|
|
|
DEM USE ONLY Date Received ____________
|
|
|
Office of Water Resources
RIPDES
PERMIT # RIR100455
REPORTING
PERIOD (check one):
¨ YEAR 1 XX YEAR 2 ¨ YEAR 3 ¨ YEAR
4 ¨ YEAR 5
March 04-Dec 04 Jan 05-Dec 05
Jan 06-Dec 06 Jan 07-Dec 07 Jan 08-Dec 08
|
Name:
UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND |
|||
|
Mailing Address:
SHERMAN BUILDING, 523 PLAINS AVENUE |
|||
|
City:
KINGSTON |
State: RI |
Zip:02881 |
Phone: (
401) 874-5488 |
|
Contact
Person: JEROME SIDIO |
Title:
DIRECTOR, FACIL.ITIES SERVICES |
||
|
Legal status
(circle one): PRI - Private PUB - Public BPP - Public/Private STA - State FED – Federal Other
(please specify): |
|||
OWNER OF MS4 (if different from OPERATOR)
|
Name: |
|||
|
Mailing
Address: |
|||
|
City: |
State: |
Zip: |
Phone:
( ) |
|
Contact
Person: |
Title: |
||
|
I certify
under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared
under the direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to
assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information
submitted. Based on my inquiry of the
person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly
responsible for gathering the information, I certify that the information
submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and
complete. I am aware that there are
significant penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. Print Name ___ JEROME B. SIDIO ________________________ Print Title ___ DIRECTOR, FACILITIES SERVICES__________ Signature
_____________________________________________________ Date __3/03/06_____ |
MINIMUM CONTROL
MEASURE #1:
![]()
PUBLIC
EDUCATION AND OUTREACH (Part IV.B.1
General Permit)
A. REQUIRED MEASURABLE GOALS:
|
||||||||||
Permit ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
||||
|
IV.B.1.b.2 |
|
Strategies on how
to inform the community on how to become involved in the storm water program
and how operators will utilize partnerships with governmental and
non-governmental entities (1st
year) |
X |
|
|
Re-evaluating
BMP as related to goal. See note on
Cooperative Extension Program, below. |
|
X |
|
|
|
IV.B.1.b.4 |
|
Strategies to list
target pollutant sources the public education program is designed to
address (1st year) |
X |
|
|
Re-evaluating
BMP as related to goal. See note on
Cooperative Extension Program, below. |
|
X |
|
|
|
B.
ADDITIONAL MEASURABLE GOALS: |
||||||||||
|
|
1A |
Classroom Education
on Storm Water – Develop Implementation Strategies (1st Year) |
|
X |
|
Re-evaluating
BMP. See note on Cooperative
Extension Program, below. |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
1B |
Flyer and Brochure
Distribution – Develop Implementation Strategies (1st Year) |
|
X |
|
Re-evaluating
BMP. See note on Cooperative
Extension Program, below. |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
1C |
Using the Media –
Develop Implementation Strategies (1st Year) |
|
X |
|
Re-evaluating
BMP. See note on Cooperative
Extension Program, below. |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
II. OVERALL EVALUATION: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH cont’
|
A.
GENERAL SUMMARY AND STATUS OF
MEASURABLE GOALS: (Note: Identify parties responsible
for achieving the measurable goals and reference any reliance on another
entitity for achieving measurable goals)
IV.B.1.b A
number of activities were instituted by several different organizations
within the University during 2005 to support
Public Outreach efforts. The
primary departments involved include the College of Environmental and Life
Science (CELS), and within the College, the Cooperative Extension
Office. Additionally, the Department
of Safety and Risk Management, the Facilities Services Department, and the
College of Engineering all have educational components. Attached is a
brief summary of accomplishments related to URI's stormwater management
activities. Since we've had the pervious pavement fact sheets on the web, we've
also responded to numerous phone calls and emails from consultants, town
officials and interested citizens on this topic. Conservation commissions and
others report using the information in public hearings on proposed
development projects to support better site design and reduced impervious
cover. The URI Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials
(NEMO) is part of the National
NEMO Network and provides outreach to municipal officials on controlling
effects of changing land use on local water resources. The program focuses on
use of GIS-based watershed assessment tools to provide local decision-makers
with the knowledge and educational resources to identify local water quality
problems and to adopt effective pollution controls within a watershed context. Publications
Presentations
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
B.
APPROPRIATENESS AND EFFECTIVENESS:
IV.B.1.b The
program is currently in the initial stages of development, and concentrated
on porous pavement for the first year.
At the beginning of this year, the Cooperative Extension Program
received a grant from RIDEM to develop a statewide approach to Education and
outreach that will be made available to all small MS4s for use in the permit
process. The URI Cooperative Extension Office received a RIDEM grant to
develop an Educational Training Program, for Storm Water Management, that
will be taught through the NEMO outreach program. This new program will provide an effective and efficient means
to develop an educational package that can be used by municipalities across
the state. |
MINIMUM CONTROL
MEASURE #2:
![]()
PUBLIC
INVOLVEMENT/PARTICIPATION (Part IV.B.2
General Permit)
|
A. REQUIRED MEASURABLE GOALS:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Permit ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO
TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
|||||||||||||||
|
IV.B.2.b.2.i |
|
Strategies to
identify the target audiences of the public involvement program and
description of the groups engaged (1st
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.2.b.2.ii |
|
Strategies to
describe types of public involvement activities in the program (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.2.b.2. iii |
|
The operator must
provide adequate public notice of the draft annual report and provide the
opportunity for public comment (annually) |
|
X |
|
The
report was prepared late due to lack of manpower to compile the
information. The report is currently
on track to be completed by April 7, and public comments received by April
20. |
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
B.
ADDITIONAL MEASURABLE GOALS: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Permit
ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
2A |
Stream Cleanup and
Monitoring Programs – Organize One Cleanup Event (1st – 5th
Year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
2B |
Stencil Storm
Drains – Stencil 25% of URI’s Storm Drains (2nd Year) |
|
X |
|
No stenciling took
place in year two. The program will start
in year 3. |
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
2C |
Stencil Storm
Drains – Stencil 50% of URI’s Storm Drains (4th Year) |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
2D |
Stencil Storm
Drains – Stencil 100% of URI’s Storm Drain (5th Year) |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
2E |
University Storm
Water Committee – Establish the Committee, Hold Required Meetings (1st
Year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
2F |
University Storm
Water Committee – Hold Quarterly Meetings (2nd – 5th
Year) |
|
|
X |
No meetings were
held in year 2. The Committee started
meeting regularly in year 3 and will meet quarterly. |
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
2G |
Pet Waste
Collection – Design Signs for Common Areas (2nd Year) |
x |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
2H |
Pet Waste
Collection – Post Signs (3rd Year) |
|
|
X |
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
II. OVERALL
EVALUATION: PUBLIC
INVOLVEMENT/PARTICIPATION cont’d
|
A. GENERAL SUMMARY AND STATUS OF
MEASURABLE GOALS: (Note: Identify parties responsible
for achieving the measurable goals and reference any reliance on another
entitity for achieving measurable goals) IV.B.2.b.2.ii The Cooperative Extension Office provided
significant opportunities for public involvement and outreach. Through a series of ongoing programs and
new initiatives, and working with a number of partners at the local, state,
and Regional level, the office provided a wealth of information throughout Rhode
Island. URI Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials
(NEMO) offers training in the science, management, and regulation of water
resources for community leaders and volunteer board members. Our goal is to
provide decision makers with the skills and resources to identify local water
quality problems and to adopt effective pollution controls. A variety of
educational programs are offered throughout the year, ranging from evening or
one day workshops to intensive, small group trainings that are tailored to meet
the participants' interests and needs. We focus on use of Geographic
Information Systems in watershed assessment conducted in partnership with
communities. Technical assistance in protecting local watersheds is available
to communities on a case-by-case basis. The University of Rhode Island Watershed Watch Program
(URIWW) is a statewide volunteer monitoring program. It focuses on providing
current information on the water quality of surface water resources
throughout Rhode Island, including lakes, ponds, reservoirs, rivers, streams
and the marine environment. The heart
of the program consists of weekly measurements taken by numerous trained
volunteer monitors. The program emphasizes watershed scale monitoring because
the water quality of a given body of water is a reflection of the activities
in the lands and waters that surround it and lie upstream.The program is
intended to encourage communities and shoreline residents to understand the
need to cooperatively manage and improve the water quality of all the water
bodies within a watershed. In this way we can ensure that Rhode Island's
bays, estuaries, and freshwater resources remain one of the state's great
assets. Goals * To promote active citizen participation in water quality
protection. * To educate the public about water quality issues. * To obtain multi-year surface water
quality information in order to ascertain current conditions and to detect
trends. MANAGE is a watershed risk-assessment tool that uses computer
generated maps and other data to evaluate pollution risks of land use and
landscape features. Designed as a decision support system, MANAGE generates
site-specific information needed to support local management actions. As part
of URI Cooperative Extension’s educational and technical assistance to RI
communities, MANAGE is applied by Cooperative Extension in partnership with
municipal officials and other community groups. The goal
of Rhode Island's Source Water Assessment Program is to better protect
drinking water supplies at their source by evaluating threats to water
quality and making this information available to water suppliers, town
officials, and landowners. This is part of a national initiative, established
under the Safe Drinking Water Act and led by the US Environmental Protection
Agency. SAFEWATER - This project is a joint effort by three Rhode Island
communities - New Shoreham, South Kingstown, and Charlestown, in partnership
with URI Cooperative Extension Water Quality Program. The goal is to
establish comprehensive local wastewater management programs in each
community using a watershed approach with selective use of advanced treatment
systems in high risk areas to protect critical groundwater supplies and
sensitive coastal waters. Pet Waste – The Narragansett Bay Campus developed and installed signs for
pet waste management; these signs will also be used on the Kingston Campus. |
|
B.
APPROPRIATENESS AND EFFECTIVENESS: The URI
Cooperative Extension Office provides information and outreach to the local
community on water quality management for municipal and state officials, and
to the general public. The office
received a RIDEM grant this year to develop an Educational Training Program
for Storm Water Management that will be taught through the NEMO outreach
program. This new program will
provide an effective and efficient means to develop an educational package
that can be used by municipalities across the state. |
MINIMUM CONTROL
MEASURE #3:
![]()
ILLICIT
DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION
(Part IV.B.3 General Permit)
|
A. REQUIRED MEASURABLE GOALS:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Permit
ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
|||||||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.1 |
|
Development of an
outfall map showing the location of all outfalls and names of receiving
waters (3rd year) |
|
|
X |
Contract in place
to complete the map by the end of this calendar year. |
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.2 |
|
Strategies for
tagging outfall pipes if GIS maps are not being developed(1st
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.4 |
|
Introduction of an
ordinance to prohibit and enforce illicit discharges to the MS4 (1st year) |
|
X |
|
URI is not a
municipality and cannot issue ordnances.
See Part II |
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Ordinance
adoption (2nd year) |
X |
|
|
(See Part II) |
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.5. i |
|
Strategies for
locating priority areas (1st
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.5. ii |
|
Procedures for
receipt and consideration of complaints
(1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.5. iii |
|
Procedures for
tracing the source of an illicit discharge
(1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.5. iv |
|
Procedures for
removing the source of the illicit discharge
(1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.5. v |
|
Procedures for
program evaluation and assessment (1st
year) |
|
X |
|
Further discussion
will take place at the SWMPP Committee Meetings to address the program
evaluation and assessment. This will
be completed by the next report. |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.5. vi |
|
Procedures for
inspection of all catch basins and manholes for illicit connections and
non-storm water discharges (1st
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Inspections taking
place at least once (4th year) |
|
|
X |
Subject to
available funds |
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.5. vii |
|
Procedures for
conducting a minimum of two dry weather surveys, one between Jan 1st
and April 30th and one between July 1st and Oct 31st. (Sanitary sewers- bacteria sampling is
only required once between July 1st and Oct 31st (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Two dry weather
surveys to be completed (4th
year) |
|
|
X |
Two samples
scheduled for year three |
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.6 |
|
Procedures for
coordinating with physically interconnected MS4s, including state and federal
owned or operated MS4s, when illicit discharges are detected or reported (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.7 |
|
Procedures for
referral to RIDEM of non-storm water discharges not authorized by this permit
or a pre-existing permit (1st
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.3.b.9 |
|
Procedures for
tracking and recording actions to detect/address illicit discharges (1st
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
B.
ADDITIONAL MEASURABLE GOALS: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Permit
ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
3A |
Develop a Complete
Storm Water System Map – Inspect and GPS Locate All Outfalls (3rd
Year) |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
3B |
Develop a Complete
Storm Water System Map – Update Map (4th – 5th Year) |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
3C |
Develop a Complete
Storm Water System Map – Inspect all Catch Basins and Manholes (4th
Year) |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
3D |
Inspect and Sample
URI Discharges – Inspect All University Discharges (3rd Year) |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
3E |
Inspect and Sample
URI Discharges – Complete Dry – Weather Surveys (4th Year) |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
3F |
Illegal Dumping
Education – Expand Upon Current Hazardous Waste Management Program (1st
– 5th Year) |
|
X |
|
Re-evaluating
BMP education. See note on
Cooperative Extension Program, MCM #1 |
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
3G |
Illicit Discharge
Policy – The University Will Enforce Its Current Hazardous Waste Management
Program (1st – 5th Years) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
3H |
Illicit Discharge
Policy – The University Will Develop Procedures to Report and Document Policy
Violations (1st Year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
3I |
Illicit Discharge
Policy – Procedures Developed for Referral to RIDEM of Unauthorized Non-Storm
Water Discharge (1st Year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
3K |
Illicit Discharge
Policy – Procedures Developed for Coordination with Interconnected MS4s (1st
Year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
II. OVERALL EVALUATION: ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION
cont’d
|
A.GENERAL SUMMARY AND STATUS OF
MEASURABLE GOALS: (Note: Identify parties responsible
for achieving the measurable goals and reference any reliance on another
entitity for achieving measurable goals) IV.B.3.b.1:
Several years ago we developed a base map
with all inflows and outfalls, and these will be confirmed under the present
Drainage Master Plan contract.
Several new inflows will be developed over the next several years as a
result of new construction, and these inflows will be added to the map as
they are developed. The system is not
GIS, but this will also be completed through a mapping program over the next
four years. IV.B.3.b.4: URI is
not a municipality, but local policies, to include the Spill Prevention
Control and Containment Plan (SPCC) are in place that prohibit illicit
discharges, and inspections are conducted at potential source areas, such as
the vehicle maintenance shop, by both Facilities Services staff and
S&RM. Testing is coordinated by
Facilities Services and performed bi-annually by local laboratories to
identify any illicit discharges into the waste stream. These inspections are being expanded this
year to include the storm water system.
Additionally, an annual inspection is conducted with the Town of South
Kingstown for potential illicit discharges into the sanitary and storm
system. IV.B.3.b.5. ii: Both the Department of Safety and Risk Management, and the Facilities Service Control Center receive complaints. The complaints are followed up by either an investigator from S&RM, or the Utilities Engineer, or Assistant Director for Lands & Grounds, depending on the nature of the complaint. The complaints are logged on our Work Order System, and the work orders are closed once the remedial action is complete. Illicit discharges are categorized as Priority 1s, or Emergencies, depending on the nature of the complaint. We do not allow any known “non-allowable discharges in the system. Inspections are performed on a regular basis, at least annually, but not recorded. We have continuous flow in the
storm water system as a result of ground water infiltration into the
system. The ground water levels
through out the campus vary but runs into the 2’ to 4’ range. IV.B.3.b.6/7:
URI follows
state and federal requirements; in Rhode
Island, any reportable quantity spill of
chemical or petroleum products require notification to the DEM, the National
Response Center and 911. This is detailed in the SPCC plan. These procedures
hook into the RIEMA and fire marshal
as needed. On the federal level info is faxed immediately to the EPA, Coast
Guard, and State agencies. The operator types
the report as you speak. A reportable chemical spill down the sewer would
also be reported to the pretreatment plant/Peter
Bates directly. If necessary, they can shut valves to prevent flow/damage to the sewer
plant. If material goes to a
drain, we call-in one of the 5 vendors on the State
MPA for petroleum and chemical emergencies (list includes Clean Harbors and
Lincoln Environmental). This prevents the problem of underestimating the
situation. The MPA requirements
insure completion to RIDEM standards. If necessary
DEM will pull drain covers to insure all
pollution is cleaned. S&RM currently has a
PO in place for both Lincoln and Clean Harbors, as this is the most expedient procedure. IV.B.3.b.9: We keep records of complaints at S&RM, file incident reports with DEM, and follow-up for
corrective action with the "perpetrator" when known. If a spill
happens we respond and record the action. S&RM
teaches the annually required HAZCOM and hazardous waste classes, and we instruct all those trained to report all environmental
problems via campus police since this is the only number manned 24/7. The
Chemical Hygiene officers are on-call.
|
|
B.
APPROPRIATENESS AND EFFECTIVENESS: The program is effective, but not resourced to the level desired to
achieve the best results. As an
example, some catch basins can only be inspected annually, and only 25-30% of
the catch basins can be cleaned each year.
|
MINIMUM CONTROL
MEASURE #4:
![]()
CONSTRUCTION
SITE STORM WATER RUNOFF CONTROL (Part
IV.B.4 General Permit)
|
A. REQUIRED MEASURABLE GOALS:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Permit
ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO
TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
|||||||||||||||
|
IV.B.4.b.1 |
|
Development and
introduction of a mechanism to require erosion and sediment control, control
of other wastes, and sanctions to ensure compliance (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Mechanism
adoption (2nd year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
IV.B.4.b.2 |
|
Procedures for
issuing permits and implementing policies and procedures for all construction
projects disturbing >1 acre
(2nd
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Implementation of
procedures (end of 2nd year) |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
IV.B.4.b.4 |
|
Implementation of
program to review 100% of plans and SWPPPs for construction projects >
1 acre not reviewed by other State Programs
(2nd year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.4.b.5 |
|
Procedures for
coordination of site plan and SWPPP review when relying on State program
reviews of construction activity (2nd year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Implementation of
procedures (end of 2nd year) |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
IV.B.4.b.7 |
|
Inspect 100% of all
construction projects within the regulated area that discharge or have the
potential to discharge to the MS4 (2nd
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.4.b.8 |
|
Procedures for
referral to the State of non-compliant construction site operators (2nd
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
B.
ADDITIONAL MEASURABLE GOALS: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Permit
ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
4A |
Develop University
Policies – Develop a Storm Water Erosion and Control Policy Regarding
Construction Activities (1st Year) |
|
X |
|
The need for a
separate policy is under review by the Committee. See section A, General Summary, below. |
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
4B |
Develop University
Policies – Develop Methods for Issuing and Tracking Permits (1st
Year) |
|
X |
|
Revaluating vehicle
to use to establish policy for external contractors. See section A, General Summary, below. |
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
4C |
Develop University
Policies – Adopt and Implement Policies and Procedures (2nd Year) |
|
X |
|
Revaluating vehicle
to use to establish policy for external contractors. See section A, General Summary, below. |
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
A.
A. GENERAL SUMMARY AND STATUS OF
MEASURABLE GOALS: (Note: Identify parties
responsible for achieving the measurable goals and reference any reliance on
another entitity for achieving measurable goals) The
primary organization responsible for achieving the measurable goals for
construction site runoff control is the Office of Capital Projects. IV.B.4b.1 ‘Development and introduction of a
mechanism … (1st year)’: The
primary mechanism to control contract work is through the General Plans and
Specifications of the University.
Division 2, Site Construction, requires erosion and sediment control,
and control of other wastes. Failure
to comply results in a breach of contract and is dealt with according to
contract law. Within the Office of
Capital Projects a weekly Staff Meeting is held wherein projects are reviewed
to include erosion and sediment control issues. Each Project Manager is
reminded to include inspections for compliance with erosion and sediment
control issues. In specific
situations contractors have been directed to improve or re-establish control
measures required in the specifications. ‘Mechanism
adoption (2nd year)’: The mechanism described above is in
operation. IV.B.4.b.2 ‘Procedures for issuing permits and
implementing policies …’: The University does not issue permits, but does
implement policy. The primary policy,
as described above, is the issuance of the General Plans and Specifications
in every contract. The University
continues to develop the Operations and Maintenance program. Operational reviews were initiated within
the Office of Capital Projects with the incorporation of discussions with the
project managers, with the communication outreach during design development
as relating to storm water drainage and wetlands impacts, and the initiation
of a wetlands file for all campus-wide activities. ‘Implementation
of Procedures (end of 2nd year): The mechanism described above has
been implemented. IV.B.4.b.4
‘Implementation of program to review 100% of plans …’: The
review of projects under design for compliance with SWMPP is required in the
OCP guidance and mandates for project design. The design reviews are conducted on all construction
projects. Part of those reviews
insure compliance with all required federal, state, and local code and
regulatory requirements, to include the SWMPPP. IV.B.4.b.5 ‘Procedures for
coordination of site plan and SWMPP review when relying on State Program
reviews of construction activity (2nd year)’: URI
does not rely on State Program reviews of construction activity, but conducts
reviews within the Office of Capital Projects as outlined above. Site construction activity is reviewed
within the Office of Capital Projects in two (2) separate venues. The first
is the weekly construction management meeting and the identification of
construction site issues, as described earlier. The second is the independent
peer review of ongoing construction activities and the ability to question an
activity on site which conflicts with the Long Range Storm Water Management
Plan. The SWMPPP is reviewed by the Engineer of Record, or the PM, and the
findings are integrated into the project design review described above. Although the Storm Water Management Plan
is new, the essence is well known to the OCP staff and the project managers
identify problems in site development and construction ‘Implementation of procedures
(end of second year): The URI Facilities Group will enact a review committee
for site development and new construction on campus. This group will have the
ability to review construction plans during the development stage, and will
involve more community participation. IV.B4.b.7 ‘Inspect 100% of all
construction projects within the regulated …’: There
are two methods of inspection that are incorporated into the SWMPP construction
plan. The primary method of
inspection is through the Office of Capital Projects, and requires inspection
bt either the Engineer of Record or the Project Management Section, depending
on the size and complexity of the project.
The secondary method of inspection is under development and involves inspection by the SWMPP
Committee. The Committee will
participate in the design review, and will also have the ability to review
the project under construction, and report any variations identified to the
Project Manager for resolution. The
Facilities Group is presently in the process of organizing this committee and
its mandate as outlined in the University of Rhode Island Phase II Storm
Water Management Plan. IV.B.4.b.8 ‘Procedures for
referral to the State …’: The University Office of Capital Projects is
responsible to report any contractors that fail to comply with required SWPPP
functions for specific construction activities, or to report any circumstance
where a construction activity, or failure in maintenance, may negatively
impact the watershed. Additionally,
the Office of S&RM can independently report the same findings. |
|
B.
APPROPRIATENESS AND EFFECTIVENESS: IV.B.4b.1 ‘Development and
introduction of a mechanism’ The current system of managing
the SWMPP through the General Plans and Specifications is working. The requirements are clearly defined and
legally enforceable. The remedies are standard elements of the purchasing process
and well defined by contract law. However, additional efforts will be made to inspect and enforce
erosion control measures. IV.B.4.b.2 ‘Procedures for
issuing permits and implementing policies …’: Same as
IV.B.4b1 (above) IV.B.4.b.4 ‘Implementation of program to review 100% of
plans and SWMPPs…The effectiveness of this program was demonstrated
in three projects this past year: the warehouse expansion and EMS building;
the L&G building; and the two new parking lots. In the development and construction of the Warehouse Expansion
and the new EMS Building the original design parameters did not require a
State review, however an in-house check for design and BMPs identified
concerns with the on site infiltration plan. These plans were upgraded to the
intended design standards and allowed for further review to coordinate with
planned municipal work to improve overall drainage control. Another project
demonstrating planning improved drainage control came with the Design/Build
development of the new Lands & Grounds facility for the University. This
plan resulted in the improvement of an existing asphalt area to provide for
on site drainage sedimentation and control.
A third example came from the construction progress review of two (2)
separate parking areas on the University campus. One of these lots had
submitted for wetlands review and approval, the other had not been deemed
required for this review. As the construction season closed in 2005, there
were notable deficiencies in the completion of the drainage control systems.
Meetings were held with the consulting project managers, designers and
contractors to highlight the work required and to establish a priority in its
completion. IV.B.4.b.5 ‘Procedures for
coordination of site plan and SWMPP review when relying on State Program
reviews. The program is working effective to date, and has identified
several projects where the coordination between the site plan and the SWMPP
had to be modified (as described above). IV.B4.b.7 ‘Inspect 100% of all
construction projects within the regulated …; This plan is working effectively, as the EOR and
the PM have ownership of the project and the technical expertise to provide
oversight. The SWMPP Committee will
provide additional input and an “extra set of eyes” to assist in the
management of the process. IV.B.4.b.8 ‘Procedures for
referral to the State …’: There has been some
incidental contact to the Office of Capital Projects over the past year and
those notices have resulted in corrective action from the contractor. There
are no incidents where a contractor has failed to take corrective action when
presented with a concern on compliance to the SWMPP. |
MINIMUM CONTROL
MEASURE #5:
![]()
POST
CONSTRUCTION STORM WATER MANAGEMENT IN NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT
(Part
IV.B.5 General Permit)
|
A. REQUIRED MEASURABLE GOALS:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Permit
ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES NO |
|||||||||||||||
|
IV.B.5.b.2 |
|
Description of how
the program is consistent with the State of Rhode Island Storm Water Design
and Installation Manual and will be tailored for the community/facility,
minimize water quality impacts, and maintain pre-development runoff conditions (2nd year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.5.b.3 |
|
Procedures for
pre-application meetings (2nd
year) |
|
X |
|
URI controls all
construction on campus, and does not require applications. Pre-construction meetings are held and
storm water management issues covered. |
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.5.b.4 |
|
Implementation of
program to review 100% of plans for development projects one or more acres
not reviewed by other State Programs
(2nd year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.5.b.5 |
|
Description of how
the program will coordinate with existing State programs requiring
post-construction storm water management
(2nd year) |
|
X |
|
Will be completed
during 3rd year. |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.5.b.6 |
|
Procedures for
referral of new discharges of storm water associated with industrial
activity (2nd year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.5.b.9 |
|
Develop and
introduce regulatory mechanism to address post-construction runoff (1st year) |
|
X |
|
Construction
contracts are used to monitor post construction runoff |
|
X |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Mechanism
adoption (2nd year) |
|
X |
|
Construction
contracts are used to monitor post construction runoff |
|
X |
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
IV.B.5.b.10 |
|
Procedures for
post-construction inspections of BMPs and inspect 100% of all development >
1 acre within the regulated area that discharges to the MS4 (2nd
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Implementation of
procedures (end of 2nd year) |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
IV.B.5.b.12 |
|
Development of a
program to identify existing structural BMPs
(2nd year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
B.
ADDITIONAL MEASURABLE GOALS: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Permit
ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
5A |
Post Construction
Runoff Policy – Develop a Policy Regarding Post Construction Runoff (1st
Year) |
|
X |
|
Revaluating need
for BMP – similar to IV.B.5.b.10. |
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
5B |
Post Construction
Runoff Policy – Adopt Post Construction Runoff Policy (2nd Year) |
|
X |
|
Revaluating need
for BMP – similar to IV.B.5.b.10. |
x |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
5C |
BMP Inspection and
Maintenance – Review All Plans and Complete Site Inspections for Construction
Projects (2nd – 5th Year) |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
II. OVERALL EVALUATION: POST CONSTRUCTION STORM WATER
MANAGEMENT IN NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT
|
A.
GENERAL SUMMARY AND STATUS OF
MEASURABLE GOALS: IV.B.5b4‘: The
primary mechanism to control contract work is through the General Plans and
Specifications of the University.
Division 2, Site Construction, requires erosion and sediment control,
and control of other wastes. Failure
to comply results in a breach of contract and is dealt with according to contract
law. Within the Office of Capital
Projects a weekly Staff Meeting is held wherein projects are reviewed to
include erosion and sediment control issues. Each Project Manager is reminded
to include inspections for compliance with erosion and sediment control
issues. In specific situations
contractors have been directed to improve or re-establish control measures
required in the specifications. IV.B5.b.3’: The University does not
issue applications, but does implement policy. The primary policy, as described above, is the issuance of the
General Plans and Specifications in every contract. The University continues to develop the Operations and
Maintenance program. Operational
reviews were initiated within the Office of Capital Projects with the
incorporation of discussions with the project managers, with the
communication outreach during design development as relating to storm water
drainage and wetlands impacts, and the initiation of a wetlands file for all
campus-wide activities. IV.B.5.b.4: URI
does not rely on State Program reviews of construction activity, but conducts
reviews within the Office of Capital Projects as outlined above. Site construction activity is reviewed
within the Office of Capital Projects in two (2) separate venues. The first
is the weekly construction management meeting and the identification of
construction site issues, as described earlier. The second is the independent
peer review of ongoing construction activities and the ability to question an
activity on site which conflicts with the Long Range Storm Water Management
Plan. The SWMPPP is reviewed by the Engineer of Record, or the PM, and the
findings are integrated into the project design review described above. Although the Storm Water Management Plan
is new, the essence is well known to the OCP staff and the project managers
identify problems in site development and construction IV.B.5.b.6 – New discharges associated with industrial
activity will be reviewed by the Facilities Group at the time of
construction, and compliance with regulatory guidelines, and maintenance and
operations procedures, will be verified at that time. |
|
B.
APPROPRIATENESS AND EFFECTIVENESS: Post Construction efforts
are as effective as the construction efforts. There are mechanisms in place to insure contractors properly
compete the work required, but additional emphasis will be place on post
construction inspections. |
MINIMUM CONTROL
MEASURE #6:
![]()
POLLUTION
PREVENTION AND GOOD HOUSEKEEPING IN MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS (Part IV.B.6 General Permit)
|
A. REQUIRED MEASURABLE GOALS:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Permit
ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON-
YES NO
TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
|||||||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.1.i |
|
Procedures for
identifying, locating and describing all municipally owned structural
BMPs (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.1.ii |
|
Procedures for
inspecting and cleaning BMPs (1st
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.1. iii |
|
Procedures for an
annual catch basin inspection and cleaning program (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Implementation of
program (3rd year) |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.1. iv |
|
Procedures to
minimize erosion of road side shoulders and ditches (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.1.v |
|
Procedures to
identify and report annually the known discharges causing scouring at outfall
pipes or outfalls with excessive sedimentation (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.1. vi |
|
Procedures for a
road sweeping program that includes sweeping all streets and roads within the
regulated area annually ( 1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Implementing the
program to occur annually (3rd
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.1. vii |
|
Description of
maintenance activities, schedules and long-term inspection procedures for
controls to reduce floatables (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.1. viii |
|
Procedures for the
proper disposal of removed waste from the MS4 (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.2 |
|
Operator must
report and describe all operations under legal control that may have the
potential to introduce pollutants into storm water runoff (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.4 |
|
Procedures for the
development of an O&M and good housekeeping program for non-industrial
facilities with the potential to introduce pollutants to their storm water
discharges with the goal of minimizing or eliminating pollutant runoff (1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
All recommended
BMPs to be implemented by 4th year |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.7 |
|
Procedures for
assessment of flow management projects
(1st year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
IV.B.6.b.8 |
|
Procedures for implementing
proper erosion and sediment and water quality control for construction
projects (1st
year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
B.
ADDITIONAL MEASURABLE GOALS: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Permit
ID#
|
BMP
ID
|
List Measurable Goal
|
Was
goal met?
ON- YES NO TRK |
If not met
briefly list reasons, current status, plans and new date for meeting the goal |
Effective?
YES NO |
TMDL?
YES
NO |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
6A |
Operations and
Maintenance Program – Develop Program (1st Year) |
|
X |
|
BMPs in place,
formal program To be completed by the end of year 4. |
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
6B |
Operations and
Maintenance Program – Update Program (2nd – 5th Year) |
|
X |
|
BMPs in place,
formal program To be completed by the end of year 4. |
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
6C |
Catch Basin
Cleaning Program – All Catch Basins Cleaned Annually (3rd – 5th
Year) |
|
|
X |
Subject to
available funds |
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
6D |
Street Cleaning –
Sweep All Roads Once Per Year (1st – 2nd Year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
6E |
Street Cleaning –
Sweep All Roads Twice Per Year (3rd – 5th Year) |
|
|
X |
Subject to
available funds |
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
6F |
Street Cleaning –
Sweep All Parking Lots on Campus (1st – 5th Year) |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
II. OVERALL EVALUATION: POLLUTION PREVENTION AND GOOD HOUSEKEEPING IN MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS
|
A.GENERAL SUMMARY AND STATUS OF
MEASURABLE GOALS: (Note: Identify parties responsible
for achieving the measurable goals and reference any reliance on another
entitity for achieving measurable goals) Discussion continues on
the number of structural BMPs on campus, and on the method to determine the
necessary frequency of cleaning.
Areas such as long term retention basins do not need cleaning as
frequent as most catch basins. Within
the type (such as catch basins) some need cleaning more frequently than
others. Many basins are inspected on
a regular basis as part of the daily Grounds Crew routine, but others are
inspected less frequently this does not seem to cause a problem. Erosion control on road
edges is addressed in numerous locations by concrete curbing. Other techniques have not been effective
as the campus is located on a hillside with high volume run-off down the
hill. Other methods of using swales
and gulleys to channel the water are used where they are able to maintain the
high flows. Road sweeping has been
increased to 5 times/year to better maintain the volume of debris collected
in the road beds. Road sweeping and
increased litter pick-up are two of the main efforts used to reduce
floatables. URI hired an A&E firm
to review drainage across the campus and to prepare a Drainage Master
Plan. That plan will be used to
assess flow management and determine necessary projects to reduce
erosion. The work is scheduled for
completion this Fiscal Year.
|
|
B.
APPROPRIATENESS AND EFFECTIVENESS: All BMPs appear to be
effective, but lack the resources necessary to achieve the best results. As an example, some catch basins can only
be inspected annually, and only 25-30% of the catch basins can be cleaned
each year. |
PART III: ADDITIONAL
ANNUAL REPORT REQUIREMENTS
![]()
SECTION
I. Please provide an assessment of the
progress towards meeting the requirements for the control of storm water
identified in an approved TMDL (Part
IV.G.2.d).
|
No approved TMDLs within the MS4 |
SECTION
2. Public Notice Information (IV.G.2.h and IV.G.2.i) *Note: attach copy of public notice
|
Date of Public Notice: April 4, 2005 |
How public was notified: Through the community newspaper, and on
the Facilities Services website. |
|
Was public meeting held? YES NO Date: April 20,
2006, 4:00PM (not yet held at time
of due date)
Where: Sherman Building, URI |
|
|
Summary of public comments received: Will be received during the week of
April 17-April 20. |
|
|
Planned responses or changes to the
program: Will be determined after review. |
|
SECTION 3. Note any planned municipal construction projects/opportunities to incorporate water quality BMPs, low impact development, or activities to promote infiltration and recharge (Part IV.G.2.j)
|
The University
improved a drainage design system in coordination with a town-planned effort
on Plains Road. The community was planning to replace street structures in
Plains Road over the next summer and requested that the University construct
our system in concrete to allow for a connection replacing an open trench.
This accommodation on the EMS sitework was made and the combined projects
will improve drainage control in the area, which is a problem with each heavy
rainfall. The design of the Lands &
Grounds Garage reduces storm water
run-off from the site. The design places the facility adjacent to the
Whitehorn Brook wetland, bringing all roof run-off into a ground water
injection system. The system is designed for a 100-year storm flow event and
has received RIDEM wetlands approval.
The project is subject to the availability of funds for FY 07. In
addition to the Cultech storage and infiltration system designed for this purpose,
the planned facility utilizes a storage tank for oil/water/sediment control
for all interior garage floor run-off. The service allows the interior floor
run-off to be treated prior to disposal in the sewer collection system. The University
constructed and occupies two new parking areas. The lot off Flagg Road was
designed in a conventional format utilizing drainage structures and holding
basins. The design maintains the existing run-off intensities and improves
water quality. The second lot
construction expands the permeable asphalt system off Plains Road and
increased the volume of pavement supporting ground water injection.
Maintenance, cleaning and policing of these facilities continues on a regular
basis to protect the environment and systems in place. |
SECTION
4. Interconnections (Part IV.G.2.k and
IV.G.2.l)
Interconnection:
|
Date Found: |
Location: |
Connectee: |
Originating Source: |
Planned and Coordinated Efforts and
Activities with Connectee: |
|
Area Drain at start
of system |
Unknown |
South of Briar Lane |
SK |
Street Drain |
Recently completed
joint project to improve flow through system |
|
Sheet and area flow
into WHB |
Unknown |
At beginning of
WHB, on priv prop |
Tibbits |
Farm and forest |
URI has initiated
procedures to purchase the property |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SECTION 5.
Illicit Discharge Inspections to Date (Part IV.G.2.m)
|
Total Illicit
Discharges Identified: NONE |
# of Complaints
Received: |
|
# of Violations
Issued: 0 |
# of Unresolved
Violations Referred to RIDEM: |
|
Summary of
Enforcement Actions: |
|
|
Extent
to which the MS4 system has been mapped: The
existing plan was developed several years ago and was consolidated from other
available plans on the system. It is
not complete, and experience has shown that we cannot verify the accuracy of
the underground lines. The plan has a
reasonable degree of accuracy for all inflows. It is in an AutoCAD format and consists of numerous planimetric
features, to include catch basins, pavement edges, wetlands, two-foot contours, etc. |
|
SECTION 6. Plan
and SWPPP Reviews
|
# of Construction
Reviews completed: |
# of Post-Construction
Reviews completed: |
|
Summary of Reviews
and Findings: Project management reviews were
held for SWPPP for the site work at the Independence Hall Renovations. During construction, the sitework caused
sedimentation build-up in the exit roadways which was carried out into the
street. After reviewing the problem
the contractor was directed to place a gravel blanket at the exit to remove
the sediment from the vehicles. This
solved the problem. Plan reviews of the EMS
construction identified that the design would not meet the desired
infiltration objectives for new construction. The effort stimulated a RIDEM
review of the design, improved control measures to the original plan, and
increased the storage and infiltration area of the CulTech system. The Warehouse and EMS
construction were reviewed through the Office of Capital Projects for
compliance to the SWMPP. Following that review and subsequent modifications,
the application was submitted to RIDEM, where the design modifications were
approved, improving the storm service ability of the injection system for
roof run-off. The plans for the
new residential housing predated the SWMPP, and did not encompass drainage
planning beyond the immediate area of the planned construction. The paramount
objective was to retain or lower the per-construction run-off calculations.
The plans developed for this construction did submit to RIDEM wetlands review
and approval. The plans for the Lands &
Grounds Facility look beyond the immediate area of construction and reduce
the storm flow run-off for storm events. The existing asphalt site is
designed to collect for ground injection all roof run-off from the
construction. Interior garage bays are designed to collect ice-melt, sand and
other water from within the structure and to process that effluent through a
settlement basin prior to discharge in the municipal sewer system. Additional
basins are planned for installation in the parking lot area to improve water
quality of the run-off and to increase the capacity for sediment settlement
and increase the collection points. The most significant improvement to the SWMPP effort is the award and progress of the Storm Water Master Plan by the University. This plan is expected to be drafted in April 2006 and to provide a storm water model for the University watershed. This plan will identify specific goals for improvement of drainage controls within the watershed and provide a mechanism to plan future construction in a manner that improves drainage flow. |
Summary of Reviews
and Finding: Operation and maintenance plans for all new or modified structures are
forwarded to the Maintenance Department after completion of construction. Inclusive within the turnover procedures for all
Capital Projects construction is a defined procedure outline, including the
turnover of all improvements to the Facilities staff. This meeting involves
the Facilities staff with the design engineers and the contractors delivering
the improvements turned over. A review of the
parking lot construction systems was initiated by the Office of Capital
Projects when negative impacts were witnessed with the construction in place.
The review of that work found that the construction had not been completed in
accordance with the approved plans and the contractor is now scheduling the
repairs as required. |
SECTION 7.
Erosion and Sediment Control Inspections (Part IV.G.2.n)
|
# of Site
Inspections: Not recorded |
# of Complaints
Received: Not recorded |
|
# of Violations
Issued: 0 |
# of Unresolved
Violations Referred to RIDEM: 0 |
|
Summary of Enforcement
Actions: The MS4 is one square mile in
size, so inspections are performed daily by the Lands & Ground Staff
through the course of their daily requirements. Since we are not a municipality, we do not issue citations. In general, the Facilities Group performs
all maintenance within the MS4 and oversees all construction as outlined
above. The maintenance of the
University drainage systems is performed by the Facilities Staff, and the
requirements are generated by their daily inspections of structures, roads
and embankments. The basins are cleaned annually by contract and inspected by
the Facilities Group. As this is part
of the daily routine, no records are kept of these inspections. The Assistant Director for Lands
and Grounds oversaw selective cleaning of the Whitehorn Brook drainage basin
during the past summer season. This effort cleared the culvert areas at
crossings of Whitehorn brook between the University and Route 138. The Route
138 crossing is designed to allow adequate flow in heavy storm events;
however, the interim crossings are not designed as a system to pass flow
uniformally, and this results in
substantial sedimentation and obstruction within the system. The Master
Drainage Design Plan will look at this issue and make suggestions for system
improvement. Some project
construction identified unwanted erosion or sediment build-up, and those
matters were addressed within the contract language using project resources
to take immediate corrective action to restore site conditions. |
|
SECTION 8. Post Construction Inspections: Proper Installation of Structural BMPs (Part IV.G.2.o)
|
# of Site
Inspections: Not recorded |
# of Complaints
Received: Not recorded |
|
# of Violations
Issued: 0 |
# of Unresolved
Violations Referred to RIDEM: 0 |
|
Summary of
Enforcement Actions: The post
construction inspection of the parking lots identified that the construction
was not completed in accordance with the plans. Additional trenching, grading
and structure controls were required to reduce storm water run-off. This
direction has been made to the contractor and the work is now scheduled for
completion. Site inspections were held with the
completion of the building at 210 Flagg Road construction to review the
establishment of vegetation on the site for future drainage control and to
inspect existing drainage structures. This effort identified the need for
improvement/repair to drainage structures within the vicinity of the
construction. The necessary repairs
were made by the Facilities Group. Construction at the EMS Facility
and the associated site inspections revealed a failing street culvert in the
vicinity of the construction. The inspection and identification allowed for
the opportunity for the University to work with the town to modify the
planned construction on the site to better support the Town’s drainage
project, which is scheduled to take
place over the summer. Post construction inspections for sitework and drainage construction were also completed at the new Alumni Building construction on Upper College Road. The inspections affirmed the work in place and no new work was required. Minor warranty work was initiated for minor on-site erosion. |
|
SECTION 9. Post Construction Inspections: Proper Operation and Maintenance of Structural BMPs (Part IV.G.2.p)
|
# of Site
Inspections: 2/year/structure; Not recorded |
# of Complaints
Received: 0 |
|
# of Violations
Issued: 0 |
# of Unresolved
Violations Referred to RIDEM: 0 |
|
Summary of
Enforcement Actions: The units are all
part of the URI system and managed by URI.
|
|
SECTION
10. Structural BMPs (Part IV.B.6.b.1.i)
BMP
ID:
|
Location: |
Name of BMP Owner/Operator: |
Description of BMP: |
|
|
Butterfield Road |
Lands & Grounds |
Sedimentation Box
(septic design with baffles) |
|
|
Ryan’s Center |
Global |
Vortechnics system
- Oil & Water separator |
|
|
Plains Road and
Dairy Barn Parking Lots |
Land & Grounds |
Porous Pavement
system with below grade recharge bed. |
SECTION
11. Discharges Causing Scouring or
Excessive Sedimentation (Part IV.B.6.b.1.v)
Outfall
ID:
|
Location: |
Description of Problem: |
Description of Remediation Taken: |
Receiving Water Body
Name/Description: |
|
|
Ballentine Pond |
Sedimentation |
Clean with backhoe |
White Horn Brook |
|
|
Roger Williams Pond |
Sedimentation |
Clean with backhoe |
White Horn Brook |
|
|
Ellery Pond |
Sedimentation |
Dredge with
equipment |
White Horn Brook |
SECTION
12. Please include a summary of results
of any other information that has been collected and analyzed. This includes
any type of data
|
The University started a design
plan to identify the drainage flow within the watershed, and began the
establishment of a Wetlands file tracking and inventory. The Storm Water
Model is scheduled for review in April/May 2006. This tool will be a key
resource in the identification of potential impacts of site work within the
campus. The development of a centralized Wetlands Application file is
designed to track the preliminary design development of potential wetlands
impact projects and to track the progress of that design development through
permit application and construction. We intend to expand the
utilization of the Storm Water Model to review planned construction in a
longer range University Master Plan that will help guide construction,
maintenance and future planning. The
University continues to develop the Operations and Maintenance program. Operational
reviews were initiated within the Office of Capital Projects with the
incorporation of discussions with the project managers, with the
communication outreach during design development as relating to storm water
drainage and wetlands impacts, and the initiation of a wetlands file for all
campus-wide activities. |