Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCSD 17-06RESOLUTION NO. OCSD 17-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE REHABILITATION OF THE WESTERN REGIONAL SEWERS, PROJECT NO. 3-64; ADOPTING THE CORRESPONDING STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; AND APPROVING THE WESTERN REGIONAL SEWERS, PROJECT NO. 3-64 WHEREAS, the Orange County Sanitation District (the "District") is considering the approval of a project known as the Rehabilitation of the Western Regional Sewers, Project No. 3-64 (the "Project"); WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. ("CEQA")) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.), the District prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") (State Clearinghouse Number 2015111077) that reflected the independent judgment of the District as to the potential environmental impacts of the Project. The DEIR determined that certain aspects of the Project would have significant impacts on the environment that cannot be mitigated and therefore the District prepared a Statement of Overriding Considerations identifies applicable mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, the District consulted with other public agencies and the general public, and provided such agencies and the public with the opportunity to provide written and oral comments on the Project and the DEIR as required by CEQA, including a public review period of 45 days, which commenced on October 17, 2016, and ended on December 1, 2016; and OCSD 17 -06-1 1229943.1 WHEREAS, on November 17, 2016, District staff held a public meeting to provide a further opportunity for public agencies and the general public to comment on the DEIR; and WHEREAS, the District has reviewed the comments received and has responded in the Final Environmental Impact Report to all significant environmental issues raised during the review and consultation process; and WHEREAS, the comments received on the DEIR, either in full or in summary, together with the District's responses have been included in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Project; and WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report, including the comments received by the District on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, has been presented to the District's Board of Directors (the "Board") for review and consideration prior to the approval of, and commitment to, the Project, and the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report, approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program and the Statement of Overriding Considerations is consistent with the provisions of CEQA. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. The Board of Directors certifies that the Final Environmental Impact Report, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A, including comments and responses thereto, and related technical appendices, have been completed in compliance with CEQA and are a complete and adequate description of the environmental conditions of the proposed Project. Section 2. The Board has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report together with all comments received during the OCSD 17-06-2 1229943.1 public review process prior to approval of Project No. 3-64 and the Final Environmental Impact Report reflects the District's independent judgment and analysis. Section 3. The Board of Directors finds on the basis of the whole record before it that, with the exception of temporary but significant and unavoidable construction- related noise impacts, there is no substantial evidence that the Project, as mitigated, will have a significant effect on the environment, and that the impact associated with construction related noise is outweighed by the Project's benefit of increasing the service life of the Western Regional Sewers. Section 4. The Board of Directors adopts the Findings of Fact attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. Section 5. The Board of Directors further adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B including the specific finding that the benefits of the approval of Project No. 3-64 outweigh the following significant unavoidable impact: Temporary and periodic in ambient noise levels during construction in the Project vicinity. Section 6. The Board of Directors finds that the recommended mitigation measures contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report shall be implemented and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to this Resolution as Chapter 9 of Exhibit A to ensure that all mitigation measures will be implemented. Section 7. The Final Environmental Impact Report has been completed in compliance with the requirements of CEQA and is hereby adopted. Section 8. The Board approves the Rehabilitation of the Western Regional Sewers, Project No. 3-64. OCSD 17 -06-3 1229943.1 Section 9. The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which the Board's decision is based are located at the District Administration Offices, 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA 92708, and the custodian for these documents is the Clerk of the Board. Section 10. District staff is authorized and directed to file the Notice of Determination and any other documents in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 22, 2017 ATTEST: ~-J~ OCSD 17 -06-4 1229943.1 Exhibit "A" Final Environmental Impact Report on file in the Clerk of the Board's office. OCSD 17 -06-5 1229943.l !/ ) c .Q .. . . . . ~ Q) :5 2 !/ ) c 0 (. ) O> .£ :5 2 I: : ~ 0 0 .. . . . . c Q) E .$ c7 5 !/ ) O> .£ "' C c u: : : 0 (/ ) (. ) 0 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE REHABILITATION OF THE WESTERN REGIONAL SEWERS, PROJECT NO. 3-64 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2015111077 MARCH 22, 2017 SECTION 1: THE PROJECT 1.1 Project Description The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), as Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), is proposing to rehabilitate and/or replace the entire length of the Orange-Western Sub-trunk, the Los Alamitos Sub-trunk, the Westside Relief Interceptor, and the Seal Beach Boulevard. Interceptor. Collectively, these sewer lines are identified as the Western Regional Sewers. These sewer lines convey sewage flows from the City of Seal Beach, the community of Rossmoor in unincorporated Orange County, the City of Los Alamitos, the City of Cypress, the City of La Palma, and other areas in the vicinity to the Westside Pump Station in Rossmoor. The Orange-Western Sub-trunk conveys flows from the Cities of Cypress, Buena Park, and Anaheim to the Miller Holder Trunk and the Knott Interceptor. The Orange-Western Sub-trunk is not tributary to the Westside Pump Station. Sewage flows from all Project components ultimately are directed to OCSD Treatment Plant No. 2 located at 22212 Brookhurst Street in Huntington Beach. Los Alamitos Sub-trunk The Los Alamitos Sub-trunk, constructed in 1959, is 34,620 feet long and has 90 manholes. The pipe diameter ranges in size from 18 to 30 inches. The Los Alamitos Sub-trunk is within the following cities: La Palma (La Palma Avenue and Denni Street), Cypress (Denni Street, Guardian Drive, Orange Avenue, Bloomfield Avenue, and Bloomfield Street), Los Alamitos (Bloomfield Street, West Cerritos Avenue, Chestnut Street, Sausalito Street, Oak Street, Katella Avenue, and Los Alamitos Boulevard), Seal Beach (Seal Beach Boulevard and Old Ranch Parkway), and the community of Rossmoor. Westside Relief Interceptor The Westside Relief Interceptor was constructed in 1975 and 1976. This line is approximately 32,100 feet long with 81 manholes. Pipe size ranges from 15 to 39 inches in diameter. The Westside Relief Interceptor is within the following cities: La Palma (Crescent Avenue and Moody Street), Cypress (Moody Street, Orange Avenue, and Denni Street), Los Alamitos (Denni Street, Katella Avenue, and Los Alamitos Boulevard), and Seal Beach (Seal Beach Boulevard and Old Ranch Parkway). The Los Alamitos Sub-trunk and Westside Relief Interceptor meet at the intersection of Orange Avenue and Denni Street at Diversion Structure No. 65. Diversion Structure No. 65 is configured to divert southerly flow from the Los Alamitos Sub-trunk to the west, rather than allowing it to continue southward along with flow from the Westside Relief Interceptor. The Los Alamitos Sub-trunk can flow into the Westside Relief 1 1230040.1 Interceptor but not the other way around. The two lines subsequently run in a southerly direction along Los Alamitos Boulevard for approximately 10,800 feet. Westside Pump Station and Force Main The Westside Pump Station is located at 3112 Yellowtail Drive in the community of Rossmoor. The pump station underwent a major renovation in 2008 (Project 3-52). This Project consisted of rehabilitating the existing pump station to meet then-current OCSD standards and national and state codes. In addition, the station's capacity was increased to meet then-projected peak wet-weather flows. The work included modification of the ventilation systems, control systems, and the station's structure and isolation of the pump and electrical rooms from one another. The mechanical equipment was relocated 30 feet below ground. The building underwent some minor modifications, and the roof was upgraded. The front gate was moved to the east of the property to ease access into the pump station. Additional landscaping was installed to enhance the front of the facility. Orange-Western Sub-trunk The Orange-Western Sub-trunk, constructed in 1959, is 13,940 feet long and has 38 manholes. The pipe is 21 inches in diameter. The Orange-Western Sub-trunk consists of two segments. The first segment begins just north of the intersection of Crescent Avenue and Western Avenue in the City of Buena Park. The pipeline continues south on Western Avenue and turns west on West Orange Avenue before connecting to the Knott Interceptor. The second segment continues west on West Orange Avenue from the Knott Avenue intersection to the Miller Holder Trunk Sewer at the Valley View Street intersection. Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor The Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor, constructed in 1970, is 5,530 feet long and has 8 manholes. The pipe is 51 inches in diameter. The Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor begins just south of the Westside Pump Station at the end of Old Ranch Parkway in the City of Seal Beach. The pipeline continues south across the Interstate 405 (1-405) freeway right-of-way and in North Gate Road south of 1-405 until merging with Seal Beach Boulevard. The pipeline then continues south along Seal Beach Boulevard until it reaches the Seal Beach Pump Station located at the intersection of Seal Beach and Westminster Boulevards. The Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station extends to the centerline of Seal Beach Boulevard. Approximately 3,500 feet of Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor is within an easement on land owned by the United States Navy. 1.2 Purpose and Objectives The Western Regional Sewer pipelines have exceeded their functional life and have developed deficiencies that have led to the intrusion of groundwater and, in some cases, hard calcium deposits which make the pipes hard to clean and impede wastewater flow. Also, portions of both the Los Alamitos Sub-trunk (15,540 linear feet) and the Westside Relief Interceptor (16,010 linear feet) are considered capacity deficient, are unable to handle projected 2040 wet weather flows, and need to be upsized to minimize the existing surcharging potential. Further, the Westside Pump Station wet well was 2 1230040.1 renovated in 2008 to extend its serviceable life. The repairs to the wet well are nearing the end of their expected life, and the wet well needs to be replaced. The purpose of the proposed Project is to increase the life of the Western Regional Sewers within the western region of OCSD's service area by another 50 years and to ensure that the projected 2040 wet weather peak flows (10-Year Storm) would be adequately contained. Objectives for the proposed Project include the following: • Extend the service life ofthe Western Regional Sewers by either rehabilitation of the existing lines or replacement of the lines on new alignment within the same streets; • Replace the Westside Pump Station wet well to prevent future failure and release of sewage to the environment; • Accommodate projected 2040 wet weather peak flows (10-Year Storm); • Minimize impacts to the environment; • Minimize existing surcharging in new/rehabilitated pipes; • Minimize groundwater intrusion in new/rehabilitated pipes; and • Reduce potential for odors. Without rehabilitation of the Western Regional Sewers and implementation of the Westside Pump Station improvements, the potential for groundwater intrusion and surcharging would continue and the wet well would further degrade. Additionally, OCSD would not meet requirements to accommodate projected 2040 wet weather flows, potentially resulting in unplanned sanitary sewer releases to the environment. SECTION 2: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS OCSD is the Lead Agency approving the Project and conducting environmental review under CEQA (California Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq.), and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq (CEQA Guidelines). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15084(d)(3), OCSD retained a consultant, Jacobs, to assist with the preparation of CEQA environmental documents. OCSD has reviewed and edited as necessary the submitted drafts and hereby certifies that the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR or FEIR) reflects its own independent judgment and analysis under CEQA Guidelines Section 15090(a)(3) and Public Resources Code Sections 21082.l(a)-(c). In November 2015, OCSD published a CEQA Initial Study for the proposed Project and determined that preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was necessary. OCSD prepared and published a Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR or DEIR) in October 2016, in compliance with CEQA, and filed a Notice of Completion with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, indicating that the DEIR had been completed and was available for review and comment by the public. Pursuant to Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, OCSD also published a Notice of Availability on October 17, 2016, which began a 45-day period for public and agency comments on the Project DEIR. A public notice was placed in the Orange County Register, Orange County Breeze, and Seal Beach Sun 3 1230040.1 News general circulation newspapers on October 17, 2016, informing the public of the availability of the DEIR and that a public meeting would be held during this comment period. Copies of the DEIR were also made available on October 17, 2016, for public review at the following locations: • OCSD, Administrative Office, 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA • Los Alamitos-Rossmoor Library, 12700 Montecito Road, Seal Beach, CA • La Palma Library, 7842 Walker Street, La Palma, CA • Seal Beach/Mary Wilson Library, 707 Electric Avenue, Seal Beach, CA • Cypress Library, 5331 Orange Avenue, Cypress, CA • Fountain Valley Library, 17635 Los Alamos Street, Fountain Valley, CA • Anaheim Central Library, 500 West Broadway, Anaheim, CA • Buena Park Library, 7150 La Palma Avenue, Buena Park, CA Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15083, a public meeting was held on November 17, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. at the Los Alamitos Community Center in the City of Los Alamitos. The meeting was held to provide the public an opportunity to voice comments or concerns regarding potential effects of the proposed Project and the issues included in the EIR. With the exception of an attorney from Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP representing Forest Lawn Cemetery, no other members of the public, community groups, or public agencies attended the meeting. The FEIR for the Project was published in February 2017. The FEIR includes responses to comments received during the public comment period. The FEIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. The FEIR is intended to serve as an informational document for public agency decision-makers and the general public regarding the objectives and components of the Project. The FEIR addresses the potential significant environmental impacts associated with the Project, and identifies feasible mitigation measures and alternatives that may be adopted to reduce or eliminate these impacts. The DEIR and FEIR are incorporated by reference into this CEQA findings document. The FEIR is the primary reference document for the formulation and implementation of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program {MMRP) for the Project. Environmental impacts cannot always be mitigated to a level that is considered less than significant. In accordance with CEQA, if a lead agency approves a project that has significant unavoidable impacts that cannot be mitigated to a level below significance, the agency must state in writing the specific reasons and overriding considerations for approving the project based on the final CEQA documents and any other information in the public record for the project (CEQA Guidelines,§ 15093). This is called a "statement of overriding considerations." The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which OCSD's CEQA findings are based are located at the OCSD Administrative Office Building at 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA 92708, and on the OCSD website at www.ocsd.com. This information is provided in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(e). 4 1230040.l SECTION 3: FINDINGS 3.1 Introduction CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives where feasible to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur with the implementation of the Project. Project mitigation or alternatives are not required, however, where they are infeasible or where a mitigation measure is within another agency's responsibility and jurisdiction (CEQA Guidelines§ 15091(a)). For those significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level, the lead agency is required to find that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the proposed Project outweigh the significant effects on the environment (Public Resources Code § 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines§ 15093). If such findings can be made, the CEQA Guidelines state in Section 15093(a) that "the adverse environmental effects may be considered acceptable." CEQA also requires that the findings made pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 be supported by substantial evidence in the record (CEQA Guidelines,§ 15091(b)). Under CEQA, substantial evidence means enough relevant information has been provided (reasonable inferences from this information may be made) to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be reached. Substantial evidence includes facts, reasonable assumptions predicated on facts, and expert opinion supported by facts (CEQA Guidelines,§ 15384). The findings reported in the following pages incorporate the facts and discussions in the DEIR for the Project as fully set forth therein. For each ofthe significant impacts identified in the DEIR, the following sections are provided: • Description of Significant Effects: A specific description of the environmental effects identified in the EIR, including a conclusion regarding the significance of the impact. • Mitigation Measures: Identified feasible mitigation measures or actions, that are required as part of the Project, and if mitigation is infeasible, the reasons supporting the finding that the mitigation is infeasible. • Rationale: A summary of the reasons for the finding(s). • Reference: A citation to the specific section in the EIR addressing the identified impact including the evidence supporting the finding. For environmental effects that are identified in the DEIR as no impacts or less than significant impacts and do not require mitigation, a statement explaining why the impacts are less than significant is provided. 3.2 Environmental Impacts that are Less than Significant and Do Not Require Mitigation Certain resource-specific impacts, identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Checklist, were evaluated previously in the Initial Study for the proposed Project (DEIR Appendix A). As a result of this Initial Study, it was determined that the proposed Project would result in no impacts to Agriculture and Forestry 5 1230040.1 Resources, Mineral Resources, and Population and Housing. These environmental resource areas were not addressed further in the EIR. Finding: As a result of the analyses conducted for the DEIR, it was determined that the proposed Project would result in no impacts or less than significant impacts, and no required mitigation measures, for the following resource areas: • Geology and Soils (DEIR Section 3.5, pages 3-82 through 3-93) • Greenhouse Gas Emissions (DEIR Section 3.6, pages 3-94 through 3-104) • Public Services (DEIR Section 3.10, pages 3-207 through 3-210) • Recreation (DEIR Section 3.11, pages 3-211 through 3-215) • Traffic and Circulation (DEIR Section 3.12, pages 3-216 through 3-234) Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analyses presented in the aforementioned Draft EIR sections, which are incorporated by reference herein. 3.3 Environmental Impacts Found to be Less than Significant After Mitigation The following section lists significant impacts of the proposed Project along with corresponding mitigation measures identified in DEIR Chapter 3.0 that reduce these impacts to less than significant after mitigation. Implementation of these mitigation measures will be monitored and enforced in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. Aesthetics AES-1: Would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant. • AES MM 1: OCSD will obtain interment schedules from the Forest Lawn Cemetery and temporarily suspend construction activities for the Los Alamitos Sub-trunk within the Forest Lawn Cemetery during interment ceremonies to minimize construction disturbances to Forest Lawn operations. Visual screening will also be installed where work will occur within and adjacent to Forest Lawn in order to reduce temporary impacts to visitors associated with construction equipment and activities. • AES MM la: More disruptive construction requiring segments of open-cut trenching within the Forest Lawn property will be conducted at night, where feasible, to minimize significant impacts to visitors. • AES MM 2: Based on final design and prior to removal or trimming of any tree, OCSD will identify all trees that require removal or trimming. For trees located within the existing easement, OCSD will provide replacement in-kind landscaping surrounding the easement area for the 6 1230040.1 corresponding municipality or private owner. The OCSD liaison to Forest Lawn will work with cemetery representatives during tree trimming, removal, and replacement within the cemetery property. Coordination with Forest Lawn will include identifying trees to be removed and trimmed prior to cutting, discussing trees of concern and protection options, and determining species, size and planting locations for replacement specimens outside of the existing easement. The size of replacement trees will be comparable to trees removed where possible and where site conditions allow. • AES MM 3: OCSD will limit construction hours forthe Westside Pump Station to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday to minimize visual impacts of construction activities on adjacent residences, unless otherwise required for completion of construction activities or system operation, at which time adjacent property owners will be notified in advance. • AES MM 4: OCSD will erect visual screening along the property walls adjacent to the pump station and across the front of the pump station during construction activities at the Westside Pump Station to minimize visual impacts of construction activities on adjacent residences. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.1 (pages 3-3 through 3-13), which is incorporated herein by reference. Construction and operation of the Project is temporary and would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. AES-2: Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant. • AES MM 5: Should nighttime construction be required, OCSD will require that all lighting is focused and directed onto the work area only. OCSD will monitor lighting to ensure that there is no spillover to residential areas or other sensitive receptors. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.1 (pages 3-3 through 3-13), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Air Quality AQ-1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant. • AQ MM 1: OCSD shall require its construction contractor, either through the use of scheduling, sequencing of equipment usage, or other means, to demonstrate that construction-related 7 1230040.1 activities for all Project segments will not generate daily emissions exceeding the SCAQMD NOx threshold shown in DEIR Table 3.2-5. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.2 (pages 3- 14 through 3-38 and Table 3.2.5), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. AQ-2: Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant. • SeeAQMM 1. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.2 (pages 3- 14 through 3-38), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. AQ-3: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant. • SeeAQMM 1. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.2 (pages 3- 14 through 3-38), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Biological Resources 810-1: Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Finding: Implementation ofthe following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • AES MM 2: Based on final design and prior to removal or trimming of any tree, OCSD will identify all trees that require removal or trimming. For trees located within the existing easement, OCSD will provide replacement in-kind landscaping surrounding the easement area for the corresponding municipality or private owner. The OCSD liaison to Forest Lawn will work with 8 1230040.1 cemetery representatives during tree trimming, removal, and replacement within the cemetery property. Coordination with Forest Lawn will include identifying trees to be removed and trimmed prior to cutting, discussing trees of concern and protection options, and determining species, size and planting locations for replacement specimens outside of the existing easement. The size of replacement trees will be comparable to trees removed where possible and where site conditions allow. • BIO MM 1: Shrub and tree trimming and/or removal activities associated with the proposed Project shall generally be conducted outside the nesting season (February 15 through July 15). However, if shrub and tree removal must occur during the nesting season, a qualified wildlife biologist (as determined by California Department of Fish and Wildlife) shall conduct preconstruction surveys for nesting birds within suitable nesting habitat in the proposed Project area including a 300-foot buffer around the construction limits. The nesting bird surveys shall be conducted one week before initiation of construction activities within those habitats. If no active nests are detected during surveys, construction may proceed. If active nests are detected, then a no-disturbance buffer shall be established around nests identified during preconstruction surveys. The extent of the no-disturbance buffer shall be 50 feet for non-raptors and 300 feet for raptors. [These buffer distances may be altered by a qualified biologist depending on the level of noise or construction disturbance, line of sight between the nest and the disturbance, ambient levels of noise and other disturbances, and other topographic or artificial barriers. These buffers shall be maintained until after the breeding season has ended or until the biologist determines that the young have fledged. Within this buffer, all nonessential construction activities (e.g., equipment storage, meetings) shall be avoided; however, construction activities can proceed if the biologist determines that the nesting birds are not likely to abandon the nest during construction. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.3 (pages 3- 40 through 3-47), which is incorporated herein by reference. Construction and operation of the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Cultural Resources CUL-1: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • CUL MM 3: Final design of the Los Alamitos Sub-trunk within Forest Lawn shall avoid disturbance of historic buildings, structures, or objects on the Forest Lawn property that are outside the OCSD easements. These include the Ascension Mausoleum; the Church of Our Fathers; the Main Mortuary Building; the park's maintenance facilities building; and the park entrance, and generally the memorial tablets, grave markers, stones, statues, and ornaments. • CUL MM 4: OCSD shall work with Forest Lawn Cemetery to ensure that pipeline alignment will remain within the existing alignment within OCSD easements, Guardian Drive, or other locations 9 1230040.1 to avoid disturbance of existing interments immediately adjacent to the easements. Pipe realignment shall be coordinated with Forest Lawn Cemetery management prior to implementation. Alignments within existing easements will not require Forest Lawn approval, but Project managers shall coordinate with Forest Lawn managers regarding Project details within Forest Lawn property. • CUL MM 5: For the portion of the Los Alamitos Sub-trunk within Forest Lawn Cemetery, the contractor shall avoid disturbance of interment ceremonies and gravesites through the use of protective barriers, visual aids (i.e., signs, flagging, etc.) and defined exclusion areas on plans to provide mutually acceptable distance between construction areas and interments, as determined in consultation with Forest Lawn Cemetery management. Visual aids shall distinguish ornamental or structural elements from locations of known gravesites. • CUL MM 6: OCSD shall provide a liaison during construction of the Los Alamitos Sub-trunk within Forest Lawn Cemetery. Although disturbance to existing gravesites is not anticipated, should graves be impacted by construction, the OCSD liaison shall take immediate action to notify Forest Lawn and prevent further disturbance. The liaison will notify project managers and the Forest Lawn management should graves be disturbed. The Project managers shall consult with Forest Lawn management to determine the appropriate course of action in the event that impacts to gravesites are anticipated or, if they occur, in order to avoid any further disturbance. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.4 (pages 3- 48 through 3-81), which is incorporated herein by reference. Construction and operation of the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5. CUL-2: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • CUL MM 1: OCSD shall retain an archaeologist (Project Archaeologist) meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Professional Qualified Staff (PQS) to provide worker awareness training regarding archaeological resources to construction personnel prior to the start of construction. The training shall include, at minimum, the following: o The types of artifacts, features, or structures that could occur at the proposed Project site o The procedures that should be taken in the event of an archaeological discovery, including human remains o Laws protecting archaeological resources and burials o Penalties for destroying or removing archaeological resources, protected historical structures, or burials • CUL MM 7: In the event of unanticipated archaeological or paleontological resource discoveries during construction activities, the contractor will stop work within 50 feet of the discovery until 10 1230040.1 it can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Professional Qualified Staff (PQS) or a paleontologist meeting the professional standards enumerated in Cooper et al 2010. Construction activities may continue in other areas of the site. The qualified archaeologist or paleontologist shall evaluate the resource(s) encountered and recommend appropriate disposition of the resource(s) in consultation with the Orange County Sanitation District. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.4 (pages 3- 48 through 3-81), which is incorporated herein by reference. Construction and operation of the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. CUL-3: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • CUL MM 2: A qualified paleontologist, meeting the professional standards enumerated in Cooper et al 2010, shall provide worker awareness training on paleontological resources to construction personnel prior to the start of construction. The training shall include, at minimum, the following: o The types of fossils that could occur at the proposed Project site o The procedures that should be taken in the event of a fossil discovery o Laws protecting paleontological resources o Penalties for destroying or removing paleontological resources • See CUL MM 7. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.4 (pages 3- 48 through 3-81), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. CUL-4: Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside formal cemeteries? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • See CUL MM 1. • See CUL MM 4. • See CUL MM 5. 11 1230040.l • See CUL MM 6. • See CUL MM 7. • CUL MM 8: Should any tribal entity identified on the Native American Heritage Commission contact list request on-site monitoring during construction of particular segments of the Project area out of concern for potential impacts to known or unanticipated tribal resources, OCSD shall provide a tribal approved Native American monitor/liaison1 . Sections of the Project area that may require such monitoring are contingent upon engineering design specifics, which have yet to be finalized. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.4 (pages 3- 48 through 3-81), which is incorporated herein by reference. Construction and operation of the Project should not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside formal cemeteries. Hazards/Hazardous Materials HAZ-1: Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? HAZ-2: Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5; and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? HAZ-3: Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Finding: Implementation ofthe following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • HAZ MM 1: The contractor shall be responsible for providing trained personnel for monitoring and operation of construction activities and spill management, including cleanup and replacement of damaged property and fines. In the event an unauthorized spill occurs during construction activities, the contractor shall contact the appropriate agencies for cleanup and disposal pursuant to all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.7 (pages 3- 105 through 3-128), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Please note: Since the publication and circulation of the IS/NOP, recently adopted legislative amendments to the CEQA Checklist have created a separate Tribal Cultural Resource impact category (see separate finding below). The significance question contained in the revised checklist is, "Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun?" As discussed in DEIR Section 3.4.4.3 Construction Impacts, consultation with Native American Tribes has been initiated (see DEIR Appendix A) and, to date, two tribes have expressed interest in the Project. OCSD will provide for the presence of a tribal on-site monitor in response to AB 52 consultations. Thus, the DEIR met the letter and intent of the amended CEQA Checklist. 12 1230040.1 Project would not result in or create a significant hazard to the public or the environment associated with hazards or hazardous materials. Land Use and Planning LU-1: Would the project conflict with existing plans or regulations pertaining to nighttime construction lighting and noise where sensitive land uses are affected? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • See AES MM 5. • SeeAQMM 1. • NOi MM 1: OCSD will require the contractor to prepare a Noise Control Plan (NCP) demonstrating noise reduction, at minimum of 5 dBA to 10 dBA and below the 90-dBA Federal Transit Authority threshold, prior to commencing any construction. The NCP will specifically address noise control near sensitive receptors and for construction for which a variance has been obtained from the appropriate jurisdiction (e.g., weekend and nighttime construction). The NCP will identify the location of noise-sensitive receptors and list the types of noise control measures proposed (e.g., sound blankets and temporary noise barriers providing 5 dBA to 23 dBA of noise reduction) and any conditions specified in the variance. Once approved by OCSD, the contractor will be required to implement the plan. To ensure compliance with the NCP, the contractor will be required to monitor all construction noise for activities potentially affecting sensitive receptors in areas approved by variance, as well as all schools, hospitals, convalescent homes, churches, and other noise-sensitive areas within 1,000 feet of the construction activities. If construction activities take place during weekend and nighttime hours near sensitive receptors that have activities occurring on site during these times, coordination will be conducted with the site owners/managers to ensure adequate measures are taken to reduce or avoid noise impacts. • NOi MM 2: The contractor will adhere to the specified hours in all local ordinances when construction activities are permitted. A variance will be required prior to construction if activities are planned to occur outside the permitted hours. OCSD will comply with any conditions specified in the variance. The following will minimize noise generated by all construction activities: 1230040.1 o All construction equipment shall be maintained according to manufacturer's specifications and inspected regularly. o All noise-producing construction equipment shall be equipped with muffling devices, quiet use generators, or other equivalent noise-reducing features to minimize temporary noise. o Stationary sources shall be located a minimum of 25 feet (the closest distance used to estimate construction noise impacts) from noise-sensitive receptors, unless otherwise constrained by site-specific conditions. 13 o The use of noise-producing signals such as horns, whistles, alarms, bells, etc. shall be in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations. o Sound blankets and temporary sound barriers shall be located adjacent to construction activities where noise impacts above the regulated maximum levels are anticipated near noise-sensitive receptors. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.8 (pages 3- 142 through 3-160), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would not conflict with existing plans or regulations pertaining to nighttime construction lighting and noise where sensitive land uses are affected. Noise NOl-2: Would the project expose persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • See NOi MM 1. • See NOi MM 2. • NOi MM 3: The following will minimize vibration generated from construction activities: o Route heavily loaded trucks away from residential streets. o Operate earthmoving or other construction equipment with the potential to create vibration-induced impact as far away from vibration-sensitive sites as construction location-specific conditions allow. o Pile-driving equipment for shoring installation, if utilized, will be of a non-vibratory type, will have short starting and stopping capabilities and will be able to operate at high revolutions. In addition, soil particle velocity will be monitored during the use of such equipment. If any vibration levels are measured above the 0.20 IPS threshold level, construction will be stopped immediately. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.9 (pages 3- 169 through 3-193), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would not expose persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or ground borne noise levels. Tribal Cultural Resources TRI CUL-1: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing 14 1230040.1 in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? Finding: Implementation ofthe following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • See CUL MM 1. • See CUL MM 7. • See CUL MM 8. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analyses in Draft EIR Section 3.4 (pages 3- 48 through 3-81), as well as FEIR Section 3.13 (Tribal Cultural Resources, Pages 3-234 through 3-244), which are incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. TRI CUL-2: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by the substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce Project-related impacts to less than significant: • See CUL MM 1. • See CUL MM 7. • See CUL MM 8. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analyses in Draft EIR Section 3.4 (pages 3- 48 through 3-81), as well as FEIR Section 3.13 (Tribal Cultural Resources, Pages 3-234 through 3-244), which are incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. 3.4 Environmental Impacts Found to be Significant and Unavoidable 15 1230040.l Noise NOl-4: Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above the ambient noise conditions? Finding: Implementation of mitigation measures NOi MM 1, NOi MM 2, and NOi MM 3 would reduce noise and vibration levels during construction and operation; however, even with these measures, significant noise during construction, as identified in Impact NOl-4, would still occur. Impact NOl-4 remains a significant and unavoidable impact after implementation of the following mitigation measures: • See NOi MM 1. • See NOi MM 2. • See NOi MM 3. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.9 (pages 3- 169 through 3-206), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above the ambient noise conditions, which could not be mitigated to a less than significant level. 3.5 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives The DEIR analyzed two build alternatives, as well as the No Build/No Project alternative. The two build alternatives consisted of: • Build Alternative 1: Replace portions of the existing Los Alamitos Sub-trunk and Westside Relief Interceptor with new, larger capacity pipe. This build alternative would also rehabilitate portions of the existing Los Alamitos Sub-trunk and Westside Relief Interceptor sewer pipe in- place. In addition, Build Alternative 1 would rehabilitate the Orange-Western Sub-trunk and Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor pipelines in-place. Further, Build Alternative 1 would rehabilitate the Westside Pump Station force main and wet well. • Build Alternative 2: Replace the entire Los Alamitos Sub-trunk pipeline with new, larger capacity pipe. This build alternative also would divert all flow from the Westside Relief Interceptor north of Orange Avenue to an enlarged Los Alamitos Sub-trunk via a new diversion structure. In addition, Build Alternative 2 would rehabilitate the entire length of the Westside Relief Interceptor in-place. Further, Build Alternative 2 would rehabilitate the Westside Pump Station force main and wet well. Finding: Build Alternative 1 is the Environmentally Superior Alternative. Rationale for Finding: On the basis of the analyses presented in the DEIR, of the two alternatives considered, Build Alternative 1 is considered to be the Environmentally Superior Alternative due to its lower potential for construction-related impacts associated with air quality, noise, and traffic relative to Build Alternative 2. 16 1230040.1 Cumulative Effects Section 15355 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines defines cumulative impacts as "two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts." Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines provides guidance for analyzing significant cumulative impacts in an EIR. According to Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, cumulative impact analysis may be conducted and presented by either of two methods: (1) a list of past, present, and probable projects producing related or cumulative impacts; or (2) a summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document that has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area-wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. The cumulative list approach was utilized in the analyses conducted for the DEIR for the following resource areas: • • • • • • • • • • • • • Aesthetics (DEIR Section 4.1.2, pages 4-3 through 4-4) Air Quality (DEIR Section 4.1.3, page 4-4) Biological Resources (DEIR Section 4.1.4, page 4-5) Cultural Resources (DEIR Section 4.1.5, page 4-5) Geology and Soils (DEIR Section 4.1.6, page 4-6) Greenhouse Gas Emissions (DEIR Section 4.1.7, page 4-6) Hazards/Hazardous Materials (DEIR Section 4.1.8, page 4-7) Land Use and Planning (DEIR Section 4.1.9, pages 4-7 through 4-8) Noise (DEIR Section 4.1.10, page 4-8) Public Services (DEIR Section 4.1.11, page 4-9) Recreation (DEIR Section 4.1.12, page 4-9) Traffic and Circulation (DEIR Section 4.1.13, pages 4-9 through 4-10) Tribal Cultural Resources (FEIR Section 4.1.14, pages 4-10 through 4-11) Finding: The Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts. Rationale for Finding: On the basis of the analyses presented in the DEIR (Section 4.1.2 through 4.1.13), as well as the FEIR (Section 4.1.14), which are incorporated herein by reference, construction and operation of the Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to the above referenced resources. 3.6 Findings Regarding Other CEQA Considerations Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts (DEIR Section 5.1, page 5-1) 17 1230040.1 As described in DEIR Chapter 3.0, the proposed Project would result in significant impacts related to Aesthetics {3.1), Air Quality (3.2), Biological Resources {3.3), Cultural Resources (4.4), Hazards and Hazardous Materials (3.7), Land Use/Planning {3.8), and Noise (3.9). With the exception of temporary construction-related noise impacts, all of these significant impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance through implementation of mitigation measures, as described in each section. Finding: The Project would result in one significant and unavoidable environmental impact. As noted in Section 3.4 of these findings, the proposed Project would result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels during construction (Impact NOl-4), which would remain significant and unavoidable after mitigation. As a result, Impact NOl-4 would be the only significant and unavoidable environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 3.9 (pages 3- 169 through 3-206), which is incorporated by reference herein. Construction and operation of the Project would result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above the ambient noise conditions, which could not be mitigated to a less than significant level. Growth Inducing Impacts (DEIR section 5.2, pages 5-1 through 5-2) Finding: The Project would not result in growth-inducing impacts. Rehabilitation and/or replacement of the Western Regional Sewers and improvements to the Westside Pump Station would not directly or indirectly induce substantial population growth in the area because the proposed Project involves rehabilitation and/or replacement of the Western Regional Sewers and new construction to replace a wet well at an existing pump station; these components have exceeded their functional life. Capacity-deficient segments, as identified in DEIR Section 2.3, Purpose and Objectives, would be increased to accommodate 2040 wet weather peak flows (10-Year Storm). Rationale for finding: The above finding is based on the analyses in Draft EIR Section 5.2 (pages 5-1 through 5-2) and in Section 4.13 of the Initial Study (DEIR, Appendix A), which are incorporated by reference herein. The proposed rehabilitation and/or replacement segments would not increase the capacity of the system, as the pipes would be replaced in-kind with no increase in pipe diameter and would not directly or indirectly induce substantial growth. Energy Conservation Finding: The proposed Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy. The guidance on energy conservation in CEQA Guidelines Appendix F is based on the statutory requirement that the mitigation measures in an EIR include "measures to reduce the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy'' (Public Resources Code Section 21100{b){3)). Consistent with this mandate, CEQA Guidelines Appendix F lists possible energy impacts and potential 18 1230040.1 conservation measures that should be considered in an EIR when they are "applicable or relevant to the project" and the impacts are "potentially significant." Appendix F does not mandate the analysis of particular energy-related impacts or include specific significance criteria by which to measure a project's energy impacts. For the purposes of the DEIR analysis, consideration is given to whether the Project would result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy. Rationale for Finding: The above finding is made based on the analysis in Draft EIR Section 5.3 (pages 5-2 through 5-3), which is incorporated herein by reference. Construction and operation of the Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of electricity or diesel fuel. 3.7 Findings Regarding Responses to Comments and Revisions in the Final EIR Chapter 8 was added to the Final EIR to include the comment letters submitted during the public review period of the Draft EIR and responses to those comments, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15088. The 45-day review period for the Draft EIR began on October 17, 2016, and concluded on December 1, 2016. Comment letters were received from the following seven public agencies and other interested parties during the review period: • Orange County Fire Authority • Orange County Public Works, Orange County Development Services • Orange County Transportation Authority • Los Alamitos Unified School District • Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP on behalf of Forest Lawn Memorial-Park Association • State of California Native American Heritage Commission • Gabrielefio Band of Mission Indians -Kizh Nation The FEIR incorporates the Draft EIR prepared by OCSD, the comments and recommendations received on the DEIR, and revisions to the DEIR by the Lead Agency in response to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process (Chapter 8), minor revisions to the text included as part ofthe record by OCSD, and the addition of Chapter 9, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Based on the responses to comments and revisions in the FEIR, the Board finds the comments and recommendations on the DEIR were adequately responded to and no new significant and unavoidable environmental impacts were raised, and that the mitigation measures identified in this FEIR have been incorporated into a mitigation monitoring and reporting program to ensure that they are implemented. SECTION 4: STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 19 1230040.1 CEQA requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a project against its unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the project. Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides the following: "(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." (b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR} but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091." As set forth in the preceding sections, OCSD's approval of the Rehabilitation of the Western Regional Sewers, Project No. 3-64 will result in a significant environmental impact that cannot be avoided even with the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures. Whenever a lead agency adopts a project which will result in a significant and unavoidable impact, the agency must, pursuant to Public Resources Code sections 21002 and 21081{b) and State CEQA Guidelines section 15093, state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the FEIR and/or other information in the administrative record. As documented in the DEIR and as explained in these Findings, the Project will potentially result in one significant and unavoidable impact to the environment as follows: NOl-4: The Project would result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above the ambient noise conditions during construction. The OCSD Board has balanced the Project's benefits against the Project's significant unavoidable noise impact. The Board finds that the Project's benefits outweigh the Project's temporary construction- related significant unavoidable impact, and therefore finds that the Project's significant unavoidable impact is acceptable. 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 the Project's significant and unavoidable impact. The proposed Project would: • Extend the service life of the Western Regional Sewers • Prevent potential for future failure and release of sewage to the environment 20 1230040.1 • Accommodate projected 2040 wet weather peak flows (10-Year Storm) • Minimize impacts to the environment • Minimize existing surcharging in new/rehabilitated pipes • Minimize groundwater intrusion in new/rehabilitated pipes • Reduce potential for odors SECTION 5: ADOPTION OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROJGRAM Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, a public agency making findings required by subdivision (a) of Section 21081 must adopt a reporting and monitoring program for the changes to the Project which have been adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The Board hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The Board further finds that said program meets the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 by ensuring compliance during project implementation with the mitigation measures identified in the EIR. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is attached to the OCSD Resolution adopting these Findings as Chapter 9 of Exhibit "A." CONCLUSIONS For the foregoing reasons, OCSD finds that the project's significant, unavoidable environmental impact associated with construction-related noise is outweighed by the above-referenced benefits, any one of which is individually sufficient to outweigh the significant, unavoidable environmental effect of the proposed Project. Therefore, the Board adopts these Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. 21 1230040.1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, Kelly A. Lore, Clerk of the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. OCSD 17-06 was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said Board on the 22nd day of March 2017, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: Barnes; Bernstein; Collacott; Deaton; Delgleize; Ferryman; Hawkins; Jones; Kim; Krippner; R. Murphy; Peotter; Shaw; Shawver; F. Smith; T. Smith; Steel; Wagner; Wanke; and Yarc None None Nagel; Parker; Sebourn; Tinajero; and Withers IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of Orange County Sanitation District this 22nd day of March 2017. Kell y A lJ OVe Clerk of tM Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation District OCSD 17-06-7 1229943.1