MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE
MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE
MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE
QUALITATIVE RESULTS
Municipality: Contra Costa County (Unincorporated) Permit Year: 2008/2009
Introduction:
The continuing goal of the Contra Costa County (County) Watershed Program (CWP) is to maintain compliance with its municipal stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. One of the primary ways this is accomplished is through Municipal Maintenance activities that call for optimizing pollutant removal during routine maintenance activities and preventing discharges to storm drains from publicly-maintained facilities, including the County’s three corporation yards.
Although the Municipal Maintenance section of the County’s NPDES compliance program is overseen by staff at the CWP, its field implementation is carried out mostly by County Public Works Department (PWD) Maintenance Division and overseen by PWD Construction Inspection Division, as well as other County Departments like General Services, which maintains a fueling station and fleet maintenance facility and conducts facility maintenance and landscaping activities at various County locations.
CWP staff continues to develop good working relations with Road Crew Leads and Flood Control management at the PWD Maintenance Division, which maintains three corporation yards in the County and is responsible for implementation of many of the County’s municipal maintenance activities, including maintenance of roads, drainage systems, and flood control channels. CWP directly funds several municipal maintenance activities with stormwater utility assessments. This Permit Year (PY) 2008/09 CWP contributed $60,000 to catch basin cleaning and $690,000 to Flood Control Maintenance of drainage facilities.
CWP continues to manage the County’s Street Sweeping Program, ensuring responsibility for following the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) at the County’s three corporation yards, collecting data on the volume of debris removed from catch basins, drainage inlets, culverts, flood control facilities, and along the side of County maintained roadways, as well as executing contracts with special districts, such as the Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District (BIMID), which maintains drainage facilities and pump stations.
All Departments have identified activities that generate pollutants, including storage bays for roadway aggregate and substrate, central collection areas for abandoned and hazardous wastes that are picked up along roadsides, and debris drying areas for street sweeping spoils and catch basin cleanings. CWP staff employs various Best Management Practices (BMPs), including continual training, routine corporation yard inspections, drainage inlet markings, protection booms, and erosion control BMPs during road maintenance to eliminate discharges to the storm drain system.
For more information about Municipal Maintenance at Contra Costa County (unincorporated), please contact Charmaine Bernard at (925) 313-2236 or by e-mail at cbern@county.us or for more information about the Municipal Maintenance Activities section of CWP’s Annual Report.
Implementation & Evaluation:
Analysis of Stated PY 2007/08 Annual Report Goals for PY 2008/09
1. Continue to maintain the high standards set for our high quality street sweeping program. Negotiate the next three-year contract term with the most responsible and lowest bidder.
This task was completed successfully. CWP will continue to be serviced by our former street sweeping company, Universal Building Services (UBS). As the lowest most responsible bidder, CWP will receive another three years of quality service with the option of a two-year extension.
2. Resolve street sweeping complaints in a timely manner that conveys appreciation to complainants for bringing service failures to the County’s attention. Use the information gathered to improve the Contractor’s service.
Over the years, CWP has developed an excellent relationship with contracted street sweeping manager, Mr. Bill Godfrey. As CWP becomes aware of complaints and brings them to Bill’s attention, they are always handled timely and professionally.
3. Continue to utilize MaintStar to track street sweeping and illicit discharge complaints and follow-up investigations. Continue to adapt the Program’s query and reporting capabilities to generate useful year-end datasets that can be incorporated into our Annual Reports.
This task was completed. Transition to tracking all street sweeping and illicit discharge complaints from PWD Network drives to the MaintStar program has been completed. Training in setting up and running queries is also complete. The new updated MaintStar version allows additional features that have made reporting easier, including conversion of work orders to PDF format for ease of referring requests outside of the Department and conversion of complaint reports to Excel format.
4. Continue to install new storm drain markers and replace missing and damaged storm drain markers as needed.
CWP is making excellent progress in its Storm Drain Marking Program. Due to the current recession, the student worker program at PWD has been temporarily suspended. However, we are fortunate to still have Amanda Olds on staff who has been instrumental in redoing CWP’s storm drain marking tracking spreadsheet, supplying an inventory of unincorporated neighborhoods whose drains have been completed, partially completed (and at what percentage) and communities still in need of being marked. Staff assisted Amanda and student worker, Jennifer Paulson, who has been ‘borrowed’ from PWD Real Property Division half days to accompany Amanda, in completing the East County outlying community of Discovery Bay this spring.
5. Continue to support and/or provide training in clean water reporting requirements
to other departments and divisions in order to streamline the Annual Report data collection process, and supply more qualitative information about the stormwater pollution prevention activities being carried out by them.
This is ongoing. As CWP becomes aware of pollution prevention (P2) efforts being undertaken by other divisions and departments throughout the County, CWP will incorporate this information into future Annual Reports. CWP has learned that the County Board of Supervisor agendas have become a useful tool to learn of P2 activities going on throughout the County.
6. Ensure that corporation yard SWPPPs are updated to reflect staff changes, and ensure that the staff responsible for implementing the SWPPPs are aware of their responsibilities.
The Waterbird corporation yard’s SWPPP has been completely revised and multiple new attachments added in order to be consistent with the proposed Municipal Regional Permit’s C.2.f requirements for Corporation Yard BMP Implementation. The revisions include attaching all relevant fact sheets from the Caltrans Storm Water Handbook Maintenance Staff Guide and its addenda. A meeting was convened between CWP and Maintenance management to correct inconsistencies in the last SWPPP edition from 2006 and update new operating procedures.
At the time of this writing, similar revisions and additional attachments have been incorporated into the West County Richmond corporation yard SWPPP. It is currently in review by the West County Crew Lead and expected to be completed this summer. However, efforts to update the East County SWPPP are on hold as both West and East County corporation yards may be closed due to the State budget and its effect on PWD’s gas tax funding source.
7. Perform annual inspections of the three corporation yards for SWPPP compliance.
Based on feedback from Maintenance management that they feel like they are being overly regulated, CWP has stepped back a bit this year and allowed routine SWPPP and stormwater inspections to be conducted by inspectors from the Hazardous Materials Program. Since the majority of pollutant sources are from the abandoned waste containers and hazardous waste generated by the sign and paint crew, it seems most appropriate to allow HazMat to take the lead as the Certified Unified program Agency that has been State designated to ensure proper hazardous waste management by generators, such as the Waterbird corporation yard.
8. Continue to distribute the “Water-Wise Gardening in Contra Costa County” CD- ROM to interested County residents.
The CWP continues to receive e-mail requests for the Water-Wise Gardening CD and continues to send them to interested gardeners in the public. Over 200 CDs were distributed this year.
9. Continue to seek grant funding for special projects, especially from the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB’s) Proposition 84 Stormwater Grant Program (expected to be released in fall of 2008).
CWP is also currently working with San Francisco Estuary Institute to secure grant funding to retrofit the North Richmond Pump Station to divert low flows, which are often more polluted urban runoff, during summer months to the West County Wastewater District for sanitary treatment. CWP continues to pursue other funding opportunities via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and the State Clean Water Revolving Fund.
10. Continue to effectively manage time and priorities within a climate of increasing regulatory and funding challenges.
While funding challenges currently facing the County and County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (FCD) may reduce the amount of overall maintenance projects that can be conducted, ensuring that appropriate water quality BMPs are employed during all maintenance projects remains a priority. As staff gains experience in implementing BMPs and identifies improved means of implementing them, protecting water quality becomes an increasingly efficient routine aspect of how work is conducted.
11. Encourage cities to take more responsibility for enforcing their illicit discharge ordinances within our County maintained flood control facilities.
This task is ongoing and being dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Efforts to do so via the Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP) were denied by CCCWP management who felt like this issue was not a function of CCCWP and that the County and FCD needed to initiate discussion with affected jurisdictions on their own. Due to a lack of support in this cause, CWP’s momentum for effecting positive change collectively has been stalled, but CWP continues to encourage municipalities to work together to gain corrective action as incidents arise.
12. Work with Maintenance Division to come up with a mutually agreed upon plan for reporting missing or damaged storm drain markers and procedures for ensuring their expedient replacement.
CWP staff met with Maintenance management and their student worker who has entered several years of catch basin cleaning data in order to be able to assess trends and prioritize annual inspections and clean-out to those facilities that tend to accumulate more debris. Maintenance has allowed CWP to alter their catch basin field data sheets to include an extra column to track whether storm drain markers are missing or in need of reapplication due to damage.
13. Encourage the FCD to continue to assess stormwater BMPs that may be cost effective, easy to maintain and useful in providing increased stormwater treatment benefits within FCD flood control facilities.
During PY 2008/09, the CWP worked with the FCD to advocate augmenting flood control facility designs with features to remove pollutants from stormwater runoff and to provide hydrograph modification management benefits. Since concentrated stormwater runoff is conveyed to these facilities, they constitute an exceptional opportunity to achieve efficiency in treating stormwater runoff (and providing flow control). A primary focus of this effort was to identify flood control facilities that could serve as regional facilities that would provide treatment and flow control for new developments that are tributary to those facilities (per provision C.3.g.ii).
Efforts to incorporate treatment and flow control of runoff into flood control facility designs have been put on hold to an extent, since the most recent iteration of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) does not appear to allow for regional alternative compliance solutions for purposes of complying with C.3 for most projects. It would be especially challenging to secure funding to include such features in designs of flood control facilities (and with subsequently maintaining these treatment and flow control features) if there is no way to secure additional contributions from land developments that are tributary to the facilities (which may not be possible if the features do not help the developments comply with C.3).
Within current funding constraints, and in the context of uncertainty regarding whether regional facilities will be allowed for C.3 compliance under the MRP, the Flood Control District does continue to consider these options when designing new facilities or modifying existing facilities. Where feasible, treatment and flow control features will be included in FCD flood control facilities.
14. Develop new funding sources (municipal bonds, etc.) to install trash and other pollutant BMP treatment facilities within FCD flood control facilities.
Many of these activities are being pursued by the FCD as part of the Integrated Regional Watershed Management Plan (IRWMP) and associated funding available through the State Water Resources Control Board’s Clean Water Revolving Fund and the American Recovery and Reimbursement Act (ARRA) of 2009 being pursued by Mitch Avalon, Deputy Director for the Flood Control Division, and Mark Boucher of the FCD.
15. Increase involvement in CCCWP’s Municipal Maintenance subcommittee and use this as an opportunity to help effect positive change in the County’s Flood Control Channels that flow through different city jurisdictions.
CWP staff participated in and jointly presented at the Spring Muni Workshop for Municipal Staff sharing their experience in planning and carrying out a two-day multiagency homeless encampment clean out. The workshop included lessons learned for other municipalities to engage in a successful and safe event.
16. Conduct SWPPP trainings for all Public Works Maintenance Yard staff (of approximately 90), including training regarding each of the three corporation yards. Training will include basic SWPPP contents, spill cleanup and all Hazardous Waste Business Plan/Hazardous Waste generator requirements.
Multiple trainings were completed this year, including Hazardous Substance and SWPPP Implementation held October 8, 15, and 22, 2008, First Responder operations for new employees held October 29, and 30, 2008, and First Responder Operations (FRO) Refresher training held on Nov. 4, 5, and 6, 2008.
17. CWP Sweeping Manager will work with Maintenance to set up a reporting system so that debris retrieval data can be reported for PWD-conducted sweeping activities.
Due to confidentiality of several parts of the MaintStar system “Work Planning” module that Maintenance tracks their work orders in, CWP have not been successful in gaining rights to access this data. However, Field Operation manager, Pat Giles, worked closely with CWP staff to run various reports for all of the Municipal Maintenance related activities completed over the course of this Permit Year.
Municipal Maintenance Activities During PY 2008/09:
Since the CWP is a program within the Flood Control Division of the Contra Costa County Department of Public Works, Municipal Maintenance is directly tied to the department’s function, which is to construct and maintain safe and efficient transportation, drainage, and recreational infrastructure throughout the County. This is facilitated by the competent partnership of several Departments at the County, including Public Works, General Services, and Agriculture, along with many Divisions within Public Works, most notably Design, Engineering Services, and Transportation Engineering.
After infrastructure is planned, designed, and constructed, the Maintenance Division is the primary entity responsible for the ongoing operations and maintenance of the 650 miles of County roads and thousands of miles of flood control facilities and storm drain systems. This is accomplished by a staff of approximately 100 employees made up of Management, Administration, Engineering Staff, and Maintenance Workers.
PWD Maintenance Road Crew NPDES Activities
This PY 2008/09 PWD Maintenance Division operated under a $19 Million budget for about 100 employees. No County General Funds are used for road operations and maintenance (O&M). Principal revenue sources are the gas tax revenues and Measure C funds, which are used for general road O&M, traffic safety, hazard mitigation projects, and Proposition 42, the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund for rehabilitation and reconstruction work to existing roadways. Projects are prioritized according to the following three tiers:
• Safety improvements
• Preservation of existing roads which includes, pavement and general road maintenance in the form of surface treatments, overlays, ditch cleaning, culvert replacement, pothole patching, crack sealing, and bridge and shoulder maintenance.
• Road enhancement, which includes addition of bicycle lanes, pedestrian improvements, and increased capacity lanes.
PWD Maintenance Road crews are divided into three service areas within the unincorporated areas of the County: West, Central/South, and East. Crews are continually looking for ways to incorporate construction and maintenance BMPs for erosion and sediment control into their daily jobs. They routinely use structural controls like sandbags, tar paper to protect drainage inlets during chip seal work, straw wattles, visqueen, and rope. Road crews also carry absorbent pads and booms, and spill kits with diatomaceous earth/kitty litter in all crew cabs and supervisor vehicles. Crews are trained in proper erosion control methods for their road resurfacing and construction activities as well as bridge and flood control maintenance and painting activities. County municipal maintenance crews strive to prevent pollutants from impervious roadway surfaces, captured at catch basins and drainage inlets of the storm drain system, and within the trash racks installed within watercourses from reaching natural receiving water bodies like the Delta and Bay.
Click here for an article about PWD’s Municipal Maintenance budget challenges in PY 2008/09 and how it has affected workloads causing a shift from roadway maintenance including roadway and shoulder reshaping, road repairs, revamping outlets, redoing delineators, bridge work, guard rail improvements, graffiti removal, and tree trimming to Flood Control drainage facility maintenance.
Following is a breakdown of the primary NPDES municipal maintenance activities by our PWD Maintenance Division Road Crews as tracked in our MaintStar System for PY 2008/09 from which data was collected for purposes of this Annual Report:
2316 Inspect and Manually Clean Catch Basins (with hand tools as necessary)
# Catch Basins Volume (cu ft) Volume (cu yd) Labor (hrs.)
7872 11400 422.2 2892
2308 Catch Basin Cleaning with Vac-con truck
# Catch Basins Volume (cu ft) Volume (cu yd) Labor (hrs.)
406 + 2 culverts 10060 372.6 657
2306 Flush Culverts
# Culverts Linear Feet Volume (cu ft) Volume (cu yd) Labor (hrs.)
285 2730 1306.8 48.4 1982
+ 15 catch basins
2303 Ditch Cleaning (Roads)
Linear Feet Volume (cu ft) Volume (cu yd) Labor (hrs.)
150226 216364.5 8013.5 6807
PWD Maintenance Flood Control NPDES Activities
PWD Maintenance Flood Control crews maintain improved and natural flood control improved facilities, which include channelized, natural, and concrete-lined waterways. Activities related to Municipal Maintenance include graffiti abatement, illegal dumping investigation, and removal of large objects, such as shopping carts, mattresses, appliances, and debris that may pose a drainage hazard resulting in localized flooding.
Crews also annually clean 35 to 40 trash racks and drainage channels under a Memorandum of Understanding established with the California Department of Fish and Game. Following is a breakdown of the primary NPDES municipal maintenance activities by our PWD Maintenance Division Flood Control Crews as tracked in our MaintStar System from which data was collected for purposes of this Annual Report:
2072 Ditch Cleaning Flood Control
Volume (cu yd) Length (feet)
1786 54,651
2073 Ditch Cleaning/Silt Removal in Non-concrete Channels
Volume (cu yd) Length (feet) Labor (hrs.)
1083 4,610 470
2074 Concrete Channel Cleaning
Volume (cu yd) Length (feet) Labor (hrs.)
1626 11,481 685
2076 Trash Rack Maintenance
Volume (cu yd) # Trash Racks Labor (hrs.)
61.9 123 390
2092 Dam Maintenance
Volume (cu yd)
214.5
Totals for Flood Control Maintenance NPDES activities documented in MaintStar system equals 5071.4 cubic yards of debris over 70,742 feet or 13.4 miles in comparison to Ditch Cleaning activities that have been manually documented on Drainage Maintenance NPDES Drainage Cleaning Reporting Form tally sheets, which documented a total of 6,711 cubic yards of debris (sediment and garbage) collected from natural and lined channels in residential, commercial and industrial areas of the County.
|Length Cleaned (feet) |Sediment (cu yd) |Garbage (cu yd) |
|Roadside |Lined |Natural |
|= 28.4 miles |= 6711 cu yd of debris |
Click Data Summary for a listing of the NPDES Municipal Maintenance activities performed this PY 2008/09 by PWD Maintenance and Flood Control that are listed throughout this MUNI Section of this Annual Report. Also, here are links to two newsletters that the PWD and Department of Conservation and Development produce to educate stakeholders about the County’s municipal maintenance activities: The Community Informer Road and Transportation Edition and The Link. Both provide more background on some of the municipal maintenance services performed by the County and include informative articles about Our County Departments Working Together at Municipal Maintenance, Street Sweeping, Road Maintenance and Illegal Dumping.
For more detailed information about Municipal Maintenance Operations performed by PWD Maintenance, please contact Joe Yee, Assistant Public Works Director of the Maintenance Division, at (925) 313-7002 or by e-mail at jyee@county.us or Pat Giles, Field Operations Manager, at (925) 313-7044 or by e-mail at pgile@county.us.
Street Sweeping Program
Street sweeping is an important tool for keeping pollutants from entering the storm drain system. It also keeps the County’s roadways safe and its neighborhoods clean. PY 2008/09 was a busy time for the street sweeping program as CWP began the Permit Year going out to bid for a new street sweeping contractor. Much effort went into ensuring our County’s List of Streets and Road Log Miles were accurate after numerous change work orders added new streets and subdivision to the County’s maintenance responsibility.
The new contract includes provisions in the Service Plan for authorizing an additional 240 hours of additional sweeping of areas with heavy leaf fall, including Alamo, Saranap, Rodeo, and El Sobrante. It also has a provision related to the upcoming MRP municipal maintenance requirements under C.2 as well as the Mercury and Poly Chlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) removal provision under C.11 and C.12, respectively, which will allow a shift of sweeping requirements as necessary.
With the first Tentative Order, CWP was expecting a drastic increase in sweeping frequency of heavy commercial and high density urban areas with the possibility of sweeping uncurbed streets in the County. The Revised Tentative Order has taken a diametric stance with the proposed removal of the mandated street sweeping BMP under the Municipal Maintenance permit provision. The County struggles to find cost savings during this period of economic challenge and is waiting with anticipation for the MRP to be finalized and the street sweeping program to be modified as needed. CWP anticipates that some neighborhoods will be swept much more infrequently.
CWP worked closely with the general Service Department to draft a “Request for Proposal” through the County’s e-procurement system, BidSync (formerly RFP Depot). Thanks to the wide audience the program advertises to, CWP was able to outreach to 167 businesses of which 60 were small and/or disadvantaged business enterprises. CWP received five very competitive bids for providing service to over 22,000 residents along 453 miles of our County’s sweeping routes. Our former street sweeping contractor, UBS, was the lowest, most responsible bidder, receiving excellent references from the City of Dublin and Town of Danville. By once again joining forces with this highly competent and professional provider, CWP has saved the County taxpayers much money in start-up costs associated with having to “retrain” a new vendor. CWP looks forward to at least three years of service from UBS with an optional two-year extension.
This PY 2008/09, CWP staff and Maintenance Division responded to and successfully resolved 38 MaintStar service complaints, ranging from customers reporting neighbors not moving their cars to skipped service complaints and requests for sweeping of additional routes. Staff adapted MaintStar, a system used to track County maintenance activities, for use in logging, tracking, and closing out street sweeping service requests and complaints. This year’s transition to tracking street sweeping complaints exclusively in MaintStar has been accomplished. The MaintStar database, which is jointly used by various Public Works Divisions, allows for shared work requests that may affect or need to be followed up by various divisions. You can view an example street sweeping work order here.
CWP continues to oversee implementation of routine street sweeping service of publically-maintained curbed roads in unincorporated areas of the County to ensure to the maximum extent practicable that pollutants are not allowed to enter the storm drain system. This year CWP combined the former two three-year contracts (2005-2008) for West County and Central/East/South County(s) into one contract for ease of managing, adding new service areas, and invoicing. Our current contract is still divided into the following service areas with mostly all (except isolated portions) curbed streets in unincorporated County being swept once per month:
|Route |Sub Route |Sweep Day of the Month |Service Area Description** |
| | |* | |
|Alamo |Route 1 |1st Friday |Danville Blvd., Livorna Rd., Stone Valley Rd., neighborhoods South of Stone Valley |
| | | |Rd. & west of Danville Blvd. |
|Alamo |Route 2 |2nd Friday |Neighborhoods west of Danville Blvd to the west side of Roundhill Golf and Country |
| | | |Club, between Livorna and Stone Valley Rd. |
|Alamo |Route 3 |3rd Friday |Neighborhoods along the middle portion of Stone Valley Rd. |
|Alamo |Route 4 |4th Friday |Neighborhoods at the east end of Stone Valley Rd. around Green Valley Rd. |
|Blackhawk Rd. | |2nd Tuesday |Between Danville border and Blackhawk Dr. |
|Camino Tassajara | |1st Wednesday |Subdivision 8331 east of Lawrence Rd. and Alamo Creek Subdivision |
|Clyde | |3rd Friday |Includes E680, Concord |
|Crockett | |4th Tuesday | |
|Discovery Bay |Route 1 |2nd Friday |Includes Knightsen and majority of Disco Bay waterways |
|Discovery Bay |Route 2 |1st Monday |Includes Newport Dr. and neighborhoods north of Highway 4 |
|E. Richmond Heights | |3rd Monday | |
|El Sobrante Residential| |2nd Wednesday |Includes Appian, San Pablo Dam Rd. |
|El Sobrante | |2nd Friday |Includes Arterials and N. Arlington Ave. |
|Kensington | |1st Friday (pm) |Includes commercial sections of Colusa Circle and Arlington Ave. |
|Kensington | |3rd Friday |Includes residential section of Arlington Ave. |
|Montara Bay/Montalvin | |4th Monday | |
|Northgate | |4th Thursday | |
|North Richmond | |1st Thursday |Odd Side noon–4pm |
|North Richmond | |1st Friday |Even side noon–4pm |
|Pacheco | |2nd Tuesday |Includes Martinez, Pleasant Hill, W680, PH Bart |
|Pleasant Hill BART |Route 1 |1st Saturday |Swept 12am–4am; includes Coggins Drive and East I-680 along Treat Blvd. |
|Route |Sub Route |Sweep Day of the Month |Service Area Description** |
| | |* | |
|Pleasant Hill BART |Route 2 |2nd Tuesday |Along Cherry Lane and south of Treat Blvd. |
|Rodeo |Route 1 |4th Friday |Includes San Pablo Ave and neighborhood along Parker and SE of I-80 |
|Rodeo |Route 2 |3rd Monday |Includes neighborhoods east of Parker north of I-80 |
|Saranap |Route 1 |1st Thursday |Between CA-24 and Olympic Blvd, Tice Valley Blvd. |
|Saranap |Route 2 |3rd Thursday |Newell Ave. and streets to the south; Pleasant Hill Rd.; Taylor Blvd. and streets to|
| | | |the north |
|Tara Hills | |2nd Tuesday | |
The County currently sweeps approximately 453 curbed miles each month. The largest segment by region is West County, which has 202 curbed miles. South County and Central County have 110 and 92 curbed miles, respectively, and East County contains 50 curbed miles.
See below for a comparison of the newly negotiated price per curbed mile for street sweeping in unincorporated areas of the County and disposal of street sweeping debris to a County approved landfill. It represents a savings of $55,753.92 over the three-year contract term for the same level of service that CWP currently enjoys:
|STREET SWEEPING CONTRACT COMPARISONS |
| |Former |New | |
| |2005-08 Contract |2008-11 Contract | |
|Monthly invoice |$11,652.41 |$10,103.69 | |
|Avg. $/curbed mile |$25.72 |$22.30 | |
|Cost savings/month |$1,548.72 |
|Cost savings/year |$18,584.64 |
|Cost savings/contract term |$55,753.92 |
| | | | |
| |Former |New |Miles/Service Area |
|Price per Curbed Mile |2005-08 Contract |2008-11 | |
| | |Contract | |
|West County |$21.73 |$22.60 |202 |
|Central |$27.23 |$22.79 |91 |
|South |$27.23 |$21.06 |110 |
|East |$21.55 |$22.96 |50 |
|Avg/curbed mile |$24.15 |$22.30 |453 |
Earlier this year, CWP added the following new service areas to our contract:
• Beginning March 2009, sweep all County Maintained Islands as part of each indicated route’s monthly sweep. This has historically been a function of PWD’s Maintenance Division as an activity they performed on an as needed basis, sometimes annually, or when customers filed complaints or requests with PWD. Our sweeping contactor has been instrumental in coordinating with all three road crews’ leads prior to each month’s scheduled neighborhood sweep. Road crews are dispatched to remove vegetation and debris from the islands to the gutter prior to the scheduled island street sweep.
• Beginning March 2009, sweep the curbed portions of San Pablo Avenue between Tara Hills and Montalvin Manor, which historically have not been swept. Monthly sweep of this street will be scheduled at Contractor’s discretion, possibly during special monthly sweeps of Richmond Parkway when a broom sweeper is used to recover rocks and gravel. This portion of roadway is heavily graveled and has been neglected.
• Beginning March 2009, sweep the curbed portion of Cummings Skyway between San Pablo Avenue & I-80 as part of the Crockett Route that swept on the fourth Tuesday of each month.
• Monthly sweep of the two newer subdivisions, as part of a new Camino Tassajara route whose roads have been accepted by the County, Subdivision 8331 east of Lawrence Road and Alamo Creek Subdivision, both located east of the Danville city border.
In order to alter the existing contract, administrative amendments for these sweeping additions, which totaled $789.12 per month, were effectively completed and executed. This process involves a site visit, calculation of curbed miles to the hundredths of a mile, creation of GIS maps of the new service areas, completion of change work orders, scheduling the new sweep areas on days that fit in with the contractor’s current service duties and do not conflict with garbage days (when dumpsters are blocking the curbs), updates to schedule and street list posting on the CWP and PWD websites, and written notification to residents along the new sweeping routes of the upcoming monthly sweep. Notice of Street Sweeping notifications were mailed out to all parcel site addresses along the new sweeping routes.
CWP also scheduled a special sweep of the 2900 block of Cherry Lane in Walnut Creek, which should be swept as part of the Pleasant Hill BART Route 2 on the second Tuesday of each month. However, due to heavy traffic and limited parking in the vicinity of the Archstone Apartment complex and the BART Station, this street is usually blocked with cars on the day of the sweep. As a result, excess leaves blanketed the roadway under the parked cars’ footprints. At the request of residents of the apartment complex who initiated complaints to the apartment’s property management company for the trip hazard and esthetic issue that the accumulated leaves posed, this issue was brought to the attention of CWP.
A special sweep was scheduled for February 10, 2009. PWD Maintenance Central Road Crews assisted by posting barricades the weekend before the event, with signage about the special sweep and that there would be no parking along this block on this date. CWP coordinated with Lt. Wagner of the Sheriff’s Office Valley Station, and Deputy Schwent was dispatched to provide parking enforcement the day of the event in case cars needed to be towed. CWP staff was happy to observe no cars parked along the barricaded block.
UBS showed up on time with their sweeper truck, and the street sweeping manager assisted by manually loosening up the accumulated organic matter so that the sweeper truck could recover the smashed leaves and debris. As a follow-up to the successful special sweep, the Maintenance Sign Crew installed permanent “No Parking” during street sweeping day’s signs so that law enforcement can ticket/tow violators as necessary, and Cherry Lane will continue to remain neat following its monthly sweep.
This PY 2008/09 CWP staff also worked at assessing the most appropriate times to sweep the residential and commercial parts of Kensington in order to find a time during which the least number of cars are parked along Colusa Circle and Arlington Avenue. Street Sweeping Notices were mailed out to let businesses and residents along the sweeping routes know that Colusa and the “downtown” portion of Arlington Avenue are being swept after midnight, the area in front of the daycare on Arlington between 6:00-8:00 a.m., and the residential part of Arlington between 11:00 a.m.–2:00 p.m. Breaking the Kensington route into these sweeping times will ensure the street sweeper will be able to access the curb and be most effective at recovering pollutants.
Another special street sweeping issue that occurred during PY 2008/09 was the rectification of the Special Districts’ contribution to the monthly street sweeping of several uncurbed streets in Alamo. CWP currently sweeps about 100 miles of curbed roadway in Alamo each month over four routes. Several years ago, the Alamo Beautification Committee requested sweeping of uncurbed portions of Danville Boulevard, Miranda Avenue, Livorna Road, and Stone Valley Road as part of the County’s monthly sweep and offered to pay separately for these streets from Zone 36 funds, which at the time of the previous contract was calculated at $204.50.
With the renegotiation of the new contract that began in November of 2008, and its reduced rates, CWP staff realized the need for a reimbursement to Zone 36 funds and recalculation of their new monthly contribution to $158.16. A memo was sent to the Special Districts Division and information about this modification was relayed to the Deputy Director prior to a public meeting in Alamo this spring.
For more information about the County’s Street Sweeping Program, including the current schedule, street sweeping tips, and CWP’s Street Sweeping Brochure, go to CWP’s portion of the County’s website at: .
Pollutants Removed
The following chart was created to analyze any trends that might be evident based on changes to the street sweeping program. The total volume of material removed during PY 2008/09 was 1,852.25 cubic yards, (in PY 2007/08, CWP removed 1,632 cubic yards), which is higher than the previous year’s by over 220 cubic yards. This may be due to the fact that CWP street sweeping drivers, having serviced the County for over seven years, are familiar with the routes and sweeping systems and are capable of increased sweeping efficiency. Also, as described above, this spring, the CWP added additional service areas, and our new contract again carries the allowance for up to 240 hours of extra fall leaf removal, of which 33.25 hours was used in November, 39.5 in December, and 18 hours in January for a total of almost 91 hours this PY 2008/09, which justifies the increase in debris collection.
[pic]
During PY 2008/09, the highest volumes of material removed in November and December were 243 and 228, respectively, compared with PY 2007/08 at 186 and 210 cubic yards, respectively. The service areas with the most volume included Alamo at 415.5 cubic yards (22% of total debris removed), then El Sobrante with 345 cubic yards (19%), and Rodeo/Crockett in third place with 275 cubic yards (15%) removed.
In addition to regular sweeping, PWD Maintenance contracts for street sweeping following road resurfacing and chip seal work and for routine cleaning of traffic islands. Towards the end of PY 2008/09, PWD Maintenance purchased a new street sweeper. Although it was out of service for the remainder of the permit year getting new PWD markings and training staff in its use, it was in service for part of PY 2008/09, and MaintStar tracked the following street sweeping debris removal data by PWD Surface Treatment Crews and their contractors for County roads and bike paths:
Miles Volume (cu yd.) Labor (hrs.)
2301 General Street Sweeping 476 64.4 291
2314 Bike Path Sweeping 12 4 10
The most recent Street Sweeping Special Study completed by the Contra Costa Clean Water Program was in May (2008) of PY 2007/08. It analyzed pollutant load removal from samples collected from various cities within the County from street sweeping BMPs. It provides data for the baseline level of pollutants and Total Concentration Values (TCVs) in our County’s street sweeping spoils and estimates the quantities removed by our street sweeping efforts. Using the heavy metals and petroleum product conversions provided in the special study, CWP is pleased to report this PY 2008/09 removed the following volumes of contaminates from our roadways and prevented these pollutants from impacting our waterways:
|Total PCBs (lbs) |0.06 |
|Total Mercury (lbs) |0.28 |
| Total Copper (lbs) |241.5 |
| Total Lead (lbs) |87.62 |
|Total Nickel (lbs) |72.66 |
|Total Zinc (lbs) |384.69 |
| Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (lbs) |4701.79 |
| Total Oil and Grease (lbs) |10258.46 |
| Total Sediment |3111 |
| |Residential |Commercial |Industrial |Total |
|Sediment Removed (yd3) |1611.46 |222.27 |86.92 |1920.65 |
|Sediment Removed (kg) |2368842.53 |326736.90 |127776.08 |2823355.50 |
|Copper (kg) |142.13 |19.60 |7.67 |169.40 |
|Copper (lbs) |313.34 |43.22 |16.90 |373.47 |
|Lead (kg) |142.13 |19.60 |7.67 |169.40 |
|Lead (lbs) |313.34 |43.22 |16.90 |373.47 |
|Zinc (kg) |426.39 |58.81 |23.00 |508.20 |
|Zinc (lbs) |940.03 |129.66 |50.71 |1120.40 |
|TPH (kg) |5211.45 |718.82 |281.11 |6211.38 |
|TPH (lbs) |11489.29 |1584.73 |619.74 |13693.76 |
|Sediment (tons) |2610.46 |360.06 |140.81 |3111.34 |
|Other (kg) |11370.44 |1568.34 |613.33 |13552.11 |
|Other (lbs) |25067.54 |3457.59 |1352.15 |29877.29 |
| | | | | |
|"Other" includes a total of oil and grease. | | | |
| | | | | |
|Assumptions: | | |This spreadsheet has been replaced by|
| | | |the "Attachment D: Typical |
| | | |Concentration |
|Sediment density: 1 cubic yard (yd3) = 1470 kg |Values" spreadsheet provided each |
| |year by |
|Copper TCV: 60 mg/kg | | | the program. |
|Lead TCV: 60 mg/kg | | | | |
|Zinc TCV: 180 mg/kg | | |HOWEVER there is no new calculation |
| | | |for sediment so you may need to refer|
| | | |to |
|TPH TCV: 2200 mg/kg | | | the above "Sediment" calculation. |
|O&G TCV: 4800 mg/kg | | | | |
For more information about the County’s Street Sweeping Program please call Charmaine Bernard at (925) 313-2236 or by e-mail at cbern@county.us.
SWPPP Implementation and Recycling at Corporation Yards
The Municipal Maintenance portion of CWP’s permit includes oversight of the pollution prevention activities at the main Public Works Maintenance Corporation Yard at Waterbird Way (Martinez) and at the two satellite yards in West County (Richmond) and East County (Brentwood).
The Corporation Yards are permitted under our County’s NPDES Permit for Municipal Stormwater Discharges, which requires that site-specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) be maintained, updated, and implemented. It also requires the implementation of BMP’s during municipal maintenance activities and stormwater monitoring activities, including inspections and visual assessment of BMP effectiveness.
Potential pollutant sources and areas of concern at all of the corporation yards include four primary areas:
1. Surface treatment supply bays store chip and seal cutback (oil and gravel mixture) and other aggregates for road surface treatment and repair.
2. Hazardous waste storage areas store 55-gallon drums of spent paints and solvents from road painting operations, as well as dumped appliances, e-waste, and household hazardous waste containers, such as propane cylinders, paints, motor oil, and other chemicals illegally dumped along roadsides and collected by road crews.
3. Vehicle and equipment parking lots store fleet vehicles and specialty road equipment.
4. Debris drying area stores nonhazardous street sweeping spoils from chip seal surface treatments and routine sweeping of the County operated airport. Debris from catch basin and culvert cleaning are also stored at this location and are conservatively disposed of as hazardous waste, due to the presence of trace amounts of metals and petroleum products.
Additional stormwater protection practices being carried out at the corporation yards, include a monthly maintenance managers meeting to discuss any issues or problems regarding P2 operations and SWPPP implementation, and training all employees in SWPPP BMPs during crew meetings and managers’ meetings.
Earlier this year, CWP staff met with Waterbird Management to update their SWPPP to be consistent with current practices and new staff assignments for the required areas of responsibility. Copies of the most recent 2009 SWPPP for the Martinez/Waterbird Corporation Yard is available here. Due to budget issues, the West and East County yards may be closed. These SWPPP updates are currently being revised: West County/Richmond SWPPP (under development), East County/Brentwood SWPPP (pending).
PWD Maintenance facilities continue to expand their recycling programs and are now recycling oil, paint, e-waste, batteries, and appliances. Many of these items, which are often found dumped in creeks and onto roadways in the County, had previously been shipped off and disposed of through incineration or destruction when picked up by Maintenance crews. Instead of being put into the waste stream, many of these items are now recycled. Oils and petroleum products are blended to be used as alternative fuels and latex paints are recycled into new paint and other paint-related materials. Hazardous waste is taken to Central County Household Hazardous Waste Facility or disposed of by the County’s hazardous waste management company, PSC.
County Maintenance Crews working out of the County’s corporation yards follow an effective recycling program that ensures batteries, cardboard, and appliances are recycled through the County’s General Services Department (GSD). Electronic waste, such as printers and computers are managed as Universal Waste and recycled via Universal Waste Management, Inc. in Oakland. Tires are collected and recycled through a rubber tire recycler.
In an effort to further reduce contributions to the waste stream (especially hazardous waste); Maintenance staff is continually phasing new materials and products into use that are less deleterious to the environment (and bio-degradable, where feasible). These innovations safeguard the watersheds, as well as the County’s citizens and employees.
Illegal Dumping & Litter Control
County Jail inmates continue to assist Maintenance Flood Control and Vegetation Management crews to remove solid waste from the County’s creeks, perform graffiti removal along improved channel walls, and manage vegetation by tree trimming and removal. Coordination for the Litter Removal Program between Public Works and the County’s Probation Department is facilitated by Chuck Jefferies; he can be contacted at (925) 313-7047 or cjeff@county.us.
The following is a breakdown of the PWD Maintenance budget related to illegal trash cleanup for PY 2008/09. Data for the previous two permit Years has also been provided as a reference for the redistribution of litter funding that the County has had to implement:
| |2006-07 |2007-08 |2008-09 |
|Countywide Debris Pick-up |$336,658 |$29,228 |$21,917 |
|Low-Level Roadside Hazardous Waste Roadside Pick-up | | |$33,410 |
| |$37,216 |$38,341 | |
|North Richmond Litter/Debris |$77,013 |$ 14,625 |$7,663 |
|Workfare G21 West County |$7,000 |$126,295 |$73,215 |
|Workfare G31 Central County |$3,507 |$ 86,226 |$63,981 |
|Workfare G36 East County | |$108,170 |$106,645 |
|Workfare G41 South County |$76,225 | | |
|Juvenile Litter Pick-up Program | |$34,347 |$559 |
Note that the drastic decrease in Countywide Debris Pick-up between PY 2006/07 and PY 2007/08 reflects the MUNI Program shifting to use of region-specific work order numbers corresponding to West, Central, and East County debris removals in order to better track the illegal dumping issue on a regional basis. In North Richmond, CWP expenses decreased substantially because the City of Richmond contracted with the County to remove debris from that area. Richmond Sanitary Service removes solid waste dumps and Richmond Public Works responds to abandoned e-waste and household hazardous waste. Funding for these programs comes from the Transfer Station Mitigation Fund, which is not represented in the above chart.
Public Works Maintenance Road Crews also removed dumped debris from the roadsides and shoulders as driven by public health and safety concerns. Debris included larger items, such as e-waste and appliances, but also included household hazardous waste containers that were intact and could safely be identified and transported to HHW storage areas at the corporation yards by crews. The following is a work report summary for Maintenance debris removal activities for PY 2008/09. For comparison, Road Crews removed a total of 1627.5 cu yd of debris in the previous PY 2007/08:
2304 Debris/Litter Pick-up on Side of Road
Crew # Area Center Line Miles # Roads Trash Labor
(cu yd.) (hrs.)
2409 121 West County 204 645 565 622
2410 122 Central/South 227 957 168 509
2411 123 East & Camino 210 295 590 1086
Tassajara
Totals 641 1897 1160 2217
Numerous other trash abatement programs are in place throughout the County and are detailed in the CWP’s website page about illicit discharges and include investigation and follow-up by several County Departments who are simultaneously working at combating litter and illegal dumping — the most obvious source of pollution to our waterways:
• Health Services Department — Hazardous Materials Division and Environmental Health Division, Solid Waste Code Enforcement
• Public Works Department — Road Maintenance Division and County Watershed Program
• Conservation & Development Department — Building Inspection Division Code Enforcement
It is alarming to observe the significant increase in the volume of dumped debris and abandoned waste that Road Crews are beginning to encounter during these harder economic times. Much more work remains, but crews continue to find efficient ways to respond to discharges in a timely and cost effective manner, such as by conducting “milk runs” of areas that have received several notifications of proximal dumps over the previous few weeks.
Storm Drain Marking
The two storm markers that were designed in PY 2005/06 continued to be applied to all County maintained drainage inlets, and include designs that are specific to inlets that drain to the Bay:
[pic]
…and that drain to the Delta:
[pic]
Student workers continue to replace all missing or damaged storm drain markers in the unincorporated areas of the County. Although markers being removed (due to vandalism and ineffective adhesive application) had been an issue in previous permit years, this has largely been resolved. CWP worked with PWD Maintenance management this spring to develop a tracking process for road crews to document which storm drain markers may be missing within neighborhoods that have already been marked. A status list of storm drain markings by unincorporated neighborhood was completed to date and supplied to the PWD Maintenance Field Operations Manager. CWP also edited their catch basin inspection and cleaning forms by adding a column that will allow crews to document locations of missing markers. This information will be forwarded to CWP for student workers to reapply missing markers as necessary.
During PY 2008/09, CWP student workers installed over 2,368 markers as compared to the 1,525 markers completed in the previous PY 2007/08. This brings the total of storm drain markers applied up to 4,845. You can view a storm drain marking summary of the communities completed to date by clicking here. Staff continues to disseminate the “We All Live in a Watershed” and the “After the Storm” brochure to residents adjacent to the new marker locations, as well as any citizen that approaches the student workers with inquiries. CWP staff continues to educate County residents about stormwater pollution prevention at every opportunity.
Catch Basin and Culvert Inspection and Cleaning
CWP is proud of the level of pollutant removal that occurs as a result of our catch basin cleaning operations by municipal crews. Thanks to their hard work, a significant volume of pollutants in the form of trash, leaves, and sediment is prevented from being flushed through the storm drain system and into receiving waterways. This level of municipal maintenance ensures that the County’s catch basins function optimally, to prevent localized flooding, while keeping pollutants from impacting natural waterways. PWD Maintenance road crews maintain the storm drain inlets through a program of annual inspection and cleaning. As described in previous versions of the County’s Annual Report, the main elements of CWP’s catch basin cleaning and inspection procedures are listed below:
1. Individual catch basins and culverts are inspected and cleaned on at least an annual basis throughout the year based on observations made by County staff or per MaintStar Work Order Requests generated following customer complaints. The extent of blockage, potential for flooding and/or property damage, public safety, potential water quality impacts, and the threat to aquatic life are factors in determining which drainage facilities are to be cleaned and when.
2. Immediately following completion of surface treatment operations in late summer/early fall, field personnel begin annual catch basin/culvert inspection and cleaning operations, as mandated by the County Stormwater Management Plan.
3. Known problem areas within unincorporated County are completed first. Problem areas are defined as catch basins/culverts located in areas identified by maintenance personnel during annual field inspections as containing excessive amounts of pollutants, silt, leaves, trash, etc. Identification and prioritization of problem areas is reevaluated each year.
4. Upon completion of known problem areas, field personnel continue annual cleaning of catch basins and culverts in other areas of unincorporated County. Urban areas are cleaned first. Rural areas are cleaned last unless there are known problems that result in blockages, flooding, and/or potential property damage, or public safety concerns.
5. During the annual catch basin/culvert cleaning process, drainage facilities are identified and are noted as problem areas if they are found to be excessively dirty. These facilities are added to the list of known problem areas. These facilities are monitored throughout the wet season and additional cleanings are performed, if necessary.
6. Deviations from the annual catch basin/culvert cleaning plan may be necessary due to factors that are out of the control of maintenance personnel. Public safety, potential for property damage, emergencies, storm events, flooding, etc., are factors that can effect implementation of the annual cleaning plan as well as repeat cleanings for identified problem facilities. Budget constraints may also have an impact on the implementation of the annual and follow-up cleaning program.
CWP staff was fortunate to work closely with PWD Maintenance Crews during the catch basin cleaning activities in the neighborhood of East Richmond Heights in fall of 2008 prior to the rainy season. The Road Crew Supervisor, Pat Giles, accompanied C. Bernard (CWP) on a tour of several types of catch basin drainage inlets that were scheduled for clean-out on this day by the County vactor truck crew. CWP was surprised to witness the degree of physical labor involved in freeing some of the accumulated and compacted sediment from the catch basin.
Even with the help of the heavy equipment, crews needed to flush the drain and loosen-up the compacted debris with hand tools while operating the vac-con truck to suck up the consolidated gunk. Most of the catch basins had plastic bottles and other floatables collecting in them. One drainage inlet had a text book in it and crews reported removing fluorescent light tubes, engine parts, and two-by-fours in other recently cleaned drains.
Although the County’s catch basin cleaning program is doing considerable work in removing these gross contaminates as well as sediment laden with heavy metals, poly aromatic hydrocarbons, and other minute pollutants, CWP is encouraging Maintenance Management to employ more BMPs like filters, gravel bags, and more frequent trips to the Waterbird Corporation Yard to discharge catch basin spoils and wastewater in order to minimize the need to decant while in the field. A follow-up meeting with management was held to encourage sanitary sewer disposal of recovered wash water, which was later determined to be infeasible as it shifts a stormwater discharge issue to the sanitary districts and puts them in potential violation of their own NPDES permit(s).
CWP continues to work with PWD Maintenance to ensure that the County not only remains in compliance with its NPDES permit requirements, but that it serves as an example to other municipalities of excellence in a catch basin cleaning program. During PY 2008/09 PWD Maintenance crews collected 845 cubic yards or nearly 85 large dump trucks of sediment and debris from a total of 8580 catch basins and culverts preventing all of this material from being flushed into and contaminating the Bay.
Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District
One of BIMID’s responsibilities is to ensure Bethel Island’s roadside ditches and levee toe ditches are maintained so that they remain free from accumulated sediments and function optimally in conveying levee seepage and stormwater runoff to the island’s main canal and pump stations at the end of Taylor Road and the south side of the Island off Bethel Island Road.
BIMID documents the quantity of sediment material removed from ditches and channels by recording the specific cross sectional area, depth, and length of excavation and calculated volume. This PY 2008/09 BIMID crews collected a total of 2737 cubic yards of sediment and vegetation from 5570 feet of Bethel Island’s commercial and agricultural drainages according to the following breakdown:
Sediment (cu yd) Vegetation (cu yd) Length (feet)
Agricultural 2665 0 5330
Commercial 6___ 66 240
Total 2671 66 5570
BIMID also acts as the main stormwater regulatory agency on the island and provides staffing for the inspection and maintenance of drainages from excessive vegetation growth, illicit discharges, and illegal dumps. BIMID also keeps ditches functioning optimally by removing built-up silt and sediment that can impede the flow of water. For heavy excavation projects, BIMID may need to contract for the removal of excess growth and foreign objects. All volumes of silt and debris removed are documented for inclusion in CWP’s Annual Reports. BIMID also assists CWP in providing public education to Bethel Island residents and BIMID staff on protecting stormwater quality. Finally, they perform maintenance at the two pump stations on Bethel Island to ensure effective discharge of stormwater into the surrounding sloughs to prevent localized flooding.
At the start of 2009, BIMID Board Members contacted CWP to inquire about the County allocating a larger share of the Stormwater Utility Assessment (SUA) that is collected from the Bethel Island population of approximately 2,312 residents out of the total unincorporated population of 151,690 residents. CWP analyzed the funds coming in and the NPDES requirements that are carried out on Bethel Island in order to justify whether or not we could supply BIMID with a larger share of the SUA for their drainage maintenance operations. You can view the Analysis of Bethel Island Stormwater Activities that CWP carried out on Bethel Island during PY 2008/09 using the most recent data we had available at the time of this calculation. Our assessment justified increases in BIMID’s allotment to $15,000 per year.
At the time of the writing of this Annual Report, CWP is in the final stages of initiating a new three-year contract with BIMID at the increased contract rate of up to $15,000 per year for a contract limit of $45,000 for them to continue assisting the County in carrying out drainage activities of the publically owned ditches and two pump stations on the Island. The new contract and Service Plan is in final routing and should be executed soon.
Training
PWD Maintenance Division has a continuous program of training revolving personnel responsible for environmental and clean water compliance. Training includes an 8-hour refresher for the 40-hour HAZWOPER, Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response training for key staff members, Municipal Maintenance Workshop via the CCCWP, and FRO for new employees and refresher training as well as on-the-job training.
This year, CWP sponsored Department of Health Services, Hazardous Materials Programs (HazMat) in providing numerous trainings to PWD Maintenance Crews, including three sessions in Hazardous Substances and SWPPPs, which were held at the PWD Maintenance Squad Bays on October 8, 15, and 22, 2008. This training included proper hazard recognition of unknowns and abandoned containers in the field and how to cordon-off an area and initiate proper notifications. In addition to supplying awareness tools for Maintenance crews, a brainstorming activity ensued that allowed crews to share with each other some of the stormwater pollution prevention activities and BMPs they follow in carrying out their day-to-day maintenance operations. Training also included basic SWPPP contents for each of the three corporation yards, spill cleanup, and all Hazardous Waste Business Plan/Hazardous Waste Generator requirements.
This PY 2008/09 CWP was also fortunate to have the managerial support to fund the State Course FRO for New Employees on October 29 and 30, 2008, and FRO Refresher Training on November 4, 5, and 6, 2008. All segments were again provided by State certified trainers for County HazMat. The in-depth training supplied operational know-how for defensive action by first responders for containing hazardous materials releases. It included recognition exercises for roadway incidents including real-life hazardous materials responses, Department of Transportation Hazardous Waste Classification, Incident Command System organization, hazard awareness, basic chemical behaviors, entry routes, personal protective equipment, methods of responding to spills with defensive containment to prevent further exposure, and general methods to safeguard employees’ personal safety.
CWP participated in both the Hazardous Substances and FRO Training and staff was impressed by the level of expertise of the County’s HazMat trainers. They shared personal experiences in responding to actual hazardous materials releases throughout the County that gave the training concepts a reality that made the audience really pay attention.
CWP was glad to learn under the California Vehicle Code 2454 that for HazMat incidents on highways, the law enforcement agency with primary traffic investigative powers is the incident commander, which would be California Highway Patrol or the County Sheriff’s Office. For HazMat involving marine waters or waters of the State, the CA Department of Fish and Game is the Incident Commander. CWP was also glad to verify that HazMat notifications to the State Cal EMA (former Office of Emergency Services) are required for any quantity of hazardous materials released to the environment, and if oil is discharged, it is mandatory to also report the release to the National Response Center. This requirement confirmed CWP’s Oil Spill Notification Postcard, which was discussed in the Illicit Discharge section of this Annual Report.
Homeless Encampment Cleanup and Presentation
CWP participated both physically and monetarily to a coordinated homeless encampment cleanup held on February 20 and 21, 2009. The homeless encampment and trash abatement effort was coordinated by the Homeless Task Force via the County Administrators Office and included participation by PWD Maintenance, Flood Control, Sheriff’s Office, East Bay Regional Park District, City of Concord, and Caltrans, among other agencies. Crews cleaned up 15 encampments under bridge abutments along Walnut and Grayson Creeks manually and with boom trucks and other heavy equipment. Over seven dumpsters of debris were collected from these vital waterways.
A joint presentation of the effort was shared with other municipalities during CCCWP’s Spring Municipal Maintenance Training Workshop held on April 24, 2009, at the Centre of Concord. PWD Maintenance Flood Control, CWP, Health Services Dept. Homeless Program and the City of Concord shared this event’s success and lessons learned in the hopes of encouraging other municipalities to conduct such a cleanup.
In addition to this presentation, this year’s workshop, themed “Regulatory Requirements for Municipal Maintenance Supervisors and Coordinators” also included segments from CCCWP about the status of the upcoming MRP and its proposed Municipal Maintenance Requirements under Provision C.2 and C.10 (Trash Reduction), Environmental Health’s Waste Tire Program, Central Sanitary District’s Sewer Overflow Regulatory Requirements, and HazMat’s Municipal Responsibility for Spills. Several inspectors from various County Department’s were in attendance.
Integrated Pest Management and Pesticide Toxicity Reduction
The CWP works with all County Departments that apply pesticides to ensure that they are following accepted Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices and strategies. See Contra Costa County’s IPM Policy here. IPM is an approach to managing pests by combining biological, cultural, physical, and chemical tools in a way that minimizes economic, health, and environmental risks. Less toxic methods of pest controls, such as use of organic substances, are assessed before escalating interventions to the use of chemical alternatives.
The New Year brought the first IPM Coordinator to the County. Tanya Drlik began working for Contra Costa County in January 2009. She has over 35 years of experience in the field of IPM and was one of a team of pioneers who first applied IPM principals in an urban setting. Her most recent accomplishment prior to coming to the County was developing the first structural IPM certification program anywhere in the world: EcoWise Certified. This program evaluates pest control operators who manage pests in and around buildings and additionally has been approved and adopted by the CCCWP. All contractors engaged by the County that provide pest control services are now required to be IPM-certified by an organization such as EcoWise Certified (see for information regarding this certification program).
It is refreshing to have an IPM coordinator working for Contra Costa County. This allows for a formal way of creating policy to alert citizens and County staff of pesticide treatments on the County properties. Additionally, the coordinator provides advice on the County’s IPM programs at the Agricultural, General Services, and Public Works Departments to help develop detailed IPM plans for sites under their management.
A pesticide subcommittee has been formed this year to begin the discussion-making process for choosing pesticide products for the County. Each division in the County that uses pesticides will be evaluated, and a master plan will be developed that will provide recommendations for changes that can be made to reduce or eliminate the need for pesticide use while enhancing the beauty and functionality of the County’s maintained landscaped areas.
This PY 2008/09 CWP sent several employees from our staff, PWD Maintenance —Vegetation Management, and Flood Control, and General Services to several IPM related training courses. One was Professor Marc Merman’s IPM Seminar, approved by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation and the International Society of Arboriculture, which was held on September 25, 2008. The course discussed pests, and taught Integrated Pest Management approaches for dealing with them:
“Because it makes sense: In order to defeat your enemies, you must know them. The more you know about where they live, how they feed, when they mate, who their enemies are and how they can help you, the more successful you will be in your protective endeavors.”
—Marc Merman
CWP staff also participated in a 7-week course sponsored by CCCWP titled, Bay Friendly Landscaping, which works with nature and takes a holistic approach to the design, construction, and maintenance of the local landscape in order to reduce waste and prevent pollution of local creeks and the San Francisco Bay watershed. CWP believes the tools taught in this highly acclaimed course will be able to be employed by Municipal Maintenance staff in carrying out their daily jobs in harmony with the environment. For more information about the outreach for the class, go to the Public Education & Industrial Outreach section of this Annual Report.
Contra Costa County pesticide use has declined since FY 2000/01. The Agriculture Department has achieved a 66% reduction; General Services–Grounds Division has had a 71% reduction, and the PWD has made a 37% reduction of pesticide used. However, it is important to note that IPM is simply not a pesticide reduction program. It is a holistic, ecological approach to pest management that will have benefits for the County as well as the environment.
The 2009 Contra Costa County Watershed Calendar was handed out to 56,000 households and interested residents in the unincorporated portion of the County. Highlights for the month of April included messages on reducing pests and pesticides by learning about IPM to prevent pests and to use less toxic pest controls; hiring green businesses, like EcoWise Certified pest management professionals and Bay-Friendly certified landscapers; and reiterating the way to control ants with IPM is to not allow for regular perimeter spraying of premises.
Modifications:
None
Permit Year 2009/10 Municipal Maintenance Goals:
1. Develop a closer relationship with GSD staff. Review and ensure implementation with their SWPPP for their fleet services operations.
2. Ensure Maintenance staff view SWPPP for Municipal Operations DVD. Also share with GSD staff.
3. Work with PWD Maintenance Division management to ensure implementation of BMPs for municipal maintenance activities around the corporation yards and in the field.
4. Work with PWD Maintenance to create an access database for tracking previous years of catch basin inspection and cleaning data in order to look for trends in high collection areas and be able to prioritize cleaning schedules.
5. Continue to support the County IPM Coordinator in PWD’s implementation of the County’s IPM policy through participation in the IPM Task Force quarterly meetings.
6. Work with CCCWP on Proposition 218 Bill that would designate stormwater as a utility like sewer for increased funding needed to support upcoming requirements of the MRP.
7. Continue to work with other municipalities via CCCWP’s Municipal Maintenance workgroup to tackle some of the larger issues in the upcoming MRP like trash, PCBs, and Mercury reduction.
8. Work with PWD Maintenance Flood Control to reconcile discrepancy between Drainage Maintenance data from NPDES Reporting Forms and results queried from MaintStar.
9. Assist Delta Diablo Sanitary Service with Bay Point outreach for residents along street sweeping routes by mailing out notice of sweeping day and our Street Sweeping brochure.
10. Support the office of the County Administrator’s homeless task force to help cleanup homeless encampments along our Flood Control channels, which are frequently trash hot spots.
11. Update street sweeping schedule and route information to reflect recently added service areas.
Municipal Maintenance – quantitative results
| |Industrial Areas|Commercial Areas |Residential Areas | |
|Description | | | |Total |
| |
|Street Sweeping |
| | | | |663[1] |
|Total number of curb miles within Agency’s jurisdiction | | | | |
| | | | |453 |
|Number of curb miles swept | | | | |
| | | | |1920 |
|Total volume of material removed through sweeping (cubic | | | | |
|yards) | | | | |
| |
|Preliminary Estimated Mass (Dry Weight) of Constituents Removed by Street Sweeping |
|Total PCBs (lbs) | |0.06 |
|Total Mercury (lbs) | |0.28 |
| | |241.5 |
|Total Copper (lbs) | | |
| | |87.62 |
|Total Lead (lbs) | | |
|Total Nickel (lbs) | |72.66 |
|Total Zinc (lbs) | |384.69 |
| | |4701.79 |
|Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (lbs) | | |
| | |10258.46 |
|Total Oil and Grease (lbs) | | |
| |
|Publicly Owned Storm Drain Facilities |
| |
|Total Number of Storm Drain Facilities |
| | | | |8130 |
|Inlets | | | | |
| | | | |8 |
|Culverts (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |53 |
|V-Ditches/Roadside Ditches (miles) | | | | |
| |1 |0 |2 |1 |
|Pump Stations | | | | |
| | | | |82 |
|Constructed Channels (1) (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |858[2] |
|Natural Watercourses (2) (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |39 |
|Trash Racks | | | | |
| |
|Number of Storm Drain Facilities Inspected/Cleaned |
| | | | |8293 |
|Inlets | | | | |
| | | | |163 |
|Number of Storm Drain Inlets requiring more frequent cleaning| | | | |
| | | | |287 |
|Culverts | | | | |
| | | | |38.8 |
|V-Ditches/roadside ditches (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |3 |
|Pump stations | | | | |
| | | | |48 |
|Number of Pump Station Maintenance inspections | | | | |
| | | | |26.3 |
|Constructed Channels (1) (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |2.1 |
|Natural Watercourses (2) (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |123 |
|Trash racks | | | | |
| | | | |5 |
|Number of Illegal Dumping Hot Spots identified during Routine| | | | |
|Inspections | | | | |
| |
|Volume of Material Removed from Storm Drain Facility Cleaning (cubic yards) |
| | | | |794.8 |
|Inlets | | | | |
| | | | |50.4 |
|Culverts | | | | |
| | | | |9799.5 |
|V-Ditches/roadside ditches | | | | |
| | | | |- |
|Pump stations | | | | |
| | | | |1926 |
|Constructed Channels (1) | | | | |
| | | | |1083 |
|Natural Watercourses (2) | | | | |
| | | | |61.9 |
|Trash racks | | | | |
| |
|Preliminary Estimated Mass (Dry Weight) of Constituents Removed by Storm Drain Facility Cleaning |
| | | | |826.8 |
|Total Copper (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |1780.4 |
|Total Lead (lbs) | | | | |
|Total Zinc (lbs) | | | |54809.4 |
| | | | |37906.9 |
|Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |74358.5 |
|Total Oil and Grease (lbs) | | | | |
| |
|Miscellaneous Municipal Activities |
| | | | |2368 |
|Number of Municipal Maintenance Facility Inlets | | | | |
|Stenciled/Marked with the “No Dumping” Message | | | | |
| | | | |3600[3] |
|Number of Municipal Maintenance Facility Inspections for | | | | |
|Leaky Vehicles and Equipment | | | | |
| | | | |unknown |
|Total Volume of Material Collected from Litter Receptacles | | | | |
| |
|Pesticide/Herbicide Use |
| | | | |8626.6 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied (Reported as| | | | |
|lbs of A.I.) | | | | |
| | | | |See Above |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied (gallons) | | | | |
| | | | |0 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied with copper | | | | |
|as an active ingredient (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |0 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied with copper | | | | |
|as an active ingredient (gallons) | | | | |
| | | | |0 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied with diazinon| | | | |
|as an active ingredient (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |0 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied with diazinon| | | | |
|as an active ingredient (gallons) | | | | |
| |
|Fertilizer Use |
| | | | |26,200 |
|Total amount of fertilizer applied (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |- |
|Total amount of fertilizer applied (gallons) | | | | |
| |
|Number of Employees Attending Municipal Maintenance Training/Workshops |
| | | | |5 |
|Municipal training/workshops | | | | |
| | | | |2 |
|Program training/workshops | | | | |
| | | | |55,200 |
|Other: 2009 Contra Costa County Watershed Calendar (April | | | | |
|Message: Reduce Pests and Pesticides), Waterwise Gardening | | | | |
|CD | | | | |
| |
|Street Sweeping |
| | | | |663[4] |
|Total number of curb miles within Agency’s jurisdiction | | | | |
| | | | |453 |
|Number of curb miles swept | | | | |
| | | | |1920 |
|Total volume of material removed through sweeping (cubic | | | | |
|yards) | | | | |
| |
|Preliminary Estimated Mass (Dry Weight) of Constituents Removed by Street Sweeping |
|Total PCBs (lbs) | |0.06 |
|Total Mercury (lbs) | |0.28 |
| | |241.5 |
|Total Copper (lbs) | | |
| | |87.62 |
|Total Lead (lbs) | | |
|Total Nickel (lbs) | |72.66 |
|Total Zinc (lbs) | |384.69 |
| | |4701.79 |
|Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (lbs) | | |
| | |10258.46 |
|Total Oil and Grease (lbs) | | |
| |
|Publicly Owned Storm Drain Facilities |
| |
|Total Number of Storm Drain Facilities |
| | | | |8130 |
|Inlets | | | | |
| | | | |8 |
|Culverts (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |53 |
|V-Ditches/Roadside Ditches (miles) | | | | |
| |1 |0 |2 |1 |
|Pump Stations | | | | |
| | | | |82 |
|Constructed Channels (1) (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |858[5] |
|Natural Watercourses (2) (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |39 |
|Trash Racks | | | | |
| |Industrial Areas|Commercial Areas |Residential Areas | |
|Description | | | |Total |
| |
|Number of Storm Drain Facilities Inspected/Cleaned |
| | | | |8293 |
|Inlets | | | | |
| | | | |163 |
|Number of Storm Drain Inlets requiring more frequent cleaning| | | | |
| | | | |287 |
|Culverts | | | | |
| | | | |28.5 |
|V-Ditches/roadside ditches (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |3 |
|Pump stations | | | | |
| | | | |48 |
|Number of Pump Station Maintenance inspections | | | | |
| | | | |26.3 |
|Constructed Channels (1) (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |2.1 |
|Natural Watercourses (2) (miles) | | | | |
| | | | |123 |
|Trash Racks | | | | |
| | | | |0 |
|Number of Illegal Dumping Hot Spots identified during Routine| | | | |
|Inspections | | | | |
| |
|Volume of Material Removed from Storm Drain Facility Cleaning (cubic yards) |
| | | | |794.8 |
|Inlets | | | | |
| | | | |50.4 |
|Culverts | | | | |
| | | | |9799.5 |
|V-Ditches/roadside ditches | | | | |
| | | | |– |
|Pump stations | | | | |
| | | | |1926 |
|Constructed Channels (1) | | | | |
| | | | |1083 |
|Natural Watercourses (2) | | | | |
| | | | |61.9 |
|Trash Racks | | | | |
| |Industrial Areas|Commercial Areas |Residential Areas | |
|Description | | | |Total |
| |
|Preliminary Estimated Mass (Dry Weight) of Constituents Removed by Storm Drain Facility Cleaning |
| | | | |826.8 |
|Total Copper (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |1780.4 |
|Total Lead (lbs) | | | | |
|Total Zinc (lbs) | | | |54809.4 |
| | | | |37906.9 |
|Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |74358.5 |
|Total Oil and Grease (lbs) | | | | |
| |
|Miscellaneous Municipal Activities |
| | | | |2368 |
|Number of Municipal Maintenance Facility Inlets | | | | |
|Stenciled/Marked with the “No Dumping” Message | | | | |
| | | | |3600[6] |
|Number of Municipal Maintenance Facility Inspections for | | | | |
|Leaky Vehicles and Equipment | | | | |
| | | | |unknown |
|Total Volume of Material Collected from Litter Receptacles | | | | |
| |
|Pesticide/Herbicide Use |
| | | | |8626.6 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied (reported as| | | | |
|lbs of A.I.) | | | | |
| | | | |See Above |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied (gallons) | | | | |
| | | | |0 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied with copper | | | | |
|as an active ingredient (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |0 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied with copper | | | | |
|as an active ingredient (gallons) | | | | |
| |Industrial Areas|Commercial Areas |Residential Areas | |
|Description | | | |Total |
| | | | |0 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied with diazinon| | | | |
|as an active ingredient (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |0 |
|Total quantity of pesticides/herbicides applied with diazinon| | | | |
|as an active ingredient (gallons) | | | | |
| |
|Fertilizer Use |
| | | | |26,200 |
|Total amount of fertilizer applied (lbs) | | | | |
| | | | |– |
|Total amount of fertilizer applied (gallons) | | | | |
| |
|Number of Employees Attending Municipal Maintenance Training/Workshops |
| | | | |5 |
|Municipal training/workshops | | | | |
| | | | |2 |
|Program training/workshops | | | | |
| | | | |55,200 |
|Other: 2009 Contra Costa County Watershed Calendar (April | | | | |
|Message: Reduce Pests and Pesticides), Waterwise Gardening | | | | |
|CD | | | | |
1) Constructed Channels — A constructed channel means a constructed pathway for conveying stormwater runoff. The constructed channel may be earthen, rock or concrete lined. It is differentiated from a “v-ditch” in so much as it has a defined bed.
2) Natural Watercourses — A natural watercourse means a natural pathway for conveying stormwater runoff within defined bed and banks.
-----------------------
[1] This is the total miles of County roads. We don’t have a breakdown of curbed and uncurbed roads.
[2] This number includes named creeks and tributaries only. It does not include unnamed and ephemeral creeks.
[3] All County vehicles are inspected every 6 months or 4,000 miles, and all Sheriff’s Department vehicles are checked every 3 months.
[4] This is the total miles of County roads. We don’t have a breakdown of curbed and uncurbed roads.
[5] This number includes named creeks and tributaries only. It does not include unnamed and ephemeral creeks.
[6] All County vehicles are inspected every six months or 4,000 miles, and all Sheriff’s Department vehicles are checked every three months.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
Related searches
- maintenance worker appreciation day
- nyc health maintenance exam form
- diamond resorts default maintenance fees
- maintenance workers appreciation week 2019
- acura rdx maintenance a123
- acura maintenance a123
- national maintenance appreciation week 2019
- maintenance work order software programs
- acura maintenance code
- acura maintenance code a13
- acura maintenance codes
- maintenance workers appreciation day 2019