Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
11-21-16 EO&WR Committee Packet
OTAY WATER DISTRICT ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS & WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING and SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA Board Room MONDAY November 21, 2016 3:00 P.M. This is a District Committee meeting. This meeting is being posted as a special meeting in order to comply with the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54954.2) in the event that a quorum of the Board is present. Items will be deliberated, however, no formal board actions will be taken at this meeting. The committee makes recommendations to the full board for its consideration and formal action. AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JU- RISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 TO THE EXISTING CONTRACT WITH TRAN- STAR PIPELINE, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,760 FOR THE RANCHO SAN DIE- GO BASIN SEWER REHABILITATION - PHASE 1 PROJECT (MARTIN) [5 min] 4. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4317, FIXING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES OWNED BY LICIA A. BARNETT (APN: 517-112-09-00) INTO THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT DIS- TRICT NO. 18 (MARTIN) [5 min] 5. ADOPT THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE 870-2 PUMP STA- TION PROJECT (COBURN-BOYD) [5 mins] 6. FIRST QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 2017 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE REPORT (MARTIN) [5 minutes] 7. SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE (WATTON) [10 mins] 8. ADJOURNMENT 2 BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING: Tim Smith, Chair Gary Croucher All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be delib- erated and may be subject to action by the Board. The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the Dis- trict’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered at the open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website. Copies of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by contacting her at (619) 670-2280. If you have any disability that would require accommodation in order to enable you to partici- pate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Certification of Posting I certify that on November 18, 2016 I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section §54954.2). Executed at Spring Valley, California on November 18, 2016. /s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: December 7, 2016 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Engineering Manager PROJECT: S2033-003103 DIV. NO.: 5 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Approve Change Order No. 4 to the Contract with Transtar Pipeline, Inc. for the Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 1 Project GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) approve Change Order No. 4 to the existing contract with Transtar Pipeline, Inc. (Transtar) in the amount of $50,760.00 for the Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 1 Project (see Exhibit A for Project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to execute Change Order No. 4 to the construction contract with Transtar for the Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 1 Project. ANALYSIS: At the February 3, 2016 Board Meeting, the Board awarded a construction contract in an amount of $970,970 to Transtar to 2 construct sewer improvements that consist of sewer system repairs at fourteen (14) locations within the Rancho San Diego Basin as shown on Exhibit A. The sewer improvements involve the replacement of approximately 3,252 linear feet of 8-inch gravity sewer, four (4) new sewer manholes, reconnection of sewer lines and laterals, maintaining sewer service, restoration of pavement and landscaping, removal of trees, traffic control, erosion control, protection of existing utilities, and all testing and inspection as required by the Contract Documents. Since the award of the construction contract, three (3) change orders have been approved under the General Manager’s authority that total $30,882.71. The approved change orders compensated the Contractor for the following: a realignment of planned sewer at Site 734, located off Hillsdale Road (CO 01); a revised sewer profile at Site 722, located at Julianna Street (CO 02); and restoration of three (3) County of San Diego survey monuments located within the sewer alignments (CO 03). A listing of the change orders and their respective amounts are included in the Change Order Log that is part of Exhibit B. During the construction of the planned sewer at Site 733, located at Paseo Grande, it was discovered that the existing sewer main was located outside the as-built alignment in unconsolidated existing fill. Potholing during construction revealed similar conditions existing throughout the entire Site 733 segment. The Contractor was directed to correct the alignment to the greatest extent possible during which unanticipated loose and caving material was encountered affecting the Contractor’s production. Change Order No. 4 is necessary to resolve all costs associated with the additional work needed to address this unforeseen condition including pothole investigation and additional excavation and backfill. Change Order No. 4 also addresses contract time as a result of the added work described above. Time impacts associated with Change Order No. 4 are provided in Exhibit B, including the addition of twenty two (22) days for impacts due to caving material and one (1) day for weather impacts as provided in contract. In total, the twenty three (23) additional days added to the contract will result in a revised total contract duration of 197 calendar days. The Contractor is completing work on Site 773, Site 728, located on Burris Drive, and Site 771, located on Fuerte Estates Drive. The Contractor has encountered unconsolidated materials at Sites 773 and 728. The District’s Construction Manager is currently assessing the impacts presented by the Contractor and steps are being taken by staff to mitigate impacts to the overall project. It is anticipated 3 that the Project will reach substantial completion by the end of November 2016. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The total budget for CIP S2033, as approved in the FY 2017 budget, is $3,000,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast including this contract, are $2,999,806.00. See Attachment B for budget detail. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that the budget for CIP S2033 is sufficient to support the Project. The Finance Department has determined that, under the current rate model, 100% of the funding is available from the Replacement Fund. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high quality and reliable water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is innovative in providing water services at competitive rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. DM:mlc P:\WORKING\CIP S2033 Sewer System Rehabilitation\Staff Reports\BD 12-07-16 RSD Ph 1 Construction\BD 12- 07-16 Staff Report RSD Basin Sewer Rehab Phase 1 CO 04 (DM-RP).Docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Budget Detail Exhibit A – Location Map Exhibit B – Change Order No. 4 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: S2033-003103 Approve Change Order No. 4 to the Contract with Transtar Pipeline, Inc. for the Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 1 Project COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on November 21, 2016. The Committee supported Staff's recommendation. NOTE: The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail SUBJECT/PROJECT: S2033-003103 Approve Change Order No. 4 to the Contract with Transtar Pipeline, Inc. for the Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 1 Project Bud 3-Nov-16 Budget 3,000,000 Planning Regulatory Agency Fees 100 100 - 100 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN Standard Salaries 220,584 220,584 - 220,584 Total Planning 220,684 220,684 - 220,684 Design 001102 Consultant Contracts 152,958 152,958 - 152,958 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 20,720 20,720 - 20,720 DARNELL & ASSOCIATES INC 21,446 21,446 - 21,446 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL 3,818 3,818 - 3,818 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES 21,086 21,086 - 21,086 NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND 6,995 6,995 - 6,995 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 71,183 71,183 - 71,183 ARCADIS US INC Professional Legal Fees 920 920 - 920 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF Service Contracts 385 385 - 385 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT 1,500 1,500 - 1,500 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 5,040 5,040 - 5,040 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC 333 333 - 333 THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE Standard Salaries 491,072 491,072 - 491,072 Total Design 797,455 797,455 - 797,455 Construction Construction Contracts 970,970 710,031 260,939 970,970 TRANSTAR PIPELINE INC 16,088 16,088 0 16,088 CO #1 TRANSTAR PIPELINE INC 7,350 7,350 0 7,350 CO#2 TRANSTAR PIPELINE INC 7,445 - 7,445 7,445 CO #3 TRANSTAR PIPELINE INC 50,736 - 50,736 50,736 CO #4 TRANSTAR PIPLINE INC 470,211 470,211 0 470,211 ARRIETA CONSTRUCTION INC 24,748 24,748 0 24,748 CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST Consultant Contracts 2,400 2,400 - 2,400 RBF CONSULTING 100,590 80,390 20,200 100,590 ALYSON CONSULTING 2,738 2,738 - 2,738 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 3,000 - 3,000 3,000 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES Professional Legal Fees 3,392 3,392 - 3,392 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF Regulatory Agency Fees 30,000 27,343 2,657 30,000 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO Standard Salaries 232,000 210,820 21,180 232,000 Project Contingency 60,000 - 60,000 60,000 Total Construction 1,981,667 1,555,511 107,037 1,981,667 Grand Total 2,999,806 2,573,650 426,156 2,999,806 Vendor/Comments Otay Water District S2033 - Sewer System Various Locations Rehabilitation Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost OTAY WATER DISTRICTRANCHO SAN DIEGO BASINSEWER REHABILITATION PHASE 1 EXHIBIT A CIP S2033F P:\WORKING\CIP S2033 Sewer System Rehabilitation\Graphics\RSD Phase 1\S2033, RSD Sewer Basin Phase 1, Location Map, Dec 2015.mxd JAMACHA RD C H A S E A V VISTA GRANDE HILLSDALE RD TINA ST WILLOW GLEN DR HILLSDALE RD HIDDEN MESA RD VISTA GRANDE RD SUNDALE RD RD WIND RIVER RD D O N A H U E D R 745 734 723 771 722 733 729 773 728744 880 867 753 779 VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE NTS DIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 ?ò Aä%&s ?p ?Ë F 0 1,000500 Feet Legend Sewer Main Repairs (RSD Phase 1) Sewer Gravity Mains Sewer Manholes Site Number123 Contract / P.O. Change Order No. 4 page 2 of 2 Description of Work Description Increase Decrease Time Item No. 1: This Change Order provides for increased excavation, backfill and alignment correction resulting from encountering very loose and caving material and the existing sewer pipe outside the as-built alignment at Site 733 per RFI 006. $50,736.00 22 Item No. 2: Add 1 calendar day due to weather impacts per Contract Specifications 00700-8-5. $0.00 $0.00 1 Sub Total Amount $50,736.00 $0.00 23 Total Net Change Order Amount $50,736.00 Reason: Item No. 1: Resulting from excavation for Site 733 Paseo Grande sewer replacement (Dwg. C-05), buried rock outcropping was encountered with unconsolidated existing fill materials and the existing sewer pipe was discovered to be outside the correct alignment. Potholing revealed similar conditions existing throughout the entire segment. The Contractor was directed to correct the alignment to the extent possible during which unanticipated loose and caving material was encountered affecting production. This change order is necessary to resolve all costs associated with this work including pothole investigation, additional excavation and backfill required to complete the work. Item No. 2: Contract Documents Section 00700-8.5 provides for no cost time extensions due to weather impacts on the project progress. Weather impacted the project one (1) day between August and October 2016. The project was impacted on October 28, 2016 due to weather. COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY COR Site 733 Caving Soils - NEGOTIATED W.O. # PREPARED BY - Douglas Cook Contract: RSD Sewer - Phase 1 SIGNATURE: JOBSITE: C.I.P. NO. DATE: --- --- Impacts of Caving Soils --- --- Operator Foreman 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 $92.16 $4,424 - --$4,424 Operator 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 $85.98 $4,127 - --$4,127 Laborer 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 $64.03 $3,073 ---$3,073 Laborer Apprentice 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 $36.43 $1,749 ---$1,749 Labor Foreman 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 $71.86 $3,449 ---$3,449 Crew Truck 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 -$30.69 $1,473 --$1,473 Pickup Truck 2.0 EA 48.00 96.0 -$28.17 $2,704 --$2,704 Cat 314 Excavator 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 -$60.18 $2,889 --$2,889 Cat 930 Loader 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 -$91.98 $4,415 --$4,415 Bobcat S650 Skidsteer 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 -$24.79 $1,190 --$1,190 Cat 321CL CR Excavator 1.0 EA 48.00 48.0 -$108.59 $5,212 --$5,212 ------ 576.0 $16,822 $17,883 $0 $0 $0 SALES TAX - 8.00%1 LS $0 $0 $16,822 $17,883 $0 $0 $34,705 MARK-UP PER CONTRACT (OH, PROFIT & BOND) $2,692 $2,861 $0 $5,553 TOTAL PRIME CONTRACTOR PRICE 576.0 $19,514 $20,745 $0 $0 $40,258 ----- Super 10 Dump Truck with Driver 2.0 EA 48.00 96.0 ---$99 $9,504 $9,504 ------ ------ 0.0 $0 $0 $0 $9,504 $9,504 SALES TAX 1 ls $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,504 $9,504 MARK-UP PER CONTRACT (OH, PROFIT & BOND)$0 $0 $0 $475 $475 TOTAL SUBCONTRACTOR PRICE 0.0 $0 $0 $0 $9,979 $9,979 PRIME CONTRACTOR MARK-UP PER CONTRACT $0 $0 $0 $499 $499 TOTAL RFP PRICE 576.0 $19,514 $20,745 $0 $10,478 $50,736 UNITSQUANTITY LABOR MH/UNIT TOTAL COST LABOR RATE TOTAL MANHOURS SUBTOTAL COST TOTAL COST SUBTOTAL COST TOTAL COST SUBCONTRACTOR DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION EQUIPMENT MATERIAL TOTAL COSTUNIT COST TOTAL COSTUNIT COST QUANTITY UNITS LABOR EQUIPMENT UNIT COST TOTAL COSTMH/UNIT TOTAL MANHOURS LABOR RATE TOTAL COST TOTALUNIT COSTUNIT COST TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST MATERIAL UNIT PRICE TOTALTOTAL COSTUNIT COST Page 1 of 1 10467 Roselle Street San Diego, CA 92121-1503 City, State Zip Phone: 858-453-0744 Fax: 858-453-0745 CA Lic# 724178-A ax: 858-453-0745 September 30, 2016 Doug Cook Construction Manager RE: Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer – Phase 1, RFI #006 Cost and Time Impacts, Sewer Alignment and substandard compaction, Paseo Grande, Site 733, Sheet C-05 Doug: Attached are our T & M sheets for additional costs incurred installing the sewer at Site 733, Paseo Grande. Existing sewer backfill material was loose, substandard, and uncompacted material. We were unable to shore trenches using hydraulic shoring as we used on the downstream portion Site 880. Trench shields had to be used. Our concerns were outlined in RFI #006. In addition we request 22 Calendar Days (8/11-9/1) added to our contract for time spent dealing with the substandard conditions. Equipment is per current Caltrans Rental Rates. Markups are per Section 00700. Backup documentation is also included. Shoring/trench plates which are billed weekly are shown on T&M 013 only. Dump Fees, trucking to dump and additional import material are shown on T&M 014. Total of submitted claim is $135,085.66. Please review for approval and issue appropriate change order. Let me know if you have any questions or wish to discuss. Sincerely John V. Brito VP/Project Manager John V. Brito CIP S2033 - Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation, Phase 1 Project: S2033 Consultant/Contractor: Transtar Pipeline, Inc.Subproject: 003000 APPROVED C.O. AMOUNT BY DATE DESCRIPTION TYPE C.O. 1 $16,088.00 RP 8/22/2016 Contractor 2 $7,350.00 GA 9/8/2016 Revised sewer profile at Site 722 add 35 lf 8-inch sewer Contractor 3 $7,444.71 MW 10/28/2016 Restore three existing survey monuments Contractor 4 $50,736.00 Board Contractor 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 3435 Total C.O.'s To Date: $81,618.71 8.4% Original Contract Amount:$970,970.00 Current Contract Amount:$1,052,588.71 Change Order Breakdown for the Month: Month Net C.O.$ Limit Authorization C.O. % 11/16 $2,000 Insp 0.0% $5,000 PM/Supervisor 0.0% $10,000 Manager 0.0% $20,000 Chief 0.0% $25,000 AGM 0.0% $75,000 GM 0.0% $81,618.71 >$75,000 Board CHANGE ORDER LOG Realignment resulting in increased excavation and backfill at Site 734 per RFI 001. Paseo Grande differing site condition - unconsolodated existing fill material STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: December 7, 2016 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Engineering Manager PROJECT NO: FILE NO: D0980-090289 ENG70-10-147 DIV. NO. 5 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4317 Approving the Sewer Annexation of Property Owned by Licia A. Barnett to Otay Water District Improvement District No. 18 (APN 517-112-09-00 - Vista Vereda, El Cajon, CA) GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 4317 approving the annexation of the property owned by Licia A. Barnett to Improvement District (ID) No. 18 (see Exhibit A for Location Map). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: The proposed annexation is to provide sewer service to the parcel located at Vista Vereda, El Cajon, in an unincorporated area of the County of San Diego California 92019 (APN 517-112- 09-00). ANALYSIS: A written request and Petition signed by Licia A. Barnett, has been received for annexation of APN 517-112-09-00, located at Vista Vereda, in the City of El Cajon and County of San Diego, for sewer service. The total acreage to be annexed is 0.51 2 acres. The property is within the jurisdictional boundary of the Otay Water District and following the Board’s approval, it will become part of ID No. 18. The parcel is located adjacent to an existing 8-inch Otay Water District sewer main and 12-inch water main. The parcel is already contained within the District’s water ID boundary. This parcel is part of the District’s Wastewater Master Plan. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The property owner will pay the District’s annexation processing fee of $776.20, sewer annexation fees (current fee is $1,059.57 per EDU) and sewer capacity fees for parcels located outside the sewer ID (current fee is $6,661.37) in effect at the time the service service is provided, and any additional fees, including the availability fee, as established in the attached Resolution. STRATEGIC GOAL: Provide enhanced sewer service to meet customer needs. LEGAL IMPACT: No legal impact. DM/RP:mlc \\Owd-fp1\engrplan\Public-s\Annexation Requests\2016\Barnett Sewer Annex Request - Vista Vereda\Staff Report\BD 12-07-16 - Staff Report Sewer Annexation ID 18- Barnett Sewer Annex Request - 1199_.doc Atttachments: Attachment A - Committee Action Attachment B - Resolution No. 4317 Exhibit A - Legal Description Exhibit B - Legal Map Exhibit A -- Location Map ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: D0980-090289 ENG70-10-147 Adopt Resolution No. 4317 Approving the Sewer Annexation of Property Owned by Licia A. Barnett to Otay Water District Improvement District No. 18 (APN 517-112-09-00 - Vista Vereda, El Cajon, CA) COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on November 21, 2016. The Committee supported Staff’s recommendation. NOTE: The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. ATTACHMENT B Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 4317 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF OTAY WATER DISTRICT APPROVING THE ANNEXATION TO OTAY WATER DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 18 OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED AS “LICIA A. BARNETT SEWER ANNEXATION (APN: 517-112-09- 00)” (FILE NO. ENG70-10-147/DIVISION 5) WHEREAS, a letter has been submitted by LICIA A. BARNETT, the owner and party that has an interest in the land described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto, for annexation of said land to Otay Water District Sewer Improvement District No. 18 pursuant to California Water Code Section 72670 et seq.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 72680.1 of said Water Code, the Board of Directors may proceed and act thereon without notice and hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINDS, RESOLVES, ORDERS AND DETERMINES as follows: 1. A depiction of the area proposed to be annexed, and the boundaries of ID 18 following the annexation, is set forth on a map in Exhibit “B” filed with the Secretary of the District, which map shall govern for all details as to the area proposed to be annexed. 2. The purpose of the proposed annexation is to make sewer service available to the area to be annexed, which availability constitutes a benefit to said area. 3. The Board finds and determines that the area proposed to be annexed to ID 18 will be benefited by such annexation and that the property currently within ID 18 will also be benefited and not injured by such annexation because after the annexation a ATTACHMENT B Page 2 of 4 larger tax base will be available to finance the sewer facilities and improvements of ID 18. 4. The Board of Directors hereby declares that the annexa- tion of said property is subject to the owners complying with the following terms and conditions: (a) The petitioner for said annexation shall pay to Otay Water District the following: (1) The annexation processing fee at the time of application; (2) State Board of Equalization filing fees in the amount of $3,500; (3) The sewer annexation fees at the time of connection to the Otay Water District water system; (4) Yearly assessment fees will be collected through the County Tax Assessor’s office in the amount of $30 for APN 517-112-09-00; (5) In the event that sewer service is to be provided, Petitioners shall pay all applicable sewer fees per Equipment Dwelling Unit (EDU) at the time the sewer connection is purchased; and (6) Payment by the owner of APN 517-112-09-00 of all other applicable local or state agency fees or charges. (b) The property to be annexed shall be subject to taxation after annexation thereof for the purposes ATTACHMENT B Page 3 of 4 of the improvement district, including the payment of principal and interest on bonds and other obligations of the improvement district, author- ized and outstanding at the time of annexation, the same as if the annexed property had always been a part of the improvement district. 5. The Board hereby declares the property described in Exhibit "A" shall be considered annexed to ID 18 upon passage of this resolution. 6. The Board of Directors further finds and determines that there are no exchanges of property tax revenues to be made pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 95 et seq., as a result of such annexation. 7. The annexation of APN 517-112-09-00 to the District’s Sewer Improvement District 18 is hereby designated as the “LICIA A. BARNETT SEWER ANNEXATION (APN: 517-112-09-00)”. 8. Pursuant to Section 57202(a) of the Government Code, the effective date of the LICIA A. BARNETT SEWER ANNEXATION (APN: 517-112-09-00) shall be the date this Resolution is adopted by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District. 9. The General Manager of the District and the Secretary of the District, or their respective designees, are hereby ordered to take all actions required to complete this annexation. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 7th day of December, 2016. ATTACHMENT B Page 4 of 4 President ATTEST: __________________________________ District Secretary EXHIBIT A GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION APN: 517-112-09 ANNEXATION INTO OTAY WATER DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO.18 OTAY WATER DISTRICT BEING A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 16 SOUTH, RANGE 1 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY APPROVED MAY 3, 1859, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 19, SAID CORNER BEING THE BEGINNING OF A 338.41 FEET RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 89° 16' 35" WEST, TO SAID POINT, SAID POINT BEING ALSO THE BEGINNING OF THE CENTER LINE OF THAT CERTAIN 40.0 FEET STRIP OF LAND DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, RECORDED JULY 25, 1956, IN BOOK 6191, PAGE 507, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE COURSE 1. THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 32° 45' 25" A DISTANCE OF 193.47 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, AND NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTER LINE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTER LINE AS FOLLOWS: COURSE 2. NORTH 33° 28' 50" EAST A DISTANCE OF 34.51 FEET TANGENT TO SAID CURVE TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 230.00 FEET RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY; THENCE COURSE 3. THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 54° 21' 44" A DISTANCE OF 218.22 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTER LINE TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE 230.00 FEET RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE COURSE 4. THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20° 40' 51" A DISTANCE OF 83.02 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTER LINE TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO A. VALVERDE BY DEED RECORDED AUGUST 21, 1968, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1968-143231, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE COURSE 5. NORTH 00° 39' 27" EAST A DISTANCE OF 500.10 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID VALVERDES LAND TO A POINT WHICH IS 80 FEET SOUTHERLY FROM THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER THEREOF BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE COURSE 6. SOUTH 89° 50' 50" EAST A DISTANCE OF 280.01 FEET PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAND TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND; THENCE COURSE 7. NORTH 00° 39' 27" EAST A DISTANCE OF 80.00 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE COURSE 8. NORTH 89° 50' 50" WEST A DISTANCE OF 280.01 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAND TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE COURSE 9. SOUTH 00° 39' 27" WEST A DISTANCE OF 80.00 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND TO THE TRUE POINT BEGINNING. CONTAINING 0.51 ACRES ___________________________________ VICTOR RODRIGUEZ-FERNANDEZ LS 5335 SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT “B” DISCLAIMER: FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY. THE DESCRIPTION OF LAND IS NOT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION AS DEFINED BY THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND MAY NOT BE USED AS A BASIS FOR AN OFFER FOR SALE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED vrf/10302016 R$ R$ "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "`"` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "`"` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` "` 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 ¹r ¹r $R $R $R $R $R $R $R ¹r ¹r¹r $R l?l? l? l? l? l? l? l?l? l? l? l? l? l? l? l? l? l? l? l? l?l? l? l?l? l? "Cé "CéQW QW QWQW QW QW HERMOSA TOWNSEND PL. VISTA VEREDA R D . VERDE GLEN SAKINAST. JULIANNA ST. G RANDE CT. VISTA VISTA VEREDA HIDDENMESAT R AIL ONYX D R. TR E S EDER CIRCLE M O N A R C H R IDGECIRCLE VISTA GRANDE WAY VIST A 92019 90 153 155 127 Vista Vereda Verde Gln V ist a G r a n d e R d Vista Grande Way Vista Hermosa Way 368 §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ DIV. 5 DIV. 2 DIV. 1 DIV. 3 DIV. 4 5 8 8 805 805 805 11 9454 94 125 125 905 125 905 125 .0 100 200 300 40050FeetLOCA T I O N M A P V I C I N I T Y M A PEXHIBIT AVISTA VEREDA,EL CAJON, CA 92019SEWER ANNEXATION D0980-090289 517-112-09-00 0.51 ACRES 0 VISTA VEREDA, EL CAJON, CA 92019 LICIA A. BARNETT DIV. 5 18 11/2/2016 PROJECT#: APN: AREA: OWNER: ADDRESS: DATE: DIR: SEWER ID: ^_ PROJECT SITE STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: December 7, 2015 SUBMITTED BY: Lisa Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist Bob Kennedy Engineering Manager PROJECT: P2083 - 001101 DIV. NO. 2 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 870-2 Pump Station Project GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) approves the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 870-2 Pump Station Project (see Exhibit A for Project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board approval for the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the 870-2 Pump Station Project. ANALYSIS: The Otay Water District is proposing the construction and operation of a new pump station (870-2 Pump Station) and associated sewer force main alignment that would replace the existing Low Head Pump Station (LHPS; 571-1 Pump Station) and High Head Pump Station (HHPS; 870-1 2 Pump Station). Both the LHPS and HHPS have reached the end of their useful lives. The existing pump stations pump water from the Roll Reservoir (570 Zone Reservoir) located on Otay Mesa to different hydraulic zones to maintain water supply within these zones. The new 870-2 Pump Station would pump to the two hydraulic zones currently supplied by the LHPS and HHPS, the 570 zone and the 870 zone. Additionally, these existing pump stations have insufficient capacity for the desalinated water supply that would be introduced to the Roll Reservoir if the District’s proposed Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project (OMCDSP) is implemented. The pump station, site plan, and yard piping have been coordinated with the proposed desalination facilities project to avoid conflicts. The proposed pump station conceptual layout allows for phased construction beginning with installation of pumps that will supply water from the 570 hydraulic zone to the 870 hydraulic zone and two recirculation pumps to maintain water quality in the Roll Reservoir. Phase 2, which would only occur if determined necessary for the OMCDSP, would consist of the installation of pumps that would convey water from the 570 hydraulic zone to the 624 hydraulic zone. In addition to the pump station, construction of the project includes the installation of associated yard piping, a sewer force main, and the improvement of the partially paved access road to the site. The LHPS and HHPS will be demolished at a later date (not part of this project). ICF International prepared the initial study and MND for the Project under their as-needed environmental services contract with the District. Based on the findings of these documents, and with proper mitigation measures taken, as outlined in the final MND (Attachment B), the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The impacts that require mitigation are biological resources, cultural resources, and geology/soils. The 30 day notice period for the public to comment on the draft MND began on September 9, 2016 and closed on October 10, 2016. Four comment letters were received from the San Diego County Archaeological Society, the California Department of Fish & Wildlife, the County of San Diego, and the Viejas Band of the Kumeyaay Indians. All of the letters received and the responses to comments are included in the Final MND. The Final MND also includes the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting plan (MMRP), which details the measures that will be taken for mitigation. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer None. 3 STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high quality and reliable water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional, effective, and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "A District that is innovative in providing water services at competitive rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service." LEGAL IMPACT: None. LC-B/BK:mlc P:\WORKING\CIP P2083 870-2 Pump Station Replacement\Staff Reports\BD 12-07-16, Staff Report, 870-2 Pump Station Replacement Project MND.docx Attachments: Exhibit A – Project Location Map Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Final IS/MND and MMRP ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2083-001101 Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 870-2 Pump Station Project COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on November 21, 2016. The Committee supported Staff's recommendation. NOTE: The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. OTAY WATER DISTRICT870-2 PUMP STATIONLOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A CIP P2083F P: \ W O R K I N G \ C I P P 2 0 8 3 8 7 0 - 2 P u m p S t a t i o n R e p l a c e m e n t \ G r a p h i c s \ E x h i b i t s - F i g u r e s \ E x h i b i t A , L o c a t i o n M a p , O c t o b e r 2 0 1 6 . m x d ROLLRESERVOIR(571-1) LOW HEADPUMP STATION HIGH HEADPUMPSTATION ACCESS FROMALTA RD OWD PROPERTY LINE(APPROX) Firearms Training Facility VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE NTSDIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 !\ ?ò Aä ?Ë ;&s ?p F 0 250125 Feet FINAL INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT 870-2 PUMP STATION P REPARED FOR: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, California 91978 P REPARED BY: ICF 525 B Street, Suite 1700 San Diego, California 92101 November 2016 ICF. 2016. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station. Final. November (ICF 669.13) San Diego, CA. Prepared for Otay Water District, Spring Valley, CA. Contents Comments Received on the Draft IS/MND .......................................................................................... 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Agency and Organization Comments ..................................................................................................... 1 Letter A: Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Letter B: State of California, Department of Fish and Wildlife ............................................................... 9 Letter C: County of San Diego, Planning and Development Services ................................................... 16 Letter D: San Diego County Archaeological Society ............................................................................. 20 Letter E: San Diego County Archaeological Society .............................................................................. 23 Attachment A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment B Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station i November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Comments Received on the Draft IS/MND Introduction A draft version of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (draft IS/MND) was circulated for a 30-day public review between September 9, 2016 and October 10, 2016, and the Notice of Intent to Adopt the MND (NOI) was posted with the San Diego County Clerk. The Otay Water District (District) determined that a 30-day public review period was appropriate for the MND pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15073. The draft MND was available for public review at the Otay Water District, 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd., Spring Valley, CA 91978, on the District’s website, www.otaywater.gov, and at the City of San Diego Public Library, Otay Mesa-Nestor Branch, 3003 Coronado Avenue, San Diego, CA 92154. This chapter provides the persons, organizations, and public agencies that commented during this public review period. The District has evaluated the comments on environmental issues received from those agencies/parties and has prepared written responses to each pertinent comment relating to the adequacy of the environmental analysis contained within the draft IS/MND. These responses are provided following each individual comment letter. Revisions were made to the draft IS/MND, which are reflected in strikeout underline format in the draft IS/MND, provided as Attachment A to this final IS/MND. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is provided as Attachment B to this final IS/MND. Agency and Organization Comments The District received four comment letters on the draft IS/MND during the 30-day public review period. The following agencies/organizations provided letters: • Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit (standard cover letter) • California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) • County of San Diego, Planning and Development Services (PDS) • San Diego County Archaeological Society (SDCAS) • Viejas Tribe The comment letters and corresponding responses follow this page. Changes to the draft IS/MND, which includes clarifications related to comments received, are included in Attachment A. None of the changes are considered “substantial” pursuant to Section 15073.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, recirculation of the draft IS/MND is not necessary. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 1 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 2 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Letter A: Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit A-1 The comment notes that the State Clearinghouse has submitted the draft MND to selected state agencies for review. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 5 provided a comment letter (Letter B) and responses to those comments are included as responses to Letter B below. Changes to the final IS/MND were made in response to these comments and are provided in strikeout/underline format in the draft IS/MND (see Attachment A). No letters were received from any other state agencies. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 4 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 5 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 6 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 7 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 8 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Letter B: State of California, Department of Fish and Wildlife B-1 The comment indicates the project has potential impacts to wildlife and sensitive habitats, provides an introduction to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, a summary of the project, and summarizes the impact analysis and mitigation provided in the draft IS/MND. The District concludes their comment by noting that it has specific comments and recommendations related to the project’s mitigation of biological resource impacts. The District appreciates the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW’s) interest in the proposed project and its associated effects on biological resources. This comment is noted, but does not raise any issues requiring a response pursuant to CEQA. The specific comments raised in the pages that follow this introduction are listed separately along with the District’s individual responses. No clarifications are needed in the Final MND. B-2 The comment notes that the MND states that a ministerial grading permit from the County of San Diego will be required, which is not directly subject to CEQA. Section 3.8 of the County MSCP Subarea Plan states that no grading will be done within the South County Segment (SCS) without a determination of conformance with the SCS. The project is directly adjacent to County conserved lands, and may affect adjacent habitats due to the close proximity of construction activities; therefore, this project may have implications for the County MSCP, such as fugitive dust and increased night lighting during construction. The project should conform to all adjacency guidelines within the County SAP. Limits of project impacts should be clearly marked on the ground (i.e., by flagging or high visibility construction tape) and on plans, and sensitive areas adjacent to the project should be avoided by construction activities. Other measures or best management practices (BMPs) may also be appropriate, such as a thorough pre-construction education program to make workers aware of the sensitivity of adjacent lands. The MND acknowledges the project site’s proximity to the SCS of the County’s MSCP on page 3-20 and 3-45 of the draft IS/MND (Attachment A). As noted on these pages, the proposed project would comply with all Land Use Adjacency Guidelines of the County’s MSCP Subarea Plan. The project site and its surroundings are currently used for industrial purposes, which would not change with implementation of the proposed project. As discussed on pages 3-14 and 3-15 of the draft IS/MND (Attachment A), construction of the proposed project would incorporate standard SDAPCD dust control measures and would adhere to SDAPCD Rules 50, 51, 55, and 67.7, which would limit fugitive dust emissions that could impact adjacent sensitive habitat such as Quino host/nectar plants or vernal pools. As required by Mitigation Measure Bio-1, a biological monitor shall be present during removal of vegetation and other construction activities that occur within the Quino season as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2014 protocol, which would ensure that potential impacts on Quino are avoided. In addition, no night time construction is proposed; therefore, there would be Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 9 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND no nighttime construction lighting that could potentially impact nesting birds. Furthermore, the limits of project construction will be clearly marked when construction activities would occur adjacent to sensitive habitat. No clarifications are needed in the Final MND. B-3 This comment indicates that the MND identifies 0.01 acre of impact to southern willow scrub. The comment recommends early coordination with the Lake and Streambed Alteration group, and subsequent notification as determined necessary, to avoid project delays. The District acknowledges that early consultation with CDFW, specifically the Lake and Streambed Alteration group, is prudent to avoid any project delays. As such, the District intends to consult with CDFW, along with other appropriate regulatory agencies, to enter into a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement, as noted on page 3-20 of the draft IS/MND. No clarifications are needed in the Final MND. B-4 The comment notes that MM BIO-3 discusses compensatory mitigation for the project and indicates that direct impacts to listed species may require additional mitigation, acknowledging that this will be determined through consultation with CDFW and the USFWS for respective listed species. The commenter also requests to review the mitigation plan if creation of riparian habitat at the San Miguel Habitat Management Area is chosen as a mitigation option. The District acknowledges that CDFW may require mitigation beyond that which is required by the project’s MMRP. The District looks forward to consulting with CDFW and USFWS for respective listed species and will provide a mitigation plan for review if creation of riparian habitat at the San Miguel Habitat Management Area is chosen as a mitigation option by the USFWS. No clarifications are needed in the Final MND. B-5 The comment indicates that MM BIO-2-2 is unclear in its avoidance of nesting least Bell’s vireo. The commenter recommends that construction during the breeding season be avoided to the maximum extent practicable, especially in/near areas known to be occupied by least Bell’s vireo. The commenter indicates that the map on page 3-18 shows two occurrences of least Bell’s vireo within the direct impact area, and multiple occurrences adjacent to the drainage with the proposed culvert, but states that the text in the discussion only mentions one single male within the project footprint and two fledglings 200 feet to the south. The description in the text does not appear to reflect the extent of occupancy by least Bell’s vireo within the site and adjacent areas as shown in the map. The comment continues by stating that if clearing is done during the breeding season of the least Bell’s vireo, there is potential to adversely impact the species. If appropriate noise reduction below 60dBA cannot be maintained, construction should be avoided in these areas rather than just curtailed and the qualified project biologist(s) should be responsible for coordinating with USFWS and CDFW to determine if construction activities could disturb an active nest and when nests are no longer active, and also monitor to ensure birds are not agitated by construction activities. Moreover, if seasonal avoidance or appropriate buffers cannot be maintained for the least Bell’s vireo, a 2081 Incidental Take Permit (ITP) or a 2080.1 consistency determination from CDFW may be recommended to authorize impacts caused by construction activities. If it is anticipated that work will need to occur during the breeding season within or Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 10 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND adjacent to occupied least Bell’s vireo habitat, the commenter recommends early coordination to determine if an ITP is advisable. Additionally, the commenter recommends a 3:1 ratio for impacts to southern willow scrub that is occupied by least Bell’s vireo. BIO-2 has been clarified to indicate that early coordination may be needed if avoidance of the breeding season is not feasible in order to determine if an Incidental Take Permit is needed. Please see the changes shown on page 2-1 and 3-18 of the draft IS/MND. Additionally, the District has revised the text on page 3-17 of the draft MND to reflect the occurrences of least Bell’s Vireo as shown on Figure 14 in the Draft MND. Furthermore, the District will coordinate to determine if an Incidental Take Permit for LBV is needed prior to implementation of the proposed project. Lastly, the District has revised the mitigation on page 3-18 to reflect a 3:1 ratio for impacts to southern willow scrub that is occupied by least Bell’s vireo. B-6 The comment notes Mitigation Measure BIO-2 states that “coastal California gnatcatcher survey will consist of a minimum of three surveys 7 days apart.” This is not consistent with the USFWS approved protocol for the species for agencies not participating in an NCCP. Coastal California gnatcatcher is a federally listed species and presence-absence surveys should follow the USFWS approved protocol, which require 6 surveys during the breeding season or 9 surveys outside of the breeding season, in order to conclude a site is not occupied by California gnatcatcher. The commenter recommends that the District contact the USFWS for further direction on this species, particularly with regard to avoidance measures for potential indirect impacts from noise. The District has revised MM BIO-2 to ensure consistency with the USFWS approved protocol for the coastal California gnatcatcher for agencies not participating in an NCCP. The District has coordinated and will continue to coordinate with the USFWS in order to ensure that the implementation of the proposed project will provide adequate avoidance measures for potential indirect impacts from noise for the coastal California gnatcatcher, consistent with federal law. B-7 The comment notes that due to the very close proximity of occupied Quino habitat, the avoiding construction at the both the Low Head and High Head pump stations during the Quino flight season is recommended. The District acknowledges the proximity of the proposed project site to the occupied Quino habitat. The District will coordinate the demolition schedule prior to demolition to avoid disturbances to the occupied Quino habitat during the flight season. However, it is notable that “construction” in these areas is limited to demolition activities to remove the existing stations and would not entail any new development. B-8 In the future, the commenter recommends that a Biological Technical Report (BTR) be submitted to the State Clearinghouse along with all project-specific documents related to the MND. The BTR that was provided to the commenter was not specific to this individual project but was produced for the Otay Mesa Conveyance Pipeline. This BTR was based on surveys that are at least two years old and, due to prevailing drought, may have missed identifying sensitive plant or animal species within the impact areas. Regarding potential impacts to Quino, the commenter defers to the USFWS to determine if updated Quino adult and host plant surveys are necessary. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 11 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND The District acknowledges this comment and will take this recommendation into consideration for future District projects. In addition, the District is coordinating with USFWS on the biological resources onsite. No changes to the Final IS/MND are needed. B-9 The comment notes that MM BIO-4 discusses nesting bird avoidance and recommends preconstruction surveys within three days of project commencement rather than five, and recommends surveying within at least 500 feet of construction activities to avoid adjacent nesting birds. The commenter also generally recommends a 300-foot no-work buffer for nesting passerine birds and a 500-foot no-work buffer for active raptor nests; however, the buffer may be reduced depending on the amount of screening vegetation between the nest and construction activities, ambient levels of human activity, and possibly other factors. Also, if construction ceases for greater than two weeks, another survey should be completed to avoid nesting birds that may have moved into the area. The District acknowledges this comment and has revised MM BIO-4 to reflect the recommendations for the preconstruction surveys for nesting birds. Please see the clarifications made on pages 2-2 and 3-19. B-10 The comment notes that there is a potential for sensitive wildlife species to shelter in and around construction equipment left on site. To avoid impacts to wildlife, the commenter recommends that all construction equipment be checked by the biological monitor prior to use. The District recognizes the potential for sensitive wildlife species to shelter in and around construction equipment left on site. As part of MM BIO-1, the biological monitor will ensure that all pieces of construction equipment are properly checked prior to use in order to avoid impacts to wildlife. B-11 The commenter provides contact information. The District appreciates CDFW’s comments on the project with respect to biological resources. If any additional questions or concern arise, the District will contact the point of contact provided in this letter. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 12 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 13 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 14 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 15 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Letter C: County of San Diego, Planning and Development Services C-1 The comment indicates that the County of San Diego has reviewed the IS/MND and has submitted comments that follow. The District appreciates the County of San Diego’s interest in the proposed project. This comment is noted, but does not raise any issues requiring a response pursuant to CEQA. The specific comments raised in the pages that follow this introduction are listed separately along with the District’s individual responses. C-2 The comment states that Alta Road is the primary access to the County’s East Mesa facilities and there are no improved secondary access. The comment states that the construction of the proposed project cannot interfere with emergency secondary ingress/egress as the dirt and partially paved road leading to the proposed station is the County’s temporary secondary access. The comment requests additional details regarding how the access to the County’s East Mesa facilities would remain available, both during and after construction of the new pump station, to the occupants of the Mesa facilities. The District acknowledges the proposed project site’s proximity to Alta Road which currently serves as the primary access road to the County’s East Mesa facilities. The District will implement a Traffic Control Permit approved by the County of San Diego. The Traffic Control Permit will ensure that adequate emergency access and egress is maintained and that traffic will move efficiently and safely in and around the construction site. The County’s temporary secondary access may be briefly unavailable during construction to allow for paving. Once construction is complete, this road will better serve as a secondary access road to the East Mesa facilities. The District has updated Section VIII.g, Hazards and Hazardous Materials to reflect the information regarding the Traffic Control permit. C-3 The comment recommends including a discussion that permanent structural BMPs may be required to address pollutant control and hydromodification management. The District has provided additional details regarding non-structural and structural measures required to address post-construction storm water runoff, pollutant control and hydromodification management under Sections IX.a and IX.c-f, Hydrology and Water Quality. The proposed project is anticipated to meet the runoff reduction requirements through implementation of non-structural controls. Structural controls would only be considered if the full volume of water cannot be treated by the non-structural controls and conservation design measures. To comply with the runoff reduction requirements, the proposed project would reduce runoff through on-site storm water reuse, interception, evapotranspiration and infiltration through non-structural controls and conservation design measures. Examples include, disconnection of impervious surfaces through distributed pervious areas, rain barrels or cistern, pervious concrete, interceptor vegetation such as swales, buffer zones from natural water bodies, protection of outdoor material storage and secondary containment, and Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 16 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND landscaping with native or drought tolerant species); these approaches are similar to Low Impact Development (LID). C-4 The comment states that the proposed project may be required to implement structural BMPs for pollutant control and flow attenuation. The comment recommends adding additional language to Section IX.e stating that permanent source control, site design, and structural BMPs will be implemented, where feasible and required. This comment is noted. Please refer to response to comment C-3. C-5 The comment states that the proposed project may be required to implement structural BMPs for pollutant control and flow attenuation. The comment recommends adding additional language to Section IX.e stating that permanent source control, site design, and structural BMPs will be implemented, where feasible and required. This comment is noted. Please refer to response to comment C-3. The District has provided additional details regarding non-structural and structural measures required to address pollutant control and flow attenuation under Section IX.e, Hydrology and Water Quality. C-6 The comment states that the existing County of San Diego Regional Trail, Otay Mountain Truck Trail, crosses the northern portion of the proposed project site. The comment recommends addressing impacts to the Otay Mountain Truck Trail in the Recreation and Transportation sections of the Draft MND. The District acknowledges the proximity of the existing Otay Mountain Truck Trail to the proposed project site. The Otay Mountain Truck Trail would not be impacted by the proposed project as it would not cross the proposed project site and no changes would be proposed to the trail. No changes to the draft IS/MND are required. C-7 The comment recommends that further details be provided in Section XVI.a regarding paving activities for the existing dirt road. Specifically, the comment recommends stating the complete extent of the proposed paving. This comment is noted. The District has included further discussion under Section 1.3, Project Description and Section XVI.a, Transportation and Traffic, regarding the complete extent of the proposed paving activities for the proposed project site. As indicated, the portion of the road to be paved would begin at Alta Road, head northeast to the proposed pump station, then continue north along the east side of the Roll Reservoir where it would turn into the reservoir and come to an end. No other changes to the Final MND are required. C-8 The comment recommends including a discussion on the potential impacts from the Brownfield Unexploded Ordinance as this area is mapped within 0.5 mile of the proposed project site. This comment is noted. The District has included a discussion under Section VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials regarding the potential impacts from the Brownfield Unexploded Ordinance areas which exist approximately 0.5 mile west and southwest of the proposed project site. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 17 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND C-9 The comment notes that the County’s Department of Parks and Recreation will be conducting Quino checkerspot butterfly habitat enhancement and restoration immediately northwest of the proposed site. This comment is noted. The District appreciates the advanced notice of the Quino checkerspot butterfly habitat enhancement and restoration efforts near the proposed project site. This location is outside the project site and the District does not anticipate any conflicts between the respective actions. C-10 The comment provides contact information and indicates interest in receiving future documents and notices. The District appreciates the County’s review of the draft IS/MND and will send the county responses to its comments. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 18 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 19 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Letter D: San Diego County Archaeological Society D-1 The comment indicates the letter is a follow up from the previous September 18th letter. This updated letter indicates support for the District’s revisions to the cultural resources mitigation program, if revised as stated. The commenter recommends that the District add language to the cultural resources mitigation program that would require curation at a facility meeting the standards of 36CFR79. The District agrees with the language suggestion from the San Diego County Archaeological Center and has added language to MM CUL-2 that indicates curation must occur at a facility that meets the standards of 36CFR79. Please see the clarification made to MM CUL-2 on page 2-2 of the draft IS/MND as revised. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 20 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 21 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 22 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Letter E: San Diego County Archaeological Society Please note that Letter D was received in response to the District submitting the cultural resources study that was request in Letter E. Therefore, while responses are provided to the first letter received (Letter E), the subsequent letter (Letter D) indicates support for the project’s cultural analysis and mitigation measures, as revised. E-1 The comment states that the Draft MND does not provide a version of the cultural resources appendix with sensitive material removed. Thus, the SDCAS was unable to judge the adequacy of impact analysis and was unable to determine if the recommended mitigation in the aforementioned appendix matches that in the Draft MND. The District acknowledges this oversight. A copy of this appendix was provided to the SDCAS for review and comment. E-2 The comment states that Section 2.1.2 in the Draft MND includes MM CUL-1, which calls for testing of SDI-10668. The comment further states that testing is not mitigation and must be completed prior to, and disclosed during, the CEQA public review, for the public disclosure of project impacts. The comment questions if this issue was adequately addressed in the cultural resources appendix with sensitive materials removed as noted in comment E-1. The District acknowledges this comment. The Draft MND has been revised to indicate that all but a small portion of CA-SDI-10668 was previously determined not eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). The CRHR-eligible portion of the site is located outside of the project. Therefore, no archeological testing is proposed. As a result, the original text for MM CUL-1 has been removed and replaced with the text previously associated with MM-CUL-2 under Section V. Cultural Resources. E-3 The comment states that MM CUL-2 defers public disclosure of essential information until after the public review of the Draft MND. The comment reiterates the language within the mitigation measure and states that the requirements for the archaeological and Native American monitoring will be included. The comment notes that these details are available in other District environmental documents, such as the recently reviewed 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan Update Draft Programmatic EIR. The comment states that there is no reason to not incorporate the same measures in the Draft MND. This comment is noted. The District has revised both MM CUL-2 and MM CUL-3 (now MM CUL-1 and MM CUL-2, respectively) and updated with the content and level-of-detail presented in the 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan update DPEIR. E-4 The comment request that MM CUL-3 be revised to incorporate the level of detail in the aforementioned Water Facilities Master Plan Update Draft Programmatic EIR. This comment is noted. The District has revised MM CUL-3 (now MM CUL-2) and updated with the content and level-of-detail presented in the 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan update DPEIR. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 23 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND E-5 The comment requests that the mitigation measures in the cultural resources section of the Draft MND be revised prior to adoption by the District. This comment is noted. The District has revised both MM CUL-2 and MM CUL-3 (now MM CUL-1 and MM CUL-2, respectively). E-6 The comment concludes by stating that the SDCAS would appreciate the opportunity to review an edited cultural resources appendix for the proposed project as well as revisions to the cultural resources portion of the Draft MND. This comment is noted. A copy of this appendix was provided to the SDCAS. Additionally, the District will provide a copy of the Final MND. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 24 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 25 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Comments and Responses to Draft MND Letter F: Viejas Tribe F-1 The Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians have reviewed the proposed project and have determined that the proposed project site contains cultural significance and/or ties to Viejas. The Viejas Band requests that a Kumeyaay cultural monitor be on site during ground disturbing activities in order to inform the Viejas Band of any new developments such as inadvertent discovery of cultural artifacts, cremation sites or human remains. The District appreciates the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians’ interest in the proposed project. The District will ensure that a Kumeyaay cultural monitor is present during all ground disturbing activities for the proposed project, as indicated in MM CUL-1 and MM CUL-2. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 26 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Attachment A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT 870-2 PUMP STATION FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT State Clearinghouse No. 2016091019 Prepared for: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, California 91978-2096 Prepared by: ICF 525 B Street, Suite 1700 San Diego, California 92101 November 2016 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OTAY WATER DISTRICT 870-2 PUMP STATION Mitigation measures have been identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station to reduce or avoid potential environmental impacts. To ensure compliance, the following mitigation monitoring and reporting program has been formulated. This program provides a checklist of mitigation measures and monitoring requirements, including the responsible party and when the mitigation will occur. Table 1 summarizes the mitigation measures for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station. Information contained within the checklist clearly identifies the mitigation measure, delineates the monitoring schedule, and defines the conditions required to verify compliance. The following list is an explanation of the five columns that constitute the checklist. Column 1 Mitigation Measure: Each measure is numbered and provided with a brief description of mitigation to reduce an impact to a below a level of significance. Column 2 Monitor: Identifies the public agency or private entity that is responsible for determining compliance with the mitigation measure and for informing the Otay Water District (OWD) about compliance. Column 3 Schedule: The monitoring schedule depends upon the progression of the overall project. Therefore, specific dates are not used within the "Schedule" column. Instead, scheduling describes a logical succession of events (e.g., prior to construction, annual) and if necessary, delineates a follow-up program. Column 4 Verification of Compliance: Verification by the responsible monitor that the mitigation measure has been completed. The OWD, as the lead agency, will be ultimately responsible for ensuring the implementation of all mitigation and monitoring measures. These measures are provided within this MMRP to ensure inclusion within the appropriate future construction documents to confirm implementation. 1 Table 1 Mitigation Checklist Mitigation Measure Implementer/Monitor Schedule Verification of Compliance (Date/Notes) To avoid potential impacts to candidate, sensitive or special-status species, as well as any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, the following measures shall be implemented. MM BIO-1: Biological Monitoring. Due to the proximity of Quino, a biological monitor will be present during removal of vegetation and other construction activities occurring within the Quino season as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2014 protocol (third week of February to the second Saturday in May) to avoid potential impacts on this species by directing construction away from occupied Quino habitat. Additionally, the assigned biological monitor will ensure that all pieces of construction equipment are properly checked prior to use in order to avoid impacts to Quino and other wildlife species. Biological monitor Pre- and during construction MM BIO-2: Construction and Removal of Vegetation Not to Occur during Least Bell’s Vireo or Coastal California Gnatcatcher Breeding Season. Prior to any construction activity, all contractual agreements with the District will ensure that the following project requirements regarding sensitive wildlife species are completed. All clearing, grubbing, or grading of vegetation will be avoided to the maximum extent practicable between February 15 and September 15, the breeding season of the coastal California gnatcatcher and least Bell’s vireo. Construction activities resulting in increased noise levels will be avoided to the maximum extent feasible within 300 feet of occupied habitat during the breeding season. However, if construction activities resulting in increased noise levels are proposed during the breeding season for the CGN and/or LBV, the following requirements will have to be met. If construction activities are to occur during the breeding season, Biological monitor Pre- and during construction 2 Mitigation Measure Implementer/Monitor Schedule Verification of Compliance (Date/Notes) preconstruction surveys will be required to locate active nests and establish buffer (i.e., no construction) zones. The CAGN survey will consist of a minimum of six surveys, spaced 7 days apart. If construction activities are to occur during the breeding season, the CAGN survey will consist of a minimum of nine surveys, spaced 7 days apart For the LBV, surveys will be conducted per USFWS protocols between April 10 and July 31; the LBV survey will consist of a minimum of eight surveys, spaced 10 days apart. If active CAGN or LBV nests are located within the project site the nests will be avoided, and supplemental noise abatement measures may be required. Noise abatement may include the installation of temporary acoustic barriers to reduce noise levels to 60 dBA or below. If adequate noise reduction is not feasible, then construction will be avoided adjacent to any occupied nests during the breeding season. Directional lighting and mufflers to minimize construction noise will also be required to minimize indirect impacts. The qualified project biologist(s) should be responsible for coordinating with USFWS and CDFW to determine if construction activities could disturb an active nest and when nests are no longer active, and also monitor to ensure birds are not agitated by construction activities. If seasonal avoidance or appropriate buffers cannot be maintained for LBV, a 2081 Incidental Take Permit (ITP) or a 2080.1 consistency determination from CDFW may be required to authorize impacts caused by construction activities. If it is anticipated that work will need to occur during the breeding season within or adjacent to occupied least LBV habitat, the District will enter into early coordination with CDFW to determine if an ITP is advisable. MM BIO-3: San Miguel Habitat Management Area. Impacts on the 0.64 acre of sensitive vegetation communities, consisting of 0.01 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.5 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub, and 0.13 acre of nonnative grassland, will be mitigated at a ratios of 3:1, 2:1, and 0.5:1, respectively, through the use of available credits at the District’s San Miguel Habitat Management Area (HMA) or through the OWD During construction 3 Mitigation Measure Implementer/Monitor Schedule Verification of Compliance (Date/Notes) creation of habitat within the HMA. Consultation with the USFWS and CDFW will be conducted for the listed species to ensure adequate compensatory mitigation. Furthermore, the limits of project construction will be clearly marked when construction activities would occur adjacent to sensitive habitat. MM BIO-4: Nesting Bird Surveys. Nesting bird surveys will be required for all project activities and will be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than three days prior to commencing project activities. The size of the nesting bird survey area will be determined by a qualified biologist at the time of the survey. If nests are found, the biologist will identify and flag a 300-foot no-work buffer for nesting passerine birds and a 500-foot no-work buffer for active raptor nests. These buffers will remain in place until the young have fledged or the nest is no longer active. The specific buffer width will be determined by the biologist at the time of discovery and will vary according to the avian species, site conditions, and the type of work activities to be conducted. Additionally, if construction ceases for greater than two weeks, another survey will be completed to avoid impacts to potential nesting birds that may have moved into the project vicinity. Biological monitor During construction To avoid impacts to cultural resources, the following measures shall be implemented. MM CUL-1: Cultural Resources Monitoring. Prior to grading, the District shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in coordination with a Native American monitor. Prior to beginning any work that requires cultural resources monitoring: i. A preconstruction meeting shall be held that includes the archaeologist, construction supervisor and/or grading contractor, and other appropriate personnel to go over the cultural resources monitoring program. ii. The archaeologist shall (at that meeting or subsequently) OWD/Qualified archaeologist Pre- and during construction; Prior to grading 4 Mitigation Measure Implementer/Monitor Schedule Verification of Compliance (Date/Notes) submit to the District a copy of the site/grading plan that identifies areas to be monitored. iii. The archaeologist shall coordinate with the construction supervisor and District on the construction schedule to identify when and where monitoring is to begin, including the start date for monitoring. iv. The archaeologist shall be present during grading/excavation and shall document such activity on a standardized form. A record of monitoring activity shall be submitted to the District each month and at the end of monitoring. MM CUL-2: Data Recovery Plan. In the event archaeological resources are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, the on-site construction supervisor shall be notified and shall redirect work away from the location of the discovery to allow for preliminary evaluation of potentially significant archaeological resources. The construction supervisor shall be notified by the archaeologist when the discovered resources have been collected and removed from the site, at which time the construction supervisor shall direct work to continue in the location of the discovery. i. Prepare a research design, resource evaluation plan and, if necessary, an archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The significance of the discovered resources shall be determined in consultation with the Native American representative, as appropriate. All archaeological work shall be conducted in the presence of a Native American monitor. ii. If, in the opinion of the qualified archaeologist and in light of the data available, the significance of the site is such that data recovery cannot capture the values that qualify the site for inclusion in the CRHR, then the District shall reconsider OWD/ Qualified archaeologist During construction 5 Mitigation Measure Implementer/Monitor Schedule Verification of Compliance (Date/Notes) project plans in light of the high value of the resource, and implement more substantial project modifications that would allow the site to be preserved intact, such as redesign, placement of fill, or relocation or abandonment. iii. Perform appropriate technical analyses, prepare a report and file it with the SCIC, and provide for the permanent curation of recovered resources Perform appropriate technical analyses, prepare a report and file it with the SCIC, and provide for the permanent curation of recovered resources at a facility meeting the standards of 36CFR79, as follows: a. The archaeologist shall ensure that all significant cultural resources collected are cleaned, catalogued, and analyzed to identify function and chronology as they relate to the history of the area; that faunal material is identified as to species; that specialty studies are completed, as appropriate; and that a letter of acceptance from the curation institution has been submitted to the District. b. Curation of artifacts shall be completed in consultation with the Native American representative, as applicable. MM CUL-3: Paleontological Surveys. A qualified vertebrate paleontologist shall be retained by the District to perform paleontological monitoring during initial ground disturbance. The location of construction activities likely to encounter subsurface sediments with high paleontological sensitivity shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist upon review of project excavation and grading plans. Very shallow surficial excavations, less than 5 feet in depth, within areas of previous disturbance shall be monitored on a part-time basis to ensure that underlying sensitive units are not adversely affected. Any areas consisting of artificial fill materials shall OWD/Qualified paleontologist During construction 6 Mitigation Measure Implementer/Monitor Schedule Verification of Compliance (Date/Notes) not require monitoring. To avoid impacts associated with strong seismic groundshaking, the following measure shall be implemented. MM GEO-1: Geotechnical Study. Prior to the issuance of building or grading permits, the project proponent will conduct a full geotechnical study to evaluate soil conditions and geologic hazards on the project site. The geotechnical study will be signed by a California-registered professional engineer and must contain field exploration data (drilling and soil sampling); laboratory testing of soil samples; and an engineering analysis to determine soil properties related, but not limited to: ground-motion acceleration parameters, the amplification properties of the subsurface units at the specific site(s), the potential for hydrocompaction to affect the proposed facilities, and the potential for collapsible, subsiding, liquefiable or expansive soils to affect the proposed project. The project proponent will implement recommendations found in the geotechnical study and use conclusions to determine the appropriate engineering to minimize geotechnical hazard impacts. OWD/ California-registered professional engineer Prior to the issuance of building or grading permits 7 Attachment B Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration FINAL INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT 870-2 PUMP STATION P REPARED FOR: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, California 91978 P REPARED BY: ICF 525 B Street, Suite 1700 San Diego, California 92101 November 2016 ICF. 2016. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station. Final. November. (ICF 669.13.) San Diego, CA. Prepared for Otay Water District, Spring Valley, CA. Contents List of Tables and Figures ...................................................................................................................... iv List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................................... v Page Chapter 1 Project Description .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Project Location, Site Description, and Surrounding Land Uses ...................................... 1-1 1.3 Project Description .......................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3.1 Pump Station 870-2 Features .......................................................................................... 1-2 1.3.2 Sewer Lift Station and Force Main ................................................................................... 1-4 1.3.3 Proposed Access Roads .................................................................................................... 1-4 1.3.4 Proposed Construction Phasing ....................................................................................... 1-5 1.3.5 Proposed Site Grading ..................................................................................................... 1-5 1.3.6 Proposed Demolition ....................................................................................................... 1-5 1.4 Authority to Prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration .................................................. 1-6 1.5 Preparers of the Mitigated Negative Declaration............................................................ 1-6 1.6 Results of Public Review .................................................................................................. 1-7 1.7 Approvals Required .......................................................................................................... 1-7 Chapter 2 Determination ................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Mitigation Measures ........................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1.1 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1.2 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................... 2-3 2.1.3 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................. 2-4 Chapter 3 Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form ..................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .................................................................... 3-2 3.2 Determination .................................................................................................................. 3-2 3.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .............................................................................. 3-3 I. Aesthetics ................................................................................................................................... 3-5 II. Agricultural and Forestry Resources ......................................................................................... 3-7 III. Air Quality .............................................................................................................................. 3-10 IV. Biological Resources .............................................................................................................. 3-16 V. Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................. 3-21 VI. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................... 3-25 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................... 3-29 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station i November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Contents VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................................... 3-31 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................................ 3-35 X. Land Use and Planning ............................................................................................................ 3-41 XI. Mineral Resources ................................................................................................................. 3-43 XII. Noise ..................................................................................................................................... 3-45 XIII. Population and Housing ....................................................................................................... 3-51 XIV. Public Services ..................................................................................................................... 3-53 XV. Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 3-55 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ......................................................................................................... 3-56 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems .............................................................................................. 3-59 XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................................... 3-62 Chapter 4 References ...................................................................................................................... 4-1 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station ii November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Contents Appendices A Air Emissions Calculations for Pump Station 870-2, ICF International, September 2016 B Biological Resources Technical Report for Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project, AECOM, October 2013 C Cultural Resources Assessment for Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project, Atkins, September 2013 (CONFIDENTIAL) D Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for Pump Station 870-2, Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., November 2013 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station iii November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Contents Tables and Figures Table Page 1 Estimated Construction Criteria Pollutant Emissions ........................................................................ 3-12 2 Estimated Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions .......................................................................... 3-13 3 Estimated Construction and Operational GHG Emissions ................................................................ 3-30 4 County of San Diego General Noise Standards ...................................................................................... 3-46 5 Summary of Construction Noise Analyses .............................................................................................. 3-47 6 FTA Criteria for Potential Building Damage Due to Groundborne Vibration ........................... 3-49 Figure Follows Page 1 Regional Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................................................ 1-2 2 Existing Aerial and District Boundary ......................................................................................................... 1-2 3 Existing Infrastructure ...................................................................................................................................... 1-2 4 Low Head Pump Station and High Head Pump Station........................................................................ 1-2 5 Proposed Location and Siting ......................................................................................................................... 1-2 6 Proposed Site Layout and Infrastructure .................................................................................................. 1-2 7 Phase 1 Plan ........................................................................................................................................................... 1-2 8 Phase 2 Plan ........................................................................................................................................................... 1-2 9 Proposed Pump Station Section..................................................................................................................... 1-2 10 Approximate Alignment of Proposed Sewer Force Main .................................................................... 1-4 11 Sewer Lift Station Section ................................................................................................................................ 1-4 12 Existing Conditions at Proposed Culvert Area ......................................................................................... 1-4 13 Demolition Plan .................................................................................................................................................... 1-6 14 Sensitive Species ................................................................................................................................................ 3-18 15 Vegetation Communities ................................................................................................................................ 3-20 16 Zoning and General Plan Designation. ...................................................................................................... 3-44 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station iv November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ADTs average daily trips APE area of potential effect AQIA Air Quality Impact Analysis BMPs best management practices CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CAGN coastal California gnatcatcher CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model CARB California Air Resources Board CDC California Department of Conservation CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CH4 methane CO2 carbon dioxide CO2e CO2-equivalent CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency cy cubic yards CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife District Otay Water District DOT U.S. Department of Transportation DPM Diesel Particulate Matter EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Environmental Site Assessment FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program FTA Federal Transit Administration GHG greenhouse gas HHPS High Head Pump Station HMA Habitat Management Area HMBP Hazardous Materials Business Plan hp horsepower I- Interstate IS Initial Study kW kilowatt LBV least Bell’s vireo Leq average noise level LHPS Low Head Pump Station MBTA Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act ME Medical Examiner’s mgd million gallons per day MLD Most Likely Descendent MND Mitigated Negative Declaration MRZ Mineral Resource Zone Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station v November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Contents MSCP San Diego County Multiple Species Conservation Program MTCO2e metric ton carbon dioxide equivalent N2O nitrogen dioxide NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NFPA National Fire Protection Association NOX nitrous oxides NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NSLU Noise-Sensitive Land Use O3 ozone OMCDSP Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project PDR Preliminary Design Report PI Principal Investigator PLC Programmable Logic Controller PLWTP Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns PPV peak particle velocity RAQS San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended in 1984 ROG reactive organic gas RVSS reduced-voltage solid-state starters RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition SCIC South Coastal Information Center SDAB San Diego Air Basin SDAPCD San Diego Air Pollution Control District SDG&E San Diego Gas and Electric SIP State Implementation Plan SMARA Surface Mining Reclamation Act of 1975 SOX sulfur oxides SR- State Route SUSMP Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan SWMP Stormwater Management Plan SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service w/w weight-in-weight Williamson Act California Land Conservation Act of 1975 WPO Watershed Protection, Stormwater Management, and Discharge Control Ordinance Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station vi November 2016 ICF 669.13 Chapter 1 Project Description 1.1 Introduction The Otay Water District (District) is proposing to construct and operate a new pump station (870-2 Pump Station) and associated sewer force main alignment that would replace the existing Low Head Pump Station (LHPS; 571-1 Pump Station) and High Head Pump Station (HHPS; 870-1 Pump Station). Both the LHPS and HHPS have reached the end of their useful lives. The existing pump stations pump water from the Roll Reservoir (570 Zone Reservoir) to different hydraulic zones to maintain water supply within these zones. The new 870-2 Pump Station would pump to the two hydraulic zones currently supplied by the LHPS and HHPS, the 570 zone and the 870 zone. Additionally, these existing pump stations have insufficient capacity for the desalinated water supply that would be introduced to the Roll Reservoir if the District’s proposed Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project (OMCDSP) is implemented.1 The 870-2 pump station, sewer force main, site plan, and associated yard piping would be coordinated with the proposed desalination facilities project to ensure conflicts are avoided. 1.2 Project Location, Site Description, and Surrounding Land Uses The proposed pump station site is located on District-owned land approximately 175 feet south of the District’s Roll Reservoir site in the unincorporated San Diego County community of Otay Mesa. Elevation at the site is approximately 557 feet above sea level. The site’s regional location is shown in Figure 1. The site proposed for the new pump station and the associated sewer force main alignment is an undeveloped area characterized by undulating terrain with native and nonnative vegetation. Dirt access roads extend through the proposed pump station site and sewer line alignment. Access to the site is provided via a southern partially paved road taken at Alta Road, which is approximately 700 feet to the south of the proposed pump station site. The site is located near the East Mesa Detention Facility, approximately 550 feet to the east and northeast of the gun firing range. A San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) transmission line extends to the southwest of the site. Vacant land and dirt access roads immediately surround the pump station site. Figure 2 provides an aerial of the existing conditions at the site. The existing infrastructure is shown in Figure 3. Figure 4 shows the existing LHPS and HHPS. Figure 5 shows the proposed siting of the pump station. 1 The OMCDSP consists of a new potable water supply source from the planned Rosarito Desalination Facility in Mexico and a pipeline terminating at the Roll Reservoir (870-1 Reservoir) site. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 1-1 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Project Description 1.3 Project Description 1.3.1 Pump Station 870-2 Features 1.3.1.1 Pump Station Layout The pump station layout includes the recirculation system flow meter, disinfection sampling, and dosing points and static mixer inside the pump station to avoid outside vaults that require confined space entry for operations, maintenance, and repairs. In addition, a restroom with a single sink and toilet would be provided for OWD staff. Figure 6 shows site layout and piping for the proposed pump station. Suction and discharge flow meters would be in below-grade vaults within the project site. The removal of all pumps would be through covered removable roof openings. All other equipment in the pump room, including electric pump motors, could be removed with a bridge crane. The proposed pump station conceptual layout allows for phased construction beginning with installation of pumps that would supply water from the 570 hydraulic zone to the 870 hydraulic zone and two recirculation pumps to maintain water quality in the Roll Reservoir. Phase 2, which would only occur if determined necessary for the OMCDSP, would consist of the installation of pumps that would convey water from the 570 hydraulic zone to the 624 hydraulic zone. Figure 7 shows the conceptual Phase 1 pump station plan. Figure 8 shows the conceptual Phase 2 pump station plan. Figure 9 shows the proposed pump station section. 1.3.1.2 Instrumentation and Controls The proposed project would include preliminary status, alarms, and position signals. Some examples include pressure monitors, flow rate monitors, chemical monitors, temperature alarms, and start/stop commands. A complete list is provided in the project’s Preliminary Design Report (PDR). 1.3.1.3 Chloramines Booster Facilities Chloramines booster facilities would be included as part of the pump station building. The facilities would include a 12.5% weight-in-weight (w/w) sodium hypochlorite storage and metering system and a 19% w/w aqueous ammonia storage and dosing system. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 1-2 November 2016 ICF 669.13 USAMEXICO ClevelandNationalForest SanDiegoBay S a n D i e g oS a n D i e g oC o u n t yC o u n t y ST905 ST54 ST274 ST125 ST163 ST67 ST75 ST52 ST15 ST94 ¨§¦5 ¨§¦805 ¨§¦8 ChulaChulaVistaVista AlpineAlpine BonitaBonita BostoniaBostonia CasaCasade Oro-Mount Helixde Oro-Mount HelixEl CajonEl Cajon ImperialImperialBeachBeach LakesideLakeside La MesaLa Mesa La PresaLa Presa LemonLemonGroveGrove NationalNationalCityCity RanchoRanchoSan DiegoSan Diego SanteeSantee SpringSpringValleyValley WinterWinterGardensGardens Figure 1Regional Vicinity MapOtay Water District Pump Station 870-2 ± Source: ESRI StreetMap North America (2010) 0 2 41 Miles San Bernardino Riverside ImperialSan Diego Orange Los Angeles Kern P a c i f i cO c e a n USA MEXICO K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ P u m p _ S t a t i o n _ 8 7 0 \ m a p d o c \ I S M N D \ F i g 0 1 _ R e g i o n a l _ V i c i t n y . m x d D a t e : 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 4 1 9 3 1 6 ^_ Project Site Figure 2 Existing Aerial and District Boundary Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ P u m p _ S t a t i o n _ 8 7 0 \ m a p d o c \ I S M N D \ F i g 0 2 _ D i s t r i c t _ B n d r y . m x d D a t e : 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 4 1 9 3 1 6 Figure 3 Existing Infrastructure Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ P u m p _ S t a t i o n _ 8 7 0 \ m a p d o c \ I S M N D \ F i g 0 3 _ E x i s t _ I n f r a s t r u c t u r e . m x d D a t e : 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 4 1 9 3 1 6 Figure 4 Low Head Pump Station and High Head Pump Station Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ San Dieg o \projects\otay_water_d istrict\00 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ Pump_ Station _ 8 7 0 \map doc\I SMND\Fig4 _ L H P S _ a n d _ H H P S .ai Date: 7/18/20 1 4 24 9 9 1 Existing Low Head Pump Station High Head Pump Station Figure 5 Proposed Location and Siting Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ San Dieg o \projects\otay_water_d istrict\00 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ Pump_ Station _ 8 7 0 \map doc\I SMND\Fig0 5 _ P r o p o s e d _ L o c _ S i t i n g .mxd Date: 7/18/20 1 4 24 9 9 1 Figure 6 Proposed Site Layout and Infrastructure Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ San Dieg o \projects\otay_water_d istrict\00 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ Pump_ Station _ 8 7 0 \map doc\I SMND\Fig0 6 _ P r o p o s e d _ S i t e _ L a y o u t .mxd Date: 08 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 6 1 9 5 4 2 Figure 7 Phase 1 Plan Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ San D ieg o \ p rojects\o t a y_w a t e r_d istrict\00 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ Pump_ Sta t ion _ 8 7 0 \ m a p doc\ISMND\Fig0 7 _ P h a s e _ 1 _ P l a n . m xd Date : 0 8 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 6 1 9 5 4 2 Figure 8 Phase 2 Plan Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ San D ieg o \ p rojects\o t a y_w a t e r_d istrict\00 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ Pump_ Sta t ion _ 8 7 0 \ m a p doc\ISMND\Fig0 8 _ P h a s e _ 2 _ P l a n . m xd Date : 7 / 18/2 0 1 4 2 4 9 9 1 Figure 9 Proposed Pump Station Section Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ San Dieg o \projects\otay_water_d istrict\00 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ Pump_ Station _ 8 7 0 \map doc\I SMND\Fig0 9 _ P r o p o s e d _ P u m p _ S t a t i o n _ S e c t i o n .mxd Date: 08 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 6 19 5 4 2 Otay Water District Project Description 1.3.1.4 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Ventilation openings and systems would be provided as required by National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 820.2 Only the control room with Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) cabinet, the sodium hypochlorite storage tank room, and the aqueous ammonia storage tank room would be air-conditioned. The sodium hypochlorite room would be air-conditioned to minimize the loss of strength of the chemical solution. Ventilation in the pump room would be through multiple acoustical intake louvers in the east wall, centered on pumps and motorized exhaust fans opposite the room and located on the roof. 1.3.1.5 Stand-By Generator, Related Equipment, and Fuel Storage In order to provide power to critical pump station electrical loads when the SDG&E electric service is unavailable, a 480-volt, 3-phase stand-by diesel engine generator is included in the design of the pump station electrical system. At minimum, it is anticipated that the stand-by engine generator would be sized to supply continuous power to the following equipment: Three 400-horsepower (hp) electric motor driven pumps equipped with reduced-voltage solid-state starters (RVSS). All ancillary electrical loads associated with two 400-hp natural gas engine driven pumps. Electrical equipment and instrumentation associated with chemical storage and feed systems. Critical supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA), control system, and telemetry equipment. A 1500-kilowatt (kW) stand-by engine generator would be required. It would be installed in a dedicated room in the pump station building, reducing any perceivable noise from its operation, and making it less susceptible to theft, vandalism, and inclement weather. The generator would be electronically connected to the pump station electrical distribution system through an automatic transfer switch installed in the electrical room next to the distribution switchgear that would automatically sense the loss of SDG&E power, start the stand-by engine generator, and connect the stand-by engine generator to the distribution switchgear. Upon restoration of SDG&E power, the automatic transfer switch would then re-connect the distribution switchgear to the SDG&E service and shutdown the standby engine generator. The automatic transfer switch status would be monitored by the pump station control system and would be reported to SCADA. The specific features of the automatic transfer switch would be specified based on District equipment standards to ensure consistency with automatic transfer switches at other pump stations. The generator would require a 12-volt lead-acid battery system for engine starting. The lead-acid batteries would be rack-mounted on the engine generator skid, and the battery charger would be wall-mounted in the engine generator room. 2 NFPA 820 lists requirements for protection against fire and explosion hazards specific to wastewater treatment facilities and their associated collection systems. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 1-3 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Project Description An approximately 5,000 gallon outdoor above-ground diesel fuel storage tank would be installed to provide 3 days of continuous engine generator runtime at 100% load. The storage tank would be specified with leak detection and level sensing instrumentation for monitoring by the engine generator local control panel and the pump station control system, and would consist of a steel primary tank with concrete encasement for secondary containment. Moreover, a diesel fuel day tank, supplied from the diesel fuel storage tank, would be installed next to the engine in the engine generator room. Exhaust piping and emissions control equipment would be installed to ensure compliance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 4 emissions levels. 1.3.1.6 Facility Aesthetics The proposed project’s appearance, style, finishes, and architectural refinement would be consistent with the District’s existing pump station buildings and structures. The building walls would be split-face masonry block. A parapet wall extending above the actual roof would be provided with a mansard roof façade clad with a barrel tile facsimile. All pump station components, when possible, would be housed inside the building. Surge tanks, fuel storage and waste oil tanks, and the electrical utility service transformer would be located outside of the building. 1.3.2 Sewer Lift Station and Force Main The proposed restroom and chloramine sampling and analyzing at the 870-2 Pump Station would create a small, but continuous waste stream of a maximum of 440 gallons per day that would have to be disposed of. The majority of the waste stream would come from the chloramine sampling equipment. The flow rate from this equipment varies between 40 to 400 gallons per day depending on its configuration. At waste flow rate of 165 gallons or less per day, a holding tank and waste hauling would be recommended; however, a sewer lift station and force main are recommended for a flow rate above 165 gallons per day. Based on the District preferences and past experience, a sewer lift station and force main would be constructed. Figure 10 shows the location of the proposed sewer lift station and force main, which begins at the southwest corner of the project site and continues south along the unpaved road to a connection at an existing manhole located at Alta Road. Figure 11 shows a cross section of the proposed sewer lift station. 1.3.3 Proposed Access Roads The existing paved and compacted dirt roads would be used to access the project site. The sections of the access road that are paved would be repaved and the existing compacted dirt sections would be paved. The portion of the road to be paved would begin at Alta Road, head northeast to the proposed pump station, then continue north along the east side of the Roll Reservoir where it would turn into the reservoir and come to an end. A small drainage culvert is proposed at a small ephemeral drainage that occurs within an approximately 50-square-foot area along the access road. Figure 12 shows images of the drainage. Consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 1-4 November 2016 ICF 669.13 ProposedSewer PumpStation Low-HeadPumpStation High-HeadPumpStation Figure 10 Approximate Alignment of Proposed Sewer Force Main Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\San Diego\projects\otay_water_district\00669_13_Pump_Station_870\mapdoc\Bio\Fig014_SensitiveSpecies.mxd Date: 8/30/2016 35549 LegendProposed Culvert Proposed PumpStation 870-2 Proposed SewerForce Main Alignment ± Source: SANGIS Imagery (2012);Carollo (2014) 0 125 25062.5 Feet Figure 11 Sewer Lift Station Section Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ San Dieg o \projects\otay_water_d istrict\00 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ Pump_ Station _ 8 7 0 \map doc\I SMND\Fig1 1 _ S e w e r _ L i f t _ S t a t i o n _ S e c t .ai Date: 7/18/20 1 4 24 9 9 1 Figure 12 Existing Conditions at Proposed Culvert Area Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ San Dieg o \projects\otay_water_d istrict\00 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ Pump_ Station _ 8 7 0 \map doc\I SMND\Fig1 2 _ E x i s t _ C o n d _ P r o p o s e d _ C u l v e r t .mxd Date: 7/18/20 1 4 24 9 9 1 Culvert Area Looking North Culvert Area Looking South Otay Water District Project Description (RWQCB), and wildlife agencies would be required; and permits such as a Section 404, 401 certification, and a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement may be needed, all of which would occur after the CEQA process. 1.3.4 Proposed Construction Phasing Construction activities are expected to begin in fall 2017 and be completed by late 2019. The 870-2 Pump Station can be constructed and connections made to the existing 42-inch 570 Zone Reservoir outlet, 30-inch 870 discharge, and 30-inch 570 recirculation lines without limiting the functionality of the existing LHPS, HHPS, or their associated piping. The construction sequence steps would include the following. 1. Connection to the existing 42-inch 570 Zone Reservoir outlet pipeline. 2. Connection to the existing 30-inch 570 Zone Reservoir recirculation pipeline. 3. Connection to the existing 30-inch 870-2 Pump Station discharge pipeline. 4. Conversion of the existing 30-inch recycled water to potable water. 5. Natural gas service to the 870-2 Pump Station. The 870-2 Pump Station can be constructed and tested prior to the demolition of the LHPS and HHPS. Therefore, if a problem occurs during startup of the 870-2 Pump Station, the LHPS and HHPS could be easily placed back into service. No isolation valves would need to be opened or closed. 1.3.5 Proposed Site Grading Approximately 2.07 acres would be graded and grubbed, resulting in approximately 15,000 cubic yards (CY) of excavation. Of this amount, approximately 2,000 CY would be recompacted on site, and the remaining 13,000 CY would be disposed of by the Contractor at an off-site location. Cut slopes are proposed to be constructed to create a level pad. The gradient of the cut slopes would range from 1:1 to 3:1. 1.3.6 Proposed Demolition The existing LHPS and HHPS could remain in service until pump station 870-2 is placed into service. Once 870-2 is commissioned and has been operational for a period of time, the LHPS and HHPS would be removed. Pipelines and appurtenances specific to the LHPS and HHPS that are below 3 feet in depth would be abandoned in place instead of being removed. Pipelines to be abandoned would be cut and plugged or entirely filled with sand or grout. Furthermore, they would be capped or blind-flanged as close as possible to avoid dead ends. Items and parts that are potentially reusable would be denoted for salvage. Once demolition of the LHPS and HHPS occurs, their sites would be regraded to match surrounding grades. Figure 13 shows the conceptual demolition plan. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 1-5 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Project Description 1.4 Authority to Prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration As provided in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15070 (Title 14 – California Code of Regulations), a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) may be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when an Initial Study (IS) has identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but when revisions to the project have been made so that no significant effect on the environment would result from project implementation. The District is the lead agency and is responsible for planning, constructing, and operating the pump station and associated facility improvements. Based on the findings of the Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form prepared for this project, the District has determined that preparation of the MND is the appropriate environmental documentation for purposes of CEQA compliance. Chapter 3 of this MND contains the environmental analysis. 1.5 Preparers of the Mitigated Negative Declaration This MND was prepared by ICF, 525 B Street, Suite 1700, San Diego, California, 92101. The following professionals contributed to its preparation: Otay Water District Lisa Coburn-Boyd—Environmental Compliance Specialist ICF Devon Muto—Project Director Charlie Richmond—Project Manager & QA/QC Holly Ayala—Final IS/MND Preparation Tristan Evert—Final IS/MND Preparation Mario Barrera—Geology/Soils, Hazards & Hazardous Materials Karolina Chmiel—Cultural Resources Soraya Swiontek—Geographic Information Systems Erika Eidson—Biological Resources Peter Hardie—Noise Jim Harry—Environmental Planner Meghan Heintz—Hydrology/Water Quality Alexa LaPlante—Hydrology/Water Quality Matt McFalls—Air Quality, Greenhouse Gases Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 1-6 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Figure 13 Demolition Plan Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 6 6 9 _ 1 3 _ P u m p _ S t a t i o n _ 8 7 0 \ m a p d o c \ I S M N D \ F i g 1 3 _ D e m o _ P l a n . a i D a t e : 7 / 1 7 / 2 0 1 4 1 9 3 1 6 Otay Water District Project Description Tanvi Lal—Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing Tamseel Mir—Aesthetics, Recreation, Transportation and Circulation 1.6 Results of Public Review 1.7 RESULTS OF PUBLIC REVIEW PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER Approvals Required The proposed project would require the following permits and approvals: Otay Water District • Approve the project • Approve the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration • Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program California Department of Public Health (CDPH) • Permit amendment to include chemical treatment process within the pump station San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) • Permits for natural gas engine and two standby generators San Diego Gas & Electric • Joint Use Agreement • Connection Application City of San Diego • Sewer Connection Approval Regional Water Quality Control Board • Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) • Section 401 certification County of San Diego • Construction Permit • Drainage Easement Encroachment Permit • Encroachment Permit Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 1-7 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Project Description • Excavation Permit • Grading Permit United States Army Corps of Engineers • Section 404 compliance United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Endangered Species Act Section 7 compliance California Department of Fish and Game • CESA compliance • Streambed Agreement Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 1-8 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Chapter 2 Determination In conformance with State CEQA Guidelines, the District prepared an Initial Study and completed an Environmental Checklist Form (see Chapter 3) for the proposed pump station 870-2 and the associated sewer lift station and conveyance. During the Initial Study process, the lead agency determined that, unless specific mitigation measures were implemented, the proposed project would have a significant impact on biological resources, cultural resources (paleontology), and geology and soils. The project has been revised to include specific measures (see Section 2.1) that fully mitigate for these potentially significant impacts. The Initial Study Checklist (see Chapter 3) provides an analysis of all environmental issues. 2.1 Mitigation Measures Implementation of the mitigation measures described below would reduce all impacts to a less-than-significant level. 2.1.1 Biological Resources MM BIO-1: Biological Monitoring. Due to the proximity of Quino, a biological monitor will be present during removal of vegetation and other construction activities occurring within the Quino season as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2014 protocol (third week of February to the second Saturday in May) to avoid potential impacts on this species by directing construction away from occupied Quino habitat. Additionally, the assigned biological monitor will ensure that all pieces of construction equipment are properly checked prior to use in order to avoid impacts to Quino and other wildlife species. MM BIO-2: Construction and Removal of Vegetation Not to Occur during Least Bell’s Vireo or Coastal California Gnatcatcher Breeding Season. Prior to any construction activity, all contractual agreements with the District will ensure that the following project requirements regarding sensitive wildlife species are completed. All clearing, grubbing, or grading of vegetation will be avoided to the maximum extent practicable between February 15 and September 15, the breeding season of the coastal California gnatcatcher and least Bell’s vireo. Construction activities resulting in increased noise levels will be avoided to the maximum extent feasible within 300 feet of occupied habitat during the breeding season. However, if construction activities resulting in increased noise levels are proposed during the breeding season for the CGN and/or LBV, the following requirements will have to be met. If construction activities are to occur during the breeding season, preconstruction surveys will be required to locate active nests and establish buffer (i.e., no construction) zones. The Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 2-1 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Determination CAGN survey will consist of a minimum of six surveys, spaced 7 days apart. If construction activities are to occur during the breeding season, the CAGN survey will consist of a minimum of nine surveys, spaced 7 days apart For the LBV, surveys will be conducted per USFWS protocols between April 10 and July 31; the LBV survey will consist of a minimum of eight surveys, spaced 10 days apart. If active CAGN or LBV nests are located within the project site the nests will be avoided, and supplemental noise abatement measures may be required. Noise abatement may include the installation of temporary acoustic barriers to reduce noise levels to 60 dBA or below. If adequate noise reduction is not feasible, then construction will be avoided adjacent to any occupied nests during the breeding season. Directional lighting and mufflers to minimize construction noise will also be required to minimize indirect impacts. The qualified project biologist(s) should be responsible for coordinating with USFWS and CDFW to determine if construction activities could disturb an active nest and when nests are no longer active, and also monitor to ensure birds are not agitated by construction activities. If seasonal avoidance or appropriate buffers cannot be maintained for LBV, a 2081 Incidental Take Permit (ITP) or a 2080.1 consistency determination from CDFW may be required to authorize impacts caused by construction activities. If it is anticipated that work will need to occur during the breeding season within or adjacent to occupied least LBV habitat, the District will enter into early coordination with CDFW to determine if an ITP is advisable. MM BIO-3: San Miguel Habitat Management Area. Impacts on the 0.64 acre of sensitive vegetation communities, consisting of 0.01 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.5 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub, and 0.13 acre of nonnative grassland, will be mitigated at a ratios of 3:1, 2:1, and 0.5:1, respectively, through the use of available credits at the District’s San Miguel Habitat Management Area (HMA) or through the creation of habitat within the HMA. Consultation with the USFWS and CDFW will be conducted for the listed species to ensure adequate compensatory mitigation. Furthermore, the limits of project construction will be clearly marked when construction activities would occur adjacent to sensitive habitat. MM BIO-4: Nesting Bird Surveys. Nesting bird surveys will be required for all project activities and will be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than three days prior to commencing project activities. The size of the nesting bird survey area will be determined by a qualified biologist at the time of the survey. If nests are found, the biologist will identify and flag a 300-foot no-work buffer for nesting passerine birds and a 500-foot no-work buffer for active raptor nests. These buffers will remain in place until the young have fledged or the nest is no longer active. The specific buffer width will be determined by the biologist at the time of discovery and will vary according to the avian species, site conditions, and the type of work activities to be conducted. Additionally, if construction ceases for greater than two weeks, another survey will be completed to avoid impacts to potential nesting birds that may have moved into the project vicinity. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 2-2 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Determination 2.1.2 Cultural Resources MM CUL-1: Cultural Resources Monitoring. Prior to grading, the District shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in coordination with a Native American monitor. Prior to beginning any work that requires cultural resources monitoring: i. A preconstruction meeting shall be held that includes the archaeologist, construction supervisor and/or grading contractor, and other appropriate personnel to go over the cultural resources monitoring program. ii. The archaeologist shall (at that meeting or subsequently) submit to the District a copy of the site/grading plan that identifies areas to be monitored. iii. The archaeologist shall coordinate with the construction supervisor and District on the construction schedule to identify when and where monitoring is to begin, including the start date for monitoring. iv. The archaeologist shall be present during grading/excavation and shall document such activity on a standardized form. A record of monitoring activity shall be submitted to the District each month and at the end of monitoring. MM CUL-2: Data Recovery Plan. In the event archaeological resources are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, the on-site construction supervisor shall be notified and shall redirect work away from the location of the discovery to allow for preliminary evaluation of potentially significant archaeological resources. The construction supervisor shall be notified by the archaeologist when the discovered resources have been collected and removed from the site, at which time the construction supervisor shall direct work to continue in the location of the discovery. i. Prepare a research design, resource evaluation plan and, if necessary, an archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The significance of the discovered resources shall be determined in consultation with the Native American representative, as appropriate. All archaeological work shall be conducted in the presence of a Native American monitor. ii. If, in the opinion of the qualified archaeologist and in light of the data available, the significance of the site is such that data recovery cannot capture the values that qualify the site for inclusion in the CRHR, then the District shall reconsider project plans in light of the high value of the resource, and implement more substantial project modifications that would allow the site to be preserved intact, such as redesign, placement of fill, or relocation or abandonment. iii. Perform appropriate technical analyses, prepare a report and file it with the SCIC, and provide for the permanent curation of recovered resources at a facility meeting the standards of 36CFR79, as follows: a. The archaeologist shall ensure that all significant cultural resources collected are cleaned, catalogued, and analyzed to identify function and chronology as they relate to the history of the area; that faunal material is identified as to species; that specialty studies are completed, as appropriate; and that a letter of acceptance from the curation institution has been submitted to the District. b. Curation of artifacts shall be completed in consultation with the Native American representative, as applicable. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 2-3 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Determination MM CUL-3: Paleontological Surveys. A qualified vertebrate paleontologist shall be retained by the District to perform paleontological monitoring during initial ground disturbance. The location of construction activities likely to encounter subsurface sediments with high paleontological sensitivity shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist upon review of project excavation and grading plans. Very shallow surficial excavations, less than 5 feet in depth, within areas of previous disturbance shall be monitored on a part-time basis to ensure that underlying sensitive units are not adversely affected. Any areas consisting of artificial fill materials shall not require monitoring. 2.1.3 Geology and Soils MM GEO-1: Geotechnical Study. Prior to the issuance of building or grading permits, the project proponent will conduct a full geotechnical study to evaluate soil conditions and geologic hazards on the project site. The geotechnical study will be signed by a California-registered professional engineer and must contain field exploration data (drilling and soil sampling); laboratory testing of soil samples; and an engineering analysis to determine soil properties related, but not limited to: ground-motion acceleration parameters, the amplification properties of the subsurface units at the specific site(s), the potential for hydrocompaction to affect the proposed facilities, and the potential for collapsible, subsiding, liquefiable or expansive soils to affect the proposed project. The project proponent will implement recommendations found in the geotechnical study and use conclusions to determine the appropriate engineering to minimize geotechnical hazard impacts. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 2-4 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Chapter 3 Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 Project 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, CA 91978-2004 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Environmental Compliance Specialist (619) 670-2219 4. Project Location: Community of Otay, located in San Diego, CA. See Figure 1 for a regional location and Figure 2 for an aerial map of the project area and immediate vicinity. 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, CA 91978-2004 6. General Plan Designation: Public/Semi-Public Facilities 7. Zoning: S-90 Holding Area 8. Description of Project: See Section 1.3 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: See Section 1.2 10. Other Public Agencies whose Approval Is Required: County of San Diego (Responsible Agency)—Ministerial Construction and Grading Permits (Sec. 87.201) United States Army Corps of Engineers—Section 404 compliance Regional Water Quality Control Board—Section 401 certification United States Fish and Wildlife Service—Section 7 compliance California Department of Fish and Wildlife—CESA compliance, Streambed Agreement Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-1 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form 3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would potentially be affected by this project (i.e., the project would involve at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact”), as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agricultural and Forestry Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance 3.2 Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions to the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have an impact on the environment that is “potentially significant” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis, as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Printed Name For Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-2 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form 3.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained if it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. 4. “Negative Declaration: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” applies when the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from a “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less-than-Significant Impact”. The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less-than-significant level. (Mitigation measures from Section XVII, “Earlier Analyses”, may be cross-referenced.) 5. Earlier analyses may be used if, pursuant to tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration [Section 15063(c)(3)(D)]. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where earlier analyses are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, when appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-3 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-4 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form I. Aesthetics Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The proposed project site is surrounded by industrial and institutional facilities. The industrial facilities include the large Roll Reservoir (870-1) immediately to the north of the site and two pump stations north and east of the reservoir, LHPS and HHPS. The institutional facilities include the R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility to the south and the East Mesa Detention Facility to the immediate east. Beyond these facilities, the area is largely rural or undeveloped with no sensitive receptors located in the immediate vicinity. The proposed project would include the replacement of the LHPS and HHPS with the construction of the proposed 870-2 pump station and associated sewer lift and conveyance. Once the proposed 870-2 pump station would be placed in service and operational for a period of time, the existing LHPS and HHPS would be demolished. Additionally, under the proposed project, the existing access road would be paved and improved with a drainage culvert. Thus, the changes associated with the proposed project would be in character with the surroundings. The County General Plan identifies the low-lying coastal plain, mountainous peninsular range, and desert Salton (Imperial Basin) as three distinctive geographic provinces that provide natural vistas and scenic environments in the County (County of San Diego 2011). A vista can be a view from a particular location or composite views along a roadway or trails. Scenic vistas often refer to views of natural lands, but may also be compositions of natural and developed areas. As previously stated, the project area consists of mostly rural or undeveloped land. The proposed installation of the pump station and associated improvements to the existing access road would not adversely affect a scenic vista. No impacts on natural features or ridgelines would occur under the proposed project. Additionally, no visual impacts associated with Otay Lake would occur. Therefore, there would be no impact. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-5 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway? No Impact. There are no designated scenic highways in the vicinity of the proposed project. State Route (SR-) 94, located more than 12 miles east of the project site has been classified as an “eligible state scenic highway – not officially designated.” Similarly, Interstate (I-) 5 is designated an “eligible state scenic highway” and is located approximately 10 miles west of the project site. SR-125 is located more than 3.5 miles west of the project site, but is not a designated or eligible scenic highway. The site is not visible from SR-94 or I-5. (State of California 2011.) The County General Plan’s Conservation and Open Space Element includes a comprehensive County Scenic Highway System. Review of the County Scenic Highway System indicates that there are no other officially designated scenic routes in the project vicinity (County 2011). Therefore, proposed replacement of the existing pump stations and other associated proposed improvements would not adversely impact views from a scenic highway. No impact would occur. c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less-than-Significant Impact. Facilities around the project site that constitute the character of the area include the Roll Reservoir that dominates the area, two existing pump stations (LHPS and HHPS), and the East Mesa Detention Facility. The proposed project would be designed with the character of the other buildings and facilities in mind, and the project components would match the appearance, style, finishes, and architectural refinement of the District’s existing pump station buildings and structures. The building walls would be textured masonry block, either split-face or slump. A parapet wall extending above the actual roof would include a mansard roof façade. All proposed pump station components would be housed inside the proposed building as feasible. The proposed project would also include a landscaping component within the project site. Construction of the proposed culvert for the existing access road would not involve extensive use of cut or fill and would occur within the existing access road. This would not substantially alter the terrain within the area. Consequently, implementation of the proposed project would maintain the existing visual character of the project site. Therefore, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in a significant adverse impact on visual character or quality of the area. d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would not be a source of substantial lighting. Proposed lighting would be similar to lighting provided at the existing facilities located near the project site, such as the parking area to the east and the reservoir to the north. All lighting would be designed for security and safety and would be pointed downward and shielded. Glare would not occur because the building would be a single story and would use predominately non-reflective materials identical to other District pump station facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-6 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form II. Agricultural and Forestry Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact In determining whether impacts on agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts on forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project, and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in the Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Act contract? c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-7 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Less-than-Significant Impact. Under the California Land Conservation Act of 1975 (Williamson Act) and the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), farmlands are mapped by the State of California Department of Conservation (CDC) in order to provide data for decision-makers to use in planning for current and future uses of the state’s agricultural lands. The project site is designated by the County of San Diego’s General Plan as “Public/Semi-Public Facilities” and is zoned as “S-90: Holding Area.” Neither the project site nor any parcels within the project vicinity are considered Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (California Department of Conservation 2014). Although the project site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, the FMMP identifies the proposed project site as Farmland of Local Importance on its California Important Farmlands Finder map for San Diego County. However, the project area is located on District property that currently contains two nearby pump stations (LHPS and HHPS) and a large reservoir (Roll Reservoir 870), as well as their related structures and conveyance equipment. The broader setting is rural with largely undeveloped land to the north and west, and major state facilities (R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility and East Mesa Detention Facility Complex) on the south and east, respectively. Thus, the area is not used for farming, and the proposed project would be in character with project site’s surroundings. Therefore, the proposed project would not convert any current or recently active farmland to non-agricultural use; impacts on farmland would be less than significant. b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. No Williamson Act contracts exist for the project site (California Department of Conservation 2014). The County’s General Plan designates the project site as Public/Semi-Public Facilities and allows major facilities built and maintained for public use, including community service facilities such as water and sewer facilities (County of San Diego 2014a). Moreover, the site is zoned for S-90, which is considered a Holding Area zone and allows civic, commercial, industrial, and agricultural enclosures (County of San Diego 2014b). Therefore, because there are no Williamson Act contracts on the land and because the project site zoning allows for industrial enclosures such as the 870-2 pump station and related facilities, no impact would result from implementation of the proposed project. c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site, including offsite improvements, does not contain forest lands or timberland. The County of San Diego does not have any existing Timberland Production Zones. The County’s General Plan designates the project site as Public/Semi-Public Facilities and allows major facilities built and maintained for public use, including community service facilities such as water and sewer facilities. In addition, the project is consistent with the existing zoning of S-90 Holding Area. The S-90 zone is used to prevent premature urban or non- Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-8 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form urban development until more precise zoning regulations are prepared. Uses permitted in the S-90 zone include enclosures related to civic, commercial, industrial, and agricultural uses. The project site contains pump stations, reservoirs, and related structures and infrastructure. The proposed project would replace the LHPS and HHPS with the new 870-2 pump station and include some offsite improvements such as a culvert and paving for the dirt road that provides access to Alta Road. Paving activities will extend from Alta Road to the existing Low-Head Pump Station. All proposed activities would be consistent with the existing zoning for the site. Therefore, project implementation would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland production zones. d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The project site does not contain any forest lands as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g); therefore, project implementation would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. In addition, the project is not in the vicinity of offsite forest resources. No impact would occur. e. Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. There is no agricultural land or forest uses on or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, replacement of the LHPS and HHPS with the new 870-2 pump station, and proposed offsite improvements would not involve any other changes that would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or forest to non-forest use. No impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-9 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form III. Air Quality Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact When available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a nonattainment area for an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site is in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) whose boundaries are contiguous with San Diego County. Within San Diego County, the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) has the primary responsibility for the development and implementation of rules and regulations designed to attain national and state ambient air quality standards, as well as the permitting of new or modified sources, development of air quality management plans, and adoption and enforcement of air pollution regulations. The SDAPCD is the local agency responsible for the administration and enforcement of air quality regulations in San Diego County. The San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) is the region’s plan for improving regional air quality while attaining state standards, while the State Implementation Plan (SIP) is the region’s plan for improving regional air quality while attaining federal standards. The SDAPCD develops a set of emissions control measures that reduce emissions within the basin, in an effort to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). These emission controls are adopted as local air quality rules and regulations. San Diego County is currently designated as a nonattainment area for the federal 8-hour ozone (O3) standard, a maintenance area for federal carbon monoxide (CO), and a nonattainment area for state 8-hour O3, serious nonattainment area for state 1-hour O3, particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) and particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10) standards (CARB 2013). Both the RAQS and SIP rely on information from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), including projected growth in the County; and Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-10 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form mobile, area, and all other source emissions in order to project future emissions and determine from that the strategies necessary for the reduction of stationary source emissions through regulatory controls. CARB mobile source emission projections and SANDAG growth projections are based on population and vehicle trends and land use plans developed by the region’s cities, county, and special districts. Projects that propose development that is consistent with the growth anticipated by the relevant planning documents that were used in the formulation of the RAQS and SIP would be consistent with the RAQS and SIP. The proposed project area has a land use designation of “Public/Semi-Public Facilities” and is zoned as S-90 “Holding Area.” Uses within a Holding Area include civic, commercial, industrial, and agricultural uses, as well as any temporary uses allowed by a Major Use Permit. Further, the Public/Semi-Public Facilities designation identifies major facilities built and maintained for public use, including community service facilities such as water and sewer facilities. The project site is an existing District site with pump stations, reservoirs, and related structures and infrastructure present on site. The proposed project would replace the existing Low Head and High Head pump stations with the new pump station. Construction of the project would be allowed within the Specific Plan Area designation and the M-52 zone (see “X. Land Use and Planning” below). Thus, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning use regulations. Additionally, both short-term construction and long-term operations would result in minimal emissions far below thresholds, as described below. The project would not result in any land use or zoning changes that would conflict with the General Plan or zoning designations. As such, because the project would be consistent with the County of San Diego General Plan, which was used in the formulation of the RAQS and SIP, the project is considered consistent with the RAQS and SIP. The primary construction-related pollutant in terms of the SDAB air quality plan is PM10. Grading and construction activities would be subject to SDAPCD rules and regulations, including Rule 50 (Visible Emissions), Rule 51 (Nuisance), and Rule 55 (Fugitive Dust Control) (SDAPCD 2010). The principal sources of PM10 emissions would be fugitive dust from earthmoving activities and vehicle travel on unpaved and paved surfaces. The requirements of Rules 50, 51, and 55 can be met by the implementation of standard construction best management practices (BMPs) for dust control. In addition, the project would be subject to the requirements of SDAPCD Rule 67.7, which sets provisions on the application and sale of emulsified asphalt materials. Project construction and grading activities would adhere to applicable SDAPCD rules and regulations. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less-than-Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project would result in emissions as a result of ground disturbance and site excavation, off-road construction vehicle exhaust, and employee and material delivery vehicle exhaust. Emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of construction activity occurring, and, for fugitive dust, prevailing weather conditions. The project’s construction emissions were estimated and compared to SDAPCD air quality impact analysis (AQIA) trigger levels, as shown in SDAPCD Rule 20.2. An adverse impact on air quality would result if the emission levels from the project were to exceed any of the AQIA trigger levels. As shown in Table 1, project construction is not anticipated to exceed any AQIA trigger levels. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-11 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Construction and operational emissions were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod, version 2013.2.2). Construction information, including phasing schedule, equipment numbers and types, and number of vehicle trips, were provided by the project applicant. CalEEMod defaults with respect to vehicle trip lengths and equipment were used. For purposes of analysis, it was assumed that project construction would occur in two separate phases; first with Site Excavation occurring for 30 days, then with Pump Station and Yard Piping occurring for 300 days. It was assumed that Site Excavation and Pump Station and Yard Piping phases would occur sequentially and would not overlap. It was assumed that 15,000 CY of material would be cut on site, 2,000 CY of which would be used as fill on site, while the remaining 13,000 CY would be hauled off site using 10 CY trucks and 12,000 CY would be imported, also using 10 CY trucks. With respect to project operations, the new pump station is expected to increase energy and fuel use and result in an increase in operational and maintenance vehicle trips. Operational and maintenance vehicle trips were obtained from the project applicant, and would include one operational worker trip per day, three maintenance worker trips per week, two material delivery trips per week in summer, and two material delivery trips per month in winter. The vehicle fleet mix within CalEEMod was adjusted to reflect the fleet mix for worker trucks and material delivery trucks. Further, emissions associated with electricity and natural gas consumption were estimated within CalEEMod using consumption data provided by the project applicant. Emissions associated with diesel fuel consumption were estimated using fuel consumption data from the applicant assuming a 329 hp diesel pump, brake specific fuel consumption of 0.367 pounds per horsepower-hour, and an average diesel fuel density of 7.1 pounds per gallon (EPA 2012). Additionally, it was assumed the 1,500 kilowatt (2,011 hp) emergency generator would be in-use for 1 hour on the worst-case day and in use for 50 hours per year. As shown in Table 1, project construction emissions would be below applicable SDAPCD trigger levels for criteria pollutants. Thus, construction of the project would not result in an impact on air quality because emissions would not exceed applicable air quality standards or contribute to existing air quality violations. Table 1. Estimated Construction Criteria Pollutant Emissions Construction Phase Pounds per day ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 Phase 1: Site Excavation 7.0 82.6 63.1 0.1 7.3 4.0 Phase 2: Pump Station and Yard Piping 6.9 65.3 54.1 0.1 4.6 2.6 Maximum Daily Emissions 7.0 82.6 63.1 0.1 7.3 4.0 AQIA Trigger Levels 75 250 550 250 100 55 Exceed Trigger Levels? No No No No No No ROG = reactive organic gas. CO = carbon monoxide. PM10 = particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns. PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns. NOX = oxides of nitrogen. SOX = sulfur oxides. Note: CalEEMod emission output sheets are provided in Appendix A. There would be no overlap between Site Excavation and the Pump Station and Yard Piping phases. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-12 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form As shown in Table 2, project operational emissions would be below applicable SDAPCD trigger levels for criteria pollutants. Thus, construction of the project would not result in an impact on air quality because emissions would not exceed applicable air quality standards or contribute to existing air quality violations. Table 2. Estimated Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions Construction Phase Pounds per day ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 Worker and Delivery Vehicles 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Natural Gas Combustion 0.5 4.1 3.5 0.0 0.3 0.3 Emergency Generator 1.2 15.8 4.2 0.0 0.4 0.4 Diesel Fuel Combustion 0.2 2.2 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.1 Maximum Daily Emissionsa 1.8 22.3 8.8 0.0 0.8 0.8 AQIA Trigger Levels 75 250 550 250 100 55 Exceed Trigger Levels? No No No No No No ROG = reactive organic gas. CO = carbon monoxide. PM10 = particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns. PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns. NOX = oxides of nitrogen. SOX = sulfur oxides. a Values may not add due to rounding. Note: CalEEMod emission output sheets are provided in Appendix A. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-13 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a nonattainment area for an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less-than-Significant Impact. See response to III.a and III.d. Cumulative impacts could result if the project would exceed established thresholds of significance. The SDAB is currently designated as a nonattainment area for the federal 8-hour O3 standard, a maintenance area for federal CO, and nonattainment area for state 8-hour O3, serious nonattainment area for state 1-hour O3, PM2.5 and PM10 standards, which is a result of past and present projects and will be further impeded by reasonably foreseeable future projects. As discussed under III.a, criteria pollutant emissions would be below SDAPCD thresholds during both construction and operational activities. In addition, cumulative impacts could result if the proposed project would be constructed at the same time as other development projects in the area, thereby exposing sensitive receptors to cumulative emission concentrations (see response to III.d). The project site is in a rural setting that is surrounded largely by undeveloped land to the north and west, and the R.J Donovan Correctional Facility and East Mesa Detention Facility Complex on the south and east, respectively. There are no residences near the project site, and the closest commercial development is 2 miles to the south of the site. It is not anticipated that extensive construction would occur in the area while the proposed project is being constructed. Possible cumulative impacts on air quality as a result of all construction activities in the area would be addressed by the standard SDAPCD measures that apply to construction projects. It is anticipated that, with the incorporation of the standard SDAPCD dust control measures, the contribution of the project to cumulative impacts related to PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would be less than significant. Project operations would not contribute to any significant cumulative impacts related to nonattainment status for ozone, PM10, or PM2.5. The proposed project would not result in emissions that exceed SDAPCD regional significance thresholds, and therefore would not negatively impact regional air quality (see Tables 1 and 2). Consequently, proposed project construction and operations would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in emissions. This impact would be less than significant. d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less-than-Significant Impact. See response to III.a and III.c. Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM), which is classified as a carcinogenic toxic air contaminant by CARB, is the primary pollutant of concern with regards to health risks to sensitive receptors. Diesel-powered construction equipment and heavy duty on-road vehicles operating on- and off site during construction and operations would emit diesel exhaust, which can be inhaled by nearby sensitive receptors. Land uses near the project area include the large reservoir (870-1) and two pump stations (LHPS and HHPS) to the north, the R.J Donovan Correctional Facility and the East Mesa Detention Facility Complex to the south and east, respectively, and undeveloped land beyond these facilities. Construction activities would occur over an approximately 12-month period, which is much shorter than the assumed 70-year exposure period used to estimate lifetime cancer risks. Long-term operations would be limited to periodic vehicle trips and some onsite fuel combustion. Onsite truck idling would be minimal, limited to a maximum of 5 minutes per truck, consistent with CARB’s Heavy Duty Idling Reduction Program. The proposed project may create a nuisance for nearby visitors and inmates at the R.J Donovan and East Mesa Detention Facility Complex during hours of construction and operations, as diesel trucks could Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-14 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form create occasional exposure to exhaust, but this exposure would be minimal and would not pose a significant health risk and, furthermore, would be similar to the existing condition once the facility is operational. Additionally, adherence to SDAPCD Rules 50, 51, 55, and 67.7 would limit dust and ROG emissions that could impact nearby receptors. Therefore, the potential human health impact is considered to be minimal. In addition, the project would not create congestion at nearby roadways or intersections, so the exposure to elevated CO concentrations is considered minimal. This impact would be less than significant. e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less-than-Significant Impact. Project-related odor emissions would primarily be limited to the construction period, during which emissions from construction equipment could be temporarily evident in the immediately surrounding area. Potential sources of odors during construction activities include diesel exhaust from construction equipment and diesel vehicles. These odors would not affect a substantial number of people, as the scale of construction would be small, the frequency of permanent trips would be very low, and the potentially affected area would be limited due to the localized evidence of these odors. Additionally, such temporary sources of odors are not considered significant. Therefore, the project’s odor impact would be less than significant. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-15 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form IV. Biological Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Biological studies were conducted in 2013 by AECOM staff in support of the Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project (OMCDSP). The findings of those surveys—as presented in the Biological Resources Report for that project—were used to analyze potential effects of the proposed project on sensitive biological resources (Appendix B). Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-16 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Rare plant surveys conducted in 2013 for the OMCDSP determined that special-status plants do not occur within the project site for the proposed pump station. However, a few individuals of San Diego goldenstar (Bloomeria clevelandii) and two individuals of San Diego barrel cactus (Ferocactus viridescens) occur along the alignment for the proposed sewer force main (Figure 14). However, these individuals do not represent a regionally significant population; thus, impacts on these species are considered to be less than significant. Focused surveys conducted by AECOM in 2013 determined that Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino; Quino) occur north, west, and southwest of Roll Reservoir and in the vicinity of the LHPS (Figure 14). No Quino or host plants were detected at the site of the proposed pump station; however, the closest occurrence of Quino was reported from approximately 300 feet west of the proposed pump station site (Figure 14). A significant impact could occur due to the proximity of the site to areas supporting Quino. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would ensure that impacts on this species would be less than significant. During one of the eight focused surveys conducted by AECOM in 2013 a single male least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii; LBV) was detected within the project site for the proposed pump station (Figure 14); this individual was not detected in the project site on any other occasion. Additionally, LBV were detected 25 times in the area around the project site and a breeding pair and fledglings of LBV were detected approximately 200 feet south of the project site for the proposed pump station. Therefore, there is the potential for significant impacts. Implementation of mitigation measure MM BIO-2 would reduce the project’s potential adverse impacts on LBV to a less than significant level. Focused surveys conducted by AECOM in 2013 determined that coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica; CAGN) do not occur in the vicinity of the proposed pump station project site; the closest individual was detected approximately 725 feet to the north. A CGN family unit and a territorial pair were detected in Diegan coastal sage scrub north of Roll Reservoir, in the vicinity of the existing LHPS (Figure 14). The proposed pump station would not result in direct impacts on suitable coastal sage scrub habitat occupied by the CGN; however, increased noise levels from project activities, especially those associated with the LHPS, may result in indirect impacts on CGN. Implementation of mitigation measures MM BIO-2 would reduce the project’s potential adverse impacts on CGN to a less-than-significant level. Surveys conducted by AECOM in 2013 also determined that San Diego jackrabbit (Lepus californicus bennettii) was the only special-status species detected in the vicinity of the pump station site. Indirect impacts on this species would occur from loss of habitat. These impacts would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through habitat-based mitigation (see mitigation measure MM BIO-3). Removal of vegetation will not occur during the bird nesting season. However, increased noise levels due to project activities could result in indirect impacts on birds/raptor species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act [MBTA]), which would be a potentially significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-4 would reduce the project’s potential direct and indirect adverse impacts from short-term construction noise on species protected by the MBTA to a less-than-significant level. MM BIO-1: Biological Monitoring. Due to the proximity of Quino, a biological monitor will be present during removal of vegetation and other construction activities occurring within the Quino season as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2014 protocol (third week of February to the second Saturday in May) to avoid potential impacts on this species by directing construction away from occupied Quino habitat. Additionally, the assigned biological Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-17 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form monitor will ensure that all pieces of construction equipment are properly checked prior to use in order to avoid impacts to Quino and other wildlife species. MM BIO-2: Construction and Removal of Vegetation Not to Occur during Least Bell’s Vireo or Coastal California Gnatcatcher Breeding Season. Prior to any construction activity, all contractual agreements with the District will ensure that the following project requirements regarding sensitive wildlife species are completed. All clearing, grubbing, or grading of vegetation will be avoided to the maximum extent practicable between February 15 and September 15, the breeding season of the coastal California gnatcatcher and least Bell’s vireo. Construction activities resulting in increased noise levels will be avoided to the maximum extent feasible within 300 feet of occupied habitat during the breeding season. However, if construction activities resulting in increased noise levels are proposed during the breeding season for the CGN and/or LBV, the following requirements will have to be met. If construction activities are to occur during the breeding season, preconstruction surveys will be required to locate active nests and establish buffer (i.e., no construction) zones. The CAGN survey will consist of a minimum of six surveys, spaced 7 days apart. If construction activities are to occur during the breeding season, the CAGN survey will consist of a minimum of nine surveys, spaced 7 days apart For the LBV, surveys will be conducted per USFWS protocols between April 10 and July 31; the LBV survey will consist of a minimum of eight surveys, spaced 10 days apart. If active CAGN or LBV nests are located within the project site the nests will be avoided, and supplemental noise abatement measures may be required. Noise abatement may include the installation of temporary acoustic barriers to reduce noise levels to 60 dBA or below. If adequate noise reduction is not feasible, then construction will be avoided adjacent to any occupied nests during the breeding season. Directional lighting and mufflers to minimize construction noise will also be required to minimize indirect impacts. The qualified project biologist(s) should be responsible for coordinating with USFWS and CDFW to determine if construction activities could disturb an active nest and when nests are no longer active, and also monitor to ensure birds are not agitated by construction activities. If seasonal avoidance or appropriate buffers cannot be maintained for LBV, a 2081 Incidental Take Permit (ITP) or a 2080.1 consistency determination from CDFW may be required to authorize impacts caused by construction activities. If it is anticipated that work will need to occur during the breeding season within or adjacent to occupied least LBV habitat, the District will enter into early coordination with CDFW to determine if an ITP is advisable. MM BIO-3: San Miguel Habitat Management Area. Impacts on the 0.64 acre of sensitive vegetation communities, consisting of 0.01 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.5 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub, and 0.13 acre of nonnative grassland, will be mitigated at a ratios of 3:1, 2:1, and 0.5:1, respectively, through the use of available credits at the District’s San Miguel Habitat Management Area (HMA) or through the creation of habitat within the HMA. Consultation with the USFWS and CDFW will be conducted for the listed species to ensure adequate compensatory mitigation. Furthermore, the limits of project construction will be clearly marked when construction activities would occur adjacent to sensitive habitat. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-18 November 2016 ICF 669.13 ")")")")")")") ") ")")") ")")")") ") ") ")")")")")")") ") ") ")") ") ") ")")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")")") ")") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ")")") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ")")")") ") ") ")")") ") ")")") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #*#* ") ") ") #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #*#*#* #* ^^ ^^ ^^^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ ^ __ __ ___ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ProposedSewer PumpStation Low-HeadPumpStation High-HeadPumpStation Figure 14 Sensitive Species Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\San Diego\projects\otay_water_district\00669_13_Pump_Station_870\mapdoc\Bio\Fig014_SensitiveSpecies.mxd Date: 8/30/2016 35549 LegendProposed Culvert Proposed PumpStation 870-2 Proposed SewerForce Main Alignment #*Coast barrel cactus ^_San Diego Goldenstar ")Quino CheckerspotButterfly Observations ") Coastal CaliforniaGnatcatcherObservations #*Least Bell’s VireoObservations Quino CheckerspotButterfly Host Plants ± Source: SANGIS Imagery (2012);Carollo (2014) 0 125 25062.5 Feet Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form MM BIO-4: Nesting Bird Surveys. Nesting bird surveys will be required for all project activities and will be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than three days prior to commencing project activities. The size of the nesting bird survey area will be determined by a qualified biologist at the time of the survey. If nests are found, the biologist will identify and flag a 300-foot no-work buffer for nesting passerine birds and a 500-foot no-work buffer for active raptor nests. These buffers will remain in place until the young have fledged or the nest is no longer active. The specific buffer width will be determined by the biologist at the time of discovery and will vary according to the avian species, site conditions, and the type of work activities to be conducted. Additionally, if construction ceases for greater than two weeks, another survey will be completed to avoid impacts to potential nesting birds that may have moved into the project vicinity. b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Southern willow scrub, a riparian habitat, and Diegan coastal sage scrub and nonnative grassland, both of which are sensitive natural vegetation communities, were identified within the project footprint (see Figure 15). The project footprint also supports disturbed habitat and tamarisk scrub, neither of which are considered sensitive natural communities. The project would impact approximately 0.64 acre of sensitive vegetation communities, consisting of 0.01 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.5 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub, 0.13 acre of nonnative grassland. The District is proposing to mitigate impacts on 0.5 acre of coastal sage scrub species at a 2:1 ratio and impacts on nonnative grassland at a 0.5:1 acre through the use of coastal sage scrub credits at the District’s established San Miguel HMA (mitigation measure MM BIO-3). Implementation of mitigation measure MM BIO-3 would reduce the project’s potential adverse impacts on sensitive vegetation communities to a less-than-significant level. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Less-than-Significant Impact. Jurisdictional features occurring within the proposed culvert footprint are potentially jurisdictional under the USACE, RWQCB, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Permits potentially required for the project include a Nationwide 12 permit from the USACE, a Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, and a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW. Therefore, because the proposed project would be required to obtain the appropriate permits to impact jurisdictional waters and mitigation would be prescribed by the regulatory agencies that would reduce impacts to less than significant, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or within established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact. The project site does not function as a wildlife corridor or as a native wildlife nursery site. The project site is contiguous with undeveloped areas to the north, west, and south, which Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-19 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form would allow for the continued movement of wildlife through this area. Therefore, construction and operation of the proposed project would not interfere with the movement of any native resident wildlife species or within established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Furthermore, waterways with the ability to support fish do not occur on the project site. e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project site is adjacent to the San Diego County Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP). Design of the proposed project is considered consistent with the provisions of the County MSCP. In order to comply and be consistent with the County MSCP, local jurisdictions are required to implement mitigation and/or encroachment standards, manage and monitor conserved lands, and conduct environmental review as required by CEQA, as detailed in the County MSCP. The proposed project would not conflict with the above-mentioned plan or the provisions of this plan because its design would not result in significant impacts on any biological resources (see responses to IV.a and IV.4b). Impacts would be less than significant. f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less-than-Significant Impact. See response to IV.e. The proposed project would be consistent with provisions identified in the County MSCP. Local jurisdictions are required to implement mitigation and/or encroachment standards, manage and monitor conserved lands, and conduct environmental review as required by CEQA; and the proposed project is consistent with these County MSCP provisions. Impacts would be less than significant. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-20 November 2016 ICF 669.13 ProposedSewer PumpStation Low-HeadPumpStation High-HeadPumpStation Figure 15 Vegetation Communities Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\San Diego\projects\otay_water_district\00669_13_Pump_Station_870\mapdoc\Bio\Fig15_VegetationCommunities.mxd Date: 8/30/2016 35549 LegendProposed Culvert Proposed PumpStation 870-2 Proposed SewerForce MainAlignment Vegetation Communities Disturbed Land Urban/Developed Diegan CoastalSage Scrub NonnativeGrassland Southern WillowScrub Tamarisk Scrub ± Source: SANGIS Imagery (2012);Carollo (2014) 0 125 25062.5 Feet Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form V. Cultural Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? No Impact. ICF completed a cultural resource inventory and field survey for the proposed project in March 2014 (Appendix C). The purpose of the cultural resources report was to assess whether historical or archaeological resources might be adversely affected within the area of potential effect (APE) by the activities associated with construction of the proposed facilities, pursuant to CEQA. A cultural resource records search performed at the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) did not identify any previously recorded historical resources within the project area. Furthermore, the literature search indicated that no previously recorded historical resources were known to be present within the project APE. No sites in the APE are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, California Inventory of Historic Resources, or California Historical Landmarks. An intensive pedestrian survey used to verify the existence of any previously recorded sites on the property and to identify, map, and describe all new historic cultural resources did not uncover any existing or new historical resources. Because no previously recorded historical resources and no new historical resources were discovered to be present in the APE during the records search and the current field survey, no impacts would occur. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in an impact on historical resources. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on a literature and records search and cultural resources field survey, the project has the potential to result in direct impacts on a known archaeological resource, site CA-SDI-10668. All but a small portion of this recorded site has been previously determined ineligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, and the portion that remains unevaluated is located outside of the project area (Kyle 1986; WESTEC 1988). However, since the project is located within a documented archaeological site, project-related Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-21 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form ground disturbance could result in the physical destruction of unknown archaeological resources discovered during construction (unanticipated discoveries). Such impacts are potentially significant and could include damage to or removal of important resources, as well as impacts on their context and integrity, limiting the ability to recover important data. To account for the possibility of an unanticipated discovery of archaeological resources or human remains during project-related ground disturbance, Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 will be implemented, as described below. MM CUL-1: Cultural Resources Monitoring. Prior to grading, the District shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in coordination with a Native American monitor. Prior to beginning any work that requires cultural resources monitoring: i. A preconstruction meeting shall be held that includes the archaeologist, construction supervisor and/or grading contractor, and other appropriate personnel to go over the cultural resources monitoring program. ii. The archaeologist shall (at that meeting or subsequently) submit to the District a copy of the site/grading plan that identifies areas to be monitored. iii. The archaeologist shall coordinate with the construction supervisor and District on the construction schedule to identify when and where monitoring is to begin, including the start date for monitoring. iv. The archaeologist shall be present during grading/excavation and shall document such activity on a standardized form. A record of monitoring activity shall be submitted to the District each month and at the end of monitoring. MM CUL-2: Data Recovery Plan. In the event archaeological resources are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, the on-site construction supervisor shall be notified and shall redirect work away from the location of the discovery to allow for preliminary evaluation of potentially significant archaeological resources. The construction supervisor shall be notified by the archaeologist when the discovered resources have been collected and removed from the site, at which time the construction supervisor shall direct work to continue in the location of the discovery. i. Prepare a research design, resource evaluation plan and, if necessary, an archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The significance of the discovered resources shall be determined in consultation with the Native American representative, as appropriate. All archaeological work shall be conducted in the presence of a Native American monitor. ii. If, in the opinion of the qualified archaeologist and in light of the data available, the significance of the site is such that data recovery cannot capture the values that qualify the site for inclusion in the CRHR, then the District shall reconsider project plans in light of the high value of the resource, and implement more substantial project modifications that would allow the site to be preserved intact, such as redesign, placement of fill, or relocation or abandonment. iii. Perform appropriate technical analyses, prepare a report and file it with the SCIC, and provide for the permanent curation of recovered resources Perform appropriate technical analyses, prepare a report and file it with the SCIC, and provide for the permanent curation of recovered resources at a facility meeting the standards of 36CFR79, as follows: Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-22 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form c. The archaeologist shall ensure that all significant cultural resources collected are cleaned, catalogued, and analyzed to identify function and chronology as they relate to the history of the area; that faunal material is identified as to species; that specialty studies are completed, as appropriate; and that a letter of acceptance from the curation institution has been submitted to the District. d. Curation of artifacts shall be completed in consultation with the Native American representative, as applicable. c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Previous analysis prepared for the project site identified the site being primarily underlain by Tertiary-age Otay Formation, which is described as consisting of poorly indurated, massive, light-colored sandstone, siltstone, and claystone interbedded with bentonite lenses. Numerous fossil localities have been discovered in the Otay Formation in the Chula Vista and Otay Mesa areas of southwestern San Diego County. These localities have produced well-preserved remains of a diverse assemblage of terrestrial vertebrates such as tortoises, lizards, snakes, birds, rodents, foxes, rhinoceros, camels, and mouse-deer (Deméré 2010). Because of its paleontological richness, the Otay Formation is assigned a high paleontological resource sensitivity. Impacts are potentially significant because grading and excavation for the proposed project may result in disturbance or destruction of paleontological resources associated with the Otay Formation. Mitigation Measure CUL-3 would reduce the impacts to less than significant. MM CUL-3: Paleontological Surveys. A qualified vertebrate paleontologist shall be retained by the District to perform paleontological monitoring during initial ground disturbance. The location of construction activities likely to encounter subsurface sediments with high paleontological sensitivity shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist upon review of project excavation and grading plans. Very shallow surficial excavations, less than 5 feet in depth, within areas of previous disturbance shall be monitored on a part-time basis to ensure that underlying sensitive units are not adversely affected. Any areas consisting of artificial fill materials shall not require monitoring. d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less-than-Significant Impact. See responses to V.a and V.b. A letter was sent to the NAHC on February 27, 2014. The response, dated March 3, 2014, indicated that no sacred sites on record with the commission were present on the project site. However, there is a possibility that unmarked, previously unknown Native American or European-American graves could be present within the project site. Project construction includes activities that have the potential to disturb previously unknown, buried human remains. In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 5097and Health and Safety Code 7050.5, if human remains are identified or suspected, the District would immediately notify the Principal Investigator (PI) who, in turn, would notify the Medical Examiner’s (ME) office. If the ME, in consultation with the PI, determines that the remains are Native American, then the ME would contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC would then identify Most Likely Descendent (MLD) candidates. The PI would initiate consultation with the MLD(s) before activity continues at the site of discovery. The PI and MLD would establish a mutually agreed upon protocol for processing the remains, associated grave goods, and sacred objects and the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-23 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form analysis and ultimate disposition of these materials. Following completion of applicable analyses, the human remains and any other items associated with the burial would be repatriated to the MLD. Written verification of repatriation from MLD would complete this process. Compliance with state regulations would result in less-than-significant impacts on buried human remains. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-24 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form VI. Geology and Soils Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 4. Landslides? b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.) No Impact. No active faults are in the vicinity of the project, and thus fault rupture is unlikely to occur during project implementation. Additionally, the project area is not located within a State of California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone, and project features do not include the addition of new structures meant for human occupancy within 50 feet of the nearest fault. The Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-25 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form nearest earthquake fault zone is located in the Point Loma Quadrangle, approximately 6 miles to the west in the San Diego Bay. As such, people or structures would not be exposed to substantial adverse effects from a rupture of a known earthquake fault. No impact would occur. 2. Strong seismic groundshaking? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As with most southern California regions, the project site would be subject to strong ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake. According to the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, 870-2 Pump Station Project, Assessors Parcel Numbers 648-010-17-11 and 648-010-23-00 Jamul, California (November 2013) prepared by Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., three major faults zones and some subordinate fault zones are found in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. The Elsinore Fault zone and the San Jacinto Fault zones trend northwest-southeast, and are found near the middle of the province. The San Andreas Fault zone borders the northeasterly margin of the province. Additionally, the Otay Mesa area is located in Seismic Zone 4, which is a designation previously used in the Uniform Building Code to denote the areas of the highest risk to earthquake ground motion (California Seismic Safety Commission 2005). As a result, the project could be subject to future seismic shaking and strong ground motion resulting from seismic activity, and damage could occur. However, the proposed project is not expected to draw a substantial amount of people, either during project activities or permanently, and the number of personnel required for routine maintenance would be similar to the existing condition. Moreover, no structures intended for human occupation would be built, and thus potential risk to the occasional personnel visiting the site would be limited. Finally, construction of the proposed project would be subject to applicable ordinances of the 2013 California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations Title 24), and implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce anticipated impacts related to the proximity of earthquake faults by requiring the project to be built to withstand seismic ground shaking. As a result, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Geotechnical Study. Prior to the issuance of building or grading permits, the project proponent will conduct a full geotechnical study to evaluate soil conditions and geologic hazards on the project site. The geotechnical study will be signed by a California-registered professional engineer and must contain field exploration data (drilling and soil sampling); laboratory testing of soil samples; and an engineering analysis to determine soil properties related, but not limited to: ground-motion acceleration parameters, the amplification properties of the subsurface units at the specific site(s), the potential for hydrocompaction to affect the proposed facilities, and the potential for collapsible, subsiding, liquefiable or expansive soils to affect the proposed project. The project proponent will implement recommendations found in the geotechnical study and use conclusions to determine the appropriate engineering to minimize geotechnical hazard impacts. 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Implementation of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects from seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Liquefaction occurs when saturated, low-density, loose materials (e.g., sand or silty sand) are weakened and transformed from a solid to a near-liquid state as a result of increased pore water pressure. The increase in pressure is caused by strong ground motion from an earthquake. Liquefaction more often occurs in areas underlain by silts and fine sands and where shallow groundwater exists. Based on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Otay Mesa Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-26 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Conveyance and Disinfection System Project, San Diego California (November 2013) prepared by Geocon Incorporated, (Appendix D) and general knowledge of local hydrogeology, groundwater beneath the proposed project area is likely present at depths greater than 50 feet. Due to the lack of a shallow groundwater table the potential for liquefaction at the site is considered low. Additionally, the proposed project is not expected to draw a substantial amount of people, either during project activities or permanently, and the small number of personnel required for routine maintenance would be similar to the existing condition. Finally, implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would further reduce anticipated impacts related to liquefiable soils by requiring the project to be built to withstand seismic ground shaking. Therefore, people or structures would not be exposed to substantial adverse effects from seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Impacts would be less than significant. 4. Landslides? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Implementation of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects from seismic-related ground failure, including landslides. According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared by Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. (Appendix D), the majority of the project site is relatively flat with the southern portion of the proposed project area descending towards the south into a small ravine. As such, landslide potential in the project area is negligible. Additionally, the proposed project is not expected to draw a substantial amount of people, either during project activities or permanently, and the small number of personnel required for routine maintenance would be similar to the existing condition. Finally, construction of the proposed project would be subject to applicable ordinances of the 2013 California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations Title 24) and subject to geotechnical recommendations as part of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, which would reduce potential geologic hazard impacts to less than significant, including those related to landslides. b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less-than-Significant Impact. The soils of Otay Mesa have generally been disturbed by farming activities for more than 100 years. Soil in the proposed project vicinity has been classified as a gravely clay loam within the Stockpen Soil Series and a loam within the Huerhuero Soil Series. These soils are moderately to well drained and have very slow infiltration rates. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Erosion is a condition that could adversely affect development on any site. Construction activities could exacerbate erosion conditions by exposing soils and adding water to the soil from irrigation and runoff from new impervious surfaces. The General Construction Permit, which was adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board under Order 2009-0009-DWQ, is required for soil disturbance activities that would be greater than 1 acre. The proposed project is set to exceed the minimum 1 acre of disturbed land and thus is subject to conditions found in the General Permit. As part of the General Permit and during construction activities, completion and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required. The SWPPP would include a site map and a description of proposed construction activities and demonstration of compliance with relevant local ordinances and regulations, and also describes BMPs that would be implemented to prevent soil erosion and Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-27 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form discharge of other construction-related pollutants that could contaminate nearby water resources. Permittees are further required to conduct annual monitoring and reporting to ensure that BMPs are correctly implemented and effective in controlling the discharge of stormwater-related pollutants. Compliance with these General Permit requirements during and after construction would ensure that there would be no significant impacts from substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Therefore, the impact is considered less than significant. c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Areas immediately north of the proposed project currently support similar stations on site, and thus the soils are considered adequate for the proposed project. Furthermore, potential for offsite and onsite landslides was not identified, and onsite earth materials were not considered liquefiable. Finally, construction of the proposed project would be subject to applicable ordinances of the 2013 California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations Title 24) and subject to geotechnical recommendations as part of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, which would reduce potential geologic hazard impacts to less than significant, including those related to unstable geologic units or soil. d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less-than-Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not be located on expansive soil, creating substantial risks to life or property. Expansive soils are fine-grained soils (generally high-plasticity clays) that can undergo a significant increase in volume with an increase in water content as well as a significant decrease in volume with a decrease in water content. Changes in the water content of highly expansive soils can result in severe distress for structures constructed on or against the soils. According to the Southern California Soil &Testing, Inc. Phase I ESA, native soil found on site is partially composed of clay. Although this is the case, construction of the proposed project would be subject to applicable ordinances of the 2013 California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations Title 24) and subject to geotechnical recommendations as part of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, which would reduce potential geologic hazard impacts, including those related to expansive soils, to less than significant. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. The project does not propose the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems; therefore, no impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-28 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Less-than-Significant Impact. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 provides guidance to lead agencies for determining the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and Section 15064.4(a) provides that a lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate, or estimate the amount of GHG emissions resulting from a project. The State CEQA Guidelines do not provide numeric or qualitative thresholds of significance for evaluating GHG emissions. The County of the San Diego has not formally adopted guidelines for evaluating the significance of GHG and climate change impacts. The County’s interim GHG threshold of 900 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) is based on the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s (CAPCOA) CEQA & Climate Change and is a recommended generic threshold for land use projects. However, this project is categorized as a stationary source of emissions since the project would replace two small water pumping stations with one large, modern pump station and the majority of the project’s emissions would result from non-mobile exhaust sources with minimal mobile source emissions. Neither the SDAPCD nor the County recommend a stationary source GHG threshold but other air districts in the state (e.g. Bay Area Air Quality Management District and South Coast Air Quality Management District) recommend a 10,000 MTCO2e threshold for stationary source projects and this threshold is used to determine GHG impacts from this project. Project construction would result in GHG emissions from off-road diesel equipment exhaust and emissions from employee and material delivery travel. The primary emissions occur as CO2 from gasoline and diesel combustion, with more limited vehicle tailpipe emissions of methane (CH4) and nitrogen dioxide (N2O) and other GHG emissions related to vehicle cooling systems. Project operations would result in GHG emissions from increased energy and fuel use and result in an increase in operational and maintenance vehicle trips. In addition to the emissions sources identified in Section III.b, “Air Quality”, the GHG analysis includes electricity-related GHG emissions associated with pump operations. Construction- and operations-period CO2-equivalent (CO2e) emissions were estimated using CalEEMod emissions model and summed annually. The estimate of the project GHG emissions during construction and operations is provided in Table 3. Consistent with County guidance, construction emissions are summed and amortized over a 30-year project life and then added to operational emissions. As shown in Table 3, the proposed project’s emissions (the sum of amortized Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-29 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form construction and annual operational emissions), although above the 900 MT CO2e threshold for land use projects, would be far below the 10,000 MTCO2e threshold for stationary source projects. Moreover, the project is replacing existing pump station uses that currently emit GHGs and these uses would be replaced with a more modern and efficient pump station. Consequently, the impact of construction- and operations-related emissions from the project is considered less than significant. Therefore, the project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that could have a significant impact on the environment. Table 3. Estimated Construction and Operational GHG Emissions Project Element MTCO2e Construction Site Excavation 204 Pump Station and Yard Piping 1,733 Total 1,937 Amortized Total 65 Operations Worker and Delivery Vehicles 7 Natural Gas Combustion 824 Electricity Consumption 440 Emergency Generator 42 Diesel Fuel Consumption 63 Total Annual 1,376 Sum of Amortized Construction + Annual Operations 1,441 GHG Significance Threshold 10,000 Exceed Threshold? No CalEEMod emission output sheets are provided in Appendix A. b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less-than-Significant Impact. The County and SDAPCD have yet to adopt a qualified plan, policy, or regulation to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the most applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions is Assembly Bill 32, which codified the state’s GHG emissions reduction targets for the future. As discussed in the response to VII.a, the combined construction and operations GHG emissions would not exceed the 10,000 MTCO2e threshold for stationary source projects. Therefore, project construction and operations would not hinder implementation of Assembly Bill 32 and would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. This impact is considered less than significant. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-30 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or involve handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. Be located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, be within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. Be located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less-than-Significant Impact. During the construction phase of the proposed project, construction activities would involve the use of fuel, solvents, paints, oils, grease, and caulking. Such transport, use, and disposal must be compliant with applicable regulations such as the Federal Toxic Substances Control Act (1976) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended in 1984 (RCRA); and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Hazardous Materials Regulations, including Parts 107 (Hazard Materials Program), 130 (Oil Spill Prevention and Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-31 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Response), 172 (Emergency Response), and 177 (Highway Transportation), would all apply to the proposed project and/or surrounding uses, along with the local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA3) regulations. Although small amounts of solvents, paints, oils, grease, and caulking would be transported, used, and disposed of during the construction phase, these materials are typically used in construction projects and would not represent the transport, use, and disposal of acutely hazardous materials. Additionally, the use of these products would be temporary, and standard BMPs outlined in the SWPPP as part of the Construction General Permit requirements (the proposed project is set to exceed the minimum 1 acre of disturbed land and would require a SWPPP as part of the Construction General Permit requirements) would be applied to ensure that all hazards potentially occurring during this phase of the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Fuels and new/waste oil are expected to be handled, stored and disposed of off-site (in the case of waste oil) as part of routine project operations. Although this is the case, transportation of these materials in and out of the proposed project area would not be part a routine project activity. Fuels and unused/waste oil would be stored on site, thus limiting the amount of vehicle trips used for disposal of waste oil and acceptance of new oil and fuels. Additionally, the site would be required to comply with all of the San Diego County Department of Environmental Health’s Hazardous Materials Division CUPA requirements, such as the development of a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP). The HMBP would contain information on the location, type, quantity, and health risks of hazardous materials stored, used, or disposed of on site (HMBPs are required if a business uses, handles or stores hazardous materials in quantities greater than 500 pounds of a solid substance, 55 gallons of a liquid, and 200 cubic feet of compressed gas). Adherence to CUPA requirements would ensure proper handling, storage, and usage of hazardous materials in order to safeguard life and property and would ensure that the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment during project operation. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less-than-Significant Impact. An environmental database search conducted as part of the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment 870-2 Pump Station Project, Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 648-010-17-11 and 648-010-23-00 (November 2013), prepared by Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc., provided no indication of historical or current contamination on the proposed project site. Furthermore, only one hazardous materials site was identified within a 1-mile radius of the proposed project—the East Mesa Detention Center, located approximately 300 feet to the southeast. The East Mesa Detention Center site was a diesel impacted soil only site that was granted closure in 2007. As such, pre-existing contamination from this site is not expected to have impacted the proposed project area. For operational analysis see response to VIII.a. above. Impacts would be less than significant. 3 The CUPA for San Diego County is the County’s Department of Environmental Health. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-32 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form c. Emit hazardous emissions or involve handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not create any impacts associated with hazardous emissions or handling of acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school. There are no existing or proposed schools located within 0.25 mile of the proposed project area. The closest school, High Tech High Chula Vista, is located approximately 2.4 miles to the northwest of the project site. No impact would occur d. Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less-than-Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not create any impacts associated with being included on list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Research conducted during the environmental database search provided no current or historical hazardous material information regarding the proposed project site. Furthermore, the only hazardous materials site identified within a 1-mile radius of the proposed project area does not represent a hazard risk for construction activities of the proposed project (see VIII.b.). However, the proposed project site is located within 0.5 mile west and southwest of an identified Brownfield Unexploded Ordinance zone. However, no project activities would occur within this area. As such, the Brownfield Unexploded Ordinance zone would not represent a hazard risk for construction activities during implementation of the proposed project. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant e. Be located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, be within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The proposed project site is not within an airport land use plan area or within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, no impacts would occur. f. Be located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impacts would occur. g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less-than-Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The proposed project would not result in any substantial traffic queuing along Alta Road and would not allow any construction vehicles or equipment to park or remain stationary within the roadway. Additionally, the District will implement a Traffic Control Permit approved by the relevant local agency, including the County of San Diego. The Traffic Control Permit will ensure that adequate emergency access and egress is maintained and that traffic will move efficiently and safely in and around the construction site. Moreover, the project does not include any characteristics (e.g., permanent road closures, long-term blocking of road access) that would Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-33 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form physically impair or otherwise interfere with emergency response or evacuation in the project vicinity. All large construction vehicles entering and exiting the site would be guided by personnel, as needed, and would not linger on Alta Road. During construction activities, the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable requirements set forth by the County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services’ Operational Area Emergency Plan, County Sherriff’s Department, and the San Diego County Fire Authority. The Office of Emergency Services provides coordination of emergency response at the local level in the event of a disaster, including wildland fires. The County Sherriff and Fire Authority would respond to any emergencies in the project area. Because the project would not interfere with emergency plans, the project’s impact would be less than significant. h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Less-than-Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. According to information obtained from CalFire, the proposed project site exists within a CalFire Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (CalFire 2007). Fire Hazard Severity Zones are identified as moderate, high, and very high hazard severity zones using a science-based and field-tested computer model that assigns a hazard score based on the factors that influence fire likelihood and fire behavior. Factors considered include fire history, existing and potential fuel (natural vegetation), flame length, blowing embers, terrain, and typical weather for the area. Although fire can be a significant threat in the proposed project area, additional personnel would not be exposed to significant risk of loss, injury, or death. The proposed project is not expected to draw a substantial amount of people, either during project activities or permanently, and the number of personnel required for occasional routine maintenance would be similar to the existing condition. Additionally, the proposed project is expected to follow fire management policies, rules, and regulations established by the County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services, County Fire Authority, and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Vegetation on site would be limited, and any landscaping would be compliant with the guidance established by the above-mentioned agencies. Compliance with these established procedures, rules, and regulations would reduce the impacts related to exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from wildfires to less than significant. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-34 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form IX. Hydrology and Water Quality Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding onsite or offsite? e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect floodflows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-35 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less-than-Significant Impact. The Project site is located in San Diego, approximately 12.2 miles east of the Pacific Ocean and 3 miles north of the Mexican border. The site lies within the Poggi Canyon-Otay River hydrologic unit (HUC 910.2). This hydrologic unit encompasses 43 square miles and is part of the Otay River watershed, which discharges to the San Diego Bay (UC Davis 2013). According to the 2013 California Water Plan Update: Pilot Statewide Assessment, the Poggi Canyon-Otay River hydrologic unit scored 100 for the Native fish community, 30 for Impervious Surface: Water Quality Index, 47 for Impervious Surface: Geomorphic Condition, and 0 for Aquatic Fragmentation(UC Davis 2013).The Lower Otay Reservoir is located approximately 1 mile to the north of the project site and is currently listed by the EPA as 303(d) impaired for color, iron, manganese, nitrogen, ammonia (total ammonia), pH (high) (PCW 2014). Constituents of concern for the Otay River watershed include coliform bacteria, trace metals, and other toxic constituents (PCW 2014). Sources of these constituents include urban runoff, agricultural runoff, resource extraction, septic systems, marinas, and boating activities. The project site is located in an area with steep topography. The project would involve approximately 15,000 cubic yards of excavation on over 2 acres. Cut slopes are proposed to be constructed to create a level pad. The gradient of the cut slopes would range from 1:1 to 3:1. The site is located approximately 557 feet above sea level. Based on topography within the project vicinity, drainage would tend to flow south and southeast of the site, where elevations decrease and an ephemeral drainage exists. The potential impacts of construction activities on water quality primarily concern sediments, turbidity, and pollutants associated with sediments. Construction-related activities that expose and move soils are primarily responsible for sediment releases. In addition, site grading would expose soils that would later be compacted. These project activities could result in wind and rain erosion of the existing onsite soils and could increase the amount of suspended solids contained in storm flows due to erosion of exposed soils during construction. Non-sediment potential contaminants that could enter water runoff from the construction site include oil, gasoline, petroleum products, and trash. All of these contaminants could contribute to the degradation of water quality. Construction for the project is expected to occur during the dry season, which would reduce the potential for stormwater runoff from the project site. Because of this, water from the site is expected to be minimal, and primarily associated with specific construction activities, such as dust control. Because the project would disturb approximately 2.07 acres, which is more than 1 acre of land, the proposed project is subject to the General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order 2009-0009-DWQ) (Construction General Permit), which regulates stormwater discharges for construction activities CWA Section 402. As part of the Construction General Permit and during construction activities, the District would file a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the Construction General permit with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and complete and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by Qualified SWPPP Developers and Practitioners. The SWPPP would include a site map and a description of proposed construction activities and demonstration of compliance with relevant local ordinances and regulations, and also describes construction BMPs that would be implemented to prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction-related pollutants that could contaminate nearby water resources. The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the San Diego RWQCB, however, the Otay Water District is not a permittee that is subject to requirements of the Waste Discharge Requirements for Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-36 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Discharges of Urban Runoff from the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) draining the Watersheds of the County Of San Diego, the Incorporated Cities of San Diego County, the San Diego Unified Port District, and the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (NPDES Order No. R9-2013-0001) (San Diego MS4 Permit). Because the Otay Water District is not covered under the San Diego MS4 Permit, the proposed project would be subject to the post construction requirements of the Construction General Permit. The Construction General Permit specifies runoff reduction requirements for all sites not covered by a Phase I or Phase II MS4 NPDES permit, to avoid, minimize and/or mitigate post-construction storm water runoff impacts. The runoff reduction requirements include the use of non-structural and structural measures to replicate the pre-project water balance (defined as the volume of rainfall that ends up as runoff) for the smallest storms up to the 85th percentile storm event (or the smallest storm event that generates runoff, whichever is larger). The pre-project water balance can be calculated using either Appendix 2 of the Construction General Permit or a watershed process-based, continuous simulation model such as the EPA’s Storm Water Management Model (SWMMM) or Hydrologic Simulation Program Fortran (HSPF); either method will be reviewed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to the termination of the active Waste Discharge Identification Number issued for the project under the Construction General Permit. The volume of water that cannot be addressed using nonstructural practices shall be captured in structural practices and approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board at least 30 days prior to the use of any structural control measure used to comply with this requirement. The proposed project is anticipated to result in 0.4 acre (17,424 square feet) of new impervious area. In compliance with the Construction General Permit, in order for construction to be found complete and terminated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Otay Water District must install post-construction storm water management measures and establish a long-term maintenance plan for those measures. The long-term maintenance plan is required to be designed for a minimum of five years, and will describe the procedures to ensure that the post-construction storm water management measures are adequately maintained. To comply with the runoff reduction requirements, the proposed project would reduce runoff through on-site storm water reuse, interception, evapotranspiration and infiltration through non-structural controls and conservation design measures. Examples include, disconnection of impervious surfaces through distributed pervious areas, rain barrels or cistern, pervious concrete, interceptor vegetation such as swales, buffer zones from natural water bodies, protection of outdoor material storage and secondary containment, and landscaping with native or drought tolerant species); these approaches are similar to Low Impact Development (LID). The proposed project is anticipated to meet the runoff reduction requirements through implementation of non-structural controls. Structural controls would only be considered if the full volume of water cannot be treated by the non-structural controls. Structural controls may include use a detention basin. The Otay Water District would be required to file a Notice of Termination (NOT) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board when construction is complete and final stabilization of the project site has been reached. Upon filing the NOT, the Otay Water District is certifying to the Regional Water Quality Control Board that all the identified requirements for final stabilization and post construction have been met in accordance with the Construction General Permit. According to the Construction General Permit, the District will need to submit a SWPPP with an erosion and sediment control plan developed and implemented to prevent or minimize the potential for erosion to occur and ultimately reach surface waters in the project vicinity. Among several other measures, the erosion and sediment control plan would include the following BMPs: Project Planning; Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-37 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Good site management “Housekeeping”, including waste management: Non-stormwater management; Run-on and run-off control; BMPs must be site specific, seasonably appropriate, and construction plan appropriate. Dry season BMPs must plan for and address unusual rain events that may occur during the dry season (May 1 through September 30th); and Post-construction storm water management measures (e.g., on-site storm water reuse, interception, evapotranspiration and infiltration through non-structural controls and conservation design measures [e.g., disconnection of impervious surfaces through distributed pervious areas, rain barrels or cistern, pervious concrete, interceptor vegetation such as swales, buffer zones from natural water bodies, protection of outdoor material storage and secondary containment, and landscaping with native or drought tolerant species). As a result of compliance with the Construction General Permit and implementation of construction stormwater BMPs and post-construction storm water management measures, the proposed project would result in less-than-significant impacts related to water quality. b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Less-than-Significant Impact. The Otay River watershed management plan does not consider the watershed to be a major source of groundwater. Most groundwater in the Otay River watershed is found in the semi-consolidated San Diego Formation, and the project site lies outside of the San Diego Formation. The majority of the area within and surrounding the project site is pervious, and the project is expected to result in 0.4 acre of new impervious area. Paving is proposed for the access road connecting Alta Road with the project site. However, the access road is already partially paved and the additional paving would not result in a significant amount of new impervious surface area. Therefore, existing natural groundwater recharge4 is not expected to be largely impacted as a result of the project. The planned drainage culvert along the access road just south of the project site would address groundwater seepage across the road and allow for water to contribute to flows and/or infiltrate into the soil once it reaches the ephemeral drainage. Dewatering activities are not anticipated, and the proposed project would not result in the substantial depletion of groundwater supplies or substantially interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or lowering of the groundwater table. Impacts related to lowering the groundwater table and groundwater recharge would be less than significant. c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on site or off site? Less-than-Significant Impact. The existing drainage patterns would not be dramatically altered as a result of the project. In addition, the project would implement an erosion and sediment control plan during construction and post-construction storm water management measures for operation 4 Recharge is determined by the ability for water to infiltrate into the soil. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-38 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form that includes implementation of on-site storm water reuse, interception, evapotranspiration and infiltration through non-structural controls and conservation design measures. As a result, changes in the drainage pattern resulting in erosion and/or siltation would be less than significant. d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on site or off site? Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site is not located in a 100-year flood hazard area (Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] 2014). It is designated with a low-to-moderate flood risk according to FEMA floodplain maps. The existing drainage patterns would be altered by the construction of improvements to an access road just south of the proposed project. A drainage culvert would be constructed to prevent groundwater seepage across the access road. This change to the drainage pattern would not substantially increase the rate of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flood on or off site. As a result, changes to the drainage pattern impacts would be considered less than significant. e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less-than-Significant Impact. As described above, the proposed project would not alter or improve offsite drainage pattern or substantially change the amount of stormwater that would sheet flow off site as required by the Construction General Permit. Planned grading could slightly slow water runoff from the project site during construction; however, once operational, the project site would result in a minor increase in impervious surface area (when compared to the total pervious areas surrounding the project site), and would require implementation of post-construction storm water management measures such as, on-site storm water reuse, interception, evapotranspiration and infiltration through non-structural controls and conservation design measures. Drainage would continue to run in the current direction and would not be substantially greater than current runoff. Therefore, the project would not contribute to an exceedance of the existing and planned stormwater drainage, and impacts would be less than significant. f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in less-than-significant short-term construction or long-term operational impacts on water quality. Construction impacts would be reduced through the implementation of BMPs in the erosion and sediment control plan, as required by the Construction General Permit. During operation, the proposed project is anticipated to result in 0.4 acre (17,424 square feet) of new impervious area. The proposed project would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit runoff reduction requirements and implement post-construction storm water management measures. The post-construction storm water management measures will include on-site storm water reuse, interception, evapotranspiration and infiltration through non-structural controls and conservation design measures, where feasible to protect water quality. A small drainage culvert is proposed at a small ephemeral drainage that occurs within an approximately 50-square-foot area along the unpaved gravel access road connecting Alta Road with the project site. Design and construction of the culvert would be in compliance with USACE, RWQCB, Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-39 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form and CDFW permits such as a Section 404, 401 certification, and a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement, if they are needed. Therefore, implementation of the project in compliance with existing regulations would result in less-than-significant impacts related to water quality. g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact. No housing is proposed on site. Therefore, no related impacts would occur. h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact. The project site is not located in a 100-year flood hazard area. No structures that could impede or redirect flood flows are proposed. Therefore, no impact would occur. i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project does not propose any habitable structures on site and would not cause people to gather on site. Thus, the possibility of exposing people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam is remote. Impacts would be less than significant. j. Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact. The project site is located over 12.2 miles away from the Pacific Ocean, and is generally considered too far away to be subject to a tsunami. Therefore, the project would not result in impacts related to potential tsunami inundation. The closest enclosed body of water that could result in an earthquake-induced seiche is the Lower Otay Reservoir, located north of the project site. However, the project site is at a higher elevation than the reservoir and a canyon lies between the project site and the reservoir. Therefore, there would be no impact on the project site as a result of overflow caused by a seiche. The slopes within and around the project site are vegetated with grasses and some native and nonnative vegetation. The elevation grade is not significant enough to cause a concern over mudflow. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts associated with mudflows. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-40 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form X. Land Use and Planning Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? a. Physically divide an established community? No Impact. The project site is an existing District-owned site in a rural setting that is surrounded largely by undeveloped land to the north and west, and the East Mesa Detention Facility Complex on the south and east. There are no residences near the project site, and the closest commercial development is 2 miles to the south. The proposed project would involve the replacement of the LHPS and HHPS with the new 870-2 pump station, and some offsite improvements. The project site is within the boundaries of District property where there are the two aforementioned pump stations, the Roll Reservoir, and other related facilities and infrastructure. No changes to surrounding land uses and no barriers that would divide the community are proposed. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not physically divide an established community, and impacts would not occur. b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact. The project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project. The project site has a County General Plan land use designation of Public/Semi-Public Facilities. The adjoining areas to the project site are also designated as Public/Semi-Public Facilities. Figure 16 shows the zoning classification and land use designation. The Public/Semi-Public Facilities designation identifies major facilities built and maintained for public use. Examples include institutional uses, academic facilities, governmental complexes, and community service facilities, such as County airports, public schools, correctional institutions, solid waste facilities, water facilities, and sewer facilities. This designation may include privately owned Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-41 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form facilities built and maintained for public use, such as hospitals, cemeteries, and landfills. A maximum Floor Area Ratio5 of 0.50 is permitted by this designation. The project site is located within the Otay Subregional Plan Area of the San Diego County General Plan Area. The Otay Subregion plan area is located in the most southwesterly corner of unincorporated San Diego County, bordered by the Jamul/Dulzura subregion to the north and east, the City of Chula Vista to the west, and the international border with Mexico to the south. The subregion is characterized by the Upper and Lower Otay reservoirs, two detention facilities, a landfill, Otay Mountain, and the San Ysidro Mountains. The subregion is largely undeveloped and in public ownership (County of San Diego 2014). The project site is zoned as S-90: Holding Area as defined by the County of San Diego’s Zoning Ordinance. The Holding Area zone is used to prevent premature urban or non-urban development until more precise zoning regulations are prepared. Uses permitted in the Holding Area zone include civic, commercial, industrial, and agricultural uses, as well as any temporary uses allowed by a Major Use Permit. Further, the Public/Semi-Public Facilities designation identifies major facilities built and maintained for public use, including community service facilities such as water and sewer facilities. The proposed project would involve the replacement of the LHPS and HHPS with the new 870-2 pump station, and some offsite improvements. The project site is within the boundaries of District property where there are the two aforementioned pump stations, the Roll Reservoir, and other related facilities and infrastructure. The project is consistent with the underlying land use designation and zoning. Thus, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. No impact would occur. c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Less than Significant. The proposed project site is adjacent to the County MSCP. As discussed in Section IV, “Biological Resources,” the proposed project would not conflict with the County MSCP or its provisions because its design would not result in significant and unavoidable impacts on any biological resources (see responses to IV.a, IV.b, and IV.e). In addition, the District has an approved coastal sage scrub mitigation bank from which it would use available credits to reduce potential impacts on coastal sage scrub to less-than-significant levels (see response to IV.b). Local jurisdictions are required to implement mitigation and/or encroachment standards, manage and monitor conserved lands, and conduct environmental review as required by CEQA; and the proposed project is consistent with these County MSCP provisions. Impacts would be less than significant. 5 Nonresidential building intensity is expressed as a maximum floor-area ratio (FAR), which is the ratio of the gross building square footage on a lot to the net square footage of the lot or parcel. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-42 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form XI. Mineral Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. In 1975, the Department of Conservation’s California Geological Survey created a program to assist in the protection and development of mineral resources through the land use planning process. This program is mandated by the Surface Mining Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA). Local agencies are required to use mineral land classification maps and reports when developing land use plans and when making land use decisions. SMARA requires that the State Mining and Geology Board map areas throughout the state that contain regionally significant mineral resources. Aggregate mineral resources within the state are classified by the board through application of the Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) system. The MRZ system is used to map all mineral commodities within identified jurisdictional boundaries and classifies lands that contain mineral deposits and identifies the presence or absence of substantial sand and gravel deposits and crushed rock source areas (i.e., commodities used as, or in the production of, construction materials). The State Geologist classifies MRZs within a region based on the following factors: 1. MRZ-1: Areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. 2. MRZ-2: Areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. 3. MRZ-3: Areas containing mineral deposits for which the significance cannot be determined from available data. 4. MRZ-4: Areas where available information is inadequate for assignment of any other MRZ category. The project site is located in MRZ-3, indicating that sufficient data are not currently available to determine the significance of any mineral deposits that may be present (Miller 1996). According to the State of California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, no oil wells exist on the project site (California Department of Conservation 2014). The proposed project would not result in a loss of known mineral resources. The proposed project is not located within a MRZ-2 zone. The project site is located in MRZ-3, and thus the significance of Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-43 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form any potentially present mineral resources cannot be determined due to limited data. Further, within the existing District site, the project would replace two existing pump stations with a new pump station, add decomposed granite to an existing dirt access road, and install a sewer lift station and sewer conveyance infrastructure to dispose of wastewater. These project components would not preclude the ability to explore for resources at some future date, which could still occur if desired and would be allowed by current regulations. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource, and no impact would occur. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact. See response to XI.a above. The proposed project is not located within a locally important mineral resource discovery site (Miller 1996). The project site has a General Plan designation of Public/Semi-Public facilities and is part of the Otay Subregional Plan Area. Thus, it is unlikely that the proposed project would be located on a site or have any impacts associated with the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. As a result, implementation of the project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site, and no impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-44 November 2016 ICF 669.13 S87 A70 S90 S90 S90 S88 Figure 16 Zoning and General Plan Designation Otay Water District Pump Station 870-2 K:\San Diego\projects\otay_water_district\00669_13_Pump_Station_870\mapdoc\Bio\Fig16_GeneralPlan_Zoning.mxd Date: 7/18/2014 24991 Legend Project Site Zoning Agriculture (A70) Holding Area (S90) Limited Control (S87) Specific Plan (S88) General Plan Open Space (Conservation) Public/Semi-Public Facilities Rural Lands (RL-40) Specific Plan Area ±Source: SANGIS Imagery (2012); Zoning SANGIS GIS (2013); General Plan SANGIS (2008) 0 1,000500 Feet Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form XII. Noise Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in a local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. Be located within an airport land use plan area, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. Be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a. Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in a local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? Less-than-Significant Impact. An ICF noise specialist analyzed and assessed potential noise impacts from the proposed project. The analysis utilized information provided by the District, and data and calculation techniques provided by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Findings indicate that the project would comply with the County of San Diego noise standards. Applicable Regulations – Construction Noise. The County of San Diego’s Code of Regulatory Ordinances, Section 36.4 (i.e., Title 3, Division 6, Chapter 4), seeks to control construction noise by placing limits both on the hours during which construction activity may occur and on the average noise levels that may be generated during those hours, as follows. Construction equipment may not be operated between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., or at any time on a Sunday or holiday. During the permitted hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., noise from construction equipment may not exceed an 8-hour average noise level (i.e., 8-hour Leq) of 75 dBA. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-45 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Applicable Regulations – Operational Noise. The San Diego County Noise Ordinance establishes sound level limits that apply to operational noise impacting various land uses as summarized in Table 4, below. Table 4. County of San Diego General Noise Standards Zone Time 1-Hour Average (Leq) Sound Level Limits, dBA (1) RS, RD, RR, RMH, A70, A72, S80, S81, S90, S92, RV, and RU with a General Plan Land Use Designation density of less than 10.9 dwelling units per acre 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 50 45 (2) RRO, RC, RM, S86, V5, RV and RU with a General Plan Land Use Designation density of 10.9 or more dwelling units per acre 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 55 50 (3) S94, V4, and all commercial uses 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 60 55 (4) V1, V2 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. 60 55 V1 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 55 V2 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 50 V3 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 70 65 (5) M50, M52, and M54 Anytime 70 (6) S82, M56, and M58 Anytime 75 (7) S88 See notes below Note: The sound level limits in the table that apply in an S88 zone depend on the use being made of the property. The limits in subsection (1) apply to property with a residential, agricultural, or civic use. The limits in subsection (3) apply to property with a commercial use. Source: Table 36.404 Sound Level Limits in Decibels (dBA), County of San Diego’s Code of Regulatory Ordinances. Short-Term Construction Noise. Noise from construction of the proposed project would not exceed County Noise Ordinance limits at the nearest Noise-Sensitive Land Use (NSLU). Construction of the proposed pump station, sewer lift station, and sewer main would take approximately 15 months. The contractor for the project would comply with all construction activity time limits required by the County Noise Ordinance. The project would also adhere to all construction noise regulations of the County Noise Ordinance. The closest developed land use to the project is the East Mesa Detention Facility’s adjacent Firearms Training Facility located to the east. Beyond this facility to the southeast is the East Mesa Detention Complex. The firearms facility is the main existing source of noise in the project vicinity, and users of the facility are exposed to frequent high noise levels as the result of firearm discharge; therefore, the firearms facility is not considered an NSLU. The closest NSLU is the East Mesa Detention Complex, which has exterior areas of human use located approximately 1,000 feet from the center of the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-46 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form proposed pump station location and approximately 700 feet from the nearest section of the proposed sewer main alignment. Based on information provided by the project engineer, construction would occur in two main phases: (1) site excavation (occurring during the first 30 work days); and (2) pump station and yard piping construction (occurring during the subsequent 300 work days). Each phase would utilize an assortment of construction equipment items. Not all of these items would necessarily operate on site during a typical day, and, if they did, it is unlikely that they would all operate simultaneously. However, to provide a conservative estimate, noise analyses were conducted assuming all equipment items would operate during each work day. The construction equipment schedule for each phase was provided by the project engineer (Carollo), and the analysis was conducted using typical construction equipment noise levels and calculation techniques provided by the FTA and FHWA. The analyses are summarized in Table 5; referring to the table, construction noise levels are estimated to range from 62 to 68 at the detention complex. These noise levels would be well below the applicable County noise standard of 75 dBA (8-hour Leq). Therefore, the impact from construction noise would be less than significant. Table 5. Summary of Construction Noise Analyses Case Analyzed/ Equipment Item Maximum Noise Level at 50 feet (dBA)a Number of Unitsb Usage Factora,c Distance to Receiver (feet)d Average Noise Level at Receiver (dBA) Phase 1, Site Excavation, at Pump Station Site Dozer 85 1 0.4 1,000 55 Dump Truck 84 3 0.4 1,000 59 Front Loader 85 1 0.4 1,000 55 Work Truck 84 1 0.4 1,000 54 Pickup Truck 75 1 0.4 1,000 45 Total for All Equipment 62 Phase 1, Site Excavation, at Sewer Main Dozer 85 1 0.4 700 58 Dump Truck 84 3 0.4 700 62 Front Loader 85 1 0.4 700 58 Work Truck 84 1 0.4 700 57 Pickup Truck 75 1 0.4 700 48 Total for All Equipment 65 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-47 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Case Analyzed/ Equipment Item Maximum Noise Level at 50 feet (dBA)a Number of Unitsb Usage Factora,c Distance to Receiver (feet)d Average Noise Level at Receiver (dBA) Phase 2, Station and Piping, at Pump Station Excavator 85 1 0.4 1,000 58 Backhoe 80 1 0.4 1,000 53 Forklift 84 1 0.4 1,000 57 Dump Truck 84 1 0.4 1,000 57 Crane 83 1 0.16 1,000 52 Work Truck 84 2 0.4 1,000 60 Pickup Truck 75 2 0.4 1,000 51 Concrete Pump 82 1 0.2 1,000 52 Paving Machine 89 1 0.5 1,000 63 Concrete Truck 82 1 0.2 1,000 52 Tractor Trailer 84 1 0.4 1,000 57 Total for All Equipment 68 Phase 2, Station and Piping, at Sewer Main Alignment Excavator 85 1 0.4 700 55 Backhoe 80 1 0.4 700 50 Forklift 84 1 0.4 700 54 Dump Truck 84 1 0.4 700 54 Crane 83 1 0.16 700 49 Work Truck 84 2 0.4 700 57 Pickup Truck 75 2 0.4 700 48 Concrete Pump 82 1 0.2 700 49 Paving Machine 89 1 0.5 700 60 Concrete Truck 82 1 0.2 700 49 Tractor Trailer 84 1 0.4 700 54 Total for All Equipment 64 a Obtained or estimated from: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, FTA, (FTA-VA-90-1003-06), May 2006 and/or FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Version 1.1, December 8, 2008. b Noise level increase = 10×log(number of units) c Usage Factor is the percentage of time equipment is operating in noisiest mode while in use. d Noise level decrease = 10×log(usage factor). Noise level decreases at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance from source to receiver. Long-Term Operational Noise. Operational noise associated with the proposed project would consist of various mechanical equipment (pumps, motors, etc.) operating at the pump station on a daily basis. A new emergency generator would be installed, but would only be run in case of emergency when electrical service from SDG&E is unavailable, or for short periods during scheduled maintenance. The majority of the new equipment, including the emergency generator, would be enclosed within a new pump station building, which would be designed to comply with the County’s noise ordinance standards. The new pumps and motors would replace similar existing onsite equipment that is currently located outside (i.e., without the benefit of acoustical shielding from Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-48 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form a pump station building). In addition, it is noted that the closest NSLU, the detention center to the southeast, is located approximately 1,000 feet away from the proposed pump station. Therefore, exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of noise ordinance standards would not occur, and noise impacts as a result of the project would be less than significant. b. Expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would not generate excessive groundborne vibrations or groundborne noise levels. During construction, short-term vibration would be generated in the immediate vicinity of the project site, but high-impact construction methods, such as pile driving or blasting, would not be used. As noted previously, the contractor for the project would comply with all construction activity time limits required by the County Noise Ordinance. The FTA (2006) provides guidelines for assessing the significance of vibration from construction activities. These guidelines address both potential annoyance/interference with vibration-sensitive land uses and potential vibration-induced building damage. For land uses that include buildings where people sleep, such as detention facilities, the FTA indicates that possible annoyance/interference impacts may occur at groundborne vibration levels of 72 to 80 VdB6. For assessment of potential building damage, the FTA provides the criteria in terms of the peak particle velocity (PPV)7 as indicated in Table 6, below; these criteria would apply to all nearby buildings, including those at the neighboring firearms facility. All the nearby buildings are relatively modern engineered structures; therefore, the indicated criterion of 0.3 inches per second PPV is considered appropriate. Table 6. FTA Criteria for Potential Building Damage Due to Groundborne Vibration Building Category PPV Criterion (inches/second) Reinforced-concrete, steel or timber (no plaster) 0.5 Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3 Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2 Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 Vibration levels from construction equipment attenuate as they radiate from the source. The equation to determine the vibration velocity level (LV) at a specified distance from the equipment states that LV = LV(25ft) – 30 × log(D/25) where LV(25ft) is the vibration velocity level at a reference distance of 25 feet, and D is the distance from the equipment to the sensitive receptor (FTA 2006). The equation to determine PPV at a specific distance states that 6 VdB is a decibel measure of vibration velocity level that describes the root mean square (rms) velocity amplitude of the vibration on a logarithmic scale, referenced to 1 micro-inch/second. 7 PPV is the peak particle velocity, measured in inches per second (in/s), and describes the maximum instantaneous peak amplitude of the vibration velocity. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-49 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form PPV = PPVref × (25/D) 1.5 where PPVref is the PPV at a reference distance of 25 feet, and D is the distance from the equipment to the sensitive receptor (FTA 2006). The highest vibration levels associated with project construction would be associated with heavy equipment such as large bulldozers. Reference vibration levels for this type of equipment are 87 dBV and 0.089 inches per second PPV (FTA 2006) at a distance of 25 feet. The closest buildings that would be sensitive to potential annoyance/interference from construction activity would be at the detention complex, approximately 700 feet east of the sewer main alignment. At this distance, the vibration velocity level is estimated to be 44 VdB, which is well below the potential impact criterion of 72 to 80 VdB. The closest structures that would be sensitive to potential building damage from construction vibration would be at the firearms training facility, approximately 300 feet east of the project site. At this distance, the PPV is estimated to be 0.002 inches per second, which is well below the potential impact criterion of 0.3 inches per second. Therefore, impacts from groundborne vibration or groundborne noise would be less than significant. c. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less-than-Significant Impact. See response to XII.a. d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less-than-Significant Impact. See response to XII.a. e. Be located within an airport land use plan area, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The nearest airport is Brown Field Municipal Airport, which is approximately 2.5 miles from the project site. Referring to the airport’s Land Use Compatibility Plan (San Diego County Airport Land Use Commission 2010), the project site is well outside both the existing and future 60 dB CNEL noise contour for the airport. Therefore, no impacts would occur. f. Be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. There are no private airstrips in the project vicinity. No one residing or working in the project area would be exposed to excessive noise levels from private airstrips. No impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-50 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form XIII. Population and Housing Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace a substantial number of existing housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace a substantial number of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project area is located in the Otay Subregional Plan Area in unincorporated San Diego County. Unincorporated San Diego County has a total area of 3,572 square miles, and population was estimated at 484,604 in 2012 (SANDAG 2014a). The Otay Community Plan Area encompasses an area of 28,474 acres and had a population of 4,695 in 2008 (SANDAG 2014b). Total housing units in unincorporated San Diego County were estimated to be 169,142 in 2010, while there were 5 housing units estimated in the Otay Community Plan Area in 2008 (SANDAG 2014a, 2014b). The proposed project site is an existing Otay Water District site with the Roll Reservoir and LHPS and HHPS to the north and the R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility and East Mesa Detention Facility Complex (including the Firing Range) on the south and east, respectively. The rest of the surrounding area is undeveloped and in its natural state. The proposed project does not include housing or commercial development that would directly affect the number of residents or employees in the area and would not contribute to the creation of additional housing or jobs in the Otay Community Plan Area. Also, the proposed project would not extend roads or involve the addition of any growth-inducing infrastructure. The proposed project would replace the LHPS and HHPS with the proposed 870-2 pump station and include some offsite improvements, such as access road improvements and contraction of a sewer lift station and sewer main designed to service the project. The new pump station would be able to better accommodate the water demand of the existing District service area and would be able to accommodate water from the OMDCDS. As such, impacts would not be considered substantially growth-inducing either directly or indirectly because the project would be built to accommodate the existing population needs and to accommodate the planned OMDCDS. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Displace a substantial number of existing housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. There are no existing housing units on the proposed project site. The project area is located in a rural setting, and the project site is in an area with existing pump stations, the Roll Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-51 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Reservoir, and other related facilities. The proposed project does not involve the construction or demolition of housing. Therefore, the proposed project would not displace people or housing, and there would be no impact. c. Displace a substantial number of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The proposed project would not displace any people because no residents are located on the project site. Thus, the construction of replacement housing is not required elsewhere. No impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-52 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form XIV. Public Services Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: Fire protection? No Impact. Impacts of the project on fire service would be beneficial. The proposed project would be designed to the latest fire prevention standards and incorporate the requirements of the 2013 California Building Standards Code. Much of the equipment would be installed inside the new pump station. The older LHPS and HHPS, which in both cases have their equipment outside, would be removed. Moreover, the proposed project would improve the dirt access road to Alta Road by paving the road and building a culvert over a drainage feature, which would improve access to the site and exiting from the site. No impact would occur. Police protection? No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the demand for or impact response times of police protection services. Impacts of the project on police service would be beneficial. The proposed project would improve access to and from the project site by applying decomposed granite to the existing dirt access road and covering a drainage feature with a culvert. Moreover, two pump stations would be removed and replaced with the single pump station proposed by the project. Also, potential vandalism and theft would be reduced by enclosing many of the pumps, motors, and generator associated with the pump station in the proposed pump station building. No impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-53 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Schools? No Impact. The proposed project would serve the existing District service area customers and would be able to handle water conveyed from the OMDCDS. The project itself would not generate a demand for public school services. No impact would occur. Parks? No Impact. The proposed project would serve the existing District service area customers and would be able to handle water conveyed from the OMDCDS. The project itself would not generate a demand for parks or park services. Therefore, no impacts would occur. Other public facilities? No Impact. The proposed project would not affect other public facilities. No impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-54 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form XV. Recreation Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. The proposed project would include the replacement of the LHPS and HHPS with the proposed 870-2 pump station. Typically, residential uses increase the use of parks and recreational facilities. No residential uses would be constructed under the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks. Consequently, substantial physical deterioration of these facilities would not occur or be accelerated. No impact would occur. b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The proposed project would include the replacement of two pump stations that have reached their capacity. No residential uses would be developed under the proposed project. Additionally, the proposed project would not include the construction of new recreational facilities or the expansion of existing recreational facilities. The construction or expansion of recreational facilities would not be required. No impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-55 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form XVI. Transportation/Traffic Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation, including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including, but not limited to, intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to, level-of-service standards and travel demand measures or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards because of a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? a. Exceed the capacity of the existing circulation system, based on an applicable measure of effectiveness (as designated in a general plan policy, ordinance, etc.), taking into account all relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Less-than-Significant Impact. The number of vehicle trips is not anticipated to substantially increase under construction and operation of the proposed project. Construction and demolition activities would require additional trips as vehicles access the project site. In total, approximately 5,000 dump truck trips, 140 concrete truck trips, 300 tractor trailer trips, 1,260 work truck trips, 1,260 pickup truck trips, and 3,780 crew vehicles trips will take place over a 330 day period, which equates to approximately 36 trips per day. These additional trips would be temporary in nature and would cease once construction activities are completed. Moreover, they would occur on low traveled roadways such as Alta Road near the project site. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-56 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form Operation of the proposed project would not result in substantially greater vehicle trips and would be similar to current conditions at the project site. Operational trips may consist of a single daily trip to the pump station and a weekly trip for chloramines delivery and other chemicals used at the site. Level of service would not substantially change under the proposed project because the proposed pump station would replace two existing pump stations. Currently an existing partially paved road provides access to the project site. This road is used by District staff and contractors, and is available for emergency personnel if needed. As described in Chapter 1, “Project Description,” the access route to the site under the proposed project would be paved. The paved road would also serve as traction for vehicles tires, particularly during or after rain. The portion of the road to be paved would begin at Alta Road, head northeast to the proposed pump station, then continue north along the east side of the Roll Reservoir where it would turn into the reservoir and come to an end. Moreover, a culvert would be constructed over an existing natural drainage feature, which would stop vehicles from entering the drainage and potentially becoming stuck during or after heavy rains. Therefore, impacts on the existing circulation system would be less than significant. b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less-than-Significant Impact. There are no designated roads or highways near the project site. Furthermore, the proposed project would require only 24 average daily trips (ADTs) over the 330-day construction period, and many of these trips would take place outside peak hours. During operation, only 1-2 ADTs are anticipated, which is substantially less than the congestion management program’s threshold of 50 peak hour trips or 200 ADTs. Impacts would be less than significant. c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The proposed project would be a single story structure adjacent to much larger facilities. Therefore, the project would not create any change in air traffic patterns, and no impact would occur. d. Substantially increase hazards because of a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No Impact. See XVI.a. The improvements to the existing dirt access road would improve the safety of access to the project site. No impact would occur. e. Result in inadequate emergency access? Less-than-Significant Impact. See XVI.a. The improvements to the existing dirt access road would allow police and fire protection vehicles to more easily access the project site. No impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-57 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. The proposed project would include the replacement of existing pump facilities and associated improvements, including improvements to an existing access road. Implementation of the proposed project would not change or impede any established policies, plans, or programs that support alternative forms of transportation. No impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-58 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form XVII. Utilities and Service Systems Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or would new or expanded entitlements be needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less-than-Significant Impact. The new pump station 870-2 would be linked to a proposed sewer lift station and sewer main that would travel underground along the dirt access road that runs to Alta Road. The sewer main would tie in to the sewer main that is present under Alta Road, where it would eventually reach the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant (PLWTP) located in the City of San Diego. The PLWTP treats approximately 175 million gallons of wastewater per day generated in a 450-square-mile area by more than 2.2 million residents. The plant has a treatment capacity of 240 mgd. Thus, the project’s small contribution of wastewater from occasional restroom use and from chemical water waste would not pose a capacity issue for the PLWTP. Therefore, impacts related to wastewater treatment would be less than significant. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-59 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed pump station would connect to the existing conveyance system, which consists of water line stubs at the project site for future high pressure potable water and future recirculation. As discussed under XVII.a, the project would also construct and operate a sewer lift station and a sewer main line to Alta Road. Moreover, the proposed project would construct and operate a water pump station and remove two existing pump stations, the LHPS and HHPS. Impacts associated with these water and wastewater facilities are analyzed for each respective resource area in this IS/MND. Significant but mitigable impacts have been identified for biological resources, cultural resources, and geology/soils. See Sections IV, V, and VI for a discussion of the impacts and the required mitigation measures. c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would include onsite stormwater drainage facilities that would be designed to continue releasing stormwater into the existing natural drainage that is south of the proposed pump station. The proposed project would increase the impervious surface area by approximately 0.4 acre. This increase in impervious surface area is negligible given the area is largely undeveloped and much of the runoff would percolate into the soil or move through the existing ephemeral stream to the south. Moreover, the proposed project would have to comply with stormwater regulations and standards as described in Section IX, “Hydrology and Water Quality.” Given the minimal addition of site-specific stormwater infrastructure, no significant impacts would occur with project implementation. d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or would new or expanded entitlements be needed? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would not require new or expanded water entitlements. The only water that would be used by the proposed project would be water for dust suppression and cleaning during construction, and water for restroom use and cleaning during project operation. This amount of water would be minimal and would not have a significant effect on existing water supplies. Impacts would be less than significant. e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? No Impact. See XVII.a. f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? Less-than-Significant Impact. Solid waste would be generated during construction of the proposed project that would be disposed of or diverted in accordance with the appropriate regulations such as Assembly Bill 939, including opportunities to reuse and recycle construction materials. Minimal long-term solid waste would be generated by the proposed project and would largely consist of waste brought on site by visiting District staff or District vendors servicing the pump station and Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-60 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form would likely consist of food wrappings, drink containers, and cleaning products. The small amount of solid waste would be easily accommodated by existing landfills. Therefore, no impact related to landfill capacity would occur. g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact. See response to XVII.f. The proposed project would comply with all state and local solid waste regulations. No impact would occur. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-61 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section IV, “Biological Resources,” the project site currently has the potential to support one special status species: least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii). However, Mitigation Measures BIO-2 would reduce any potentially significant impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the CDFW or USFWS to less-than-significant levels. As discussed in Section V, “Cultural Resources,” the proposed project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The proposed project would incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-1 to reduce potential impacts related to the proposed project in the event that paleontological resources are identified during ground-disturbing activities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation measures. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in substantial degradation of the quality of the environment, and potential impacts associated with construction of the proposed project would not substantially affect the habitat of a wildlife species, cause a species to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, affect a rare or endangered species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-62 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. A cumulative impact could occur if the project would result in an incrementally considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact identified from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects for each resource area. Past projects that have occurred in the area within 1 mile of the project site include the Roll Reservoir, LHPS, HHPS, and the East Mesa Detention (including Firing Range) and R.J. Donovan Correctional Facilities. These projects represent the existing condition. Present projects are projects that are currently under construction. There are no known projects currently under construction within 1 mile of the project site. Future projects have development applications in process or approved, but no physical construction has yet occurred. The only project with an application in process for future development is the East Mesa Road Paving Project, located approximately 0.65 mile from the project site. The East Mesa Road Paving Project would pave a dirt and gravel service road that encircles a small reservoir in order to facilitate improved access around the reservoir. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the area have had relatively minor impacts individually due to the still largely open space and natural setting immediately surrounding these projects within 1 mile of the project site. These projects have not contributed to a significant cumulative impact in regard to agricultural and forestry resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities. However, these significant cumulative impacts have occurred from loss of biological resources, the change to the natural aesthetic setting, and the cumulative contribution to global climate change from greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, projects that affect the air basin have resulted in significant cumulative impacts on criteria pollutants such that the basin is currently in nonattainment for O3, PM2.5, and PM10. The project would have no impact on land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, and recreation and therefore would not contribute to a cumulative impact even if one was identified. Moreover, the proposed project’s impacts on agricultural and forestry, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, transportation, and utilities would be slight and would not amount to an incrementally cumulative considerable contribution to these resource areas such that it would cause these impacts to rise to a level of cumulative significance. Resource areas where the proposed project could potentially contribute to cumulative impacts are aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, and greenhouse gas emissions. However, the project’s impact on aesthetics is minimal due to the small building size adjacent to much larger structures and facilities such as the Roll Reservoir and the East Mesa Detention Facility. Air quality thresholds are cumulative in nature as they are designed to identify a project’s significant contribution to existing air emissions determined to be currently at hazardous levels. The project’s air emissions are substantially under these cumulative thresholds. The project’s impacts on biological resources would be fully mitigated as described in Section IV. Mitigation would ensure impacts are less than significant, and no cumulatively considerable contribution from the project would occur. The project’s effect on cultural resources is limited to potential impacts on fossil resources, which would be fully mitigated by providing a qualified monitor during excavation activities. The project’s impacts on geology and soils would be specific to the project site and would not exacerbate an existing geology and soils issue or affect the cumulative Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-63 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Otay Water District Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form projects in the project’s vicinity. Finally, the project’s level of greenhouse gas emissions are well under the cumulative threshold for greenhouse gases set by the County of San Diego. Thus, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to significant cumulative impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects would be less than cumulatively considerable. c. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction and operation of the proposed project would be within District-owned property that allows for facilities such as the proposed pump station, sewer lift station, and sewer main. As discussed in detail in this Initial Study, the proposed project would not have significant and unavoidable environmental effects that would cause direct or indirect adverse effects on humans. Significant but mitigable impacts would occur on biological resources, cultural resources, and geology/soils. After mitigation is incorporated, impacts related to these resources as they affect human beings directly or indirectly would be less than significant. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 3-64 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Chapter 4 References CalFire. 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA San Diego County. Last revised: November 2007. Available: http://frap.fire.ca.gov/webdata/maps/san_diego/fhszs_map.37.pdf. Accessed: March 12, 2014. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2013. Area Designations 2013. Available: < http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2013/area13/area13.htm>. Posted: October 23. County of San Diego. 2011. County of San Diego General Plan- Chapter 5 Conservation and Open Space Element. Available: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/pds/gpupdate/docs/BOS_Aug2011/C.1-4_Conservation_and_Open_Space.pdf. Accessed: July 15, 2014. County of San Diego. 2014. Office of Emergency Services. Available: http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/oes/. Accessed: March 12, 2014. Deméré, Thomas. 2010. Technical Report: Paleontological Resource Assessment Otay Ranch- Village 9, City of Chula Vista, San Diego County, CA. prepared by Department of Paleo Services San Diego Natural History Museum. Kyle, Carolyn. 1988. Cultural Resources Survey and Testing Program for the East Mesa Detention Facility, San Diego, California. Report on File at the South Coastal Information Center. San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD). 2010. Rules and Regulations. Available: http://www.sdapcd.org/rules/current_ rules.html. Last Updated: July 2010. State of California. 2011. California Scenic Highway Mapping System. San Diego County. Available: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm. Accessed: July 15, 2014. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2012. Exhaust and Crankcase Emission Factors for Nonroad Engine Modeling – Compression-Ignition. Available: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/nonrdmdl/nonrdmdl2010/420r10018.pdf. July. Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District 870-2 Pump Station 4-1 November 2016 ICF 669.13 Appendix A Air Emissions Calculations for Pump Station 870-2, ICF International, September 2016 San Diego County, Winter OWD 870-2 Pump Station 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population User Defined Industrial 1.00 User Defined Unit 2.07 1.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 13 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.6 40 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company San Diego Gas & Electric 2015Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 684.8 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 1 of 20 Project Characteristics - CO2 intensity factor updated to reflect 2015 operational year Land Use - 2.07 acres clear and grub based on updated data Construction Phase - 30 days for site excavation and demo, 300 for construction, starts 1/1/2015 Off-road Equipment - Demo - dozer with ripper and wheeled loader Off-road Equipment - Excavation and clearing - dozer with ripper and wheeled loader. Off-road Equipment - Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 1 each excavator, backhoe, forklift, crane, concrete pump, paving machine Trips and VMT - 5,000 haul truck trips assuming 10 CY trucks and 25,000 CY of material hauling (12,000 import + 13,000 export). 300 tractor trailer trips during construction. Vendors changed to HHDT and 20-mi trip distance for concrete trucks. Demolition - Grading - -15,000 CY exported for dust. 13,000 trucked offsite. Vehicle Trips - 4 trips/weekday, 1 each weekend day, to represent work trips, maint trips, and material deliveries. Fleet changed to 25% HHDT and 75% LDT1. Vechicle Emission Factors - 0.75 LDT1, 0.25 HHDT Vechicle Emission Factors - 0.75 LDT1, 0.25 HHDT Vechicle Emission Factors - 0.75 LDT1, 0.25 HHDT Consumer Products - Energy Use - 1,411,804 kWh/yr from engineers. 153,456 therm = 15,341,968.74 kBTU Operational Off-Road Equipment - 2011.5 HP Emergency Generator, 50 hrs/yr, 1 hr/day worst-case Diesel use for other equipment based on 329 HP pump, EPA defaults for fuel consumption and diesel weight, and 15 gallons/day. Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 2 0 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 220.00 300.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6.00 30.00 tblEnergyUse T24E 0.00 1,411,804.00 tblEnergyUse T24NG 0.00 15,341,968.74 tblGrading AcresOfGrading 15.00 2.07 tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 15,000.00 tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 12,000.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 0.00 1.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 2 of 20 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.00 2.07 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 6.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperDaysPerYear 260.00 50.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperDaysPerYear 260.00 365.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHorsePower 84.00 2,012.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHorsePower 84.00 329.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHoursPerDay 8.00 1.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHoursPerDay 8.00 1.10 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperLoadFactor 0.74 0.84 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperOffRoadEquipmentNumber 0.00 1.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperOffRoadEquipmentNumber 0.00 1.00 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 720.49 684.8 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2015 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 3,375.00 5,000.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.30 20.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.30 20.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 140.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorVehicleClass HDT_Mix HHDT tblTripsAndVMT VendorVehicleClass HDT_Mix HHDT tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 20.00 tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 0.00 20.00 tblVehicleEF HHD 0.02 0.25 tblVehicleEF HHD 0.02 0.25 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 3 of 20 tblVehicleEF HHD 0.02 0.25 tblVehicleEF LDA 0.51 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDA 0.51 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDA 0.51 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDT1 0.07 0.75 tblVehicleEF LDT1 0.07 0.75 tblVehicleEF LDT1 0.07 0.75 tblVehicleEF LDT2 0.19 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDT2 0.19 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDT2 0.19 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD1 0.04 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD1 0.04 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD1 0.04 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD2 5.3090e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD2 5.3090e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD2 5.3090e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MCY 6.5410e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MCY 6.5410e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MCY 6.5410e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MDV 0.13 0.00 tblVehicleEF MDV 0.13 0.00 tblVehicleEF MDV 0.13 0.00 tblVehicleEF MH 3.4710e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MH 3.4710e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MH 3.4710e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MHD 0.01 0.00 tblVehicleEF MHD 0.01 0.00 tblVehicleEF MHD 0.01 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 4 of 20 2.0 Emissions Summary tblVehicleEF OBUS 1.8320e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF OBUS 1.8320e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF OBUS 1.8320e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF SBUS 6.1400e-004 0.00 tblVehicleEF SBUS 6.1400e-004 0.00 tblVehicleEF SBUS 6.1400e-004 0.00 tblVehicleEF UBUS 2.0870e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF UBUS 2.0870e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF UBUS 2.0870e-003 0.00 tblVehicleTrips CNW_TTP 0.00 41.00 tblVehicleTrips CW_TTP 0.00 59.00 tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 0.00 5.00 tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 0.00 3.00 tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 0.00 92.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 0.00 1.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 0.00 1.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.00 4.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 5 of 20 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2015 7.0160 82.5981 63.0970 0.1476 4.7734 2.4774 7.2509 1.6933 2.3101 4.0034 0.0000 14,986.88 88 14,986.88 88 0.6378 0.0000 15,000.28 22 2016 6.1170 57.4931 50.8854 0.1273 2.6037 1.6917 4.2954 0.7115 1.6246 2.3361 0.0000 12,599.90 61 12,599.90 61 0.4615 0.0000 12,609.59 72 Total 13.1330 140.0913 113.9824 0.2750 7.3771 4.1691 11.5463 2.4049 3.9347 6.3396 0.0000 27,586.79 49 27,586.79 49 1.0993 0.0000 27,609.87 93 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2015 7.0160 82.5981 63.0970 0.1476 4.7734 2.4774 7.2509 1.6933 2.3101 4.0034 0.0000 14,986.88 88 14,986.88 88 0.6378 0.0000 15,000.28 22 2016 6.1170 57.4931 50.8854 0.1273 2.6037 1.6917 4.2954 0.7115 1.6246 2.3361 0.0000 12,599.90 61 12,599.90 61 0.4615 0.0000 12,609.59 72 Total 13.1330 140.0913 113.9824 0.2750 7.3771 4.1691 11.5463 2.4049 3.9347 6.3396 0.0000 27,586.79 49 27,586.79 49 1.0993 0.0000 27,609.87 93 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 6 of 20 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 2.3000e- 004 Energy 0.4533 4.1209 3.4615 0.0247 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 4,945.034 2 4,945.034 2 0.0948 0.0907 4,975.128 9 Mobile 0.0359 0.1649 0.4057 5.3000e- 004 0.0253 2.3100e- 003 0.0276 6.7600e- 003 2.1200e- 003 8.8800e- 003 50.4039 50.4039 1.7900e- 003 50.4414 Offroad 1.3351 18.0207 4.9254 0.0198 0.4720 0.4720 0.4720 0.4720 2,246.267 1 2,246.267 1 0.1178 2,248.741 8 Total 1.8243 22.3064 8.7928 0.0450 0.0253 0.7875 0.8128 6.7600e- 003 0.7873 0.7941 7,241.705 5 7,241.705 5 0.2144 0.0907 7,274.312 3 Unmitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 7 of 20 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 2.3000e- 004 Energy 0.4533 4.1209 3.4615 0.0247 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 4,945.034 2 4,945.034 2 0.0948 0.0907 4,975.128 9 Mobile 0.0359 0.1649 0.4057 5.3000e- 004 0.0253 2.3100e- 003 0.0276 6.7600e- 003 2.1200e- 003 8.8800e- 003 50.4039 50.4039 1.7900e- 003 50.4414 Offroad 1.3351 18.0207 4.9254 0.0198 0.4720 0.4720 0.4720 0.4720 2,246.267 1 2,246.267 1 0.1178 2,248.741 8 Total 1.8243 22.3064 8.7928 0.0450 0.0253 0.7875 0.8128 6.7600e- 003 0.7873 0.7941 7,241.705 5 7,241.705 5 0.2144 0.0907 7,274.312 3 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Excavation and Clearing Grading 1/1/2015 2/11/2015 5 30 2 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Building Construction 2/12/2015 4/6/2016 5 300 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 73.18 80.79 56.02 43.89 0.00 59.94 58.08 0.00 59.95 59.44 0.00 31.02 31.02 54.96 0.00 30.91 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 8 of 20 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Excavation and Clearing Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Excavation and Clearing Rubber Tired Dozers 1 2.00 255 0.40 Excavation and Clearing Rubber Tired Loaders 1 2.00 199 0.36 Excavation and Clearing Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Cranes 1 2.00 226 0.29 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Excavators 1 2.00 162 0.38 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Forklifts 1 2.00 89 0.20 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Paving Equipment 1 2.00 130 0.36 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Pumps 1 2.00 84 0.74 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 2.00 97 0.37 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Excavation and Clearing Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Excavation and Clearing 6 20.00 0.00 5,000.00 10.80 20.00 20.00 LD_Mix HHDT HHDT Pump Station and Yard Piping Const 10 20.00 140.00 0.00 10.80 20.00 20.00 LD_Mix HHDT HHDT Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 9 of 20 3.2 Excavation and Clearing - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.7052 0.0000 1.7052 0.8546 0.0000 0.8546 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7611 26.3031 15.6340 0.0209 1.6277 1.6277 1.5285 1.5285 2,135.201 0 2,135.201 0 0.5241 2,146.207 7 Total 2.7611 26.3031 15.6340 0.0209 1.7052 1.6277 3.3329 0.8546 1.5285 2.3831 2,135.201 0 2,135.201 0 0.5241 2,146.207 7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 4.1734 56.1935 46.4983 0.1248 2.9040 0.8485 3.7524 0.7952 0.7804 1.5756 12,682.63 37 12,682.63 37 0.1042 12,684.82 23 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0815 0.1015 0.9647 1.9600e- 003 0.1643 1.2900e- 003 0.1656 0.0436 1.1800e- 003 0.0448 169.0541 169.0541 9.4300e- 003 169.2522 Total 4.2549 56.2950 47.4630 0.1267 3.0683 0.8497 3.9180 0.8387 0.7816 1.6203 12,851.68 78 12,851.68 78 0.1137 12,854.07 45 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 10 of 20 3.2 Excavation and Clearing - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.7052 0.0000 1.7052 0.8546 0.0000 0.8546 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7611 26.3031 15.6340 0.0209 1.6277 1.6277 1.5285 1.5285 0.0000 2,135.201 0 2,135.201 0 0.5241 2,146.207 6 Total 2.7611 26.3031 15.6340 0.0209 1.7052 1.6277 3.3329 0.8546 1.5285 2.3831 0.0000 2,135.201 0 2,135.201 0 0.5241 2,146.207 6 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 4.1734 56.1935 46.4983 0.1248 2.9040 0.8485 3.7524 0.7952 0.7804 1.5756 12,682.63 37 12,682.63 37 0.1042 12,684.82 23 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0815 0.1015 0.9647 1.9600e- 003 0.1643 1.2900e- 003 0.1656 0.0436 1.1800e- 003 0.0448 169.0541 169.0541 9.4300e- 003 169.2522 Total 4.2549 56.2950 47.4630 0.1267 3.0683 0.8497 3.9180 0.8387 0.7816 1.6203 12,851.68 78 12,851.68 78 0.1137 12,854.07 45 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 11 of 20 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 3.3031 17.9749 14.0943 0.0208 1.2724 1.2724 1.2467 1.2467 1,915.386 5 1,915.386 5 0.4025 1,923.838 4 Total 3.3031 17.9749 14.0943 0.0208 1.2724 1.2724 1.2467 1.2467 1,915.386 5 1,915.386 5 0.4025 1,923.838 4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.5057 47.2026 39.0586 0.1048 2.4393 0.7127 3.1520 0.6679 0.6556 1.3235 10,653.41 23 10,653.41 23 0.0875 10,655.25 08 Worker 0.0815 0.1015 0.9647 1.9600e- 003 0.1643 1.2900e- 003 0.1656 0.0436 1.1800e- 003 0.0448 169.0541 169.0541 9.4300e- 003 169.2522 Total 3.5872 47.3040 40.0233 0.1068 2.6036 0.7140 3.3176 0.7115 0.6567 1.3682 10,822.46 64 10,822.46 64 0.0970 10,824.50 30 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 12 of 20 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 3.3031 17.9749 14.0943 0.0208 1.2724 1.2724 1.2467 1.2467 0.0000 1,915.386 5 1,915.386 5 0.4025 1,923.838 4 Total 3.3031 17.9749 14.0943 0.0208 1.2724 1.2724 1.2467 1.2467 0.0000 1,915.386 5 1,915.386 5 0.4025 1,923.838 4 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.5057 47.2026 39.0586 0.1048 2.4393 0.7127 3.1520 0.6679 0.6556 1.3235 10,653.41 23 10,653.41 23 0.0875 10,655.25 08 Worker 0.0815 0.1015 0.9647 1.9600e- 003 0.1643 1.2900e- 003 0.1656 0.0436 1.1800e- 003 0.0448 169.0541 169.0541 9.4300e- 003 169.2522 Total 3.5872 47.3040 40.0233 0.1068 2.6036 0.7140 3.3176 0.7115 0.6567 1.3682 10,822.46 64 10,822.46 64 0.0970 10,824.50 30 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 13 of 20 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2016 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.9887 16.9027 13.8356 0.0208 1.1529 1.1529 1.1290 1.1290 1,910.035 4 1,910.035 4 0.3767 1,917.946 2 Total 2.9887 16.9027 13.8356 0.0208 1.1529 1.1529 1.1290 1.1290 1,910.035 4 1,910.035 4 0.3767 1,917.946 2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.0542 40.4984 36.1805 0.1046 2.4394 0.5375 2.9770 0.6680 0.4945 1.1624 10,526.73 65 10,526.73 65 0.0761 10,528.33 40 Worker 0.0741 0.0921 0.8693 1.9500e- 003 0.1643 1.2300e- 003 0.1655 0.0436 1.1300e- 003 0.0447 163.1343 163.1343 8.7000e- 003 163.3171 Total 3.1283 40.5904 37.0497 0.1065 2.6037 0.5388 3.1425 0.7115 0.4956 1.2071 10,689.87 07 10,689.87 07 0.0848 10,691.65 10 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 14 of 20 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2016 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.9887 16.9027 13.8356 0.0208 1.1529 1.1529 1.1290 1.1290 0.0000 1,910.035 4 1,910.035 4 0.3767 1,917.946 2 Total 2.9887 16.9027 13.8356 0.0208 1.1529 1.1529 1.1290 1.1290 0.0000 1,910.035 4 1,910.035 4 0.3767 1,917.946 2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.0542 40.4984 36.1805 0.1046 2.4394 0.5375 2.9770 0.6680 0.4945 1.1624 10,526.73 65 10,526.73 65 0.0761 10,528.33 40 Worker 0.0741 0.0921 0.8693 1.9500e- 003 0.1643 1.2300e- 003 0.1655 0.0436 1.1300e- 003 0.0447 163.1343 163.1343 8.7000e- 003 163.3171 Total 3.1283 40.5904 37.0497 0.1065 2.6037 0.5388 3.1425 0.7115 0.4956 1.2071 10,689.87 07 10,689.87 07 0.0848 10,691.65 10 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 15 of 20 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.0359 0.1649 0.4057 5.3000e- 004 0.0253 2.3100e- 003 0.0276 6.7600e- 003 2.1200e- 003 8.8800e- 003 50.4039 50.4039 1.7900e- 003 50.4414 Unmitigated 0.0359 0.1649 0.4057 5.3000e- 004 0.0253 2.3100e- 003 0.0276 6.7600e- 003 2.1200e- 003 8.8800e- 003 50.4039 50.4039 1.7900e- 003 50.4414 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT User Defined Industrial 4.00 1.00 1.00 9,176 9,176 Total 4.00 1.00 1.00 9,176 9,176 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by User Defined Industrial 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 0.00 41.00 92 5 3 5.0 Energy Detail4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.000000 0.750000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.250000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 16 of 20 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.4533 4.1209 3.4615 0.0247 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 4,945.034 2 4,945.034 2 0.0948 0.0907 4,975.128 9 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.4533 4.1209 3.4615 0.0247 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 4,945.034 2 4,945.034 2 0.0948 0.0907 4,975.128 9 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day User Defined Industrial 42032.8 0.4533 4.1209 3.4615 0.0247 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 4,945.034 2 4,945.034 2 0.0948 0.0907 4,975.128 9 Total 0.4533 4.1209 3.4615 0.0247 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 4,945.034 2 4,945.034 2 0.0948 0.0907 4,975.128 9 Unmitigated 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 17 of 20 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 2.3000e- 004 Unmitigated 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 2.3000e- 004 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day User Defined Industrial 42.0328 0.4533 4.1209 3.4615 0.0247 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 4,945.034 2 4,945.034 2 0.0948 0.0907 4,975.128 9 Total 0.4533 4.1209 3.4615 0.0247 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 0.3132 4,945.034 2 4,945.034 2 0.0948 0.0907 4,975.128 9 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 18 of 20 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 2.3000e- 004 Total 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 2.3000e- 004 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 2.3000e- 004 Total 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 0.0000 2.3000e- 004 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 19 of 20 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 10.0 Vegetation 9.0 Operational Offroad ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Equipment Type lb/day lb/day Generator Sets 1.1521 15.8278 4.1654 0.0164 0.4070 0.4070 0.4070 0.4070 1,865.395 2 1,865.395 2 0.1018 1,867.532 0 Pumps 0.1830 2.1929 0.7600 3.3500e- 003 0.0650 0.0650 0.0650 0.0650 380.8720 380.8720 0.0161 381.2098 Total 1.3351 18.0207 4.9254 0.0198 0.4720 0.4720 0.4720 0.4720 2,246.267 2 2,246.267 2 0.1178 2,248.741 8 UnMitigated/Mitigated Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Generator Sets 1 1.00 50 2012 0.74 Diesel Pumps 1 1.10 365 329 0.84 Diesel CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:12 AMPage 20 of 20 San Diego County, Annual OWD 870-2 Pump Station 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population User Defined Industrial 1.00 User Defined Unit 2.07 1.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 13 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.6 40 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company San Diego Gas & Electric 2015Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 684.8 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 1 of 25 Project Characteristics - CO2 intensity factor updated to reflect 2015 operational year Land Use - 2.07 acres clear and grub based on updated data Construction Phase - 30 days for site excavation and demo, 300 for construction, starts 1/1/2015 Off-road Equipment - Demo - dozer with ripper and wheeled loader Off-road Equipment - Excavation and clearing - dozer with ripper and wheeled loader. Off-road Equipment - Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 1 each excavator, backhoe, forklift, crane, concrete pump, paving machine Trips and VMT - 5,000 haul truck trips assuming 10 CY trucks and 25,000 CY of material hauling (12,000 import + 13,000 export). 300 tractor trailer trips during construction. Vendors changed to HHDT and 20-mi trip distance for concrete trucks. Demolition - Grading - -15,000 CY exported for dust. 13,000 trucked offsite. Vehicle Trips - 4 trips/weekday, 1 each weekend day, to represent work trips, maint trips, and material deliveries. Fleet changed to 25% HHDT and 75% LDT1. Vechicle Emission Factors - 0.75 LDT1, 0.25 HHDT Vechicle Emission Factors - 0.75 LDT1, 0.25 HHDT Vechicle Emission Factors - 0.75 LDT1, 0.25 HHDT Consumer Products - Energy Use - 1,411,804 kWh/yr from engineers. 153,456 therm = 15,341,968.74 kBTU Operational Off-Road Equipment - 2011.5 HP Emergency Generator, 50 hrs/yr, 1 hr/day worst-case Diesel use for other equipment based on 329 HP pump, EPA defaults for fuel consumption and diesel weight, and 15 gallons/day. Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 2 0 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 220.00 300.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6.00 30.00 tblEnergyUse T24E 0.00 1,411,804.00 tblEnergyUse T24NG 0.00 15,341,968.74 tblGrading AcresOfGrading 15.00 2.07 tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 15,000.00 tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 12,000.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 0.00 1.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 2 of 25 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.00 2.07 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 6.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperDaysPerYear 260.00 50.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperDaysPerYear 260.00 365.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHorsePower 84.00 2,012.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHorsePower 84.00 329.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHoursPerDay 8.00 1.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperHoursPerDay 8.00 1.10 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperLoadFactor 0.74 0.84 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperOffRoadEquipmentNumber 0.00 1.00 tblOperationalOffRoadEquipment OperOffRoadEquipmentNumber 0.00 1.00 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 720.49 684.8 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2015 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 3,375.00 5,000.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.30 20.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.30 20.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 140.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorVehicleClass HDT_Mix HHDT tblTripsAndVMT VendorVehicleClass HDT_Mix HHDT tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 20.00 tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 0.00 20.00 tblVehicleEF HHD 0.02 0.25 tblVehicleEF HHD 0.02 0.25 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 3 of 25 tblVehicleEF HHD 0.02 0.25 tblVehicleEF LDA 0.51 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDA 0.51 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDA 0.51 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDT1 0.07 0.75 tblVehicleEF LDT1 0.07 0.75 tblVehicleEF LDT1 0.07 0.75 tblVehicleEF LDT2 0.19 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDT2 0.19 0.00 tblVehicleEF LDT2 0.19 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD1 0.04 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD1 0.04 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD1 0.04 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD2 5.3090e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD2 5.3090e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF LHD2 5.3090e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MCY 6.5410e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MCY 6.5410e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MCY 6.5410e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MDV 0.13 0.00 tblVehicleEF MDV 0.13 0.00 tblVehicleEF MDV 0.13 0.00 tblVehicleEF MH 3.4710e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MH 3.4710e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MH 3.4710e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF MHD 0.01 0.00 tblVehicleEF MHD 0.01 0.00 tblVehicleEF MHD 0.01 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 4 of 25 2.0 Emissions Summary tblVehicleEF OBUS 1.8320e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF OBUS 1.8320e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF OBUS 1.8320e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF SBUS 6.1400e-004 0.00 tblVehicleEF SBUS 6.1400e-004 0.00 tblVehicleEF SBUS 6.1400e-004 0.00 tblVehicleEF UBUS 2.0870e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF UBUS 2.0870e-003 0.00 tblVehicleEF UBUS 2.0870e-003 0.00 tblVehicleTrips CNW_TTP 0.00 41.00 tblVehicleTrips CW_TTP 0.00 59.00 tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 0.00 5.00 tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 0.00 3.00 tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 0.00 92.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 0.00 1.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 0.00 1.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.00 4.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 5 of 25 2.1 Overall Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2015 0.8811 8.8025 6.8274 0.0170 0.3651 0.2664 0.6314 0.1058 0.2543 0.3601 0.0000 1,540.557 4 1,540.557 4 0.0609 0.0000 1,541.837 1 2016 0.2066 1.9888 1.6627 4.4000e- 003 0.0879 0.0583 0.1463 0.0241 0.0560 0.0801 0.0000 394.8502 394.8502 0.0144 0.0000 395.1531 Total 1.0877 10.7912 8.4901 0.0214 0.4530 0.3247 0.7777 0.1299 0.3103 0.4402 0.0000 1,935.407 6 1,935.407 6 0.0754 0.0000 1,936.990 2 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2015 0.8811 8.8025 6.8274 0.0170 0.3651 0.2664 0.6314 0.1058 0.2543 0.3601 0.0000 1,540.557 1 1,540.557 1 0.0609 0.0000 1,541.836 8 2016 0.2066 1.9888 1.6627 4.4000e- 003 0.0879 0.0583 0.1463 0.0241 0.0560 0.0801 0.0000 394.8501 394.8501 0.0144 0.0000 395.1530 Total 1.0877 10.7912 8.4901 0.0214 0.4530 0.3247 0.7777 0.1299 0.3103 0.4402 0.0000 1,935.407 2 1,935.407 2 0.0754 0.0000 1,936.989 9 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 6 of 25 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 Energy 0.0827 0.7521 0.6317 4.5100e- 003 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 1,257.240 5 1,257.240 5 0.0343 0.0189 1,263.804 1 Mobile 4.7300e- 003 0.0236 0.0548 8.0000e- 005 3.5300e- 003 3.3000e- 004 3.8600e- 003 9.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 1.2500e- 003 0.0000 6.5680 6.5680 2.3000e- 004 0.0000 6.5729 Offroad 0.0622 0.7959 0.2428 1.0200e- 003 0.0220 0.0220 0.0220 0.0220 0.0000 105.3641 105.3641 4.9700e- 003 0.0000 105.4685 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.1497 1.5716 0.9294 5.6100e- 003 3.5300e- 003 0.0795 0.0831 9.5000e- 004 0.0795 0.0805 0.0000 1,369.172 6 1,369.172 6 0.0395 0.0189 1,375.845 5 Unmitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 7 of 25 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 Energy 0.0827 0.7521 0.6317 4.5100e- 003 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 1,257.240 5 1,257.240 5 0.0343 0.0189 1,263.804 1 Mobile 4.7300e- 003 0.0236 0.0548 8.0000e- 005 3.5300e- 003 3.3000e- 004 3.8600e- 003 9.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 1.2500e- 003 0.0000 6.5680 6.5680 2.3000e- 004 0.0000 6.5729 Offroad 0.0622 0.7959 0.2428 1.0200e- 003 0.0220 0.0220 0.0220 0.0220 0.0000 105.3641 105.3641 4.9700e- 003 0.0000 105.4685 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.1497 1.5716 0.9294 5.6100e- 003 3.5300e- 003 0.0795 0.0831 9.5000e- 004 0.0795 0.0805 0.0000 1,369.172 6 1,369.172 6 0.0395 0.0189 1,375.845 5 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 41.55 50.64 26.13 18.18 0.00 27.71 26.54 0.00 27.72 27.40 0.00 7.70 7.70 12.60 0.00 7.67 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 8 of 25 Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Excavation and Clearing Grading 1/1/2015 2/11/2015 5 30 2 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Building Construction 2/12/2015 4/6/2016 5 300 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Excavation and Clearing Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Excavation and Clearing Rubber Tired Dozers 1 2.00 255 0.40 Excavation and Clearing Rubber Tired Loaders 1 2.00 199 0.36 Excavation and Clearing Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Cranes 1 2.00 226 0.29 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Excavators 1 2.00 162 0.38 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Forklifts 1 2.00 89 0.20 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Paving Equipment 1 2.00 130 0.36 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Pumps 1 2.00 84 0.74 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 2.00 97 0.37 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Excavation and Clearing Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45 Trips and VMT Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 9 of 25 3.2 Excavation and Clearing - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0256 0.0000 0.0256 0.0128 0.0000 0.0128 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0414 0.3946 0.2345 3.1000e- 004 0.0244 0.0244 0.0229 0.0229 0.0000 29.0553 29.0553 7.1300e- 003 0.0000 29.2051 Total 0.0414 0.3946 0.2345 3.1000e- 004 0.0256 0.0244 0.0500 0.0128 0.0229 0.0358 0.0000 29.0553 29.0553 7.1300e- 003 0.0000 29.2051 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Excavation and Clearing 6 20.00 0.00 5,000.00 10.80 20.00 20.00 LD_Mix HHDT HHDT Pump Station and Yard Piping Const 10 20.00 140.00 0.00 10.80 20.00 20.00 LD_Mix HHDT HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 10 of 25 3.2 Excavation and Clearing - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0600 0.8461 0.6481 1.8700e- 003 0.0427 0.0127 0.0554 0.0117 0.0117 0.0234 0.0000 172.8168 172.8168 1.4100e- 003 0.0000 172.8464 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.1300e- 003 1.5000e- 003 0.0144 3.0000e- 005 2.4100e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.4300e- 003 6.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 6.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.3233 2.3233 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 2.3260 Total 0.0612 0.8476 0.6625 1.9000e- 003 0.0451 0.0127 0.0578 0.0123 0.0117 0.0240 0.0000 175.1401 175.1401 1.5400e- 003 0.0000 175.1723 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0256 0.0000 0.0256 0.0128 0.0000 0.0128 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0414 0.3946 0.2345 3.1000e- 004 0.0244 0.0244 0.0229 0.0229 0.0000 29.0553 29.0553 7.1300e- 003 0.0000 29.2051 Total 0.0414 0.3946 0.2345 3.1000e- 004 0.0256 0.0244 0.0500 0.0128 0.0229 0.0358 0.0000 29.0553 29.0553 7.1300e- 003 0.0000 29.2051 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 11 of 25 3.2 Excavation and Clearing - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0600 0.8461 0.6481 1.8700e- 003 0.0427 0.0127 0.0554 0.0117 0.0117 0.0234 0.0000 172.8168 172.8168 1.4100e- 003 0.0000 172.8464 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.1300e- 003 1.5000e- 003 0.0144 3.0000e- 005 2.4100e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.4300e- 003 6.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 6.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.3233 2.3233 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 2.3260 Total 0.0612 0.8476 0.6625 1.9000e- 003 0.0451 0.0127 0.0578 0.0123 0.0117 0.0240 0.0000 175.1401 175.1401 1.5400e- 003 0.0000 175.1723 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.3815 2.0761 1.6279 2.4000e- 003 0.1470 0.1470 0.1440 0.1440 0.0000 200.6939 200.6939 0.0422 0.0000 201.5795 Total 0.3815 2.0761 1.6279 2.4000e- 003 0.1470 0.1470 0.1440 0.1440 0.0000 200.6939 200.6939 0.0422 0.0000 201.5795 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 12 of 25 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.3883 5.4727 4.1920 0.0121 0.2759 0.0821 0.3580 0.0757 0.0755 0.1513 0.0000 1,117.779 0 1,117.779 0 9.1100e- 003 0.0000 1,117.970 3 Worker 8.7100e- 003 0.0115 0.1106 2.3000e- 004 0.0185 1.5000e- 004 0.0187 4.9200e- 003 1.4000e- 004 5.0600e- 003 0.0000 17.8892 17.8892 9.9000e- 004 0.0000 17.9099 Total 0.3970 5.4842 4.3026 0.0123 0.2944 0.0823 0.3767 0.0806 0.0757 0.1563 0.0000 1,135.668 1 1,135.668 1 0.0101 0.0000 1,135.880 2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.3815 2.0761 1.6279 2.4000e- 003 0.1470 0.1470 0.1440 0.1440 0.0000 200.6937 200.6937 0.0422 0.0000 201.5792 Total 0.3815 2.0761 1.6279 2.4000e- 003 0.1470 0.1470 0.1440 0.1440 0.0000 200.6937 200.6937 0.0422 0.0000 201.5792 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 13 of 25 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2015 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.3883 5.4727 4.1920 0.0121 0.2759 0.0821 0.3580 0.0757 0.0755 0.1513 0.0000 1,117.779 0 1,117.779 0 9.1100e- 003 0.0000 1,117.970 3 Worker 8.7100e- 003 0.0115 0.1106 2.3000e- 004 0.0185 1.5000e- 004 0.0187 4.9200e- 003 1.4000e- 004 5.0600e- 003 0.0000 17.8892 17.8892 9.9000e- 004 0.0000 17.9099 Total 0.3970 5.4842 4.3026 0.0123 0.2944 0.0823 0.3767 0.0806 0.0757 0.1563 0.0000 1,135.668 1 1,135.668 1 0.0101 0.0000 1,135.880 2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2016 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.1031 0.5831 0.4773 7.2000e- 004 0.0398 0.0398 0.0390 0.0390 0.0000 59.7801 59.7801 0.0118 0.0000 60.0276 Total 0.1031 0.5831 0.4773 7.2000e- 004 0.0398 0.0398 0.0390 0.0390 0.0000 59.7801 59.7801 0.0118 0.0000 60.0276 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 14 of 25 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2016 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1011 1.4025 1.1556 3.6100e- 003 0.0824 0.0185 0.1009 0.0226 0.0170 0.0397 0.0000 329.9137 329.9137 2.3600e- 003 0.0000 329.9633 Worker 2.3700e- 003 3.1300e- 003 0.0298 7.0000e- 005 5.5300e- 003 4.0000e- 005 5.5800e- 003 1.4700e- 003 4.0000e- 005 1.5100e- 003 0.0000 5.1564 5.1564 2.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.1622 Total 0.1035 1.4056 1.1854 3.6800e- 003 0.0879 0.0186 0.1065 0.0241 0.0171 0.0412 0.0000 335.0701 335.0701 2.6300e- 003 0.0000 335.1255 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.1031 0.5831 0.4773 7.2000e- 004 0.0398 0.0398 0.0390 0.0390 0.0000 59.7800 59.7800 0.0118 0.0000 60.0276 Total 0.1031 0.5831 0.4773 7.2000e- 004 0.0398 0.0398 0.0390 0.0390 0.0000 59.7800 59.7800 0.0118 0.0000 60.0276 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 15 of 25 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 4.7300e- 003 0.0236 0.0548 8.0000e- 005 3.5300e- 003 3.3000e- 004 3.8600e- 003 9.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 1.2500e- 003 0.0000 6.5680 6.5680 2.3000e- 004 0.0000 6.5729 Unmitigated 4.7300e- 003 0.0236 0.0548 8.0000e- 005 3.5300e- 003 3.3000e- 004 3.8600e- 003 9.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 1.2500e- 003 0.0000 6.5680 6.5680 2.3000e- 004 0.0000 6.5729 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.3 Pump Station and Yard Piping Const - 2016 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1011 1.4025 1.1556 3.6100e- 003 0.0824 0.0185 0.1009 0.0226 0.0170 0.0397 0.0000 329.9137 329.9137 2.3600e- 003 0.0000 329.9633 Worker 2.3700e- 003 3.1300e- 003 0.0298 7.0000e- 005 5.5300e- 003 4.0000e- 005 5.5800e- 003 1.4700e- 003 4.0000e- 005 1.5100e- 003 0.0000 5.1564 5.1564 2.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.1622 Total 0.1035 1.4056 1.1854 3.6800e- 003 0.0879 0.0186 0.1065 0.0241 0.0171 0.0412 0.0000 335.0701 335.0701 2.6300e- 003 0.0000 335.1255 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 16 of 25 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT User Defined Industrial 4.00 1.00 1.00 9,176 9,176 Total 4.00 1.00 1.00 9,176 9,176 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by User Defined Industrial 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 0.00 41.00 92 5 3 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.000000 0.750000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.250000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 17 of 25 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 438.5346 438.5346 0.0186 3.8400e- 003 440.1157 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 438.5346 438.5346 0.0186 3.8400e- 003 440.1157 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0827 0.7521 0.6317 4.5100e- 003 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 818.7059 818.7059 0.0157 0.0150 823.6884 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0827 0.7521 0.6317 4.5100e- 003 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 818.7059 818.7059 0.0157 0.0150 823.6884 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr User Defined Industrial 1.5342e +007 0.0827 0.7521 0.6317 4.5100e- 003 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 818.7059 818.7059 0.0157 0.0150 823.6884 Total 0.0827 0.7521 0.6317 4.5100e- 003 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 818.7059 818.7059 0.0157 0.0150 823.6884 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 18 of 25 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr User Defined Industrial 1.5342e +007 0.0827 0.7521 0.6317 4.5100e- 003 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 818.7059 818.7059 0.0157 0.0150 823.6884 Total 0.0827 0.7521 0.6317 4.5100e- 003 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 818.7059 818.7059 0.0157 0.0150 823.6884 Mitigated 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr User Defined Industrial 1.4118e +006 438.5346 0.0186 3.8400e- 003 440.1157 Total 438.5346 0.0186 3.8400e- 003 440.1157 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 19 of 25 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 Unmitigated 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr User Defined Industrial 1.4118e +006 438.5346 0.0186 3.8400e- 003 440.1157 Total 438.5346 0.0186 3.8400e- 003 440.1157 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 20 of 25 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 Total 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 Total 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 21 of 25 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr User Defined Industrial 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 22 of 25 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr User Defined Industrial 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 8.0 Waste Detail Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Category/Year CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 23 of 25 8.2 Waste by Land Use Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr User Defined Industrial 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr User Defined Industrial 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 24 of 25 10.0 Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Equipment Type tons/yr MT/yr Generator Sets 0.0288 0.3957 0.1041 4.1000e- 004 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0102 0.0000 42.3065 42.3065 2.3100e- 003 0.0000 42.3549 Pumps 0.0334 0.4002 0.1387 6.1000e- 004 0.0119 0.0119 0.0119 0.0119 0.0000 63.0576 63.0576 2.6600e- 003 0.0000 63.1136 Total 0.0622 0.7959 0.2428 1.0200e- 003 0.0220 0.0220 0.0220 0.0220 0.0000 105.3641 105.3641 4.9700e- 003 0.0000 105.4685 UnMitigated/Mitigated Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Generator Sets 1 1.00 50 2012 0.74 Diesel Pumps 1 1.10 365 329 0.84 Diesel CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 8/31/2016 11:11 AMPage 25 of 25 Appendix B Biological Resources Technical Report for Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project, AECOM, October 2013 Due to the large size of this appendix, the file has not been attached to the IS/MND. However, the report can be provided upon request within 2 business days. Contact information is provided on page 3-1 of the IS/MND. Appendix C Cultural Resources Assessment for Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project, Atkins, September 2013 CONFIDENTIAL Appendix D Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for Pump Station 870-2, Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., November 2013 PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT 870-2 PUMP STATION PROJECT ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS 648-010-17-11 AND 648-010-23-00 JAMUL, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: MS. LISA COBURN-BOYD ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 91978 PREPARED BY: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE STREET SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92120 Providing Professional Engineering Services Since 1959 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE GENERAL SITE INFORMATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... I 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................................................................................ 2 1.3 RELIANCE ............................................................................................................................................................ 3 2. PHYSIOGRAPHIC SETTING ......................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 TOPOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 4 2.4 REGIONAL AND LOCAL HYDROGEOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 4 2.5 HYDROLOGIC FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION ....................................................................................................... 5 3. SITE BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................... 5 3.1 SITE OWNERSHIP ................................................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 SITE HISTORY ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 3.2.1 Historical Use Review ..................................................................................................................................... 6 3.2.2 City/County Directories .................................................................................................................................. 8 3.2.3 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps ......................................................................................................................... 8 3.2.4 County of San Diego Building and Safety Department Files ........................................................................... 8 3.3 REGULATORY DATABASE SEARCH ...................................................................................................................... 8 3.3.1 East Mesa Detention Center – 446 Alta Road (300 feet to southeast) ......................................................... 8 3.3.2 Brown Field Bombing Range – 2 mile northeast of Otay (sic) Mesa, San Diego, San Diego, CA 92154 (4,500 feet to southwest) ....................................................................................................................................................... 9 3.3.3 Orphan Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 9 3.4 REGULATORY AGENCY REVIEW .......................................................................................................................... 9 3.4.1 San Diego Fire Protection District ................................................................................................................... 9 3.4.2 County of San Diego ....................................................................................................................................... 9 3.4.3 Department of Toxic Substances Control ..................................................................................................... 10 3.4.4 San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board ........................................................................................ 10 3.4.5 Review of Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources Files ................................................................... 10 3.5 INTERVIEWS WITH PROPERTY OWNER............................................................................................................. 10 3.5.1 Past or Present Uses Indicating Environmental Concern .............................................................................. 10 3.5.2 Environmental Liens of Governmental Notification ..................................................................................... 10 3.5.3 Presence of Hazardous Substances or Environmental Violations ................................................................. 10 3.5.4 Previous Assessments ................................................................................................................................... 11 3.5.5 Legal Proceedings ......................................................................................................................................... 11 3.6 USER SPECIFIC INFORMATION .......................................................................................................................... 11 3.6.1 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations ................................................................................... 11 3.6.2 Presence or Likely Presence of Contamination ............................................................................................. 11 3.6.3 Other ............................................................................................................................................................ 11 3.7 PREVIOUS ASSESSMENTS ................................................................................................................................. 12 4. SITE RECONNAISSANCE .......................................................................................................................... 12 4.1 PURPOSE ........................................................................................................................................................... 12 4.2 SUBJECT SITE ..................................................................................................................................................... 12 4.3 ADJACENT PROPERTIES..................................................................................................................................... 13 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) SECTION PAGE 5. FINDINGS AND OPINIONS ......................................................................................................................... 14 6. DATA GAPS ................................................................................................................................................. 14 7. LIMITATIONS/DEVIATIONS FROM ASTM PRACTICES .......................................................................... 14 8. CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................................................ 14 9. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 15 ATTACHMENTS FIGURES Figure 1 ...................................................................................................................... Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 ................................................................................................................................... Site Map Figure 3 and 4 ....................................................................................... Site Photograph Location Map Figures 5 through 14 ................................................................................................. Site Photographs TABLES Table 1 ....................................................................................................... Summary of Historical Use Table 2 ............................................................................................ Summary of Site Reconnaissance APPENDICES Appendix A ............................................................................. Resume of Environmental Professional Appendix B .............................................................. Historical Aerial Photographs/Topographic Maps Appendix C ..... .................................. EDR Report (Provided on Compact Disc as a PDF Document) Appendix D ............................................................................................. Phase I Client Questionnaire EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request and authorization of the Client (Otay Water District), Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc. (SCS&T), conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the property identified as 870-2 Pump Station and located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, in the community of Jamul, San Diego County, California (Figure 1). The purpose of this Phase I ESA was to assess the presence or likely presence of an existing, historical, or threatened release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures, soil, and/or groundwater beneath the subject property, to the extent practical (i.e., recognized environmental conditions as delineated in ASTM E1527-13). The subject property consists of two parcels identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN) 648- 010-17-11 and 648-010-23-00. The subject property is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road. The subject property is comprised of approximately 19 acres. In general, the subject property is bounded by undeveloped land to the north and west, and by the East Mesa Detention Facility Complex on the south and east (Figure 2). Other than the prison and law enforcement training facilities adjacent to and near the site, the closest commercial development is “Impact Auto Body and Paint”, approximately 2 miles south of the site on Otay Mesa Road. According to the County of San Diego Land Use and Environment Group (LUEG), the subject property is zoned Public/Semi-Public Facilities. Based on historical records such as aerial photographs, and topographic maps, the subject property was undeveloped until sometime after 1953 and prior to 1964 when it was developed into a reservoir/public utility facility. Expansion of the reservoir and associated onsite facilities occurred between 1964 and 2005, when the site reached its current configuration (Figure 3). On November 19th, 2013, SCS&T personnel conducted a site reconnaissance to physically observe the site and adjoining properties for conditions indicating a potential recognized environmental concern. Concerns would include any evidence of contamination, distressed vegetation, petroleum-hydrocarbon staining, waste drums, illegal dumping, or improper waste storage and/or handling. Evidence of the likely presence of recognized environmental conditions were not noted on the subject property during our site reconnaissance. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase I ESA- 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page ii We have performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Designation E1527-13 for the property identified as 870-2 Pump Station and located at northern terminus of Alta Road, in the community of Jamul, San Diego County, California. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Section 7.0 of this report. This Phase I ESA has revealed no evidence of the likely presence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the property. DISCLAIMER Clients’ reliance, and any third party’s reliance on the terms, conditions, findings, conclusions, and opinions set forth in this report is expressly conditioned upon Client’s consent, acknowledgement, and agreement to the following terms (“Agreement”). If Client or any third party does not agree to this Agreement, they shall not be entitled to rely upon any work performed by Consultant including but not limited to, this Report. The Agreement for Consultant to perform its scope of services at the Project and to render this report and any subsequent reliance letters is entered into solely for the benefit of Client and Consultant and in no way is intended to benefit or extend any right or interest to any third party. It is the intention of Client and Consultant that they are the sole beneficiaries to the rights and obligations arising herefrom, and any benefit to be derived by any third party is merely incidental to and unintended by the Agreement. Consultant’s services in connection with the Project shall not subject the Consultant’s individual employees, officers, or directors to any personal legal exposure for the risks associated with this project. Therefore, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the Client agrees that as the Client’s sole and exclusive remedy, any claim, demand or suit shall be directed and/or asserted against the Consultant, a California corporation, and not against any of the Consultant’s individual employees, officers or directors. Consultant’s liability for damages due to professional negligence will be limited to an amount not to exceed the total fees received by consultant under this agreement, or the amount of $50,000, whichever is greater. It is intended that this limitation apply in the aggregate to any and all claims, losses, costs or damages, including attorney’s fees and expert witness fees and costs, resulting from or related to the project or this agreement. Consultant shall, upon Client’s written request within 180 days after the date of any report produced by Consultant for Client under this Agreement provide up to two letters of reliance to third party lenders or equity participants identified by Client for an additional fee of $500. Such Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase I ESA- 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page iii reliance letters shall entitle the addressees thereof to rely upon the report addressed to Client as though the report were addressed to such third party, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and acknowledging that the limitation on liability in this Agreement applies to the aggregate liability to Client and any such third parties. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 2 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was to assess the possible presence of recognized environmental conditions for the property identified as 870-2 Pump Station and located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, in the community of Jamul, San Diego County, California (Figure 1). The purpose of this Phase I ESA was to assess the presence or likely presence of recognized environmental conditions as delineated in ASTM E1527-13). Recognized environmental conditions include property uses that may indicate the presence of an existing, historical, or threatened release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures, soil, and/or groundwater beneath the property. The term recognized environmental conditions is not intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk or harm to public health or the environment, and that would not be subject to enforcement action by a regulatory agency. This ESA was performed in general conformance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process, Designation E1527-13. 1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES The following scope of services was conducted by SCS&T: A review of readily available documents which included previous environmental reports by SCS&T, topographic, geologic, and hydrogeologic conditions associated with the subject site. A review of readily available maps, aerial photographs and other documents relative to historical subject site usage and development. A review of readily available federal, state, county, and city documents and database files concerning hazardous material storage, generation and disposal, active and inactive landfills, existing environmental concerns, and associated permits related to the subject property and/or immediately adjacent sites. A site reconnaissance to ascertain current conditions of the subject property. Interviews with person(s) knowledgeable of the subject property. The preparation of this report which presents our findings, opinions and conclusions. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 3 1.3 RELIANCE This ESA has been prepared for the sole use of the Otay Water District (“Client”). This assessment should not be relied upon by other parties without the express written consent of SCS&T and the above named client. Any use or reliance upon this assessment by a party other than the above named client, therefore shall be solely at the risk of such third party and without legal recourse against SCS&T, its employees, officers, or directors, regardless of whether the action in which recovery of damages is brought or based upon contract, tort, statute or otherwise. This assessment should not be interpreted as a statistical evaluation of the subject site, but rather is intended to provide a preliminary indication of on-site impacts from previous site usage and/or the release of hazardous materials. If no significant indicators of the presence of hazardous materials and/or petroleum contamination are encountered during this search, this does not preclude their presence. The findings in this report are based upon published geologic and hydrogeologic information, and information (both documentary and oral) provided by the County of San Diego, Environmental Data Resources, Inc., (EDR®) (i.e., agency database search), various state and federal agencies, and SCS&T’s field observations. Some of this data is subject to change overtime and is based on information not currently observable or measurable, but recorded by documents or orally reported by individuals. 2. PHYSIOGRAPHIC SETTING 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property consists of two parcels identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN) 648- 010-17-11 and 648-010-23-00. The subject property is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road. The subject property is comprised of approximately 19 acres. In general, the subject property is bounded by undeveloped land to the north and west, and by the East Mesa Detention Facility Complex on the south and east (Figure 2). Other than the prison and law enforcement training facilities adjacent to and near the site, the closest commercial development is “Impact Auto Body and Paint”, approximately 2 miles south of the site on Otay Mesa Road. According to the County of San Diego Land Use and Environment Group (LUEG), the subject property is zoned Public/Semi-Public Facilities. Based on historical records such as aerial photographs, and topographic maps, the subject property was undeveloped until sometime after 1953 and prior to 1964 when it was developed into a reservoir/public utility facility. Expansion of the reservoir and associated onsite facilities occurred between 1964 and 2005, when the site reached its current configuration (Figure 2). Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 4 2.2 TOPOGRAPHY The subject property is located on the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5 Minute Otay Mesa Quadrangle map (USGS, 1975). The map indicates the elevation of the subject property is approximately 560 feet above mean sea level (msl). The subject site is located along a northwest- southeast running ridge line. The majority of the subject site is relatively flat with the southern portion of the subject site descending towards the south into a small ravine. 2.3 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY The subject property lies within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. The Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province, one of the largest geomorphic units in western North America, extends from the Transverse Ranges Geomorphic Province and the Los Angeles Basin, south to Baja California. It is bound on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the south by the Gulf of California and on the east by the Colorado Desert Province. The Peninsular Ranges are essentially a series of northeast-southeast oriented fault blocks (CDMG, 2002). Regional mapping of the El Cajon 30’ X 60’ Quadrangle (Todd, 2004) indicates the subject property is underlain by Tertiary-age fanglomerate deposits consisting of moderately to well consolidated and slopewash. The subject property is not within a Fault-Rupture Hazard Zone (Hart & Bryant, 2007; CDMG, 2000) or within a known Active Fault Near-Source Zone (CDMG, 1988). Three (3) major faults zones and some subordinate fault zones are found in this province. The Elsinore Fault zone and the San Jacinto Fault zones trend northwest-southeast, and are found near the middle of the province. The San Andreas Fault zone borders the northeasterly margin of the province, whereas, a fault related to the San Andreas Transform Fault System, the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault zone, exists near the western margin and Continental Borderland Geomorphic Province (Jennings, 1994). The possibility of ground acceleration or ground shaking at the site may be considered similar to the Southern California region as a whole. Soil in the vicinity of the site has been identified by the United States Department of Agriculture – Soil Conservation Service as a gravely clay loam within the Stockpen Soil Series and a loam within the Huerhuero Soil Series (USDA, 2011). These soils are moderately to well drained and have very slow infiltration rates. 2.4 REGIONAL AND LOCAL HYDROGEOLOGY According to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board – San Diego Region 9 (RWQCB, 1995), the subject site is located within the Otay Valley Hydrologic Area, of the Otay Hydrologic Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 5 Unit. Groundwater in this subarea has been classified as having existing beneficial uses for municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply and industrial service supply. The California Department of Water Resources Water Data Library (WDL) website and information provided in the EDR® report indicates that there are no Public Water Supply Wells located within 1- mile of the subject property. Additionally, SCS&T reviewed data on the GeoTracker Website, regarding depth to groundwater for properties located near the subject site. No groundwater monitoring wells are reported to be within ½ mile of the subject property. 2.5 HYDROLOGIC FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION SCS&T reviewed the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Hazard Map online database (2010) to determine if the subject property was located within an area designated as a Flood Hazard Zone. According to the information reviewed on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Map Numbers FM06073C2181G and FM06073C2183G, the subject property is located within Zone X. Zone X designates the following: Areas outside the one percent annual chance floodplain; Areas of one percent annual chance sheet flow flooding where average depths are less than one-foot; Areas of one percent annual chance stream flooding where the contributing drainage area is less than one square mile; Or, areas protected from the one percent annual chance flood by levees. No Base Flood Elevations or depths are shown within this zone. Insurance purchase is not required in these zones. 3. SITE BACKGROUND 3.1 SITE OWNERSHIP The current owner of the subject property is listed as the Otay Water District with a mailing address of 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard, Spring Valley, California 91978. 3.2 SITE HISTORY SCS&T reviewed readily available information sources to evaluate historic land use in and around the subject site. These information sources include aerial photographs, USGS maps and files Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 6 maintained by the County of San Diego. A summary of our reviews are presented in the following sections. 3.2.1 Historical Use Review Aerial photographs and historical topographical maps were reviewed to identify historical land development and any surface conditions which may have impacted the subject property. Photographs and historical topographic maps dating 1903, 1904, 1943, 1953, 1955, 1964, 1971, 1975, 1980, 1990, 1991, 1994, 1996, 2005, 2009, 2010 and 2012 were obtained and reviewed from EDR®, an environmental information/database retrieval service. Aerial imagery from 1994 through 2012 maintained by Google Earth® was also reviewed. Table 1 summarizes the results of the aerial photograph and historical topographic map review. Copies of the aerial photographs and historical topographic maps provided by EDR® are included in Appendix B. Based on the data reviewed, the subject property was undeveloped until at least 1953. Sometime after 1953 and prior to 1964, the subject site began to be used for a reservoir/public utility facility. A small reservoir is visible in the area currently identified as the “high head pump station”. Several small structures are apparent in the area currently identified as the “low head pump station”. Access roads are also apparent at the site in the 1964 aerial photograph. Roll Reservoir was constructed sometime prior to 1971. In the subsequent aerial photographs, the construction of the prison facility and law enforcement training facility adjacent to the subject site begins in about 1990 and is completed by 2005. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 7 TABLE 1 Summary of Historical Use Year Source and Scale Comments 1903 Topographic map 1:125,500 Subject property and adjacent properties appear undeveloped. Scale not suitable to discern individual properties. 1904 Topographic map 1:250,000 Subject and adjacent properties appear similar to the 1903 topographic map. 1943 Topographic map 1:62,500 Subject and adjacent property appear similar to the 1903 topographic map. 1953 Aerial Photograph 1: 6,000 Subject and adjacent properties appear undeveloped. Dirt roads are visible south of the subject property. 1955 Topographic map 1:24,000 Subject and adjacent properties appear undeveloped. “Jeep Trails” are mapped on the north side of the subject property. 1955 Topographic map 1:62,500 Subject and adjacent property appear similar to the previous topographic map. 1964 Aerial Photograph 1:6,000 Structures associated with the Low Head Pump Station and High Head Pump Station are present. An access road connects the two pump stations. Individual structures are difficult to discern. 1971 Topographic Map 1:24,000 High Head Pump Station and Roll Reservoir are mapped on site. Adjacent properties appear undeveloped. 1971 Aerial Photograph 1:7,6,000 Roll Reservoir and a smaller reservoir are visible on the subject property. The smaller reservoir is located where the current High Head Pump Station is mapped. Adjacent properties appear undeveloped. 1975 Topographic Map 1:24,000 The subject and adjacent properties appear similar to the previous topographic map. 1980 Aerial Photograph 1:6,000 The smaller reservoir at the High Head Pump Station location appears filled in. Adjacent and surrounding properties appear undeveloped. 1990 Aerial Photograph 1:6,000 Subject property appears similar to the previous aerial photograph. Alta Road appears in its current alignment. Construction has begun on the prison facility southeast of subject property 1991 Topographic Map 1:50,000 Map scale does not allow discernment of individual properties and structures. 1994 Aerial Photograph 1:6,000 Subject and adjacent properties appear similar to previous aerial photograph. 1996 Topographic Map 1:24,000 Roll Reservoir is apparent on subject property. The adjacent prison facility is mapped and identified as “GF Bailey Detention Fac.”. 2005 Aerial Photograph 1:6,000 Subject property appears as in its current configuration. A law enforcement training facility has been constructed between the subject property and the prison facility. 2009, 2010, and 2012 Aerial Photographs 1:6,000 Subject and adjacent properties appear similar to previous aerial photograph. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 8 3.2.2 City/County Directories City and county directories were reviewed for listings that may indicate the use or storage of hazardous materials. SCS&T personnel reviewed listings from 1970 to 2013. The subject property was not listed in any of the city/county directories. No listings were noted that may indicate the use or storage of hazardous materials. 3.2.3 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps Sanborn Fire Insurance maps were developed in the late 1800s and early 1900s for use as an assessment tool for fire insurance rates in urbanized areas. EDR® performed a search of their complete Library of Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps. Sanborn Map coverage of the subject property was not found. 3.2.4 County of San Diego Building and Safety Department Files SCS&T contacted the County of San Diego Land Use and Environment Group to review any existing files related to the subject property. SCS&T reviewed historical permits available on-line with the Building Department. No records for the subject site were on file. 3.3 REGULATORY DATABASE SEARCH SCS&T reviewed known electronic database listings for possible hazardous waste generating establishments in the vicinity of the subject site, as well as adjacent sites with known environmental concerns. Facilities were identified by county, state, or federal agencies that generate, store, or dispose of hazardous materials. The information in this section was obtained from EDR®, an environmental information/database retrieval service. A copy of the EDR® report is provided in Appendix C, (only on compact disc as a PDF document), along with a description of the individual databases. The subject property was not listed on the databases reviewed as having environmental concerns. Two additional sites are identified within ¼-mile of the subject property in the EDR report as having known environmental concerns are identified and discussed in the following sections. 3.3.1 East Mesa Detention Center – 446 Alta Road (300 feet to southeast) This facility is listed on the following databases: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Listing (LUST) San Diego Co. Site Assessment and Mitigation Database (San Diego Co. SAM) This site is reported to have had two 12,000 gallon UST’s. The UST’s were removed in 2005 and replaced with a single split wall 20,000 gallon UST. Soil sampling conducted during UST removal Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 9 activities indicated a release of petroleum hydrocarbons had occurs at the site. Subsequent assessment activities estimated a total of 260 cubic yards of soil had been impacted by the release. The County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health issued a “no further action required” for the site in December 2007. Based on a review of files provided by EDR®, and files maintained by GeoTracker, it is not likely that this release or activities at this site have created a recognized environmental condition at the subject site. This release should be considered a “controlled recognized environmental condition”. 3.3.2 Brown Field Bombing Range – 2 mile northeast of Otay (sic) Mesa, San Diego, San Diego, CA 92154 (4,500 feet to southwest) This facility is listed on the following databases: State Response Sites (Response) Envirostor Database (Envirostor) This site is known or suspected to contain military munitions and explosives. Based on the distance of this site from the subject property and the site’s historic use, it is not likely that activities at this site have adversely impacted the subject property. 3.3.3 Orphan Summary The sites listed included in the Orphan Summary did not appear to be adjacent to the site or have environmental concerns that are likely to have adversely impacted the site. 3.4 REGULATORY AGENCY REVIEW 3.4.1 San Diego Fire Protection District SCS&T contacted the San Diego Rural Fire Protection District (SDRFPD) concerning any permit, inspection, UST, of cleanup information available concerning the subject property. As of the date of this report, the SDRFPD has not responded. 3.4.2 County of San Diego Department of Planning and Land Use The County of San Diego Department of Planning and Land Use (DPLU) was contacted regarding code violations or building/construction permits for the subject property. No information from the DPLU was readily available. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 10 3.4.3 Department of Toxic Substances Control SCS&T researched the DTSC online database EnviroStor for listings on or adjacent to the subject property. The subject property was not listed on any of the databases researched. 3.4.4 San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board SCS&T reviewed the online database GeoTracker (2010), which provides records on LUSTs and Spills, Leaks, Investigation and Cleanup (SLIC) sites, which is maintained by the State Water Quality Control Board. The subject property was not listed on any of the databases researched. 3.4.5 Review of Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources Files Oil and gas wells were not observed at the subject property during our site reconnaissance. A review of the California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources Website for oil and gas fields in California and Alaska (CDOGGR, 2007), Wildcat Map W-I-7, did not indicate the presence of oil or gas wells on or adjacent to the subject property. 3.5 INTERVIEWS WITH PROPERTY OWNER SCS&T previously contacted the current property owner representative, Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd, with the Otay Water District, for information regarding the subject property. The information provided by Ms. Coburn-Boyd is documented below. 3.5.1 Past or Present Uses Indicating Environmental Concern Ms. Coburn-Boyd stated that she is not aware of current or previous uses of the subject property and of any adjoining property which may create an environmental concern. 3.5.2 Environmental Liens of Governmental Notification Ms. Coburn-Boyd stated that she is not aware of any environmental liens of governmental notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with respect to the property of any facility located on the property. 3.5.3 Presence of Hazardous Substances or Environmental Violations Ms. Coburn-Boyd stated that she is aware of the past and current existence of hazardous substances or petroleum products on the subject property. There is a 500-gallon oil storage tanks on the subject property. Ms. Coburn-Boyd is not aware of environmental violations with respect to the property or any facility located on the property. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 11 3.5.4 Previous Assessments Ms. Coburn-Boyd stated that she is not aware of any environmental site assessment reports prepared for the property that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property of that recommended further assessment of the property. 3.5.5 Legal Proceedings Ms. Coburn-Boyd stated that she is not aware of any past, threatened, or pending lawsuits of administrative proceedings concerning a release of threatened release of any hazardous substance of petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of the property. 3.6 USER SPECIFIC INFORMATION Pursuant to ASTM E1527-05, SCS&T provided a Phase I ESA User Specific Questionnaire to the “user” (the person on whose behalf the Phase I ESA is being conducted), Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd, with the Otay Water District. The User Specific Information provided by Ms. Coburn-Boyd is documented below. A list of the user specific questions (per ASTM E1527-05) with Ms. Coburn- Boyd’s associated responses are included in Appendix D. 3.6.1 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations Ms. Coburn-Boyd stated that she is not aware of any environmental liens or activity use limitations on the subject property. 3.6.2 Presence or Likely Presence of Contamination Ms. Coburn-Boyd stated that she has limited knowledge of the current of the current and historic uses the subject property as they relate to the presence or likely presence of hazardous substances and petroleum products. She is not aware of any spills or chemical releases or of any environmental cleanups that have taken place at the subject property. 3.6.3 Other Ms. Coburn-Boyd did note that the Phase I ESA was requested analyze any potential impacts from hazards/hazardous materials for the CEQA document being developed for the construction of a pump station. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 12 3.7 PREVIOUS ASSESSMENTS It is SCS&T understanding that geotechnical, biological resource, and archeological assessments have been conducted for the subject property by others. 4. SITE RECONNAISSANCE 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of our site reconnaissance was to physically observe the subject site, site structures, and adjoining properties for conditions indicating an existing release, past release, or material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the subject site, or into soil and/or groundwater beneath the subject property. This would include any evidence of contamination, distressed vegetation, petroleum-hydrocarbon surface staining, waste drums, USTs, ASTs, illegal dumping, or improper waste storage/handling. Detailed information pertaining to our site reconnaissance is provided in the text below. 4.2 SUBJECT SITE An SCS&T representative visited the subject property on November 19, 2013. SCS&T conducted a walking inspection around the perimeter of the subject property, and then traversed the subject property. Visual conditions observed during the site reconnaissance of the subject property, are documented in a Photographic Log (Figures 5 through 14), and summarized in Table 2. TABLE 2 Summary of Site Reconnaissance Item Concerns Comments General Housekeeping No No concerns noted. Surface Spills No None observed. Stained Surfaces Yes Minor surficial stating near pump at High Head Pump Station. Fill Materials No No significant fill soils. Pits/Ponds/Lagoons No None observed. Surface Impoundments No None observed. ASTs/USTs Yes One 240-gallon and one 500-gallon AST were observed within the High Head Pump Station. Distressed Vegetation No None observed. Wetlands No None observed. Electrical Substations No None observed. Areas of Dumping No Greenwaste, wood, tires, and irrigation lines. Transformers Yes Two power poles with transformers were observed near Low and High Head Pump Stations. Waste/ Scrap Storage No No concerns. Chemical Use/Storage No None observed. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 13 The subject property consists of two parcels identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN) 648- 010-17-11 and 648-010-23-00. Access to subject property is from the northern terminus of Alta Road. The subject site is access through dirt roads throughout the site. Numerous underground vaults, blow off valves, high pressure gas lines, and underground water systems were observed through the subject site. Two pump stations, Low Head and High Head Pump Station are also located on the subject property. The majority of the subject site is currently covered with native weeds, grasses, and shrubs. Low Head Pump Station- Low Head Pump Station is located in the northern portion of the site. A chain-link fence was observed around the perimeter with a locked access gate. One 5 gallon bucket was observed in the northern portion of the Low Head Pump Station. A utility pole with pole-mounted electrical transformers, and electrical service lines were observed near the pumps. No staining, odors, or indications of releases from the transformers were observed. High Head Pump Station- High Head Pump Station is located in the eastern portion of the site. A chain-link fence was observed around the perimeter with a locked access gate. Two Above Ground Storage Tanks (ASTs) and two 55 gallon drums were observed within the High Head Pump Station. One AST appears to be empty and was labeled with used oil. The other AST was labeled with new oil. The 55-gallon drums were also labeled as oil. Minor surficial sating was observed the general location of the pumps. A utility pole with pole-mounted electrical transformers, and electrical service lines were observed near the dirt access road. No significant staining, odors, or indications of releases from the ASTs or transformers were observed. The minor surficial staining observed is considered a de minimis condition. 4.3 ADJACENT PROPERTIES SCS&T conducted a visual and auto reconnaissance of the adjoining neighborhoods (to the extent practical) to evaluate the potential for offsite impacts that may affect the subject property. These would include evidence of chemical storage or usage, surface staining or leakage, distressed vegetation, or evidence of illegal dumping. In general, the subject property is surrounded by agricultural/residential development. Immediately adjacent properties were not identified as having environmental related issues on any of the databases researched, and are not considered as an environmental concern at this time. No service stations, dry cleaner, or heavy industrial properties were located in the immediate vicinity. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 14 5. FINDINGS AND OPINIONS Based on the information obtained in this ESA, SCS&T has the following findings and opinions: Historical REC’s – No known or suspected Historic unresolved REC’s have been revealed during the preparation of this ESA. Known or suspected REC’s – No known or suspected REC’s have been revealed during the preparation of this ESA. Controlled REC’s – One controlled REC, East Mesa Detention Center, has been revealed during the preparation of this ESA. De Minimis Conditions – A de minimis condition related to minor surface staining near the AST’s within the “high head pump station” was noted during the preparation of this ESA. 6. DATA GAPS Section 3.2.21 (ASTM 1527-13) defines a data gap as “a lack or inability to obtain information required by the practice despite good faith efforts of the environmental professional to gather such information.” Significant data gaps affect the ability of the Environmental Professional to identify recognized environmental conditions affecting the site. Based on the information obtained during the course of this investigation, no data gaps were encountered. 7. LIMITATIONS/DEVIATIONS FROM ASTM PRACTICES Section 12.10 (ASTM 1527-13), states that all limitations, deletions and deviations from this practice shall be listed individually and in detail, including client imposed constraints, and all additions should be listed. SCS&T believes that there are no exceptions to, or deletions from, the ASTM Designation E1527- 05 Guidelines. 8. CONCLUSIONS We have performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Designation E1527-13 for the property identified as 870-2 Pump Station and located at northern terminus of Alta Road, in the community of Jamul, San Diego County, California. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Section 7.0 of this report. This Phase I ESA has revealed no evidence of the likely presence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the property. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Page 15 9. REFERENCES 1) California Department of Water Resources, Water Data Library (WDL), Website (http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary), accessed November 2013. 2) California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 2000, Digital Images of Official Maps of Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones of California, Southern Region, DMG CD 2000-003. 3) California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada, published by International Conference of Building Officials. 4) California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (CDOGGR) website, www.consrv.ca.gov, Oil and Gas Maps District 1, accessed November 2013. 5) Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC), Website (http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/), EnviroStor database, accessed November2013. 6) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) website, accessed November 2013 (www.fema.gov). 7) Hart, E.W., and Bryant, W.A., 2007, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. 8) Jennings, Charles W., 1994 Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Division of Mines and Geology, California Geologic Data Map Series, Map Number 6. 9) San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board –Region 9, 1995, (SARWQCB): California State Water Resources Control Board Publication. 10) State Water Resources Control Board, Website, GeoTracker database, (http://www.geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov/), accessed November 2013. 11) United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service, Website (http://www.websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/) Web Soil Survey, accessed November 2013. 12) United States Geologic Survey (USGS), 1968 (date revised 1975), 7.5’ Topographic Map, Otay Mesa, California Quadrangle. 13) United States Geologic Survey (USGS), 2004, Preliminary Map of the El Cajon 30’ X 60’ Quadrangle, Version 1, compiled by V.R. Todd. APPENDIX A RESUME OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL DOUGLAS A. SKINNER, CEG, PG Principal Geologist SUMMARY As a Geologist with Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc. since 1999, Mr. Skinner provides consulting and technical services as a project manager, and senior geologist for investigation and reporting efforts at sites impacted by petroleum hydrocarbons, heavy metals, and pesticides. As an environmental professional, he has hands on experience in the installation groundwater monitoring and remediation wells, collecting soil and water samples in many different types of environments, planning and implementing sampling protocols, data interpretation and reporting. He has 6 years of environmental project management experience, and over 12 years professional geologic experience. Mr. Skinner has experience in planning, implementing and evaluating Phase I and Phase II environmental assessments in commercial real estate transactions. EDUCATION 1996 Bachelor of Science, Geology (Environmental Emphasis), Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. 1996 Bachelor of Science, Geography (Urban Planning and Resource Management Emphasis), Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah REGISTRATION/CERTIFICATES Professional Geologist No. 7971, State of California Certified Engineering Geologist No. 2472, State of California WORK HISTORY 1999 to 2006 Senior Geologist, Senior Project Manager 2008 to Present Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. Supervised numerous environmental and geotechnical engineering projects. Managed projects from initial client contact to report submittal including project scope development, proposal and budget development, obtaining required permits, equipment scheduling, data analysis and report preparation. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Appendix A, Page 2 2006 to 2008 Staff/Project Geologist Petra Geotechnical, Inc. Planned, implemented, and managed environmental site investigations and remediation projects. Managed projects from initial client contact to report submittal including project scope development, proposal and budget development, obtaining required permits, equipment scheduling, data analysis and report preparation. 1996 Geologist U.S Bureau of Land Management Worked as a geologist on the Abandoned Mine Inventory and Location Team. Performed field location of abandoned mines in wilderness areas within the State of Utah. Performed initial geologic and environmental inventories at abandoned mine sites. Created photographic and written documentation of observations. Mapped locations using GPS and USGS Maps. Compiled data into digitized database. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS Old Oak Ranch, Lakeside, CA. Conducted Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessment on multi-acre site formerly used for agricultural purposes. Subject property was to be developed for single family residences. Evaluated environmental concerns regarding herbicide, pesticide, and petroleum product soil contamination. Renaissance at North Park, El Cajon, CA. Conducted Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments on a one block area of downtown El Cajon consisting of an abandoned bowling alley as well as many other commercial businesses. Subject property was to be developed as mixed use residential and commercial development. Several significant potential recognized environmental concerns on the subject property and adjacent properties were identified and evaluated during the Phase I and Phase II process. Lake Rancho Viejo, Pala Mesa Village, CA. Conducted Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments and evaluated environmental concerns on a multi-acre property bisected by the Interstate 15 corridor. Site reconnaissance was conducted over several days and involved coordination of several different property owners. Subject property was to be developed as a large scale residential housing tract. Otay Water District November 25, 2013 Phase 1 ESA – 870-2 Pump Station SCS&T No. 1311158-1 Jamul, California Appendix A, Page 3 The Meadows, Del Mar, CA. Conducted Phase I environmental site assessment on a proposed multi-acre residential development. Subject site consisted of undeveloped parcel as well as graded lots. The Bridges - Lots 87, 88, and 89, Del Mar, CA. Conducted Phase I environmental site assessment on three graded residential lots. Phase I was conducted as part of a real estate transaction. Schofield Property, Rancho Santa Fe, CA. Conducted Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessment on multi-acre site formerly used for agricultural purposes. Subject property was to be developed for single family residences. Evaluated environmental concerns regarding herbicide, pesticide, and petroleum product soil contamination. Sherwood Ridge, Lots 2 through 15, Valley Center, CA. Conducted Phase I environmental site assessment on fourteen graded, undeveloped residential lots. Phase I was conducted as part of a real estate transaction. Emerald Drive, Oceanside, CA. Conducted Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessment on multi-acre site formerly used for agricultural purposes. Subject property was to be developed for single family residences. Evaluated environmental concerns regarding herbicide, pesticide, and petroleum product soil contamination. Villa Royale Apartments, El Cajon, CA. Conducted Phase I environmental site assessment on multi-unit apartment complex. Phase I was conducted as part of a real estate transaction. Loves Restaurant, Mission Valley, CA. Conducted Phase I environmental site assessment on a vacant commercial restaurant site. Evaluated potential environmental concerns related to adjacent underground storage tanks and illicit dumping. Phase I was conducted as part of a real estate transaction. The Cove, 7-Acre Vernal Pool Site, San Jacinto, CA. Conducted Phase I environmental site assessment on an undeveloped formerly agricultural site. Phase I was conducted as part of a property transfer. APPENDIX B HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS/TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package 870-2 Pump Station Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 Inquiry Number: 3775911.5 November 07, 2013 EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Aerial Photo Decade Package is a screening tool designed to assist environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDR’s professional researchers provide digitally reproduced historical aerial photographs, and when available, provide one photo per decade. When delivered electronically by EDR, the aerial photo images included with this report are for ONE TIME USE ONLY. Further reproduction of these aerial photo images is prohibited without permission from EDR. For more information contact your EDR Account Executive. Thank you for your business. Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050 with any questions or comments. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report AS IS. Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2013 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. Date EDR Searched Historical Sources: Aerial Photography November 07, 2013 Target Property: Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 Year Scale Details Source 1953 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'Flight Year: 1953 Park 1964 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'Flight Year: 1964 Cartwright 1971 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'Flight Year: 1971 USGS Best Copy Available from original source 1980 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'Flight Year: 1980 AMI 1990 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'Flight Year: 1990 USGS 1994 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'/DOQQ - acquisition dates: 1994 EDR 2005 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'Flight Year: 2005 EDR 2009 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'Flight Year: 2009 EDR 2010 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'Flight Year: 2010 EDR 2012 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'Flight Year: 2012 EDR 3775911.5 2 INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 1953 = 500' INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 1964 = 500' INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 1971 = 500' INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 1980 = 500' INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 1990 = 500' INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 1994 = 500' INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 2005 = 500' INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 2009 = 500' INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 2010 = 500' INQUIRY #: YEAR: 3775911.5 2012 = 500' EDR Historical Topographic Map Report 870-2 Pump Station Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 Inquiry Number: 3775911.4 November 05, 2013 EDR Historical Topographic Map Report Environmental Data Resources, Inc.s (EDR) Historical Topographic Map Report is designed to assist professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDRs Historical Topographic Map Report includes a search of a collection of public and private color historical topographic maps, dating back to the early 1900s. Thank you for your business. Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050 with any questions or comments. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report AS IS. Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2013 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. Historical Topographic Map Unsurveyed Area on the Topographic Map ÕN TARGET QUADTARGET QUAD NAME:CUYAMACA MAP YEAR:1903 SERIES:30 SCALE:1:125000 SITE NAME:870-2 Pump Station ADDRESS:Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 LAT/LONG:32.5947 / -116.9268 CLIENT:Southern CA Soil and Testing CONTACT:Doug Skinner INQUIRY#:3775911.4 RESEARCH DATE:11/05/2013 Historical Topographic Map Unsurveyed Area on the Topographic Map ÕN TARGET QUADTARGET QUAD NAME:SOUTHERN CA SHEET 2 MAP YEAR:1904 SERIES:60 SCALE:1:250000 SITE NAME:870-2 Pump Station ADDRESS:Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 LAT/LONG:32.5947 / -116.9268 CLIENT:Southern CA Soil and Testing CONTACT:Doug Skinner INQUIRY#:3775911.4 RESEARCH DATE:11/05/2013 Historical Topographic Map ÕN TARGET QUADTARGET QUAD NAME:JAMUL MAP YEAR:1943 SERIES:15 SCALE:1:62500 SITE NAME:870-2 Pump Station ADDRESS:Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 LAT/LONG:32.5947 / -116.9268 CLIENT:Southern CA Soil and Testing CONTACT:Doug Skinner INQUIRY#:3775911.4 RESEARCH DATE:11/05/2013 Historical Topographic Map ÕN TARGET QUADTARGET QUAD NAME:OTAY MESA MAP YEAR:1955 SERIES:7.5 SCALE:1:24000 SITE NAME:870-2 Pump Station ADDRESS:Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 LAT/LONG:32.5947 / -116.9268 CLIENT:Southern CA Soil and Testing CONTACT:Doug Skinner INQUIRY#:3775911.4 RESEARCH DATE:11/05/2013 Historical Topographic Map Unsurveyed Area on the Topographic Map ÕN TARGET QUADTARGET QUAD NAME:JAMUL MAP YEAR:1955 SERIES:15 SCALE:1:62500 SITE NAME:870-2 Pump Station ADDRESS:Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 LAT/LONG:32.5947 / -116.9268 CLIENT:Southern CA Soil and Testing CONTACT:Doug Skinner INQUIRY#:3775911.4 RESEARCH DATE:11/05/2013 Historical Topographic Map ÕN TARGET QUADTARGET QUAD NAME:OTAY MESA MAP YEAR:1971 PHOTOREVISED FROM :1955 SERIES:7.5 SCALE:1:24000 SITE NAME:870-2 Pump Station ADDRESS:Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 LAT/LONG:32.5947 / -116.9268 CLIENT:Southern CA Soil and Testing CONTACT:Doug Skinner INQUIRY#:3775911.4 RESEARCH DATE:11/05/2013 Historical Topographic Map ÕN TARGET QUADTARGET QUAD NAME:OTAY MESA MAP YEAR:1975 PHOTOINSPECTED FROM :1955 SERIES:7.5 SCALE:1:24000 SITE NAME:870-2 Pump Station ADDRESS:Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 LAT/LONG:32.5947 / -116.9268 CLIENT:Southern CA Soil and Testing CONTACT:Doug Skinner INQUIRY#:3775911.4 RESEARCH DATE:11/05/2013 Historical Topographic Map ÕN TARGET QUADTARGET QUAD NAME:JAMUL MAP YEAR:1991 SERIES:15 SCALE:1:50000 SITE NAME:870-2 Pump Station ADDRESS:Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 LAT/LONG:32.5947 / -116.9268 CLIENT:Southern CA Soil and Testing CONTACT:Doug Skinner INQUIRY#:3775911.4 RESEARCH DATE:11/05/2013 Historical Topographic Map ÕN TARGET QUADTARGET QUAD NAME:OTAY MESA MAP YEAR:1996 SERIES:7.5 SCALE:1:24000 SITE NAME:870-2 Pump Station ADDRESS:Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 LAT/LONG:32.5947 / -116.9268 CLIENT:Southern CA Soil and Testing CONTACT:Doug Skinner INQUIRY#:3775911.4 RESEARCH DATE:11/05/2013 APPENDIX C EDR REPORT EDR Report (Provided on Compact Disc as a PDF Document) 870-2 Pump Station Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 Inquiry Number: 3775911.6 November 07, 2013 The EDR-City Directory Image Report 440 Wheelers Farms Road Milford, CT 06461 800.352.0050 www.edrnet.comEnvironmental Data Resources IncEnvironmental Data Resources IncEnvironmental Data Resources IncEnvironmental Data Resources Inc TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION Executive Summary Findings City Directory Images Thank you for your business. Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050 with any questions or comments. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction orforecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2013 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates is prohibited without prior written permission. EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Environmental Data Resources, Inc.’s (EDR) City Directory Report is a screening tool designed to assist environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDR’s City Directory Report includes a search of available city directory data at 5 year intervals. RESEARCH SUMMARY The following research sources were consulted in the preparation of this report. A check mark indicates where information was identified in the source and provided in this report. Year Target Street Cross Street Source 2013 þ þ Cole Information Services 2008 þ þ Cole Information Services 2003 þ þ Cole Information Services 1999 þ þ Cole Information Services 1996 þ þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1990 ¨þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1985 þ þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1980 þ þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1976 þ þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1970 þ þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory RECORD SOURCES EDR is licensed to reproduce certain City Directory works by the copyright holders of those works. The purchaser of this EDR City Directory Report may include it in report(s) delivered to a customer. Reproduction of City Directories without permission of the publisher or licensed vendor may be a violation of copyright. 3775911-6 Page 1 FINDINGS TARGET PROPERTY STREET Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 Year CD Image Source ALTA RD 2013 pg A1 Cole Information Services 2008 pg A3 Cole Information Services 2003 pg A5 Cole Information Services 1999 pg A7 Cole Information Services 1996 pg A9 Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1990 -Haines Criss-Cross Directory Street not listed in Source 1985 pg A12 Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1980 pg A13 Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1976 pg A14 Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1970 pg A16 Haines Criss-Cross Directory 3775911-6 Page 2 FINDINGS CROSS STREETS Year CD Image Source WUESTE RD 2013 pg. A2 Cole Information Services 2008 pg. A4 Cole Information Services 2003 pg. A6 Cole Information Services 1999 pg. A8 Cole Information Services 1996 pg. A10 Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1990 pg. A11 Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1985 -Haines Criss-Cross Directory Street not listed in Source 1980 -Haines Criss-Cross Directory Target and Adjoining not listed in Source 1976 pg. A15 Haines Criss-Cross Directory 1970 -Haines Criss-Cross Directory Target and Adjoining not listed in Source 3775911-6 Page 3 City Directory Images - ALTA RD Cole Information Services 3775911.6 Page: A1 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 2013 446 CANTEEN CORRECTIONS CCA SAN DIEGO DETENTION CENTER COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO GEORGE F BAILEY DETENTION 468 RECYCLING SERVICES INC 480 DONOVAN CAFE SU CASA 633 MARIO DIAZ - WUESTE RD Cole Information Services 3775911.6 Page: A2 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 2013 2165 OTAY LAKE 2167 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN 2270 SEAN FLYNN - ALTA RD Cole Information Services 3775911.6 Page: A3 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 2008 446 C C A SAN DIEGO CORRECTIONAL FACILIT CANTEEN CORRECTIONS CORRECTIONS CORP OF AMERICA EAST MESA DETENSION FACILITY SAN DIEGO COUNTY CU 448 CENTEX CONSTRUCTION GROUP INC 480 CA DEPT OF CORRECTIONS DONOVANS CAFE R J DONOVAN CF RICHARD J DONOVAN CORRECTIONAL FACIL 633 MARIO DIAZ - WUESTE RD Cole Information Services 3775911.6 Page: A4 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 2008 2167 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN 2270 WILLIAM LIPOWCAN - ALTA RD Cole Information Services 3775911.6 Page: A5 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 2003 446 CLASSROOM E M F EAST MESA DETENTION FACIL SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF SHRF DEPT 480 CMT BLUES LLC DONOVANS CAFE 509 TEODORO MARTIN - WUESTE RD Cole Information Services 3775911.6 Page: A6 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 2003 2167 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN 2270 WILLIAM LIPOWCAN - ALTA RD Cole Information Services 3775911.6 Page: A7 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1999 446 CCA SAN DIEGO DETENTION CENTER SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT 480 C M T BLUES INCORPORATED SU CASA 504 ROLANDO DURAZO ROLANDO DURAZO 633 MARIO DIAZ - WUESTE RD Cole Information Services 3775911.6 Page: A8 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1999 1750 ARCO OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER 2167 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN 2270 WILLIAM LIPOWCAN - ALTA RD Haines Criss-Cross Directory 3775911.6 Page: A9 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1996 - WUESTE RD Haines Criss-Cross Directory 3775911.6 Page: A10 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1996 - WUESTE RD Haines Criss-Cross Directory 3775911.6 Page: A11 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1990 - ALTA RD Haines Criss-Cross Directory 3775911.6 Page: A12 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1985 - ALTA RD Haines Criss-Cross Directory 3775911.6 Page: A13 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1980 - ALTA RD Haines Criss-Cross Directory 3775911.6 Page: A14 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1976 - WUESTE RD Haines Criss-Cross Directory 3775911.6 Page: A15 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1976 - ALTA RD Haines Criss-Cross Directory 3775911.6 Page: A16 SourceTarget Street Cross Street 1970 FORM-STD-KKT ®kcehCoeG htiw tropeR ™paM suidaR RDE ehT 440 Wheelers Farms Road Milford, CT 06461 Toll Free: 800.352.0050 www.edrnet.com 870-2 Pump Station Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 Inquiry Number: 3775911.2s November 04, 2013 SECTION PAGE Executive Summary ES1 Overview Map 2 Detail Map 3 Map Findings Summary 4 Map Findings 8 Orphan Summary 13 Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1 GEOCHECK ADDENDUM Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1 Physical Setting Source Summary A-2 Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-5 Physical Setting Source Map A-10 Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-12 Physical Setting Source Records Searched A-13 TC3775911.2s Page 1 Thank you for your business. Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050 with any questions or comments. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2013 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC3775911.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR). The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-05) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate. TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION ADDRESS ROLL RESERVOIR JAMUL, CA 91935 COORDINATES 32.5947000 - 32˚ 35’ 40.92’’Latitude (North): 116.9268000 - 116˚ 55’ 36.48’’Longitude (West): Zone 11Universal Tranverse Mercator: 506869.3UTM X (Meters): 3606169.5UTM Y (Meters): 557 ft. above sea levelElevation: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY 32116-E8 OTAY MESA, CA MX02Target Property Map: 1991Most Recent Revision: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT 2012Photo Year: USDASource: TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR. DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the following databases: STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list NPL National Priority List EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC3775911.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens Federal Delisted NPL site list Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions Federal CERCLIS list CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List CERC-NFRAP CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list CORRACTS Corrective Action Report Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators RCRA-SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators RCRA-CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls LUCIS Land Use Control Information System Federal ERNS list ERNS Emergency Response Notification System State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF Solid Waste Information System State and tribal leaking storage tank lists SLIC Statewide SLIC Cases INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land State and tribal registered storage tank lists UST Active UST Facilities AST Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC3775911.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites VCP Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites ODI Open Dump Inventory DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations WMUDS/SWAT Waste Management Unit Database SWRCY Recycler Database HAULERS Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites US CDL Clandestine Drug Labs HIST Cal-Sites Historical Calsites Database SCH School Property Evaluation Program Toxic Pits Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites CDL Clandestine Drug Labs San Diego Co. HMMD Hazardous Materials Management Division Database US HIST CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks CA FID UST Facility Inventory Database HIST UST Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database SWEEPS UST SWEEPS UST Listing Local Land Records LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information LIENS Environmental Liens Listing DEED Deed Restriction Listing Records of Emergency Release Reports HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System CHMIRS California Hazardous Material Incident Report System LDS Land Disposal Sites Listing MCS Military Cleanup Sites Listing SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch Other Ascertainable Records RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC3775911.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data DOD Department of Defense Sites CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees ROD Records Of Decision UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites US MINES Mines Master Index File TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System PADS PCB Activity Database System MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System RADINFO Radiation Information Database FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System RMP Risk Management Plans CA BOND EXP. PLAN Bond Expenditure Plan UIC UIC Listing NPDES NPDES Permits Listing Cortese "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List HIST CORTESE Hazardous Waste & Substance Site List CUPA Listings CUPA Resources List Notify 65 Proposition 65 Records DRYCLEANERS Cleaner Facilities WIP Well Investigation Program Case List ENF Enforcement Action Listing HAZNET Facility and Manifest Data EMI Emissions Inventory Data INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing MWMP Medical Waste Management Program Listing COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List HWT Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database HWP EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites 2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem PRP Potentially Responsible Parties WDS Waste Discharge System EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database PROC Certified Processors Database EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS EDR Exclusive Records EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC3775911.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 EDR US Hist Auto Stat EDR Exclusive Historic Gas Stations EDR US Hist Cleaners EDR Exclusive Historic Dry Cleaners SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases. Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property. Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed. Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases. Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis. STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS State- and tribal - equivalent NPL RESPONSE: Identifies confirmed release sites where DTSC is involved in remediation, either in a lead or oversight capacity. These confirmed release sites are generally high-priority and high potential risk. A review of the RESPONSE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 09/05/2013 has revealed that there is 1 RESPONSE site within approximately 1 mile of the target property. PageMap IDDirection / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BROWN FIELD BOMBING RANGE 2 MILES NORTHEAST OF OT WSW 1/2 - 1 (0.869 mi.) A2 9 State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS ENVIROSTOR: The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites. A review of the ENVIROSTOR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 09/05/2013 has revealed that there is 1 ENVIROSTOR site within approximately 1 mile of the target property. PageMap IDDirection / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BROWN FIELD BOMBING RANGE 2 MILES NORTHEAST OF OT WSW 1/2 - 1 (0.869 mi.) A2 9 Status: Inactive - Action Required EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC3775911.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 State and tribal leaking storage tank lists LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board Leaking Underground Storage Tank Information System. A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 09/16/2013 has revealed that there is 1 LUST site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. PageMap IDDirection / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ EAST MESA DETENTION CENTER 446 ALTA RD SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.215 mi.) 1 8 Status: Completed - Case Closed SAN DIEGO CO. SAM: The listing contains all underground tank release cases and projects pertaining to properties contaminated with hazardous substances that are actively under review by the Site Assessment and Mitigation Program. A review of the SAN DIEGO CO. SAM list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/23/2010 has revealed that there is 1 SAN DIEGO CO. SAM site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. PageMap IDDirection / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ EAST MESA DETENTION CENTER 446 ALTA RD SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.215 mi.) 1 8 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Other Ascertainable Records FUDS: The Listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites Properties where the US Army Corps Of Engineers is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions. A review of the FUDS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2011 has revealed that there is 1 FUDS site within approximately 1 mile of the target property. PageMap IDDirection / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BROWN FIELD BOMBING RANGE WSW 1/2 - 1 (0.873 mi.) A3 12 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC3775911.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped. Count: 5 records. Site Name Database(s)____________ ____________ OTAY MESA CID DRUMS CERCLIS JAMUL BURNSITE SWF/LF OTAY WD 9-1 PUMP STATION San Diego Co. HMMD SDG&E - HARVEST GATE STATION San Diego Co. HMMD NELSON & SLOAN CO. US MINES EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc. 230 k v 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 k v 600 160 0 1200 400 40 0 400 400 60 0 600 600 800 800 800 1000 7 0 0 1700 15 0 0 7 00 30 0 300 50 0 5 0 0 500 500 700 700 900 900 110 0 EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc. 230 k v 00 600 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search TargetDistance Total Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NPL 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Proposed NPL 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPNPL LIENS Federal Delisted NPL site list 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Delisted NPL Federal CERCLIS list 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500CERCLIS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500FEDERAL FACILITY Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500CERC-NFRAP Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CORRACTS Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500RCRA-TSDF Federal RCRA generators list 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-LQG 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-SQG 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-CESQG Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US ENG CONTROLS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US INST CONTROL 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUCIS Federal ERNS list 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPERNS State- and tribal - equivalent NPL 1 NR 1 0 0 0 1.000RESPONSE State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS 1 NR 1 0 0 0 1.000ENVIROSTOR State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWF/LF State and tribal leaking storage tank lists 1 NR NR 0 1 0 0.500LUST TC3775911.2s Page 4 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search TargetDistance Total Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SLIC 1 NR NR 0 1 0 0.500SAN DIEGO CO. SAM 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN LUST State and tribal registered storage tank lists 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250UST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250AST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250INDIAN UST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250FEMA UST State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500VCP 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN VCP ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US BROWNFIELDS Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500ODI 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500DEBRIS REGION 9 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500WMUDS/SWAT 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWRCY 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPHAULERS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN ODI Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS CDL 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000HIST Cal-Sites 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250SCH 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Toxic Pits 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPCDL 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSan Diego Co. HMMD 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS HIST CDL Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250CA FID UST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250HIST UST 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250SWEEPS UST Local Land Records 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPLIENS 2 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPLIENS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500DEED Records of Emergency Release Reports 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPHMIRS TC3775911.2s Page 5 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search TargetDistance Total Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPCHMIRS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPLDS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPMCS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSPILLS 90 Other Ascertainable Records 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA NonGen / NLR 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPDOT OPS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000DOD 1 NR 1 0 0 0 1.000FUDS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CONSENT 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000ROD 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500UMTRA 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250US MINES 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPTRIS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPTSCA 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPFTTS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPHIST FTTS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSSTS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPICIS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPADS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPMLTS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRADINFO 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPFINDS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRAATS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRMP 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CA BOND EXP. PLAN 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUIC 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPNPDES 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500Cortese 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500HIST CORTESE 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250CUPA Listings 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Notify 65 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250DRYCLEANERS 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250WIP 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPENF 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPHAZNET 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPEMI 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000INDIAN RESERV 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SCRD DRYCLEANERS 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250MWMP 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPCOAL ASH DOE 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500COAL ASH EPA 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250HWT 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000HWP 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPFinancial Assurance 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPLEAD SMELTERS 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.2502020 COR ACTION 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS AIRS 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPRP 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPWDS TC3775911.2s Page 6 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search TargetDistance Total Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPEPA WATCH LIST 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS FIN ASSUR 0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPCB TRANSFORMER 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500PROC EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS EDR Exclusive Records 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000EDR MGP 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250EDR US Hist Auto Stat 0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250EDR US Hist Cleaners NOTES: TP = Target Property NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance Sites may be listed in more than one database TC3775911.2s Page 7 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation 01/01/1950Date: OtherAction Type: T06019760128Global Id: Leak StoppedAction: 01/01/1950Date: OtherAction Type: T06019760128Global Id: Leak ReportedAction: 01/01/1950Date: OtherAction Type: T06019760128Global Id: Regulatory Activities: 08/09/2005Status Date: Open - Case Begin DateStatus: T06019760128Global Id: 12/18/2007Status Date: Completed - Case ClosedStatus: T06019760128Global Id: Status History: Not reportedPhone Number: james.clay@sdcounty.ca.govEmail: San DiegoCity: P.O. Box 129261Address: SAN DIEGO COUNTY LOPOrganization Name: JAMES CLAYContact Name: Local Agency CaseworkerContact Type: T06019760128Global Id: Contact: Click here to access the California GeoTracker records for this facility: Not reportedSite History: DieselPotential Contaminants of Concern: SoilPotential Media Affect: Local AgencyFile Location: 122765-001LOC Case Number: Not reportedRB Case Number: SAN DIEGO COUNTY LOPLocal Agency: JCCase Worker: SAN DIEGO COUNTY LOPLead Agency: 12/18/2007Status Date: Completed - Case ClosedStatus: LUST Cleanup SiteCase Type: -116.923493Longitude: 32.591072Latitude: T06019760128Global Id: STATERegion: LUST: 1136 ft. 0.215 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 674 ft. 1/8-1/4 SAN YSIDRO, CA 92173 SE SAN DIEGO CO. SAM446 ALTA RD N/A 1 LUSTEAST MESA DETENTION CENTER S107619787 TC3775911.2s Page 8 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation 8/9/2005Date Began: 12/18/2007Date: Closed CaseFacility Status: Soils OnlyFacility Type: LOP - State FundFunding: DEH Site Assessment & MitigationAgency: 122765-001Case Number: SAN DIEGO CO. SAM: Notice of ResponsibilityAction: 09/19/2005Date: ENFORCEMENTAction Type: T06019760128Global Id: Leak DiscoveryAction: 01/01/1950Date: OtherAction Type: T06019760128Global Id: Leak BeganAction: EAST MESA DETENTION CENTER (Continued) S107619787 BROWN FIELD AIRFIELDAlias Name: SOILPotential Description: Explosives (UXO, MEC, Munitions Debris (MD, NONE SPECIFIEDConfirmed COC: Explosives (UXO, MEC, Munitions Debris (MDPotential COC: FIRING RANGE - ARTILLERYPast Use: NONE SPECIFIEDAPN: -116.9416Longitude: 32.5875Latitude: DERAFunding: NORestricted Use: 11/08/2010Status Date: Inactive - Action RequiredStatus: Not reportedSpecial Program Status: 40Senate: 80Assembly: NONE SPECIFIEDSite Mgmt. Req.: 401302Site Code: Cleanup CypressDivision Branch: Douglas BautistaSupervisor: Omoruyi PatrickProject Manager: DTSC - Site Cleanup ProgramLead Agency Description: SMBRPLead Agency: SMBRPCleanup Oversight Agencies: NONational Priorities List: 46.44Acres: FUDSSite Type Detail: State ResponseSite Type: 80000890Facility ID: RESPONSE: 4590 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster A 0.869 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 557 ft. 1/2-1 SAN DIEGO, CA 92154 WSW ENVIROSTOR2 MILES NORTHEAST OF OTEY MESA, SAN DIEGO N/A A2 RESPONSEBROWN FIELD BOMBING RANGE S109348527 TC3775911.2s Page 9 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation 40Senate: 80Assembly: 401302Site Code: 80000890Facility ID: Cleanup CypressDivision Branch: Douglas BautistaSupervisor: Omoruyi PatrickProgram Manager: SMBRPLead Agency: SMBRPRegulatory Agencies: NONPL: 46.44Acres: FUDSSite Type Detailed: State ResponseSite Type: ENVIROSTOR: Not reportedSchedule Revised Date: Not reportedSchedule Due Date: Not reportedSchedule Document Type: Not reportedSchedule Sub Area Name: Not reportedSchedule Area Name: Not reportedFuture Due Date: Not reportedFuture Document Type: Not reportedFuture Sub Area Name: Not reportedFuture Area Name: recommended as future action for the site. DTSC approved the final SI Report. A Remedial Investigation wasComments: 01/22/2008Completed Date: *Site Inspection (SI) ReportCompleted Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: conference-call addressing the Programmatic Work Plan comments. DTSC approved the final SI Work Plan on 8/24/2007 following aComments: 08/24/2007Completed Date: Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report (PA/SI)Completed Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: resolution. (TPP) document following the Programmatic Work Plan comment DTSC reviewed and concurred with the final Technical Project PlanComments: 09/15/2006Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment ReportCompleted Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID NumberAlias Type: 80000890Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code)Alias Type: 401302Alias Name: INPRAlias Type: J09CA1130Alias Name: Federal Facility IDAlias Type: CA99799F600000Alias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: BROWN FIELD BOMBING RANGE (Continued) S109348527 TC3775911.2s Page 10 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation Not reportedSchedule Revised Date: Not reportedSchedule Due Date: Not reportedSchedule Document Type: Not reportedSchedule Sub Area Name: Not reportedSchedule Area Name: Not reportedFuture Due Date: Not reportedFuture Document Type: Not reportedFuture Sub Area Name: Not reportedFuture Area Name: recommended as future action for the site. DTSC approved the final SI Report. A Remedial Investigation wasComments: 01/22/2008Completed Date: *Site Inspection (SI) ReportCompleted Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: conference-call addressing the Programmatic Work Plan comments. DTSC approved the final SI Work Plan on 8/24/2007 following aComments: 08/24/2007Completed Date: Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report (PA/SI)Completed Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: resolution. (TPP) document following the Programmatic Work Plan comment DTSC reviewed and concurred with the final Technical Project PlanComments: 09/15/2006Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment ReportCompleted Document Type: Not reportedCompleted Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDECompleted Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID NumberAlias Type: 80000890Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code)Alias Type: 401302Alias Name: INPRAlias Type: J09CA1130Alias Name: Federal Facility IDAlias Type: CA99799F600000Alias Name: Alternate NameAlias Type: BROWN FIELD AIRFIELDAlias Name: SOILPotential Description: Explosives (UXO, MEC, Munitions Debris (MD, NONE SPECIFIEDConfirmed COC: Explosives (UXO, MEC, Munitions Debris (MDPotential COC: FIRING RANGE - ARTILLERYPast Use: NONE SPECIFIEDAPN: -116.9416Longitude: 32.5875Latitude: DERAFunding: NONE SPECIFIEDSite Mgmt. Req.: NORestricted Use: 11/08/2010Status Date: Inactive - Action RequiredStatus: Not reportedSpecial Program: BROWN FIELD BOMBING RANGE (Continued) S109348527 TC3775911.2s Page 11 MAP FINDINGSMap ID Direction EDR ID NumberDistance EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation is proposing to build a business park complex on the property. Administration for disposal. The Baldwin Company, the current owner, declared surplus by mid-1961, and assigned to the General Services On 21 April 1944, the U.S.-acquired range and the easement had been therefore may present an explosive hazard. munitions and explosives of concern (e.g., unexploded ordnance) and Ranch Inc. This property is known or suspected to contain military 23 June 1961, the 46.44 acres of easement were granted to Kuebler northeast of Brown (or Otay Mesa) Air Field. By quitclaim deeds dated was used for a Navy range in San Diego County, approximately 2 miles rock approach markers by revocable permit in November 1944. This site the Navy acquired an unknown quantity of land adjoining the site for acquired an easement along the road leading to the site. In addition, Brown Field (or Otay Mesa) Air Field. On 21 July 1944, the U.S. also range in San Diego County, approximately. 2 miles northeast of the on 21 April 1944, the U.S. acquired 46.44 acres of land for a NavyDescription: Not reportedFuture Prog: Not reportedCurrent Prog: OTHERCurrent Owner: 6152CTC: Not reportedRAB: Not ListedNPL Status: 213-452-3920Telephone: 2011Fiscal Year: Los Angeles District (SPL)US Army District: 51Congressional District: SAN DIEGOCounty: 09EPA Region: CAState: CHULA VISTACity: BROWN FIELD BOMBING RANGEFacility Name: 53787INST ID: J09CA1130FUDS #: CA9799F6000Federal Facility ID: FUDS: 4609 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster A 0.873 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 557 ft. 1/2-1 CHULA VISTA, CA WSW N/A A3 FUDSBROWN FIELD BOMBING RANGE 1007212448 TC3775911.2s Page 12 ORPHAN SUMMARY City EDR ID Site Name Site Address Zip Database(s) Count: 5 records. JAMUL S106063815 OTAY WD 9-1 PUMP STATION HWY 94 91935 San Diego Co. HMMD JAMUL S105155612 JAMUL BURNSITE JAMUL DRIVE SWF/LF SAN DIEGO 1015730674 OTAY MESA CID DRUMS CORNER HERITAGE ROAD AND OTAY 92154 CERCLIS SAN DIEGO S110498344 SDG&E - HARVEST GATE STATION 0 HARVEST 92154 San Diego Co. HMMD SAN DIEGO COUNTY M300003193 NELSON & SLOAN CO.OTAY PIT & MILL US MINES TC3775911.2s Page 13 To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required. Number of Days to Update:Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days from the date the government agency made the information available to the public. STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list NPL: National Priority List National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) and regional EPA offices. Date of Government Version: 04/26/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/09/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 10/11/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPL Site Boundaries Sources: EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) Telephone: 202-564-7333 EPA Region 1 EPA Region 6 Telephone 617-918-1143 Telephone: 214-655-6659 EPA Region 3 EPA Region 7 Telephone 215-814-5418 Telephone: 913-551-7247 EPA Region 4 EPA Region 8 Telephone 404-562-8033 Telephone: 303-312-6774 EPA Region 5 EPA Region 9 Telephone 312-886-6686 Telephone: 415-947-4246 EPA Region 10 Telephone 206-553-8665 Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule in the Federal Register. EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing. Date of Government Version: 04/26/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/09/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 10/11/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner received notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens. Date of Government Version: 10/15/1991 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/1994 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/1994 Number of Days to Update: 56 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-4267 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC3775911.2s Page GR-1 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Federal Delisted NPL site list DELISTED NPL: National Priority List Deletions The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. Date of Government Version: 04/26/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/09/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 10/11/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal CERCLIS list CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. Date of Government Version: 04/26/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/29/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/09/2013 Number of Days to Update: 72 Source: EPA Telephone: 703-412-9810 Last EDR Contact: 10/18/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FEDERAL FACILITY: Federal Facility Site Information listing A listing of National Priority List (NPL) and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) sites found in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) Database where EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office is involved in cleanup activities. Date of Government Version: 07/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/09/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/20/2012 Number of Days to Update: 72 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-603-8704 Last EDR Contact: 10/11/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List CERCLIS-NFRAP: CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned Archived sites are sites that have been removed and archived from the inventory of CERCLIS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. Date of Government Version: 04/26/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/29/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/09/2013 Number of Days to Update: 72 Source: EPA Telephone: 703-412-9810 Last EDR Contact: 10/18/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity. TC3775911.2s Page GR-2 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 07/11/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/08/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: EPA Telephone: 800-424-9346 Last EDR Contact: 10/02/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the waste. TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste. Date of Government Version: 07/11/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/08/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 10/02/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 07/11/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/08/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 10/02/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RCRA-SQG: RCRA - Small Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 07/11/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/08/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 10/02/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RCRA-CESQG: RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 07/11/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/08/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 10/02/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-3 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries US ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Sites List A listing of sites with engineering controls in place. Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental media or effect human health. Date of Government Version: 06/17/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/21/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/03/2013 Number of Days to Update: 104 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-603-0695 Last EDR Contact: 09/10/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies US INST CONTROL: Sites with Institutional Controls A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures, such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally required as part of the institutional controls. Date of Government Version: 06/17/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/21/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/03/2013 Number of Days to Update: 104 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-603-0695 Last EDR Contact: 09/10/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies LUCIS: Land Use Control Information System LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure properties. Date of Government Version: 08/20/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/23/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 70 Source: Department of the Navy Telephone: 843-820-7326 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/02/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies Federal ERNS list ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/15/2013 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard Telephone: 202-267-2180 Last EDR Contact: 10/01/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually State- and tribal - equivalent NPL RESPONSE: State Response Sites Identifies confirmed release sites where DTSC is involved in remediation, either in a lead or oversight capacity. These confirmed release sites are generally high-priority and high potential risk. Date of Government Version: 09/05/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 09/05/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/18/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS TC3775911.2s Page GR-4 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ENVIROSTOR: EnviroStor Database The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites. Date of Government Version: 09/05/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 09/05/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/18/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF (SWIS): Solid Waste Information System Active, Closed and Inactive Landfills. SWF/LF records typically contain an inve ntory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills. These may be active or i nactive facilities or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal sites. Date of Government Version: 08/19/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/19/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 50 Source: Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Telephone: 916-341-6320 Last EDR Contact: 08/19/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/02/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal leaking storage tank lists LUST REG 8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8). For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/28/2005 Number of Days to Update: 41 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8) Telephone: 909-782-4496 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011 Data Release Frequency: Varies LUST REG 7: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Imperial, Riverside, San Diego, Santa Barbara counties. Date of Government Version: 02/26/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/24/2004 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Colorado River Basin Region (7) Telephone: 760-776-8943 Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 6V: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, San Bernardino counties. Date of Government Version: 06/07/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/07/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Victorville Branch Office (6) Telephone: 760-241-7365 Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC3775911.2s Page GR-5 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING LUST REG 6L: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 09/09/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/07/2003 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lahontan Region (6) Telephone: 530-542-5572 Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 5: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Alpine, Amador, Butte, Colusa, Contra Costa, Calveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yolo, Yuba counties. Date of Government Version: 07/01/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (5) Telephone: 916-464-4834 Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/17/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 4: Underground Storage Tank Leak List Los Angeles, Ventura counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 09/07/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2004 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region (4) Telephone: 213-576-6710 Last EDR Contact: 09/06/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/19/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 3: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz counties. Date of Government Version: 05/19/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/19/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/02/2003 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region (3) Telephone: 805-542-4786 Last EDR Contact: 07/18/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/31/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 2: Fuel Leak List Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma counties. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/20/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/2004 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2) Telephone: 510-622-2433 Last EDR Contact: 09/19/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/02/2012 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LUST REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigation Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, Modoc, Siskiyou, Sonoma, Trinity counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 02/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2001 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/29/2001 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board North Coast (1) Telephone: 707-570-3769 Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC3775911.2s Page GR-6 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING LUST: Geotracker’s Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Report Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by state. For more information on a particular leaking underground storage tank sites, please contact the appropriate regulatory agency. Date of Government Version: 09/16/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2013 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: see region list Last EDR Contact: 10/17/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LUST REG 9: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Report Orange, Riverside, San Diego counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 03/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2001 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/21/2001 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (9) Telephone: 858-637-5595 Last EDR Contact: 09/26/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/09/2012 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC: Statewide SLIC Cases The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/16/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/17/2013 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 10/17/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies SLIC REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigations The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/03/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/07/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/25/2003 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region (1) Telephone: 707-576-2220 Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 2: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/20/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/2004 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2) Telephone: 510-286-0457 Last EDR Contact: 09/19/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/02/2012 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SLIC REG 3: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 05/18/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/15/2006 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region (3) Telephone: 805-549-3147 Last EDR Contact: 07/18/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/31/2011 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually TC3775911.2s Page GR-7 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING SLIC REG 4: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 11/17/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/18/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/04/2005 Number of Days to Update: 47 Source: Region Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region (4) Telephone: 213-576-6600 Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/17/2011 Data Release Frequency: Varies SLIC REG 5: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/05/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/21/2005 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (5) Telephone: 916-464-3291 Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 6V: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 05/24/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/25/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/16/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board, Victorville Branch Telephone: 619-241-6583 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 6L: SLIC Sites The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/07/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2004 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region Telephone: 530-542-5574 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 7: SLIC List The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 11/24/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/29/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/04/2005 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: California Regional Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region Telephone: 760-346-7491 Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 8: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/03/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/03/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2008 Number of Days to Update: 11 Source: California Region Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8) Telephone: 951-782-3298 Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually TC3775911.2s Page GR-8 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING SLIC REG 9: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/10/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/28/2007 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (9) Telephone: 858-467-2980 Last EDR Contact: 08/08/2011 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/21/2011 Data Release Frequency: Annually INDIAN LUST R10: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. Date of Government Version: 07/29/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/30/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 94 Source: EPA Region 10 Telephone: 206-553-2857 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN LUST R1: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land. Date of Government Version: 02/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/01/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 184 Source: EPA Region 1 Telephone: 617-918-1313 Last EDR Contact: 11/01/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. Date of Government Version: 08/27/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/28/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2012 Number of Days to Update: 49 Source: EPA Region 8 Telephone: 303-312-6271 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN LUST R6: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma. Date of Government Version: 09/12/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/13/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/11/2011 Number of Days to Update: 59 Source: EPA Region 6 Telephone: 214-665-6597 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R4: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/02/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 91 Source: EPA Region 4 Telephone: 404-562-8677 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually INDIAN LUST R7: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska Date of Government Version: 08/27/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/27/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 66 Source: EPA Region 7 Telephone: 913-551-7003 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-9 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING INDIAN LUST R9: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada Date of Government Version: 03/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 415-972-3372 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal registered storage tank lists UST: Active UST Facilities Active UST facilities gathered from the local regulatory agencies Date of Government Version: 09/16/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2013 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: SWRCB Telephone: 916-341-5851 Last EDR Contact: 10/17/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually AST: Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities A listing of aboveground storage tank petroleum storage tank locations. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 916-327-5092 Last EDR Contact: 10/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R10: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 10 (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/05/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/06/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Number of Days to Update: 65 Source: EPA Region 10 Telephone: 206-553-2857 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R9: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 9 (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands, and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/21/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Number of Days to Update: 45 Source: EPA Region 9 Telephone: 415-972-3368 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R8: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 8 (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 27 Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 07/29/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/01/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 92 Source: EPA Region 8 Telephone: 303-312-6137 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC3775911.2s Page GR-10 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING INDIAN UST R7: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 7 (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and 9 Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Number of Days to Update: 43 Source: EPA Region 7 Telephone: 913-551-7003 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R6: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 6 (Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas and 65 Tribes). Date of Government Version: 05/10/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/11/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/14/2011 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: EPA Region 6 Telephone: 214-665-7591 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually INDIAN UST R5: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 5 (Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 08/20/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/23/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 70 Source: EPA Region 5 Telephone: 312-886-6136 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R4: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 4 (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Tribal Nations) Date of Government Version: 08/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/02/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 91 Source: EPA Region 4 Telephone: 404-562-9424 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually INDIAN UST R1: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 1 (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and ten Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 09/28/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/07/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Number of Days to Update: 156 Source: EPA, Region 1 Telephone: 617-918-1313 Last EDR Contact: 11/01/2014 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies FEMA UST: Underground Storage Tank Listing A listing of all FEMA owned underground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 01/01/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 55 Source: FEMA Telephone: 202-646-5797 Last EDR Contact: 10/17/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-11 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites INDIAN VCP R7: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Lisitng A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 7. Date of Government Version: 03/20/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2008 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA, Region 7 Telephone: 913-551-7365 Last EDR Contact: 04/20/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/2009 Data Release Frequency: Varies VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties Contains low threat level properties with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases and the project proponents have request that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC’s costs. Date of Government Version: 09/05/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 09/05/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/18/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN VCP R1: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 1. Date of Government Version: 09/28/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/02/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2012 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: EPA, Region 1 Telephone: 617-918-1102 Last EDR Contact: 10/01/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties takes development pressures off of undeveloped, open land, and both improves and protects the environment. Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) stores information reported by EPA Brownfields grant recipients on brownfields properties assessed or cleaned up with grant funding as well as information on Targeted Brownfields Assessments performed by EPA Regions. A listing of ACRES Brownfield sites is obtained from Cleanups in My Community. Cleanups in My Community provides information on Brownfields properties for which information is reported back to EPA, as well as areas served by Brownfields grant programs. Date of Government Version: 06/24/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/25/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/09/2013 Number of Days to Update: 45 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-566-2777 Last EDR Contact: 09/24/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites ODI: Open Dump Inventory An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Part 258 Subtitle D Criteria. Date of Government Version: 06/30/1985 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/17/2004 Number of Days to Update: 39 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 800-424-9346 Last EDR Contact: 06/09/2004 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC3775911.2s Page GR-12 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING DEBRIS REGION 9: Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations A listing of illegal dump sites location on the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation located in eastern Riverside County and northern Imperial County, California. Date of Government Version: 01/12/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/21/2009 Number of Days to Update: 137 Source: EPA, Region 9 Telephone: 415-947-4219 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned WMUDS/SWAT: Waste Management Unit Database Waste Management Unit Database System. WMUDS is used by the State Water Resources Control Board staff and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards for program tracking and inventory of waste management units. WMUDS is composed of the following databases: Facility Information, Scheduled Inspections Information, Waste Management Unit Information, SWAT Program Information, SWAT Report Summary Information, SWAT Report Summary Data, Chapter 15 (formerly Subchapter 15) Information, Chapter 15 Monitoring Parameters, TPCA Program Information, RCRA Program Information, Closure Information, and Interested Parties Information. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2000 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/10/2000 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2000 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-227-4448 Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SWRCY: Recycler Database A listing of recycling facilities in California. Date of Government Version: 09/16/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/19/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/17/2013 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: 916-323-3836 Last EDR Contact: 09/16/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HAULERS: Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing A listing of registered waste tire haulers. Date of Government Version: 04/26/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/26/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/16/2013 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: Integrated Waste Management Board Telephone: 916-341-6422 Last EDR Contact: 10/01/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/02/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN ODI: Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands Location of open dumps on Indian land. Date of Government Version: 12/31/1998 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/03/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/24/2008 Number of Days to Update: 52 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-308-8245 Last EDR Contact: 11/04/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/17/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites US CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, contacting local law enforcement and local health departments. TC3775911.2s Page GR-13 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 08/06/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/03/2013 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Telephone: 202-307-1000 Last EDR Contact: 09/04/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/16/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HIST CAL-SITES: Calsites Database The Calsites database contains potential or confirmed hazardous substance release properties. In 1996, California EPA reevaluated and significantly reduced the number of sites in the Calsites database. No longer updated by the state agency. It has been replaced by ENVIROSTOR. Date of Government Version: 08/08/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/03/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2006 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/25/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SCH: School Property Evaluation Program This category contains proposed and existing school sites that are being evaluated by DTSC for possible hazardous materials contamination. In some cases, these properties may be listed in the CalSites category depending on the level of threat to public health and safety or the environment they pose. Date of Government Version: 09/05/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 09/05/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/18/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TOXIC PITS: Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites Toxic PITS Cleanup Act Sites. TOXIC PITS identifies sites suspected of containing hazardous substances where cleanup has not yet been completed. Date of Government Version: 07/01/1995 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/30/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/26/1995 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-227-4364 Last EDR Contact: 01/26/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/27/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs A listing of drug lab locations. Listing of a location in this database does not indicate that any illegal drug lab materials were or were not present there, and does not constitute a determination that the location either requires or does not require additional cleanup work. Date of Government Version: 06/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/03/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 37 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-255-6504 Last EDR Contact: 09/03/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies US HIST CDL: National Clandestine Laboratory Register A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, contacting local law enforcement and local health departments. Date of Government Version: 09/01/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/19/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/2009 Number of Days to Update: 131 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Telephone: 202-307-1000 Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC3775911.2s Page GR-14 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks CA FID UST: Facility Inventory Database The Facility Inventory Database (FID) contains a historical listing of active and inactive underground storage tank locations from the State Water Resource Control Board. Refer to local/county source for current data. Date of Government Version: 10/31/1994 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/1995 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 916-341-5851 Last EDR Contact: 12/28/1998 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned UST MENDOCINO: Mendocino County UST Database A listing of underground storage tank locations in Mendocino County. Date of Government Version: 09/23/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/23/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: 707-463-4466 Last EDR Contact: 09/03/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/16/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually HIST UST: Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database The Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database is a historical listing of UST sites. Refer to local/county source for current data. Date of Government Version: 10/15/1990 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/1991 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/12/1991 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-341-5851 Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2001 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SWEEPS UST: SWEEPS UST Listing Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the SWRCB in the early 1990’s. The listing is no longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list. Date of Government Version: 06/01/1994 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/07/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2005 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2005 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned Local Land Records LIENS 2: CERCLA Lien Information A Federal CERCLA (’Superfund’) lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent Superfund monies. These monies are spent to investigate and address releases and threatened releases of contamination. CERCLIS provides information as to the identity of these sites and properties. Date of Government Version: 02/06/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/25/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 15 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-6023 Last EDR Contact: 11/01/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies LIENS: Environmental Liens Listing A listing of property locations with environmental liens for California where DTSC is a lien holder. Date of Government Version: 06/14/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/21/2013 Number of Days to Update: 65 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 09/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-15 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING DEED: Deed Restriction Listing Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Facility Sites with Deed Restrictions & Hazardous Waste Management Program Facility Sites with Deed / Land Use Restriction. The DTSC Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program (SMBRP) list includes sites cleaned up under the program’s oversight and generally does not include current or former hazardous waste facilities that required a hazardous waste facility permit. The list represents deed restrictions that are active. Some sites have multiple deed restrictions. The DTSC Hazardous Waste Management Program (HWMP) has developed a list of current or former hazardous waste facilities that have a recorded land use restriction at the local county recorder’s office. The land use restrictions on this list were required by the DTSC HWMP as a result of the presence of hazardous substances that remain on site after the facility (or part of the facility) has been closed or cleaned up. The types of land use restriction include deed notice, deed restriction, or a land use restriction that binds current and future owners. Date of Government Version: 09/11/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/14/2013 Number of Days to Update: 33 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 09/11/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Records of Emergency Release Reports HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Number of Days to Update: 55 Source: U.S. Department of Transportation Telephone: 202-366-4555 Last EDR Contact: 10/01/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually CHMIRS: California Hazardous Material Incident Report System California Hazardous Material Incident Reporting System. CHMIRS contains information on reported hazardous material incidents (accidental releases or spills). Date of Government Version: 03/12/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/01/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/25/2013 Number of Days to Update: 55 Source: Office of Emergency Services Telephone: 916-845-8400 Last EDR Contact: 10/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies LDS: Land Disposal Sites Listing The Land Disposal program regulates of waste discharge to land for treatment, storage and disposal in waste management units. Date of Government Version: 09/16/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2013 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: State Water Qualilty Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 10/17/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly MCS: Military Cleanup Sites Listing The State Water Resources Control Board and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards partner with the Department of Defense (DoD) through the Defense and State Memorandum of Agreement (DSMOA) to oversee the investigation and remediation of water quality issues at military facilities. Date of Government Version: 09/16/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2013 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 866-480-1028 Last EDR Contact: 10/17/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC3775911.2s Page GR-16 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING SPILLS 90: SPILLS90 data from FirstSearch Spills 90 includes those spill and release records available exclusively from FirstSearch databases. Typically, they may include chemical, oil and/or hazardous substance spills recorded after 1990. Duplicate records that are already included in EDR incident and release records are not included in Spills 90. Date of Government Version: 06/06/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/22/2013 Number of Days to Update: 50 Source: FirstSearch Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 01/03/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned Other Ascertainable Records RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRA - Non Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. Date of Government Version: 07/11/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/08/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 10/02/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies DOT OPS: Incident and Accident Data Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Incident and Accident data. Date of Government Version: 07/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/18/2012 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Telephone: 202-366-4595 Last EDR Contact: 08/05/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/18/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies DOD: Department of Defense Sites This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: USGS Telephone: 888-275-8747 Last EDR Contact: 10/18/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually FUDS: Formerly Used Defense Sites The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the US Army Corps of Engineers is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 15 Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Telephone: 202-528-4285 Last EDR Contact: 09/10/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters. TC3775911.2s Page GR-17 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 06/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/03/2013 Number of Days to Update: 57 Source: Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library Telephone: Varies Last EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies ROD: Records Of Decision Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical and health information to aid in the cleanup. Date of Government Version: 04/26/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/11/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 143 Source: EPA Telephone: 703-416-0223 Last EDR Contact: 09/13/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually UMTRA: Uranium Mill Tailings Sites Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs. When the mills shut down, large piles of the sand-like material (mill tailings) remain after uranium has been extracted from the ore. Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low; however, in some cases tailings were used as construction materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized. Date of Government Version: 09/14/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/07/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/01/2012 Number of Days to Update: 146 Source: Department of Energy Telephone: 505-845-0011 Last EDR Contact: 05/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies US MINES: Mines Master Index File Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971. The data also includes violation information. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/03/2013 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration Telephone: 303-231-5959 Last EDR Contact: 09/05/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/16/2013 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/31/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 44 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-566-0250 Last EDR Contact: 08/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant site. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/29/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 64 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-260-5521 Last EDR Contact: 09/24/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2014 Data Release Frequency: Every 4 Years TC3775911.2s Page GR-18 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA, TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances Telephone: 202-566-1667 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) A listing of FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) inspections and enforcements. Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-566-1667 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HIST FTTS: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-2501 Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2007 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HIST FTTS INSP: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Inspection & Enforcement Case Listing A complete inspection and enforcement case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-2501 Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2008 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March 1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/10/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/25/2011 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-4203 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC3775911.2s Page GR-19 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ICIS: Integrated Compliance Information System The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the national enforcement and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Date of Government Version: 07/20/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2012 Number of Days to Update: 61 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-5088 Last EDR Contact: 10/09/2014 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PADS: PCB Activity Database System PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers of PCB’s who are required to notify the EPA of such activities. Date of Government Version: 06/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 107 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-566-0500 Last EDR Contact: 10/18/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. Date of Government Version: 07/22/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/02/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 91 Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Telephone: 301-415-7169 Last EDR Contact: 09/10/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RADINFO: Radiation Information Database The Radiation Information Database (RADINFO) contains information about facilities that are regulated by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for radiation and radioactivity. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/09/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/01/2013 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-343-9775 Last EDR Contact: 10/09/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and ’pointers’ to other sources that contain more detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System). Date of Government Version: 03/08/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 111 Source: EPA Telephone: (415) 947-8000 Last EDR Contact: 09/11/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database. TC3775911.2s Page GR-20 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 04/17/1995 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/03/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/07/1995 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-4104 Last EDR Contact: 06/02/2008 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/01/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned RMP: Risk Management Plans When Congress passed the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, it required EPA to publish regulations and guidance for chemical accident prevention at facilities using extremely hazardous substances. The Risk Management Program Rule (RMP Rule) was written to implement Section 112(r) of these amendments. The rule, which built upon existing industry codes and standards, requires companies of all sizes that use certain flammable and toxic substances to develop a Risk Management Program, which includes a(n): Hazard assessment that details the potential effects of an accidental release, an accident history of the last five years, and an evaluation of worst-case and alternative accidental releases; Prevention program that includes safety precautions and maintenance, monitoring, and employee training measures; and Emergency response program that spells out emergency health care, employee training measures and procedures for informing the public and response agencies (e.g the fire department) should an accident occur. Date of Government Version: 05/08/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/25/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/10/2012 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-564-8600 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies BRS: Biennial Reporting System The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG) and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/19/2013 Number of Days to Update: 52 Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 800-424-9346 Last EDR Contact: 08/26/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Biennially CA BOND EXP. PLAN: Bond Expenditure Plan Department of Health Services developed a site-specific expenditure plan as the basis for an appropriation of Hazardous Substance Cleanup Bond Act funds. It is not updated. Date of Government Version: 01/01/1989 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/27/1994 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/02/1994 Number of Days to Update: 6 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: 916-255-2118 Last EDR Contact: 05/31/1994 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned NPDES: NPDES Permits Listing A listing of NPDES permits, including stormwater. Date of Government Version: 08/19/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/19/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 50 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-445-9379 Last EDR Contact: 08/19/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/02/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly UIC: UIC Listing A listing of underground control injection wells. Date of Government Version: 08/21/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/17/2013 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: Deaprtment of Conservation Telephone: 916-445-2408 Last EDR Contact: 09/17/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-21 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CORTESE: "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board (LUST), the Integrated Waste Board (SWF/LS), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (Cal-Sites). Date of Government Version: 07/05/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/26/2013 Number of Days to Update: 52 Source: CAL EPA/Office of Emergency Information Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 10/01/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HIST CORTESE: Hazardous Waste & Substance Site List The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board [LUST], the Integrated Waste Board [SWF/LS], and the Department of Toxic Substances Control [CALSITES]. This listing is no longer updated by the state agency. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/22/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/08/2009 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 01/22/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned NOTIFY 65: Proposition 65 Records Listings of all Proposition 65 incidents reported to counties by the State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This database is no longer updated by the reporting agency. Date of Government Version: 10/21/1993 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/01/1993 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/1993 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-445-3846 Last EDR Contact: 09/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2014 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned DRYCLEANERS: Cleaner Facilities A list of drycleaner related facilities that have EPA ID numbers. These are facilities with certain SIC codes: power laundries, family and commercial; garment pressing and cleaner’s agents; linen supply; coin-operated laundries and cleaning; drycleaning plants, except rugs; carpet and upholster cleaning; industrial launderers; laundry and garment services. Date of Government Version: 09/10/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2013 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control Telephone: 916-327-4498 Last EDR Contact: 09/10/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/24/2012 Data Release Frequency: Annually WIP: Well Investigation Program Case List Well Investigation Program case in the San Gabriel and San Fernando Valley area. Date of Government Version: 07/03/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/21/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2009 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Los Angeles Water Quality Control Board Telephone: 213-576-6726 Last EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies ENF: Enforcement Action Listing A listing of Water Board Enforcement Actions. Formal is everything except Oral/Verbal Communication, Notice of Violation, Expedited Payment Letter, and Staff Enforcement Letter. Date of Government Version: 08/09/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/13/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 56 Source: State Water Resoruces Control Board Telephone: 916-445-9379 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-22 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING HAZNET: Facility and Manifest Data Facility and Manifest Data. The data is extracted from the copies of hazardous waste manifests received each year by the DTSC. The annual volume of manifests is typically 700,000 - 1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 350,000 - 500,000 shipments. Data are from the manifests submitted without correction, and therefore many contain some invalid values for data elements such as generator ID, TSD ID, waste category, and disposal method. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/16/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/26/2013 Number of Days to Update: 41 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 916-255-1136 Last EDR Contact: 10/15/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually EMI: Emissions Inventory Data Toxics and criteria pollutant emissions data collected by the ARB and local air pollution agencies. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/25/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/22/2013 Number of Days to Update: 58 Source: California Air Resources Board Telephone: 916-322-2990 Last EDR Contact: 09/27/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN RESERV: Indian Reservations This map layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/08/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: USGS Telephone: 202-208-3710 Last EDR Contact: 10/18/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SCRD DRYCLEANERS: State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. It is comprised of representatives of states with established drycleaner remediation programs. Currently the member states are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. Date of Government Version: 03/07/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/09/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/02/2011 Number of Days to Update: 54 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 615-532-8599 Last EDR Contact: 10/21/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/03/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies US FIN ASSUR: Financial Assurance Information All owners and operators of facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste are required to provide proof that they will have sufficient funds to pay for the clean up, closure, and post-closure care of their facilities. Date of Government Version: 03/04/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/15/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 56 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-566-1917 Last EDR Contact: 09/27/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/02/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PCB TRANSFORMER: PCB Transformer Registration Database The database of PCB transformer registrations that includes all PCB registration submittals. Date of Government Version: 02/01/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/19/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2012 Number of Days to Update: 83 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 202-566-0517 Last EDR Contact: 11/01/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-23 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING PROC: Certified Processors Database A listing of certified processors. Date of Government Version: 09/16/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/19/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/17/2013 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: 916-323-3836 Last EDR Contact: 09/16/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly MWMP: Medical Waste Management Program Listing The Medical Waste Management Program (MWMP) ensures the proper handling and disposal of medical waste by permitting and inspecting medical waste Offsite Treatment Facilities (PDF) and Transfer Stations (PDF) throughout the state. MWMP also oversees all Medical Waste Transporters. Date of Government Version: 08/29/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/13/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/14/2013 Number of Days to Update: 31 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: 916-558-1784 Last EDR Contact: 09/11/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies COAL ASH DOE: Sleam-Electric Plan Operation Data A listing of power plants that store ash in surface ponds. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/22/2009 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Department of Energy Telephone: 202-586-8719 Last EDR Contact: 10/15/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies COAL ASH EPA: Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List A listing of coal combustion residues surface impoundments with high hazard potential ratings. Date of Government Version: 08/17/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/21/2011 Number of Days to Update: 77 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 09/13/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies HWT: Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database A listing of hazardous waste transporters. In California, unless specifically exempted, it is unlawful for any person to transport hazardous wastes unless the person holds a valid registration issued by DTSC. A hazardous waste transporter registration is valid for one year and is assigned a unique registration number. Date of Government Version: 07/15/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/16/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/12/2013 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-440-7145 Last EDR Contact: 10/15/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HWP: EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing Detailed information on permitted hazardous waste facilities and corrective action ("cleanups") tracked in EnviroStor. Date of Government Version: 08/28/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/27/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 44 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-323-3400 Last EDR Contact: 08/27/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Financial Assurance 2: Financial Assurance Information Listing A listing of financial assurance information for solid waste facilities. Financial assurance is intended to ensure that resources are available to pay for the cost of closure, post-closure care, and corrective measures if the owner or operator of a regulated facility is unable or unwilling to pay. TC3775911.2s Page GR-24 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 08/12/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/20/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 49 Source: California Integrated Waste Management Board Telephone: 916-341-6066 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/02/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies Financial Assurance 1: Financial Assurance Information Listing Financial Assurance information Date of Government Version: 06/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/08/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/27/2013 Number of Days to Update: 19 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: 916-255-3628 Last EDR Contact: 10/25/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies LEAD SMELTER 1: Lead Smelter Sites A listing of former lead smelter site locations. Date of Government Version: 01/29/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/14/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-603-8787 Last EDR Contact: 09/24/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies LEAD SMELTER 2: Lead Smelter Sites A list of several hundred sites in the U.S. where secondary lead smelting was done from 1931and 1964. These sites may pose a threat to public health through ingestion or inhalation of contaminated soil or dust Date of Government Version: 04/05/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/27/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: American Journal of Public Health Telephone: 703-305-6451 Last EDR Contact: 12/02/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned 2020 COR ACTION: 2020 Corrective Action Program List The EPA has set ambitious goals for the RCRA Corrective Action program by creating the 2020 Corrective Action Universe. This RCRA cleanup baseline includes facilities expected to need corrective action. The 2020 universe contains a wide variety of sites. Some properties are heavily contaminated while others were contaminated but have since been cleaned up. Still others have not been fully investigated yet, and may require little or no remediation. Inclusion in the 2020 Universe does not necessarily imply failure on the part of a facility to meet its RCRA obligations. Date of Government Version: 11/11/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/25/2012 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 703-308-4044 Last EDR Contact: 08/16/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies FEDLAND: Federal and Indian Lands Federally and Indian administrated lands of the United States. Lands included are administrated by: Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, National Wild and Scenic River, National Wildlife Refuge, Public Domain Land, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Area, Wildlife Management Area, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Department of Justice, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/06/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 339 Source: U.S. Geological Survey Telephone: 888-275-8747 Last EDR Contact: 10/18/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: N/A TC3775911.2s Page GR-25 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING PRP: Potentially Responsible Parties A listing of verified Potentially Responsible Parties Date of Government Version: 04/15/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/03/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 72 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-6023 Last EDR Contact: 10/04/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly WDS: Waste Discharge System Sites which have been issued waste discharge requirements. Date of Government Version: 06/19/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/20/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2007 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: 916-341-5227 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly US AIRS (AFS): Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem (AFS) The database is a sub-system of Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). AFS contains compliance data on air pollution point sources regulated by the U.S. EPA and/or state and local air regulatory agencies. This information comes from source reports by various stationary sources of air pollution, such as electric power plants, steel mills, factories, and universities, and provides information about the air pollutants they produce. Action, air program, air program pollutant, and general level plant data. It is used to track emissions and compliance data from industrial plants. Date of Government Version: 01/23/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/30/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 100 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-5962 Last EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually US AIRS MINOR: Air Facility System Data A listing of minor source facilities. Date of Government Version: 01/23/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/30/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 100 Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-5962 Last EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually EPA WATCH LIST: EPA WATCH LIST EPA maintains a "Watch List" to facilitate dialogue between EPA, state and local environmental agencies on enforcement matters relating to facilities with alleged violations identified as either significant or high priority. Being on the Watch List does not mean that the facility has actually violated the law only that an investigation by EPA or a state or local environmental agency has led those organizations to allege that an unproven violation has in fact occurred. Being on the Watch List does not represent a higher level of concern regarding the alleged violations that were detected, but instead indicates cases requiring additional dialogue between EPA, state and local agencies - primarily because of the length of time the alleged violation has gone unaddressed or unresolved. Date of Government Version: 06/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/13/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2013 Number of Days to Update: 31 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: 617-520-3000 Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS EDR Exclusive Records TC3775911.2s Page GR-26 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING EDR MGP: EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants) compiled by EDR’s researchers. Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800’s to 1950’s to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel. These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture of coal, oil, and water that also produced a significant amount of waste. Many of the byproducts of the gas production, such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals), sludges, oils and other compounds are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. The byproduct from this process was frequently disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil and groundwater contamination. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned EDR US Hist Auto Stat: EDR Exclusive Historic Gas Stations EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include gas station/filling station/service station establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to gas, gas station, gasoline station, filling station, auto, automobile repair, auto service station, service station, etc. This database falls within a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR’s HRHR effort presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns, but may not show up in current government records searches. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies EDR US Hist Cleaners: EDR Exclusive Historic Dry Cleaners EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential dry cleaner sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include dry cleaning establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to dry cleaners, cleaners, laundry, laundromat, cleaning/laundry, wash & dry etc. This database falls within a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR’s HRHR effort presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns, but may not show up in current government records searches. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies EDR US Hist Cleaners: EDR Proprietary Historic Dry Cleaners - Cole Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: N/A Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies EDR US Hist Auto Stat: EDR Proprietary Historic Gas Stations - Cole Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: N/A Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-27 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING COUNTY RECORDS ALAMEDA COUNTY: Contaminated Sites A listing of contaminated sites overseen by the Toxic Release Program (oil and groundwater contamination from chemical releases and spills) and the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program (soil and ground water contamination from leaking petroleum USTs). Date of Government Version: 07/25/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/26/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/09/2013 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services Telephone: 510-567-6700 Last EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Underground Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Alameda county. Date of Government Version: 07/25/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/26/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2013 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services Telephone: 510-567-6700 Last EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually AMADOR COUNTY: CUPA Facility List Cupa Facility List Date of Government Version: 06/20/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/21/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/21/2013 Number of Days to Update: 61 Source: Amador County Environmental Health Telephone: 209-223-6439 Last EDR Contact: 09/10/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies BUTTE COUNTY: CUPA Facility Listing Cupa facility list. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/02/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/22/2013 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: Public Health Department Telephone: 530-538-7149 Last EDR Contact: 10/09/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned CALVERAS COUNTY: CUPA Facility Listing Cupa Facility Listing Date of Government Version: 06/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/24/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/09/2013 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Calveras County Environmental Health Telephone: 209-754-6399 Last EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly COLUSA COUNTY: TC3775911.2s Page GR-28 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list. Date of Government Version: 06/20/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/09/2013 Number of Days to Update: 39 Source: Health & Human Services Telephone: 530-458-0396 Last EDR Contact: 10/04/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: Site List List includes sites from the underground tank, hazardous waste generator and business plan/2185 programs. Date of Government Version: 08/20/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/23/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: Contra Costa Health Services Department Telephone: 925-646-2286 Last EDR Contact: 11/04/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/17/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually DEL NORTE COUNTY: CUPA Facility List Cupa Facility list Date of Government Version: 01/09/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/10/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/25/2013 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: Del Norte County Environmental Health Division Telephone: 707-465-0426 Last EDR Contact: 11/04/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/17/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies EL DORADO COUNTY: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility list. Date of Government Version: 08/20/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/23/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: El Dorado County Environmental Management Department Telephone: 530-621-6623 Last EDR Contact: 11/04/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/17/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies FRESNO COUNTY: CUPA Resources List Certified Unified Program Agency. CUPA’s are responsible for implementing a unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste management regulatory program. The agency provides oversight of businesses that deal with hazardous materials, operate underground storage tanks or aboveground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 06/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/16/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/24/2013 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Dept. of Community Health Telephone: 559-445-3271 Last EDR Contact: 10/09/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually HUMBOLDT COUNTY: TC3775911.2s Page GR-29 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA Facility List CUPA facility list. Date of Government Version: 08/09/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/22/2013 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Humboldt County Environmental Health Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 08/09/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies IMPERIAL COUNTY: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list. Date of Government Version: 07/26/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/22/2013 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: San Diego Border Field Office Telephone: 760-339-2777 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies INYO COUNTY: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list. Date of Government Version: 09/10/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/14/2013 Number of Days to Update: 33 Source: Inyo County Environmental Health Services Telephone: 760-878-0238 Last EDR Contact: 09/10/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies KERN COUNTY: Underground Storage Tank Sites & Tank Listing Kern County Sites and Tanks Listing. Date of Government Version: 08/31/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/01/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/30/2010 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: Kern County Environment Health Services Department Telephone: 661-862-8700 Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly KINGS COUNTY: CUPA Facility List A listing of sites included in the county’s Certified Unified Program Agency database. California’s Secretary for Environmental Protection established the unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste regulatory program as required by chapter 6.11 of the California Health and Safety Code. The Unified Program consolidates the administration, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities. Date of Government Version: 08/22/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/27/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Kings County Department of Public Health Telephone: 559-584-1411 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies LAKE COUNTY: TC3775911.2s Page GR-30 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 01/23/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Number of Days to Update: 33 Source: Lake County Environmental Health Telephone: 707-263-1164 Last EDR Contact: 10/21/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/03/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies LOS ANGELES COUNTY: San Gabriel Valley Areas of Concern San Gabriel Valley areas where VOC contamination is at or above the MCL as designated by region 9 EPA office. Date of Government Version: 03/30/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/23/2009 Number of Days to Update: 206 Source: EPA Region 9 Telephone: 415-972-3178 Last EDR Contact: 09/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2014 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HMS: Street Number List Industrial Waste and Underground Storage Tank Sites. Date of Government Version: 03/28/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/21/2013 Number of Days to Update: 65 Source: Department of Public Works Telephone: 626-458-3517 Last EDR Contact: 10/09/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually List of Solid Waste Facilities Solid Waste Facilities in Los Angeles County. Date of Government Version: 07/22/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/22/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/26/2013 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: La County Department of Public Works Telephone: 818-458-5185 Last EDR Contact: 10/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/03/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies City of Los Angeles Landfills Landfills owned and maintained by the City of Los Angeles. Date of Government Version: 03/05/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/10/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/08/2009 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: Engineering & Construction Division Telephone: 213-473-7869 Last EDR Contact: 07/17/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/04/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies Site Mitigation List Industrial sites that have had some sort of spill or complaint. Date of Government Version: 01/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/21/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/25/2013 Number of Days to Update: 32 Source: Community Health Services Telephone: 323-890-7806 Last EDR Contact: 10/21/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/03/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually City of El Segundo Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in El Segundo city. TC3775911.2s Page GR-31 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 07/31/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/01/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/27/2013 Number of Days to Update: 26 Source: City of El Segundo Fire Department Telephone: 310-524-2236 Last EDR Contact: 10/21/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/03/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually City of Long Beach Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in the city of Long Beach. Date of Government Version: 03/28/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/23/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/26/2003 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: City of Long Beach Fire Department Telephone: 562-570-2563 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually City of Torrance Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in the city of Torrance. Date of Government Version: 07/15/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/18/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2013 Number of Days to Update: 33 Source: City of Torrance Fire Department Telephone: 310-618-2973 Last EDR Contact: 10/09/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually MADERA COUNTY: CUPA Facility List A listing of sites included in the county’s Certified Unified Program Agency database. California’s Secretary for Environmental Protection established the unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste regulatory program as required by chapter 6.11 of the California Health and Safety Code. The Unified Program consolidates the administration, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities. Date of Government Version: 09/20/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/24/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/18/2013 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: Madera County Environmental Health Telephone: 559-675-7823 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies MARIN COUNTY: Underground Storage Tank Sites Currently permitted USTs in Marin County. Date of Government Version: 11/26/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/28/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/21/2013 Number of Days to Update: 54 Source: Public Works Department Waste Management Telephone: 415-499-6647 Last EDR Contact: 10/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually MERCED COUNTY: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility list. Date of Government Version: 08/23/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/27/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Merced County Environmental Health Telephone: 209-381-1094 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies MONO COUNTY: TC3775911.2s Page GR-32 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING CUPA Facility List CUPA Facility List Date of Government Version: 09/04/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/14/2013 Number of Days to Update: 39 Source: Mono County Health Department Telephone: 760-932-5580 Last EDR Contact: 09/03/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/16/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies MONTEREY COUNTY: CUPA Facility Listing CUPA Program listing from the Environmental Health Division. Date of Government Version: 09/11/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/12/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/14/2013 Number of Days to Update: 32 Source: Monterey County Health Department Telephone: 831-796-1297 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies NAPA COUNTY: Sites With Reported Contamination A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Napa county. Date of Government Version: 12/05/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/06/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/07/2012 Number of Days to Update: 63 Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-253-4269 Last EDR Contact: 09/03/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/16/2013 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned Closed and Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites Underground storage tank sites located in Napa county. Date of Government Version: 01/15/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/16/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/08/2008 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-253-4269 Last EDR Contact: 09/03/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/16/2013 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned NEVADA COUNTY: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility list. Date of Government Version: 05/29/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/30/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/15/2013 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: Community Development Agency Telephone: 530-265-1467 Last EDR Contact: 11/04/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/17/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies ORANGE COUNTY: List of Industrial Site Cleanups Petroleum and non-petroleum spills. TC3775911.2s Page GR-33 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 08/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/13/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 56 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: 714-834-3446 Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually List of Underground Storage Tank Cleanups Orange County Underground Storage Tank Cleanups (LUST). Date of Government Version: 08/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/13/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 56 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: 714-834-3446 Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly List of Underground Storage Tank Facilities Orange County Underground Storage Tank Facilities (UST). Date of Government Version: 08/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/13/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 56 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: 714-834-3446 Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PLACER COUNTY: Master List of Facilities List includes aboveground tanks, underground tanks and cleanup sites. Date of Government Version: 08/22/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/22/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 49 Source: Placer County Health and Human Services Telephone: 530-745-2363 Last EDR Contact: 08/20/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually RIVERSIDE COUNTY: Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites Riverside County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST). Date of Government Version: 07/18/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/18/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/24/2013 Number of Days to Update: 6 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 951-358-5055 Last EDR Contact: 09/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Storage Tank Tank List Underground storage tank sites located in Riverside county. Date of Government Version: 07/18/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/18/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2013 Number of Days to Update: 33 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 951-358-5055 Last EDR Contact: 09/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SACRAMENTO COUNTY: TC3775911.2s Page GR-34 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Toxic Site Clean-Up List List of sites where unauthorized releases of potentially hazardous materials have occurred. Date of Government Version: 05/03/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/08/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/24/2013 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management Telephone: 916-875-8406 Last EDR Contact: 10/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Master Hazardous Materials Facility List Any business that has hazardous materials on site - hazardous material storage sites, underground storage tanks, waste generators. Date of Government Version: 05/03/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/08/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/23/2013 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management Telephone: 916-875-8406 Last EDR Contact: 10/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: Hazardous Material Permits This listing includes underground storage tanks, medical waste handlers/generators, hazardous materials handlers, hazardous waste generators, and waste oil generators/handlers. Date of Government Version: 09/03/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/03/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 37 Source: San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division Telephone: 909-387-3041 Last EDR Contact: 08/08/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN DIEGO COUNTY: Hazardous Materials Management Division Database The database includes: HE58 - This report contains the business name, site address, business phone number, establishment ’H’ permit number, type of permit, and the business status. HE17 - In addition to providing the same information provided in the HE58 listing, HE17 provides inspection dates, violations received by the establishment, hazardous waste generated, the quantity, method of storage, treatment/disposal of waste and the hauler, and information on underground storage tanks. Unauthorized Release List - Includes a summary of environmental contamination cases in San Diego County (underground tank cases, non-tank cases, groundwater contamination, and soil contamination are included.) Date of Government Version: 09/23/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/24/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/17/2013 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: Hazardous Materials Management Division Telephone: 619-338-2268 Last EDR Contact: 09/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Solid Waste Facilities San Diego County Solid Waste Facilities. Date of Government Version: 10/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/06/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/30/2012 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: 619-338-2209 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-35 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Environmental Case Listing The listing contains all underground tank release cases and projects pertaining to properties contaminated with hazardous substances that are actively under review by the Site Assessment and Mitigation Program. Date of Government Version: 03/23/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: San Diego County Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 619-338-2371 Last EDR Contact: 09/10/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY: Local Oversite Facilities A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in San Francisco county. Date of Government Version: 09/19/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/19/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/2008 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: Department Of Public Health San Francisco County Telephone: 415-252-3920 Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Storage Tank Information Underground storage tank sites located in San Francisco county. Date of Government Version: 11/29/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/10/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/15/2011 Number of Days to Update: 5 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: 415-252-3920 Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY: San Joaquin Co. UST A listing of underground storage tank locations in San Joaquin county. Date of Government Version: 09/25/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/27/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/18/2013 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: Environmental Health Department Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 09/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2014 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY: CUPA Facility List Cupa Facility List. Date of Government Version: 08/26/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/27/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 44 Source: San Luis Obispo County Public Health Department Telephone: 805-781-5596 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies SAN MATEO COUNTY: Business Inventory List includes Hazardous Materials Business Plan, hazardous waste generators, and underground storage tanks. TC3775911.2s Page GR-36 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 07/02/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/23/2013 Number of Days to Update: 49 Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: 650-363-1921 Last EDR Contact: 06/13/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually Fuel Leak List A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in San Mateo county. Date of Government Version: 09/16/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/17/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2013 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: 650-363-1921 Last EDR Contact: 09/16/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SANTA BARBARA COUNTY: CUPA Facility Listing CUPA Program Listing from the Environmental Health Services division. Date of Government Version: 09/08/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/09/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/07/2011 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Santa Barbara County Public Health Department Telephone: 805-686-8167 Last EDR Contact: 09/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies SANTA CLARA COUNTY: Cupa Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 09/03/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/04/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 408-918-1973 Last EDR Contact: 09/03/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/16/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies HIST LUST - Fuel Leak Site Activity Report A listing of open and closed leaking underground storage tanks. This listing is no longer updated by the county. Leaking underground storage tanks are now handled by the Department of Environmental Health. Date of Government Version: 03/29/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/30/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/21/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Santa Clara Valley Water District Telephone: 408-265-2600 Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LOP Listing A listing of leaking underground storage tanks located in Santa Clara county. Date of Government Version: 09/03/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/06/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/14/2013 Number of Days to Update: 38 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: 408-918-3417 Last EDR Contact: 09/03/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/16/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually Hazardous Material Facilities Hazardous material facilities, including underground storage tank sites. TC3775911.2s Page GR-37 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Date of Government Version: 08/14/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/16/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/08/2013 Number of Days to Update: 53 Source: City of San Jose Fire Department Telephone: 408-535-7694 Last EDR Contact: 08/08/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/25/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually SANTA CRUZ COUNTY: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility listing. Date of Government Version: 08/22/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/27/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 44 Source: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Telephone: 831-464-2761 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies SHASTA COUNTY: CUPA Facility List Cupa Facility List. Date of Government Version: 09/09/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/14/2013 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Shasta County Department of Resource Management Telephone: 530-225-5789 Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Varies SOLANO COUNTY: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Solano county. Date of Government Version: 09/18/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/20/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/17/2013 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-784-6770 Last EDR Contact: 09/16/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Solano county. Date of Government Version: 09/18/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/24/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/18/2013 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-784-6770 Last EDR Contact: 09/16/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SONOMA COUNTY: Cupa Facility List Cupa Facility list Date of Government Version: 07/05/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/21/2013 Number of Days to Update: 47 Source: County of Sonoma Fire & Emergency Services Department Telephone: 707-565-1174 Last EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC3775911.2s Page GR-38 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Sonoma county. Date of Government Version: 07/02/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/12/2013 Number of Days to Update: 38 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: 707-565-6565 Last EDR Contact: 09/30/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SUTTER COUNTY: Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Sutter county. Date of Government Version: 09/10/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/14/2013 Number of Days to Update: 33 Source: Sutter County Department of Agriculture Telephone: 530-822-7500 Last EDR Contact: 09/10/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/23/2013 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually TUOLUMNE COUNTY: CUPA Facility List Cupa facility list Date of Government Version: 01/14/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/16/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Divison of Environmental Health Telephone: 209-533-5633 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies VENTURA COUNTY: Business Plan, Hazardous Waste Producers, and Operating Underground Tanks The BWT list indicates by site address whether the Environmental Health Division has Business Plan (B), Waste Producer (W), and/or Underground Tank (T) information. Date of Government Version: 08/19/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/27/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 44 Source: Ventura County Environmental Health Division Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 08/19/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/02/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Inventory of Illegal Abandoned and Inactive Sites Ventura County Inventory of Closed, Illegal Abandoned, and Inactive Sites. Date of Government Version: 12/01/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/01/2011 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/19/2012 Number of Days to Update: 49 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 10/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites Ventura County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST). Date of Government Version: 05/29/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/24/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 37 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 08/19/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/02/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC3775911.2s Page GR-39 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Medical Waste Program List To protect public health and safety and the environment from potential exposure to disease causing agents, the Environmental Health Division Medical Waste Program regulates the generation, handling, storage, treatment and disposal of medical waste throughout the County. Date of Government Version: 05/28/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/24/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/12/2013 Number of Days to Update: 49 Source: Ventura County Resource Management Agency Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 10/28/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/11/2014 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Tank Closed Sites List Ventura County Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites (UST)/Underground Tank Closed Sites List. Date of Government Version: 08/29/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/18/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2013 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: 805-654-2813 Last EDR Contact: 09/16/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly YOLO COUNTY: Underground Storage Tank Comprehensive Facility Report Underground storage tank sites located in Yolo county. Date of Government Version: 06/24/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/26/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/20/2013 Number of Days to Update: 55 Source: Yolo County Department of Health Telephone: 530-666-8646 Last EDR Contact: 09/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/08/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually YUBA COUNTY: CUPA Facility List CUPA facility listing for Yuba County. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/05/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/22/2013 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: Yuba County Environmental Health Department Telephone: 530-749-7523 Last EDR Contact: 11/04/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/17/2014 Data Release Frequency: Varies OTHER DATABASE(S) Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report. CT MANIFEST: Hazardous Waste Manifest Data Facility and manifest data. Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a tsd facility. Date of Government Version: 07/30/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/19/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/03/2013 Number of Days to Update: 45 Source: Department of Energy & Environmental Protection Telephone: 860-424-3375 Last EDR Contact: 08/19/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/02/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC3775911.2s Page GR-40 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING NJ MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/19/2012 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/28/2012 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 10/18/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually NY MANIFEST: Facility and Manifest Data Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a TSD facility. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2013 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/10/2013 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Department of Environmental Conservation Telephone: 518-402-8651 Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/18/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually PA MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/24/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/19/2013 Number of Days to Update: 26 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: 717-783-8990 Last EDR Contact: 10/21/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/03/2014 Data Release Frequency: Annually RI MANIFEST: Manifest information Hazardous waste manifest information Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/21/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/05/2013 Number of Days to Update: 45 Source: Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 401-222-2797 Last EDR Contact: 08/23/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/09/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually WI MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2013 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/27/2013 Number of Days to Update: 49 Source: Department of Natural Resources Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 09/16/2013 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/30/2013 Data Release Frequency: Annually Oil/Gas Pipelines: This data was obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It is referred to by USGS as GeoData Digital Line Graphs from 1:100,000-Scale Maps. It was extracted from the transportation category including some oil, but primarily gas pipelines. Electric Power Transmission Line Data Source: Rextag Strategies Corp. Telephone: (281) 769-2247 U.S. Electric Transmission and Power Plants Systems Digital GIS Data Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers, and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located. AHA Hospitals: Source: American Hospital Association, Inc. Telephone: 312-280-5991 The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association’s annual survey of hospitals. TC3775911.2s Page GR-41 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Medical Centers: Provider of Services Listing Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Telephone: 410-786-3000 A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services, a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Nursing Homes Source: National Institutes of Health Telephone: 301-594-6248 Information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States. Public Schools Source: National Center for Education Statistics Telephone: 202-502-7300 The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on elementary and secondary public education in the United States. It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are comparable across all states. Private Schools Source: National Center for Education Statistics Telephone: 202-502-7300 The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on private school locations in the United States. Daycare Centers: Licensed Facilities Source: Department of Social Services Telephone: 916-657-4041 Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2003 & 2011 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2002 and 2005 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Scanned Digital USGS 7.5’ Topographic Map (DRG) Source: United States Geologic Survey A digital raster graphic (DRG) is a scanned image of a U.S. Geological Survey topographic map. The map images are made by scanning published paper maps on high-resolution scanners. The raster image is georeferenced and fit to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection. STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION © 2010 Tele Atlas North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material. TC3775911.2s Page GR-42 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING TC3775911.2s Page A-1 geologic strata. of the soil, and nearby wells. Groundwater flow velocity is generally impacted by the nature of the Groundwater flow direction may be impacted by surface topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, characteristics 2. Groundwater flow velocity. 1. Groundwater flow direction, and Assessment of the impact of contaminant migration generally has two principal investigative components: forming an opinion about the impact of potential contaminant migration. EDR’s GeoCheck Physical Setting Source Addendum is provided to assist the environmental professional in 1991Most Recent Revision: 32116-E8 OTAY MESA, CA MX02Target Property Map: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP 557 ft. above sea levelElevation: 3606169.5UTM Y (Meters): 506869.3UTM X (Meters): Zone 11Universal Tranverse Mercator: 116.9268 - 116˚ 55’ 36.48’’Longitude (West): 32.5947 - 32˚ 35’ 40.92’’Latitude (North): TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES JAMUL, CA 91935 ROLL RESERVOIR 870-2 PUMP STATION TARGET PROPERTY ADDRESS ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE ADDENDUM® TC3775911.2s Page A-2 should be field verified. on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity Source: Topography has been determined from the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY: ELEVATION PROFILES El e v a t i o n ( f t ) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) TP TP 0 1/2 1 Miles✩Target Property Elevation: 557 ft. North South West East 61 8 61 9 61 1 54 5 39 3 42 7 57 3 57 754 8 55 753 147 4 40 2 39 6 52 8 58 0 66 7 55 1 48 2 39 7 43 6 49 4 36 8 27 8 40 1 50 2 42 9 54 6 55 7 55 4 59 6 76 2 78 0 80 9 91 4 10 2 4 11 1 7 12 7 4 General WNWGeneral Topographic Gradient: TARGET PROPERTY TOPOGRAPHY should contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. assist the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, Surface topography may be indicative of the direction of surficial groundwater flow. This information can be used to TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION collected on nearby properties, and regional groundwater flow information (from deep aquifers). sources of information, such as surface topographic information, hydrologic information, hydrogeologic data using site-specific well data. If such data is not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary to rely on other Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION INFORMATION ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY® TC3775911.2s Page A-3 Not Reported GENERAL DIRECTIONLOCATION GROUNDWATER FLOWFROM TPMAP ID hydrogeologically, and the depth to water table. authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, groundwater flow direction as determined flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted by environmental professionals to regulatory EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System to provide data on the general direction of groundwater AQUIFLOW® Search Radius: 1.000 Mile. Not found Status: 1.25 miles Search Radius: Site-Specific Hydrogeological Data*: * ©1996 Site-specific hydrogeological data gathered by CERCLIS Alerts, Inc., Bainbridge Island, WA. All rights reserved. All of the information and opinions presented are those of the cited EPA report(s), which were completed under a Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) investigation. contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should of groundwater flow direction in the immediate area. Such hydrogeologic information can be used to assist the Hydrogeologic information obtained by installation of wells on a specific site can often be an indicator HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail MapOTAY MESA NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY NWI Electronic Data CoverageNWI Quad at Target Property Not ReportedAdditional Panels in search area: 06073C - FEMA DFIRM Flood dataFlood Plain Panel at Target Property: YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail MapSAN DIEGO, CA FEMA FLOOD ZONE FEMA Flood Electronic DataTarget Property County and bodies of water). Refer to the Physical Setting Source Map following this summary for hydrologic information (major waterways contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should Surface water can act as a hydrologic barrier to groundwater flow. Such hydrologic information can be used to assist HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY® TC3775911.2s Page A-4 Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994). of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - a digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATION Eugeosynclinal DepositsCategory:MesozoicEra: Lower Jurassic and Upper TriassicSystem: Lower MesozoicSeries: lMzeCode: (decoded above as Era, System & Series) at which contaminant migration may be occurring. Geologic information can be used by the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the relative speed GEOLOGIC INFORMATION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY move more quickly through sandy-gravelly types of soils than silty-clayey types of soils. characteristics data collected on nearby properties and regional soil information. In general, contaminant plumes to rely on other sources of information, including geologic age identification, rock stratigraphic unit and soil using site specific geologic and soil strata data. If such data are not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary Groundwater flow velocity information for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional GROUNDWATER FLOW VELOCITY INFORMATION ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY® EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc. 2 1 3 2 4 4 0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Miles TC3775911.2s Page A-6 Min: 7.4 Max: 8.4 Min: 0.01 Max: 0.42 more), Fat Clay. limit 50% or Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Clayey passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clayclay59 inches20 inches 3 Min: 6.1 Max: 7.8 Min: 0.01 Max: 0.42 more), Fat Clay. limit 50% or Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Clayey passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Claygravelly clay20 inches 3 inches 2 Min: 5.6 Max: 6.5 Min: 0.42 Max: 1.4 50%), Lean Clay limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Clayey passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clay loam gravelly clay 3 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) > 0 inchesDepth to Watertable Min: > 0 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min: HighCorrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Partially hydric Moderately well drainedSoil Drainage Class: water table, or are shallow to an impervious layer. Class D - Very slow infiltration rates. Soils are clayey, have a highHydrologic Group: gravelly clay loamSoil Surface Texture: STOCKPENSoil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 1 in a landscape. The following information is based on Soil Conservation Service SSURGO data. for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) leads the National Cooperative Soil DOMINANT SOIL COMPOSITION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY® TC3775911.2s Page A-7 Min: 7.4 Max: 8.4 Min: 1.4 Max: 4 Silty Sand. Sands with fines, SOILS, Sands, COARSE-GRAINED Clayey sand. Sands with fines, SOILS, Sands, COARSE-GRAINED and Sand. Clayey Gravel 200), Silty, or passing No. pct. or less materials (35 Granular to sandy loam stratified sand59 inches50 inches 3 Min: 7.4 Max: 8.4 Min: 0.01 Max: 0.42 50%), Lean Clay limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Clayey passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clayclay loam50 inches 9 inches 2 5.1 Max: 6 Min: Min: 4 Max: 14 50%), silt. limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED 50%), Lean Clay. limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Silty passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clayloam 9 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) > 0 inchesDepth to Watertable Min: > 0 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min: HighCorrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Not hydric Moderately well drainedSoil Drainage Class: water table, or are shallow to an impervious layer. Class D - Very slow infiltration rates. Soils are clayey, have a highHydrologic Group: loamSoil Surface Texture: HUERHUEROSoil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 2 ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY® TC3775911.2s Page A-8 Moderately well drainedSoil Drainage Class: water table, or are shallow to an impervious layer. Class D - Very slow infiltration rates. Soils are clayey, have a highHydrologic Group: loamSoil Surface Texture: HUERHUEROSoil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 4 Max: Min: Min: Max: Not reportedNot reported bedrock unweathered27 inches22 inches 4 Min: 4.5 Max: 5.5 Min: 0.01 Max: 0.42 more), Fat Clay. limit 50% or Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Clayey passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clay loam gravelly clay22 inches18 inches 3 Min: 4.5 Max: 5.5 Min: 0.01 Max: 0.42 more), Fat Clay. limit 50% or Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Clayey passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clayclay loam18 inches 7 inches 2 5.1 Max: 6 Min: Min: 4 Max: 14 50%), silt. limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Silty passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Claysilt loam 7 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) > 0 inchesDepth to Watertable Min: > 25 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min: HighCorrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Not hydric Well drainedSoil Drainage Class: water table, or are shallow to an impervious layer. Class D - Very slow infiltration rates. Soils are clayey, have a highHydrologic Group: silt loamSoil Surface Texture: SAN MIGUELSoil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 3 ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY® TC3775911.2s Page A-9 1.000State Database Nearest PWS within 1 mileFederal FRDS PWS 1.000Federal USGS WELL SEARCH DISTANCE INFORMATION SEARCH DISTANCE (miles)DATABASE opinion about the impact of contaminant migration on nearby drinking water wells. professional in assessing sources that may impact ground water flow direction, and in forming an EDR Local/Regional Water Agency records provide water well information to assist the environmental LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS Min: 7.4 Max: 8.4 Min: 1.4 Max: 4 Silty Sand. Sands with fines, SOILS, Sands, COARSE-GRAINED Clayey sand. Sands with fines, SOILS, Sands, COARSE-GRAINED and Sand. Clayey Gravel 200), Silty, or passing No. pct. or less materials (35 Granular to sandy loam stratified sand72 inches55 inches 3 Min: 7.4 Max: 8.4 Min: 0.01 Max: 0.42 50%), Lean Clay limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Clayey passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clayclay55 inches11 inches 2 5.1 Max: 6 Min: Min: 4 Max: 14 50%), silt. limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Silty passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clayloam11 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) > 0 inchesDepth to Watertable Min: > 0 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min: HighCorrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Not hydric ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY® TC3775911.2s Page A-10 No Wells Found STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TPWELL IDMAP ID Note: PWS System location is not always the same as well location. No PWS System Found FEDERAL FRDS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TPWELL IDMAP ID No Wells Found FEDERAL USGS WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TPWELL IDMAP ID ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY® EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc. 600 1600 14 0 0 1200 0 40 0 400 400 400 60 0 600 600 800 800 800 1 0 00 7 0 0 170015 0 0 7 00 30 0 300 50 0 50 0 500 0 500 700 700 700 900 900 110 0 CA TC3775911.2s Page A-12 Not ReportedNot ReportedNot ReportedNot ReportedBasement 0%0%100%0.400 pCi/LLiving Area - 2nd Floor 0%0%100%0.677 pCi/LLiving Area - 1st Floor % >20 pCi/L% 4-20 pCi/L% <4 pCi/LAverage ActivityArea Number of sites tested: 30 Federal Area Radon Information for SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CA : Zone 3 indoor average level < 2 pCi/L. : Zone 2 indoor average level >= 2 pCi/L and <= 4 pCi/L. Note: Zone 1 indoor average level > 4 pCi/L. Federal EPA Radon Zone for SAN DIEGO County: 3 0691935 ______________________ > 4 pCi/LNum TestsZipcode Radon Test Results State Database: CA Radon AREA RADON INFORMATION ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS RADON ® TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model (DEM) Source: United States Geologic Survey EDR acquired the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model in 2002 and updated it in 2006. The 7.5 minute DEM corresponds to the USGS 1:24,000- and 1:25,000-scale topographic quadrangle maps. The DEM provides elevation data with consistent elevation units and projection. Scanned Digital USGS 7.5’ Topographic Map (DRG) Source: United States Geologic Survey A digital raster graphic (DRG) is a scanned image of a U.S. Geological Survey topographic map. The map images are made by scanning published paper maps on high-resolution scanners. The raster image is georeferenced and fit to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection. HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2003 & 2011 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2002 and 2005 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION AQUIFLOW Information SystemR Source: EDR proprietary database of groundwater flow information EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System (AIS) to provide data on the general direction of groundwater flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted to regulatory authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, hydrogeologically determined groundwater flow direction and depth to water table information. GEOLOGIC INFORMATION Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - A digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994). STATSGO: State Soil Geographic Database Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) leads the national Conservation Soil Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO) soil survey maps. SSURGO: Soil Survey Geographic Database Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) Telephone: 800-672-5559 SSURGO is the most detailed level of mapping done by the Natural Resources Conservation Services, mapping scales generally range from 1:12,000 to 1:63,360. Field mapping methods using national standards are used to construct the soil maps in the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database. SSURGO digitizing duplicates the original soil survey maps. This level of mapping is designed for use by landowners, townships and county natural resource planning and management. TC3775911.2s Page A-13 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS FEDERAL WATER WELLS PWS: Public Water Systems Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water Telephone: 202-564-3750 Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS is any water system which provides water to at least 25 people for at least 60 days annually. PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources. PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water Telephone: 202-564-3750 Violation and Enforcement data for Public Water Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) after August 1995. Prior to August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS). USGS Water Wells: USGS National Water Inventory System (NWIS) This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected data on surface water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on wells, springs, and other sources of groundwater. STATE RECORDS Water Well Database Source: Department of Water Resources Telephone: 916-651-9648 California Drinking Water Quality Database Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: 916-324-2319 The database includes all drinking water compliance and special studies monitoring for the state of California since 1984. It consists of over 3,200,000 individual analyses along with well and water system information. OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION California Oil and Gas Well Locations Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: 916-323-1779 Oil and Gas well locations in the state. RADON State Database: CA Radon Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: 916-324-2208 Radon Database for California Area Radon Information Source: USGS Telephone: 703-356-4020 The National Radon Database has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey. The study covers the years 1986 - 1992. Where necessary data has been supplemented by information collected at private sources such as universities and research institutions. EPA Radon Zones Source: EPA Telephone: 703-356-4020 Sections 307 & 309 of IRAA directed EPA to list and identify areas of U.S. with the potential for elevated indoor radon levels. TC3775911.2s Page A-14 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED OTHER Airport Landing Facilities: Private and public use landing facilities Source: Federal Aviation Administration, 800-457-6656 Epicenters: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration California Earthquake Fault Lines: The fault lines displayed on EDR’s Topographic map are digitized quaternary fault lines, prepared in 1975 by the United State Geological Survey. Additional information (also from 1975) regarding activity at specific fault lines comes from California’s Preliminary Fault Activity Map prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology. STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION © 2010 Tele Atlas North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material. TC3775911.2s Page A-15 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED Certified Sanborn® Map Report 870-2 Pump Station Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 Inquiry Number: 3775911.3 November 04, 2013 Certified Sanborn® Map Report 11/04/13 Site Name: 870-2 Pump Station Roll Reservoir Jamul, CA 91935 Client Name: Southern CA Soil and Testing 6280 Riverdale Street San Diego, CA 92120 Contact:Doug SkinnerEDR Inquiry #3775911.3 The complete Sanborn Library collection has been searched by EDR, and fire insurance maps covering the target property location provided by Southern CA Soil and Testing were identified for the years listed below. The certified Sanborn Library search results in this report can be authenticated by visiting www.edrnet.com/sanborn and entering the certification number. Only Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) is authorized to grant rights for commercial reproduction of maps by Sanborn Library LLC, the copyright holder for the collection. Certified Sanborn Results: Site Name:870-2 Pump Station Address:Roll Reservoir City, State, Zip:Jamul, CA 91935 Cross Street: P.O. #1311158 Project:870-2 Pump Station Project Certification #48B4-4D0F-A5E6 Library of Congress University Publications of America EDR Private Collection The Sanborn Library LLC Since 1866™ The Sanborn Library includes more than 1.2 million Sanborn fire insurance maps, which track historical property usage in approximately 12,000 American cities and towns. Collections searched: Sanborn® Library search results Certification # 48B4-4D0F-A5E6 UNMAPPED PROPERTY This report certifies that the complete holdings of the Sanborn Library, LLC collection have been searched based on client supplied target property information, and fire insurance maps covering the target property were not found. Limited Permission To Make Copies Southern CA Soil and Testing (the client) is permitted to make up to THREE photocopies of this Sanborn Map transmittal and each fire insurance map accompanying this report solely for the limited use of its customer. No one other than the client is authorized to make copies. Upon request made directly to an EDR Account Executive, the client may be permitted to make a limited number of additional photocopies. This permission is conditioned upon compliance by the client, its customer and their agents with EDR's copyright policy; a copy of which is available upon request. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2013 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. 3775911 - 3 page 2 APPENDIX D PHASE I CLIENT QUESTIONNAIRE STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: December 7, 2016 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Engineering Manager PROJECT: VARIOUS DIV. NO. ALL APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief of Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Informational Item – First Quarter Fiscal Year 2017 Capital Improvement Program Report GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: No recommendation. This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To update the Board about the status of all CIP project expenditures and to highlight significant issues, progress, and milestones on major projects. ANALYSIS: To keep up with growth and to meet our ratepayers' expectations to adequately deliver safe, reliable, cost-effective, and quality water, each year the District staff prepares a Six-Year CIP Plan that identifies the District’s infrastructure needs. The CIP is comprised of four categories consisting of backbone capital facilities, replacement/renewal projects, capital purchases, and developer's reimbursement projects. The First Quarter Fiscal Year 2017 update is intended to provide a detailed analysis of progress in completing these projects within the allotted time and budget of $10.7 million. Expenditures through the First Quarter totaled approximately $2.0 million. Approximately 19% of the Fiscal Year 2017 expenditure budget was spent (see Attachment B). FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer No fiscal impact as this is an informational item only. STRATEGIC GOAL: The Capital Improvement Program supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high quality and reliable water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional, effective, and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is innovative in providing water services at competitive rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. DM/RP:mlc P:\Forms\D-Construction\CIP Quarterly Reports\CIP Qtr Reports\FY 2017\Q1\Staff Report\BD 12-07-16 Staff Report First Quarter FY 2017 CIP Report (DM-RP).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B - Fiscal Year 2017 First Quarter CIP Expenditure Report Attachment C – Presentation ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: VARIOUS Informational Item – First Quarter Fiscal Year 2017 Capital Improvement Program Report COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on November 21, 2016. The Committee supported Staff’s recommendation. NOTE: The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. FISCAL YEAR 2017 1st QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 09/30/2016) ($ In Thousands) Attachment B 2017 09/30/16 CIP No. Description Project Manager FY 2017 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget % Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget % Comments CAPITAL FACILITY PROJECTS - P2040 Res - 1655-1 Reservoir 0.5 MG Cameron 20$ 1$ 19$ 5% 3,400$ 485$ 2,915$ 14% Review of the previous environmental documents to begin FY 2017 Q3. P2267 36-Inch Main Pumpouts and Air/Vacuum Ventilation Installations Marchioro 220 17 203 8% 735 476 259 65% Design completed FY 2017 Q1. Construction to begin in FY 2017 Q2. On track. P2382 Safety and Security Improvements Payne 250 60 190 24% 2,811 2,633 178 94% On schedule for completion June 30, 2017 P2405 PL - 624/340 PRS, Paseo Ranchero and Otay Valley Road Cameron 5 - 5 0% 570 - 570 0% Tied to CIP P2553. P2451 Otay Mesa Desalination Conveyance and Disinfection System Kennedy 50 75 (25) 150% 3,875 3,645 230 94% Work to finalize EIR/EIS was expected to be completed FY 2016, but instead will be completed FY 2017. Project within overall budget. P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations Marchioro 250 1 249 0% 4,000 1,599 2,401 40% Sequence 1 construction accepted FY 2016 Q4. In one year warranty period. P2460 I.D. 7 Trestle and Pipeline Demolition Beppler 50 - 50 0% 600 5 595 1% Planning level investigations started. Do not expect to expend full fiscal year budget based upon preliminary discussions regarding what level of structural consultant input is required prior to bidding the project. P2466 Regional Training Facility Coburn-Boyd6 - 6 0% 300 288 12 96% Project continues to be on hold. P2485 SCADA Communication System and Software Replacement Kerr 85 19 66 22% 2,014 1,686 328 84% Project on schedule for FY 2017 Q1. P2486 Asset Management - Info Master Water Implementation Zhao 25 - 25 0% 957 879 78 92% On track. P2494 Multiple Species Conservation Plan Coburn-Boyd48 - 48 0% 950 854 96 90% Expect to use all of budget later this fiscal year. P2496 Otay Lakes Road Utility Relocations Martin 5 - 5 0% 325 283 42 87% Project accepted FY 2016 Q4. P2504 Regulatory Site Access Road and Pipeline Relocation Cameron 20 - 20 0% 900 330 570 37% Project is driven by County Fire. P2516 PL - 12-Inch, 640 Zone, Jamacha Road - Darby/OsageMarchioro- - - 0% 800 - 800 0% On hold for FY 2017. P2520 Motorola Mobile Radio Upgrade Martinez 30 3 27 10% 120 81 39 68% We expect to expend the remaining balance in FY 2017 Q3. P2521 Large Meter Vault Upgrade Program Carey 100 - 100 0% 400 219 181 55% Work is scheduled to begin FY 2017 Q3. P2537 Operations Yard Property Acquisition Improvements Beppler 10 3 7 30% 775 731 44 94% Construction project accepted FY 2016 Q4. In one year warranty period. P2541 624 Pressure Zone PRSs Marchioro 10 (2) 12 -20% 760 740 20 97% Construction project accepted FY 2016 Q4. In one year warranty period. P2547 District Administration Vehicle Charging Stations Cameron 85 - 85 0% 125 20 105 16% On track. P2550 Fuel Island Upgrade Payne 112 93 19 83% 112 93 19 83% In close out. Final test due in 6 months. P2551 Blossom Lane Helix WD and Otay WD Interconnection Beppler 20 1 19 5% 210 169 41 80% Implementation of SCADA and warranty period of completed construction. Budget on track. P2552 South Barcelona Helix WD and Otay WD Interconnection Beppler 20 1 19 5% 210 166 44 79% Implementation of SCADA and warranty period of completed construction. Budget on track. P2553 Heritage Road Bridge Replacement and Utility Relocation Cameron 100 - 100 0% 1,430 5 1,425 0% City of Chula Vista driven project. The City will update their status to all utilities at a meeting in November 2016. P2564 Administration Carpet Replacement Program Payne 5 - 5 0% 215 - 215 0% Planning to be completed June 30, 2017. P2568 Technology Business Processes Improvement Kerr 100 - 100 0% 135 25 110 19% No expenditures allocated for FY 2017 Q1. The Board item for Enterprise Content Management System was approved at the October Board Meeting. Funds will be transferred from other projects to cover the cost. P2569 Metro Ethernet Implementation/ District Facilities - Pilot Kerr 45 31 14 69% 145 137 8 94% Project on schedule for FY 2017 Q1. P2570 SCADA Equipment & Infrastructure Enhancement Kerr 100 - 100 0% 300 - 300 0% No expenditures allocated for FY 2017 Q1. P2571 Datacenter Network Enhancement & Replacement of Infrastructure Componets Kerr - - - 0% 200 - 200 0% No expenditures allocated for FY 2017. P2572 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Kerr - - - 0% 500 - 500 0% No expenditures allocated for FY 2017. P2584 Res - 657-1 and 657-2 Reservoir Demolitions Marchioro - - - 0% 720 - 720 0% On hold for FY 2017. R2077 RecPL - 24-Inch, 860 Zone, Alta Road - Alta Gate/Airway Beppler 20 1 19 5% 2,852 2,812 40 99% Under construction. Completion anticipated in FY 2017 Q3. R2079 RecPL - 6-Inch, 450 Zone, Otay Valley Road - Otay Valley/Entertainment Beppler 10 - 10 0% 150 - 150 0% No activity to date. R2109 Sweetwater River Wooden Trestle Improvement for the Recycled Water Forcemain Beppler 10 - 10 0% 375 353 22 94% Construction project accepted FY 2016 Q2. In one year warranty period. FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 09/30/16 LIFE-TO-DATE, 09/30/16 Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2017\BD 12-07-16\CIP FY 2017 1st Quarter Update\FINAL FY17 1st qtr exp.xlsx Page 1 of 4 11/8/2016 FISCAL YEAR 2017 1st QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 09/30/2016) ($ In Thousands) Attachment B 2017 09/30/16 CIP No. Description Project Manager FY 2017 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget % Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget % Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 09/30/16 LIFE-TO-DATE, 09/30/16 R2110 RecPS - 944-1 Optimization and Pressure Zone Modifications Marchioro 5 - 5 0% 200 130 70 65% Construction project accepted FY 2016 Q4. In one year warranty period. R2116 RecPL - 14-Inch, 927 Zone, Force Main Improvements Marchioro 1,000 28 972 3% 2,500 684 1,816 27% Construction began FY 2017 Q1. On track. R2117 RWCWRF Disinfection System Improvements Beppler 10 - 10 0% 1,520 111 1,409 7% Awaiting completion of WRF Master Plan and force main assessment before selecting proposed improvements. R2118 Steele Canyon Sewer PS Large Solids Handling Improvements Beppler 68 3 65 4% 75 8 67 11% Design in progress; will need to coordinate construction with a shutdown of WRF. R2119 RWCWRF Automation & Security Upgrades Beppler 95 18 77 19% 300 52 248 17% WRF Master Plan almost complete. Initiation of automation and security improvements to start FY 2017 Q3. R2120 RWCWRF Filtered Water Storage Tank Improvements Beppler 250 5 245 2% 500 5 495 1% Design in progress. Need to coordinate construction with operation of WRF. R2122 Emergency Recycled Water Fire Hydrant Installations Cameron 15 1 14 7% 75 33 42 44% Project was completed in FY 2017 Q1. R2123 Repurpose Otay Mesa Recycled Water Lines Beppler 35 - 35 0% 350 - 350 0% No activity on this project to date. R2124 RecPS - 927-1 Pump 5 Replacement Anderson 55 - 55 0% 55 - 55 0% Advertisement to bid for replacement is anticipated FY 2017 Q2. Money to be expended by the end of FY 2017 Q3. S2012 San Diego County Sanitation District Outfall and RSD Outfall Replacement Beppler 150 - 150 0% 2,420 1,020 1,400 42% County project. Costs are invoiced annually. S2027 Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation Beppler 50 - 50 0% 3,500 300 3,200 9% County project. Costs are invoiced annually. S2033 Sewer System Rehabilitation Beppler 200 372 (172) 186% 3,000 2,372 628 79% Project within overall budget. Anticipate completion FY 2017 Q2. S2043 RWCWRF Sludge Handling System Beppler 1 - 1 0% 47 40 7 85% No activity planned until Metro Pure Water costs are established. S2047 Asset Management - Info Master Sewer Implementation Zhao - - - 0% 58 - 58 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. Total Capital Facility Projects Total: 3,745 731 3,014 20%46,571 23,469 23,102 50% REPLACEMENT/RENEWAL PROJECTS P2083 PS - 870-2 Pump Station Replacement Marchioro 390$ 130 260 33% 17,000$ 1,795 15,205 11% Advertisement for construction bid anticipated FY 2017 Q3. On track. P2174 PS - 1090-1 Pump Station Replacement (400 gpm)Marchioro 1 - 1 0% 1,500 4 1,496 0% On hold for FY 2017. P2400 PL - 20-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 711 Zone, Otay Lakes Road - at Santa Paula Marchioro - - - 0% 2,000 - 2,000 0% On hold for FY 2017. P2493 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 60 2 58 3% 1,675 1,544 131 92% Expenditures expected in FY 2017 Q2 for warranty work. P2507 East Palomar Street Utility Relocation Cameron 120 1 119 1% 940 719 221 76% Project closeout to begin in FY 2017 Q2. P2508 Pipeline Cathodic Protection Replacement Program Marchioro 300 2 298 1% 725 251 474 35% Construction began FY 2017 Q1. On track. P2518 803-3 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 40 - 40 0% 700 645 55 92% Two year warranty period will be completed in FY 2017 Q3. P2519 832-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 65 - 65 0% 750 670 80 89% Two year warranty period will be completed in FY 2017 Q3. P2529 711-2 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 360 420 (60) 117% 840 781 59 93% Construction to be completed FY 2017 Q2. P2530 711-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 90 29 61 32% 1,040 934 106 90% Construction to be completed FY 2017 Q2. P2531 944-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 50 13 37 26% 410 323 87 79% Construction contract completed FY 2016 Q4. Currently in two year warranty period. P2532 944-2 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 50 - 50 0% 1,050 937 113 89% Construction contract completed FY 2016 Q4. Currently in two year warranty period. P2533 1200-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 10 - 10 0% 810 - 810 0% Planning anticipated to being FY 2017 Q2. P2534 978-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 615 11 604 2% 715 11 704 2% Design completed FY 2017 Q1. Construction to begin in FY 2017 Q2. On track. P2535 458-2 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron 50 3 47 6% 885 776 109 88% Construction contract completed FY 2016 Q4. Currently in two year warranty period. P2538 Administration and Operations Building Fire Sprinkler Replacement Program Cameron 10 - 10 0% 110 89 21 81% Project was completed in late FY 2016. No expenditures are anticipated, unless for warranty work at one year. P2539 South Bay Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Utility Relocations Cameron 100 4 96 4% 1,090 882 208 81% SANDAG driven project. Spending will increase in FY 2017 Q4. Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2017\BD 12-07-16\CIP FY 2017 1st Quarter Update\FINAL FY17 1st qtr exp.xlsx Page 2 of 4 11/8/2016 FISCAL YEAR 2017 1st QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 09/30/2016) ($ In Thousands) Attachment B 2017 09/30/16 CIP No. Description Project Manager FY 2017 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget % Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget % Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 09/30/16 LIFE-TO-DATE, 09/30/16 P2542 850-3 Reservoir Interior Coating Cameron 50 - 50 0% 630 527 103 84% Construction contract completed FY 2016 Q2. Currently in two year warranty period. P2543 850-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 10 - 10 0% 875 - 875 0% Planning anticipated to being in FY 2017 Q2. P2544 850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 835 11 824 1% 1,070 11 1,059 1% Design completed FY 2017 Q1. Construction to begin in FY 2017 Q2. On track. P2545 980-1 Reservoir Interior Exterior Coating Cameron 330 133 197 40% 1,495 1,130 365 76% Reservoir placed into service FY 2017 Q1. On track to accept project FY 2017 Q2. P2546 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron - - - 0% 1,450 - 1,450 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. P2555 Administration and Operations Parking Lot Improvements Cameron 275 7 268 3% 500 55 445 11% Design anticipated to be complete in FY 2017 Q2. P2557 520 Res Recirculation Pipeline Chemical Supply and Analyzer Feed Replacement Project Beppler 50 20 30 40% 100 30 70 30% Design in progress. Construction expected to be completed this fiscal year within budget. P2559 Pressure Vessel Repair and Replacement Program Marchioro 65 12 53 18% 650 59 591 9% RWCWRF surge tank to be replaced by in-house force FY 2017 Q2. On track. P2561 Res - 711-3 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 1 2 (1) 200% 1,800 4 1,796 0% Existing cover/liner materials analyzed by laboratory FY 2017 Q1. On track. P2562 Res - 571-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 90 - 90 0% 2,600 - 2,600 0% Advertisement for construction bid anticipated FY 2017 Q3. On track. P2563 Res - 870-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 1 2 (1) 200% 1,000 2 998 0% Existing cover/liner materials analyzed by laboratory FY 2017 Q1. On track. P2565 803-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0% 940 - 940 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. P2566 520-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0% 1,500 - 1,500 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. P2567 1004-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0% 905 - 905 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. P2573 PL - 12-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 803 Zone, Hillsdale Road Marchioro 160 49 111 31% 1,750 49 1,701 3% PDR completed FY 2017 Q1. On track. P2574 PL - 12-Inch and 14-inch Pipeline Replacement, 803 and 978 Zone, Vista Grande, Pence Drive Marchioro 50 - 50 0% 2,750 - 2,750 0% On hold until FY 2017 Q3 or Q4. P2578 PS - 711-2 (PS 711-1 Replacement and Expansion) - 14,000 gpmMarchioro - - - 0% 6,600 - 6,600 0% On hold for FY 2017. P2579 Temporary Lower Otay Pump Station Improvements Beppler 140 - 140 0% 140 - 140 0% No activitity to date. P2592 East H Street Bike Lane Utility Coordination Beppler 50 - 50 0% 50 - 50 0% No activitity to date. P2593 458-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0% 840 - 840 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. P2594 Large Meter Replacement Carey 240 68 172 28% 485 68 417 14% On track. R2111 RWCWRF - RAS Pump Replacement Beppler 10 - 10 0% 570 555 15 97% Construction project accepted FY 2016 Q3. Project is in one year warranty period. R2112 450-1 Disinfection Facility Rehabilitation Cameron 25 - 25 0% 265 214 51 81% One year warranty completed FY 2017 Q1. R2121 Res - 944-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 1 - 1 0% 1,400 19 1,381 1% On hold for FY 2017. S2024 Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Beppler 50 15 35 30% 8,500 1,130 7,370 13% Project to exceed budget for easement acquistions. Bidding to be in FY 2017 Q3. S2044 Trenchless Sewer Rehabilitation Beppler 600 13 587 2% 650 13 637 2% Design to be completed and project bid in FY 2017 Q2. Construction expected to be completed in FY 2017 Q4. S2045 Fuerte Drive Sewer Relocation Beppler 190 2 188 1% 200 2 198 1% County driven project is behind schedule. Likely only design costs will be spent this fiscal year. S2046 RWCWRF - Aeration Panels Replacement Beppler 250 3 247 1% 450 3 447 1% Design of replacement panels projected to be performed in FY 2017 Q3. Installation may occur next fiscal year, pending panel delivery time. S2048 Hillsdale Road Sewer Repairs Beppler 100 12 88 12% 500 12 488 2% Design in progress. Project on schedule for budgeted amount. S2049 Calavo Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 2 Beppler 20 - 20 0% 1,000 - 1,000 0% Planning phase, no activity expected until FY 2017 Q3. S2050 Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 2 Beppler - - - 0% 300 - 300 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. S2051 RWCWRF - Headworks Improvements Beppler - - - 0% 750 - 750 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. S2052 RWCWRF - Access Roads Repaving Cameron - - - 0% 750 - 750 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. S2053 RWCWRF - Sedimentation Basins Refurbishment Beppler - - - 0% 600 - 600 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. S2054 Calavo Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 3 Beppler - - - 0% 300 - 300 0% No expenditures for FY 2017. Total Replacement/Renewal Projects Total: 5,904 964 4,940 16%76,605 14,244 62,361 19% Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2017\BD 12-07-16\CIP FY 2017 1st Quarter Update\FINAL FY17 1st qtr exp.xlsx Page 3 of 4 11/8/2016 FISCAL YEAR 2017 1st QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 09/30/2016) ($ In Thousands) Attachment B 2017 09/30/16 CIP No. Description Project Manager FY 2017 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget % Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget % Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 09/30/16 LIFE-TO-DATE, 09/30/16 CAPITAL PURCHASE PROJECTS P2282 Vehicle Capital Purchases Rahders 197$ - 197 0% 5,049$ 3,636 1,413 72% Anticipate 100% expense by the end of FY 2017 Q3. P2285 Office Equipment and Furniture Capital Purchases Payne 15 2 13 13% 589 554 35 94% Purchases to be completed by June 30, 2017. P2286 Field Equipment Capital Purchases Rahders 38 14 24 37% 1,634 1,372 262 84%Anticipate 100% expense for FY 2017. P2366 APCD Engine Replacements and Retrofits Rahders 820 312 508 38% 3,371 2,863 508 85% Anticipate 100% expense by the end of FY 2017 Q3. - Total Capital Purchase Projects Total: 1,070 328 742 31%10,643 8,425 2,218 79% DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT PROJECTS P2325 PL-10" to 12" Oversize, 1296 Zone, PB Road-Rolling Hills Hydro PS/PB Bndy Beppler 3$ - 3 0% 22$ 19 3 86% Reimbursement completed FY 2016 Q3. P2403 PL - 12-inch, 624 Zone, Heritage Road - Olympic/Otay Valley Beppler - - - 0% 550 - 550 0% CIP being updated to reflect changes in Village 3 SAMP and Water Facilities Master Plan. P2556 HWY 94 Upsized Utility Relocations at Melody Lane Beppler 1 - 1 0% 100 - 100 0% No work is anticipated on the project for FY 2017. R2084 RecPL - 20-Inch, 680 Zone, Village 2 - Heritage/La Media Beppler 10 - 10 0% 365 1 364 0% Under construction in FY 2017 Q1. Request for reimbursement anticipated FY 2017 Q3. Total Developer Reimbursement Projects Total: 14 - 14 0%1,037 20 1,017 2% 107 10,733$ 2,023$ 8,710$ 19% 134,856$ 46,158$ 88,698$ 34% Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2017\BD 12-07-16\CIP FY 2017 1st Quarter Update\FINAL FY17 1st qtr exp.xlsx Page 4 of 4 11/8/2016 Otay Water District Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2017 First Quarter (through September 30, 2016) Attachment C 711-1 (3.1 MG) - Completed Reservoir 9/30/2016 Background The approved CIP Budget for Fiscal Year 2017 consists of 89 projects that total $10.7 million. These projects are broken down into four categories. 1.Capital Facilities $ 3.7 million 2.Replacement/Renewal $ 5.9 million 3.Capital Purchases $ 1.1 million 4.Developer Reimbursement $ 14.0 thousand Overall expenditures through the First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2017 totaled $2.0 million, which is approximately 19% of the Fiscal Year budget. 2 Fiscal Year 2017 First Quarter Update ($000) CIP CAT Description FY 2017 Budget FY 2017 Expenditures % FY 2017 Budget Spent Total Life-to- Date Budget Total Life-to-Date Expenditures % Life-to- Date Budget Spent 1 Capital Facilities $3,745 $731 20% $46,571 $23,469 50% 2 Replacement/ Renewal $5,904 $964 16% $76,605 $14,244 19% 3 Capital Purchases $1,070 $328 31% $10,643 $8,425 79% 4 Developer Reimbursement $14 $0 0% $1,037 $20 2% Total: $10,733 $2,023 19% $134,856 $46,158 34% 3 Fiscal Year 2017 First Quarter CIP Budget Forecast vs. Expenditures 4 5 CIP Projects in Construction 980-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades (P2545) Remove and Replace Deteriorating Reservoir Coatings. Structural Modifications to Increase Service Life. $1.50M Budget Start: February 2016 Completed: August 2016 6 980-1 Reservoir (5.0 MG) – Completed Exterior Location: North End of Salt Creek Golf Course, Hunte Parkway, Chula Vista Division No. 5 08/10/2016 CIP Projects in Construction 711-1 & 711-2 Reservoirs Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades (P2530, P2529) Remove and Replace Deteriorating Reservoir Coatings. Structural Modifications to Increase Service Life. $1.88M Budget Start: November 2015 Completed: September 2016 7711-2 (2.3 MG) – Completed Reservoir Location: Park Meadows Road, Chula Vista. Adjacent to East Lake County Club Golf Course Division No. 1 9/30/2016 CIP Projects in Construction Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation – Phase 1 (S2033-003103) Sewer system repairs at 14 locations 3,250 LF of 8-inch sewer 4 new sewer manholes $3.00M Budget Start: March 2016 Estimated Completion: November 2016 8 Replacement of 8-Inch Sewer –Vista Grande Road (Site 729) Division No. 5 Locations: 14 locations including Hillsdale Road, Donahue Drive, Juliana Street Vista Grande Road, and Sundale Road. 9/13/2016 Construction Contract Status 9 PROJECT TOTAL % P2529 P2530 711-1 &711-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Advanced Industrial Services, Inc.$1,103,715 $1,195,695 $15,018 1.4% $1,210,713 $1,206,515 1.3% 99.7% Completed September 2016 P2545 980-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Advanced Industrial Services, Inc.$769,000 $876,500 $9,025 1.2% $885,525 $879,025 1.0% 99.3% Completed August 2016 S2033 Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 1 Transtar $951,470 $970,970 $23,438 2.5% $977,075 $733,469 0.6% 75.1% November 2016 P2508 R2116 14-Inch Force Main Rehabilitation Project Charles King Company Inc.$1,045,100 $1,101,250 $0 0.0% $1,045,100 $0 -5.1% 0.0% January 2017 TOTALS: $3,869,285 $4,144,415 $47,481 1.2%$4,118,413 $2,819,009 -0.6% FY 2017 CIP CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS CURRENT CONTRACT AMOUNT TOTAL EARNED TO DATE **THIS CHANGE ORDER RATE INCLUDES THE CREDIT FOR UNUSED ALLOWANCES *NET CHANGE ORDERS DO NOT INCLUDE ALLOWANCE ITEM CREDITS. IT'S A TRUE CHANGE ORDER PERCENTAGE FOR THE PROJECT CIP NO. PROJECT TITLE CONTRACTOR BASE BID AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT W/ ALLOWANCES % CHANGE ORDERS W/ ALLOWANCE CREDIT** % COMPLETE EST. COMP. DATE NET CHANGE ORDERS LTD* Consultant Contract Status Consultant Contract Status 11 QUESTIONS?QUESTIONS? 12