Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCSD 04-10.!;, RESOLUTION NO. OCSD 04-10 CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENT AL IMP ACT REPORT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TREATMENT PLANT NO. 2 HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT, JOB NO. P2-66; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT; ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), hereinafter referred to as "Board", is presently considering the approval of a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) augmenting the 1999 Strategic Plan Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), a Master Plan for new facilities through the year 2020; and, ~EREAS, on October 27, 1999, the Board adopted a Final Program EIR for the Strategic Plan ("PEIR"), which identified individual projects at Treatment Plant Nos. 1 and 2 that would be needed to accommodate the projected population growth in its service area through 2020; and, WHEREAS, the PEIR identified as part of the program the need for certain improvements at Treatment Plant No. 2 including upgrades to the existing headworks pumping and screening facility, and construction of three new grit chambers to improve the wastewater processes of the existing influent sampling system; and, WHEREAS, the District proposes to modify the program evaluated in the PEIR as it relates to improvements to Treatment Plant No. 2 by (1) constructing new headworks facilities to replace the existing structures, which receives wastewater from five major trunk sewers within the District's service area, and (2) installing new odor control facilities that would utilize a new bio- tower scrubbing technology ("Headworks Replacement Project"), WHEREAS, the District is the lead agency for the Headworks Replacement Project, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended, the State of California CEQA Guidelines and District CEQA procedures; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines 15162, District staff determined that a subsequent EIR (SEIR) was required for the Headworks Replacement Project due to the substantial changes to previously contemplated improvements at Plant No. 2. These changes required major revisions to several sections of the previous PEIR to make the PEIR adequately apply to the Headworks Replacement Project. WHEREAS, District Staff has consulted with other public agencies and the general public, giving them an opportunity to comment on the Draft SEIR as required by CEQA; and, RESOLUTION 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 Staffs 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 project. 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 Subsequent 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 project 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 Board adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations as described in Attachment B. 4. The District will implement the mitigation measures recommended in the earlier PEIR and referenced on the FSEIR and the new mitigation measures recommended in the FSEIR to reduce the significant impacts of the project to a less than significant level. 5. The Board adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as described in Attachment C to ensure that all mitigation measures are implemented; and, 6. 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 April 28, 2004. ... RESOLUTION ATTEST: EDMS No. 003768676 ATTACHMENT A FINDINGS OF FACT ATTACHMENT A I. FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SEIR) FOR THE PROJECT The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR), prepared pursuant to Section 15089 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, consists ofone volume including the Draft SEIR., comment letters received on the Draft SEIR., and the Response to Comments (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 Subsequent EIR. and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference in the Final Subsequent 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 project are based. The administrative record is located at the District's administrative offices at 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California, 92708. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR ESA / 201168 ATTACHMENT A III. PURPOSE OF FINDINGS The Final SEIR, prepared in accordance with 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, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. These findings include one of the following: 1. Changes or alterations have been required to, 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: 1. 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. 3. They explain 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, an impact would remain significant. The conclusions presented in these findings are based on the PEIR, the Final SEIR and other evidence in the record of proceedings. 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. The Board will adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MMRP") concurrently with these findings to ensure that the all mitigation measures will be implemented. The MMRP developed for the SEIR includes applicable mitigation measures from the MMRP developed for the Program EIR and any new feasible measures developed as part of the Subsequent EIR process. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 2 ESA / 201168 ATTACHMENT A V. THE HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT The District proposes to replace the headworks facilities at Treatment Plant No. 2 located in the City of Huntington Beach. The headworks serve as the initial point of entry for all influent flow into Treatment Plant No. 2. Currently, the existing headworks consist of flow metering and diversion structures, pumps, bar screens, grit chambers and chemical addition facilities prior to primary sedimentation. The proposed new headworks facilities will have a 340 mgd peak wet weather flow capacity and will not increase the existing treatment capacity of Plant No. 2. The existing power buildings (A and B) will have the majority of electrical equipment removed. These buildings will not be demolished, but will remain onsite and possibly used for storage in the future. The proposed Power Building E will include some of the electrical equipment contained in power buildings A and B with additional upgrades. The new headworks facilities will include the use of vortex grit basins instead of aerated grit basins and the addition of both screenings and grit handling equipment to increase the solid content of these materials prior to disposal in a landfill. Project construction will occur entirely within the property boundaries of the District's Treatment Plant No. 2. The District will construct fifteen separate structures. The design of the new buildings would be similar to the character and height of the surrounding facilities. The tallest of the new headworks facilities will be 56 feet tall. The project will occur within a 30-acre area located in the central portion of Plant No. 2. This area currently accommodates the existing sludge drying beds, headworks B and C, two underground storage tanks, and a truck washing facility. These facilities will be decommissioned and demolished as part of the project. The road network and parking area on the affected portion of Plant No. 2 will also be modified. Construction activity will last approximately five years beginning in June 2005 and ending in June 2010, with approximately 1,050 days, or three years of actual construction work. The new headworks and ancillary facilities will be fully constructed prior to the demolition of the existing facility. 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 100 to 150 workers. Construction will require excavation of approximately 175,000 cy of soil, 75,000 cy of which will be disposed of offsite, requiring approximately 3,750 haul truck tips. The new headworks will utilize new odor control bio-tower technology, tested for the past two years by the District. The bio-towers will be approximately 48 feet tall and located adjacent to the main facility. The existing scrubbers and odor control facilities, currently used to treat the foul air from both the existing headworks and primary clarifiers, will be modified. In the future, the north scrubbers will only be used to treat foul air from the primary clarifiers and the new bio- towers will be totally dedicated to the new headworks. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 3 ESA / 201168 A TI ACHMENT A VI. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT UNA VOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS AIR QUALITY A. Facts: 1. The Final SEIR analyzes potential air quality impacts in Section 3 .2. As described in this section, project construction equipment and haul trucks would emit criteria pollutants that would exceed the significance thresholds set by the South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD") for oxides of nitrogen (NOx). This impact is identified in the SEIR (see page 3- 15) as a significant and unavoidable impact of the project. 2. The 1999 PEIR identifies several feasible measures to reduce NOx emission impacts. These measures include regular maintenance of equipment engines, requiring trucks and vehicles in loading or unloading queues to shut off their engines when not in use, and discontinuing construction activities during second stage smog alerts (see mitigation measures 6.5-la and 6.5- lb}. The EIR concludes, however, that this impact cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. B. 'Findings: This Board finds that: 1. All mitigation measures identified in the 1999 PEIR to reduce NOx emissions are adopted and shall be implemented in accordance with the concurrently adopted MMRP. 2. This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations adopted concurrently herewith. VII. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS REDUCED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS BY MITIGATION MEASURES INCORPORATED 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 A. Facts I. The SEIR discusses Aesthetic impacts in Section 3.1. According to the SEIR, the project would be visible from adjacent residential neighborhoods and Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 4 ESA / 201168 ATIACHMENT A The residential properties with views of the treatment plant are located in the cities of Huntington Beach to the northwest, Costa Mesa to the northeast, and Newport Beach to the southeast. 2. The SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.1-1, 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 ensure that there will be an equally effective landscape buffer between the new headworks facilities and nearby residential neighborhoods and PCH. This mitigation measure will further ensure that the existing aesthetic quality and degree of visibility of the headworks site is maintained post-construction. B. Findings: This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measure in the SEIR is adopted as stated in paragraph 3 of the approval resolution. This measure will mitigate the aesthetic impact of any new structures to a less than significant level. AIR QUALITY A. ·Facts 1. The Final SEIR concludes that although dust emissions would not exceed thresholds of significance, a mitigation measure to control fugitive dust during truck hauling operations would further substantially minimize fugitive dust emissions. 2. The Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.2-1, 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. B. Findings: This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measure in the SEIR will be adopted as a precautionary measure to further reduce and assist in minimizing PM 10 emissions to a less than significant level. A. Facts 1. The Final SEIR states that the proposed project is not anticipated to result in objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. As described in mitigation measure M-3.2-2, the District shall ensure that contractors immediately remove salvage/demolished equipment from Plant No.2 to minimize potential odors during the removal of existing facilities. Staging areas will not be used to store salvaged/demolished equipment. 2. In addition, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.2-3 to ensure that the project would not emit offsite nuisance odors, the Contractor shall develop an odor mitigation plan (which could include draining and flushing equipment prior to demolition, application of hydrogen peroxide, etc) to be approved by District's Air Quality Division. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 5 ESA / 201168 ATIACHMENT A B. Findings: This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measures in the SEIR are adopted as stated in paragraph 3 of the approval resolution. These measures will mitigate the temporary odors generated during construction to a less than significant level. 2. The construction of the new headworks odor control facility would substantially improve the existing odor control equipment. The new facilities are considered a beneficial impact of the project. GEOLOGY AND SOILS A. Facts 1. As described in Section 3.3 of the Final SEIR, the proposed headworks facilities 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. To ensure that the project would not result in significant seismic hazards, the Final SEIR commits the District to the following: a. To mitigate potential seismic impacts, the Final 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 ensure the safety of the structures and occupant. The SEIR also identifies specific mitigation measures from the 1999 PEIR to mitigate impacts: • Mitigation Measure 6.6-1 B 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 6.6-2A allows the District to implement the Spill Prevention Containment and Countermeasures Plan (SPCC). • Mitigation Measure 6.6-2B provide for OSCD chemical facilities to be designed with secondary containment, such as berms, to contain and divert toxic chemicals from wastewater flows and isolate damaged facilities to reduce contamination risks. b. Under Mitigation Measure 3 .1-1, the District will implement recommendations made in the geotechnical report as prepared by Converse Consultants, which includes, but is not limited to the following: • For construction near fault splays, additional excavation and backfill with non-cohesive material on the base and sides of structures may be required. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 6 ESA / 201168 B. Findings: ATTACHMENT A • To accommodate potential ground movement caused by seismic event, pipes with flexible coupling should be considered. • Removal and recompaction of the upper fill soils to minimize the potential for differential settlement to affect structures on grade. • For critical structures, the use of mat foundation or reinforced perimeter footings with interior footings interconnected with grade beams for more rigidity to reduce the potential of seismically induced settlement or liquefaction. • Structures with basements should be supported on mat foundations founded on native soils or compacted fill. • Groundwater should be lowered by dewatering to at least five feet below the lowest excavation level. Existing structures should be protected during dewatering. • Temporary construction slopes should be 1.5: 1 or flatter for soils below groundwater level and 1: 1 or flatter for soils above groundwater level. Surcharge loads should not be permitted within five feet or a distance equal to the depth of excavation, whichever is greater, unless the excavation is properly shored. • Temporary shoring will be required where open cut excavations will not be feasible and space limitations would not allow for minimum excavation slopes or because of nearby structures. This Board finds that: 1. All mitigation measures identified in the 1999 PEIR to reduce seismic hazards are adopted as stated in paragraph 3 of the approval resolution. These measures will mitigate geology and soils impacts to a less than significant level. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS A. Facts 1. The Final SEIR analyzes impacts relating to hazards and hazardous materials in Section 3.4. As discussed in this section, contaminated soils could be encountered during underground storage tank removal or excavation for construction of the new structures. 2. To reduce potential impacts resulting from underground storage tank removal or excavation for construction purposes, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3 .4-1, which provides that any contaminated soils encountered on the project site during tank removal, site clearance, or excavation will be removed from the project site and disposed of off-site in accordance with hazardous waste regulations. The measure also provides that the District will notify the Orange County Health Care Agency of remedial actions. 3. To reduce the risk of exposure to hazards and hazardous materials during construction, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.4-2, which requires that all structures to be demolished must be investigated for the presence oflead paint and/or asbestos containing material and precautions must be taken to ensure the safe removal and disposal of these materials. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 7 ESA I 20 I Hi8 A IT ACHMENT A 4. To reduce risk of potential fire or explosion hazard from disturb abandoned oil and gas wells during construction activities, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.4-3, which requires the District to comply with the requirements of the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources Construction Site Plan Review process. The Division will be notified if any previously unlmown wells are discovered during construction. B. Findings: This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measures in the SEIR are adopted as stated in paragraph 3 of the approval resolution. These recommended measures will mitigate the risk of encountering hazardous materials during construction and excavation to a less than significant level. HYDROLOGY A. Facts 1. The Final SEIR analyzes hydrology and water quality impacts in Section 3.5. The Final SEIR concludes that the project would temporarily reduce the treatment capacity during the period when the new headworks is being connected into the system. This could result in violations of waste discharge requirements. 2. To mitigate potential violation of discharge requirements, the Final SEIR identifies two mitigation measures M-3.5-1 and M-3.5-2, which require OCSD to have in place the means of balancing influent between the two treatment plants to avoid exceeding effluent quality discharge limits prior to implementation of the connection phase of the new headworks and for OCSD to obtain an agreement with the Orange County Water District (OCWD) specifically stating that the Santa Ana River Interceptor (SARI) line may be diverted to Plant No. 1 during the 14-month headworks connection phase during certain peak wet weather events. The agreement shall include procedures to be followed by OCSD and OCWD during peak wet weather events such that the OCWD will discontinue production ofrecycled water for the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) until the SARI line is removed from the source water of Reclamation Plant No. 1. B. Findings: This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measures in the SEIR as stated above are adopted as stated in paragraph 3 of the approval resolution. These measures will avoid exceeding effluent quality discharge limits as identified in the interim compliance plan set by SARWQCB and the EPA and will reduce potential water quality impacts to a less than significant level. A. Facts 1. The Final SEIR also concludes that ground disturbance activity during construction could add pollutants to storm water runoff. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 8 ESA / 201168 AIT ACHMENT A 2. To reduce potential water quality impacts from storm water during construction, the Final SEIR identifies specific mitigation measures from the 1999 PEIR to mitigate impacts. Mitigation Measure M-6.7-la requires the District to implement best management practices during construction. Mitigation Measure M-6. 7-1 b requires the District to conduct storm water pollution prevention training for construction workers. Mitigation measure M-6.7-lc requires the District to conduct on site storm drain inspections periodically. Mitigation measure M-6.7-ld requires that the District require contractors to prepare storm water pollution prevention plans. Mitigation measure M-6.7-le requires the District to comply with the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) best management practices. Mitigation measure M-6.7-2a requires that contractors comply with the District's dewatering specifications. Mitigation measure M-6.7- 2b requires that the dewatering activities comply with the general permit (CAG998001, Order No. RS-2003-0061) for de minimis discharges including construction de-watering. B. Findings: This Board finds that: 1. All mitigation measures identified in the 1999 PEIR to reduce storm water quality impacts are adopted as stated in paragraph 3 of the approval resolution. These measures will reduce water quality impacts relating to storm water runoff to a less than significant level. NOISE A. Facts 1. The Final SEIR identified potential noise impacts during construction of the new head works and during operation of the new head works facilities. Operational activities that may generate noise include pump noise and truck traffic associated with chemical delivery and grit and sludge removal. Moreover, construction noise may be generated by demolition, grading and earth moving activities, hauling materials, sheet piling for shoring excavations, and ultimate construction of the building structures. Construction noise levels would generally fluctuate depending on the type, number, and duration of construction equipment. These impacts, however, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level based on the following: a. For Operational activities, the Final SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-3.6-1, which provides that buildings housing noise generating equipment be insulated to meet fence-line noise standards. Mitigation Measure 6.4-2 of the PEIR states that measures to meet this fence-line standard include: • Locating noise sources away from sensitive receptors, installation of acoustical enclosures around noise sources, installation of critical application silencers and sequential mufflers for exhaust noise, installation of louvered vents, directing vent systems away from nearby residences, and constructing soundwalls at the property lines. b. 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. The project would also be subject to Mitigation Measures 6.4-la, 6.4-lb, and 6.4-le of the PEIR, which require limiting construction hours to 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. except for emergency or special circumstances, muffling OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 9 ESA I 201168 A TI ACHMENT A devices on construction equipment, and notifying neighboring residential areas of construction schedule. B. Findings: This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measures in the SEIR as identified above are adopted as stated in paragraph 3 of the approval resolution and will reduce noise impacts associated with project construction or operations to a less than significant level. VIII. FINDINGS CONCERNING IDENTIFIED IMPACTS 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 A. Facts 1. The Final SEIR analyzes potential air quality impacts in Section 3.2. According to the Final SEIR, routine operation of the headworks would emit criteria pollutants. However, the estimated daily average construction emissions would not exceed the significance thresholds set by the SCAQMD. Stationary emissions from increased cogeneration and odor control facilities would be subject to SCAQMD permitting requirements and would therefore be considered less than significant. In addition, the two to three delivery truck trips per week that the new headworks facilities would generate would emit a negligible amount air emissions and would not be significant. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. Project stationary source will have a less than significant impact on air quality. GEOLOGY AND SOILS A. Facts I. According to the Final SEIR, under Section 3.3, dewatering for the proposed project could create unstable soil conditions, creating risks to proposed and nearby existing structures. A geotechnical report performed by Converse Consultants recommended that groundwater be lowered at least five feet below the lowest excavation level to prevent loosening of the soils and heaving at the bottom of the excavation. Converse Consultants also performed a hydrogeologic OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 10 ESA / 201168 ATTACHMENT A study, which evaluated the permeability of the soils and dewatering characteristics of the site. The hydrogeologic report evaluated aquifer characteristics and provided design criteria for the dewatering system so that engineering methods can be developed to proteCt the stability and integrity of the existing proposed structures and avoid significant impacts to these structures. The District will implement the recommendations to minimize the risk of settlement from dewatering to ensure conformance with California Building Code standards. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. Incorporation of the design features identified in the Converse Consultants report ensure that project de~atering activity will have a less than significant impact on geology and soils. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS A. Facts 1. The proposed project would include the routine transport and storage of hazardous chemicals including ferric chloride, sodium hypochlorite, sodium hydroxide, and hydrochloric acid. The proposed project would also involve the construction of two 21,000-gallon aboveground ferric chloride storage tanks located adjacent to the main facility. 2. The Final SEIR concludes that implementation of the Districts Integrated Emergency Response Program (IERP) covering worker safety, spill prevention, emergency response, and hazardous materials management at the treatment plants would ensure that no significant impacts would result from storage and use of hazardous chemicals. Therefore, no further mitigation is required. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. The District's existing Integrated Emergency Response Program will ensure that impacts relating to the routine transport and storage of hazardous chemicals will be less than significant. HYDROLOGY A. Facts 1. The proposed project would be susceptible to potential flooding impacts. Treatment Plant No. 2 is adjacent to the SAR and protected from flooding by walls and levees that were constructed by the ACOE in 1995. The Plant was recently revised by FEMA as Zone X, an area "protected from the one percent annual chance flood by levee, dike, or other structures subject to possible failure or overtopping during larger floods." The Plant is, however, located within the Prado Dam Inundation Area. In addition, the City of Huntington Beach General Plan Environmental Hazards Element indicates that the Plant is located in a Moderate Tsunami Run- Up Area. The likelihood that the Prado Dam will fail or that a tsunami large enough to inundate OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 11 ESA / 201168 A TI ACHMENT A the plant will occur is low. The proposed project would not increase the risks of inundation by tsunami or dam failure. Therefore, no mitigation is required for potential flooding impacts. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. The risks and impacts associated with flooding will be less than significant impact. NOISE A. Facts 1. Vibration would be caused by heavy trucks, excavators, dozers, and interlocking sheet piling for shoring during excavation. The Final SEIR concludes that the groundbome noise and vibration levels would be temporary and the distances to sensitive receptors would greatly lessen groundbome noise and vibration perceived at local sensitive receptors. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant and no mitigation is required. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. Groundbome noise and vibration will be less than significant. TRAFFIC A. Facts 1. The Final SEIR discusses potential traffic impacts in Section 3.7. The Final SEIR concludes that during periods of peak construction, the proposed project would add to traffic to local access streets during peak commute hours. During peak commute hours, new headworks facilities construction traffic will temporarily impact the Orange County freeway system and local roadways, primarily Brookhurst. However, as documented in the Final SEIR, Brookhurst St. operates at excellent level of service under existing conditions and would not be adversely impacted. The PEIR includes mitigation measure M-6.2-1, which requires the District to prepare a detailed construction schedule, notify the Cities of Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach of construction projects, and schedule construction vehicles to minimize traffic on arterial highways. Implementation of this mitigation measure requires the preparation of a traffic control plan, which will be prepared in consultation with the City of Huntington Beach Transportation Division. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. Mitigation measure M-6.2-1 of the 1999 PEIR applies to all construction projects undertaken in conjunction with the Program. Implementation of this measure will ensure that potential short term construction impacts are less than significant. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SElR 12 ESA / 201168 A TI ACHMENT A A. Facts 1. The Final SEIR also concludes that during operation of the projeCt, there would be a slight increase in the routine delivery and solids haul truck trips. After completion of the project, operations would only slightly increase truck trips from Treatment Plant No. 2. Chemical deliveries would increase from four trips to five or six deliveries per day. Grit and screenings removal trips would be reduced from 490 to 310 haul trucks per year due to improved screenings compaction and larger storage/hauling containers. Operations of the new head works facility would require about the same number of personnel as the existing headworks facility. The new headworks would not substantially increase traffic entering and leaving Treatment Plant No. 2, therefore, no mitigation measure is required. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. Traffic impacts during operation of the project will be less than a significant. IX. FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES A. 'NO PROJECT ALTERNATNE Under this alternative, the District would take no action to refurbish the existing headworks. The Board finds that this alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the proposed project and rejects this alternative for the following reasons: 1. As the existing equipment aged, the possibility of sewage spills and fugitive odor releases would increase. 2. The facilities would not comply with building codes and electrical codes and could pose worker safety hazards. 3. The existing structures would continue to be located on a strike-slip fault and the risk of serious damage from an earthquake would remain high to critical headworks structures. B. 1999 PEIR ALTERNATIVE Under this alternative, the District would proceed in accordance with the program analyzed in the PEIR, which included upgrading the existing headworks. The Board finds that this alternative is less desirable than the proposed project and rejects the alternative for the following reasons: 1. As stated on page 1-1 of the Final SEIR, the District conducted a study assessing the headworks upgrade project identified in the 1999 Strategic Plan and evaluated in the Program EIR. 1 The study concluded that the headworks facility was in poor condition both structurally and mechanically and that upgrading the headworks would be costly for the minimal benefit provided. Rehabilitation would require a more complex construction sequence, would disrupt 1 Rehabilitation ofHeadworks C, Cost Reduction Alternative Analysis OCSD Plant No. 2 Headworks Replacement, Job No. P2-66, Draft Report, prepared by Carollo Engineers. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 13 ESA/ 201168 ATTACHMENT A more plant operations, would have greater seismic risk, and would not provide the best available technology for performance, operation, and maintenance due to the practical limitations of the existing facilities. Furthermore, initial capital costs and present worth costs would be higher than replacement costs. Thus, rehabilitation of the headworks could not be done economically to meet the District's standards. 2. The existing headworks facilities are located directly on a strike-slip fault. An earthquake on this fault would shear and damage these structures. Although there are methods to strengthen structures against ground motion, nothing can be done to prevent shear damage in structures located directly on strike-slip faults.1 Therefore, the risk of serious damage from an earthquake would remain high for these existing facilities. EDMS No. 003768674 1 Rehabilitation ofHeadworks C, Cost Reduction Alternative Analysis OCSD Plant No. 2 Headworks Replacement, Job No. P2-66, Draft Report, prepared by Carollo Engineers. OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR 14 ESA / 201168 ATTACHMENT B STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS A TI ACHMENT B STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the Board of Directors ("Board") to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. (Public Resources Code §2108l(b); 14 Cal. Code Regs §§15043, 15093(a)). As documented in the SEIR and explained in the Findings of Fact for the Project, the project will result in a significant and unavoidable impact on air quality during construction (Impact 3.2-1). Specifically, the project would emit nitrogen oxides (NOx) in excess of daily significance thresholds established by the SCAQMD. Therefore, the Board must identify and explain, in writing, the specific benefits of this project that outweigh the project's significant and unavoidable impact of air quality during construction .. This Board finds that the project's unavoidable impacts are acceptable in light of the project's benefits. Each benefit constitutes an overriding consideration warranting approval of the project, independent of the other benefits, despite the unavoidable construction air quality impact. 1. Safe and Reliable Wastewater Collection and Treatment The Headworks Replacement Project will enable the District to provide sanitary sewer collection services and wastewater treatment for the projected population of the Service Area through the year 2020, protecting public health and safety. Renovation of the 40-year old facility, as included in the 1999 PEIR would not eliminate the risk of mechanical failures associated with aging equipment and structures or provide the greatest protection from seismic hazards. The existing headworks structures are located directly on a strike-slip fault. An earthquake on this fault would shear and damage these structures.1 Replacement of the headworks would remove the existing critical headworks facilities from this high activity fault splay. In addition, rehabilitation of these facilities would require a more complex construction sequence that would disrupt more plant operations resulting in more construction risks than replacement of the facilities. Furthermore, the Headworks Replacement Project would provide improved preliminary treatment by adding enhanced grit and debris removal equipment, improved odor control efficiency, and would comply with the most up to date seismic codes, building codes, and electrical codes. 2. Cost Effective Solution As stated on page 1-1 of the Final SEIR, the District conducted a study assessing the headworks upgrade project identified in the 1999 Strategic Plan and evaluated in the Program EIR. The study concluded that the headworks facility was in poor condition both structurally and mechanically and that upgrading the headworks would be more costly than the replacement cost for the minimal benefit that would be provided. 1 Rehabilitation ofHeadworks C, Cost Reduction Alternative Analysis OCSD Plant No. 2 Headworks Replacement, Job No. P2-66, Draft Report, prepared by Carollo Engineers. EDMS NO. 003768675 OCSD Headworks Replacement Final SEIR ESA/201168 ATTACHMENT C MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AESTHETICS A ITACHMENT C -MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE TREATMENT PLANT NO. 2 HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT Impact 3.1-1: Several of the new structures would be visible from adjacent residential neighborhoods and Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). Measure (M-3.1-1) The contractor shall replace damaged landscaping and restore the construction area near the property boundary to a condition similar to existing conditions. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE l. Include in construction contract specifications AIR QUALITY MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with construction contract specifications. Record pre and post- construction conditions for administrative record MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction activities Impact 3.2-1: Construction of the proposed project would emit criteria pollutants. Estimated daily average construction emissions would exceed significance thresholds set by the SCAQMD. Measure (M-6.5-la in the PEIR) General contractors shall maintain equipment engines in proper tune and operate construction equipment so as to minimize exhaust emissions. Such equipment shall not be operated during second stage smog alerts. C-1 ATTACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT Measure (M-6.5-lb in the PEIR) During construction, trucks and vehicles in loading or unloading queues shall be kept with their engines off, when not in use, to reduce vehicle emissions. Construction activities shall be phased and scheduled to avoid emissions peaks, and discontinued during second-stage . smog alerts. Measure (M-6.5-lc in the PEIR) General contractors should use reasonable and typical watering techniques to reduce fugitive dust emissions. All unpaved demolition and construction areas shall be wetted as necessary during excavation and construction, and temporary dust covers shall be used to reduce durst emissions and meet SCAQMD District Rule 403. Measure (M-6.5-ld in the PEIR) Soil binders shall be spread on site, unpaved roads, and parking areas when needed. Measure (M-6.5-le in the PEIR) Ground Cover shall be re-established following completion of construction activities through seeding and watering if needed. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include air emissions restrictions and standard operating procedures for construction work in contract specifications. 2. Include dust reduction measures listed in mitigation measures in contract specifications 3. Conduct oversight of construction activities to ensure scope of work is carried out. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of construction oversight for administrative record ( MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction ATIACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT Measure (M-3.2-1) Soil removal contractors shall cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials, or maintain at least two feet offreeboard. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of site inspection (i.e. truck trips, coverage for administrative record) MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD Impact 3.2-3: The proposed project is not anticipated to result in objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Measure (M-3.2-2) The District shall ensure that contractors immediately remove salvaged/demolished equipment from Plant No. 2 to minimize potential odors during the removal of existing facilities. Staging areas shall not be used to store salvaged/demolished equipment. Measure (M-3.2-3) To ensure that the project would not emit offsite nuisance odors, the Contractor shall develop an odor mitigation plan (which could include draining and flushing equipment prior to demolition, application of hydrogen peroxide, etc) to be approved by District's Air Quality Division. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with construction contract specifications C-3 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE During construction GEOLOGY AND SOILS ATTACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT Impact 3.3-1: The proposed 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-lb in 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. Measure (M-6.6-la in the PEIR) Spill Prevention. The District will implement the Spill Prevention Containment and Countermeasures Plan (SPCC). Measure (M-6.6-lb in the PEIR) Spill Containment. OCSD chemical facilities will be designed with secondary containment, such as berms, to contain and divert toxic chemicals from wastewater flows and isolate damaged facilities to reduce contamination risks. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include design-level geotechnical evaluations in specifications prior to construction. 2. Require compliance with California Building Code in contract specifications. 3. Implement and update SPCC plan. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of specifications for administrative record. Maintain record of specifications for administrative record. Maintain record of SPCC for administrative record. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD OCSD OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to construction activities. Prior to construction activities. As needed. Measure (M-3.1-1) The District shall implement the recommendations made in the geotechnical report prepared by Converse Consultants, which includes, but is not limited, to the following: C-4 AITACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT • For construction near fault splays, additional excavation and backfill with non-cohesive material on the base and sides of structures may be required. • To accommodate potential ground movement caused by seismic e~ent, pipes with flexible coupling should be considered. • Removal and recompaction of the upper fill soils to minimize the potential for differential settlement to affect structures on grade. • For critical structures, the use of mat foundation or reinforced perimeter footings with interior footings interconnected with grade beams for more rigidity to reduce the potential of seismically induced settlement or liquefaction. • Structures with basements should be supported on mat foundations founded on native soils or compacted fill. • Groundwater should be lowered by dewatering to at least five feet below the lowest excavation level. Existing structures should be protected during dewatering. • Temporary construction slopes should be 1.5: I or flatter for soils below groundwater level and I: I or flatter for soils above groundwater level. Surcharge loads should not be permitted within five feet or a distance equal to the depth of excavation, whichever is greater, unless the excavation is properly shored. • Temporary shoring will be required where open cut excavations will not be feasible and space limitations would not allow for minimum excavation slopes or because of nearby structures. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with construction contract specifications Maintain record of construction specifications, geotechnical evaluation, soil surveys and construction oversight for administrative record. C-5 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to approving final design and construction Prior to construction A TI ACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Impact 3.4-2: Contaminated soils could be encountered during underground storage tank removal or excavation for construction of the new structures. Measure (M-3.4-1) Any contaminated soils encountered on the project site during tank removal, site clearance, or excavation shall be sampled to determine the nature and extent of the contamination and disposed of off-site in accordance with applicable hazardous waste regulations, including SCAQMD Rule 1166 where soil samples reveal VOC levels in excess of 50 parts per million. The District will notify the Orange County Health Care Agency and other regulatory agencies as necessary prior to undertaking remedial actions. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in construction contract specifications 2. Notify Orange County Health Care Agency and other regulatory agencies as necessary MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY Contractor's SPCC Plan to be approved by the OCSD District's Safety Division Obtain approval from OCHA and other OCSD agencies if necessary. Impact 3.4-3: Structures to be demolished may contain lead paint and/or asbestos containing materials MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to installation Prior to and during tank removal. Measure (M-3.4-2) Structures to be demolished will be investigated for the presence oflead paint or asbestos containing material and proper precautions will be taken for safe removal and disposal of these materials prior to demolition activities. C-6 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Compliance with asbestos and lead paint removal plans. Monitor removals and maintain administrative record. AITACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to demolition. Impact 3.4-4: Construction activities could disturb abandoned oil and gas wells and pose a potential fire or explosion hazard. Measure (M-3.4-3) The District shall comply with requirements of the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources Construction Site Plan Review process. The Division will be notified if any previously unknown wells are discovered during the construction process. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with approved construction contract specifications. C-7 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during installation. HYDROLOGY ATIACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT Impact 3.5-1: The proposed project will temporarily modify the quality of effluent discharged to the ocean. Measure (M-3.5-1) Prior to implementation of the connection phase of the new headworks, OCSD shall have in place the means of balancing influent between the two treatment plants to avoid exceeding effluent quality discharge limits. Measure (M-3.5-2) OCSD shall include in its operating agreement with the Orange County Water District (OCWD) language stating that the SARI line may be diverted to Plant No. 1 during the 14-month headworks connection phase under a 2.0 or higher peaking factor during peak wet weather events. The agreement shall include procedures to be followed by OCSD and OCWD during peak wet weather events such that the GWRS will discontinue production of recycled water until the SARI line is removed from the source water of Reclamation Plant No. 1. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. OCSD Board of Directors and/or Joint Agency Committee approval MONITORJNG AND REPORTING ACTIONS Obtain agreement with OCWD. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD/OCWD Impact 3.5-2: The construction of the proposed project would result in erosion and receiving water quality impacts. MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to Construction Bid Approval. · Measure (M-6.7-la in the PEIR) Best Management Practices. The District will implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) as outlined in the SWMP. Measure (M-6.7-lb in the PEIR) Storm Water Management. The District will train construction and operation employees in storm water pollution prevention practices. Individual contractors performing construction at each treatment facility shall be required to comply with provisions of the SWMP. C-8 A IT ACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT Measure (M-6.7-lc in the PEIR) Storm Drain Inspection. The District will inspect and maintain all on-site storm water drains and catch basins on plant property regularly. Measure {M-6.7-ld in the PEIR) Regional Board. The District will apply the SARWQCB's recommended BMPs during construction and operation as specified in the SWMP. Measure (M-6.7-le in the PEIR) Construction Site Storm Water. For construction involving disturbance greater than five acres ofland, the District will incorporate into contract specifications the following requirements: The District will comply with the RWQCB requirements of the NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity. The District will require that the contractor implement control measures that are consistent with the General Permit and with the recommendations and policies of the RWQCB. This would include submitting a Notice of Intent and site map to the RWQCB, developing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, and implementing site-specific best management practices to prevent sedimentation to surface waters. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Implement BMPs. 2. Implement SWMP. 3. Periodically update SWMP. 4. Periodically inspect construction sites. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain compliance with SWMP for administrative record. Maintain record of site inspections. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE As needed. Measure (M-6.7-2a in the PEIR) Groundwater Dewatering. Construction contractors will comply with the District's Dewatering Specifications. Measure {M-6.7-2b in the PEIR) Dewatering Discharge. Water from dewatering operations will be disposed of in a suitable manner in conformance with the NPDES permit, as approved by RWQCB. C-9 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Update dewatering procedures periodically. 2. Periodically inspect construction sites. NOISE MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of dewatering procedures for administrative record. Maintain record of site inspections. Impact 3.6-1: Operations of the proposed headworks facility would generate noise. A Tf ACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE During construction. Measure (M-3.6-1) All buildings will be designed to insulate noise of the machinery such that fence-line noise standards would not be exceeded. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in construction contract specifications. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of construction oversight for administrative record. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Measure (M-6.4-2a in the PEIR) OCSD shall establish a performance noise standard for operational noise at Reclamation Plant No. 1 and Treatment Plant No. 2. The performance standard shall apply to the property line of each plant and shall prohibit hourly average noise levels in excess of 55 dBA between the hours of7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and 50 dBA between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., as required by the Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach Noise Ordinances. Available mitigation to achieve the performance standard consists oflocating noise sources away from sensitive receptors, installation of acoustical enclosures around noise sources, installation of critical application silencers and sequential mufflers for exhaust noise, installation oflouvered vents, directing vent systems away from nearby residences, and constructing sound walls at the property lines. C-10 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include compliance with local noise and construction ordinances in standard operational procedures 2. Implement noise reduction procedures when possible. 3. Consider operational noise when locating new equipment. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of noise complaints for administrative record. Impact 3.6-2: The proposed project would generate noise during construction. AIT ACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE On-going 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. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in construction contract specifications MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of construction oversight for administrative record MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Measure (M-6.4-la in the PEIR) The District's standard specifications provide construction hours of work between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM, except for emergency or special circumstances requiring that work be done during low-flow periods. C-11 ATTACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT Measure (M-6.4-lb in the PEIR) All equipment used during construction shall be muffled and maintained in good operating condition. All internal combustion engine driven equipment shall be fitted with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition . IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include compliance with local noise and construction ordinances in construction specifications 2. Include noise reduction procedures in construction specifications 3. Provide construction oversight to ensure scope of work is carried out. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS . Maintain record of construction oversight for administrative record MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction Measure (M-6.4-le in the PEIR) Nearby sensitive receptors affected by construction shall be notified concerning the project timing and construction schedule, and shall be provided with a phone number to call with questions or complaints. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Prepare and distribute notifications. 2. Include noise reduction procedures in construction specifications 3. Provide construction oversight to ensure scope of work is carried out. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of notification and distribution list. C-12 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to construction TRAFFIC AITACHMENT C-MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM SEIR FOR HEADWORKS REPLACEMENT PROJECT Impact 6.2-1: Periods of peak construction of the proposed project would add to traffic along local access streets. Measure (M-6.2-1 in PEIR) For each major project or construction period, the District would complete a detailed construction schedule and notify the Cities of Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach of construction. Construction vehicles shall be run on a schedule to minimize truck traffic on arterial highways. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Require traffic control plan for construction projects. 2. Notify affected cities of construction schedule. 3. Provide construction oversight. EDMS No. 003768702 MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Ensure that construction vehicle traffic complies with traffic control plan. Provide record of construction oversight. C-13 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction