ebmud water treatment and transmission improvements program · ebmud water treatment and...

Draft Environmental Impact ReportSCH # 2005092019

Volume 1 of 3

June 2006

EBMUD WATER TREATMENT AND TRANSMISSIONIMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM

East Bay MunicipalUtility District

225 Bush StreetSuite 1700San Francisco, CA 94104415.896.5900www.esassoc.com

Los Angeles

Oakland

Orlando

Petaluma

Sacramento

Seattle

Tampa

204369

Draft Environmental Impact ReportSCH # 2005092019

EBMUD WATER TREATMENT AND TRANSMISSIONIMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM

Volume 1 of 3

June 2006East Bay MunicipalUtility District

EBMUD WTTIP i ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS EBMUD Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program Draft Environmental Impact Report

Page

Volume 1 A. Acronyms vii

S. Summary S-1 S.1 Introduction S-1 S.2 Project Background and Objectives S-1 S.3 Project Description S-3 S.4 Summary of Impacts S-11 S.5 Analysis of Alternatives S-17 S.6 Issues to be Resolved S-19 S.7 Organization of This EIR S-19

1. Introduction 1-1 1.1 Purpose of the EIR 1-1 1.2 CEQA EIR Process 1-1

2. Project Description 2-1 2.1 Overview of the Alternatives 2-1 2.2 Project Background, Need, and Objectives 2-7 2.3 Project Location 2-25 2.4 Water Treatment Plant Improvements, Alternative 1 2-29 2.5 Water Treatment Plant Improvements, Alternative 2 2-57 2.6 Elements Common to Both Alternatives 2-67 2.7 Intended Uses of the EIR 2-89

Maps (follow Chapter 2)

A1 WTTIP Facility Locations on Street Map Base A2 WTTIP Facility Locations on Street Map Base A3 WTTIP Facility Locations on Street Map Base A4 WTTIP Facility Locations on Street Map Base B1 WTTIP Facility Locations on Topographic Maps B2 WTTIP Facility Locations on Topographic Maps B3 WTTIP Facility Locations on Topographic Maps B4 WTTIP Facility Locations on Topographic Maps B5 WTTIP Facility Locations on Topographic Maps

Table of Contents

Page

EBMUD WTTIP ii ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006


B6 WTTIP Facility Locations on Topographic Maps B7 WTTIP Facility Locations on Topographic Maps C-LWTP-1 Lafayette Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 C-LWTP-2 Lafayette Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 2 C-OWTP-1 Orinda Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 C-OWTP-2 Orinda Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 2 C-OLA-1 Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct, Alternative 2 C-OLA-2 Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct, Alternative 2 C-OLA-3 Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct, Alternative 2 C-OLA-4 Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct, Alternative 2 C-OLA-5 Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct, Alternative 2 C-WCWTP-1 Walnut Creek Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 or 2 C-SOBWTP-1 Sobrante Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 or 2 C-USLWTP-1 Upper San Leandro Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 or 2 C-ARRES-1 Ardith Reservoir and Donald Pumping Plant C-FHPP-1 Fay Hill Pumping Plant and Pipeline Improvements C-FHRES-1 Fay Hill Reservoir C-GLENPL-1 Glen Pipeline Improvements C-HVPP-1 Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline C-HVPP-2 Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline C-HVPP-3 Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline C-HIGHRES-1 Highland Reservoir and Pipelines C-LELPL-1 Leland Isolation Pipeline and Bypass Valves C-LELPL-2 Leland Isolation Pipeline and Bypass Valves C-MORRES-1 Moraga Reservoir C-MORPL-1 Moraga Road Pipeline C-MORPL-2 Moraga Road Pipeline C-MORPL-3 Moraga Road Pipeline C-MORPL-4 Moraga Road Pipeline C-MORPL-5 Moraga Road Pipeline C-MORPL-6 Moraga Road Pipeline C-MORPL-7 Moraga Road Pipeline C-NLELRES-1 New Leland Pressure Zone Reservoir and Pipeline C-SUNPP-1 Sunnyside Pumping Plant and Pipeline C-TICEPP-1 Tice Pumping Plant and Pipeline C-WITHPP-1 Withers Pumping Plant D-LWTP-1 Lafayette Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 – Site Plan D-LWTP-2 Lafayette Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 2 – Site Plan D-LWTP-3 Lafayette Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 – Cross-Section –

Through Clearwells and Pumping Plants from viewpoint of existing Lafayette Aqueducts facing north

D-OWTP-1 Orinda Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 – Site Plan D-OWTP-2 Orinda Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 2 – Site Plan D-OWTP-3 Orinda Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 or 2 – Cross-Sections D-WCWTP-1 Walnut Creek Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 or 2 – Site Plan D-SOBWTP-1 Sobrante Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 or 2 – Site Plan D-SOBWTP-2 Sobrante Water Treatment Plant, Alternative 1 or 2 – Cross-Section,

Backwash Water Recycle Facilities

Table of Contents

Page

EBMUD WTTIP iii ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006


D-USLWTP-1 Upper San Leandro Water Treatment Plant – Alternative 1 or 2 – Site Plan

D-OLA-1 Typical Tunneling Examples D-OLA-2 Tunnel Construction Shaft D-OLA-3 Tunnel Construction Shaft Staging Area D-OLA-4 Tunnel Profile D-ARRES-1 Ardith Reservoir and Donald Pumping Plant – Site Plan D-ARRES-2 Ardith Reservoir and Donald Pumping Plant – Cross-Section D-FHPP-1 Fay Hill Pumping Plant and Pipeline Improvements – Site Plan D-FHRES-1 Fay Hill Reservoir – Site Plan D-FHRES-2 Fay Hill Reservoir – Cross-Section D-HVPP-1 Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline – Site Plan D-HVPP-2 Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline –Cross-Section D-HIGHRES-1 Highland Reservoir and Pipelines – Site Plan D-HIGHRES-2 Highland Reservoir and Pipelines – Cross-Section D-MORRES-1 Moraga Reservoir – Site Plan D-MORRES-2 Moraga Reservoir – Cross-Section D-SUNPP-1 Sunnyside Pumping Plant and Pipeline – Site Plan D-SUNPP-2 Sunnyside Pumping Plant and Pipeline – Cross-Section D-TICEPP-1 Tice Pumping Plant and Pipeline – Site Plan D-TICEPP-2 Tice Pumping Plant and Pipeline – Cross-Section D-WITHPP-1 Withers Pumping Plant – Site Plan D-WITHPP-2 Withers Pumping Plant – Cross-Section

(Volumes 2 and 3 are bound separately)

Volume 2 3. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

Volume 3 4. Growth Inducement Potential and Secondary Effects of Growth 5. Cumulative Impacts 6. Analysis of Alternatives 7. Report Preparers Appendices

Table of Contents

Page

EBMUD WTTIP iv ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006

List of Figures S-1 EBMUD Service Area S-2 S-2 Project Location S-7 2-1 EBMUD Service Area 2-8 2-2 Existing Water Treatment Plant Service Area Boundaries 2-9 2-3 Pressure Zone Map 2-12 2-4 Pressure Zone Diagram 2-13 2-5 Existing Water Treatment Plant Processes 2-15 2-6 Project Location 2-27 2-7 Proposed New or Upgraded Water Treatment Plant Processes 2-31 2-8 Schematic Flow Diagrams of Lafayette WTP – Existing

Conditions and Alternative 1, Proposed Conditions 2-33 2-9 Pipeline Construction Techniques 2-38 2-10 Schematic Flow Diagrams of Orinda WTP – Existing Conditions

and Alternatives 1 and 2, Proposed Conditions 2-45 2-11 Schematic Flow Diagrams of Walnut Creek WTP – Existing

Conditions and Alternatives 1 and 2, Proposed Conditions 2-49 2-12 Schematic Flow Diagrams of Sobrante WTP – Existing

Conditions and Alternatives 1 and 2, Proposed Conditions 2-51 2-13 Schematic Flow Diagrams of Upper San Leandro WTP – Existing

Conditions and Alternatives 1 and 2, Proposed Conditions 2-55

List of Tables S-1 Project Objectives S-3 S-2 WTTIP Proposed Facility Locations S-4 S-3 Summary of WTTIP Alternatives 1 and 2 Water Treatment Plant

Improvements S-9 S-4 Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program –

Projects in Lafayette: Summary of Impacts S-21 S-5 Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program –

Projects in Orinda: Summary of Impacts S-24 S-6 Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program –

Projects in Town of Moraga: Summary of Impacts S-27 S-7 Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program –

Projects in Walnut Creek: Summary of Impacts S-29 S-8 Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program –

Projects in Oakland: Summary of Impacts S-31 S-9 Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program –

Projects in Unincorporated Contra Costa County: Summary of Impacts S-33

S-10 Summary of Mitigation Measures by Impact S-35 1-1 Summary of Issues raised in community and agency meetings

Pertaining to the Scope and Content of the WTTIP EIR 1-3 2-1 WTTIP Proposed Facility Locations 2-2 2-2 Summary of WTTIP Alternatives 1 and 2 Water Treatment Plant

Improvements 2-5 2-3 Summary of Need Addressed by Specific Water Treatment

Improvements Projects 2-17 2-4 Existing and Future Demands for Each Water Treatment Plant 2-18 2-5 Project Objectives 2-22

Table of Contents

Page

EBMUD WTTIP v ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006

List of Tables (continued) 2-6 Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program

Construction Schedule – Water Treatment Plant Improvements, Alternative 1 2-36

2-7 Expected Construction Work Hours for WTTIP Projects 2-36 2-8 Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program

Construction Schedule – Water Treatment Plant Improvements, Alternative 2 2-58

2-9 Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program Construction Schedule – Elements Common to Both Alternatives 2-68

2-10 Reservoir Characteristics 2-69 2-11 Plant Pumping Characteristics 2-70 2-12 Streets and Areas Along the Proposed Moraga Road Pipeline

Alignment 2-80 2-13 Discretionary Approvals for Project-Level WTTIP Elements 2-91

EBMUD WTTIP vii ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006

ACRONYMS

AB Assembly Bill ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments AC Alameda-Contra Costa ACCWP Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program ACGIH American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists ADRP Archaeological Data Recovery Program ANSI American National Standards Institute APS auxiliary power system ASPIS Abandoned Sites Program Information System AST above-ground storage tank ASTM ASTM International (formerly the American Society of Testing Materials) ATCM Airborne Toxic Control Measure AWP Annual Work Plan BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District BART Bay Area Rapid Transit BAT best available technology BCT Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology BMPs best management practices BRS Biennial Reporting System CalARP California Accidental Release Program Cal-EPA California Environmental Protection Agency Cal/OSHA California Occupational Health and Safety Administration CAER Community Awareness & Emergency Response CAP Clean Air Plan CARB California Air Resources Board CBC California Building Code CCAP California Cyptosporidium Action Plan CCCSD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District CCCWP Contra Costa Clean Water Program CCR California Code of Regulations CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CDMG California Division of Mines and Geology CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act CESA California Endangered Species Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations CGS California Geological Survey CHMIRS California Hazardous Materials Incident Reporting System CIWMB California Integrated Waste Management Board cm/sec centimeters per second CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level

Acronyms

EBMUD WTTIP viii ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006

CNPS California Native Plant Society CO carbon monoxide Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CORTESE Cortese Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List CPO Chlorine-Produced Oxidants CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency CWA Clean Water Act CY cubic yards dB decibel dBA A-weighted noise level in decibels dbh diameter at breast height DBP Disinfection Byproducts DEHP di (2ethylhexyl) phthalate DHS Department of Health Services DOF Department of Finance DOI U.S. Department of the Interior DPM diesel particulate matter DSOD Division of Safety of Dams DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District EBRPD East Bay Regional Park District EDR Environmental Data Resources EIR environmental impact report EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Program ERNS Emergency Response Notification System FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FESA Federal Endangered Species Act FFIS Federal Facilities Information System FINDS Facility Index System FURS Federal Underground Injection Control g gravity GIS geographic information system gpd/acre gallons per day per acre gpm gallons per minute GPS geographic positioning system HAA haloacetic acid HABS Historic American Buildings Survey HAZNET Hazardous Waste Information System HDPE high-density polyethylene HMBP hazardous materials business plan HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System HSAA Carpenter-Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act HWCL California Hazardous Waste Control Law Hz hertz in/sec inches per second I-580 Interstate 580 I-680 Interstate 680 I-980 Interstate 980 km Kilometers LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission

Acronyms

EBMUD WTTIP ix ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006

lbs/day pounds per day Ldn day-night noise level Leq steady-state energy level Lmax maximum A-weighted sound level LPC Landmarks Preservation Commission LUD land use unit demands LUST leaking underground storage tank M magnitude MCLs Maximum Contaminant Levels mg million gallon(s) mgd million gallons per day mg/kg milligram per kilogram mg/L milligram per liter MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System MM Modified Mercalli Mmax maximum moment magitude MMI Modified Mercalli Intensity mm/yr millimeters per year MOU Memorandum of Understanding mph miles per hour MRZs Mineral Resource Zones msl mean sea level MTBE methyl tertiary-butyl ether MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission Mw Moment Magnitude NAAQS national ambient air quality standards NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NDMA N-nitrosodimethlyamine NEMA National Electrical Manufactures Association NFPA National Fire Protection Association NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOP notice of preparation NOx nitrogen oxides NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPL National Priority List NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service O3 ozoneOAP Ozone Attainment Plan OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PCB polychlorinated biphenyl pcf pounds per cubic feet PGA peak ground acceleration PGV peak ground velocity PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric PM particulate matter PM10 particulate matter (10 microns or less in diameter) PM2.5 particulate matter (2.5 microns or less in diameter) ppm parts per million PPV peak particle velocity

Acronyms

EBMUD WTTIP x ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006

PRC Public Resources Code psf pounds per square feet PZPP Pressure Zone Planning Program RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RMP risk management plan rms root-mean-square ROG reactive organic gases RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SAAQS state ambient air quality standards SARA Superfund Act and Reauthorization Act SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System SEP Seismic Evaluation Program SIP State Implementation Plan SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act SO2 sulfur dioxide STLC soluble threshold limit concentration SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology SWAMP Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program SWF/LF Solid Waste Information System SWPPP stormwater pollution prevention plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TCLP toxicity characteristic leaching procedure TCMs transportation control measures THM trihalomethanes TMDL Total Maximum Daily Loads TLV Threshold Limit Value TRC total residual chlorine TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act TTLC total threshold limit concentration TUC Transportation Utility Corridor UBC Uniform Building Code UCMP University of California Museum of Paleontology UFC Uniform Fire Code USB Ultimate Service Boundary USC United States Code USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey USTs underground storage tanks UV ultraviolet UWMP Urban Water Master Plan VOC volatile organic compound WCMP Water Conservation Master Plan WDRS Waste Discharge Requirements WGCEP Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities WTP Water Treatment Plant WTTIP Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program WTTMP Water Treatment and Transmission Master Plan

EBMUD WTTIP S-1 ESA / 204369 Environmental Impact Report June 2006

SUMMARY

This chapter contains the following sections:

S.1 Introduction S.2 Project Background and Objectives S.3 Project Description S.4 Summary of Impacts S.5 Analysis of Alternatives S.6 Issues to be Resolved S.7 Organization of This EIR

S.1 Introduction This Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) assesses the potential impacts of the Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program (WTTIP) proposed by the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD).

This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines. EBMUD is the lead agency for this CEQA process. Inquiries about the project should be directed to:

Judy Zavadil, Senior Project Manager Water Distribution Planning Division

East Bay Municipal Utility District 375 Eleventh Street (Mail Slot #701) Oakland, CA 94607-4240

[email protected]

S.2 Project Background and Objectives EBMUD provides water service to 20 incorporated cities and 15 unincorporated areas in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. EBMUD’s water system serves approximately 1.3 million people in a 325-square-mile area. The Oakland-Berkeley Hills divide EBMUD’s service area into the West of Hills and East of Hills service areas. Figure S-1 shows the District’s water service area, the water treatment plants, major raw water transmission facilities, and raw water reservoirs in the service area.

EBMUD Water Treatment and Transmission Improvements Program . 204369

Figure S-1EBMUD Service Area

SOURCE: EBMUD

Summary


WTTIP improvements are driven by a variety of overlapping needs: meeting existing and future water demands in Lafayette, Orinda, Moraga (Lamorinda) and Walnut Creek; meeting future regulatory standards related to water quality; complying with environmental permit conditions; and replacing and upgrading aging infrastructure, as described in Section 2.2, of Chapter 2, Project Description. The objectives that were considered during development of WTTIP projects are detailed in Table S-1 below:

TABLE S-1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

Category Project Objectives

Reliability Provide reliable water treatment, transmission, and distribution infrastructure that meets long-term operational needs under average and maximum-day demand conditions

Meet EBMUD standards for planned, unplanned, and emergency outages Meet security initiatives

Regulatory & Water Quality Continue to meet drinking water and environmental regulations with a margin of safety and achieve EBMUD internal long-term water quality goals

Operations Ensure project will meet short-term peak demand periods in excess of projected demands

Minimize the risk of service disruption and meet demands during construction

Implementation Minimize implementation issues by considering the complexity of public and local agency issues

Environmental Minimize environmental impacts during construction Minimize environmental impacts after construction and during operations

Economics Minimize life-cycle costs (capital, operating, and maintenance) to EBMUD customers

S.3 Project Description The WTTIP project consists of improvements at 5 water treatment plants (including, for one of the alternatives, construction of a new Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct) and 19 other projects. See Table S-2 and Figure S-2 for a list of the projects and their locations. The projects are discussed at length in Sections 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6. Table S-2 provides page references to each project’s description (e.g., need, design, and construction characteristics) and its map code. Project maps follow Chapter 2 and are organized by map type (A – street base, B –topographic base, C – aerial-photograph base, and D – design drawings). Some of these projects are evaluated in detail in the EIR while others are evaluated more generally, as explained in Section S.3.1. In addition, the EIR evaluates two alternatives:

Alternative 1 – Supply from Orinda and Lafayette WTPs Alternative 2 – Supply from Orinda WTP

Section S.3.2 describes these alternatives.

Summary


TABLE S-2 WTTIP PROPOSED FACILITY LOCATIONS

Facility Project Location Address or Nearest Intersection Page

Map

Cod

e

Lafayette Water Treatment Plant (WTP)a

Lafayette 3848 Mt. Diablo Boulevard 2-29 LWTP

Orinda WTPa Orinda 190 Camino Pablo 2-42 OWTP

Walnut Creek WTPa Walnut Creek 2201 Larkey Lane 2-47 WCWTP

Sobrante WTPa Contra Costa County 5500 Amend Road 2-50 SOBWTP

Upper San Leandro WTPa Oakland 7700 Greenly Drive 2-54 USLWTP

Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct Orinda/Lafayette Tunnel from Orinda Sports Field near Orinda WTP to intersection of East Altarinda Drive and St. Stephens Drive; Pipeline: along El Nido Ranch Road from St. Stephens Drive to Mt. Diablo Boulevard, along Mt. Diablo Boulevard from El Nido Ranch Road to 3848 Mt. Diablo Boulevard

2-61 OLA

Project-Level Transmission and Distribution System Improvements Common to Both Alternatives

Ardith Reservoir and Donald Pumping Planta

Orinda At existing Donald Pumping Plant near Ardith Drive and Westover Court 2-67 ARRES

Fay Hill Pumping Plant and Pipeline Improvementsa

Moraga Pumping Plant: southwest corner of intersection of Rheem Boulevard and Moraga Road; Pipeline: Rheem Boulevard west of Chalda Way

2-71 FHPP

Fay Hill Reservoira Moraga At existing Fay Hill Reservoir site off of Fay Hill Road near Rheem Boulevard 2-72 FHRES

Glen Pipeline Improvements and Glen Reservoir Decommissiona

Lafayette Nordstrom Lane from Hilltop Drive to Glen Road, Glen Road from Nordstrom Lane to just west of Monticello Road; Monticello Road north of Presher Way

2-73 GLENPL

Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline

Orinda Pumping Plant: on Lombardy Lane near Van Ripper Lane; Pipeline: from pumping plant southwest on Lombardy Lane to Miner Road, then southwest on Miner Road to Oak Arbor Road

2-74 HVPP

Highland Reservoir and Pipelines

Lafayette Lafayette Reservoir Recreation Area; Pipeline: from reservoir to Mt. Diablo Boulevard

2-75 HIGHRES

Lafayette Reclaimed Water Pipeline

Lafayette Lafayette WTP; Pipeline: from Lafayette WTP to Highland Reservoir overflow/drain pipeline

2-40 -- b

Leland Pressure Zone Isolation Bypass Valvesa

Walnut Creek Danville Boulevard near Rudgear Road 2-77 LELPL

Leland Isolation Pipeline Walnut Creek Lacassie Drive from North California Street to North Main Street 2-77 LELPL

Moraga Reservoira Moraga At existing Moraga Reservoir near Draeger Drive and Claudia Court 2-78 MORRES

a Existing EBMUD facility. b The Lafayette Reclaimed Water Pipeline would be co-located with other pipelines (refer to HIGHRES maps). c No conceptual design has been completed for program-level facilities. Refer to topographic maps (Maps C) for facility locations.

Summary


TABLE S-2 (Continued) WTTIP PROPOSED FACILITY LOCATIONS

Facility Project Location Address or Nearest Intersection Page

Map

Cod

e

Moraga Road Pipeline Lafayette/Moraga Northern edge of Lafayette Reservoir Recreation Area, Moraga Road from Nemea Court/Madrone Drive to Draeger Drive

2-79 MORPL

Sunnyside Pumping Plant and Pipeline

Orinda/Lafayette Pumping Plant: Happy Valley Road near Sundown Terrace; Pipeline: pumping plant to Happy Valley Road

2-81 SUNPP

Tice Pumping Plant and Pipeline

Contra Costa County

Pumping Plant: near Tice Valley Boulevard and Olympic Boulevard; Pipeline: from pumping plant across Olympic Boulevard, north on Boulevard Way to Warren Road

2-82 TICEPP

Withers Pumping Plant Contra Costa County

At Grayson Reservoir near Reliez Valley Road and Silver Hill Way 2-83 WITHPP

Program-Level Transmission and Distribution System Improvements Common to Both Alternatives

Leland Reservoir Replacementa

Lafayette Opposite 1050 Leland Drive 2-85 -- c

New Leland Pressure Zone Reservoir and Pipeline

Walnut Creek / Contra Costa County

Reservoir: Caltrans property adjacent to I-680; Pipeline: from reservoir northwest to Danville Boulevard near Rudgear Road

2-85 NLELRESc

St. Mary’s Road/Rohrer Drive Pipeline

Moraga / Lafayette / Walnut Creek

Tentative location: Moraga Road south from Draeger Drive to St. Mary’s Road, northeast on St. Mary’s Road to Rohrer Drive

2-86 -- c

San Pablo Pipeline Orinda / Contra Costa County / Richmond

Tentative location: Orinda WTP east to Old San Pablo Dam Road to San Pablo Tunnel; through tunnel to San Pablo WTP

2-86 -- c

a Existing EBMUD facility. b The Lafayette Reclaimed Water Pipeline would be co-located with other pipelines (refer to HIGHRES maps). c No conceptual design has been completed for program-level facilities. Refer to topographic maps (Maps C) for facility locations.

This EIR serves as a project EIR and a program EIR. Table S-2 indicates the proposed actions evaluated at a project level of detail (which will therefore, subject to approval by the EBMUD Board of Directors, be ready for implementation following necessary regulatory approvals) and the proposed actions evaluated at a program level of detail. Generally, program-level improvements are projects that EBMUD might implement sometime in the future, depending on (for example) changing water quality regulations, changing source water quality, and/or increases in demand for treated water; these projects have not been developed enough to permit a detailed evaluation. Consequently, the program-level elements are evaluated in a more general manner. In Chapter 3, impacts associated with these projects are discussed at the end of each technical section (e.g., Section 3.3, Visual Quality). The District will undertake further environmental review pursuant to CEQA following completion of conceptual design and prior to implementation as more details about the specific locations and construction characteristics of those projects are developed.

Summary


When the District undertakes subsequent environmental review for facilities evaluated at a program level of detail, the information contained in this EIR will be revisited to determine the accuracy and the adequacy of these evaluations. In accordance with criteria set forth in CEQA, this EIR can:

Provide the basis in an Initial Study for determining whether a specific WTTIP project may have significant effects;

Be incorporated by reference to deal with regional influences, secondary effects, cumulative impacts, alternatives, and other factors that apply to the WTTIP as a whole; and/or

Focus subsequent environmental review to permit discussion solely of new effects or more adverse effects than those considered in this EIR.

This EIR evaluates two WTTIP alternatives at an equal level of detail. The fundamental difference between these alternatives is whether the Lafayette Water Treatment Plant (WTP) is retained and upgraded (Alternative 1) or decommissioned (Alternative 2). Table S-3 identifies the actions at each water treatment plant that are included in the alternatives.

Alternative 1 – Supply from Orinda and Lafayette WTPs This alternative involves retaining and upgrading the Lafayette WTP, as well as upgrading the Orinda, Sobrante, Walnut Creek, and Upper San Leandro WTPs. The proposed changes at these WTPs generally involve improvements to the raw water treatment processes, the backwash water treatment processes, treated water storage, and/or transmission. The components of Alternative 1 (EBMUD’s preferred alternative) are presented in detail in Section 2.4.

Alternative 2 – Supply from Orinda WTP This alternative involves decommissioning the Lafayette WTP. Customers currently served by the Lafayette WTP1 would instead receive water from the Orinda WTP year-round. To accomplish this, EBMUD would modify Orinda WTP operations and construct a new treated water storage facility (clearwell), pumping plant, and combination tunnel/pipeline (referred to as the Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct) to convey treated water to Lafayette for distribution. Proposed changes to the Sobrante, Walnut Creek, and Upper San Leandro WTPs would basically be the same as Alternative 1, although the proposed sizes of some facilities at the Sobrante and Upper San Leandro WTPs would be somewhat bigger.

1 The areas served by the Lafayette WTP (during warm-weather demand conditions) include portions of Lafayette,

Moraga, Orinda, and Walnut Creek.

085

With

ers

Pum

ping

Pla

nt

Wal

nu

t C

reek

Wat

er T

reat

men

tP

lan

t

Lela

nd P

ress

ure

Zon

e Is

olat

ion

Pip

elin

e

Gle

nP

ipel

ine

Impr

ovem

ents

Lela

nd R

eser

voir

Tice

Pum

ping

Pla

nt

Mor

aga

Res

ervo

irD

onal

dP

umpi

ng P

lant

Ard

ith R

eser

voir

Laf

ayet

teW

ater

Tre

atm

ent

Pla

nt

To S

anP

ablo

Wat

erTr

eatm

ent

Pla

nt

Lafa

yett

eR

eser

voir

Orin

da-

Lafa

yette

Aqu

educ

t

Sai

nt M

ary’

s R

oad/

Roh

rer

Driv

e P

ipel

ine

BR

ION

ES

RE

GIO

NA

L

PAR

K

Mor

aga

Roa

dP

ipel

ine

Fay

Hill

Pip

elin

eIm

prov

emen

ts

Fay

Hill

R

eser

voir

Fay

Hill

Pum

ping

Pla

nt

Hap

py V

alle

yP

umpi

ng P

lant

Sun

nysi

deP

umpi

ng P

lant

San

Pab

lo P

ipel

ine

Hig

hlan

d R

eser

voir

and

Pip

elin

es;

Lafa

yette

Rec

laim

edW

ater

Pip

elin

e

Ori

nd

aW

ater

Tre

atm

ent

Pla

ntBrio

nes

Res

ervo

ir

San

Pab

loR

eser

voir

New

Lel

and

Pre

ssur

e Z

one

Res

ervo

ir an

d P

ipel

ine

Lela

nd P

ress

ure

Zon

e B

ypas

s V

alve

s68

0

24

ElN

ido

Ran

chR

oad

Cam

ino

Pablo

MO

RA

GA

WA

LN

UT

CR

EE

K

LA

FA

YE

TT

E

OR

IN

DA

Wat

er T

reat

men

t Pla

nt

Pum

ping

Pla

nt

Rese

rvoi

r

Othe

r Fac

ilitie

s

Pipe

line

Tunn

el

Proj

ect L

evel

Prog

ram

Lev

el

01

Mile

EB

MU

D W

ater

Tre

atm

ent a

nd T

rans

mis

sion

Impr

ovem

ents

Pro

gram

. 20

4369

Fig

ure

S-2

Pro

ject

Loc

atio

n

SO

UR

CE

: Eas

t Bay

Mun

icip

al U

tility

Dis

tric

t; E

SA

58

1

31

08

5

08

8

BA

NC

RO

FT

AV

E

INTE

RN

ATIO

NAL

BLVD

73RD A

VE

HIG

H S

T

82N

D A

VE

FO

OT

HIL

LA

VE

MACARTHUR BLVD

SKYL

INE

BLVD

KEL

LERA

VE

Up

per

San

Lea

nd

roW

ater

Tre

atm

ent

Pla

nt

08

PKW

Y

VALLEY VIEW RD

SAN PABLO

DAM

RD

PINOLE VALLEY RD

RICH

MO

ND

HIL

LTO

PD

R

CA

STRO

RA

NCHRD

El

So

bra

nte

Oa

kla

nd

So

bra

nte

Wat

er T

reat

men

tP

lan

t

Summary


Preliminary Subject to Revision

TABLE S-3 SUMMARY OF WTTIP ALTERNATIVES 1 AND 2 WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS

Alternative 1 (Preferred) Alternative 2 Facility and Project Project Level Program Level Project Level Program Level

Lafayette WTP

Capacitya Increase from 25 to 34 mgd

Decrease from 25 to zero mgd

Clearwells Chlorine Contact Basin Backwash Water Recycle Systemb

Sodium Hypochlorite Storage and Feed Raw Water Bypass Pipe Leland and Bryant Pumping Plants Electrical Substation Emergency Generator Lafayette Reclaimed Water Pipeline High-Rate Sedimentation Units Ultraviolet Light Disinfection Walter Costa Trail Relocation

Orinda WTP

Capacitya 175 mgd (no change)

No change, but plant would need to operate at

180 mgd during peak demand periods

Backwash Water Recycle Systemb

Clearwelld

Los Altos Pumping Plant No. 2 San Pablo pumping plant and pipelines Low Lift Pumping Plant Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct Electrical Substation Emergency Generator High-Rate Sedimentation Units Chlorine Contact Basin Ultraviolet Light Disinfection

Walnut Creek WTPa

Capacity Plant operating capacity

would increase to 115 mgdc

Plant operating capacity would increase to

115 mgdc

Leland Pumping Plant No. 2 UV Disinfection High-Rate Sedimentation Units

Sobrante WTP Ozone Upgrades Filter-to-Waste Equalization Basin Backwash Water Equalization Basin High-Rate Sedimentation Units Chlorine Contact Basin

Upper San Leandro WTP Ozone Upgrades Filter-to-Waste Equalization Basin

a WTP capacity values are for maximum-day operating capacity during warm-weather demand conditions. b The backwash water recycle system may include the following facilities: filter-to-waste equalization basin, backwash water waste equalization basin,

flocculation and sedimentations basins, UV disinfection building, solid storage tank and pumping plant, chemical storage and feed room, and electrical room.

c To meet peak-hour demands, the plant must operate up to 115 mgd for a few hours each day. Maximum daily demand remains at 96 mgd.d Orinda WTP, Alternative 1, Program Level includes 2 clearwells

Summary


The proposed Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct would convey treated water from the Orinda WTP to the transmission mains near the Lafayette WTP. The proposed alignment of the aqueduct generally parallels the existing Lafayette Aqueducts No. 1 and No. 2, which convey raw water from Lafayette to the Orinda WTP via gravity. The proposed aqueduct would operate under pressure. The Los Altos Pumping Plant No. 2 would pump treated water from the Orinda WTP to the distribution system currently served by the Lafayette WTP. The components of Alternative 2 are presented in detail in Section 2.5.

Projects Common to Both Alternatives All of the other projects listed in Table S-2 are common to both the preferred Alternative 1, and Alternative 2, including:

Ardith Reservoir and Donald Pumping Plant Fay Hill Pumping Plant and Pipeline Improvements Fay Hill Reservoir Glen Pipeline Improvements Glen Reservoir Decommission Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline Highland Reservoir and Pipelines Lafayette Reclaimed Water Pipeline Leland Pressure Zone Isolation Bypass Valves Leland Isolation Pipeline Moraga Reservoir Moraga Road Pipeline Sunnyside Pumping Plant and Pipeline Tice Pumping Plant and Pipeline Withers Pumping Plant Leland Reservoir Replacement2New Leland Pressure Zone Reservoir and Pipeline2

St. Mary’s Road/Rohrer Drive Pipeline2

San Pablo Pipeline2

These components are presented in detail in Section 2.6.

Tables 2-6, 2-8, and 2-9 in Chapter 2 present the proposed schedule for design and construction of upgrades for WTTIP projects under Alternative 1, Alternative 2, and those projects common to Alternatives 1 and 2, respectively. Table 2-7 presents the proposed work hours for all WTTIP projects.

Construction of all WWTIP projects would span 12 years (2007 to 2018); the construction schedules for some projects would overlap. The earliest project is expected to begin construction in the Spring of 2007 and the last project is expected to begin construction in late 2016. The first

2 Program-level projects. See Section S.3.1 for further explanation.

Summary


program-level element (New Leland Pressure Zone Reservoir) is expected to begin construction in 2011, with construction of all other program-level projects expected to begin after 2015.

S.4 Summary of Impacts Tables S-4 through S-9 at the end of this chapter present a summary of the environmental impacts associated with each project. The tables are organized by the city in which the projects are located, as follows:

Table S-4 identifies the impacts associated with projects wholly or partially located in the City of Lafayette

Table S-5 identifies the impacts associated with projects wholly or partially located in the City of Orinda

Table S-6 identifies the impacts associated with projects wholly or partially located in the Town of Moraga

Table S-7 identifies the impacts associated with projects located in the City of Walnut Creek

Table S-8 identifies the impacts associated with the one project located in the City of Oakland (improvements at the Upper San Leandro WTP)

Table S-9 identifies the impacts associated with projects in unincorporated Contra Costa County

The level of significance for each impact was determined using significance criteria (thresholds) developed for each category of impacts. For example, this EIR uses the definitions of protected or heritage trees for each of the above jurisdictions as criteria in evaluating the significance of tree removal or damage that could be caused by a WTTIP project.3 The significance criteria are presented in the appropriate sections of Chapter 3. Significant impacts are those adverse environmental impacts that would meet or exceed the significance thresholds; less-than-significant impacts would not exceed the thresholds. Tables S-4 through S-9 provide page references for a description of each impact associated with each project. Table S-10 summarizes the measures to avoid, minimize, or otherwise reduce significant impacts at one or more of the WTTIP projects to less-than-significant levels.

3 Tree protection standards vary by jurisdiction. As an example, the Town of Moraga protects trees with a single

trunk diameter of 5 inches or more measured 3 feet above the natural grade or, if having multiple trunks, a total perimeter of 40 inches or more measured 3 feet above the natural grade. Protected trees include: (1) general trees (a tree other than a native tree, an orchard tree, or tree of historic significance); (2) native trees indigenous to the area, including California bay, oak, redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), and knobcone pine (Pinus attenuata); (3) orchard trees (fruit or nut trees planted for commercial agricultural purposes); and (4) trees of historic significance (having historic value related to the heritage of the town and designated by action of the Town Council). For more information on all tree protection policies, see p.3.6-20.

Summary


There are several impacts discussed in this EIR that are considered significant and unavoidable. These impacts have been identified for some projects in the areas of visual quality (altered visual appearance, see Section 3.3), biological resources (removal or loss of protected trees, see Section 3.6), and traffic (temporary loss of street access during construction, see Section 3.8). In addition, some of the indirect effects of growth resulting from implementation of the WTTIP as a whole (see Chapter 4) are considered significant and unavoidable. These impacts are discussed by resource area below. The individual projects that would result in potentially significant and unavoidable impacts are as follows:

Glen Pipeline Improvements Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline Highland Reservoir and Pipelines Tice Pumping Plant and Pipeline

Visual Quality The introduction of a new, partially buried tank on the Highland Reservoir site, and the removal of up to 35 mature trees would change the visual conditions considerably. The proposed project would add prominent new built structures that would appear in strong visual contrast to the natural landform and vegetation pattern. These changes would substantially alter the site’s undeveloped oak woodland hillside appearance and even with implementation of a landscape plan as mitigation, this visual effect would remain significant.

The proposed Highland Reservoir as seen from a recreation trail in the Lafayette Reservoir Recreation Area would appear against a landscape backdrop and would be noticeable, although it would not be visually prominent. To some degree, its form and the graded terrain would contrast with the surrounding natural landscape. The removal of mature oak trees from the site would also be a noticeable visual change that would adversely affect this trail view. Within five years the proposed landscaping would provide some additional screening. However, given the degree of visual contrast between proposed project features and the natural landscape setting, and in light of City of Lafayette’s policies regarding hillside and tree protection as well as District policies regarding visual quality at recreation sites, the effect on trail views is considered significant and unavoidable.

Removal of Protected Trees Vegetation at the proposed site of the Highland Reservoir consists of non-native grassland, coyote brush, and numerous large-diameter (mostly 30 inches at standard height and greater) multi-stemmed oak trees within mixed oak woodland. Approximately 30 to 35 oak trees are proposed for removal at the reservoir site. All of these trees are considered protected under the City of Lafayette’s tree ordinance. On the basis of the number of multi-stemmed, large-diameter native oak trees, this EIR analysis concludes that no measures can fully mitigate this loss and impacts to trees at the proposed reservoir site would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Summary


TrafficThere are roadways within proposed pipeline segments for which the construction zone would result in insufficient remaining width to maintain alternate one-way traffic flow. For example, segments of Nordstrom Lane, Glen Road, Miner Road, Lombardy Lane, and Boulevard Way(each 22 to 25 feet wide) would need to be closed to all through-traffic (except emergency vehicles) during work hours, with detour routing available in some, but not all, cases. Access impacts on the roads for which no detour routing is available would be significant and unavoidable. Similarly, roads for which no detour routing is available for public busses would also be significant and unavoidable. Affected bus lines include County Connection Bus Lines 126, 106 and 101, all subject to temporary road closure.

Growth Implementation of the WTTIP as a whole would support an amount of growth that is consistent with regional growth projections, but there are potentially significant secondary effects from the project because it removes a potential obstacle to planned development. Some of these secondary effects of planned growth have been identified in documents prepared by the relevant land use jurisdictions as significant and unavoidable, while others are significant but mitigable. Significant unavoidable impacts that could occur as a result of planned growth include: loss of open space, traffic increases, degradation of air quality, and change in the visual character of the region.

Due to the breadth and extent of the WTTIP projects, this EIR provides an analysis both of the collective impacts of all project-level and program-level projects included in the WTTIP as well as the potential for overlap with other pertinent projects proposed and/or planned in the region. The collective impact discussion provides a synthesis of both project- and program-level impacts for all proposed WTTIP facilities described in Chapter 3, and indicates the potential for overlapping impacts associated with multiple projects proposed for construction within the same time frame and same geographic area. The most noteworthy of these cumulative impacts are loss of protected trees, traffic, increases in dust and other air quality pollutant emissions, and elevated noise levels. These and all other cumulative impacts are summarized below and discussed more fully in Chapter 5.

Protected Trees Chapter 3, Section 3.6 presents the potential impacts of each WTTIP facility on biological resources. With the exception of impacts to protected trees at the Highland Reservoir, all identified impacts would be either less than significant or less than significant locally with implementation of proposed mitigation measures.

As described in Table 3.6-4 (p. 3.6-26) and Impact 3.6-1, the total number of protected trees that would be removed at all sites would be approximately 200 to 280 trees under either Alternative 1 or 2. In addition, more trees could be damaged during project construction. At the Highland Reservoir site, removal of 30 to 35 multi-stemmed, large-diameter protected oak trees was

Summary


determined to be a significant and unavoidable local impact. When considered collectively within the geographic scope of the proposed project and with implementation of proposed mitigation (e.g., tree replacement), the number of protected trees to be removed at all sites combined, including the Highland Reservoir site, would not represent a substantial portion of the protected trees present in the surrounding 925-acre Lafayette Reservoir Recreation Area, or the program area as a whole. Therefore, the removal of protected trees under the WTTIP projects collectively or cumulatively (with implementation of proposed mitigation) with other projects would not be considered significant.

TrafficAs described in Chapter 3, Section 3.8, implementation of the WTTIP would result in potential impacts on traffic and circulation, including increased construction vehicles and traffic delays, loss of parking, traffic safety issues, access disruption, transit disruption, and roadway wear and tear. With the exception of impacts associated with the lack of detour routing, all identified impacts would be less than significant or could be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

On the basis of the proposed construction scheduling of specific facility projects, simultaneous (overlapping) construction is likely to occur for multiple WTTIP facilities. The implication of overlapping construction pertains to the potential for construction-generated traffic for more than one facility to use the same road(s); that is, the total number of vehicle trips added to the common route(s) due to concurrent construction of multiple projects could be cumulatively higher than the maximum number of daily and hourly vehicle trips used to determine impacts of a single facility project. However, the period of time of maximum trip generation would vary among the facility projects, and therefore, the maximum traffic flows on the common route(s) would not necessarily be the sum of the maximum trips generated by the overlapping projects. Nonetheless, so as to not underestimate the potential traffic and circulation impacts resulting from simultaneous construction projects, those impacts were assessed assuming that the maximum trips generated by the overlapping projects would occur at the same time.

Examples of simultaneous use of roads by construction workers and trucks for more than one facility project (based on proposed construction scheduling) are the following:

Camino Pablo (two-lane section north of Miner Road): Traffic generated by construction at the Orinda WTP (Alternative 2) and the Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct (Alternative 2) (tunnel portion) would use this road during the years 2015–2017. The impact determination for the overlapping use of the two-lane Camino Pablo would be the same (less than significant with mitigation) as for the Orinda WTP (Alternative 2) or Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct (Alternative 2) (tunnel portion) alone.

Camino Pablo (four-lane section between Highway 24 and Miner Road): Traffic generated by construction for the Orinda WTP (Alternative 1) and Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline projects would both use this road during the years 2011–2013. The impact determination for the overlapping use of the four-lane Camino Pablo would be the same (less than significant with mitigation) as for the Orinda WTP (Alternative 1) or Happy Valley Pumping Plant and Pipeline projects alone.

Summary


Acalanes Road (El Nido Ranch Road to Mt. Diablo Boulevard): Traffic generated by construction at the Lafayette WTP (Alternative 1) and the Sunnyside Pumping Plant would both use this road during the years 2012–2013. The impact determination for the overlapping use of this section of Acalanes Road would be the same (less than significant with mitigation) as for the individual project elements alone.

Moraga Road (Mt. Diablo Boulevard to Rheem Boulevard): Traffic generated by construction for the Fay Hill Pumping Plant and Pipeline and the Moraga Reservoir projects would both use this road during the years 2016–2017. The impact determination for the overlapping use of this section of Moraga Road would be the same (less than significant with mitigation) as for the Fay Hill Pumping Plant and Pipeline project or Moraga Reservoir project alone.

El Nido Ranch Road (Highway 24 to Upper Happy Valley Road): Traffic generated by construction of the Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct (tunnel portion) and the Sunnyside Pumping Plant would use this road, but not at the same time, so there would be no additive (overlapping) impacts.

Collectively, the traffic and circulation impacts resulting from implementation of the WTTIP as a whole would be less than significant.

Air Quality All potential air quality impacts associated with WTTIP facilities, as described in Chapter 3, Section 3.9, would be less than significant or could be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Potential air quality impacts include increases in dust and equipment emissions during construction, exposure to diesel particulates, emissions from ventilation fans, operational emissions, odors, and secondary emissions from power use.

As described in Impact 3.9-1, construction emissions associated with implementation of all WTTIP projects would span 12 years (2007 to 2018), and projects with overlapping construction schedules would have the potential for combined emissions in the same air basin. Total WTTIP-related average dust emissions are estimated to be 105 and 139 pounds per day under Alternatives 1 and 2, respectively (see p. 3.9-12). Due to the extended schedule of the combined WTTIP projects, a comparison of estimated dust emissions of the combined projects to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) operational significance criterion of 80 pounds per day for dust would be exceeded between 2011 and 2018 under Alternative 2, and possibly on occasion under Alternative 1 when peak earthmoving activities occur. Similarly, for construction equipment exhaust emissions, the combined WTTIP construction activities would have the potential to exceed the BAAQMD’s significance criteria for carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide between 2007 and 2018. Due to this combined or collective impact, supplemental mitigation measures, as described in Measure 3.9-1, would be required to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Impact 3.9-2 describes the potential for exposure of sensitive receptors to short-term increases in diesel particulates along truck haul routes during project construction. This impact was determined to be less than significant at all WTTIP project sites under Alternative 1; even with

Summary


overlapping construction schedules and overlapping haul routes for multiple WTTIP projects, the potential impact would still be less than significant. For Alternative 2, there is some potential for daily combined truck trip volumes to exceed threshold levels between 2015 and 2018. However, implementation of Measure 3.9-2 (haul route coordination and scheduling) would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.

Impact 3.9-3 relates to potential air pollutant emissions from ventilation fans and pertains only to tunneling. This site-specific impact could be mitigated to a less-than-significant level, and there would be no collective impact, since proposed tunneling activities would be limited to the Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct.

Operational air quality impacts, described in Impacts 3.9-4, 3.9-5, and 3.9-6, would all be less than significant with no mitigation required at any of the project sites. Therefore, the collective operational air quality impacts resulting from implementation of the WTTIP as a whole would be less than significant.

Noise Chapter 3, Section 3.10, identifies potential noise and vibration impacts associated with construction and operation of WTTIP project facilities. As described in Impacts 3.10-1 and 3.10-2, at most locations construction noise impacts would be mitigated to a level consistent with daytime and nighttime noise ordinance limits; in most cases, if feasible noise controls are implemented, construction noise levels at the closest sensitive receptors could be reduced to below the speech interference criterion. The exceptions would be for construction activities associated with the Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct, Glen Pipeline, Happy Valley Pipeline, Moraga Road Pipeline, Tice Pipeline, Highland Reservoir, Happy Valley Pumping Plant, and Leland Pressure Zone Isolation Bypass Valve. Implementation of noise controls (Measure 3.10-1a), time limits (Measure 3.10-1b), and use of temporary sound barriers (Measure 3.10-1e) would reduce potential construction impacts to a less-than-significant level, although mitigated construction noise could still cause occasional disturbance at the closest noise-sensitive receptors.

Construction noise impacts identified for each facility were evaluated with respect to site-specific conditions, including ambient noise levels and distance to closest receptors. Most construction noise impacts would be facility-specific. Overlapping noise impacts would be limited to impacts along haul routes where overlapping construction schedules for multiple WTTIP facilities could result in combined noise increases from increased truck traffic. Collective noise increases associated with simultaneous use of roads by haul trucks for more than one facility project (based on proposed construction scheduling) would include the following:

Camino Pablo (north of Miner Road), Moraga Road (Mt. Diablo Boulevard to Rheem Boulevard), and Moraga Way (Highway 24 to Ivy Drive): Estimated haul-truck-related noise levels would be 64 to 66 dBA (Leq), which is not expected to result in noticeable noise increases on these road segments. Truck-related noise increases would not noticeably increase ambient noise levels. In addition, these temporary noise increases would only occur during the less noise-sensitive, daytime weekday hours.

Summary


Camino Pablo (Highway 24 to Miner Road), Mt. Diablo Boulevard (Acalanes Road to east of the Lafayette Reservoir Recreation Area), Acalanes Road (El Nido Ranch Road to Mt. Diablo Boulevard), Rheem Boulevard (Moraga Road to Chalda Way), Deer Hill Road (Highway 24 to Oak Hill Road), and Oak Hill Road (Highway 24 to Mt. Diablo Boulevard): Estimated haul-truck-related noise levels would range between 62 and 65 dBA (Leq), which would not be expected to result in noticeable noise increases on these road segments. Collective traffic increases on these road segments are not expected to result in significant noise impacts on sensitive receptors.

Ardith Drive (Ivy Drive to Ardith Reservoir site), and Ivy Drive (Moraga Road to Ardith Drive): Estimated haul-truck-related noise levels would be 65 dBA (Leq), which could result in noticeable noise increases on these residential streets, where noise levels are expected to be 60 dBA (Ldn) or less. However, these temporary maximum noise increases would occur for a limited amount of time (three to six weeks if the excavation and backfilling phases were to overlap). Potential collective noise increases would be less during the remainder of construction. In addition, these temporary truck-related noise increases would only occur during the less noise-sensitive, daytime weekday hours, and noise levels are not expected to exceed the 70-dBA speech interference criterion at adjacent residences.

S.5 Analysis of Alternatives Chapters 2 through 5 of this EIR present detailed evaluations of Alternative 1 – Supply from Orinda and Lafayette WTPs (the preferred alternative) and Alternative 2 – Supply from the Orinda WTP; Chapter 6 describes and evaluates other alternatives to the WTTIP (including the required No Project Alternative), describes the alternatives screening process and alternatives eliminated from consideration, and compares the environmental merits of the alternatives.

The WTTIP is the result of a six-year planning effort that entailed consideration of over 60 alternatives. Sources of alternatives to be considered included background reports prepared for the WTTIP (described in Section 6.10), suggestions made in responses to the notice of preparation (NOP) and at public meetings held for the WTTIP, and EIR preparers (based on the environmental impacts described in Chapter 3). Table 6-1 (p.6-3) lists the alternatives considered, indicates whether the alternatives are evaluated in the EIR or were eliminated, and the source of the alternative. Numerous alternatives were eliminated from consideration based on inability to meet most of the project’s basic objectives, infeasibility, or inability to reduce the project’s environmental impacts. Those alternatives retained for consideration (in addition to Alternatives 1 and 2) are presented in Sections 6.3 through 6.9. The alternatives screening process, alternatives eliminated and the reasons for their elimination are discussed in Section 6.10.

Many of the same significant impacts would occur under Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 because those impacts are associated with projects common to both alternatives. All of the impacts determined to be unavoidable would occur under either alternative because those impacts are associated with the Highland Reservoir project (impacts to visual quality and biological resources); and Tice, Happy Valley, and Glen pipelines (temporary, construction-phase impacts related to available width of traffic lanes, vehicular access, and transit service).

Summary


However, there are several important differences between the potential impacts and extent of required mitigation measures associated with the two alternatives. The differences primarily reflect the fact that the Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct project would only be associated with Alternative 2 and thus that project’s impacts over a one- to two-year period would be avoided under Alternative 1. Although the tunneling proposed as part of the Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct project would avoid surface-disturbance impacts associated with open-trench construction, it would concentrate impacts at the tunnel entry shaft (and, to a lesser extent, the exit shaft), and there are some impacts unique to tunneling, including noise associated with 24-hour construction and groundborne vibration. The total areal extent of construction also would be greater under Alternative 2 than under Alternative 1 because of the Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct.

Other differences between the alternatives relate to the impacts to, and sensitivities of, the areas immediately surrounding the Orinda WTP and Lafayette WTP sites. There are a greater number of residences closer to the Orinda WTP than is the case at the Lafayette WTP. There are about twice as many residences within 1,000 feet of the Orinda WTP as there are within 1,000 feet of the Lafayette WTP. The Lafayette WTP backs up to Highway 24, and the open space of the Lafayette Reservoir Recreation Area lies to the south, across Mt. Diablo Boulevard. Mt. Diablo Boulevard itself, because of its breadth near the Lafayette WTP, provides something of a buffer from other nearby residential areas, although this is also partially the case along the west side of the Orinda WTP, adjacent to Camino Pablo.

The more extensive construction footprints and greater excavation and grading requirements associated with Alternative 2 -- about 680,000 cubic yards of excavation, compared to about 445,000 cubic yards of excavation for Alternative 1 -- would result in incrementally greater construction-phase air emissions (e.g. approximately 139 lbs/day of PM10 emissions under Alternative 2 versus about 105 lbs/day under Alternative 1). In both cases, those emissions can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

Potential cumulative construction traffic added to Camino Pablo (two-lane section north of Miner Road) would be incrementally greater under Alternative 2 than Alternative 1 (about three percent above existing traffic volumes under Alternative 2 and one percent above existing traffic volumes under Alternative 1). In both cases the increases would fall within the typical daily traffic volume fluctuations. Conversely, potential cumulative construction traffic added to Acalanes Road (El Nido Ranch Road to Mt. Diablo Boulevard) would represent about a five percent increase above existing traffic volumes and would only occur under Alternative 1. Cumulative truck traffic resulting from potentially overlapping WTTIP projects, and associated diesel particulate emissions, would also be incrementally greater under Alternative 2 than under Alternative 1, although the analytic threshold (600 truck trips per day) would not likely be exceeded along any particular haul route under either alternative.

There would be fewer (15-20) protected trees potentially removed under Alternative 1 than under Alternative 2, primarily because more protected trees would be removed to upgrade and expand the Lafayette WTP than would be required to upgrade and expand the Orinda WTP. There would be somewhat more (20-30) protected trees potentially damaged under Alternative 2, owing

Summary


primarily to the Orinda-Lafayette Aqueduct project, although the degree of damage is unknown and may be quite limited in many cases (e.g. tree limb loss).

For these reasons, Alternative 1 is considered environmentally superior to Alternative 2.

The No Project Alternative would neither meet the needs addressed by the WTTIP nor satisfy the project objectives. In the short term, the No Project Alternative would be environmentally superior to either “action” alternative because none of the impacts associated with those alternatives would occur. However, as described in Section 6.2, a continuation of existing conditions would become untenable, and the District would eventually have to implement projects to address the purpose and need identified for the WTTIP. This situation could, in turn, result in environmental effects that could be worse than those of either Alternative 1 or 2 in the long term.

S.6 Issues to be Resolved At a regularly scheduled meeting presently anticipated to take place in the fall of 2006, the EBMUD Board of Directors will consider certification of this EIR as complete and adequate and will then consider approval of the proposed project. Issues to be resolved for WTTIP projects include:

Selection of an Alternative. The District Board of Directors will select Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 for implementation when it approves the project and adopts Findings as required under CEQA.

Decisions to Implement Potential Program-level Improvements. The need for high-rate sedimentation and ultraviolet disinfection processes at the water treatment plants would be determined in the future, subsequent to Board action on project-level WTTIP elements, based on regulatory requirements. Likewise, the need to construct the program-level clearwells and San Pablo Pumping Plant and Pipeline at and from the Orinda WTP would be determined in the future, based on further consideration of water management strategies. In the future,EBMUD will need to implement the Saint Mary’s Road/Rohrer Drive Pipeline, New Leland Pressure Zone Reservoir, and Leland Reservoir Replacement projects. As part of implementation of these various projects, EBMUD would conduct the necessary site evaluation, design, environmental review and permitting activities before beginning construction.

Numerous issues of concern were raised through the scoping and public meetings conducted in association with circulation of the NOP’s, and are addressed through the discussions of impacts, mitigation measures and alternatives presented throughout this EIR.

S.7 Organization of This EIR This Draft EIR has been organized into the following sections:

1. Introduction. This chapter discusses the CEQA process and the purpose of the EIR.

Summary


2. Project Description. This chapter provides an overview of the WTTIP, describes the need for and objectives of the WTTIP projects, and describes in detail proposed design, construction, and operating characteristics. The maps for this EIR are presented after Chapter 2, and are organized by map type and by project.

3. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures. This chapter presents a description of the physical and regulatory setting of the WTTIP and identifies the criteria to be applied for determining impact significance, describes impacts that could result from implementation of the WTTIP projects, and identifies measures to mitigate those impacts. This chapter is divided into sections addressing various environmental issue areas (land use, planning and recreation; visual quality; etc.). Project-level evaluations of WTTIP projects are provided first in the discussion of impacts and mitigations, with the program elements addressed at the end of each environmental issue section.

4. Growth Inducement Potential and Secondary Effects of Growth. This chapter analyzes the potential for implementation of the WTTIP to remove obstacles to urban development and identifies secondary environmental effects potentially caused by growth.

5. Cumulative Impacts. This chapter (a) presents a discussion of the combined or overlapping impacts that could result from implementation of WTTIP projects that are temporally and spatially proximate; (b) identifies and describes other EBMUD projects, as well as projects proposed by others, that could contribute to significant cumulative impacts; and (c) indicates the potential for implementation of the WTTIP in combination with other projects to contribute to significant cumulative impacts.

6. Analysis of Alternatives. This chapter describes and evaluates other alternatives to the WTTIP (including the required No Project Alternative), describes the alternatives screening process and alternatives eliminated from consideration, and compares the environmental merits of the alternatives.

7. Report Preparers. This chapter identifies those involved in preparing this Draft EIR.

Sum

mar

y

aIm

pact

s su

mm

ariz

ed; p

leas

e se

e C

hapt

er 3

for d

etai

ls. D

oes

not i

nclu

de p

rogr

am-le

vel e

lem

ents

. See

Tab

leS

-10

for m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s.

b Th

ese

proj

ects

are

in m

ultip

le ju

risdi

ctio

ns (L

afay

ette

and

Orin

da).

c Th

is p

roje

ct is

in m

ultip

le ju

risdi

ctio

ns (L

afay

ette

and

Mor

aga)

.

LTS

= L

ess

Than

Sig

nific

ant

SM

= S

igni

fican

t and

Miti

gabl

e S

U =

Sig

nific

ant a

nd U

navo

idab

le

-- =

Impa

ct d

oes

not a

pply

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-2

1E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

TAB

LE S

-4

WA

TER

TR

EATM

ENT

AN

D T

RA

NSM

ISSI

ON

IMPR

OVE

MEN

TS P

RO

GR

AM

– P

RO

JEC

TS IN

LA

FAYE

TTE:

SU

MM

AR

Y O

F IM

PAC

TS

Lafa

yette

WTP

Impa

ctsa

Alternative 1

Described on page

Alternative 2

Described on page

Orinda-Lafayette Aqueductb(Alternative 2 only)

Described onpage


Described onpage

Glen Pipeline Improvements

Described onpage


Described onpage

Moraga Road Pipelinec

Described onpage

Sunnyside Pumping Plant and Pipelineb

Described onpage

Land

Use

, Plan

ning

, and

Rec

reat

ion

Div

ide

an E

stab

lishe

d C

omm

unity

LT

S

3.2-

14

--

3.2-

14

LTS

3.

2-14

LT

S

3.2-

14

LTS

3.

2-14

LT

S

3.2-

14

LTS

3.

2-14

LT

S

3.2-

14

Agr

icul

tura

l Res

ourc

es Im

pact

s --

3.

2-16

--

3.

2-16

--

3.

2-16

LT

S

3.2-

16

--

3.2-

16

LTS

3.

2-16

LT

S

3.2-

16

LTS

3.

2-16

R

ecre

atio

n R

esou

rces

Impa

cts

LTS

3.

2-17

LT

S

3.2-

17

LTS

3.

2-17

LT

S

3.2-

18

--

3.2-

16

LTS

3.

2-18

LT

S

3.2-

18

--

3.2-

16

Visu

al Qu

ality

Sho

rt-Te

rm V

isua

l Effe

cts

durin

g C

onst

ruct

ion

LTS

3.

3-23

LT

S

3.3-

23

LTS

3.

3-23

LT

S

3.3-

23

LTS

3.

3-23

LT

S

3.3-

19

LTS

3.

3-23

LT

S

3.3-

19A

ltera

tion

of A

ppea

ranc

e of

WTT

IP S

ites

SM

3.

3-24

S

M

3.3-

25

LTS

3.

3-29

S

M

3.3-

32

LTS

3.

3-30

S

U

3.3-

31

SM

3.

3-33

S

M

3.3-

33

Effe

cts

on V

iew

s S

M

3.3-

36

SM

3.

3-38

LT

S

3.3-

41

SM

3.

3-44

LT

S

3.3-

42

SU

3.

3-42

S

M

3.3-

44

SM

3.

3-45

E

ffect

s on

Sce

nic

Vis

ta

LTS

3.

3-46

LT

S

3.3-

46

LTS

3.

3-46

LT

S

3.3-

46

LTS

3.

3-46

S

U

3.3-

46

LTS

3.

3-46

LT

S

3.3-

46

New

Sou

rces

of L

ight

and

Gla

re

SM

3.

3-47

LT

S

3.3-

47

SM

3.

3-47

S

M

3.3-

47

LTS

3.

3-47

S

M

3.3-

47

LTS

3.

3-47

S

M

3.3-

47

Geol

ogy,

Soils

, and

Seis

mici

ty

Slo

pe S

tabi

lity

LTS

3.

4-22

LT

S

3.4-

22

SM

3.

4-22

S

M

3.4-

24

LTS

3.

4-23

S

M

3.4-

16

SM

3.

4-16

S

M

3.4-

25

Gro

unds

haki

ng

SM

3.

4-26

S

M

3.4-

26

SM

3.

4-26

S

M

3.4-

26

SM

3.

4-26

S

M

3.4-

26

SM

3.

4-26

S

M

3.4-

26

Exp

ansi

ve S

oils

S

M

3.4-

27

SM

3.

4-27

S

M

3.4-

27

SM

3.

4-27

S

M

3.4-

27

SM

3.

4-27

S

M

3.4-

27

SM

3.

4-27

Li

quef

actio

n S

M

3.4-

28

LTS

3.

4-29

S

M

3.4-

29

SM

3.

4-30

S

M

3.4-

30

SM

3.

4-30

LT

S

3.4-

31

LTS

3.

4-31

G

roun

d S

quee

zing

--

3.4-

32

-- 3.

4-32

S

M

3.4-

32

-- 3.

4-32

--

3.4-

32

-- 3.

4-32

--

3.4-

32

-- 3.

4-32

Hydr

olog

y and

Wat

er Q

ualit

y

D

egra

datio

n of

Wat

er Q

ualit

y du

ring

Con

stru

ctio

nS

M

3.5-

26

SM

3.

5-27

S

M

3.5-

28

SM

3.

5-30

S

M

3.5-

29

SM

3.

5-29

S

M

3.5-

30

SM

3.

5-31

Gro

undw

ater

Dew

ater

ing

LTS

3.

5-32

--

3.

5-32

LT

S

3.5-

33

LTS

3.

5-34

LT

S

3.5-

34

LTS

3.

5-34

LT

S

3.5-

35

--

3.5-

35

Div

ersi

on o

f Flo

od F

low

s --

3.

5-35

--

3.

5-35

S

M

3.5-

35

--

3.5-

35

--

3.5-

35

--

3.5-

35

SM

3.

5-35

--

3.

5-35

D

isch

arge

of C

hlor

amin

ated

Wat

er d

urin

g C

onst

ruct

ion

LTS

3.

5-36

LT

S

3.5-

36

LTS

3.

5-36

--

3.5-

36

-- 3.

5-36

--

3.5-

36

-- 3.

5-36

--

3.5-

36

Ope

ratio

nal D

isch

arge

of C

hlor

amin

ated

Wat

er

LTS

3.

5-37

--

3.

5-37

--

3.

5-37

LT

S

3.5-

38

--

3.5-

37

LTS

3.

5-38

--

3.

5-37

--

3.

5-37

Cha

nge

in Im

perv

ious

Sur

face

s LT

S

3.5-

43

LTS

3.

5-43

LT

S

3.5-

43

LTS

3.

5-44

LT

S

3.5-

44

SM

3.

5-44

LT

S

3.5-

44

LTS

3.

5-44

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-4 (C

ontin

ued)

W

ATE

R T

REA

TMEN

T A

ND

TR

AN

SMIS

SIO

N IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

PR

OG

RA

M –

PR

OJE

CTS

IN L

AFA

YETT

E:

SUM

MA

RY

OF

IMPA

CTS

aIm

pact

s su

mm

ariz

ed; p

leas

e se

e C

hapt

er 3

for d

etai

ls. D

oes

not i

nclu

de p

rogr

am-le

vel e

lem

ents

. See

Tab

le S

-10

for m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s.

b Th

ese

proj

ects

are

in m

ultip

le ju

risdi

ctio

ns (L

afay

ette

and

Orin

da).

c Th

is p

roje

ct is

in m

ultip

le ju

risdi

ctio

ns (L

afay

ette

and

Mor

aga)

.

LTS

= L

ess

Than

Sig

nific

ant

SM

= S

igni

fican

t and

Miti

gabl

e S

U =

Sig

nific

ant a

nd U

navo

idab

le

-- =

Impa

ct d

oes

not a

pply

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-2

2E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Lafa

yette

WTP

Impa

ctsa

Alternative 1

Described on page

Alternative 2

Described on page


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage

Biol

ogica

l Res

ourc

es

Loss

of o

r Dam

age

to P

rote

cted

Tre

es

SM

3.

6-24

--

3.

6-24

S

M

3.6-

24

SM

3.

6-24

S

M

3.6-

24

SU

3.

6-24

S

M

3.6-

24

SM

3.

6-24

D

egra

datio

n to

Stre

ams,

Wet

land

s, a

nd

Rip

aria

n H

abita

ts

SM

3.

6-34

--

3.

6-34

S

M

3.6-

36

SM

3.

6-35

S

M

3.6-

37

SM

3.

6-38

S

M

3.6-

39

--

3.6-

34

Loss

of o

r Dam

age

to S

peci

al-S

tatu

s P

lant

s S

M

3.6-

41

--

3.6-

41

--

3.6-

41

SM

3.

6-41

S

M

3.6-

41

SM

3.

6-41

S

M

3.6-

41

--

3.6-

41

Dis

turb

ance

to S

peci

al-S

tatu

s B

irds

SM

3.

6-43

S

M

3.6-

43

SM

3.

6-46

S

M

3.6-

47

SM

3.

6-47

S

M

3.6-

47

SM

3.

6-48

S

M

3.6-

49

Dis

turb

ance

to S

peci

al-S

tatu

s B

ats

SM

3.

6-51

S

M

3.6-

51

SM

3.

6-53

S

M

3.6-

54

SM

3.

6-54

S

M

3.6-

54

SM

3.

6-55

S

M

3.6-

55

Dis

turb

ance

to S

an F

ranc

isco

Dus

ky-F

oote

d W

oodr

atS

M

3.6-

56

--

3.6-

56

SM

3.

6-57

S

M

3.6-

56

SM

3.

6-58

S

M

3.6-

58

SM

3.

6-58

--

3.

6-56

Deg

rada

tion

of S

peci

al-S

tatu

s A

quat

ic S

peci

es

Hab

itat

SM

3.

6-59

--

3.

6-59

S

M

3.6-

61

SM

3.

6-62

S

M

3.6-

61

SM

3.

6-62

S

M

3.6-

62

--

3.6-

63

Dis

rupt

ion

to W

ildlif

e C

orrid

ors

LTS

3.

6-67

--

3.

6-67

LT

S

3.6-

68

LTS

3.

6-69

LT

S

3.6-

68

LTS

3.

6-68

LT

S

3.6-

69

LTS

3.

6-69

Cultu

ral R

esou

rces

A

rcha

eolo

gica

l Res

ourc

es, i

nclu

ding

U

nrec

orde

d C

ultu

ral R

esou

rces

S

M

3.7-

17

SM

3.

7-17

S

M

3.7-

17

SM

3.

7-17

S

M

3.7-

17

SM

3.

7-17

S

M

3.7-

17

SM

3.

7-17

Pal

eont

olog

ical

Res

ourc

es

SM

3.

7-25

S

M

3.7-

25

SM

3.

7-25

S

M

3.7-

25

SM

3.

7-25

S

M

3.7-

25

SM

3.

7-25

S

M

3.7-

25

His

toric

Set

tings

LT

S

3.7-

26

LTS

3.

7-26

--

3.

7-26

LT

S

3.7-

26

--

3.7-

26

LTS

3.

7-26

LT

S

3.7-

26

--

3.7-

26

Traf

fic an

d Ci

rcul

atio

n

In

crea

sed

Traf

fic

SM

3.

8-11

S

M

3.8-

11

SM

3.

8-11

S

M

3.8-

11

SM

3.

8-11

S

M

3.8-

11

SM

3.

8-11

S

M

3.8-

11

Red

uced

Roa

d W

idth

S

M

3.8-

18

SM

3.

8-18

S

M

3.8-

18

SM

3.

8-18

S

U

3.8-

18

SM

3.

8-18

S

M

3.8-

16

--

3.8-

15

Par

king

S

M

3.8-

19

SM

3.

8-19

S

M

3.8-

19

SM

3.

8-19

S

M

3.8-

19

SM

3.

8-19

S

M

3.8-

19

LTS

3.

8-19

Tr

affic

Saf

ety

SM

3.

8-20

S

M

3.8-

20

SM

3.

8-20

S

M

3.8-

20

SM

3.

8-20

S

M

3.8-

20

SM

3.

8-20

S

M

3.8-

20

Acc

ess

--

3.8-

20

--

3.8-

20

SM

3.

8-20

LT

S

3.8-

20

SU

3.

8-21

LT

S

3.8-

20

SM

3.

8-20

--

3.

8-20

Tr

ansi

t --

3.

8-21

--

3.

8-21

S

M

3.8-

21

LTS

3.

8-21

--

3.

8-21

LT

S

3.8-

21

SM

3.

8-22

--

3.

8-21

P

avem

ent D

amag

e/W

ear

LTS

3.

8-22

LT

S

3.8-

22

LTS

3.

8-22

LT

S

3.8-

22

SM

3.

8-22

LT

S

3.8-

22

LTS

3.

8-22

LT

S

3.8-

22

Air Q

ualit

y

C

onst

ruct

ion

Em

issi

on

SM

3.

9-15

S

M

3.9-

15

SM

3.

9-18

S

M

3.9-

21

SM

3.

9-20

S

M

3.9-

21

SM

3.

9-22

S

M

3.9-

22

DP

M E

mis

sion

s A

long

Hau

l Rou

tes

LTS

3.

9-25

LT

S

3.9-

25

LTS

3.

9-25

LT

S

3.9-

25

LTS

3.

9-25

LT

S

3.9-

25

LTS

3.

9-25

LT

S

3.9-

25

Tunn

el-R

elat

ed E

mis

sion

s --

3.

9-28

--

3.

9-28

S

M

3.9-

28

--

3.9-

28

--

3.9-

28

--

3.9-

28

--

3.9-

28

--

3.9-

28

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-4 (C

ontin

ued)

W

ATE

R T

REA

TMEN

T A

ND

TR

AN

SMIS

SIO

N IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

PR

OG

RA

M –

PR

OJE

CTS

IN L

AFA

YETT

E:

SUM

MA

RY

OF

IMPA

CTS

aIm

pact

s su

mm

ariz

ed; p

leas

e se

e C

hapt

er 3

for d

etai

ls. D

oes

not i

nclu

de p

rogr

am-le

vel e

lem

ents

. See

Tab

le S

-10

for m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s.

b Th

ese

proj

ects

are

in m

ultip

le ju

risdi

ctio

ns (L

afay

ette

and

Orin

da).

c Th

is p

roje

ct is

in m

ultip

le ju

risdi

ctio

ns (L

afay

ette

and

Mor

aga)

.

LTS

= L

ess

Than

Sig

nific

ant

SM

= S

igni

fican

t and

Miti

gabl

e S

U =

Sig

nific

ant a

nd U

navo

idab

le

-- =

Impa

ct d

oes

not a

pply

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-2

3E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Lafa

yette

WTP

Impa

ctsa

Alternative 1

Described on page

Alternative 2

Described on page


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage

Air Q

ualit

y (co

nt.)

Ope

ratio

nal P

ollu

tant

Em

issi

ons

at T

reat

men

t Fa

cilit

ies

LTS

3.

9-29

LT

S

3.9-

31

-- 3.

9-29

--

3.9-

29

-- 3.

9-29

--

3.9-

29

-- 3.

9-29

--

3.9-

29

Ope

ratio

nal O

dor E

mis

sion

s LT

S

3.9-

32

LTS

3.

9-32

LT

S

3.9-

32

LTS

3.

9-32

LT

S

3.9-

32

LTS

3.

9-32

LT

S

3.9-

32

LTS

3.

9-32

S

econ

dary

Em

issi

ons

from

Ele

ctric

ity

Gen

erat

ion

LTS

3.

9-33

LT

S

3.9-

33

LTS

3.

9-33

LT

S

3.9-

33

LTS

3.

9-33

LT

S

3.9-

33

LTS

3.

9-33

LT

S

3.9-

33

Noise

and

Vibr

atio

n

C

onst

ruct

ion

Noi

se In

crea

ses

SM

3.

10-1

7 S

M

3.10

-17

SM

3.

10-2

0S

M

3.10

-26

SM

3.

10-2

5 S

M

3.10

-25

SM

3.

10-2

8 S

M

3.10

-29

Noi

se In

crea

ses

Alo

ng H

aul R

oute

s LT

S

3.10

-35

LTS

3.

10-3

6 LT

S

3.10

-37

LTS

3.

10-3

7 LT

S

3.10

-37

LTS

3.

10-3

7 LT

S

3.10

-37

LTS

3.

10-3

7C

onst

ruct

ion-

Rel

ated

Vib

ratio

n E

ffect

s S

M

3.10

-38

SM

3.

10-3

8 S

M

3.10

-39

LTS

3.

10-3

8 LT

S

3.10

-38

LTS

3.

10-3

8 S

M

3.10

-38

LTS

3.

10-3

8O

pera

tiona

l Noi

se In

crea

ses

SM

3.

10-4

3 LT

S

3.10

-43

LTS

3.10

-40

LTS

3.

10-4

0 LT

S

3.10

-40

LTS

3.

10-4

0 LT

S

3.10

-40

SM

3.

10-4

6

Haza

rds a

nd H

azar

dous

Mat

erial

s

H

azar

dous

Mat

eria

ls in

Soi

l and

Gro

undw

ater

S

M

3.11

-23

--

3.11

-23

SM

3.

11-2

4S

M

3.11

-26

SM

3.

11-2

5 S

M

3.11

-26

SM

3.

11-2

6 S

M

3.11

-27

Haz

ardo

us B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

ls

SM

3.

11-2

8 S

M

3.11

-29

--

3.11

-28

--

3.11

-28

--

3.11

-28

--

3.11

-28

--

3.11

-28

--

3.11

-28

Gas

sy C

ondi

tions

in T

unne

ls

--

3.11

-30

--

3.11

-30

LTS

3.

11-3

0--

3.

11-3

0 --

3.

11-3

0 --

3.

11-3

0 --

3.

11-3

0 --

3.

11-3

0 H

igh

Pre

ssur

e G

as L

ine

Rup

ture

--

3.

11-3

0 --

3.

11-3

0 S

M

3.11

-30

SM

3.

11-3

0 --

3.

11-3

0 S

M

3.11

-30

SM

3.

11-3

0 S

M

3.11

-30

Wild

land

Fire

s --

3.

11-3

1 --

3.

11-3

1 LT

S

3.11

-31

--

3.11

-31

--

3.11

-31

--

3.11

-31

--

3.11

-31

LTS

3.

11-3

1 R

elea

se fr

om C

onst

ruct

ion

Equ

ipm

ent

LTS

3.

11-3

2 LT

S

3.11

-32

LTS

3.

11-3

2LT

S

3.11

-32

LTS

3.

11-3

2 LT

S

3.11

-32

LTS

3.

11-3

2 LT

S

3.11

-32

Acc

iden

tal R

elea

se d

urin

g O

pera

tion

LTS

3.

11-3

6 LT

S

3.11

-36

--

3.11

-33

LTS

3.

11-3

6 --

3.

11-3

3 --

3.

11-3

3 --

3.

11-3

3 --

3.

11-3

3

Publ

ic Se

rvice

s and

Util

ities

D

isru

ptio

n of

Util

ity L

ines

S

M

3.12

-11

SM

3.

12-1

1 S

M

3.12

-14

SM

3.

12-1

5 S

M

3.12

-14

SM

3.

12-1

4 S

M

3.12

-15

SM

3.

12-1

5 In

crea

se in

Ele

ctric

ity D

eman

d LT

S

3.12

-17

LTS

3.

12-1

7 LT

S

3.12

-17

LTS

3.

12-1

7 LT

S

3.12

-17

LTS

3.

12-1

7 LT

S

3.12

-17

LTS

3.

12-1

7 In

crea

se in

Pub

lic S

ervi

ces

Dem

and

LTS

3.

12-1

9 LT

S

3.12

-19

LTS

3.

12-1

9LT

S

3.12

-19

LTS

3.

12-1

9 LT

S

3.12

-19

LTS

3.

12-1

9 LT

S

3.12

-19

Adv

erse

Effe

ct O

n La

ndfil

l Cap

acity

S

M

3.12

-19

--

3.12

-19

SM

3.

12-1

9S

M

3.12

-19

SM

3.

12-1

9 S

M

3.12

-19

SM

3.

12-1

9 --

3.

12-1

9 Fa

ilure

to A

chie

ve S

tate

Div

ersi

on M

anda

tes

SM

3.

12-2

1 S

M

3.12

-21

SM

3.

12-2

1S

M

3.12

-21

SM

3.

12-2

1 S

M

3.12

-21

SM

3.

12-2

1 --

3.

12-2

1

Sum

mar

y

aIm

pact

s su

mm

ariz

ed; p

leas

e se

e C

hapt

er 3

for d

etai

ls. D

oes

not i

nclu

de p

rogr

am-le

vel e

lem

ents

. See

Tab

le S

-10

for m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s.

b Th

ese

proj

ects

are

in m

ultip

le ju

risdi

ctio

ns (O

rinda

and

Laf

ayet

te).

LTS

= L

ess

Than

Sig

nific

ant

SM

= S

igni

fican

t and

Miti

gabl

e S

U =

Sig

nific

ant a

nd U

navo

idab

le

-- =

Impa

ct d

oes

not a

pply

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-2

4E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

TAB

LE S

-5

WA

TER

TR

EATM

ENT

AN

D T

RA

NSM

ISSI

ON

IMPR

OVE

MEN

TS P

RO

GR

AM

– P

RO

JEC

TS IN

OR

IND

A:

SUM

MA

RY

OF

IMPA

CTS

Orin

da W

TP

Impa

ctsa

Alternative 1

Described onpage

Alternative 2

Described onpage


Described onpage

Ardith and Donald Pumping Plant

Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage

Land

Use

, Plan

ning

, and

Rec

reat

ion

Div

ide

an E

stab

lishe

d C

omm

unity

--

3.

2-14

--

3.

2-14

LT

S

3.2-

14

--

3.2-

14

LTS

3.

2-14

LT

S

3.2-

14

Agr

icul

tura

l Res

ourc

es Im

pact

s --

3.

2-16

--

3.

2-16

--

3.

2-16

--

3.

2-16

--

3.

2-16

LT

S

3.2-

16

Rec

reat

ion

Res

ourc

es Im

pact

s LT

S

3.2-

17

LTS

3.

2-17

LT

S

3.2-

17

--

3.2-

16

LTS

3.

2-17

--

3.

2-16

Visu

al Qu

ality

S

hort-

Term

Vis

ual E

ffect

s du

ring

Con

stru

ctio

n LT

S

3.3-

23

LTS

3.

3-23

LT

S

3.3-

23

LTS

3.

3-23

LT

S

3.3-

19

LTS

3.

3-19

A

ltera

tion

of A

ppea

ranc

e of

WTT

IP S

ites

SM

3.

3-25

S

M

3.3-

26

LTS

3.

3-29

S

M

3.3-

29

SM

3.

3-30

S

M

3.3-

33

Effe

cts

on V

iew

s S

M

3.3-

38

SM

3.

3-39

LT

S

3.3-

41

SM

3.

3-41

S

M

3.3-

42

SM

3.

3-45

E

ffect

s on

Sce

nic

Vis

ta

LTS

3.

3-46

LT

S

3.3-

46

LTS

3.

3-46

LT

S

3.3-

46

LTS

3.

3-46

LT

S

3.3-

46

New

Sou

rces

of L

ight

and

Gla

re

SM

3.

3-47

S

M

3.3-

47

SM

3.

3-47

S

M

3.3-

47

SM

3.

3-47

S

M

3.3-

47

Geol

ogy,

Soils

, and

Seis

mici

ty

Slo

pe S

tabi

lity

LTS

3.

4-22

LT

S

3.4-

22

SM

3.

4-22

S

M

3.4-

23

SM

3.

4-23

S

M

3.4-

25

Gro

unds

haki

ng

SM

3.

4-26

S

M

3.4-

26

SM

3.

4-26

S

M

3.4-

26

SM

3.

4-26

S

M

3.4-

26

Exp

ansi

ve S

oils

S

M

3.4-

27

SM

3.

4-27

S

M

3.4-

27

SM

3.

4-27

S

M

3.4-

27

SM

3.

4-27

Li

quef

actio

n S

M

3.4-

29

SM

3.

4-29

S

M

3.4-

29

LTS

3.

4-30

S

M

3.4-

30

LTS

3.

4-31

G

roun

d S

quee

zing

--

3.4-

32

-- 3.

4-32

S

M

3.4-

32

-- 3.

4-32

--

3.4-

32

-- 3.

4-32

Hydr

olog

y and

Wat

er Q

ualit

y

D

egra

datio

n of

Wat

er Q

ualit

y du

ring

Con

stru

ctio

n S

M

3.5-

27

SM

3.

5-28

S

M

3.5-

28

SM

3.

5-29

S

M

3.5-

29

SM

3.

5-31

G

roun

dwat

er D

ewat

erin

g LT

S

3.5-

32

LTS

3.

5-32

LT

S

3.5-

33

--

3.5-

33

LTS

3.

5-34

--

3.

5-35

D

iver

sion

of F

lood

Flo

ws

--

3.5-

35

--

3.5-

35

SM

3.

5-35

--

3.

5-35

S

M

3.5-

35

--

3.5-

35

Dis

char

ge o

f Chl

oram

inat

ed W

ater

dur

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n LT

S

3.5-

36

LTS

3.

5-36

LT

S

3.5-

36

--

3.5-

36

--

3.5-

36

--

3.5-

36

Ope

ratio

nal D

isch

arge

of C

hlor

amin

ated

Wat

er

--

3.5-

38

LTS

3.

5-38

--

3.

5-37

LT

S

3.5-

38

--

3.5-

37

--

3.5-

37

Cha

nge

in Im

perv

ious

Sur

face

s LT

S

3.5-

43

LTS

3.

5-43

LT

S

3.5-

43

SM

3.

5-45

LT

S

3.5-

43

LTS

3.

5-44

Biol

ogica

l Res

ourc

es

Loss

of o

r Dam

age

to P

rote

cted

Tre

es

LTS

3.

6-30

S

M

3.6-

30

SM

3.

6-33

LT

S

3.6-

30

SM

3.

6-30

S

M

3.6-

30

Deg

rada

tion

to S

tream

s, W

etla

nds,

and

Rip

aria

n H

abita

ts

-- 3.

6-36

S

M

3.6-

36

SM

3.

6-36

--

3.6-

34

SM

3.

6-37

--

3.6-

34

Loss

of o

r Dam

age

to S

peci

al-S

tatu

s P

lant

s --

3.

6-41

--

3.

6-41

--

3.

6-41

--

3.

6-41

S

M

3.6-

41

--

3.6-

41

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-5 (C

ontin

ued)

W

ATE

R T

REA

TMEN

T A

ND

TR

AN

SMIS

SIO

N IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

PR

OG

RA

M –

PR

OJE

CTS

IN O

RIN

DA

: SU

MM

AR

Y O

F IM

PAC

TS

aIm

pact

s su

mm

ariz

ed; p

leas

e se

e C

hapt

er 3

for d

etai

ls. D

oes

not i

nclu

de p

rogr

am-le

vel e

lem

ents

. See

Tab

le S

-10

for m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s.

b Th

ese

proj

ects

are

in m

ultip

le ju

risdi

ctio

ns (O

rinda

and

Laf

ayet

te).

LTS

= L

ess

Than

Sig

nific

ant

SM

= S

igni

fican

t and

Miti

gabl

e S

U =

Sig

nific

ant a

nd U

navo

idab

le

-- =

Impa

ct d

oes

not a

pply

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-2

5E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Orin

da W

TP

Impa

ctsa

Alternative 1

Described onpage

Alternative 2

Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage

Biol

ogica

l Res

ourc

es (c

ont.)

D

istu

rban

ce to

Spe

cial

-Sta

tus

Bird

s S

M

3.6-

45

SM

3.

6-45

S

M

3.6-

46

SM

3.

6-46

S

M

3.6-

47

SM

3.

6-49

D

istu

rban

ce to

Spe

cial

-Sta

tus

Bat

s --

3.

6-52

S

M

3.6-

53

SM

3.

6-53

--

3.

6-51

S

M

3.6-

54

SM

3.

6-55

D

istu

rban

ce to

San

Fra

ncis

co D

usky

-Foo

ted

Woo

drat

--

3.

6-57

S

M

3.6-

57

SM

3.

6-57

--

3.

6-56

S

M

3.6-

58

--

3.6-

56

Deg

rada

tion

of S

peci

al-S

tatu

s A

quat

ic S

peci

es H

abita

t --

3.

6-60

S

M

3.6-

60

SM

3.

6-61

--

3.

6-59

S

M

3.6-

61

--

3.6-

59

Dis

rupt

ion

to W

ildlif

e C

orrid

ors

--

3.6-

67

LTS

3.

6-67

LT

S

3.6-

68

--

3.6-

66

LTS

3.

6-68

LT

S

3.6-

69

Cultu

ral R

esou

rces

A

rcha

eolo

gica

l Res

ourc

es, i

nclu

ding

Unr

ecor

ded

Cul

tura

l R

esou

rces

S

M

3.7-

17

SM

3.

7-17

S

M

3.7-

17

SM

3.

7-17

S

M

3.7-

17

SM

3.

7-17

Pal

eont

olog

ical

Res

ourc

es

SM

3.

7-25

S

M

3.7-

25

SM

3.

7-25

S

M

3.7-

25

SM

3.

7-25

S

M

3.7-

25

His

toric

Set

tings

LT

S

3.7-

26

LTS

3.

7-26

--

3.

7-26

--

3.

7-26

--

3.

7-26

--

3.

7-26

Traf

fic an

d Ci

rcul

atio

n

In

crea

sed

Traf

fic

SM

3.

8-11

S

M

3.8-

11

SM

3.

8-11

S

M

3.8-

11

SM

3.

8-11

S

M

3.8-

11

Red

uced

Roa

d W

idth

--

3.

8-15

--

3.

8-15

S

M

3.8-

18

--

3.8-

18

SM

3.

8-16

--

3.

8-15

P

arki

ng

SM

3.

8-19

S

M

3.8-

19

SM

3.

8-19

S

M

3.8-

19

SM

3.

8-19

LT

S

3.8-

19

Traf

fic S

afet

y S

M

3.8-

20

SM

3.

8-20

S

M

3.8-

20

SM

3.

8-20

S

M

3.8-

20

SM

3.

8-20

A

cces

s --

3.

8-20

--

3.

8-20

S

M

3.8-

20

--

3.8-

20

SM

3.

8-21

--

3.

8-20

Tr

ansi

t --

3.8-

21

-- 3.

8-21

S

M

3.8-

21

-- 3.

8-21

S

U

3.8-

22

-- 3.

8-21

P

avem

ent D

amag

e/W

ear

LTS

3.

8-22

LT

S

3.8-

22

LTS

3.

8-22

S

M

3.8-

22

SM

3.

8-22

LT

S

3.8-

22

Air Q

ualit

y

C

onst

ruct

ion

Em

issi

on

SM

3.

9-16

S

M

3.9-

16

SM

3.

9-18

S

M

3.9-

18

SM

3.

9-20

S

M

3.9-

22

DP

M E

mis

sion

s A

long

Hau

l Rou

tes

LTS

3.

9-25

LT

S

3.9-

25

LTS

3.

9-25

LT

S

3.9-

25

LTS

3.

9-25

LT

S

3.9-

25

Tunn

el-R

elat

ed E

mis

sion

s --

3.

9-28

--

3.

9-28

S

M

3.9-

28

--

3.9-

28

--

3.9-

28

--

3.9-

28

Ope

ratio

nal P

ollu

tant

Em

issi

ons

at T

reat

men

t Fac

ilitie

s LT

S

3.9-

30

LTS

3.

9-30

--

3.

9-30

--

3.

9-30

--

3.

9-30

--

3.

9-30

O

pera

tiona

l Odo

r Em

issi

ons

LTS

3.

9-32

LT

S

3.9-

32

LTS

3.

9-32

LT

S

3.9-

32

LTS

3.

9-32

LT

S

3.9-

32

Sec

onda

ry E

mis

sion

s fro

m E

lect

ricity

Gen

erat

ion

LTS

3.

9-33

LT

S

3.9-

33

LTS

3.

9-33

LT

S

3.9-

33

LTS

3.

9-33

LT

S

3.9-

33

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-5 (C

ontin

ued)

W

ATE

R T

REA

TMEN

T A

ND

TR

AN

SMIS

SIO

N IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

PR

OG

RA

M –

PR

OJE

CTS

IN O

RIN

DA

: SU

MM

AR

Y O

F IM

PAC

TS

aIm

pact

s su

mm

ariz

ed; p

leas

e se

e C

hapt

er 3

for d

etai

ls. D

oes

not i

nclu

de p

rogr

am-le

vel e

lem

ents

. See

Tab

le S

-10

for m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s.

b Th

ese

proj

ects

are

in m

ultip

le ju

risdi

ctio

ns (O

rinda

and

Laf

ayet

te).

LTS

= L

ess

Than

Sig

nific

ant

SM

= S

igni

fican

t and

Miti

gabl

e S

U =

Sig

nific

ant a

nd U

navo

idab

le

-- =

Impa

ct d

oes

not a

pply

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-2

6E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Orin

da W

TP

Impa

ctsa

Alternative 1

Described onpage

Alternative 2

Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage


Described onpage

Noise

and

Vibr

atio

n

C

onst

ruct

ion

Noi

se In

crea

ses

SM

3.

10-1

8S

M

3.10

-18

SM

3.

10-2

0S

M

3.10

-23

SM

3.

10-2

5S

M

3.10

-29

Noi

se In

crea

ses

Alo

ng H

aul R

oute

s LT

S

3.10

-36

LTS

3.

10-3

6 LT

S

3.10

-37

LTS

3.

10-3

7LT

S

3.10

-37

LTS

3.

10-3

7 C

onst

ruct

ion-

Rel

ated

Vib

ratio

n E

ffect

s S

M

3.10

-38

SM

3.

10-3

8 S

M

3.10

-39

LTS

3.

10-3

8LT

S

3.10

-38

LTS

3.

10-3

8 O

pera

tiona

l Noi

se In

crea

ses

LTS

3.

10-4

4S

M

3.10

-44

LTS

3.

10-4

4S

M

3.10

-45

SM

3.

10-4

6S

M

3.10

-46

Haza

rds a

nd H

azar

dous

Mat

erial

s

H

azar

dous

Mat

eria

ls in

Soi

l and

Gro

undw

ater

S

M

3.11

-23

SM

3.

11-2

4 S

M

3.11

-24

SM

3.

11-2

5S

M

3.11

-25

SM

3.

11-2

7 H

azar

dous

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

--

3.

11-2

8S

M

3.11

-28

--

3.11

-28

LTS

3.

11-2

9--

3.

11-2

8--

3.

11-2

8 G

assy

Con

ditio

ns in

Tun

nels

--

3.

11-3

0--

3.

11-3

0 LT

S

3.11

-30

--

3.11

-30

--

3.11

-30

--

3.11

-30

Hig

h P

ress

ure

Gas

Lin

e R

uptu

re

--

3.11

-30

--

3.11

-30

SM

3.

11-3

0--

3.

11-3

0S

M

3.11

-30

SM

3.

11-3

0 W

ildla

nd F

ires

LTS

3.

11-3

1LT

S

3.11

-31

LTS

3.

11-3

1--

3.

11-3

1LT

S

3.11

-31

LTS

3.

11-3

1 R

elea

se fr

om C

onst

ruct

ion

Equ

ipm

ent

LTS

3.

11-3

2LT

S

3.11

-32

LTS

3.

11-3

2LT

S

3.11

-32

LTS

3.

11-3

2LT

S

3.11

-32

Acc

iden

tal R

elea

se d

urin

g O

pera

tion

--

3.11

-33

--

3.11

-33

--

3.11

-33

--

3.11

-33

--

3.11

-33

--

3.11

-33

Publ

ic Se

rvice

s and

Util

ities

D

isru

ptio

n of

Util

ity L

ines

S

M

3.12

-11

SM

3.

12-1

1 S

M

3.12

-11

SM

3.

12-1

1S

M

3.12

-14

SM

3.

12-1

5 In

crea

se in

Ele

ctric

ity D

eman

d LT

S

3.12

-17

LTS

3.

12-1

7 LT

S

3.12

-17

LTS

3.

12-1

7LT

S

3.12

-17

LTS

3.

12-1

7 In

crea

se in

Pub

lic S

ervi

ces

Dem

and

LTS

3.

12-1

9LT

S

3.12

-19

LTS

3.

12-1

9LT

S

3.12

-19

LTS

3.

12-1

9LT

S

3.12

-19

Adv

erse

Effe

ct O

n La

ndfil

l Cap

acity

S

M

3.12

-19

SM

3.

12-1

9 S

M

3.12

-19

SM

3.

12-1

9S

M

3.12

-19

--

3.12

-19

Failu

re to

Ach

ieve

Sta

te D

iver

sion

Man

date

s S

M

3.12

-21

SM

3.

12-2

1 S

M

3.12

-21

SM

3.

12-2

1S

M

3.12

-21

--

3.12

-21

Summary

a Impacts summarized; please see Chapter 3 for details. Does not include program-level elements. See Table S-10 for mitigation measures.

b These projects are in multiple jurisdictions (Moraga and Lafayette).

LTS = Less Than Significant SM = Significant and Mitigable

SU = Significant and Unavoidable -- = Impact does not apply


TABLE S-6 WATER TREATMENT AND TRANSMISSION IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM –

PROJECTS IN TOWN OF MORAGA: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS

Impactsa Fay

Hill

Pum

ping

Pl

ant a

nd P

ipel

ine

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Fay

Hill

Res

ervo

ir

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Mor

aga

Roa

d Pi

pelin

eb

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Mor

aga

Res

ervo

ir

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Land Use, Planning, and Recreation Divide an Established Community LTS 3.2-14 -- 3.2-14 LTS 3.2-14 -- 3.2-14 Agricultural Resources Impacts LTS 3.2-16 LTS 3.2-16 LTS 3.2-16 -- 3.2-16 Recreation Resources Impacts -- 3.2-16 -- 3.2-16 LTS 3.2-18 -- 3.2-16

Visual Quality Short-Term Visual Effects during

ConstructionLTS 3.3-23 LTS 3.3-23 LTS 3.3-19 LTS 3.3-23

Alteration of Appearance of WTTIP Sites

LTS 3.3-30 LTS 3.3-30 SM 3.3-33 LTS 3.3-32

Effects on Views LTS 3.3-41 LTS 3.3-41 SM 3.3-44 LTS 3.3-44 Effects on Scenic Vista LTS 3.3-46 LTS 3.3-46 LTS 3.3-46 LTS 3.3-46 New Sources of Light and Glare SM 3.3-47 SM 3.3-47 LTS 3.3-47 LTS 3.3-47

Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Slope Stability LTS 3.4-16 SM 3.4-22 SM 3.4-16 SM 3.4-24 Groundshaking SM 3.4-26 SM 3.4-26 SM 3.4-26 SM 3.4-26 Expansive Soils SM 3.4-27 SM 3.4-27 SM 3.4-27 SM 3.4-27 Liquefaction LTS 3.4-30 LTS 3.4-30 SM 3.4-31 LTS 3.4-31 Ground Squeezing -- 3.4-32 -- 3.4-32 -- 3.4-32 -- 3.4-32

Hydrology and Water Quality Degradation of Water Quality during

ConstructionSM 3.5-29 SM 3.5-29 SM 3.5-30 SM 3.5-30

Groundwater Dewatering -- 3.5-33 -- 3.5-34 LTS 3.5-35 -- 3.5-35 Diversion of Flood Flows -- 3.5-35 -- 3.5-35 SM 3.5-35 -- 3.5-35 Discharge of Chloraminated Water

during Construction -- 3.5-36 LTS 3.5-36 -- 3.5-36 LTS 3.5-36

Operational Discharge of Chloraminated Water

-- 3.5-37 -- 3.5-37 -- 3.5-37 -- 3.5-37

Change in Impervious Surfaces LTS 3.5-45 SM 3.5-45 LTS 3.5-44 SM 3.5-45

Biological Resources Loss of or Damage to Protected Trees LTS 3.6-30 SM 3.6-30 SM 3.6-30 SM 3.6-30 Degradation to Streams, Wetlands, and

Riparian Habitats -- 3.6-34 -- 3.6-34 SM 3.6-39 -- 3.6-34

Loss of or Damage to Special-Status Plants

-- 3.6-41 -- 3.6-41 SM 3.6-41 -- 3.6-41

Disturbance to Special-Status Birds SM 3.6-46 SM 3.6-46 SM 3.6-48 SM 3.6-48 Disturbance to Special-Status Bats -- 3.6-51 SM 3.6-53 SM 3.6-55 -- 3.6-51 Disturbance to San Francisco Dusky-

Footed Woodrat -- 3.6-56 -- 3.6-56 SM 3.6-58 -- 3.6-56

Degradation of Special-Status Aquatic Species Habitat

-- 3.6-59 -- 3.6-59 SM 3.6-62 -- 3.6-59

Disruption to Wildlife Corridors -- 3.6-66 LTS 3.6-68 LTS 3.6-66 -- 3.6-66

Summary

TABLE S-6 (Continued) WATER TREATMENT AND TRANSMISSION IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM –

PROJECTS IN TOWN OR MORAGA: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS

a Impacts summarized; please see Chapter 3 for details. See Table S-10 for mitigation measures.




Impactsa Fay

Hill

Pum

ping

Pl

ant a

nd P

ipel

ine

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Fay

Hill

Res

ervo

ir

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Mor

aga

Roa

d Pi

pelin

eb

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Mor

aga

Res

ervo

ir

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Cultural Resources Archaeological Resources, including

Unrecorded Cultural Resources SM 3.7-17 SM 3.7-17 SM 3.7-17 SM 3.7-17

Paleontological Resources SM 3.7-25 SM 3.7-25 SM 3.7-25 SM 3.7-25 Historic Settings -- 3.7-26 -- 3.7-26 LTS 3.7-26 -- 3.7-26

Traffic and Circulation Increased Traffic SM 3.8-11 SM 3.8-11 SM 3.8-11 SM 3.8-11 Reduced Road Width SM 3.8-18 -- 3.8-18 SM 3.8-16 -- 3.8-18 Parking SM 3.8-19 LTS 3.8-19 SM 3.8-19 SM 3.8-19 Traffic Safety SM 3.8-20 SM 3.8-20 SM 3.8-20 SM 3.8-20 Access SM 3.8-20 -- 3.8-20 SM 3.8-20 -- 3.8-20 Transit LTS 3.8-21 -- 3.8-21 SM 3.8-22 -- 3.8-21 Pavement Damage/Wear LTS 3.8-22 LTS 3.8-22 LTS 3.8-22 SM 3.8-22

Air Quality Construction Emission SM 3.9-19 SM 3.9-19 SM 3.9-22 SM 3.9-22 DPM Emissions Along Haul Routes LTS 3.9-25 LTS 3.9-25 LTS 3.9-25 LTS 3.9-25 Tunnel-Related Emissions -- 3.9-28 -- 3.9-28 -- 3.9-28 -- 3.9-28 Operational Pollutant Emissions at

Treatment Facilities -- 3.9-29 -- 3.9-29 -- 3.9-29 -- 3.9-29

Operational Odor Emissions LTS 3.9-32 LTS 3.9-32 LTS 3.9-32 LTS 3.9-32 Secondary Emissions from Electricity

Generation LTS 3.9-33 LTS 3.9-33 LTS 3.9-33 LTS 3.9-33

Noise and Vibration Construction Noise Increases SM 3.10-24 SM 3.10-24 SM 3.10-28 SM 3.10-28 Noise Increases Along Haul Routes LTS 3.10-37 LTS 3.10-37 LTS 3.10-37 LTS 3.10-37 Construction-Related Vibration Effects LTS 3.10-38 LTS 3.10-38 SM 3.10-38 SM 3.10-38 Operational Noise Increases SM 3.10-46 LTS 3.10-40 LTS 3.10-40 LTS 3.10-40

Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hazardous Materials in Soil and

Groundwater SM 3.11-25 SM 3.11-25 SM 3.11-26 SM 3.11-26

Hazardous Building Materials SM 3.11-29 SM 3.11-29 -- 3.11-28 SM 3.11-29 Gassy Conditions in Tunnels -- 3.11-30 -- 3.11-30 -- 3.11-30 -- 3.11-30 High Pressure Gas Line Rupture -- 3.11-30 -- 3.11-30 SM 3.11-30 -- 3.11-30 Wildland Fires -- 3.11-31 -- 3.11-31 -- 3.11-31 -- 3.11-31 Release from Construction Equipment LTS 3.11-32 LTS 3.11-32 LTS 3.11-32 LTS 3.11-32 Accidental Release during Operation -- 3.11-33 -- 3.11-33 -- 3.11-33 -- 3.11-33

Public Services and Utilities Disruption of Utility Lines SM 3.12-14 SM 3.12-11 SM 3.12-15 SM 3.12-11 Increase in Electricity Demand LTS 3.12-17 LTS 3.12-17 LTS 3.12-17 LTS 3.12-17 Increase in Public Services Demand LTS 3.12-19 LTS 3.12-19 LTS 3.12-19 LTS 3.12-19 Adverse Effect On Landfill Capacity SM 3.12-19 SM 3.12-19 SM 3.12-19 SM 3.12-19 Failure to Achieve State Diversion

MandatesSM 3.12-21 SM 3.12-21 SM 3.12-21 SM 3.12-21

Summary

a Impacts summarized; please see Chapter 3 for details. Does not include program-level elements. See Table S-10 for mitigation measures.





PROJECTS IN WALNUT CREEK: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS

Walnut Creek WTP

Impactsa Alte

rnat

ive

1 or

2

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Lela

nd Is

olat

ion

Pipe

line

and

Byp

ass

Valv

es

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Land Use, Planning, and Recreation Divide an Established Community -- 3.2-14 LTS 3.2-14 Agricultural Resources Impacts -- 3.2-16 -- 3.2-16 Recreation Resources Impacts LTS 3.2-17 LTS 3.2-18

Visual Quality Short-Term Visual Effects during Construction LTS 3.3-23 LTS 3.3-19 Alteration of Appearance of WTTIP Sites SM 3.3-27 SM 3.3-32 Effects on Views SM 3.3-39 SM 3.3-44 Effects on Scenic Vista LTS 3.3-46 LTS 3.3-46 New Sources of Light and Glare SM 3.3-47 LTS 3.3-47

Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Slope Stability SM 3.4-16 LTS 3.4-24 Groundshaking SM 3.4-26 SM 3.4-26 Expansive Soils SM 3.4-27 SM 3.4-27 Liquefaction LTS 3.4-29 SM 3.4-31 Ground Squeezing -- 3.4-32 -- 3.4-32

Hydrology and Water Quality Degradation of Water Quality during Construction SM 3.5-28 SM 3.5-30 Groundwater Dewatering LTS 3.5-33 -- 3.5-34 Diversion of Flood Flows -- 3.5-35 SM 3.5-35 Discharge of Chloraminated Water during Construction LTS 3.5-36 -- 3.5-36 Operational Discharge of Chloraminated Water -- 3.5-37 -- 3.5-37 Change in Impervious Surfaces LTS 3.5-45 LTS 3.5-45

Biological Resources Loss of or Damage to Protected Trees -- 3.6-30 SM 3.6-30 Degradation to Streams, Wetlands, and Riparian Habitats SM 3.6-34 SM 3.6-34 Loss of or Damage to Special-Status Plants -- 3.6-41 -- 3.6-41 Disturbance to Special-Status Birds SM 3.6-46 SM 3.6-46 Disturbance to Special-Status Bats SM 3.6-51 SM 3.6-51 Disturbance to San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat -- 3.6-56 -- 3.6-56 Degradation of Special-Status Aquatic Species Habitat -- 3.6-59 -- 3.6-59 Disruption to Wildlife Corridors -- 3.6-66 -- 3.6-66

Cultural Resources Archaeological Resources, including Unrecorded Cultural Resources SM 3.7-17 SM 3.7-17 Paleontological Resources SM 3.7-25 SM 3.7-25 Historic Settings -- 3.7-26 -- 3.7-26

Traffic and Circulation Increased Traffic SM 3.8-11 SM 3.8-11 Reduced Road Width -- 3.8-15 SM 3.8-17 Parking LTS 3.8-19 SM 3.8-19

Summary


PROJECTS IN WALNUT CREEK: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS





Walnut Creek WTP

Impactsa Alte

rnat

ive

1 or

2

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Lela

nd Is

olat

ion

Pipe

line

and

Byp

ass

Valv

es

Des

crib

ed o

npa

ge

Traffic and Circulation (cont.) Traffic Safety SM 3.8-20 SM 3.8-20 Access -- 3.8-20 LTS 3.8-20 Transit -- 3.8-21 LTS 3.8-21 Pavement Damage/Wear SM 3.8-22 LTS 3.8-22

Air Quality Construction Emission SM 3.9-17 SM 3.9-21 DPM Emissions Along Haul Routes LTS 3.9-25 LTS 3.9-25 Tunnel-Related Emissions -- 3.9-28 -- 3.9-28 Operational Pollutant Emissions at Treatment Facilities LTS 3.9-31 -- 3.9-29 Operational Odor Emissions LTS 3.9-32 LTS 3.9-32 Secondary Emissions from Electricity Generation LTS 3.9-33 LTS 3.9-33

Noise and Vibration Construction Noise Increases SM 3.10-19 SM 3.10-27 Noise Increases Along Haul Routes LTS 3.10-36 LTS 3.10-37 Construction-Related Vibration Effects SM 3.10-38 LTS 3.10-38 Operational Noise Increases SM 3.10-45 LTS 3.10-40

Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hazardous Materials in Soil and Groundwater SM 3.11-24 SM 3.11-26 Hazardous Building Materials -- 3.11-28 -- 3.11-28 Gassy Conditions in Tunnels -- 3.11-30 -- 3.11-30 High Pressure Gas Line Rupture -- 3.11-30 SM 3.11-31 Wildland Fires -- 3.11-31 -- 3.11-31 Release from Construction Equipment LTS 3.11-32 LTS 3.11-32 Accidental Release during Operation -- 3.11-33 -- 3.11-33

Public Services and Utilities Disruption of Utility Lines SM 3.12-11 SM 3.12-15 Increase in Electricity Demand LTS 3.12-17 LTS 3.12-17 Increase in Public Services Demand LTS 3.12-19 LTS 3.12-19 Adverse Effect On Landfill Capacity SM 3.12-19 LTS 3.12-19 Failure to Achieve State Diversion Mandates SM 3.12-21 SM 3.12-21

Summary






PROJECTS IN OAKLAND: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS

Impactsa Upp

er S

an

Lean

dro

WTP

Des

crib

ed o

n pa

ge

Land Use, Planning, and Recreation Divide an Established Community -- 3.2-14 Agricultural Resources Impacts -- 3.2-16 Recreation Resources Impacts -- 3.2-16

Visual Quality Short-Term Visual Effects during Construction LTS 3.3-23 Alteration of Appearance of WTTIP Sites LTS 3.3-28 Effects on Views LTS 3.3-41 Effects on Scenic Vista LTS 3.3-46 New Sources of Light and Glare SM 3.3-47

Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Slope Stability LTS 3.4-22 Groundshaking SM 3.4-26 Expansive Soils SM 3.4-27 Liquefaction LTS 3.4-29 Ground Squeezing -- 3.4-32

Hydrology and Water Quality Degradation of Water Quality during Construction SM 3.5-28 Groundwater Dewatering -- 3.5-33 Diversion of Flood Flows -- 3.5-35 Discharge of Chloraminated Water during Construction LTS 3.5-36 Operational Discharge of Chloraminated Water -- 3.5-37 Change in Impervious Surfaces LTS 3.5-46

Biological Resources Loss of or Damage to Protected Trees SM 3.6-30 Degradation to Streams, Wetlands, and Riparian Habitats -- 3.6-34 Loss of or Damage to Special-Status Plants -- 3.6-41 Disturbance to Special-Status Birds SM 3.6-45 Disturbance to Special-Status Bats -- 3.6-51 Disturbance to San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat -- 3.6-56 Degradation of Special-Status Aquatic Species Habitat -- 3.6-59 Disruption to Wildlife Corridors -- 3.6-66

Cultural Resources Archaeological Resources, including Unrecorded Cultural Resources SM 3.7-17 Paleontological Resources SM 3.7-25 Historic Settings -- 3.7-26

Traffic and Circulation Increased Traffic SM 3.8-11 Reduced Road Width -- 3.8-15 Parking LTS 3.8-19

Summary


PROJECTS IN OAKLAND: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS





Impactsa Upp

er S

an

Lean

dro

WTP

Des

crib

ed o

n pa

ge

Traffic and Circulation Traffic Safety SM 3.8-20 Access -- 3.8-20 Transit -- 3.8-21 Pavement Damage/Wear SM 3.8-22

Air Quality Construction Emission SM 3.9-17 DPM Emissions Along Haul Routes LTS 3.9-25 Tunnel-Related Emissions -- 3.9-28 Operational Pollutant Emissions at Treatment Facilities LTS 3.9-32 Operational Odor Emissions LTS 3.9-32 Secondary Emissions from Electricity Generation LTS 3.9-33

Noise and Vibration Construction Noise Increases SM 3.10-19 Noise Increases Along Haul Routes LTS 3.10-37 Construction-Related Vibration Effects SM 3.10-38 Operational Noise Increases LTS 3.10-45

Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hazardous Materials in Soil and Groundwater SM 3.11-24 Hazardous Building Materials SM 3.11-29 Gassy Conditions in Tunnels -- 3.11-30 High Pressure Gas Line Rupture -- 3.11-30 Wildland Fires -- 3.11-31 Release from Construction Equipment LTS 3.11-32 Accidental Release during Operation LTS 3.11-37

Public Services and Utilities Disruption of Utility Lines SM 3.12-11 Increase in Electricity Demand LTS 3.12-17 Increase in Public Services Demand LTS 3.12-19 Adverse Effect On Landfill Capacity SM 3.12-19 Failure to Achieve State Diversion Mandates SM 3.12-21

Summary






PROJECTS IN UNINCORPORATED CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS

Impactsa Sobr

ante

WTP

Des

crib

ed o

n pa

ge

Tice

Pum

ping

Pl

ant a

nd P

ipel

ine

Des

crib

ed o

n pa

ge

With

ers

Pum

ping

Pl

ant

Des

crib

ed o

n pa

ge

Land Use, Planning, and Recreation Divide an Established Community -- 3.2-14 LTS 3.2-14 -- 3.2-14 Agricultural Resources Impacts -- 3.2-16 -- 3.2-16 LTS 3.2-16 Recreation Resources Impacts -- 3.2-16 LTS 3.2-18 LTS 3.2-19

Visual Quality Short-Term Visual Effects during Construction LTS 3.3-23 LTS 3.3-19 LTS 3.3-23 Alteration of Appearance of WTTIP Sites SM 3.3-27 SM 3.3-34 SM 3.3-34 Effects on Views SM 3.3-40 SM 3.3-45 SM 3.3-46 Effects on Scenic Vista LTS 3.3-46 LTS 3.3-46 LTS 3.3-46 New Sources of Light and Glare SM 3.3-47 SM 3.3-47 SM 3.3-47

Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Slope Stability SM 3.4-22 SM 3.4-25 SM 3.4-25 Groundshaking SM 3.4-26 SM 3.4-26 SM 3.4-26 Expansive Soils SM 3.4-27 SM 3.4-27 SM 3.4-27 Liquefaction LTS 3.4-29 SM 3.4-31 LTS 3.4-32 Ground Squeezing -- 3.4-32 -- 3.4-32 -- 3.4-32

Hydrology and Water Quality Degradation of Water Quality during Construction SM 3.5-28 SM 3.5-31 SM 3.5-31 Groundwater Dewatering LTS 3.5-33 LTS 3.5-35 -- 3.5-35 Diversion of Flood Flows -- 3.5-35 SM 3.5-35 -- 3.5-35 Discharge of Chloraminated Water during Construction LTS 3.5-36 -- 3.5-36 -- 3.5-36 Operational Discharge of Chloraminated Water -- 3.5-37 -- 3.5-37 -- 3.5-37 Change in Impervious Surfaces LTS 3.5-43 LTS 3.5-44 LTS 3.5-45

Biological Resources Loss of or Damage to Protected Trees SM 3.6-30 SM 3.6-30 SM 3.6-30 Degradation to Streams, Wetlands, and Riparian

HabitatsSM 3.6-36 SM 3.6-39 LTS 3.6-34

Loss of or Damage to Special-Status Plants -- 3.6-41 SM 3.6-41 -- 3.6-41 Disturbance to Special-Status Birds SM 3.6-45 SM 3.6-49 SM 3.6-49 Disturbance to Special-Status Bats SM 3.6-53 SM 3.6-55 -- 3.6-51 Disturbance to San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat LTS 3.6-57 LTS 3.6-58 -- 3.6-56 Degradation of Special-Status Aquatic Species Habitat SM 3.6-61 SM 3.6-63 -- 3.6-59 Disruption to Wildlife Corridors LTS 3.6-68 LTS 3.6-66 -- 3.6-66

Cultural Resources Archaeological Resources, including Unrecorded

Cultural Resources SM 3.7-17 SM 3.7-17 SM 3.7-17

Paleontological Resources SM 3.7-25 SM 3.7-25 SM 3.7-25 Historic Settings -- 3.7-26 -- 3.7-26 -- 3.7-26

Traffic and Circulation Increased Traffic SM 3.8-11 SM 3.8-11 SM 3.8-11 Reduced Road Width -- 3.8-15 SM 3.8-16 -- 3.8-15 Parking SM 3.8-19 SM 3.8-19 LTS 3.8-19

Summary


PROJECTS IN UNINCORPORATED CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS





Impactsa Sobr

ante

WTP

Des

crib

ed o

n pa

ge

Tice

Pum

ping

Pl

ant a

nd P

ipel

ine

Des

crib

ed o

n pa

ge

With

ers

Pum

ping

Pl

ant

Des

crib

ed o

n pa

ge

Traffic and Circulation (cont.) Traffic Safety SM 3.8-20 SM 3.8-20 SM 3.8-20 Access -- 3.8-20 SM 3.8-21 -- 3.8-20 Transit -- 3.8-21 SU 3.8-22 -- 3.8-21 Pavement Damage/Wear LTS 3.8-22 SM 3.8-22 LTS 3.8-22

Air Quality Construction Emission SM 3.9-17 SM 3.9-23 SM 3.9-22 DPM Emissions Along Haul Routes LTS 3.9-25 LTS 3.9-25 LTS 3.9-25 Tunnel-Related Emissions -- 3.9-28 -- 3.9-28 -- 3.9-28 Operational Pollutant Emissions at Treatment Facilities LTS 3.9-31 -- 3.9-29 -- 3.9-29 Operational Odor Emissions LTS 3.9-32 LTS 3.9-32 LTS 3.9-32 Secondary Emissions from Electricity Generation LTS 3.9-33 LTS 3.9-33 LTS 3.9-33

Noise and Vibration Construction Noise Increases SM 3.10-19 SM 3.10-29 SM 3.10-30 Noise Increases Along Haul Routes LTS 3.10-36 LTS 3.10-37 LTS 3.10-37 Construction-Related Vibration Effects SM 3.10-38 SM 3.10-38 LTS 3.10-38 Operational Noise Increases LTS 3.10-45 SM 3.10-47 SM 3.10-48

Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hazardous Materials in Soil and Groundwater SM 3.11-24 SM 3.11-27 SM 3.11-27 Hazardous Building Materials SM 3.11-29 -- 3.11-28 -- 3.11-28 Gassy Conditions in Tunnels -- 3.11-30 -- 3.11-30 -- 3.11-30 High Pressure Gas Line Rupture -- 3.11-30 SM 3.11-30 -- 3.11-30 Wildland Fires -- 3.11-31 -- 3.11-31 LTS 3.11-31 Release from Construction Equipment LTS 3.11-32 LTS 3.11-32 LTS 3.11-32 Accidental Release during Operation LTS 3.11-37 -- 3.11-33 -- 3.11-33

Public Services and Utilities Disruption of Utility Lines SM 3.12-11 SM 3.12-15 SM 3.12-16 Increase in Electricity Demand LTS 3.12-17 LTS 3.12-17 LTS 3.12-17 Increase in Public Services Demand LTS 3.12-19 LTS 3.12-19 LTS 3.12-19 Adverse Effect On Landfill Capacity SM 3.12-19 SM 3.12-19 SM 3.12-19 Failure to Achieve State Diversion Mandates SM 3.12-21 SM 3.12-21 SM 3.12-21

Sum

mar

y

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-3

5E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

TAB

LE S

-10

SUM

MA

RY

OF

MIT

IGA

TIO

N M

EASU

RES

BY

IMPA

CT

Impa

ct

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re(s

)

3.3-

1:S

hort-

term

vis

ual

effe

cts

(con

stru

ctio

n)

For s

tatio

nary

(non

-pip

elin

e) p

roje

cts

expe

cted

to b

e co

nstru

cted

ove

r a p

erio

d of

one

yea

r or m

ore,

the

Dis

trict

will

requ

ire th

e co

ntra

ctor

to e

nsur

e th

at c

onst

ruct

ion-

rela

ted

activ

ity is

as

clea

n an

d in

cons

picu

ous

as p

ract

ical

by

stor

ing

build

ing

mat

eria

ls a

nd e

quip

men

t with

in th

e pr

opos

ed

cons

truct

ion

stag

ing

area

s or

in a

reas

that

are

gen

eral

ly a

way

from

pub

lic v

iew

and

by

rem

ovin

g co

nstru

ctio

n de

bris

pro

mpt

ly a

t reg

ular

inte

rval

s.

3.3-

2a:A

ltere

d V

isua

l A

ppea

ranc

e(c

onst

ruct

ion)

Im

plem

ent l

ands

capi

ng p

lans

, in

cons

ulta

tion

with

app

licab

le ju

risdi

ctio

n.

P

lant

nat

ive

vege

tatio

n an

d/or

con

stru

ct e

arth

ber

ms

arou

nd a

ll pr

opos

ed a

bove

-gro

und

faci

litie

s to

pro

vide

scr

eeni

ng.

R

eveg

etat

e di

stur

bed

area

s to

min

imiz

e te

xtur

al c

ontra

sts

with

the

surr

ound

ing

vege

tatio

n.

R

epla

ce a

ny la

ndsc

apin

g at

the

WTT

IP p

roje

ct s

ites

that

is re

mov

ed o

r des

troye

d du

ring

cons

truct

ion,

con

sist

ent w

ith th

e la

ndsc

ape

plan

, usi

ng

gras

ses,

shr

ubs,

and

tree

s ty

pica

l of t

he s

urro

undi

ng a

rea.

War

rant

land

scap

e pl

antin

gs fo

r one

yea

r afte

r pro

ject

com

plet

ion.

3.3-

2b: A

ltere

d V

isua

l A

ppea

ranc

e (p

erm

anen

t)

Res

tore

dis

turb

ed, g

rade

d ar

eas

to a

nat

ural

-app

earin

g la

ndfo

rm.

3.3-

2c:C

hang

ed V

iew

s fro

m S

urro

undi

ng A

reas

Pain

t or i

nclu

de a

ppro

pria

te c

oncr

ete

adm

ixtu

res

in p

ropo

sed

faci

litie

s to

ach

ieve

low

-gla

re, e

arth

-tone

col

ors

that

ble

nd w

ith th

e su

rroun

ding

terra

in a

nd

visu

al s

ettin

g.

– A

t the

Laf

ayet

te W

TP, l

ands

cape

d be

rms

may

be

inco

rpor

ated

into

the

final

site

and

land

scap

e pl

ans

at p

ropo

sed

clea

rwel

l site

s in

ord

er to

sc

reen

vie

ws

from

the

Wal

ter C

osta

Tra

il.

– A

t the

Orin

da W

TP b

ackw

ash

wat

er fa

cilit

y us

e te

xtur

es, c

olor

s an

d m

ater

ials

that

will

ble

nd w

ith e

xist

ing

filte

r pla

nt b

uild

ings

.–

For t

he T

ice,

With

ers,

Hap

py V

alle

y, a

nd S

unny

side

Pum

ping

Pla

nts,

new

pum

p st

ruct

ures

and

bui

ldin

gs w

ill in

clud

e ar

chite

ctur

al tr

eatm

ent a

nd

desi

gn e

lem

ents

(suc

h as

pitc

hed

roof

s, ro

of o

verh

angs

, or o

rnam

enta

l win

dow

or t

rim d

etai

l) to

enh

ance

the

appe

aran

ce o

f new

faci

litie

s.

– Fo

r the

Laf

ayet

te W

TP, O

rinda

WTP

, Hap

py V

alle

y an

d Ti

ce P

umpi

ng P

lant

s, th

e de

sign

of n

ew w

alls

, gat

es, a

nd fe

ncin

g w

ill in

clud

e ae

sthe

tic

arch

itect

ural

trea

tmen

t whe

re fa

cilit

ies

are

loca

ted

near

pub

lic tr

ails

, res

iden

ces,

or s

ceni

c ro

adw

ays.

3.3-

5:Li

ght G

lare

dur

ing

Nig

httim

e C

onst

ruct

ion

E

nsur

e th

at li

ghtin

g us

ed d

urin

g ni

ghtti

me

cons

truct

ion

is d

irect

ed d

ownw

ard

and

orie

nted

suc

h th

at n

o lig

ht s

ourc

e is

dire

ctly

vis

ible

from

ne

ighb

orin

g re

side

ntia

l are

as to

the

exte

nt p

ossi

ble.

3.3-

5:Li

ght G

lare

from

P

erm

anen

t Lig

htin

g

Util

ize

cuto

ff sh

ield

s an

d no

ngla

re fi

xtur

e de

sign

.

Ens

ure

that

all

perm

anen

t ext

erio

r lig

htin

g is

dire

cted

ons

ite a

nd d

ownw

ard

to th

e ex

tent

pos

sibl

e.

U

se m

otio

n-se

nsor

act

ivat

ion,

land

scap

ing,

and

avo

id h

ighl

y re

flect

ive

build

ing

mat

eria

ls a

nd/o

r fin

ishe

s.

3.4-

1:S

lope

Sta

bilit

y H

azar

ds

P

erfo

rm s

ite-s

peci

fic d

esig

n-le

vel g

eote

chni

cal e

valu

atio

ns fo

r non

-pip

elin

e pr

ojec

ts, i

nclu

ding

det

aile

d sl

ope

stab

ility

eva

luat

ions

, to

iden

tify

spec

ific

haza

rds

and

miti

gate

thos

e ha

zard

s in

fina

l des

ign

and

durin

g co

nstru

ctio

n. S

lope

sta

biliz

atio

n m

easu

res

may

incl

ude:

app

ropr

iate

slo

pe in

clin

atio

n (n

ot s

teep

er th

an 2

hor

izon

tal t

o 1

verti

cal),

slo

pe te

rrac

ing,

fill

com

pact

ion,

soi

l rei

nfor

cem

ent,

surfa

ce a

nd s

ubsu

rface

dra

inag

e fa

cilit

ies,

en

gine

ered

reta

inin

g w

alls

, but

tress

es, a

nd/o

r ero

sion

con

trol m

easu

res.

3.4-

2:G

roun

dsha

king

H

azar

ds

P

erfo

rm s

ite-s

peci

fic d

esig

n-le

vel e

valu

atio

ns o

f sei

smic

sus

cept

ibili

ty fo

r non

-pip

elin

e pr

ojec

ts, i

nclu

ding

sub

surfa

ce e

xplo

ratio

n as

app

ropr

iate

and

in

corp

orat

e se

ism

ic d

esig

n cr

iteria

to e

nsur

e th

at fa

cilit

ies

are

desi

gned

to w

ithst

and

the

high

est e

xpec

ted

peak

acc

eler

atio

n. D

esig

n an

d co

nstru

ct

build

ings

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith th

e D

istri

ct’s

sei

smic

des

ign

stan

dard

s an

d/or

mee

t or e

xcee

d de

sign

sta

ndar

ds fo

r Sei

smic

Zon

e 4

in th

e m

ost r

ecen

t ed

ition

of t

he C

alifo

rnia

Bui

ldin

g C

ode.

3.4-

3:E

xpan

sive

Soi

ls

Haz

ards

Per

form

site

-spe

cific

inve

stig

atio

ns fo

r non

-pip

elin

e pr

ojec

ts to

det

erm

ine

the

pres

ence

and

cha

ract

eris

tics

of p

oten

tially

com

pres

sibl

e so

ils, t

he

engi

neer

ing

prop

ertie

s of

the

foun

datio

n m

ater

ial,

the

dept

h an

d th

ickn

ess

of s

oil l

ayer

s, a

nd th

e de

pth

to g

roun

dwat

er.

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-10

(Con

tinue

d)

SUM

MA

RY

OF

MIT

IGA

TIO

N M

EASU

RES

BY

IMPA

CT

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-3

6E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Impa

ct

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re(s

)

3.4-

3:E

xpan

sive

Soi

ls

Haz

ards

(con

t.)

Incl

ude

mea

sure

s to

redu

ce s

ettle

men

t or u

plift

, inc

ludi

ng: r

emov

al a

nd re

plac

emen

t of s

oil,

deep

foun

datio

ns, a

nd/o

r dee

p m

ixin

g of

com

pres

sibl

e or

exp

ansi

ve s

oils

with

sta

biliz

ing

agen

ts.

A

ny fi

ll us

ed w

ill b

e se

lect

ed, p

lace

d, c

ompa

cted

, and

insp

ecte

d in

acc

orda

nce

with

pla

ns a

nd s

peci

ficat

ions

pre

pare

d by

a li

cens

ed p

rofe

ssio

nal

engi

neer

.

3.4-

4:Li

quef

actio

n H

azar

ds

P

erfo

rm s

ite-s

peci

fic e

valu

atio

n an

d te

stin

g fo

r non

-pip

elin

e pr

ojec

ts to

det

erm

ine

pote

ntia

l for

liqu

efac

tion

and

dam

age

to p

roje

ct fa

cilit

ies.

Min

imiz

e si

gnifi

cant

liqu

efac

tion

haza

rds

thro

ugh:

den

sific

atio

n or

dew

ater

ing

of s

urfa

ce o

r sub

surfa

ce s

oils

, con

stru

ctio

n of

pile

or p

ier f

ound

atio

ns

to s

uppo

rt pi

pelin

es a

nd/o

r bui

ldin

gs, a

nd/o

r rem

oval

and

repl

acem

ent o

f liq

uefia

ble

mat

eria

l with

mor

e ap

prop

riate

mat

eria

l.

3.4-

5:S

quee

zing

Gro

und

in T

unne

l

Exc

avat

e tu

nnel

usi

ng e

ither

ste

el ri

b-ty

pe s

uppo

rts a

nd b

lock

ing

or a

pre

cast

con

cret

e se

gmen

tal l

inin

g sy

stem

.

Use

sho

tcre

te to

stre

ngth

en s

idew

alls

and

face

s w

hen

the

tunn

el e

xcav

atio

n is

not

adv

ance

d w

ithin

abo

ut a

day

.

3.5-

1:D

egra

datio

n to

C

reek

Wat

er Q

ualit

y

G

rade

con

stru

ctio

n st

agin

g ar

eas

to c

onta

in s

urfa

ce ru

noff

so th

at c

onta

min

ants

suc

h as

oil,

gre

ase,

and

fuel

pro

duct

s do

not

dra

in to

war

ds c

reek

s an

d ot

her r

ecei

ving

wat

ers.

If he

avy-

duty

con

stru

ctio

n eq

uipm

ent i

s st

ored

ove

rnig

ht a

t the

con

stru

ctio

n st

agin

g ar

eas,

pla

ce d

rip p

ans

bene

ath

the

mac

hine

ry e

ngin

e bl

ock

and

hydr

aulic

sys

tem

s to

pre

vent

any

leak

age

from

ent

erin

g si

te ru

noff

or re

achi

ng re

ceiv

ing

wat

ers.

Obt

ain

an e

ncro

achm

ent p

erm

it fro

m th

e C

ontra

Cos

ta C

ount

y Fl

ood

Con

trol a

nd W

ater

Con

serv

atio

n D

istri

ct a

nd c

ompl

y w

ith s

tate

and

fede

ral

agen

cy re

quire

men

ts p

erta

inin

g to

wor

k in

or n

ear w

etla

nds

or s

tream

beds

.

3.5-

3:Fl

ood

Flow

Im

peda

nce

P

rohi

bit t

he s

tock

pilin

g of

soi

l, st

orag

e of

haz

ardo

us m

ater

ials

, and

sto

ckpi

ling

of c

onst

ruct

ion

mat

eria

ls in

floo

d zo

nes

durin

g th

e ra

iny

seas

on.

3.5-

6:Im

perv

ious

S

urfa

ce In

crea

se

In

corp

orat

e si

te d

esig

n an

d la

ndsc

ape

feat

ures

to m

axim

ize

infil

tratio

n, p

rom

ote

rete

ntio

n or

det

entio

n, s

low

runo

ff, a

nd m

inim

ize

impe

rvio

us

surfa

ces

so th

at p

ost-d

evel

opm

ent p

ollu

tant

load

s fro

m th

e si

te a

re re

duce

d to

the

max

imum

ext

ent p

ossi

ble.

3.6-

1:Lo

ss o

f or D

amag

e to

Pro

tect

ed T

rees

Prio

r to

cons

truct

ion,

tree

s to

be

reta

ined

that

are

adj

acen

t to

or w

ithin

pro

ject

con

stru

ctio

n ar

eas

will

be

iden

tifie

d, m

appe

d, a

nd c

lear

ly d

elin

eate

d by

pro

tect

ive

fenc

ing

(e.g

., sh

ort p

ost a

nd p

lank

wal

ls),

inst

alle

d at

the

tree

drip

line.

Whe

re d

riplin

e en

croa

chm

ent m

ust o

ccur

, use

spe

cial

co

nstru

ctio

n te

chni

ques

(e.g

., ha

nd tr

ench

ing)

to a

llow

the

root

s to

bre

athe

and

obt

ain

wat

er. N

o st

orag

e of

equ

ipm

ent,

mac

hine

ry, s

tock

pile

s of

ex

cava

ted

soils

, or c

onst

ruct

ion

mat

eria

ls; o

r dum

ping

of o

ils o

r che

mic

als

with

in re

tain

ed tr

ee d

riplin

es.

N

o m

ore

than

25

perc

ent o

f a tr

ee’s

can

opy

rem

oved

dur

ing

the

prun

ing

of re

tain

ed tr

ees.

Rem

oval

of p

rote

cted

tree

s na

tive

to th

e lo

cal a

rea,

suc

h as

val

ley

oak

and

coas

t liv

e oa

k, re

plac

ed b

y na

tive

trees

on

a 3:

1 ba

sis.

Non

-nat

ive

prot

ecte

d tre

es re

plac

ed a

t a 1

:1 ra

tio w

ith a

nat

ive

tree

spec

ies.

War

rant

the

heal

th o

f all

trees

to b

e pr

eser

ved

with

in a

nd a

djac

ent t

o th

e co

nstru

ctio

n co

rrid

or o

f pro

ject

-rel

ated

pip

elin

e an

d fa

cilit

y si

tes

for t

hree

ye

ars

(five

yea

rs if

drip

line

area

was

dis

turb

ed).

R

epla

ce a

ny tr

ee th

at is

to b

e re

tain

ed, b

ut th

at d

ies

as a

resu

lt of

pro

ject

con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es d

urin

g th

e w

arra

nty

perio

d, w

ith a

tree

of t

he s

ame

spec

ies.

D

evel

op a

nd im

plem

ent a

five

-yea

r tre

e m

onito

ring

prog

ram

with

app

ropr

iate

per

form

ance

sta

ndar

ds.

R

efin

e pi

pelin

e al

ignm

ents

in th

e fie

ld, t

o th

e ex

tent

feas

ible

and

with

in h

ydra

ulic

con

stra

ints

, to

avoi

d re

mov

al o

f pro

tect

ed tr

ees.

3.6-

2:D

egra

datio

n to

S

tream

s, W

etla

nds,

and

R

ipar

ian

Hab

itats

C

onfin

e co

nstru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es to

are

as a

bove

or b

elow

the

stre

am c

ross

ing,

or b

y us

ing

jack

-and

-bor

e or

sim

ilar c

onst

ruct

ion

whe

re fe

asib

le a

nd

whe

re n

o ot

her s

ensi

tive

habi

tat (

e.g.

, stre

am, r

ipar

ian

habi

tat,

or p

rote

cted

tree

s) w

ould

be

affe

cted

.

Esta

blis

h a

min

imum

25-

foot

con

stru

ctio

n ex

clus

ion

zone

(fro

m th

e ed

ge o

f wet

land

, rip

aria

n ha

bita

t, or

the

cree

k ba

nks,

whi

chev

er is

gre

ater

), us

ing

prot

ectiv

e fe

ncin

g.

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-10

(Con

tinue

d)

SUM

MA

RY

OF

MIT

IGA

TIO

N M

EASU

RES

BY

IMPA

CT

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-3

7E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Impa

ct

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re(s

)

3.6-

2:D

egra

datio

n to

S

tream

s, W

etla

nds,

and

R

ipar

ian

Hab

itats

(c

ont.)

If

impa

cts

to p

oten

tially

juris

dict

iona

l fea

ture

s an

d as

soci

ated

ripa

rian

vege

tatio

n ca

nnot

be

avoi

ded

or m

inim

ized

, a q

ualif

ied

biol

ogis

t will

com

plet

e a

wet

land

del

inea

tion

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith C

orps

gui

delin

es a

nd w

ill ob

tain

the

appr

opria

te p

erm

its/a

gree

men

ts, i

nclu

ding

a S

ectio

n 40

1 w

ater

qua

lity

certi

ficat

ion

from

the

RW

QC

B, a

Sec

tion

404

wet

land

per

mit

from

the

Cor

ps, a

nd/o

r a S

ectio

n 16

02 S

tream

bed

Alte

ratio

n Ag

reem

ent f

rom

the

CD

FG.

R

econ

tour

and

reve

geta

te a

ny te

mpo

raril

y or

per

man

ently

dis

turb

ed p

ortio

ns o

f a c

reek

, wet

land

, or r

ipar

ian

habi

tat a

t a ra

tio d

epen

ding

on

type

of

dist

urba

nce

and

loca

tion

of re

stor

atio

n op

portu

nity

.

Dev

elop

and

impl

emen

t a fi

ve-y

ear w

etla

nd m

itiga

tion

and

mon

itorin

g pr

ogra

m w

ith a

ppro

pria

te p

erfo

rman

ce s

tand

ards

.

Prot

ect t

he u

nveg

etat

ed c

reek

ban

ks b

y re

plan

ting

bank

s us

ing

nativ

e or

ste

rile

non-

nativ

e se

eds

or s

eedl

ings

follo

win

g co

nstru

ctio

n w

ithin

the

cree

k,

rem

ovin

g no

n-na

tive

vege

tatio

n fro

m s

tream

ban

ks, a

nd e

mpl

oyin

g bi

otec

hnic

al b

ank

stab

ilizat

ion

met

hods

, suc

h as

willo

w w

attle

s an

d bi

odeg

rada

ble

eros

ion

cont

rol m

ats,

whe

re a

ppro

pria

te.

W

here

app

licab

le fo

r ove

rflow

dis

char

ges

into

a c

reek

or r

eser

voir,

inst

all e

nerg

y di

ssip

ater

s, s

uch

as ri

prap

, in

the

cree

k to

min

imiz

e er

osio

n an

d w

ater

qu

ality

effe

cts.

Ensu

re th

at w

ork

activ

ities

with

in c

reek

s ar

e co

mpl

eted

dur

ing

the

low

-flow

per

iod

(bet

wee

n Ap

ril 1

and

Oct

ober

15)

, unl

ess

othe

rwis

e ap

prov

ed b

y ap

prop

riate

regu

lato

ry a

genc

ies.

Stor

e eq

uipm

ent a

nd m

ater

ials

aw

ay fr

om w

ater

way

s to

the

exte

nt fe

asib

le. N

o de

bris

will

be d

epos

ited

with

in 6

0 fe

et o

f cre

eks

for m

ost W

TTIP

pro

ject

s.

Pr

ovid

e pr

oper

and

tim

ely

mai

nten

ance

for v

ehic

les

and

equi

pmen

t use

d du

ring

cons

truct

ion

to re

duce

the

pote

ntia

l for

mec

hani

cal b

reak

dow

ns le

adin

g to

a s

pill

of m

ater

ials

into

or a

roun

d th

e cr

eeks

. Con

duct

mai

nten

ance

and

fuel

ing

activ

ities

aw

ay fr

om th

e cr

eek.

Inst

all s

ilt fe

ncin

g m

ater

ial a

t the

edg

e of

est

ablis

hed

buffe

r zon

es fo

r rip

aria

n ha

bita

t, or

at t

he e

dge

of th

e cr

eek

whe

re n

o rip

aria

n ha

bita

t is

pres

ent.

M

inim

ize

the

rem

oval

of r

ipar

ian

and

wet

land

veg

etat

ion.

3.6-

3Lo

ss o

f or D

amag

e to

S

peci

al-S

tatu

s P

lant

s /

Sen

sitiv

e N

atur

al

Com

mun

ities

C

ondu

ct s

easo

nal p

rese

nce/

abse

nce

surv

eys

for s

peci

al-s

tatu

s pl

ant s

peci

es a

nd s

ensi

tive

plan

t com

mun

ities

with

in th

e lim

its o

f con

stru

ctio

n pr

ior

to c

onst

ruct

ion.

If id

entif

ied,

avo

id (t

hrou

gh fa

cilit

y re

desi

gn if

nec

essa

ry) t

o th

e ex

tent

feas

ible

and

/or e

stab

lish

a vi

sibl

e bu

ffer z

one

(25

feet

at

min

imum

) prio

r to

cons

truct

ion.

If it

is n

ot fe

asib

le to

avo

id d

istu

rban

ce o

r mor

talit

y, re

stor

e sp

ecia

l-sta

tus

plan

t hab

itat a

nd/o

r sen

sitiv

e pl

ant

com

mun

ities

at a

n eq

ual r

atio

. Dev

elop

and

impl

emen

t a fi

ve-y

ear r

esto

ratio

n m

itiga

tion

and

mon

itorin

g pr

ogra

m, w

ith a

ppro

pria

te p

erfo

rman

ce

stan

dard

s.

Rev

eget

ate

all n

atur

al a

reas

tem

pora

rily

dist

urbe

d du

e to

pro

ject

act

iviti

es a

nd re

stor

e us

ing

loca

lly c

olle

cted

pla

nt m

ater

ials

spe

cific

to th

at

com

mun

ity.

M

onito

r all

reve

geta

ted

site

s fo

r fiv

e ye

ars

usin

g ap

prop

riate

per

form

ance

sta

ndar

ds.

3.6-

4:D

istu

rban

ce to

N

estin

g S

peci

al-S

tatu

s B

irds

S

ched

ule

cons

truct

ion

activ

ities

dur

ing

the

nonb

reed

ing

seas

on (S

epte

mbe

r 1 th

roug

h Ja

nuar

y 31

) to

the

exte

nt fe

asib

le. O

ther

wis

e im

plem

ent t

he

follo

win

g:

– R

etai

n a

qual

ified

wild

life

biol

ogis

t to

cond

uct p

reco

nstru

ctio

n su

rvey

s of

all

pote

ntia

l nes

ting

habi

tat w

ithin

500

feet

of c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ities

whe

re

acce

ss is

ava

ilabl

e.

– If

activ

e ne

sts

are

foun

d du

ring

prec

onst

ruct

ion

surv

eys,

cre

ate

a no

-dis

turb

ance

buf

fer (

acce

ptab

le in

siz

e to

the

CD

FG) a

roun

d ac

tive

rapt

or

nest

s an

d ne

sts

of o

ther

spe

cial

-sta

tus

bird

s du

ring

the

bree

ding

sea

son,

or u

ntil

it is

det

erm

ined

that

all

youn

g ha

ve fl

edge

d. T

ypic

al b

uffe

rs

incl

ude

500

feet

for r

apto

rs a

nd 2

50 fe

et fo

r oth

er n

estin

g bi

rds.

Con

duct

pre

cons

truct

ion

burr

owin

g ow

l sur

veys

in a

ll ar

eas

that

may

pro

vide

sui

tabl

e ha

bita

t for

this

spe

cies

. If p

rese

nt, a

void

dis

turb

ing

activ

e bu

rrow

ing

owl n

ests

dur

ing

the

bree

ding

sea

son

and

impl

emen

t sta

ndar

d C

DFG

gui

delin

es d

urin

g th

e no

nbre

edin

g se

ason

.

Avo

id d

istu

rbin

g w

inte

r roo

sts

of b

ald

eagl

es b

y pe

rform

ing

prec

onst

ruct

ion

surv

eys,

avo

idin

g kn

own

win

terin

g ha

bita

t, an

d cr

eatin

g no

-dis

turb

ance

bu

ffers

.

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-10

(Con

tinue

d)

SUM

MA

RY

OF

MIT

IGA

TIO

N M

EASU

RES

BY

IMPA

CT

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-3

8E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Impa

ct

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re(s

)

3.6-

5: D

istu

rban

ce to

Sp

ecia

l-Sta

tus

Bat

Spec

ies

P

rior t

o co

nstru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es (i

.e.,

grou

nd c

lear

ing

and

grad

ing,

incl

udin

g re

mov

al o

f tre

es o

r shr

ubs)

with

in 2

00 fe

et o

f tre

es th

at p

oten

tial s

uppo

rt sp

ecia

l-sta

tus

bats

, ret

ain

a qu

alifi

ed b

at b

iolo

gist

to s

urve

y fo

r spe

cial

-sta

tus

bats

. If p

rese

nt, c

reat

e a

no-d

istu

rban

ce b

uffe

r (ac

cept

able

in s

ize

to

the

CD

FG) a

roun

d ac

tive

bat r

oost

s du

ring

the

bree

ding

sea

son

(Apr

il 15

thro

ugh

Aug

ust 1

5).

3.6-

6:D

istu

rban

ce to

S

an F

ranc

isco

dus

ky-

foot

ed w

oodr

at

C

ondu

ct p

reco

nstru

ctio

n su

rvey

s to

iden

tify

poss

ible

nes

ts a

nd, i

f pre

sent

, avo

id o

r rel

ocat

e ne

sts

prio

r to

cons

truct

ion.

3.6-

7:D

egra

datio

n of

A

quat

ic H

abita

t and

S

ensi

tive

Spe

cies

Im

plem

ent b

est m

anag

emen

t pra

ctic

es (B

MP

s) fo

r con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es, t

o re

duce

pot

entia

l im

pact

s to

ste

elhe

ad a

nd o

ther

aqu

atic

spe

cies

and

ha

bita

t res

ultin

g fro

m s

edim

enta

tion,

turb

idity

, and

acc

iden

tal h

azar

dous

mat

eria

l inp

uts.

Impl

emen

t a b

iolo

gica

l res

ourc

e ed

ucat

ion

prog

ram

for c

onst

ruct

ion

crew

s an

d co

ntra

ctor

s th

at in

clud

es m

ater

ials

des

crib

ing

sens

itive

reso

urce

s,

reso

urce

avo

idan

ce, p

erm

it co

nditi

ons,

and

pos

sibl

e fin

es fo

r vio

latio

ns o

f sta

te o

r fed

eral

env

ironm

enta

l law

s.

M

onito

r con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es w

ithin

and

adj

acen

t to

aqua

tic a

nd ri

paria

n ha

bita

ts.

D

iver

t wat

er fr

om a

roun

d th

e se

ctio

n of

any

wor

ksite

that

is w

ithin

the

activ

ely

flow

ing

chan

nel o

f cre

eks.

Pla

ce s

edim

ent c

urta

ins

dow

nstre

am o

f the

con

stru

ctio

n or

mai

nten

ance

act

ivity

zon

e to

pre

vent

sed

imen

t dis

turb

ed d

urin

g tre

nchi

ng a

ctiv

ities

with

in

or n

ear c

reek

s.

If

grou

ndw

ater

is e

ncou

nter

ed, o

r if w

ater

rem

ains

with

in th

e w

orks

ite a

fter f

low

s ar

e di

verte

d, p

ump

out o

f the

con

stru

ctio

n ar

ea a

nd in

to a

sui

tabl

y co

nstru

cted

rete

ntio

n ba

sin.

Inst

all s

ilt fe

ncin

g in

all

area

s w

here

con

stru

ctio

n oc

curs

with

in 1

00 fe

et o

f act

ivel

y flo

win

g w

ater

.

Pre

pare

and

impl

emen

t a s

pill

prev

entio

n pl

an to

ens

ure

the

prop

er h

andl

ing

and

stor

age

of p

oten

tially

haz

ardo

us m

ater

ials

, as

wel

l as

the

prop

er

proc

edur

es fo

r cle

anin

g up

and

repo

rting

any

spi

lls. I

f nec

essa

ry, c

onst

ruct

con

tain

men

t ber

ms

to p

reve

nt s

pille

d m

ater

ials

from

reac

hing

the

cree

k ch

anne

ls.

S

tore

equ

ipm

ent a

nd m

ater

ials

at l

east

60

feet

from

wat

erw

ays.

No

debr

is (s

uch

as tr

ash

and

spoi

ls) d

epos

ition

with

in 1

00 fe

et o

f wet

land

s. L

ocat

e st

agin

g an

d st

orag

e ar

eas

for e

quip

men

t, m

ater

ials

, fue

ls, l

ubric

ants

, and

sol

vent

s ou

tsid

e of

the

stre

am c

hann

el a

nd b

anks

and

with

in th

e sm

alle

st

area

feas

ible

. Pla

ce d

rip p

ans

unde

r sta

tiona

ry e

quip

men

t suc

h as

mot

ors,

pum

ps, g

ener

ator

s, c

ompr

esso

rs, a

nd w

elde

rs lo

cate

d w

ithin

or a

djac

ent

to c

reek

.

Avo

id p

oten

tial h

abita

t for

Cal

iforn

ia re

d-le

gged

frog

thro

ugh

the

use

of b

ore-

and-

jack

or o

ther

tren

chle

ss c

onst

ruct

ion

tech

niqu

es. E

mpl

oy

reas

onab

le a

nd p

rude

nt m

easu

res

such

as

envi

ronm

enta

l tra

inin

g, c

onst

ruct

ion

equi

pmen

t and

mat

eria

ls s

tora

ge g

uide

lines

, silt

fenc

ing,

and

re

vege

tatio

n.

Avo

id d

istu

rbin

g w

este

rn p

ond

turtl

e, fo

othi

ll ye

llow

-legg

ed fr

og, a

nd th

eir h

abita

ts b

y co

nduc

ting

pre-

cons

truct

ion

surv

eys

to d

eter

min

e pr

esen

ce,

and

if ap

prop

riate

, by

tem

pora

rily

relo

catin

g an

y id

entif

ied

wes

tern

pon

d tu

rtles

or f

ooth

ill y

ello

w fr

ogs

upst

ream

of t

he c

onst

ruct

ion

site

, and

pla

cing

te

mpo

rary

bar

riers

aro

und

the

cons

truct

ion

site

to p

reve

nt in

gres

s.

3.7-

1:D

istu

rban

ce to

A

rcha

eolo

gica

l Site

s

In th

e ev

ent o

f acc

iden

tal d

isco

very

of c

ultu

ral r

esou

rces

, suc

h as

stru

ctur

al fe

atur

es, b

one,

she

ll, a

rtifa

cts,

hum

an re

mai

ns, a

rchi

tect

ural

rem

ains

(s

uch

as b

ricks

or o

ther

foun

datio

n el

emen

ts),

or h

isto

ric a

rcha

eolo

gica

l arti

fact

s (s

uch

as a

ntiq

ue g

lass

bot

tles,

cer

amic

s, h

orse

shoe

s, e

tc.),

su

spen

d w

ork,

and

reta

in a

qua

lifie

d cu

ltura

l res

ourc

e sp

ecia

list t

o in

vest

igat

e an

d de

term

ine

the

sign

ifica

nce

of th

e fin

d.

R

etai

n a

qual

ified

arc

haeo

logi

cal c

onsu

ltant

to m

onito

r gro

und-

dist

urbi

ng o

r veg

etat

ion

rem

oval

act

ivity

with

in 5

00 fe

et o

f a k

now

n ar

chae

olog

ical

si

te. I

f an

inta

ct a

rcha

eolo

gica

l dep

osit

is e

ncou

nter

ed, c

ease

all

soil-

dist

urbi

ng a

ctiv

ities

in th

e vi

cini

ty o

f the

dep

osit,

eva

luat

e th

e de

posi

t, an

d ta

ke

appr

opria

te re

med

ial a

ctio

ns.

3.7-

2:D

istu

rban

ce to

P

aleo

ntol

ogic

al S

ites

In

the

even

t a fo

ssil

is d

isco

vere

d du

ring

cons

truct

ion,

exc

avat

ions

with

in 5

0 fe

et o

f the

find

unt

il th

e di

scov

ery

is e

xam

ined

by

a qu

alifi

ed

pale

onto

logi

st, h

alt t

he s

igni

fican

ce o

f the

find

eva

luat

ed, a

nd a

ppro

pria

te re

med

ial a

ctio

ns ta

ken.

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-10

(Con

tinue

d)

SUM

MA

RY

OF

MIT

IGA

TIO

N M

EASU

RES

BY

IMPA

CT

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-3

9E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Impa

ct

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re(s

)

3.7-

3:D

istu

rban

ce o

r A

ltera

tion

to H

isto

ric

Res

ourc

es

P

rovi

de a

dditi

onal

land

scap

ing

arou

nd s

ensi

tive

treat

men

t pla

nt a

nd d

istri

butio

n fa

cilit

ies

to s

cree

n el

emen

ts fr

om v

iew

and

sof

ten

thei

r vis

ual

appe

aran

ce.

3.8-

1:C

onst

ruct

ion

Traf

fic In

crea

ses

3.8-

2:R

estri

cted

Tra

vel

Lane

s3.

8-3:

On-

Stre

et P

arki

ng

Dis

plac

emen

t3.

8-4:

Traf

fic S

afet

y H

azar

ds

3.8-

5:A

cces

s D

isru

ptio

n 3.

8-6:

Tran

sit S

ervi

ce

Dis

rupt

ion

O

btai

n an

y ne

cess

ary

road

enc

roac

hmen

t per

mits

prio

r to

cons

truct

ion.

Coo

rdin

ate

deve

lopm

ent o

f a tr

affic

saf

ety

/ tra

ffic

man

agem

ent p

lan

(for w

ork

in th

e pu

blic

righ

t-of-w

ay) w

ith a

genc

ies

havi

ng ju

risdi

ctio

n ov

er th

e af

fect

ed ro

ads.

Dev

elop

circ

ulat

ion

and

deto

ur p

lans

to m

inim

ize

impa

cts

to lo

cal s

treet

circ

ulat

ion.

Use

hau

l rou

tes

min

imiz

ing

truck

traf

fic o

n lo

cal r

oadw

ays

to th

e ex

tent

pos

sibl

e. U

se fl

agge

rs a

nd/o

r sig

nage

to g

uide

veh

icle

s th

roug

h an

d/or

aro

und

the

cons

truct

ion

zone

.

Con

trol a

nd m

onito

r con

stru

ctio

n ve

hicl

e m

ovem

ents

thro

ugh

the

enfo

rcem

ent o

f sta

ndar

d co

nstru

ctio

n sp

ecifi

catio

ns b

y pe

riodi

c on

site

insp

ectio

ns.

To

the

exte

nt fe

asib

le, a

nd a

s ne

eded

to a

void

adv

erse

impa

cts

on tr

affic

flow

, sch

edul

e tru

ck tr

ips

outs

ide

of p

eak

mor

ning

and

eve

ning

com

mut

e ho

urs.

Li

mit

lane

clo

sure

s du

ring

peak

hou

rs to

the

exte

nt p

ossi

ble.

Res

tore

road

s an

d st

reet

s to

nor

mal

ope

ratio

n by

cov

erin

g tre

nche

s w

ith s

teel

pla

tes

outs

ide

of a

llow

ed w

orki

ng h

ours

or w

hen

wor

k is

not

in p

rogr

ess.

Lim

it, w

here

pos

sibl

e, th

e pi

pelin

e co

nstru

ctio

n w

ork

zone

to a

wid

th th

at, a

t a m

inim

um, m

aint

ains

alte

rnat

e on

e-w

ay tr

affic

flow

pas

t the

co

nstru

ctio

n zo

ne. P

arki

ng m

ay b

e pr

ohib

ited

if ne

cess

ary

to fa

cilit

ate

cons

truct

ion

activ

ities

or t

raffi

c m

ovem

ent.

If th

e w

ork

zone

wid

th lo

ss n

ot

allo

w a

10-

foot

-wid

e pa

ved

trave

l lan

e, th

en c

lose

the

road

to th

roug

h-tra

ffic

(exc

ept e

mer

genc

y ve

hicl

es) a

nd u

se d

etou

r sig

ning

for a

ltern

ativ

e ac

cess

stre

ets.

Incl

ude

sign

age

to d

irect

ped

estri

ans

and

bicy

clis

ts a

roun

d pr

ojec

t con

stru

ctio

n w

ork

zone

s th

at d

ispl

ace

side

wal

ks a

nd/o

r bik

e la

nes.

Sto

re a

ll eq

uipm

ent a

nd m

ater

ials

in d

esig

nate

d co

ntra

ctor

sta

ging

are

as o

n or

adj

acen

t to

the

wor

ksite

in s

uch

a m

anne

r to

min

imiz

e ob

stru

ctio

n to

tra

ffic.

Id

entif

y lo

catio

ns fo

r par

king

by

cons

truct

ion

wor

kers

(with

in th

e co

nstru

ctio

n zo

ne o

r, if

need

ed, a

t a n

earb

y lo

catio

n w

ith tr

ansp

ort p

rovi

ded

betw

een

the

park

ing

loca

tion

and

the

wor

ksite

).

Com

ply

with

road

side

saf

ety

prot

ocol

s. P

rovi

de “R

oad

Wor

k A

head

” war

ning

sig

ns a

nd s

peed

con

trol (

incl

udin

g si

gns

info

rmin

g dr

iver

s of

st

ate-

legi

slat

ed d

oubl

e fin

es fo

r spe

ed in

fract

ions

in a

con

stru

ctio

n zo

ne) t

o ac

hiev

e re

quire

d sp

eed

redu

ctio

ns fo

r saf

e tra

ffic

flow

thro

ugh

the

wor

k zo

ne.

C

oord

inat

e w

ith fa

cilit

y ow

ners

or a

dmin

istra

tors

of s

ensi

tive

land

use

s su

ch a

s po

lice

and

fire

stat

ions

, tra

nsit

stat

ions

, hos

pita

ls, a

nd s

choo

ls.

Pro

vide

adv

ance

not

ifica

tion

to th

e fa

cilit

y ow

ner o

r ope

rato

r of t

he ti

min

g, lo

catio

n, a

nd d

urat

ion

of c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ities

and

the

loca

tions

of

deto

urs

and

lane

clo

sure

s.

C

oord

inat

e co

nstru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es, t

o ex

tent

pos

sibl

e, to

min

imiz

e tra

ffic

dist

urba

nces

adj

acen

t to

scho

ols

(e.g

., do

wor

k du

ring

sum

mer

mon

ths

whe

n th

ere

is le

ss a

ctiv

ity a

t sch

ools

). Fo

r con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es th

at o

ccur

dur

ing

the

scho

ol y

ear,

prov

ide

flagg

ers

in th

e sc

hool

are

as to

ens

ure

traffi

c an

d pe

dest

rian

safe

ty.

C

oord

inat

e w

ith th

e C

ount

y C

onne

ctio

n so

the

trans

it pr

ovid

er c

an te

mpo

raril

y re

loca

te b

us ro

utes

or b

us s

tops

in w

ork

zone

s as

it d

eem

s ne

cess

ary.

To th

e ex

tent

feas

ible

, and

as

need

ed to

avo

id a

dver

se im

pact

s on

traf

fic fl

ow, s

ched

ule

cons

truct

ion

of p

roje

ct e

lem

ents

to a

void

ove

rlapp

ing

max

imum

trip

-gen

erat

ion

cons

truct

ion

phas

es.

3.8-

7: R

oad

Dam

age

and

Wea

r

Prio

r to

proj

ect c

onst

ruct

ion,

doc

umen

t roa

d co

nditi

ons

for a

ll ro

utes

to b

e us

ed b

y pr

ojec

t-rel

ated

veh

icle

s. R

epai

r roa

ds d

amag

ed b

y co

nstru

ctio

n to

a

stru

ctur

al c

ondi

tion

at le

ast e

qual

to th

at w

hich

exi

sted

prio

r to

cons

truct

ion

activ

ity.

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-10

(Con

tinue

d)

SUM

MA

RY

OF

MIT

IGA

TIO

N M

EASU

RES

BY

IMPA

CT

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-4

0E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Impa

ct

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re(s

)

3.9-

1:D

ust a

nd E

xhau

st

Em

issi

on In

crea

ses

M

aint

ain

dust

con

trol w

ithin

the

site

and

pro

vide

ade

quat

e m

easu

res

to p

reve

nt a

dus

t pro

blem

for n

eigh

bors

. Use

wat

er s

prin

klin

g, te

mpo

rary

en

clos

ures

, and

oth

er s

uita

ble

met

hods

to li

mit

the

risin

g of

dus

t and

dirt

. Ens

ure

that

no

visi

ble

dust

clo

uds

exte

nd b

eyon

d th

e pr

ojec

t bou

ndar

ies

or

exte

nd m

ore

than

50

feet

from

the

sour

ce o

f any

ons

ite p

roje

ct c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ities

.

Load

truc

ks in

a m

anne

r to

prev

ent m

ater

ials

or d

ebris

from

dro

ppin

g on

stre

ets.

Trim

load

s an

d re

mov

e al

l mat

eria

l fro

m s

helf

area

s of

veh

icle

s to

pr

even

t spi

llage

. Tak

e pr

ecau

tions

whe

n ne

cess

ary

to a

void

cre

stin

g du

st a

nd li

tterin

g by

wat

erin

g th

e lo

ad a

fter t

rimm

ing

and

by p

rom

ptly

sw

eepi

ng

the

pave

men

t to

rem

ove

dirt

and

dust

.

Cov

er a

ll tru

cks

haul

ing

soil,

san

d, a

nd o

ther

loos

e m

ater

ials

.

Pav

e, a

pply

wat

er, o

r app

ly n

onto

xic

soil

stab

ilize

rs o

r roc

k on

all

unpa

ved

acce

ss ro

ads,

par

king

are

as, a

nd s

tagi

ng a

reas

at c

onst

ruct

ion

site

s.

S

wee

p da

ily w

ith w

ater

sw

eepe

rs a

ll pa

ved

acce

ss ro

ads,

par

king

are

as, a

nd s

tagi

ng a

reas

at c

onst

ruct

ion

site

s.

S

wee

p st

reet

s da

ily w

ith w

ater

sw

eepe

rs if

vis

ible

soi

l mat

eria

l is

carr

ied

onto

adj

acen

t pub

lic s

treet

s.

H

ydro

seed

or a

pply

non

toxi

c so

il st

abili

zers

to in

activ

e co

nstru

ctio

n ar

eas

(pre

viou

sly

grad

ed a

reas

inac

tive

for 1

0 da

ys o

r mor

e).

E

nclo

se, c

over

, wat

er, o

r app

ly n

onto

xic

soil

bind

ers

to e

xpos

ed s

tock

pile

s (d

irt, s

and,

etc

.).

Li

mit

traffi

c sp

eeds

on

unpa

ved

road

s to

15

mile

s pe

r hou

r.

Inst

all s

andb

ags

or o

ther

ero

sion

con

trol m

easu

res

to p

reve

nt s

ilt ru

noff

to p

ublic

road

way

s.

R

epla

nt v

eget

atio

n in

dis

turb

ed a

reas

as

quic

kly

as p

ossi

ble.

Use

line

pow

er in

stea

d of

die

sel g

ener

ator

s at

all

cons

truct

ion

site

s w

here

line

pow

er is

ava

ilabl

e. L

ine

pow

er w

ill b

e us

ed a

t the

tunn

el e

ntry

and

exi

t sh

afts

for t

he O

rinda

-Laf

ayet

te A

qued

uct p

roje

ct.

Li

mit

the

idlin

g of

all

mob

ile a

nd s

tatio

nary

con

stru

ctio

n eq

uipm

ent t

o fiv

e m

inut

es; l

imit

the

idlin

g of

all

dies

el-fu

eled

com

mer

cial

veh

icle

s (w

eigh

ing

over

10,

000

poun

ds, b

oth

Cal

iforn

ia- o

r non

-Cal

iforn

ia-b

ased

truc

ks) t

o 30

sec

onds

at a

sch

ool o

r fiv

e m

inut

es a

t any

loca

tion.

In a

dditi

on, l

imit

the

use

of d

iese

l aux

iliar

y po

wer

sys

tem

s an

d m

ain

engi

nes

to fi

ve m

inut

es w

hen

with

in 1

00 fe

et o

f hom

es o

r sch

ools

whi

le d

river

is re

stin

g.

O

pera

te a

ny s

tatio

nary

, die

sel-f

uele

d, c

ompr

essi

on-ig

nitio

n en

gine

s as

par

t of c

onst

ruct

ion

of W

TTIP

faci

litie

s to

com

ply

with

app

licab

le fu

el a

nd fu

el

addi

tive

requ

irem

ents

and

em

issi

on s

tand

ards

.

If st

atio

nary

equ

ipm

ent (

such

as

gene

rato

rs fo

r ven

tilat

ion

fans

) mus

t be

oper

ated

con

tinuo

usly

, loc

ate

such

equ

ipm

ent a

t lea

st 1

00 fe

et fr

om h

omes

or

sch

ools

whe

re p

ossi

ble.

Per

form

tune

-ups

regu

larly

for a

ll eq

uipm

ent,

parti

cula

rly fo

r hau

l and

del

iver

y tru

cks.

3.9-

3:V

entil

atio

n Fa

n E

mis

sion

s

For a

ny p

roje

cts

that

wou

ld re

quire

a tu

nnel

ven

tilat

ion

syst

em, i

f hyd

roge

n su

lfide

gas

or a

ny o

ther

odo

rous

gas

es a

re e

ncou

nter

ed d

urin

g tu

nnel

ex

cava

tion

and

beco

me

a nu

isan

ce o

dor p

robl

em (i

nclu

ding

die

sel e

xhau

st),

add

wat

er s

crub

bers

and

app

ropr

iate

che

mic

als

to th

e ve

ntila

tion

syst

em to

rem

ove

the

nuis

ance

odo

rs.

3.10

-1:C

onst

ruct

ion

Noi

se

Man

age

cons

truct

ion

activ

ities

at t

he c

onst

ruct

ion

site

so

that

they

do

not c

ause

day

time

nois

e le

vels

to e

xcee

d th

e 70

-dB

A s

peec

h in

terfe

renc

e cr

iterio

n at

the

clos

est a

ffect

ed s

ensi

tive

rece

ptor

s, n

or b

e in

cons

iste

nt w

ith lo

cal o

rdin

ance

s, w

here

feas

ible

.

Lim

it tru

ck o

pera

tions

(hau

l tru

cks

and

conc

rete

del

iver

y tru

cks)

to s

peci

fied

dayt

ime

hour

s.

U

se b

est a

vaila

ble

nois

e co

ntro

l tec

hniq

ues

(incl

udin

g m

uffle

rs, i

ntak

e si

lenc

ers,

duc

ts, e

ngin

e en

clos

ures

, and

aco

ustic

ally

atte

nuat

ing

shie

lds

or

shro

uds)

for a

ll eq

uipm

ent a

nd tr

ucks

as

nece

ssar

y.

If

impa

ct e

quip

men

t (e.

g., j

ack

ham

mer

s, p

avem

ent b

reak

ers,

and

rock

dril

ls) i

s us

ed d

urin

g pr

ojec

t con

stru

ctio

n, u

se h

ydra

ulic

ally

or e

lect

ric-

pow

ered

equ

ipm

ent w

here

ver p

ossi

ble

to a

void

the

nois

e as

soci

ated

with

com

pres

sed-

air e

xhau

st fr

om p

neum

atic

ally

pow

ered

tool

s. H

owev

er,

whe

re s

uch

use

is u

navo

idab

le, u

se a

n ex

haus

t muf

fler o

n th

e co

mpr

esse

d-ai

r exh

aust

. Use

ext

erna

l jac

kets

on

the

tool

s th

emse

lves

, whe

re

feas

ible

. Em

ploy

qui

eter

pro

cedu

res,

suc

h as

dril

ling

rath

er th

an im

pact

equ

ipm

ent,

whe

neve

r fea

sibl

e.

W

here

ver p

ile d

rivin

g is

requ

ired

(pos

sibl

y at

tunn

el s

hafts

, jac

k-an

d-bo

re p

it sh

afts

, Mor

aga

Res

ervo

ir an

d Ti

ce P

umpi

ng P

lant

site

s), p

redr

ill p

ile

hole

s to

min

imiz

e th

e du

ratio

n of

pile

driv

ing.

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-10

(Con

tinue

d)

SUM

MA

RY

OF

MIT

IGA

TIO

N M

EASU

RES

BY

IMPA

CT

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-4

1E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Impa

ct

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re(s

)

3.10

-1:C

onst

ruct

ion

Noi

se (c

ont.)

Lo

cate

sta

tiona

ry n

oise

sou

rces

as

far f

rom

sen

sitiv

e re

cept

ors

as p

ossi

ble.

If th

ey m

ust b

e lo

cate

d ne

ar re

cept

ors,

use

ade

quat

e m

uffli

ng (w

ith

encl

osur

es).

Orie

nt e

nclo

sure

ope

ning

or v

entin

g aw

ay fr

om s

ensi

tive

rece

ptor

s.

Lo

cate

mat

eria

l sto

ckpi

les

as w

ell a

s m

aint

enan

ce/e

quip

men

t sta

ging

and

par

king

are

as a

s fa

r as

prac

ticab

le fr

om re

side

nces

and

sch

ools

.

If an

y pi

pelin

e co

nstru

ctio

n zo

nes

are

loca

ted

with

in 5

0 fe

et o

f sch

ool c

lass

room

s or

chi

ldca

re fa

cilit

ies,

sch

edul

e pi

pelin

e co

nstru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es (o

r at

leas

t the

noi

sier

pha

ses

of c

onst

ruct

ion)

on

wee

kend

or s

choo

l vac

atio

n da

ys to

the

exte

nt fe

asib

le, a

void

ing

wee

kday

hou

rs w

hen

scho

ols

are

in

sess

ion.

D

esig

nate

a c

onta

ct p

erso

n re

spon

sibl

e fo

r res

pond

ing

to c

onst

ruct

ion-

rela

ted

issu

es, i

nclu

ding

noi

se.

Li

mit

cons

truct

ion

at th

e W

TTIP

pro

ject

site

s to

the

hour

s of

ope

ratio

n sp

ecifi

ed b

y ea

ch ju

risdi

ctio

n’s

nois

e or

dina

nce

exce

pt d

urin

g cr

itica

l wat

er

serv

ice

outa

ges

or o

ther

em

erge

ncie

s an

d sp

ecia

l situ

atio

ns. W

here

feas

ible

, sub

ject

any

equ

ipm

ent o

pera

ting

beyo

nd th

ese

hour

s to

the

day

and

nigh

t noi

se li

mits

of e

ach

juris

dict

ion

for v

ario

us a

ctiv

ities

in s

ingl

e-fa

mily

resi

dent

ial z

ones

.

Con

duct

a n

oise

mon

itorin

g pr

ogra

m p

rior t

o im

plem

enta

tion

of a

ny p

roje

ct w

here

con

stru

ctio

n w

ould

ext

end

beyo

nd o

rdin

ance

tim

e lim

its to

ac

cura

tely

det

erm

ine

base

line

ambi

ent n

oise

leve

ls a

t the

clo

sest

resi

dent

ial r

ecep

tors

and

to m

easu

re in

crea

ses

in n

oise

leve

ls a

t the

se re

cept

ors

durin

g a

test

run

of e

quip

men

t pro

pose

d to

be

oper

ated

on

the

site

dur

ing

the

mor

e no

ise-

sens

itive

nig

httim

e ho

urs.

Adj

ust p

roje

ct n

oise

lim

its a

nd/o

r in

corp

orat

e ad

ditio

nal c

ontro

l mea

sure

s (e

.g.,

soun

d ba

rrie

rs) a

s en

gine

con

trols

, app

ropr

iate

dep

endi

ng o

n th

e re

sults

of t

his

mon

itorin

g pr

ogra

m.

A

t the

Upp

er S

an L

eand

ro W

TP, m

ake

a re

ason

able

effo

rt to

lim

it op

erat

ion

of im

pact

con

stru

ctio

n eq

uipm

ent t

o le

ss th

an 1

0 da

ys to

be

cons

iste

nt

with

Oak

land

Noi

se O

rdin

ance

con

stru

ctio

n no

ise

limits

. How

ever

, if t

his

limit

cann

ot b

e m

et, c

onst

ruct

ion

at th

is s

ite w

ill o

ccur

in a

man

ner

cons

iste

nt w

ith th

e O

akla

nd C

ity C

ounc

il A

dopt

ed C

onst

ruct

ion

Noi

se M

itiga

tion

Mea

sure

s to

the

exte

nt fe

asib

le.

R

educ

e co

nstru

ctio

n-re

late

d no

ise

leve

ls a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith th

e O

rinda

-Laf

ayet

te A

qued

uct a

nd a

ny o

ther

WTT

IP p

roje

cts

that

invo

lve

cons

truct

ion

of

tunn

el s

hafts

(inc

ludi

ng ja

ck-a

nd-b

ore

pits

) by

reta

inin

g an

aco

ustic

al e

ngin

eer t

o de

sign

sou

nd a

bate

men

t mea

sure

s th

at w

ill m

eet t

he lo

cal

ordi

nanc

e lim

its, t

o th

e ex

tent

pos

sibl

e. A

mon

g ot

her t

hing

s, th

e ac

oust

ical

eng

inee

r will

pro

vide

des

ign

spec

ifica

tions

for t

he s

ound

bar

rier d

esig

n an

d th

e sp

ecifi

c ve

ntila

tion

fan

to b

e us

ed (b

ased

on

type

, siz

e, o

rient

atio

n, lo

catio

n, e

xhau

st, e

tc.)

at tu

nnel

por

tals

.

Use

qui

et tu

nnel

ven

tilat

ion

fans

dire

cted

aw

ay fr

om s

ensi

tive

rece

ptor

s. A

dditi

onal

mea

sure

s th

at c

ould

be

empl

oyed

to re

duce

fan

nois

e, if

ne

cess

ary,

incl

ude

encl

osin

g fa

ns, t

reat

ing

the

inte

rior s

urfa

ce o

f the

enc

losu

re fo

r aco

ustic

al a

bsor

ptio

n, o

r usi

ng s

ilenc

ers

or a

cous

tical

ly li

ned

inle

t pl

ena

to c

ontro

l the

inle

t noi

se.

P

rior t

o co

nstru

ctio

n, ta

ke b

asel

ine

nois

e m

easu

rem

ents

at t

he e

ntry

and

exi

t sha

fts. I

f bas

elin

e am

bien

t noi

se le

vels

alre

ady

exce

ed a

pplic

able

no

ise

ordi

nanc

e lim

its a

t the

clo

sest

resi

dent

ial r

ecep

tors

, adj

ust t

he p

roje

ct n

oise

lim

its a

ppro

pria

tely

so

that

con

stru

ctio

n no

ise

leve

ls d

o no

t res

ult

in a

not

icea

ble

incr

ease

in a

mbi

ent n

oise

leve

ls a

t the

se re

cept

ors.

Cea

se lo

ader

ope

ratio

ns a

t the

sur

face

(the

are

a ou

tsid

e th

e tu

nnel

sha

ft) in

the

tunn

el p

orta

l vic

initi

es a

t 6 p

.m. o

n w

eekd

ays

and

do n

ot o

pera

te o

n w

eeke

nds

exce

pt d

urin

g cr

itica

l wat

er s

ervi

ce o

utag

es o

r oth

er e

mer

genc

ies

and

spec

ial s

ituat

ions

.

Con

stru

ct b

ins

used

to tr

ansp

ort s

poils

, inc

ludi

ng ro

cks

and

debr

is, o

f non

met

allic

mat

eria

l or h

ave

a no

nmet

allic

line

r (su

ch a

s ca

rdbo

ard)

, if

feas

ible

. Per

form

muc

k bo

x tip

ping

/dum

ping

at t

he s

urfa

ce in

a m

anne

r tha

t min

imiz

es c

lang

ing,

ban

ging

, or b

oom

ing

nois

es (m

etal

to m

etal

con

tact

) du

ring

even

ing

and

nigh

ttim

e ho

urs

(6 p

.m. t

o 8:

00 a

.m. o

n w

eekd

ays)

.

Res

trict

und

ergr

ound

con

trolle

d de

tona

tion

in th

e tu

nnel

sha

ft ar

eas

to th

e ho

urs

of 8

:00

a.m

. to

6:00

p.m

. Lim

it th

e am

ount

of e

xplo

sive

and

the

dela

y tim

es o

f any

exp

losi

ve c

harg

es u

sed

so a

s to

pro

duce

a m

axim

um n

oise

leve

l at t

he c

lose

st a

djac

ent r

ecep

tor o

f 60

dBA

(Ldn

).

Do

not o

pera

te b

acku

p al

arm

s on

any

equ

ipm

ent d

urin

g ni

ghtti

me

hour

s (1

0:00

p.m

. to

7:00

a.m

.).

E

rect

sou

nd b

arrie

rs a

roun

d th

e tu

nnel

ent

ry a

nd e

xit s

hafts

to m

inim

ize

nois

e im

pact

s on

adj

acen

t rec

epto

rs.

Lo

cate

pro

pose

d ja

ck-a

nd-b

ore

pits

as

far f

rom

sen

sitiv

e re

cept

ors

as te

chni

cally

feas

ible

.

Whe

reve

r a s

ensi

tive

rece

ptor

is lo

cate

d w

ithin

150

feet

of a

con

stru

ctio

n si

te a

t a tr

eatm

ent p

lant

, res

ervo

ir, o

r pum

ping

pla

nt, a

nd a

t bot

h tu

nnel

sh

afts

, pro

vide

tem

pora

ry s

ound

bar

riers

bet

wee

n th

e co

nstru

ctio

n si

te a

nd th

e cl

oses

t rec

epto

rs to

redu

ce n

oise

leve

ls to

bel

ow th

e sp

eech

in

terfe

renc

e cr

iterio

n at

the

clos

est r

ecep

tor.

Use

sou

nd-a

bsor

bing

bla

nket

s at

app

ropr

iate

loca

tions

as

nece

ssar

y.

Lo

cate

any

ope

ning

s in

sou

nd b

arrie

rs th

at a

re p

rovi

ded

for t

ruck

/veh

icle

acc

ess

away

from

sen

sitiv

e re

cept

ors.

Sum

mar

y

TAB

LE S

-10

(Con

tinue

d)

SUM

MA

RY

OF

MIT

IGA

TIO

N M

EASU

RES

BY

IMPA

CT

EB

MU

D W

TTIP

S-4

2E

SA

/ 20

4369

E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t Ju

ne 2

006

Impa

ct

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re(s

)

3.10

-3:C

onst

ruct

ion

Vib

ratio

n

Lim

it su

rface

vib

ratio

n to

no

mor

e th

an 0

.5 in

/sec

PP

V, m

easu

red

at th

e ne

ares

t res

iden

tial o

r oth

er s

ensi

tive

stru

ctur

e. C

ondu

ct m

onito

ring

to v

erify

.

Prio

r to

any

cont

rolle

d de

tona

tions

, per

form

test

s to

det

erm

ine

the

rock

pro

perti

es s

o th

at v

ibra

tions

from

the

blas

t rem

ain

with

in th

e re

quire

d P

PV

lim

it of

0.5

in/s

ec a

t the

nea

rest

stru

ctur

e.

To

the

exte

nt p

ossi

ble,

not

ify re

side

nts

in th

e po

tent

ially

affe

cted

are

a in

adv

ance

of c

ontro

lled

deto

natio

n ac

tiviti

es.

3.10

-4:O

pera

tiona

l N

oise

E

nclo

se p

umpi

ng a

nd e

mer

genc

y ge

nera

tor f

acili

ties,

and

loca

te v

ents

on

the

build

ing

faca

des

faci

ng a

way

from

adj

acen

t res

iden

tial r

ecep

tors

.

Con

stru

ct m

ason

ry s

ound

bar

riers

aro

und

trans

form

ers,

and

mak

e su

bsta

tions

of s

uffic

ient

hei

ght t

o pr

ovid

e at

leas

t 10

dB o

r mor

e of

noi

se

atte

nuat

ion.

3.11

-1:E

xpos

ure

to

Haz

ardo

us m

ater

ials

in

Soi

l

Fo

r con

stru

ctio

n of

all

faci

litie

s re

quiri

ng e

xcav

atio

n of

mor

e th

an 5

0 cu

bic

yard

s of

soi

l, co

nduc

t a P

hase

I an

d, if

war

rant

ed, P

hase

II e

nviro

nmen

tal

site

ass

essm

ent a

nd ta

ke re

med

ial a

ctio

ns a

s ap

prop

riate

.

3.11

-2:E

xpos

ure

to

Haz

ardo

us M

ater

ials

R

elat

ed to

Bui

ldin

g D

emol

ition

C

ondu

ct a

haz

ardo

us b

uild

ing

mat

eria

ls s

urve

y fo

r eac

h of

the

stru

ctur

es s

ubje

ct to

dem

oliti

on o

r ren

ovat

ion

activ

ities

and

take

app

ropr

iate

ab

atem

ent a

ctio

n, s

uch

as c

onta

inm

ent a

nd/o

r rem

oval

.

3.12

-1:D

amag

e to

E

xist

ing

Util

ities

Loca

te o

verh

ead

and

unde

rgro

und

utili

ty li

nes,

suc

h as

nat

ural

gas

, ele

ctric

ity, s

ewag

e, te

leph

one,

fuel

, and

wat

er li

nes

that

may

reas

onab

ly b

e ex

pect

ed to

be

enco

unte

red

durin

g ex

cava

tion

wor

k.

H

ighl

ight

all

high

-prio

rity

utili

ties

in c

onst

ruct

ion

draw

ings

.

Coo

rdin

ate

regu

larly

on

plan

ned

exca

vatio

n oc

curr

ing

near

a h

igh

prio

rity

utili

ty.

S

peci

fy a

saf

e di

stan

ce to

wor

k ne

ar h

igh-

pres

sure

gas

line

s, a

nd d

o no

t aut

horiz

e ex

cava

tion

clos

er to

the

pipe

line

until

the

desi

gnat

ed h

ealth

and

sa

fety

offi

cer c

onfir

ms

and

docu

men

ts in

the

cons

truct

ion

reco

rds

that

: (1)

the

line

was

app

ropr

iate

ly lo

cate

d in

the

field

by

the

utili

ty o

wne

r usi

ng a

s-bu

ilt d

raw

ings

and

a p

ipel

ine-

loca

ting

devi

ce, a

nd (2

) the

loca

tion

was

ver

ified

by

hand

by

the

cons

truct

ion

cont

ract

or.

P

rote

ct, s

uppo

rt, o

r rem

ove

unde

rgro

und

utili

ties

as n

eces

sary

to s

afeg

uard

em

ploy

ees.

Not

ify lo

cal f

ire d

epar

tmen

ts a

ny ti

me

dam

age

to a

gas

util

ity re

sults

in a

leak

or s

uspe

cted

leak

, or w

hene

ver d

amag

e to

any

util

ity re

sults

in a

thre

at

to p

ublic

saf

ety.

Pro

mpt

ly c

onta

ct u

tility

ow

ner i

f any

dam

age

occu

rs a

s a

resu

lt of

the

proj

ect a

nd re

conn

ect d

isco

nnec

ted

cabl

es a

nd li

nes

with

ow

ner a

ppro

val.

O

bser

ve D

epar

tmen

t of H

ealth

Ser

vice

s (D

HS

) sta

ndar

ds, w

hich

requ

ire: (

1) a

10-

foot

hor

izon

tal s

epar

atio

n be

twee

n pa

ralle

l sew

age

and

wat

er

mai

ns (g

ravi

ty o

r for

ce m

ains

); (2

) a 1

-foot

ver

tical

sep

arat

ion

betw

een

perp

endi

cula

r wat

er a

nd s

ewag

e lin

e cr

ossi

ngs;

and

(3) e

ncas

emen

t of

sew

age

mai

ns in

pro

tect

ive

slee

ves

whe

re a

new

wat

er li

ne c

ross

es u

nder

or o

ver a

n ex

istin

g w

aste

wat

er m

ain.

Coo

rdin

ate

final

con

stru

ctio

n pl

ans

and

spec

ifica

tions

with

affe

cted

util

ities

, suc

h as

PG

&E

.

3.12

-4:L

andf

ill C

apac

ity

Red

uctio

n

Enc

oura

ge p

roje

ct fa

cilit

y de

sign

and

con

stru

ctio

n m

etho

ds th

at p

rodu

ce le

ss w

aste

, or t

hat p

rodu

ce w

aste

that

cou

ld m

ore

read

ily b

e re

cycl

ed o

r re

used

.

ebmud water treatment and transmission improvements program · ebmud water treatment and...

Documents