Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCSD 02-23RESOLUTION NO. OCSD 02-23 MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATING TO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EFFLUENT PUMP STATION ANNEX, JOB NO. J-77 AND COLLECTION SYSTEM ODOR AND CORROSION CONTROL PROGRAM; ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTING THE 1999 STRATEGIC PLAN EIR; CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE EFFLUENT PUMP STATION ANNEX. JOB NO. J-77 AND COLLECTION SYSTEM ODOR AND CORROSION CONTROL PROGRAM ("PROJECT"); AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION RE SAID PROJECT A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATING TO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EFFLUENT PUMP STATION ANNEX, JOB NO. J-77 AND COLLECTION SYSTEM ODOR AND CORROSION CONTROL PROGRAM; ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTING THE 1999 STRATEGIC PLAN EIR; CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUPPLEMENT AL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE EFFLUENT PUMP STATION ANNEX, JOB NO. J-77 AND COLLECTION SYSTEM ODOR AND CORROSION CONTROL PROGRAM ("PROJECT"); AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION RE SAID PROJECT WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District ("District"), hereinafter referred to as "Board", is presently considering the approval of the Effluent Pump Station Annex ("EPSA") and Collection System Odor and Corrosion Control Program ("OCP"); and, WHEREAS, on October 27, 1999, the Board adopted a Final Program EIR for the Strategic Plan ("PEIR"), which identified projects and programs needed to accommodate the projected population growth in its service area through 2020; and, WHEREAS, the PEIR identified (1) the need to upgrade the Foster Pump Station ("FPS"), which acts as a back-up pump to the ocean discharge outfall, and (2) the existing odor system control program, which consists of intermittent application of caustic soda at various locations in the collection system; and, WHEREAS, the District proposes to modify the program evaluated in the PEIR by (1) constructing a new back-up pump station, the EPSA, to replace the FPS, and (2) the continued operation and future installation of continuous chemical feed systems at various locations along the collection system; and, WHEREAS, the District is the lead agency for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Effluent Pump Station Annex and Collection System Odor and Corrosion Control Program , pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, ("CEQA"), the State of California CEQA Guidelines and District CEQA procedures; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15163, District staff determined that a supplement to the PEIR (SEIR) was required because only minor additions or changes were necessary to make the PEIR adequately apply to the EPSA and OCP; and, WHEREAS, District staff consulted with other public agencies and the general public, and gave them several opportunities to comment on the Draft SEIR as required by CEQA; and, WHEREAS, on September 4, 2002, the District staff held a duly-noticed public workshop to provide a further opportunity for the general public to comment on and respond to the Draft SEIR; and, WHEREAS, the Board has objectively evaluated the comments from public agencies and persons who reviewed the Draft SEIR; and, WHEREAS, the comments and recommendations received on the Draft SEIR, either in full or in summary, together with the District staff's responses to significant environmental concerns raised in the review and consultation process, have been included in the Final SEIR; and, . WHEREAS, District staff presented to the Board the PEIR and the Final SEIR consisting of the Draft SEIR, list of comments on the Draft SEIR, and responses to the comments received on the Draft SEIR for review and consideration prior to the final approval of, and commitment to, the two projects. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of Orange County Sanitation District, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: 1. That the Board of Directors hereby certifies that the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and that the Board of Directors has reviewed and considered the information contained in the PEIR as revised by the FSEIR prior to approval of, or commitment to, the two projects, .. ) and that the FSEIR, consisting of the Draft SEIR and the Response to Comments, reflects the District's independent judgment and analysis; and, 2. The Board finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of the project and adopts the Findings of Fact as described in Attachment A; and, 3. The District will implement the mitigation measures recommended in the PEIR and the mitigation measures recommended in the FSEIR to reduce the significant impacts of the project to a less than significant level. 4. The Board adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as described in Attachment B to ensure that all mitigation measures are implemented; and, 4. The Board authorizes and directs the Board Secretary to file the Notice of Determination and any other documents in accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the District's CEQA procedures. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held December 18, 2002. ,\ ) .1 -; ' . '' ' . ' .. " . 1' '-. ' ATIEST: . \ ) ~ ' ' .~ ' ·~ \ r · .. , J. ' ' . . -( - Board • ATTACHMENT A -FINDINGS OF FACT ESA / 960436 ATTACHMENT A -FINDINGS OF FACT I. FINAL SEIR FOR THE PROJECT The Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) consists of one volume including the revised Draft SEIR, comments letters received on the Draft SEIR, and responses to those comments. II. THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD CONTENTS OF THE RECORD The following information is incorporated by reference and made part of the record supporting these findings and the actions taken by the District in certifying the Final SEIR and approving the project: 1. The Final Supplemental EIR and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference in the Final Supplemental EIR. 2. The Final Program EIR for the 1999 Strategic Plan and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference in the Final Program EIR, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. 3. All testimony, documentary evidence and all correspondence submitted to or delivered to the District in connection with the meetings and public hearings at which the Draft SEIR or Final SEIR was considered by the District. 4. All testimony, documentary evidence and all correspondence submitted to or delivered to any of the District's member districts in connection with the meetings, workshops and public hearings at which the Draft SEIR or Final SEIR was considered by the District's member districts. 5. All staff reports, memoranda, maps, slides, letters, minutes of meetings and other documents relied upon or prepared by District staff and consultants relating to the project. 6. Any other documents specified by Public Resources Code section 21167.6(e). LOCATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD The District is the custodian of the administrative record, including all CEQA documents and the other background documents and materials, which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which the District's Board decisions to certify the Final SEIR and approve the projects are based. The administrative record is located at the District's administrative offices at 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California, 92708. III. PURPOSE OF FINDINGS In accordance with CEQA, the Board is required to make a finding under 14 Cal.Code Regs § 15091 for each significant effect shown in the previous EIR as revised by the Final SEIR. 14 ESA /960436 • '"" "I-' ;~1·"' ~ •. ' ' .. ATIACHMENT A-FINDINGS OF FACT Cal. Code Regs § 15163. The purpose of these findings is to supplement the previous Board's findings when they adopted the Strategic Plan PEIR. The previous Board findings, which are provided in Resolution No. OCSD 99-19, are incorporated by reference herein. The Final SEIR, prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), evaluates the significant adverse environmental impacts that could result from the project. Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the public agency approving or carrying out the project shall make written findings for each significant impact identified in the SEIR. These findings include one of the following: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as defined in the EIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. These findings accomplish the following: I. They address the significant environmental effects identified in the SEIR for the approved project. 2. They incorporate all mitigation measures associated with these significant impacts identified in either the Draft SEIR or Final SEIR -Response to Comments. 3. They indicate whether a significant effect is avoided or reduced by the adopted mitigation measures to a less than significant level, or remain significant and unavoidable, either because there are no feasible mitigation measures or because, even with implementation of mitigation measures, a significant impact will occur. The conclusions presented in these findings are based on the PEIR, the Final SEIR and other evidence in the record of proceedings. The Final SEIR identifies no impacts that remain significant and unavoidable consequences of the project. IV. EFFECT OF FINDINGS To the extent that these findings conclude that various proposed mitigation measures outlined in the Program EIR as modified by the Final SEIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the District hereby binds itself to implement these measures. These findings, in other words, are not merely information. The mitigation measures identified as feasible and within the District's authority to implement for the approved project are express conditions of approval which the District binds itself to upon adoption of this resolution and project approval. Other requirements are referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program ("MMRP") adopted concurrently with these findings, becoming effective through ESA / 960436 ' 2 AITACHMENT A-FINDINGS OF FACT project implementation. The MMRP developed for the SEIR does not supersede the MMRP developed for the Program EIR, but rather provides additional measures applicable to the newly proposed projects. In other words, the projects assessed in the SEIR must be consistent with the MMRP for the Program EIR in addition to the newly developed MMRP. V. FINDINGS CONCERNING THE PROJECTS EFFLUENT PUMP STATION ANNEX The District proposes construction of a new backup pump station, the Effluent Pump Station Annex EPSA, to replace the Foster Pump Station (FPS). The proposed EPSA will consist of three different buildings (a pump station, distribution building, and standby power facility), associated piping and replacement of the existing Santa Ana River emergency overflow weirs. Two existing buildings will be demolished to make room for the new buildings and several conduits and junction boxes will also be demolished or modified. Approximately 40,000 to 50,000 cubic yards ( cy) of soil will be excavated during construction and approximately I 0,000 to 20,000 cy of soil will be needed for fill. Therefore, the net volume of soil to be removed will be about 30,000 cy, which will require approximately 1,500 round-trip truck trips to remove from the site. In addition, approximately I .5 acres of existing property will be graded and designed to generally match existing grades. Construction activity will take up to 33 months from early 2003 through 2005, with approximately 750 days (2 years) of actual construction work. The FPS will remain in-service until the middle of construction of the EPSA, at which time the FPS will be demolished and removed from the Plant No. 2 site. The on-site construction workforce will likely average about 35 to 45 workers per day over the course of the project. During peak construction activity, this number will range from approximately I 00 to 150 workers. ODOR AND CORROSION CONTROL PROGRAM In an effort to provide a more effective odor control program for the collection system and reduce corrosion from caustic soda, the District is proposing to implement a new Odor and Corrosion Control Program (OCP) involving chemicals and application methods recommended in the pilot study. The chemicals would be stored in above-ground storage tanks installed in local utility yards. Eight continuous feed systems were recommended in various locations throughout the collection system, with more possible locations to be identified in the future depending on the need for odor control. Locations of the future storage tanks have not been determined, but could be located near sensitive land uses such as residential areas, schools, and care facilities. The tanks would not be located in areas where zoning restrictions forbid chemical storage. Installation of the continuous feed systems is a relatively minor operation involving the installation of temporary polyethylene tanks with PVC pipes running from the tank to the pumps and injection points. These aboveground tanks have a storage capacity of roughly 4,000 gallons and range in size from 8 to I 2 feet in diameter and 8 to I 6 feet in height. The tanks would be ESA / 960436 3 • • AITACHMENT A -FINDINGS OF FACT refilled approximately 1 to 3 times per week. Installation of the feed system and storage tanks takes one to two weeks and may involve minor excavation, trenching, and potentially temporary lane closures. The OCP system's overall annual chemical usage would be approximately 1,500,000 gallons of ferric chloride, 500,000 gallons of hydrogen peroxide, 440,000 gallons of magnesium hydroxide, and 550,000 gallons of nitrates. None of these chemicals are toxic or pose an air quality hazard to public health if accidentally spilled. VI. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT UNA VOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS The Final SEIR indicates that the project would not result in any significant unavoidable impact to the environment. VII. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS REDUCED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS BY MITIGATION MEASURES IN CORPORA TED INTO THE PROJECT The Final SEIR identifies significant impacts that are reduced to a "less than significant" level by the inclusion in the project approval of the mitigation measures identified in the Final SEIR. Changes or alternations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final SEIR to a less than significant level. These changes and alterations are presented in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting program, which the Board is adopting concurrently with these findings. AESTHETICS As described in Section 3.2 of the Final SEIR, the new EPSA pump station building would be visible from adjacent residential neighborhoods and PCH. In addition, the tanks for the odor control program could be visible from adjacent land uses. These impacts, however, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level based on the following: a. The Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.2-1 which requires the contractor to replace damaged landscaping and restore the construction area near the property boundary to a condition similar to existing conditions. This will insure that there will be an equally effective landscape buffer between the new EPSA building and nearby residential neighborhoods and Pacific Coast Highway. This mitigation measure will further insure that the existing aesthetic quality and degree of visibility of the EPSA site is maintained post-construction. b. The Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.2-2 which provides that when siting future chemical feed systems, the District will prioritize industrial sites, such as storage yards, which are generally not adjacent to sensitive land uses. If an industrial site is not available, the District will attempt to place the chemical storage tanks out of public ESA / 960436 4 ATIACHMENT A-FINDINGS OF FACT view. The District will shield the tanks from public view using fencing or by other means as appropriate to match the existing character of the surrounding area. This measure will insure that future tank locations are visually compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. c. Although mitigation measure M-3.2-1 and M-3.2-2 reduce any significant aesthetic impacts to a level of insignificance, the Final SEIR also recommended mitigation measure M-3.2-3, which requires the District to coordinate with the various affected cities prior to installing new chemical storage tanks in the service area. This measure will provide an additional safeguard and allow each affected city input on the location of the continuous feed systems within their communities. This will further insure that aesthetic impacts would be further reduced to a level of insignificance. GEOLOGY AND SOILS As described in Section 3.3 of the Final SEIR, the proposed EPSA and OCP project could expose people or structures to potential adverse effects due to rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong ground shaking, ground failure, including liquefaction and landslides due to seismic activity. The Final SEIR also concluded that the proposed EPSA project could be located on expansive soil, creating risks to proposed structures. These impacts, however, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level based on the following: a. To mitigate potential seismic impacts, the SEIR provides stringent requirements that apply to the construction of new facilities. The Final SEIR states that "any new structures under the proposed project would be required to meet updated California Building Codes standard specific for the underlying geologic materials in order to insure the safety of the stmctures and its occupant. (See page 3 .3-8). The SEIR also identifies specific mitigation measures from the 1999 PEIR to mitigate impacts, specifically mitigation measure 6.6-IA and 6.6-lB. These mitigation measures provide that the District will design and construct new facilities in accordance with District seismic standards and/or meet or exceed seismic design standards in the most recent edition of the California Building code. Mitigation measure 6.6-1 A identifies the "performance standard" as "minimization of the hazards" and lists the following measures to achieve minimization of liquefaction hazards: • De-densification or de-watering of surface or sub-surface soils • Construction of pile or pier foundations to support pipelines and/or buildings ESA / 960436 5 .. • AITACHMENT A -FINDINGS OF FACT • Removal of material that could undergo liquefaction in the event of an earthquake and replacement with stable material b. To reduce potential geologic hazards relating to the OCP, the Final SEIR identifies M-3.3-1, which provides that chemical storage tanks and appurtenant piping and connections will be designed to withstand ground shaking to avoid potential spills during a seismic event. This measure insures that structural seismic standards will be incorporated into the design of future tank facilities. c. To reduce the potential hazards from expansive soils, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure 6.6-IB from the program EIR. As discussed in subsection (a), this mitigation measure identifies a specific performance standard and provides various measures to minimize risks associated with expansive soils and liquefaction. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS The Final SEIR analyzes impacts relating to hazards and hazardous materials in Section 3.4. As discussed in this section, the proposed EPSA and OCP project would include the transport, storage, and use of diesel fuel and odor reduction chemicals that could pose a spill or leak hazard. The Final SEIR further provides that OCP chemical storage site construction could impair or interfere with emergency response routes due to the temporary lane closures. These impacts, however, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level based on the following: a. To reduce potential impacts resulting from a potential spill or leak, the Final SEIR identifies 2 mitigation measures. Mitigation measure M-3.4-1 provides that storage and use of hazardous materials at the Treatment Plant and OCP sites throughout the service area will comply with state and federal regulations and storage and dispensing permits will be obtained as necessary. In addition, the District will follow procedures relating to the proper handling and storage of hazardous materials at the OCP sites as required by mitigation measure M-3.4-2. These procedures require the District to (1) obtain a permit to store hazardous materials from the local fire department; (2) provide notification to the Orange County health care agency of each storage site location and caustic soda application site; (3) equip chemical delivery trucks with spill equipment adequate to contain and clean up any solid or liquid spill; (4) provide chemical storage tanks with adequate secondary containment; and (5) modify the District's Spill Prevention Containment and Counter Measure Plan to include the OCP chemical storage sites. As provided for in mitigation measure M-3.4-3, the District shall require that all personnel working with such chemicals have health and safety training per OSHA requirements. Mitigation measure M-3.4-4 requires controlled access at the OCP chemical storage sites to prevent trespassing and unauthorized encounters with chemical ESA I 960436 6 ATTACHMENT A -FINDINGS OF FACT substances. Combined, these measures insure that any risks associated with the use of hazardous materials are reduced to a level of insignificance. b. To reduce the risk of exposure to hazards and hazardous materials during construction, the Final SEIR identifies two mitigation measures. Mitigation measure M- 3.4-5 provides that any contaminated soils encountered on the project site during demolition, site clearance, or construction activities shall be removed from the project site and disposed of off-site in accordance with applicable hazardous waste regulations. Mitigation measure M-3.4-6 requires that all structures to be demolished must be investigated for the presence of lead paint and/or asbestos containing material and precautions must be taken to insure the safe removal and disposal of these materials. These measures will reduce the risk of exposure to construction personnel in areas immediately adjacent to the construction site. c. To reduce potential interference with emergency response routes to a level of insignificance, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3 .4-7 which requires the District to provide notice of construction and lane closures lasting more than one day to local emergency service providers within 72 hours prior to construction activities. District coordination with these emergency service provides would insure that alternative routes are available for emergency vehicles. HYDROLOGY The Final SEIR analyzes hydrology and water quality impacts in section 3.5. The Final SEIR concludes that the EPSA and OCP projects could violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements due to ground disturbance activity during construction. These impacts, however, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level based on the following: a. To reduce potential water quality impacts, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3 .5-1 which requires the District to prepare a storm water pollution prevention plan to identify best management practices to minimize water quality impacts resulting from EPSA construction activities. The District will also file a Notice oflntent for de-watering activities during construction to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and all de-watering activity would comply with the general NPDES permit (CAG998001) for de minimus discharges including construction de-watering. Mitigation measures for de-watering activities are also discussed in the PEIR in measure 6.7-2A and 6. 7-2B which will further reduce water quality and hydrology impacts. b. To mitigate potential flooding impacts at EPSA and OCP, the District shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Orange County Flood Control District prior to ESA I 960436 7 • • ATIACHMENT A-FINDINGS OF FACT working within the Santa Ana River levee, as required by mitigation measure M-3.5-2. In addition, mitigation measure M-3.5-3 prohibits construction activity in the Santa Ana River channel. With respect to the OCP, mitigation measure M-3.5-4 provides that no chemical storage tanks shall be installed within the FEMA-designated l 00-year floodplain. Therefore, the potential that these facilities will be impacted by future flood, is less than significant. NOISE The Final SEIR identified potential noise impacts during construction of the EPSA and during operation of both the EPSA and OCP. Construction activities that may generate noise include demolition, grading and earth moving activities, hauling materials, pile driving, and ultimate construction of the building structures. Construction noise levels would generally fluctuate depending on the type, number, and duration of construction equipment. Potential operational noise sources include testing of emergency generators and back-up pumps, and additional traffic_ trips at the EPSA. Regarding the OCP, operational noise sources include potential truck trips to fill the chemical storage tanks. These impacts, however, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level based on the following: a. To reduce potential operational noise impacts of the EPSA, the new facilities will be designed to insulate noise of the machinery, such that the fence line noise standards would not be exceeded. This will insure that any surrounding sensitive land uses would not be adversely impacted by the testing of emergency generators and back-up pumps. b. To reduce potential construction noise impacts at the EPSA, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.6-2 which requires the construction contractor to comply with the city of Huntington Beach and Orange County noise standards. In addition, mitigation measure M-3.6-3 provides that all equipment used during construction should be muffled and maintained in good operating condition. Moreover, all internal combustion engine driven equipment should be fitted with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition. These measures will reduce the noise levels during construction activity to prevent disturbance of surrounding sensitive land uses. TRAFFIC The Final SEIR discusses potential traffic impacts in section 3.7. The Final SEIR concludes that during periods of peak construction, the EPSA and OCP project would add to traffic to local access streets during peak commute hours. During peak commute hours, EPSA construction traffic will temporarily impact the Orange County freeway system and local roadways, primarily ESA / 960436 8 A IT ACHMENT A -FINDINGS OF FACT Brookhurst. However, as documented in the Final SEIR, Brookhurst St. operates at LOS A under existing conditions and would not be adversely impacted. In addition, project construction traffic would not substantially reduce the level of service on I-405, which conveys over 240,000 daily trips (over 14,000 of which are trucks) with a peak hour average over 19,000 trips1 at Brookhurst Street. Installation of the continuous feed systems and storage tanks takes one to three weeks and may involve excavation, trenching, and potentially lane closures. Chemical deliveries to storage tanks could require temporary lane closures one to three times per week. The construction activities would be short and chemical deliveries would be brief and are not expected to pose significant traffic impacts. These impacts, will be further avoided or reduced to a less than significant level based on the following: a. Despite the project's nominal or less than significant traffic contribution during the peak hours, the Final SEIR identified Mitigation Measure M-3.7-1 which limits truck traffic to non-peak hours to the extent feasible. The project must also comply with mitigation measure 6.2-1 of the PEIR which requires the District to minimize peak hour construction traffic. The measure will reduce the volume of construction traffic accessing the freeway and local streets during the peak commute hours and would ensure that construction traffic impacts remain less than significant. b. Mitigation measure M-3.7-2 requires the District to provide construction worker parking on site for each phase of construction. This will prevent any spill-over parking effects on surrounding neighborhoods and local streets. Mitigation measure M-3.7-3 also requires that for any lane closure excavation within the CalTrans right of way, including Pacific Coast Highway, the District must comply with CalTrans encroachment permit application project. This last measure will insure that the project would not disrupt traffic flows on CalTrans rights of way. 1 Caltrans Website accessed October 4, 2002, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/saferesr/trafdata/200 I all/r280405i .htm 9 ESA /960436 • ATIACHMENT A-FINDINGS OF FACT VIII. FINDINGS CONCERNING IDENTIFIED IMP ACTS THAT WERE DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITHOUT NEEDING TO IDENTIFY MITIGATION MEASURES The Final SEIR identifies impacts that are considered to be "less than significant" not requiring mitigation measures. It is hereby determined that these environmental impacts of the project will be less than significant. AIR QUALITY The Final SEIR analyzes potential air quality impacts in section 3.1. According to the Final SEIR, construction of the EPSA would emit criteria pollutants. However, the estimated daily average construction emissions would not exceed the significance thresholds set by the South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD"). Construction related emissions would primarily be: (l) dust generated from excavation grading, grading and soil removal; (2) exhaust emissions from powered construction equipment; and (3) motor vehicle emissions associated with construction activities. As shown on Table 3 .1-4 of the Final SEIR, each distinct phase of construction activity would not exceed the SCAQMD significance criteria. Nonetheless, as an added precaution, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.1-1 which requires soil removal contractors to cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials, or maintain at least two feet of free board. The Final SEIR also concluded that the operation of the proposed EPSA and OCP project would emit criteria pollutants. However, similar to construction emissions, the estimated daily average emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds or otherwise violate air quality standards. Although stationary emissions would be generated by the occasional use of back-up diesel generators, no SCAQMD permits are required because the back-up generators would be used less than 200 hours per year. Therefore, these emissions are not considered significant. In addition, the two to three delivery truck trips per week that the OCP facilities would generate a negligible amount air emissions and would not be significant. Moreover, no additional mobile source emissions are anticipated because the project entails the replacement of the existing Foster Pump Station with the EPSA. The proposed OCP project is anticipated to reduce objectionable odors generated by the collection system. The OCP would reduce the odorous gases currently generated by the waste water collection system and is considered a beneficial impact of the project. HYDROLOGY The EPSA and OCP project could alter existing drainage patterns and result in erosion and flooding, especially during construction activities. The existing site, however, is fairly flat and little erosion or flooding is anticipated to occur. The EPSA, in fact, is located in an area where ESA /960436 10 ATTACHMENT A-FINDINGS OF FACT storm water is collected and sent back through the treatment system. Implementation of BMPs during construction would minimize erosion and siltation impacts. Due to the minimal amount of excavation, the OCP would not require or result in any change in drainage patterns that could result in substantial erosion or flooding. Therefore, no mitigation is required for potential drainage and flooding impacts. NOISE Because the OCP requires only 3 trucks per week, additional trips would not raise the ambient noise in the area significantly and no mitigation is required. Although the proposed EPSA project could expose persons to, or generate, excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. However, the groundborne noise and vibration levels would be temporary in nature and would only occur during specified construction phases. In addition, the distances to sensitive receptors would greatly lessen groundborne noise and vibration perceived at local sensitive receptors. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant and no mitigation is required. TRAFFIC Operations of the EPSA and OCP project would modify impacts to traffic locally. Regarding the EPSA, projected numbers of District personnel listed on page 3-32 of the PEIR would not change substantially as a result of the EPSA project. Operation of the OCP would not increase truck traffic since the chemical delivery trucks servicing these new locations would replace the trucks that previously delivered caustic soda for the slug dosing application method. In addition, the slug application method of discharging caustic soda to the sewer through manholes requires temporary lane closures lasting less than a whole day. In areas where permanent continuous feed systems are installed, slug application would be eliminated, reducing the need for lane closures. This would reduce the existing level of impact. IX. FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES The 1999 PEIR, as supplemented by the SEIR addressed alternatives to the program. For purposes of the Final SEIR, the alternatives to the proposed EPSA and OCP, include proceeding in accordance with the program analyzed in the PEIR, which included upgrading the existing Foster Pump Station and continuing caustic soda application for odor control. The following specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make these alternatives, which entail proceeding under the original program infeasible or outweighed by the benefits of this project: As stated on page 2-1 of the Final SEIR, the District conducted a study assessing the Foster Pump Station upgrade project identified in the 1999 Strategic Plan and evaluated in the Program EIR. The study concluded that the Foster Pump Station was ineffective and located on an active fault. ESA / 960436 11 AITACHMENT A-FINDINGS OF FACT As such, the study recommended construction of a new pumping facility. The study also concluded that upgrading the Foster Pump Station would be costly for the minimal benefit provided. Based on this recommendation, the District developed the EPSA project to avoid these impacts in a cost effective manner. The EPSA project would avoid impacts that the original project as conceived in the 1999 Strategic Plan would not. The OCP was developed to provide greater odor reduction benefit in the collection system than the original program described in the 1999 Strategic Plan. The OCP would reduce odor and corrosion impacts more effectively than the original program with minimal cost differences. X. FINDINGS CONCERNING MITIGATION MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL SEIR THAT WILL BE ELIMINATED AND WILL NOT BE ADOPTED AS PART OF THE PROJECT OR IN THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN The Final SEIR identifies Mitigation Measure 3.7-4 that would require all soil haul trucks leaving the treatment plant to allow 3 minute intervals at a minimum between departures to avoid bunching at local intersections and surface streets. The District has determined that this mitigation measure is infeasible because it would impose undue burdens on haul truck operations, substantially increasing construction periods, substantially reducing efficiency and increasing costs to such a degree. Furthermore, Mitigation Measure 3.7-1 was identified in the Final SEIR on page 3. 7-4 as being sufficient in and of itself to reduce the identified impacts to peak hour traffic to a less than significant level. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 3.7-4 will not be adopted as part of the project and will not be included in the MMRP. ESA / 960436 12 ATTACHMENT B -MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM ESA /960436 AITACHMENT B -MITIGATION AND MONITORING PRO RAM SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE EFFLUENT PUMP STATION ANNEX AND COLLECTION SYSTEM ODOR AND CORROSION CONTROL PRORAM EFFLUENT PUMP STATION ANNEX (EPSA) AIR QUALITY Impact 3.1-1: Construction of the EPSA would emit criteria pollutants. Estimated daily average construction emissions would not exceed significance thresholds set by the SCAQMD. Measure (M-3.1-1) Soil removal contractors shall cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials, or maintain at least two feet offreeboard. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in construction contract specifications AESTHETICS MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of site inspection (i.e. truck trips, coverage for administrative record) MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD Impact 3.2-1: The new EPSA pump station building would be visible from adjacent residential neighborhoods and PCH. MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Measure (M-3.2-1) The contractor shall replace damaged landscaping and restore the construction area near the property boundary to a condition similar to existing conditions. B-1 Environmental Science Associates IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in construction contract specifications GEOLOGY AND SOILS MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with construction contract specifications. Maintain record of communication and pre and post-construction site conditions for administrative record AITACHMENT B -MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction activities Impact 3.3-1: The proposed EPSA and OCP project could expose people or structures to potential adverse effects due to rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong ground shaking, ground failure, including liquefaction and landslides due to seismic activity. Measure (M-6.6-la in the PEIR) During the project design phase for all facilities, the District will perform design-level geotechnical evaluations. The geotehcnical evaluations will include subsurface exploration and review of seismic design criteria to ensure that design of the facilities meet seismic safety requirements of the Uniform Building Code. Site-specific testing for soils susceptible to liquefaction would be conducted. If testing results indicates that conditions are present that could result in significant liquefaction and damage to project facilities, appropriate feasible measures will be developed and incorporated into the project design. The performance standard to be used in the geotechnical evaluation for mitigation liquefaction hazards will be minimization of the hazards. Measures to minimize significant liquefaction hazards could include the following: • Densification or dewatering of surface or subsurface soils • Construction of pile or pier foundations to support pipelines and/or buildings • Removal of material that could undergo liquefaction in the event of an earthquake and replacement with stable material. Recommendations of the geotechnical report will be incorporated into the design and construction of proposed facilities. Measure (M-6.6-1 bin the PEIR) Seismic Safety. The District will design and construct new facilities in accordance with District seismic standards and/or meet or exceed seismic, design standards in the most recent edition of the California Building Code. Environmental Scien tes ATIACHMENT 8 -MITIGATION AND MONITORING PR RAM SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP Impact 3.3-2: The proposed EPSA project could be located on expansive soil, creating risks to proposed structures. Refer to Measure 6.6-lb of the PEIR and implementation procedure described above. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with construction contract specification Maintain record of construction specifications, geotechnical evaluation, soil surveys and construction oversight for administrative record HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to approving final design and construction Prior to and during construction Impact 3.4-1: The proposed EPSA and OCP project would include the transport, storage, and use of diesel fuel and odor reduction chemicals that could pose a spill or leak hazard. Measure (M-3.4-1) Storage and use of hazardous materials at the Treatment Plant and OCP sites throughout the service area will comply with state and federal regulations and storage and dispensing permits will be obtained as necessary. Measure (M-3.4-5) Any contaminated soils encountered on the project site during demolition, site clearance, or construction activities shall be removed from the project site and disposed of off-site in accordance with applicable hazardous waste regulations. Measure (M-3.4-6) Structures to be demolished will be investigated for the presence of lead paint or asbestos containing material and proper precautions will be taken for safe removal and disposal of these materials prior to demolition activities. B-3 Environmental Science Associates .. .;.... _,. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Contractor's SPCC Plan to be approved by the District's Safety Division 2. Modify OCSD SPCC Monitor compliance with the approved construction contract specifications, OCSD's 3. Notify Orange County Health Care Agency SPCC and approved contractor SPCC HYDROLOGY Compliance with approved asbestos and lead paint removal plans. Monitor removals and maintain adminstrative record ATIACHMENT B -MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to installation Prior to and during installation Impact 3.5-1: The proposed EPSA and OCP project could violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Measure (M-3.5-1) The District will prepare a SWPPP that will identify BMPs to minimize water quality impacts resulting from EPSA construction activities. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY MONITORING SCHEDULE t Environmental Science Associates ATIACHMENT 8-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PR RAM I. Include in construction contract specifications 2. Contractor to comply with BMPs outlined in the OCSD's Storm Water Management Plan SWPPP to be reviewed and approved by OCSD's Environmental Compliance & Monitoring Division Maintain record of site inspections and construction oversight. OCSD Impact 3.5-3: The proposed EPSA and OCP project would be susceptible to potential flooding impacts. SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP Prior to construction Ongoing Measure (M-3.5-2) The District shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Orange County Flood Control District prior to work within the Santa Ana River levee. Measure (M-3.5-3) No construction activities would be conducted within the Santa Ana River channel. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Coordinate with OCFCD 2. Include in construction contract specifications 3. Obtain OCFCD permit NOISE MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of communication with affected agency, encroachment permits and construction oversight for administrative record Impact 3.6-1: Operations of the proposed EPSA and OCP project would generate noise. B-5 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Envirorunental Science Associates ATIACHMENT B -MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP Measure (M-3.6-1) The EPSA and emergency generator buildings will be designed to insulate noise of the machinery such that fence- line noise standards would not be exceeded. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in construction contract specifications. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY Maintain record of construction oversight for OCSD administrative record Impact 3.6-2: The proposed EPSA project would generate noise during construction. MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Measure (M-3.6-2) During construction phases, the contractor shall ensure that all construction is performed in accordance with the City of Huntington Beach and Orange County noise standards. Measure (M-3.6-3) All equipment used during construction should be muffled and maintained in good operating condition. All internal combustion engine driven equipment should be fitted with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. lnch.ide in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY Maintain record of construction oversight and OCSD project communication (i.e. public notices, construction schedule) for administrative record MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Environmental Scie ciates • ATIACHMENT B-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PR SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP TRAFFIC Impact 3.7-1: Periods of peak construction of the proposed EPSA and OCP project would add to traffic along local access streets. Measure (M-3.7-1) Dirt haul trucks and construction deliveries shall avoid peak traffic periods (7:00-9:00 AM and 4:00 -6:00 PM) to the extent feasible. Measure (M-3. 7-2) Parking for construction workers shall be provided on District property for each phase of construction. Measure (M-3.7-3) Projects that would require lane closure or excavation within a Caltrans right-of-way including the PCH must comply with Caltrans' Encroachment Permit application process. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in construction contract specifications 2. Obtain permit from Caltrans MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with construction contract specifications. Maintain record of traffic control plan, permits, and inspection of pre and post- construction site B-7 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Environmental Science Associates AITACHMENT B-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP COLLECTION SYSTEM ODOR AND CORROSION CONTROL PROGRAM (OCP) AESTHETICS Impact 3.2-2: The tanks for the OCP could be visible from adjacent land uses. Measure (M-3.2-2) When siting future chemical feed systems, the District will prioritize industrial sites, such as storage yards, which are generally not adjacent to sensitive land uses. If an industrial site is not available, the District will attempt to place the chemical storage tanks out of public view. The District will shield the tanks from public view using fencing or by other means as appropriate to match the existing character of the surrounding area. Measure (M-3.2-3) The District will coordinate with the cities prior to installing new chemical storage tanks in the service area. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Evaluate prospective storage sites 2. Coordinate with cities to detennine compatibility of use GEOLOGY AND SOILS MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of communications with affected agencies, pre and post-construction conditions, and construction oversight for administrative record. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and after tank installation Impact 3.3-1: The proposed EPSA and OCP project could expose people or structures to potential adverse effects due to rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong ground shaking, ground failure, including liquefaction and landslides due to seismic activity. Measure (M-3.3-1) Chemical storage tanks and appurtenant piping and connections will be designed to withstand ground shaking to avoid potential spills during a seismic event. Environmental Science es IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with approved construction contract specifications. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AITACHMENT 8 -MITIGATION AND MONITORING PR MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during installation of tanks Impact 3.4-1: The proposed EPSA and OCP project would include the transport, storage, and use of diesel fuel and odor reduction chemicals that could pose a spill or leak hazard. Measure (M-3.4-1) Storage and use of hazardous materials at the Treatment Plant and OCP sites throughout the service area will comply with state and federal regulations and storage and dispensing permits will be obtained as necessary. Measure (M-3.4-2) The District will follow procedures to ensure proper handling and storage of hazardous materials and reduce the potential for spills at the OCP chemical storage sites. At a minimum, the procedures will include: • obtain a permit to store hazardous materials from the local fire department; • provide notification to the Orange County Health Care Agency of the site location and caustic soda application site; • equip chemical delivery trucks with spill cleanup equipment adequate to contain and clean up any solid or liquid spill; • equip chemical storage tanks with adequate secondary containment; • modify the District's SPCC Plan to include the OCP chemical storage sites or ensure that chemical transport contractors have adequate SPCC plans in place covering the chemical storage sites. The SPCC Plan will cover chemical transfer activities (including DOT requirements}, public notification and placarding requirements, secondary containment, emergency spill response actions, routine site access control, and site management and maintenance procedures. The contractor's SPCC Plan would require approval by the District's Safety Division. Measure (M-3.4-3) The District shall require that all personnel working with hazardous chemicals have health and safety training. This is a legal OSHA requirement under the Worker Right to Know regulations in the Federal Code of Regulations, Title 29. The training shall include, at minimum, the proper use of safety equipment, hazard identifications, and proper handling and disposal of spilled hazardous materials. B-9 Envirorunental Science Associates ATIACHMENT B-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP Measure (M-3.4-4) Access to OCP chemical storage sites will be controlled to allow access only to authorized personnel. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in construction contract specifications 2. Modify OCSD SPCC 3. Notify Orange County Health Care Agency 4. Obtain permit from fire departments MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Contractor's SPCC Plan to be approved by the District's Safety Division Monitor compliance with the approved construction contract specifications, OCSD's SPCC and approved contractor SPCC MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD Impact 3.4-2: OCP chemical storage site construction could impair or interfere with emergency response routes. MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to installation Prior to and during installation Measure (M-3.4-7) The District will provide notice of construction and lane closures lasting more than one day to local emergency service providers within 72 hours prior to construction activities. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in construction contract specifications 2. Include 24-hour emergency access in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of signage, public (i.e. business and fire department) notifications, inspections, and construction schedule for administrative record MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Environmental Scien ces .. HYDROLOGY ATIACHMENT B -MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP Impact 3.5-3: The proposed EPSA and OCP project would be susceptible to potential flooding impacts. Measure (M-3.5-4) No chemical storage tanks shall be installed within the FEMA-designated I 00-year floodplain. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in construction contract specifications 2. Inspection of storage tank site locations TRAFFIC MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Compliance with approved construction contract specifications Maintain record of construction oversight for administrative record MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to installation Prior to and during installation Impact 3.7-1: Periods of peak construction of the proposed EPSA and OCP project would add to traffic along local access streets. Measure (M-3.7-3) Projects that would require lane closure or excavation within a Caltrans right-of-way including the PCH must comply with Caltrans' Encroachment Permit application process. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS B-11 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY MONITORING SCHEDULE Envirorunental Science Associates I. Include in construction contract specifications 2. Obtain permit from Caltrans Monitor compliance with construction contract specifications. Maintain record of traffic control plan, permits, and inspection of pre and post- construction site ATIACHMENT B -MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR EPSA AND OCP OCSD Prior to and during construction Envirorunental Scien tes • ATTACHMENT A -FINDINGS OF FACT ESA/960436