SECTION 4 :DWHU4XDOLW\&RPSOLDQFH

7KLVVHFWLRQRIWKH6:53SURYLGHVDQRYHUYLHZRI SWRP CHECKLIST GUIDELINES EHQHILFLDOXVHVRIZDWHUVZLWKLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHU ZDWHUVKHG ZDWHU TXDOLW\ UHJXODWRU\ VWDQGDUGV ܈ Plan identifies activities that generate or contribute SRWHQWLDOVRXUFHVRISROOXWDQWVDQGDQH[SODQDWLRQ to the pollution of storm water or dry weather runoff, or that impair the effective beneficial use of RIKRZWKH6:53LVFRQVLVWHQWZLWKH[LVWLQJDQG storm water or dry weather runoff. SODQQHGUHJXODWRU\UHTXLUHPHQWVDQGSHUPLWV ܈ Plan describes how it is consistent with and assists in, compliance with TMDL implementation  :$7(548$/,7<35,25,7,(6  plans and NPDES permits. See also Section 7.3.2. 7KH 1&5:4&% KDV LGHQWLILHG D YDULHW\ RI ܈ Plan identifies applicable permits and describes how it meets all applicable waste discharge EHQHILFLDOXVHVIRUWKHZDWHUVRIWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHU permit requirements. 7KH XVHV DUH RXWOLQHG LQ WKH 1&5:4&%¶V :DWHU4XDOLW\ &RQWURO 3ODQ IRU WKH 1RUWK &RDVW 5HJLRQ%HQHILFLDOXVHVDUHLGHQWLILHGE\WKH6WDWH:DWHU5HVRXUFHV&RQWURO%RDUG 6:5&% IRUDOO ZDWHUVRIWKH6WDWHDVGHILQHGE\&DOLIRUQLD:DWHU&RGHDQGPD\LQFOXGHDQ\RIWKHXVHVOLVWHG LQ7DEOHVXFKDV

x $JULFXOWXUDODQG,QGXVWULDO6XSSO\ x *URXQGZDWHU5HFKDUJH x 1DYLJDWLRQ x :DWHU&RQWDFW5HFUHDWLRQ x 1RQ&RQWDFW:DWHU5HFUHDWLRQ x &RPPHUFLDODQG6SRUW)LVKLQJ x :DUPDQG&ROG)UHVKZDWHU+DELWDW x :LOGOLIH+DELWDW x 5DUH7KUHDWHQHGRU(QGDQJHUV6SHFLHV x 0LJUDWLRQRI$TXDWLF2UJDQLVPV x 6SDZQLQJ5HSURGXFWLRQDQGRU(DUO\'HYHORSPHQW

,Q DGGLWLRQ WR WKHVH EHQHILFLDO XVHV WKH 5XVVLDQ 5LYHU ZDWHUVKHG KDV WKH SRWHQWLDO WR VXSSO\ LQGXVWULDOSURFHVVHVVXFKDVPLQLQJFRROLQJZDWHUVXSSO\K\GUDXOLFFRQYH\DQFHJUDYHOZDVKLQJ ILUH SURWHFWLRQ DQG RLO ZHOO UHSUHVVXUL]DWLRQ 7KH H[LVWLQJ DQG SRWHQWLDO IXWXUH EHQHILFLDO XVHV ZLWKLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHGDUHOLVWHGE\VXEUHJLRQDQGVXEZDWHUVKHGLQ7DEOH

)RU WKH PRVW SDUW SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ WKH XSSHU SRUWLRQV RI HDFK VXEUHJLRQ RI WKH ZDWHUVKHG HDFK 1&5:4&%+6$FRUUHODWHVWRRQHRUPRUHSODQQLQJDUHD+8&VXEZDWHUVKHGVDVGHILQHGE\WKH 86*HRORJLFDO6XUYH\ 86*6 ,QORZHUO\LQJSRUWLRQVRIWKHZDWHUVKHGMXGJHPHQWPXVWEHXVHGLQ LQIHUULQJDEHQHILFLDOXVHDVPLQRUGLIIHUHQFHVLQWKHGHILQLWLRQRISODQQLQJDUHDVGRRFFXU)RUWKH SXUSRVHRIWKH6:53WKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHGZDVGLYLGHGLQWRWKUHHVXEUHJLRQVZLWKQLQH86*6 +8&ZDWHUVKHGVDQG+8&VXEZDWHUVKHGVDVVKRZQRQ)LJXUH 

July 2018 4-1 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

7DEOH %H QHIL FLD O8VH 'HILQ LWLRQ VIR UWKH 5XVV LDQ 5LYH U:DWHUVKHG

Beneficial Use Abbreviation Description of Use Municipal and Water for community, military, or individual water supply systems including, but not MUN Domestic Supply limited to, drinking water supply. Water for farming, horticulture, or ranching including, but not limited to, irrigation, stock Agricultural Supply AGR watering, or support of vegetation for range grazing. Water for industrial activities that do not depend primarily on water quality including, but Industrial Service IND not limited to, mining, cooling water supply, hydraulic conveyance, gravel washing, fire Supply protection, or oil well repressurization. Industrial Process PRO Water for industrial activities that depend primarily on water quality. Supply Groundwater Water for natural or artificial recharge of groundwater for purposes of future extraction, GWR Recharge maintenance of water quality, or halting of saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers. Freshwater FRSH Water for natural or artificial maintenance of surface water quantity or quality (e.g., salinity). Replenishment Navigation NAV Water for shipping, travel, or other transportation by private, military or commercial vessels. Hydropower POW Water for hydropower generation. Generation Water for recreational activities involving body contact with water, where ingestion of Water Contact water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, swimming, REC-1 Recreation wading, water-skiing, skin and scuba diving, surfing, white-water activities, fishing, or use of natural hot springs. Water for recreational activities involving proximity to water, but not normally involving body contact with water, where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses Non-Contact Water REC-2 include, but are not limited to, picnicking, sunbathing, hiking, beachcombing, camping, Recreation boating, tidepool and marine life study, hunting, sightseeing, or aesthetic enjoyment in conjunction with the above activities. Water for commercial, recreational (sport) collection of fish, shellfish, or other aquatic Commercial and Sport COMM organisms including, but not limited to, uses involving organisms intended for human Fishing consumption or bait purposes. Warm Freshwater Water that supports warm water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation WARM Habitat or enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, or wildlife, including invertebrates. Cold Freshwater Water that supports cold water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation or COLD Habitat enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, or wildlife, including invertebrates. Water that supports terrestrial ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation Wildlife Habitat WILD and enhancement of terrestrial habitats, vegetation, wildlife (e.g., mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates), or wildlife water and food sources. Water that supports habitats necessary, at least in part, for the survival and successful Rare, Threatened, or RARE maintenance of plant or animal species established under state or federal law as rare, Endangered Species threatened or endangered. Migration of Aquatic Water that supports habitats necessary for migration or other temporary activities by MIGR Organisms aquatic organisms, such as anadromous fish. Spawning, Water that supports high quality aquatic habitats suitable for reproduction and early Reproduction, and/or SPWN development of fish. Early Development Water that supports habitats suitable for the collection of filter-feeding shellfish (e.g., Shellfish Harvesting SHELL clams, oysters, and mussels) for human consumption, commercial, or sports purposes. Water that supports estuarine ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation or Estuarine Habitat EST enhancement of estuarine habitats, vegetation, fish, shellfish, or wildlife (e.g., estuarine mammals, waterfowl, shorebirds). Water for aquaculture or mariculture operations including, but not limited to, Aquaculture AQUA propagation, cultivation, maintenance, or harvesting of aquatic plants and animals for human consumption or bait purposes. 

July 2018 4-2 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan 7DE OH %HQ HILFLD O8VH V D 

Municipal and NCRWQCB USGS HUC12 Domestic Freshwater Hydropower Shellfish Estuarine HSAs Subwatersheds Supply Replenishment Generation Harvesting Habitat Aquaculture Lower Russian River Subregion Green Valley Creek Dutch Bill Creek Guerneville EEPPEP Porter Creek Willow Creek East Austen Creek Austin Creek E P P Ward Creek Middle Russian River Subregion Upper Laguna de Santa Rosa Laguna PEEP P Lower Laguna de Santa Rosa Upper Santa Rosa Creek Santa Rosa E PP P Lower Santa Rosa Creek Porter Creek Mark West EEPP P Windsor Creek Soda Spring Creek Galloway Creek Lake Sonoma Warm Warm Springs Creek EEE E Springs Pena Creek Mill Creek West Slough Oat Valley Creek Gill Creek Sausal Creek Geyserville EEPP P Maacama Creek Franz Creek Brooks Creek Big Sulphur Alder Creek E P P Creek Little Sulphur Creek Upper Russian River Subregion East Fork Russian River Ackerman Creek Orrs Creek Nill Creek Morrison Creek Ukiah Robinson Creek EEEP P McNab Cree Feliz Creek Dooley Creek Cummiskey Creek Pieta Creek Burright Creek Coyote Lake Mendocino EEE P Valley Cold Creek Forsythe Forsythe Creek E P P Creek Salt Hollow Creek (a) The definitions of Beneficial Use are located in Table 4-1. P = Potential beneficial use E = Existing beneficial use 

s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.3\WQA\072017_3 Water Quality Russian River Watershed Association Last Revised: 12-22-17 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

 &OHDQ :D WHU$FW 6HFWL RQ  G /LVW 

6HFWLRQ G RIWKH&OHDQ:DWHU$FWOLVWVZDWHUERGLHVWKDWGRQRWPHHWZDWHUTXDOLW\VWDQGDUGV DQG DUH GHHPHG ³LPSDLUHG´ 7KH 1&5:4&% FROOHFWV PRQLWRULQJ GDWD DQG GHWHUPLQHV ZKLFK ZDWHUERGLHVZLOOEHDGGHGWRWKH6HFWLRQ G OLVW7KHOLVWFRPSLOHGE\1&5:4&%LVWKHQ DSSURYHG E\ WKH 6:5&% DQG WKH )HGHUDO (QYLURQPHQWDO3URWHFWLRQ $JHQF\ (3$  7KH 1&5:4&%LVDOVRUHVSRQVLEOHIRUGHYHORSLQJ70'/VIRULPSDLUHGZDWHUERGLHVZKLFKIDOOXQGHU LWVMXULVGLFWLRQ$QXSGDWHG6HFWLRQ G UHSRUWLVH[SHFWHGLQ

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



July 2018 4-4 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

7DEOH  G 3ULRUL W\3ROOXWDQW VLQWKH5XVVLDQ 5LYHU:DWHUVKHG D 

Location in the Watershed Water Quality Impairment Bacteria/Pathogens(b) All Hydrologic Sub-Areas in the Russian River Watershed Sedimentation/Siltation High Water Temperature Upper Russian River Subregion Coyote Valley HSA Mercury Ukiah HSA Aluminum Middle Russian River Subregion Geyserville HSA Diazinon Warm Springs HSA Mercury Lower Russian River Subregion Dissolved Oxygen Laguna HSA Mercury Nitrogen and Phosphorus Aluminum Dissolved Oxygen Mark West HSA Nitrogen and Phosphorus Manganese Santa Rosa HSA Mercury Specific Conductivity Guerneville HSA Aluminum Dissolved Oxygen (a) This list of impairments is from the 2012 Clean Water Act 303(d) list of Water Quality Limited Segments for the North Coast Region. (b) Not all HSAs in the Russian River watershed were listed as impaired on the 2012 303(d) list. However, more recent monitoring data identified fecal pathogen pollution in all HSAs in the watershed.

 7RWDO 0D[LPXP 'DLO\/RDG V 

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

7KH1&5:4&%KDVGHYHORSHGWKH'UDIW$FWLRQ3ODQIRUWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHU:DWHUVKHG3DWKRJHQ ,QGLFDWRU %DFWHULD 7RWDO 0D[LPXP 'DLO\ /RDG 1&5:4&% D  WR DGGUHVV WKH SDWKRJHQ LPSDLUPHQWVLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHG7KHDFWLRQSODQRXWOLQHVVSHFLILFVWUDWHJLHVIRUUHGXFLQJ

July 2018 4-5 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

SDWKRJHQGLVFKDUJHVWRZDWHUERGLHVZLWKLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHG1&5:4&%DQWLFLSDWHV IXOODWWDLQPHQWRIWKHSDWKRJHQZDWHUTXDOLW\REMHFWLYHZLWKLQ\HDUVRISODQLPSOHPHQWDWLRQ

7KH1&5:4&%DGRSWHGWKH7RWDO0D[LPXP'DLO\/RDG,PSOHPHQWDWLRQ3ROLF\6WDWHPHQWIRU 6HGLPHQW ,PSDLUHG 5HFHLYLQJ :DWHUV LQ WKH 1RUWK &RDVW 5HJLRQ DOVR NQRZQ DV WKH 6HGLPHQW70'/,PSOHPHQWDWLRQ3ROLF\ 1&5:4&% LQ1RYHPEHUDQGGHYHORSHG WKH:RUN3ODQWR&RQWURO([FHVV6HGLPHQWLQ6HGLPHQW,PSDLUHG:DWHUVKHGV 1&5:4&%  LQ  ,Q WKHVH GRFXPHQWV 1&5:4&% VWDII GLVFXVV D SODQ WR UHJXODWH VHGLPHQW SROOXWLRQ WKURXJKH[LVWLQJSHUPLWWLQJDQGHQIRUFHPHQWWRROV7KHSROLF\DOVRRXWOLQHVWDVNVWKDWQHHGWREH SHUIRUPHG WR DGGUHVV WKH ZDWHUVKHG¶V VHGLPHQW LPSDLUPHQW LQFOXGLQJ WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI D VHGLPHQWVRXUFHDQDO\VLVWRKHOSVHWWKHDSSURSULDWH70'/

7KH1&5:4&%DGRSWHGWKH3ROLF\6WDWHPHQWIRU,PSOHPHQWDWLRQRIWKH:DWHU4XDOLW\2EMHFWLYH IRU7HPSHUDWXUHLQWKH1RUWK&RDVW5HJLRQ 1&5:4&%D LQ-DQXDU\7KLVSROLF\ RXWOLQHV1&5:4&%¶VSODQWRDGGUHVVWKHZDWHUVKHG¶VWHPSHUDWXUHLPSDLUPHQWLQSDUWWKURXJKWKH GHYHORSPHQWRIDUHJLRQZLGHWHPSHUDWXUH70'/LPSOHPHQWDWLRQSROLF\

&XUUHQWO\WKHUHLVDQRQJRLQJVWDWHZLGHHIIRUWWRGHYHORSPHUFXU\70'/VIRUDWOHDVWODNHV DQGUHVHUYRLUVWKURXJKRXW&DOLIRUQLDLQFOXGLQJ/DNH6RQRPDDQG/DNH0HQGRFLQRZLWKLQWKH 5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHG7KH/DJXQDGH6DQWD5RVDVXEZDWHUVKHGLVQRWLQFOXGHGLQWKLVHIIRUW DQGWKHGHYHORSPHQWRID/DJXQDGH6DQWD5RVD70'/IRUPHUFXU\KDVQRW\HWEHHQVFKHGXOHG

$ 70'/ IRU KLJK OHYHOV RI DPPRQLD DQG ORZ GLVVROYHG R[\JHQ ZDV DSSURYHG LQ  IRU WKH /DJXQDGH6DQWD5RVD$UHYLVHGQXWULHQW70'/LQFOXGLQJQLWURJHQDQGSKRVSKRUXVDORQJZLWKD 70'/IRUGLVVROYHGR[\JHQDUHEHLQJGHYHORSHGE\WKH1&5:4&%IRUWKH/DJXQDGH6DQWD5RVD 1XWULHQWDQGGLVVROYHGR[\JHQ70'/VDUHDOVREHLQJGHYHORSHGIRUWKH6DQWD5RVD&UHHN+6$

 $&7,9,7,(67+$7327(17,$//<*(1(5$7 (25 &2175,%87( 72:$7(5 48$/,7< ,668(6 

7KH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHGKDVH[SHULHQFHGDQLQFUHDVHLQWRXULVPSRSXODWLRQVL]HDJULFXOWXUH DQGVWUHDPPRGLILFDWLRQZKLFKKDVJHQHUDWHGDUDQJHRIZDWHUTXDOLW\LVVXHVLQWKHUHJLRQ7KH PRVW XUEDQL]HG DUHDV LQ WKH ZDWHUVKHG LQFOXGLQJ 8NLDK :LQGVRU +HDOGVEXUJ 6DQWD 5RVD 6HEDVWRSRO5RKQHUW3DUNDQG&RWDWLKDYHLQFUHDVLQJLPSHUYLRXVDUHDVWKDWSURGXFHDQLQFUHDVHG YROXPH RI VWRUP ZDWHU UXQRII SHU DFUH FRPSDUHG WR XQGHYHORSHG DUHDV RI WKH ZDWHUVKHG 0&5&'  /HVV GHYHORSHG DUHDV RI WKH ZDWHUVKHG KRZHYHU FDQ DOVR FRQWULEXWH VLJQLILFDQWO\WRUHJLRQDOZDWHUTXDOLW\LPSDLUPHQWVZKHQDJULFXOWXUDOUXQRIIGHOLYHUVVHGLPHQWDQG RWKHUSROOXWDQWVWRZDWHUZD\V

 3RWHQ WLDO 6RXUFH VR I6HG LPH QW 

7KHUHDUHPDQ\VRXUFHVRIVHGLPHQWLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHG6RPHRIWKHVHLQFOXGHJUDYHO PLQLQJFRQYHUVLRQRIIRUHVWVWRDJULFXOWXUDOODQGFRQVWUXFWLRQDFWLYLWLHVXUEDQUXQRIIDQGZDWHU LQIUDVWUXFWXUH VXFK DV GLYHUVLRQV GDPV DQG OHYHHV $GGLWLRQDO VRXUFHV RI VHGLPHQW LQFOXGH JUD]LQJDJULFXOWXUHWLPEHUKDUYHVWDQGUXUDOURDGXVH

*UDYHOPLQLQJEHJDQLQDQGEHFDPHWKHSULQFLSDOPLQLQJLQGXVWU\IURP+HDOGVEXUJWR8NLDK LQWKHHDUO\V:KLOHJUDYHOPLQLQJLVQRORQJHUDSURPLQHQWLQGXVWU\LQWKHUHJLRQWKHHIIHFWV

July 2018 4-6 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

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¶VIORZLQVWHDGOHDGLQJWRFKDQQHOGRZQFXWWLQJLQWKHORZHUUHDFKHVRIWKHULYHU $VWULEXWDULHVUHVSRQGWRWKHORZHULQJRIWKHPDLQVWHP¶VVWUHDPEHGWKH\DOVRGRZQFXWOHDGLQJWR YHUWLFDOFKDQQHOEDQNVZKLFKDUHXQVWDEOHDQGYXOQHUDEOHWRHURVLRQ(URVLRQDOGRZQFXWWLQJUHGXFHV WKHFURVVVHFWLRQDODUHDRIDULYHURUVWUHDPDQGGXULQJIORRGIORZVWKLVFRQVWULFWLRQLQFUHDVHVIORZ YHORFLW\ZKLFKFDQIXUWKHUGHVWDELOL]HHPEDQNPHQWVUHOHDVLQJPRUHVHGLPHQW 0&5&' 

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

 3RWHQ WLDO 6RXUFH VR I%DF WHULD 3DWKR JHQ V 

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

1&5:4&% KDV DOVR IRXQG WKDW UHJDUGOHVV RI WKH WLPH RI \HDU EDFWHULDO FRQFHQWUDWLRQV DUH VLJQLILFDQWO\KLJKHULQGHYHORSHGDUHDVWKDQRWKHUDUHDV)HFDOLQGLFDWRUEDFWHULDFRQFHQWUDWLRQV FRUUHODWH ZLWK WKH SDUFHO GHQVLW\ RI DUHDV ZLWK RQVLWH ZDVWHZDWHU WUHDWPHQW V\VWHPV 1&5:4&%D  ,Q DGGLWLRQ WR KXPDQ ZDVWH LQFUHDVHG DPRXQWV RI DQLPDO ZDVWH IURP GDLULHVIDUPVDQGSHWVFDQFRQWULEXWHWRIHFDOEDFWHULDORDGV 0&5&' 

 3RWHQ WLDO 6RXUFH VR I7H PS HUDWX UH,QF UHDV H

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

July 2018 4-7 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

FRQVWUXFWLRQ FDQ DOVR LPSDFW ZDWHU WHPSHUDWXUH &RQWUROOHG GDP UHOHDVHV KDYH VKLIWHG KDELWDW FRQGLWLRQVWRIDYRUZDUPZDWHUILVKVSHFLHVE\LQFUHDVLQJWKHYROXPHRIZDUPVXPPHUIORZVDQG GHFUHDVLQJ WKH YROXPH RI FROG ZLQWHU IORZV 0&5&'   8UEDQL]DWLRQ LQFUHDVHV ZDWHU WHPSHUDWXUHVDVVWRUPZDWHUUXQRIIIURPGHYHORSHGDUHDVLVJHQHUDOO\PXFKZDUPHUWKDQUXQRII IURP XQGHYHORSHG DUHDV GXH WR WKH ZDUP XQVKDGHG LPSHUYLRXV VXUIDFHV XUEDQ UXQRII FRQWDFWV EHIRUHLWHQWHUVORFDOZDWHUERGLHV 55:$ 

 3RWHQ WLDO 6RXUFH VR I7UDV K

7KH PDLQ VRXUFHV RI WUDVK LQ WKH 5XVVLDQ 5LYHU ZDWHUVKHG DUH KRPHOHVV HQFDPSPHQWV GLUHFW OLWWHULQJIURPSXEOLFSDWKZD\VDQGYHKLFOHVDQGOLWWHUWUDQVSRUWHGYLDVWRUPGUDLQV)DVWIRRGWUDVK DQGOLWWHUDURXQGFRPPHUFLDOVKRSSLQJFHQWHUVLVDFRPPRQFRQFHUQWKURXJKRXWWKHZDWHUVKHG 2WKHUVRXUFHVRIWUDVKLQFOXGHSRRUO\PDLQWDLQHGGXPSVWHUVDQGWKHSUDFWLFHRIGXPSVWHUGLYLQJ 55:$ 

 3RWHQ WLDO 6RXUFH VR I0HUFXU \

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

,Q  D 6XUIDFH :DWHU $PELHQW 0RQLWRULQJ 3URJUDP 6:$03  UHSRUW SURGXFHG E\ WKH 6:5&% IRXQG WKDWVSRUWILVKLQWKH /DJXQDGH 6DQWD5RVD HVSHFLDOO\ EDVVFRQWDLQ OHYHOV RI PHWK\OPHUFXU\ JUHDWHU WKDQ WKH 1R &RQVXPSWLRQ $GYLVRU\ 7LVVXH /HYHO HVWDEOLVKHG E\ WKH 2IILFHRI(QYLURQPHQWDO+HDOWK+D]DUG$VVHVVPHQW 6:5&% 7KH/DJXQDGH6DQWD5RVD LVWKHRQO\ORFDWLRQZLWKKLJKPHWK\OPHUFXU\OHYHOVLGHQWLILHGLQWKHVWXG\WKDWGRHVQRWDOUHDG\ KDYHDILVKFRQVXPSWLRQDGYLVRU\LQSODFH7KHVRXUFHRIWKHKLJKPHWK\OPHUFXU\OHYHOVLQWKH /DJXQDGH6DQWD5RVDLVXQNQRZQDQGDGGLWLRQDOVWXGLHVQHHGWREHFRQGXFWHGWRGHWHUPLQHWKH VRXUFHVRIFRQWDPLQDWLRQEHIRUHUHJXODWRU\DFWLRQLVWDNHQ

 3RWHQ WLDO 6RXUFH VR I3KRV SKR URXV 1LWURJHQ 

6WRUP ZDWHU DQG GU\ ZHDWKHU UXQRII IURP DJULFXOWXUDO ODQGV FDQ ZDVK IHUWLOL]HU DQG XQWUHDWHG DQLPDOZDVWHZKLFKFRQWDLQERWKQLWURJHQDQGSKRVSKRUXVLQWRWULEXWDULHVDQGWKHPDLQVWHPRI WKH5XVVLDQ5LYHU2WKHUSRWHQWLDOVRXUFHVRISKRVSKRURXVLQFOXGHSHVWLFLGHVLQGXVWU\FOHDQLQJ FRPSRXQGVKXPDQDQG SHWZDVWHVDQGSKRVSKDWHFRQWDLQLQJURFNV2WKHUSRWHQWLDOVRXUFHVRI QLWURJHQLQFOXGHOHDNLQJVHSWLFWDQNV 55:$

 3RWHQ WLDO &DXV HV RI'HF UHDV HG 'LVVR OYH G2[ \JHQ 

$TXDWLF HFRV\VWHPV UHTXLUH D VXIILFLHQW OHYHO RI GLVVROYHG R[\JHQ WR DFFRPPRGDWH DHURELF RUJDQLVPVVXFKDVILVKDQGDTXDWLFLQVHFWV'LVVROYHGR[\JHQFRQWHQWIOXFWXDWHVQDWXUDOO\EXWLW FDQEHVHYHUHO\GHSOHWHGE\KXPDQDFWLYLWLHV

July 2018 4-8 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

$PDMRUFDXVHRIGHSOHWHGGLVVROYHGR[\JHQFRQWHQWLQZDWHUERGLHVLVLQFUHDVHGOHYHOVRIELRORJLFDO R[\JHQGHPDQG %2' 7KHGLVFKDUJHRIXQWUHDWHGKXPDQDQGDQLPDOZDVWH DQGWRDOHVVHUH[WHQW WUHDWHGZDVWH WRZDWHUZD\VLQFUHDVHV %2'ZKLFKLQWXUQLQFUHDVHVWKHUDWHRIR[\JHQFRQVXPSWLRQ LQWKHZDWHUERG\,IWKHUDWHRIR[\JHQFRQVXPSWLRQH[FHHGVWKHUDWHDWZKLFKSODQWVDQGQDWXUDO DHUDWLRQFDQUHSOHQLVKWKHGLVVROYHGR[\JHQFRQWHQWWKHGLVVROYHGR[\JHQFRQWHQWZLOOGHFUHDVH

6HGLPHQWDWLRQDQGLQFUHDVHGZDWHUWHPSHUDWXUHFDQDOVRFRQWULEXWHWRGHFUHDVHGGLVVROYHGR[\JHQ FRQWHQW6HGLPHQWDWLRQLQFUHDVHVWXUELGLW\ZKLFKSUHYHQWVVXQOLJKWIURPUHDFKLQJDTXDWLFSODQWV :LWKRXW VXQOLJKW SODQWV FDQQRW SHUIRUP WKH SKRWRV\QWKHVLV QHHGHG WR UHSOHQLVK WKH GLVVROYHG R[\JHQ FRQVXPHG E\ DHURELF RUJDQLVPV 7KHUPDO SROOXWLRQ DQG LQFUHDVHG ZDWHU WHPSHUDWXUH GHFUHDVHVWKHDELOLW\RIZDWHUWRKROGGLVVROYHGR[\JHQ

7KHGLVFKDUJHRIH[FHVVQXWULHQWVHVSHFLDOO\QLWURJHQDQGSKRVSKRURXVWRZDWHUZD\VLVNQRZQDV HXWURSKLFDWLRQDQGFDQOHDGWRFULWLFDOO\ORZGLVVROYHGR[\JHQFRQWHQW([FHVVQXWULHQWVDQGZDUP ZDWHUWHPSHUDWXUHSURPRWHVWKHJURZWKRIDOJDOEORRPVZKLFKEORFNVXQOLJKWIURPUHDFKLQJSODQWV DQG LQFUHDVH %2' DV WKH GHDG DOJDH VLQNV WR WKH ERWWRP RI WKH ZDWHUZD\ DQG GHFRPSRVHV 0&5'& 

 &216,67 (1&<:,7+70'/,03/(0(17$7,213/$16

7KLVVHFWLRQRIWKH6:53SURYLGHVDVXPPDU\VWDWXVRIYDULRXV70'/VDQGLGHQWLILHVRWKHUSODQV GHYHORSHG WR DGGUHVV WKH UHGXFWLRQ LQ SROOXWDQW ORDGLQJ LQ WKH ZDWHUVKHG 6:53 SURMHFW LPSOHPHQWDWLRQZLOOVXSSRUWFRPSOLDQFHZLWKH[LVWLQJDQGIXWXUH70'/LPSOHPHQWDWLRQSODQV XVLQJ D YDULHW\ RI VWUDWHJLHV PHQWLRQHG EHORZ EDVHG RQ W\SHV RI SROOXWDQWV 6HOHFWLQJ DQG LPSOHPHQWLQJ SURMHFWV WKDW FDQ LPSURYH WKH TXDOLW\ RI VWRUP ZDWHU DQG GU\ ZHDWKHU UXQRII LQFUHDVHVWKHXWLOLW\RIVWRUPZDWHUDVDUHVRXUFH

$VHWRIDSSURSULDWH%HVW0DQDJHPHQW3UDFWLFHV %03V ZHUHLGHQWLILHGLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHU ,QWHJUDWHG&RDVWDO:DWHUVKHG0DQDJHPHQW3ODQDQGDUHDOVRGLVFXVVHGEHORZ6HFWLRQGHVFULEHV LQGHWDLOWKHPHWKRGVIRULQFRUSRUDWLQJWKHDYDLODEOHLQIRUPDWLRQLQWKHVHSODQVLQWRWKHHYDOXDWLRQ RI6:53SURMHFWVIRUSULRULWL]DWLRQ

 6HGLP HQW

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

6:53SURMHFWVUHFRPPHQGHGIRUSULRULWL]DWLRQZHUHDVVHVVHGEDVHGRQHYDOXDWLRQFULWHULDRXWOLQHG E\WKH7$&DVGHVFULEHGLQ6HFWLRQ3URMHFWVFODLPLQJVHGLPHQWFDSWXUHDVDEHQHILWZHUHGLYLGHG LQWRWZREURDGFDWHJRULHVWKRVHZKLFKUHGXFHHURVLRQWKURXJKVWUHDPEDQNVWDELOL]DWLRQDQGWKRVH WKDWSURSRVHWRUHGXFHVHGLPHQWORDGVWKURXJKRWKHUPHWKRGV)LYH  6:53SURMHFWVTXDQWLILHG

July 2018 4-9 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

WKHDUHDRIEDQNWKDWWKH\ZRXOGVWDELOL]H)LIWHHQ  6:53SURMHFWVTXDQWLILHGWKHDPRXQWRI VHGLPHQWFDSWXUHGE\WKHSURMHFWWKURXJKRWKHUPHWKRGV2WKHUPHWKRGVXVHGE\VXEPLWWHGSURMHFWV LQFOXGH FDSWXULQJ DQG LQILOWUDWLQJ VHGLPHQWODGHQ VWRUP ZDWHU DQG GU\ ZHDWKHU UXQRII XVLQJ ELRVZDOHVDQGRWKHU/,'IHDWXUHVWRVORZIORZDQGILOWHUVHGLPHQWDQGUHGHVLJQLQJGLUWURDGVWR UHGXFHHURVLRQ

 %DFWH ULD3D WKRJ HQV 

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

 7HP SHUDW XUH

&XUUHQWO\ WKHUH DUH QR WHPSHUDWXUH 70'/V LQ SODFH LQ WKH 5XVVLDQ 5LYHU ZDWHUVKHG 6:53 SURMHFWVZLOOFRPSO\ZLWKDQ\IXWXUH70'/VVXFKDVWKRVHGLVFXVVHGLQWKH3ROLF\6WDWHPHQWIRU ,PSOHPHQWDWLRQ RI WKH :DWHU 4XDOLW\ 2EMHFWLYH IRU 7HPSHUDWXUH LQ WKH 1RUWK &RDVW 5HJLRQ 1&5:4&% D  $V GLVFXVVHG LQ WKH 3ROLF\ 6WDWHPHQW EHFDXVH VWUHDP IORZ DOWHUDWLRQV FDXVHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWORDGVDUHDOHDGLQJFDXVHRILQFUHDVHGZDWHUWHPSHUDWXUHDSSURDFKHV WRPLWLJDWHWKHLQFUHDVHLQZDWHUWHPSHUDWXUHVDUHSDUWLDOO\GHSHQGHQWRQWKHVXFFHVVRIPHDVXUHV WRGHFUHDVHH[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWDWLRQ5HVWRULQJULSDULDQYHJHWDWLRQZKLFKVKDGHVZDWHUERGLHVLV DQRWKHUPLWLJDWLRQVWUDWHJ\7KLVFRQWUROVWUDWHJ\FDQEHHVSHFLDOO\HIIHFWLYHDVYHJHWDWHGULSDULDQ EXIIHUVKHOSSUHYHQWVHGLPHQWHURVLRQ'HFUHDVLQJZDWHUGLYHUVLRQVWKURXJKVXEVWLWXWLRQRIZDWHU VRXUFHV RU FRQVHUYDWLRQ HIIRUWV FDQ DOVR EH DQ HIIHFWLYH VWUDWHJ\ WR PLWLJDWH LQFUHDVHG ZDWHU WHPSHUDWXUH 1&5:4&%D 7KLUW\RQH6:53SURMHFWVFODLPZDWHUWHPSHUDWXUHUHGXFWLRQ DVDSRVVLEOHSURMHFWEHQHILWZLWKVHYHQSURMHFWVTXDQWLI\LQJWKHDPRXQWRIWHPSHUDWXUHUHGXFWLRQ DVUDQJLQJIURPR&WRR&7KHPDMRULW\RIWKHVHSURMHFWVSODQWRDFFRPSOLVKWHPSHUDWXUH UHGXFWLRQE\UHYHJHWDWLQJULSDULDQDUHDVRUE\FDSWXULQJDQGLQILOWUDWLQJZDUPXUEDQUXQRII

 7UDVK 

7KHUHDUHQRWUDVK70'/VLQSODFHLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHGDQGQRIXWXUHWUDVK70'/VDUH SODQQHG 7KH FRPPXQLWLHV RI WKH 5XVVLDQ 5LYHU ZDWHUVKHG KDYH DOUHDG\ LPSOHPHQWHG PDQ\ WUDVKUHODWHG %03V 7KH 6:5&% :DWHU 4XDOLW\ &RQWURO 3ODQ IRU ,QODQG 6XUIDFH :DWHUV (QFORVHG%D\VDQG(VWXDULHVRI&DOLIRUQLD$SSHQGL[(7UDVK3URYLVLRQVDGRSWHGRQ$SULO UHTXLUHVWKDW06SHUPLWWHHVXVHDFRPELQDWLRQRIIXOOWUDVKFDSWXUHV\VWHPVPXOWLEHQHILWSURMHFWV

July 2018 4-10 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

RURWKHUFRQWUROVWRHOLPLQDWHWUDVKIURPVWRUPZDWHUGLVFKDUJHIURPPXQLFLSDOVWRUPVHZHUV\VWHPV 7RPHHWWKLVUHTXLUHPHQWDOO06SHUPLWWHHVLQWKHUHJLRQZLOOVXEPLWWUDVKLPSOHPHQWDWLRQSODQV WR WKH 1&5:4&% E\ 'HFHPEHU   ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH 55:$ LV FXUUHQWO\ GHYHORSLQJ D 7UDVK$VVHVVPHQW5HSRUWWKDWZLOOEHXVHGWRLGHQWLI\VWUDWHJLHVWRDGGUHVVWUDVKLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHU ZDWHUVKHG 7ZHOYH 6:53 SURMHFWV FODLP WUDVK FDSWXUH DV D SURMHFW EHQHILW ZLWK VHYHQ SURMHFWV TXDQWLI\LQJWKHDPRXQWRIWUDVKFDSWXUHG7KHVHSURMHFWVZLOOFDSWXUHWUDVKHLWKHUE\ILOWHULQJUXQRII WKURXJK/,'IHDWXUHVRUE\WUDSSLQJWUDVKLQGHWHQWLRQSRQGVDQGFDQDVVLVWLQPHHWLQJWKHJRDOVRI WKHWUDVKSURYLVLRQV

 0HUFXU \

7KHUH DUH QR PHUFXU\ 70'/V LQ SODFH LQ WKH 5XVVLDQ 5LYHU ZDWHUVKHG DOWKRXJK VHYHUDO DUH FXUUHQWO\EHLQJGHYHORSHGIRU/DNH0HQGRFLQR/DNH6RQRPDDQGWKH/DJXQDGH6DQWD5RVD 6:53SURMHFWVZLOOFRPSO\ZLWKDQ\DSSOLFDEOH70'/V%HFDXVHWKHVRXUFHVRIPHUFXU\LQWKH ZDWHUVKHGDUHSULPDULO\JHRORJLFSURMHFWVWKDWUHGXFHVHGLPHQWDWLRQPD\UHGXFHPHUFXU\OHYHOV EXW WKH H[WHQW RI WKH SRVVLEOH LPSDFW LV XQNQRZQ 3URMHFWV WKDW FDSWXUHWUDVK PD\ DOVR UHGXFH PHUFXU\SROOXWLRQLIWKHWUDVKFDSWXUHGFRQWDLQVVLJQLILFDQWOHYHOVRIPHUFXU\

 3KRV SKR UR XV 1LWURJHQ 

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

7KHUHLVDFRQFHUQWKDW6:53SURMHFWVWKDWLQILOWUDWHQXWULHQWODGHQUXQRIIZKLOHEHQHILFLDOWR VXUIDFHZDWHUTXDOLW\PD\KDYHDGHWULPHQWDOLPSDFWRQJURXQGZDWHUTXDOLW\,Q0DUFKWKH 6DQWD5RVD3ODLQ6DOWDQG1XWULHQW0DQDJHPHQW3ODQZDVSXEOLVKHGLQUHVSRQVHWRWKH6WDWH¶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

July 2018 4-11 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

 'LVVR OYH G2[\JHQ 

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

 $33/,& $%/(3(5 0,76

7KHUHDUHH[LVWLQJSODQVSROLFLHVSURJUDPVDQGOHJLVODWLRQGLUHFWO\DQGLQGLUHFWO\UHODWHGWRVWRUP ZDWHUDQGGU\ZHDWKHUUXQRIIPDQDJHPHQWWKDWDSSO\WRWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHG$VXPPDU\ RISHUPLWVDQGWKHLUDSSOLFDELOLW\LVSURYLGHGLQ7DEOH

 1DWLRQ DO3R OOXWD QW'LV FKD UJH(OL PLQ DWLR Q6 \VW HP 3HUPL WV 

7KH6WDWHDQG5HJLRQDO:DWHU%RDUGVLVVXH13'(63HUPLWVIRUWKHGLVFKDUJHRIVWRUPZDWHUWR VXUIDFH ZDWHU XQGHU WKH DXWKRULW\ RI WKH )HGHUDO &OHDQ :DWHU $FW )HGHUDO &:$  DQG WKH &DOLIRUQLD :DWHU &RGH 8QGHU WKH DXWKRULW\ RI WKH &DOLIRUQLD :DWHU &RGH WKH 6:5&% DQG 5:4&%¶V LVVXH 13'(6 SHUPLWV DV :DVWH 'LVFKDUJH 5HTXLUHPHQWV 6WRUP ZDWHU GLVFKDUJHV UHJXODWHGE\13'(63HUPLWVLQFOXGHGLVFKDUJHVIURPFRQVWUXFWLRQDFWLYLWLHVLQGXVWULDODFWLYLWLHV DQG06V13'(6SHUPLWVDUHVHWRQDILYH\HDUVFKHGXOH3URMHFWSURSRQHQWVZLOOEHH[SHFWHGWR FRPSO\ZLWK13'(6SHUPLWVLIWKHLUSURMHFWVDUHIXQGHG7DEOHSURYLGHVDVXPPDU\RIDOO VWRUPZDWHU13'(6SHUPLWVDSSOLFDEOHLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHG

4.4.1.1 MS4 NPDES Permits

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³LWHUDWLYHSURFHVV´ ZLWK FRQWLQXRXV LPSURYHPHQW RI PDQDJHPHQWDFWLRQVWRPHHWZDWHU TXDOLW\ VWDQGDUGV $OO SHUPLWWHHV DUH UHTXLUHG WR UHSRUW RQ FRPSOLDQFH VWDWXV DQG SURJUDP LPSOHPHQWDWLRQRQDQDQQXDOEDVLVWRWKH6:5&%



July 2018 4-12 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan 7DEOH6XSSOHPHQWDO'HVFULSWLRQVRI)HGHUDO6WDWHDQG5HJLRQDO:DWHUVKHG3ODQV3ROLFLHVDQG3URJUDPV

Type of Regulation Title Agency Date Description CEQA is California’s broadest environmental law. Guides CDFG during issuance of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) CDFG 1970 permits and approval of projects. CEQA applies to all discretionary projects proposed to be conducted or approved by a California public agency.

CESA states that all native species of fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals, 1984 invertebrates, and plants, and their habitats, threatened with extinction and those California Endangered Species Act (CESA) CDFG (Federal 1973) experiencing a significant decline which, if not halted, would lead to a threatened or endangered designation, will be protected or preserved.

California’s comprehensive water quality control law and program to protect 1969

Overreaching Legislation Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act SWRCB beneficial uses. Requires adoption of Basin Plans by RWQCBs and that Basin (2011 Amended) Plans become part of the CWP.

Draft Regulations for Groundwater Replenishment with Dept. Public 2011 Draft TBD Recycled Water Health (CDPH)

Recycled Water Policy SWRCB 2011 TBD Policy for Water Quality Control for Recycled Water CDPH 2009 TBD

Dept of Water Presents status and trends for water-dependent resources, supplies, and demands. 2011 in California Water Plan (CWP) Update 2013 Resources Evaluates regional and statewide management strategies to identify effective Development (DWR) actions and policies. Includes Regional Basin Plans.

Phase I is intended to protect all State waters from dredge and fill discharges. Wetland and Riparian Area Protection Policy (WRAPP) Defines “wetlands;” “riparian”. Assessment framework for collecting and reporting Phase I: Wetland Area Protection Policy and Dredge SWRCB 2011 Phase I aquatic resource information. Phase II (expands scope to other potential threats) and Fill Regulations and Phase III (expands scope to include “Riparian” definition, objectives, and restoration) are in development. Applies to applications to appropriate water, small domestic use and stockpond registrations; and water right petitions. Focuses on protective measures for Policy for Maintaining Instream Flows in Northern anadromous fish. Seasonally limits diversions to high-flow periods. Prohibits California Coastal Streams SWRCB 2010 diversions until streamflows are higher than minimum instream flow needed by (North Coast Instream Flow Policy) fishes. Limits diversion rate to maintain habitat. Considers cumulative effects of diversions on flow. Restricts permitting of new onstream dams. Monitoring and reporting requirements. Workplan for Developing Biological Objectives for Defines a path toward creating biological objectives to protect aquatic resources of SWRCB 2010 Draft Perennial Wadeable Streams in the State of California the State. Establishes the State’s Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program. TMDL sets Water Quality Control Policy for Addressing Impaired limits on the amount of pollutants water can be exposed to before adversely Waters: Regulatory Structure and Options SWRCB 2005 impacting Beneficial Uses of water. Required by Section 303(d) of the Federal CWA, (TMDL Policy) established in 1972.

Plans and Policies Policies Plans and Water Quality Control Policy for developing California’s Describes the process by which the SWRCB and Regional Boards will comply with the SWRCB 2004 Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list listing requirements of Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA).

For Pacific Ocean waters adjacent to the California coast outside enclosed bays, estuaries, and coastal lagoons. Beneficial Uses establishment. Water quality Water Quality Plan for Ocean Waters of California 1972 SWRCB objectives. Effluent quality requirements. Waste discharge prohibitions. Waste (Ocean Plan) 1990 Update management principles. Provides for designation of Areas of Special Biological Significance with special water quality requirements. Provides full protection to current and potential sources of drinking water standards. Policy on Sources of Drinking Water SWRCB 1988 Provides conditions for exceptions. Nonpoint Source Management Plan SWRCB 1988 Identifies nonpoint source control programs and milestones. Effluent limitations. Requires Regional Water Quality Control Boards (i.e. NCRWQCB) to conduct Policy with Respect to Water Reclamation in California SWRCB 1977 reclamation surveys and actions. Water quality principles and guidelines. Prevent degradation of water quality. Protect Water Quality Control Policy for the Enclosed Bays and 1974 SWRCB Beneficial Uses. Does not apply to vessel waste or land runoff except for siltation Estuaries of California (Antidegradation Policy) 1995 Update and sewer flows. Water Quality Plan for the Control of Temperature in the For thermal characteristics of water and waste discharges. Water quality objectives. Coastal and Interstate Waters and Enclosed Bays and SWRCB 1972 Effluent quality limits. Discharge prohibitions. Estuaries of California (Thermal Plan) Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Requires continued maintenance of existing high-quality waters. Provides conditions SWRCB 1968 Quality Waters in California (Antidegradation Policy) for exceptions. Requires State to develop statewide regulations for septic systems to ensure Draft Regulations for Groundwater Replenishment with NCRWQCB 2011 Draft surface and ground waters are not contaminated by domestic septic system waste Recycled Water and are safe for Beneficial Uses. Russian River and tributary monitoring at several sites to determine bacteria NCRWQCB and abundance and variability (1996-2010). 2011-2012 efforts aimed at development of Sonoma County Pathogens in the Russian River Policy 1996 Russian River Pathogen TMDL. Land use, beach use impacts on bacteria levels. Dept. of Health Quality assurance project plans (QUAPP). Establishes bacteria thresholds for human Services health. NCRWQCB, Plans and Policies Policies and Plans Regulates discharges from logging and associated timber harvest activities. Timber CAL FIRE, State Timber Policy 1972 Harvest Plans (THPs), Habitat Conservation Plans, Sustained Yield Plans reviewed. Board of Participates in TMDL development. Forestry To assist and support the State’s WRAPP. Describes each agency’s wetland Five Year Coordinated Work Plan for Wetlands CDFG and program activities and how they will coordinate to achieve common goals. Focus 2011 Conservation Program Development SWRCB is on Regulation; Monitoring and Assessment; Water Quality Standards for Wetlands; and Voluntary Restoration and Protection. California California Wetland Monitoring Workgroup Tenets of a Wetland Proposed in To develop standardized practices and methods to assist and support the State’s State Wetland and Riparian Monitoring Program Monitoring 2010 WRAPP. (WRAMP) Group Assessment of conditions of all surface waters; initial focus on wadeable perennial streams. Included TSMP, SMW, Coastal Fish Contamination Program, Reference Condition Management Program. Will capture data from TMDS, NPS, and State Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) SWRCB 2000 Watershed Project Support Programs. Does not monitor effluent or discharge, which is under NPDES permits and Waste Discharge Requirements. Uses the CEDEN database. All data eventually goes to EPA’s STORET database. Groundwater Ambient Monitoring & GAMA Collects data on chemicals in groundwater wells. Compiles and reports data SWRCB 2000 Assessment Program on Geo Tracker GAMA. Monitoring of acute and chronic toxicity of surface waters. Tests on organismal NCRWQCB, Inland Surface Waters Toxicity Testing 1993 growth, reproduction, survival. Describes extent, magnitude, type, source of surface UC Davis toxicity. Focus is on agricultural, mining, and urban areas. Database available. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Monitoring directed at areas of known or potential contamination of bays and SWRCB 1989 (NPDES) estuarian waters. Identifies and characterizes toxic hotspots. Database available.

Assessment/Monitoring Programs Programs Assessment/Monitoring Long-term monitoring of geographic and temporal (inter-annual) trends in toxic State Mussel Watch Program (SMW) SWRCB, CDFG 1977 pollution on the California coast. Database available 1977 to 2000. Detection and evaluation of toxic substances in organisms in fresh, estuarine, and marine water from sample stations Some stations monitor long-term trends, others Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) SWRCB, CDFG 1976 are temporarily established for priority projects as needed. Database available 1978 to 2000. Discharger Self-Monitoring and Compliance Monitoring as part of NPDES permits for ground and surface water. Complaint investigation and enforcement as North Coast Region Water Quality Monitoring Programs NCRWQCB Various appropriate. Special studies/ intensive surveys/ nonpoint source investigations. (Various) Aerial surveys to monitor facilities. Development of water quality models (e.g., for Russian River by DWR). Source: Russian River Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan, June 2012. 

s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section4\Tbls-Figs Russian River Watershed Association Last Revised: 12-20-17 Storm Water Resource Planning Grant Report Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

7DEOH 6WR UP:D WHU 13'( 63HU PLWV $SSOL FDE OHL QWK H5XV VLD Q5LY HU:D WHUVK HG 

Program Order Number Permittees NPDES Phase I MS4s R1-2015-0030 City of Cloverdale City of Cotati City of Healdsburg City of Rohnert Park City of Santa Rosa City of Sebastopol City of Ukiah County of Sonoma Sonoma County Water Agency Town of Windsor NPDES Small MS4s 2013-0001-DWQ County of Mendocino Sonoma State University NPDES Caltrans MS4 2012-0011-DWQ State of California, Department of Transportation NDPES Construction 2009-0009-DWQ Project disturbing an acre or more of land surface General Permit NPDES Industrial 2014-0057-DWQ Applicable Industrial Facilities General Permit

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

July 2018 4-14 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 4 Water Quality Compliance

$OO6:53SURMHFWVZLOOEHGHYHORSHGDQGLPSOHPHQWHGLQFRPSOLDQFHZLWKDSSOLFDEOH06SHUPLWV ZLWKLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHGE\SURSRQHQWVRQFHWKHSURMHFWLVIXQGHG $GGLWLRQDOO\6:53 SURMHFWV ZLOO VXSSRUW 06 SHUPLW FRPSOLDQFH GXH WR WKH ZDWHUVKHGZLGH UHJLRQDO DSSURDFK WR GHYHORSLQJPXOWLEHQHILWVWRUPZDWHUDQGGU\ZHDWKHUUXQRIIPDQDJHPHQWSURMHFWV

4.4.1.2 Construction General NPDES Permit

7KH6:5&%DGRSWHGWKH13'(6*HQHUDO3HUPLWIRU6WRUP:DWHU'LVFKDUJHV$VVRFLDWHGZLWK &RQVWUXFWLRQ DQG /DQG 'LVWXUEDQFH $FWLYLWLHV 2UGHU 1R ':4 &*3  RQ 6HSWHPEHUDQGDVDPHQGHGE\':4DQG':4$Q\FRQVWUXFWLRQ DFWLYLW\WKDWUHVXOWVLQODQGVXUIDFHGLVWXUEDQFHRIRQHDFUHRUPRUH RUVPDOOHUSURMHFWVLISDUWRI DFRPPRQODUJHUSODQGHYHORSPHQW PXVWREWDLQFRYHUDJHRIWKH&*37KH&*3UHTXLUHVWKH GLVFKDUJH RI ZDWHUV IURP SURMHFW VLWHV WR PHHW DOO GLVFKDUJH SURKLELWLRQV UHFHLYLQJ ZDWHU OLPLWDWLRQV DQG HIIOXHQW OLPLWDWLRQV WKURXJK WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI D 6WRUP :DWHU 3ROOXWLRQ 3UHYHQWLRQ3ODQ 6:333 LPSOHPHQWDWLRQRI%03VPRQLWRULQJDQGUHSRUWLQJ6:53SURMHFWV GLVWXUELQJRQHDFUHRUPRUHRIODQGVXUIDFHZLOOEHUHTXLUHGWRREWDLQFRYHUDJHDQGFRPSO\ZLWK &*3UHTXLUHPHQWV7KH&*3H[SLUHGRQ6HSWHPEHUDQGLVDGPLQLVWUDWLYHO\H[WHQGHGXQWLO WKH6:5&%DGRSWVDQHZSHUPLW7KHQHZSHUPLWZLOOVXSHUVHGH2UGHU1R':4 6:53SURMHFWVWKDWDUHIXQGHGDQGUHTXLUHODQGGLVWXUEDQFHVZLOOEHUHTXLUHGWRREWDLQFRYHUDJH XQGHUWKHQHZSHUPLWRQFHDGRSWHG 6:5&% 

4.4.1.3 Industrial General NPDES Permit

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

July 2018 4-15 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 4\012418_Sec 4 Storm Water Resource Plan  SECTION 5 2UJDQL]DWLRQ&RRUGLQDWLRQDQG&ROODERUDWLRQ

7KLVVHFWLRQRIWKH6:53SURYLGHVDQRYHUYLHZRI SWRP CHECKLIST GUIDELINES WKH UHODWLRQVKLSV FRRUGLQDWLRQ DQG FROODERUDWLRQ EHWZHHQWKH55:$WKH7$&WKHSXEOLFYDULRXV ց Local agencies and nongovernmental VWDNHKROGHUVDQGRWKHUDJHQFLHVZKRSDUWLFLSDWHG organizations were consulted in Plan development. LQ WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH 6:53 &ROODERUDWLRQ ց Community participation was provided for in Plan DQGSXEOLFRXWUHDFKDUHDIRFXVRIWKH55:$DWDOO development. See also Section 9. ց Plan includes description of the existing WLPHV DQG KDYH EHHQ NH\ VWUHQJWKV LQ GHYHORSLQJ integrated regional water management group(s) WKH6:537KH55:$PDGHHIIRUWVWRUHDFKRXW implementing an integrated regional water WRVWDNHKROGHUVDQGFROODERUDWRUVLQGLYLGXDOO\DQG management plan. SHU WKH 6:53 *XLGHOLQHV VRXJKW RXWUHDFK ց Plan includes identification of and coordination with agencies and organizations that need to RSSRUWXQLWLHV WR FRQQHFW ZLWK GLVDGYDQWDJHG participate and implement their own authorities FRPPXQLWLHV '$&V  VHYHUHO\ GLVDGYDQWDJHG and mandates to address the storm water and dry weather runoff management objectives of the FRPPXQLWLHV 6'$&V  DQG QRQJRYHUQPHQWDO Plan for the targeted watershed. RUJDQL]DWLRQV $OWKRXJK WKHUH DUH QR VSHFLDO ց Plan includes identification and discussion of SURYLVLRQVZLWKLQWKH6:53*XLGHOLQHVWKH55:$ public engagement efforts and community SXUVXHG RXWUHDFK WR WULEHV DV WULEDO FRPPXQLWLHV participation in Plan development. See also Section 9. IDFHZDWHUPDQDJHPHQWFKDOOHQJHVVLPLODUWR'$&V ց Plan includes identification of required decisions that 7KLVVHFWLRQH[SODLQVWKHUROHVDQGSDUWLFLSDWLRQRI must be made by local, state or federal regulatory PHPEHUVFROODERUDWRUVDQGFRPPXQLWLHVLQ6:53 agencies for Plan implementation and coordinated watershed-based or regional monitoring and GHYHORSPHQW DQG GHVFULEHV FRRUGLQDWLRQ ZLWK WKH visualization. See also Section 8.1. ,QWHJUDWHG 5HJLRQDO :DWHUVKHG 0DQDJHPHQW 3ODQ ց Plan describes planning and coordination of ,5:03  DQG RWKHU H[LVWLQJ SODQV RUGLQDQFHV existing local governmental agencies, including DQGSURJUDPV where necessary new or altered governance structures to support collaboration among two or more lead local agencies responsible for plan 7(&+1,&$/$'9,625<&200,77(( implementation. See also Section 8.2. ց Plan describes the relationship of the Plan to 7KH 55:$ SHUIRUPHG RXWUHDFK WR LWV PHPEHU other existing planning documents, ordinances, DJHQFLHVIURP)HEUXDU\WR-XQHWR and programs established by local agencies. LQIRUPWKHVHHQWLWLHVDERXWWKH6:53DQGDVVHVV ց Plan explains why individual agency participation in various isolated efforts is appropriate. LQWHUHVWLQSDUWLFLSDWLQJRQWKH7$&3RWHQWLDO7$& PHPEHUVZHUHLQIRUPHGWKDWWKHUHZRXOGEHPXOWLSOHDYHQXHVWRSDUWLFLSDWHLQWKHGHYHORSPHQWRI WKH 6:53 LQFOXGLQJ 7$& PHPEHUVKLS VWDNHKROGHU HQJDJHPHQW DQG SXEOLF FRPPHQW 7KH LQGLYLGXDOVOLVWHGLQ7DEOHH[SUHVVHGWKHDELOLW\DQGGHVLUHWREH7$&PHPEHUVDQGDJUHHGWR VHUYHRQWKH7$&

7KH7$&DQG7$&PHPEHUVZHUHUHTXLUHGWRJXLGH6:53GHYHORSPHQWWKURXJKSDUWLFLSDWLRQLQ PLOHVWRQHPHHWLQJVYRWLQJDQGGHFLVLRQPDNLQJIDFLOLWDWLRQRXWUHDFKDQGUHYLHZV7KHUROHRI WKH7$&DQGLWVPHPEHUVZDVWR

x )DFLOLWDWHVWDNHKROGHURXWUHDFKDQGUHYLHZWKH6WDNHKROGHU(QJDJHPHQW3ODQDQG SURMHFWZHEVLWH x $ORQJZLWKVWDNHKROGHUVVXJJHVWSURMHFWVIRUHYDOXDWLRQGXULQJWKH6:53SURFHVV x 3URYLGHDQ\DYDLODEOHGDWDWRVXSSRUWLGHQWLILFDWLRQDQGDQDO\VLVRISRWHQWLDOSURMHFWV x 6FUHHQSURMHFWVSURSRVHGE\WKH55:$7$&PHPEHUVVWDNHKROGHUVDQGWKHSXEOLF WRHQVXUHSURMHFWVZLOOPHHWWKHJRDOVRIWKH6:53

July 2018 5-1 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 5 Organization, Coordination, and Collaboration

x (VWDEOLVKWKHZDWHUVKHGV¶SULRULWLHVIRUYDULRXVEHQHILWW\SHV x $VVLJQEHQHILWVWRHDFKHYDOXDWHGSURMHFW x $VVLVW55:$LQLGHQWLI\LQJDSSURSULDWHPHWKRGVIRUTXDQWLI\LQJEHQHILWVDQGUHYLHZ PHPRUDQGDGRFXPHQWLQJWKHHYDOXDWLRQSURFHVVDQGPHWKRGV x 5DQNDQGSULRULWL]HWKHSURMHFWVIRUIXWXUHLPSOHPHQWDWLRQDQG x 5HYLHZDQGFRPPHQWRQWKH$GPLQLVWUDWLYH3XEOLFDQG)LQDO'UDIW6:53GRFXPHQWV DQGVHHNLQSXWIURPRWKHULQGLYLGXDOVZLWKLQHDFKRUJDQL]DWLRQDVQHFHVVDU\

7DEOH7HFKQLFDO$GYLVRU\&RPPLWWHH0HPEHUV

TAC Member Agency Eric Janzen City of Cloverdale Anwar Mirza City of Cotati Dirk Medema City of Healdsburg Nick Bennett City of Rohnert Park Heaven Moore City of Santa Rosa Henry Mikus City of Sebastopol Rick Seanor City of Ukiah Sarah Dukett County of Mendocino Will Stockard County of Sonoma Susan Haydon Sonoma County Water Agency Elizabeth Cargay Town of Windsor Mona Dougherty North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Harish Bagha State Water Resources Control Board 

38%/,&$1'67$.(+2/'(52875($&+3/$11,1*

7KURXJK 55:$¶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

July 2018 5-2 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 5 Organization, Coordination, and Collaboration

7DEOH6:53&ROODERUDWRUVDQG6WDNHKROGHUV

Collaborators Collaborating Entity Karen Gaffney Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District Tamara Alaniz Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control Peter Nico Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Natalie Manning NOAA Ann Johnston Sonoma Land Trust Keith Abeles Sonoma RCD Kara Heckert Sonoma RCD Sierra Cantor Gold Ridge Resource Conservation District Joe Scriven Mendocino County RCD Patricia Hickey Mendocino County RCD Lisa Micheli Pepperwood Preserve Kevin Munroe Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation Josh Collins San Francisco Estuary Institute Corbin Johnson Sonoma County, Regional Park Department Potential Stakeholder Representative Organization Brenda Adelman Russian River Watershed Protection Committee (RRWPC) Don McEnhill Russian Riverkeeper Katherine Gledhill West Coast Watershed Gretchen Schubeck Daily Acts Adriane Garayalde Russian River Confluence Chris Brokate Clean River Alliance Alex Johnson The Fresh Water Trust Scott Greacen Friends of the Eel River Daniel Muelrath Valley of the Moon Water District Matthew D Froneberger Forestville Water District Margaret A. Digenova American Water Steven Fuller-Raul Sonoma County Water Coalition Ethan Rotman USFWS Tallulah Winquist USFWS Tracie Nelson CADFG Dan Carney Marin Municipal Water District Helen Ryan California Indian Environmental Alliance (CIEA) Teri Shore Greenbelt Alliance Jenny Blaker Cotati Creek Critters 



July 2018 5-3 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 5 Organization, Coordination, and Collaboration

'XULQJWKH6:53GHYHORSPHQWSURFHVV55:$FRQVLVWHQWO\XSGDWHGLWVGHGLFDWHGZHESDJHDW ZZZUUZDWHUVKHGRUJSURMHFWVWRUPZDWHUUHVRXUFHSODQZLWKFXUUHQWLQIRUPDWLRQ7KHZHESDJHSURYLGHG XSGDWHVRQ6:53VWDWXVSURMHFWVXEPLWWDOGHDGOLQHVIHHGEDFNOHWWHUGHDGOLQHVDQGEULHIQHZV EXOOHWLQV$³:D\VWR6WD\8SWR'DWH´VHFWLRQSUHVHQWHGDQRXWOLQHRIWKH6:53DQGSODQQHGRU VXEPLWWHG GHOLYHUDEOHV 8VLQJ WKH 55:$ SODWIRUP IOLHUV DQG XSGDWHV ZHUH VHQW WKURXJK WKH FOHDQZDWHU#UUZDWHUVKHGRUJHPDLOOLVWDQGFRPPHQWVDQGTXHVWLRQVZHUHUHFHLYHGIURPWKHSXEOLF 6HYHUDO DGGLWLRQDO SXEOLFDWLRQ RXWOHWV ZHUH HPSOR\HG LQFOXGLQJ QHZVSDSHUV :HHNO\ H1HZV PHPEHUVKLSHPDLOVVRFLDOPHGLDDQGHYHQWSDJHV

2875($&+(9(176$1'&20081,7<,192/9(0(17

7KH ILUVW VWDNHKROGHU DQG SXEOLF RXWUHDFK PHHWLQJV ZHUH KHOG RQ -XQH   LQ 8NLDK DQG -XQHLQ6DQWD5RVD7KHSXEOLFPHHWLQJSUHVHQWHGWKH6:53¶VSXUSRVHJRDOVSURFHVV DQGVFKHGXOHDQGJDYHWKHSXEOLFDQRSSRUWXQLW\WRZHLJKLQRQWKHLUSULRULWLHVLQWKHHYDOXDWLRQ PDWUL[DQGUHODWLYHLPSRUWDQFHRIEHQHILWV6WDNHKROGHUVDQGFROODERUDWRUVZHUHLQIRUPHGRIWKH SXEOLFPHHWLQJWKURXJKHYHQWRXWUHDFKDWWKH/DNH6RQRPD6WHHOKHDG)HVWLYDOIOLHUVLQ(QJOLVK DQG6SDQLVKVHQWWRQHZVRXWOHWVDQGWKH55:$¶VVRFLDOPHGLDRXWOHWV

7KHVHFRQGVWDNHKROGHUDQGSXEOLFRXWUHDFKPHHWLQJWRRNSODFHRQ$SULOLQ&ORYHUGDOH 7KHVDPHRXWUHDFKSURFHVVHVZHUHXVHGWRUHDFKRXWWRWKHSXEOLFVWDNHKROGHUVDQGFROODERUDWRUV $IOLHUZDVFUHDWHGLQ(QJOLVKDQG6SDQLVKLQGLFDWLQJWKHWRSLFRIWKHPHHWLQJ'XULQJWKHSXEOLF PHHWLQJ WKH 55:$ SUHVHQWHG DQG VRXJKW LQSXW RQ WKH GUDIW 6:53 GRFXPHQW DQG RQ WKH HYDOXDWLRQFULWHULDUHODWLYHLPSRUWDQFHDQGUDQNLQJDQGSULRULWL]DWLRQRIWKH6:53SURMHFWV

&225',1$7,21:,7+27+(5$*(1&,(6$1'3/$11,1*())2576

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



July 2018 5-4 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 5 Organization, Coordination, and Collaboration

7DEOH'LVDGYDQWDJHG&RPPXQLWLHVLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHU:DWHUVKHG 1&53D 

Community Name Roseland Moorland Park Fulton Guerneville Monte Rio Calpella Cazadero Graton Hopland (SDACs) Hopland Rancheria (SDACs) Ukiah (SDACs) 

7DEOH1DWLYH$PHULFDQ7ULEDO7UXVW/DQGVLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHU:DWHUVKHG 1&53E 

Tribal Organization Cloverdale Rancheria of Pomo Indians Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians Dry Creek Rancheria of Pomo Indians Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria Guidiville Rancheria Hopland Band of Pomo Indians Lytton Rancheria of Pomo Indians(a) Pinoleville Pomo Nation Potter Valley Tribe Redwood Valley Rancheria of Pomo Indians (a) Tribe is not currently held in Trust by the United States Government and therefore was not mapped on Figure 3-10, Tribal Trust Lands. It was, however, contacted through CIEA. 

July 2018 5-5 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 5 Organization, Coordination, and Collaboration

7DEOH6RQRPD&RXQW\:DWHU&RDOLWLRQ&RQQHFWLRQV

Member Organizations Atascadero/Green Valley Creek Watershed Council Community Clean Water Institute Dry Creek Valley Association Friends of Mark West Watershed California River Watch O.W.L. Foundation Preserve Rural Sonoma County Russian River Watershed Protection Committee Sonoma County Conservation Action SWiG (Sebastopol Water Information Group) Sonoma Coast Surfrider Valley of the Moon Alliance Wine & Water Watch Supporting Organizations Bellevue Township California Native Plants Society: Milo Baker Chapter Concerned Citizens for Santa Rosa Coast Action Group Community Alliance with Family Farmers Forest Unlimited Forestville Citizens for Sensible Growth Friends of the Eel River Friends of the Gualala River Graton Community Projects Madrone Audubon Society NOWWE: New-Old Ways Wholistically Emerging Occidental Arts and Ecology Center - Water Institute Petaluma River Council Russian River Chamber of Commerce Sierra Club (Sonoma County Group) Town Hall Coalition Western Sonoma County Rural Alliance 

0HPEHUDJHQFLHVDQGFROODERUDWLQJHQWLWLHVSUHSDUHGOHWWHUVRIVXSSRUWGXULQJWKHJUDQWDSSOLFDWLRQ SURFHVV ZKLFK RXWOLQHG WKHLU UROHV DQG PDWFK FRQWULEXWLRQV DV VXPPDUL]HG LQ 7DEOH $V PHQWLRQHGLQWKHWDEOHWKH6RQRPD&RXQW\$JULFXOWXUDO3UHVHUYDWLRQDQG2SHQ6SDFH'LVWULFW SURYLGHG GHWDLOHG YHJHWDWLRQ PDS GDWD WKDW ZDV VLPSOLILHG LQ )LJXUH *HQHUDO /DQG 8VH 0HQGRFLQR&RXQW\¶VGDWDZDVQRWDVVSHFLILFDV6RQRPD&RXQW\¶VGDWDDQGWKHUHIRUHWKHGDWDVHWV ZHUHVLPSOLILHGWRUHODWHWRRQHDQRWKHU



July 2018 5-6 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan Table 5-6. RRWA Member and Collaborating Entity Roles in SWRP Development

Entity Role and Contributions RRWA Member Agencies (11) x Provide documentation and funding for RRWA coordination activities x County of Mendocino x Technical Working Group from member agency public works staff assists in prioritization x County of Sonoma of projects x Sonoma County Water Agency x RRWA Board of Directors will provide elected official leadership x City of Cloverdale x Assist in prioritization of projects x City of Cotati x City of Healdsburg x City of Rohnert Park x City of Santa Rosa x City of Sebastopol x City of Ukiah x Town of Windsor

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) x Oversee data management and analysis methodologies x Provide technical review x Provide review and input Permit & Resource Management Department (PRMD) - x Evaluate SWRP for ordinance and permitting compliance/consistency County of Sonoma x Provide support for mapping, resource planning, riparian habitat protection, storm water management review and permitting Sonoma County Regional Parks x Provide data on natural resource conditions x Provide review and input Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space x Provide data on derived from the Sonoma Veg Map and LIDAR project District (SCAPOSD) x Provide plan materials x Provide review and input Resource Conservation Districts (RCDs): Sonoma RCD, x Provide documentation and data management Gold Ridge RCD, Mendocino RCD x Provide best management practices on rural and agricultural practices that contribute to storm water or storm water mitigation x Assist in scoping the regional management objectives x Participate as a stakeholder in the identification of storm water projects x Provide expertise for potentially qualifying storm water projects in the Laguna de Santa Rosa x Provide review and input Sonoma Land Trust x Contribute data and provide analysis of storm water management on key public properties and land holdings x Provide review and input Pepperwood Preserve x Advise on the development of the SWRP based on current methodologies and climate models x Advise on stakeholder involvement x Provide review and input Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory x Advise on implementation methodologies x Provide interpretation for decision-making and planning activities related to the scientific validity and quality assurance of storm water capture and reuse. x Provide review and input Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation x Provide data on natural resources x Provide review and input National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) x Provide review and input Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water x Advise on natural resource management and water supply Conservation Improvement District x Provide review and input North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board x Assist in prioritization of projects (NCRWQCB) x Provide review and input

s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.6\January\Section5   Russian River Watershed Association Last Revised: 12-20-17 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 5 Organization, Coordination, and Collaboration

,17(*5$7('5(*,21$/:$7(56+('0$1$*(0(173/$1

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¶VSULRULWLHV7KH6:53LVVLPLODU LQVFRSHWRWKH,5:03EXWRQDZDWHUVKHGVFDOHUDWKHUWKDQDUHJLRQDOVFDOH

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

7DEOH,5:033KDVH,,,*RDOVDQG2EMHFWLYHV

Goals Objectives *RDO: Intraregional Objective 1: Respect local autonomy and local knowledge in Plan and project Cooperation & Adaptive development and implementation Management Objective 2: Provide an ongoing framework for inclusive, efficient intraregional cooperation and effective accountable IRWMP project implementation. *RDO: Economic Vitality Objective 3: Ensure that economically disadvantaged communities are supported and that project implementation enhances the economic vitality of disadvantaged communities. Objective 4: Conserve and improve the economic benefits of North Coast Region working landscapes and natural areas. *RDO: Ecosystem Objective 5: Conserve, enhance, and restore watersheds and aquatic ecosystems, Conservation & including functions, habitats, and elements that support biological diversity. Enhancement Objective 6: Enhance salmonid populations by conserving, enhancing, and restoring required habitats and watershed processes. *RDO: Beneficial Uses Objective 7: Ensure water supply reliability and quality for municipal, domestic, of Water agricultural, cultural, and recreational uses while minimizing impacts to sensitive resources. Objective 8: Improve drinking water quality and water related infrastructure to protect public health, with a focus on economically disadvantaged communities. Objective 9: Protect groundwater resources from over-drafting and contamination. *RDO: Climate Objective 10: Assess climate change effects, impacts, vulnerabilities, and strategies for Adaptation & Energy local and regional sectors. Independence Objective 11: Promote local energy independence, water/energy use efficiency, GHG emission reduction, and jobs creation. *RDO: Public Safety Objective 12: Improve flood protection and reduce flood risk in support of public safety.

July 2018 5-8 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 5 Organization, Coordination, and Collaboration

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¶VFRPPXQLW\DQGHQYLURQPHQW

5(*8/$725<,03$&7

7KH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHGDUHD¶VPDQ\H[LVWLQJSODQVVWXGLHVDQGGRFXPHQWVUHODWLQJWRVWRUP ZDWHU UHVRXUFH PDQDJHPHQW DUH RXWOLQHG LQ $SSHQGL[( 7KH OLVW LQFOXGHV NH\ H[LVWLQJ PDQDJHPHQWSODQVVWXGLHVDQGRWKHUGRFXPHQWVWKDWDGGUHVVVWRUPZDWHUUHVRXUFHPDQDJHPHQW ZLWKLQWKHK\GURORJLFERXQGDULHVRIWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHG$SSHQGL[(SURYLGHVWKHWLWOH DXWKRU DQG GDWH RI SXEOLFDWLRQ IRU HDFK GRFXPHQW 7KH H[LVWLQJ VWRUP ZDWHU RUGLQDQFHV IRU PXQLFLSDOLWLHVZLWKLQWKHZDWHUVKHGDUHOLVWHGLQ7DEOH

7DEOH([LVWLQJ0XQLFLSDODQG&RXQW\2UGLQDQFHV

County/Municipality Ordinance County Code Title 16 County of Mendocino Chapter 16.30 Stormwater Runoff Pollution Prevention Procedure County Code Chapter 11 County of Sonoma Section 6: Grading and Stormwater Management Municipal Code: Title 16: Environment City of Cloverdale Chapter 16.10 Stormwater Municipal Code: Title 13: Water, Sewers and Electrical City of Cotati Chapter 13.68 Stormwater Ordinance Ordinance No. 1054 City of Healdsburg Chapter 13.28 Urban Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Controls Municipal Code: Title 13 – Water and Sewers City of Rohnert Park Chapter 13.64 Stormwater Discharge Ordinance No. 3272 City of Santa Rosa Stormwater Ordinance, Chapter 17-12: Stormwater Municipal Code: Title 15: Water, Building & Construction City of Sebastopol Chapter 15.77 Urban Runoff Reduction Requirements; Chapter 15.78 Stormwater Low Impact Development Technical Design Manual Municipal Code: Division 4: Utilities City of Ukiah Chapter 8: Stormwater Discharge Ordinance No. 2008-249 and No. 2016-303 Town of Windsor Chapter 4 Stormwater Quality Sonoma County Not Applicable (The Water Agency does not have land authority and therefore does not Water Agency have ordinances.)

July 2018 5-9 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 5 Organization, Coordination, and Collaboration

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

0XQLFLSDOLWLHVLQWKH5XVVLDQ5LYHUZDWHUVKHGKDYHILYH\HDU&DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQW3ODQVLQSODFH 3HUWLQHQWSURMHFWVLQFOXGHGLQWKHVHSODQVFRQVLVWRILPSURYHPHQWVWRFUHHNVDQGGUDLQDJHV\VWHPV SDUNVZDWHUVKHGSODQQLQJDQGUHVWRUDWLRQIORRGFRQWUROPDQDJHPHQWUHF\FOHGZDWHUDQGZDWHU VWRUDJH7KHVHSODQVDUHOLVWHGLQ$SSHQGL[($V6:53SURMHFWVDUHIXQGHGWKH\PD\KDYHDQ LPSDFWRQIXWXUHORFDOSODQQLQJDQGEXGJHWLQJDQGOLNHZLVHSURMHFWVIURPVXFKSODQVPD\EH HOLJLEOHIRUIXWXUHJUDQWIXQGLQJDQGVKRXOGEHVXEPLWWHGIRUFRQVLGHUDWLRQLQ6:53XSGDWHV

:KLOHWKHUHDUHPDQ\RWKHUSODQVSURJUDPVDQGRUGLQDQFHVWKDWUHODWHWRWKH6:53DIHZSODQV WKDWUHODWHGLUHFWO\WRIORRGSURWHFWLRQZDWHUPDQDJHPHQWDQGUHODWHGLQIUDVWUXFWXUHDUH

x 0XQLFLSDO*HQHUDO3ODQV x /RFDO+D]DUG0LWLJDWLRQ3ODQV x 8UEDQ:DWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQV

(QWLWLHVLQYROYHGLQWKHGHYHORSPHQWRIWKHVHSODQVVKRXOGPRQLWRU6:53SURMHFWIXQGLQJDQG FRQVLGHUSURSRVLQJDSSURSULDWHSURMHFWVIRUFRQVLGHUDWLRQLQIXWXUH6:53XSGDWHV

,1',9,'8$/$*(1&<6:536833257352-(&76

7KUHHDJHQFLHVFRQGXFWHGDGGLWLRQDOHIIRUWVWRGHYHORSDQGVXSSRUWWKH65:37KRVHSURMHFWVDUH GHVFULEHGDVIROORZV

7KH:DWHU$JHQF\LVDUHJLRQDOOHDGHULQZDWHUUHVRXUFHVPDQDJHPHQW7KH:DWHU$JHQF\SURYLGHV ZKROHVDOHDQGUHWDLOGULQNLQJZDWHUVHUYLQJRYHUFXVWRPHUVLQ6RQRPDDQG0DULQ&RXQWLHV ,QDGGLWLRQWRPDQDJHPHQWDQGSURYLVLRQRISRWDEOHZDWHUVXSSO\WKH:DWHU$JHQF\¶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¶V6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW*URXQGZDWHU5HFKDUJH,QLWLDWLYHEHLQJFRQGXFWHGIRU WKUHH   JURXQGZDWHU EDVLQV LQFOXGLQJ 6DQWD 5RVD 3ODLQ 3HWDOXPD 9DOOH\ DQG 6RQRPD 9DOOH\ *URXQGZDWHU%DVLQV7KHILHOGLQYHVWLJDWLRQVZHUHFRQGXFWHGLQWKHZLQWHUDQGVSULQJRIZLWK DVXPPDU\GHYHORSHG-XO\DQGLQFOXGHGLQWKLV6:53DV$SSHQGL[*

July 2018 5-10 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 5 Organization, Coordination, and Collaboration

%DVHGRQWKHLQIRUPDWLRQJDWKHUHGGXULQJWKHILHOGLQYHVWLJDWLRQVWKH:DWHU$JHQF\GHYHORSHGD WHPSODWHIRUDSSOLFDWLRQWRRWKHUDUHDVZKHUHVWRUPZDWHUUHODWHGUHFKDUJHVWXGLHVDUHZDUUDQWHG 7KLVZRUNSHUIRUPHGDVSDUWRIWKH6:53FRPSOLPHQWVDQGIXUWKHUVWKHNQRZOHGJHEDVHIRUWKH :DWHU $JHQF\ DQG RWKHU VWDNHKROGHUV PDQDJLQJ PXOWLSOH EHQHILW VWRUPZDWHU SURMHFWV LQ WKHLU FRPPXQLWLHV7KH6WRUP:DWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQQLQJ$VVHVVPHQW7HPSODWHLVLQFOXGHGLQWKLV 6:53DV$SSHQGL[+

3HSSHUZRRG3UHVHUYHKDVDQH[LVWLQJUHODWLRQVKLSZLWKWKH55:$DQGSURYLGHGYDOXDEOHLQSXWIRU WKH6:533HSSHUZRRG3UHVHUYHDJUHHGWRSURYLGHDYDLODEOHUHIHUHQFHGRFXPHQWV*,6PDSSLQJ VWXGLHVDQGRWKHUGDWDWRFRPSOHWHWKH6:53DVZHOODVTXDOLWDWLYHRUTXDQWLWDWLYHGDWDWRVXSSRUW DQ\ SURMHFWV LW SURSRVHV IRU LQFOXVLRQ 3HSSHUZRRG 3UHVHUYH DOVR DGYLVHG RQ VWDNHKROGHU LQYROYHPHQWIRUWKH6:53

7KH6RQRPD/DQG7UXVW 6/7 LVDORFDOQRQSURILWRUJDQL]DWLRQDQGKDVEHHQUHFRJQL]HGDVD OHDGHULQGHYHORSLQJORQJWHUPODQGSURWHFWLRQVWUDWHJLHVDQGSURPRWLQJODQGFRQVHUYDWLRQDQG VWHZDUGVKLSVLQFH6/7KDVDQH[LVWLQJUHODWLRQVKLSZLWK55:$DQGSURYLGHGYDOXDEOHLQSXW IRUWKH6:536LPLODUWR3HSSHUZRRG3UHVHUYHWKH6/7DJUHHGWRSURYLGHDYDLODEOHUHIHUHQFH GRFXPHQWV*,6PDSSLQJVWXGLHVDQGRWKHUGDWDWRFRPSOHWHWKH6:53DVZHOODVTXDOLWDWLYHRU TXDQWLWDWLYHGDWDWRVXSSRUWDQ\SURMHFWVLWSURSRVHVIRULQFOXVLRQ



July 2018 5-11 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 5\012418_R Section 5 Storm Water Resource Plan SECTION 6 Quantitative Methods

To be consistent with State Water Code SWRP CHECKLIST GUIDELINES requirements, the Russian River SWRP was required to develop and utilize a metrics-based ܈ Plan includes an integrated metrics-based analysis to demonstrate that the Plan’s proposed storm analysis to demonstrate that its proposed storm water and dry weather capture projects and water and dry weather runoff projects and programs will satisfy the Plan’s identified water programs will satisfy the State’s identified water management objectives and multiple benefits. management objectives and provide multiple ܈ Plan includes an analysis of how each project and program complies with or is consistent with an benefits. This section outlines the overall applicable NPDES permit. The analysis should methodology for soliciting, screening, analyzing simulate the proposed watershed-based outcomes using modeling, calculations, pollutant mass and prioritizing SWRP projects in accordance balances, water volume balances, and/or other with the State Water Resource Control Board’s methods of analysis. Describes how each project or Storm Water Resource Plan Guidelines1 program will contribute to the preservation, restoration, or enhancement of watershed (SWRCB, 2015c). processes. See also Section 7.3.2. ܈ Plan includes an analysis of how collectively the 6.1 METHODOLOGY SELECTION projects and programs in the watershed will capture and use the proposed amount of storm water and Due to the wide variety of potential benefits to dry weather runoff. See also Section 7.3.1. ܈ Plan includes an analysis of how each project and different areas within the Russian River program will maximize and/or augment water watershed, the SWRP TAC developed an analysis supply and improve flood control. See also matrix to weigh the importance of each potential Sections 7.3.3 and 7.3.4. project benefit outlined in the SWRP Guidelines, ܈ Plan includes a narrative of how each project and program will benefit the environment and/or normalize the amount of benefit expected into a community, with some type of quantitative point score, and sum the total point value for all measurement. See also Sections 7.3.5 and 7.3.6. project benefits. This strategy allows local control ܈ Plan describes data collection and management, including: mechanisms by which data will be over the prioritization to optimize regional managed and stored; how data will be accessed by benefits, while ensuring compliance with stakeholders and the public; how existing water SWRP Guidelines that will position prioritized quality and water quality monitoring will be assessed; frequency at which data will be updated; projects for future funding solicitations. The and how data gaps will be identified. methodology is open and transparent, allowing input from the public, stakeholders, and the TAC, and it is adaptable to analysis of a variety of project proposals.

The methodology can be summarized as a four-step process: 1. Project identification; 2. Project screening; 3. Project evaluation; and 4. Project prioritization using the analysis matrix.

1 SWRP Guidelines, 2015. State Water Resources Control Board California Environmental Protection Agency, December 2015.

July 2018 6-1 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 6\012418_R Section 6 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 6 Quantitative Methods

6.1.1 Establishment of the Evaluation Matrix

6.1.1.1 Identification of Evaluation Criteria

In accordance with the SWRP Guidelines, SWRP projects must provide multiple benefits to maximize water supply, water quality, flood management, environmental, and other community benefits within the Russian River watershed. Projects can provide the required benefits in a variety of ways; therefore, the TAC, at its June 1, 2017 meeting, developed a draft list of project evaluation criteria that addresses the needs of the region. The list was revised and updated at the TAC’s July 25, 2017 meeting with the goal of ensuring that each potential benefit from the SWRP Guidelines would be reflected in the matrix. At the November 13, 2017 TAC meeting, minor updates were made to the evaluation criteria, which also reflected comments received from both the TAC and the RWQCB regarding establishing a closer connection between project evaluation criteria and the SWRP Guidelines. As shown in Table 6-1, potential project benefits from the SWRP Guidelines were assigned a code beginning with “M” for “Main Benefits” or “A” for “Additional Benefits”, and followed by a numeric identifier to strengthen and clarify the connection between the SWRP Guidelines and the SWRP project benefits.

Table 6-1. Storm Water and Dry Weather Runoff Management Benefits

Main Benefit Additional Benefit Benefit Category Code Projects Must Have At Least TWO Code Projects Must Have At Least ONE Water Quality A1 Non-point source pollution control while contributing to compliance with Increased filtration and/or M1 Reestablish natural drainage applicable permit treatment of runoff A2 and treatment and/or TMDL requirements Water Supply M2 Water supply reliability A3 Water conservation through groundwater management and/or M3 Conjunctive use runoff capture and use Decreased flood risk by reducing runoff Flood Management M4 A4 Reduced sanitary sewer overflows rate and/or volume Environmental and habitat protection Reduced energy use, greenhouse gas and improvement, including: A5 emissions, or provides a carbon sink M5 - wetland enhancement/creation; Environmental - riparian enhancement; and/or Reestablishment of the A6 - instream flow improvement natural hydrograph M6 Increased urban green space A7 Water temperature improvements M7 Employment opportunities created A8 Community involvement Community Enhance and/or create recreational M8 Public education A9 and public use areas

The project benefits identified in the SWRP Guidelines and project evaluation criteria selected by the TAC are listed in Table 6-2. It was noted that there was no discernable measure of benefit A2 “Reestablish natural drainage and treatment” (from Table 6-1) that was not already accounted for by other metrics (noted with asterisks in Table 6-2), and thus no individual A2 benefit was included in the Table 6-2 matrix.

July 2018 6-2 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 6\012418_R Section 6 Storm Water Resource Plan Table 6-2. SWRP Project Evaluation Criteria

Final Weightings by Project Benefit Watershed Sub-Region Number Project Benefit Type Evaluation Criteria Lower Middle Upper Water Quality Indices 303(d) Metal Load Reduction 4.5 4 4.3 303(d) Sediment Load Reduction 4 3.8 3.8 303(d) Sediment Load Reduction by bank stabilization 3.3 3 3.2 303(d) Coliform Load Reduction 3.3 3.7 3.1 M1(a) Water Quality Enhancement 303(d) Diazinon Reduction 3.5 4 3.3 (choose one) 303(d) Nitrogen or Phosphorous Reduction 3.5 3 4.3 303(d) Improved Dissolved Oxygen 3.5 3 4.3 303(d) Specific Conductivity Improvement 3.5 3 4.3 Trash Capture Projection 4.5 3.7 4.2 Non-Point Source Pollution A1 Includes Non-Point Source Pollution Control 2 2 2 Control

A7 Water Temperature Improvement 303(d) Temperature Reduction 2.5 2.5 2.4

Water Supply Indices M2(a) Water Supply Reliability Storage Volume, incl. Wetlands/Floodplains, Open Space 4.2 4.7 4.2 M3 Conjunctive Use Groundwater Recharge 3.7 4.7 5 A3 Water Conservation Reduced Water Use in Landscape 3.6 3.7 2.9 Flood Reduction Indices Volume of Reduced/Captured Runoff 4.5 4.5 4.3 M4(a) Decreased Flood Risk Reduction in Peak Flow Rate 4.5 4.5 4.3 (choose one) Does the Project Mitigate Regular, Localized Flooding? 3 4 3.6 Reduced Sanitary Sewer A4 Reduced Sanitary Sewer Overflows 2.3 2.7 2.1 Overflows Environmental Enhancement Indices Wetland Creation 3.1 3 3.5 M5(a) Environmental & Habitat Wetland Enhancement 3.1 3 3.5 (choose one) Protection & Improvement Riparian Restoration or Enhancement 3.6 2.3 3.5 Instream Flow Enhancement 4 3 3.9 M6 Increased Urban Green Space Urban Green Space Creation 2.9 3.3 3.5 Reduced Energy Use 2 2 2 A5 Reduced Energy Use, Gas Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2 2 2 (choose one) Emissions, Creates Carbon Sink Provides a Carbon Sink 2 2 2 A6(a) Re-establish Natural Hydrograph Project Restores a Natural Hydrograph 2 2 2 Community Benefit Indices M7 Employment Opportunities Employment Opportunities 2.8 2.3 3 M8 Public Education Public Education 4.1 2.7 3.5 A8 Community Involvement Project Encourages Community Involvement 3.1 1.7 2.5 A9 Pedestrian Paths 2.9 2.3 3 Enhance/Create Public Use (choose one) Recreation Added 3 2 4 (a) It is assumed A2: "Reestablish natural drainage and treatment" can be measured with the same metrics already listed.

s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\Section6 Russian River Watershed Association Last Revised: 12-19-17 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 6 Quantitative Methods

6.1.1.2 Weighting of Benefits The TAC, collaborating entities, stakeholders, and the public determined the importance of each evaluation criteria to the watershed, based on a solicitation for input that occurred at the June and July 2017 TAC meetings and public meetings held in both the Cities of Ukiah and Santa Rosa in June 2017. The weighting values ranged from one to five, with one being the least valued and five being the most valued evaluation criteria. Outreach to the public focused on identifying the importance of each of the five primary benefit types: water quality, water supply, flood management, environmental, and community. The public was asked to weigh each of these potential project benefits on a zero to five scale. Input from the TAC was solicited both before and after the public meetings, in order to allow for discussion and incorporation of public input. The TAC was requested to provide input at a more detailed level, providing a weight for each evaluation criteria on a zero to five scale. In addition, at the June 2017 TAC meeting, it was requested that the weightings be revised to reflect different weights based on the location of the project within the watershed. For the July 2017 TAC meeting, three subregions were identified, as shown on Figure 3-1 (Section 3). These three subregions represent, roughly, the lower, middle, and upper portions of the watershed. The map was presented and accepted by the TAC at the July 2017 meeting, and weightings for each evaluation criteria were set for each subregion by averaging the votes of TAC members in that subregion. Based on the revised evaluation criteria approved at the November 2017 TAC meeting, the weightings were revised slightly to incorporate new benefits in order to increase consistency. The final evaluation weightings are presented in Table 6-2. 6.2 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION An initial call for project concepts was made during the project kickoff meeting, with additional solicitations for project ideas made at both public meetings. An online project information form was released on June 28, 2017. The form recorded basic information about project recommendations, including contact information for project proponents, sponsors, descriptions, and the potential main and additional benefits. Ninety-five (95) project ideas were submitted for consideration in the SWRP between June 28 to September 29, 2017. Proponents ranged from member and collaborator agencies to members of the public and non-profits, and the range of potential project benefits encompassed all the State priorities. The full list of initial projects received for consideration is presented in Section 7. 6.3 PROJECT SCREENING During the June, July, and November 2017 TAC meetings, there were significant discussions of the potential project screening criteria that should be used to eliminate ineligible projects from consideration in the SWRP. The final list of screening criteria reflects the four mandatory criteria all projects must have to be included in the SWRP, consistent with the SWRP Guidelines, which are: x Project has a specific location within the Russian River watershed; x Project has at least two main (quantified) benefits and one additional benefit; x Project is legal and ethical in accordance with the SWRP Guidelines; and x Project is located on available and suitable public lands or an agreement to place a project on private land will be executed prior to application for implementation funding.

July 2018 6-4 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 6\012418_R Section 6 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 6 Quantitative Methods

Potential project submittals were reviewed to determine whether they met the screening criteria. A letter was returned to each project proponent on August 31, 2017 indicating the project’s screening status and a request for any missing and additional information that would be needed to quantify potential project benefits. The TAC determined a secondary screening criterion was needed to categorize projects to highlight those projects eligible for Proposition One and other future storm water and dry weather capture funding opportunities. The TAC agreed that this was not a mandatory criterion for a project to be included in the SRWP, but a helpful screening tool to easily identify storm water and dry weather runoff capture projects. All projects were screened for this secondary criterion to create a second prioritized list of projects.

6.4 PROJECT EVALUATION

Project evaluation reflected a two-step process: quantification of the benefits expected from each project, as developed by project proponents; and normalized scoring, which converts quantifications in a variety of units into a zero to five-point score for each benefit for each project.

6.4.1 Quantification of Benefits

A Quantification of Benefits form was provided to all project proponents during project screening to allow the collection of detailed project information in a consistent format. On this form, each project proponent noted the types of benefits that were expected from their project. If an amount of benefit could be quantified for a given evaluation criteria, this information was provided by the project proponent, as proponents have the greatest understanding of each individual project. Not all potential project benefits were quantified, but, in accordance with the Guidelines, at least two main benefits were quantified for each project that was prioritized. The methods used to quantify each benefit varied widely based on the benefit being measured, the location and type of project, as well as local and regional guidance. Benefit measures from the Quantification of Benefits form are reflected on Figure 6-1. Methods used to develop the quantifications for each project are outlined, by benefit type, in Appendix D.

July 2018 6-5 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 6\012418_R Section 6 Storm Water Resource Plan QUANTIFICATION OF PROJECT BENEFITS

Project Title: SWRP Project ID Number: Submitted By:

Please complete the table as follows: 1. Indicate which benefits your project provides in the “Provides Benefit” column. 2. For at least two of the main benefits your project provides, quantify those benefits in the “Estimated Value” column using at least one of the metrics associated with that benefit. Please note that, while you only need to provide quantitative benefit measures for two “State Identified” Main Benefits, projects providing more quantifications will likely receive a higher prioritization.

Benefit Code Benefit Provides Benefit Estimated Value Units of Measurement Explanation of Metric Click or tap here to enter text. lb/year Amount of aluminum, manganese, and mercury captured in an average year Click or tap here to enter text. lb/year Amount of sediments captured in an average year Click or tap here to enter text. sq-ft of bank Reduction of sediment load in an average year by bank stabilization Click or tap here to enter text. MPN/mL Reduction in average coliform bacteria concentration in receiving water body Water Quality M1 Increased Filtration and/or Treatment of Runoff ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. lb/year Amount of diazinon captured in an average year Click or tap here to enter text. lb/year Amount of total nitrogen and phosphorus captured in an average year Click or tap here to enter text. mg/L Increase in average dissolved oxygen content in receiving water body Click or tap here to enter text. % reduction Percent decrease in average specific conductivity in receiving water body Click or tap here to enter text. lb/year Amount of trash captured in an average year Click or tap here to enter text. acre-feet/year Amount of new onsite storage and use in a dry year M2 Water Supply Reliability ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. acre-feet/year Amount of infiltration into groundwater in an average year Water Supply Click or tap here to enter text. acre-feet/year Volume of potable water offset use in a dry year M3 Conjunctive Use ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. acre-feet/year Amount stored/recharged in an average year Click or tap here to enter text. % reduction Peak flow rate reduction in a 100-year event Flood Management M4 Decreased Flooding Rate/Volume ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. acre-feet/year Volume reduced or captured in a 100-year event ܆Yes ܆No Yes/No Does the project mitigate a regular, localized flooding issue?

Wetland Enhancement ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. acres Amount of wetland enhanced New Wetlands ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. acres Amount of new wetland created Environment & Habitat M5 Riparian Enhancement ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. sq-ft Amount of riparian habitat enhanced or restored Protection “State Identified” Main Benefits (Must Quantify at Least Two) Least at Quantify (Must Benefits Main “State Identified” Instream Flow Improvement ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. % of seasonal flow Percentage of critical seasonal flow M6 Increased Urban Green Space ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. acres Amount of new green space created M7 Employment Opportunities ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. FTE Expected number of full time equivalent positions created Community M8 Public Education ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. people/year Expected number of people reached A1 Nonpoint Source Pollution Control ܆Yes ܆No ܆Yes ܆No Yes/No Project includes non-point source pollution control Water Quality A2 Re-establish Natural Drainage/Treatment ܆Yes ܆No ܆Yes ܆No Yes/No Project re-establishes natural drainage and treatment

Water Supply A3 Water Conservation ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. acre-feet/year Volume water use reduction in an average year Flood Management A4 Reduced Sanitary Sewer Overflows ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. SSOs/year Number of sanitary sewer overflows expected to be avoided

Reduced Energy Use ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. kwH/year Amount of energy saved

A5 Reduced Greenhouse Gasses ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. lb CO2e/year Amount reduction of greenhouse gas emissions Environment & Habitat Provides Carbon Sink ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. Mg/acre Amount of carbon sequestered per acre Protection A6 Re-establish Natural Hydrograph ܆Yes ܆No ܆Yes ܆No Yes/No Project restores a natural hydrograph A7 Temperature Improvement ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. degrees Celsius Amount of temperature reduction during the critical season

A8 Community Involvement ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. people/year Expected number of people reached

“State Identified” Additional Benefits Additional “State Identified” Community Click or tap here to enter text. miles Pedestrian paths created A9 Improve/Create Recreation Area ܆Yes ܆No Click or tap here to enter text. people/year Expected number of users

s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.5.2\082517_QuantiBenefits Russian River Watershed Association Last Revised: 08-25-17 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 6 Quantitative Methods

6.4.2 Normalized Scoring

Because evaluation criteria may be measured in a variety of different units, depending on the type of benefit being quantified, it was necessary to normalize project scoring in order to assign points to each project for each benefit. This was done by determining the range of expected project benefits and assigning the project with the lowest amount of benefit a point score of one, and the project with the highest amount of benefit a point score of five. Scores of zero points were assigned to any project that is not expected to provide a given project benefit. All projects expected to provide a benefit then received a score between one and five points. Because, for most evaluation criteria, there is not an even distribution of the amount of expected benefit, a logarithmic distribution was used to assign a point score between one and five points to each project for each benefit, as shown in Example 1, below.

Example 1. Normalization of Quantified Evaluation Criteria for Four Sample Projects

Normalized Quantified Evaluation Sample Project Evaluation Criteria Logged Value Normalization Step Criteria Score Project A 3 0.5 Smallest value = 1 1.0 Project B 15 1.2 Linearly distribute 2.0 remaining logged values Project C 180 2.3 between 1 and 5 3.5 Project D 2000 3.3 Largest value = 5 5.0 6.5 TOTAL PROJECT SCORING AND PRIORITIZATION

Once each project received a score for each evaluation criterion, the score was multiplied by the weight assigned by the TAC to achieve a criteria-weighted score for that criterion. For some projects, where a single benefit can be measured by multiple evaluation criteria, as with water quality enhancement benefits, where a reduction in sediment loading and metals may occur for the same project, the highest weighted score for evaluation criteria within that benefit category was selected to represent the project’s score for that benefit. The criteria-weighted scores were then summed for all benefit categories to obtain the total weighted score for each project, as shown on Example 2, below.

Example 2. Scoring of a Sample Project with Quantified M2, M3, and M4 Benefits

Multiply by Largest Expected Weight for Score for Project Normalized Appropriate Criteria-Weighted Each Benefits Evaluation Criteria Score Subregion Score Benefit New onsite storage 2.4 x 4.2 = 10.1 M2 Groundwater infiltration x 4.2 = 0.0 14.7 Potable water offset 3.5 x 4.2 = 14.7 M3 Storage/recharge in a dry year 2.2 x 5.0 = 11.0 11.0

Sample Project A Peak flow reduction 4.4 x 4.3 = 18.9 M4 Storm volume reduced or captured x 4.3 = 0.0 18.9 Mitigates a regular flooding issue 5.0 x 3.6 = 18.0 Project A Total Weighted Score: 44.6

July 2018 6-7 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 6\012418_R Section 6 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 6 Quantitative Methods

6.5.1 Bonus Points Based on the priorities identified in the SWRP Guidelines, projects that provided certain elements should be prioritized for future State funding. Such projects include:

x Projects supported by entities that have created permanent, local, or regional funding; x Projects that use a metric-driven approach to maximize benefits within the watershed; x Projects located on lands in public ownership; x Projects that augment local water supplies; x Projects and programs that preserve, restore, or enhance watershed processes; and x Projects and programs that create or restore habitat, open space, parks, recreation, or green open space in disadvantaged communities.

The TAC used this list of State priorities, along with regional priorities, as a foundation for a bonus scoring system in the ranking of projects. The goal of the bonus scoring system was to provide additional points to projects that met these priorities to help them rank higher on the prioritization list. The TAC worked on developing the bonus scoring criteria, described below.

6.5.1.1 Projects with a Funding Match and Long-Term Operation & Maintenance Funding The TAC determined that projects already identified with a funding match and secured operation and maintenance funding should be a priority for implementation, as these funding sources are critical for future project funding and implementation. During project identification, project proponents were asked to verify that such funding would be available for their project(s) and to identify the project’s sponsor. These projects have been given an extra ten points in order to facilitate these projects ranking at a higher priority. This criterion is consistent with State priorities, as noted above.

6.5.1.2 Projects Serve a Disadvantaged or Severely Disadvantaged Community or Area of Environmental Injustice The SWRP Guidelines indicate that projects serving DACs, SDACs, and areas of environmental injustice are a high priority for Proposition One funding. The Russian River watershed includes DAC and SDAC areas, as recognized by the State of California and shown on Figure 6-2. The SWRP also seeks to support increased environmental justice projects, and recognizes the strong correlation between DACs and environmental injustice, as noted on Figure 6-2. The TAC agreed that supporting these communities is a high priority and elected to award fifteen bonus points to projects located within SDACs and ten bonus points to projects located within DACs.

6.5.1.3 Projects Located on Public Lands The SWRP Guidelines indicate that projects located on public land are a high priority for funding. Such projects may be located within parks, public open space, community gardens, farm and agricultural preserves, school sites, or on other government property. The locations of these land uses are identified on Figure 3-7 (Section 3). Projects on public lands are likely to provide more benefit to the community, including opportunities for public enjoyment, education, and outreach.

July 2018 6-8 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 6\012418_R Section 6 Storm Water Resource Plan Last Saved: 12/18/2017 3:06:18 PM \\SRS-FS1\Santa Rosa\Clients\592 Russian River Watershed Association 2014-2015\10-16-05 RRWA SWRP\GIS\MXD\SWRP Report\Section 6\6-2_DACs and EJ.mxd : areimer

E

E

L RI V E R

GGLLEE NNNN CCOO.. CCOOLLUUSS AA CCOO..

M

I D D L EC

R

E

E K

Ukiah

20

CLEAR LAKE 253

C 53 O L LAKE

128 GARC IA R IV E R

101

175

Cloverdale 29 D MMEENN DDOOCCIINNOO CCOO.. RY C RE P EK U SONOMASONOMA CO.CO. T P A UT H C A REE H K C R E

E K DR Y LAKELAKE CO.CO. P C NAPANAPA CO.CO. RE E K R U S S I A N R IV ER Healdsburg

NA PA RI Windsor VER

T CRE ES E K W K R 116 A

M

Santa Rosa N A 1 P A

12 Sebastopol

SAL MON K Pacific Ocean C REE Rohnert Park Cotati

Notes: 1. The data for economically disadvantaged communities was derived in 2016 by the Department of Water Resources to be S used in IRWMP planning. O MARINN CO. 2. Environmental Justices data comes from the Environmental O M Protection Agency EJSCREEN Tool updated in 2016. A C 3. Data shown is limited to the Russian River watershed. O . 121

Symbology Russian River Watershed North Coast Resource Partnership: Economically Disadvantaged Community Figure 6-2 Economically Disadvantaged Community Disadvantaged Communities and Severely Economically Disadvantaged Community Environmental Justice Index: National Priorities List Sites (Percentile %) Environmental Justice Indices 80 - 90 Percentile 063 90 - 95 Percentile Russian River Watershed Association

95 - 100 Percentile Miles Russian River Storm Water Resources Plan Section 6 Quantitative Methods

The TAC agreed that supporting projects on public lands would enhance the watershed and elected to award these projects five bonus points.

6.5.1.4 Projects that Meet Multiple Mandates Municipalities within the Russian River watershed are subject to meeting multiple regulatory requirements, including, but not limited to, municipal storm water requirements and future TMDLs. SWRP planning provides the opportunity to identify projects that can meet multiple water quality mandates, resulting in regulatory compliance while utilizing available resources in a fiscally responsible manner. The TAC agreed to award projects indicating a measurable improvement for more than one evaluation criteria within the M1 benefit three additional bonus points.

6.5.1.5 Projects with Unquantified Benefits

While the goal of the SWRP is to prioritize projects based on ranking quantifiable benefits, the TAC anticipates not all benefits identified will be (or can be) quantified. The TAC decided that if a project expects to realize a benefit, the project should receive some credit for that benefit, even if it cannot be quantified. The TAC agreed to award one bonus point for each unquantified benefit. Projects can receive multiple bonus points from unquantified benefits, but these bonus points are not multiplied by a weighting, as quantified benefits are, and thus the result is a lower score for unquantified benefits than for quantified benefits.

6.5.2 Project Prioritization

The comparison of all total weighted scores, including bonus points, provides a measure of the relative benefit of each project, and results in a prioritized list of projects. The TAC elected to develop two separate prioritized lists of projects: one that identifies priorities for future Proposition One funding solicitations, and one that prioritizes projects that may qualify for other future funding sources. Results of the prioritization process can be found in Section 7.

Projects submitted for consideration, but not included in the prioritization lists, will continue to be developed and evaluated. These projects are consistent with the types of multi-benefit projects solicited for the SWRP, but need further development. The SWRP is intended to be an adaptable plan, allowing additional projects to be evaluated and prioritized on an ongoing basis. As these projects advance and more information becomes available, they will be prioritized consistent with the process outlined in this section.

6.6 DATA MANAGEMENT

During the process of developing the SWRP, the RRWA was responsible for managing and storing the project data submitted by project proponents. As shown in Appendix C, the RRWA collected information in the form of reports, plans, permits, and geographic information system (GIS) data. Data collection occurred in the form of project submittals, data requests, and supplemental research. The information in reports, plans, permits, assessments, and other references was managed in Microsoft Access, which was used to identify relevant references as the SWRP was prepared.

July 2018 6-10 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 6\012418_R Section 6 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 6 Quantitative Methods

The SWRP has been submitted to the NCRP Board for incorporation into the IRWMP. All IRMWP projects, including implemented SWRP projects, are subject to the IRMWP Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Criteria, the North Coast Data Management Plan (NCRP, 2014) and the NCRP Project Performance & Monitoring Plan Guidelines. As described in these documents, all IRWMP projects are required to develop and implement a Project Performance Monitoring Plan. These plans specify data management responsibilities include the identification and use of a data management platform for data upload, quality assurance and quality control criteria, and submitting performance reports to the NCRP (NCRP, 2015). Data will be accessible to stakeholders and the public through the NCRP website at www.northcoastresourcepartnership.org, which provides summaries of IRWMP projects and their benefits. A feature where users with website accounts can access the NCRP project database is currently in development.

The NCRWQCB is currently working with the San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) to develop a regional monitoring program for the Russian River watershed known as the Russian River Regional Monitoring Program (R3MP). One of the main objectives of the R3MP will be to ensure water quality monitoring conducted in the watershed is adequately standardized, coordinated, and accessible. Although the R3MP is still in the process of being developed, it is anticipated that it would track SWRP project effectiveness for certain project benefits. The R3MP is being developed to track and account for improvements to beneficial uses that result from the implementation of storm water and dry weather runoff capture projects. Tracking SWRP project effectiveness would be a logical project for the R3MP to manage. Water quality monitoring at project sites will be conducted in accordance with all relevant requirements, including those set by MS4 NPDES Permits, Construction General NPDES Permits, and Industrial General NPDES Permits (see Section 4 for a discussion of these permits). In order to implement projects, proponents will submit applications for funding to a variety of agencies and funding sources. Water quality monitoring requirements may differ depending on the sources of funding for a given project. Water quality monitoring data will be assessed by the relevant regulatory agency(s), which is determined by the project location and the nature of the project, and uploaded to the agency’s portal and the NCRP project database.

Identifying and eliminating data gaps is essential for the SWRP to accurately identify and prioritize future projects. Regional data gaps are identified in the IRWMP (NCRP Section 13.3, 2014). Project-specific data gaps can be identified by tracking project submission data using organized and sortable spreadsheets. As many of the projects in the SWRP are still in their early planning stages, there are many data gaps which can be filled in future database updates. Current data gaps include:

x Unquantified benefits claimed by projects. Many projects were unable to quantify all of their benefits at the time of the development of the SWRP. As projects enter later stages of planning and design, an estimate of these benefits may be provided by the project proponents. In addition, improved estimates of currently quantified benefits may be provided by project proponents. x Project cost estimates. Many projects were unable to provide detailed cost estimates at the time of SWRP development. As projects enter later stages of planning and design, an estimate of cost may be provided by the project proponents. Improved estimates of current project cost estimates may be provided by project proponents in future.

July 2018 6-11 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 6\012418_R Section 6 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 6 Quantitative Methods

x Project funding sources. Many project proponents indicated that while they have applied for project funding from various sources, they do not know the amount of funding they will receive from those sources at this time. As funding agencies process these applications and as project proponents apply for additional funding sources, project funding data can be updated.

As data gaps are filled and existing data is updated, the IRWMP will update the project database at least annually, and more frequently if needed (NCRP Section 13.4, 2014).

July 2018 6-12 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 6\012418_R Section 6 Storm Water Resource Plan SECTION 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

This section presents the results of SWRP project SWRP CHECKLIST GUIDELINES prioritization, based on the project solicitation, screening, and evaluation conducted in accordance ܈ Plan identifies opportunities to augment local water supply through groundwater recharge or with the quantitative evaluation methodologies storage for beneficial use of storm water and dry described in Section 6. This section provides the list weather runoff. of project submittals, project descriptions, results of ܈ Plan identifies opportunities for source control for the prioritization evaluation, and two lists of both pollution and dry weather runoff volume, onsite and local infiltration, and use of storm prioritized projects: those that meet the standards for water and dry weather runoff. Proposition One funding based on the Storm Water ܈ Plan identifies projects that reestablish natural Resource Plan Guidelines1 (SWRP Guidelines), and water drainage treatment and infiltration systems, or mimic natural system functions to the those that meet the standards, while also providing maximum extent feasible. storm water capture, in accordance with the ܈ Plan identifies opportunities to develop, restore, Proposition One Storm Water Grant Program or enhance habitat and open space through Guidelines2 (Proposition One Guidelines). storm water and dry weather runoff management, including wetlands, riverside habitats, parkways, and parks. 7.1 PROJECT SUBMITTALS ܈ Plan identifies opportunities to use existing publicly owned lands and easements. As described in Section 6, project solicitation ܈ For new development and redevelopments, plan occurred between June 28, 2017 and identifies design criteria and best management practices to prevent storm water and dry weather September 29, 2017. Ninety-five (95) project ideas runoff pollution and increase effective storm were submitted for consideration in the SWRP. water and dry weather runoff management for Project proponents included member agencies, new and upgraded infrastructure and residential, commercial, industrial, and public development. collaborating entities, members of the public, and ܈ Plan uses appropriate quantitative methods for non-profit organizations. prioritization of projects. See also Appendix D. ܈ Plan prioritizes projects and programs using a Table 7-1 lists all projects submitted for metric-driven approach and a geospatial analysis consideration for prioritization in the SWRP. A of multiple benefits to maximize water supply, water quality, flood management, environmental, map of submitted project locations is shown on and community benefits within the watershed. Figure 7-1. See also Sections 6.4 and 6.5. ܈ Each project in accordance with the Plan contributes to at least two or more Main Benefits and the maximum number of Additional Benefits as listed in Table 4 of the Guidelines. See also Section 6.3.

1 SWRCB, 2015c. 2 SWRCB, 2015b. Section 3, eligibility requirements page 4.

July 2018 7-1 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plant Table 7-1. Projects Submitted for Prioritization in the Storm Water Resource Plan

Project ID(a) Project Title Proponent 1 Distributed Parcel Based Storm Water Management and Water Recycling Program City of Healdsburg 2 Community Center Playing Fields Reconstruction City of Healdsburg 3 Cerri Building City of Healdsburg 4 West Plaza Parking Lot Reconstruction City of Healdsburg 5 Healdsburg Avenue Pavement Reduction and Storm Water Management City of Healdsburg 6 Grove Street Detention Basin BMP Improvements City of Healdsburg 7 North Detention Basin BMP Improvements City of Healdsburg 8 Pordon-Bianca Storm Drain and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction City of Healdsburg 9 Recreation Field Turf Replacement City of Healdsburg 10 Healdsburg High School Recreation Field Replacement City of Healdsburg 11 Healdsburg Recycled Water System City of Healdsburg 12 Forsythe Creek Floodplain and Riparian Restoration Mendocino RCD(b) 13 Orrs Creek Fish Passage Mendocino RCD(b) 14 Downtown Cloverdale Flood Reduction City of Cloverdale 15 Northeast Detention Basin City of Rohnert Park 16 Alliance Redwood Water Conservation NOAA(c) 17 High School Storm Water Management Strategies Laguna Foundation 18 Atascadero Creek Off-Channel Habitat Gold Ridge RCD(b) 19 Green Valley Creek Off-Channel Winter Refugia Habitat Enhancement, Phase II Gold Ridge RCD(b) 20 Purrington Creek Instream Habitat Enhancement Gold Ridge RCD(b) 21 Laguna de Santa Rosa Headwaters Restoration City of Cotati 22 Salt Creek and Santa Rosa Creek Road Improvements Sonoma RCD(b) 23 Laguna de Santa Rosa Non-Dairy Livestock Enhancement Program Sonoma RCD(b) 24 Santa Rosa Junior College, Shone Farm, Carbon Farm Plan Gold Ridge RCD(b) 25 Low Impact Development Credit Mitigation Bank Mendocino County 26 Hobbs Winery Creek Restoration Sonoma RCD(b) 27 Bidwell Creek Floodplain and Meadow Enhancement Sonoma RCD(b) 28 Mark West Creek Instream Enhancement Sonoma RCD(b) 29 Streamflow Enhancement in Critical Coho Watersheds Sonoma RCD(b) 30 Mark West Creek Sediment Reduction Sonoma RCD(b) 31 Groundwater Infiltration and Conservation BMP Demonstrations Sonoma RCD(b) 32 Angel Creek Habitat Enhancement Sonoma RCD(b) 33 Increasing Groundwater Recharge on Rangelands Sonoma RCD(b) 34 Kidd Creek Instream Habitat and Floodplain Restoration Sonoma RCD(b) 35 Installing Vegetative Filter Strips to Clean and Infiltrate Water on Ranchlands Sonoma RCD(b) 36 Keyline Ploughing to Increase Groundwater Infiltration on Ranches Sonoma RCD(b) 37 Permit Sonoma LID Retrofit Sonoma PRMD(d) 38 Mark West Creek Storm Water Resource Management and Green Infrastructure Planning Sonoma PRMD(d) 39 Windsor Creek Detention Pond Town of Windsor 40 Pruitt Creek Detention Pond Town of Windsor 41 Hall Park Detention and Irrigation Pond Town of Windsor 42 Dawn Way and Old Redwood Highway Detention Pond Town of Windsor 43 Town of Windsor Corp Yard Parking Lot LID Town of Windsor 44 Corp Yard Green Clipping Transfer Area LID Retrofit Town of Windsor 45 Watershed Resilience on Public Lands in the Mark West Watershed Sonoma RCD(b) 46 Vineyard Stormwater and Nutrient Management in the Dry Creek Subwatershed Sonoma RCD(b) 47 Gibson Creek Habitat Enhancement Plan Pinky Kushner 48 Copeland Creek Stormwater Demonstration Gardens Daily Acts 49 Country Club Drive Stormwater Demonstration Garden Phase 1 and 2 Daily Acts 50 Laguna de Santa Rosa Dairy Enhancement Gold Ridge RCD(b) 51 Laguna Water Quality and Drainage Enhancement Sonoma County Water Agency 52 Matanzas Creek Flood Protection and Environmental Enhancement Sonoma County Water Agency 53 Santa Rosa Creek Storm Water Management and Habitat Enhancement Sonoma County Water Agency 54 Spring Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancements Sonoma County Water Agency 55 Biochar as a Cover for Manure Lagoons Gold Ridge RCD(b) 56 Upper Green Valley Floodplain Reconnection Gold Ridge RCD(b) 57 Rural Residential Stormwater Management Rebate Program Gold Ridge RCD(b) 58 Oken Stream and Wetland Restoration SCAPOSD(e) 59 Young Armos Habitat Restoration SCAPOSD(e) 60 Upper Mark West Creek Watershed Salmonid Habitat Enhancement SCAPOSD(e) 61 Integrated Climate-Hydrologic Modeling of Russian River Watershed for Optimized Stormwater Management Lawrence Berkeley National Lab 62 Distributed Storm Water Management and Water Recycling City of Healdsburg 63 Affordable Housing Storm Water Management and Water Recycling City of Healdsburg 64 Foss Creek at Vine Street Rain Garden and Riparian Corridor Improvements City of Healdsburg 65 Foss Creek at Dry Creek Road Riparian Corridor Improvements City of Healdsburg 66 Russian River Watershed Trash Generation Rates City of Rohnert Park 67 Saddle Mountain Preserve Road Improvements and Riparian Restoration SCAPOSD(e) 68 Healdsburg Storm Drain, Water Main and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction City of Healdsburg 69 Greywater Retrofit Program City of Healdsburg 70 Upper Russian River Revegetation and Sediment Reduction California Land Stewardship Institute 71 Increasing In-Stream Flows on the Upper Russian River California Land Stewardship Institute 72 Mill Creek Revegetation California Land Stewardship Institute 73 Gird Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancement Sonoma Land Trust 74 Ranch Conservation Easement Sonoma Land Trust 75 Santa Rosa Greenway Sonoma Land Trust 76 Ragle Ranch Park Stormwater Retention and Riparian Restoration Sonoma County 77 North Sonoma Mountain Regional Park and Open Space Riparian Restoration Expansion Sonoma County 78 Shiloh Ranch Regional Park Trails Improvement and Erosion Control Sonoma County 79 Storm Water Education at the Environmental Discovery Center at Spring Lake Regional Park Sonoma County 80 Green Infrastructure Planning at a Landscape Scale in the Russian River Watershed San Francisco Estuary Institute 81 Paulin Creek Restoration at Northwest Community Park City of Santa Rosa 82 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 2 City of Santa Rosa 83 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 3 City of Santa Rosa 84 City of Santa Rosa Corporation Yard Water Quality Improvement City of Santa Rosa 85 Tanglewood Park Restoration and Storm Water Improvement City of Santa Rosa 86 QWEL Rainwater Harvesting Training Module Sonoma County Water Agency 87 Ives Park Pedestrian & Stormwater Improvement Daily Acts 88 Doolin Creek Realignment City of Ukiah 89 Gibson Creek Daylighting City of Ukiah 90 Ukiah Public Parking Facility LID Upgrades City of Ukiah 91 Planting the Rain Rainwater Harvesting Rebate Program City of Santa Rosa 92 Copeland Creek Stormwater Awareness Platform Sonoma State University 93 Bank Stabilization of the Russian River near Salt Hollow Creek Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians 94 Storm Water Pollution Prevention at Ukiah Unified Schools Ukiah Unified School District 95 Equine Water Stewardship in the Russian River Watershed Equine Environmental Management Consulting (a) Projects were assigned Project IDs in the order of project submission to the SWRP. Project IDs do not reflect ranking or prioritization of projects. (b) RCD = Resource Conservation District (c) NOAA = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (d) PRMD = Permit and Resource Management Department (e) SCAPOSD = Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District

Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\WP\4.10\Section7Tables Last Revised: 04-27-18 Storm Water Resource Plan Last Saved: 1/15/2018 8:47:42 AM \\SRS-FS1\Santa Rosa\Clients\592 Russian River Watershed Association 2014-2015\10-16-05 RRWA SWRP\GIS\MXD\SWRP Report\Section 7\Fig7-1_Project Locations.mxd : areimer

E

E

L RI V E R

GGLLEE NNNN CCOO.. CCOOLLUUSS AA CCOO..

M

I D D L EC

R

E

E K

Ukiah

20

CLEAR LAKE 253

C 53 O L LAKE

128 GARC IA R IV E R

101

175

29 D MMEENN DDOOCCIINNOO CCOO.. RY C Cloverdale RE P EK U SONOMASONOMA CO.CO. T P A UT H C A REE H K C R E

E K DR Y LAKELAKE CO.CO. P C NAPANAPA CO.CO. RE E K R U S S I A N R IV ER

Healdsburg

N AP A R IVER Windsor

T CRE ES E K W K R 116 A

M

N A 1 Santa Rosa P A

12 Sebastopol

SAL MON K Pacific Ocean C REE Rohnert Park Cotati

S O MARINN CO. O M A C O . 121

Symbology Project Site Figure 7-1 Burn Area (October, 2017) Russian River Watershed Project Sites Cities and Towns

Upper Russian River Sub-Region 063 Middle Russian River Sub-Region Russian River Watershed Association Lower Russian River Sub-Region Miles Russian River Storm Water Resources Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

7.2 PROJECT PRIORITIZATION

As described in Section 6, 95 projects were received for consideration and prioritization in the SWRP. Projects that met the initial screening criteria were then scored based on the benefits expected from each project, the amount of each benefit expected, and the importance of each benefit to the watershed. Additional bonus points were awarded to projects that met certain criteria. The final score for each project was ranked from highest to lowest, resulting in the final prioritized list of projects. The results of the project prioritization process are detailed below.

7.2.1 Project Screening

Of the 95 projects submitted for consideration in the SWRP, 51 projects passed screening using the criteria established by the TAC and described in Section 6. Table 7-2 presents the Storm Water Resource Management Project List, the list of projects which passed screening and were evaluated for prioritization. Descriptions of these Storm Water Resource Management Projects are provided in Appendix B. A total of 39 projects were removed from consideration because the project did not meet the screening criteria, there was insufficient information to appropriately prioritize the project, or the project was submitted later in the SWRP process and has yet to be evaluated. These projects may provide significant regional benefits, and should be considered for potential future prioritization. Five (5) projects were withdrawn from the process at the request of the applicant and are thus not included here.

A secondary screening criterion was then applied to the 51 eligible projects to determine if the projects also included a storm water or dry weather runoff capture component, as required by the Proposition One Guidelines. This created two lists of projects that represent different watershed priorities.

7.2.2 Project Evaluation

After the screening was completed, the 51 projects identified as eligible for SWRP consideration were then evaluated for prioritization. The process for identifying project benefits, quantifying benefits, and scoring is detailed in Section 6.

In addition to the scoring process, projects with certain characteristics were awarded bonus points. The bonus point criteria identified by the TAC were based on giving projects additional points for meeting prioritized elements identified in the Proposition One Guidelines. Bonus points were further explained in Section 6. Table 7-3 presents the bonus points awarded to projects on the Storm Water Resource Management Projects List.

July 2018 7-4 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Table 7-2. Storm Water Resource Management Projects

Main Benefits(a),(b) Additional Benefits(a),(b) Project ID Project Title M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 2 Community Center Playing Fields Reconstruction O X X X - - - X X O - - - X O X X 3 Cerri Building OXXXX - - XXO- - - XOXX 4 West Plaza Parking Lot Reconstruction O XXXX - - XXO- - - XOXX 5 Healdsburg Avenue Pavement Reduction and Storm Water Management O X X X - O - X X O - - - X O X - 6 Grove Street Detention Basin BMP Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - XOX - 7 North Detention Basin BMP Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - XOXX 8 Pordon-Bianca Storm Drain and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction O X X X - - - X X O - O - X O X - 9 Recreation Field Turf Replacement O O O X - - - X X O O - - X - X O 10 Healdsburg High School Recreation Field Replacement O X X X - - - X X O - - - X - X X 11 Healdsburg Recycled Water System - X X ----X-OX-XX-XX 12 Forsythe Creek Floodplain and Riparian Restoration XXXXX - XXXO- -OXXX - 13 Orrs Creek Fish Passage X X X - X - X X - O - - - X X - X 14 Downtown Cloverdale Flood Reduction X - XXXX - - X ------X 17 High School Storm Water Management Strategies O X X O O O - X X O - - - X - X - 21 Laguna de Santa Rosa Headwaters Restoration O - - X X X - X - O - - - X - X O 26 Hobbs Winery Creek Restoration X - - O X - - X X O - - - X - O X 27 Bidwell Creek Floodplain and Meadow Enhancement X O - X X - - - X O O - O X O - - 28 Mark West Creek Instream Enhancement O - - O X - - X X O ----OXX 29 Streamflow Enhancement in Critical Coho Watersheds - X X - O - - X - - X ------30 Mark West Creek Sediment Reduction X X - X O - - X X O - - X X - - - 31 Groundwater Infiltration and Conservation BMP Demonstrations O X X X O - - X X O X ------37 Permit Sonoma LID Retrofit XXXX - - XXXOX - - X - X - 38 Mark West Creek LID Retrofit Opportunities and Implementation Project X O - X X - X X X O O - - X - X - 39 Windsor Creek Detention Pond X X - X - - - X X ------X 40 Pruitt Creek Detention Pond X X - X X X - X X ------XX 41 Hall Park Detention and Irrigation Pond O X - X - - - X X ------XX 42 Dawn Way and Old Redwood Highway Detention Pond X X - X X X - X X ----X-XX 43 Town of Windsor Corp Yard Parking Lot LID X ------XX------44 Corp Yard Green Clipping Transfer Area LID Retrofit X X - O - X - X X ------X- 46 Vineyard Stormwater and Nutrient Management in the Dry Creek Subwatershed X - - X X - - X X O - - O ---- 48 Copeland Creek Stormwater Demonstration Gardens - - X - X - - X O - - - X - - X X 49 Country Club Drive Stormwater Demonstration Garden Phase 1 and 2 - - X - X - - X X - - - X - - X - 52 Matanzas Creek Flood Protection and Environmental Enhancement X O - X O - - - X ------54 Spring Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancements O X - - X ----O------63 Affordable Housing Storm Water Management and Water Recycling O X X X - - - X X O XXXX - X - 64 Foss Creek at Vine Street Rain Garden and Riparian Corridor Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - X - XX 65 Foss Creek at Dry Creek Road Riparian Corridor Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - X - XX 70 Upper Russian River Revegetation and Sediment Reduction X - - - X - - - X O ----X-- 71 Increasing In-Stream Flows on the Upper Russian River - X X - X - - - X - X - - X - - - 73 Gird Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancement X ------XXO-----X- 74 Ranch Conservation Easement - X - X ------X-X--O- 75 Santa Rosa Greenway -X--XX-X----X--XX 81 Paulin Creek Restoration at Northwest Community Park ----XX-X-O---XXOO 82 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 2 ----XX-X-O---XXXX 83 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 3 ----XX-X-O---XXXX 85 Tanglewood Park Restoration and Storm Water Improvement O - - X X - - - X O ----X-X 87 Ives Park Pedestrian & Stormwater Improvement - - X - - X - X X ------X- 88 Doolin Creek Realignment O - O O XXXXOO- - - XOXX 89 Gibson Creek Daylighting O - O O XXXXOO- - - XOXX 90 Ukiah Public Parking Facility LID Upgrades X - - O - - X O O ------X 92 Copeland Creek Stormwater Awareness Platform O O - O O O X X ------O- (a) X = Benefit was quantified by project proponent. (b) O = Benefit was claimed by project proponent, but not quantified.

Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\WP\4.10\Section7Tables Last Revised: 04-27-18 Storm Water Resource Plan Table 7-3. Bonus Points Awarded to Storm Water Resource Management Projects

Bonus Points Meets Multiple Benefits a Benefits a Located on Unquantified Total Bonus Project ID Project Title Funded Mandates DAC SDAC Public Land Benefits Points 2 Community Center Playing Fields Reconstruction 10 0 0 0 5 3 18.0 3 Cerri Building 10 0 0 0 5 3 18.0 4 West Plaza Parking Lot Reconstruction 10 0 0 0 5 3 18.0 5 Healdsburg Avenue Pavement Reduction and Storm Water Management 10 0 0 0 5 4 19.0 6 Grove Street Detention Basin BMP Improvements 10 0 0 0 5 3 18.0 7 North Detention Basin BMP Improvements 10 0 0 0 5 3 18.0 8 Pordon-Bianca Storm Drain and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction 10 0 0 0 5 4 19.0 9 Recreation Field Turf Replacement 10 0 0 0 5 5 20.0 10 Healdsburg High School Recreation Field Replacement 10 0 0 0 5 2 17.0 11 Healdsburg Recycled Water System 10 0 0 0 5 1 16.0 12 Forsythe Creek Floodplain and Riparian Restoration 0 0 0 0 0 2 2.0 13 Orrs Creek Fish Passage 10 0 10 5 5 1 31.0 14 Downtown Cloverdale Flood Reduction 10 0 0 0 0 0 10.0 17 High School Storm Water Management Strategies 10 0 0 0 5 5 20.0 21 Laguna de Santa Rosa Headwaters Restoration 0 0 10 0 5 2 17.0 26 Hobbs Winery Creek Restoration 10 0 0 0 0 3 13.0 27 Bidwell Creek Floodplain and Meadow Enhancement 10 0 0 0 0 5 15.0 28 Mark West Creek Instream Enhancement 0 0 0 0 5 4 9.0 29 Streamflow Enhancement in Critical Coho Watersheds 10 0 0 0 0 1 11.0 30 Mark West Creek Sediment Reduction 10 0 0 0 0 2 12.0 31 Groundwater Infiltration and Conservation BMP Demonstrations 10 0 0 0 0 3 13.0 37 Permit Sonoma LID Retrofit 10 3 10 5 5 1 34.0 38 Mark West Creek LID Retrofit Opportunities and Implementation Project 10 3 0 0 5 3 21.0 39 Windsor Creek Detention Pond 10 0 10 0 5 0 25.0 40 Pruitt Creek Detention Pond 10 0 10 0 5 0 25.0 41 Hall Park Detention and Irrigation Pond 10 0 0 0 5 1 16.0 42 Dawn Way and Old Redwood Highway Detention Pond 10 3 0 0 5 0 18.0 43 Town of Windsor Corp Yard Parking Lot LID 10 3 0 0 5 0 18.0 44 Corp Yard Green Clipping Transfer Area LID Retrofit 10 3 0 0 5 1 19.0 46 Vineyard Stormwater and Nutrient Management in the Dry Creek Subwatershed 0 3 0 0 0 2 5.0 48 Copeland Creek Stormwater Demonstration Gardens 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.0 49 Country Club Drive Stormwater Demonstration Garden Phase 1 and 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 52 Matanzas Creek Flood Protection and Environmental Enhancement 10 0 0 0 5 2 17.0 54 Spring Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancements 0 0 0 0 5 2 7.0 63 Affordable Housing Storm Water Management and Water Recycling 10 0 0 0 5 2 17.0 64 Foss Creek at Vine Street Rain Garden and Riparian Corridor Improvements 10 0 0 0 5 2 17.0 65 Foss Creek at Dry Creek Road Riparian Corridor Improvements 10 0 0 0 5 2 17.0 70 Upper Russian River Revegetation and Sediment Reduction 10 0 10 5 0 1 26.0 71 Increasing In-Stream Flows on the Upper Russian River 10 0 0 0 0 0 10.0 73 Gird Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancement 10 0 0 0 0 1 11.0 74 Ranch Conservation Easement 10 0 0 0 0 1 11.0 75 Santa Rosa Greenway 10 0 0 0 0 0 10.0 81 Paulin Creek Restoration at Northwest Community Park 10 0 10 0 5 2 27.0 82 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 2 10 0 0 0 5 1 16.0 83 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 3 10 0 0 0 5 1 16.0 85 Tanglewood Park Restoration and Storm Water Improvement 10 0 0 0 5 2 17.0 87 Ives Park Pedestrian & Stormwater Improvement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 88 Doolin Creek Realignment 10 0 10 5 5 6 36.0 89 Gibson Creek Daylighting 10 0 10 5 0 6 31.0 90 Ukiah Public Parking Facility LID Upgrades 10 0 10 5 5 3 33.0 92 Copeland Creek Stormwater Awareness Platform 10 0 0 0 5 6 21.0

Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\WP\4.10\Section7Tables Last Revised: 04-27-18 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

7.2.3 Prioritization Results

Prioritization was based on each project’s total weighted score, including any bonus points. The projects with the highest scores were assigned the highest priority for implementation. Based on the two sets of screening criteria established by the TAC, two separate lists of prioritized projects resulted. Projects that were not included in either of these lists but may represent opportunities to provide storm water benefits to the watershed, were included in a third list, but not prioritized. These projects may be eligible for prioritization as more information becomes available. Figure 7-2 presents the process used to separate projects into the three lists. Figure 7-3 presents the location and status of each project following screening, scoring, and prioritization into the three lists which are described in the following sections.

Figure 7-2. Project Screening Process

July 2018 7-7 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Last Saved: 5/1/2018 11:37:18 AM \\SRS-FS1\Santa Rosa\Clients\592 Russian River Watershed Association 2014-2015\10-16-05 RRWA SWRP\GIS\MXD\SWRP Report\Section 7\Fig7-3_Project Status.mxd : areimer

E

E

L RI V E R

GGLLEE NNNN CCOO.. CCOOLLUUSS AA CCOO..

M

I D D L EC

R

E

E K

Ukiah

20

CLEAR LAKE 253

C 53 O L LAKE

128 GARC IA R IV E R

101

175

29 D MMEENN DDOOCCIINNOO CCOO.. RY C Cloverdale RE P EK U SONOMASONOMA CO.CO. T P A UT H C A REE H K C R E

E K DR Y LAKELAKE CO.CO. P C NAPANAPA CO.CO. RE E K R U S S I A N R IV ER

Healdsburg

N AP A R IVER Windsor

T CRE ES E K W K R 116 A

M

N A 1 Santa Rosa P A

12 Sebastopol

SAL MON K Pacific Ocean C REE Rohnert Park Cotati

S O MARINN CO. O M A C O . 121

Symbology Project Status Burn Area (October, 2017) Storm Water and Dry Weather Runoff Capture Project Russian River Watershed Figure 7-3 Storm Water Resource Management Project Cities and Towns Recommended for Future Prioritization Upper Russian River Sub-Region Project Status Did Not Pass Screening Criteria Middle Russian River Sub-Region Insufficient Information Provided Lower Russian River Sub-Region 063 Russian River Watershed Association Withdrawn by Applicant Miles Russian River Storm Water Resources Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

Fifty-one (51) projects were prioritized based on the basic criteria outlined by the SWRP Guidelines. These projects were all identified as having a specific location within the Russian River watershed, having two main quantified benefits and at least one additional benefit, and being legal and ethical. Table 7-4 presents the Prioritized Storm Water Resource Management Projects List, ranked from highest to lowest priority for implementation.

7.2.3.1 Storm Water or Dry Weather Runoff Capture Project Prioritization List

Of the 51 projects identified in the Guidelines Prioritization List above, 42 were identified as meeting all the criteria of the Storm Water Resource Management Project Prioritization List, as well as including a storm water or dry weather runoff capture component. The Prioritized Storm Water and Dry Weather Runoff Capture Projects List, ranked from highest to lowest priority for implementation, is presented in Table 7-5.

7.2.3.2 Additional Potential Projects

Thirty-nine (39) projects submitted for consideration as a SWRP project were not able to be prioritized because the project did not meet the screening criteria, there was insufficient information to appropriately prioritize the project, or the project was submitted later in the SWRP process and has yet to be evaluated. Table 7-6 lists the projects that were submitted for consideration, but have not yet been prioritized.

7.3 COLLECTIVE BENEFIT ANALYSIS

Per the SWRP Guidelines, an analysis of the collective benefits of the prioritized SWRP projects was performed. Analyses were based on quantitative and qualitative data submitted to the SWRP by project proponents. Because most projects did not quantify all of their claimed benefits, the collective benefits to the watershed are likely far greater than those presented in this section, should all the prioritized projects be implemented.

7.3.1 Storm Water and Dry Weather Runoff Capture and Use Analysis

The prioritized SWRP projects will collectively capture and use an estimated 11,400 acre-feet/year (AFY) of storm water and dry weather runoff. Figure 7-4 presents the breakdown of capture methods proposed by the prioritized projects. The majority of capture is expected to be provided by the creation of new wetlands and floodplain reconnection. Of the 42 prioritized projects which provide storm water or dry weather runoff capture, 29 projects provided an estimate of the amount of water the project would capture. Therefore, the actual amount of capture provided by implementing all prioritized projects is likely greater than the current estimate of 11,400 AFY; this estimate can be revised as projects without a quantified benefit get closer to implementation.

Figure 7-5 presents the expected beneficial uses of the captured water. It was assumed that all projects which captured storm water or dry weather runoff via wetlands, floodplain reconnection, detention basins, infiltration chambers, or bioswales will use the water for groundwater recharge, unless explicitly stated otherwise by the project proponent. Approximately 97 percent of the water captured will be used for groundwater recharge. The remainder will be used primarily for irrigation.

July 2018 7-9 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Table 7-4. Prioritized List of Storm Water Resource Management Projects Main Benefits(a),(b) Additional Benefits(a),(b) Rank Project ID Project Title M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 Total Score 1 40 Pruitt Creek Detention Pond X X - X X X - X X ------XX 150.2 2 12 Forsythe Creek Floodplain and Riparian Restoration XXXXX - XXXO- -OXXX - 145.4 3 7 North Detention Basin BMP Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - XOXX 139.3 4 6 Grove Street Detention Basin BMP Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - XOX - 134.9 5 42 Dawn Way and Old Redwood Highway Detention Pond X X - X X X - X X ----X-XX 126.5 6 65 Foss Creek at Dry Creek Road Riparian Corridor Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - X - XX 126.3 7 10 Healdsburg High School Recreation Field Replacement O X X X - - - X X O - - - X - X X 122.2 8 2 Community Center Playing Fields Reconstruction O X X X - - - X X O - - - X O X X 119.0 9 30 Mark West Creek Sediment Reduction X X - X O - - X X O - - X X - - - 118.4 10 63 Affordable Housing Storm Water Management and Water Recycling O X X X - - - X X O XXXX - X - 118.1 11 5 Healdsburg Avenue Pavement Reduction and Storm Water Management O X X X - O - X X O - - - X O X - 116.8 12 4 West Plaza Parking Lot Reconstruction O XXXX - - XXO- - - XOXX 116.5 13 75 Santa Rosa Greenway - X - - X X - X ----X--XX 114.3 14 64 Foss Creek at Vine Street Rain Garden and Riparian Corridor Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - X - XX 112.0 15 3 Cerri Building OXXXX - - XXO- - - XOXX 111.7 16 8 Pordon-Bianca Storm Drain and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction O X X X - - - X X O - O - X O X - 110.7 17 37 Permit Sonoma LID Retrofit XXXX - - XXXOX - - X - X - 110.0 18 13 Orrs Creek Fish Passage X X X - X - X X - O - - - X X - X 109.7 19 39 Windsor Creek Detention Pond X X - X - - - X X ------X 108.8 20 11 Healdsburg Recycled Water System - X X ----X-OX-XX-XX 106.3 21 14 Downtown Cloverdale Flood Reduction X - XXXX - - X ------X 105.1 22 88 Doolin Creek Realignment O - O O XXXXOO- - - XOXX 100.8 23 71 Increasing In-Stream Flows on the Upper Russian River - X X - X - - - X - X - - X - - - 97.4 24 31 Groundwater Infiltration and Conservation BMP Demonstrations O X X X O - - X X O X ------96.8 25 83 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 3 ----XX-X-O---XXXX 95.7 26 82 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 2 ----XX-X-O---XXXX 94.3 27 38 Mark West Creek LID Retrofit Opportunities and Implementation Project X O - X X - X X X O O - - X - X - 93.4 28 89 Gibson Creek Daylighting O - O O XXXXOO- - - XOXX 93.3 29 21 Laguna de Santa Rosa Headwaters Restoration O - - X X X - X - O - - - X - X O 92.9 30 17 High School Storm Water Management Strategies O X X O O O - X X O - - - X - X - 91.7 31 81 Paulin Creek Restoration at Northwest Community Park ----XX-X-O---XXOO 84.0 32 41 Hall Park Detention and Irrigation Pond O X - X - - - X X ------XX 83.7 33 27 Bidwell Creek Floodplain and Meadow Enhancement X O - X X - - - X O O - O X O - - 81.4 34 44 Corp Yard Green Clipping Transfer Area LID Retrofit X X - O - X - X X ------X- 79.8 35 74 Ranch Conservation Easement - X - X ------X-X--O- 79.5 36 85 Tanglewood Park Restoration and Storm Water Improvement O - - X X - - - X O ----X-X 75.8 37 28 Mark West Creek Instream Enhancement O - - O X - - X X O ----OXX 72.1 38 9 Recreation Field Turf Replacement O O O X - - - X X O O - - X - X O 70.2 39 52 Matanzas Creek Flood Protection and Environmental Enhancement X O - X O - - - X ------68.3 40 26 Hobbs Winery Creek Restoration X - - O X - - X X O - - - X - O X 63.4 41 46 Vineyard Stormwater and Nutrient Management in the Dry Creek Subwatershed X - - X X - - X X O - - O ---- 53.9 42 43 Town of Windsor Corp Yard Parking Lot LID X ------XX------52.7 43 92 Copeland Creek Stormwater Awareness Platform O O - O O O X X ------O- 49.7 44 70 Upper Russian River Revegetation and Sediment Reduction X - - - X - - - X O ----X-- 49.2 45 49 Country Club Drive Stormwater Demonstration Garden Phase 1 and 2 - - X - X - - X X - - - X - - X - 46.2 46 90 Ukiah Public Parking Facility LID Upgrades X - - O - - X O O ------X 45.5 47 29 Streamflow Enhancement in Critical Coho Watersheds - X X - O - - X - - X ------44.0 48 73 Gird Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancement X ------XXO-----X- 41.9 49 48 Copeland Creek Stormwater Demonstration Gardens - - X - X - - X O - - - X - - X X 41.8 50 87 Ives Park Pedestrian & Stormwater Improvement - - X - - X - X X ------X- 41.5 51 54 Spring Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancements O X - - X ----O------36.2 (a) X = Benefit was quantified by project proponent. (b) O = Benefit was claimed by project proponent, but not quantified.

Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\WP\4.10\Section7Tables Last Revised: 04-27-18 Storm Water Resource Plan Table 7-5. Prioritized List of Storm Water and Dry Weather Runoff Capture Projects Main Benefits(a),(b) Additional Benefits(a),(b) Rank Project ID Project Title M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 Total Score 1 40 Pruitt Creek Detention Pond X X - X X X - X X ------XX 150.2 2 12 Forsythe Creek Floodplain and Riparian Restoration XXXXX - XXXO- -OXXX - 145.4 3 7 North Detention Basin BMP Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - XOXX 139.3 4 6 Grove Street Detention Basin BMP Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - XOX - 134.9 5 42 Dawn Way and Old Redwood Highway Detention Pond X X - X X X - X X ----X-XX 126.5 6 65 Foss Creek at Dry Creek Road Riparian Corridor Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - X - XX 126.3 7 10 Healdsburg High School Recreation Field Replacement O X X X - - - X X O - - - X - X X 122.2 8 2 Community Center Playing Fields Reconstruction O X X X - - - X X O - - - X O X X 119.0 9 63 Affordable Housing Storm Water Management and Water Recycling O X X X - - - X X O XXXX - X - 118.1 10 5 Healdsburg Avenue Pavement Reduction and Storm Water Management O X X X - O - X X O - - - X O X - 116.8 11 4 West Plaza Parking Lot Reconstruction O XXXX - - XXO- - - XOXX 116.5 12 75 Santa Rosa Greenway - X - - X X - X ----X--XX 114.3 13 64 Foss Creek at Vine Street Rain Garden and Riparian Corridor Improvements O XXXXX - XXO- - - X - XX 112.0 14 3 Cerri Building OXXXX - - XXO- - - XOXX 111.7 15 8 Pordon-Bianca Storm Drain and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction O X X X - - - X X O - O - X O X - 110.7 16 37 Permit Sonoma LID Retrofit XXXX - - XXXOX - - X - X - 110.0 17 39 Windsor Creek Detention Pond X X - X - - - X X ------X 108.8 18 11 Healdsburg Recycled Water System - X X ----X-OX-XX-XX 106.3 19 14 Downtown Cloverdale Flood Reduction X - XXXX - - X ------X 105.1 20 71 Increasing In-Stream Flows on the Upper Russian River - X X - X - - - X - X - - X - - - 97.4 21 31 Groundwater Infiltration and Conservation BMP Demonstrations O X X X O - - X X O X ------96.8 22 83 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 3 ----XX-X-O---XXXX 95.7 23 82 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 2 ----XX-X-O---XXXX 94.3 24 38 Mark West Creek LID Retrofit Opportunities and Implementation Project X O - X X - X X X O O - - X - X - 93.4 25 21 Laguna de Santa Rosa Headwaters Restoration O - - X X X - X - O - - - X - X O 92.9 26 17 High School Storm Water Management Strategies O X X O O O - X X O - - - X - X - 91.7 27 81 Paulin Creek Restoration at Northwest Community Park ----XX-X-O---XXOO 84.0 28 41 Hall Park Detention and Irrigation Pond O X - X - - - X X ------XX 83.7 29 27 Bidwell Creek Floodplain and Meadow Enhancement X O - X X - - - X O O - O X O - - 81.4 30 44 Corp Yard Green Clipping Transfer Area LID Retrofit X X - O - X - X X ------X- 79.8 31 74 Ranch Conservation Easement - X - X ------X-X--O- 79.5 32 85 Tanglewood Park Restoration and Storm Water Improvement O - - X X - - - X O ----X-X 75.8 33 28 Mark West Creek Instream Enhancement O - - O X - - X X O ----OXX 72.1 34 9 Recreation Field Turf Replacement O O O X - - - X X O O - - X - X O 70.2 35 52 Matanzas Creek Flood Protection and Environmental Enhancement X O - X O - - - X ------68.3 36 46 Vineyard Stormwater and Nutrient Management in the Dry Creek Subwatershed X - - X X - - X X O - - O ---- 53.9 37 43 Town of Windsor Corp Yard Parking Lot LID X ------XX------52.7 38 49 Country Club Drive Stormwater Demonstration Garden Phase 1 and 2 - - X - X - - X X - - - X - - X - 46.2 39 90 Ukiah Public Parking Facility LID Upgrades X - - O - - X O O ------X 45.5 40 29 Streamflow Enhancement in Critical Coho Watersheds - X X - O - - X - - X ------44.0 41 48 Copeland Creek Stormwater Demonstration Gardens - - X - X - - X O - - - X - - X X 41.8 42 87 Ives Park Pedestrian & Stormwater Improvement - - X - - X - X X ------X- 41.5 (a)X=Benefitwasquantifiedbyprojectproponent. (b)O=Benefitwasclaimedbyprojectproponent,butnotquantified.

Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\WP\4.10\Section7Tables Last Revised: 04-27-18 Storm Water Resource Plan Table 7-6. Additional Potential Projects

Project ID(a) Project Title Proponent Status 1 Distributed Parcel Based Storm Water Management and Water Recycling Program City of Healdsburg Does Not Meet Screening Criteria 15 Northeast Detention Basin City of Rohnert Park Insufficient Information Provided 16 Alliance Redwood Water Conservation NOAA(b) Insufficient Information Provided 18 Atascadero Creek Off-Channel Habitat Gold Ridge RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 19 Green Valley Creek Off-Channel Winter Refugia Habitat Enhancement, Phase I Gold Ridge RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 20 Purrington Creek Instream Habitat Enhancement Gold Ridge RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 22 Salt Creek and Santa Rosa Creek Road Improvements Sonoma RCD(c) Does Not Meet Screening Criteria 23 Laguna de Santa Rosa Non-Dairy Livestock Enhancement Program Sonoma RCD(c) Does Not Meet Screening Criteria 24 Santa Rosa Junior College, Shone Farm, Carbon Farm Plan Gold Ridge RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 25 Low Impact Development Credit Mitigation Bank Mendocino County Insufficient Information Provided 32 Angel Creek Habitat Enhancement Sonoma RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 33 Increasing Groundwater Recharge on Rangelands Sonoma RCD(c) Does Not Meet Screening Criteria 34 Kidd Creek Instream Habitat and Floodplain Restoration Sonoma RCD(c) Does Not Meet Screening Criteria 35 Installing Vegetative Filter Strips to Clean and Infiltrate Water on Ranchlands Sonoma RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 36 Keyline Ploughing to Increase Groundwater Infiltration on Ranche Sonoma RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 45 Watershed Resilience on Public Lands in the Mark West Watershed Sonoma RCD(c) Does Not Meet Screening Criteria 47 Gibson Creek Habitat Enhancement Plan Pinky Kushner Withdrawn by Applicant 50 Laguna de Santa Rosa Dairy Enhancemen Gold Ridge RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 51 Laguna Water Quality and Drainage Enhancemen Sonoma County Water Agency Insufficient Information Provided 53 Santa Rosa Creek Storm Water Management and Habitat Enhancemen Sonoma County Water Agency Insufficient Information Provided 55 Biochar as a Cover for Manure Lagoons Gold Ridge RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 56 Upper Green Valley Floodplain Reconnection Gold Ridge RCD(c) Insufficient Information Provided 57 Rural Residential Stormwater Management Rebate Program Gold Ridge RCD(c) Does Not Meet Screening Criteria 58 Oken Stream and Wetland Restoration SCAPOSD(d) Insufficient Information Provided 59 Young Armos Habitat Restoration SCAPOSD(d) Insufficient Information Provided 60 Upper Mark West Creek Watershed Salmonid Habitat Enhancement SCAPOSD(d) Insufficient Information Provided 61 Integrated Climate-Hydrologic Modeling of Russian River Watershed for Optimized Stormwater Management Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Insufficient Information Provided 62 Distributed Storm Water Management and Water Recycling City of Healdsburg Withdrawn by Applicant 66 Russian River Watershed Trash Generation Rates City of Rohnert Park Insufficient Information Provided 67 Saddle Mountain Preserve Road Improvements and Riparian Restoration SCAPOSD(d) Insufficient Information Provided 68 Healdsburg Storm Drain, Water Main and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction City of Healdsburg Does Not Meet Screening Criteria 69 Greywater Retrofit Program City of Healdsburg Withdrawn by Applicant 72 Mill Creek Revegetation California Land Stewardship Institute Withdrawn by Applicant 76 Ragle Ranch Park Stormwater Retention and Riparian Restoration Sonoma County Insufficient Information Provided 77 North Sonoma Mountain Regional Park and Open Space Riparian Restoration Expansion Sonoma County Insufficient Information Provided 78 Shiloh Ranch Regional Park Trails Improvement and Erosion Contro Sonoma County Insufficient Information Provided 79 Storm Water Education at the Environmental Discovery Center at Spring Lake Regional Park Sonoma County Insufficient Information Provided 80 Green Infrastructure Planning at a Landscape Scale in the Russian River Watershed San Francisco Estuary Institute Withdrawn by Applicant 84 City of Santa Rosa Corporation Yard Water Quality Improvement City of Santa Rosa Does Not Meet Screening Criteria 86 QWEL Rainwater Harvesting Training Module Sonoma County Water Agency Insufficient Information Provided 91 Planting the Rain Rainwater Harvesting Rebate Program City of Santa Rosa Insufficient Information Provided 93 Bank Stabilization of the Russian River near Salt Hollow Creek Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians Recommended for Future Prioritization 94 Storm Water Pollution Prevention at Ukiah Unified Schools Ukiah Unified School District Recommended for Future Prioritization 95 Equine Water Stewardship in the Russian River Watershed Equine Environmental Management Consulting Does Not Meet Screening Criteria (a) Projects were assigned Project IDs in the order of project submission to the SWRP. Project IDs do not reflect ranking or prioritization of projects. (b) NOAA = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (c) RCD = Resource Conservation District (d) SCAPOSD = Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District

Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\WP\4.10\Section7Tables Last Revised: 04-27-18 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

See Appendix B for project descriptions, which outline how each storm water or dry weather runoff capture project will provide capture and beneficial use of storm water and/or dry weather runoff.

Figure 7-4. Storm Water and Dry Weather Runoff Capture Method (11,400 acre-feet/year total)

5% 2%

8%

15%

70%

(a) Wetlands Creation/Floodplain Reconnection Detention Basin Infiltration Chambers Bioswales Other

(a) Other includes Offsetting Potable Water Use, Rain Gardens, Rain Barrels, Reservoir Enhancement, Water Storage Tanks, and Conservation Easements

July 2018 7-13 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

Figure 7-5. Beneficial Use of Captured Water (11,400 acre-feet/year total)

0.004% 3%

96%

Groundwater Recharge Irrigation Surface Water Supply

7.3.2 Water Quality Benefit Analysis

All projects prioritized by the SWRP comply with, and are consistent with, the regional NPDES permit (NCRWQCB, 2015). No prioritized projects are expected to significantly increase pollutant loads to the watershed, and many projects will reduce loads of pollutants to the Russian River and its tributaries. The NPDES permit requirements were considered when determining the weights for the evaluation criteria, as discussed in Section 6. If a sub-region of the watershed was listed as impaired for a pollutant, evaluation criteria that would contribute to alleviating the impairment were assigned a higher weight for that sub-region. See Section 4 for additional information on how the SWRP complies with water quality TMDLs and NPDES permits.

Table 7-7 presents the estimated water quality benefits to the watershed if all prioritized projects are implemented. The collective benefits for evaluation criteria which consider pollutant loading (for example, capture of metals or capture of sediment) were estimated by taking the sum of the quantified project responses. However, some evaluation criteria consider a concentration change or percent change of a pollutant or water quality indicator (for example, increase in dissolved oxygen content), and a sum of the quantified project responses does not represent the collective benefit to the watershed. For these evaluation criteria, a count of the projects which quantified that

July 2018 7-14 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

benefit is presented in Table 7-7. A brief summary of the responses for these non-additive evaluation criteria is presented below:

x Only one prioritized project quantified an increase in dissolved oxygen content. The expected increase in dissolved oxygen content provided by this project is 0.5 mg/L. x 36 of the prioritized projects will provide non-point source pollution control. Project proponents were not asked to quantify this benefit. x Of the 7 prioritized projects which provide temperature improvement as a benefit, the temperature improvement in the stream reach associated with each project ranges from 0.5°C to 1°C, with an average improvement of 0.8 °C.

No quantified estimates of the reduction in coliform bacteria concentration, amount of diazinon captured, or decrease in specific conductivity were submitted. Thus, the collective benefit provided by prioritized projects for these metrics is unknown.

The prioritized projects will primarily improve regional water quality by reducing the loading of sediments and trash to the watershed. This can be accomplished by planting vegetation and restoring stream beds to control erosion, reducing peak flow velocities, installing trash capture devices, and capturing storm water.

Table 7-7. Collective Water Quality Benefits of Prioritized Projects

Water Quality Evaluation Criteria Total Benefit Units Amount of aluminum, manganese, and mercury captured in an average year 1.4(a) lb/year Amount of sediments captured in an average year 27,600,000(a) lb/year Reduction of sediment load in an average year by bank stabilization 12,000(a) sq-ft of bank Reduction in average coliform bacteria concentration in receiving water body unknown(b) MPN/mL Amount of diazinon captured in an average year unknown(b) lb/year Amount of total nitrogen and phosphorus captured in an average year 28(a) lb/year Increase in average dissolved oxygen content in receiving water body 1(c) stream reaches Percent decrease in average specific conductivity in an average year unknown(b) % reduction Amount of trash captured in an average year 1,490(a) lb/year Non-point source pollution control 36(c) project sites Temperature improvement 7(c) stream reaches (a) Sum of quantified responses (b) No quantified responses received (c) Number of projects which quantified this benefit

Of the 40 prioritized projects which claimed water quality as a benefit, only 18 projects provided an estimate of the reduction in pollutant load or concentration that the project would provide. Therefore, the actual water quality benefits provided by implementing all prioritized projects is likely considerably greater than is indicated by Table 7-7. See Appendix B for a description of how each water quality project will contribute to the preservation, restoration, or enhancement of watershed processes.

July 2018 7-15 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

7.3.3 Water Supply Benefit Analysis

Projects prioritized in the SWRP will collectively augment water supply with over 11,000 AFY of capture and reuse. Table 7-8 presents the estimated water supply benefits to the watershed if all prioritized projects are implemented. The collective benefits for water supply evaluation criteria were estimated by taking the sum of the quantified project responses. The prioritized projects will benefit regional water supply primarily by increasing the effective water supply. Effective increases in water supply can be accomplished in a variety of ways, including on-site storm water storage and detention, increased infiltration of runoff, offset of potable water use, and conjunctive use.

Table 7-8. Collective Water Supply Benefits of Prioritized Projects

Water Quality Evaluation Criteria Total Benefit(a) Units Effective increase in water supply in an average year 11,900 acre-feet/year Volume water use reduction in an average year 91 acre-feet/year (a) Sum of quantified responses

See Appendix B for project descriptions that outline how each water supply project will maximize and augment local water supply.

7.3.4 Flood Management Benefit Analysis

Projects prioritized in the SWRP will collectively mitigate over 20 local flooding issues. Table 7-9 presents the estimated flood management benefits to the watershed if all prioritized projects are implemented. The collective volume captured, and number of reduced sanitary sewer overflows were estimated by taking the sum of the quantified project responses. However, the sum of the quantified peak flow rate reduction does not represent a collective benefit to the watershed. In addition, project proponents were not asked to quantify the size of the regular, localized flooding issue their project mitigates. For these evaluation criteria, a count of the projects which quantified that criteria is presented in Table 7-9. A brief summary of the quantified responses for these non-additive evaluation criteria is presented below:

x Of the 5 projects which provide peak flow rate reduction as a benefit, the peak flow rate reduction at the project site ranges from less than 1 percent to 37 percent, with an average improvement of 15 percent. x 22 of the projects will mitigate a regular, localized flooding issue. The size of the flooding issue mitigated varies depending on the specific project site and the magnitude of the storm event.

July 2018 7-16 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

Table 7-9. Collective Flood Reduction Benefits of Prioritized Projects

Community Evaluation Criteria Total Benefit Units Volume reduced or captured in a 100-year event 341(a) acre-feet/year Peak flow rate reduction in a 100-year event 5(b) sites Mitigates a regular, localized flooding issue 22(b) projects Reduction in sanitary sewer overflows 1(a) SSOs/year (a) Sum of quantified responses (b) Number of projects which quantified this benefit

See Appendix B for an explanation of how each flood management project will mitigate flooding issues.

7.3.5 Environmental Benefit Analysis

Projects prioritized in the SWRP will collectively restore nearly 2 million square feet of riparian habitat, restore or create 44 acres of wetlands, and create 90 acres of new urban green space. Table 7-10 presents the estimated environmental benefits to the watershed if all prioritized projects are implemented. The collective benefits for several evaluation criteria were estimated by taking the sum of the quantified project responses. Sums of the critical seasonal streamflow restored and carbon sequestered by each project do not represent collective benefits to the watershed because the units used to quantify them are site-specific. For these evaluation criteria, a count of the projects which quantified that benefit is presented in Table 7-10. A brief summary of the responses for non-additive evaluation criteria is presented below:

x Of the 4 projects which restore critical seasonal streamflow, the amount of critical seasonal streamflow restored ranges from 1.5 percent to 36 percent, with an average improvement of 14 percent. x Only one project quantified the amount of carbon it sequestered. The expected carbon sequestered by that project is 94 Mg/acre. x 29 of the projects will restore a natural hydrograph. The manner in which this is accomplished and the amount of alteration necessary to achieve this goal varies depending on site specific conditions. Because hydrograph restoration is difficult to quantify, project proponents were asked to provide qualitative information for this evaluation criteria.

The prioritized projects will provide environmental benefits primarily through wetland creation, wetland enhancement, riparian habitat enhancement, and urban green space creation.

July 2018 7-17 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

Table 7-10. Collective Environmental Benefits of Prioritized Projects

Environmental Evaluation Criteria Total Benefit Units Amount of wetland enhanced 18(a) acres Amount of new wetland created 26(a) acres Amount of riparian habitat enhanced or restored 1,990,000(a) sq-ft Critical seasonal streamflow restored 4(b) stream reaches Amount of new green space created 90(a) acres Amount of energy saved 11,700(a) kwH/year Amount reduction of greenhouse gas emissions 10,500,000(a) lb CO2e/year Carbon sequestered 1(b) project sites Restores a natural hydrograph 29(b) project sites (a) Sum of quantified responses (b) Number of projects which quantified this benefit

See Appendix B for an explanation of how each flood management project will benefit the environment, mimic natural systems functions, and restore or enhance habitat and open space.

7.3.6 Community Benefit Analysis

Projects prioritized in the SWRP will collectively educate over 100,000 people, involve over 66,000 people in the community, and improve recreational areas which collectively receive over a million visitors a year. Table 7-11 presents the estimated environmental benefits to the watershed if all prioritized projects are implemented. The collective benefits for all community evaluation criteria were estimated by taking the sum of the quantified project responses. The prioritized projects will primarily benefit the community by providing public education, community involvement, and improved recreation areas. Many projects will incorporate educational signage and have volunteers assist in project implementation to increase community participation.

Table 7-11. Collective Community Benefits of Prioritized Projects

Community Evaluation Criteria Total Benefit(a) Units Full-time equivalent positions created 14 FTE People reached by public education features 117,000 people/year Participation in community involvement activities 66,700 people/year Pedestrian paths created 3.8 miles Users of improved/created recreation areas 1,025,000 visits/year (a) Sum of quantified responses

See Appendix B for an explanation of how each flood management project will benefit the community.

July 2018 7-18 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

7.4 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT

While all of the projects discussed in this section will provide significant benefits for the watershed if implemented, poor management practices during project construction or negligent design of developed project areas can lead to negative impacts which offset or negate the benefits these projects provide. As SWRP projects are implemented, it is essential that they adhere to BMPs for storm water management to minimize negative impacts from construction and development activities related to the projects.

BMPs to prevent storm water and dry weather runoff containing pollution from construction sites from entering waterways are identified in Tables 7-7 and 7-8 of the regional NPDES permit (NCRWQCB, 2015). Examples of BMPs that can be used to reduce the impact of constructing new developments and redevelopments include erosion control techniques, such as preserving existing vegetation, hydroseeding, geotextiles and mats, and mulching; sediment controls, such as fiber rolls, gravel bag berms, check dams, and storm drain inlet protection; water conservation practices; and waste management, such as stockpile management and spill prevention and control.

BMPs for the implementation of SWRP projects that include development and redevelopment will address the following three storm water planning principles:

x Reduce Runoff. Due to the increase in impervious surface area caused by development, design BMPs must reduce the storm water runoff from the development site. Design practices which achieve this goal include reducing building footprints, building narrower streets and sidewalks, and clustering development to reduce sprawl. Design elements which achieve this goal include green roofs, permeable pavements, vegetated swales, detention basins, and cisterns. x Control Sources of Pollutants. Developments and redevelopments should be designed to minimize storm water contact with pollutant sources. Design practices which achieve this goal include marking drain inlets, using water quality friendly materials, and proper design of trash and storage areas. Design elements that achieve this goal include marked drain inlets, signage, and efficient irrigation systems. x Treat Runoff. Developments and redevelopments should be designed to treat runoff from the project site before it enters storm drains or natural water bodies. Design practices and elements which achieve this goal must be determined on a site-specific basis, by considering the pollutants which may be present on the site, as well as other site conditions. Examples of design elements which may provide treatment include vegetated swales, detention basins, and trash capture screens.

For an expanded description of storm water BMPs, see the California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook (CASQA, 2003). See Section 8 for a description of how the identified SWRP projects will meet all development standards, adhere to all relevant regulations, and obtain permits and land use agreements. Project proponents are responsible for obtaining permits and ensuring compliance with regulations during project implementation.

July 2018 7-19 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 7 Identification and Prioritization of Projects

7.5 CONCLUSIONS

Of the 95 projects submitted for SWRP consideration, 51 have been prioritized based on State guidelines and the quantification methodology developed by the TAC. All prioritized projects are multi-benefit projects, with the highest ranked projects providing the most benefits that address watershed priorities. The dynamic list of projects is set to improve a variety of priorities set on a watershed scale, and represents the ongoing dedication to watershed improvements from a diversified group of stakeholders.

The projects submitted for consideration, but not included in the prioritization lists, will continue to be developed and evaluated by proponents. These projects are consistent with the types of multi-benefit projects solicited for the SWRP, but require further development. The SWRP is intended to be an adaptable plan, allowing additional projects to be evaluated and prioritized on an ongoing basis. As these projects advance and more information becomes available, they will be prioritized consistent with the process described in Section 6.

RRWA would like to acknowledge the dedication and effort of all project proponents who submitted projects for SWRP consideration that resulted in a strong list of regional projects dedicated to the improvement of the Russian River watershed.

July 2018 7-20 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 7\012418_R Section 7 Storm Water Resource Plan

SECTION 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

This section of the SWRP summarizes the plan for SWRP CHECKLIST GUIDELINES implementation, including a discussion of schedules, implementation strategy, and performance tracking for ܈ Plan identifies resources for implementation, SWRP projects. Implementation of the SWRP is including: projection of additional funding needs and sources for administrative and dependent on a variety of factors, including the implementation needs; and the schedule for following: arranging and securing implementation financing. x Funding opportunities and collaborations vary ܈ Plan projects and programs are identified to ensure the effective implementation of the from year to year; storm water resources plan pursuant to this part and achieve multiple benefits. See also x Regulatory drivers vary from year to year; Section 7.2. ܈ Plan identifies development of appropriate x New TMDLs are currently under development decision support tools and the data necessary for the Russian River that may influence the to use the decision support tools. See also focus of future available funding and the Section 6.1.1. priorities for project implementation; and ܈ Plan describes the timeline for submitting the Plan to existing plans. x Recent wildfires and continued increases in ܈ Plan describes specific actions by which the extreme weather conditions may influence Plan will be implemented. project development and priorities. ܈ Plan describes all entities responsible for project implementation. ܈ Plan describes community participation Therefore, implementation of projects that are currently strategy. See also Section 9. prioritized in the SWRP and implementation of projects ܈ Plan describes procedures to track status of that may be submitted in the future will vary based on the each project. participation of each project sponsor in grant ܈ Plan describes timelines for all active or solicitations, as they become available, and on the type planned projects. and amount of funding awarded in the future. ܈ Plan describes procedures for ongoing review, updates, and adaptive management of the Plan. Future regulatory drivers will influence the selection ܈ Plan describes a strategy and timeline for and implementation of SWRP projects. The obtaining necessary federal, state, and local North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board is permits. in the process of developing a Pathogen TMDL for the ܈ The Plan will be submitted to the applicable integrated regional water management Russian River and a Nutrient TMDL for the Laguna de (IRWM) group for incorporation in the Santa Rosa (tributary to the Russian River). These IRWMP. TMDLs will include requirements to address pollutant ܈ Plan describes how implementation loading and meet waste load allocations, which can be performance measures will be tracked. met with the implementation of multi-benefit projects. Once these TMDLs are adopted and implemented in the watershed, projects from the SWRP that best support compliance with TMDLs may be even more likely to be selected for implementation.

Requirements set forth in future municipal storm water permits will also be a factor in the selection of projects for implementation. Compliance with trash reduction requirements, green street infrastructure planning, and alternative compliance pathways can all be supported with the implementation of multi-benefit projects. These requirements, along with the availability of funding, will determine the type and number of projects that can be implemented.

July 2018 8-1 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

This section outlines, to the extent possible, the strategy for incorporating this SWRP into other local and regional planning efforts, funding projects, and implementing performance measurement to inform the adaptive management process.

8.1 STRATEGY TO IMPLEMENT THE SWRP

For the SWRP to be effective, an adaptive management strategy is needed to transition from development to implementation to maintenance. This section outlines the process for incorporating the SWRP into the IRWMP, managed by NCRP, and other applicable nexus plans, as well as reflecting future changes to priorities and projects.

8.1.1 Timeline for SWRP Completion

The Public Draft SWRP was made available on the project website (www.rrwatershed.org/project/stormwater- resource-plan) on March 30, 2018, and notification was provided to the public and stakeholders. The SWRP was then presented to the public for comment at a public meeting on April 17, 2018 and comments were accepted until the end of the comment period on April 23, 2018. Comments and responses are reflected in this document and are listed in Appendix F. The RRWA Board of Directors adopted this Final SWRP and submitted it to the NCRP for incorporation into the IRWMP.

July 2018 8-2 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

8.1.2 Timeline for SWRP Submittal to the IRWMP

The Public Draft SWRP was submitted to the NCRP’s technical peer review committee (TPRC) on March 30, 2018 for review to ensure alignment with the IRWMP Goals and Objectives and for technical comment. A copy of the Public Draft SWRP was presented to the NCRP policy review panel (PRP) at their April quarterly meeting, for review and comment. TPRC and PRP comments have been considered and addressed in this document. A copy of this Final SWRP was sent to the NCRP to be presented to the PRP for the final adoption decision vote.

March - April - July - NCRP Staff NCRP Board NCRP PRP Review Review Incorporation

8.1.3 Entities Responsible for SWRP Completion

The RRWA will continue to work with the NCRP to ensure the SWRP is incorporated into the IRWMP. The RRWA also submitted the SWRP to the SWRCB. Future project implementation is the responsibility of individual project proponents, as described in Section 9, while RRWA and the NCRP will work to adaptively manage the SWRP, as discussed in Section 8.3.

8.1.4 Community Participation Strategy

Community and stakeholder participation is very important to the SWRP development process. Public meetings were advertised and held at the start of project solicitations in June 2017. The public was invited to indicate their priorities and to recommend projects for prioritization both in person, and through the project’s website. In addition, comments on the Public Draft SWRP were accepted during the public comment period from March 23, 2018 to April 23, 2018. Comments were reviewed and responded to, and a summary of comments and responses are provided in Appendix F.

Throughout the process of the SWRP development, RRWA members and collaborators, members of the public, and stakeholder groups have worked together to develop and strengthen project proposals and incorporate information on the watershed and its water quality, storm water capture, flood control and environmental and community priorities into the SWRP.

8.1.5 Supplemental Storm Water Studies

To provide additional data for selection and prioritization of future storm water projects, the Water Agency performed an investigation of several SWRP project locations that appeared feasible or optimal for multi-benefit storm water resource management projects based on soil type, geologic maps, local groundwater conditions, and technical studies. Project 31 (Groundwater Infiltration and Conservation BMP Demonstrations) and Project 42 (Dawn Way/Old Redwood Highway Detention Pond) were selected for field investigations, which were conducted in the winter and spring of 2018. A geophysical survey was conducted at both project sites, and a subsurface investigation was performed at the site for Project 31. A summary of these field investigations is included in this

July 2018 8-3 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

SWRP as Appendix G. The results of these studies will be used to identify sites which have optimum conditions for groundwater infiltration and can be used to site future storm water resource management projects included in future plan updates. Based on the results of this work, the Water Agency developed a template for sub-watershed-specific storm water management planning assessments, which is included in this SWRP as Appendix H.

8.2 STRATEGY TO IMPLEMENT SWRP PROJECTS

8.2.1 Actions for Project Implementation

Project implementation will require an ongoing partnership between funders, project proponents, and regulatory entities, each with distinct responsibilities. Projects will be selected for implementation by a variety of potential grantors based on the ability of each project to meet the priorities of the specific funding available. Projects with a large number of regional benefits, an available funding match, and benefits to diverse communities may be more likely to be selected for implementation.

8.2.1.1 State Water Resources Control Board

The SWRCB is responsible for issuing grant solicitations and guidance, entering into agreements with project proponents for project implementation, and verifying implementation compliance with SWRCB grant requirements. Project proponents must submit their projects to the SWRCB during a solicitation period and meet grant criteria to be considered for funding.

8.2.1.2 Russian River Watershed Association

The RRWA will continue to fulfill its role in connecting its member agencies and collaborating entities with the resources to implement projects, streamline regulatory compliance, and provide other services to facilitate implementation and compliance, as needed. In addition, RRWA will contribute to the adaptive management of the SWRP, as discussed in Section 8.3 below.

8.2.1.3 North Coast Resource Partnership

Integrated Regional Water Management is a collaborative effort to identify and implement water management solutions on a regional scale that increase regional self-reliance, reduce conflict, and manage water to concurrently achieve social, environmental, and economic objectives. Integrated Regional Water Management is the application of Integrated Water Management principles on a regional scale. The NCRP acts as the repository for the IRWMP for the North Coast Region.

SWRP projects seeking funding that requires project inclusion into an IRWMP will need to follow the steps outlined in the NCRP’s Project Review and Selection Process Guidelines for the On-Going Project Inclusion Process. Steps for project inclusion in the IRWMP are:

x Project proponent must complete a separate application for project inclusion in the IRWMP. x Project proponent must submit a signed Memorandum of Mutual Understandings to NCRP.

July 2018 8-4 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

x NCRP staff will review the project and follow-up with project proponents regarding any eligibility concerns. x The TPRC will review and accept eligible projects. x NCRP staff will “Publish” eligible NCRP projects and project summaries will be included on the IRWMP website. NCRP staff will report to the PRP at a NCRP Quarterly Meeting. x Additional project information will be required when NCRP funding solicitations and calls for proposals occur. NCRP project proponents will be allowed to edit preliminary project information. x NCRP projects will be reviewed and scored by the TPRC if required by a respective funding solicitation; NCRP priority projects will be selected by the PRP. NCRP priority project proponents will need to adopt the NCRP IRWMP when completed as per IRWM Guidelines.

8.2.1.4 Project Proponents

Project proponents will ensure any agreements are in place with landowners, ensure the availability of match funding, apply for grant funding, and enter an agreement with the State or other relevant grantors. Project proponents will be responsible for obtaining any permits, providing project management staff, and designing, constructing, and maintaining their projects. Once implementation is completed, proponents will need to operate, maintain, and monitor the progress of their projects toward meeting grantor, regional, and local project goals.

8.2.2 Timeline for Project Implementation

The implementation of projects in this SWRP will be driven by the availability of grant funding and the project proponents’ ability to secure this funding. Due to the uncertainty of future grant funding for storm water projects and the inability to determine which projects will ultimately be successful at obtaining limited funds, the implementation schedule must be able to adapt to changing circumstances. Funding is anticipated to be obtained through a combination of grant funding and local match. Each project proponent has identified the source of a likely funding match, if one is needed. Certain grant funding opportunities are recurrent and can therefore be anticipated. It is expected that those proponents who have projects prioritized by this SWRP will apply for all appropriate State and Federal funding opportunities, among others, as they become available.

In addition to SWRCB and IRWMP implementation funding, some other potential State and Federal funding opportunities include:

x California Coastal Conservancy Proposition 1 Grants x California Department of Fish and Wildlife Proposition 1 and Fisheries Restoration Grants x California Water Resources Control Board SWRP Proposition 1 Implementation Grants x California Water Resources Control Board 319(h) Program Grants x California Wildlife Conservation Board Habitat Enhancement and Restoration Program Grants

July 2018 8-5 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

x Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART Drought Response Program Grants x National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Bay Watershed Education and Training and National Marine Fisheries Service Fisheries Research Grants x Various Federal Fish & Wildlife Service Grants x Various United States Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service Environmental Quality Incentives Program and Conservation Stewardship Program Grants x Various Federal Department of Energy Grants x California Department of Conservation’s Sustainable Agricultural Lands Conservation Program’s Agricultural Easement Grants x Various Federal Emergency Management Agency Grants x Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District Matching Grant Program

8.2.2.1 Cost of Project Implementation

None of the projects prioritized in this SWRP are currently funded. Thus, every project represents a current funding need. Each project proponent has identified the source of a potential funding match, and many have identified a variety of grant funding streams and partnerships to facilitate project implementation. Project proponents have provided estimates of both implementation and long-term operations and maintenance costs for each project. These are presented in Table 8-1. Costs were developed as estimates only. They were not independently verified and may be subject to change as design advances and projects near the implementation phase.

July 2018 8-6 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

Table 8-1. Projected Implementation Costs for all Ranked Projects

Projected Annual Total Cost over Projected Operation & 20-year Project Implementation Maintenance Horizon**, Rank ID* Project Name Cost, dollars Costs, dollars dollars 1 40 Pruitt Creek Detention Pond 4,900,000 133,000 6,878,704 2 12 Forsythe Creek Floodplain and Riparian Restoration 2,600,000 4,500 2,666,949 3 7 North Detention Basin BMP Improvements 2,400,000 2,350 2,434,962 4 6 Grove Street Detention Basin BMP Improvements 3,000,000 2,350 3,034,962 5 42 Dawn Way and Old Redwood Highway Detention Pond 2,300,000 38,000 2,865,344 6 65 Foss Creek at Dry Creek Road Riparian Corridor Improvements 4,100,000 2,350 4,134,962 7 10 Healdsburg High School Recreation Field Replacement 11,700,000 2,350 11,734,962 8 2 Community Center Playing Fields Reconstruction 10,100,000 2,350 10,134,962 9 30 Mark West Creek Sediment Reduction 1,191,104 - 1,191,104 10 63 Affordable Housing Storm Water Management and Water Recycling 250,000 2,350 284,962 11 5 Healdsburg Avenue Pavement Reduction and Storm Water Management 39,700,000 3,100 39,746,120 12 4 West Plaza Parking Lot Reconstruction 1,300,000 2,350 1,334,962 13 75 Santa Rosa Greenway 3,700,000 - 3,700,000 14 64 Foss Creek at Vine Street Rain Garden and Riparian Corridor Improvements 1,100,000 2,350 1,134,962 15 3 Cerri Building 8,900,000 2,350 8,934,962 16 8 Pordon-Bianca Storm Drain and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction 6,700,000 2,350 6,734,962 17 37 Permit Sonoma LID Retrofit 275,000 1,000 289,877 18 13 Orrs Creek Fish Passage 495,000 2,000 524,755 19 39 Windsor Creek Detention Pond 870,000 25,000 1,241,937 20 11 Healdsburg Recycled Water System 18,000,000 10,000 18,148,775 21 14 Downtown Cloverdale Flood Reduction 5,055,000 28,125 5,473,429 22 88 Doolin Creek Realignment 3,000,000 75,000 4,115,811 23 71 Increasing In-Stream Flows on the Upper Russian River 545,000 25,000 916,937 24 31 Groundwater Infiltration and Conservation BMP Demonstrations 378,000 8,000 497,020 27 38 Mark West Creek LID Retrofit Opportunities and Implementation Project 96,800 1,000 111,677 28 89 Gibson Creek Daylighting 6,500,000 75,000 7,615,811 29 21 Laguna de Santa Rosa Headwaters Restoration 8,800,000 50,000 9,543,874 30 17 High School Storm Water Management Strategies 250,000 - 250,000 32 41 Hall Park Detention and Irrigation Pond 870,000 13,000 1,063,407 33 27 Bidwell Creek Floodplain and Meadow Enhancement 667,542 - 667,542 34 44 Corp Yard Green Clipping Transfer Area LID Retrofit 310,000 3,000 354,632 35 74 Ranch Conservation Easement 2,550,000 3,000 2,594,632 37 28 Mark West Creek Instream Enhancement 3,295,155 - 3,295,155 38 9 Recreation Field Turf Replacement 10,500,000 2,350 10,534,962 39 52 Matanzas Creek Flood Protection and Environmental Enhancement 4,612,000 100,000 6,099,747 40 26 Hobbs Winery Creek Restoration 76,000 - 76,000 41 46 Vineyard Stormwater and Nutrient Management in the Dry Creek Subwatershed 25,000 - 25,000 42 43 Town of Windsor Corp Yard Parking Lot LID 170,000 4,000 229,510 43 92 Copeland Creek Stormwater Awareness Platform 500,000 - 500,000 44 70 Upper Russian River Revegetation and Sediment Reduction 255,000 25,000 626,937 45 49 Country Club Drive Stormwater Demonstration Garden Phase 1 and 2 20,000 3,700 75,047 46 90 Ukiah Public Parking Facility LID Upgrades 983,000 75,000 2,098,811 47 29 Streamflow Enhancement in Critical Coho Watersheds 554,704 - 554,704 48 73 Gird Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancement 130,000 3,000 174,632 49 48 Copeland Creek Stormwater Demonstration Gardens 11,650 3,450 62,977 50 87 Ives Park Pedestrian & Stormwater Improvement 26,500 5,000 100,887 51 54 Spring Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancements 220,000 5,000 294,387 *Includes only projects that provided a cost estimate **Assumed discount rate of 3-percent

July 2018 8-7 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

8.2.2.2 Entities Responsible Project implementation will be managed by project proponents. These include the key partners listed in Table 8-2.

Table 8-2. Project Proponents for all Prioritized Projects

Rank Project ID Project Title Project Proponent 1 40 Pruitt Creek Detention Pond Town of Windsor 2 12 Forsythe Creek Floodplain and Riparian Restoration Mendocino County RCD 3 7 North Detention Basin BMP Improvements City of Healdsburg 4 6 Grove Street Detention Basin BMP Improvements City of Healdsburg 5 42 Dawn Way and Old Redwood Highway Detention Pond Town of Windsor 6 65 Foss Creek at Dry Creek Road Riparian Corridor Improvements City of Healdsburg 7 10 Healdsburg High School Recreation Field Replacement City of Healdsburg 8 2 Community Center Playing Fields Reconstruction City of Healdsburg 9 30 Mark West Creek Sediment Reduction Sonoma RCD 10 63 Affordable Housing Storm Water Management and Water Recycling City of Healdsburg 11 5 Healdsburg Avenue Pavement Reduction and Storm Water Management City of Healdsburg 12 4 West Plaza Parking Lot Reconstruction City of Healdsburg 13 75 Santa Rosa Greenway Sonoma Land Trust 14 64 Foss Creek at Vine Street Rain Garden and Riparian Corridor Improvements City of Healdsburg 15 3 Cerri Building City of Healdsburg 16 8 Pordon-Bianca Storm Drain and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction City of Healdsburg 17 37 Permit Sonoma LID Retrofit Sonoma PRMD 18 13 Orrs Creek Fish Passage Mendocino County RCD 19 39 Windsor Creek Detention Pond Town of Windsor 20 11 Healdsburg Recycled Water System City of Healdsburg 21 14 Downtown Cloverdale Flood Reduction City of Cloverdale 22 88 Doolin Creek Realignment City of Ukiah 23 71 Increasing In-Stream Flows on the Upper Russian River California Land Stewardship Institute 24 31 Groundwater Infiltration and Conservation BMP Demonstrations Sonoma RCD 25 83 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 3 City of Santa Rosa 26 82 Lower Colgan Creek Restoration Phase 2 City of Santa Rosa 27 38 Mark West Creek LID Retrofit Opportunities and Implementation Project Sonoma PRMD 28 89 Gibson Creek Daylighting City of Ukiah 29 21 Laguna de Santa Rosa Headwaters Restoration City of Cotati 30 17 High School Storm Water Management Strategies Laguna Foundation 31 81 Paulin Creek Restoration at Northwest Community Park City of Santa Rosa 32 41 Hall Park Detention and Irrigation Pond Town of Windsor 33 27 Bidwell Creek Floodplain and Meadow Enhancement Sonoma RCD 34 44 Corp Yard Green Clipping Transfer Area LID Retrofit Town of Windsor 35 74 Ranch Conservation Easement Sonoma Land Trust 36 85 Tanglewood Park Restoration and Storm Water Improvement City of Santa Rosa 37 28 Mark West Creek Instream Enhancement Sonoma RCD 38 9 Recreation Field Turf Replacement City of Healdsburg 39 52 Matanzas Creek Flood Protection and Environmental Enhancement Sonoma County Water Agency 40 26 Hobbs Winery Creek Restoration Sonoma RCD 41 46 Vineyard Stormwater and Nutrient Management in the Dry Creek Subwatershed Sonoma RCD 42 43 Town of Windsor Corp Yard Parking Lot LID Town of Windsor 43 92 Copeland Creek Stormwater Awareness Platform Sonoma State University 44 70 Upper Russian River Revegetation and Sediment Reduction California Land Stewardship Institute 45 49 Country Club Drive Stormwater Demonstration Garden Phase 1 and 2 Daily Acts 46 90 Ukiah Public Parking Facility LID Upgrades City of Ukiah 47 29 Streamflow Enhancement in Critical Coho Watersheds Sonoma RCD 48 73 Gird Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancement Sonoma Land Trust 49 48 Copeland Creek Stormwater Demonstration Gardens Daily Acts 50 87 Ives Park Pedestrian & Stormwater Improvement Daily Acts 51 54 Spring Creek Storm Water Quality Enhancements Sonoma County Water Agency

July 2018 8-8 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

8.2.2.3 Community Participation Strategy

Each project that applies for grant funding must meet the standards for community involvement and stakeholder outreach. As projects move into implementation, it will be the responsibility of proponents to facilitate public and stakeholder involvement. In addition, many projects have identified opportunities for ongoing public engagement as one of the project benefits. These projects will not only meet the standards of community engagement during the development of the project, but offer opportunities throughout the life of the project to enhance community participation and education.

8.2.2.4 Permitting

Permitting is an important component of many implementation projects. Individual project proponents will be responsible for complying with federal, state, and local agency requirements, including relevant permits and the California Environmental Quality Act. Permits will be obtained prior to project implementation. Implementation of projects will include proper permit compliance and reporting.

8.2.2.5 Tracking Project Progress

Project proponents will be responsible for providing status updates to the grantor(s) for each project. Each agency tracks project implementation differently.

As a condition of State Proposition One and IRWM funding, each project proponent funded through these sources will develop a Project Performance Monitoring Plan to track project performance according to the appropriate project performance and monitoring plan guidelines. Project performance monitoring plans must describe the tools that will be used to monitor project performance and set interim targets (or milestones) that will be used to track the project’s pace in providing the expected benefits; indicate where the data will be collected and the types of analyses to be used; explain how the monitoring tools and targets are appropriate for the benefits claimed; and include a discussion of how monitoring data will be used to measure performance.

R3MP, SWAMP, USGS, and the Water Agency provide, or plan to provide, monitoring programs that can be used to measure project performance by tracking quantifiable metrics such as water quality, streamflow, and endangered species populations.

x The R3MP will be developed to monitor contaminant transport and ambient water quality conditions within the Russian River watershed. x SWAMP is in part managed by the Clean Water Team (CWT) which is a citizen monitoring program by the State Water Resources Control Board. CWT monitoring coordinators provide technical assistance and guidance documents, training, quality assurance/quality control support, temporary loans of equipment, and communication among citizens programs. Features monitored through SWAMP’s citizen programs include basic water quality, water supply, aquatic invasive species and salmonid habitat improvements. x USGS provides an abundant amount of data for streamflow, groundwater, surface water and water quality. The USGS is also currently working with the Water Agency and State

July 2018 8-9 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

Water Resources Control Board on a project for determining the water availability in the Russian River watershed, which is planned for completion by October 2019. x The Water Agency is engaged in salmon and steelhead monitoring programs in addition to the collaborative water supply project with USGS mentioned above.

Projects selected for any type of State funding are required to spend funds according to the approved project scope and budget. Timely progress reports are required for all projects. Project status will be updated at least bi-annually on the State’s Bonds Accountability website (www.bondaccountability.ca.gov). Site visits may also be conducted during construction for development projects. Payment requests must include a certification by the project proponent that each expense complies with requirements outlined in the project agreement. Project proponents must also submit supporting documentation for each expense, with reimbursements approved only for eligible expenses pursuant to program guidelines and contained within the approved project budget. Programs may also withhold a portion of each payment request to be released contingent upon project completion.

Department expenditures of bond proceeds are subject to audit to determine whether the expenditures made from bond proceeds:

x Were made according to the established front-end criteria and processes; x Were consistent with all legal requirements; and x Achieved the intended outcomes.

To comply with this requirement, the State performs audits through methods outlined by the State’s Department of Finance. In general, projects are subject to a close-out review at the time the project is completed and prior to releasing final funds. The purpose of the close-out review is to ensure all project components were completed according to program guidelines and the terms of the project agreement, including the project scope and budget. Project proponents must comply with all current laws and regulations which apply to the project and submit documents summarizing total project costs and all additional funding sources.

8.3 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

For the SWRP to be effective, an adaptive management strategy is needed to transition from planning to implementation. The pace for implementation of projects, project timing, and project funding will be heavily influenced by outside drivers, including available funding, new regulatory mandates, and environmental influences. As these influences change the landscape of storm water planning, as new and updated project designs become available, and as other projects receive funding and are implemented, the SWRP will require updates to remain a relevant document for planning the future of storm water in the region. The RRWA plans to be engaged in overseeing the adaptive management of the SWRP by seeking additional funding for adaptive management and facilitating communication between agencies.

Updates to the list of projects prioritized for funding or other information on the watershed’s priorities will be reflected through regional collaborations, managed collaboratively by RRWA and NCRP.

July 2018 8-10 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

8.3.1 Communication

The RRWA will continue to update the SWRP webpage and provide map updates to inform the public of project progress and connect the public with developing new projects. As new projects are submitted to the SWRP, they will be evaluated by RRWA staff and, if they pass the screening criteria, prioritized as described in Section 6 into a Supplementary Projects List. RRWA has sufficient funding to prepare a 2019 Supplementary Project List and will seek funding to continue to actively manage the SWRP, as long as potential implementation funding is likely. The RRWA will keep local agencies updated through public meetings held throughout the year. SWRP revisions will be made available electronically on the RRWA website, and paper copies of selected updated sections will be distributed to member agencies.

8.3.2 Future Project Submittals

Based on the data received from the initial SWRP project submissions, RRWA has compiled a list of recommended quantification methods which future projects can use when submitting project data. Table 8-3 presents several recommended quantification methods. However, each project proponent should use engineering judgement to employ methods that work for their individual project location and benefits.

Table 8-3. Recommended Quantification Methods

Relevant Benefit(s) Quantification Method Design equations All benefits Comparison with similar projects Benefits requiring area or GIS analysis volume calculations Drawing set analysis Trash capture Data from local or regional trash assessment HEC-RAS modeling Flood reduction benefits XPSWMM modeling CALeeMOD tool Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions CA ARB method Carbon sequestration COMET-Planner online calculator Public education, community involvement, and Extrapolation of historical data improved recreation area benefits

8.3.3 Project Tracking and Monitoring

RRWA will facilitate implementation and monitoring through the ongoing efforts of R3MP, SWAMP, USGS and the Water Agency as described in Section 8.2.3.8, but tracking and monitoring of individual projects will be the responsibility of grantees, in accordance with their grant agreements.

July 2018 8-11 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 8 Implementation Strategy and Schedule

8.3.4 Long-Term Funding

Currently the RRWA’s budget is limited and is not sufficient for long-term management. However, the 2018-2019 Workplan (RRWA, 2018) includes funding to seek longer-term financial solutions to update the SWRP and to consider additional projects for prioritization. Should the text of the SWRP be updated in the future, the addition of new projects, re-prioritization of projects, and the acquisition of new data will likely result in updates to the following appendices:

x Appendix B – Project Descriptions x Appendix C – Project Data x Appendix D – Project Quantitative Methods x Appendix E – Watershed Planning Document References

However, it is likely that only the Supplemental Project List will be prepared and published. There is currently no funding in place to guarantee further updates to the SWRP, and therefore, no schedule to complete such updates. If additional funding targeting storm water and dry weather runoff capture project implementation is not forthcoming, the usefulness of this specific plan will be limited to capturing and describing the priorities of the region, and presenting data resources for future planning to address new regional priorities. Updates on the status of projects and changes to priorities will be implemented through the IRWMP, should RRWA not be able to identify additional funding.

Whether it is fully updated in the future or not, the SWRP serves as the repository for a wide array of potentially beneficial projects to address an array of regional priorities.

July 2018 8-12 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 8 Storm Water Resource Plan

SECTION 9 Education, Outreach, and Public Participation

Outreach is a key component of the SWRP SWRP CHECKLIST GUIDELINES development process. Soliciting and incorporating ܈ Community participation is provided for in Plan input from a wide variety of groups increases the implementation. See also Section 8.1.4. likelihood that the SWRP will prioritize useful ܈ Plan describes public education and public projects that can provide significant benefits to the participation opportunities to engage the public watershed. This section discusses how public when considering major technical and policy issues related to the development and involvement in the development of the SWRP has implementation. been, and how it will continue to be, encouraged, as ܈ Plan describes mechanisms, processes, and well as plans for future public involvement now that milestones that have been or will be used to facilitate public participation and communication the SWRP has been adopted. during development and implementation of the Plan. ܈ Plan describes mechanisms to engage 9.1 GENERAL OUTREACH STRATEGIES communities in project design and implementation. ܈ Plan identifies specific audiences, including local The RRWA uses a variety of media to communicate ratepayers, developers, locally regulated important information about projects of interest to commercial and industrial stakeholders, nonprofit its membership and the region, including organizations, and the public. ܈ Plan describes strategies to engage disadvantaged information about the SWRP. Using a variety of and climate vulnerable communities within the media increases the exposure of the public to the Plan boundaries and ongoing tracking of their SWRP and increases the chances of engaging the involvement in the planning process. community in the development and implementation ܈ Plan describes efforts to identify and address environmental injustice needs and issues within of the prioritized projects in the future. the watershed. ܈ Plan includes a schedule for initial public 9.1.1 RRWA Website engagement and education.

The RRWA has a webpage dedicated to the SWRP process. The webpage is intended to convey general information on the SWRP and its purpose and goals, identify collaborating entities, and provide a calendar of important dates and contact information. The website address for the SWRP project information site is: www.rrwatershed.org/project/stormwater-resource-plan. Through the site, the public can join the SWRP Public Outreach email list, email questions or comments to [email protected], and access forms, news, and project deliverables. The SWRP Public Outreach email list currently consists of over 450 people and is used to announce public meetings and updates.

9.1.2 News Media

Several different public media outlets were contacted for current and future outreach communication. The form of publication varies depending on the outlet, which are listed in Table 9-1. In advance of public meetings held on June 26, 2017 in Ukiah, on June 27, 2017 in Santa Rosa, and on April 17, 2018 in Cloverdale the RRWA prepared fliers for distribution and articles for publication.

Print advertisements for the SWRP were simple and direct, emphasizing specific action items and providing the website, email addresses, and a phone number to call to obtain information.

July 2018 9-1 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 9 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 9 Education, Outreach, and Public Participation

Table 9-1. Publication Outreach Sources

Media Outlet Type of Publication The Press Democrat* Newspaper and events calendar Association of Clean Water Administrators News* Weekly eNews Russian River Chamber of Commerce Website and membership email Empire Report Social media Cloverdale Reveille* Event page The Community Voice – Cotati Event page Ukiah Daily Journal* Online and print publication The Sonoma County Gazette* Online publication Maven’s Notebook Online publication El Superior Periodico Hispano Online publication Impulso Patch Online publication *These sources confirmed publication or had confirmed calendar updates.

9.1.3 Event Outreach

The RRWA attended the annual Lake Sonoma Steelhead Festival held at the Milt Brandt Visitors Center at Lake Sonoma on February 11, 2017 and on February 10, 2018. Staff hosted a booth, handed out bulletins announcing the SWRP, and discussed ways for the public to get involved.

The regularly scheduled RRWA Technical Working Group and Board of Director meetings discussed the SWRP throughout the SWRP development process. These meetings are open to the public and provide an opportunity for public input on watershed issues.

RRWA members and collaborators attended the Russian River Confluence event, held on March 24, 2017 at the Shone Farm in Forestville. This event is focused on engaging stakeholders in watershed planning efforts, including the SWRP, and was attended by Federal, State and regional policy makers, representatives from Native American Tribal communities, water and wastewater service providers, non-profit organizations, resource conservation districts, business owners, farmers, landowners, and other members of the public.

The Russian River-Friendly Landscaping Event, Supply in the Sky: Stormwater as a Resource, held on January 24, 2017, and two Low Impact Design Trainings, one for municipal plan review, held on April 3, 2017, and one for the design community, held on April 24, 2017, focused on water resource stewardship, green infrastructure, water supply, and a variety of other topics. This public event allowed discussion of the relevance of the SWRP in regional planning and offered an opportunity to engage members of the public from a variety of backgrounds.

From May 16 to 25, 2017, the RRWA participated in a series of Vital Lands Initiative Thematic Workshops hosted by the Sonoma County Agricultural and Open Space District that were attended by a variety of watershed stakeholders and members of the public. Themes included natural resources, agriculture, greenbelts and scenic lands, and recreation and open space. These

July 2018 9-2 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 9 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 9 Education, Outreach, and Public Participation workshops provided an ideal venue to meet stakeholders and members of the public and introduce the ongoing SWRP development effort.

9.1.4 Fliers

Electronic copies of fliers designed by the RRWA were provided to the TAC members, collaborators, and stakeholders in English and, as needed, in Spanish. Fliers were placed by member agency staff at service counters, hung on bulletin boards, and handed out at local community events. In addition, TAC members were asked to distribute fliers through other appropriate venues typically used to provide public information to their audience. Disadvantaged community contacts were provided a digital copy of fliers to distribute. These fliers, prepared in English and Spanish, included a bulletin announcing the initiation of a grant-funded SWRP and fliers announcing public meetings.

9.1.5 Social Media

The RRWA utilized its Facebook presence to increase public awareness of the SWRP by publishing meeting notifications and other pertinent news. Key posts announced public meetings and project milestones; followers could repost announcements and events. TAC members and collaborators were also encouraged to share information on their social media outlets. The RRWA will continue to use Facebook in this fashion throughout implementation of the SWRP.

9.1.6 Other Outreach Methods

Other general types of outreach performed by the RRWA or members of the TAC included distributing fliers in locations other than those listed above and contacting Title 1 schools to post to their websites and distribute via email lists. Specific efforts were made to reach technical staff at member and collaborator agencies to solicit data, project recommendations, and input at key times in the SWRP development process. In addition, calls were made to each project proponent, including members, collaborators, non-governmental organizations, and members of the public to encourage the provision of adequate information to rank and describe each project. Additional outreach actions were encouraged during TAC meetings and any information requested in support of such outreach was provided.

9.2 SPECIAL OUTREACH GROUPS

During SWRP development, the RRWA identified various groups whose input would assist in incorporating a wide variety of projects with multiple benefits. The RRWA identified DACs, SDACs, climate vulnerable communities, communities of environmental injustice, and tribal organizations as groups whose input would be of great value to the SWRP. Extra effort was made to reach out to these groups to solicit their input and involve them in the SWRP. Other groups that were contacted through public outreach include NGOs, ratepayers, developers, and locally-regulated commercial and industrial stakeholders.

9.2.1 Disadvantaged Communities

DACs are identified by the State of California as any community where the median household income is below 80 percent of the statewide median household income. SDACs are communities whose median household income is 60 percent or less of the statewide median household income.

July 2018 9-3 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 9 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 9 Education, Outreach, and Public Participation

Since the identification of these communities is based on statistics that are constantly in flux and subject to interpretation, the DAC and SDAC locations identified by the IRWMP were deemed the best available information. An effort was made to reach out to DACs and SDACs and to create opportunities for their participation in the SWRP. DACs and SDACs were contacted through outreach to Title 1 schools via the PeachJar flier distribution system through the Mendocino and Sonoma County Offices of Education and the Mendocino and Sonoma County Community Development Commissions. To better reach DACs, the RRWA provided translation into Spanish, which is the language spoken by the largest population of non-English-speakers in the area. DACs identified during the outreach process through the NCRP are listed in Table 9-2, and shown on Figure 6-2.

Table 9-2. Disadvantaged Communities in the Russian River Watershed (NCRP, 2017a)

Community Name Roseland Moorland Park area of Santa Rosa Fulton Guerneville Monte Rio Calpella Cazadero Graton Hopland (SDACs) Hopland Rancheria (SDACs) Ukiah (SDACs)

9.2.2 Climate Vulnerable Communities

Communities vulnerable to climate change have been studied by a wide variety of sources in California. The California Energy Commission (2012) mapped climate vulnerable communities by census tract and found that the watershed is primarily at low risk from climate change. Because the California Energy Commission did not identify any communities which are at high risk from climate change, this plan defers to local knowledge that suggests that areas of the lower watershed will be most impacted by climate change, since rising sea level may cause increased flooding, decreased drainage, and salinity intrusion, among other issues. Because the majority of the watershed’s population is in the lower watershed, it appeared that general public outreach yielded an appropriate amount of participation from these communities in the plan.

9.2.3 Communities of Environmental Injustice

The US EPA has developed an Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool (2016) that was used to map the watershed by County. Both Sonoma County and Mendocino County have an above average exposure to lead paint, but are on par with the state and national averages for other indicators of environmental injustice. The vast majority of the watershed has near average environmental

July 2018 9-4 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 9 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 9 Education, Outreach, and Public Participation justice, compared to the Nation. Areas of environmental injustice are highly correlated with demographic factors, such as below-average income levels, minority populations, and lower educational levels. City of Santa Rosa staff were engaged to target communications to their communities vulnerable to environmental injustice. In addition, communication through the Sonoma County Community Development Commission facilitated outreach to these areas.

9.2.4 Tribal Outreach

The RRWA identified ten different tribal organizations within the watershed based on data from the NCRP and the CIEA that are listed in Table 9-3. Coordination of outreach was facilitated by the CIEA. To solicit participation from these tribes, fliers were distributed to the CIEA’s email distribution list in advance of public meetings. In addition, RRWA obtained contact information from the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians for individual tribal members likely to be interested in expanding tribal involvement in the SWRP. Personal outreach to these individuals included emails and phone calls in February 2018 and following the April 2018 NCRP meeting. Figure 3-10 shows the locations of tribal trusts within the watershed.

Table 9-3. Native American Tribal Trust Lands in the Russian River Watershed (NCRP, 2017b)

Tribal Organization Cloverdale Rancheria of Pomo Indians Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians Dry Creek Rancheria of Pomo Indians Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria Guidiville Rancheria Hopland Band of Pomo Indians Lytton Rancheria of Pomo Indians* Pinoleville Pomo Nation Potter Valley Tribe Redwood Valley Rancheria of Pomo Indians *Tribal lands are not currently held in trust by the United States Government and therefore were not mapped on Figure 3-10, Tribal Trust Lands. The tribe was, however, contacted through CIEA.

9.2.5 Outreach to Non-Governmental Organizations

Using their own contact and distribution lists, the RRWA and individual TAC members reached out to a variety of organizations, including NGOs. At the Russian River Confluence event the Water Agency disseminated SWRP information, which was then posted to the event’s online resource page and emailed out to the event distribution list. In addition, many NGOs were contacted through the Sonoma County Water Coalition, as shown in Table 9-4. The full list of NGOs contacted by all member agencies is unknown.

July 2018 9-5 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 9 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 9 Education, Outreach, and Public Participation

Table 9-4. Sonoma County Water Coalition Connections

Member Organizations Supporting Organizations Atascadero/Green Valley Creek Watershed Bellevue Township Council Community Clean Water Institute California Native Plants Society: Milo Baker Chapter Dry Creek Valley Association Concerned Citizens for Santa Rosa Friends of Mark West Watershed Coast Action Group California River Watch Community Alliance with Family Farmers O.W.L. Foundation Forest Unlimited Preserve Rural Sonoma County Forestville Citizens for Sensible Growth Russian River Watershed Protection Committee Friends of the Eel River Sonoma County Conservation Action Friends of the Gualala River SWiG (Sebastopol Water Information Group) Graton Community Projects Sonoma Coast Surfrider Madrone Audubon Society Valley of the Moon Alliance NOWWE: New-Old Ways Wholistically Emerging Wine & Water Watch Occidental Arts and Ecology Center - Water Institute Petaluma River Council Russian River Chamber of Commerce Sierra Club (Sonoma County Group) Town Hall Coalition Western Sonoma County Rural Alliance

9.2.6 Ratepayers

The relevance of the SWRP to ratepayers in each service area is dependent on which projects get prioritized for funding. The majority of the watershed’s population are ratepayers, and therefore general public outreach yielded ratepayer participation during the public comment period. However, the RRWA also participates in an ongoing collaboration with the Water Quality Credit Trading Program in the Laguna de Santa Rosa, managed by the Sonoma and Gold Ridge RCDs that connects point source dischargers to planning and regulatory leaders. The SWRP was discussed at these meetings as a part of the regulatory framework within which the Water Quality Credit Trading Program operates. Future communications from the RRWA, project proponents, or water service providers may be targeted at ratepayers if a SWRP project is anticipated to have a significant effect on water or wastewater rates.

9.2.7 Developers

The relevance of the SWRP to developers is dependent on which projects get prioritized for funding. General public involvement and local communities have represented developers in the SWRP development process. Future communications from the RRWA or project proponents may

July 2018 9-6 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 9 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 9 Education, Outreach, and Public Participation be targeted at developers if a SWRP project is anticipated to have a significant effect on local development potential.

9.2.8 Locally Regulated Commercial and Industrial Stakeholders

The relevance of the SWRP to commercial and industrial stakeholders is dependent on which projects get prioritized for funding. It is probable that general public outreach yielded an appropriate amount of stakeholder participation in plan development. Future communications from the RRWA or project proponents may be targeted at these stakeholders if a SWRP project is anticipated to have a significant effect on discharge limits, water quality standards, or other regulatory provisions which these stakeholders are subject to.

9.2.9 North Coast Resource Partnership

The RRWA presents annually to the NCRP, which is responsible for developing and implementing the IRWMP. This Final SWRP was submitted for inclusion into the IRWMP. Coordination with NCRP was very important to successful SWRP development. The RRWA presented to NCRP on April 21, 2017, and included information on the status and schedule for SWRP completion. Additional coordination with NCRP took place by phone, as needed, throughout the development of the SWRP.

9.3 TIMELINE OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES

9.3.1 June 2017 - Public Meetings Round 1

Two initial public meetings were held to receive public input on prioritizing various project benefits; the first on June 26, 2017 at the City of Ukiah’s Council Chambers, and the second on June 27, 2017 at the Regional Water Board in Santa Rosa. The input received at these meeting was incorporated into the weighting values assigned to quantified project evaluation criteria (see Section 6). As a result of these meetings, members of the public were connected to potential project sponsors and given the opportunity to develop and strengthen project concepts for prioritization of their projects in the SWRP.

9.3.2 April 2018 - Public Meetings Round 2

A second public meeting was held on April 17, 2018 to present the Draft SWRP to the public and receive public comments. During the meeting, the public were given an overview of the SWRP and the potential technical and policy issues related to development and implementation. Comments received at this meeting were reviewed and responded to, and a summary of comments and responses are provided in Appendix F.

9.3.3 April 2018 - Public Comment Period

There was a public comment period from March 23, 2018 to April 23, 2018 to allow input on the Draft SWRP. Public comments were reviewed and responded to, and a summary of comments and responses are provided in Appendix F.

July 2018 9-7 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 9 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 9 Education, Outreach, and Public Participation

9.3.4 Future Public Outreach Events

Once this Final SWRP is included in the IRWMP, it will be the responsibility of the NCRP to continue to include and engage with the public on regional issues and funding opportunities. The NCRP currently has a calendar and “North Coast News” page on their website where they publish updates on issues occurring in the North Coast. The IRWMP coordinates regional planning priorities with local planning efforts. The Russian River Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan was written by the Mendocino County Resource Conservation District and includes their plan for stakeholder participation. The SWRP has followed, and RRWA will continue to follow, several of the main mechanisms of outreach suggested in the IRWMP, including presentation and solicitation of input at public meetings, draft plan review with stakeholders and collaborators, and dissemination of data and information online.

9.3.5 Project Design and Implementation

Based on the availability of grant funding for the projects in the SWRP, the opportunities for outreach through public engagement and education may vary. Projects that apply for grant funding must meet the standards for community involvement and stakeholder outreach, and project- specific outreach will be created and organized by the project proponents. Methods for involving the public may vary depending on the project proponent and the nature of the project.

Public involvement is important in both the design stage and implementation stage of each project. Potential methods to involve the public in project design include town hall meetings, online surveys, and door-to-door surveys. Potential methods for involving the public in project implementation include using volunteer workers to construct and maintain the project and providing educational signage or tours after the project is constructed.

July 2018 9-8 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 9 Storm Water Resource Plan

SECTION 10 Standard Provisions

10.1 STANDARD PROVISIONS

The authors of this SWRP have, with good intent, compiled available information into the SWRP, with reference to the SWRP Guidelines and the Grant Agreement. The authors are not responsible for information provided by third parties, and do not make any warrantee about future funding or performance of projects selected for prioritization herein.

To the knowledge of the authors, all terms, provisions, and commitments of the Grant Agreement regarding the preparation of this document have been fulfilled. To the knowledge of the authors, this SWRP does not violate any provision of any Federal, State, or local law or regulation in effect, or result in any breach or default under any contract, obligation, indenture, or other instrument to which any participant is bound. However, individual RRWA member agencies, collaborators in the development of this SWRP, and project proponents are legally responsible for their contributions, and RRWA and the City of Ukiah, as the State’s grantees, shall not be held liable for any errors or omissions on the part of those who contributed to this document. Project proponents prepared all project design, calculations of project benefits, and cost estimating. Cost estimates may be subject to change as design of each project develops.

The inclusion of projects in this SWRP does not imply a design or constructability review has been performed by the authors. All project proponents are responsible for projects they have proposed and it has been assumed that information put forth by proponents is true and accurate to the best of their knowledge. The authors shall not be held liable for any loss or liability arising out of any claim or action brought against the SWRP or its projects or proponents.

There is no obligation, debt or liability assumed for the future funding, construction, operation or maintenance of any project prioritized in the SWRP. Project proponents and/or project sponsors must apply and compete for future funding opportunities and execute agreements for such funding to implement projects. In addition, the compliance of such funded projects with applicable laws, including permitting, will be the sole responsibility of the party submitting for such implementation funding.

Projects were evaluated on their merits using an impartial system to score project benefits. Criteria and project benefits were set prior to scoring in an effort to provide an impartial ranking. In situations where projects from a particular proponent ranked higher in the prioritization than those of another proponent, the discrepancy has generally been attributed to the level of detail provided by the proponent on which to score projects, as well as the number of potential project benefits to the watershed.

In addition, it has been the intent of all parties participating in the development of this SWRP to reflect the needs of a broad cross-section of agencies, members of the public, disadvantaged communities, tribes, and non-governmental organizations. The authors have made every effort to avoid discrimination against any party and are not aware of any discrimination by members or collaborators in the development of the SWRP.

Funding for the development of this SWRP has been provided in full or in part through an agreement with the SWRCB using funds from Proposition One. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the foregoing, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use. This document is a part of the public record, and all information provided by project proponents is included in the public record, by reference.

July 2018 10-1 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\Section 10\121317_R Section 10 Storm Water Resource Plan

SECTION 11 References

CASQA, 2003. Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook (2003). California Stormwater Quality Association. CDFW, 2012. Strategic Vision. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. April 2012. Caltrans, 2016. Statewide Stormwater Management Plan. California Department of Transportation, Division of Environmental Analysis. July 2016. SWRCB, 2013. Contaminants in Fish from California Rivers and Streams, 2011. California Water Boards, Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. DWR, 2013. Bulletin 118 – Update 2003 Groundwater Basin Descriptions. Web Interface. www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/bulletin118/gwbasins2003.cfm. Accessed July 2017. DWR, 2016. Bulletin 118 Series, California’s Groundwater, Interim Update. California Department of Water Resources. December 23, 2016. MCRCD, 2012. Russian River Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan. Mendocino County Resource Conservation District. June 2012. NCRP, 2010. Draft North Coast Data Management Plan (2010). North Coast Resource Partnership. NCRP, 2014. North Coast Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. North Coast Resource Partnership. August 2014. NCRP, 2015. North Coast Resource Partnership Project Performance and Monitoring Plan Guidelines. North Coast Resource Partnership. March 2015 NCRP, 2017a. Monitoring and Data Plan. Web interface. www.northcoastirwmp.net/Content/10377/North_Coast_Assessment_Monitoring_and_Data_Management.html North Coast Resource Partnership. Accessed December 2017. NCRP, 2017b. Web interface. www.northcoastresourcepartnership.org/app_pages/view/7718. North Coast Resource Partnership. Accessed December 2017. NCRWQCB, 2008. Work Plan to Control Excess Sediment in Sediment-Impaired Waters. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. NCRWQCB, 2011. Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. May 2011. NCWQCB, 2012a. Policy Statement for Implementation of the Water Quality Objective for Temperature in the North Coast Region. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. January 2012. NCRWQCB, 2012b. 2012 Clean Water Act List of Water Quality Limited Segments for the North Coast Region. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. August 2014 NCRWQCB, 2004. Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Policy Statement for Sediment Impaired Receiving Waters in the North Coast Region, Sediment TMDL Implementation Policy. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. November 2004. NCRWQCB, 2015. Phase I MS4 Order. 2015. NPDES Phase I MS4 Permit, Order No. R1-2015-0030. October 2015. NCRWQCB, 2017a. Draft Action Plan for the Russian River Watershed Pathogen Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. NCRWQCB, 2017b. Laguna de Santa Rosa web interface. www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoast/water_issues/programs/watershed_info/russian_river/laguna_de_santa_rosa North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. Accessed December 2017. PG&E, 2017. Potter Valley Project. Web interface. www.pge.com/en_US/safety/electrical-safety/safety-initiatives/potter-valley/potter-valley-project.page. Pacific Gas & Electric. Accessed December 2017.

July 2018 11-1 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 11 Storm Water Resource Plan Section 11 References

RRWA, 2016. Common Pollutants. Web Interface. www.rrwatershed.org/project/common-pollutants. Accessed July 2017. RRWA, 2017. Russian River Watershed Trash and Litter Assessment Summary Report. Russian River Watershed Association. August 2017. Sebastopol, 2007. Water Supply Assessment Northeast Area Specific Plan. PES Environmental, Inc. June 27, 2007. SCWA, 2012. Laguna-Mark West Watershed Planning Scoping Study. Sonoma County Water Agency. May 2012. SCWA, 2016a. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Brown and Caldwell. June 2016. SCWA, 2016b. Fish Habitat Flows & Water Rights Project, Draft Environmental Impact Report. Sonoma County Water Agency. August 2016. SCWA, 2017. Water Supply. Web Interface. www.scwa.ca.gov/water-supply. Accessed December 2017. SR, 2013. Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin Salt and Nutrient Management Plan, RCM Water and Management. March 2013 SWRCB, 2009. NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ. State Water Resources Control Board. September 2009. SWRCB, 2012. NPDES Statewide Permit for California Department of Transportation Order No. 2012-0011-DWQ. State Water Resources Control Board. September 2012. SWRCB, 2013. NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems, Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ. State Water Resources Control Board. February 2013. SWRCB, 2014. NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity, Order No. 2014-0057 DWQ. State Water Resources Control Board. April 2014. SWRCB, 2015a. GeoTracker Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program. Web Interface. http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/gama. Accessed January 2018. SWRCB, 2015b. Proposition One Storm Water Grant Guidelines. State Water Resources Control Board. December 15, 2015. SWRCB, 2015c. Storm Water Resource Plan Guidelines. State Water Resources Control Board. December 15, 2015. SWRCB, 2015d. Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California, Appendix E: Trash Provisions. State Water Resources Control Board. April 7, 2015. SWRCB, 2018. Industrial Storm Water Program – Proposed Storm Water Industrial General Permit Amendment. Web Interface. www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/tmdl_igp.shtml#proposed_amd_2017_docs. Accessed January 2018. USACE, 2017. US Army Corps of Engineers: A Brief History. Web Interface. www.usace.army.mil/About/History/Brief-History-of-the-Corps/Introduction. United State Army Corps of Engineers. Accessed December 2017. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Federal Clean Water Act. California Code of Regulations, Title 23, California Water Code.

July 2018 11-2 Russian River Watershed Association s\c\592\10-16-05\wp\4.10\012418_R Section 11 Storm Water Resource Plan Funding has been provided in full or in part through an agreement with the SWRCB, using funds from Proposition 1. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the foregoing, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. This work product is part of Task 4.11 of Agreement No. D1612602.