Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCSD 05-13RESOLUTION NO. OCSD 05-13 CERTIFYING THE SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SECONDARY TREATMENT AND PLANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, JOB NO. J-40-10; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT; ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS; ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; AND APPROVING THE SECONDARY TREATMENT AND PLANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, JOB NO. J-40-10. WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), ("Board") is considering the approval of several rehabilitation and new construction projects at Reclamation Plant No. l in the City of Huntington Beach ("Plant No. l ") and Treatment Plant No. 2 in the City of Fountain Valley ("Plant No. 2") to upgrade OCSD wastewater process to meet secondary treatment standards ("Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project, Job No. J-40-1 O" or "Project"); and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 ("Public Resources Code§ 21000 et. seq.), as amended, and the CEQA Guidelines ("CEQA Guidelines") (14 Cal. Code Regs.§ 15000 et. seq.), on October 27, 1999, the Board adopted the Program Environmental Impact Report ("PEIR") for the 1999 Strategic Plan, which identified individual projects at 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 analyzed the environmental effects of certain improvements at Plant No. 1 and Plant No. 2 including upgrades to the existing treatment facilities and construction of new facilities to improve the wastewater processes under four (4) different treatment scenarios, including a scenario to achieve secondary treatment standards ("Secondary Treatment Scenario"); and, WHEREAS, the Project reflects modifications to the number and types of improvement projects that OCSD will undertake at Plant No. 1 and Plant No. 2 that were previously considered and analyzed in the PEIR under the Secondary Treatment Scenario; and, WHEREAS, because OCSD will be undertaking the Project, OCSD is the lead agency for the Project pursuant to CEQA; and, . ·. '. ' '.·WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15162, OCSD staff determined '. v' :· · ·"· · '· tnara· Sub'sequent Environmental Impact Report ("SEIR") was required for the Project due to -.... f'. '\ ...... . ":. , su~sta11.tfaJ ·c,;~anges in the Secondary Treatment Scenario program contemplated in the PEIR; and ,.:.-"" ·.._ ... ',. ,,,I .. , l. . . :;-'" : ~:,: .-- . . . , W!'J.EREA.S, Environmental Science Associates, under the direction of OCSD Staff has .p.rdpare.(a.:SE'IR for the Project consisting of the Draft SEIR (Volume 1) and the Final SEIR .r., \ •.. ,. •.: ,' .,,,,,, -.:, .. ·1, \ ' ( :. :r ·, ' RESOLUTION (Volume 2), which includes copies of the comment letters OCSD staff received on the Draft SEIR and the OCSD responses to said comments, and Draft SEIR text revisions. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of Orange County Sanitation District, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: 1. That the Board certifies that the SEIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines; and, 2. That the Board has reviewed and considered the information contained in the SEIR before considering Project approval; and, 3. That the Board determines that the SEIR reflects OCSD's independent judgment and analysis: and, 4. That the Board adopts the Findings of Fact, attached as "Attachment A;" and, 5. That the Board adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached as "Attachment B:" and, 6. That the Board adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached as Attachment C; and, 7. That the Board approves the Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project, Job No. J-40-1 O; and 8. That the Board specifies that the record of proceedings on which the Board's decision is based is located at OCSD administrative offices at I 0844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California, 92708. The custodian of the record of proceedings is the OCSD Board Secretary. Project files are located in the OCSD Engineering Planning and Design Division. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held May 25, 2005. Chair ATTEST: '-". L ~ .... , '\ ,,. -~ ..... ..-: . · . .-.... i? ·.., . --) ,l EDMS No. 003788473 , ,, j " I ,J "\ - ' :l ATTACHMENT A FINDINGS OF FACT ATIACHMENT A I. SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SEIR) FOR THE PROJECT The Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project (SEIR), prepared pursuant to Section 15089 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, consists of two volumes. Volume 1 is the Draft SEIR and Volume 2 is the Final SEIR which includes the comment letters received on the Draft SEIR, and the Response to Comments (responses to those comments). The SEIR augments the 1999 Strategic Plan Program Environmental Impact Report. 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 SEIR and approving the project: 1. The SEIR and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference in the Draft and Final SEIR documents. 2. The 1999 Strategic Plan Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference in the PEIR, 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 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 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 ). OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 2 A IT A CHM ENT A 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 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. III. PURPOSE OF FINDINGS The 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: l. Changes or alterations have been required to, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as defined in the SEIR. 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 SEIR. 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 the 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 and the SEIR and other evidence in the record of proceedings. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 3 A TI ACHMENT A IV. EFFECT OF FINDINGS To the extent that these findings conclude that various proposed mitigation measures outlined in the PEIR as modified by the 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 to which the District binds itself 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 PEIR and any new feasible measures developed as part of the SEIR process. V. THE SECONDARY TREATMENT AND PLANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT The District proposes to rehabilitate existing treatment facilities and construct new treatment facilities at Reclamation Plant No. 1 (Plant No. 1) and Treatment Plant No. 2 (Plant No. 2). The Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project (Project) will upgrade the District's secondary treatment capacity to meet secondary treatment standards and will provide treatment facilities that can be operated in a cost-effective and environmentally responsible manner. The Project consists of the group of thirteen individual construction projects listed in Table 1. In total, six projects are proposed at Plant No. 1 and seven projects are proposed at Plant No. 2. Two of the projects, Pl-102 at Plant No. 1 and P2-90 at Plant No. 2, would involve construction of large new secondary treatment facilities to meet project objectives. Two other substantial construction projects, Pl-101 and P2-92, are planned to upgrade and expand biosolids handling facilities at both plants. Each of the proposed facility projects would be located within the existing boundaries of the District's two treatment plants, with no construction to occur outside of the plant boundaries. In addition to these construction projects, the proposed Project includes routine repairs and minor modifications conducted at both plants on an ongoing basis. Table 1 Proposed Improvements Required for Secondary Treatment at Plant Nos. 1 and 2 Rehabilitation of Existing Structure or Construction of Construction Project Title New Structure Schedule Plant No.1 Pl-82 Activated Sludge Rehabilitation Rehab/New 2005-2006 Pl-97 Plant No. 1 66KV Substation New 2005-2007 Pl-100 Sludge Digester Rehabilitation at Plant No. 1 Rehab 2007-2011 Pl-101 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at New 2008-2010 Plant No. 1 OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 4 A TT A CHM ENT A Rehabilitation of Existing Structure or Construction of Construction Project Title New Structure Schedule Plant No. I Pl-102 Secondary Activated Sludge Facility 2 at New 2007-2012 PlantNo. I Pl-106 Truck Wash and Relocation of Dewatering New 2006-2007 Beds at Plant No. l Plant No. 2 P2-74 Rehabilitation of the Activated Sludge Plant Rehab 2006-2008 P2-80 Primary Treatment Rehab/Refurbish Rehab 2006-2009 P2-89 Rehabilitation of Solids Storage Silos C & D Rehab 2007-2010 P2-90 Trickling Filters New 2007-2011 P2-91 Digester Rehabilitation at Plant No. 2 Rehab 2007-2012 P2-92 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Rehab 2008-2011 Plant No. 2 P2-93 Truck Wash and Relocation of De watering New 2006-2007 Beds at Plant No. 2 Upgrading the treatment facilities at both plants would occur in phases commencing in 2005 and continuing through 2012. Many of the proposed improvements would be under construction at the same time. In any given year, it is possible that six to eight or more projects would be under construction simultaneously. Construction for rehabilitation projects would include some demolition, excavation, trenching, concrete pouring, pile driving and/or other foundation work, remodeling of existing structures and removal and installation of equipment. Construction activities for the larger projects (P 1-101, Pl-102, P2-90) would include demolition and removal of some existing facilities, site clearance and grading, excavation and soil removal, dewatering, pile driving and/or other foundation work, concrete pouring and construction of facilities. Table 2 presents construction information such as duration of the construction of period, the approximate cubic yards of soil to be excavated, numbers of piles or columns and the volume of concrete. The table also includes the approximate number of construction workers needed for each project. Construction crews may range from 5 to 100 workers depending on the construction activities. The amount and types of construction machinery expected would vary for each phase of each construction project. Equipment would include scrapers, bulldozers, loaders, trenchers, haul trucks, concrete trucks, water trucks, delivery trucks, cranes and generators. Excavated soils would be stockpiled on site or removed. Dewatering would likely be required for the larger excavations. Extracted groundwater would be discharged through the treatment system. New equipment, building materials, construction equipment and concrete would be delivered daily to OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 5 ATTACHMENT A each construction site. Staging areas and worker parking areas would all be located entirely on the plant sites. Table 2 -Construction Details Volume of Estimated Volume of Projects Duration Excavation No. of Concrete (months) (cubic Piles or (cubic yards) Columns* yards) Plant No. l Pl-82: Activated Sludge Rehabilitation 15 7,500 194 3,000 Pl-97: Plant No. I 66KV Substation 24 20 NA 20 Pl-100: Sludge Digester Rehabilitation at Plant No. I 32 400 20 200 P 1-10 I : Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant No. 1 24 10,000 250 6,000 PI-102: Secondary Activated Sludge Facility 2 at Plant No. I 54 435,000 5,000 82,000 P 1-106: Truck Wash and Dewatering Beds at Plant No. 1 12 1,000 NA 100 Plant No. 2 P2-74: Rehabilitation of the Activated Sludge Plant 28 NA NA NA P2-80: Primary Treatment Rehab/Refurbish 37 25 NA NA P2-89: Rehabilitation of Solids Storage Silos C & D 47 NA NA NA P2-90: Trickling Filters 49 70,000 2,000 21,000 P2-9 I: Digester Rehabilitation at Plant No. 2 50 NA NA NA P2-92: Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant No. 2 35 6,000 180 4,000 P2-93 Relocation of Dewatering Beds at Plant No. 2 12 1,000 NA 100 Source: Orange County Sanitation District. *Foundation alternatives include piles, columns or geo-piers. NA= Not Applicable VI. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT UNA VOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS AIR QUALITY A. Facts 1. The 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 Draft SEIR (see pages 3.2-7 through 3.2-11) as a significant and unavoidable impact of the project. 2. The 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 OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 6 No. of Workers I day 50-60 5-20 5-40 20-30 30-15o+ 5-20 5-30 15-30 5-20 15-100 5-20 15-30 5-20 ATTACHMENT A construction activities during second stage smog alerts (see mitigation measures 6.5-la and 6.5-lb). 3. According to the SEIR (see pages 3.2-11 through 3.2-13), operation of the proposed Project would emit criteria pollutants. Operational emissions would include stationary and mobile source emissions. Estimated average emissions of NOx associated with biosolids hauling and chemical deliveries in heavy diesel powered trucks would exceed significance thresholds set by the SCAQMD. The SEIR identifies mitigation measure 6.5-3a, which requires the District to maintain its ride-share programs to reduce commuter traffic and resulting NOx emissions. This impact, however, would remain significant and unavoidable. B. Findings This Board finds that: 1. NOx emissions during project construction and operation will have a significant and unavoidable impact on air quality; the mitigation measures described above are adopted and will reduce this impact, but not to a level of insignificance. 2. This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations adopted concurrently herewith. NOISE A. Facts 1. The SEIR analyzes potential noise impacts in Section 3. 7. As described in this section, project construction would produce an increase in the noise environment of 5 dBA or greater, considered to be the minimum required increase for a change in community reaction (U.S. Department of Transportation, 1990) and, for the purposes of this analysis, constitutes a significant noise impact. This impact is identified in the SEIR as significant and unavoidable. 2. The PEIR identifies several feasible mitigation measures to reduce dBA during construction. These mitigation measures include the prohibition of excess operational noise levels during a scheduled time period, muffled construction equipment, pile-driving noise reduction techniques, use of alternative foundations, construction notification (see mitigation measures 6.4-la, 6.4-lb, 6.4-lc, 6.4-ld, 6.4-le, 6.4-lf). The SEIR concludes, however, that this impact is significant and unavoidable. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 7 ATTACHMENT A B. Findings This Board finds that: 1. Noise levels during project construction will be significant and unavoidable; the mitigation measures described above are adopted and will reduce this impact, but not to a level of insignificance. 2. This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations adopted concurrently herewith. TRAFFIC I TRANSPORTATION A. Facts 1. The SEIR analyzes potential traffic and transportation impacts in section 3.8. As described in this section, project construction would increase traffic in relation to existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. This impact is identified in the SEIR as significant and unavoidable. 2. The SEIR identifies mitigation measure M-6.2-1 to reduce traffic and transportation impacts. The measure requires the District to prepare a construction schedule and haul route plan, which will be submitted to the affected jurisdictions, including the City of Fountain Valley, the City of Huntington Beach and Caltrans, for review and comment. This impact, however, would remain significant and unavoidable. B. Findings This Board finds that: 1. Traffic during project construction will have a significant and unavoidable impact on local roadways; the mitigation measure described above is adopted and will reduce this impact, but not to a level of insignificance. 2. This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations adopted concurrently herewith. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 8 A TI ACHMENT A CUMULATIVE IMPACTS A. Facts 1. The SEIR analyzes the Project's cumulative impacts in Section 5.2. According to the SEIR, the Project would have significant and unavoidable air quality impacts during construction in light of the existing poor air quality condition of the South Coast Air Basin. The SCAB currently does not comply with air quality standards for a variety of air pollutants that will be emitted during project construction. The SEIR identifies various measures to reduce the Project's direct impacts on air quality during construction that would similarly reduce the Project's cumulative impact. However, the Project's cumulative air quality impact would remain significant and unavoidable during construction. 2. The SEIR concludes in Section 5.2 that the Project would result in a cumulative noise impact during construction due to the number of projects that would be constructed concurrently and the proximity of residential areas to the construction noise sources. The SEIR identifies various measures 6.4-1 a through 6.4-1 f to reduce the Project's direct noise impacts during construction that would similarly reduce the Project's cumulative impact. In addition, certain existing topographical features and intervening buildings would function as noise buffers. Nonetheless, the Project's cumulative construction noise impact would remain significant and unavoidable. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. Pollutant emissions during project construction will have a significant and unavoidable cumulative air quality impact; the mitigation measures described above are adopted and will reduce this impact, but not to a level of insignificance. 2. Noise levels during project construction will have a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact; the mitigation measures described above are adopted and will reduce this impact, but not to a level of insignificance. 3. These impacts are overridden by project benefits as set forth m the statement of overriding considerations adopted concurrently herewith. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 9 ATIACHMENT A VII. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS REDUCED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS BY MITIGATION MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT The 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 SEIR. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the 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 1. 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). The residential properties with views of Plant No. 1 are located in the city of Fountain Valley. The residential properties with views of Plant No. 2 are located in the city of Huntington Beach. 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 Plant No. 1 and nearby residential neighborhoods and Plant No 2 and nearby residential neighborhoods and the PCH. This mitigation measure will further ensure that the existing aesthetic quality and degree of visibility of Plant No. 1 and Plant No. 2 is maintained post-construction. B. Findings This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measure in the SEIR is adopted as stated in paragraph 4 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 I. The SEIR discusses air quality impacts in Section 3.2. According to the SEIR, during construction, odors could be generated temporarily as the trunk lines and pump station wetwells OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project l 0 A 1T ACHMENT A are disconnected and reconnected with the rehabilitated facilities. In addition, as part of the Project, existing odor control equipment would be upgraded to substantially improve the odor control facilities. 2. The SEIR identifies mitigation measure M3.2-2, which requires the District ensure that contractors remove salvaged/demolished equipment from the treatment plants to minimize potential odors during the removal of existing facilities. It further requires that staging areas not be used to store salvaged/demolished equipment. This mitigation measure will ensure neither construction nor operation of the proposed Project would result in objectionable odors that would affect a substantial number of people. B. Findings This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measure in the SEIR is adopted as stated in paragraph 4 of the approval resolution. This measure will mitigate the air quality impact of objectionable odors to a less than significant level. GEOLOGY AND SOILS A. Facts 1. As described in Section 3.3 of the SEIR, 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. To ensure that the Project would not result in significant seismic hazards, the SEIR commits the District to the following: a. To mitigate potential seismic impacts, the SEIR provides stringent requirements that apply to the construction of new facilities. The SEIR states that any new structures under the proposed Project would be required to meet updated California Building Code standards 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 PEIR to mitigate impacts: • Mitigation Measure 6.6-la provides that during the project design phase for all facilities, the District will perform design-level geotechnical evaluations. The geotechnical evaluations will include subsurface exploration and review of seismic design criteria to ensure that design of the facilities meet seismic safety requirements of the California Building Code. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 11 ATTACHMENT A • 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. b. Several of the proposed construction projects involve excavation and dewatering. Groundwater at both sites is known to be near the ground surface, due to the proximity of the ocean. In the event that excavation would reach groundwater levels, soils could loosen at the bottom of an excavation, resulting in unstable soil conditions. Additionally, dewatering could promote land settlement in surrounding areas, which could damage nearby existing structures on the plant site. The SEIR identifies specific mitigation measures in addition to mitigation measures from the PEIR: • Mitigation Measure 3.3-2 provides that the District or its consultant shall conduct a geotechnical investigation during the design phase of each construction project to develop measures to address poor soil conditions and dewatering requirements to be implemented during project design and construction that will protect people and structures. District shall include the measures in its project design and construction specifications and shall oversee contractor implementation. B. Findings This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measure in the SEIR is adopted as stated in paragraph 4 of the approval resolution. This measure will mitigate the geologic and soil impact of the Project to a less than significant level. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS A. Facts 1. The SEIR discusses hazards and hazardous materials impacts in Section 3.4. According to the SEIR, abandoned oil wells could be encountered during excavation at Plant No. 2. This represents a safety hazard for workers. In addition, abandoned oil wells may act as conduits for surface contamination to reach groundwater, and well shafts can pose safety, fire and explosion hazards during construction activities and for the life of the Project. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 12 A TT A CHM ENT A 2. The PEIR identifies mitigation measures 7.8-3e and 7.8-3f, which are restated in the SEIR and require the District to identify existing and abandoned oil production wells prior to construction activities. In addition, mitigation measure 7.8-3f identifies procedures to be undertaken in the event that previously unidentified oil wells are discovered. These mitigation measures will ensure that impacts associated with oil wells would be reduced. 3. According to the SEIR, some areas of the plan sites have been used for industrial activities such a sludge drying and automobile storage. Soil in these areas may contain petroleum hydrocarbons, elevated levels of metals, or other industrial contaminants. Mitigation measures are identified that would ensure that if contaminated soils were encountered, removal would be handled in accordance with applicable regulations. 4. The SEIR identifies mitigation measure 3.4-1 which requires that any contaminated soils encountered on the project site during site clearance or excavation shall be removed from the project site and disposal of off-site in accordance with applicable hazardous waste regulations. This mitigation measure will ensure hazards impacts would be reduced to less than significant. B. Findings This Board finds that: I . The recommended mitigation measures in the SEIR are adopted as stated in paragraph 4 of the approval resolution. This measure will mitigate the hydrological impact of the Project to a less than significant level. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY The SEIR analyzes hydrology and water quality impacts in Section 3.5. The proposed Project may have a significant impact on surface hydrology, water quality, and/or groundwater. The SEIR concludes that the existing plant sites are fairly flat and little erosion is anticipated to occur. The existing drainage system allows stormwater that comes into contact with process areas to be captured, treated through the wastewater treatment process, and ultimately discharged to the ocean. The proposed Project would increase impervious surfaces at both plant sites. Storm water runoff would be collected and sent through the treatment system as is currently the case. 2 The SEIR identifies and updates mitigation measures 6.7-la, 6.7-lb, and 6.7-lc from the PEIR to reduce the Project's potential storm water impacts. These measures have been updated to reflect the Onsite Stormwater Management Plant (OSSWMP) the District prepared as required by the RWQCB. OCSD would ensure that construction contractors comply with the existing OSSWMP for construction on the plant sites and implement BMPs for construction and operation OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 13 A TI ACHMENT A of the proposed Project in accordance with the requirements of its OSSWMP approved by the RWQCB as part of its NPDES for Ocean Discharge. (Construction activities are not proposed in the Administration Building area where there are two manholes that connect to the local drainage system; thus, no construction run-off is expected to reach the local drainage system.) 3. Proposed excavation would be deeper than local groundwater levels and would require dewatering during construction. Water from dewatering activities would be disposed of through the plant treatment system and ultimately discharged through the ocean outfall after treatment. Mitigation measures for dewatering activities are discussed in the PEIR in Measures 6.7-2a and 6.7-2b. B. Findings This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measure in the SEIR is adopted as stated in paragraph 4 of the approval resolution. This measure will mitigate the hydrological impact of the Project to a less than significant level. NOISE A. Facts 1. The SEIR discussed impacts associated with noise in Section 3. 7. According to the SEIR, the Project would increase operational noise levels due to operation of pumps and truck traffic associated with chemical delivery and grit and sludge removal. 2. The PEIR identifies mitigation measure 6.4-2a, which requires that OCSD establish a performance noise standard for operational noise at Plant No. 1 and Plant No. 2. The performance standard shall apply to the property line of each plant. The SEIR also identifies new mitigation measure 3. 7-1, which requires that all buildings would be designed to insulate noise of the machinery such that the fence-line noise standards would not be exceeded. B. Findings This Board finds that: 1. The recommended mitigation measures in the SEIR are adopted as stated in paragraph 4 of the approval resolution. These measures will mitigate the operational noise impacts of the Project to a less than significant level. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 14 ATTACHMENT A VIII. FINDINGS CONCERNING IDENTIFIED IMPACTS THAT WERE DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITHOUT NEEDING TO IDENTIFY MITIGATION MEASURES The 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 SEIR discusses air quality impacts in section 3.2. According to the SEIR, during construction, the Project would generate CO, ROC, and PM 10 emissions that are less than the SCAQMD's significance criteria for these pollutants. 2. Even though PM 10 emissions are less than significant, the District is requiring additional mitigation measures that will further reduce PM 10 emissions. These measures include the use of soil binders in appropriate areas (Measure 3 .2-1 ), the use of watering techniques including the wetting of unpaved demolition and construction areas at least twice per day (Measure 6.5-lc from the PEIR) and the reestablishment of ground cover through seeding and watering (Measure 6.5-1 e from the PEIR). B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. The Project will have a less than significant construction impact from the emission of CO, ROC and PM 10 • HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS A. Facts 1. The proposed Project would include the routine transport and storage of hazardous chemicals including sodium hypochlorite, sodium hydrogen peroxide and caustic soda. The District's worker safety program as managed through the Integrated Emergency Response Program (IERP) covers chemical handling procedures. Workers would be provided appropriate training and safety equipment in compliance with OSHA regulations. Implementation of the District's IERP would ensure that chemical handling would pose a less than significant impact and no further mitigation is required. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 15 A TI AC HM ENT A B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. The Project will have a less than significant hazards and hazardous materials impact. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY A. Facts 1. The SEIR discusses hydrology and water quality impacts in Section 3.5. As discussed in the SEIR, Plant No. 1 and Plant No. 2 are located immediately adjacent to the SAR and protected from flooding by walls and levees that were constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 1995. The area where the plants are located was recently revised by the Federal Emergency Management Association 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."1 This designation has been established since the certification of the PEIR. As mentioned above, both treatment plants are also located within the Prado Dam Inundation Area.2 In addition, the City of Huntington Beach General Plan Environmental Hazards Element indicates that Plant No. 2 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 either plant will occur is low. The proposed Project would not increase the risks of inundation by tsunami or dam failure. No mitigation measures are required. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. The Project will have a less than significant impact on hydrology due to possible flooding. MARINE ENVIRONMENT A. Facts 1. The biggest improvements to effluent quality as a result of the proposed Project include significant reductions in the concentration of microorganisms, cadmium, chromium, lead, nickel, and zinc and most organic compounds, and total nitrogen. All these reductions would improve effluent quality and reduce any potential impacts associated with the wastewater discharge into the receiving waters. Most significant would be the reduction in pathogens (total and fecal coliforms and 1 FEMA, Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 06059C0054F, February 13, 2002. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 16 A 1T ACHMENT A viruses) by over 96 percent. These reductions result from secondary treatment methods and chlorination of the final effluent. These reductions would significantly improve the quality of the wastewater discharge for preserving and protecting the beneficial uses of the receiving waters. Final effluent concentrations for BOD, TSS, oil and grease, and total nitrogen would not change. No further mitigation is required. B. Findings The Board finds that: I. The Project will improve the quality of treated wastewater discharge and therefore would have a less than significant impact on the marine environment. NOISE A. Facts 1. The SEIR discusses noise impacts in Section 3.7. As discussed in the SEIR, construction activities such as excavation and grading have the potential to generate groundbome vibration near the construction site. Vibration would be caused by heavy trucks, excavators, dozers and interlocking sheet piling for shoring during excavation. However, due to the short-term nature of the groundbome vibration and distance to sensitive receptors, this would be considered a less than significant impacts. No mitigation measures are required. D. Findings The Board finds that: I. The Project will have a less than significant impact due to groundbome vibration. TRAFFIC I TRANSPORTATION A. Facts I. The SEIR discusses traffic impacts in Section 3.8. According to the SEIR, the proposed Project would increase vehicle trips only slightly over levels assessed in the PEIR. Most of the vehicle trips associated with the operation of the two plants are worker commute trips. Completion of the proposed Project would only slightly increase truck trips to and from the treatment plants. Furthermore, operation of the treatment plants would require about the same Ibid; and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers website, http://www.spl.usace.army.mil/resreg/htdocs/PrdoFIM/plate7.pdf, accessed June 6, 2002. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 17 A TI A CHM ENT A number of personnel as the existing treatment plants. Once construction is complete, the treatment plant would not substantially increase traffic entering and leaving it. No significant increase in traffic would be associated with the operation of the proposed Project. B. Findings The Board finds that: 1. Project operation will have a less than significant impact on vehicle trips. IX. FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES A. NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE Under the "No Project" alternative, the District would implement Scenario 2 in the PEIR. This scenario provides a level of treatment necessary to meet the 1999 NPDES permit conditions and the California Ocean Plan. All wastewater would receive advanced primary treatment and some of the wastewater would receive secondary treatment prior to ocean discharge. This scenario includes the diversion of 50-80 mgd average daily flow and up to 100 mgd peak wet weather flow of secondary effluent from OCSD to the GWR system. The Board finds that the ''No Project" alternative is less desirable than the proposed Project and rejects this alternative for the following reasons: 1. The level of treatment provided by Scenario 2 in the PEIR would not meet the District objectives nor the regulatory requirements for effluent discharge. 2. This alternative would not avoid or minimize significant noise impacts. This alternative, like the proposed Project, would result in construction activities that would intermittently and temporarily generate noise levels above ambient levels in the project vicinity. 3. This alternative would not avoid or minimize significant air quality impacts. This alternative, like the proposed Project, would result in short-term emissions including dust and other criteria pollutants from demolition, construction and restoration activities. B. CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED SLUDGE ALTERNATIVE AT PLANT NO. 2 Under this alternative, the District would utilize the conventional activated sludge (CAS) process to provide secondary treatment at Plant No. 2. This alternative was one of three alternatives studied since 1999 to evaluate the appropriate type of secondary treatment at Plant No. 2. The CAS process uses microorganisms to feed on organic contaminants in wastewater, producing a high-quality effluent and high quantities of activated sludge. The Board finds this OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 18 A 1T ACHMENT A alternative less desirable than the proposed Project and rejects this alternative for the following reasons: 1. This alternative is more expensive in terms of capital cost, annual 0 & M costs, and the cost per million gallons treated than the proposed Project. 2. This alternative does not offer substantial treatment benefits in the removal of trace orgamcs. 3. This alternative would involve more materials hauling and result in more construction traffic than the proposed Project. This alternative would generate more noise and vibration than the proposed Project to install foundations. 4. This alternative would not avoid or minimize any other significant impact associated with the proposed Project. B. MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR ALTERNATIVE AT PLANT NO. 2 Under this alternative, the District would provide secondary treatment at Plant No. 2 through the use of a membrane bioreactor (MBR) system. A MBR system involves oxidation of wastewater by microorganisms that grow within a series of treatment units. A MBR system also clarifies effluent by pressurizing wastewater and forcing it through submersed membranes. The Board finds that this alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the proposed Project and rejects the alternative for the following reasons: 1. This treatment alternative is more expensive in terms of capital costs and operation and maintenance costs than the proposed Project. These costs would also be higher than the corresponding costs for the conventional activated sludge alternative described above. 2. This alternative does not offer substantial treatment benefits in the removal of trace organics from wastewater at Plant No. 2. 3. This alternative would not avoid or minimize any other significant impact associated with the proposed Project. EDMS No. 003788463 OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project 19 ATTACHMENT B STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ATIACHMENT 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 §21081(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 significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality, noise and traffic during construction (Impacts 3.2-1, 3.7-2, and 3.8-1). In addition, the proposed project would have significant unavoidable cumulative impacts to air quality and noise. Therefore, the Board must identify and explain, in writing, the specific benefits of this project that outweigh the project's significant and unavoidable construction impacts of the project. This Board has balanced the Project's benefits against the Project's significant unavoidable impacts on air quality, noise, and traffic. The Board finds that the Project's benefits outweigh the Project's significant unavoidable impacts, and the impacts are therefore acceptable in light of the Project's benefits. The Board finds that each of the following benefits is an overriding consideration, independent of the other benefits, that warrants approval of the project notwithstanding Project's significant and unavoidable impacts: 1. Improvements in Effluent Quality This Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project is being undertaken to construct the treatment facilities needed to upgrade the District's secondary treatment capacity to meet secondary standards. In July 2002, in response to public input received during the development of its ocean discharge permit renewal application, the District voluntarily decided to have its ocean discharge meet secondary standards. Completion of the Project will result in upgraded wastewater treatment using: (1) trickling filters at Plant No. 2 rather than aeration basins, (2) two new digesters or improved sludge thickening at Plant No. 1 and no new digesters at Plant No. 2, and (3) centrifuges at both plants for biosolids dewatering. As documented in Sections 2.2 and 3.6 of the SEIR, the upgrade in treatment generally results in improved water quality compared to the level of treatment approved as part of the District's 1999 20-year Strategic Plan. Compared to the temporary nature of the construction impacts that, while significant, do not cause a permanent environmental change, the environmental benefits of upgraded treatment will result in permanent improvements to effluent quality. 2. Cost Effective Solution As described in Section S.4 of the SEIR, OCSD has undertaken a comprehensive assessment of treatment alternatives and related costs in determining what type of projects should be initiated to upgrade treatment as described in this environmental document. For example, trickling filters were selected as a proven technology that has gained a fair measure of public acceptance. Compared to alternative treatment methods, construction costs for trickling filters are more OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plan Improvement Project 2 ESA/203742 .. ATTACHMENT 8 favorable. This technology requires more land area and the greatest number of piles but the least amount of soil excavation and therefore less hauling and less air quality impact. On the other hand, trickling filters involve the tallest structures although the visual impact assessment indicates that his impact is not significant. The analysis showed that alternative treatment processes would not reduce or significantly reduce the construction impacts (traffic, air and noise) associated with the treatment facilities. This technology was selected as the most cost-effective treatment process. EDMS NO. 003788464 OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plan Improvement Project 3 ESA / 203742 ATTACHMENT C MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AESTHETICS ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE SECONDARY TREATMENT AND IMPROVEMENT PROJECT A TI ACHMENT C-MMRP Impact 3.1-1: Although several of the new structures would be visible from adjacent residential neighborhoods, the Project would not substantially alter or degrade the existing visual character of the site and surroundings. Measure (M-3.1-1) The contractor shall replace damaged landscaping and restore the construction area near each plant's property boundary to a condition similar to existing conditions. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include in the 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 project would emit criteria pollutants. Some estimated daily average construction-phase emissions would exceed significance thresholds set by the SCAQMD. Measure (3.2-la) Soil binders shall be used on site in appropriate areas (generally non-traffic areas such as disturbed areas awaiting next phase of construction activity) where they can effectively reduce dust generation. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 2 April 2005 ESA/203472 A TI AC HM ENT C -MMRP Measure (6.5-la) 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. Measure (6.5-lb) 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 (6.5-lc) General contractors shall use reasonable and typical watering techniques to reduce fugitive dust emissions. All unpaved demolition and construction areas shall be wetted at least twice a day during excavation and construction, and temporary dust covers shall be used to reduce dust emissions and meet SCAQMD District Rule 403. Measure (6.5-le) Ground cover shall be re-established on the construction site through seeding and watering. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Include air emissions restrictions and standard operating procedures for construction work in the contract specifications. 2. Include dust reduction measures listed in mitigation measures in cotract 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. Impact 3.2-2: Operation of the proposed project would emit criteria pollutants. Estimated daily average emissions would exceed significance thresholds set by the SCAQMD. Measure (6.5-3a) The District will maintain its ride-share programs to reduce commuter traffic and air quality impacts. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 3 April 2005 ESA/203472 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Maintain current ride-share program for OCSD employees. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor participation and effectiveness of program. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD A TI ACHMENT C -MMRP MONITORING SCHEDULE On-going throughout construction and operations. Impact 3.2-3: Neither construction or operation of the proposed Project would result in objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Measure (3.2-2) The District shall ensure that contractors remove salvaged/demolished equipment from the treatment plants to minimize potential odors during the removal of existing facilities. Staging areas shall not be used to store salvaged/demolished equipment. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE I. Include in contract specifications. GEOLOGY AND SOILS MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with construction contract specifications. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE During construction. Impact 3.3-1: The proposed Project could expose people or structures to potential adverse effects due to geologic and seismic hazards. Measure (6.6-la) Geotechnical Evaluations. During the project design phase for all facilities, the District will perform design-level geotechnical evaluations. The geotechnical evaluations will include subsurface exploration and review of seismic design criteria to ensure that design of the facilities meet seismic safety requirements of the UBC. Site-specific testing for soils susceptible to liquefaction shall 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 evaluations for mitigating 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. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 4 April 2005 ESA/203472 A TI A CHM ENT C -MMRP • 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 (6.6-lb) 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 CBC. Measure (6.6-2a) Spill Prevention. The District will implement the Spill Prevention Containment and Countermeasures Plan (SPCC). Measure (6.6-2b) 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 I. Complete design-level geotechnical evaluations prior to construction. 2. Require compliance with California Building Code in contract specifications. 3. Implement and update SPCC plan. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain file of completed geotechnical evaluations. Maintain record of specifications and as-builts for administrative record Maintain record of SPCC plan for administrative record. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD OCSD OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to construction activities. Prior to construction activities. As needed. Impact 3.3-2: Dewatering could create unstable soil conditions, creating potential risk of property damage to proposed and nearby existing structures. Measure (3.3-2) The District or its consultant shall conduct a geotechnical investigation during the design phase of each facility project to develop measures to address poor soil conditions and dewatering requirements to be implemented during project design and construction that will protect people and structures. District shall include the measures in its project design and construction specifications and shall oversee contractor implementation. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 5 April 2005 ESN203472 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Complete geotechnical investigation prior to construction. Assure that contractors implement all recommendations of geotechnical investigations. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Monitor compliance with construction contract specifications. Maintain record of geotechnical investigations, construction specifications, as- builts and construction oversight for administrative record. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD A TI ACHMENT C -MMRP MONITORING SCHEDULE Complete geotechnical investigation prior to approving final design. Monitor compliance during construction. Prior to construction. Impact 3.4-2: Abandoned oil wells could be encountered during excavation at Plant No. 2 and represent both a safety hazards for workers as well as a potential conduit for surface contamination to reach groundwater if wells are not properly abandoned. Measure (7.8-3e) Identify Abandoned Oil Wells. Prior to construction, the District shall identify existing and abandoned oil production wells within the project area using the California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), District 1 well location maps. Access to identified non-abandoned oil wells will be maintained. Previously abandoned wells identified beneath proposed structures or utility corridors may need to be plugged to current DOGGR specifications including adequate gas venting systems. Measure (7.8-31) Abandon Wells. Should construction activities uncover previously unidentified oil production wells, the DOGGR will be notified, and the well will be abandoned following DOGGR specifications for well abandonment. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 6 April 2005 ESN203472 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Locate wells and consult with DOGGR during design. 2. Include in construction contract specifications. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Record pre and post-construction conditions for administrative record. Monitor compliance with approved construction contract specifications. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD OCSD ATI ACHMENT C -MMRP MONITORING SCHEDULE During design. Prior to and during installation. Impact 3.4-3: Soils contaminated from previous activities in the area could be encountered during excavation activities and create a significant hazard to the public or environment if not properly contained and disposed of. Measure (M-3.4-1) Any contaminated soils encountered on the projectsite during site clearance or excavation shall be removed from the project site and disposed of off-site in accordance with applicable hazardous waste regulations. The District will notify the Orange County Health Care Agency of remedial actions IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Removal of contaminated soils. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Contract with qualified firms for the removal and transportation of soils to permitted facilities Maintain administrative records of all remedial actions OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 7 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Throughout site clearance and excavation phase of construction. April 2005 ESN203472 A 1T AC HM ENT C -MMRP HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Impact 3.5-1: The construction of the proposed Project could result in erosion and receiving water quality impacts. Measure (6.7-la) Best Management Practices. The District will implement BMPs as outlined in the District's Onsite Stormwater Management Plan (OSSWMP). Measure (6.7-lb) Storm Water Management. The District will train construction and operation employees in stormwater pollution prevention practices. Individual contractors perfonning construction at each treatment facility shall be required to comply with provisions of the District's OSSWMP. Measure (6.7-lc) Stormwater Facility Maintenance. The District will inspect and maintain all on-site stormwater drains and catch basins on plant property regularly. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE l. Implement BMPs. 2. Implement OSSWMP. 3. Periodically update OSSWMP. 4. Periodically inspect construction sites. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain compliance with OSSWMP for administrative record. Maintain record of site inspections. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE As needed. Measure (6.7-2a) Groundwater Dewatering. Construction contractors will comply with the District's Dewatering Specifications. Measure (6.7-2b) Groundwater Dewatering Disposal. Water from dewatering will be disposed of in a suitable manner in conformance with the District's OSSWMP as approved by the RWQCB. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 8 April 2005 ESA/?03472 IMPLEMENTATION PROl'[Dl TR[ 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. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD A TI ACHMENT C -MMRP MONITORING SCHEDULE During design and construction. Impact 3.7-1: Operation of the proposed Project treatment facilities would generate noise but with mitigation noise levels would not exceed established standards or result in a substantial permanent increase above ambient conditions. Measure (6.4-2a) Noise Performance Standard. 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 d.BA between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and 50 d.BA 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 of 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. Measure (3.7-1) All buildings will be designed to insulate noise of the machinery such that fence-line noise standards would not be exceeded. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Design new facilities to conform to noise performance standard and include noise performance standard in construction contract specifications. MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Maintain record of specifications, construction oversight and as-builts for administrative record. MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction. Impact 3.7-2: The proposed Project would generate noise during construction that could result in substantial temporary increases in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 9 April 2005 ESN203472 A TI A CHM ENT C -MMRP Measure (6.4-la) Construction Hours. 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. Measure (6.4-lb) Muffled Equipment. 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. Measure (6.4-lc) Pile-Driving Noise Reduction. OCSD shall consult with an acoustical engineer to evaluate other alternatives for mitigating impacts from extensive pile driving activities when necessary. Measure (6.4-ld) Alternatives for Foundations. OCSD will evaluate the use of alternative foundation designs to avoid a need for pilings where cost- effective and technically feasible. Measure (6.4-le) Construction Notification. 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. Measure (6.4-lt) Pile Driving Noise Reduction. Noise-reduction measures will be implemented such as acoustic insulation or by other means during the construction period at Plant No. l to reduce a nuisance condition to the closest residences when pile driving is taking place. 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. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 10 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE On-going April 2005 ESN203472 A TI ACHMENT C -MMRP TRAFFIC Impact 3.8-1: Periods of peak construction of the proposed Project would add to traffic along local access streets (including freeway access) causing temporary but substantial increases in traffic over existing conditions. Measure (6.2-1) Contractor Coordination. For each major project or construction period, the District shall complete a detailed construction schedule and haul route plan and notify Caltrans and the Cities of Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach of construction. The District shall submit the schedule and haul route plan to the said Jurisdictions for review and comment. Construction vehicles shall be run on a schedule to minimize truck traffic on arterial highways during peak periods, and to reduce their impediment on street construction. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE 1. Require traffic control plan for construction projects. 2. Notify affected cities and agencies of construction schedule for review and comment. 3. Provide construction oversight. EDMS 003788475 MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIONS Ensure that construction vehicle traffic complies with traffic control plan. Provide record of construction oversight. OCSD Secondary Treatment and Plant Improvement Project SEIR 11 MONITORING RESPONSIBILITY OCSD MONITORING SCHEDULE Prior to and during construction. April 2005 ESN203472