Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-16-2016 Item 12 Council Reading File - SLOWRRFPublicDraftEIR_FINAWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Final Environmental Impact Report SCH # 2015101044 July 2016 Prepared by: City of San Luis Obispo, Utilities Department 879 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Prepared with the Assistance of: Rincon Consultants, Inc. 1530 Monterey Street, Suite D San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Report SCH: 2015101044 Prepared by: City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department 879 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Contact: David Hix Prepared with the assistance of: Rincon Consultants, Inc. 1530 Monterey Street, Suite D San Luis Obispo, California 93401 This report is printed on 50% recycled paper with 10% post-consumer content. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Table of Contents City of San Luis Obispo i Table of Contents Page Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................. 1 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 21 1.1 WRRF Project Program Charter ............................................................................................. 21 1.2 Purpose and Intended Uses of this Final Project Environmental Impact Report ........... 22 1.3 Administration of the Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program in California ......... 22 1.4 Relationship to the San Luis Obispo 2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report22 1.5 Scope of this FinaL Environmental Impact Report ............................................................. 23 1.6 Effects Found Not to be Significant ....................................................................................... 23 1.7 Agency Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................................................ 24 1.7.1 Lead Agency ..................................................................................................................... 24 1.7.2 Responsible and Trustee Agencies ................................................................................ 24 1.8 Public Review Process ............................................................................................................. 26 1.9 EIR Organization ...................................................................................................................... 26 1.10 Standard Terminology ............................................................................................................ 27 2 Project Description ....................................................................................................................... 29 2.1 Project Applicant ...................................................................................................................... 29 2.2 Project Location ........................................................................................................................ 29 2.3 Project Site Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 32 2.4 Proposed Project ....................................................................................................................... 32 2.4.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 32 2.4.2 Project Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 35 2.5 Project Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 54 2.6 Required Approvals ................................................................................................................ 55 2.7 Intended Uses of the EIR ......................................................................................................... 56 3 Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures ................................................ 57 3.1 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................ 59 3.1.1 Setting ................................................................................................................................ 59 3.1.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................... 64 3.1.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................................................................. 68 3.2 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................ 79 3.2.1 Setting ................................................................................................................................ 79 3.2.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................... 89 3.2.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................................................................. 92 3.3 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................. 109 3.3.1 Cultural Resources Setting ............................................................................................ 109 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Table of Contents City of San Luis Obispo ii 3.3.2 Geologic Setting .............................................................................................................. 115 3.3.3 Paleontological Sensitivity of Mapped Units ............................................................. 116 3.3.4 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................. 116 3.3.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 120 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................... 131 3.4.1 Setting .............................................................................................................................. 131 3.4.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................. 135 3.4.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 139 3.5 Noise ........................................................................................................................................ 145 3.5.1 Setting .............................................................................................................................. 145 3.5.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................. 148 3.5.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 150 3.6 Recreation ................................................................................................................................ 157 3.6.1 Setting .............................................................................................................................. 157 3.6.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................. 158 3.6.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 162 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................. 165 3.7.1 Setting .............................................................................................................................. 165 3.7.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................. 168 3.7.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 173 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................................................... 181 3.8.1 Setting .............................................................................................................................. 181 3.8.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................. 182 3.8.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 189 3.9 Public Services/Utilities ........................................................................................................ 197 3.9.1 Setting .............................................................................................................................. 197 3.9.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................. 200 3.9.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 205 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant ..................................................................................... 211 3.10.1 Aesthetics ........................................................................................................................ 211 3.10.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources ................................................................................ 212 3.10.3 Geology and Soils ........................................................................................................... 213 3.10.4 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................. 215 3.10.5 Mineral Resources .......................................................................................................... 216 3.10.6 Population and Housing ............................................................................................... 216 3.10.7 Transportation/Traffic .................................................................................................. 217 4 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations........................................................................................ 221 4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 221 4.2 Growth-Inducing Impacts .................................................................................................... 221 4.2.1 Direct Inducement of Growth ...................................................................................... 222 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Table of Contents City of San Luis Obispo iii 4.2.2 Indirect Inducement of Growth - Removal of Obstacles to Growth ....................... 222 4.2.3 Economic and Population Growth .............................................................................. 222 4.3 Cumulative Effects ................................................................................................................. 222 4.3.1 CEQA Analysis Requirements ..................................................................................... 222 4.3.2 Cumulative Project Scenario......................................................................................... 223 4.3.3 Cumulative Impacts Analysis ...................................................................................... 225 4.4 Other Topics Required by CEQA and NEPA .................................................................... 226 4.4.1 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts of the Project ................................................. 226 4.4.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes ....................................................... 226 4.4.3 Indian Trust Assets ........................................................................................................ 226 4.4.4 Compliance with Federal Statutes and Regulations ................................................. 227 5 Alternatives .................................................................................................................................. 231 5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 231 5.2 Alternatives Considered but Rejected ................................................................................. 232 5.3 Alternative 1: No Project ....................................................................................................... 232 5.3.1 Description ...................................................................................................................... 232 5.3.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 233 5.4 Alternative 2: Alternate Process Options ............................................................................ 233 5.4.1 Description ...................................................................................................................... 233 5.4.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 234 5.5 Environmentally Superior Alternatives .............................................................................. 237 6 References and Preparers .......................................................................................................... 239 6.1 References ............................................................................................................................... 239 6.2 Persons Contacted .................................................................................................................. 249 6.3 List of Preparers ..................................................................................................................... 249 7 Comments and Responses ........................................................................................................ 251 7.1 Comments and Responses .................................................................................................... 251 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Table of Contents City of San Luis Obispo iv List of Tables Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation ......... 5 Table 2-1 Renewed NPDES Discharge Limits for Selected Pollutants (R3-2014-0043) .......... 34 Table 3.1-1 Current Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards ..................................... 62 Table 3.1-2 Attainment Status of the South Central Coast Air Basin ........................................... 62 Table 3.1-3 Ambient Air Quality Data ............................................................................................. 63 Table 3.1-4 Annual Construction Emissions ................................................................................... 72 Table 3.1-5 Quarterly Construction Emissions Per Phase ............................................................. 72 Table 3.1-6 Worst-Case Quarterly Construction Emissions .......................................................... 73 Table 3.1-7 Annual Testing Emissions from 2000 KW Generator ................................................ 76 Table 3.1-8 Annual Testing Emissions from 1000 KW Generator ................................................ 76 Table 3.1-9 Combined Annual Testing Emissions .......................................................................... 76 Table 3.1-10 Worst Case Use of Emergency Generators- 2000 KW and 1000 KW Generators .. 77 Table 3.2-1 Summary of Vegetation/Land Cover Types within the Study Area ...................... 81 Table 3.2-2 Sensitive Plant Communities within the Vicinity of the Project Site ....................... 87 Table 3.2-3 Summary of Potentially Jurisdictional Wetlands, Waters and Riparian Habitats ............................................................................................................................ 89 Table 3.2-4 Summary of Impacts to California Red-legged Frog Habitat ................................... 96 Table 3.4-1 Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................. 141 Table 3.4-2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Stationary Equipment ........................................ 142 Table 3.4-3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Biogenic Processes .............................................. 142 Table 3.4-4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Backup Generators ............................................. 143 Table 3.4-5 Total Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................. 143 Table 3.5-1 Noise Measurement Results ........................................................................................ 146 Table 3.5-2 Maximum Noise Exposure for Noise-Sensitive Uses Due to Stationary Noise Sources ............................................................................................................................ 149 Table 3.5-3 Maximum Noise Levels for Nonscheduled, Intermittent, Short-term Operation (Less than Ten Days) of Mobile Equipment .............................................................. 149 Table 3.5-4 Maximum Noise Levels for Repetitively Scheduled and Relatively Long-Term Operation (Periods of Ten Days or More) of Stationary Equipment ..................... 149 Table 3.5-5 Vibration-Related Building Damage Thresholds ..................................................... 151 Table 3.5-6 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ........................................................ 153 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Table of Contents City of San Luis Obispo v Table 3.5-7 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ............................................. 154 Table 3.5-8 WRRF Noise Level Estimates at Nearest Sensitive Receptor.................................. 155 Table 3.7-1 Beneficial Uses for the San Luis Obispo Creek below W. Marsh Street ................ 168 Table 3.7-2 Water Quality Objectives within the Study Area ..................................................... 168 Table 4-1 Cumulative Projects List .............................................................................................. 223 Table 5-1 Alternate Process Options Considered for the WRRF Upgrade ............................ 234 Table 5-2 Impact Comparison Summary .................................................................................... 237 Table 7-1 Comments Received for the Draft EIR ....................................................................... 251 List of Figures Figure 2-1 Regional Location of Project Site .................................................................................. 30 Figure 2-2 Project Site and Vicinity ................................................................................................. 31 Figure 2-3 Existing Site Features to be Demolished ...................................................................... 37 Figure 2-4 Construction Sequencing ............................................................................................... 39 Figure 2-5 Proposed Site Plan ......................................................................................................... 41 Figure 2-6 Proposed Process Flow Diagram .................................................................................. 43 Figure 2-7a Site Photos ........................................................................................................................ 45 Figure 2-7b Site Photos ........................................................................................................................ 46 Figure 2-7c Site Photos ........................................................................................................................ 47 Figure 2-7d Site Photos ........................................................................................................................ 48 Figure 2-7e Site Photos ........................................................................................................................ 49 Figure 2-7f Site Photos ........................................................................................................................ 50 Figure 3.2-1 Vegetation Communities and Jurisdictions ................................................................ 80 Figure 3.2-2 Sensitive Species, Natural Communities, and Designated Critical Habitats ......... 85 Figure 3.5-1 Noise Measurement Locations .................................................................................... 147 Figure 3.6-1 WRRF Site Plan and Public Amenities Concepts ..................................................... 159 Figure 3.6-2 Rendering of the Water Resource Center .................................................................. 160 Figure 3.6-3 Water Resource Center Site Plan ................................................................................ 161 Figure 3.7-1 Flood Hazards ............................................................................................................... 166 Figure 3.8-1 Airport Hazard Zones .................................................................................................. 183 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Table of Contents City of San Luis Obispo vi Appendices Appendix A Notice of Preparation Appendix B Air Quality Emissions Model Information Appendix C Biological Resources Assessment Appendix D Cultural Resources Technical Report Appendix E Paleontological Resources Memorandum Appendix F Noise Appendix G Hazards Appendix H Air Quality Conformity Analysis Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This final environmental impact report (Final EIR) evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposed City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project. This document has been prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines, and includes additional analysis for the “CEQA-Plus” documentation that is required for the City of San Luis Obispo (City) to apply for State Revolving Fund (SRF) funding.1 The City is the lead agency for the CEQA process. Inquiries regarding this document and project should be directed to: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA Attn: David Hix Phone: 805-781-7039 PROJECT OVERVIEW The City proposes the WRRF Project, which entails upgrading the City’s wastewater treatment facility to comply with updated discharge requirements outlined in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in September 2014. The NPDES permit went into effect December 1, 2014, and compliance is required by November 30, 2019. At the same time, the WRRF would be upgraded to provide a nominal increase in average dry weather flow (ADWF) capacity to serve the needs of the City, as projected in the updated San Luis Obispo 2035 General Plan Land Use Element. Need and Objectives The WRRF Project is necessary in order to meet new wastewater discharge requirements and accommodate forecasted future growth in the City. The objectives of the WRRF Project include: 1. Meeting the standards outlined in the NPDES permit adopted by the RWQCB and SWRCB in September 2014 (effective December 1, 2014) 2. Providing a nominal increase in ADWF capacity to serve the needs of the City, as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element 3. Increasing the production of recycled water, positioning the City for potential future potable reuse 4. Incorporating interpretive features and public amenities 5. Replacing aging infrastructure and equipment 1 SWRCB is the responsible agency that would review and consider the information in the environmental document prior to approving the project.. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 2 The new NPDES permit contains stricter discharge limitations that require significant process upgrades to the WRRF facility, specifically, disinfection byproduct limits that will require new disinfection technology and nitrate limits that will require a significant upgrade of the secondary treatment processes. A new Time Schedule Order (TSO) was also adopted in September 2014, which requires the City to achieve the disinfection byproduct limits and nitrate limits by November 30, 2019. The City General Plan Land Use Element projects a future 2035 City population of 57,200 (City of San Luis Obispo December 2014: Table 3). The ADWF capacity required to accommodate this increase in population is 5.4 million gallons per day (mgd), while the current capacity of the WRRF is 5.1 mgd.2 Therefore, a nominal increase in ADWF capacity is needed to serve the needs of the City’s anticipated growth. For “a statement of objectives sought by the proposed project,” which includes the City’s vision, mission, and objectives for the proposed project, please refer to Section 2.5, Project Objectives. Project Location The City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) is located at 35 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. The facility occupies approximately 55 acres (along with other uses described below) between U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) on the west and San Luis Obispo Creek on the east. Figure 2-1 shows the project location within the City limits and in the region. Figure 2-2 shows the project site and vicinity. Project Description The WRFF Project includes equipment and process upgrades that are based on meeting various performance standards so that the facility will comply with updated discharge specifications set by the RWQCB and SWRCB. Implementation of the proposed project would include the following elements: 1. Demolishing existing structures to make room for new and enlarged equipment 2. Modernizing equipment and operations processes to improve primary, secondary, and tertiary wastewater treatment systems, as well as solids and liquids handling processes 3. Upgrading effluent cooling system through the addition of cooling towers, wetland cooling, and/or other methods 4. Improving internal site drainage for stormwater management and flood control, with the possibility of designing these improvements to support the effluent cooling system 5. Incorporating public amenities at the site, including within the newly constructed Water Resource Center, the proposed Learning Center, and grading and restoring land at the northeast corner of the WRRF site after removal of the existing supernatant lagoon; this restored area may ultimately be used for public park purposes under the direction of the City Parks and Recreation Department 6. Promoting continued research and development activities by Cal Poly and future testing of as yet unidentified pilot process and treatment technologies at the WRRF facility 2 These estimates were calculated based on the three driest months of the year. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 3 These project elements are further described in Section 2.4.2, Project Characteristics, and the proposed changes are shown in Figure 2-4 (Construction Sequencing) and 2-5 (Proposed Site Plan). Additionally, detailed descriptions of the proposed upgrades are provided in Section 7 of the WRRF Facilities Plan, while control upgrades and other proposed amenities are further described in other sections of the WRRF Facilities Plan. The WRRF Facilities Plan is available at the following link: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities- department/wastewater/wastewater-treatment/wrrf-upgrade-project. (San Luis Obispo City June 2015) Because the WRRF must continue operating during upgrades, not all of the demolition and upgrades would occur concurrently. The proposed construction sequencing is shown in Figure 2-4 (Construction Sequencing) and described in the WRRF Facilities Plan (San Luis Obispo City June 2015: Figure 13-2). This sequencing, however, may be refined as the design process continues. Construction activities are expected to start in late 2017. The deadline for most of the proposed upgrades that are required to meet the TSO issued by the SWRCB is November 30, 2019. Other upgrades that will address capacity, condition and other facility needs are planned to be completed as part of this project, at a later date. As the City continues to move forward with design procurement discussions with the RWQCB, the City will evaluate if the compliance schedule for nitrate permit limit can be extended. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Two alternatives to the proposed project were chosen for analysis as follows: • Alternative 1: No Project • Alternative 2: Alternate Process Options The No Project Alternative assumes that the proposed project site and existing treatment methods at the WRRF would remain as currently described in the existing setting under each issue area discussed in Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures. It should be noted that implementation of the No Project Alternative would not be feasible because implementation of improvements at the project site are required to meet the more stringent discharge limits in the new NPDES permit for the facility as well as the accompanying TSO. The TSO establishes the compliance schedule for the permit and requires the City achieve the required disinfection byproduct limits and nitrate limits by November 30, 2019. If the No Project Alternative is selected the City would not be able to achieve compliance with the NPDES permit requirements in the required timeframe. Alternative 2 (Alternate Process Options) considers alternate technologies that would enable the WRRF to meet the new NPDES permit requirements. These process alternatives are available for renewable energy, flow equalization, disinfection, cooling, secondary treatment and filtration. Details of these various alternatives are discussed in the WRRF Facilities Plan. While these alternate process options were not included in the proposed project, they would be feasible for use at the WRRF site, though not preferred. For a list of the current technology at the site, the technology that was selected for each process for inclusion in the proposed project, and a list of the alternate technologies considered as part of this alternative, refer to Table 5-1. The alternate technologies considered comprise Alternative 2. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 4 TYPE OF DOCUMENT This document has been prepared in accordance with CEQA statutes and guidelines, and includes additional analysis required for the “CEQA-Plus” documentation that is required for the City to apply for SRF funding.3 CEQA-Plus documentation includes evaluation of compliance with the Federal Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and the General Conformity Rule for the Federal Clean Air Act. In addition, it requires evaluation of compliance with the federal regulatory framework. Relevant to this project are the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, policies for protection of wetlands, and flood plain management. In compliance with CEQA, this Final EIR contains a description of the project and existing environmental setting, identification of project impacts, mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant, and an analysis of project alternatives. The analysis in this document is expanded beyond the typical content requirements of an EIR to include additional CEQA‐Plus information pertaining to federally designated endangered species, cultural resource protection, conformity with applicable air management plans, and other federal executive orders and federal regulations. This EIR focuses on those issues of primary concern identified through an initial scoping process, which included discussions among the public, consulting staff, and the City during the 30-day public comment period for the Notice of Preparation (NOP). During this process, nine issue areas were identified for evaluation in this Final EIR. These topics are discussed in Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures, and include: • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Noise • Recreation • Hydrology and Water Quality • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Public Services and Utilities The remaining environmental topics are addressed in Section 3.10, Effects Found Not to be Significant. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY No comments or concerns were raised by agencies or the public during the scoping comment period. ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED There are no issues to be resolved prior to implementation of the proposed project. 3 SWRCB is the responsible agency that would review and consider the information in the environmental document prior to approving the project. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 5 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Table ES-1 provides a summary of potential impacts by issue area, as analyzed in Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures. Only the impacts in Chapter 3 have been assigned a numbering system. All identified environmental impacts associated with the proposed project can be mitigated to less than significant levels, either with the implementation of standard project best management practices (BMPs) included as part of the proposed project and/or with mitigation measures identified in the analysis. No significant unavoidable impacts would occur from proposed project implementation. Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation AIR QUALITY Impact AQ-1 The proposed project would not contribute to population growth, and would therefore be consistent with the growth assumptions in the 2001 Clean Air Plan and the City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan. This impact would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact AQ-2 Construction of the proposed project would result in temporary generation of air pollutants, which would affect local air quality. Short term emissions would exceed SLOAPCD thresholds for ozone precursors. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. AQ-2(a) Standard Mitigation Measures. The project shall comply with the following, outlined in Section 2.3.1 of the SLOAPCD CEQA Handbook: • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; • Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with CARB certified fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road); • Use diesel construction equipment meeting CARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State off-Road Regulation; • Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy- duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; • Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; • All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes, with the exception of concrete delivery vehicles. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit; • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted; • Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; • Equipment shall be electrified when feasible; • Diesel powered equipment shall be substituted with gasoline powered equipment when feasible; • Alternatively fueled construction equipment shall be used onsite when feasible, such as compressed natural gas Less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 6 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane, or biodiesel. AQ-2(b) Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Construction Equipment. The following BACTs, outlined in the SLOAPCD CEQA Handbook, shall be incorporated into construction of the proposed project: • Tier 3 or Tier 4 off-road and 2010 on-road compliant engines shall be used; • Equipment shall be repowered with the cleanest engine available; • California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies shall be installed. Impact AQ-3 Standard operation of the proposed project would involve regular testing of two new diesel generators, which would incrementally increase long-term emissions. Regular testing of the generators would ensure they would not generate emissions greater than the daily or annual thresholds set by SLOAPCD. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact AQ-4 In the unlikely event of an emergency power outage, the two new generators would temporarily generate worst-case scenario emissions over a short period of time. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact AQ-5 The proposed project would have the potential to emit odors as a result of several processes on site. However, the project would include a variety of odor control technologies and would be 300 feet away from the nearest sensitive receptor. Therefore, impacts would be Class IV, beneficial. None required. Beneficial. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impact BIO-1 Construction of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special- status species. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. BIO-1(a) Special Status Plant Species Surveys. Prior to the start of on-site construction activities and when the plants are in a phenological stage conducive to positive identification (i.e., usually during the blooming period for the species), the applicant shall ensure an approved biologist will conduct surveys for special status plant species throughout suitable habitat within the project site. BIO-1(b) Special Status Plant Species Avoidance. If special status plant species are discovered within the study area, the applicant shall ensure an approved biologist will flag and fence these locations before construction activities start Less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 7 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation to avoid impacts. BIO-1(c) Restoration Plan. If avoidance is not feasible; the applicant shall ensure all impacts be mitigated at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (number of acres/individuals restored to number of acres/individuals impacted) for each species as a component of habitat restoration. The applicant shall prepare and submit a restoration plan to the City for approval. The restoration plan shall include, at a minimum, the following components: • Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); • Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; • Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values); • Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); • Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); • Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year, along with performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, and annual monitoring reports to be submitted to the City for a maximum of five years; • Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 30 percent relative cover by vegetation type; • An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address any shortcomings in meeting success criteria; • Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and • Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). BIO-1(d) Best Management Practices. The applicant shall ensure the following general wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required: • No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the project site during construction activities. • All trash that may attract predators must be properly contained and removed from the work site. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 8 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from San Luis Obispo Creek and the southern holding ponds and in a location where a spill would not drain toward aquatic habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills prior to the onset of work activities. All workers shall be informed of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control BMPs (i.e., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects on adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek. No plastic monofilament netting shall be utilized on-site. • All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. • Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas. • Work shall be restricted to daylight hours. BIO-1(e) WEAP Training. Prior to the initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), the applicant shall ensure all personnel associated with project construction shall attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training. • The training shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer documenting they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. BIO-1(f) Blainville’s Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma blainvilli). The applicant shall ensure the following measures are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to Blainville’s horned lizard. • A qualified biologist shall be present on-site during initial ground disturbance in areas determined to have suitable habitat for this species. Any Blainville’s horned lizards that are observed during initial ground disturbance shall be relocated the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat not likely to be affected by activities associated with the proposed project. BIO-1(g) Western Pond Turtle (Actinemys [=Emys] marmorata). The applicant shall ensure the following measures are implemented to avoid and minimize potential Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 9 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation impacts to southern western pond turtle: • A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours prior to the onset of work activities within and around areas considered potential western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals are likely to be injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall be allowed sufficient time to move them from the project site before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any western pond turtle the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the proposed project. • Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to southern western pond turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. BIO-1(h) California Red-Legged Frog (Rana draytonii). The applicant shall ensure the following measures are implemented to ensure that impacts to CRLF from the proposed project are reduced to a less than significant level. • Only USFWS-approved biologists shall participate in activities associated with the capture, handling, and monitoring of CRLF. • Ground disturbance shall not begin until written approval is received from the USFWS that the biologist is qualified to conduct the work. If the USFWS does not authorize the relocation of CRLF occurring within the project site, CRLF found within the project site shall be avoided with a 100-foot buffer and no activities shall occur within that buffer until the CRLF has left the project site on its own. • The project site shall be surrounded by a solid temporary exclusion fence (such as silt fencing) that shall extend at least three feet above the ground and be buried into the ground at least 6 inches to exclude CRLF from the project site. Plastic monofilament netting or other similar material will not be used. The location of the fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist. The fence shall remain in place throughout construction activities. Installation of the exclusion fencing shall be monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure that it is installed correctly. • All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. • Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas. • Work shall be restricted to daylight hours. • To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the approved biologist, the fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force shall be followed at all times. • No pets or firearms shall be permitted on-site. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 10 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation BIO-1(i) Steelhead Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus). The applicant shall ensure the following mitigation measures are undertaken to ensure that impacts to steelhead from the proposed project are reduced to a less than significant level. These measures are included in or are subsequent to the measures stipulated in the facility’s existing National Marine Fisheries Service Biological Opinion. • Before any activities begin on the project, a qualified biologist will conduct a training session for all construction personnel. At a minimum, the training will include a description of the steelhead and its habitat, the specific measures that are being implemented to conserve this species for the current project, and the boundaries within which the project may be accomplished. Brochures, books, and briefings may be used in the training session, provided that a qualified person is on hand to answer any questions. • During the duration of project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained and secured, promptly removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from the work areas. • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 100 feet from riparian habitat or bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). The monitor shall ensure that contamination of suitable habitat does not occur during such operations. Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area used for construction activities shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goals. • The City will attempt to schedule work within the immediate vicinity of San Luis Obispo Creek for times of the year when potential impacts to steelhead would be minimal. To the maximum extent feasible, work should be restricted during the wet season (October 15 through April 30) and should ideally occur during the late summer and early fall. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, the City shall implement the following BMPs. If the BMPs are somehow ineffective, the City, in consultation with the appropriate resource agency(ies), will attempt to remedy the situation immediately. • It shall be the owner’s/contractor’s responsibility to maintain control of the entire construction operations and to keep the entire site in compliance. • The owner/contractor shall be responsible for monitoring erosion and sediment control measures (including but not limited to fiber rolls, inlet protections, silt fences, and gravel bags) prior, during and after storm events, Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 11 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation monitoring includes maintaining a file documenting onsite inspections, problems encountered, corrective actions, and notes and a map of remedial implementation measures. • All earth stockpiles over 2.0 cubic yards shall be covered with a tarp and ringed with straw bales or silt fencing. The site shall be maintained so as to minimize sediment- laden runoff to any storm drainage system including existing drainage swales and/or sand watercourses. o Construction operations shall be carried out in such a manner that erosion and water pollution will be minimized. o State and local laws concerning pollution abatement shall be complied with. o If grading operations are expected to denude slopes, the slopes shall be protected with erosion control measures immediately following grading on the slopes. • Specifically, in order to prevent sedimentation and debris from entering San Luis Obispo Creek during construction, silt fencing shall be installed along the top of the banks on the west side of the channel prior to the onset of construction activities. • The project biologist will monitor construction activities, in stream habitat, and overall performance of BMPs and sediment controls for the purpose of identifying and reconciling any condition that could adversely affect steelhead or their habitat. • Equipment will be checked daily for leaks prior to the initiation of construction activities. A spill kit will be placed near the creek and will remain readily available during construction in the event that any contaminant is accidentally released. • In addition to these avoidance and minimization measures, mitigation measure BIO-2 would also ensure that potential indirect impacts to steelhead from this project are reduced to the extent practicable. BIO-1(j) Nesting Birds. The applicant shall ensure the following mitigation measures are undertaken to reduce any potential impacts to nesting birds to a less than significant level. • For construction activities occurring during the nesting season (generally February 1 to September 15), surveys for nesting birds covered by the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to vegetation removal. The surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 500-foot buffer around the site. If active nests are located, all construction work shall be conducted outside a buffer zone from the nest to be determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be a minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species and at least 300 feet for raptor species. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 12 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation construction personnel and equipment until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to removal of the buffer. • If feasible, removal of vegetation within suitable nesting bird habitats will be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 14), after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season. Impact BIO-2 Construction of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on sensitive habitats, including riparian areas. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. BIO-2 Riparian Habitat. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a minimum a 1:1 ratio for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian habitat. The HMMP will identify the specific mitigation sites and it will be implemented immediately following project completion. The HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following components: • Description of the project/impact site (i.e. location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); • Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; • Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation- site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation- site); • Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation-site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); • Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); • Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports); • Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent relative cover by vegetation type; • An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to restoration efforts; • Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and • Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). BIO-3 Jurisdictional Water and Wetlands Best Management Practices (discussed below) Less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 13 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation Impact BIO-3 Construction of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. BIO-1(d) Best Management Practices (discussed above) BIO-3 Jurisdictional Water and Wetlands BMPs. The following BMPs shall be implemented: 1. To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control best management practices (i.e., installation of straw wattle, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects on jurisdictional areas in the vicinity of the project. Plastic monofilament erosion control matting will not be implemented onsite. 2. Project activities within the jurisdictional areas shall occur during the dry season (typically between June 1 and November 1) in any given year, or as otherwise directed by the regulatory agencies. Deviations from this work window can be made with permission from the relevant regulatory agencies. 3. During construction, no litter or construction debris shall be placed within jurisdictional areas. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. In addition, all project-generated debris, building materials, and rubbish shall be removed from jurisdictional areas and from areas where such materials could be washed into them. 4. Any substances which could be hazardous to aquatic species resulting from project-related activities shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering jurisdictional areas. 5. All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. Less than significant. CULTURAL RESOURCES Impact CR-1 Construction of the proposed project would involve ground-disturbing activities which have the potential to unearth or adversely impact archaeological resources. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. CR-1(a) WEAP Training. Prior to project construction, the applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for historic archaeology to conduct a Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) for all construction personnel working on the project. The training shall include an overview of potential cultural resources that could be encountered during ground disturbing activities to facilitate worker recognition, avoidance, and notification to a qualified archaeologist in the event of unanticipated discoveries. The Native American monitor shall also be present at the WEAP training to provide the Native American perspective on cultural resources and potential project-related impacts, and to receive information regarding the project schedule, roles and responsibilities, and mitigation measures CR-1(b) Archaeological and Native American Monitoring. Prior to project construction the applicant shall retain a Less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 14 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation qualified archaeologist and Native American representative to conduct archaeological monitoring of all project related ground disturbing activities within 200 feet of the creek bed. Archaeological monitoring should be performed under the direction of an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983). The duration and timing of monitoring shall be determined by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City and based on the grading plans and level of previous disturbance within work areas. If archaeological resources are encountered during ground- disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and the find be evaluated for significance under Section 106 of the NHPA and CEQA. CR-1(c) Discovery of Archaeological Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during project construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. Evaluation of significance for the find may include the determination of whether or not the find qualifies as an archaeological site. Isolated finds do not qualify as historical resources under CEQA or historic properties under the NHPA and require no management consideration under either regulation. Should any resource(s) be identified, an evaluation of eligibility for the CRHR and NRHP may be required through the development of a treatment plan including a research design and subsurface testing through the excavation of test units and shovel test pits. After effects to the find have been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Mitigation of significant impacts or adverse effects to the find may include a damage assessment of the find, archival research, and/or data recovery to remove any identified archaeological deposits, as determined by a qualified archaeologist. CR-1(d) Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the San Luis Obispo County coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Impact CR-2 Construction of the proposed project would involve ground-disturbing activities which have the potential to unearth or adversely impact paleontological resources. Impacts would be CR-2(a) Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Program. Prior to construction activity a qualified paleontologist should prepare a Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Program to be implemented during project ground disturbance activity. This program should be based on the final project plans to identify specific areas where Less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 15 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. ground disturbing activity has the potential to impact scientifically significant paleontological resources and include the following details: 1) Outline the procedures for construction staff Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training; 2) Specify the extent, location and duration of paleontological monitoring based on proposed construction activity; 3) Specify the procedures for salvage and preparation of fossils; 4) Require a final mitigation and monitoring report; and 5) Specify the qualifications of a qualified paleontologist and paleontological monitors. CR-2(b) Paleontological WEAP. Prior to the start of construction, construction personnel should be informed on the appearance of fossils and the procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction staff. CR-2(c) Paleontological Monitoring. Any excavations exceeding five feet in depth, including those in the young alluvium, should be monitored according to the specifications outlined in the PMMP. At a minimum, paleontological monitoring should be sufficient to evaluate the potential of newly exposed geologic units to contain fossils. If the qualified paleontologist determines that geologic units are unlikely to yield significant paleontological resources, monitoring may be discontinued. If ground disturbance activity is initiated in a new area or to a deeper depth than previous excavations, paleontological monitoring should be re-initiated. Monitoring should be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor as specified in the PMMP. Ground disturbing activity that does not exceed five feet in depth in young alluvium would not require paleontological monitoring. CR-2(d) Salvage of Fossils. If fossils are discovered, the qualified paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) should recover them. Typically fossils can be safely salvaged quickly by a single paleontologist and not disrupt construction activity. In some cases larger fossils (such as complete skeletons or large mammal fossils) require more extensive excavation and longer salvage periods. In this case the paleontologist should have the authority to temporarily direct, divert or halt construction activity to ensure that the fossil(s) can be removed in a safe and timely manner. CR-2(e) Preparation and Curation of Recovered Fossils. Once salvaged, fossils should be identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection (such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology or the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History), along with all pertinent field notes, photos, data, and maps. CR-2(f) Final Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Report. Upon completion of ground disturbing activity (and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 16 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation curation of fossils if necessary) the qualified paleontologist should prepare a final mitigation and monitoring report outlining the results of the mitigation and monitoring program. The report should include discussion of the location, duration and methods of the monitoring, stratigraphic sections, any recovered fossils, and the scientific significance of those fossils, and where fossils were curated. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Impact GHG-1 The proposed project would generate greenhouse gas emissions through construction, increased energy use, increased biogenic processes as a result of the increased wastewater capacity, and testing of emergency diesel generators. The increased emissions would be below the SLOAPCD threshold for annual greenhouse gas emissions, therefore impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact GHG-2 The proposed project would not conflict with State GHG reduction goals, or any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. NOISE Impact N-1 Construction activities associated with the proposed project would expose nearby sensitive receptors to temporary increases in noise, however, these would not exceed City noise thresholds. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact N-2 Project construction would expose nearby sensitive receptors to a temporary increase in vibration levels. However, vibration levels during construction would not expose nearby structures to vibration damage or excessive vibration noise. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact N-3 Noise associated with operation of the proposed project would not exceed City thresholds. Therefore, impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 17 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation RECREATION Impact REC-1 The proposed project would potentially affect operation of existing and planned park and recreation facilities, as it would enhance recreational amenities at the site. This is a Class IV, beneficial impact. None required. Beneficial. Impact REC-2 Impacts associated with construction of the recreational components of the proposed project are part of the wider project analyzed in this EIR. Potential adverse impacts have been identified in several environmental issue areas, related primarily to construction activities associated with the proposed project. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. Mitigation measures identified in Section 3.1, Air Quality, Section 3.2, Biological Resources, Section 3.3, Cultural Resources, and Section 3.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, would apply. Less than significant. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Impact HYD-1 During construction the proposed project could potentially violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. HYD-1 Prepare an Emergency Wastewater Treatment Plan. Before construction is initiated, the City of San Luis Obispo shall work with its design engineers and construction contractor to develop an Emergency Wastewater Treatment Plan which identifies procedures for handling and treating wastewater flows during construction of the Project. This Plan shall include procedures and contingency measures for proper handling and treatment of wastewater flows in the event that the treatment train goes offline unexpectedly as a result of construction activities, such as temporary storage wastewater flows. The Plan shall consider storage options, varying levels of treatment and/or blending, temporary treatment options, and conveyance to alternative treatment facilities. An existing emergency treatment plan could be used in place of this Emergency Wastewater Treatment Plan so long as its provisions could be successfully implemented during project construction. HAZ-1(a) Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Control Plan (discussed below) HAZ-1(b) Preparation of Hazardous Materials Business Plan (discussed below) Less than significant. Impact HYD-2 The proposed project would not result in flooding, erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact HYD-3 The proposed project would result in an improvement in the quality of discharges from the WRRF to None required. Beneficial. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 18 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation San Luis Obispo Creek. Impacts would be Class IV, beneficial. Impact HYD-4 The proposed project would result in placement of structures within a 100-year flood hazard area. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. HYD-4 Design Stormwater Outfall with Energy Dissipaters. The City of San Luis Obispo shall ensure that the San Luis Obispo Creek stormwater outfall, if selected to manage storm flows on the WRRF site, is designed with energy dissipation features as needed to prevent flooding and erosion at or downstream of the point of discharge. The design and location of the stormwater outfall shall be approved by USACE to ensure that it does not impede high flow capacity. Less than significant. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Impact HAZ-1 Construction of the proposed project would temporarily increase the routine transport and use of hazardous materials used in construction activities. Operation of the expanded and upgraded WRRF would entail the routine transportation, use, storage, and/or disposal of minor amounts of hazardous materials. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. HAZ-1(a) Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Control Plan. Before construction begins, all construction contractors shall be required to develop and implement a HMMSCP that includes project-specific contingency plan for hazardous materials and waste operations. The HMMSCP shall establish policies and procedures consistent with applicable codes and regulations, including but not limited to the California Building and Fire Codes, and federal and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The HMMSCP shall articulate hazardous materials handling practices to prevent their release into San Luis Obispo Creek during construction of the storm water outfall. HAZ-1(b) Preparation of Hazardous Materials Business Plan. Prior to operation of the new facilities, a HMBP shall be prepared and implemented for the proposed project. The HMBP shall include a hazardous materials inventory, site plan, an emergency response plan, and requirements for employee training. An existing HMBP can be updated and resubmitted for the expanded facilities. Less than significant. Impact HAZ-2 The proposed project has potential to create a hazard through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment during both construction and operation. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. HAZ-1(a) Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Control Plan (discussed above) HAZ-1(b) Preparation of Hazardous Materials Business Plan (discussed above) Less than significant. Impact HAZ-3 The proposed project could result in the disturbance of contaminated soils on an active cleanup sites listed on the SWRCB GeoTracker database. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. HAZ-3(a) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. Before construction begins, the City of San Luis Obispo shall perform a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) to clarify the potential for soil contamination due to the adjacent open cleanup site. The recommendations set forth in the Phase I ESA shall be implemented before construction begins. Follow-up sampling may be conducted, if needed, to characterize soil and groundwater quality. Prior to construction, contractors shall be informed of the location of potential areas of hazardous materials that may be encountered during construction, and shall ensure that safety precautions are in place to avoid or minimize exposure to potentially contaminated soils, and to Less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 19 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation reduce the potential for accidental damage to underground storage tanks that could cause accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment. HAZ-3(b) Contaminated Soil Contingency Plan. The City of San Luis Obispo shall require its construction contractors to develop and implement a Contaminated Soil Contingency Plan to handle treatment and/or disposal of contaminated soils. If contaminated soil is encountered during project construction, work shall halt and an assessment made to determine the extent of contamination. Treatment and/or disposal of contaminated soils shall be conducted in accordance with the Contingency Plan. Impact HAZ-4 The proposed project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area due to location within an airport land use plan. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact HAZ-5 The proposed project could impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency evacuation and response during construction. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. HAZ-5 Traffic Management Plan. Prior to the start of construction, the City shall develop a Traffic Management Plan, in coordination with City Transit, Public Works, and other appropriate departments or users of the site, that would include industry, Caltrans, and City standards for managing construction traffic to and from the site. Measures to manage construction traffic could include warning signs, flag men, and scheduling deliveries outside the AM and PM peak hours. The Traffic Management Plan shall include measures that address how to accommodate emergency evacuation and response, if needed. Less than significant. Impact HAZ-6 The proposed project would not increase the exposure of people or structures to wildfire risks due to population growth, but construction activities could create hazardous fire conditions. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. HAZ-6 Prevention of Fire Hazards. During construction of the proposed project, staging areas, welding areas, or areas slated for construction shall be cleared of dried vegetation or other material that could ignite. Construction equipment that includes a spark arrestor shall be equipped in good working order. In addition, construction crews shall have a spotter during welding activities to look out for potentially dangerous situations, such as accidental sparks. Other construction equipment, including those with hot vehicle catalytic converters, shall be kept in good working order and used only within cleared construction zones. The creation and maintenance of approved fire access to work areas shall be required in accordance with local Fire regulations. During construction of the proposed project, contractors shall require vehicles and crews working at the project site to have access to functional fire extinguishers. Less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo 20 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significance After Mitigation Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES Impact UTL-1 The proposed project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth and require the need for new or addition fire protection or police services that would result in the need for expanded facilities. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact UTL-2 The proposed project would include improvements to the WRRF, which would improve treated wastewater quality. There would be a beneficial impact on wastewater effluent quality. Impacts would be Class IV, beneficial. None required. Beneficial. Impact UTL-3 Stormwater drainage improvements are included as part of the proposed project. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact UTL-4 The proposed project would not require additional water supplies. No impact would occur. None required. No impact. Impact UTL-5 The proposed project would not be served by a landfill with insufficient capacity to accommodate solid waste that would be generated. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Impact UTL-6 The proposed project would comply with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. None required. Less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 1.0 Introduction City of San Luis Obispo 21 1 INTRODUCTION This final environmental impact report (Final EIR) evaluates the physical environmental impacts of the proposed City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility Project (WRRF Project). In summary, the WRRF Project upgrades are necessary to meet the more stringent discharge requirements placed in the WRRF’s NPDES permit by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), with compliance required by late 2019. At the same time, the WRRF is being upgraded in order to provide the nominal increase in average dry weather flow (ADWF) capacity to serve the needs of the City of San Luis Obispo (City) as projected in the updated San Luis Obispo 2035 General Plan Land Use Element. This Final EIR evaluates the potentially significant environmental effects of the upgrade at a project level of detail. This Final EIR has been prepared under the direction of the City in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.) and the State-issued CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, partial funding for construction of the WRRF is being sought from the SWRCB State Revolving Fund (SRF) Loan Project, which is partially funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Therefore, this document has been prepared in accordance with the Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR Sections 1500–1508) issued by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) (1970, as amended), the Environmental Review Guide for Special Appropriation Grants (USEPA 2008), and the Environmental Review Process Guidelines for State Revolving Fund Applicants (SWRCB 2004). Based on these guidelines, this Final EIR is expanded beyond the typical content requirements of an EIR to include additional “CEQA‐Plus” information pertaining to federally designated endangered species, cultural resource protection, conformity with applicable air management plans, and other federal executive orders and federal regulations. 1.1 WRRF PROJECT PROGRAM CHARTER The City of San Luis Obispo has a long history of treating wastewater in that the City constructed one of the first sewage treatment plants in the State. The City is committed to ensuring water quality in the most efficient and effective manner possible. To demonstrate its commitment, the City has created a Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Program Charter with the following vision and mission: Vision: Create a community asset that is recognized as supporting health, well-being, and quality of life Mission: Deliver a Water Resource Recovery Facility in partnership with stakeholders that provides economic, social and environmental value to our community The Charter goes into more detail regarding the City’s guiding principles, as well as listing specific economic, environmental and social objectives; additional detail is provided in Section 2.0 Project Description. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 1.0 Introduction City of San Luis Obispo 22 1.2 PURPOSE AND INTENDED USES OF THIS FINAL PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CEQA requires that state and local government agencies consider the environmental effects of projects over which they have discretionary authority before taking action on those projects. CEQA also requires that each public agency avoid or mitigate to less‐than‐significant levels, wherever feasible, the significant environmental effects of projects it approves or implements. The purpose of an EIR is “to identify the significant effects on the environment of a project, to identify alternatives to the project, and to indicate the manner in which those significant effects can be mitigated or avoided” (PRC Section 21002.1[a]). If a project would result in significant and unavoidable environmental impacts that cannot be feasibly mitigated to less‐than‐ significant levels, the project can still be approved, but the lead agency’s decision‐maker (in this case, the San Luis Obispo City Council) must issue a “statement of overriding considerations” explaining in writing the specific economic, social, or other considerations that it believes make those significant effects acceptable (PRC Section 21002; California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 15093). The City of San Luis Obispo is the Lead Agency for this EIR, as defined by CEQA. Other public agencies with jurisdiction over the project are described below in Section 1.4, Agency Roles and Responsibilities. 1.3 ADMINISTRATION OF THE CLEAN WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND PROGRAM IN CALIFORNIA The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act or CWA), as amended in 1987, established the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program. The CWSRF program offers low interest financing agreements for water quality projects. Upgrades to the WRRF may be partially funded with a loan from the CWSRF Loan Program. The program is administered, nationally, by the USEPA, and in certain instances the administration has been delegated to the states. In California, administration of the CWSRF program has been delegated to the SWRCB. In turn, the SWRCB requires that all projects being considered under the CWSRF program must comply with CEQA and certain federal environmental protection laws. SWRCB requires compliance with the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA; Section 7), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA; Section 106), the General Conformity Rule for the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), and other executive orders and federal regulations. Collectively, the SWRCB refers to these requirements as “CEQA‐Plus.” Therefore, this Final EIR has been prepared in accordance with the Environmental Review Process Guidelines for State Revolving Fund Loan Applicants (SWRCB 2004) and is expanded beyond the typical content requirements of an EIR to include additional “CEQA‐Plus” information. The SWRCB, as a responsible agency for the project, was included in the scoping of this EIR, and will consider this CEQA document prior to any CWSRF loan authorization. 1.4 RELATIONSHIP TO THE SAN LUIS OBISPO 2035 GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The WRRF Project would improve treated wastewater quality to meet RWQCB NPDES permit requirements, and would be in line with the growth planned and presented in the San Luis Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 1.0 Introduction City of San Luis Obispo 23 Obispo 2035 General Plan. The San Luis Obispo 2035 General Plan is specifically intended to support the orderly growth of the City of San Luis Obispo. The General Plan policies aim to reduce the potential for negative impacts associated with the growth, and the direct and indirect environmental impacts associated with the City’s growth are analyzed in the San Luis Obispo 2035 General Plan EIR. The City Council certified the 2035 San Luis Obispo General Plan EIR and adopted the 2035 General Plan, including the land use map, on December 9, 2014. The City’s 2035 General Plan EIR is hereby incorporated by reference to the extent it is applicable to policies, environmental impacts, and mitigation measures, as summarized throughout this Final EIR. The City’s General Plan EIR is available for public inspection on the City of San Luis Obispo website, under City Departments, Community Development, General Plan: http://www.slo2035.com/ or at the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department, located at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 during regular business hours. Relevant portions of the City’s General Plan EIR are summarized in this Final EIR, where appropriate. 1.5 SCOPE OF THIS FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT In accordance with PRC Section 21092 and CCR Section 15082, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) on October 13, 2015 to inform agencies and the general public that an EIR was being prepared and invite comments on the scope and content of the document (Appendix A). The NOP was posted with the State Clearinghouse, posted on the City of San Luis Obispo website, and distributed directly to public agencies (including potential responsible and trustee agencies), interested parties, and organizations. The NOP was circulated for 30 days, through November 13, 2015. In accordance with PRC Section 21083.9 and CCR Section 15082(c), a noticed scoping meeting for the Final EIR occurred on Tuesday October 27, 2015 from 6:00 PM – 8:00 PM at the City Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, City of San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. The City has considered all relevant NOP comments in preparation of this Final EIR. Based on this input and analyses completed by the City, the following environmental resources may be affected by implementation of the proposed WRRF upgrades: • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Greenhouse Gases • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Hydrology and Water Quality • Noise • Recreation • Public Services and Utilities Environmental impact analysis and identification of feasible mitigation measures, where needed, related to these topics are presented in Sections 3.1 to 3.9 of this document. 1.6 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT Pursuant to CEQA, the discussion of potential effects on the physical environment is focused on those impacts that may be significant or potentially significant. CEQA allows a lead agency to Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 1.0 Introduction City of San Luis Obispo 24 limit the detail of discussion of the environmental effects that are not considered potentially significant (PRC Section 21100, CCR Sections 15126.2[a] and 15128). CEQA requires that the discussion of any significant effect on the environment be limited to substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse changes in physical conditions that exist within the affected area, as defined in PRC Section 21060.5 (statutory definition of “environment”). Effects dismissed early in the scoping process (which included discussions among the public, consulting staff, and the County of San Luis Obispo) as clearly insignificant and unlikely to occur need not be discussed further in the EIR unless the Lead Agency subsequently receives information inconsistent with the findings (CCR Section 15143). The proposed WRRF upgrades would result in no impacts or less than significant environmental impacts related to the following resources which are presented in Section 3.10 of this document. • Aesthetics • Agriculture and Forest Resources • Geology and Soils • Land Use and Planning • Mineral Resources • Population and Housing • Transportation/Traffic 1.7 AGENCY ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 1.7.1 Lead Agency The City of San Luis Obispo is the lead agency for this EIR under CEQA, as defined in CCR Section 15367. The City has the principal responsibility for approving and carrying out the WWRF Project upgrades and for ensuring that the requirements of CEQA have been met. After the EIR public review process is complete, the City Council is the party responsible for certifying that the EIR adequately evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposed project. The City Council has the authority to either approve or reject the proposed project. 1.7.2 Responsible and Trustee Agencies Responsible and trustee agencies are consulted by the lead agency to ensure they are afforded the opportunity for input during the environmental review process. A trustee agency is a state agency that has jurisdiction by law over natural resources that are held in trust for the people of the State of California (CCR Section 15386). The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is a trustee agency with jurisdiction over fish and wildlife and their habitats that may be affected by the proposed project. A responsible agency is a public agency other than the lead agency that has legal responsibility for reviewing, carrying out, or approving elements of a project (CCR Section 15381). Responsible agencies should participate in the lead agency’s CEQA process, review the lead agency’s CEQA document, and use the document when making a decision on project elements. The following agencies may have responsibility for or jurisdiction over, implementation of some elements of the proposed project. The following list also includes agencies responsible for permitting, funding, and other regulatory actions likely to be required prior to implementation of individual elements of the proposed project. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 1.0 Introduction City of San Luis Obispo 25 a. FEDERAL Although federal agencies are not “responsible” agencies under CEQA, they may use the environmental information in an EIR as the basis for their compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In the case of this EIR, however, because it also meets the SWRCB’s “CEQA‐Plus” guidelines, this EIR is also intended to meet the NEPA requirements for the following agencies: • USEPA: Compliance with NEPA in connection with the SRF Loan Program. • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS): Compliance with Section 7 of the FESA. • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS): Compliance with Section 7 of the FESA. NO change in the existing Biological Opinion for the site is proposed. Concurrence may be required. b. STATE • CDFW: Potential permits under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Section 2081 of the Fish and Wildlife Code if take of listed species is likely to occur. • California State Office of Historic Preservation: Compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA. This is a delegated authority of the federal government and pertains to any project that would involve federal funding or state lead agency approval. • SWRCB: The SWRCB requires that all projects being considered under the CWSRF program comply with CEQA and certain federal environmental protection laws, notably Section 7 of the FESA, Section 404 of the FCAA (General Conformity), and the NHPA (Section 106). • Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board: NPDES Permit for operation of the WRRF; coverage under the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activities (Construction General Permit), Construction General Permit Order No. 2009‐009‐DWQ, for disturbance of more than 1 acre (this requires development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan [SWPPP]); compliance with Industrial Storm Water General Permit Order No. 97‐03‐DWQ for storm water discharges associated with industrial sites; CWA Section 401 water quality certification for any disturbance of waters of the United States; Waste Discharge Requirement permit to be issued if only non‐jurisdictional waters of the State are present in the project area; and compliance with the general order for dewatering, if necessary. c. REGIONAL AND LOCAL • City of San Luis Obispo: Building structure permit for construction of new buildings; grading and drainage permit; paving permit; encroachment permit; SWPPP approval; electrical and plumbing permits. • San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District: Authority to construct (for devices that emit air pollutants), permit to operate, and Air Quality Management Plan consistency determination. • Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and, Southern California Gas Company (SCG): Approval for new power infrastructure to the site, if needed. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 1.0 Introduction City of San Luis Obispo 26 1.8 PUBLIC REVIEW PROCESS In accordance with PRC Section 21092 and CCR Section 15082, an NOP was distributed on October 13, 2015, to responsible agencies as well as interested parties and organizations. The NOP was posted on the City’s website. The purpose of the NOP was to provide notification that an EIR was being prepared for the project and to solicit guidance on the scope and content of EIR. The NOP and comments received are included in Appendix A of this document. This Final EIR was circulated for public review and comment for a period of at least 45 days, from April 18, 2016 to June 6, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. During this period, comments from the general public, as well as organizations and agencies, on the Draft EIR’s accuracy and completeness were submitted to the lead agency (see Section 7.0, Comments and Responses). The Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR was posted on the City’s website. Upon completion of the public review and comment period, this Final EIR was prepared and includes both written and oral comments on the Draft EIR received during the public‐review period, responses to those comments, and any revisions to the Draft EIR made in response to public comments. The Draft EIR and Final EIR comprise the EIR for the proposed project. Before approving the proposed project, the lead agency, the City of San Luis Obispo, is required to certify that the EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA, that the decision‐making body reviewed and considered the information in the EIR, and that the EIR reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency. The City intends to certify and adopt the Final EIR at a public meeting to be held at the San Luis Obispo City Council Chambers located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo; notice of this meeting will be provided at the time it is known. As required by CCR Section 15096, before approval of CWSRF funding for the proposed project, the SWRCB, acting as a responsible agency, must review and consider the City’s EIR, distribute the EIR to selected federal agencies for review and comment, and make findings as to the adequacy of the EIR. 1.9 EIR ORGANIZATION This Final EIR is organized into chapters as identified and briefly described below. Chapters are further divided into sections (e.g., Chapter 4, Environmental Setting, Environmental Impacts, and Mitigation Measures and Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources): • Executive Summary: This chapter introduces the proposed project; provides a summary of the environmental review process, effects found not to be significant, and key environmental issues; and lists significant environmental impacts and mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to a less‐than‐significant level. • Chapter 1, Introduction: This chapter provides a description of the lead and responsible agencies, the legal authority and purpose of the EIR, the public review process, and organization of the EIR. • Chapter 2, Project Description: This chapter begins by describing the project location, background, and purpose and need. Then the proposed project is described in detail, with the overall plan described. • Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, Environmental Impacts, and Mitigation Measures: The resource sections within this chapter evaluate the expected environmental impacts generated by the proposed project at a project level. Within each subsection of Chapter 3, the regulatory background, existing environmental Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 1.0 Introduction City of San Luis Obispo 27 setting, the significance criteria, and the analysis methodology and assumptions are described. The anticipated changes to the existing environmental conditions after development of the proposed project are then evaluated for each resource. For any significant or potentially significant impact that would result from project implementation, mitigation measures are presented along with the remaining level of significance. Environmental impacts are numbered sequentially throughout the sections of Chapter 3 (e.g. Impact 3.2‐1, Impact 3.2‐2, etc.). Any required mitigation measures are then numbered to correspond to the appropriate impact; for example, the mitigation measure for Impact 3.2‐1 would be Mitigation Measure 3.2‐1. •Chapter 4, Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations: This chapter provides a discussion of potential direct and indirect growth inducing impacts, cumulative impacts, other alternatives considered during development of the project elements, any significant and unavoidable impacts, significant and irreversible commitment of resources, and a record of compliance with Federal environmental laws and regulations as required for the “CEQA‐Plus” process. •Chapter 6, References and List of Preparers: This chapter identifies the organizations and persons consulted during preparation of this Final EIR and the documents used as sources for the analysis. It also identifies the lead and responsible agency contacts, as well as the preparers of this Final EIR. 1.10 STANDARD TERMINOLOGY This Final EIR uses the following standard terminology to assess the level of impact (i.e., significant effects) on the environment: •No Impact indicates no change from existing conditions (no mitigation is required). •A Less than Significant Impact indicates no substantial adverse change in the environment (no mitigation is required). •A Potentially Significant Impact or Significant Impact indicates an impact that could potentially or would cause a substantial adverse change in the environment (mitigation is recommended, where feasible). •A Significant and Unavoidable Impact indicates an impact that would cause a substantial adverse change in the environment that cannot be avoided, even with the implementation of all feasible mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 1.0 Introduction City of San Luis Obispo 28 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 29 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT APPLICANT The project sponsor and CEQA Lead Agency is the City of San Luis Obispo. 2.2 PROJECT LOCATION The City of San Luis Obispo WRRF is located at 35 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. The facility occupies approximately 66 acres (along with other uses described below) between U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) on the west and San Luis Obispo Creek on the east. Figure 2-1 shows the project location within the City limits and in the region. Figure 2-2 shows the project site and vicinity. Most of the components of the WRRF are located within Assessor Parcel Number 053-051-045 (54.7 acres), which fronts Prado Road. The project site also includes the mostly undeveloped area to the southwest of the main facility site as well as the area containing the decommissioned chlorine contact channels and related equipment, approximately 0.5 mile south of the main facility. The decommissioned chlorine contact channels and equipment are located adjacent to existing holding ponds near the present effluent outfall or discharge point for the WRRF. In addition, San Luis Obispo Creek runs adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site. The project site is at the southern limit of the USGS San Luis Obispo 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle. It is located in the southern half of Section 3, Township 31 South, Range 12 East, from the Mt. Diablo baseline and meridian. The undeveloped area southwest of the main facility and the decommissioned chlorine contact channels are at the northern edge of the USGS Pismo Beach 7.5 minute quadrangle. The effluent discharge point to San Luis Obispo Creek is located along the creek, downstream from the main facility, adjacent to the holding ponds. The service area for the WRRF is the entire City of San Luis Obispo, plus limited areas in the unincorporated County of San Luis Obispo. These unincorporated areas include the campus of the California Polytechnic University (Cal Poly) and the San Luis Obispo County Airport. The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Land Use Element anticipates annexations and development in three additional areas, as well as in the airport area and other recent specific plan areas. The three new specific plan areas are: SP-2 San Luis Ranch, SP-3 Madonna on LOVR, and SP-4 Avila Ranch (San Luis Obispo December 2014: Figure 3). Development in all of these areas has been considered in the updated Land Use Element, upon which the capacity requirement for the WRRF that is discussed in this document has been based. The City provides recycled water for irrigation uses at parks and other open space areas. Some components of the WRRF project involve the recycled water system (improved disinfection, for example) and are addressed in this EIR. This EIR does not cover any offsite extensions or modifications to the recycled water distribution system, the impacts of which would be assessed at the time they are proposed for consideration by the City. ^_SanLuisObispoCreekRegional Location of Project Site Figure 2-1 City of San Luis Obispo Imagery provided by ESRI and its licensors © 2015. Section 2.0 Project DescriptionWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR ^_Project Location San Luis Obispo Creek San Luis Obispo City Limits ± 0 21 Miles ^_ 30 DecommissionedDisinfection Facilities B ob J o n e s BikeTrailMain WRRF Site HoldingPonds £¤101 £¤101 L o s Os o s V alle y R d SHigueraStPradoRd SanLuisObispoCreekProject Site and Vicinity Figure 2-2 City of San Luis Obispo Imagery provided by Google and its licensors © 2016. Section 2.0 Project DescriptionWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Project Site San Luis Obispo Creek Bob Jones Trail ±0 800400 Feet 31 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 32 2.3 PROJECT SITE CHARACTERISTICS The majority of the project site is disturbed and contains either existing WRRF equipment and related uses or former water treatment infrastructure. These include the headworks (influent receiving and coarse solids removal), primary treatment system (to separate solid material from effluent), secondary treatment system (mainly to remove organic material), filtration, disinfection, cooling, solids treatment, and various ponds, and other equipment. Details regarding the existing plant condition are provided in the WRRF Facilities Plan (San Luis Obispo City June 2015: Section 3). San Luis Obispo Creek is located along the entire easterly boundary of the project site. The creek originates several miles northeast of the city, and enters the Pacific Ocean about seven miles downstream from the WRRF. A segment of the Bob Jones Bike Trail runs along the west side of the creek, and is located between the WRRF perimeter fencing and the edge of the riparian vegetation associated with the creek. The primarily undeveloped area to the southwest of the main facility also includes a portion of the Bob Jones Bike Trail. The site perimeter contains fencing and landscaping that separates it from the bike trail. The project site contains other uses besides the WRRF. These other uses include the Prado Day Center, a City transit bus facility, a City corporation yard and storage area and a small bore gun range. The Prado Day Center is scheduled for relocation to a nearby parcel on the north side of Prado Road. The new Prado Day Center has already been reviewed and approved by the City, and that relocation is not part of this project. However, demolition of the existing Prado Day Center facility is included in this project scope. The existing City corporation yard, containing vehicle maintenance, parking, and related facilities, would remain; however, a new entrance to the corporation yard would be created due to the planned construction of the Prado Road overpass. The City bus facility would also remain. The building housing the small bore gun range would be demolished as part of the project. The General Plan land use designations shown for the project site are “Public” and “Open Space”. The main facility is zoned for public facilities (PF and PF-S), and the area to the south between U.S. 101 and San Luis Obispo Creek is zoned for conservation and open space (C/OS- 20). 2.4 PROPOSED PROJECT 2.4.1 Background The City WRRF Facilities Plan (San Luis Obispo, June 2015) contains an extensive discussion of the background for the project, technical evaluations of various treatment options, and detailed descriptions and graphics for the various improvements proposed. This EIR presents a brief summary of that information, with an emphasis on the items that relate to environmental issues and the assessment of impacts and mitigation. The primary document or permit that governs the WRRF is the approval from the RWQCB and SWRCB. This approval is in the form of Order No. R3-2014-0033, establishing the Waste Discharge Requirements for the facility. Under authority from the USEPA, the SWRCB approval Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 33 also serves as the federal permit under the NPDES requirements, and the approval is NPDES No. CA0049224. The Waste Discharge Requirements Order establishes prohibitions on certain types of discharges, and limitations and specifications for the permitted discharges. This Order was adopted in September, 2014, and it establishes discharge requirements that are more stringent than before, and which the current treatment plant equipment cannot meet. The Waste Discharge Requirements also has an accompanying Time Schedule Order (TSO No. R3-2014- 0036) that establishes the compliance schedule for the project. The WRRF Facilities Plan (San Luis Obispo City June 2015: Section 1) explains this situation: A key driver of the WRRF Project is the new NPDES permit adopted in September 2014 (effective December 1, 2014). The new permit includes discharge limitations that will require significant process upgrades. Specifically, the new permit includes strict disinfection byproduct limits which will require a new disinfection technology, as well as nitrate limits which will require a significant upgrade of the secondary treatment processes. A new Time Schedule Order (TSO) was also adopted in September 2014 which requires the City to achieve the disinfection byproduct limits and nitrate limits by November 30, 2019. A detailed listing of the Discharge Limits for various pollutants is included in Table 2-1. The existing facility is currently rated for 5.1 million gallons per day (mgd) for ADWF conditions.4 The WRRF Facilities Plan states that the plant currently treats an average of approximately 3.5 mgd under ADWF (without Cal Poly ADWF is 3.1 mgd) and 3.9 mgd under average annual flow (AAF) conditions (San Luis Obispo June 2015: Section 1.1 and Table 5-1). The EIR for the City’s recent update of the Land Use and Circulation Element estimates the AAF at 4.39 mgd based on records for 2000 through 2012 (San Luis Obispo December 2014: page 4-359). The difference between the two AAF condition estimates may reflect the influence of more recent drought conditions, including conservation measures implemented in response. The City General Plan Land Use Element projects a future 2035 City population of 56,686 (City of San Luis Obispo December 2014: Table 3), with a slightly higher population of 57,200 if the City’s Urban Reserve Capacity is used. For planning purposes, a per capita wastewater generation rate of 87.5 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) for ADWF conditions was used to determine the required capacity, which is consistent with what the City has used in past studies and evaluations (City of San Luis Obispo 2015: page 5-2). A population projection of 57,200, which is in line with the City’s Urban Reserve Capacity as well as projected contributions from Cal Poly, was used to determine an estimated ADWF of 5.4 mgd. During wet weather, additional water enters the collection system through inflow and infiltration even though the system is not designed to collect stormwater flows. The peak flows during wet weather amount to an equivalent of 33.5 mgd (San Luis Obispo City June 2015: Table 1-2), but the current plant has a peak wet weather flow capacity of 22 mgd (City of San Luis Obispo September 2014: page 4-359). Currently, wet weather flows are handled through a 4 Calculated based on three driest months of the year. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 34 Table 2-1 Renewed NPDES Discharge Limits for Selected Pollutants (R3-2014-0043) Parameter Unit Average Dry Weather Flow Average Annual Average Monthly Average Weekly Maximum Daily Instantaneous Minimum Instantaneous Maximum Maximum Effluent Discharge Flow mgd 5.1 - - - - - - Biological Oxygen Demand, 5 day (BOD) mg/L - - 10 30 50 - - lb/d - - 425 1,275 2,125 - - Total Suspended Solids (TSS) mg/L - - 10 30 75 - - lb/d - - 425 1,275 3,190 - - Un-ionized Ammonia mg N/L - - - - 0.025 - - Interim Nitrate mg N/L - - 42.6 - - - - Nitrate mg N/L - - 10 - - - - Coliform MPN/100 mL - - 23 2.2 - - 240 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L - - - - - 4.0 - pH s.u. - - - - - 6.5 8.3 Interim Chlorodibromomethane µg/L - - - - - - 42 Interim Dichlorodibromomethane µg/L - - - - - - 36 Final Chlorodibromomethane µg/L - - 0.4 - 1.0 - - Final Dichlorodibromomethane µg/L - - 0.56 - 1.0 - - N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) µg/L - - 0.00069 - 0.0014 - - a In-stream criteria (i.e., non-discharge limit). b The fecal coliform concentrations shall not exceed a median of 2.2 MPN/100 mL as determined from the last 7 days of sampling results for which analyses have been completed; no more than one sample shall exceed 23 MPN/100 mL total coliform in any 30-day period; no sample shall exceed 240 MPN/100 mL total coliform. c Interim limits listed in renewed TSO R3-2014-0036 are valid through November 30, 2019. d Final limits compliance by November 30, 2019. mgd = million gallons per day; mg/L = milligrams per liter; lb/d = pounds per day; µg/L = micrograms per liter; mg N/L = milligrams Nitrate / liter; MPN/100 mL = most probable number per 100 milliliters; s.u. = standard unit Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 35 combination of temporary storage in ponds and the practice of blending treated and less treated flows prior to discharge; however, the latter practice is no longer permitted under the new NPDES permit. In summary, the WRRF is being upgraded to meet a number of objectives, including providing the nominal increase in ADWF capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element to upgrade/replace aging infrastructure. Primarily, though, the WRRF upgrade is necessary to meet the more stringent discharge requirements established by the RWQCB and SWRCB in late 2014. Finally, the proposed upgrades would increase the production of recycled water, provide a number of public amenities, and position the City for potential future potable reuse, as described below. 2.4.2 Project Characteristics The WRRF Facilities Plan provides details regarding the components of the project and their construction. These are summarized in the following sections. a. Demolition of Existing Structures. During the WRRF upgrade certain structures would be demolished to make room for new and enlarged equipment. The Prado Day Center building would be removed, along with the small bore gun range, some sludge drying beds and other facilities. Figure 2-3 shows a draft demolition plan, indicating the structures that are proposed to be demolished. Since the WRRF must continue operating during the upgrades, not all of the indicated demolition would occur concurrently. b. Treatment Upgrades. Section 7 in the WRRF Facilities Plan provides a detailed description of the proposed upgrades within the WRRF. The details of the equipment and processes identified for the WRRF upgrade are described below and are based on meeting various performance standards, so that the facility will comply with the discharge specifications set by the SWRCB, as summarized in Table 2-1, above. The proposed changes are shown in Figures 2-4 (Construction Sequencing) and 2-5 (Proposed Site Plan), and summarized briefly below. Figure 2-6 illustrates the proposed process flow diagram with the upgraded equipment. Figures 2-7a-f provide photos characterizing existing conditions at the site and locations of proposed upgrades. • Primary Treatment. Addition of a new flow monitoring system, along with other mechanical and structural improvements to the existing headworks. Rehabilitation of the primary clarifiers and upgrades to the supporting mechanical equipment. • Flow Equalization. Upgrades to the existing equalization pond (including an increase in capacity) to enhance operations and maintenance and improve wet weather performance. • Secondary Treatment. Upgrades and expansion of secondary treatment system to remove nitrogen and organic components, necessary to meet the new Waste Discharge Requirements specifications. • Tertiary Treatment. Expansion of the filter capacity to meet peak flow requirements and construction of a new Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection unit to meet the new stringent discharge limits for disinfection byproducts. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 36 This page intentionally left blank. Source: Facilities Master Plan Figure 12-1.Existing Site Features to be DemolishedFigure 2-3City of San Luis ObispoWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIRSection 2.0 Project Description/080 160 Feet37 Source: Facilities Master Plan: Figure 1-5Construction SequencingFigure 2-4City of San Luis ObispoWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIRSection 2.0 Project DescriptionSTAGE 1 CONSTRUCTIONSTAGE 2 CONSTRUCTIONSTAGE 3 CONSTRUCTIONSTAGE 4 CONSTRUCTION/080 160 Feet39, Source: Facilities Master Plan: Figure 1-3Proposed Site PlanFigure 2-5City of San Luis ObispoWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIRSection 2.0 Project Description/080 160 Feet41, Source: Facilities Master Plan: Figure 7-15Proposed Process Flow DiagramFigure 2-6City of San Luis ObispoWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIRSection 2.0 Project Description43 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 2.0 Project Description Site Photos Figure 2-7a City of San Luis Obispo Photo 1: Digester #2 located in northeastern area of project site. Photo 2: Main Equalization Basin located in northern area of the project site, adjacent to Prado Road. 45 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 2.0 Project Description Site Photos Figure 2-7b City of San Luis Obispo Photo 3: Biofilter #3 centrally located in northern area of site. Photo 4: Top of Biofilter #3. 46 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 2.0 Project Description Site Photos Figure 2-7c City of San Luis Obispo Photo 5: Primary Clarifier and trickling filters centrally located in northern area of project site. Photo 6: Cooling towers located in the center of the site, Bob Jones Trail can be seen to the east. 47 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 2.0 Project Description Site Photos Figure 2-7d City of San Luis Obispo Photo 7: Administration building and filter tower complex located centrally in northern area of site. Photo 8: Top of filter tower complex. 48 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 2.0 Project Description Site Photos Figure 2-7e City of San Luis Obispo Photo 9: Decomissioned chlorine contact channels and ponds located at the southern end of the site. Photo 10: Top of decommissioned chlorine contact channels. 49 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 2.0 Project Description Site Photos Figure 2-7f City of San Luis Obispo Photo 11: Triangular pond located at southern end of site. Photo 12: Looking south from top of filter tower complex. 50 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 51 • Solids and Liquids Handling Processes. o Solids Thickening. Addition of new equipment to thicken the solids produced in the treatment process. Upgrade would replace existing Dissolved Air Flotation Thickener, with a less energy-intensive process. o Anaerobic Digester. Construction of a new anaerobic digester. o Biosolids Dewatering. Replacement of the old belt filter press with a new screw press. o Sidestream Treatment/Return Stream Management. Several upgrades would be made in the handling and treatment of waste streams produced internally. These include filter backwash, thickening return fluid (sidestream), digester return fluid (sidestream), lagoon supernatant (from dewatering sidestream), sludge drying bed return fluid, and plant drain. c. Cooling. Upgrades to effluent cooling would be provided as part of the project, either through the addition of cooling towers, wetland cooling or other methods. Additional cooling could be provided through a combination of cooling towers and/or heat exchangers. An alternate cooling method may include use of the undeveloped area immediately southwest of the main facility for development of a wetland cooling system. The concept of using wetlands for cooling and polishing effluent before discharge in lieu of using mechanical chillers has been modeled and determined to be a viable option for cooling at the site. The size of this area is sufficient to allow use of the wetland cooling option without requiring removal of the portion of Bob Jones Bike Trail present in that area of the site, though some realignment may be necessary. Following is a description of where a potential wetland cooling system would be located at the site, its conceptual design and an operation overview. It should be noted that at this time the use of wetlands is being considered as an option for effluent cooling and that the decision on whether or not to include this feature in the final design has not yet been made. However, all potential impacts from construction of the wetland cooling option are being considered in this environmental assessment and no additional review will be required if the process is selected. Concept Layout. The proposed project includes an option to create 17 acres of wetlands, across six proposed wetland cells, adjacent to San Luis Obispo Creek for about ½ mile between the creek and U.S. 101 and from the main WRRF site (see Figure 2-2) to just upstream of the confluence of the creek with the tributary from Laguna Lake. Cells would be individual wetland ponds that are hydrologically connected. Approximately 10 acres would be new construction and 7 acres would incorporate the existing northern and southern holding ponds, triangle wetland, and the small seasonal wetland with interpretive signage located at the southerly end of the site. Some of the critical design criteria for cooling wetlands are as follows: • The pond water levels would be lowered to create an emergent wetland and the ponds would be planted with wetlands plants with minimal earthwork to create two zones of depth. Each cell will have a narrow deep zone ranging between 2 and 6 feet deep full length of the upstream end to distribute flow uniformly over the shallow zone and will have a similar deep zone to collect flow on the downstream end of each shallow zone. Shallow zones will have water depths varying between 2 inches to 18 inches, with an average of about 1 foot (12 inches). The northern holding pond would operate at about the same average water depth as is currently (approximately 1 foot deep) and the interpretive wetland water depth would average approximately 1 foot. The new wetland cells will have slightly sloped bottoms and the largest deep Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 52 zones, while the existing wetland cells (holding ponds and existing seasonal wetland) will have smaller deep zones to minimize disturbance of the existing vegetation. • All wetland features will be designed to be flooded briefly for short periods of time in large flood events. Portions of the wetlands will be contained with berms and portions will be fully in cut without berms. Berm configuration will consider flood flow passage. • All wetland cells would have water level control structures that allow independent adjustment of water level and range of water level fluctuations. • Part of the cooling function of wetlands comes from shade cover so the wetlands will generally have emergent vegetation but can also use shade from trees on the perimeter, on islands, and in shallow zones. Floating plants and submerged plants also reflect some solar radiation and will be used in specific areas such as in the deep zones. The mix of plants will include as much variety as possible within the native plant palettes available in the region. Planting densities would be such that the wetlands would not become choked with vegetation. • The final wetland cell in the design would include a small manhole pump station near the existing outfall facilities and a submerged rotating screen inlet in a deep zone of about 5 feet. The screen would have approximately 50 openings per square inch to exclude tadpoles, insects, and organic matter. Cooling Wetland Operational Overview. Wetlands alone would provide enough effluent cooling in the fall and winter months (November through February) to meet discharge requirements, and wetlands followed by the use of existing and new cooling towers would be used in the spring and summer months (April through October). WRRF effluent would flow into and out of the wetlands in the winter at the rate that effluent is produced and the wetland water levels would be anticipated to remain fairly constant. In the summer the cooling towers (proposed to be located at the southern end of the site) would operate primarily at night to produce the coolest water for release into the stream during the evening and early morning hours when steelhead most often move up and down the creek. During warmer periods of the year (e.g. summer and late fall) the wetlands would be operated to provide storage of water for peak operation of the cooling towers at night. During this warmer period, the volume of the total wetland area would be reduced at night and refill each day. However, water level fluctuations in each cell would vary, with water levels in some cells being held at a constant level, while others could fluctuate by more than 50%. The approximate minimum depth in any given cell during April through October would be 0.2 foot. During cooler periods (generally from November through February), when the wetlands alone would be expected to provide enough cooling, the approximate minimum depth in any cell would be 1 foot. Likewise, during the cooler periods in the fall, it would be possible to drain the wetlands briefly to control invasive species while using cooling towers only for temperature control. During the day, WRRF effluent would accumulate in the wetlands for initial cooling and be stored until evening when the cooling towers would be used to remove additional heat before discharge to the creek. Some water that is cooled at night will be stored for release during the day to meet minimum flow requirements. In the spring and fall, conditions would allow use of fewer cooling towers and would allow reduced water level fluctuations in the wetlands. Effluent temperatures would be expected to range from approximately 70 to 80°F in summer and approximately 60 to 70°F in the winter. Temperatures across all ponds would range from Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 53 approximately 65 to 80°F in the summer and approximately 55 to 70°F in the winter. The total dissolved solids (TDS) levels of the effluent in the wetlands would generally remain below 0.9 parts per thousand. The final turbidity level of the effluent coming out of the system and being discharged into San Luis Obispo Creek would be in line with the requirements of the facility’s existing NMFS Biological Opinion for steelhead. d. Stormwater Management/Flood Protection Improvements. The project would also include internal drainage improvements. As part of the proposed project, stormwater discharges from the site would be managed using one of several options, including a) continuing to direct all stormwater to the existing discharge points, b) directing part or all of the onsite stormwater flow to the undeveloped area southwest of the main facility, if the wetland cooling option is selected, c) directing part of the stormwater flow to a new discharge point along San Luis Obispo Creek, possibly near the northeast corner of the WRRF, or d) a combination of the three options above. In addition, low impact development (LID), including minor upgrades, such as incorporating LID/stormwater collection features as part of newly constructed buildings and treatment facilities, may also be included as part of the internal stormwater management plan for the WRRF site to improve the quality of stormwater flows prior to discharge. However, all potential impacts from any of the above stormwater management options are being considered in this environmental assessment and no additional review will be required if any combination of the above is selected. In addition, planned flood protection improvements include construction of enhanced protection for key facilities, which includes raising concrete walls protecting some structures, and a new berm around the flow equalization basin. e. Public Amenities. Public amenities proposed at the site include construction of a new Water Resource Center, and grading and restoration of land at the northeast corner of the WRRF after removal of the existing supernatant lagoon, which may ultimately be used for public park purposes under the direction of the City Parks and Recreation Department. The purpose of the Water Resource Center is to serve staff needs while simultaneously engaging and educating the community on the water cycle and recycled water treatment. The Water Resource Center would consolidate all of the major buildings at the WRRF, with the exception of the maintenance shop (due to noise concerns). Other amenity improvements would include a Learning Center (in the repurposed administration building) with a walking tour of the facility, interpretive exhibits, picnic areas, a small amphitheater and demonstration gardens and wetlands. The project would also include improvements to perimeter fencing and landscaping, particularly at the Prado Road frontage of the property, as well improvements for security, access control, and internal circulation. f. Research and Development. Cal Poly currently conducts water treatment research at the WRRF facility. Cal Poly would continue to conduct these types of activities in the future at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All activities would be within the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. In addition, the City intends to test as yet unidentified pilot processes and treatment technologies in the future at the WRRF facility. These tests would occur at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All would be within Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 54 the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. g. Other Proposed Improvements. The following is a list of other proposed upgrades/improvements included as part of the WRRF Project. • Odor Control. Odor control improvements would be installed at several locations. • Internal Access Improvements. Design includes an improved, single access point from Prado Road and an internal street system that will maintain access to the bus maintenance yard and City corporation yard during construction and after the WRRF upgrade. • Additional Electrical and Control Upgrades. Improved electrical service to meet the needs of new equipment, and improved instrumentation and controls for operation of the WRRF. • Renewable Energy Improvements. Installation of solar photovoltaic panels and related equipment at various locations throughout the WRRF. h. Construction Sequencing and Site Plan. Figure 2-4 shows the preliminary construction sequencing proposed for the WRRF upgrade, though this may be refined as the design process continues. Some of the new facilities would replace existing structures unrelated to the WRRF, while others would be installed as older equipment is removed. Figure 2-5 shows the location of equipment and improvements proposed and the existing equipment to be retained, though again this may be refined as further design occurs. i. Construction Schedule. Construction activities are expected to start in late 2017. The deadline for most of the proposed upgrades required to meet the Time Schedule Order issued by the SWRCB is November 30, 2019. Other upgrades that would address capacity, condition and other facility needs are planned as part of this project and will be constructed as part of the same project, but could be completed later. As the City continues to move forward with design procurement discussions with the RWQCB, the City will evaluate if the compliance schedule for nitrate permit limit can be extended. See Figure 2-4 along with the WRRF Facilities Plan for more information on the ordering of the internal improvements (San Luis Obispo City June 2015: Figure 13-2). In summary, the proposed project includes upgrading the existing WRRF in order to: (1) meet the more stringent discharge requirements adopted by the RWQCB and SWRCB in late 2014; (2) provide a nominal increase in ADWF capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element; (3) replace aging equipment; (4) maximize the production of recycled water; and (5) incorporate interpretive features and public amenities. Further detail on the proposed improvements and how they were selected are provided in the WRRF Facilities Plan. 2.5 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The State CEQA Guidelines require that the EIR Project Description include "a statement of objectives sought by the proposed project” [State CEQA Guidelines, subsection 15124(b)]. The WRRF is a major community asset in San Luis Obispo. Besides the obvious need of meeting the City’s demand for wastewater treatment and the SWRCB and NPDES permit requirements Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 55 for discharge specifications, the City has identified the following project vision, mission, and objectives (San Luis Obispo City June 2015: Section 1.3): Vision: Create a community asset that is recognized as supporting health, well-being and quality of life Mission: Deliver a Water Resource Recovery Facility in partnership with stakeholders that provides economic, social and environmental value to the community Objectives and Performance Measures: • Economic o Optimize capital investment and life cycle cost o Maximize value for ratepayers’ investment o Incorporate flexibility and scalability to adapt to future conditions o Simplify process flow and make treatment more robust o Optimize application of appropriate technology • Social o Create and sustain diverse partnerships that add value to the community o Provide an interpretive center and dedicated features to engage and educate the community o Be a good neighbor o Engender the trust of project stakeholders o Support the development and empowerment of City employees • Environmental o Develop and implement a holistic strategy to maximize sustainable resource recovery and manage salts, nutrients and environmental pollutants in the Basin o Incorporate sustainability practices in planning, design, construction, and operation o Maintain compliance and minimize impacts to operations and the community during construction o Sustain reliable compliance post-construction 2.6 REQUIRED APPROVALS From the WRRF Facilities Plan (San Luis Obispo City June 2015: Section 13.1.2) the following permits have been identified as possibly applying to the project. The list will be refined as detailed plans are developed. • California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and take authorization as applicable. • Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA). Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and take authorizations as applicable. Consultation with NOAA NMFS and concurrence on existing Biological Opinion. • California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Consultation and coordination with the NAHC. • Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 401. Water Quality Certification from Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 2.0 Project Description City of San Luis Obispo 56 • CWA, Section 402. NPDES General Permit from the CCRWQCB for general construction activities and General Permit for Discharges with Low Threat to Water Quality. • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR)/Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for flood control improvements. • Caltrans Encroachment Permit. • San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District. Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate. • City building, grading, and encroachment permits, as appropriate. • Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). Approval for new power infrastructure to the site. 2.7 INTENDED USES OF THE EIR Most of the agency approvals described above are discretionary in nature – meaning that the approving agency has the authority to deny the specific permit or to place conditions on its approval. These types of actions are subject to CEQA, and this EIR is intended to provide environmental information for those approvals, as well as for the actions by the City. It is possible that other similar reviews and approvals may be required due to future design modifications and/or as project features are further defined. Unless a subsequent review identifies new substantial environmental effects outside of those discussed in this EIR, it is anticipated that this EIR and the CEQA process followed in its preparation, will serve the needs of any future approving agency. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.0 Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures City of San Luis Obispo 57 3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES The analyses included in the following sections were completed based on the information provided in Section 2.0, Project Description, as well as comments received during the Notice of Preparation period, and addresses all environmental issues from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. “Significant effect” is defined by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15382 as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment, but may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant.” The assessment of each issue area in Sections 3.1 through 3.9 begins with a discussion of the environmental and regulatory setting relevant to that issue. Following the setting is a discussion of the project’s impacts relative to the issue. Within the impact analysis, the first subsection identifies the methodologies used and the “significance thresholds,” which are those criteria adopted by the City, other agencies, universally recognized, or developed specifically for this analysis to determine whether potential impacts are significant. The next subsection describes each impact of the proposed project, mitigation measures for significant impacts, and the level of significance after mitigation. Each impact is listed in bold text, with the discussion of the impact and its significance immediately following. Each bolded impact listing also contains a statement of the significance determination for the environmental impact as follows: Class I, Significant and Unavoidable: An impact that cannot be reduced to below the threshold level given all reasonably available and feasible mitigation measures. Such an impact requires a Statement of Overriding Considerations to be issued if the Project is approved. Class II, Significant but Mitigable: An impact that can be reduced to below the threshold level given all reasonably available and feasible mitigation measures. Such an impact requires findings to be made. Class III, Less than Significant: An impact that may be adverse, but does not exceed the threshold levels and does not require mitigation measures. However, avoidance and minimization measures that could lessen the environmental effect may be suggested if readily available and achievable. Class IV, Beneficial: An impact that would reduce existing environmental problems or hazards. Following each environmental impact discussion is a listing of recommended mitigation measures (if required) and the residual effects or level of significance remaining after the implementation of the measures. In those cases where the mitigation measure for an impact could have a significant environmental impact in another resource area, this impact is discussed as a residual effect. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.0 Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures City of San Luis Obispo 58 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 59 3.1 AIR QUALITY 3.1.1 Setting a. Climate and Topography. The project site is located within the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), which includes San Luis Obispo County, Santa Barbara County, and Ventura County. The project site is located near the northern portion of the SCCAB. The San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) is responsible for local control and monitoring of criteria pollutants throughout the San Luis Obispo County portion of the SCCAB. The South Central Coast Basinwide Control Council, composed of the SLOAPCD, Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, promotes coordination of air pollution control efforts throughout the SCCAB. Climate, or the average weather condition, affects air quality in several ways. Wind patterns can remove or add air pollutants emitted by stationary or mobile sources. Inversion, a condition where warm air traps cooler air underneath it, can hold pollutants near the ground by limiting upward mixing (dilution). Topography also plays a part, as valleys often trap emissions by limiting later dispersal. Regional average temperatures in the area range from the low forties to the high seventies (Fahrenheit) and precipitation averages approximately 23.45 inches per year (1948-2005) (Western Regional Climate Center, 2005). The warmest months are typically July, August, and September. b. Air Pollutants of Primary Concern. The state and federal Clean Air Acts mandate the control and reduction of certain air pollutants. Under these Acts, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established ambient air quality standards for certain “criteria” pollutants. Ambient air pollutant concentrations are affected by the rates and distributions of corresponding air pollutant emissions, as well as by the climactic and topographic influences discussed above. The primary determinant of concentrations of non-reactive pollutants (such as carbon monoxide [CO] and particulate matter) is proximity to major sources. Ambient CO levels in particular usually closely follow the spatial and temporal distributions of vehicular traffic. A discussion of primary criteria pollutants is provided below. Ozone. Ozone is a colorless gas with a pungent odor. Most ozone in the atmosphere is formed as a result of the interaction of ultraviolet light, reactive organic gases (ROG), and oxides of nitrogen (NOX). ROG (the organic compound fraction relevant to ozone formation, and sufficiently equivalent for the purposes of this analysis to volatile organic compounds, or VOC) is composed of non-methane hydrocarbons (with some specific exclusions), and NOX is made of different chemical combinations of nitrogen and oxygen. A highly reactive molecule, ozone readily combines with many different components of the atmosphere. Consequently, high levels of ozone tend to exist only while high ROG and NOX levels are present to sustain the ozone formation process. Once the precursors have been depleted, ozone levels rapidly decline. Because these reactions occur on a regional rather than local scale, ozone is considered a regional pollutant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 60 Carbon Monoxide. CO is an odorless, colorless gas that is emitted by mobile and stationary sources as a result of incomplete combustion of hydrocarbons or other carbon-based fuels. CO causes a number of health problems including fatigue, headache, confusion, and dizziness. The incomplete combustion of petroleum fuels in on-road vehicles and at power plants is a major cause of CO. CO is also produced during the winter from wood stoves and fireplaces. CO tends to dissipate rapidly into the atmosphere; consequently violations of the state CO standard are generally associated with the major roadway intersections during peak hour traffic conditions. Localized carbon monoxide “hotspots” can occur at intersections with heavy peak hour traffic. Specifically, hotspots can be created at intersections where traffic levels are sufficiently high such that the local CO concentration exceeds the federal and state Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS). Nitrogen Dioxide. Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is a by-produce of fuel combustion, with the primary source being motor vehicles and industrial boilers and furnaces. The principal form of nitrogen oxide produced by combustion is nitric oxide (NO), but NO reacts rapidly to form NO2, creating the mixture of NO and NO2 commonly called NOX. Nitrogen dioxide is an acute irritant. A relationship between NO2 and chronic pulmonary fibrosis may exist, and an increase in bronchitis in young children at concentrations below 0.3 parts per million (ppm) may occur. Nitrogen dioxide absorbs blue light and causes a reddish brown cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility. It can also contribute to the formation of PM10 and acid rain. Particulate Matter. Suspended particulate matter (airborne dust) consists of particles small enough to remain suspended in the air for long periods. Fine particulate matter includes particles small enough to be inhaled, pass through the respiratory system, and lodge in the lungs, with resultant health effects. Particulate matter can include materials such as sulfates and nitrates, which are particularly damaging to the lungs. Health effects studies resulted in revision of the Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) standard in 1987 to focus on particulates that are small enough to be considered “inhalable,” i.e. 10 microns or less in size (PM10). PM10 arises from sources such as road dust, diesel soot, combustion products, construction operations, and dust storms. PM10 scatters light and significantly reduces visibility. In addition, these particulates penetrate the lungs and can potentially damage the respiratory tract. On June 19, 2003, CARB adopted amendments to the statewide 24-hour particulate matter standards based upon requirements set forth in the Children’s Environmental Health Protection Act (SB 25). In July of 1997, a further revision of the federal standard added criteria for PM2.5, reflecting recent studies that suggested that particulates less than 2.5 microns in diameter are of particular concern. Due to increased concerns over health impacts related to fine particulate matter (particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less), both State and Federal PM2.5 standards have been created. These standards were established due to increasing concerns that previous standards were inadequate and the statewide potential for significant health impacts associated with fine particulate matter exposure was determined to be large and wide-ranging. Fine particulate matter impacts primarily affect infants, children, the elderly, and those with pre- existing cardiopulmonary disease. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 61 Sulfur Dioxide. Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is a gaseous compound of sulfur and oxygen, formed when sulfur-containing fuel is burned by mobile sources, such as locomotives, ships, and off-road diesel equipment. Additionally, several industrial processes emit SO2, including petroleum refining and metal processing. Exposure to sulfur dioxide can cause bronchoconstriction accompanied by symptoms, which may include wheezing, shortness of breath, and chest tightness, especially during exercise or physical activity. Children, the elderly, and people with asthma, cardiovascular disease or chronic lung disease are most susceptible to these symptoms. Continued exposure at elevated levels can result in an increased incidence of pulmonary symptoms and disease, decreased pulmonary function, and increased risk of mortality. Lead. Lead is a metal found naturally in the environment, as well as in manufacturing products. The major sources of lead emissions historically have been mobile and industrial sources. As a result of the phase-out of leaded gasoline, metal processing is currently the primary source of lead emissions. The highest level of lead in the air is generally found near lead smelters. Other stationary sources are waste incinerators, utilities, and lead-acid battery manufacturers. In the past, mobile sources were the main contributor to ambient lead concentrations in the air. In the early 1970s, USEPA set national regulations to gradually reduce the lead content in gasoline. In 1975, unleaded gasoline was introduced for motor vehicles equipped with catalytic converters. USEPA completed the ban prohibiting the use of leaded gasoline in highway vehicles in December 1995. As a result of USEPA’s regulatory efforts to remove lead from gasoline, lead concentrations have declined substantially over the past several decades. The most dramatic reductions in lead emissions occurred prior to 1990 in the transportation sector due to the removal of lead from gasoline sold for most highway vehicles. Lead emissions were further reduced substantially between 1990 and 2008, with substantial reductions occurring in the metal industries, at least in part as a result of national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants. CARB and USEPA establish ambient air quality standards for major pollutants at thresholds intended to protect public health. Federal and state standards have been established. For ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead, and fine particulates (PM10 and PM2.5). Table 3.1-1 summarizes the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for each of these pollutants. Standards have been set at levels intended to be protective of public health. California standards are more restrictive than federal standards for each of these pollutants except for lead and the eight-hour average for CO. Depending on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the local air basin is classified as in “attainment” or “non-attainment.” Some areas are unclassified, which means no monitoring data are available. Unclassified areas are considered to be in attainment. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 62 Table 3.1-1 Current Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time California Standards Federal Standards Ozone 1 Hour 0.090 ppm - 8 Hour 0.070 ppm 0.070 ppm* Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) 24 Hour 50 μg/m3 150 μg/m3 Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 μg/m3 - Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 24 Hour No State Standard 35 μg/m3 Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 μg/m3 12 μg/m3 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8 Hour 9.0 ppm 9 ppm 1 Hour 20 ppm 35 ppm Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Annual Arithmetic Mean 0.030 ppm 0.053 ppm 1 Hour 0.18 ppm 100 ppb Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Annual Arithmetic Mean - 0.030 ppm 24 Hour 0.04 ppm 0.14 ppm 3 Hour - 0.5 ppm 1 Hour 0.25 ppm 75 ppb Lead 30 Day Average 1.5 μg/m3 - Calendar Quarter - 1.5 μg/m3 3-Month Average - 0.15 μg/m3 Source: CARB, 2015 * The USEPA recently adopted revised primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone. The USEPA is revising the levels of both standards to 0.070 parts per million (ppm), and retaining their indicators (O3), forms (fourth-highest daily maximum, averaged across three consecutive years) and averaging times (eight hours). The previous federal 8-hour standard was 0.050 ppm. ppm = parts per million; μg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; ppb = parts per billion c. Current Ambient Air Quality. Local air districts and CARB monitor ambient air quality to assure that air quality standards are met, and if they are not met, to also develop strategies to meet the standards. Air quality monitoring stations measure pollutant ground- level concentrations (typically, ten feet above ground level). Table 3.1-2 summarizes the state and federal attainment status for the criterial pollutants in the SCCAB. Table 3.1-2 Attainment Status of the South Central Coast Air Basin Pollutant California Standard Federal Standard Ozone Non-Attainment Non-Attainment Eastern SLO County Attainment Western SLO County* Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) Non-Attainment Unclassified**/Attainment Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Attainment Unclassified**/Attainment Carbon Monoxide (CO) Attainment Unclassified** Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Attainment Unclassified** Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Attainment Unclassified** Lead Attainment No Attainment Information Source: SLOAPCD, 2013 * San Luis Obispo County has been designated non-attainment east of the -120.4 deg Longitude line, in areas of SLO County that are south of latitude 35.45 degrees, and east of the -120.4 Longitude line, in areas of SLO County that are north of the latitude 35.45 degrees. This non-attainment status is based on the previous federal ozone standard. **Unclassified (EPA/Federal definition): Any area that cannot be classified on the basis of available information as meeting or not meeting the national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard for that pollutant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 63 As shown in Table 3.1-2, the SCCAB the SCCAB is a non-attainment area for both the federal and state standards for ozone and state standards for PM10. The SCCAB is in attainment for the state and federal standards for NO2 and CO. Ambient air quality is monitored at 24 SCCAB-operated monitoring stations, located throughout the SCCAB; seven of the stations are located in San Luis Obispo County. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is located at 3220 South Higuera Street, approximately 0.1 mile northeast of the northeastern edge of the project site (Prado Road). The primary pollutants of concern for the SCCAB are ozone and PM10, as those are the pollutants for which the district is in non-attainment. As indicated in Table 3.1-3, there were no federal or state ozone exceedances at the nearest SCCAB monitoring station in 2012 or 2013. There was one 8-hour exceedance in 2014.The state standard for PM10 was exceeded once in 2012 and three times in 2013. The federal standard for PM2.5 was not exceeded in 2012, 2013, or 2014. Table 3.1-3 Ambient Air Quality Data Pollutant 2012 2013 2014 Ozone (ppm), Worst Hour 0.07 0.67 0.08 Number of days of State exceedances (>0.090 ppm) 0 0 0 Ozone (ppm), 8-hour average 0.057 0.061 0.074 Number of days of State exceedances (>0.070 ppm) 0 0 1 Number of days of Federal exceedances (>0.050 ppm)* 0 0 0 Particulate Matter, <10 microns, µg/m3, Worst 24 Hours 51.3 75.6 43.2 Number of days above State standard (>50 µg/m3) 1 3 0 Number of days above Federal standard (>150 µg/m3) 0 0 0 Particulate Matter <2.5 microns, µg/m3, Worst 24 Hours 15.4 19.5 15.6 Number of days above Federal standard (>35 µg/m3) 0 0 0 Source: CARB Top Four Summary available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php * Federal ozone exceedances are based on standard in place at the time of the measurement. ppm = parts per million; μg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter d. Toxic Air Contaminants. According to Section 39655 of the California Health and Safety Code, a toxic air contaminant (TAC) is “an air contaminant which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.” In addition, 189 substances that have been listed as federal hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) pursuant to Section 7412 of Title 42 of the United States Code are TACs under the State’s air toxics program pursuant to Section 39657(b) of the California Health and Safety Code. TACs can cause various cancers, depending on the particular chemicals, their type and duration of exposure. Additionally, some of the TACs may cause other health effects with short or long term exposure. The ten TACs posing the greatest health risk in California are acetaldehyde, benzene, 1-3 butadiene, carbon tetrachloride, hexavalent chromium, para-dichlorobenzene, formaldehyde, methylene chloride, perchlorethylene, and diesel particulate matter. Mobile sources of TACs include freeways and other roads with high traffic volumes (urban roads with traffic volumes exceeding 100,000 vehicles per day, or rural roads with volumes greater than 50,000 vehicles per day), while stationary sources include distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, dry cleaners, and large gas dispensing facilities. The main roadway near the project Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 64 site is U.S. Highway 101 which has an Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume of 61,100 (Caltrans, 2014), which does not exceed the high traffic volume rate of 100,000 vehicles per day. Additionally, there are none of the above referenced stationary sources in the vicinity. Therefore, the project site is not located near any major sources of TACs. 3.1.2 Regulatory Framework The principal air quality regulatory mechanisms include the following: • Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), in particular, the 1990 amendments; • California Clean Air Act (CCAA); • California Health and Safety Code (H&SC), in particular, Chapter 3.5 (Toxic Air Contaminants) (H&SC) (Section 39650 et. seq.) and Part 6 (Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment) (H&SC Section 44300 et. seq.); • SLOAPCD 2001 Clean Air Plan; and • City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan. a. Federal. The federal government has been empowered by the FCAA to regulate the emission of airborne pollutants and has established ambient air quality standards for the protection of public health. The USEPA is the federal agency designated to administer air quality regulation. Federal Clean Air Act. USEPA is charged with implementing national air quality programs. USEPA’s air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the FCAA. The FCAA was passed in 1963 by the U.S. Congress and has been amended several times. The 1970 FCAA amendments strengthened previous legislation and laid the foundation for regulatory scheme of the 1970s and 1980s. In 1977, Congress again added several provisions, including non- attainment requirements for areas not meeting NAAQS and the Prevention of Significant Deterioration program. The 1990 FCAA amendments represent the latest in a series of federal efforts to regulate the protection of air quality in the U.S. The FCAA allows states to adopt more stringent standards or to include other pollution species. NAAQS. As discussed above, the FCAA requires USEPA to establish primary and secondary NAAQS for a number of criteria pollutants. The air pollutants for which standards have been established are considered the most prevalent air pollutants that are known to be hazardous to human health. NAAQS have been established for the following pollutants: ozone, CO, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead. Title III of the Federal CAA. Hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) are the air contaminants identified by USEPA as known or suspected to cause cancer, other serious illnesses, birth defects, or death. The FCAA requires USEPA to set standards for these pollutants and reduce emissions of controlled chemicals. Specifically, Title III of the FCAA requires USEPA to promulgate National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for certain categories of sources that emit one or more pollutants that are identified as HAPs. The FCAA also requires USEPA to set standards to control emissions of HAPs through mobile source control programs. These include programs to reformulated gasoline, national low emissions vehicle standards, Tier 2 motor vehicle emission standards, gasoline sulfur control requirements, and heavy-duty engine standards. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 65 HAPs tend to be localized and are found in relatively low concentrations in ambient air. However, they can result in adverse chronic health effects if exposure to low concentrations occurs for long periods of time. Many HAPs originate from human activities, such as fuel combustion and solvent use. Emission standards may differ between “major sources” and “area sources” of the HAPs/TACs. Under the FCAA, major sources are defined as stationary sources with the potential to emit more than 10 tons per year (tpy) of any one HAP or more than 25 tpy of any combination of HAPs; all other sources are considered area sources. Mobile source air toxics (MSATs) are a subset of the 188 HAPs. Of the 21 HAPs identified by the USEPA as MSATs, a priority list of six HAPs was identified that include: diesel exhaust, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, and 1,3-butadiene. While vehicle miles traveled in the United States is expected to increase by 64% over the period from 2000 to 2020, emissions of MSATs are anticipated to decrease substantially as a result of efforts to control mobile source emissions (by 57-67% depending on the contaminant). b. State. The state government has been empowered by the CCAA to regulate the emission of airborne pollutants and has established ambient air quality standards for the protection of public health. CARB is the state equivalent of the USEPA in California. CARB establishes air quality standards and is responsible for control of mobile emission sources. California Clean Air Act. The CCAA, signed into law in 1988, requires all areas of the state to achieve and maintain the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. CARB is the State air pollution control agency and is part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA). CARB is the agency responsible for coordination and oversight of the State and local air pollution control programs in California, and for implementing the requirements of the CCAA. CARB oversees local district compliance with California and federal laws, approves local air quality plans, submits the SIPs to the USEPA, monitors air quality, determines and updates area designations and maps, and sets emissions standards for new mobile sources, consumer products, small utility engines, off-road vehicles, and fuels. CAAQS. The CCAA requires CARB to establish CAAQS. Similar to the NAAQS, CAAQS have been established for the following pollutants: ozone, CO, NO2, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, lead, vinyl chloride, hydrogen sulfide, sulfates, and visibility-reducing particulates. In most cases, the CAAQS are more stringent than the NAAQS pollutants. The CCAA requires that all local air districts in the State endeavor to achieve and maintain the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. The CCAA specifies that local air districts should focus particular attention on reducing the emissions from transportation and area-wide emission sources, and provides districts with the authority to regulate indirect sources. Tanner Air Toxics Act and Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act. Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) in California primarily are regulated through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (AB1807) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588) (Hot Spots Act). As discussed above, HAPs/TACs are a broad class of compounds known to cause morbidity or mortality (cancer risk). HAPs/TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). Because chronic exposure can result in adverse health effects, TACs are regulated at the regional, state, and federal level. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 66 AB 1807 sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. Research, public participation, and scientific peer review are necessary before CARB can designate a substance as a TAC. To date, CARB has identified more than 21 TACs and adopted USEPA’s list of HAPs as TACs. In 1998, diesel particulate matter (DPM) was added to CARB’s list of TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB adopts an Airborne Toxic Control Measure for sources that emit that particular TAC. If a safe threshold exists at which no toxic effect occurs from a substance, the control measure must reduce exposure below that threshold. If no safe threshold exists, the measure must incorporate Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to minimize emissions. The Hot Spots Act requires existing facilities that emit toxic substances above a specified level to prepare a toxic emissions inventory and a risk assessment if the emissions are significant, notify the public of significant risk levels, and prepare and implement risk reduction measures. Diesel Exhaust and Diesel Particulate Matter. Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about two-thirds of the cancer risk from TACs (based on the statewide average). According to CARB, diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors, and fine particles. This complexity makes the evaluation of health effects of diesel exhaust a complex scientific issue. Some chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by CARB, and are listed as carcinogens either under State Proposition 65 or under the Federal Hazardous Air Pollutants programs. CARB reports that recent air pollution studies have shown an association that diesel exhaust and other cancer-causing toxic air contaminants emitted from vehicles are responsible for much of the overall cancer risk from TACs in California. Particulate matter emitted from diesel-fueled engines (DPM) was found to comprise much of that risk. CARB has adopted and implemented a number of regulations for stationary and mobile sources to reduce emissions of DPM. Several of these regulatory programs affect medium and heavy duty diesel trucks that represent the bulk of DPM emissions from California highways. These regulations include the solid waste collection vehicle (SWCV) rule, in-use public and utility fleets, and the heavy-duty diesel truck and bus regulations. In 2011, CARB approved the latest regulation to reduce emissions of DPM and nitrogen oxides from existing on-road heavy-duty diesel fueled vehicles. The regulation requires affected vehicles to meet specific performance requirements between 2012 and 2023, with all affected diesel vehicles required to have 2010 model-year engines or the equivalent by 2023. These requirements are phased in over compliance period and depend on the model year of the vehicle. With implementation of CARB’s Risk Reduction Plan, DPM concentrations are expected to be reduced by 85% in 2020 from the estimated year 2000 level. As emissions are reduced, risks associated with exposure to emissions also are expected to be reduced. CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook. In April 2005, CARB released the final version of its Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. This guidance document is intended to encourage local land use agencies to consider the risks from air pollution before they approve the siting of sensitive land uses (e.g., residences) near sources of air pollution, particularly TACs (e.g., freeway and high traffic roads, commercial distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, dry cleaners, gasoline stations, and industrial facilities). These advisory recommendations include general setbacks or buffers from air pollution sources. However, unlike industrial or stationary sources of air pollution, the siting of new sensitive Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 67 land uses does not require air quality permits or approval by air districts, and as noted above, the CARB handbook provides guidance only rather than binding regulations. CAPCOA Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects. The California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA) is a consortium of air district managers throughout California, which provide guidance material to address air quality issues in the state. As a follow up to CARB’s 2005 Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, CAPCOA prepared the Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects. This guidance document was released to ensure that the health risk of projects were identified, assessed, and avoided or mitigated, if feasible, through the CEQA process. The CAPCOA guidance document provides recommended methodologies for evaluating health risk impacts for development projects. c. Local. Local control in air quality management is provided by CARB through county- level or regional (multi-county) air pollution control districts (APCDs). The local APCD is responsible for enforcing standards and regulating stationary sources. SLOAPCD regulates air quality in San Luis Obispo County, and is responsible for attainment planning related to criteria air pollutants, and for district rule development and enforcement. As part of SLOAPCD's responsibility to meet state and federal clean air standards, the APCD adopts rules and issues permits that require compliance with these standards. Rules applicable to this project include, but are not limited to, Rules 401 and 402. Permits allow SLOAPCD to specify operating conditions consistent with its countywide clean air strategy. It also reviews air quality analyses prepared for CEQA assessments, and has published the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 2012). The purpose of the Handbook is to assist lead agencies, planning consultants, and project components in assessing the potential air quality impacts from development. The Handbook is designed to provide uniform procedures for preparing the air quality analysis section of environmental documents for projects subject to CEQA. The guidelines put forth in the Handbook define the criteria used by the SLOAPCD to determine when an air quality analysis is necessary, the type of analysis that should be performed, the significance of the impacts predicted by the analysis, and the mitigation measures needed to reduce the overall air quality impacts (SLOAPCD, 2012). 2001 Clean Air Plan. In accordance with the California Clean Air Act, the SLOAPCD developed the 2001 Clean Air Plan (SLOAPCD, 2002). The Clean Air Plan is required to develop a plan to achieve and maintain the state ozone standard by the earliest practicable date. The Clean Air Plan outlines the SLOAPCD’s strategies to reduce ozone precursor emissions from a wide variety of stationary and mobile sources. City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan. The City adopted the City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan (CAP) in2012 (City of San Luis Obispo, 2012). The CAP identifies strategies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, in order to meet the City’s GHG reduction goals. The CAP sets a target of 1990 emissions levels by 2020, a 22% reduction from projected business-as-usual. More information about GHG is provided in Section 3.4, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this document. d. Sensitive Receptors. Certain population groups are more sensitive to air pollution than the general population; in particular, children, the elderly, and acutely ill and chronically ill persons, especially those with cardio-respiratory diseases, are considered sensitive receptors. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 68 Sensitive receptors that are in proximity to localized sources of particulate matter, toxics, and CO are of particular concern. As described in the SLOAPCD’s CEQA Handbook, sensitive receptors include schools, parks and playgrounds, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential dwelling unit(s). The SLOAPCD recommends evaluating potential impacts to sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of the project site. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are single family residences located approximately 300 feet away. 3.1.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures a. Methodology for Analysis. The analysis of the proposed project’s air quality impacts follows the guidance and methodologies recommended in the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook as well as Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project was analyzed for construction and operational impacts. Construction Emissions. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod, 2011 and 2013) was used to estimate construction emissions from off-road equipment and fugitive dust generated during the construction phase. The CalEEMod program quantifies emissions associated with the use of off-road equipment, on-road worker commune, as well as, construction delivery and haul trucks. Fugitive dust emissions are quantified for grading and site preparation activities/earthwork, truck loading, demolition, and vehicle trips on paved and unpaved surfaces. The program calculates fugitive dust associated with onsite earthwork, including onsite grading and site preparation phases, based on the construction equipment to be used (e.g., crawler tractors, graders, dozers, scrapers), hours of use, and the estimated area of disturbance calculated for each pieces of equipment. Operational Emissions. Operational emissions are typically comprised of mobile source emissions, emissions associated with energy consumption, and area source emissions. The proposed project would not increase the number of vendor trips or employee trips. Additionally, emissions from stationary operational equipment would not increase, as all of the equipment is electrical powered and quantified as G. Emissions for testing and emergency use of a 2000KW and a 1000KW generator were quantified based on performance data for CAT 2000KW 3516C and CAT 1000KW C32 generators. b. Threshold of Significance. The proposed project was analyzed for impacts, following the guidance of Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines and the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines contain the following checklist of effects that may be deemed potentially significant: Would the proposed project: 1. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; 2. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation; 3. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under applicable federal or state ambient air quality Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 69 standard (including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative thresholds for ozone precursors); 4. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; and/or 5. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The State CEQA Guidelines further state that the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the determinations above. SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The SLOAPCD April 2012 CEQA Air Quality Handbook identified the following thresholds of significance: If construction activities meet or exceed the following emissions, the project would have a significant construction-related air quality impact: • Ozone Precursor (ROG and NOX) Emissions o Daily: For construction projects expected to be completed in less than one quarter (90 days), exceedance of the 137 lb/day threshold requires Standard Mitigation Measures [not applicable to this project, because project construction would last approximately 36 months]; o Quarterly-Tier 1: For construction projects lasting more than one quarter, exceedance of the 2.5 tons/qtr threshold requires Standard Mitigation Measures and Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for construction equipment. If implementation of the Standard Mitigation and BACT measures cannot bring the project below the threshold, off-site mitigation may be necessary; and, o Quarterly-Tier 2: For construction projects lasting more than one quarter, exceedance of the 6.3 tons/qtr threshold requires Standard Mitigation Measures, BACT, implementation of a Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP), and off-site mitigation. • Diesel Particulate Matter (Diesel PM) Emissions o Daily: For construction projects expected to be completed in less than one quarter, exceedance of the 7 lb/day threshold requires Standard Mitigation Measures [not applicable to this project, because project construction would last approximately 36 months] o Quarterly-Tier 1: For construction projects lasting more than one quarter, exceedance of the 0.13 tons/quarter threshold requires Standard Mitigation Measures, BACT for construction equipment; and, o Quarterly-Tier 2: For construction projects lasting more than one quarter, exceedance of the 0.32 ton/qtr threshold requires Standard Mitigation Measures, BACT, implementation of a CAMP, and off-site mitigation. • Fugitive Particulate Matter (PM10), Dust Emissions o Quarterly: Exceedance of the 2.5 tons/qtr threshold requires Fugitive PM10 Mitigation Measures and may require the implementation of a CAMP. If operational activities meet or exceed the following emissions levels, the project would have a significant operation-related air quality impact: • Ozone Precursor (ROG and NOX) Emissions o Daily- 25 pounds(lbs)/year o Annual- 25 tons/year Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 70 • Diesel Particulate Matter (Diesel PM) Emissions o Daily- 1.25 lbs/day • Fugitive Particulate Matter (PM10), Dust Emissions o Daily- 25 lbs/day o Annual- 25 tons/year • Carbon Monoxide (CO) o Daily- 550 lbs/day Air Quality Management Plan Consistency. A project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2001 Clean Air Plan if it is inconsistent with the plan’s growth assumptions, in terms of population, employment, or regional growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). These population forecasts were developed, in part, using data obtained from local jurisdictions on projected land uses and population projections identified in community plans. Projects that result in an increase in population that is inconsistent with local community plans would be considered inconsistent with the 2001 Clean Air Plan. c. Impact Statements and Mitigation Threshold Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Impact AQ-1 The proposed project would not contribute to population growth, and would therefore be consistent with the growth assumptions in the 2001 Clean Air Plan and the City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan. This impact would be Class III, less than significant. CEQA Guidelines §15125(b) requires that an EIR evaluate a project’s consistency with applicable regional plans, in this instance the 2001 Clean Air Plan and the City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan. The SLOAPCD issues consistency determinations in order to assess the potential cumulative impacts of development on regional air quality. Project emissions which are not consistent with the 2001 Clean Air Plan or the Climate Action Plan are not accommodated in the plans, and would represent a potentially significant impact for the purposes of CEQA. The proposed project does not include residential development and would not directly increase population growth. Development in the project area has been considered in the updated Land Use Element, upon which the capacity requirement for the WRRF has been based. As such, the proposed project would not induce population growth in the area. Mitigation Measures. The proposed project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth in the area, and therefore would not conflict with assumptions made in either the 2001 Clean Air Plan or the City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan. No mitigation is required. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 71 Threshold Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Impact AQ-2 Construction of the proposed project would result in temporary generation of air pollutants, which would affect local air quality. Short term emissions would exceed SLOAPCD thresholds for ozone precursors. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. Construction of the proposed project would result in the temporary generation of vehicle and equipment exhaust and fugitive dust. Construction would occur in four phases over approximately 36 months, with phases overlapping for approximately 6 months. The analysis of construction emissions is based on the following phases: • Phase 1: UV & Filtration Facilities • Phase 2: Secondary Treatment Facilities • Phase 3:Solids Handling, Flow Equalization Facilities, and Buildings • Phase 4: Facilities Improvements This phase breakdown is based on information from the Facilities Plan and is a worst reasonable-case scenario. It is highly unlikely that the worst emissions from each phase would occur at the same time because that would require that all of the most intense parts of construction occur concurrently. This would require additional equipment, in place of sharing equipment amongst phases. As a result, the four phases above provide a worst reasonable-case scenario for construction emissions and would represent the maximum level of impacts even with a variation in schedule. In addition, the order shown above does not necessarily indicate the order in which the individual phases would occur. The ozone precursors NOX and ROG would be emitted by the operation of construction equipment, while PM10 would be emitted by activities that disturb the soil, such as grading and excavation. Emissions would also be generated by construction employees traveling to and from the construction site, as well as trucks hauling materials to and from the site. Construction- related emissions could result in adverse health risks to nearby sensitive receptors if emission thresholds are exceeded. Off-Road Equipment. Off-road equipment includes equipment powered by USEPA- defined non-road engines. The off-road equipment exhaust emissions were calculated with emissions factors within the CalEEMod model. The results provided the total peak emissions for each phase that would occur if all pieces of equipment needed for that phase were used on the same day for a total of eight hours. This is a conservative estimate; actual emissions are expected to be lower since it is unlikely that all construction equipment would operate simultaneously. Off-road equipment exhaust emissions are included in the project construction emissions. The SLOAPCD has implemented short-term construction emission thresholds for daily and quarterly emissions, based on length of construction. Construction projects that last less than one quarter are required to meet daily emissions thresholds and construction projects that last longer than one quarter are required to meet quarterly emissions thresholds. Emissions Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 72 thresholds have been set for combined ROG and NOX, DPM, and Fugitive Dust (PM10). Construction on the proposed project would be distributed throughout the construction period, beginning in 2017 and ending in late 2019/early 2020. Construction would occur in four overlapping phases. As the project construction would last longer than one quarter, quarterly emissions thresholds would apply. Annual emissions are shown in Table 3.14-4. Emissions are broken down by quarter in Table 3.1-5 and the worst quarter emissions are compared to SLOAPCD thresholds in Table 3.1-6. Table 3.1-4 Annual Construction Emissions Phase Year Pollutant (tons/year) ROG NOX CO SO2 Diesel PM PM10 PM2.5 Phase 1 2017 0.09 0.71 0.57 <0.01 0.08 0.08 0.05 2018 0.56 2.09 1.86 <0.01 0.24 0.16 0.13 Phase 2 2018 0.11 1.19 0.98 <0.01 0.11 0.22 0.13 2019 0.32 2.73 2.39 <0.01 0.31 0.19 0.16 2020 0.11 0.03 0.04 <0.01 0.00 <0.01 <0.01 Phase 3 2019 0.19 1.81 1.57 <0.01 0.19 0.26 0.16 2020 0.71 1.86 1.77 <0.01 0.21 0.13 0.11 Phase 4 2020 0.03 0.26 0.23 <0.01 0.02 0.08 0.05 Worst Annual Emissions (all phases) 2017 0.09 0.71 0.57 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.05 2018 0.67 3.28 2.83 0.00 0.35 0.38 0.25 2019 0.51 4.54 3.96 0.01 0.50 0.45 0.32 2020 0.85 0.26 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.08 0.05 Source: CalEEMod calculations, see Appendix B Table 3.1-5 Quarterly Construction Emissions Per Phase Phase Year Active Quarters Pollutant (tons/quarter) ROG NOX CO SO2 Diesel PM PM10 PM2.5 Phase 1 2017 1 0.09 0.71 0.57 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.05 2018 4 0.14 0.52 0.46 0.00 0.06 0.04 0.03 2019 1 0.14 0.52 0.46 0.00 0.06 0.04 0.03 Phase 2 2018 1 0.11 1.19 0.98 0.00 0.11 0.22 0.13 2019 4 0.08 0.68 0.60 0.00 0.08 0.05 0.04 2020 1 0.11 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase 3 2019 2 0.09 0.91 0.79 0.00 0.10 0.13 0.08 2020 4 0.18 0.46 0.44 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.03 Phase 4 2020 1 0.03 0.26 0.23 0.00 0.02 0.08 0.05 Source: CalEEMod calculations, see Appendix B Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 73 Table 3.1-6 Worst-Case Quarterly Construction Emissions Year Worst Quarter Emissions (tons/quarter) ROG NOX ROG+ NOX CO Diesel PM Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 2017 0.09 0.71 0.8 0.57 0.08 0.08 0.05 2018 0.25 1.71 1.96 1.44 0.17 0.26 0.16 2019 0.31 2.11 2.42 1.85 0.24 0.22 0.15 2020 0.32 0.76 1.08 0.71 0.07 0.11 0.08 SLOAPCD Tier 1 Thresholds (tons/quarter) - - 2.5 - 0.13 2.5 - SLOAPCD Tier 2 Thresholds (tons/quarter) - - 6.3 - 0.32 2.5 - Threshold Exceeded for any year? N/A N/A No N/A Yes No N/A Sources: CalEEMod calculations, see Appendix B SLOAPCD Air Quality Handbook, http://www.slocleanair.org/images/cms/upload/files/CEQA_Handbook_2012_v1.pdf As shown in Table 3.1-6, construction emissions generated by the proposed project would not exceed SLOAPCD quarterly thresholds ROG+NOX or Fugitive PM10. Emissions of DPM would exceed the Tier 1 threshold of 0.13 in 2018 and 2019. Per the SLOAPCD CEQA Handbook, standard mitigation measures and Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for construction equipment are required to ensure that DPM is reduced to a less than significant level. Standard mitigation measures and BACTs for construction equipment are outlined in the SLOAPCD CEQA Handbook. Mitigation Measures. In addition to compliance with all applicable SLOAPCD rules and regulations With the incorporation of the following standard mitigation measures and BACTs for construction equipment, would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. AQ-2(a) Standard Mitigation Measures. The project shall comply with the following, outlined in Section 2.3.1 of the SLOAPCD CEQA Handbook: • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; • Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with CARB certified fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road); • Use diesel construction equipment meeting CARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State off-Road Regulation; • Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; • Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 74 • All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes with the exception of concrete delivery vehicles. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit; • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted; • Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; • Equipment shall be electrified when feasible; • Diesel powered equipment shall be substituted with gasoline powered equipment when feasible; • Alternatively fueled construction equipment shall be used onsite when feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane, or biodiesel. AQ-2(b) Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Construction Equipment. The following BACTs, outlined in the SLOAPCD CEQA Handbook, shall be incorporated into construction of the proposed project: • Tier 3 or Tier 4 off-road and 2010 on-road compliant engines shall be used; • Equipment shall be repowered with the cleanest engine available; • California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies shall be installed. Significance After Mitigation. In addition to compliance with all applicable SLOAPCD rules and regulations, With the incorporation of the following standard mitigation measures and BACTs for construction equipment, would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Threshold Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Threshold Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Threshold Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Impact AQ-3 Standard operation of the proposed project would involve regular testing of two new diesel generators, which would incrementally increase long-term emissions. Regular testing of the generators ensure they would not generate emissions greater than the daily or annual thresholds set by SLOAPCD. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 75 Operational emissions for the proposed project would be generated primarily from the testing of two new diesel generators, a 22000 KW generator and a 1000 KW generator. These generators are included in the Facilities Plan and are the maximum necessary sizes that the proposed project would utilize, and thus provide a worst-case estimate. If smaller generators are deemed adequate and utilized in place of the 2000 KW and 1000 KW generators, then operational emissions would be lower. As the proposed project would not increase vendor trips or employee commute trips, emissions from mobile sources would not increase as a result of the proposed project. San Luis Obispo County is currently in non-attainment for state and federal ozone standards and state PM10 standards. Data from the closest monitoring station suggests that concentrations of ozone have exceeded state and federal standards once in the past three years. This exceedance occurred in 2014 and is based on the new federal ozone standard adopted in October 2015. Concentrations of PM10 exceeded state standards four times in the last three years (three times in 2013 and once in 2012), see Table 3.1-3. The County is currently in attainment for state and federal PM2.5, CO, NOX, SOX, and lead. As operation of the proposed project is not expected to increase vendor or employee vehicle trips, mobile emissions would not be expected to contribute to air quality violations for any of the pollutants. The proposed 2000 KW generator were based on the CAT 2000KW 3516C, with a Brake Horse Power (bhp) at ¼ of 839, at ½ of 1,521, and at ¾ of 2,212 (Milton Cat, 2015a). The proposed 1000 KW generator was based on the CAT 1000KW C32 with a bhp at ¼ of 420, at ½ of 765, and at ¾ of 1,116 (Milton Cat, 2015b). Based on a standard testing schedule for emergency generator sets, tests were assumed to last 30 minutes per generator, with a ¼ standby test run each month and a ½ standby test run once annually. This would amount to a total of 5.5 total annual hours of testing at ¼ standby and 0.5 total annual hours of testing at ½ standby for each generator. Other stationary equipment located at the project facility is electrical powered. Electricity is generated off-site and would not have a localized impact at the project site. Operational emissions associated with use of the electrical equipment are analyzed in Section 3.4, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Operational emissions were calculated using emissions factors from 2000 KW 3516C and 1000 KW C32 Specification Sheets. Operational emissions calculations and results are available in Appendix B. Average daily, worst case daily, and total annual emissions for the 2000 KW generator are shown in Table 3.1-7. Average daily emissions reflect the total annual emissions of the generator averaged over the year. Worst case daily emissions reflect total daily emissions on the day the generator is tested at ½ standby. Average daily, worst case daily, and total annual emissions for the 1000 KW generator are shown in Table 3.1-8. The combined emissions, for both of the generators, are shown in Table 3.1-9. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 76 Table 3.1-7 Annual Testing Emissions from 2000 KW Generator HC1 NOX ROG+NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 DPM2 CO2 Daily Emissions Average lbs/day 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.36 Worst Case lbs/day 0.18 9.04 9.22 0.49 1.56 0.04 0.00 0.04 874.58 SLOAPCD Daily Threshold (lbs/day) - - 25 550 - 25 - 1.25 - Exceed Threshold? - - No No - No - No - Annual Emissions Total lbs/year 1.30 63.87 65.17 3.44 11.02 0.31 0.30 0.61 9,620.33 Tons/year 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.81 SLOAPCD Annual Threshold (tons/year) - - 25 - - 25 - - - Exceed Threshold? - - No - - No - - - Source: Operational Emissions Calculations, see Appendix B 1 HC emissions are assumed to be the same as ROG emissions for bulk emissions evaluation. 2All of the particulate matter generated by operation of the standby generators is diesel particulate matter; therefore PM10 and PM2.5 were totaled to find total DPM emissions. Table 3.1-8 Annual Testing Emissions from 1000 KW Generator HC1 NOX ROG+NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 DPM2 CO2 Daily Emissions Average lbs/day 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.26 Worst Case lbs/day 0.01 4.16 4.17 0.11 0.78 0.02 0.00 0.02 439.88 SLOAPCD Daily Threshold (lbs/day) - - 25 550 - 25 - 1.25 - Exceed Threshold? - - No No - No - - Annual Emissions Total lbs/year 0.06 29.26 29.32 0.77 5.52 0.11 0.10 0.21 4,838.63 Tons/year 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.42 SLOAPCD Annual Threshold (tons/year) - - 25 - - 25 - - - Exceed Threshold? - - No - - No - - - Source: Operational Emissions Calculations, see Appendix B 1HC emissions are assumed to be the same as ROG emissions for bulk emissions evaluation. 2All of the particulate matter generated by operation of the standby generators is diesel particulate matter; therefore PM10 and PM2.5 were totaled to find total DPM emissions. Table 3.1-9 Combined Annual Testing Emissions HC1 NOX ROG+NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 DPM2 CO2 Daily Emissions Average lbs/day 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.62 Worst Case lbs/day 0.19 13.2 13.39 0.60 2.34 0.06 0.00 0.06 1,314.46 SLOAPCD Daily Threshold (lbs/day) - - 25 550 - 25 - 1.25 - Exceed Threshold? - - No No - No - No - Annual Emissions Total lbs/year 1.36 93.49 94.85 4.21 16.54 0.42 0.40 0.82 14,458.96 Tons/year 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.23 SLOAPCD Annual Threshold (tons/year) - - 25 - - 25 - - - Exceed Threshold? - - No - - No - - - Source: Operational Emissions Calculations, see Appendix B 1 HC emissions are assumed to be the same as ROG emissions for bulk emissions evaluation 2All of the particulate matter generated by operation of the standby generators is diesel particulate matter; therefore PM10 and PM2.5 were totaled to find total DPM emissions. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 77 Under normal operating procedures, operational emissions of the proposed project would not exceed the operational emissions thresholds set by SLOAPCD for any pollutant. As such, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is necessary. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation is necessary. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Impact AQ-4 In the unlikely event of an emergency power outage, the two new generators would temporarily generate worst-case scenario emissions over a short period of time. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. In the event of a PG&E power outage, both generators would operate simultaneously. The worst case scenario is estimated at 1.9 total hours (114 minutes), based on six PG&E power outages since 2008. The longest PG&E power outage lasted 178 minutes, with the next longest lasting 114 minutes. Worst case scenario emissions are shown in Table 3.1-10. Table 3.1-10 Worst Case Use of Emergency Generators- 2000 KW and 1000 KW Generators HC1 NOX ROG+NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 DPM2 CO2 Daily Emissions Average lbs/day 0.00 0.20 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.92 Worst Case lbs/day 1.07 72.99 74.06 3.29 12.96 0.33 0.32 0.65 7,271.68 SLOAPCD Daily Threshold (lbs/day) - - 25 550 - 25 - 1.25 - Exceed Threshold? - - Yes No - No - No - Annual Emissions Total lbs/year 1.07 72.99 74.06 3.29 12.96 0.33 0.32 0.65 7,271.68 Tons/year 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.64 SLOAPCD Annual Threshold (tons/year) - - 25 - - 25 - - - Exceed Threshold? - - No - - No - - - Source: Operational Emissions Calculations, see Appendix B 1HC emissions are assumed to be the same as ROG emissions for bulk emissions evaluation. 2All of the particulate matter generated by the operation of the standby generators is diesel particulate matter, therefore PM10 and PM2.5 were totaled to find total DPM emissions. Under the worst-case scenario, in which both the 2000 KW and 1000 KW generators operate simultaneously for 1.9 hours, emissions of ozone precursors (ROG + NOX) would exceed the daily threshold of 25 lbs/day. This would occur in the event of a PG&E power outage only, and would result in a temporary exceedance over a very short period of time. Since 2008, there have been just six PG&E power outages in the area, with a conservative average length of 114 minutes. While daily emissions would have the potential to exceed the daily ozone precursor emission threshold, the likelihood is low and if the emergency, worst-case scenario were to occur it would be over a very short period of time. Additionally, annual emissions would remain well below the annual threshold for all pollutants, even with the occurrence of an emergency, worst- case situation. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation would be necessary. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.1 Air Quality City of San Luis Obispo 78 Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Threshold Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Impact AQ-5 The proposed project would have the potential to emit odors as a result of several processes on site. However, the project would include a variety of odor control technologies and would be 300 feet away from the nearest sensitive receptor. Therefore, impacts would be Class IV, beneficial. The WRRF has the potential to emit odors due to a variety of processes that occur on site. The current odor sources at the WRRF include sludge drying beds, an equalization basin, a supernatant lagoon, a pressed solids loading area, primary clarifiers, and headworks. Potential prospective odor sources include the addition of an RV dump station, a rotary drum thickener to replace or supplement the dissolved air flotation thickener, and anoxic portions of the proposed new secondary treatment process. However, one of the main objectives of the proposed project is to prevent and reduce odor on site, with a variety of odor control technologies proposed. The proposed project would involve the removal of drying beds, the supernatant lagoon, and the equalization basin for diurnal equalization (only utilizing the basin during high-volume storm events). The proposed project would also increase access to the solids pressing area to facilitate the gathering of pressed solids by semi-trucks. This would be an improvement over existing conditions because pressed solids are currently set north of the equalization basin due to limitations on vehicle access to the area where solids are currently pressed (directly south of Digester #3). The proposed project would also reduce odor on site by covering portions of the headworks. Additional odor control technology that has yet to be specified would also be incorporated, as feasible throughout the site. The SLOAPCD lists schools, playgrounds and childcare centers, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, hospitals, retirement homes, and residential units as sensitive receptors to odor. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a mobile home park approximately 300 feet downwind from the project site. Even though the proposed project has a variety of odor sources, odor generation will be reduced through process enhancements, and odor control systems will be added to address remaining odor sources. The reduction of odors to levels lower than currently emitted at the project site is a goal for the City of San Luis Obispo, and new odor control systems and enhancements to the treatment process would accomplish this. Therefore, with the implementation of new odor control technology, the proposed project would have a potentially beneficial impact. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation is necessary. Significance After Mitigation. The project would be less than significant without mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 79 3.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.2.1 Setting a. Regional Setting. The project site is located at 35 Prado Road in the City, California (see Figure 2-2 in Section 2.0). The approximate center of the project site occurs at latitude 35°15'2.12"N and longitude 120°40'39.52"W (WGS-84 datum). The project site is bisected by the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. The Public Land Survey System depicts the project site within the Mt. Diablo Meridian, Township 31S, Range 12E, Section 03. The project site is within the South Coast Ranges (SCoR) geographic subregion of California. The SCoR subregion is a component of the larger Central Western California Region, which occurs within the even larger California Floristic Province (Baldwin et al., 2012). b. Project Site Setting. The project site is bordered by U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) to the west and San Luis Obispo Creek to the east. Currently the site consists primarily of developed and disturbed areas, with undeveloped lands adjacent to San Luis Obispo Creek. Lands surrounding the site consist of agriculture and rural residences; various developed mixed use commercial/industrial properties, as well as the U.S. 101. The Bob Jones Trail traverses the site. The topography of the project site is generally flat with gentle sloping towards San Luis Obispo Creek. Onsite elevations range from approximately 110 to 140 feet (ft) above mean sea level. For the purposes of this section, the study area is limited to all of the project components as outlined in Section 2.0, Project Description, and encompasses roughly 66 acres (see Figure 2-2). These components collectively comprise the disturbance area for the proposed project. Habitat Types Seven terrestrial vegetation communities or land cover types occur within the project site: Developed/Landscaped/Constructed, Groves and Screens, Coastal Scrub, Non-native Annual Grassland, Red Willow Thicket, Seasonal Wetland, and Sparsely Vegetated Streambed. Vegetation was classified and mapped during a biological resources survey conducted on October 8, 2015 and January 11, 2016 to characterize the site and is discussed in more detail below. A summary of vegetation/land cover types identified in the Biological Study Area (BSA) is presented in Table 3.2-1 and Figure 3.2-1 provides a map of these features. Habitat characterizations were based on the classification systems presented in A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition (MCV2; Sawyer et al., 2009) and Preliminary Description of Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland, 1986); but have been modified slightly to most accurately reflect the existing site conditions. California Vegetation (Holland and Keil, 1995) and California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) were also referenced for describing the habitat types within the study area. Plant species nomenclature and taxonomy used for the project site follow treatments within Baldwin et al. (2012). £¤101 SHigueraStPradoRd Seasonal Wetland NorthernHolding Pond SouthernHolding Pond S a n L u i s O bispoCre ek Vegetation Communities and Jurisdictional Features Figure 3.2-1 City of San Luis Obispo Imagery provided by Google and its licensors © 2016. Section 3.2 Biological ResourcesWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Biological Study Area 36'' Pipe Outfall Pump Station Water Control Structure Jurisdictional Features CDFW/RWQCB Jurisdiction[0.45 ac] RWQCB Jurisdiction [1.11 ac] USACE Other Waters Jurisdiction[0.11 ac] Vegetation Community Coastal Scrub Developed / Landscaped /Constructed Non-native Annual Grassland Red Willow Thicket Seasonal Wetland Sparsely Vegetated Streambed Groves and Screens ±0 600300 Feet Inset Map Inset Map 80 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 81 Table 3.2-1 Summary of Vegetation/Land Cover Types within the Study Area Habitat Type Approximate Acreage Approximate Percent of Total Area Developed/Landscaped/Constructed, including: • Hardscape, buildings, and landscaping • Open water (constructed basins) • Riparian and wetland (constructed holding ponds) 50.0 75 Groves and Screens 4.4 6.6 Non-native Annual Grassland 10.4 15.6 Coastal Scrub 0.3 0.4 Red Willow Thicket 0.4 0.6 Seasonal Wetland 1.1 1.7 Sparsely Vegetated Streambed 0.1 0.1 TOTAL 66.7 100 Developed/Landscaped/Constructed A substantial portion of the study area consists of existing water treatment facilities and supporting roads, structures, and parking areas, mapped as developed areas. Within areas mapped as developed, basins and holding ponds associated with the water treatment facility are present. These features are lined, water is artificially sourced, and several of these features lack vegetation. However, the holding ponds in the southern portion of the study area have accumulated sediment and organic matter which has facilitated establishment of emergent wetland plants and riparian vegetation. These holding ponds are described along with developed areas because the features are constructed and hydrology is artificial. The developed/landscaped/constructed land cover type occupies approximately 50 acres of the study area. Hardscape, buildings, and maintained landscape. These are areas that are largely devoid of vegetation, including paved areas, structures, and facilities associated with the water treatment operations, including sludge and drying beds. This land cover type includes parking areas, access areas, and storage areas. Some landscaping is present in planters and perimeters around the existing treatment plant facilities, including turf grass and landscaped trees and shrubs such as olive (Olea europa), oleander (Nerium oleander), and bank cat claw (Acacia redolens). Developed areas are not classified in the MCV2 classification system (Sawyer et al., 2009) or the Holland classification system (Holland, 1986), but are included in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System (CWHR) as Urban (Mayer and Laudenslayer, 1988). Open water. Open water associated with treatment operations is present in some lined basins, including an equalization basin at the north end of the study area, as well as the southern holding pond at the south end of the study area. Open water associated with constructed basins, including water treatment facilities are not classified in the MCV2 classification system (Sawyer et al., 2009) or the Holland classification system (Holland, 1986). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 82 Riparian and emergent wetland. The northern holding pond in the south end of the BSA currently supports wetland vegetation and riparian trees and shrubs in sediment and organic matter that have accumulated within the lined pond. Riparian species include tall flat sedge, and arroyo and red willows. Predominant wetland species are California bulrush, with some patches of cattail. Both ponds are constructed and water is artificially sourced. Vegetation present has likely recruited from seed blown in from adjacent naturally occurring wetland and riparian habitats in the San Luis Obispo Creek riparian corridor. Although these features are the product of artificial water sources, the presence of perennial emergent wetland vegetation and riparian canopy provide some suitable habitat for wildlife, including nesting birds, waterfowl, amphibians, and pond turtles. However, vegetation types supported by artificial water sources are not typically classified in the MCV2 classification system (Sawyer et al., 2009) or the Holland classification system (Holland, 1986). Groves and Screens Groves of planted native and introduced trees are present within the project site. This vegetation type also includes vegetation screens along perimeters of the treatment facility and the Bob Jones Trail. Vegetation in this category includes a mix of trees native in the vicinity of the study area, such as coast live oak, as well as other species native to California but not known to occur naturally in the vicinity of the study area, such as Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), and Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa). The majority of the trees are within younger age classes. However, smaller groves of mature trees were observed within the study area as well. Other species observed include scattered individuals of Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), and Canary Island palm (Phoenix canariensis). These groves are not classified in the MCV2 classification system (Sawyer et al., 2009) or the Holland classification system (Holland, 1986), but provide some wildlife habitat, particularly for nesting birds. Coastal Scrub An isolated patch of coastal scrub is present in the southern half of the study area. Coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) and arroyo willow are co-dominant within this vegetation type. Central Coast Riparian Scrub habitat type (Element Code #63200), as described by Holland (1986), and the Arroyo Willow Thicket community (Salix lasiolepis Alliance) described in MCV2 (Sawyer et al., 2009) most closely corresponds to the vegetation type occurring within the site. Non-native Annual Grassland Non-native annual grasslands were mapped within the study area where non-native annual grasses are predominant. Evidence of routine mowing is present in fields and visible on aerial photos. Composition is variable and patchy. Ripgut brome, wild oat (Avena barbata), and foxtail (Hordeum murinum) are dominant in patches; mustards (Brassica nigra; Hirschfeldia incana) are common. This vegetation type had very few native plants present. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 83 This vegetation type most closely corresponds to non-native grassland type (Element Code #42200) described by Holland (1986) and includes areas that are consistent with two semi- natural herbaceous stands described in the MCV2: Avena (barbata, fatua) semi-natural stands and Bromus (diandrus, hordeaceus)-Brachypodium distachyon semi-natural stands (Sawyer et al., 2009). Red Willow Thicket Within the northeast corner of the BSA, red willow thickets occur on the banks on both sides of San Luis Obispo Creek. The upper canopy is dominated by red willow (Salix laevigata) and Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii). Occasional sycamores (Platanus racemosa) are present in the corridor. The canopy provides consistent tree cover; however, it does not fully shade San Luis Obispo Creek. The understory of this habitat type is well developed, and shrub layer dominants included red willow, arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), and giant wild rye (Elymus condensatus). Dominants occurring within the herb layer include bur chervil, wild cucumber (Marah fabaceus var. agrestis), bristly ox-tongue, and sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare). The red willow thicket vegetation community within the project area most closely corresponds to element #61210 Central Coast Cottonwood-Sycamore Riparian Forest (Holland, 1986) and to Salix laevigata Shrubland Alliance in the Manual of California Vegetation system (Sawyer et al., 2009). Seasonal Wetland As previously mentioned, a seasonal wetland with hydrology primarily supplied by treated water is present in the study area. Dominant species include horsetail, San Diego sedge, and basket rush. Other species observed in the understory include sneezeweed and yellow star thistle. The seasonal wetland vegetation community within the project area most closely corresponds to coastal and valley freshwater marsh (Element Code #52410) described by Holland (1986) and to Juncus arcticus (var. balticus, mexicanus) Herbaceous Alliance in the MCV2 (Sawyer et al., 2009). Sparsely Vegetated Streambed Running alongside the eastern end of the project site is the sparsely vegetated San Luis Obispo Creek streambed. The streambed traverses the BSA at the proposed stormwater discharge location in the northeast corner of the BSA. The majority of the streambed contains gravel and cobble; however, the streambed contained sparse annuals such as; bristly ox-tongue, bitter cress and bur chervil that recruit after the water recedes in the early summer. During the winter months the annuals are washed away by floods as the creek becomes inundated with water. Given that this community type is not naturally occurring, it is also not described in either the Holland (1986) or Sawyer et al. (2009) classification systems. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 84 Wildlife Detected Wildlife activity was moderate during the field reconnaissance surveys. Avian species observed included the western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica) and turkey vulture (Cathartes aura). The wetland vegetation within and around the holding ponds within the southern half of the study area provides habitat for several species of waterfowl. No raptor nests or other bird nests were detected within the study area or within 500 feet of the study area during the survey. Small mammal sign consisting of pocket gopher (Thomomys sp.) and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) burrows were found in all vegetation communities within the study area. The value of this habitat for wildlife is limited, as the majority of the BSA is extremely disturbed and/or developed. Nevertheless, a large portion of the BSA is situated adjacent to San Luis Obispo Creek which borders the eastern boundary of the BSA and traverses it at the proposed stormwater discharge (outfall) location in the northeast corner. The riparian corridor associated with San Luis Obispo Creek functions as an important wildlife corridor within the region. Watershed and Drainages The majority of the aquatic features within the BSA consist of man-made and heavily altered features. In general, these aquatic features consists of man-made ponds/basins, man-made wetlands, and other impoundments. San Luis Obispo Creek runs just outside the majority of the BSA along the eastern boundary of the site. The Creek occurs within the BSA only at the proposed discharge location and traverses northeast-southwest. These habitat types are visible on aerial photography. The extent of these aquatic habitats within the BSA are presented in Figure 3.2-1 and also discussed in greater detail below. Ponds/Basins In general, these aquatic features consist of man-made ponds, basins, and other impoundments associated with the WRRF. These features vary in size and depth as well as their suitability to support plant and wildlife species. None of the features within the active work area in the northern half of the BSA are considered suitable for special status species. The northern holding pond in the southern half of the BSA consists entirely of vegetation consisting primarily of arroyo and red willows (Salix lasiolepis and S. laevigata, respectively), tall flat sedge (Cyperus eragrostis), and California bulrush (Schoenoplectus californicus) with some patches of cattail (Typha sp.). The southern holding pond in the southern half of the BSA primarily contains open water with a small fringe of willows in its northern corner. The southern pond and the fringe of willows and surrounding riparian vegetation may be considered a sensitive habitat community by CDFW because it is a riparian vegetation community that has been known to host sensitive species. The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) documents occurrences of both California red-legged frog (CRLF) (Rana draytonii) and western pond turtle (Actinemys [=Emys] marmorata) within and around these holding ponds (Figure 3.2-2). 41 458 66 60 10 61 32 22 54 15 10 15 15 23 55 54 59 59 10 54 59 59 32 54 59 57 48 10 10 54 59 57 37 57 57 5757 2 2 2 54 10 57 57 57 59 22 54 57 5959 54 14 29 10 59 59 10 10 10 10 12 52 52 16 17 33 13 3135 3435 8 3 4918 44 27 27 56 27 3053 39 19 49 51 51 21 51 27 35 21 25 51 5147 39 21 1 5 21 35 25 13 34 17 1117 9 24 21 49 43 9 2128 24 35 44 39 44 34 44 47 44 53 35 45 9 39 38 9 47 9 20 26 34 17 3534 39 35 35 27 35 46 47 44 46 51 17 7 44 40 27 9 17 45 44 44 1 7 9 46 46 35 1 46 47 1 9 7 46 9 40 9 44 11 11 35 28 8 35 40 11 46 44 39 39 34 17 47 47 34 46 35 47 39 51 51 11 35 9 8 44 40 44 46 38 46 25 17 17 44 46 11 17 44 44 34 44 17 17 46 44 17 1 40 1 44 8 17 17 47 7 51 17 11 50 17 34 46 17 7 262444 47 35 35 46 9 2835 47 47 44 35 28 44 42 46 51 31 36 17 4946 25 17 44 1 35 35 44 443538 44 35 25 3544 44 24 9 44 44 9 1125 47 11 17 1111 17 11 47 47 11 25 17 3444 4644 46 44 1717 17 Sensitive Elements Reported in theCalifornia Natural Diversity Database and FederallyDesignated Critical Habitats Located within 5 miles Figure 3.2-2 City of San Luis Obispo Section 3.2 Biological ResourcesWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Imagery provided by ESRI and its licensors © 2015. Special status species data source: California Natural Diversity Database, September, 2015. Additional suppressed records reported by the CNDDB known to occur or potentially occur within this searchradius include: Monarch Butterfly. For more information please contact the Department of Fish and Game. Critical habitat datasource: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, September, 2015. Final critical habitat acquired via the USFWS Critical Habitat Portal. It is only a general representation of the data and does not include all designated critical habitat. Contact USFWS for more specific data. Project Location 5-Mile Buffer CNDDB Animals Plants Natural Communities Final Critical Habitat Steelhead California red-legged frog Tidewater goby 1 - adobe sanicle2 - American badger3 - Arroyo de la Cruz manzanita4 - Atascadero June beetle5 - Betty's dudleya6 - black legless lizard7 - black-flowered figwort8 - Blochman's dudleya9 - Brewer's spineflower10 - California red-legged frog11 - Cambria morning-glory12 - Central Maritime Chaparral13 - chaparral ragwort14 - coast horned lizard15 - Coast Range newt16 - Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh17 - Congdon's tarplant18 - Cuesta Ridge thistle19 - dune larkspur20 - dwarf soaproot21 - Eastwood's larkspur 22 - ferruginous hawk23 - foothill yellow-legged frog24 - Hoover's bent grass25 - Hoover's button-celery26 - Indian Knob mountainbalm27 - Jones' layia28 - La Panza mariposa-lily29 - loggerhead shrike30 - mesa horkelia31 - Miles' milk-vetch32 - monarch - California overwintering population33 - Morro manzanita34 - most beautiful jewelflower35 - mouse-gray dudleya36 - Ojai fritillary37 - pallid bat38 - Palmer's monardella39 - Pecho manzanita40 - Pismo clarkia41 - prairie falcon 42 - saline clover43 - San Benito fritillary44 - San Luis mariposa-lily45 - San Luis Obispo County lupine46 - San Luis Obispo fountain thistle47 - San Luis Obispo owl's-clover48 - San Luis Obispo pyrg49 - San Luis Obispo sedge50 - Santa Lucia manzanita51 - Santa Margarita manzanita52 - Serpentine Bunchgrass53 - southern curly-leaved monardella54 - steelhead - south-central California coast DPS55 - tidewater goby56 - umbrella larkspur57 - vernal pool fairy shrimp58 - western mastiff bat59 - western pond turtle60 - western yellow-billed cuckoo61 - white-tailed kite 0 1.80.9 Miles ± 85 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 86 Wetlands A seasonal wetland with hydrology that is primarily provided by treated water associated with the holding ponds is present in the southern portion of the BSA. Dominant species include horsetail (Equisetum hyemale), San Diego sedge (Carex spissa), and basket rush (Juncus textilis). Other species observed in the understory include sneezeweed (Helenium puberulum) and yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis). San Luis Obispo Creek Most of the eastern boundary of the BSA is situated adjacent to a NWI-mapped feature, San Luis Obispo Creek. Just outside the majority of the project boundary, the total length of the eastern side of the site contains an expanse of the San Luis Obispo Creek riparian corridor. San Luis Obispo Creek occurs within the BSA only at the proposed discharge location and traverses northeast-southwest as depicted in Figure 2-2 in Section 2.0, Project Description. San Luis Obispo Creek is perennial with its headwaters located in the Santa Lucia Mountains near Cuesta Grade and empties into the Pacific Ocean just west of Avila Beach. The creek is approximately 15 miles long and drains approximately 84 square miles (Hydrologic Unit Code #18060006). No flow was observed during the site visit; however, pooling was observed within the BSA. Approximately 150 linear feet of San Luis Obispo Creek occurs with the BSA and the lateral extent of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) within the BSA is 27 feet wide with an average depth of 18 inches. The average sediment texture within the creek is comprised of gravel and cobble. A small number of larger scattered boulders are also present. Small patches of emergent vegetation were observed within the creek, and consisted primarily of herbaceous species such as bur chervil (Anthriscus caucalis), bristly ox-tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), and bitter cress (Cardamine oligosperma). Red and arroyo willow shrubs and Fremont cottonwood trees occur on the steep banks of the creek. Special Status Species and Plant Communities For the purpose of this document, special status species are those plants and animals listed, proposed for listing, or candidates for listing as threatened or endangered by the USFWS under the FESA; those listed or petitioned for listing as rare, threatened, or endangered by the CDFW under the CESA; animals designated as “Fully Protected” or “Species of Special Concern” by the CDFW; and those species on the Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List (California Department of Fish and Game, 2011). This latter document includes plant species presented in the California Native Plant Society’s Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants, Sixth Edition (Tibor 2001), as updated online. Those plants contained on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) Lists 1A, 1B, and 2, 3 and 4 are considered special status species in this EIR, as defined in the following CRPR code definitions: • List 1A = Plants presumed extinct in California; • List 1B.1 = Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere; seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat); • List 1B.2 = Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere; fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened); Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 87 • List 1B.3 = Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere, not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known); • List 2 = Rare, threatened or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere; • List 3 = Plants needing more information (most are species that are taxonomically unresolved; some species on this list meet the definitions of rarity under CRPR and CESA); • List 4.2 = Plants of limited distribution (watch list), fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened); and • List 4.3= Plants of limited distribution (watch list), not very endangered in California (<20% occurrences threatened or no current threats known). Rincon staff determined that the BSA contains suitable habitat for six special status animal species and eight special status plant species. CNDDB occurrences of special status plants, wildlife, and sensitive natural communities and Federally designated critical habitats within five miles of the BSA are illustrated on Figure 3.2-2. Special Status Plant Communities Eight special status plant communities were identified by the CNDDB as occurring in the vicinity of the project site (Table 3.2-2). None of these communities occur within the study area. Table 3.2-2 Sensitive Plant Communities within the Vicinity of the Project Site Plant Community CDFW Status Habitat Presence/Absence Central dune scrub None Not present Central foredunes None Not present Central maritime chaparral None Not present Coastal and valley freshwater marsh None Not present Coastal brackish marsh None Not present Northern coastal salt marsh None Not present Northern interior cypress forest None Not present Valley needlegrass grassland None Not present Source: CDFW’s CNDDB RareFind5 Special Status Plants One hundred and sixteen (116) special status plant species were identified as occurring or potentially occurring within the vicinity of the project site (Appendix C, BRA). Of these, eight (8) special status plant species, none of which are listed under the CESA, were determined to have the potential to occur on-site. None of the special status plant species with potential to occur were detected during the reconnaissance level survey; however, the survey was not conducted within the bloom periods for these species and as such, their potential to occur within the study area is based solely on the presence of potentially suitable habitat and the proximity of the study area to CNDDB documented occurrences. Special Status Animals Fifty (50) special status animal species are known or have the potential to occur in the vicinity of the project site (Appendix C, BRA); 18 of which have been documented within five miles of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 88 BSA (Figure 3.2-2). Of the 50 species, seven (7) special status animal species were determined to have the potential to occur on site based on the presence of suitable habitat within or adjacent to the study area: California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), Blainville’s horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvilli), Western pond turtle (Actinemys [=Emys] marmorata), Coast range newt (Taricha torosa), White-tailed kite (Elanus luecurus), Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) and South/Central California Coast distinct population segment (DPS) steelhead (steelhead; Oncorhynchus mykiss). No special status animal species were detected during the reconnaissance level survey. Even though definitive surveys for special status animal species were not conducted, no individuals or sign indicating the presence of the remaining species listed above were detected. As such, the following analysis of potential for occurrence is based on habitat suitability in addition to known occurrences of these species in the vicinity. Wildlife Movement Corridors Wildlife movement corridors, or habitat linkages, are generally defined as connections between habitat patches that allow for physical and genetic exchange between otherwise isolated animal populations. Such linkages may serve a local purpose, such as providing a linkage between foraging and denning areas, or they may be regional in nature. Some habitat linkages may serve as migration corridors, wherein animals periodically move away from an area and then subsequently return. Others may be important as dispersal corridors for young animals. A group of habitat linkages in an area can form a wildlife corridor network. The habitats within the link do not necessarily need to be the same as the habitats that are being linked. Rather, the link merely needs to contain sufficient cover and forage to allow temporary inhabitation by ground-dwelling species. Typically habitat linkages are contiguous strips of natural areas, though dense plantings of landscape vegetation can be used by certain disturbance-tolerant species. Depending upon the species using a corridor, specific physical resources (such as rock outcroppings, vernal pools, or oak trees) may need to be located within the habitat link at certain intervals to allow slower-moving species to traverse the link. For highly mobile or aerial species, habitat linkages may be discontinuous patches of suitable resources spaced sufficiently close together to permit travel along a route in a short period of time. Wildlife movement corridors can be both large and small scale. Regionally, the study area is not located within an Essential Connectivity Area (ECA) as mapped in the report California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project: A Strategy for Conserving a Connected California (2010). ECAs represent principle connections between Natural Landscape Blocks. ECAs are regions in which land conservation and management actions should be prioritized to maintain and enhance ecological connectivity. ECAs are mapped based on coarse ecological condition indicators, rather than the needs of particular species and thus serve the majority of species in each region. Small scale habitat corridors are present on site and include drainages and other topographic features that facilitate movement. San Luis Obispo Creek borders the eastern boundary of the BSA and traverses the BSA at the proposed discharge location in the northeast corner of the BSA. The creek provides a suitable small scale corridor for wildlife to travel locally. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 89 Jurisdictional Features All potentially jurisdictional features within the BSA were inspected to record existing conditions and determine limits of USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW jurisdictions within the BSA. A summary of potentially jurisdictional features identified in the BSA is presented in Table 3.2-3 and Figure 3.2-1 provides a map of these features. Based upon the analysis of Rincon’s preliminary jurisdictional delineation, the site contains a seasonal wetland subject to RWQCB jurisdiction and San Luis Obispo Creek subject to CDFW, RWQCB, and USACE jurisdictions. The seasonal wetland likely fall under jurisdiction of the SWRCB and Central Coast RWQCB, which have jurisdiction over “waters of the State,” pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. As previously mentioned, a supplemental jurisdictional delineation of this feature will be conducted prior to issuance of permits. San Luis Obispo Creek within the BSA exhibits a defined bed and bank, is hydrologically connected to the Pacific Ocean (a traditional navigable water), and is of value to special status wildlife species such as CRLF and steelhead. Therefore, this waterway would likely be considered Waters of U.S. as well as Waters of the State and would be subject to regulation by the USACE as well as the RWQCB. In addition, the portion of the creek within the BSA area, including associated riparian habitat would likely fall under the jurisdiction of the CDFW. The final jurisdictional determinations of the boundaries of wetlands, waters, and riparian habitat are made by each agency, typically at the time that authorizations to impact such features are requested. Table 3.2-3 Summary of Potentially Jurisdictional Wetlands, Waters and Riparian Habitats Jurisdictional Features Jurisdictional Type Area (acres) Length (feet) Seasonal Wetland RWQCB Jurisdiction Waters of the State 1.11 N/A San Luis Obispo Creek USACE Jurisdiction Waters of the U.S. 0.11 150 San Luis Obispo Creek CDFW/RWQCB Jurisdiction Streambed and Riparian Habitats 0.45 150 3.2.2 Regulatory Framework The following is a brief summary of the regulatory context under which biological resources are managed at the Federal, State, and Local levels. A number of Federal and State statutes provide a regulatory structure that guides the protection of biological resources. Agencies with the responsibility for protection of biological resources within the project site include: • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (wetlands and other waters of the United States); • Regional Water Quality Control Board (waters of the State); • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Federally listed species and migratory birds); and • California Department Fish and Wildlife (riparian areas and other waters of the State, State-listed species). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 90 a. Federal. Federal agencies with jurisdiction within the project include the USACE, USFWS and NMFS. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the USACE has authority to regulate activities that could discharge fill of material or otherwise adversely modify wetlands or other “waters of the United States.” Perennial and intermittent creeks are considered waters of the United States if they are hydrologically connected to other jurisdictional waters. The USACE also implements the Federal policy embodied in Executive Order 11990, which is intended to result in no net loss of wetland value or acres. In achieving the goals of the Clean Water Act, the USACE seeks to avoid adverse impacts and offset unavoidable adverse impacts on existing aquatic resources. Any fill or adverse modification of wetlands that are hydrologically connected to jurisdictional waters would require a permit from the USACE prior to the start of work. Typically, when a project involves impacts to waters of the United States, the goal of no net loss of wetland acres or values is met through compensatory mitigation involving creation or enhancement of similar habitats. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service The USFWS implements the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 United States Code [USC] Section 703-711) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC Section 668). The USFWS and NMFS share responsibility for implementing the FESA (16 USC § 153 et seq.). The USFWS generally implements the FESA for terrestrial and freshwater species, while the NMFS implements the ESA for marine and anadramous species. Projects that would result in “take” of any Federally listed threatened or endangered species are required to obtain permits from the USFWS or NMFS through either Section 7 (interagency consultation with a federal nexus) or Section 10 (Habitat Conservation Plan) of FESA, depending on the involvement by the Federal government in permitting and/or funding of the project. The permitting process is used to determine if a project would jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and what measures would be required to avoid jeopardizing the species. “Take” under Federal definition means to harass, harm (which includes habitat modification), pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. Proposed or candidate species do not have the full protection of FESA; however, the USFWS and NMFS advise project applicants that they could be elevated to listed status at any time. b. State. State agencies within jurisdiction within the project include the RWQCB and CDFW. Regional Water Quality Control Board The SWRCB and the local Central Coast RWQCB have jurisdiction over “waters of the State,” pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the State. The SWRCB has issued general Waste Discharge Requirements regarding discharges to “isolated” waters of the State (Water Quality Order No. 2004-0004-DWQ, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Dredged or Fill Discharges to Waters Deemed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to be Outside of Federal Jurisdiction). The Central Coast RWQCB enforces actions Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 91 under this general order for isolated waters not subject to Federal jurisdiction, and is also responsible for the issuance of water quality certifications pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act for waters subject to Federal jurisdiction. California Department of Fish and Wildlife The CDFW derives its authority from the Fish and Game Code of California. The CESA (Fish and Game Code Section 2050 et seq.) prohibits take of state listed threatened, endangered or fully protected species. Take under CESA is restricted to direct mortality of a listed species and does not prohibit indirect harm by way of habitat modification. The CDFW also prohibits take for species designated as Fully Protected under the Code. California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3511 describe unlawful take, possession, or destruction of birds, nests, and eggs. Fully protected birds (Section 3511) may not be taken or possessed except under specific permit. Section 3503.5 of the Code protects all birds- of-prey and their eggs and nests against take, possession, or destruction of nests or eggs. Species of Special Concern (SSC) is a category used by the CDFW for those species which are considered to be indicators of regional habitat changes or are considered to be potential future protected species. Species of Special Concern do not have any special legal status except that which may be afforded by the Fish and Game Code as noted above. Although being a SSC doesn't provide any special legal status under CDFW regulations, CEQA does require that any special status State or local species be considered in evaluation of impacts. The SSC category is intended by the CDFW for use as a management tool to include these species into special consideration when decisions are made concerning the development of natural lands. The CDFW also has authority to administer the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) (Fish and Game Code Section 1900 et seq.). The NPPA requires the CDFW to establish criteria for determining if a species, subspecies, or variety of native plant is endangered or rare. Under Section 1913(c) of the NPPA, the owner of land where a rare or endangered native plant is growing is required to notify the department at least 10 days in advance of changing the land use to allow for salvage of plant. Perennial and intermittent streams and associated riparian vegetation, when present, also fall under the jurisdiction of the CDFW. Section 1600 et seq. of the Fish and Game Code (Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements) gives the CDFW regulatory authority over work within the stream zone (which could extend to the 100-year flood plain) consisting of, but not limited to, the diversion or obstruction of the natural flow or changes in the channel, bed, or bank of any river, stream or lake. c. Local. The City regulates tree removal within its jurisdiction. Implementation of the proposed project may require removal of several trees onsite. If tree removal is required, a tree removal permit must be obtained from the City prior to the onset of these activities. Once the project plans have been finalized, the exact number, type, and locations of trees within the project site to be removed can be determined and the associated tree removal permit may be obtained, if needed. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 92 Project related elements within the study area are influenced by the City’s Program Environmental Impact Report for the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (LUCE). 3.2.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures a. Methodology for Analysis. Literature Review Queries of the USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC), CDFW CNDDB, and the CNPS CRPR were conducted to obtain comprehensive information regarding State and Federally listed species as well as other special status species considered to have potential to occur within the California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles and the surrounding eight quadrangles (Arroyo Grande NE, Atascadero, Lopez Mtn., Morro Bay North, Morro Bay South, Oceano, Port San Luis, and Santa Margarita). The results of these scientific database queries were compiled into tables that are presented as Tables 3.2-3 and 3.2-4. Note that for CNDDB mapping purposes, a 5-mile search radius was used. In addition, the following resources were reviewed for information about the study area: • Aerial photographs of the study area and vicinity; • San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles; • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (2015); • USFWS IPaC list of Federally listed species with potential to occur within the study area and vicinity (2015b); • USFWS Critical Habitat Portal (2015a); • CDFW CNDDB list of species status species documented within the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles and surrounding 8 quadrangles (2015); • CDFW CNDDB map of State and Federally listed species that have been previously documented within a 5-mile (8-kilometer) radius of the study area (2015); and • CNPS CRPR list of sensitive plant species with potential to occur within the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles and surrounding 8 quadrangles (2015). Field Reconnaissance Survey A field reconnaissance survey was conducted to document the existing site conditions and to evaluate the potential for presence of sensitive biological resources including sensitive plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities, potentially jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and wetlands, and habitat for Federally and State protected nesting birds. Field reconnaissance surveys were conducted by Rincon Senior Ecologist, Colby J. Boggs on September 19, 2015 and Rincon Associate Biologist, Jamie Deutsch on October 8, 2015. Weather conditions during the surveys included an average temperature range of 72-78 degrees Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 93 Fahrenheit, with winds of five to ten miles per hour, and clear skies. Mr. Boggs and Mr. Deutsch surveyed the entire project site on foot and recorded all biological resources encountered on site. In addition to the field reconnaissance surveys, Rincon Associate Biologist, Jamie Deutsch conducted a preliminary jurisdictional delineation within the BSA on October 8, 2015 and a formal jurisdictional delineation of San Luis Obispo Creek on January 11, 2016. A supplemental formal jurisdiction will be conducted prior to issuance of permits. All potentially jurisdictional features within the site were inspected to record existing conditions and determine jurisdictional limits. During the surveys, an inventory of all plant and animal species observed was compiled and an evaluation of potentially jurisdictional aquatic features was conducted. Plant species nomenclature and taxonomy followed The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition (Baldwin et al., 2012). All plant species encountered were noted and identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level. The vegetation classification system used for this analysis is based on A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition (Sawyer et al., 2009) and Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Communities of California (Holland, 1986), but has been modified as needed to accurately describe the existing habitats observed on site. These vegetation communities were mapped onto aerial imagery depicting the project site and then later digitized using ArcGIS® (ESRI, 2013). Wildlife identification and nomenclature followed standard reference texts including Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Western North America (Sibley, 2003), Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins, 2003), and Mammals of North America (Bowers et al., 2004). The habitat requirements for each regionally occurring special status species were assessed and compared to the type and quality of the habitats observed within the BSA during the field survey. Several sensitive species were eliminated from consideration as having potential to occur on site due to lack of suitable habitat, lack of suitable soils/substrate, and/or knowledge of regional distribution. The relative density of fossorial mammal burrows and soil characteristics throughout the site were also noted. b. Threshold of Significance. According to the State CEQA Guidelines (Appendix G), it is assumed that the proposed project would result in a significant impact if it would: • Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; • Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service; • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means; Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 94 • Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites; • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. c. Impact Statements and Mitigation Threshold Would the project have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Impact BIO-1 Construction of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special-status species. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. Special Status Plants The proposed project has potential to result in direct impacts to special status plants. Eight special status plant species were determined to have potential to occur within the proposed project area considering the presence of suitable habitat. The species determined to have potential to occur would be limited to the coastal scrub, non-native annual grassland and seasonal wetland habitats, and the northern holding pond in the southern half of the site. Impacts to special status plant species may occur from ground disturbing activities associated with construction of project components in these areas. Indirect impacts could occur due to the spread of invasive, non-native species from construction equipment or imported fill materials. Invasive, non-native plant species can out-compete native species and/or alter habitat towards a state that is unsuitable for special status species. For example, the spread of certain weed species can reduce the biodiversity of native habitats through displacement of vital pollinators, potentially eliminating special status plant species. Special Status Animals (State Species of Special Concern) Blainville’s (Coast) horned lizard Suitable habitat occurs within the southern portion of the proposed disturbance area for Blainville’s horned lizard. This species has potential to occur within and around the coastal scrub, non-native annual grassland, and groves and screens land cover types within the proposed project area. Potential impacts to these species, if present, could occur during ground disturbance in the form of harassment and/or injury. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 95 Western pond turtle The southern holding ponds and adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek provide suitable habitat for the western pond turtle. Potential direct impacts to western pond turtle include harassment or injury of active as well as overwintering individuals as well as potential destruction of nests located in upland habitat if they are present within the proposed project area during implementation. Coast Range newt No evidence of Coast Range newt was found on site; however, suitable habitat is located within portions of the BSA. The bordering San Luis Obispo Creek riparian corridor provides suitable habitat for this species and the southern holding pond within the southern portion of the study area may provide suitable breeding habitat for this species. There are three records in CNDDB of occurrences within the five-mile buffer (northeast of BSA). Implementation of the proposed project may result in loss and/or fragmentation of Coast Range newt habitat or breeding sites. Direct impacts to this species could occur if it is foraging or aestivating onsite during construction activities. Loggerhead shrike The loggerhead shrike has been documented by the CNDDB within five miles of the study area and is known to occur within the general vicinity. The annual grassland and grove habitats provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for this species. Direct impacts to this species may occur due to removal of trees and shrubs that may contain active nests. Construction within the project site may result in indirect impacts should this species be present in the vicinity of areas of disturbance at the time of construction. Special Status Animals (Fully Protected and Federal/State Listed Species) White-tailed kite The white-tailed kite has been recorded by the CNDDB just within the northwestern edge of the five mile buffer (Figure 3.2-2) of the BSA. The annual grassland habitat within the site provides suitable foraging habitat for this species. The intermittent larger trees within the site and larger trees associated with the bordering San Luis Obispo Creek may provide suitable nest sites. Direct impacts to this species may occur due to removal of trees that may contain active nests. Construction within the project site may result in indirect impacts should this species be present in the vicinity of areas of disturbance at the time of construction. California red-legged frog Implementation of the proposed project will not result in loss or fragmentation of any federally designated critical habitat for CRLF. However, work is anticipated within potential aquatic habitat (i.e. southern holding pond), and therefore potential direct effects to CRLF and its habitat are anticipated. Construction of the stormwater outfall will occur within the bank of San Luis Obispo Creek; however, under no circumstance will construction or construction equipment enter or be operated within the bed of the creek. Therefore, no direct effects to aquatic habitat within San Luis Obispo Creek are expected. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 96 Potential direct effects to CRLF individuals include harassment or injury if they are present within the project area during implementation; however, effects would be avoided through implementation of avoidance and minimization measures. The majority of the upland habitat within the BSA is considered marginally suitable for CRLF; however, the wetland and riparian corridor surrounding San Luis Obispo Creek is considered suitable foraging habitat for this species. The majority of dispersing individuals are expected to occur within and around the holding ponds and San Luis Obispo Creek. The project has potential to result in direct permanent impacts/effects to CRLF aquatic habitat as a result of the proposed project/action. Direct permanent impacts/effects to upland habitat that could be used by CRLF will occur within the southern portion of the BSA during the development of the cooling ponds as well as the riparian corridor surrounding San Luis Obispo Creek. Permanent and temporary impacts/effects to both aquatic and upland CRLF habitat are summarized in Table 3.2-4. Table 3.2-4 Summary of Impacts to California Red-legged Frog Habitat California Red-legged Frog Habitat Temporary Impacts Permanent Impacts Aquatic 0.0 acre 0.02 acre Upland 0.45 acre 0.12 acre Indirect impacts to CRLF could result from general project-related disturbance and noise if individuals are foraging or aestivating within the BSA. Indirect impacts/effects may also occur as a result of water quality issues associated with the construction of the stormwater outfall and water level control structures. Potential direct and indirect impacts/effects to this species resulting from implementation of the proposed project would be avoided with avoidance and minimization measures incorporated (measures listed following species evaluations). Steelhead Construction of the proposed stormwater outfall would result in up to 0.10 acre of permanent direct impacts and approximately 0.45 acre of temporary impacts to riparian vegetation adjacent to in-stream steelhead critical habitat. Indirect impacts/effects may also occur as a result of water quality issues associated with the construction of the stormwater outfall. The existing facility has a Biological Opinion for impacts to steelhead as a result of discharging effluent into San Luis Obispo Creek. As currently designed, the water is cooled via cooling towers for temperature control prior to being discharged into the creek. The concept of using wetlands for cooling and polishing effluent before discharge in lieu of using mechanical chillers has been modeled and determined to be a viable option for cooling at the site. The new wetlands design, if selected, will adhere to all the stipulations within the existing Biological Opinion. To the maximum extent feasible, the project has been designed to avoid and minimize potential project-related impacts to steelhead. No equipment will enter or be used within the San Luis Obispo Creek bed and no construction will occur within the creek bed. Dewatering within the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 97 creek and/or water diversion activities are not necessary and are not a component of the proposed project. Potential indirect impacts/effects to this species resulting from implementation of the proposed project/action would be avoided with avoidance and minimization measures incorporated. Sensitive plant and animal species, including nesting birds, have potential to occur in the native habitats of the proposed project area. Any impacts to these species would be considered significant and mitigation would be required. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(j) would reduce these impacts to less than significant. Mitigation Measures. The following measures would reduce impact BIO-1 to a less than significant level. BIO-1(a) Special Status Plant Species Surveys. Prior to the start of on-site construction activities and when the plants are in a phenological stage conducive to positive identification (i.e., usually during the blooming period for the species), the applicant shall ensure an approved biologist will conduct surveys for special status plant species throughout suitable habitat within the project site. BIO-1(b) Special Status Plant Species Avoidance. If special status plant species are discovered within the study area, the applicant shall ensure an approved biologist will flag and fence these locations before construction activities start to avoid impacts. BIO-1(c) Restoration Plan. If avoidance is not feasible; the applicant shall ensure all impacts be mitigated at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (number of acres/individuals restored to number of acres/individuals impacted) for each species as a component of habitat restoration. The applicant shall prepare and submit a restoration plan to the City for approval. The restoration plan shall include, at a minimum, the following components: • Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); • Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; • Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values); • Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 98 • Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); • Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year, along with performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, and annual monitoring reports to be submitted to the City for a maximum of five years; • Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 30 percent relative cover by vegetation type; • An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address any shortcomings in meeting success criteria; • Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and • Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). BIO-1(d) Best Management Practices. The applicant shall ensure the following general wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required: • No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the project site during construction activities. • All trash that may attract predators must be properly contained and removed from the work site. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from San Luis Obispo Creek and the southern holding ponds and in a location where a spill would not drain toward aquatic habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills prior to the onset of work activities. All workers shall be informed of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control BMPs (i.e., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects on adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek. No plastic monofilament netting shall be utilized on-site. • All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 99 • Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas. • Work shall be restricted to daylight hours. BIO-1(e) WEAP Training. Prior to the initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), the applicant shall ensure all personnel associated with project construction shall attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training. • The training shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer documenting they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. BIO-1(f) Blainville’s Horned Lizard. The applicant shall ensure the following measures are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to Blainville’s horned lizard. • A qualified biologist shall be present on-site during initial ground disturbance in areas determined to have suitable habitat for this species. Any Blainville’s horned lizards that are observed during initial ground disturbance shall be relocated the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat not likely to be affected by activities associated with the proposed project. BIO-1(g) Western Pond Turtle (Actinemys [=Emys] marmorata). The applicant shall ensure the following measures are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to southern western pond turtle: • A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours prior to the onset of work activities within and around areas considered potential western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals are likely to be injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall be allowed sufficient time to move them from Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 100 the project site before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any western pond turtle the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the proposed project. • Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to southern western pond turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. BIO-1(h) California Red-Legged Frog (Rana draytonii). The applicant shall ensure the following measures are implemented to ensure that impacts to CRLF from the proposed project are reduced to a less than significant level. • Only USFWS-approved biologists shall participate in activities associated with the capture, handling, and monitoring of CRLF. • Ground disturbance shall not begin until written approval is received from the USFWS that the biologist is qualified to conduct the work. If the USFWS does not authorize the relocation of CRLF occurring within the project site, CRLF found within the project site shall be avoided with a 100-foot buffer and no activities shall occur within that buffer until the CRLF has left the project site on its own. • The project site shall be surrounded by a solid temporary exclusion fence (such as silt fencing) that shall extend at least three feet above the ground and be buried into the ground at least 6 inches to exclude CRLF from the project site. Plastic monofilament netting or other similar material will not be used. The location of the fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist. The fence shall remain in place throughout construction activities. Installation of the exclusion fencing shall be monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure that it is installed correctly. • All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. • Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas. • Work shall be restricted to daylight hours. • To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the approved biologist, the fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force shall be followed at all times. • No pets or firearms shall be permitted on-site. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 101 BIO-1(i) Steelhead Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus). The applicant shall ensure the following mitigation measures are undertaken to reduce impacts to steelhead from the proposed project to a less than significant level. These measures are included in or are subsequent to the measures stipulated in the facility’s existing National Marine Fisheries Service Biological Opinion, (Appendix C, BRA). • Before any activities begin on the project, a qualified biologist will conduct a training session for all construction personnel. At a minimum, the training will include a description of the steelhead and its habitat, the specific measures that are being implemented to conserve this species for the current project, and the boundaries within which the project may be accomplished. Brochures, books, and briefings may be used in the training session, provided that a qualified person is on hand to answer any questions. • During the duration of project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained and secured, promptly removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from the work areas. • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 100 feet from riparian habitat or bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). The monitor shall ensure that contamination of suitable habitat does not occur during such operations. Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area used for construction activities shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goals. • The City will attempt to schedule work within the immediate vicinity of San Luis Obispo Creek for times of the year when potential impacts to steelhead would be minimal. To the maximum extent feasible, work should be restricted during the wet season (October 15 through April 30) and should ideally occur during the late summer and early fall. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, the City shall implement the following BMPs. If the BMPs are somehow ineffective, the City, in consultation Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 102 with the appropriate resource agency(ies), will attempt to remedy the situation immediately. 1. It shall be the owner’s/contractor’s responsibility to maintain control of the entire construction operations and to keep the entire site in compliance. 2. The owner/contractor shall be responsible for monitoring erosion and sediment control measures (including but not limited to fiber rolls, inlet protections, silt fences, and gravel bags) prior, during and after storm events, monitoring includes maintaining a file documenting onsite inspections, problems encountered, corrective actions, and notes and a map of remedial implementation measures. 3. All earth stockpiles over 2.0 cubic yards shall be covered with a tarp and ringed with straw bales or silt fencing. The site shall be maintained so as to minimize sediment-laden runoff to any storm drainage system including existing drainage swales and/or sand watercourses. a. Construction operations shall be carried out in such a manner that erosion and water pollution will be minimized. b. State and local laws concerning pollution abatement shall be complied with. c. If grading operations are expected to denude slopes, the slopes shall be protected with erosion control measures immediately following grading on the slopes. 4. Specifically, in order to prevent sedimentation and debris from entering San Luis Obispo Creek during construction, silt fencing shall be installed along the top of the banks on the west side of the channel prior to the onset of construction activities. • The project biologist will monitor construction activities, in stream habitat, and overall performance of BMPs and sediment controls for the purpose of identifying and reconciling any condition that could adversely affect steelhead or their habitat. The biologist will halt work if necessary and will recommend site-specific measures to avoid adverse effects to steelhead and their habitat. • Equipment will be checked daily for leaks prior to the initiation of construction activities. A spill kit will be placed near the creek and will remain readily available during construction in the event that any contaminant is accidentally released. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 103 • In addition to these avoidance and minimization measures, mitigation measure BIO-2 would also ensure that potential indirect impacts to steelhead from this project are reduced as much as practicable. BIO-1(j) Nesting Birds. The applicant shall ensure the following mitigation measures are undertaken to reduce any potential impacts to nesting birds to a less than significant level. • For construction activities occurring during the nesting season (generally February 1 to September 15), surveys for nesting birds covered by the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to vegetation removal. The surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 500-foot buffer around the site. If active nests are located, all construction work shall be conducted outside a buffer zone from the nest to be determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be a minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species and at least 300 feet for raptor species. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to removal of the buffer. • If feasible, removal of vegetation within suitable nesting bird habitats will be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 14), after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season. Significance After Mitigation. Implementation of BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(j) would reduce impacts to listed, candidate or special-status plant and wildlife species to a less than significant level. Threshold Would the project have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service. Impact BIO-2 Construction of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on sensitive habitats, including riparian areas. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 104 The proposed project would result in impacts to the right, or west, bank of San Luis Obispo Creek and the associated riparian habitat, as well as the southern holding pond, which are likely under CDFW jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code and are considered under CEQA. Those impacts occurring within San Luis Obispo Creek’s riparian corridor are expected to consist of earth moving, grading and pouring rip-rap, which are activities associated with installing the stormwater outfall and rock slope. Several red willows and black cottonwoods are expected to be trimmed and/or removed as a result of the proposed project. Impacts occurring within the southern holding pond consist of the installation of water level control structures, pump station, and inlet pipe. Within the project area, permanent impacts to CDFW jurisdictional habitat would be up to 0.11 acre. Temporary impacts to riparian vegetation on the west bank of San Luis Obispo Creek, which is under CDFW jurisdiction, would be up to 0.45 acre. Indirect impacts which may occur as a result of implementation of the project would include impacts to water quality from earth moving activities. Project related impacts from the proposed project would be potentially significant and would require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW. Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measure would be required to address impacts related to effects on sensitive habitats. BIO-2 Riparian Habitat. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a minimum a 1:1 ratio for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian habitat. The HMMP will identify the specific mitigation sites and it will be implemented immediately following project completion. The HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following components: • Description of the project/impact site (i.e. location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); • Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; • Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation-site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation-site); • Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation-site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); • Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 105 • Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports); • Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent relative cover by vegetation type; • An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to restoration efforts; • Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and • Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). Furthermore, Mitigation Measure BIO-3, presented below for Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands is suitable and appropriate to ensure that minimal impacts to red willow thicket/riparian habitat would result from implementation of this project and that mitigation is satisfied for unavoidable impacts to such habitat. Significance After Mitigation. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2 and BIO-3 would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Threshold Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Impact BIO-3 Construction of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. The proposed project has potential to result in direct impacts to jurisdictional areas, including wetlands, other waters and riparian habitats. Approximately 1.11 acre of wetlands, 0.11 acre of other waters and 0.45 acre of streambed/riparian habitat were delineated onsite. Note the final jurisdictional determinations of the boundaries of wetlands, waters, and riparian habitat are made by each agency, typically at the time that authorizations to impact such features are requested. The project site contains features that likely fall under jurisdiction of the SWRCB and Central Coast RWQCB, which has jurisdiction over “waters of the State” pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. A Waste Discharge Requirements permit is also anticipated to be required. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 106 The proposed project is anticipated to require a Section 404 Nationwide Permit from the USACE and a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, under the Clean Water Act. Impacts to jurisdictional areas are potentially significant without mitigation incorporated. Mitigation Measures. Integration of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(d) would aid in reducing impacts to Jurisdictional Waters. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would also be required to reduce any potential impacts to waters under USACE and RWQCB jurisdictions to less than significant levels. BIO-3 Jurisdictional Water and Wetlands BMPs. The following BMPs shall be implemented: 1. To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control best management practices (i.e., installation of straw wattle, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects on jurisdictional areas in the vicinity of the project. Plastic monofilament erosion control matting will not be implemented onsite. 2. Project activities within the jurisdictional areas shall occur during the dry season (typically between June 1 and November 1) in any given year, or as otherwise directed by the regulatory agencies. Deviations from this work window can be made with permission from the relevant regulatory agencies. 3. During construction, no litter or construction debris shall be placed within jurisdictional areas. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. In addition, all project-generated debris, building materials, and rubbish shall be removed from jurisdictional areas and from areas where such materials could be washed into them. 4. Any substances which could be hazardous to aquatic species resulting from project-related activities shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering jurisdictional areas. 5. All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 107 Significance After Mitigation. Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1(d) and BIO- 3 would reduce potential impacts to federally protected wetlands, any riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural community to less than significant levels. Threshold Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites. No impacts to wildlife movement are expected considering no work will occur within the bed of San Luis Obispo Creek and the majority of the construction will occur on previously disturbed land. The proposed stormwater outfall will be constructed within the riparian corridor on the west bank of San Luis Obispo Creek; however, the small scale of the stormwater outfall will not interfere with the movement of resident or migratory wildlife. Therefore, no measures are recommended. Threshold Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or No conflicts with local policies or ordinances regarding biological resources are expected. Therefore, no impact would occur and no mitigation would be required. Threshold Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. The proposed project area does not fall within the jurisdiction of an adapted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan and therefore would not conflict with any such provisions. No impact would occur and no mitigation would be required. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.2 Biological Resources City of San Luis Obispo 108 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 109 3.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES 3.3.1 Cultural Resources Setting a. Prehistory. The project lies in the Central Coast archaeological region (Jones et al. 2007). The Central Coast has been defined as extending from south of San Francisco Bay to the northern edge of the California Bight (Jones et al. 2007:125). Following Jones et al. (2007:137), the prehistoric cultural chronology for the Central Coast can be generally divided into six periods: Paleo-Indian (ca. 10000–8000 B.C.), Millingstone/Early Archaic (8000-3500 B.C.), Early (3500-600 B.C.), Middle (600 B.C.- A.D. 1000), Middle-Late Transition (A.D. 1000-A.D. 1250), and Late (A.D. 1250-contact [ca. A.D. 1769]). Several chronological sequences have been devised to understand cultural changes along the Central Coast from the Millingstone period to contact. Jones (1993) and Jones and Waugh (1995) presented a Central Coast sequence that integrated data from archaeological studies conducted since the 1980s. Three periods are presented in their prehistoric sequence subsequent to the Millingstone period: Early, Middle, and Late periods. More recently, Jones and Ferneau (2002:213) updated the sequence following the Millingstone period as follows: Early, Early- Middle Transition, Middle, Middle-Late Transition, and Late periods. The archaeology of the Central Coast subsequent to the Millingstone period is distinct from that of the Bay Area and Central Valley, and the region has more in common with the Santa Barbara Channel area during the Middle and Middle-Late Transition periods, but few similarities during the Late period (Jones & Ferneau 2002:213). Paleo-Indian Period (ca. 10,000-8000 B.C.) When Wallace developed the Early Man horizon (referred to herein as the Paleo-Indian Period) in the 1950s, little evidence of human presence was known for the southern California coast prior to 6000 B.C. Archaeological work in the intervening years has identified numerous sites older than this date, including coastal and Channel Islands sites (e.g., Erlandson 1991; Johnson et al. 2002; Moratto 1984). The earliest accepted dates for occupation are from two of the Northern Channel Islands, located off the southern coast of Santa Barbara County. On San Miguel Island, Daisy Cave clearly establishes the presence of people in this area approximately 10,000 years ago (Erlandson 1991:105). On Santa Rosa Island, human remains have been dated from the Arlington Springs site to approximately 13,000 years ago (Johnson et al. 2002). Only a few archaeological sites along the Central Coast are documented prior to 8,000 years ago. It is likely that most earlier coastal sites are presently under water because it is estimated that 10,000 years ago sea levels were 15 – 20 meters lower than today (Bickel 1978:7). Estimates place the shore in central and southern California during this period at approximately 10 kilometers farther west than today’s coastline (Breschini and Haversat 1991:126). Recent data from Paleo-Indian sites in southern California indicate that the economy was a diverse mixture of hunting and gathering, with a major emphasis on aquatic resources in many coastal areas (e.g., Jones et al. 2002) and on Pleistocene lake shores in eastern California (Moratto 1984:90–92). Although few Clovis-like or Folsom-like fluted points have been found in southern California (e.g., Erlandson et al. 1987), it is generally considered that the emphasis on Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 110 hunting may have been greater during the Paleo-Indian period than in later periods. A fluted point fragment was recovered from site CA-SBA-1951 on the Santa Barbara Channel coastal plain (Erlandson 1994:44; Erlandson et al. 1987). Another fluted point was reportedly found on the surface in Nipomo, San Luis Obispo County (Mills et al. 2005; Jones et al. 2007). Large side-notched points of the Central Coast Stemmed series in this area date to as early as 8,000 years ago (Justice 2002). Points of this type have been recovered at Diablo Canyon (CA- SLO-2; Greenwood 1972), Cross Creek (CA-SLO-1797; Fitzgerald 2000), Little Pico Creek (CA- SLO-175; Jones and Waugh 1995), and the Honda Beach site (CA-SBA-530; Glassow 1997), among others. At the Metcalf site (CA-SCL-178), in southern Santa Clara Valley, Hildebrandt (1983) recovered two large side-notched points associated with charcoal dates ranging from 9,960 – 8,500 years ago. Several recently investigated sites also provide clear evidence for human occupation of the Central Coast during the Paleo-Indian period. CA-SLO-1764 (Lebow et al. 2001) and Cross Creek (CA-SLO-1797; Fitzgerald 2000), both near Santa Margarita in San Luis Obispo County, and CA-SLO-832 ( Jones et al. 2001) near Pismo Beach, have produced radiocarbon dates from approximately 9,000 years ago (Jones and Ferneau 2002). Millingstone Period (8000-3500 B.C.) The Millingstone period, as defined by Wallace (1955, 1978) and recognized on the Central Coast by Greenwood (1972), is characterized by an ecological adaptation to collecting suggested by the appearance and abundance of well-made milling implements. Millingstones occur in large numbers for the first time in the region’s archaeological record, and are even more numerous near the end of this period. Aside from millingstones, typical artifacts during this period include crude core and cobble-core tools, flake tools, large side-notched projectile points, and pitted stones (Jones et al. 2007). As testified by their toolkits and shell middens in coastal sites, people during this period practiced a mixed food procurement strategy. Subsistence patterns varied somewhat as groups became better adapted to their regional or local environments. Faunal remains identified at Millingstone sites point to broad-spectrum hunting and gathering of shellfish, fish, birds, and mammals, though large faunal assemblages are uncommon. The Millingstone period somewhat corresponds with King’s (1981, 1990) Early period of the Santa Barbara Channel area, although King’s Early period starts later and lasts longer (5500 – 1350 B.C.). The Cross Creek site (CA-SLO-1797) is a Millingstone occupation site in San Luis Obispo County that returned radiocarbon dates ranging between 9,500 – 4,700 years ago This site represents one of the oldest expressions of the pattern (Jones et al. 2007; Fitzgerald 2000:58). Along the Central Coast, Millingstone period sites are most common on terraces and knolls, typically set back from the current coastline (Glassow et al. 1988:68, Erlandson 1994:46). However, no less than 42 sites have been identified in various settings, including rocky coasts, estuaries, and nearshore interior valleys (Jones et al. 2007). The larger sites usually contain extensive midden deposits, possible subterranean house pits, and cemeteries. Most of these sites probably reflect intermittent use over many years of local cultural habitation and resource exploitation. Erlandson has noted that the typical Millingstone tools are not common on Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 111 contemporaneous Channel Island sites, possibly reflecting an alternate insular resource exploitation pattern (Erlandson 1994:47). Early Period (3500-600 B.C.) An extensive series of shoreline midden deposits are within the Central Coast region dating to the Early period, signifying an increase in occupation of the open coast (Jones 1995; Jones and Waugh 1995, 1997). These include estuarine sites such as CA-SLO-165 and open-coast sites in Monterey Bay area, including CA-MNT-73, CA-MNT-108, and CA-MNT-1228. Sites dating to this period are marked by large lithic artifact assemblages that include Central Coast Stemmed Series and side-notched projectile points. Square-stemmed and side-notched points have also been found in deposits at Willow Creek in Big Sur (CA-MNT-282), and Little Pico II on the San Luis Obispo coast (CA-SLO-175) (Jones and Ferneau 2002). This trend, first identified by David Banks Rogers in 1929, was confirmed by Greenwood (1972) at Diablo Canyon and since that time it has become apparent at numerous sites throughout the Central Coast. In many cases, manifestations of this trend are associated with the establishment of new settlements (Jones et al. 2007). The material culture recovered from Early period sites within the Central Coast region provides evidence for continued exploitation of inland plant and coastal marine resources. Artifacts include milling slabs and handstones, as well as mortars and pestles, which were used for processing a variety of plant resources. Bipointed bone gorge hooks were used for fishing. Assemblages also include a suite of Olivella beads, bone tools, and pendants made from talc schist. Square abalone shell (Haliotis spp.) beads have been found in Monterey Bay, but not in the Big Sur or San Luis Obispo areas (Jones and Waugh 1997:122). Shell beads and obsidian are hallmarks of the trade and exchange networks of the central and southern California coasts. The archaeological record indicates a substantial increase in the abundance of obsidian at Early period sites in the Monterey Bay and San Luis Obispo areas (Jones and Waugh 1997:124–126). Obsidian trade continued to increase during the following the Middle period. Middle Period (600 B.C. - A.D. 1000) A pronounced trend toward greater adaptation to regional or local resources occurred during the Middle period. For example, the remains of fish, land mammals, and sea mammals are increasingly abundant and diverse in archaeological deposits along the coast. Related chipped stone tools suitable for hunting were more abundant and diversified, and shell fishhooks became part of the toolkit during this period. Larger knives, a variety of flake scrapers, and drill-like implements are common during this period. Projectile points include large side- notched, stemmed, and lanceolate or leaf-shaped forms. Bone tools, including awls, are more numerous than in the preceding period, and the use of asphaltum adhesive became common. Sites from this period show a retention of stemmed points and the disappearance of the larger side-notched points (Jones and Klar 2007; Jones et al. 2007). Complex maritime technology also proliferated during this period. Notable introductions included circular shell fishhooks between 1000 and 500 B.C. (Jones and Klar 2007:466), the appearance of compound bone fishhooks between A.D. 300 and 900, and the development of Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 112 the wooden plank canoe (tomol or tomolo) by at least A.D. 400–700 (Arnold 1995; Jones and Klar 2007:466; Kennett 1998:357; King 1990:87–88; Rick et al. 2002). Hand-hewn plank canoes, sewn together with cordage and then sealed with asphaltum, were “a uniquely sophisticated craft for prehistoric North America” (Jones and Klar 2007: 461). These large canoes were used extensively for travel and trade between the Channel Islands and the mainland; however, no evidence of their use north of Point Conception is known. The introduction of shell fishhooks and plank canoes, their subsequent modifications, and the increased use of other capture devices such as nets appear to have led to a substantial focus on fishing in most coastal areas. A seasonal round settlement pattern was still followed; however, large, permanently occupied settlements, particularly in coastal areas, appear to have been the norm by the end of the period (Kennett 1998). Middle-Late Transition Period (A.D. 1000-1250) The Middle-Late Transition period is marked by relative instability and change, with major changes in diet, settlement patterns, and interregional exchange. The relatively ubiquitous Middle period shell midden sites found along the Central Coast were abandoned by the end of the Middle-Late Transition period, so most Transition period and Late period sites were first occupied during those periods (Jones and Ferneau 2002:213, 219). Site CA-SLO-239 has been tentatively dated to the Middle-Late Transition Period and contains the only residential feature, a circular house floor, dating to this time period (Jones et al. 2007; Mikkelsen et al. 2000). During the Middle-Late Transition period within the Central Coast region, projectile points diagnostic of both the Middle and Late periods are found (Jones and Ferneau 2002:217). The points include large, contracting-stemmed types typical of the Middle period, as well as Late period small, leaf-shaped points, which likely reflect the introduction of the bow and arrow. Late Period (A.D. 1250-Historic Contact) Late period sites are marked by small, finely worked projectile points, such as Desert side- notched and Cottonwood points, as well as temporally diagnostic shell beads. The small projectile points are associated with bow and arrow technology and indicate influence from the Takic migration from the deserts into southern California. The Chumash only adopted technology they found useful from the Takic culture, as compared to the broad culture change that occurred to the south. Although shell beads were typical of coastal sites, trade brought many of these maritime artifacts to inland locations, especially during the latter part of the Late period (Jones et al. 2007). Common artifacts identified at Late Period sites include bifacial bead drills, bedrock mortars, hopper mortars, lipped and cupped Olivella shell beads, and steatite disk beads. The presence of beads and bead drills suggest that low-level bead production was widespread throughout the Central Coast region (Jones et al. 2007). Unlike the large Middle period shell middens, Late period sites are more frequently single- component deposits. There are also more inland sites, with fewer and less visible sites along the Pacific shore during the Late period. However, one Late Period shell midden has been identified on the coast in Morro Bay (CA-SLO-23). The settlement pattern and dietary Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 113 reconstructions indicate a lesser reliance on marine resources than observed for the Middle and Middle-Late Transition periods, as well as an increased preference for deer and rabbit (Jones 1995). An increase in sites with bedrock mortars during the Late period further suggests that nuts and seeds began to take on a more significant dietary role (Jones et al. 2007). b. Ethnographic Overview. The project area of potential effects (APE) was historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash, so called after their historic period association with Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa (Gibson 1983; Kroeber 1925). The precise location of the boundary between the Chumashan-speaking Obispeño Chumash and their northern neighbors, the Hokan-speaking Salinan, is debatable (Milliken and Johnson 2005); however, Jones and Waugh (1995:8) note that “those boundaries may well have fluctuated through time in response to possible shifts in economic strategies and population movement.” The Chumash spoke six closely related Chumashan languages, which have been divided into two broad groups—Northern Chumash (consisting only of Obispeño) and Southern Chumash (Purisimeño, Ineseño, Barbareño, Ventureño, and Island Chumash) (Mithun 2004:389). The Chumashan language currently is considered an isolate stock with a long history in the Santa Barbara region (Mithun 2004:304). Groups neighboring the Chumash included the Salinan to the north, the Southern Valley Yokuts and Tataviam to the east, and the Gabrielino (Tongva) to the south. Chumash place names in the project vicinity include Pismu (Pismo Beach), Tematatimi (along Los Berros Creek), and Tilhini (near San Luis Obispo) (Greenwood 1978:520). Only a general outline of the lifeways of the Obispeño Chumash is known based on the little ethnographic information available (Greenwood 1978). Although their language was closer to Southern Chumash groups, the material culture and lifeways of the Northern Chumash appear to have been more similar to their northern neighbors, the Salinan. Accordingly, their populations in this area are thought to have been substantially lower than in the Santa Barbara Channel area, their villages smaller, and their livelihood less based on intensive use of marine fisheries (Glassow et al. 1988; Greenwood 1978). Permanent Chumash villages included hemispherical dwellings arranged in close groups, with the chief having the largest for social obligations (Brown 2001). Each Chumash village had a formal cemetery marked by tall painted poles and often with a defined entrance area (Gamble et al. 2001:191). Archaeological studies have identified separate sections for elite versus commoner families within the cemetery grounds (King 1969). The acorn was a dietary staple for the mainland Chumash, though its dominance varied by coastal or inland location. Chumash diet also included cattail roots, fruits and pads from cactus, and bulbs and tubers of plants such as amole (Miller 1988:89). On the coast, the wooden plank canoe (tomol) was employed in the pursuit of marine mammals and fish. The tomol not only facilitated marine resource procurement but also facilitated an active trade network maintained by frequent crossings between the mainland and the Channel Islands. Chumash populations were decimated by the effects of European colonization and missionization (Johnson 1987). Traditional lifeways largely gave way to laborer jobs on ranches and farms in the Mexican and early American periods. Today, the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians is the only federally recognized Chumash tribe, though many people of Chumash descent continue to live throughout their traditional territory. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 114 c. Historical Overview. Post-European contact history for the state of California is generally divided into three periods: the Spanish Period (1769–1822), the Mexican Period (1822– 1848), and the American Period (1848–present). Spanish Period (1769-1822) Initial European entry into the San Luis Obispo region began with the Juan Rodrigues Cabrillo Expedition in 1542. Cabrillo sailed along the coast, possibly landing in Morro Bay, and then continued as far north as San Francisco Bay (Chesnut 1993). In 1587, Pedro de Unamuno landed in what was most likely Morro Bay, but suffered casualties during an attack by Native Americans and left (Bean 1968). Sebastian Rodriguez Cermeño entered the San Luis Obispo region in 1595 as part of his exploration of the Alta California coast (Jones et al. 1994). The earliest detailed descriptions of the area come from members of Gaspar de Portolá’s land expedition, which passed through the region in 1769 (Squibb 1984). Early travelers in the Central Coast region reported seeing no large Native American villages like those noted in the Santa Barbara Channel area. Gaspar de Portolá and Franciscan Father Junípero Serra established the first Spanish settlement in Alta California at Mission San Diego de Alcalá in 1769. This was the first of 21 missions erected by the Spanish between 1769 and 1823. Portolá continued north, passing through the project vicinity and reaching San Francisco Bay in 1769. Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa was founded in 1772, the fifth of 21 missions established by the Spanish in the California (Rolle 2003). Mexican Period (1822-1848) The Mexican Period commenced when news of the success of the Mexican Revolution (1810- 1821) against the Spanish crown reached California in 1822. This period saw the federalization of mission lands in California with the passage of the Secularization Act of 1833. This Act enabled Mexican governors in California to distribute former mission lands to individuals in the form of land grants. Successive Mexican governors made more than 700 land grants between 1822 and 1846, putting most of the state’s lands into private ownership for the first time (Shumway 2007). The secularization of the missions during the Mexican period resulted in approximately 500,000 acres of former mission lands being granted to Mexican citizens in San Luis Obispo County (San Luis Obispo 2006). Mexican governor Manuel Micheltorena granted six leagues to Pedro Narvaez in 1844. This grant came to be known as Paso de Robles (Shumway 2007). The project APE is located within this land grant. American Period (1848-Present) The American Period began with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, in which the United States agreed to pay Mexico $15 million for the conquered territory, including California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming. This period saw increased settlement throughout the state. Many Mexican ranchos were sold or otherwise acquired by Americans, and most were subdivided into agricultural parcels or towns. Rancho Paso de Robles was patented in 1866 to Petronillo Rios who then sold the land to James Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 115 H. Blackburn, Daniel Drew Blackburn, and Lazarus Godehaux in 1857 for $8,000 (Shumway 2007; City of Paso Robles 2014). The County of San Luis Obispo was founded in 1850 (San Luis Obispo 2006). Roads were constructed throughout the county in the 1870s, primarily by Chinese laborers, leading to increased mobility throughout the county. In 1872, Captain John Harford began construction on the Pacific Coast Railway. Dumke (1944) described San Luis Obispo County during the California land boom of the 1880s as “the great butter and cheese belt of southern California,” initially with land affordably priced between $18 and $25 per acre. By April 1887, an estimated 3,000 to 4,000 people inhabited the region, and land prices increased dramatically. In 1894, the Southern Pacific Railroad completed a line from San Jose to San Luis Obispo encouraging trade and further settlement of the region. In the early twentieth century Port Harford was renamed Port San Luis and oil from the Santa Maria and Taft-Coalinga fields was shipped beginning in 1907 and 1913, respectively. The California Polytechnic School was established in 1901 as a high school and eventually became California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly). The county’s agriculture and ranching production supplied U.S troops during World War I and helped its residents weather the Great Depression of the 1930s. At the start of World War II, the U.S. War Department transferred nearly 100,000 military personnel to bases at Morro Bay, Camp San Luis Obispo, Camp Roberts, and Cambria. San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility The San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) was originally constructed during the 1910s as one of the first sewage treatment plants in the state. The original plant included a clarifier and floating top digester. In 1945, when Camp San Luis Obispo opened, the WRRF was expanded to include two additional clarifiers and biofilters. Since that time, the WRRF has been expanded several times to accommodate population increases and comply with increasingly stringent wastewater discharge requirements (City of San Luis Obispo 2015). 3.3.2 Geologic Setting The project area is depicted on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles (Wiegers 2010, 2011). The project is located in the San Luis Valley, between the San Luis Range to the west and the Santa Lucia Mountains to the east. These mountain ranges lie at the boundary of the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province to the south and the Coast Ranges geomorphic province to the north. These provinces are two of the 12 geomorphic provinces in the state, which are defined by lithologically distinct landscapes or landforms (CGS 2002). The San Luis Range and the Santa Lucia Mountains provide material for alluvial valley deposition within the San Luis Valley (Lettis et al. 2004). The project area itself overlies young alluvial flood-plain sediments of middle to early Holocene age (Figure 1; Wiegers 2010, 2011). These sediments consist of gravel, sand, and silts deposited by San Luis Obispo Creek from material eroded from the Santa Lucia Mountains to the east. The Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 116 project site includes one geologic unit mapped at the surface: Young alluvial flood-plain deposits (Qya2) (Wiegers 2010, 2011). 3.3.3 Paleontological Sensitivity of Mapped Units Middle to early Holocene young alluvial flood-plain deposits (Qya2) underlie the entire project area. These sediments consist of unconsolidated gravel, sand, and silt and fill a majority of the valley (Wiegers 2010, 2011). These sediments represent stream channel, alluvial fan, and debris flow deposits of material derived mainly from the Santa Lucia Mountains to the east. Most young alluvial sediments in the vicinity are only slightly dissected, with scant soil formation, suggesting a middle to early Holocene age. Because this corresponds to an age greater than 5,000 years, these sediments could contain paleontological resources. As such, these sediments could contain significant paleontological resources, but this is more likely with increased depth in the subsurface, especially if Pleistocene-aged sediments are mantled. Therefore, sediments within the project area are considered to have a low paleontological sensitivity at the surface, but to have an increased sensitivity with increased depth in the sub-surface. 3.3.4 Regulatory Framework The current study is conducted under CEQA plus federal cross-cutting documentation in place of a NEPA document in what is termed “CEQA-Plus” documentation. In order to meet the requirements of a CEQA-Plus study, the current undertaking complies with CEQA regulations at the state level and Section 106 of the NHPA to complete the federal cross-cutting documentation. The state and federal regulations are discussed here. The Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo is also discussed in this section. a. State. CEQA requires a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on historical resources (Public Resources Code [PRC], Section 21084.1). A historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing, in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), a resource included in a local register of historical resources or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5[a][1-3]). A resource shall be considered historically significant if it meets any of the following criteria: 6. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; 7. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; 8. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or 9. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. In addition, if it can be demonstrated that a project will cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC, Section 21083.2[a], [b], and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 117 [c]). PRC, Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: 10. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; 11. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or 12. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. In addition, Section 5097.5 of the California Public Code Section states: No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor. As used in this section, “public lands” means lands owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the state, or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof. Consequently, local agencies are required to comply with PRC 5097.5 for their own activities, including construction and maintenance, as well as for permit actions (e.g., encroachment permits) undertaken by others. b. Federal. This project may involve the use of funds provided by the federal government. Therefore, this environmental analysis has been conducted according to the CEQA-Plus regulatory standards. Cultural resources are considered during federal undertakings chiefly under Section 106 of the NHPA of 1966 (as amended) through one of its implementing regulations, 36 CFR 800 (Protection of Historic Properties), as well as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to Native Americans are considered under Section 101(d)(6)(A) of NHPA. Other federal laws include the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) of 1978, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) of 1979, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1989, among others. Section 106 of the NHPA (16 United States Code [USC] 470f) requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings (36 CFR 800.1). Under Section 106, the significance of any adversely affected cultural resource is assessed and mitigation measures are proposed to reduce any impacts to an acceptable level. Significant cultural resources are those resources that are listed in or are eligible for listing in the NRHP per the criteria listed below (36 CFR 60.4). Cultural resources eligible for the NRHP are labeled as historic properties. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 118 The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and that: 13. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or 14. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or 15. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of installation, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or 16. Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. PRC, Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: 17. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; 18. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or 19. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. A variety of federal statutes specifically address paleontological resources. They generally become applicable to specific projects if the project crosses or is present on federal lands. As this project is not on federal lands, federal statutes for paleontological resources generally do not apply. c. City of San Luis Obispo. In 2010 the City of San Luis Obispo passed a Historic Preservation Ordinance to identify and protect important historic resources within the city (City of San Luis Obispo 2010). When determining if a property should be designated as a listed Historic or Cultural Resource, the Cultural Heritage Commission (CHC) and City Council are to consider this ordinance and California State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) standards. To be eligible for designation, the resource shall exhibit a high level of historic integrity, be at least fifty (50) years old (less than 50 if it can be demonstrated that enough time has passed to understand its historical importance) and satisfy at least one of the following criteria: A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values. 20. Style: Describes the form of a building, such as size, structural shape and details within that form (e.g. arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.). Building style will be evaluated as a measure of: a. The relative purity of a traditional style; Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 119 b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the structure reflects a once popular style; c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles and how these styles are put together. 21. Design: Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic merit and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Reflects how well a particular style or combination of styles are expressed through compatibility and detailing of elements. Also, suggests degree to which the designer (e.g., carpenter-builder) accurately interpreted and conveyed the style(s). Building design will be evaluated as a measure of: a. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details and craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique); b. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders, although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior. 22. Architect: Describes the professional (an individual or firm) directly responsible for the building design and plans of the structure. The architect will be evaluated as a reference to: a. A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced development of the city, state or nation. b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources, designed the house at 810 Osos - Frank Avila’s father’s home - built between 1927 – 30). B. Historic Criteria: 23. History – Person: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history. Historic person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which a person or group was: a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member, etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or nationally. b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early, unique, or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or institutions (e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen, railroad officials). 24. History – Event: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. Historic event will be evaluated as a measure of: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 120 a. A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether the impact of the event spread beyond the city. b. A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city (e.g., the Ah Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early San Luis Obispo history). 25. History-Context: Associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant patterns of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental, military, industrial, or religious history. Historic context will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which it reflects: a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building (e.g., County Museum). b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building (e.g., Park Hotel). C. Integrity: Authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Integrity will be evaluated by a measure of: 26. Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not the original foundation has been changed, if known. 27. The degree to which the structure has maintained enough of its historic character or appearance to be recognizable as an historic resource and to convey the reason(s) for its significance. 28. The degree to which the resource has retained its design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan (2015) includes Policy 3.5.1, within the Cultural Resources section of its Conservation and Open Space Element, stating: The City shall provide for the protection of both known and potential archaeological resources. To avoid significant damage to important archaeological sites, all available measures, including purchase of the property in fee or easement, shall be explored at the time of a development proposal. Where such measures are not feasible and development would adversely affect identified archaeological or paleontological resources, mitigation shall be required pursuant to the Archaeological Resource Preservation Program 3.3.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures a. Methodology for Analysis Records Search and Literature Review. A search of the cultural resource records housed at the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), Central Coast Information Center (CCIC) located at University of California, Santa Barbara was conducted on September 25, 2015. The search was conducted to identify all previous cultural resources work and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 121 previously recorded cultural resources within a 0.25-mile radius of the project site. The CHRIS search included a review of the NRHP, the CRHR, the California Points of Historical Interest list, the California Historical Landmarks list, the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility list, and the California State Historic Resources Inventory list. The records search also included a review of all available historic USGS 7.5- and 15-minute quadrangle maps. The CCIC did not list any historic addresses within the search radius, nor did they possess any historical maps depicting the APE. The CCIC records search identified 60 previous studies within a 0.5-mile radius of the APE, 20 of which include portions of the APE. The CCIC records search identified nine previously recorded cultural resources within a 0.5-mile radius of the project APE, one of which (P-40-001449) is located within the APE. Resource P-40-001449 consisted of the historical San Luis Obispo City Dump, which was partially removed in 1992 as part of an expansion of the WRRF. The deposit contained burnt and compacted refuse, including glass bottles, cans, auto parts, wood, ceramics, electrical cable, and other historical artifacts dating to ca. 1900-1945. When the WRRF was expanded in 1992, portions of the deposits were removed and redeposited in an area at the west end of the San Luis Obispo Airport that is located outside of the project APE. The original investigation (Singer et al. 1993) noted that the site may be larger than the disturbance area, but this was never confirmed through additional investigation (i.e., testing). Singer et al. recommended that any future construction activities and/or demolition of older facilities within the WRRF be inspected for the presence of additional deposits related to P-40-001449. Rincon reviewed historic aerials and topographic maps from internet sources to better understand the land use history of the project site. The 1967 San Luis Obispo, CA and the 1975 Pismo Beach, CA 15-minute topographic quadrangles, accessed using USGS TopoView, depict the WRRF within the APE. Archival research was completed between September and November 2015. Research methodology focused on the review of a variety of primary and secondary source materials relating to the history and development of the project area. Sources included, but were not limited to, historic maps, aerial photographs, and written histories of the area. The following repositories, publications, and individuals were contacted to identify known historical land uses and the locations of research materials pertinent to the project site: • Archives, San Luis Obispo County Genealogical Society • Historic aerial photographs • United States Geological Survey Maps • Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Maps • City of San Luis Obispo, Utilities Department • Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Maps • Jim Autry, Former WRRF Superintendent • Other sources as noted in the references list Native American Scoping. Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a review of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) on September 25, 2015. In anticipation of the response from the NAHC, Rincon mailed anticipatory letters to 24 tribal Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 122 groups or individuals on October 7, 2015. These groups and individuals are known to Rincon to have affiliations to the project APE and surrounding area. On November 3, 2015, Rincon Senior Archaeologist Catherine Wright, conducted follow-up consultation by telephone. On November 3, 2015, Ms. Wright spoke with Ms. Lei Lynn Odom, of Chumash descent. Ms. Odom recommended that a Native American monitor be present during all ground disturbance activities. On November 3, 2015, Ms. Wright spoke with Traditional Chairperson John W. Burch of the Salinan Tribe of Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties. Chairperson Burch recommended that a Native American Monitor and qualified archaeologist be present for all construction related activities due to the potential for archaeological sites to exist in proximity to San Luis Obispo Creek. On November 11, 2015, Fred Collins of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council replied via email to Kevin Hunt, Rincon Cultural Resources Program Manager. Mr. Collins stated in his email that the project vicinity has contained cultural resources that have been relocated and recommends a Native American monitor if any cultural materials are identified. On November 13, 2015, Karen White, Council Chair of the Xolon Salinan Tribe sent a letter to the City of San Luis Obispo. Ms. White’s letter stated that they are not aware of any Xolon Salinan cultural resources in the project vicinity but that the area should be considered sensitive due to its proximity to San Luis Obispo Creek. Archaeological Field Survey. Rincon Program Manager Kevin Hunt conducted an archaeological resources survey of the WRRF Project APE on October 22, 2015. Rincon archaeologist Ashlee Bailey conducted an archaeological survey of an addition to the APE encompassing a portion of the San Luis Obispo Creek bed on January 18, 2016. The first survey consisted of walking transects oriented generally north to south and spaced no greater than 10 meters apart. The survey of the portion of the APE within the creek bed consisted of transects spaced less than 5 meters apart to cover approximately 95% of the riparian corridor. During the survey, the archaeologists examined all areas of exposed ground surface for prehistoric artifacts (e.g., chipped stone tools and production debris, stone milling tools, ceramics), historic debris (e.g., metal, glass, ceramics), or soil discoloration that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden. The archaeologists recorded project site characteristics and survey conditions using a field notebook and a digital camera. Copies of the field notes and digital photographs are on file with Rincon’s San Luis Obispo office. The archaeological field survey found that the project APE has been completely disturbed by the development of the WRRF. Surface visibility in open areas was poor due to the presence of structures associated with the WRRF and landscaping features. No surface manifestation of site P-40-001449 could be identified within the APE and subsurface testing is impossible with existing facilities in place. Previous site records for the resources did not include a CRHR or NRHP eligibility recommendation for the resource, but the site was noted to have no stratigraphic integrity and historic components were mixed with modern trash (Singer et al. 1993). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 123 Built Environment Survey. On October 6, 2015, Rincon Architectural Historian Shannon Carmack conducted an intensive-level built environment survey of the project area. The purpose of this survey was to identify and photograph any built environment resources that may be impacted by the proposed project. The field survey consisted of a visual inspection of all built environment features of the property, including buildings, structures, and associated features to assess the overall condition and integrity, and to identify and document any potential character-defining features. Field documentation included digital photographs of the property to support field observations. One property, the San Luis Obispo WRRF, was identified during the field survey that contains built environment resources constructed more than 45 years ago. The WRRF was established in the 1910s and has grown over the subsequent decades. The WRRF facility consists of digesters, biofilters, clarifiers, a control house, aeration basins, a chlorination station/office, and garage. The extant buildings, structures, and features of the facility were constructed between 1917 and 2007. The San Luis Obispo WWRF was established in 1917 and has been continuously upgraded since its initial construction to comply with increasingly stringent wastewater discharge requirements, and to accommodate population increases. With the exception of the Control Room, which was substantially altered, the remaining buildings and structures retain integrity of design, materials, workmanship, location, association, feeling, and setting. However, the WRRF does not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP, the CRHR or as a local landmark. Although the property is associated with the development and advancement of the city’s sanitation system, and represents one of the earliest systems of its type in California, all that remains from the early period is Digester No. 3 and the attached storage structure. The property has continuously expanded over the years to accommodate the increased population needs and no longer resembles the original facility from the early twentieth century. The subsequent buildings and structures constructed between the 1940s and 1990s reflect a broader national and state-wide trend to increase urban sanitation; the WRRF was not instrumental in this pattern of history (Criteria A/1). The property has not been directly associated with persons significant in our past (Criteria B/2). The buildings and structures on the property are utilitarian resources that are ubiquitous to industrial operations; they do not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, represent the work of a master, nor do they represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction (Criteria C/3). Lastly, the property is not expected to yield important information about prehistory or history (Criteria D/4). Therefore the property is not considered a historic property, as defined in Section 106 of the National Register of Historic Places, nor does it qualify as a historical resource under the California Environmental Quality Act. It has been recommended that the appropriate California Historical Resources Status Code (Status Code) be “6Z, Found ineligible for N[ational]R[egister], C[alifornia] R[egister], or Local designation through survey evaluation” be assigned (California Office of Historic Preservation 2003). For these same reasons, the property is not considered eligible as a City of San Luis Obispo historic or cultural resource. See Appendix D for further information on the built environment present at the project site. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 124 Paleontological Methodology. This paleontological resource assessment consisted of a fossil locality record search, review of existing geologic maps, and a review of primary literature regarding fossiliferous geologic units within the project vicinity and region. No field survey was conducted. See Appendix E for further information. Generally, only a highly trained paleontologist with specific expertise in a given type of fossil is qualified to determine the exact scientific significance of any given paleontological resources. However, a qualified paleontologist can evaluate the potential significance of fossil specimens and the paleontological sensitivity of given geologic units. The Society for Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) broadly defines significant paleontological resources as follows (SVP 2010:11): Fossils and fossiliferous deposits consisting of identifiable vertebrate fossils, large or small, uncommon invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils, and other data that provide taphonomic, taxonomic, phylogenetic, paleoecologic, stratigraphic, and/or biochronologic information. Paleontological resources are considered to be older than recorded human history and/or older than middle Holocene (i.e., older than about 5,000 radiocarbon years). Significant paleontological resources are determined to be fossils or assemblages of fossils that are unique, unusual, rare, uncommon, diagnostically important, or are common but have the potential to provide valuable scientific information for evaluating evolutionary patterns and processes, or which could improve our understanding of paleochronology, paleoecology, paleophylogeography or depositional histories. New or unique specimens can provide new insights into evolutionary history; however, additional specimens of even well represented lineages can be equally important for studying evolutionary pattern and process, evolutionary rates and paleophylogeography. Even unidentifiable material can provide useful data for dating geologic units if radiocarbon dating is possible. As such, common fossils (especially vertebrates) may be scientifically important, and therefore considered highly significant. The SVP (2010) describes sedimentary rock units as having a high, low, undetermined, or no potential for containing significant nonrenewable paleontological resources. This criterion is based on rock units within which vertebrate or significant invertebrate fossils have been determined by previous studies to be present or likely to be present. Significant paleontological resources are fossils or assemblages of fossils, which are unique, unusual, rare, uncommon, diagnostically or stratigraphically important, and those which add to an existing body of knowledge in specific areas, stratigraphically, taxonomically, or regionally. While these standards were specifically written to protect vertebrate paleontological resources, all fields of paleontology have adopted these guidelines. Rincon has evaluated the paleontological sensitivity of the proposed project site according to the following SVP (2010) categories: I. High Potential (sensitivity) – Rock units from which significant vertebrate or significant invertebrate fossils or significant suites of plant fossils have been recovered are considered to have a high potential for containing significant non- renewable fossiliferous resources. These units include but are not limited to, sedimentary formations and some volcanic formations which contain significant nonrenewable paleontological resources anywhere within their geographical extent, and sedimentary rock units temporally or lithologically suitable for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 125 preservation of fossils. Sensitivity comprises both (a) the potential for yielding abundant or significant vertebrate fossils or for yielding a few significant fossils, large or small, vertebrate, invertebrate, or botanical and (b) the importance of recovered evidence for new and significant taxonomic, phylogenetic, ecologic, or stratigraphic data. Areas which contain potentially datable organic remains older than Recent, including deposits associated with nests or middens, and areas which may contain new vertebrate deposits, traces, or trackways are also classified as significant. II. Low Potential (sensitivity) – Sedimentary rock units that are potentially fossiliferous, but have not yielded fossils in the past or contain common and/or widespread invertebrate fossils of well documented and understood taphonomic, phylogenetic species and habitat ecology. Reports in the paleontological literature or field surveys by a qualified vertebrate paleontologist may allow determination that some areas or units have low potentials for yielding significant fossils prior to the start of construction. Generally, these units will be poorly represented by specimens in institutional collections and will not require protection or salvage operations. However, as excavation for construction gets underway it is possible that significant and unanticipated paleontological resources might be encountered and require a change of classification from Low to High Potential and, thus, require monitoring and mitigation if the resources are found to be significant. III. Undetermined Potential (sensitivity) – Specific areas underlain by sedimentary rock units for which little information is available are considered to have undetermined fossiliferous potentials. Field surveys by a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to specifically determine the potentials of the rock units are required before programs of impact mitigation for such areas may be developed. IV. No Potential – Rock units of metamorphic or igneous origin are commonly classified as having no potential for containing significant paleontological resources. b. Thresholds of Significance. The following significance criteria associated with cultural resources have been adapted from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. An impact to cultural resources would be considered significant if the proposed project would: • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, PRC 21083.2, or 36 CFR 60.4; • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resources pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5; • Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature; • Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 defines a “substantial adverse change” as demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings. Since no historical resources are present on site, the first threshold is not discussed further in this section. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 126 c. Impacts Statements and Mitigation Threshold Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? Impact CR-1 Construction of the proposed project would involve ground- disturbing activities which have the potential to unearth or adversely impact archaeological resources. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. The results of the cultural resource records search yielded one previously recorded archaeological resource (P-40-001449) within the project APE. Resource P-40-001449 was partially excavated and removed during an expansion of the WRRF in 1992. The artifacts were associated with the San Luis Obispo Dump which operated roughly from 1900 to 1940. Although the site was not evaluated for CRHR or NRHP listing, it was noted that the site lacked integrity with components compacted, mixed, and burned. Associated materials were removed from the project APE and dumped at the west end of the San Luis Obispo airport, which is located outside of the APE. During the removal of P-40-001449, it was noted that deposits from P-40-001449 may still exist within the WRRF along San Luis Obispo Creek and may expand immediately beyond the excavated area. Currently, the excavated site location falls under standing facilities and pavement. No evidence of P-40-001449 can be seen on the surface, but remaining deposits may exist under the existing pavement and facilities. During the previous investigation of the site (Singer et al. 1993), it was suggested that any future demolition of older facilities within the WRRF expect to encounter additional deposits related to P-40-001449. Construction of the proposed project would involve ground-disturbing activities. No surface expression of P-40-0011449 was identified during the archaeological survey, and no other archaeological resources were identified during the records search or survey. However, ground- disturbing construction activities would still have the potential to unearth or adversely impact any remaining portions of P-40-0011449 or previously unidentified archaeological resources. The Native American consultation suggested the area surrounding the project APE may be sensitive for buried cultural materials due to the proximity of the project APE to San Luis Obispo Creek. Portions of the APE along the creek may also have a greater sensitivity for subsurface prehistoric cultural materials. Ground disturbing activities within and around the creek bed have the potential to unearth previously unidentified prehistoric archaeological resources. If human remains are unearthed, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner (depending on the jurisdiction in which the discovery occurs) has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the NAHC. The NAHC would then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent (MLD) of the deceased Native American, who would then help determine what course of action should be taken in dealing with the remains. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 127 Mitigation Measures. The following measures would reduce impact CR-1 to a less than significant level. CR-1(a) WEAP Training. Prior to project construction, the applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for historic archaeology to conduct a Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) for all construction personnel working on the project. The training shall include an overview of potential cultural resources that could be encountered during ground disturbing activities to facilitate worker recognition, avoidance, and notification to a qualified archaeologist in the event of unanticipated discoveries. The Native American monitor shall also be present at the WEAP training to provide the Native American perspective on cultural resources and potential project-related impacts, and to receive information regarding the project schedule, roles and responsibilities, and mitigation measures CR-1(b) Archaeological and Native American Monitoring. Prior to project construction the applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative to conduct archaeological monitoring of all project related ground disturbing activities within 200 feet of the creek bed. Archaeological monitoring should be performed under the direction of an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983). The duration and timing of monitoring shall be determined by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City and based on the grading plans and level of previous disturbance within work areas. If archaeological resources are encountered during ground- disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and the find be evaluated for significance under Section 106 of the NHPA and CEQA. CR-1(c) Discovery of Archaeological Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during project construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. Evaluation of significance for the find may include the determination of whether or not the find qualifies as an archaeological site. Isolated finds do not qualify as historical resources under CEQA or historic properties under the NHPA and require no management consideration under either regulation. Should any resource(s) be identified, an evaluation of eligibility for the CRHR and NRHP may be required through the development of a treatment plan including a research design and subsurface testing through the excavation of test units and shovel test pits. After effects to the find have Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 128 been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Mitigation of significant impacts or adverse effects to the find may include a damage assessment of the find, archival research, and/or data recovery to remove any identified archaeological deposits, as determined by a qualified archaeologist. CR-1(d) Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the San Luis Obispo County coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Significance After Mitigation. Through the WEAP training prior to ground disturbing activities, monitoring of any ground disturbing activities within and around the creek bed, and evaluation of any previously unidentified archaeological resources, implementation of CR-1(a), CR-1(b), and CR-1(c) would reduce impacts to archaeological resources to a less than significant level. Threshold Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Impact CR-2 Construction of the proposed project would involve ground- disturbing activities which have the potential to unearth or adversely impact paleontological resources. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. The project area contains one mapped unit, which has low paleontological potential (sensitivity); middle to early Holocene young alluvium (Qya2). At the surface, this young alluvium is likely older than 5,000 years, and as such, could contain fossils. However, much of the project site is highly disturbed by past construction-related activities and so consists of artificial fill to unknown depths, which is unlikely to contain fossils. Throughout the entire project area all native sediments become older with depth (e.g., Pleistocene and older), where paleontological sensitivity becomes high. Pleistocene alluvium has a record of abundant and diverse vertebrate fauna throughout California (Agenbroad 2003; Macias et al. 2014; Springer et al. 2009) and is generally considered to have high paleontological sensitivity wherever it occurs. Overall, ground disturbance associated with the construction of the proposed project has a low potential to directly disturb Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 129 geologic units with high paleontological sensitivity across the entire project site, even below approximately five feet. Impacts to paleontological resources resulting from ground disturbing construction activity could include the destruction of fossils, and would be considered a significant impact without mitigation. Mitigation Measures. The following measures would reduce impact CR-2 to a less than significant level. CR-2(a) Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Program. Prior to construction activity a qualified paleontologist should prepare a Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Program to be implemented during project ground disturbance activity. This program should be based on the final project plans to identify specific areas where ground disturbing activity has the potential to impact scientifically significant paleontological resources and include the following details: 1) Outline the procedures for construction staff Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training; 2) Specify the extent, location and duration of paleontological monitoring based on proposed construction activity; 3) Specify the procedures for salvage and preparation of fossils; 4) Require a final mitigation and monitoring report; and 5) Specify the qualifications of a qualified paleontologist and paleontological monitors. CR-2(b) Paleontological WEAP. Prior to the start of construction, construction personnel should be informed on the appearance of fossils and the procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction staff. CR-2(c) Paleontological Monitoring. Any excavations exceeding five feet in depth, including those in the young alluvium, should be monitored according to the specifications outlined in the PMMP. At a minimum, paleontological monitoring should be sufficient to evaluate the potential of newly exposed geologic units to contain fossils. If the qualified paleontologist determines that geologic units are unlikely to yield significant paleontological resources, monitoring may be discontinued. If ground disturbance activity is initiated in a new area or to a deeper depth than previous excavations, paleontological monitoring should be re-initiated. Monitoring should be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor as specified in the PMMP. Ground disturbing activity Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.3 Cultural Resources City of San Luis Obispo 130 that does not exceed five feet in depth in young alluvium would not require paleontological monitoring. CR-2(d) Salvage of Fossils. If fossils are discovered, the qualified paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) should recover them. Typically fossils can be safely salvaged quickly by a single paleontologist and not disrupt construction activity. In some cases larger fossils (such as complete skeletons or large mammal fossils) require more extensive excavation and longer salvage periods. In this case the paleontologist should have the authority to temporarily direct, divert or halt construction activity to ensure that the fossil(s) can be removed in a safe and timely manner. CR-2(e) Preparation and Curation of Recovered Fossils. Once salvaged, fossils should be identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection (such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology or the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History), along with all pertinent field notes, photos, data, and maps. CR-2(f) Final Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Report. Upon completion of ground disturbing activity (and curation of fossils if necessary) the qualified paleontologist should prepare a final mitigation and monitoring report outlining the results of the mitigation and monitoring program. The report should include discussion of the location, duration and methods of the monitoring, stratigraphic sections, any recovered fossils, and the scientific significance of those fossils, and where fossils were curated. Significance After Mitigation. Implementation of CR-1(a) through CR-1(f) would reduce impacts to paleontological resources to a less than significant level. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 131 3.4 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 3.4.1 Setting a. Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases. Climate change is an observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans along with other substantial changes in climate (such as wind patterns, precipitation, and storms) over an extended period of time. The term “climate change” is preferred to “global warming” because it helps convey that there are other changes in addition to rising temperatures. The baseline against which these changes are measured originates in historical records identifying temperature changes that have occurred in the past, such as during previous ice ages. The global climate is continuously changing, as evidenced by repeated episodes of substantial warming and cooling documented in the geologic record. The rate of change has typically been incremental, with warming or cooling trends occurring over the course of thousands of years. The past 10,000 years have been marked by a period of incremental warming, as glaciers have steadily retreated across the globe. However, scientists have observed acceleration in the rate of warming during the past 150 years. Per the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2013), the understanding of anthropogenic warming and cooling influences on climate has led to a high confidence (95% or greater chance) that the global average net effect of human activities has been the dominant cause of warming since the mid-20th century (IPCC, 2013). Gases that absorb and re-emit infrared radiation in the atmosphere are called greenhouse gases (GHGs). GHGs are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human induced climate change include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxides (N2O), fluorinated gases such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation. GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are largely by- products of fossil fuel combustion, whereas CH4 results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Man-made GHGs, many of which have greater heat absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases and SF6 (California Environmental Protection Agency [CalEPA], 2006). Different types of GHGs have varying global warming potentials (GWPs). The GWP of a GHG is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Because GHGs absorb different amounts of heat, a common reference gas (CO2) is used to relate the amount of heat absorbed to the amount of the gas emissions, referred to as “carbon dioxide equivalent” (CO2E), and is the amount of a GHG emitted multiplied by its GWP. Carbon dioxide has a GWP of one. By contrast, methane CH4, has a GWP of 21, meaning its global warming effect is 21 times greater than carbon dioxide on a molecule per molecule basis (IPCC, 1997). The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the earth’s temperature. Without the natural heat trapping effect of GHG, Earth’s surface would be about 34°C cooler (CalEPA, 2006). However, it is believed that emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 132 fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond the level of naturally occurring concentrations. The following discusses the primary GHGs of concern. Carbon Dioxide. The global carbon cycle is made up of large carbon flows and reservoirs. Billions of tons of carbon in the form of CO2 are absorbed by oceans and living biomass (i.e., sinks) and are emitted to the atmosphere annually through natural processes (i.e., sources). When in equilibrium, carbon fluxes among these various reservoirs are roughly balanced (USEPA, April 2012). CO2 was the first GHG demonstrated to be increasing in atmospheric concentration, with the first conclusive measurements being made in the last half of the 20th Century. Concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere have risen approximately 40% since the industrial revolution. The global atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased from a pre- industrial value of about 280 parts per million (ppm) to 391 ppm in 2011 (IPCC, 2007; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association [NOAA], 2015). The average annual CO2 concentration growth rate was larger between 1995 and 2005 (average: 1.9 ppm per year) than it has been since the beginning of continuous direct atmospheric measurements (1960–2005 average: 1.4 ppm per year), although there is year-to-year variability in growth rates (NOAA, 2015). Currently, CO2 represents an estimated 82.8% of total GHG emissions (DOE, August 2010). The largest source of CO2, and of overall GHG emissions, is fossil fuel combustion. Methane. Methane (CH4) is an effective absorber of radiation, though its atmospheric concentration is less than that of CO2 and its lifetime in the atmosphere is limited to 10 to 12 years. It has a global warming potential (GWP) approximately 21 times that of CO2. Over the last 250 years, the concentration of CH4 in the atmosphere has increased by 148% (IPCC, 2007), although emissions have declined from 1990 levels. Anthropogenic sources of CH4 include enteric fermentation associated with domestic livestock, landfills, natural gas and petroleum systems, agricultural activities, coal mining, wastewater treatment, stationary and mobile combustion, and certain industrial processes (USEPA, April 2012). Nitrous Oxide. Concentrations of nitrous oxide (N2O) began to rise at the beginning of the industrial revolution and continue to increase at a relatively uniform growth rate (NOAA, 2015). N2O is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those reactions that occur in fertilizers that contain nitrogen, fossil fuel combustion, and other chemical processes. Use of these fertilizers has increased over the last century. Agricultural soil management and mobile source fossil fuel combustion are major sources of N2O emissions. The GWP of nitrous oxide is approximately 310 times that of CO2. Fluorinated Gases (HFCS, PFCS, and SF6). Fluorinated gases, such as HFCs, PFCs, and SF6, are powerful GHGs that are emitted from a variety of industrial processes. Fluorinated gases are used as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), and halons, which have been regulated since the mid-1980s because of their ozone-destroying potential and are phased out under the Montreal Protocol (1987) and Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Electrical transmission and distribution systems account for most SF6 emissions, while PFC emissions result from semiconductor manufacturing and as a by-product of primary aluminum production. Fluorinated gases are typically emitted in smaller quantities than CO2, CH4, and N2O, but these compounds have much higher GWPs. SF6 is the most potent GHG the IPCC has evaluated. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 133 b. Statewide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory. Worldwide anthropogenic emissions of GHGs were approximately 40,000 million metric tons (MMT) CO2E in 2004, including ongoing emissions from industrial and agricultural sources, but excluding emissions from land use changes (i.e., deforestation, biomass decay) (IPCC, 2007). CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use accounts for 56.6% of the total emissions of 49,000 MMT CO2E (includes land use changes) and CO2 emissions from all sources account for 76.7% of the total. Methane emissions account for 14.3% of GHGs and N2O emissions account for 7.9% (IPCC, 2007). Total U.S. GHG emissions were 6,821.8 MMT CO2E in 2009 (USEPA, April 2012). Total U.S. emissions have increased by 10.5% since 1990; emissions rose by 3.2% from 2009 to 2010 (USEPA, April 2012). This increase was primarily due to (1) an increase in economic output resulting in an increase in energy consumption across all sectors; and (2) much warmer summer conditions resulting in an increase in electricity demand for air conditioning. Since 1990, U.S. emissions have increased at an average annual rate of 0.5%. In 2010, the transportation and industrial end-use sectors accounted for 32% and 26% of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, respectively. Meanwhile, the residential and commercial end-use sectors accounted for 22% and 19% of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, respectively (USEPA, April 2012). Based upon the California Air Resources Board (ARB) California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2000-2009 (ARB, 2012), California produced 453 MMT CO2E in 2009. The major source of GHG in California is transportation, contributing 38% of the state’s total GHG emissions. Electricity generation is the second largest source, contributing 23% of the state’s GHG emissions (ARB, 2012). California emissions are due in part to its large size and large population compared to other states. However, a factor that reduces California’s per capita fuel use and GHG emissions, as compared to other states, is its relatively mild climate. The ARB has projected statewide unregulated GHG emissions for the year 2020 will be 507 MMT CO2E (ARB, April 2012). These projections represent the emissions that would be expected to occur in the absence of any GHG reduction actions. c. Potential Effects of Climate Change. Globally, climate change has the potential to affect numerous environmental resources through potential impacts related to future air temperatures and precipitation patterns. Scientific modeling predicts that continued GHG emissions at or above current rates would induce more extreme climate changes during the 21st century than were observed during the 20th century. Scientists have projected that the average global surface temperature could rise by1.0-4.5°F (0.6-2.5°C) in the next 50 years, and the increase may be as high as 2.2-10°F (1.4-5.8°C) in the next century. In addition to these projections, there are identifiable signs that global warming is currently taking place, including substantial ice loss in the Arctic (IPCC, 2007). According to CalEPA’s 2010 Climate Action Team Biennial Report, potential impacts of climate change in California may include loss in snow pack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more high ozone days, more large forest fires, and more drought years (CalEPA, 2010). Below is a summary of some of the potential effects that could be experienced in California as a result of climate change. Sea Level Rise. According to The Impacts of Sea-Level Rise on the California Coast, prepared by the California Climate Change Center (CCCC) (May 2009), climate change has the potential Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 134 to induce substantial sea level rise in the coming century. The rising sea level increases the likelihood and risk of flooding. The study identifies a sea level rise on the California coast over the past century of approximately eight inches. Based on the results of various climate change models, sea level rise is expected to continue. The California Climate Adaptation Strategy (California Natural Resources Agency, 2009) estimates a sea level rise of up to 55 inches by the end of this century. Air Quality. Higher temperatures, which are conducive to air pollution formation, could worsen air quality in California. Climate change may increase the concentration of ground-level ozone, but the magnitude of the effect, and therefore its indirect effects, are uncertain. If higher temperatures are accompanied by drier conditions, the potential for large wildfires could increase, which, in turn, would further worsen air quality. However, if higher temperatures are accompanied by wetter, rather than drier conditions, the rains would tend to temporarily clear the air of particulate pollution and reduce the incidence of large wildfires, thereby ameliorating the pollution associated with wildfires. Additionally, severe heat accompanied by drier conditions and poor air quality could increase the number of heat-related deaths, illnesses, and certain asthmas attacks throughout the state (CEC, 2009). Water Supply. Analysis of paleoclimatic data (such as tree-ring reconstructions of stream flow and precipitation) indicates a history of naturally and widely varying hydrologic conditions in California and the west, including a pattern of recurring and extended droughts. Uncertainty remains with respect to the overall impact of climate change on future water supplies in California. However, the average early spring snowpack in the Sierra Nevada decreased by about 10% during the last century, a loss of 1.5 million acre-feet of snowpack storage. During the same period, sea level rose eight inches along California’s coast. California’s temperature has risen 1°F, mostly at night and during the winter, with higher elevations experiencing the highest increase. Many Southern California cities have experienced their lowest recorded annual precipitation twice within the past decade. In a span of only two years, Los Angeles experienced both its driest and wettest years on record (California Department of Water Resources [DWR], 2008; CCCC, 2009) This uncertainty complicates the analysis of future water demand, especially where the relationship between climate change and its potential effect on water demand is not well understood. The Sierra snowpack provides the majority of California’s water supply by accumulating snow during wet winters and releasing it slowly when we need it during dry springs and summers. Based upon historical data and modeling, DWR projects that the Sierra snowpack will experience a 25 to 40% reduction from its historic average by 2050. Climate change is also anticipated to bring warmer storms that result in less snowfall at lower elevations, reducing the total snowpack (DWR, 2008). Hydrology. As discussed above, climate change could potentially affect the amount of snowfall, rainfall, and snowpack; the intensity and frequency of storms; flood hydrographs (flash floods, rain or snow events, coincidental high tide and high runoff events); sea level rise and coastal flooding; coastal erosion; and the potential for salt water intrusion. Sea level rise may be a product of climate change through two main processes: expansion of sea water as the oceans warm and melting of ice over land. A rise in sea levels could jeopardize California’s Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 135 water supply due to salt water intrusion. Increased storm intensity and frequency could affect the ability of flood-control facilities, including levees, to handle storm events. Agriculture. California has a $30 billion agricultural industry that produces half of the country’s fruits and vegetables. Higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water-use efficiency. However, if temperatures rise and drier conditions prevail, water demand could increase; crop-yield could be threatened by a less reliable water supply; and greater air pollution could render plants more susceptible to pest and disease outbreaks. In addition, temperature increases could change the time of year certain crops, such as wine grapes, bloom or ripen, and thereby affect their quality (CCCC, 2006). Ecosystems and Wildlife. Climate change and the potential resulting changes in weather patterns could have ecological effects on a global and local scale. Increasing concentrations of GHGs are likely to accelerate the rate of climate change. Scientists project that the average global surface temperature could rise by 1.0-4.5°F (0.6-2.5°C) in the next 50 years, and 2.2-10°F (1.4-5.8°C) in the next century, with substantial regional variation. Soil moisture is likely to decline in many regions, and intense rainstorms are likely to become more frequent. d. Local Effects of Climate Change. While the above discussion identifies the possible effects of climate change at a global and potentially statewide level, current scientific modeling tools are unable to predict what local impacts may occur with a similar degree of accuracy. In general, regional and local predictions are made based on downscaling statewide models (CalEPA, 2010). The project site is located in an inland area, so while some of the above effects of climate change may apply to the proposed project, potential sea level rise would not affect the project site. 3.4.2 Regulatory Framework a. International. The United States is, and has been, a participant in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) since it was produced by the United Nations in 1992. The UNFCCC is an international environmental treaty with the objective of, “stabilization of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” This is generally understood to be achieved by stabilizing global GHG concentrations between 350 and 400 ppm, in order to limit the global average temperature increases between 2 and 2.4°C above pre-industrial levels (IPCC 2007). The UNFCCC itself does not set limits on GHG emissions for individual countries or enforcement mechanisms. Instead, the treaty provides for updates, called “protocols,” that would identify mandatory emissions limits. Five years later, the UNFCCC brought nations together again to draft the Kyoto Protocol (1997). The Kyoto Protocol established commitments for industrialized nations to reduce their collective emissions of six GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6, HFCs, and PFCs) to 5.2 % below 1990 levels by 2012. The United States is a signatory of the Kyoto Protocol, but Congress has not ratified it and the United States has not bound itself to the Protocol’s commitments (UNFCCC, 2007). The first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol ended in 2012. Governments, including 38 industrialized countries, agreed to a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol beginning January 1, 2013 and ending either on December 31, 2017 or December 31, Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 136 2020, to be decided by the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol at its seventeenth session (UNFCCC, November 2011). From November 30, 2015 to December 12, 2015, Paris hosted the 21st session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 21) to the UNFCCC and the 11th session of the meeting of the parties to the Kyoto Protocol. On the last day of the conference the parties reached a new global agreement to limit the rise in average global temperature to well below 2°C, with 1.5°C being the ideal benchmark. The final draft of the agreement outlines the various measures that need to be made by each country. To ensure progress and to enforce the individual goals set for each country, delegates are legally required to meet up again in 2023, and then every five years following, with new reduction targets for emissions to be evaluated by the committee (UNFCCC, 2015). b. Federal. The United States if currently using a voluntary and incentive-based approach toward emissions reductions in lieu of the Kyoto Protocol’s mandatory framework. The Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP) is a multi-agency research and development coordination effort (led by the Secretaries of Energy and Commerce) that is charged with carrying out the President’s National Climate Change Technology Initiative (USEPA, 2007). However the voluntary approach to address climate change and greenhouse gas emissions may be changing. The United States Supreme Court in Massachusetts et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al. ([2007] 549 U.S. 05-1120) held that the USEPA has the authority to regulate motor- vehicle GHG emissions under the federal Clean Air Act. The USEPA issued a Final Rule for mandatory reporting of GHG emissions for facilities that emit more than 25,000 metric tons (MT) of CO2E per year in October 2009. This Final Rule applies to fossil fuel suppliers, industrial gas suppliers, direct GHG emitters, and manufacturers of heavy-duty and off-road vehicles and vehicle engines, and requires annual reporting of emissions. The first annual reports for these sources were due in March 2011. Additionally, the reporting of emissions is required for owners of SF6- and PFC-insulated equipment when the total nameplate capacity of these insulating gases is above 17,280 pounds. On May 13, 2010, the USEPA issued a Final Rule that took effect on January 2, 2011, setting a threshold of 75,000 MT CO2E per year for GHG emissions. New and existing industrial facilities that meet or exceed that threshold require a permit after that date. On November 10, 2010, the USEPA published the “PSD and Title V Permitting Guidance for Greenhouse Gases.” The USEPA’s guidance document is directed at state agencies responsible for air pollution permits under the Federal Clean Air Act to help them understand how to implement GHG reduction requirements while mitigating costs for industry. On January 2, 2011, the USEPA implemented the first phase of the Tailoring Rule for GHG emissions Title V Permitting. Under the first phase of the Tailoring Rule, all new sources of emissions are subject to GHG Title V permitting if they are otherwise subject to Title V for another air pollutant and they emit at least 75,000 MT CO2E per year. Under Phase 1, no sources were required to obtain a Title V permit solely due to GHG emissions. Phase 2 of the Tailoring Rule went into effect July, 1, 2011. At that time new sources were subject to GHG Title V permitting if the source emits 100,000 MT CO2E per year, or they are otherwise subject to Title V permitting for another pollutant and emit a least 75,000 MT CO2E per year. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 137 c. State. CARB is responsible for the coordination and oversight of State and local air pollution control programs in California. Various statewide and local initiatives to reduce the State’s contribution to GHG emissions have raised awareness about climate change and its potential for severe long-term adverse environmental, social, and economic effects. Assembly Bill (AB) 1493 (2002), referred to as “Pavley,” requires CARB to develop and adopt regulations to achieve “the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions from motor vehicles.” On June 30, 2009, USEPA granted the waiver of Clean Air Act preemption to California for its greenhouse gas emission standards for motor vehicles beginning with the 2009 model year. Pavley I took effect for model years starting in 2009 to 2016 and Pavley II, which is now referred to as “LEV (Low Emission Vehicle) III GHG” will cover 2017 to 2025. Fleet average emission standards would reach 22% reduction by 2012 and 30% by 2016. In 2005, former Governor Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, establishing statewide GHG emissions reduction targets. EOS-3-05 provides that by 2010, emissions shall be reduced to 2000 levels; by 2020, emissions shall be reduced to 1990 levels; and by 2050, emissions shall be reduced to 80% of 1990 levels (CalEPA, 2006). In response to EOS-3-05, CalEPA created the Climate Action Team (CAT), which in March 2006 published the Climate Action Team Report (the “2006 CAT Report”) (CalEPA, 2006). The 2006 CAT Report identified a recommended list of strategies that the state could pursue to reduce GHG emissions. These are strategies that could be implemented by various state agencies to ensure that the emission reduction targets in EOS-3-05 are met and can be met with existing authority of the state agencies. The strategies include the reduction of passenger and light duty truck emissions, the reduction of idling times for diesel trucks, and overhaul of shipping technology/infrastructure, increased use of alternative fuels, increased recycling, and landfill methane capture, etc. California’s major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is outlined in Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” signed into law in 2006. AB 32 codifies the Statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (essentially a 15% reduction below 2005 emission levels; the same requirement und S-3-05), and requires ARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main State strategies for reducing GHGs to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, AB 32 requires CARB to adopt regulations to require reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. After completing a comprehensive review and update process, the ARB approved a 1990 statewide GHG level and 2020 limit of 427 MMT CO2E. The Scoping Plan was approved by ARB on December 11, 2008, and includes measures to address GHG emission reduction strategies related to energy efficiency, water use, and recycling and solid waste, among other measures. The Scoping Plan includes a range of GHG reduction actions that may include direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, and market based mechanisms. Executive Order S-01-07 was enacted on January 18, 2007. The order mandates that a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) for transportation fuels be established for California to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by at least 10% by 2020. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 138 Senate Bill (SB) 97, signed in August 2007, acknowledges that climate change is an environmental issue that requires analysis in CEQA documents. In March 2010, the California Resources Agency (Resources Agency) adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. The adopted guidelines give lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHGs and climate change impacts. ARB Resolution 07-54 establishes 25,000 metric tons of GHG emissions as the threshold for identifying the largest stationary emission sources in California for purposes of requiring the annual reporting of emissions. This threshold is just over 0.005% of California’s total inventory of GHG emissions for 2004. SB 375, signed in August 2008, enhances the State’s ability to reach AB 32 goals by directing ARB to develop regional greenhouse gas emission reduction targets to be achieved from vehicles for 2020 and 2035. In addition, SB 375 directs each of the state’s 18 major Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to prepare a “sustainable communities strategy” (SCS) that contains a growth strategy to meet these emission targets for inclusion in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). On September 23, 2010, CARB adopted final regional targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 and 2035. The San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) was assigned targets of an 8% reduction in GHGs from transportation sources from 2005 levels by 2020 and an 8% reduction in GHGs from transportation sources from 2005 levels by 2035. Renewables Portfolio Standards (RPS) pursuant to SB 1038, SB 1078, SB 1250, and SB 107 requires retail sellers of electricity to increase the amount of renewable energy they procure each year by at least 1% until 20% of their retail sales are served with renewable energy. • Senate Bill 1038 (Chapter 515, Statutes of 2002). The pertinent provisions of SB 1038 were formerly codified in Public Utilities Code Sections 383.5 and 445, but are now codified in Public Resources Code Sections 25740 through 25751 as a result of Senate Bill 183 (Chapter 666, Statutes of 2003). • Senate Bill 1078; Chapter 516, Statutes of 2002. The pertinent provisions of SB 1078 are codified in Public Utilities Code Section 399.11 through 399.15. This law was subsequently amended to add Sections 399.16, 399.17, and 399.12.5 under Senate Bill 67 (Chapter 731, Statutes of 2003), Assembly Bill 200 (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2005), and Assembly Bill 2189 (Chapter 747, Statutes of 2006), respectively. • Senate Bill 1250; Chapter 512, Statutes of 2006. SB 1250 amends pertinent provisions in Public Resources Code Sections 25740 through 25751 • Senate Bill 107; Chapter 464, Statutes of 2006. SB 107 amends pertinent provisions in Public Resources Code Sections 25740 through 25751 and Public Utilities Code Sections 399.11 through 399.16 In early 2010, CARB adopted a regulation for reducing SF6 emissions from electric power system gas-insulated switchgear (17 CCR 95350). SF6 gas is commonly used as an arc quenching and insulating medium for high and medium voltage switchgear systems used in electrical substations. The regulation requires owners of such switchgear to: (1) annually report their SF6 emissions; (2) determine the emission rate relative to the SF6 capacity of the switchgear; (3) Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 139 provide a complete inventory of all gas-insulated switchgear and their SF6 capacities; (4) produce a SF6 gas container inventory; and (5) keep all information current for CARB enforcement staff inspection and verification. Changes to the switching station owned by PG&E and any gas insulated switchgear associated with the project would be subject to this regulation. In April 2011, Governor Brown signed SB 2X requiring California to generate 33% of its electricity from renewable energy by 2020. For more information on the Senate and Assembly bills, Executive Orders, and reports discussed above, and to view reports and research referenced above, please refer to the following websites: http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/ and www.arb.ca.gov/cc/cc.htm. Pursuant to the requirements of SB 97, the Resources Agency has adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. As noted previously, the adopted State CEQA Guidelines provide general regulatory guidance on the analysis and mitigation of GHG emissions in CEQA documents, while giving lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHGs and climate change impacts. To date, the SLOAPCD and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) have adopted quantitative significance thresholds for GHGs. d. Local. SLOAPCD adopted the 2001 Clean Air Plan (APCD, 2002), which outlines the SLOAPCD’s strategies to reduce ozone precursor emissions from a wide variety of stationary and mobile sources. In 2012, the City of San Luis Obispo adopted the City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan (CAP) (City of San Luis Obispo, 2012). The CAP identifies strategies to reduce GHG emissions in order to meet the City’s GHG reduction goals. The CAP sets a target of 1990 emissions levels by 2020, a 22% reduction from projected business-as-usual. 3.4.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures a. Methodology for Analysis. Calculations of CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions are provided to identify the magnitude of potential project effects. The analysis focuses on CO2, CH4, and N2O because these comprise 98.9% of all GHG emissions by volume (IPCC, 2007) and are the GHG emissions that the project would emit in the largest quantities. Fluorinated gases, such as HFCs, PFCs, and SF6, were also considered for the analysis. However, fluorinated gases are primarily associated with industrial processes. Emissions of all GHGs are converted into their equivalent weight in CO2 (CO2E). Minimal amounts of other main GHGs (such as chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs]) would be emitted; however, these other GHG emissions would not substantially add to the calculated CO2E amounts. Construction Emissions. In order to estimate the annual emissions that would result from construction activity associated with the project, GHGs from construction projects are quantified and amortized over the life of the project. The amortized construction emissions are added to the annual average operational emissions and then compared to the operational thresholds in SLOAPCD’s CEQA Handbook (Section 3.5.1, Significance Thresholds for Project Level Operational Emissions). To amortize the emissions over the life of the project, the total GHG emissions for the construction activities are calculated, divided by the project life then added to the annual operational phase GHG emissions. The estimated useful life of the project Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 140 is 25 years. CalEEMod software was used to estimate emissions associated with short-term construction equipment operating on the site. Operational Emissions. Operational emissions would result from increased energy use from stationary equipment, biogenic processes from increased volume of wastewater flow, and backup generator testing and use. No increase in GHG emissions from mobile sources is expected, as the proposed project would not increase vendor or employee trips. Emissions from stationary operational equipment and backup generator were estimated using CalEEMod intensity factors from CO2, CH4, and N2O. Emissions from biogenic processes were estimated using the equations provided in the CalEEMod User Guide Appendix A for wastewater processes (anaerobic) (CAPCOA, 2013). Emissions from the testing and use of backup generators were estimated using performance data from a CAT2000KW 3516C generator and a CAT1000KW C32 generator. b. Threshold of Significance. Pursuant to the requirements of SB 97, the Resources Agency adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions of the effects of GHG emissions in March 2010. Section 15064.4, subdivision (b), and Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines provide guidance regarding the criteria that may be used to assess whether a project’s impacts on climate change are significant. These guidelines are used in evaluating the cumulative significance of GHG emissions from the proposed project. According to the adopted State CEQA Guidelines, impacts related to GHG emissions from the proposed project would be significant if the project would: 29. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; and/or 30. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. The vast majority of individual projects do not generate sufficient GHG emissions to create a project-specific impact through a direct influence to climate change; therefore, the issue of climate change typically involves an analysis of whether a project’s contribution towards an impact is cumulatively considerable. “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15355). For future projects, the significance of GHG emissions may be evaluated based on locally adopted quantitative thresholds, or consistency with a regional GHG reduction plan (such as a Climate Action Plan). For waste water treatment plants, Tthe SLOAPCD adopted a quantitative emissions threshold of 1,150 10,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2E) per year for most land use projects. Therefore, the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to GHG emissions and climate change would be cumulatively considerable if the project would produce more than 1,150 10,000 MT CO2E per year. In addition, a project that contributes to a net decrease in GHG emissions and is consistent with the reduction goals of AB 32 is presumed to have less than significant GHG impact. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 141 c. Impact Statements and Mitigation Discussions Threshold Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Impact GHG-1 The proposed project would generate greenhouse gas emissions through construction, increased energy use, increased biogenic processes as a result of the increased wastewater capacity, and testing of emergency diesel generators. The increased emissions would be below the SLOAPCD threshold for annual greenhouse gas emissions, therefore impacts would be Class III, less than significant. Construction GHG Analysis. Project related GHG emissions would occur throughout the four phases of construction. Emissions would be generated over four years, 2017-2020, and would total 1,253 MT per year, as shown in Table 3.4-1. Construction emissions are broken down by the four phases of construction, based on the WRRF Facilities Plan, and provide an estimate of the worst reasonable-case scenario. The likelihood that the worst emissions from each phase would occur at the same time is low, as it would require all of the most intense parts of construction to occur concurrently. This would require additional equipment, in place of sharing equipment amongst phases. As a result, the four phases modeled represent a worst reasonable-case scenario for construction emissions and would represent the maximum level of impacts even with a variation in schedule. Construction emissions were amortized over the expected life of the project, 25 years, per the SLOAPCD CEQA Handbook. Table 3.4-1 Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions CO2E Emissions by Phase Phase Year CO2E (MT/yr) Phase 1 2017 71 2018 251 Phase 2 2018 119 2019 330 2020 5 Phase 3 2019 205 2020 245 Phase 4 2020 27 Total CO2E 1,253 Total CO2E Emissions Amortized over 25 years 50.12 CO2E Emissions by Year Year CO2E MT/yr 2017 71 2018 370 2019 535 2020 277 See CalEEMod Results, Appendix B Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 142 Operational Emissions. Operation of the proposed project would generate greenhouse gases through an increase in energy use from stationary equipment, increased biogenic processes resulting from an increased volume of wastewater, and the testing of emergency diesel generators. Stationary Operational Equipment. Operations equipment at the WRRF is all electrically powered. The Facilities Plan (City of San Luis Obispo, 2015) states that the average annual electricity use is currently 5,800 Megawatt-hours (MWh)/year and estimates that, at buildout, energy use would be 6,382 MWh/year. This is an increase of 582 MWh/year. The GHG emissions associated with the increased energy use were calculated using Southern California Edison Energy Intensity factors from CalEEMod. Results are shown below in Table 3.4-2, calculations are available in Appendix B. Table 3.4-2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Stationary Equipment Pollutant Emissions (lb/year) Emissions CO2E (MT/year)* CO2 367,178 166.6 CH4 17 0.16 N2O 3.6 0 Total CO2E Emissions from Stationary Equipment 166.6 *CO2E was calculated using a GWP of 21 for CH4 and a GWP of 310 for N2O Biogenic Processes. The proposed project would increase wastewater capacity at the WRRF to 5.4 million gallons per day (mgd). Currently, the WRRF has a capacity of 5.1 mgd and has a current average dry weather flow of 3.5 mgd. The current average dry weather flow of 3.5 mgd was used for baseline emissions, resulting in a conservative estimate of 1.9 mgd increase of wastewater flow. This increased volume of wastewater would result in a proportional increase in emissions of CH4 from anaerobic digestion of wastewater, CO2 from combustion of biogas, and N2O from discharge. As discussed in Section 3.4.1(a), CO2 and CH4, are two of the main greenhouse gases contributing to climate change. GHG emissions from biogenic processes were calculated using methods described in Section 8 of Appendix A to the CalEEMod User Guide (Calculation Details). Results are shown below in Table 3.4-3, calculations are available in Appendix B. Table 3.4-3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Biogenic Processes Pollutant Emissions (MT/year) MT CO2E/year* CH4 0.23 4.86 CO2 0.67 0.67 N2O 0.15 45.5 Total CO2E Emissions from Biogenic Processes 51 *CO2E was calculated using a GWP of 21 for CH4 and a GWP of 310 for N2O Backup Generators. Two new diesel backup generators (2000KW and 1000KW) would be tested monthly at ¼ standby and annually at ½ standby. Additionally, a worst case scenario is assumed to occur once per year, in which PG&E would experience a power outage. In this case, the backup generators would run for an average of 114 minutes (1.9 hours). The CO2 emissions Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 143 for the testing and worst case scenario running of the backup generators are shown below in Table 3.4-4, calculations are available in Appendix B. Table 3.4-4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Backup Generators CO2 Emissions (metric tons/year) 2000 KW Generator Annual Testing 4.36 1000 KW Generator Annual Testing 2.19 Worst Case Scenario (1000 KW and 2000 KW Generator) 3.30 Total CO2 Emissions from Backup Generators 9.85 See Appendix B for calculations. Performance data was sourced from CAT 2000KW 3516C GenSet (Milton Cat, 2015a) and CAT 1000KW C32 GenSet (Milton Cat, 2015b) Total Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Total annual GHG emissions are the summation of yearly emissions from the amortized construction, stationary equipment, biogenic processes, and backup generators. Total emissions are shown below in Table 3.4-5. Table 3.4-5 Total Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emissions Source CO2E (metric tons/year) Amortized Construction 50.12 Stationary Equipment 166.6 Biogenic Processes 51 Backup Generators 9.85 Total GHG Emissions 277.6 SLOAPCD Threshold 1,150 Exceed Threshold? No As shown in Table 3.4-5, annual GHG emissions resulting from the proposed project would total 277.6 MT/year, which is well below the SLOAPCD threshold of 1,150 10,000 MT/year. Even without amortization of construction emissions to distribute them across the life of the project, emissions would fall below the SLOAPCD threshold. Yearly construction emissions, as shown in Table 3.4-1, would be the greatest in 2019 at 535 MT/year. Including the increase in operational emissions (stationary equipment, biogenic processes, and backup generators), this totals 762 MT/year, also well below the threshold of 1,150 10,000 MT/year. As GHG emissions from construction and operation of the proposed project would not exceed the SLOAPCD threshold, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation is necessary. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions City of San Luis Obispo 144 Threshold 2 Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Impact GHG-2 The proposed project would not conflict with State GHG reduction goals, or any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. The City of San Luis Obispo adopted the San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2012 to identify strategies to reduce GHG emissions. The CAP set a target of reaching 1990 emission levels by the year 2020, a reduction of 22% from projected business-as-usual. Reduction strategies include making buildings more energy efficient, use of renewable energy, improvement of transportation options, reduction of solid waste, maintenance of parks and open space, and reduction and reuse of consumed water. The proposed project would upgrade the WRRF facility to meet performance standards and be in compliance with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) discharge requirements. The project would include increasing the facility’s capacity to produce recycled water, as well as upgrading and replacing aging infrastructure. The proposed project would increase the amount of recycled water available for use within the City of San Luis Obispo, which is one of the GHG reduction strategies outlined in the CAP. Additionally, the proposed project would include the installation of photovoltaic panels, which would provide renewable energy to the facility. The USEPA issued a Final Rule for mandatory reporting of GHG emissions for facilities that emit more than 25,000 MT CO2E per year in October 2009. This Final Rule applies to fossil fuel suppliers, industrial gas suppliers, direct GHG emitters, and manufacturers of heavy-duty and off-road vehicle engines, and requires annual reporting of emissions. Additionally, the reporting of emissions is required for owners of SF6 and PFC-insulated equipment when the total nameplate capacity of these insulating gases is above 17,280 pounds. The project would not emit CO2E, SF6, or PFCs in these volumes, and therefore would not trigger the GHG reporting required by this regulation. Phase 2 of the Tailoring Rule for GHG emissions Title V Permitting went into effect July 1, 2011. Since that time, new sources are subject to GHG Title V permitting of the source emits 100,000 MT CO2E per year, or they are otherwise subject to Title V permitting for another pollutant and emit at least 75,000 MT CO2E per year. The project would not emit GHGs in these volumes, and therefore would not trigger the Prevention of Significant Deterioration permitting required by this regulation. Finally, as described in Impact GHG-1, the project would emit 277.6 MT CO2E annually, which is well below the SLOAPCD threshold of 1,150 10,000 MT CO2E per year. The proposed project would help the City of San Luis Obispo reach goals set forth in the CAP relating to water reuse and implementation of reusable (solar) energy. The proposed project would not exceed any State or regional GHG thresholds. Therefore, impacts from the proposed project would be less than significant related to compliance with GHG reduction plans. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation is necessary. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 145 3.5 NOISE This section evaluates both temporary impacts associated with construction activity and long- term impacts associated with operation of the proposed project. 3.5.1 Setting a. Overview of Sound Measurement. Noise level (or volume) is generally measured in decibels (dB) using the A-weighted sound pressure level (dBA). The A-weighting scale is an adjustment to the actual sound power levels to be consistent with that of human hearing response, which is most sensitive to frequencies around 4,000 Hertz (about the highest note on a piano) and less sensitive to low frequencies (below 100 Hertz). In addition to the actual instantaneous measurement of sound levels, the duration of sound is important since sounds that occur over a long period of time are more likely to be an annoyance or cause direct physical damage or environmental stress. One of the most frequently used noise metrics that considers both duration and sound power level is the equivalent noise level (Leq). The Leq is defined as the single steady A-weighted level that is equivalent to the same amount of energy as that contained in the actual fluctuating levels over a period of time. Typically, Leq is summed over a one-hour period. Sound pressure is measured on a logarithmic scale with the 0 dB level based on the lowest detectable sound pressure level that people can perceive (an audible sound that is not zero sound pressure level). Based on the logarithmic scale, a doubling of sound energy is equivalent to an increase of 3 dB and a sound that is 10 dB less than the ambient sound level has no effect on ambient noise. Because of the nature of the human ear, a sound must be about 10 dB greater than the reference sound to be judged as twice as loud. In general, a 3 dBA change in community noise levels is noticeable, while 1-2 dBA changes generally are not perceived. For reference, quiet suburban areas typically have noise levels in the range of 40 to 50 dBA, while noise levels along arterial streets are generally in the 50 to 60+ dBA range. Normal conversational levels are in the 60-65 dBA range, and ambient noise levels greater than that can interrupt conversations. Noise levels typically attenuate at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance from point sources such as industrial machinery. Noise from lightly traveled roads typically attenuates at a rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise from heavily traveled roads typically attenuates at about 3 dBA per doubling of distance. The actual time period in which noise occurs is also important since noise that occurs at night tends to be more disturbing than that which occurs during the daytime. To evaluate community noise on a 24-hour basis, the day-night average sound level was developed (Ldn). Ldn is the time average of all A-weighted levels for a 24-hour period with a 10 dB upward adjustment added to those noise levels occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. to account for the general increased sensitivity of people to nighttime noise levels. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is identical to the Ldn with one exception. The CNEL adds 5 dB to evening noise levels (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.). Thus, both the Ldn and CNEL noise measures represent a 24-hour average of A-weighted noise levels with Ldn providing a nighttime adjustment and CNEL providing both an evening and nighttime adjustment. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 146 b. Noise Source. The project site is located at 35 Prado Road, adjacent and east of U.S. 101. The project site is located in a mixed-use area with commercial and residential units to the east, open space to the south and agricultural land to the west. The San Luis Obispo Creek exists between the project site and the residential and commercial neighborhood to east, which is engrossed by thick vegetation. Noise sources to sensitive receptors in the area include noise from traffic on U.S. 101 and local roadways as well as adjacent commercial uses. It is possible that noise from the WRRF is audible at the residential units in the area; however, attenuation of noise occurs due to the distance from the WRRF and the vegetation that surrounds the San Luis Obispo Creek. Therefore, the WRRF is not a primary source of noise at the nearby sensitive receptors. c. Current Noise Levels. Four noise measurements were taken at the project site on November 16, 2015. The noise measurement locations are shown in Figure 3.5-1. The results of the noise measurements are summarized in Table 3.5-1 (see Appendix F for complete results of noise measurements). As shown therein, the noise measurements ranged from 59.9 dBA Leq to 82.0 dBA Leq. Table 3.5-1 Noise Measurement Results Location Primary Noise Source and Distance Secondary Noise Source and Distance Measured Ambient Noise (dBA) Leq a Lmax b 1. Northern portion of site near the southwestern corner of the equalization pond U.S. 101 traffic, 450 feet from centerline Birds, wind at various distances 64.4 72.0 2. Northeast portion of the project site, adjacent and south of the clarifiers Equipment operations, 5-10 feet U.S. 101, 1,000 feet from centerline 63.2 82.0 3. The central portion of the project site, south of recycled water tank Petroleum facility, 400 feet U.S. 101, 1,000 feet from centerline 59.9 68.7 4. Southeastern boundary of site near decommissioned chlorine contact channels U.S. 101 traffic, 300 feet from centerline Equipment operations, 5-10 feet 66.3 73.5 5. Northern portion of site, near Prado Day Center, facing south Prado Road traffic, 50 feet from centerline Traffic in commercial parking lot 57.3 72.5 6. Northern portion of site in parking lot of the City corporation yard, facing southwest U.S. 101 traffic/Prado Road exit traffic, 550 feet Traffic in corporation yard parking lot 59.4 76.0 7. On southern side of the San Luis Obispo creek near sensitive receptors, facing northwest Higuera Street traffic, 700 feet Commercial warehouse operations 61.1 70.6 All measurements were conducted for 15 minutes using an integrating sound level meter. a Leq is essentially the average sound level over the measurement period. bLmax is the maximum sound level over the measurement period. !> !> !> !> !> !> !>BobJonesBikeTrailNM 7 -facingW/NW NM 6 -facing SW NM 5 -facing S NM 4 -facingW/NW NM 3 -facingW/NW NM 2 -facing NW NM 1 -facing NE £¤101 £¤101 L o s O s o s V alle y R d Los OsosValley Rd Tank Farm Rd SHigueraStPrado R d Suburban Rd Per l a L n Vist a L n LosPalosD rEl Mirador CtC a lleJ o a q u in SanL uisObi spoCreekNoise Measurement Locations Figure 3.5-1 City of San Luis Obispo Imagery provided by ESRI and its licensors © 2015. Section 3.5 NoiseWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Project Site San Luis Obispo Creek !>Noise Measurement Location ±0 800400 Feet Creekside MobileHome Community Silver CityMobile Lodge Residential Commercial 147 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 148 d. Sensitive Noise Receptors. Sensitive receptors near the project site include two mobile home parks and a single-family residential community east of the project site. The closest receptor is approximately 300 feet from the nearest on-site noise source. San Luis Obispo Creek exists between the residential units and the project site. 3.5.2 Regulatory Framework a. Federal. Federal regulations establish noise limits for medium and heavy trucks (more than 4.5 tons, gross vehicle weight rating) under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 205, Subpart B. The federal truck pass-by noise standard is 80 dBA at 15 meters from the vehicle pathway centerline. These controls are implemented through regulatory controls on truck manufacturers. b. State. California has adopted noise standards in areas of regulation not preempted by the federal government. State standards regulate noise levels of motor vehicles, freeway noise affecting classrooms, sound transmission control, occupational noise control, and airport noise. The State has also developed land use compatibility guidelines for community noise environments. The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, in Appendix C: Noise Element Guidelines of “General Plan Guidelines” (2003), provided guidance for the acceptability of projects within specific CNEL contours. It diagrammatically identifies “normally acceptable,” “conditionally acceptable,” “normally unacceptable,” and “clearly unacceptable” noise levels for various land use types. For the proposed program which is a utility project, CNEL of up to 75 dBA is normally acceptable at the site. A range of 70 dBA to 80 dBA is considered conditionally acceptable at the project site. c. Local. Noise criteria for the City and the State of California for current and projected conditions state that the noise intrusive to interior habitable space of residential units from exterior sources should not exceed 45 dBA CNEL (refer to Table 3.5-2). The City of San Luis Obispo’s General Plan Noise Element (1996) provides a policy framework for addressing noise. The Noise Element contains policies that are applicable to all development within the City, the most relevant of which are summarized below. Policy 1.6. New Development and Stationary Sources. New development of noise-sensitive land uses may be permitted only where location or design allow the development to meet the standards of Table 2 [Table 3.5-2, below], for existing stationary noise sources. Policy 1.7. New or Modified Stationary Sources. Noise created by new stationary; noise sources, or by existing stationary noise sources which undergo modifications that may increase noise levels, shall be mitigated to not exceed the noise level standards of Table 2 [Table 3.5-2, below], for lands designated for noise-sensitive uses. This policy does not apply to noise levels associated with agricultural operations. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 149 Table 3.5-2 Maximum Noise Exposure for Noise-Sensitive Uses Due to Stationary Noise Sources Duration Day (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) Night (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) Hourly Leq1,2 (dB) 50 45 Maximum level1,2 (dB) 70 65 Maximum impulsive noise1,3 (dB) 65 60 1 As determined at the property line of the receiver. When determining effectiveness of noise mitigation measures, the standards may; be applied on the receptor side of noise barriers or other property-line noise mitigation measures. 2 Sound level measurements shall be made with slow meter response. 3 Sound level measurements shall be made with fast meter response. Source: City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, Brown-Buntin Associates Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control) of the City’s Municipal Code contains maximum noise levels designed to control excessive and unnecessary noise levels within the City limits (Tables 3.5-3 and 3.5-4). Policies are also aimed at protecting public health and safety. 9.12.050 Prohibited acts. 6. Construction/Demolition. a. Operating or causing the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration or demolition work between weekday hours of seven p.m. and seven a.m., or any time on Sundays or holidays, such that the sound therefrom creates a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial real property line, except for emergency work of public service utilities or by exception issued by the community development department. b. Where technically and economically feasible, construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner that the maximum noise levels at affected properties will not exceed those listed in the following schedule: Table 3.5-3 Maximum Noise Levels for Nonscheduled, Intermittent, Short-term Operation (Less than Ten Days) of Mobile Equipment Single-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Mixed Residential/Commercial Daily, except Sundays and legal holidays 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 75 dBA 80 dBA 85 dBA Daily, 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and all day Sunday and legal holidays 60 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA Source: City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. Table 3.5-4 Maximum Noise Levels for Repetitively Scheduled and Relatively Long-Term Operation (Periods of Ten Days or More) of Stationary Equipment Single-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Mixed Residential/ Commercial Daily, except Sundays and legal holidays 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 60 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA Daily, 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and all day Sunday and legal holidays 50 dBA 55 dBA 60 dBA Source: City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 150 7. Vibration. Operating or permitting the operation of any device that creates a vibration which is above the vibration perception threshold of an individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source if on private property or at one hundred fifty feet (forty-six meters) from the source if on a public space or public right-of-way. 3.5.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures a. Methodology for Analysis. A list of noise-generating operations was provided by Water Systems Consulting for the proposed project (see Appendix F). These noise-generating operations were categorized into three different categories; fans, pumps, and machines that operate at 5 horsepower or lower. In attempts to reduce the number noise sources, the 56 individual noise sources that were in close proximity to one another were aggregated into 15 different sources. Noise levels were then evaluated based on the closest sensitive receptor, a residential unit 300 feet southeast of the project site. Noise levels at this sensitive receptor were estimated by distance-attenuation calculations for each of the four (out of the 15) nearest on-site noise sources (utilizing the standard 6 dBA reduction per doubling of distance). These noise levels were then combined by using a logarithmic additive noise calculator. Lastly, the analysis took into account the attenuation that would be provided by the 200 feet of trees surrounding the San Luis Obispo Creek that exists between the project site and sensitive receptors. The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration’s Noise Barrier Handbook states that vegetation at least 15 feet in height, 100 feet wide and dense enough to completely obstruct the line-of-sight between the source and the receiver may provide up to 5 dBA of noise reduction (Federal Highway Administration, 2011). Since the vegetation surrounding the creek is 200 feet thick, the analysis assumed that the vegetation would provide a maximum reduction in noise of 10 dBA. The analysis also made the following assumptions: • Machinery operating at less than 5 horsepower would generally not contribute substantially to noise at the sensitive receptors, especially given the distance, local topography and surrounding vegetation; • Fans generate a noise level up to 75 dBA, near the source, when in operation (citation); • Pumps generate a noise level up to 72 dBA, near the source, when in operation (citation); and • Full enclosures provide approximately 5 dBA of attenuation and partial closures provide approximately 2.5 dBA of attenuation. b. Thresholds of Significance. Construction-related Noise Thresholds. Construction-related noise would be considered significant if noise from construction-related activities exceeds the maximum noise levels for construction equipment, as stated in the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (Section 9.12.050) and listed above in Table 3.5-3 and Table 3.5-4. Construction-related Groundborne Vibration and Groundborne Noise Thresholds. Construction-related vibration would be considered significant if construction-related activities Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 151 create a vibration which is above the vibration perception threshold. The vibration perception threshold is defined in the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (Section 9.12.050) as, the minimum ground or structure-borne vibrational motion necessary to cause a normal person to be aware of the vibration by such direct means as, but not limited to, sensation by touch or visual observation of moving objects. The perception threshold shall be presumed to be a motion velocity of 0.01 inches/second (in/sec) over the range of 1 to 100 Hz. In addition, the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (May 2006) was used to determine whether or not groundborne vibration resulting from project-related construction would cause damage to nearby structures. Damage criteria vary depending on the type of building adjacent to the vibration source. For example, for a building that is constructed with reinforced concrete with no plaster, the FTA guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 102 velocity decibels (VdB) (an equivalent to 0.5 inches per second (in/sec) peak particle velocity [PPV]) (FTA, May 2006) is considered safe and would not result in any construction vibration damage. For a non-engineered timber and masonry building, the construction vibration damage criterion is 94 VdB (0.2 in/sec PPV). The PPV thresholds for building damage referenced above are shown in Table 3.5-5, taken from the Transportation- and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual (Caltrans, June 2004). Table 3.5-5 Vibration-Related Building Damage Thresholds Maximum PPV (in/sec) Structure and Condition Transient Sources1 Continuous/ Frequent Intermittent Sources2 Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10 Historic and some old buildings 0.50 0.25 Older residential structures 0.50 0.30 New residential structures 1.00 0.50 Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.00 0.50 Source: Caltrans, 2004. 1 Transient sources create a single, isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. 2 Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment. ppv = peak particle velocity; in/sec = inches per second PPV = peak particle velocity Operational Noise Thresholds. For new or modified stationary operational noise, impacts are considered significant if the project-generated noise exceeds the maximum noise exposure levels for sensitive receptors, as identified in Table 3.5-2. Impacts are analyzed for current sensitive receptors near the project site. No new sensitive receptors would be located on the project site. Additionally, with respect to noise, applicable sections of Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines state that a project would normally have a significant noise impact if it would result in: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 152 • Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; • Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; • A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; and/or • A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. c. Impact Statements and Mitigation Threshold A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project Impact N-1 Construction activities associated with the proposed project would expose nearby sensitive receptors to temporary increases in noise, however, these would not exceed City noise thresholds. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. Construction noise generated by the proposed project would temporarily increase ambient noise levels in the project area. The project construction period is estimated to be intermittent for approximately five years. The highest noise levels associated with construction typically occur during the site preparation and excavation and grading stages. These phases of project construction tend to create the highest noise levels because of the use of heavy equipment, including trucks, bulldozers, graders, and scrapers. However, since the proposed project mostly involves the replacement and upgrade of current equipment, noise levels due to construction are expected to be significantly lower. Existing sensitive receptors most likely to be affected by project construction includes the surrounding neighborhood, which consists of a mobile home park and single-family residences (approximately 300 feet from the project site). The single-family residences southeast of the project site are near the open space portion of the site and would not be subject to construction noise impacts. Some of these residences are 400 feet from the decommissioned chlorine contact channel and pond and no construction or operation is planned in this area. Table 3.5-6 shows typical noise levels associated with conventional construction equipment at distances of 50 feet, 200 feet and 300 feet from the noise source. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 153 Table 3.5-6 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Typical Level 50 Feet from the Source Typical Level 200 Feet from the Source* Typical Level 300 Feet from the Source* Air Compressor 81 69 65 Backhoe 80 68 64 Concrete Mixer 85 73 69 Grader 85 73 69 Paver 89 77 73 Saw 76 64 60 Scraper 89 77 73 Truck 88 76 72 Source: Typical noise level 50 feet from the source was taken from FTA, May 2006. * Noise levels at 200 feet and 300 feet were extrapolated using a 6 dBA attenuation rate for the doubling of distance. Noise levels are measured in Leq for the expected duration that each piece of equipment is expected to operate. Each noise level assumes the piece of equipment is operating at full power for the expected duration to complete the construction activity. The duration varies widely between each piece of equipment. Noise levels also depend on the model and year of the equipment used. The noise levels assume simultaneous construction activities associated with the respective phase of construction and equipment being used. Noise levels experienced at the closest sensitive receptor could reach up to 73 dBA. However, due to the amount of vegetation between the sensitive receptor and the project site that would cause a substantial attenuation of noise, this is expected to be substantially less at approximately 63 dBA. The City’s noise threshold for construction activities and residential uses is 75 dBA. Due to the location and distance of the sensitive receptors, and the potential noise levels generated by the minor construction of the proposed project, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to construction noise that exceeds City thresholds. Therefore impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation is necessary. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Threshold Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels Impact N-2 Project construction would expose nearby sensitive receptors to a temporary increase in vibration levels. However, vibration levels during construction would not expose nearby structures to vibration damage or excessive vibration noise. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. Table 3.5-7 shows the anticipated vibration levels from construction equipment, based on the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (May 2006). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 154 Table 3.5-7 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Approximate VdB Equipment 25 Feet 200 Feet 300 Feet Loaded Trucks 87 69 65 Jackhammer 79 61 58 Small Bulldozer 58 40 37 As shown in Table 3.5-7, vibration noise levels experienced at the closest sensitive receptor could reach 65 VdB. The FTA guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 102 VdB (an equivalent to 0.5 inches per second (in/sec) PPV) (FTA, May 2006) is considered safe and would not result in any construction vibration damage. As such, project construction activities would not be expected to result in vibrations that cause structural damage. Impacts associated with vibration would therefore be less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation is necessary. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Thresholds Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project Impact N-3 Noise associated with operation of the proposed project would not exceed City thresholds. Therefore, impacts would be Class III, less than significant. The proposed project would involve upgrades to the existing WRRF such as the addition and replacement of old equipment with new and modern technology. Generally, more modern equipment is associated with lower noise levels. Even so, noise levels at the project site would not increase as a result of the upgrades because any equipment that would have the potential to increase noise levels on site (e.g. additional blowers, permeate pumps, air scour blowers, odor control fans) would be either enclosed in a building or installed with a separate noise mitigation enclosure. To be conservative, an analysis was performed to estimate the current noise levels (due to operation of the current WRRF) at the nearest sensitive to the project site. See above for methodology. Table 3.5-8 shows the noise level at each of the closest noise sources to the nearest sensitive receptor (approximately 300 feet away). However, the estimated noise level does not take into account the vegetation that surrounds San Luis Obispo Creek that exists between the project site and the sensitive receptors. These noise levels were then summed together using a logarithmic additive calculator. As shown in Table 3.5-8, noise due to the existing WRRF, would Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 155 not exceed 48.4 dBA. This is well below the City’s noise exposure threshold of 60 dBA for single family-residential units. Table 3.5-8 WRRF Noise Level Estimates at Nearest Sensitive Receptor Noise Level at 50 feet (dBA) Distance to Receptor (feet) Unmitigated Noise Level at Nearest Sensitive Receptor (dBA)1 Noise Source 1 63.5 400 45.5 Noise Source 2 73.0 350 56.2 Noise Source 3 69.0 340 52.4 Noise Source 4 64.5 320 48.4 Total Noise2 48.4 1Noise level estimate accounts for attenuation that would occur due to the vegetation that exists between the project site and the sensitive receptor, -10 dBA 2Noise levels were summed together with a logarithmic additive noise calculator, http://www.snapfour.com/CombinedNoise_Calculations.aspx Additionally, based on these measurements and observations at the project site noise, the WRRF is not the primary contributor to the existing noise environment in the area. The main contributor of noise in the area is traffic on U.S. 101 and traffic traveling on other local roadways. It is important to note that future development in the area is expected to include upgrades to the Prado-U.S. 101 interchange, such that a new overpass is planned to be constructed. This elevated, above natural grade, overpass would also increase background noise in the area. The nearest sensitive uses are also subject to noise from the adjacent commercial uses. Based on the calculations, it is possible that noise from WRRF is audible at nearby receptors but based on the distance to the project site and other attenuating factors (such as vegetation surrounding San Luis Obispo Creek) and other nearby sources, the WRRF is not a primary source of noise at any of the sensitive receptors near the project and would not exceed the City’s Noise Ordinance thresholds. Therefore, any impacts regarding operational noise would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation is necessary. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.5 Noise City of San Luis Obispo 156 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.6 Recreation City of San Luis Obispo 157 3.6 RECREATION This section analyzes existing recreational uses within WRRF site and recreational facilities in the general vicinity of the proposed project. This section analyzes adverse and beneficial impacts on recreational resources, identifies mitigation measures to reduce impacts, and determines residual impacts on recreational resources. The information in this section is based on the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan (2014), the City of San Luis Obispo Land Use and Circulation Update (LUCE) (2014) and the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan. This section also reflects information from the San Luis Obispo County General Plan and Bikeways Plan. 3.6.1 Setting a. Regional Overview. The City of San Luis Obispo is home to a wide array of dedicated recreational and open space resources, including natural and public resources, recreational facilities, open spaces and bike trails. These recreational resources are strongly influenced by city residents which have clearly voiced a preference for active recreational pursuits including multi-use paths, hiking trails, playgrounds, and swimming as outdoor activities and indoor needs for fitness and exercise. There is also a collective interest in more indoor, passive pursuits, such as lectures, fine arts, and social opportunities for their senior population. The City’s vision is to continue enhancing the network of trails, located in both open space and developed areas, and to provide pedestrian and bicycle trail links between parks, recreation facilities, recreation activities and open space. (Parks and Recreation Element, 2001). b. Local Recreation Resources. In 2012 there were 26 parks in the city, consisting of 8 community parks, 10 neighborhood parks, and 8 mini parks. There are also six joint use facilities, and several recreation centers and special facilities (e.g., Damon Garcia Sports Fields and the SLO Swim Center). Currently there are approximately 151.65 acres of parkland in the city, of which 33.53 acres are neighborhood parks. In addition to developed parks, the City owns or manages over 6,970 acres of open space within and adjacent to San Luis Obispo, some of which provide trails that accommodate hiking and mountain biking (LUCE EIR, 2014). The nearest park facility to the project site is the Las Praderas Park, a “mini-park” of less than one-half acre in size, located across San Luis Obispo Creek from the southern portion of the WRRF property (San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Element 2001:page 7-10 and Figure 1). The Las Praderas Park includes of a bench to view the creek. The park’s use or location would not be affected by the project. c. Project Site. The project site occupies approximately 66 acres (along with other uses described below) between U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) on the west and San Luis Obispo Creek on the east. San Luis Obispo Creek is located along the entire easterly boundary of the project site. A segment of the Bob Jones Bike Trail runs along the west side of the creek, and is located between the WRRF perimeter fencing and the edge of the riparian vegetation associated with the creek in the vicinity of the main part of the WRRF site. The site perimeter contains fencing and landscaping that separates it from the bike trail. In addition, the Bob Jones Bike Trail traverses the undeveloped portion of the site, which is proposed for wetland cooling under the proposed project. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.6 Recreation City of San Luis Obispo 158 In February 2015, San Luis Obispo County supervisors unanimously approved plans to complete the Bob Jones Bike Trail connecting San Luis Obispo with Avila Beach. The portion of the Bob Jones Bike Trail adjacent to the WRRF boundary is already completed and would not be affected by the proposed project or the extension of the trail itself. Both the City and County have plans underway to not only complete the Bob Jones Bike Trail but to also interconnect it with other bicycle and multi-use trails, consistent with the General Plans of both local governments. As part of the public space surrounding the Operations Building/Welcome Center, a wetland demonstration garden with a circulating boardwalk and educational signage would be constructed and provide opportunities for the public to learn about the WRRF systems and its relationship to the natural surrounding habitat. These gardens would also be the public face of the WRRF at the northern end of the project site, being clearly visible from Prado Road (see Figure 3.6-1). The project also includes the construction of a Water Resource Center and a Learning Center that will be available to the public and contain outdoor spaces. See Figure 3.6-2 for a rendering of the exterior of the Water Resource Center. The outdoor space connected to the Water Resource Center will provide a group picnic area and amphitheater amongst trees on site. See Figure 3.6-3 for Water Resource Center Site Plan. This space will allow for a variety of community groups to congregate in association with a WRRF tour, as well as a space to congregate on select Open House education days, during which the public can access the Water Resource Center via the Bob Jones Bike Trail. 3.6.2 Regulatory Framework The proposed project would be subject to the following goals, policies, and regulations. a. Federal. There are no federal regulations, authorities, or administering agencies that regulate public access or recreation that are specifically applicable to recreational resources within the project site. b. State. There are no state regulations, authorities, or administering agencies that regulate public access or recreation that are specifically applicable to recreational resources within the project site. c. Local. The proposed project would seek consistency with the following local plans. San Luis Obispo County Bikeways Plan Class I Bikeways can be primary transportation corridors and have significant commuter potential in that they provide a direct route between destinations, with crossflows by motorists minimized. San Luis Obispo County’s Class I Bikeways outside the road right-of-way, including the Bob Jones Bike Trail, are almost exclusively administered and maintained by the General Services Agency – Parks Division. Bob Jones Bike Trail is a Class I Bikeway Priority and ranked third on the capital project priority list. FLOOD PROTECTION BERM AND NEW EQ POND LINEREQ PONDEQ RETURN FLOW PUMP STATIONWATER RESOURCE CENTER WITH SOLAR PANELSSTAFF ENTRY GATEFUTURE BMX BIKE PARKRESERVE FOR FUTURE UPGRADES/CAL POLY RESEARCH CENTERPOSSIBLE FUTURE RV WASTE RECEIVING FACILITYNEW CITY CORP YARD ENTRANCESOLAR PANELS OVER PARKINGPLANT ENTRY GATEABANDONED CLARIFIER (FUTURE DIURNAL FLOW EQ BASIN IF NEEDED)NEW MAINTENANCE SHOP WITH SOLAR PANELSAERATION BLOWER BUILDING WITH SOLAR PANELSAERATION BASIN EFFLUENT FLOW SPLIT STRUCTUREFINAL CLARIFIER 4AERATION BASINS 1&2AERATION BASIN 3AERATION BASIN 4AERATION BASIN 5RELOCATED MCC’SMgOH2STORAGEMETHANOL STORAGESLUDGE DRYING BEDSFILTERS 5 & 6FILTERS 1,2,3 & 4LEARNING CENTER WITH SOLAR PANELSELECTRICAL BUILDING WITH SOLAR PANELSCOOLING TOWERSFLOW EQUALIZATION BASINSEFFLUENT CHILLER PLANTTHICKENING1,000 KW STANDBY GENERATOR2,000 KW STANDBY GENERATORSOLIDS BLEND TANKPRIMARY SLUDGE PUMP STATIONNEW DIGESTER 2COGENERATIONSIDESTREAM TREATMENTFUTURE FOG RECEIVING STATION SIDESTREAM TREATMENT EQUALIZATIONEXISTING BIOSWALEFERROUS CHLORIDE STORAGESOLAR PANELS ON DEWATERING BUILDING INFLUENT PUMP STATION, SCREENING, AND NEW FLOW METERINGRECYCLED WATER TANK WITH SOLAR PANELSNEW GRAVEL ACCESS ROAD AND GATEBIKE STORAGEVACUUM TRUCK CLEANOUT FACILITYFACILITY VEHICLE PARKINGSTAFF PATIOCONFERENCE ROOM PATIOSTAFF PARKING WITH SOLAR PANELSCAMPUS ENTRYDIRECTIONAL SIGNAGEWETLANDWETLAND & BOARDWALK/EDUCATIONAL DEMONSTRATION GARDENBOB JONES TRAILPRADO ROADVISITOR PARKINGHWY 101CITY TRANSIT FACILITYODOR CONTROL BIOFILTERFINAL CLARIFIER 5FINAL CLARIFIER 6FINAL CLARIFIER 7RAS PUMPINGPRIMARY CLARIFIER 2PRIMARY CLARIFIER 1UV DISINFECTIONPUBLIC TOUR ROUTE/STOPS11234567POTENTIAL BIKE TOUR TO OUTFALL7-POINT WALKING TOURLEARNING CENTER AREAThe outdoor space connected to the Interpretive Center will provide a group picnic area and intimate amphitheater amongst the trees. This space will allow for community groups of all sorts to gather, learn and lunch in association with a WRRF tour, as well as a great space to congregate on select Open House education days, during which the public can access the Interpretive Center via the Bob Jones Trail.1223WETLAND DEMONSTRATION GARDENSAs part of the public space surrounding the Operations Building/Welcome Center, a wetland demonstration garden with a circulating boardwalk and educational signage will provide opportunities for the public to learn about the WRRF systems and it’s relationship to the natural surrounding habitat. These gardens will also be the public face of the WRRF, being clearly visible from Prado Road.STAFF & PUBLIC PATIO SPACESThe main conference room inside the Operations building will open up directly onto an outdoor patio, providing a flexible gathering space for talks and events, immediately adjacent to the boardwalk and wetland. The WRRF staff will also have a dedicated private patio space, sectioned off from the public patio by a divider that can be open in the event the WRRF staff should want to expand the space for a larger gathering.321Source: City of San Luis Obispo, June 2015.WRRF Site Plan & Public Amenities ConceptsFigure 3.6-1City of San Luis ObispoWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIRSection 3.6 Recreation/0 320 640 Feet159 Source: City of San Luis Obispo, June 2015.Rendering of Water Resource CenterFigure 3.6-2City of San Luis ObispoWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIRSection 3.6 Recreation160 Source: City of San Luis Obispo, June 2015.Water Resource Center Site PlanFigure 3.6-3City of San Luis ObispoWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIRSection 3.6 Recreation161 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.6 Recreation City of San Luis Obispo 162 City of San Luis Obispo General Plan The following goals and policies apply to public open space and recreation at and near the project site. Policy 3.20.2. Public trails shall be provided where appropriate to provide public access to City- owned open space use of trails for hiking, mountain biking or equestrian activity shall be determined as posted. Policy 3.20.6. Open space and parks shall be connected where possible by trails or bike paths. City of San Luis Obispo Bicycle Transportation Plan Several bicycle transportation policies are related to the project due to the proximity of the Bob Jones Bike Trail, which is described in more detail in Section 3.6.1. The City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan also shows a proposed Class 1 bicycle path along Prado Road, adjacent to the northern boundary of the WRRF property (San Luis Obispo 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan: Map 1). The Bicycle Transportation Plan also outlines the implementation of the Bob Jones Bike Trail Project, which involves extending the trail from Los Osos Valley Road to the Octagon Barn beyond the southern city limits. 3.6.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures a.Methodology for Analysis. Assessment of environmental consequences of alternatives on recreation resources involved a qualitative evaluation of the potential to conflict with existing and planned park and recreation facilities or to increase demand for recreation facilities. b. Thresholds of Significance. With respect to land use and planning, applicable sections of Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines state that a project would normally have a significant impact to recreation if it would: 31.Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; and/or, 32.Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. c.Impacts Statements and Mitigation Threshold Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. Impact REC-1 The proposed project would potentially affect operation of existing and planned park and recreation facilities, as it would enhance recreational amenities at the site. This is a Class IV, beneficial impact. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.6 Recreation City of San Luis Obispo 163 The proposed project would allow the improvements needed at the WRRF to enable the plant to treat future waste water flows and loads, meet new Waste Discharge Requirements replace aging equipment, and maximize the production of recycled water, while at the same time incorporating interpretive features and public amenities. The proposed project would not increase the use of existing park facilities in the area surrounding the site, but instead would provide improved recreational facilities for the city at the WRRF site itself. Recreational facilities added as part of the proposed project include a Water Resource Center, a Learning Center connected to a group picnic area, and a Wetlands Demonstration Garden. The preservation and increase of bicycle infrastructure is an objective for the City of San Luis Obispo. The proposed project would align with this goal as the project would not hinder the future extension of the Bob Jones Bike Trail. While the inclusion of the proposed wetland cooling area could require minor realignment of the portion of this trail that runs through the WRRF site, the trail segment would not be removed from the property as part of the proposed project and continuity of the trail through the area would remain. In addition, the proposed project would improve the aesthetic character of the area surrounding the existing trail as the project would include maintenance and upgrades to the project perimeter along the bike trail and also would provide improvements to the visual character within the center portion of the site, if the wetland cooling option is selected. Impacts due to construction and maintenance activities, such as noise may occur and could affect users of the Bob Jones Bike Trail; however, these would be temporary and would end at completion of construction. Therefore, due to the improvement of the area surrounding the bike path and construction of additional recreational facilities, the project would result in a beneficial recreational impact. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation is necessary. Significance After Mitigation. The project would be less than significant without mitigation. Threshold Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Impact REC-2 Impacts associated with construction of the recreational components of the proposed project are part of the wider project analyzed in this EIR. Potential adverse impacts have been identified in several environmental issue areas, related primarily to construction activities associated with the proposed project. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. The proposed project includes the construction of a wetlands demonstration garden, a Water Resource Center and Learning Center connected to a group picnic area. The construction of these facilities would occur within the present project site boundaries and replace existing uses. As the WRRF is upgraded, certain components would become obsolete, and therefore would provide the opportunity to provide the proposed public amenities. The replacement of the current uses with public amenities would occur at different stages throughout the project, for Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.6 Recreation City of San Luis Obispo 164 example a portion of the Prado Day Center site would be replaced by the wetlands demonstration garden. The Water Resource Center would consolidate all of the major buildings at the WRRF with the exception of the maintenance shop (due to noise concerns). The Water Resource Center would serve staff needs while simultaneously engaging and educating the community on the water cycle and recycled water treatment. The intent of having an integrated building would be to encourage support and collaboration between all WRRF staff, as well as giving the public the opportunity to observe staff operating the WRRF. Access to the recreational facilities would be provided by paved streets or the developed Bob Jones Bike Trail. The operations of the facilities would require minimal electricity since the wetlands demonstration garden would require little to no energy. The Water Resource Center would require electricity to operate. This energy use would not be new but instead transferred from previous uses of the buildings. Impacts associated with construction of each of these facilities has been considered as part of the wider project analyzed in this EIR. Potentially significant impacts have been identified in the areas of air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and hazards and hazardous materials. Mitigation measures required to reduce those impacts to less than significant levels would also address impacts under this threshold. Once applied impacts would then be reduced to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures identified in Section 3.1, Air Quality, Section 3.2, Biological Resources, Section 3.3, Cultural Resources, and Section 3.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, would address this potentially significant impact. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant with required mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 165 3.7 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section presents the physical and regulatory setting for hydrology and water quality as well as the impact analysis, which considers the potential for the WRRF to impact water supply, water quality, or other water and hydrological resources. The Study Area for the analysis of hydrology and water quality is the WRRF site and its immediate vicinity, as shown in Figure 2- 2. 3.7.1 Setting The Study Area is located within the San Luis Obispo Creek Hydrologic Subarea of the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit. The San Luis Obispo County Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Plan (SLO RWMG, 2014) describes the watershed as dominated by agricultural land use, with the City at the confluence of tributaries. Within the watershed are six major tributaries of San Luis Obispo Creek: Stenner Creek, Perfumo Creek, Laguna Lake, East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek, Davenport Creek, and See Canyon. The proposed project is located adjacent to and west of the San Luis Obispo Creek for most of the project length, but does overlap with a small portion of the western bank of the creek at the northeast corner of the footprint where a new discharge site is proposed. The watershed is characterized by high magnitude, short duration floods, which generally occur during the winter months (December through March). Rainfall averages 21 inches per year (DWR, 2004), but can vary substantially between the upper and lower watershed, with up to twice the rainfall in the higher elevation areas compared to low-lying areas (City of San Luis Obispo, 2014a). a. Flood. Stormwater and flood flows in the City are conveyed through the public storm water system, culverts, or other drainage features to local creeks and waterways. Flood hazards exist within the city, primarily in low-lying areas within the watershed. The 100-year flood is defined as a flood with a magnitude that is anticipated to be experienced once every 100 years (1% probability of occurring). The 50-year flood is one with a 2% probability of occurring. According to the National Flood Hazard Layer for San Luis Obispo County, available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA; FEMA, 2014), the WRRF site itself is not within the 100-year flood hazard zone (refer to Figure 3.7-1). The Study Area is within the FEMA 500-year flood zone (0.2% probability of occurring). However, Appendix L of the WRRF Facilities Plan (City of San Luis Obispo, 2015), which is a technical memorandum (TM) addressing stormwater infrastructure, reports that the WRRF site is within the 100-year floodplain of San Luis Obispo Creek. The TM reports that the creek overtops its banks near Elks Lane and flows southwest across Prado Road and across the WRRF site, then eventually spills back into the creek on the southeast side of the WRRF site. The 100-year water surface elevations throughout the WRRF site were computed using a hydraulic HEC-RAS model. The elevation of the flood zone changes across the site, with the 100-year flood elevation at 137 feet at the northern end of the site and 125 feet at the southern end of the site (south of the chlorine contact basins). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIRSection 3.7 Hydrology and Water QualityFigure 3.7-1City of San Luis ObispoFlood HazardsSan Luis Obispo CreekDavenport CreekPrefumo CreekFroomBrizz ol ara C r eek Sources: Esri, DeLorme, USGS, NPS, Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAALaguna Lake00.40.8Miles±Study AreaStreams and RiversFlood Hazard Zones100-Year Flood500-Year FloodFloodwayGroundwater BasinsSan Luis Obispo Valley166 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 167 b. Groundwater. The Study Area overlies the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin (No. 3-9) (DWR, 2004), which provides water to over 45,000 people (DWR, 2014). This basin is recharged through infiltration, streamflow, and applied irrigation water. Storage capacity of the basin is estimated to be between 24,000 AF and 67,000 acre-feet (AF), with usable capacity between 10,000 AF and 22,000 AF. The sustained yield of the basin, or the volume of water that can safely be extracted annually without dropping water levels, is estimated at 5,900 acre-feet/year (AFY; DWR, 2004). The City of San Luis Obispo has one potable well and a total of three non-potable wells (one for construction activities and two for golf course irrigation), but in general, groundwater is not considered a primary water supply for the City (City of San Luis Obispo, 2014a). The sole potable well produces approximately 11 AFY, or 2% of the City’s potable water needs (City of San Luis Obispo, 2010). The basin is designated a medium Priority Basin under California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) and is in overdraft conditions (DWR, 2014). c. Surface Water. The City of San Luis Obispo uses surface water to supply the majority of its water demands. There are three key surface water reservoirs: Salinas Reservoir (also referred to as Santa Margarita Lake), Whale Rock Reservoir, and Nacimiento Reservoir. None of these reservoirs are located within or adjacent to the Study Area. Laguna Lake is located near the Study Area, northwest of Madonna Road, on the opposite side of U.S. 101 from the Study Area. San Luis Obispo Creek runs along the eastern side of the Study Area (refer to Figure 3.7-1). d. Recycled Water. The City of San Luis Obispo has been permitted to provide recycled water to customers from the WRRF since 2002, with deliveries beginning in 2006. The WRRF produces over 5,100 AFY of disinfected tertiary recycled water. Of this, a minimum of 1,807 AFY is discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek to maintain flows and aquatic habitat. A total of 1,000 AFY demand for the remaining recycled water is estimated to existed, primarily for use as irrigation water (City of San Luis Obispo, 2010). e. Water Quality. San Luis Obispo Creek generally has good water quality, but the portion of the creek adjacent to the Study Area is included on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List of impaired waters for chloride, chlorpyrifos, nitrates (NO3), nutrients, pathogens, and sodium (SWRCB, 2011). Groundwater quality varies depending on the type of deposits in the basin, with high quality water found in Holocene deposits, and poor water quality in Pleistocene alluvial terrace deposits. In general, the basin has high levels of nitrate and chloride (DWR, 2004). Within the Study Area, the groundwater basin primarily consists of Holocene deposits, resulting in higher water quality (San Luis Obispo County Flood Control & Water Conservation District, 2014). f. Beneficial Uses and Water Quality Objectives. Central Coast RWQCB’s Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (Basin Plan) (available at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/publications_forms/publications/basin_plan/d ocs/basin_plan_2011.pdf; Central Coast RWQCB, 2011) establishes beneficial uses and water quality objectives for water bodies (surface and ground water) within the Central Coast Region, Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 168 including the Study Area. The only water body with designated beneficial uses within the Study Area is San Luis Obispo Creek, below West Marsh Street below West Marsh Street, located approximately two miles northeast of the project area. These beneficial uses are presented in Table 3.7-1. Table 3.7-1 Beneficial Uses for the San Luis Obispo Creek below W. Marsh Street Water Body Beneficial Uses San Luis Obispo Creek Below W. Marsh Street Municipal and Domestic Supply (MUN) Agricultural Supply (AGR) Groundwater Recharge (GWR) Water Contact Recreation (REC-1) Non-Contact Water Recreation (REC-2) Wildlife Habitat (WILD) Cold Fresh Water Habitat (COLD) Warm Fresh Water Habitat (WARM) Migration of Aquatic Organisms (MIGR) Spawning, Reproduction and/or Early Development (SPWN) Freshwater Replenishment (FRESH) Commercial and Sport Fishing (COMM) Groundwater in the Study Area is suitable for agricultural water supply, municipal and domestic water supply, and industrial use. Narrative objectives specific to each beneficial use are included in Chapter 3 of the Basin Plan. Table 3.7-2 summarizes the water quality objectives specific to the surface water and groundwater resources within the vicinity of the Study Area. Table 3.7-2 Water Quality Objectives within the Study Area Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) Chloride (Cl) Sulfate (SO4) Boron (B) Sodium (Na) Nitrogen (N) San Luis Obispo Creek 650 mg/l 100 mg/l 100 mg/l 0.2 mg/l 50 mg/l - San Luis Obispo Groundwater Basin 900 mg/l 200 mg/l 100 mg/l 0.2 mg/l 50 mg/l 5 mg/l 3.7.2 Regulatory Framework a. Federal U.S. Clean Water Act The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 regulates the discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States and regulates surface water quality standards. The United States Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 169 Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is required to develop, publish, and periodically update ambient water quality criteria for the protection of human health under the federal CWA. The CWA is administered by the USEPA and the United State Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Section 303(d) – Impaired Water Bodies Section 303(d) of the CWA implements the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program, which calculates the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still safely meet water quality standards. As currently implemented, an “impaired” water body, as determined by the Regional Water Quality Control Board triggers development and implementation of a TMDL for the specific pollutant. TMDLs have been developed for Nitrate (as NO3) and nutrients in 2007, and pathogens in 2004 for the San Luis Obispo Creek (below Osos Street, located approximately 2 miles northeast of the project site). Section 402 – National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) The NPDES permit program is authorized under Section 402 of the CWA. The NPDES permit regulates point source discharges to waters of the United States. Point sources are discrete conveyances such as pipes or man-made ditches. The City is a permittee under the Waste Discharge Requirements for the WRRF (Order No. R3-2014-0033 [NPDES No. CA0049224]), which discharges to the San Luis Obispo Creek, and is a permittee under the Phase II Small MS4 General Permit (Order No. 2013-001-DWQ [NPDES General Permit No. CAS000004]) for its storm water system. b. State California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program CASGEM designates every groundwater basin in California as High, Medium, Low, or Very Low priority, based in groundwater quality, beneficial uses, groundwater levels, overdraft, and other factors. Those basins designated as High or Medium priority are required to be monitored for groundwater levels and quality for compliance with CASGEM. The San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin is designated a medium Priority Basin under CASGEM and is in overdraft conditions. Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne Act) The Porter-Cologne Act (California Water Code, Division 7, §13000 et seq.) is the principal law governing water quality regulation in California. It requires that water quality of all waters of the state be protected, and that activities and factors affecting water quality be regulated to attain the highest water quality within reason. The state is mandated to protect the quality of water from degradation. The Porter-Cologne Act designates the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) as the state water pollution control agency for all purposes stated in the CWA, which in turn designates authority to the Central Coast RWQCB for the Central Coast Region. The Porter-Cologne Act establishes policies to be implemented and authorities to be used in achieving the goals of the CWA. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 170 Construction General Permit In California, the SWRCB administers regulations promulgated by the USEPA (55 CFR 47990) requiring the permitting of stormwater-generated discharges under the NPDES. Dischargers whose projects disturb one or more acres of soil are required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit) (Order 2012-0006-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002). Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility. The Construction General Permit requires the submittal of a Notice of Intent (NOI) and the development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP must list BMPs the discharger will use to protect storm water runoff and the placement of those BMPs. Additionally, the SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program; a chemical monitoring program for "non-visible" pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of BMPs; and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment. Title 22 Regulations for Recycled Water Wastewater recycling is regulated under Title 22, Division 4 of the California Code of Regulations. These regulations establish the treatment and water quality requirements for water reclamation to varying levels, as well as establish types of uses that are allowed for each level of treatment. SWRCB has jurisdiction over recycled water use and enforcement of Title 22 regulations. The City’s recycled water permits require compliance with Title 22. Central Coast RWQCB: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) The Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (Basin Plan) (Central Coast RWQCB, 2011) was developed by the Central Coast RWQCB, as authorized by the SWRCB, to establish water quality objectives and beneficial uses of surface water bodies and groundwater. The Basin Plan includes implementation measures for water quality parameters, and establishes criteria by which water quality is evaluated for a given water body and pollutant. Central Coast RWQCB: Post Construction Requirements On July 12, 2013, the Central Coast RWQCB adopted the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region (PCR; Central Coast RWQCB, 2013). These standards apply to all new development projects in designated Stormwater Management Areas resulting in 2,500 square feet or more of net impervious surface area. The primary goal of PCR is to protect watershed health and processes through development runoff controls using: site design and runoff reduction, water quality treatment, runoff retention, and peak flow management. Master Reclamation Permit for City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility Production and distribution of tertiary treated recycled water is regulated under the City’s existing Waste Discharge Requirements/Master Reclamation Permit for City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 171 Producer and User of Recycled Water, San Luis Obispo County (Order No. R3-2003-081). The Master Reclamation Permit outlines prohibitions, requirements for construction and irrigation use, and a monitoring program. For effluent limitations, the reader is directed to the City’s NPDES Permit (Order No. R3-2014-0033). NPDES Permit for City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility RWQCBs are responsible for issuing Waste Discharge Requirements, which generally include discharge prohibitions, monitoring, and reporting programs for compliance with Water Code Section 13263. Issued by the Central Coast RWQCB, the NPDES Permit and Time Schedule Order, City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo County (Order No. R3- 2014-0033, NPDES No. CA0049224) establishes Waste Discharge Requirements relative to discharges to San Luis Obispo Creek. Effluent limitations and discharge specifications address both the receiving water and recycled water use, as directed under the City’s Master Reclamation Permit (Order No. R3-2003-081). c. Local City of San Luis Obispo General Plan The General Plan includes the following goals, policies, and programs related to recycled water relevant to the proposed project: • Goal A7.1.2. Maximize the use of the City’s available recycled water supply for approved uses. • Policy A.7.2.1. Recycled Water Supply – the City will make available recycled water to substitute for existing potable water uses as allowed by law and to supply new non-potable uses. The General Plan includes the following goals, policies, and programs related to wastewater treatment that are relevant to the proposed project: • Goal B3.1.1. Wastewater treatment that meets or exceeds regulatory requirements and ensures the protection of public health and the environment. • Policy B3.2.1. Treating Wastewater – the City will treat all wastewater in compliance with approved discharge permits. • Policy B3.2.3. Beneficial Use – The City will pursue treatment and disposal methods which provide for further beneficial use of wastewater and biosolids. • Program B3.3.1. Prepare and implement Water Reclamation Facility master plan consistent with regulatory requirements. The following flood hazard goals, policies, and programs are included in the City’s General Plan: • Policy S: Flood Hazard Avoidance and Reduction • D: Within predominately developed areas (such as downtown) infill, remodel, and replacement projects should not displace more flood water than previous structures on the site or in the vicinity. Commercial buildings may be flood-proofed where Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 172 providing floor levels above the 100-year storm flow is not appropriate due to adjacent improvements. New infill buildings may be required to have greater setbacks than their older neighbors. In addition, the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan states that the City of San Luis Obispo’s Flood Damage Prevention Regulations and Federal Flood Insurance Standards requires floors in new structures to be built above the 100-year flood level, and constructed to avoid raising flood levels. New structures should also keep floating debris and other man-made obstructions out of floodways. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 12.08 Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control of the City’s Municipal Code addresses storm water discharges to the City’s MS4 system. The chapter prohibits illegal and illicit discharges, waste disposal, and animal and property management which results in pollutants entering the storm system, as well as authorizes use of BMPs to reduce storm water pollution. The chapter requires submittal of a SWPPP, adoption of drainage design standards, and issuance of a permit for connection to the public storm drain system. It also addresses violations and abatement. Chapter 13.08 Sewer Use Ordinance of the City’s Municipal Code addresses discharges to the City’s wastewater collection system and WRRF to protect the entire system and the staff who operate it (referred to as the Publically Owned Treatment Works (POTW)). The ordinance regulates and/or prohibits discharges of a variety of constituents and requires an assortment of controls for permission and access to discharge to the POTW. Chapter 15.04 Construction and Fire Prevention Regulations of the City’s Municipal Code includes amendments to the California Building Code, and added Appendix Section J101.4 Dust Control to the Municipal Code. This calls for wetting, protection, or containment of all graded surfaces to prevent dust or spill upon adjoining properties or streets. It also includes Section A204.2 Dust and debris from the Public Safety Requirements of the California Building Code that requires minimization of dust from demolition activities, and requires nearby public ways and places be kept free of rubbish, refuse and loose material during demolition activities. Chapter 17.84 Floodplain Management Regulations of the City’s Municipal Code includes regulations intended to reduce flood losses, including restriction of uses in flood zones, controlling alteration of floodplains, and preventing construction of flood barriers. The chapter requires construction of structures elevated one foot above the base flood elevation, with an exception for “floodproofing” of non-residential construction. City of San Luis Obispo: Storm Water Management Plan The Storm Water Management Plan (City of San Luis Obispo, 2009) serves as the City’s NPDES Phase II Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) prepared in response SWRCB Water Quality Order 2003-0005-DWQ for NPDES Phase II General Permit No. CAS000004 (State General Permit). Phase II requires small municipal separate storm sewer systems (small MS4s) to obtain NPDES permit coverage. The overall objective of the SWMP is to comply with the NPDES Phase Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 173 II regulations and State General Permit, and to meet water quality standards contained in the Basin Plan. City of San Luis Obispo Post Construction Requirements, Drainage Design Manual, and City Engineering Standards On July 12, 2013, the Central Coast RWQCB adopted the Post Construction Requirements (PCRs) (see description above). A Stormwater Control Plan is required to be submitted for all projects to demonstrate exemption or level of compliance required. The PCRs outline Stormwater Control Plan content and the City has developed a template for use by applicants, available on its website. The drainage requirements in the City’s San Luis Obispo Creek Waterway Management Plan: Drainage Design Manual (City and County, 2003) and City Engineering Standards (City of San Luis Obispo, 2014c) may be superseded by the new PCR, with the more restrictive applied. 3.7.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures a. Methodology for Analysis. Potential impacts on hydrology and water quality are analyzed based on the potential for the improved and expanded WRRF to affect the local hydrology or water quality during construction or operation. b. Threshold of Significance. An impact to hydrology or water quality would be significant if the proposed project would: • Violate water quality standards or Waste Discharge Requirements • Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or substantially interfere with groundwater recharge such that the groundwater elevations decrease • Substantially alter existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site • Substantially alter existing drainage pattern of the site or area or substantially increase surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site • Substantially degrade water quality • Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area • Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structure which would impeded or redirect flood flows • Expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including as a result of the failure of a levee or dam • Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow Criteria listed above that are not applicable to actions associated with the WRRF are identified below, along with a supporting rationale as to why further consideration is unnecessary and a no impact determination is appropriate. • Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or substantially interfere with groundwater recharge such that the groundwater elevations decreases: The proposed project does not involve the use or extraction of groundwater (other than limited potential dewatering activities during construction). The proposed project would not interfere with groundwater recharge because the WRRF site is already Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 174 disturbed, and land use at the site would remain the same. There would be no impact to groundwater supplies. • Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area: The proposed project does not include construction of housing, nor would it require a substantial increase in the local labor force such that additional housing would need to be constructed. There would be no impact. • Expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including as a result of the failure of a levee or dam: The proposed project is not located downstream of a reservoir or within a dam inundation zone. As such, the proposed project is not located in an area at risk of flooding from levee or dam failure. There would be no impact. • Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow: The proposed project is not located along the coast where it could be impacted by a tsunami, nor is it along the shoreline of an enclosed water body where it could be impacted by seiche. The City’s General Plan Safety Element shows that the proposed project is not located on or adjacent to a hillside that is at risk for mudflow. There would be no impact. c. Impacts Statements and Mitigation Threshold Violate water quality standards or Waste Discharge Requirements Impact HYD-1 During construction the proposed project could potentially violate water quality standards or Waste Discharge Requirements. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. The proposed project would upgrade the WRRF such that it would meet the requirements of its 2014 NPDES permit for surface water discharges. The treatment process improvements made at the WRRF would ensure that that during operation of the facility, all water quality requirements are met. For operation of the WRRF itself, impacts would be less than significant. The proposed project would also operate in compliance with the City’s Master Reclamation Permit, which would ensure that irrigation with recycled water does not negatively impact water quality and associated beneficial uses within the region. Construction of the proposed project would necessitate taking some pieces of the existing WRRF offline at different stages of construction (e.g., not all scheduled demolitions can occur concurrently) to allow the WRRF to continue to treat wastewater flows during project construction. There is potential that during construction, a portion of the WRRF treatment train could go off-line unexpectedly as a result of accident or other unforeseen circumstance. In this case, wastewater flows would be held in storage until treatment could continue, similar to when wet weather flows exceed the treatment capacity of the facility. However, mitigation measure HYD-1, which requires development and implementation of an Emergency Wastewater Treatment Plan, would ensure that procedures are in place for storing, treating, and handling wastewater flows in the event of an unplanned system failure due to construction activities. This Emergency Wastewater Treatment Plan could be a modified or revised version of an existing emergency plan that could accommodate additional challenges to emergency Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 175 wastewater treatment response from construction activities. Impacts would be potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. Given the proposed project’s location next to the San Luis Obispo Creek, there is potential for construction activities to result in accidental sediment release in the creek or accidental release of construction-related chemicals to the creek. Construction BMPs would be implemented in accordance with the Construction General Permit (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ), which requires development and implementation of a SWPPP. Potential unforeseen spills from the construction site would also be mitigated with implementation of mitigation measure HAZ-1 requiring preparation and implementation of a Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Control Plan. Impacts would be potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. Planned pilot testing of various treatment technologies at the WRRF site are not anticipated to degrade water quality or exceed water quality standards. Pilot testing may occur to consider state-of-the-art process and treatment improvements within the WRRF site. All pilot testing would be conducted within enclosed or protected areas and would not affect either effluent or storm water quality. Potential water quality impacts from these activities are considered less than significant. Additionally, planned water quality monitoring and research activities conducted by California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo are not anticipated to degrade water quality or exceed water quality standards. Rather, these activities would collect data that allows researchers to better understand water quality conditions and responses to BMPs. Potential water quality impacts from these activities are considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure HYD-1 and Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 (see Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials) are required to mitigate the potential water quality impacts from construction of the proposed project. HYD-1 Prepare an Emergency Wastewater Treatment Plan. Before construction is initiated, the City of San Luis Obispo shall work with its design engineers and construction contractor to develop an Emergency Wastewater Treatment Plan which identifies procedures and contingency measures for handling and treating wastewater flows during construction of the Project, such as temporary storage for wastewater flows. This Plan shall include procedures and contingency measures for proper handling and treatment of wastewater flows in the event that the treatment train goes offline unexpectedly as a result of construction activities such as temporary storage wastewater flows. The Plan shall consider storage options, varying levels of treatment and/or blending, temporary treatment options, and conveyance to alternative treatment facilities. An existing emergency treatment plan could be used in place of this Emergency Wastewater Treatment Plan so long as its provisions could be successfully implemented during project construction. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 176 Significance After Mitigation. Implementation of the required mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Threshold Substantially alter existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in flooding, erosion, or siltation on- or off- site. Impact HYD-2 The proposed project would not result in flooding, erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. The proposed project would involve excavation and demolition of portions of the WRRF during construction of the proposed facilities. These construction activities could temporarily alter the drainage pattern of the site such that erosion or siltation could occur on-site or off-site, including the nearby San Luis Obispo Creek. Construction would be completed in compliance with the State’s Construction General Permit (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ). The SWPPP developed under this permit would include BMPs to reduce impacts of erosion and siltation. With compliance with the General Construction Permit, construction-related changes in drainage would be less than significant. Storm water facilities would be constructed as part of the proposed project. All new facilities would be constructed above the 100-year water surface elevation. Storm water discharges from the WRRF site would be managed via a) existing discharge points, b) percolation within the undeveloped area southwest of the main facility, and/or c) a new discharge point along San Luis Obispo Creek. In addition, LID features may also be constructed to improve storm water quality prior to discharge, including reconfiguration of existing vegetated areas and storm water collection features as part of newly constructed buildings. The proposed project would be designed to handle storm water flows through the on-site improvements, which includes flood protection measures such as walls and berms around sensitive site features. Those facilities would be in compliance the City’s Drainage Design Manual and City Engineering Standards, and would include development and implementation of a Stormwater Control Plan in compliance with the Central Coast RWQCB’s PCRs. The flood protection measures included in the proposed project were selected specifically because they would not result in a displacement of floodwaters, resulting in potential increases in off-site flooding. On-site storm water runoff would be captured and managed to prevent off-site flooding, erosion/siltation, and other potential water quality impacts. Impacts would be less than significant. Construction of the new stormwater outfall in San Luis Obispo Creek, however, could result in erosion, siltation, and flooding due to disturbance of the streambank and riparian vegetation. Construction activities are expected to have an approximately 0.10-acre permanent disturbance area and 0.45 acre temporary disturbance area for the new stormwater outfall. As described in Section 3.2, Biological Resources, permanent and temporary impacts to riparian vegetation would be mitigated via consultation with CDFW (1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement), USACE (404 Permit), and RWQCB (401 Certification). The RWQCB 401 Certification process would ensure that water quality impacts to the creek are minimized during activities that involve “removal and placement of soil, sediment, and other materials” near the streambed. With receipt of, and compliance with, necessary regulatory permits, potential flooding and erosion/siltation impacts Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 177 associated with construction of a new stormwater outfall in San Luis Obispo Creek are considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Threshold Substantially degrade water quality. Impact HYD-3 The proposed project would result in an improvement in the quality of discharges from the WRRF to San Luis Obispo Creek. Impacts would be Class IV, beneficial. The proposed project would involve upgrades of the existing WRRF, along with other site improvements. These improvements would allow wastewater treated at the WRRF to meet the more stringent standards of the 2014 NPDES permit (Order No. R3-2014-0033). The 2014 NPDES permit allows operation of the WRRF in a manner that remains protective of the environment and water quality. Discharges from the WRRF would be of a higher quality than the current WRRF because the new permit limits disinfection byproducts and nitrates in treated wastewater discharges. Treated discharge from the WRRF currently discharges to San Luis Obispo Creek, which is listed under the Clean Water Act for impairment by nitrates, among other things. The proposed project would therefore reduce the WRRF’s contribution to the water quality impairment of San Luis Obispo Creek. Therefore, the proposed project would improve water quality and impacts would be beneficial. As noted in Chapter 2.0, Project Description, the proposed project does not include expansion of the recycled water distribution system. However, any recycled water produced by the WRRF and reused in accordance with Title 22 regulations (California Code of Regulations §60001 et seq.) would not substantially degrade water quality because the SWRCB has found that the use of recycled water in accordance with Title 22 has a less than significant impact on public health and safety. Upgrades to the WRRF included in the proposed project would improve the quality of recycled water that would be distributed to existing customers. Potential water quality impacts from irrigation with recycled water would be beneficial due to the increased recycled water quality.. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be beneficial without mitigation. Threshold Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structure which would impede or redirect flood flows. Impact HYD-4 The proposed project would result in placement of structures within a 100-year flood hazard area. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 178 According to the National Flood Hazard Layer for San Luis Obispo County, the WRRF site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard zone (FEMA 2014). Figure 3.7-1, above, shows the flood hazard zones available from FEMA. However, Appendix L of the Facilities Plan (City of San Luis Obispo 2015) reports that HEC-RAS modeling of the watershed demonstrates that the WRRF site is within the 100-year floodplain of San Luis Obispo Creek. The TM reports that the creek overtops its banks near Elks Lane and flows southwest across Prado Road and across the WRRF, then eventually spills back into the creek on the southeast side of the WRRF site. The elevation of the flood zone changes across the site, with the 100-year flood elevation at 137 feet at the northern end of the site and 125 feet at the southern end of the site (south of the chlorine contact basins). The City’s Municipal Code (Chapter 17.84) requires structures to be built above the 100-year flood elevation, with an additional one foot of freeboard at a minimum. The Facilities Plan recommended on-site storm water improvements, including construction of all new facilities above the 100-year water surface elevation. As such, the proposed project includes flood protection improvements that include raising concrete walls, protecting some structures, and the new berm around the wet weather equalization pond. On-site drainage improvements would also be constructed to route storm waters and flood flows away from WRRF facilities, including a potential percolation area on an undeveloped portion of the site and/or construction of a new outfall to San Luis Obispo Creek. Placement of a new stormwater outfall would occur within the 100-year floodplain in the San Luis Obispo Creek streambank, which could impede or redirect flood flows during both construction and operation. Discharge of storm flows from the new stormwater outfall could also alter the contours of the streambed and result in sediment transport. As described in Section 3.2, Biological Resources, permanent and temporary impacts to riparian vegetation would be mitigated via consultation with CDFW (1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement), USACE (404 Permit), and RWQCB (401 Certification). The USACE 404 Permit process would ensure that any adverse impacts to aquatic resources under USACE jurisdiction are avoided or mitigated, including avoidance/reduction of flooding and erosion impacts. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-4 would require that the outfall is designed with energy dissipaters at the point of discharge to ensure that potential flooding and scour are minimized. Compliance with necessary regulatory permits and implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-4 would reduce potential impacts associated with impeding or redirecting flood flows to less than significant levels. The proposed project would result in extension of infrastructure into the 100-year floodplain, but includes onsite drainage improvements that would protect existing and new facilities from inundation during a 100-year flood event. New facilities would be designed to avoid inundation and route flood flows to appropriate percolation and/or discharge areas. These improvements would not result in an increase in flooding on adjacent properties and would improve flood protection throughout the WRRF site. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-4 would ensure that placement of a new outfall in San Luis Obispo Creek to drain the WRRF site would not result in flooding impacts. Impacts would be potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 179 Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure HYD-4 is required to mitigate the potential flooding impacts from construction of the proposed project. HYD-4 Design Stormwater Outfall with Energy Dissipaters. The City of San Luis Obispo shall ensure that the San Luis Obispo Creek stormwater outfall, if selected to manage storm flows on the WRRF site, is designed with energy dissipation features as needed to prevent flooding and erosion at or downstream of the point of discharge. The design and location of the stormwater outfall shall be approved by USACE to ensure that it does not impede high flow capacity. Significance After Mitigation. Implementation of the required mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.7 Hydrology and Water Quality City of San Luis Obispo 180 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 181 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS The following section describes the environmental setting for hazards and hazardous materials within the study area, which includes the WRRF site and adjacent areas that could be affected by use or presence of hazardous materials. Potential hazards addressed in this section include use of hazardous materials during operation, existing hazardous material from previous land use in soils and groundwater, hazardous building material that could be present in buildings to be demolished, and releases of hazardous materials during construction. The impact analysis evaluates anticipated hazardous materials and hazards-related impacts to public health or the environment resulting from the proposed project. 3.8.1 Setting a. Health Hazards. California Department of Public Health (CDPH) guidelines for producing and using recycled water are codified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 3 entitled “Water Recycling Criteria” (Title 22). The Title 22 criteria are designed to protect public health from pathogens during use of recycled water. The WRRF produces tertiary-treated recycled water compliant with CDPH Title 22 standards for disinfected tertiary recycled water. Recycled water produced by the WRRF may be used for irrigation and other uses approved under Title 22 for disinfected tertiary recycled water. b. Fire Hazards. Fires have the potential to cause significant losses to life, property, and the environment. According to CalFire, the majority of fires within San Luis Obispo County are vegetation fires, with most of the fires being caused by human activities. The project site is located within a Local Responsibility Area Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone as designated by CalFire (City of San Luis Obispo, 2014). c. Hazardous Materials. The majority of the project site contains the City’s existing WRRF, related equipment and uses, or former wastewater treatment infrastructure. Additional uses on the project site include the Prado Day Center, City transit bus facility, and a City corporation yard and storage area. Hazardous materials currently used on the site include chemicals and materials used in the wastewater treatment process, hazardous materials associated with a corporation yard, and hazardous household materials. According to a search of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database (see Appendix G), the WRRF site is listed as a Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cleanup Site due to potential soil contamination with diesel. The cleanup status of the site is completed and has been closed since March 1992. According to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database (see Appendix G), one cleanup site is identified within the vicinity of the project site. This site is located across Los Osos Valley Road to the southwest of the project site. This site is an active cleanup site due to potential contamination of an aquifer used for drinking water and soil vapor with tetrachloroethylene (PCE). The source of the potential PCE plume has not been identified, although this compound is typically used by dry cleaners. Cleanup of this site has been ongoing since 2010. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 182 d. Airports. The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport is located approximately 3.5 miles to the southeast of the project site. This airport provides commuter, charter, and private aviation services to the area. The Airport Influence Area is divided into three safety areas: Runway Protection Zones, Safety Area S-1, and Safety Area S-2. The project site is located in the Safety Area S-1, which has three sub-areas: Safety Area S-1a, Safety Area S-1b, and Safety Area S-1c (see Figure 3.8-1). The WRRF site is located within Safety Area S-1b, which includes lands that are within probable gliding distance for aircraft on expected approach or departure courses. Aviation safety hazards possible within this area include: mechanical failures, fuel exhaustion, deviation from glideslope or minimum decent altitude (MDA) (due to pilot error or equipment malfunction), loss of control during short approach procedures, stall/spin incidents during engine-out maneuvers in multi-engine aircraft, loss of control during “go around” or missed approach procedures, and midair collisions (ALUC 2005). 3.8.2 Regulatory Framework Hazardous materials and waste can result in public health hazards if released to soil, groundwater, or air. Hazardous materials as defined in California Health and Safety Code §25501(o) are materials that, because of their “quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, pose a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released to the workplace or environment.” Hazardous materials have been and are commonly used in commercial, agricultural, and industrial applications, as well as to a limited extent in residential areas. A waste is any material that is relinquished, recycled, or inherently waste-like. CCR Title 22 §66261.1, et seq. contains regulations for the classification of hazardous wastes. Article 3 criteria classify waste as hazardous if it is toxic (causes human health effects), ignitable (has the ability to burn), corrosive (causes severe burn or damage to materials), or reactive (causes explosions or generates toxic gases). Article 4 also lists specific hazardous wastes, while Article 5 identifies specific waste categories, including hazardous wastes, extremely hazardous wastes, and special wastes. If improperly handled and released to soil, groundwater, or air, (in the form of vapors, fumes, or dust), hazardous materials and wastes can result in public health hazards. a. Federal Policies and Regulations Federal Risk Management Program. Section 112(r) of the 1990 FCAA amendments requires the USEPA to publish regulations and guidance for chemical accident prevention at facilities that use certain hazardous substances. These regulations and guidance are contained in the Risk Management Plan (RMP) rule. The RMP rule requires facilities that use extremely hazardous substances to develop a RMP. These plans must be revised and resubmitted to the USEPA every five years. The information required from facilities under RMP helps local fire, police, and emergency response personnel prepare for and respond to chemical emergencies. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLA, also referred to as the Superfund law, regulates the potential for liability for cleanup of hazardous substances, provides for defense against liability, identification of contaminated sites, defines hazardous substances, petroleum products, and petroleum exclusions. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), includes emergency planning and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Material Figure 3.8-1 City of San Luis Obispo Airport Hazard Zones 183 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 184 community right-to-know. Under CERCLA, facilities must report where toxic chemicals are transferred, chemical-specific information, and supplemental information, along with identification information for their facility to the USEPA. Hazardous substances must be reported, and releases to the environment accounted for. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). RCRA regulates potential health and environmental problems associated with solid waste hazards and nonhazardous waste. RCRA defines solid waste as garbage or refuse, sludge from wastewater treatment plants, water supply treatment plants, or air pollution control facilities, and other discarded materials. Solid waste can be either hazardous or non-hazardous. Hazardous waste is waste that burns readily, is corrosive, or reactive, or if it contains certain amounts of toxic chemicals, or has been included on the USEPA’s list of hazardous wastes. RCRA regulates the disposal of waste and aims to reduce waste generation. It restricts which facilities can receive hazardous wastes and regulates facilities to ensure proper handling of materials. Preliminary Remediation Goals. The USEPA has published screening levels, referred to as Preliminary Remediation Goals, for the evaluation of chemicals commonly found in soil or groundwater where a release of hazardous materials has occurred (USEPA 2008a). For an industrial worker, these screening levels are conservative estimates of safe levels of a chemical that a worker could be exposed to in soil and groundwater. If the concentration of a chemical in the soil or groundwater is below the Preliminary Remediation Goal, then it can be assumed that the chemical would not pose a health risk to the worker. Safe levels of chemicals in soil and groundwater would generally be higher for construction workers than industrial workers. Hazardous Materials Worker Safety Requirements. The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is the federal agency responsible for ensuring worker safety. The federal regulations for worker safety are contained in CFR Title 29, as authorized in the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970; these regulations provide standards for safe workplaces and work practices, including those relating to hazardous materials handling. b. State Policies and Regulations Process Safety Management. Facilities that handle more than 10,000 pounds of a flammable liquid, or specific chemicals above threshold quantities, are subject to the Process Safety Management regulations specified in CCR Title 8 Subchapter 7 and CFR Title 29 Section 1910.119. In accordance with these regulations, the facility operator must conduct a hazard analysis for each process, develop written operating procedures, provide employee training, establish and implement an emergency action plan, and conduct periodic audits of the process. Prior to starting up a new process, or after a major modification to an existing process, the operator must perform a pre-startup review to ensure that the construction and installed equipment are in accordance with design specifications; safety, operating, maintenance, and emergency procedures are in place and are adequate; and employees are appropriately trained. For maintenance, the operator must also provide written procedures to maintain the ongoing integrity of equipment required for the regulated process. California Fire Code. The California Fire Code, Article 80, includes specific requirements for the safe storage and handling of hazardous materials. These requirements reduce the potential for a release of hazardous materials and for mixing of incompatible chemicals, and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 185 specify design features to reduce the potential for a release of hazardous materials that could affect public health or the environment, including: • Separation of incompatible materials with a noncombustible partition; • Spill control in all storage, handling, and dispensing areas; and • Separate secondary containment for each chemical storage system. The California Fire Code, Article 79, includes specific requirements for the safe storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids. Specific requirements address: • Fire protection; • Prevention and assessment of unauthorized discharges; • Labeling and signage; protection from sources of ignition; • Specifications for piping, valving, and fittings; • Maintenance of above ground tanks; • Requirements for storage vessels, vaults, and overfill protection; and • Requirements for dispensing, using, mixing, and handling of flammable and combustible liquids. Transportation of Hazardous Wastes. Regulatory requirements for the transport of hazardous wastes in California are specified in CCR Title 22 Division 4.5 Chapters 13 and 29. In accordance with these regulations, all hazardous waste transporters must have identification numbers, issued by either the USEPA or DTSC, to identify whether the waste is classified as hazardous by federal regulations or under California regulations. Hazardous waste transporters must comply with the California Vehicle Code, California Highway Patrol regulations (CCR Title 13); the California State Fire Marshal regulations (CCR Title 19); U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations (CFR Title 49); and USEPA regulations (CFR Title 40). California regulations specify specific cleanup actions that must be taken by a hazardous waste transporter in the event of a discharge or spill, and for the safe packaging and transport of hazardous wastes. Waste Classification Criteria. In accordance with CCR Title 22 Section 66261.20, et seq., excavated soil would be classified as a hazardous waste if it exhibits the characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity. A waste is considered hazardous by state and federal regulations if the soluble concentration exceeds the federal regulatory level as determined by the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP). A waste is considered hazardous under state regulations if the soluble contaminant concentration exceeds the soluble threshold limit concentration (STLC). A waste may also be classified as toxic if testing indicates toxicity greater than the specified criteria. Lead in Construction Standard. The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) Lead in Construction Standard (CCR Title 8 Section 1532.1) requires project proponents to develop and implement a lead compliance plan when lead-based paint would be disturbed during construction. The plan must describe activities that could emit lead, methods for complying with the standard, safe work practices, and a plan to protect workers from exposure to lead during construction activities. Cal/OSHA requires 24-hour notification if more than 100 square feet of lead-based paint would be disturbed. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 186 Hazardous Materials Worker Safety Requirements. The state regulations concerning the use of hazardous materials in the workplace are included in CCR Title 8, and include requirements for safety training, availability of safety equipment, accident and illness prevention programs, hazardous substance exposure warnings, and emergency action and fire prevention plan preparation. Cal/OSHA also enforces hazard communication program regulations, which contain worker safety training and hazard information requirements, such as procedures for identifying and labeling hazardous substances, communicating hazard information relating to hazardous substances and their handling, and preparation of health and safety plans to protect workers. Cal/OSHA standards are generally more stringent than federal OSHA regulations. California Accidental Release Program (CalARP). California Health and Safety Code (CHSC) §25531 and CalARP regulate the registration and handling of regulated substances. CalARP incorporates the requirements of the federal RMP rule, but is more stringent with respect to the threshold quantities of chemicals requiring RMPs and includes more chemicals than the federal program. Regulated substances are any chemicals designated as an extremely hazardous substance by the USEPA as part of its implementation of SARA Title III or by the State of California pursuant to CHSC §25532. The requirements of CHSC §25531 overlap or duplicate some of the requirements of SARA and the Clean Air Act. Facilities handling or storing regulated substances at or above Threshold Planning Quantities must register with their local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) – which is the County of San Luis Obispo’s Environmental Health Services Department (EHS) – and prepare a Risk Management Plan (RMP). CalARP is found in CCR Title 19 Chapter 4.5. The RMP is implemented by the business to prevent or mitigate releases of regulated substances that could have off-site consequences through hazard identification, planning, source reduction, maintenance, training, and engineering controls. c. Local Policies and Regulations Hazardous Materials Business Plan Program. In accordance with the Hazardous Materials Business Plan Program (CHSC §25500, et seq., and the related regulations in CCR Title 19 §2620, et seq.), businesses that use, handle, or store hazardous materials in excess of threshold quantities are required to submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) in accordance with community right to know laws. Threshold quantities are 500 pounds for solids, 55 gallons for liquids, and 200 cubic feet for compressed gases. The HMBP allows local agencies to plan appropriately for a chemical release, fire, or other incident. The HMBP is filed with and administered by the San Luis Obispo Fire Department, which ensures review by and distribution to other potentially affected agencies. The plan must be reviewed every three years to determine if any revision is needed, and must be updated within 30 days when there is a 100 percent or more increase in the quantity of previously disclosed hazardous materials, or when a facility begins storing a new hazardous material at or above threshold quantities. Hazardous Waste Generator Program. In accordance with the County of San Luis Obispo’s Hazardous Waste Generator Program, businesses that generate hazardous wastes must: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 187 • Clearly label containers with hazardous waste; • Store liquids in enclosed or covered areas, in clean sealed containers, with secondary containment; • Maintain proper emergency equipment; • Maintain a current contingency plan; provide training to employees; • Limit on-site storage to no more than 90 days or as specified in hazardous waste regulations; • Eliminate, reduce, and recycle wastes, whenever possible; • Select appropriate treatment methods for wastes; • Keep accurate records; and • Prepare a source reduction plan or checklist. Generators of hazardous waste are required to use only authorized hazardous waste transporters and management facilities, and must keep records of proper hazardous waste disposition (manifests) for three years. The County’s EHS regularly inspects facilities that generate hazardous waste for compliance with the requirements of the hazardous waste generator program. Hazardous Waste Treatment/Tiered Permitting Program. Facilities that treat hazardous waste are required to have a permit for construction and operation of the treatment facility. In 1992, California established a five-tiered program for authorizing hazardous waste treatment facilities. The five tiers relate to the level of hazardous waste treatment that would occur at a facility and include (in descending order of regulatory oversight), the Full Permit, Standardized Permit, Permit by Rule, Conditional Authorization, and Conditional Exemption Tiers. As the CUPA, EHS enforces the permitting requirements for the Permit by Rule, Conditional Authorization, and Conditional Exemption Tiers. Permanent household hazardous waste collection facilities are subject to the Permit by Rule Tier. Aboveground Storage Tank Program. Facilities with a single tank or cumulative aboveground storage capacity of 1,320 gallons or greater of petroleum are required to prepare a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plan. The SPCC plan must identify appropriate spill containment or equipment for diverting spills from sensitive areas, and discuss facility-specific requirements for the storage system, inspections, record keeping, security, and personnel training. This act does not apply to the storage of biodiesel, provided that it contains no petroleum products. For construction sites, a SPCC plan is only required for a single tank of 20,000 gallons or larger, or an aggregate volume of 100,000 gallons or greater. As described in Section 3.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, the construction SWPPP that would be prepared for the proposed project would address smaller temporary tanks used during construction, methods for controlling releases, and measures to clean up accidental releases and prevent degradation of water quality. Hazardous Materials Fire Code Requirements. As the CUPA, EHS enforces the hazardous materials-related standards of the California Fire Code, including requirements for signage of hazardous materials storage areas, storage of flammable materials, secondary containment for storage containers, and separation of incompatible chemicals. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 188 City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. Chapter 8.28 Hazardous Chemicals Transport of the City’s Municipal Code addresses chemicals that are prohibited from transport within the City. Chapter 8.32 Liability for Costs of Response to Hazardous Waste or Substance Spills, Releases, and Other Incidents of the City’s Municipal Code addresses liability issues associated with hazardous materials spills. City of San Luis Obispo Safety Element. The City’s General Plan guides the use and protection of various resources to meet community purposes. The Safety Element focuses on achieving acceptable levels of risk through decisions on land use and the form of development, with consideration for the closely related factor of transportation. The Safety Element includes policies that describe an approach to achieving the goals of the General Plan. In terms of hazardous materials, there are three policies included in the Safety Element: • Policy S 6.2: Minimizing Hazardous Materials Exposure. People’s exposure to hazardous substances should be minimized. • Policy S 6.3: Hazardous Materials in City Operations. The City should avoid using hazardous materials in its own operations to the greatest extent practical, and will follow all established health and safety practices when they are used. • Program S 10.23: Required Inspections. The City will conduct safety inspections for hazardous materials in commercial, industrial, and multifamily residential buildings. Airport Land Use Plan . The Airport Land Use Commission of San Luis Obispo County (ALUC) prepared the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) to guide land use and development within the Airport Influence Zone. The Airport Influence Area is divided into three safety areas: Runway Protection Zones, Safety Area S-1, and Safety Area S-2. The WWRF site is located in Safety Areas S-1 and S-2. Safety Area S-1 has three sub-areas: Safety Area S-1a, Safety Area S-1b, and Safety Area S-1c (refer to Figure 3.8-1). The WRRF site is located within Safety Areas S-1b and S-1c. The three applicable safety zones are described below: • Safety Area S-1b includes lands that are within probable gliding distance for aircraft on expected approach or departure courses. Safety Area S-1b also includes State- defined sideline safety areas, inner turning zones, and outer safety zones for both Runway 11-29 and Runway 7-25 and portions of existing Airport Land Use Zone 3. Aviation safety hazards possible within this area include: mechanical failures, fuel exhaustion, deviation from glideslope or MDA (due to pilot error or equipment malfunction), loss of control during short approach procedures, stall/spin incidents during engine-out maneuvers in multi-engine aircraft, loss of control during “go around” or missed approach procedures, and midair collisions (ALUC 2005). • Safety Area S-1c includes portions of Safety Area S-1 which are not included in Safety Areas S- 1a or S-1b, but are adjacent to (within 0.5 nm) frequent or low- visibility aircraft operations at less than 500 feet above ground level (AGL). Aviation safety hazards within this area include: mechanical failures, deviation from radio signals (due to pilot error or equipment malfunction), stall/spin incidents during engine-out maneuvers in multi-engine aircraft, loss of control during “go around” or Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 189 missed approach procedures, and loss of visual references by aircraft performing circle-to-land procedures. • Safety Area S-2 is the area within the vicinity of which aircraft operate frequently or in conditions of reduced visibility at altitudes between 501 and 1000 feet AGL. Aviation safety hazards within this area include: mechanical failures, fuel exhaustion, loss of control during turns from downwind to base legs or from base to final legs of the traffic pattern, stall/spin incidents during engine-out maneuvers in twin engine aircraft, and midair collisions. Operational factors of concern include circle-to-land instrument approaches south of Runway 11-29, extensive “pattern work” and practice flight by student pilots in fixed-wing or rotary-wing aircraft. Though the overall level of aviation safety risk is considered to be lower than that in Area S-1 or the Runway Protection Zones. 3.8.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures a. Methodology for Analysis. This analysis focuses on the effects of the use of hazardous materials, a potential release of existing hazardous substances in soil and groundwater, and a potential release of hazardous building materials on the public or the environment as a result of project implementation. Each potential impact is assessed in terms of the applicable regulatory measures and City construction specifications, and mitigation measures are identified for significant impacts. b. Thresholds of Significance. For the purposes of this analysis, an impact to public health and hazards would be significant if the WRRF would: • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; • Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; • Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment; • For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area; • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area; • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; or • Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 190 Criteria listed above that are not applicable to actions associated with the WRRF are identified below along with a supporting rationale as to why further consideration is unnecessary and a no impact determination is appropriate. • Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school: The proposed project is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Therefore, there would be no impact related to emissions or use of hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of a school. • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area: The proposed project is not located within two miles of a private airstrip. As such, it would not expose people residing or working in the project area to airport-related hazards for the same reasons described above. There would be no impact. c. Impacts Statements and Mitigation Threshold Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials Impact HAZ-1 Construction of the proposed project would temporarily increase the routine transport and use of hazardous materials used in construction activities. Operation of the expanded and upgraded WRRF would entail the routine transportation, use, storage, and/or disposal of minor amounts of hazardous materials. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. Construction of the proposed project would temporarily increase the routine transport and use of hazardous materials used in construction activities. Limited quantities of miscellaneous hazardous substances, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic fluids, paint, and other similar materials, would be brought onto the construction site, used, and stored during the construction period. Specifically, construction of the storm drainage outfall in San Luis Obispo Creek could result in release of construction-related hazardous materials to the waterbody. The proposed project would be required to comply with applicable standards that regulate the transport, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials during construction. Although construction of the WRRF expansion would comply with all relevant regulations, to ensure an additional level of safety and reduce the potentially significant impact, mitigation measure HAZ-1(a) would also be implemented to ensure that a Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Control Plan (HMMSCP) is developed for all construction activities. Operation of the expanded and upgraded WRRF would entail the routine transportation, use, storage, and/or disposal of minor amounts of hazardous materials. Limited quantities of diesel fuel and hydraulic fluids may be used for operation of various types of facility equipment. The WRRF would also use other chemicals and other hazardous materials for operation and maintenance of facilities, including for treatment of wastewater. Chemicals used for treatment of wastewater at the WRRF may include, but are not limited to, sodium hypochlorite, polymer, ferrous chloride, magnesium hydroxide, and sodium bisulfite. The proposed project would be Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 191 required to comply with applicable standards that regulate the transport, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials, as well as public health requirements that regulate Title 22 recycled water. Adherence to regulations associated with recycled water-related activities would ensure that the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. In addition, the proposed project would be consistent with any relevant policies from the City’s General Plan Safety Element regarding hazardous materials. Although operation of the WRRF would comply with all relevant regulations, to ensure an additional level of safety and reduce any remaining potentially significant impact, mitigation measure HAZ-1(b) would also be implemented to ensure that a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) is developed for the treatment facility. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures HAZ-1(a) and HAZ-1(b) shall be implemented to mitigate the potential impacts to the public or environment from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials associated with both construction and operation of the proposed project. HAZ-1(a) Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Control Plan. Before construction begins, all construction contractors shall be required to develop and implement a HMMSCP that includes project-specific contingency plan for hazardous materials and waste operations. The HMMSCP shall establish policies and procedures consistent with applicable codes and regulations, including but not limited to the California Building and Fire Codes, and federal and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The HMMSCP shall articulate hazardous materials handling practices to prevent their release into San Luis Obispo Creek during construction of the storm water outfall. HAZ-1(b) Preparation of Hazardous Materials Business Plan. Prior to operation of the new facilities, a HMBP shall be prepared and implemented for the proposed project. The HMBP shall include a hazardous materials inventory, site plan, an emergency response plan, and requirements for employee training. An existing HMBP can be updated and resubmitted for the expanded facilities. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant following implementation of mitigation measures HAZ-1(a) and HAZ-1(b). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 192 Threshold Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment Impact HAZ-2 The proposed project has potential to create a hazard through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment during both construction and operation. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. As described under Impact HAZ-1, the proposed project involves the routine transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. The proposed project therefore has potential to create a hazard through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Construction of the WRRF expansion would comply with all relevant regulations and implementation of mitigation measure HAZ-1(a) would also address this potentially significant impact. The project site is listed as a LUST Cleanup Site according to the SWRCB GeoTracker Database. The cleanup status of the site is complete and the case for this site has been closed since March 1992, and thus is no longer a potential hazard. Release of hazardous materials into the environmental at the project site would be unlikely and the impact is therefore less than significant. Operation of the expanded and upgraded WRRF would also entail use of hazardous materials and chemicals for operation of the treatment processes. Given the proposed project’s compliance with applicable policies and regulations, along with the incorporation of mitigation measure HAZ-1(b), the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment because hazardous materials would be identified, assessed, and controlled to the extent feasible. Mitigation Measures. Implementation of mitigation measures HAZ-1(a) and HAZ-1(b) would address the potentially significant impact associated with the project’s potential to create a hazard through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant following implementation of mitigation measures HAZ-1(a) and HAZ-1(b). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 193 Threshold Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment Impact HAZ-3 The proposed project could result in the disturbance of contaminated soils on an active cleanup sites listed on the SWRCB GeoTracker database. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. As described previously, the WRRF site is listed on the SWRCB GeoTracker database as a LUST Cleanup Site due to potential soil contamination with diesel. The cleanup status of the site is complete, and has been closed since March 1992. In addition to the WRRF site, three other sites within the vicinity of the project site are listed as LUST Cleanup Sites on the SWRCB GeoTracker Database, all of which have a cleanup status of “Completed – Case Closed”: 1. J.B. Dewar site is located at 75 Prado Road (approximately 0.2 mile); 2. Contractor’s Glass Group site is located at 56 Prado Road (approximately 0.1 mile); and 3. Prado Road Service site is located at 253 Elks Lane (approximately 0.1 mile). There is one site located to the southwest of the project site, which is listed as an “Open – Site Assessment Cleanup Program Site”. The Conoco Phillips Site #5143 is listed for potential soil contamination of crude oil, diesel, and gasoline. This site is located within approximately 450 feet of the southern end of the WRRF site, and therefore has the potential to expose contaminated soils during construction related activities. Mitigation Measure HAZ-3(a) requires that a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment be conducted to determine the presence of any potential soil contamination within the disturbance footprint, and requires mitigation of potential adverse impacts. Mitigation Measure HAZ-3(b) requires preparation and implementation of a Contaminated Soil Contingency Plan to handle treatment and/or disposal of uncovered contaminated soils. The WRRF site, along with the other listed sites within one-quarter mile of the WWRF site, are no longer active cleanup sites. However, the active Conoco Phillips Site #5143 site located within proximity to the project site could expose construction workers to contaminated soils during excavation activities. Without mitigation, impacts would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measures. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3(a) and HAZ-3(b) would reduce potential contaminated soil impacts due to proximity to an active cleanup site that is listed on the SWRCB GeoTracker database. HAZ-3(a) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. Before construction begins, the City of San Luis Obispo shall perform a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) to clarify the potential for soil contamination due to the adjacent open cleanup site. The recommendations set forth in the Phase I ESA shall be implemented before construction begins. Follow-up sampling may be conducted, if needed, to characterize soil and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 194 groundwater quality. Prior to construction, contractors shall be informed of the location of potential areas of hazardous materials that may be encountered during construction, and shall ensure that safety precautions are in place to avoid or minimize exposure to potentially contaminated soils, and to reduce the potential for accidental damage to underground storage tanks that could cause accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment. HAZ-3(b) Contaminated Soil Contingency Plan. The City of San Luis Obispo shall require its construction contractors to develop and implement a Contaminated Soil Contingency Plan to handle treatment and/or disposal of contaminated soils. If contaminated soil is encountered during project construction, work shall halt and an assessment made to determine the extent of contamination. Treatment and/or disposal of contaminated soils shall be conducted in accordance with the Contingency Plan. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant following implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3(a) and HAZ-3(b). Threshold For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area Impact HAZ-4 The proposed project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area due to location within an airport land use plan. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. The proposed project is located within Safety Area S-1b, S-1c, and S-2. Safety Areas S-1b, S-1c, and S-2 all contain potential for various aviation hazards, including mechanical failures, stall/spin incidents, loss of control or missed approach procedures, and accidents by student pilots. The ALUP does not contain any specific provisions for utilities within Safety Area S-1 and S-2. Although the proposed project is located within Safety Areas S-1b, S-1c, and S-2, the WRRF expansion and upgrades would be designed to be in compliance with policies of the General Plan Land Use and Safety Elements regarding the Airport Area, as well as the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, compliance with these policies and the Municipal Code would reduce safety hazards to people residing or working in the project area. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 195 Threshold Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan Impact HAZ-5 The proposed project could impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency evacuation and response during construction. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. The proposed project would consist of upgrades to the existing WRRF, and would not result in road closures due to roadway construction. Although no construction would occur within the roadways, there is potential for traffic to be impacted, and therefore emergency response or evacuation plans, due to the transport of equipment and construction materials to the project site. Additionally, workers traveling to and from the site have the potential to increase traffic in the vicinity of the project site. Impacts would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measures. Implementation of mitigation measure HAZ-5 would address the potentially significant impact associated with the project’s potential to interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. HAZ-5 Traffic Management Plan. Prior to the start of construction the City shall develop a Traffic Management Plan, in coordination with City Transit, Public Works, and other appropriate departments or users of the site, that would include industry, Caltrans, and City standards for managing construction traffic to and from the site. Measures to manage construction traffic could include warning signs, flag men, and scheduling deliveries outside the AM and PM peak hours. The Traffic Management Plan shall include measures that address how to accommodate emergency evacuation and response, if needed. Significance After Mitigation. Mitigation Measure HAZ-5 would require the implementation of a Traffic Management Plan, and would minimize interference with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. Impacts would be less than significant after implementation of mitigation. Threshold Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands Impact HAZ-6 The proposed project would not increase the exposure of people or structures to wildfire risks due to population growth, but construction activities could create hazardous fire conditions. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated. According to the City’s General Plan Safety Element, the City of San Luis Obispo is considered a “Community at Risk” due to the threat of wildfire impacting the urban community. The project site is located in a moderate fire hazard severity zone, as described above, on a previously Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City of San Luis Obispo 196 developed site. Despite being located in a moderate fire hazard zone, the proposed project would not increase the exposure of people or structures to wildfire risks because it would not induce population growth in or movement to areas of increased wildfire hazard zones. During construction activities, the use of spark-producing construction machinery within or adjacent to areas of moderate fire hazard could potentially create hazardous fire conditions and expose people to wildfire risks. Impacts would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure HAZ-6 shall be implemented to mitigate the potential to risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires due to the proposed project. HAZ-6 Prevention of Fire Hazards. During construction of the proposed project, staging areas, welding areas, or areas slated for construction shall be cleared of dried vegetation or other material that could ignite. Construction equipment that includes a spark arrestor shall be equipped in good working order. In addition, construction crews shall have a spotter during welding activities to look out for potentially dangerous situations, such as accidental sparks. Other construction equipment, including those with hot vehicle catalytic converters, shall be kept in good working order and used only within cleared construction zones. The creation and maintenance of approved fire access to work areas shall be required in accordance with local Fire regulations. During construction of the proposed project, contractors shall require vehicles and crews working at the project site to have access to functional fire extinguishers. Significance After Mitigation. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-6 would minimize risk of fire impacts to less than significant after mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 197 3.9 PUBLIC SERVICES/UTILITIES This section presents the physical and regulatory setting for public services and utilities. The study area for police services, fire protection, schools, parks, water supply, storm water, solid waste, and energy is the City of San Luis Obispo. For wastewater, the study area includes the City, as well as the California Polytechnic State University and the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. The impact analysis considers the potential for the WRRF to exceed the existing capacity of police, fire, schools, parks, water, wastewater, storm drainage, solid waste, and energy services. 3.9.1 Setting a. Police Services. Police services are provided in the study area by the San Luis Obispo Police Department (SLOPD). The SLOPD is comprised of approximately 60 career peace officers. The SLOPD provides 24-hour patrol officers to both emergency and non-emergency calls for service, has primary traffic enforcement jurisdiction on all public roadways within the City (except freeways), conducts preliminary and follow-up criminal investigations, maintains preventative patrols, and supports community policing efforts. The SLOPD consists of two bureaus, Administration and Operations, each consisting of four divisions. Police headquarters are located at 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA. b. Fire Protection. Fire protection services are provided by the San Luis Obispo Fire Department (SLOFD), which is organized into six divisions: Fire Administration, Emergency Operations, Fire Prevention and Education, Training, Technical Services, and Community Disaster Preparedness. SLOFD is a full-service fire department, providing paramedic advanced life support, fire suppression, specialty rescue, and hazardous materials mitigation services. The SLOFD maintains an Emergency Services Contract with Cal Poly. The SLOFD Headquarters, Fire Station One, is located at 2160 Santa Barbara Avenue, San Luis Obispo, CA. Fire Station One serves as the City’s Emergency Operations Center, and the Corporation Yard, which is located on the project site, and the Police Station serve as back-up Emergency Operations Centers. SLOFD operates from four stations and employs approximately 42 professional firefighters. SLOFD’s response time goal is four minutes or less travel time to 95% of all emergencies. Fire Stations One and Four are located approximately two miles from the project site. Generally, a response time of four minutes can be achieved if the call for service location is less than 1.5 miles from the fire station (City of San Luis Obispo 2014d). c. Schools. The study area is located within the San Luis Coastal Unified School District (SLCUSD). SLCUSD operates ten elementary schools, two middle schools, two high schools, one continuation high school, and one adult education facility. The project site is located approximately two miles from Pacific Beach High School, C.L. Smith Elementary School, and Hawthorne Elementary School. Los Verdes Montessori School, Montessori Children’s School, and Liberty Christian School are located approximately one mile to the south of the WRRF site. d. Parks. Las Praderas Park is located approximately one mile to the southwest of the project site, across from San Luis Obispo Creek to the east of the outfall point for the WRRF. The Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 198 Bob Jones Bike Trail runs along the west side of the San Luis Obispo Creek, adjacent to the southern portion of the project site. e. Water Supply. The project site is served by existing water supplies, treatment facilities, storage, and distribution systems operated by the City. The City is the sole water supplier within the city boundaries, and provides potable water to approximately 14,500 metered water customers. The City obtains its water supplies from three sources: surface water, recycled water from the WRRF, and a limited amount of groundwater. Surface water is collected in three local reservoirs: Salinas Reservoir (also known as Santa Margarita Lake), Whale Rock Reservoir, and Nacimiento Reservoir. The Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs provide a combined safe yield of 6,940 AF/year, the Nacimiento Reservoir provides 3,380 AF/year dependable yield/contractual limit, and recycled water from the WRRF provides 165 AF/year (City of San Luis Obispo 2014b). The City does not rely on groundwater as a long-term water supply source. The City’s potable water treatment plant has a capacity of 16.0 million gallons per day (mgd), which is adequate for treating all sources of surface water received by the City and is sufficient to meet the City’s water demands at full build-out under the General Plan (City of San Luis Obispo 2011). f. Wastewater. The City provides sewer services to residential, commercial, and industrial customers within the city limits, as well as California Polytechnic State University and San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. The City’s sewer system includes facilities for wastewater collection, domestic treatment and tertiary treatment. The collection system is divided into 18 flow basins, and in 2010 included an estimated 14,500 service connections (City of San Luis Obispo 2010). The WRRF is the City’s wastewater treatment facility, providing the City with tertiary treated recycled water, in accordance with standards set by the Central Coast RWQCB under Waste Discharge Requirements and NPDES permits (described below). The WRRF has a current capacity of 5.1 mgd under ADWF conditions and treats an average of 3.1 mgd under ADWF conditions (City of San Luis Obispo 2015). The WRRF was expanded in 1994 with the addition of tertiary treatment and other processes required to meet strict effluent quality standards to protect and enhance the receiving waters of San Luis Obispo Creek, and was again upgraded in 2006 with the addition of water reuse facilities. In 2014, the City’s new NPDES permit (Order No. R3-2014-0033, NPDES No. CA0049224) for the WRRF discharge to San Luis Obispo Creek was adopted. The new permit includes discharge limitations that require significant process upgrades in order to meet the new wastewater discharge water quality standards. Water Recycling In 2002, the City received regulatory approvals for use of tertiary recycled water for landscape irrigation and other approved uses. In 2006, the City began delivering recycled water which meets the most stringent Title 22 requirements. The WRRF currently produces Title 22 Unrestricted Use Recycled Water which is used to irrigate parks, medians, and landscape Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 199 features in the City. The entirety of the recycled water treated at the WRRF is compliant with Title 22 recycled water requirements, but only a portion is currently used for irrigation purposed. The remainder, as described above, is discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek. g. Storm Water. Storm water runoff in the Study Area is collected at different locations and transported via concrete swales, vegetated ditches, and culverts to three existing outfalls to the San Luis Obispo Creek, as well as overland release to open areas southwest of the WRRF. The WRRF maintains its own Industrial SWPPP, satisfying requirements of the local Central Coast RWQCB for a General Industrial Permit. h. Solid Waste. Solid waste, recycling, and green waste generated by residential, commercial, and industrial customers within the city is collected and disposed of by the San Luis Garbage Company. The city is served by three landfills: Cold Canyon, Chicago Grade, and Paso Robles Landfills. The majority of the solid waste collected in the city is disposed of at the 121-acre Cold Canyon Landfill. The Cold Canyon Landfill has a remaining capacity of 16.8%, and is permitted to receive up to 1,620 tons of solid waste per day. The Cold Canyon Landfill is a Class III (non-hazardous waste) disposal site. The permitted disposal acreage is 68 acres and the facility includes recycling and household hazardous waste collection facilities. The Cold Canyon Landfill accepts agricultural, construction and demolition, contaminated soil, dead animals, industrial, inert, mixed municipal, tires, sludge, and green waste materials. This facility is expected to reach its capacity in 2018. The Chicago Grade and Paso Robles Landfills have remaining capacities of approximately 93% and 82%, respectively (City of San Luis Obispo 2014a). The San Luis Obispo region has established a population-based solid waste disposal target of 7.4 pounds per person per day, and an employment solid waste disposal target of 18.7 pounds per person per day. The solid waste disposal targets were set at 50% of the 2006 waste disposal levels. i. Energy. Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) provides electricity services, and the Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas services for the City. PG&E owns and maintains all transmission and distribution facilities in the city of San Luis Obispo, including three major transmission lines running west to east across San Luis Obispo County. According to the 2005 Baseline Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory, electricity consumption in the city is approximately 251.5 gigawatt-hours (GWh; City of San Luis Obispo 2014a). In partnership with PG&E, the WRRF is currently undergoing energy efficiency upgrades to the cogeneration system, headworks, solids dewatering, filter towers, aeration, outdoor lighting, and the supervisory control and data acquisition system. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 200 3.9.2 Regulatory Framework a. Federal U.S. Fire Administration The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) is housed in the FEMA and provides funding and resources for fire and medical emergencies as well as fire prevention and hazardous materials management nationwide. The USFA is responsible for suppressing fires in federal areas. National Energy Policy The National Energy Policy was established by the National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPDG) in 2001 to help the private sector and, as appropriate, State and local governments promote dependable, affordable, and environmentally sound production and distribution of energy for the future (NEPDG 2001). Modernizing energy conservation and energy infrastructure, increasing energy supplies, increasing energy security, and protecting the environment are all goals of the policy. b. State California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection: State Responsibility Areas Fire hazards were initially characterized according to a number of systems including the California Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Study System of 1973 which combined fuel loading, slope, and fire weather information to determine the Fire Hazard Severity of an area. Non-federal areas identified as fire hazard are referred to as State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) because the State has the primary financial responsibility of preventing and suppressing fires. The agency responsible for suppressing fires in SRAs is the California Department of Forestry (CDF). Local fire agencies are responsible for suppressing fires in private property within City limits. Legislative mandates passed in 1981 (Senate Bill 81, Ayala, 1981) and 1982 (Senate Bill 1916, Ayala, 1982) that became effective on July 1, 1986, required the CDF to develop and implement a system to rank the fire hazards in California. Areas were rated as moderate, high or very high based primarily on fuel types. California Fire Code The California Fire Code, Article 80, includes specific requirements for the safe storage and handling of hazardous materials. These requirements reduce the potential for a release of hazardous materials and for mixing of incompatible chemicals, and specify the following design features to reduce the potential for a release of hazardous materials that could affect public health or the environment. The California Fire Code, Article 79, includes specific requirements for the safe storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids. Specific requirements address fire protection; prevention and assessment of unauthorized discharges; labeling and signage; protection from sources of ignition; specifications for piping, valving, and fittings; maintenance of above ground tanks; requirements for storage vessels, vaults, and overfill protection; and requirements for dispensing, using, mixing, and handling of flammable and combustible liquids. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 201 California Department of Education, School Site Selection and Approval Guide As part of the California Education Code, there are requirements for where school sites may be located. The School Facilities Planning Division of the California Department of Education created the School Site Selection and Approval Guide to help school districts select school sites that provide both a safe and supportive environment for students. Within the guide, the section on “Proximity to High-Pressure Water Pipelines, Reservoirs, and Water Storage Tanks” offers suggestions to coordinate with the school district on operating pressures, volumes, and flood risk. State Water Resources Control Board and Central Coast RWQCB The WRRF is within the jurisdiction of the Central Coast RWQCB, which governs many of the regulations associated with water supply, wastewater, and storm drainage. RWQCBs administer regulations related to discharges under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 as amended (the Clean Water Act [CWA]) and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Recycled water regulations are administered by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) on a statewide basis and through local RWQCBs in individual regions. In the Study Area, recycled water regulations are administered by the Central Coast RWQCB. The regulations governing recycled water are found in a combination of sources, including the Health and Safety Code, Water Code, and Titles 22 and 17 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). Issues related to the treatment, distribution, use and quality of recycled water are under the permitting authority of RWQCBs. Additional discussion of these regulations is provided in Section 3.7, Hydrology and Water Quality. Construction General Permit In California, the SWRCB administers regulations promulgated by the USEPA (55 CFR 47990) requiring the permitting of stormwater-generated discharges under the NPDES. Dischargers whose projects disturb one or more acres of soil are required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit) (Order 2012-0006-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002). Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility. The Construction General Permit requires the submittal of a Notice of Intent (NOI) and the development and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP must list BMPs the discharger will use to protect storm water runoff and the placement of those BMPs. Additionally, the SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program; a chemical monitoring program for "non-visible" pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of BMPs; and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment. Central Coast RWQCB: Post Construction Requirements On July 12, 2013, the Central Coast RWQCB adopted the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region (Central Coast RWQCB, 2013). These standards apply to all new development projects in designated Stormwater Management Areas resulting in 2,500 square feet or more of net impervious surface Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 202 area. The primary goal of post construction requirements is to protect watershed health and processes through development runoff controls using: site design and runoff reduction, water quality treatment, runoff retention, and peak flow management. NPDES Permit for City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility Issued by the Central Coast RWQCB, the NPDES Permit for the City’s WRRF (Order No. R3- 2014-0033, NPDES No. CA0049224) establishes Waste Discharge Requirements relative to discharges to San Luis Obispo Creek. Effluent limitations and discharge specifications address the receiving water, as recycled water is regulated under the City’s existing Master Reclamation Permit (Order No. R3-2003-081). California Integrated Waste Management Act The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (Assembly Bill 939) established an integrated waste management framework that consists of the following order of importance: source reduction, recycling, composting, and land disposal of solid waste. Each county is required to prepare and submit an Integrated Waste Management Plan for expected solid waste generation within the county to the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). The Act also requires each city to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element for achieving a solid waste diversion goal of 25 percent by January 1, 1995, and 50 percent by January 1, 2000. The City of San Luis Obispo met this requirement by diverting 50 percent or greater of its waste from 2000 through 2008 (CIWMB 2010). CalRecycle (formerly California Integrated Waste Management Board) CalRecycle governs solid waste regulations on the state level, delegating local permitting, enforcement, and inspection responsibilities to Local Enforcement Agencies (LEA). Regulations authored by CalRecycle (Title 14) were integrated with related regulations adopted by the SWRCB pertaining to landfills (Title 23, Chapter 15) to form CCR Title 27. California Public Utilities Commission The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) regulates Investor-Owned Utilities, including those that offer electric, natural gas, steam, and petroleum service to consumers. CPUC regulates both electric and natural gas rates and services provided by these utilities, including in-state transportation over the utilities’ transmission and distribution pipeline systems, storage, procurement, metering and billing. Natural gas regulations are found in General Orders 58, 94, 96, and 112, while electrical distribution regulations are found in General Orders 95, 128, 131, 165, and 166. California Energy Commission Buildings constructed after June 30, 1977 must comply with standards identified in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). Title 24, established by California Energy Commission (CEC) in 1978, requires the inclusion of state-of-the-art energy conservation features in building design and construction including the incorporation of specific energy Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 203 conserving design features, use of non-depletable energy resources, or a demonstration that buildings would comply with a designated energy budget. c. Local City of San Luis Obispo General Plan The General Plan includes Program 9.3 A‐C of the Safety Element, which sets response‐time program goals for three City departments: Fire, Police, and Public Works and Utilities. The objectives are as follows: • Fire Department: Four minute response time for emergency calls. • Police Department: 30 percent available‐time for patrol response, where available‐ time is defined as the percentage of total time that a patrol unit is considered available for response to emergency calls for service (i.e., not assigned to another emergency call). The Police Department responds to emergency and non‐emergency requests of citizens in a timely manner dependent on call priority, staffing, availability, road conditions, and overall safety. • Public Works and Utilities Departments: Department‐set specific response‐time objectives based on the values at risk and acceptable levels of risk related to city infrastructure issues (e.g., water main break, large trees down in the street). City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 3.15 of the City’s Municipal Code allows the City to establish general purpose retail transactions and a use tax of one‐half percent to protect and maintain essential services, including public safety, police, and fire services, based on approval by two‐thirds of the City Council and a simple majority of voters. This provision sunsets in April 2015, unless it is renewed by a majority of voters. Chapter 3.50 of the City’s Municipal Code imposes a fire facilities inspection fee for multi‐ dwelling properties collected via the secured property tax roll. The City Council is responsible for establishing the specific amount of the fee. Chapter 8.05 of the City’s Municipal Code requires all construction projects with a value of greater than or equal to fifty thousand dollars to submit and comply with a plan for recycling construction and demolition debris. The Recycling Plan must include the estimated volume or weight of project construction and demolition debris, by materials type, to be generated; the maximum volume or weight of such materials that can feasibly be diverted via reuse or recycling; the vendor or facility that the applicant proposes to use to collect or receive that material; and the estimated volume or weight of construction and demolition debris that will be landfilled. Chapter 8.08 of the City’s Municipal Code contains regulations for hazardous weed and debris removal. Whenever the Fire Chief finds weeds or debris that may become a fire hazard, he or she may issue a notice to the owner of the property to remove the hazard. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 204 The California Fire Code and amendments made by SLOFD are located in Chapter 15.04 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. Chapter 15.04 also contains the City’s amendments to the California Building, Electrical, Mechanical, and Plumbing Codes, some of which impact provision of services. City of San Luis Obispo Local Hazard Mitigation Plan The 2004 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan establishes the Fire Department’s standard of coverage that a three‐person engine company, with paramedic, meet the General Plan response‐time objective 95 percent of the time. City of San Luis Obispo: Storm Water Management Plan The Storm Water Management Plan (City of San Luis Obispo 2009) serves as the City’s NPDES Phase II Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) prepared in response SWRCB Water Quality Order 2003-0005-DWQ for NPDES Phase II General Permit No. CAS000004 (State General Permit). Phase II requires small municipal separate storm sewer systems (small MS4s) to obtain NPDES permit coverage. The overall objective of the SWMP is to comply with the NPDES Phase II regulations and State General Permit, and to meet water quality standards contained in the Basin Plan. City of San Luis Obispo Post Construction Requirements, Drainage Design Manual, and City Engineering Standards On July 12, 2013, the Central Coast RWQCB adopted the Post Construction Requirements (PCRs) (see description above). A Stormwater Control Plan is required to be submitted for all projects to demonstrate exemption or level of compliance required. The PCRs outline Stormwater Control Plan content and the City has developed a template for use by applicants, available on its website. The drainage requirements in the City’s San Luis Obispo Creek Waterway Management Plan: Drainage Design Manual (City and County, 2003) and City Engineering Standards (City of San Luis Obispo 2014c) may be superseded by the new PCR, with the more restrictive applied. San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Plan The San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Plan is a primary tool for designing waste reduction programs that are countywide in scope and addresses the county’s landfill needs in a comprehensive way. San Luis Obispo County Diversion Program The San Luis Obispo County recycling program has a goal of 65% diversion from the Cold Creek Landfill. City of San Luis Obispo 2012 Climate Action Plan The 2012 Climate Action Plan includes the goal to reduce the community waste stream to as close to zero waste as possible, with a 75% diversion rate by the year 2020 (City of San Luis Obispo 2014a). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 205 3.9.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures a. Methodology for Analysis. Potential impacts on public services are analyzed based on the potential for the proposed WRRF upgrades to affect the services described in Section 3.9.1 during construction or operation. b. Threshold of Significance. An impact to public services and utilities would be significant if the proposed WRRF upgrades would: • Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police, fire, schools, parks, or other public services; • Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable RWQCB; • Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects; • Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects; • Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, thus requiring new or expanded entitlements; • Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments; • Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs or; • Not comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Criteria listed above that are not applicable to actions associated with the WRRF are identified below, along with a supporting rationale as to why further consideration is unnecessary and a no impact determination is appropriate. • Result in Substantial Adverse Physical Impacts Associated with the Provision of New or Physically Altered Schools, Parks, or other Public Facilities – The improvements associated with the proposed project would not generate substantial population growth, as no new residential or commercial development would be constructed, nor would the proposed project contribute to unplanned growth that would result in the need for new schools, parks, or other public facilities (e.g., libraries), as discussed in Section 4.0, Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations, and in Section 3.10.6, Population and Housing. The proposed project would not generate the need for new or physically altered schools, parks or other public facilities to maintain performance objectives. There would be no impact. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 206 • Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects – The proposed project includes upgrades to the WRRF to bring the facility into compliance with the City’s 2014 NPDES permit. As such, the project would not require or result in the need for additional or expansion of water or wastewater treatment facilities. There would be no impact. The impacts of the WRRF upgrades themselves are the subject of this EIR and are discussed throughout this document. • Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments – The proposed project would upgrade the existing wastewater treatment plant in order to comply with wastewater discharge quality requirements, and would not impact the WRRF’s capacity or increase demand of the facility. There would be no impact. c. Impact Statements and Mitigation Threshold Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police or fire protection. Impact UTL-1 The proposed project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth and require the need for new or addition fire protection or police services that would result in the need for expanded facilities. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. The proposed project does not include residential or commercial development that would directly induce population growth and require new or additional fire protection or police services that would result in the need for expanded facilities. Implementation of the proposed project would not indirectly induce unplanned population growth that would place new demands on local public service providers, as described in Section 3.10.6, Population and Housing. Operation and maintenance of the proposed project would not be labor intensive, would be conducted by existing WRRF operations staff, and would not substantially increase the need for new staff from SLOPD and SLOFD to support new workers and their families. During construction activities, accidents could occur in work areas or along haul routes, which would temporarily increase demand for emergency services. An increased demand would occur on an as-needed and emergency basis. This short-term increase would be accommodated by SLOPD and SLOFD, and would be minimized to the extent feasible with the implementation of an emergency response plan, as described in Section 3.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Because the proposed project would not require any new or physically altered governmental facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police or fire protection, this impact is considered less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 207 Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Threshold Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable RWQCB. Impact UTL-2 The proposed project would include improvements to the WRRF, which would improve treated wastewater quality. There would be a beneficial impact on wastewater effluent quality. Impacts would be Class IV, beneficial. The proposed project includes improvements and upgrades to the WRRF. The upgrades included in the proposed project would improve treated wastewater quality in order to be in compliance with the requirements of the City’s 2014 NPDES permit and applicable wastewater treatment requirements. Thus, the proposed project would beneficially impact treated wastewater quality, and the impacts would be Class IV, beneficial. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be beneficial without mitigation. Threshold Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environment effects. Impact UTL-3 Stormwater drainage improvements are included as part of the proposed project. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. The proposed project would include internal drainage improvements to the WRRF site, including low impact development (LID) upgrades and storm water discharge management options. As described in Section 3.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, there is potential for construction of above-ground facilities to affect storm drainage within the project site. However, compliance with the General Construction Permit, which includes development and implementation of a SWPPP, will ensure that construction-related impacts to drainage water quality are minimized or avoided. Storm water facilities would be constructed as part of the proposed project All new facilities would be constructed above the 100-year water surface elevation, with the exception of the new stormwater outfall, which is addressed in Section 3.7, Hydrology and Water Quality under Impact HYD-4. Storm water discharges from the WRRF site would be managed via a) existing discharge points, b) percolation within the undeveloped area southwest of the main facility, and/or c) a new discharge point along San Luis Obispo Creek. In addition, LID features may also be constructed to improve storm water quality prior to discharge, including reconfiguration of existing vegetated areas and storm water collection features as part of newly constructed buildings. The proposed project would be designed to handle storm water flows through the on-site improvements, which includes flood protection measures such as walls and berms around sensitive site features. Those facilities would be in compliance with the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 208 Drainage Design Manual and City Engineering Standards, and would include development and implementation of a Stormwater Control Plan in compliance with the Central Coast RWQCB’s PCRs. On-site storm water runoff would be captured and managed through infrastructure constructed as part of the proposed project. Additional or expansion of storm water drainage facilities would not be required, and impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Threshold Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, thus requiring new or expanded entitlements. Impact UTL-4 The proposed project would not require additional water supplies. No impact would occur. The proposed project includes upgrades to the existing wastewater treatment facility. The improvements to the existing system would not require additional water supplies, thus, sufficient water supplies are available to serve the proposed project. There would be no impact. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required. Significance After Mitigation. No impact would occur. Threshold Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs. Impact UTL-5 The proposed project would not be served by a landfill with insufficient capacity to accommodate solid waste that would be generated. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. Solid waste generation from the proposed project would be limited to construction-related activities, and would not affect available solid waste disposal capacity in the region. The City of San Luis Obispo is served by three landfills with capacity to serve the proposed project. Potential impacts associated with solid waste disposal would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Threshold Not comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Impact UTL-6 The proposed project would comply with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 209 During construction of the proposed project, the contractor would be required to dispose of excavated soil and solid wastes generated during construction in accordance with local solid waste disposal requirements. Once constructed, operation and maintenance activities would not be expected to generate solid waste. Potential impacts associated with solid waste disposal would be considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required. Significance After Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.9 Public Services and Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 210 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 211 3.10 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT Section 15128 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to briefly describe any possible significant effects that were determined not to be significant and were, therefore, not discussed in detail. This section addresses the potential environmental effects of the proposed project that would not be significant. The items listed below that were found not to be significantly affected by the proposed project are contained in the environmental checklist form included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, greenhouse gases, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, recreation and public services and utilities are addressed in Sections 3.1 to 3.9. Cumulative effects are addressed in Section 4.3. 3.10.1 Aesthetics a. Setting. Visual resources are easily viewed landscape scenes that are valued for their natural or agricultural features and vegetation, including hills, mountains and rock outcrops. The City of San Luis Obispo regulates aesthetics of buildings and public spaces through implementation of adopted policies and programs. The City’s General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element Update, Conservation and Open Space Element, as well as the implementing statutes of the Municipal Code/Zoning Code and Community Design Guidelines are the core of this mechanism. The WRRF occupies approximately 60 acres, comprising the main facility as well as a mostly undeveloped area to the southwest of the main facility site and the area containing the decommissioned chlorine contact channels and related equipment, located approximately 0.5 mile south of the main facility. The majority of the project site is disturbed and contains either existing WRRF equipment and related uses or former water treatment infrastructure. San Luis Obispo Creek is located along the entire easterly boundary of the project site. A segment of the Bob Jones Bike Trail runs along the west side of the creek, and is located between the WRRF perimeter fencing and the edge of the riparian vegetation associated with the creek. The primarily undeveloped area to the southwest of the main facility also includes a portion of the Bob Jones Bike Trail. The site perimeter contains fencing and landscaping that separates it from the bike trail. Scenic Corridors. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) State Scenic Highway System includes a list of highways eligible to become, or designated as, official scenic highways. The intent of the California Scenic Highway System (as stated in Streets and Highways Code Section 260) is to protect and enhance California's natural scenic beauty and to protect the social and economic values provided by the State's scenic resources. Landscaping, including trees and dense foliage, blocks most views of the project site from the northbound side of the U.S. 101, which borders the western edge of the site. This highway is eligible for designation by the Caltrans Scenic Highway System as a “scenic highway” along a majority of its length through San Luis Obispo County. Existing views from this section of highway adjacent to the project site include agricultural fields to the west, residential neighborhoods in the mid-ground, and the Santa Ynez Mountains in the background. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 212 b. Thresholds of Significance. The assessment of aesthetic impacts involves qualitative analysis that is inherently subjective in nature. Different individuals react to aesthetic changes differently. This analysis evaluates the existing visual resources against the proposed project, analyzing the nature of the anticipated change and its compatibility with the visual character of the area. Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G checklist, potentially significant impacts would occur if the proposed project would result in any of the following: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista; b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway; c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings; or d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. c. Assessment of Impacts. The project involves the maintenance and improvement of existing water treatment facilities and therefore would have no impact on scenic vistas or resources. U.S. 101 is not classified as an officially designated or eligible State Scenic Highway in San Luis Obispo County. The nearest officially designated State Scenic Highway to the project site is State Route 1, located approximately 2.5 miles to the north. These conditions preclude the possibility of the proposed project adversely impacted scenic resources within view of a State Scenic Highway. Due to the improvements that would occur with the proposed project, such as the addition of a wetlands demonstration area and improved perimeter landscaping, the project would increase the visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings. Improvements would also be subject to the City of San Luis Obispo’s Night Sky Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 17.23). Therefore, no new source of light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area would occur as a result of the proposed project. No impacts would occur 3.10.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources a. Setting. The majority of the project site is disturbed and contains either existing WRRF equipment and related uses or former water treatment infrastructure. It does not contain any agricultural uses. The project site is surrounded by U.S. 101 to the west and urban, built-up land uses to the east. There nearest active farmland to the project vicinity occurs west of U.S. 101. No forestland is located on or near the project site. The General Plan land use designations shown for the project site are “Public” and “Open Space”. The main facility is zoned for public facilities (PF and PF-S), and the area to the south between U.S. 101 and San Luis Obispo Creek is zoned for conservation and open space (C/OS- 20). b. Thresholds of Significance. Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G checklist, potentially significant impacts would occur if the proposed project would result in any of the following: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 213 a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use; b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract; c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)); d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; and/or e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. c. Assessment of Impacts. The project site does not contain any agricultural uses. Therefore, it would not be eligible for an Important Farmland designation and the development of the proposed project would not result in the conversion of Important Farmland to non- agricultural use. The project site does not contain any active agricultural land and, therefore, would not be eligible for a Williamson Act contract. The main facility is zoned for public facilities (PF and PF- S), and the area to the south between U.S. 101 and San Luis Obispo Creek is zoned for conservation and open space (C/OS-20). These conditions preclude the possibility of the proposed project conflicting with an active Williamson Act contract or an agricultural zoning designation. The project site is surrounded by U.S. 101 to the west and urban, built-up land uses to the east. There nearest active farmland to the project vicinity occurs west of U.S. 101. This condition precludes the possibility of the development of the proposed project creating pressures to convert surrounding farmland to non-agricultural use. No impacts would occur. 3.10.3 Geology and Soils a. Setting. As described in the Paleontological Resources Technical Memo for the proposed project (Appendix E of this EIR), the project area is depicted on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles (Wiegers 2010, 2011). The project is located in the San Luis Valley, between the San Luis Range to the west and the Santa Lucia Mountains to the east. These mountain ranges lie at the boundary of the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province to the south and the Coast Ranges geomorphic province to the north. These provinces are two of the 12 geomorphic provinces in the state, which are defined by lithologically distinct landscapes or landforms (CGS 2002). The San Luis Range and the Santa Lucia Mountains provide material for alluvial valley deposition within the San Luis Valley (Lettis et al. 2004). The project area itself overlies young alluvial flood-plain sediments of middle to early Holocene age (Figure 1; Wiegers 2010, 2011). These sediments consist of gravel, sand, and silts deposited by San Luis Obispo Creek from material eroded from the Santa Lucia Mountains to the east. The Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 214 project site includes one geologic unit mapped at the surface: Young alluvial flood-plain deposits (Qya2) (Wiegers 2010, 2011). No active or potentially active faults have been mapped across the project site, according to the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan. The nearest fault to the project site is the Los Osos Fault that lies approximately 4.5 miles west of the city. Other geologic hazards include liquefaction, landslides, subsidence and unstable or expansive soils. Liquefaction is the sudden loss of the soil’s supporting strength due to groundwater filling and lubricating the spaces between soil particles as a result of ground shaking. Soils with high risk for liquefaction are typically sandy and in creek floodplains or close to lakes. In extreme cases of liquefaction, structures can tilt, break apart, or sink into the ground. The likelihood of liquefaction increases with the strength and duration of an earthquake (City of San Luis Obispo, 2015). According to Figure 5 of the Safety Element in the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, the project site is in an area with high liquefaction potential. Landslides generally occur on steep slopes that have been undercut by erosion or on slopes where the bedding planes of the bedrock are inclined down the slope. The project site does not have steep slopes and therefore is not likely to be susceptible to landslides. No other soil stability or expansive soil issues are identified in the EIR for the LUCE (City of San Luis Obispo, 2014). The geotechnical study conducted for the “San Luis Obispo Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion” (Stall, Gardner & Dunne, Inc., 1988) identifies the following “significant geotechnical factors” that may affect structure design at the site: 1. The presence of debris-laden fill soils, 4. The presence of soft silty clays at and below the proposed bearing elevations; and 5. The fluctuating groundwater table. b. Thresholds of Significance. Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G checklist, potentially significant impacts would occur if the proposed project would result in any of the following: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. rupture of a known earthquake fault, ii. strong seismic ground shaking, iii. seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, or iv. landslides; b) Result on substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse; d) Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial risks to life or property; or e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 215 c. Assessment of Impacts. No active faults are mapped across the site nor are any Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zones mapped on or immediately adjacent to the site. Therefore, no impacts related to the rupture of a known earthquake fault would occur as a result of the proposed project. The proposed project does not include upgrades that would expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: strong seismic ground shaking or seismic-related ground failure. All new structures proposed at the site would be required to comply with building requirements for seismic safety in place at the time and would replace existing, older structures. Therefore, it is conceivable that safety at the site in the event of a seismic event would improve as a result of the proposed project. In addition, the proposed project would not increase the number of people present at the site. Impacts would be less than significant. In addition, because all new structures proposed at the site would be required to comply with the building requirements in place at the time, including those that address existing soil conditions, impacts related to soils conditions would be less than significant. The project site is flat (0 to 2 percent slopes) and does not contain any known landslide areas. The site does not contain and is not located immediately adjacent to any hillsides that could pose a hazard to future site occupants due to landslides. No impact would occur. Impacts related to soil erosion are addressed in Section 3.8, Hydrology and Water Quality. The proposed project involves the upgrade of the City’s wastewater treatment and disposal infrastructure; therefore, no impacts with regard to use septic systems would occur. 3.10.4 Land Use and Planning a. Setting. The General Plan land use designations shown for the project site are “Public” and “Open Space”. The main facility is zoned for public facilities (PF and PF-S), and the area to the south between U.S. 101 and San Luis Obispo Creek is zoned for conservation and open space (C/OS-20). Residential neighborhoods exist west of the project site and are separated from the site by the approximately 250 feet of vegetation that surrounds San Luis Obispo Creek. b. Thresholds of Significance. Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G checklist, potentially significant impacts would occur if the proposed project would result in any of the following: a) Physically divide an established community; b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; or c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 216 c. Assessments of Impacts. The project site is currently in use as a public facility to treat the City’s wastewater, produce recycled water and provide other public amenities. Residential neighborhoods west of the project site are currently separated from the site by the San Luis Obispo Creek. The project would not introduce any new divisions to established communities. The proposed project would be consistent with the land use and zoning designations at the site. In addition, one of the objectives of the proposed project is to provide a nominal increase in wastewater treatment to be consistent with the population projections included in the LUCE, as such it would be potentially consistent with that document. See also Section 3.4, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, for a discussion of the project’s consistency with the City’s adopted Climate Action Plan and the statewide greenhouse gas reduction policy framework. The project site is also not within the boundaries of a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No impacts would occur. 3.10.5 Mineral Resources a. Setting. There are no current mineral extraction activities on the project site. As with most of the city, the project site is located in a Mineral Resource Zone designated by the State, MRZ-3, which is defined as areas containing known or inferred aggregate resources of undetermined significance. The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan does not identify any locally significant mineral resources. b. Thresholds of Significance. Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G checklist, potentially significant impacts would occur if the proposed project would result in any of the following: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state; or b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. c. Assessment of Impacts. As there are no current or planned mineral extraction activities on the project site, the proposed project would not result in the loss of a mineral resource of statewide or local significance. As such, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact on the availability of any known mineral resources within the study area. 3.10.6 Population and Housing a. Setting. Existing activities at the project site currently employ a workforce of 16 full time employees and two part time employees. There are no residential structures at the site. b. Thresholds of Significance. Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G checklist, potentially significant impacts would occur if the proposed project would result in any of the following: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 217 a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere; or c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. c. Assessment of Impacts. No new residential development is proposed as part of the project nor would the project remove existing residential units. The Prado Day Center is scheduled for relocation from the WRRF site to a nearby parcel on the north side of Prado Road. The new Prado Day Center has already been reviewed and approved by the City, and that relocation is not part of this project. The proposed project would not displace any people or housing necessitating the construction of housing elsewhere. No impact would occur. In addition, a substantial increase in the number of employees required to operate the facility would not occur as a result of the proposed project. While there may be a temporary increase in employment opportunities as a result of construction of the proposed project, the construction workforce is anticipated to be sourced locally and workers are not expected to permanently relocate to the City or surrounding area from outside the region. One of the objectives of the proposed project is to provide a nominal increase in wastewater treatment to be consistent with the population projections included in the LUCE. The proposed project would not extend wastewater infrastructure to areas not already served nor would it provide an increase in wastewater capacity beyond that required to serve planned population growth. As such the proposed project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth in the City beyond that consistent with current land use plans. Impacts would, therefore, be less than significant. 3.10.7 Transportation/Traffic a. Setting. The project site is bounded to the west by U.S. 101, north by Prado Road, east by the San Luis Obispo Creek and south by open space. Therefore, access to the site is only available through Prado Road. The WRRF design includes an improved, single access point from Prado Road and an internal street system that will maintain access to the bus maintenance yard and City corporation yard during construction and after the WRRF upgrade. A new entrance to the corporation yard would be created due to the planned construction of the Prado Road overpass. A segment of the Bob Jones Bike Trail runs along the west side of the creek, and is located between the WRRF perimeter fencing and the edge of the riparian vegetation associated with the creek. The primarily undeveloped area to the southwest of the main facility also includes a portion of the Bob Jones Bike Trail. b. Thresholds of Significance. Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G checklist, potentially significant impacts would occur if the proposed project would result in any of the following: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 218 a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit; b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways; c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks; d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); e) Result in inadequate emergency access; or f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. The proposed project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns; therefore, impacts under item c) are not discussed further in this section. c. Assessment of Impacts. Implementation of the proposed project would require a variety of transportation activities over the life of the project. Construction activities are expected to start in late 2017 to meet the Time Schedule Order issued by the SWRCB by November 30, 2019. Other upgrades that would address capacity, condition and other facility needs are planned to be completed at a later date. Most of the transportation activities associated with these upgrades would involve the movement of workers, materials, and equipment during the construction phase. The types and amounts of materials and equipment would depend on the type of maintenance required and technology upgrade. This would result in a temporary increase in vehicle trips on both the local roadway network, in particular Prado Road, as well as U.S. 101. Vehicle trips to and from the site during operations would be limited to a small number of trips by employee personal vehicles and a few truck shipments for deliveries as well as trips to the site by visitors using the onsite public amenities. Overall the number of operational trips associated with the proposed WRRF upgrade would not be substantially different from existing conditions. Given the small number of traffic trips generated by WRRF upgrade and the proximity to the highway, the associated negligible increase in trips on the local roadway network would not adversely impact the local transportation system or otherwise degrade level of service operations. Additionally, if the wetland cooling option is selected it would occur within the area immediately southwest of the main facility. Selection of the wetland cooling option would not require removal of the Bob Jones Bike Trail. Minor realignment may be required depending on the final layout of the wetland cooling option, if selected; however, continuity with the rest of the Bob Jones Bike Trail would be maintained. During construction activities short-term closures or realignments of the trail may be required depending on the activities being conducted and the construction phase. However, the City will minimize the time during which Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 219 the trail will be closed and/or provide a temporary path through the construction area, when feasible. In addition, signage will be provided to make users aware of current and upcoming closures, as necessary. Information on any possible trail closures will also be posted on the City’s website, via social media, and notification will be provided to local bicycle groups. As such, the proposed project both during construction and operation would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. As noted previously, the proposed project includes improved access to the facility from Prado Road and would include improved internal access throughout the facility and with the City’s corporation yard and bus facility. The proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access or increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses. Therefore, impacts related to transportation and traffic would be less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 3.10 Effects Found Not to Be Significant City of San Luis Obispo 220 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 221 4 OTHER CEQA/NEPA CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 INTRODUCTION CEQA contains statutory requirements that require the City of San Luis Obispo to consider the growth-inducing impacts of a project (CEQA Guidelines 15126.2(d)); the cumulative impacts of the project (CEQA Guidelines 15130); the significant irreversible environmental changes resulting from the project (CEQA Guidelines 15126.2(c)); and significant environmental effects which cannot be avoided if the project is implemented (CEQA Guidelines 15126.2(b)). 4.2 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15126(d) specifies that the growth-inducing impacts of a project must be addressed in an environmental impact report (EIR) and states that a proposed project is growth-inducing if it could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. A project can have the potential to induce direct and/or indirect growth. A project would directly induce growth by resulting in construction of new housing. It is important to note that direct forms of growth have indirect effects of expanding the size of local markets and attracting additional economic activity to the area. A project would indirectly induce growth by resulting in: • Substantial new permanent employment opportunities (e.g., commercial or industrial); • A construction effort with substantial short-term employment opportunities that indirectly stimulates the need for additional housing and services to support the new temporary employment demand; and/or • Removal of an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on a required public utility or service (e.g., construction of a major sewer line with excess capacity through an undeveloped area). Growth inducement itself is not an environmental effect but has the potential to lead to environmental effects. These environmental effects may include increased demand on other community and public services and infrastructure. Depending upon the type, magnitude, and location of growth, it can result in significant adverse environmental effects. A project’s growth- inducing potential is therefore considered significant if it could result in significant physical effects in one or more environmental issue areas. Typically, the growth-inducing potential of a project would be considered significant if it fosters growth or a concentration of population above what is assumed in local and regional land use plans, or in projections made by regional planning authorities. Significant growth impacts could also occur if a project provides infrastructure or service capacity to accommodate growth levels beyond those projected to occur by local or regional plans and policies. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 222 4.2.1 Direct Inducement of Growth Construction of new residences is not proposed as part of the project; therefore, the proposed project would not directly induce growth. 4.2.2 Indirect Inducement of Growth - Removal of Obstacles to Growth The proposed project would improve treated wastewater quality to meet Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board, or RWQCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements, and would accommodate the growth planned in the City of San Luis Obispo 2035 General Plan. Environmental effects associated with City growth were evaluated in the 2035 General Plan Program EIR. The San Luis Obispo General Plan is specifically intended to plan for the orderly growth of the City of San Luis Obispo and its sphere of influence; General Plan policies reduce the potential for negative impacts associated with planned growth; and the direct and indirect environmental impacts associated with the City’s growth are analyzed throughout the 2035 General Plan Program EIR. The City Council certified the 2035 San Luis Obispo General Plan Program EIR and adopted the 2035 General Plan, including the land use map, on December 9, 2014. The proposed project would provide a nominal increase in wastewater treatment capacity consistent with the growth projections in the 2035 General Plan. The proposed project would not remove an obstacle to growth that is inconsistent with local and regional land use plans. Impacts would be less than significant. 4.2.3 Economic and Population Growth By increasing wastewater treatment capacity and adhering to Waste Discharge Requirements, the proposed project would support existing development plans and policies. As described above in Section 4.2.2, the proposed project would not result in an indirect growth inducing impact that results in significant physical effects on the environment because the increase in public infrastructure would accommodate the growth already planned in the City’s General Plan. As such, while implementation of the proposed project would allow economic and population growth, the fact that it would not alter existing land use or zoning designations and it is potentially consistent with the City’s existing policy framework, means that the associated physical impacts of the economic and population growth would be less than significant. 4.3 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS 4.3.1 CEQA Analysis Requirements Cumulative impacts, as defined in Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines, refer to two or more individual effects that, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase other environmental impacts. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects. Pertinent guidance for cumulative impact analysis is provided in Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 223 • An EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental effect is “cumulatively considerable” (i.e., the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with effects of past, current, and probable future projects, including those outside the control of the agency, if necessary). • An EIR should not discuss impacts that do not result in part from the project evaluated in the EIR. • The discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not be as detailed as it is for the effects attributable to the project alone. • A project’s contribution is less than cumulatively considerable, and thus not significant, if the project is required to implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact. • The discussion of impact severity and likelihood of occurrence need not be as detailed as for effects attributable to the project alone. • The focus of analysis should be on the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects contribute, rather than on attributes of the other projects that do not contribute to the cumulative impact. 4.3.2 Cumulative Project Scenario Table 4-1 below shows the past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects within the City. None of these projects are located within the immediate vicinity of the project site, except the Prado Day Center project located on Prado Road across from the WRRF site. Table 4-1 Cumulative Projects List Project Address Description Status PLANS IN PROCESS FOR A PLANNING ENTITLEMENT Development Projects Bridge St. Project 279 Bridge St. Light Industrial Pending resubmittal Public Market Place ‐ Long‐Bonetti Ranch 3825 S. Higuera Public Market Pending resubmittal Towne Place Suites 1301 Calle Joaquin Four story hotel, 114 rooms Pending resubmittal Motel Inn 2232 Monterey Hotel, with RV camping Pending resubmittal BMW Car Dealership 1251 Calle Joaquin Car dealership and services Pending resubmittal San Luis Square (Foster’s Freeze site) 570/590 Marsh/581 Higuera Mixed‐use project Pending resubmittal Shell Station Site/Santa Rosa Street Infill 1101 Monterey Hotel/Mixed Use/Parking Structure Scheduled Hearing Freemont Square 1009 Monterey Mixed Use Project Scheduled Hearing The Yard 2450 Victoria Ave 43 Live‐Work units Scheduled Hearing Tentative Tract Maps Imel 3777 Orcutt Road 18 lot residential subdivision On Hold Chevron 276 Tank Farm Remediation, 332 acre Under review Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 224 Table 4-1 Cumulative Projects List Project Address Description Status annexation, 800,000 sq. ft. of commercial, 250 acres of open space West Creek 179 1299 Orcutt Road Residential units Pending resubmittal Specific Plans Avila Ranch Buckley Rd. 500‐700 residential units, business park option, open space EIR preparation under way San Luis Ranch Madonna Rd/US 101 350‐500 residential units, retail, office, hotel, open space Conceptual Review/Study Session Froom Ranch Los Osos Valley Rd. Senior housing, housing, retail, open space GPA/SPA initiation PLANS IN PROCESS FOR BUILDING PERMIT Aerovista Place 862 Aerovista 37,230 sq. ft. commercial buildings On Hold Digital West 600 Tank Farm 80,000 square foot office building On Hold French Hospital 1911 Johnson 4 story medical building On Hold 1845 Monterey Hotel 1845 Monterey Four story Hotel, 102 rooms On Hold Iron Work Affordable Housing 3680 Broad 43 apartments On Hold Miners Hardware (The Junction) 2120 Santa Barbara 69 residential units, 1,200sq. ft. commercial On Hold Chinatown (Phase 2) Monterey/Chorro Streets Mixed‐use project including housing, hotel, retail Pending resubmittal Hotel Serra (formerly Garden Street Terraces) 1119 Garden Street & 736 Marsh Street Mixed‐use project including housing, hotel, retail Pending resubmittal Granada Hotel 1130 Morro Street Hotel expansion Pending resubmittal Monterey Place (Phase 1) 667 Monterey Bed and Breakfast inn with 12 rooms Pending resubmittal Discovery SLO 1144 Chorro Bowling Alley, Restaurant, Night Club Pending resubmittal Serra Meadows 408 Prado 121 single family residences 23 multi‐family residences Pending resubmittal Moylan Terrace 860 Humbert 20 affordable residential units Pending resubmittal Homeless Services Center (Prado Day Center) Prado Road Homeless Services Center Pending resubmittal Aerovista Office Bldgs 892 Aerovista 37,000 sq. ft. office buildings Under review Airport Business Center 4450 Broad New 75,000 sq. ft. commercial buildings Approved Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 225 Table 4-1 Cumulative Projects List Project Address Description Status PLANS IN PROCESS FOR BUILDING PERMIT Wingate 3725 Orcutt Rd. 142 residential units, 5,000 sq. ft. of commercial On Hold Ellsworth Tract 470 Tank Farm (next to Farm Supply) Subdivide property ‐ 35 commercial lots On Hold Laurel Creek 953 Orcutt Rd. 117 residential units Pending resubmittal Toscano (Margarita) 3000 Calle Malva 173 residential units Pending resubmittal Righetti Ranch 3805 Orcutt Rd. 304 Residential units Under review Jones Property 3761 Orcutt Rd. 65 residential units, 15,070 sq. ft. of commercial Under review PLANS UNDER CONSTRUCTION University Square 890 Foothill Remodel and new 20,000 square foot commercial building Approved 10/2/14, Construction underway Chinatown (Phase 1) 848 Monterey Mixed‐use project including housing, hotel, retail Approved 1/26/15, Construction underway SLO Terrace 907 Rachel 17 single family residences Approved 7/28/15, Construction underway SLO Brew warehouse 855 Aerovista New 31,290 square foot brewery Approved 9/21/15, Construction underway 4.3.3 Cumulative Impacts Analysis The proposed project would involve upgrades to an existing water resource recovery facility and would not involve the expansion of the site or substantially increase the amount of development present at the site. Construction activities associated with modernization of the facility would be phased over five years (see Figure 2-4 in Section 2.0, Project Description). Given that only one of the foreseeable projects listed in Table 4-1 is within the immediate vicinity of the site and the phasing of construction activities would be over a five-year period, the likelihood of construction-related impacts to biological resources, noise, air quality and traffic resulting in a cumulatively significant impact in combination with other construction projects in the area is low. The project would not result in long term increases in traffic at the site compared to existing conditions; therefore, no contribution to cumulative impacts would occur. In addition, certain environmental issues, such as recreation, noise and odor would improve as a result of the project. The proposed project is consistent with the City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan (City of San Luis Obispo, 2012) and would not exceed any State or regional GHG thresholds; therefore, by definition it would not contribute to cumulative impacts to GHG and air quality resulting in a significant impact. The proposed project, in conjunction with other nearby planned, pending, and potential future projects in the City of San Luis Obispo would have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources. With the proposed mitigation measures identified in the EIR, such impacts to cultural resources would be less than significant at the project level, and these impacts are site-specific, not cumulative in nature. The proposed project would therefore not make a contribution to any Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 226 cumulative impact on cultural resources outside the project site. Similarly, the less than significant impacts to geological resources would be site specific and not cumulative in nature as would impacts related to use hazardous materials at the project site. The improvements being integrated as part of the proposed project to reduce flooding at the site were specifically chosen from the options available because they would not result in increases in offsite flooding. Also, the primary objective of the proposed project is to improve the quality of the discharge coming from the site. Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to any cumulative impact related to hydrology and water quality. Because the proposed project would improve public services related to wastewater treatment, the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts in this area would not be considerable. In fact the proposed project was considered in the EIR for the LUCE as addressing cumulative impacts from buildout in the City and would reduce otherwise cumulative significant impacts to wastewater treatment from implementation of the General Plan to a less than significant level. 4.4 OTHER TOPICS REQUIRED BY CEQA AND NEPA 4.4.1 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts of the Project As described in Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures, there would be no potentially significant and unavoidable impacts resulting from the proposed project. As such, while the City would be required to adopt Findings as part of its approval of the EIR, it would not prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations for unavoidable, adverse impacts. There would be a number of potential impacts resulting from the proposed project; however, the standard project and regulatory requirements and mitigation measures described in Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures, would reduce any potentially significant impacts to less than significant. 4.4.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Implementation of the proposed project would require irreversible commitment of natural resources including construction materials; labor; and energy required for construction, operation, and maintenance. Commitment of non-renewable natural resources used in construction would include gravel, petroleum products, steel, and other resources. Commitment of energy resources for construction would include fuel oil, natural gas, and gasoline for heavy machinery. Operation of the proposed project would continue to commit energy resources to wastewater treatment. However, the use of recycled water in place of imported, potable water supplies would offset, at least partially, the energy requirements to deliver the same amount of water from outside sources. In addition, the project incorporates the use of solar panels for energy use at the site and could use low-energy wetland cooling in place of more traditional systems. 4.4.3 Indian Trust Assets Indian trust assets (ITAs) are legal interests in assets that are held in trust by the U.S. Government for federally recognized Indian tribes or individuals. The trust relationship usually stems from a treaty, Executive Order, or act of Congress. The Secretary of the Interior is the trustee for the United States on behalf of federally recognized Indian tribes. “Assets” are Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 227 anything owned that holds monetary value. “Legal interests” are defined as a property interest for which there is a legal remedy, such as compensation or injunction, if there is improper interference. Assets can be real property, physical assets, or intangible property rights, such as a lease, or right to use something. Indian trust assets cannot be sold, leased or otherwise alienated without United States’ approval. Trust assets may include lands, minerals, and natural resources, as well as hunting, fishing, and water rights. Indian reservations, rancherias, and public domain allotments are examples of lands that are often considered trust assets. In some cases, Indian trust assets may be located off trust land. USEPA shares Indian trust responsibility with all other agencies of the Executive Branch to protect and maintain Indian Trust assets reserved by or granted to Indian tribes, or Indian individuals by treaty, statute, or Executive Order. As there is not an Indian Trust Asset on the project site, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect Indian Trust Assets. 4.4.4 Compliance with Federal Statutes and Regulations This section describes the status of compliance with relevant federal laws, executive orders, and policies, and the consultation that has occurred to date or will occur in the near future. The topics are based in part on the SWRCB’s Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program Federal Cross-cutting Environmental Regulations Evaluation Form for Environmental Review and Federal Coordination and NEPA requirements for consultation and coordination. a. Federal Endangered Species Act Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) requires Federal agencies, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of Federally-listed as threatened or endangered species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat for these species. Under Section 7, a Federal action that may result in take of a listed species (or result in destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat) must consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service. Section 3.2, Biological Resources, describes listed species that were observed or have the potential to occur in the action area. Where there is a potential for listed species to occur, the standard project requirements and Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(j) have been identified to reduce potential effects of the project. Therefore, the USFWS will be contacted and informal consultation requested for listed species for which take may occur. b. National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 The purpose of this act is to protect, preserve, rehabilitate, or restore significant historical, archeological, and cultural resources. Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account effects on historic properties. Once an undertaking has been established, the Section 106 review involves a step-by-step procedure described in detail in the implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800). As described in Section 3.3, Cultural Resources, a cultural resource assessment report compliant with Section 106 for the proposed project was conducted (see Appendix D). This Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 228 report will be submitted to SHPO for initiation of the consultation process. Completion of the cultural resources report and concurrence by SHPO would ensure compliance with the NHPA. c. Federal Clean Air Act U.S. Congress adopted general conformity requirements as part of the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments in 1990 and the USEPA implemented those requirements in 1993 (Sec. 176 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. §7506) and 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B). General conformity requires that all federal actions “conform” with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) as approved or promulgated by USEPA. The purpose of the general conformity program is to ensure that actions taken by the federal government do not undermine state or local efforts to achieve and maintain the national ambient air quality standards. Before a federal action is taken, it must be evaluated for conformity with the SIP. All “reasonably foreseeable” emissions predicted to result from the action are taken into consideration. These include direct and indirect emissions, and must be identified as to location and quantity. If it is found that the action would create emissions above de minimis threshold levels specified in USEPA regulations (40 CFR § 93.153(b)), or if the activity is considered “regionally significant” because its emissions exceed 10 percent of an area’s total emissions, the action cannot proceed unless mitigation measures are specified that would bring the proposed project into conformance. As described in Section 3.1, Air Quality, the project area lies within the SCCAB. The results of the air quality modeling showed that pollutant emissions would not exceed Federal General Conformity significance thresholds (see Appendix H). As such, the lead agency is in compliance with this Act. d. Executive Order 11988 – Floodplain Management EO 11988 requires federal agencies to recognize the values of floodplains and to consider the public benefits from restoring and preserving floodplains. As described in Section 3.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, based on recent HEC-RAS modeling efforts prepared by the Wallace Group (Wallace Group, August 2014), the WRRF is within the 100-year flood zone, with the elevation of the flood zone changing across the site. At the north end of the plant, the 100-year flood elevation is approximately at elevation 137.25 feet and at the southern end of the plant (south of the chlorine contact basins) the 100-year flood elevation is approximately 126.0 feet. The proposed project would not result in a further extension of infrastructure into the floodplain, but does include improvements that would protect existing facilities from inundation during a 100-year flood event. Similarly, new facilities would be designed to avoid inundation. These improvements would not result in an increase in flooding on adjacent properties and would improve flood protection and stormwater quality throughout the WRRF. As such, the lead agency would be in compliance with this EO. e. Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and Executive Order 13168 The Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act prohibit the take of migratory birds (or any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird) and the take and commerce of eagles. EO 13168 requires that any project with federal involvement address impacts of federal actions of migratory birds. As described in Section 3.2, Biological Resources, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on nesting birds with implementation of the proposed Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 229 Mitigation Measure BIO-1(j) if construction cannot be avoided during the nesting season. Thus, the lead agency would be in compliance with this EO. f. Executive Order 11990-Protection of Wetlands Under EO 11990, federal agencies must avoid affecting wetlands unless it is determined that no practicable alternative is available. As described in Section 3.2, Biological Resources, construction of the proposed project could have a substantial adverse impact on federally protected wetlands. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(d) and BIO-3 would reduce potential impacts to wetlands to less than significant levels. In addition, if the wetland cooling option is selected the proposed project would create additional wetland habitat to the project area. Thus, the lead agency would be in compliance with EO 11990. g. Executive Order on Trails for America in the 21st Century The EO on Trails for America requires federal agencies to protect, connect, promote, and assist trails of all types throughout the United States. As discussed in Section 3.6, Recreation, and Section 3.10.7, Transportation/Traffic, a segment of the Bob Jones Bike Trail runs along the west side of the creek, and is located between the WRRF perimeter fencing and the edge of the riparian vegetation associated with the creek. The primarily undeveloped area to the southwest of the main facility also includes a portion of the Bob Jones Bike Trail. If the wetland cooling option is selected as part of the proposed project, it would occur within the area immediately southwest of the main facility. Selection of the wetland cooling option would not require removal of the Bob Jones Bike Trail, since the area required for wetland cooling could be accommodated within the area available. Some realignment in this area could be required based on the final wetland design, though continuity with the rest of the trail would be maintained. As a result, no adverse effects on trails would occur and the lead agency is in compliance with this EO. h. Executive Order 13007 - Indian Sacred Sites Sacred sites are defined in EO 13007 (May 24, 1996) as "any specific, discrete, narrowly delineated location on Federal land that is identified by an Indian tribe, or Indian individual determined to be an appropriately authoritative representative of an Indian religion, as sacred by virtue of its established religious significance to, or ceremonial use by, an Indian religion; provided that the tribe or appropriately authoritative representative of an Indian religion has informed the agency of the existence of such a site." The proposed project would not be located on or impact any Federal lands and therefore would not affect any Indian sacred sites. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 4.0 Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations City of San Luis Obispo 230 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 5.0 Alternatives City of San Luis Obispo 231 5 ALTERNATIVES 5.1 INTRODUCTION As required by Section 15126.6(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, this EIR examines a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project which could feasibly achieve similar objectives. Included in this analysis are the CEQA-required “no project” alternative along with one other alternative. One of the key factors in considering alternatives is whether they can feasibly attain most of the objectives of the project. As described in Section 2.0, Project Description, of this EIR, the mission of the proposed project is to deliver a Water Resource Recovery Facility in partnership with stakeholders that provides economic, social and environmental value to the community. As discussed in Section 2.0, Project Description, performance measures for each of these objectives is as follows: Economic • Optimize capital investment and life cycle cost • Maximize value for ratepayers’ investment • Incorporate flexibility and scalability to adapt to future conditions • Simplify process flow and make treatment more robust • Optimize application of appropriate technology Social • Create and sustain diverse partnerships that add value to the community • Provide an interpretive center and dedicated features to engage and educate the community • Be a good neighbor • Engender the trust of project stakeholders • Support the development and empowerment of City employees Environmental • Develop and implement a holistic strategy to maximize sustainable resource recovery and manage salts, nutrients and environmental pollutants in the Basin • Incorporate sustainability practices in planning, design, construction, and operation • Maintain compliance and minimize impacts to operations and the community during construction • Sustain reliable compliance post-construction Additionally, the WRRF is being upgraded to meet explicit objectives, including meeting the more stringent discharge requirements established by the RWQCB and SWRCB in late 2014. In addition, the project would provide a nominal increase in ADWF capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element and upgrade/replace aging infrastructure. Finally, the proposed project would increase the production of recycled Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 5.0 Alternatives City of San Luis Obispo 232 water, provide a number of public amenities, and position the City for potential future potable reuse. Based on the potentially significant impacts that could result from implementation of the Program, as identified in Section 3.0, Environmental Setting, Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures, of this EIR, and the objectives identified above, two alternatives were chosen for analysis in this section. The two alternatives evaluated are as follows: • Alternative 1: No Project • Alternative 2: Alternate Process Options As required by CEQA, this section also includes a discussion of the “environmentally superior alternative” among those studied. 5.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT REJECTED State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) states that an EIR should “identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination.” Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts. No alternatives were identified but rejected for consideration in this EIR. 5.3 ALTERNATIVE 1: NO PROJECT 5.3.1 Description As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e), a No Project Alternative has been evaluated. The evaluation of the No Project Alternative allows decision makers to compare the impacts of the proposed project against no development of the project. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2), the No Project Alternative shall discuss what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved. Thus, the No Project Alternative consists of the environmental conditions that currently exist with no future development on the project site. The project site and existing treatment methods at the WRRF would remain as currently described in the existing setting under each issue area discussed in Chapter 3.0. It should be noted that implementation of the No Project Alternative would not be feasible. Implementation of improvements at the project site are required to meet the more stringent discharge limits in the new NPDES permit for the facility as well as the accompanying Time Schedule Order (TSO; No. R3-2014-0036). The TSO establishes the compliance schedule for the permit and requires City achieve the required disinfection byproduct limits and nitrate limits by November 30, 2019. If the No Project Alternative is selected it is highly unlikely that the City would be able to achieve compliance with the NPDES permit requirements in the required timeframe. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 5.0 Alternatives City of San Luis Obispo 233 5.3.2 Impact Analysis This alternative would eliminate short-term impacts related to construction activities, including temporary impacts associated with noise, traffic, hazards and hazardous materials, air emissions and greenhouse gas emissions from construction activities. Additionally, because ground-disturbing activities would not occur, potential impacts to biological and cultural resources would also not occur. However, if the No Project Alternative is selected, improvements to the quality of discharges from the site as well as improvements to noise and odor resulting from replacement of aging equipment with more modern equipment would not occur. In addition, improvements in energy efficiency due to replacement with modern equipment, addition of alternative energy infrastructure at the site and increases in recycled water production would not occur under the No Project Alternative, unlike the proposed project. Therefore, the reduction in generation of greenhouse gas emissions from these components of the project would not occur. The proposed project includes a number of improvements to alleviate flooding impacts at the site. None of these would occur as a result of the No Project Alternative. Similarly, the No Project Alternative would not provide the nominal increase in ADWF capacity at the WRRF in line with planned future growth in the City. Therefore, impacts to both utilities and hydrology would be worse under the No Project Alternative than under the proposed project. Neither the proposed project nor the No Project Alternative would result in significant impacts to the Bob Jones Bike Trail; however, the No Project Alternative would not introduce the planned improvements to community facilities envisioned as part of the proposed project. Impacts to recreation overall would be similar between the proposed project and No Project Alternative. 5.4 ALTERNATIVE 2: ALTERNATE PROCESS OPTIONS 5.4.1 Description As described in the Facilities Plan, various process alternatives exist for renewable energy, flow equalization, disinfection, cooling, secondary treatment and filtration. See Table 5-1 for a list of the current technology at the site, the technology that was selected for each process for inclusion in the proposed project and a list of the alternate technologies considered as part of development of the Facilities Plan for each process. The alternate technologies that were considered comprise Alternative 2. While these alternate process options were ultimately not included in the proposed project, they would be feasible for use at the WRRF site, though not preferred as described in the Facilities Plan. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 5.0 Alternatives City of San Luis Obispo 234 Table 5-1 Alternate Process Options Considered for the WRRF Upgrade Process Current Technology Selected for Proposed Project Other Technologies Considered Renewable Energy 1 Electricity from PG&E. Natural gas from SCG. Cogeneration. • Solar PV projects • Wind power • Micro-hydropower Flow Equalization 2 Dry weather • 4 MG flow equalization basin used for diurnal equalization Wet weather • None (peak flows are blended with nitrified effluent, disinfected and discharged to San Luis Creek) • Decommission secondary clarifier tank in-place • Expand equalization basin to 5.4 MG Diurnal Equalization • Demolish existing secondary clarifier • Diurnal equalization (using existing secondary clarifier) Disinfection 3 Chlorination and dechlorination • UV disinfection for final effluent • Low pressure high output (LPHO) lamps • Open channel configuration • Horizontal, vertical or diagonal/ inclined lamp orientations • Chlorination and dechlorination • Chloramination • Chlorine dioxide • Ozone • Pasteurization • Peracetic acid (paa) Cooling 4 Three cooling towers Two cooling options are assessed as part of the proposed project: • Cooling Towers • Wetland Cooling • Ground Source Heat Pump • Spray Pond Cooling System • Chiller Cooling System Secondary Treatment 5 During wet weather events, advanced treatment is bypassed and blended effluent is disinfected prior to discharge. • Conventional nitrification/denitrification using the MLE process • High Rate A/B Process • Conventional nitrification/denitrification using the VertiCel® technology • BioMag® • Membrane Bioreactor Filtration 6 Granular media filtration (GMF) for tertiary treatment. • Granular Media Filter Technology • Disk Filter Technology • Compressed Media Filter Technology 1 Facilities Plan, Appendix F, TM No. 6 – Renewable Energy, con presents the detailed evaluation that was performed 2 Facilities Plan, Appendix H, TM No. 9 – Capacity Considerations, presents the detailed evaluation that was performed 3 Facilities Plan, Appendix D, TM No.4 – Disinfection Study, presents the detailed evaluation that was performed 4 Facilities Plan, Appendix Q, TM No. 14 – Cooling Technology Evaluation, presents the detailed evaluation that was performed 5 Facilities Plan, Appendix O, TM No. 12 – Process Alternatives Analysis, presents the detailed evaluation that was performed 6 Facilities Plan, Appendix P, TM No. 13 - Filter Technology Evaluation, presents the detailed evaluation that was performed 5.4.2 Impact Analysis a. Air Quality. The various process options detailed in Table 5-1 would all require ground disturbance at the site and would not alter the need for construction activities, which would likely be of similar intensity as for the proposed project. Therefore, emissions associated with construction activities are anticipated to be similar to those generated by the proposed Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 5.0 Alternatives City of San Luis Obispo 235 project and, therefore, less than significant. Operational air emissions associated generated by this alternative would depend on which combination of process options detailed in Table 5-1 is selected. Some of the alternate process options listed in Table 5-1, column 4 could generate more or less air emissions than the corresponding process option selected for inclusion in the proposed project (see column 3). However, the potential for these to exceed SLOAPCD emissions thresholds is low. Impacts to air quality as part of Alternative 2 could be better than or worse than for the proposed project, depending on which process options are selected, but ultimately are anticipated to be less than significant. b. Biological Resources. The various process options detailed in Table 5-1 would all require ground disturbance at the site and would not alter the need for construction activities in the southern portion of the site where impacts to sensitive plant and animal species, including nesting birds, have potential to occur (see Section 3.2, Biological Resources). As such impacts to biological resources from Alternative 2 would generally be similar to those identified for the proposed project. However, if wind power is selected as an alternative for renewable energy there is the potential for additional impacts to avian species to occur, depending on where the turbine(s) would be located at the site (i.e. in proximity to potential nesting sites or foraging areas). No additional water discharges from the site would be required to accommodate the alternate process options; therefore, no additional impacts to San Luis Obispo Creek would be anticipated under this alternative. As with the proposed project, mitigation measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(j) would apply to this alternative. c. Cultural Resources. The various process options detailed in Table 5-1 would all require ground disturbance at the site, which could potentially disturb previously unidentified cultural resources. Impacts to cultural resources under Alternative 2 would be potentially significant and require implementation of measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(d) and CR-2(a) through CR-2(f). Similar to the proposed project, implementation of the required mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. d. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The volume of greenhouse gas emissions generated by this alternative would depend on which combination of process options detailed in Table 5-1 is selected. While several of the alternate process options listed in Table 5-1, column 4 have the potential to be more energy intensive than the corresponding process option selected for inclusion in the proposed project (see column 3), the potential for these to exceed the SLOAPCD annual GHG threshold of 1,150 10,000 MT/year is low. In addition, provision of new alternate energy sources at the site would occur under this alternative and, similar to the proposed project, this alternative would provide an increase in recycled water for use in the city, which is consistent with the City’s CAP. Impacts to greenhouse gas emissions as part of Alternative 2 could be better than or worse than for the proposed project depending on which process options are selected but ultimately would be less than significant. e. Noise. The level of noise generated by this alternative would depend on which combination of process options detailed in Table 5-1 is selected. While several of the alternate process options listed in Table 5-1, column 4 have the potential to generate more or less noise than the corresponding process option selected for inclusion in the proposed project (see column 3), the potential for these to exceed City noise thresholds is low given the existing ambient noise conditions at the site as well as the distance from the site to nearby sensitive Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 5.0 Alternatives City of San Luis Obispo 236 receptors. Noise levels associated with construction activities under this alternative would be similar to the proposed project both in terms of volume and duration. None of the alternate process options would result in an expansion of the project site. Therefore, the proximity of noise sources of noise associated with either construction or operation as part of this alternative would not be greater than under the proposed project. Impacts to noise as part of Alternative 2 could be better than or worse than for the proposed project depending on which process options are selected but ultimately would be less than significant. f. Recreation. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would include development of a number of public amenities at the site, which would result in a beneficial impact to recreation. Generally, impacts to recreation would be similar between the proposed project and Alternative 2, though under Alternative 2 realignment of a portion of the Bob Jones Bike Trail would not be required to accommodate the use of wetland cooling, eliminative that less than significant impact of the proposed project. g. Hydrology and Water Quality. Mitigation measures HYD-1 and HAZ-1 would apply to this alternative, regardless of which alternate process options were chosen and would reduce potential water quality impacts related to construction to a less than significant level. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would not alter drainage patterns at the site or in the area, as planned flood improvements proposed as part of the project would also be implemented as part of this alternative. In addition, regardless of which process options are selected from Table 5-1, column 4, the facility would still be required to comply with its NPDES permit and as such this alternative would result in an improvement in the quality of discharges to San Luis Obispo Creek. In addition, addition of a new stormwater discharge point could occur under this alternative and implantation of mitigation measure HYD-4 would be required. Overall impacts to hydrology and water quality would be similar between Alternative 2 and the proposed project. h. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Regardless of the process options selected, this alternative would involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during both construction and operation and has potential to create a hazard through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Similar to the proposed project, implementation of mitigation measures HAZ-1(a) and HAZ-1(b) would be required for this alternative. As with the proposed project, Alternative 2 could result in the disturbance of contaminated soils on an active cleanup sites listed on the SWRCB GeoTracker database. Mitigation measure HAZ-3(a) and HAZ-3(b) would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Overall, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be similar to the proposed project for Alternative 2. i. Public Services/Utilities. Selection of any of the alternate process options detailed in Table 5-1 would achieve the project objectives of providing a nominal increase in treatment capacity during ADWF conditions. In addition, the process options would allow an increase in recycled water production. As such the impacts to public services/utilities would be the same for the proposed project and Alternative 2 and would be less than significant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 5.0 Alternatives City of San Luis Obispo 237 5.5 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVES This section evaluates the impact conclusions for the proposed project and the two alternatives under consideration. It then identifies the environmentally superior alternative. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, if the No Project Alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative, the alternative among the remaining scenario(s) that is environmentally superior must also be identified. Table 5-2 shows whether each alternative’s environmental impact is greater, lesser, or similar to the proposed project for each issue area. Table 5-2 Impact Comparison Summary Issue Proposed Program No Project Alternative Alternate Process Options Air Quality = +/- +/- Biological Resources = + =/- Cultural Resources = + = Greenhouse Gas Emissions = +/- +/- Noise = +/- +/- Recreation = = +/= Hydrology and Water Quality = - = Hazards and Hazardous Materials = + = Public Services/Utilities = - = Overall = + = + Environmentally superior to the proposed project - Environmentally inferior to the proposed project = No better or worse than the proposed project As indicated above, the No Project Alternative would be the Environmentally Superior Alternative when compared to the proposed project in that it would avoid all of the potentially significant impacts associated with construction of the proposed project. However, it would not meet any of the objectives of the proposed project, including complying with the stringent discharge requirements included in the facility’s September 2014 NPDES permit and the accompanying Time Schedule Order that establishes the compliance schedule for the project. In addition, none of the beneficial impacts of the project with regards to water quality and odor reduction would be realized under this alternative. Alternative 2 (Alternate Process Options) would result in a similar level of impact as the proposed project, though in some issue areas, such as air quality, noise and greenhouse gases, potential impacts could be better or worse depending on which combination of process options is selected. This alternative would avoid the potential need to realign the segment of the Bob Jones Bike Trail that passes through the southern portion of the site as it would not include the wetlands cooling option. The impact to the trail resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant as it would not necessitate removal of the trail from within the site and would maintain continuity with the portions of the trail north and south of the facility. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 5.0 Alternatives City of San Luis Obispo 238 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 239 6 REFERENCES AND PREPARERS 6.1 REFERENCES Air Pollution Control District San Luis Obispo County (SLOAPCD). 2002. 2001 Clean Air Plan. March 2002. http://www.slocleanair.org/business/regulations.php. Accessed February 2016. -----. 2012. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. April 2012. http://www.slocleanair.org/images/cms/ upload/files/CEQA_Handbook_2012_v1.pdf. Accessed February 2016. Airport Land Use Commission of San Luis Obispo County. 2005. Airport Land Use Plan for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. https://secure2.techxpress.net/sloairport.com/ images/uploads/pages/File/ALUP_TXT.pdf. Accessed February 2016. Arnold, Jeanne E. 1995. “Transportation Innovation and Social Complexity among Maritime Hunter-Gatherer Societies.” American Anthropologist 97: 733-747. Autry, Jim. 2014. “Preface – City Sewer History” in Sewer System Management Plan Update. City of San Luis Obispo. 2014 Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, second edition. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Bean, Walton. 1968. California: An Interpretive History. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Bickel, P. McW. 1978. “Changing Sea Levels along the California Coast: Anthropological Implications.” Journal of California Anthropology 5:6-20. Bowers, N., R. Bowers, & K. Kaufman. 2004. Mammals of North America. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Publishing Company. Breschini, Gary S., and Trudy Haversat. 1991. “Early Holocene Occupation of the Central California Coast.” In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California. Jon M. Erlandson and Roger H. Colten (eds), pp.125-132. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Vol. 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Crespi, Juan. 2001. A Description of Distant Roads: Original Journals of the First Expedition into California, 1769-1770. Brown, Alan K. (editor). Alan K. Brown (translator). San Diego, CA: State University Press. California Air Resources Board (CARB). Ambient Air Quality Standards. October 1, 2015. Available: http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf -----. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data – 2000 to 2009. April 6, 2012. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm. Accessed February 2016. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 240 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). CalEEMod User Guide, Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMod. July 2013. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/caleemod- appendixa.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed February 2016. California Climate Change Research Center. 2006. Climate Scenarios for California. Sacramento, CA. -----. 2009. The Impacts of Sea-Level Rise on the California Coast. Sacramento, CA. May 2009. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2010. List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations. Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, Sacramento, CA. September 2010. -----. 2015a. Special Animals List. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Natural Diversity Database. January 2011. -----. 2015b. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), Rarefind 5 (online). Commercial Version. -----. 2015c. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). http://bios.dfg.ca.gov -----. 2015d. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Natural Diversity Database. July 2014. California Department of Transportation. June 2004. Transportation- and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual -----. 2014 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways. 2014. Available: http://traffic- counts.dot.ca.gov/docs/2014_aadt_volumes.pdf California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2004. Bulletin 118 – San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin. February 27. -----. Managing an Uncertain Future: Climate Change Adaption Strategies for California’s Water, October 2008. Available: http://www.water.ca.gov/climatechange/docs/ClimateChangeWhitePaper.pdf -----. 2014. CASGEM Basin Summary – San Luis Obispo Valley. May 30. Available: http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/casgem/pdfs/basin_prioritization/SCRO%20 35.pdf California Energy Commission. 2009. Environmental Health and Equity Impacts from Climate Change and Mitigation Policies in California: A Review of the Literature. March 2009. http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CEC-500-2009-038/CEC-500-2009-038- D.PDF. Accessed February 2016. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 2006. Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature. March 2006. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 241 http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/climate_action_team/reports/2006-04- 03_FINAL_CAT_REPORT_EXECSUMMARY.PDF. Accessed February 2016. California Native Plant Society. 2015. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. Online Edition, v8- 02. Available at www.rareplants.cnps.org. California Natural Resources Agency, 2009 California Climate Adaption Strategy, December 2009. Available: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2010publications/CNRA-1000-2010- 010/CNRA-1000-2010-010.PDF California Office of Historic Preservation. 2003. California Historical Resources Status Codes. Electronic document, http://www.ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/tab8.pdf. Accessed November 2, 2015. Central Coast RWQCB. 2013. Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region. July 12. Chesnut, Merlyn. 1993. The Gaviota Land: A Glimpse into California History. Fithian Press, Santa Barbara, California. Cornejo, AnnMarie. 2014. “Upgrade to SLO’s Sewage Plant Will Save Energy, Cut Emissions” The Tribune. 30 January 2014. http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article39467097.html. Accessed November 2015. Crawford Multari and Clark Omni-Means and the City of Atascadero Community Development Department. 2004. City of Atascadero General Plan 2025. Final Plan Update #1. Updated June 23, 2004. Dumke, Glenn S. 1944. The Boom of the Eighties in Southern California. San Marino, CA. Huntington Library Publications. Erlandson, Jon M. 1991. Early Maritime Adaptations on the Northern Channel Islands. In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by J. M. Erlandson and R. Colten. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Vol. 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. -----. 1994. Early Hunter-Gatherers of the California Coast. Plenum Press, New York. Erlandson, Jon M., Theodore Cooley, and Richard Carrico. 1987. A Fluted Projectile Point Fragment from the Southern California Coast: Chronology and Context at CA-SBA-1951. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 9:120–128. Fitzgerald, Richard T. 2000. Cross Creek: An Early Holocene/Millingstone Site. California State Water Project, Coastal Branch Series Paper Number 12. San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society, San Luis Obispo, California. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 242 Gamble, Lynn. H., Philip. L. Walker, and Glenn S. Russell. 2001. Integrative Approach to Mortuary Analysis: Social and Symbolic Dimensions of Chumash Burial Practices. American Antiquity 66:185–212. Gibson, R. O. 1983. Ethnography of the Salinan People: A Systems Approach. Master’s Thesis, California State University, Hayward. Glassow, Michael A. 1997. Middle Holocene Cultural Development in the Central Santa Barbara Channel Region. In Archaeology of the California Coast during the Middle Holocene, edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Michael A. Glassow, pp.73–90. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Vol. 4. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Glassow, Michael A, L. Wilcoxen, and J. M. Erlandson. 1988. Cultural and Environmental Change during the Early Period of Santa Barbara Channel Prehistory. In The Archaeology of Prehistoric Coastlines, edited by G. Bailey and J. Parkington pp. 64–77. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. Greenwood, Roberta S. 1972. “9000 Years of Prehistory at Diablo Canyon, San Luis Obispo County, California.” San Luis Obispo Historical Society Occasional Paper No. 7. -----. 1978. Obispeño and Purisimeño Chumash. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 520–523. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William G. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. Hildebrandt, William. 1983. Archaeological Research of the Southern Santa Clara Valley Project. California Department of Transportation, District 4. San Francisco, CA. Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Nongame Heritage Program. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Revised 1996. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, [Kroeze, C.; Mosier, A.; Nevison, C.; Oenema, O.; Seitzinger, S.; Cleemput, O. van; Conrad, R.; Mitra, A.P.; H.U., Neue; Sass, R. (eds.)], Paris: OECD, 1997. -----. 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Johnson, John R. 1987. Chumash Social Organization: An Ethnohistoric Perspective. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara. Johnson, J. R., T. W. Stafford, Jr., H. O. Ajie, and D. P. Morris. 2002. Arlington Springs Revisited. In Proceedings of the Fifth California Islands Symposium, edited by D. Browne, K. Mitchell, and H. Chaney, pp. 541–545. USDI Minerals Management Service and the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 243 Jones, Terry L. 1993. Big Sur: A Keystone in Central California Cultural History. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 29(1):1–78. -----. 1995. Transitions in Prehistoric Diet, Mobility, Exchange, and Social Organization along California’s Big Sur Coast. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Davis. Jones, Terry L., K. Davis, G. Farris, S.D. Grantham, T.W. Fung, and B. Rivers. 1994. Toward a Prehistory of Morro Bay: Phase II Archaeological Investigations for the Highway 41 Widening Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. Report prepared for Caltrans District 5, San Luis Obispo, California. Jones, D.A., C. Young, and W.R. Hildebrandt. 2001. Phase II Archaeological Test Excavation at CA-SLO-832 and CA-SLO-1420, for the James Way/Price Street Road Improvement Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis California. Submitted to California Department of Transportation, San Luis Obispo. Jones, Terry L., and Jennifer A. Ferneau. 2002. Deintensification along the Central California Coast. In Catalysts to Complexity, Late Holocene Societies of the California Coast, edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Terry L. Jones, pp. 205-232. Perspectives in California Archaeology Vol. 6. Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Jones, Terry L., Richard T. Fitzgerald, Douglas J. Kennett, Charles Miksicek, John L. Fagan, John Sharp, and Jon M. Erlandson. 2002. The Cross Creek Site and Its Implications for New World Colonization. American Antiquity 67:213–230. Jones, Terry L. and Kathryn A. Klar. 2007. California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland. Jones, Terry L., Nathan E. Stevens, Deborah A. Jones, Richard T. Fitzgerald, and Mark G. Hylkema. 2007. The Central Coast: A Midlatitude Milieu. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, pp. 125–146. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland. Jones, Terry L. and Georgie Waugh. 1995. Central California Prehistory: A View from Little Pico Creek. Perspectives in California Archaeology 3. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. -----. 1997. Climatic Consequences of Population Pragmatism? A Middle Holocene Prehistory of the Central Coast. In Archaeology of the California Coast During the Middle Holocene, edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Michael A. Glassow, pp. 111–128. Perspectives in California Archaeology 4. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Justice, Noel D. 2002. Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of California and the Great Basin. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 244 Kennett, Douglas J. 1998. Behavioral Ecology and the Evolution of Hunter-Gatherer Societies on the Northern Channel Islands, California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara. King, Chester D. 1969. Approximate 1769 Chumash Village Locations and Populations. Annual Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey 11:3. Los Angeles, California. -----. 1981. The Evolution of Chumash Society: A Comparative Study of Artifacts Used in Social System Maintenance in the Santa Barbara Channel Region Before A.D. 1804. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Davis. -----. 1990. Evolution of Chumash Society: A Comparative Study of Artifacts Used in Social System Maintenance in the Santa Barbara Channel Region Before A.D. 1804. Revised Ph.D. dissertation with a new preface and updated bibliography. In The Evolution of North American Indians, edited by David Hurst Thomas. Garland Publishing, New York. Kroeber, Alfred J. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bulletin 78, Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Reprinted 1976 by Dover Publications, Inc., New York. Lebow , C., M.C. Baloian, D.R. Harro, R.L. Mckim, C. Denardo, J. Onken, E. Romanski, and B.A. Price. 2001. Final Report of Archaeological Investigations for Reaches 5B and 6 Coastal Branch Aqueduct, Phase II. Applied EarthWorks Inc., Fresno, California. Submitted to Central Coast Water Authority, Buellton, California. Mayer, K.E. and W.F. Laudenslayer, Jr., editors. 1988. A Guide to the Wildlife Habitats of California. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Sacramento, California. Mikkelsen, P., W.R. Hildebrandt, and D. A. Jones. 2000. Prehistoric Adaptations on the Shores of Morro Bay Estuary: Excavations at Site CA-SLO-165, Morro Bay, California. San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society Occasional Papers no. 14. Miller, Bruce W. 1988. Chumash: A Picture of Their World. Sand River Press, Los Osos, California. Milliken, R. T. and J. R. Johnson. 2005. An Ethnography of Salinan and Northern Chumash-1769 to 1810. Report prepared for Caltrans District 5. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis. Copies available from California Department of Transportation, San Luis Obispo. Mills, Wayne, Michael F. Rondeau, and Terry L. Jones. 2005. A Fluted Point from Nipomo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Journal of California and Great Basin Archaeology 25(2): 68- 74. Milton Cat. Gen Set Package Performance Data [DM8263]. Web Accessed: December 2, 2015. http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/3516C/Download %20Performance%20Data%20.pdf. Accessed February 2016. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 245 -----. Performance Data [DM9933]. Web Accessed December 2, 2015. Available: http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/C32/C32%201000 KW%20C32DR38%20Performance%20Data.pdf. Accessed February 2016. Mithun, Marianne. 2004. The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Originally published 1999. Moratto, Michael. 1984. California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Annual Greenhouse Gas Index, 2015. Available: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/ Paso Robles, City of. 2014. History of Paso Robles: The Land. Electronic document, http://www.prcity.com/about/history.asp, accessed January 5, 2015. Rick C., Torben, R. Vellanoweth, Jon M. Erlandson, and Douglas J. Kennett. 2002. On the Antiquity of the Single-Piece Shell Fishhook: AMS Radiocarbon Evidence from the Southern California Coast. Journal of Archaeological Science 29:933–942. Rolle, Andrew. 2003. California: A History. Revised and expanded sixth edition. Harlan Davidson, Inc., Wheeling, Illinois. San Luis Obispo, City of. May 1996. General Plan Noise Element. San Luis Obispo, CA. -----. 2006. A Brief History. Electronic document, www.ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us/briefhistory.asp. Accessed May 10, 2006. -----. 2009. Storm Water Management Plan: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II. July. Available: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/water_issues/programs/stormwater/muni _phase2/slo_city/Jul_2009_SLO_SWMP.pdf -----. 2010. Historic Preservation Ordinance. Electronic Document, http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4142, accessed November 2, 2015 -----. 2010. General Plan Water and Wastewater Element. Available at: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6649. -----. 2011. 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Available at: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6369. -----. 2012. Climate Action Plan. August 2012. Available: http://www.slocleanair.org/images/cms/upload/files/SLO_CAP_WEb.pdf -----. November 2013. Bicycle Transportation Plan. City of San Luis Obispo, Public Works Department, San Luis Obispo, CA. Obtained November 2015 at: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=3785 -----. 2014a. General Plan – Safety Element. December 9. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 246 -----. 2014b. Land Use and Circulation Update (LUCE). December 9, 2014. City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development Department, San Luis Obispo CA. Obtained January 2015 at: http://passthrough.fw- notify.net/download/695372/http://www.slo2035.com/images/pubdraft/luce_volum e_II_appendix_a_draft_land_use_element_2014_06_web.pdf -----. 2014c. General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element, Appendix D – Background Report. Available at: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6739. -----. 2014d. General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element, Appendix I - Water Supply Assessment. Available at: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6751. -----. 2014e. City Engineering Standards. February 2014 Edition. Available: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=3473 -----. 2014f. General Plan Land Use and Circulation Draft Program EIR. Oliveira Environmental Consulting LLC. Available at: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6723. -----. 2015a. Water Resource Recovery Facility Facilities Plan. Prepared by HDR for the City of San Luis Obispo, Utilities Department, San Luis Obispo, CA. Obtained July 2015 at: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities- department/wastewater/wastewater-treatment/wrrf-upgrade-project -----. 2015b. Treatment Plant History. Electronic document, http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities- department/wastewater/wastewater-treatment/treatment-plant-history, accessed September 25, 2015. -----. 2015c. San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. October 2015. -----. 2015d. General Plan, Chapter 7 Parks and Recreation. Adopted April 3, 2001. City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development Department, San Luis Obispo CA. http://38.106.4.251/home/showdocument?id=6703. Accessed November 2015 San Luis Obispo, City of and County of San Luis Obispo. 2003. San Luis Obispo Creek Waterway Management Plan: Drainage Design Manual. Volume III. http://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=4400. Accessed February 2016. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD). San Luis Obispo County Attainment Status. August 20, 2013. http://www.slocleanair.org/images/cms/upload/files/AttainmentStatus20August201 3%288%29.pdf. Accessed February 2016. San Luis Obispo County Flood Control & Water Conservation District. 2014. CASGEM Monitoring Plan for High and Medium Priority Groundwater Basins in the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control & Water Conservation District. San Luis Obispo, CA. September 2014. San Luis Obispo Regional Water Management Group (SLO RWMG). 2014. San Luis Obispo Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. San Luis Obispo, CA. July 2014. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 247 San Luis Tribune. 1881. "That Nasty Creek." Oct. 15, 1881, San Luis Tribune, San Luis Obispo. Sawyer, J. O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Shumway, Burgess McK. 2007. California Ranchos. Second Edition. The Borgo Press. Singer, Clay. 1992. Site Record for CA-SLO-1449H. On file at the SCCIC. Singer, C, J.E. Atwood, and J. Frierman. 1993. It Came from Beneath the Streets: An Archaeological Report on the Expansion of the City of San Luis Obispo Wastewater Treatment System. Squibb, Paul. 1984. Captain Portola in San Luis Obispo County in 1769. Tabula Rasa Press, Morro Bay, California. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2011. 2010 Integrated Report (Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List/305(b) Report). December 23. Accessed 14 December 15. Available: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/integrated2010.shtml Stebbins, R. C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. 2nd ed. Houghton-Mifflin Company. Boston, Massachusetts. Suarez, A. V., Richmond, J. Q., & Case, T. J. 2000. Prey selection in horned lizards following the invasion of Argentine ants in southern California. Ecological Applications, 10(3), 711-725. Templeton Chamber of Commerce. 2015. Templeton History. Electronic document, https://www.templetonchamber.com/content/templeton-history, accessed January 5, 2015. Templeton Historical Museum Society. 2014. Early Templeton History. Electronic document, http://www.templetonmuseum.com/history.html, accessed January 5, 2014. Trenham, P.C. and H.B. Shaffer. 2005. Amphibian upland habitat use and its consequences for population viability. Ecological Applications 15(4): 1158-1168. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. December 12, 2015. Adoption of the Paris Agreement. Accessed at https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. -----. 2001. Final Summary Report: Guidelines for Jurisdictional Determinations for Waters of the United States in the Arid Southwest. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. San Francisco, California. -----. 2004. Review of Ordinary High Water Mark Indicators for Delineating Arid Streams in the Southwest United States. Technical Report ERDC TR-04-1. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 248 Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, New Hampshire. -----. 2005. Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05-05: Ordinary High Water Mark Identification. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, D.C. -----. 2006. Distribution of Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) Indicators and Their Reliability in Identifying the Limits of “Waters of the United States” in Arid Southwest Channels. Technical Report ERDC/CRREL TR-06-5. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, New Hampshire. -----. 2008a. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Technical Report ERDC/EL TR-08-28. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, Mississippi. -----. 2008b. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. Technical Report ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, New Hampshire. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2014. Lists of Hydric Soils. National Cooperative Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture. March. Accessed via: http://soils.usda.gov/use/hydric/. U.S. Department of Agricultural, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2015. Web Soil Survey. Soil Data version 8. Available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. May 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual,. FTA-VA-90-1003-06. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2010. U.S. EPA #430-R-11-005. April 2012. Available: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1973. The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.). -----. 2002. Recovery plan for the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii). US Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. -----. 2005. Revised Guidance on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-legged Frog. -----. 2015a. Critical Habitat Portal. Available at: http://criticalhabitat.fws.gov -----. 2015b. Information, Planning, and Conservation System. Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ Wallace, William. 1955. Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11:214–230. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 249 -----. 1978. Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 B.C. In California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 25–36. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. Waring, George E. 1896. Sewerage and Land Drainage. D. Van Norstrand Co., New York. Western Regional Climate Center. 2005. San Luis Obispo Polytec, California (047851): Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. Web Accessed: November http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?caslop+sca Worland, J. December 12, 2015. What to Know About the Historic ‘Paris Agreement’ on Climate Change. Time. Retrieved from http://time.com/4146764/paris-agreement-climate-cop- 21/ 6.2 PERSONS CONTACTED Autry, Jim. 2015. Personal Communication between Jim Autry, former supervisor of the WRRF and Jasmine Diaz, Water Systems Consulting, Inc. Via email. September 22, 2015. 6.3 LIST OF PREPARERS Rincon Consultants, Inc. Richard Daulton, Principal Planner Jennifer Haddow, Principal Environmental Scientist John Larson, Senior Planner Sarah Sorensen, Environmental Planner Lexi Journey, Environmental Scientist Chris Bersbach, Senior Environmental Scientist Colby Boggs, Principal Biologist Jamie Deutsch, Biologist Kevin Hunt, Senior Cultural Resources Specialist Chris Duran, Senior Archaeologist Hannah Haas, Archaeologist Breanna Campbell, Archaeologist Shannon Carmack, Senior Architectural Historian David Daitch, Senior Paleontologist Kyle Brudvik, Paleontologist Craig Huff, GIS Doug Carreiro, GIS Julia Hall, Graphics RMC Water and Environment Rosalyn Prickett, Senior Water Resources Planner Alexis Cahalin, Water Resources Planner Sally Johnson, Water Resources Planner Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Final EIR Section 6.0 References and Preparers City of San Luis Obispo 250 This page intentionally left blank. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 251 7 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES 7.1 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES This section includes comments received during the circulation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the San Luis Obispo Water Resources Recovery Facility Project; responses to the comments on the Draft EIR; and corrections and information added to the Final EIR, where appropriate, in response to comments related to the proposed project’s environmental effects. Corrections or additional text discussed in the responses to comments are also shown in the text of the Final EIR in strikeout (for deleted text) and underline (for added text) format. Other minor clarifications are also shown as corrected in this format, including corrections not based on responses to comments. Corrections to typographical errors or changes from reference to Draft EIR to Final EIR in the text are not denoted in underline or strikeout text. These changes do not introduce new information or otherwise affect the analysis or conclusions of the EIR and thus do not require recirculation under State CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5. The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review period that began on April 21, 2016 and concluded on June 6, 2016. The City of San Luis Obispo received six comment letters on the Draft EIR. Commenters and the page number on which each commenter’s letter can be found are listed below in Table 7-1. Table 7-1 Comments Received for the Draft EIR Number Name Affiliation Date Page 1 Karen White Xolon Salinan Tribe 04/19/16 252 2 Mona Tucker Northern Chumash Tribe 04/22/16 257 3 Stephen Henry U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 05/12/16 259 4 Melissa Guise San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District 06/01/16 263 5 Susan Stewart State Water Resources Control Board 06/02/16 271 6 Scott Morgan State Clearinghouse, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research 06/03/16 282 The comment letters and the City’s responses follow. Each comment letter has been numbered sequentially and each separate issue raised by the commenter, if more than one, has also been assigned a number. The responses to each comment identify first the number of the comment letter, and then the number assigned to each issue (Response 2.1, for example, indicates that the response is for the first issue raised in Comment Letter 2). In addition to soliciting public and agency comments on the Draft EIR pursuant to CEQA, the City’s Planning Commission reviewed the Draft EIR. Comments related to the content of the EIR received at the Planning Commission meeting and responses to environmental issues raised at the hearing are included in these responses to comments following the written comments and responses. From: Karen White Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 9:42 PM To: Jasmine Diaz Subject: Re: City of San Luis Obispo WRRF Project Notice of Availability for the Draft EIR Good Evening Jasmine, Based on the information below, this area does not fall within the Xolon Salinan Tribe's Geographical affiliation territory boundaries. Therefore we will decline from consult. Thank you, Karen White Xolon Salinan Tribe On Monday, April 18, 2016, 4:02 PM, Jasmine Diaz wrote: Hello, We are pleased to send you the Notice of Availability for the DRAFT EIR for the City of San Luis Obispo WRRF Project. See below for more details. NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY (WRRF) PROJECT (State Clearinghouse #2015101044, City File: OTHR-2318-2015) DATE: TO: April 18, 2016 Concerned Agencies, Interested Parties SUBJECT: NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Water Resource RecoveryPROJECT TITLE: Facility Project LEAD AGENCY: City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development Department Letter 1 252 RESPONSES DUE BY: June 2, 2016 The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project is available for public review and comment (see review period below). The Draft EIR is an informational document that evaluates a proposed project’s potential to significantly impact the environment, while also identifying ways to reduce or avoid environmental impacts through mitigation measures and alternatives to the project. PROJECT LOCATION: The City of San Luis Obispo WRRF is located at 35 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. The facility occupies approximately 66 acres (along with other uses described below) between U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) on the west and San Luis Obispo Creek on the east. Please refer to the EIR for a detailed description of the project location. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Please refer to the EIR for a detailed description of the background of the WRRF Project and a description of the proposed project: The WRFF Project includes equipment and process upgrades that are based on meeting various performance standards so that the facility will comply with updated discharge specifications set by the RWQCB and SWRCB. Implementation of the proposed project would include the following elements: 1.Demolishing existing structures to make room for new and enlarged equipment 2.Modernizing equipment and operations processes to improve primary, secondary, and tertiary wastewater treatment systems, as well as solids and liquids handling processes 3.Upgrading effluent cooling system through the addition of cooling towers, wetland cooling, and/or other methods 4.Improving internal site drainage for stormwater management and flood control, with the possibility of designing these improvements to support the effluent cooling system 5.Incorporating public amenities at the site, including within the newly constructed Water Resource Center, the proposed Learning Center, and grading and restoring land at the northeast corner of the WRRF site after removal of the existing supernatant lagoon; this restored area may ultimately be used for public park purposes under the direction of the City Parks and Recreation Department 6.Promoting continued research and development activities by Cal Poly and future testing of as yet unidentified pilot process and treatment technologies at the WRRF facility 253 These project elements are further described in the EIR, specifically Section 2.4.2, Project Characteristics, and the proposed changes are shown in Figure 2-4 (Construction Sequencing) and 2-5 (Proposed Site Plan). Additionally, detailed descriptions of the proposed upgrades are provided in Section 7 of the WRRF Facilities Plan, while control upgrades and other proposed amenities are further described in other sections of the WRRF Facilities Plan. The WRRF Facilities Plan is available at the following link: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities-department/wastewater/wastewater-treatment/wrrf-upgrade-project. Because the WRRF must continue operating during upgrades, not all of the demolition and upgrades would occur concurrently. The proposed construction sequencing is shown in Figure 2-4 of the EIR (Construction Sequencing) and described in the WRRF Facilities Plan (Figure 13-2). This sequencing, however, may be refined as the design process continues. Construction activities are expected to start in late 2017. The deadline for most of the proposed upgrades that are required to meet the TSO issued by the SWRCB is November 30, 2019. Other upgrades that will address capacity, condition and other facility needs are planned to be completed as part of this project, at a later date. AVAILABILITY: The Draft EIR will be available for review on the City’s main website page at http://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=10532. Reference copies of the Draft EIR will also be available at the City-County Library at Palm and Osos Streets, at the Community Development Department (919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo), and at the Cal Poly Library (Government Documents). Additional copies of the Draft EIR are available from the Community Development Department in Compact Disk (CD) format. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: The public review period for the Draft EIR will extend from Monday, April 18, 2016 to Thursday, June 2, 2016. Comments should be sent at the earliest possible date, but not later than 45 days after receipt of this notice. Your responses will be included in the City record for this project. Please send your response to Brian Leveille at the following address: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner Community Development DepartmentCity of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Telephone: (805) 781-7274 FAX: (805) 781-7173Email: bleveille@slocity.org POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF PROJECT: This EIR focuses on those issues of primary concern identified through an initial scoping process, which included discussions among the public, consulting staff, and the City during the 30-day public comment period for the Notice of Preparation (NOP). During this process, nine issue areas were identified for evaluation in this Draft EIR. These topics include: (NOP). During this process, nine issue areas were identified for evaluation in this Draft EIR. These topics include: 254 § Air Quality § Biological Resources § Cultural Resources § Greenhouse Gas Emissions § Hazards and Hazardous Materials § Hydrology and Water Quality § Noise § Public Services and Utilities § Recreation § Other CEQA/NEPA Considerations The project site is not on any of the lists of sites enumerated under Section 65962.5 of the Government Code including, but not limited to, lists of hazardous waste facilities, land designated as hazardous waste property or border zone property, hazardous waste disposal sites on public lands, underground storage tanks, solid waste disposal facilities and others, and the information in the Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement required under subdivision (f) of that Section. PUBLIC HEARING: The City Planning Commission will review the Draft EIR results on the following date:PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 6 pm Council Chambers, City Hall990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo CA 93401 255 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 256 Letter 1 COMMENTER: Karen White, Xolon Salinian Tribe DATE: April 19, 2016 RESPONSE: Response 1.1 The commenter states that the project area does not fall within the Xolon Salinian Tribe’s Geographical affiliation territory boundaries. As a result, the Tribe declines to consult on the project. This comment is noted. 257 From: Mona Tucker Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 3:39 PM To: Leveille, Brian Subject: DRAFT EIR FOR THE CITY OF SLO WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY (WRRF) PROJECT ( City File: OTHR-2318-2015) Hello Brian I reviewed parts of the DRAFT EIR FOR THE CITY OF SLO WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY (WRRF) PROJECT ( City File: OTHR-2318-2015) and I support the Mitigation Measure CR -1- (a), (b), (c) and (d) Thank you, Mona Mona Olivas Tucker yak tityu tityu - Northern Chumash Tribe Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 258 Letter 2 COMMENTER: Mona Olivas Tucker, Northern Chumash Tribe DATE: April 22, 2016 RESPONSE: Response 2.1 The commenter states that she reviewed the Draft EIR for the proposed project and supports Mitigation Measures CR-1(a), CR-1(b) and CR-1(c). Mitigation Measures CR-1(a), CR-1(b) and CR-1(c) relate to Worker Environmental Awareness Training regarding cultural resources, archaeological and Native American monitoring during construction in proximity to San Luis Obispo Creek and what to do in the vent of discovery of archaeological resources. The commenter’s support for these mitigation measures is noted. United States Department of the Interior IN REPLY REFER TO: OSEVEN00-2016-CPA-0106 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office 2493 Portola Road, Suite B Ventura, California 93003 Brian Leveille, Senior Planner Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 May 12, 2016 Subject: Draft Environmental Impact Report for the City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, California Dear Mr. Leveille: We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project. The City of San Luis Obispo is proposing to upgrade equipment and processes within the WRRF to meet performance standards and specifications established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and State Water Resources Control Board. The proposed project at the WRRF would involve the demolition of existing structures, installation of modern equipment, upgrading the effluent cooling system, improving site drainage, incorporating public amenities at the site, and promoting research and development activities. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) mission is to conserve and protect the Nation's fish and wildlife resources and their habitats. To assist in meeting this mandate, the Service provides comments on public notices issued for projects that may have an effect on those resources, especially federally-listed plants and wildlife. The Service's responsibilities also include administering the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Section 9 of the Act prohibits the taking of any federally listed endangered or threatened wildlife species. "Take" is defined at Section 3(19) of the Act to mean "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct." The Act provides for civil and criminal penalties for the unlawful taking of listed wildlife species. Such taking may be authorized by the Service in two ways: through interagency consultation for projects with Federal involvement pursuant to section 7, or through the issuance of an incidental take permit under section lO(a)(l)(B) of the Act. Our review of the proposed project indicates that the area that would be affected may support the following listed species and critical habitats: Common name Scientific Name Threatened or Endangered California red-legged frog Rana draytonii Threatened 259 Brian Leveille We recommend that focused surveys for this species be conducted as soon as possible in the appropriate season, following acceptable protocols, if they have not already been completed. If this species is detected or is known to be present in the project area, you should contact us to help determine what measures may bt: approprialt: lo const:rvt: lbt: specit:s and ils habitats. We can also provide guidance on the steps that may be needed to comply with the Act. If you have any questions, please contact Collette Thogerson of my staff at (805) 644-1766, or by e-mail at collette_thogerson@fws.gov. Sincerely S phen P. Henry� Field Supervisor 2 260 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 261 Letter 3 COMMENTER: Stephen P. Harvey, Field Supervisor, United States Fish and Wildlife Service DATE: May 12, 2016 RESPONSE: Response 3.1 The commenter states that the USFWS has reviewed the Draft EIR for the proposed project and also provides an accurate summary of the project description. This comment is noted. Response 3.2 The commenter provides a description of the USFWS’s mission and information regarding the provisions of the Endangered Species Act. This comment is noted. Response 3.3 The commenter notes that the project area may support the California red-legged frog, which is a federally listed threatened species. The information provided by the commenter is consistent with information presented in Section 3.2, Biological Resources, and in Appendix C, Biological Resources Assessment (BRA), of the EIR, both of which identify that California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii; CRLF) has the potential to occur on the project site. While no special status animals were detected during the reconnaissance level survey of the site, analysis of potential for occurrence was based on habitat suitability in addition to known occurrences of these species in the vicinity, including CRLF. Response 3.4 The commenter recommends that focused surveys for CRLF should be conducted and goes on to suggest that if the species is detected or is known to be present in the project area, the City should contact the USFWS to determine what measures should be appropriate to conserve the species and its habitats. The commenter also notes that the USFWS can provide guidance on the steps needed to comply with the federal Endangered Species Act. As noted in Response 3.3, Section 3.2, Biological Resources, and Appendix C, BRA, of the EIR both identify the potential for presence of CRLF on the project site. As described in Impact BIO- 1, the presence of CRLF on the project site has been assumed at the site and potential direct and indirect effects to CRLF and its habitat have been identified; therefore, focused surveys to determine presence/absence are not necessary. In addition, a suite of mitigation measures has been included in Section 3.2 to address potential direct and indirect effects on this species. These Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 262 include general avoidance and minimization measures contained in Mitigation Measures BIO- 1(d) and BIO-1(e), as well as specific CRLF avoidance and minimization measures included in Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h). The offer to provide guidance on the steps needed to comply with the federal Endangered Species Act is appreciated. See Responses 5.3 and 5.12 for more information regarding the federal Endangered Species Act Section 7 compliance process that will be undertaken for the proposed project and planned consultation with the USFWS. Air Pollution Control District San Luis Obispo County June 1, 2016 Brian Leveille Community Development Department, City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo CA 93401 SUBJECT: APCD Comments Regarding the City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Environmental Impact Report Dear Mr. Leveille: Thank you for including the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) in the environmental review process. We have completed our review of the proposed project located at 35 Prado Road in San Luis Obispo. The proposed project includes upgrading the existing Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) in order to: 1) provide a nominal increase in average dry weather flow capacity to serve the needs of the city as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element, 2) meet the more stringent discharge requirements adopted by the RWQCB and SWRCB in late 2014, 3) replace aging equipment, 4) maximize the production of recycled water, and 5) incorporate interpretive features and public amenities. The following are APCD comments that are pertinent to this project. GENERAL COMMENTS As a commenting agency in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review process for a project, the APCD assesses air pollution impacts from both the construction and operational phases of a project, with separate significant thresholds for each. Please address the action items contained in this letter that are highlighted by bold and underlined text. SPECIFIC COMMENTS Construction Phase Impacts In addition to the mitigation measure AO -2{a} and AO-2(b}. the SLOCAPCD staff recommends addition of the following mitigation measures for the project. Dust Control Measures for Construction Activities The project as described will likely not exceed the APCD's CEQA significance threshold for construction phase emissions. However, construction activities can generate fugitive dust, which could be a nuisance to local residents and businesses in close proximity to the T 805.781.5912 F 805.781.1002 w slocleanair.org 3433 Roberto Court, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 I 00% Post Consumer Recycled Poper . . • ' ,,�·��. ··� oA.g 263 Environmental Impact Report for City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) June 1, 2016 Page 2 of 4 proposed construction site. APCD staff recommends the following measures be incorporated into the project to control dust: Construction activities can generate fugitive dust, which could be a nuisance to local residents and businesses in close proximity to the proposed construction site. Projects with grading areas that are greater than 4-acres or are within 1,000 feet of any sensitive receptor shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD's 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402): a.Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; b.Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any sixty-minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible; Please note that since water use is a concern due to drought conditions, the contractor or builder shall consider the use of an APCD-approved dust suppressant where feasible to reduce the amount of water used for dust control. For a list of suppressants, see Section 4.3 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook; c.All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed; d.Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities; e.Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; f.All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; g.All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; h.Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; i.All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with eve Section 23114; j.Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; k.Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible; I.All PM,o mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and building plans; and, m.The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any sixty-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall 264 Environmental Impact Report for City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) June 1, 2016 Page 3 of 4 be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. Naturally Occurring Asbestos Naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) has been identified by the state Air Resources Board as a toxic air contaminant. Serpentine and ultramafic rocks are very common throughout California and may contain naturally occurring asbestos. The SLO County APCD has identified areas throughout the County where NOA may be present (see the APCD's 2012 CEQA Handbook, Technical Appendix 4.4). If the project site is located in a candidate area for Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA), the following requirements apply. Under the ARB Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (93105), prior to any construction activities at the site. the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if the area disturbed is exempt from the regulation. An exemption request must be filed with the APCD. If the site is not exempt from the requirements of the regulation, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD. More information on NOA can be found at slocleanair.org/business/asbestos.php. Demolition/ Asbestos Demolition activities can have potential negative air quality impacts, including issues surrounding proper handling, abatement, and disposal of asbestos containing material (ACM). Asbestos containing materials could be encountered during the demolition or remodeling of existing buildings or the disturbance, demolition, or relocation of above or below ground utility pipes/pipelines (e.g., transite pipes or insulation on pipes). If this project will include any of these activities. then it may be subject to various regulatory jurisdictions. including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants {40CFR61. Subpart M -Asbestos NESHAP}. These requirements include, but are not limited to: 1) written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a certified asbestos consultant and 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM. Please contact the APCD Enforcement Division at (805) 781-5912 and also go to slocleanair.org/business/asbestos.php for further information. To obtain a Notification of Demolition and Renovation form go to the "Other Forms" section of sloclea na i r.org/b usiness/on Ii neforms. ph p Construction Permit Requirements Based on the information provided, we are unsure of the types of equipment that may be present during the project's construction phase. Portable equipment, 50 horsepower (hp) or greater, used during construction activities, may require California statewide portable equipment registration (issued by the California Air Resources Board) or an APCD permit. The following list is provided as a guide to equipment and operations that may have permitting requirements, but should not be viewed as exclusive. For a more detailed listing, refer to the Technical Appendices, page 4-4, in the APCD's 2012 CEQA Handbook. • • • Power screens, conveyors, diesel engines, and/or crushers; Portable generators and equipment with engines that are 50 hp or greater; Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generator; 265 Environmentol lmpoct Report for City of Son Luis Obispo Woter Resource Recovery Fociliy MRRF) June 1,2016 Page 4 of 4 o lnternal combustion engines;. Rock and pavement crushing;. Unconfined abrasive blasting operations;. Tub grinders;. Trommel screens; and,. Portable plants (e.g. aggregate plant, asphalt batch plant, concrete batch plant, etc.). To minimize potential delays. prior to the start of the project. please contact the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781-5912 for specific information regarding permitting reouirements. Ooerational Permit Reouirements The project applicant will be required to apply for a permit to make the proposed plant modifications. To minimize potential delays. prior to the start of the project. please contact the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781-5912 for specific information regarding permitting requirements. Odors The SLOCAPCD recommends an Odor Control Plan be developed for the facility and submitted to the SLOCAPCD for review and approval prior to the start of construction. At a minimum it should include the following information. . ldentify all potential odor sourceso Location of sensitive receptors in the area. Odor control measures for each odor sourceo Mitigationmonitoring. Compliant response procedureso Corrective action plan procedures Greenhouse Gases It should be noted that for a source like the waste water treatment plant, the SLOCAPCD threshold of '10,000 metric tons/year should be used instead of 1,150 metric tons/year. Again, thank you for the oppoftunity to comment on this proposal. lf you have any questions or comments, feel free to contact me at 781-4667. Sincerely, 憮 ξ6 Air Quality Specialist MAGtths cc: 丁inn Fuhs′Enforcement Division′APCD Gary willie′Division Manager′APCD HAPLANヽ CEQハ ProlectReviewヽ 30003900ヽ 3929‐23929 2 docx 266 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 267 Letter 4 COMMENTER: Melissa Guise, Air Quality, Air Pollution Control District, San Luis Obispo County DATE: June 1, 2016 RESPONSE: Response 4.1 The commenter provides a summary description of the proposed project and raised specific questions that are summarized below. This comment is noted. The commenter’s specific questions are addressed in Responses 4.2 through 4.7. Response 4.2 The commenter agrees with the finding included in Impact AQ-2 that construction of the proposed project would not exceed SLOAPCD thresholds for fugitive dust and as such a less than significant impact would occur with regard to this pollutant. The commenter goes on to request that the provisions of APCD Rule 401 and Rule 402 be incorporated into the EIR as mitigation measures. The proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable APCD rules and regulations whether or not a significant impact is identified. For clarity, page 63 of the EIR has been amended as follows: SLOAPCD regulates air quality in San Luis Obispo County, and is responsible for attainment planning related to criteria air pollutants, and for district rule development and enforcement. As part of SLOAPCD's responsibility to meet state and federal clean air standards, the APCD adopts rules and issues permits that require compliance with these standards. Rules applicable to this project include, but are not limited to, Rules 401 and 402. Permits allow SLOAPCD to specify operating conditions consistent with its countywide clean air strategy. It also reviews air quality analyses prepared for CEQA assessments, and has published the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 2012). The purpose of the Handbook is to assist lead agencies, planning consultants, and project components in assessing the potential air quality impacts from development. The Handbook is designed to provide uniform procedures for preparing the air quality analysis section of environmental documents for projects subject to CEQA. The guidelines put forth in the Handbook define the criteria used by the SLOAPCD to determine when an air quality analysis is necessary, the type of analysis that should be performed, the significance of the impacts predicted by the analysis, and the mitigation measures needed to reduce the overall air quality impacts (SLOAPCD, 2012). The following additional change has been made on page 70 in response to this comment: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 268 Mitigation Measures. In addition to compliance with all applicable SLOAPCD rules and regulations, With the incorporation of the following standard mitigation measures and BACTs for construction equipment, would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Finally, the measures listed in the comment will be incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for the project and will also be included on the contractor’s specifications. Response 4.3 The commenter states that naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) has been identified by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as a toxic air contaminant and that SLOAPCD has identified areas throughout the County where NOA may be present. The commenter goes on to note that if the project site is located in a candidate area for NOA, the project would be required to comply with CARB Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying and Surface Mining Operations (93105). This includes a requirement that prior to any construction activities at the site the project proponent ensure that a geologic evaluation be conducted to determine if the area is exempt from the regulation. If not exempt, the project must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. The City will comply with all regulatory requirements applicable to the proposed project at the appropriate time, including the asbestos ATCM. This includes the required geologic evaluation and, if not exempt, preparation of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program. As the comment does not pertain to the adequacy of the CEQA documentation itself, but rather provides information on regulatory requirements. Response 4.4 The commenter suggests that asbestos containing materials (ACM) could be encountered during demolition or remodeling of existing buildings or the disturbance, demolition or relocation of above or below ground utility pipes/pipelines. The commenter goes on to note that if ACM will be encountered the project would be subject to various regulatory requirements, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFR61, Subpart M – Asbestos NESHAP) As stated in Response 4.3, the City will comply with all regulatory requirements applicable to the proposed project at the appropriate time, including the Asbestos NESHAP. If ACM have the potential to be present, this includes: 1) written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a certified asbestos consultant, and 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM. The comment does not pertain to the adequacy of the CEQA documentation itself, but rather provides information on regulatory requirements. However, in response to this comment, these requirements will be included on the contractor’s specifications for the proposed project. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 269 Response 4.5 The commenter suggests that the proposed project may be required to obtain permits for portable construction equipment. The commenter also notes that an operational permit will be required. As stated in Response 4.3, the City will comply with all regulatory requirements applicable to the proposed project at the appropriate time. The requirement for the City to obtain construction and operation permits from SLOAPCD is noted in Section 2.6, Required Approvals, of the EIR. If portable equipment requiring a permit would be used during construction, the appropriate permit(s) would also be obtained. Response 4.6 The commenter recommends an Odor Control Plan be developed for the WRRF facility. As discussed in Section 2.4.2(g), Proposed Improvements, and under Impact AQ-5 in Section 3.1, Air Quality, one of the main objectives of the proposed project is to prevent and reduce odor on site, with a variety of odor control technologies proposed. The proposed odor control improvements would result in an overall reduction in odor at the site compared to existing conditions. Therefore, the proposed project would have a beneficial impact on odor. In response to this suggestion, the request to develop an odor control plan for the site has been passed to City decision-makers for consideration during the approval process. Response 4.7 The commenter notes the SLOAPCD greenhouse gas threshold of 10,000 metric tons/year should be used for a waste water treatment plant instead of 1,150 metric tons/year. In response to the above comment, the following changes to Section 3.4, Air Quality, on p. 136, 139, 140, and 231, of the environmental document have made: p. 136 For waste water treatment plants, Tthe SLOAPCD adopted a quantitative emissions threshold of 1,150 10,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2E) per year for most land use projects. Therefore, the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to GHG emissions and climate change would be cumulatively considerable if the project would produce more than 1,150 10,000 MT CO2E per year. p. 139 As shown in Table 3.4-5, annual GHG emissions resulting from the proposed project would total 277.6 MT/year, which is well below the SLOAPCD threshold of 1,150 10,000 MT/year. Even without amortization of construction emissions to distribute them across the life of the project, emissions would fall below the SLOAPCD threshold. Yearly construction emissions, as shown in Table 3.4-1, would be the greatest in 2019 at 535 MT/year. Including the increase in operational emissions (stationary equipment, biogenic Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 270 processes, and backup generators), this totals 762 MT/year, also well below the threshold of 1,150 10,000 MT/year. As GHG emissions from construction and operation of the proposed project would not exceed the SLOAPCD threshold, impacts would be less than significant. p.140 Finally, as described in Impact GHG-1, the project would emit 277.6 MT CO2E annually, which is well below the SLOAPCD threshold of 1,150 10,000 MT CO2E per year. p.231 a. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The volume of greenhouse gas emissions generated by this alternative would depend on which combination of process options detailed in Table 5-1 is selected. While several of the alternate process options listed in Table 5-1, column 4 have the potential to be more energy intensive than the corresponding process option selected for inclusion in the proposed project (see column 3), the potential for these to exceed the SLOAPCD annual GHG threshold of 1,150 10,000 MT/year is low. In addition, provision of new alternate energy sources at the site would occur under this alternative and, similar to the proposed project, this alternative would provide an increase in recycled water for use in the city, which is consistent with the City’s CAP. Impacts to greenhouse gas emissions as part of Alternative 2 could be better than or worse than for the proposed project depending on which process options are selected but ultimately would be less than significant. As the corrected threshold is considerably higher than was previously stated, this does not affect the findings and shows that proposed project is even more unlikely to reach the SLOAPCD greenhouse gas threshold than previously concluded. Water Boards State Water Resources Control Board JUN O 2 2016 Brian Leveille City of San Luis Obispo 35 Prado Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Mr. Leveille: N,� MATTHEW RODRIQUEZ l """"'� s::c�ET ARY FOR � EN'll?:ONMENiAL PPOT::CTlot: Governors Office of Planning & Research JUN O 2 2n16 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO (CITY); WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY PROJECT (PROJECT); SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY; STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2015101044 We understand that the City is pursuing Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) financing for this Project (CWSRF No. C-06-8029-110). As a funding agency and a state agency with jurisdiction by law to preserve, enhance, and restore the quality of California's water resources, the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) is providing the following information on the EIR to be prepared for the Project. The State Water Board, Division of Financial Assistance, is responsible for administering the CWSRF Program. The primary purpose for the CWSRF Program is to implement the Clean Water Act and various state laws by providing financial assistance for wastewater treatment facilities necessary to prevent water pollution, recycle water, correct nonpoint source and storm drainage pollu.tion problems, provide for estuary enhancement, and thereby protect and promote health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the state. The CWSRF Program provides low­ interest funding equal to one-half of the most recent State General Obligation Bond Rates with a 30-year term. Applications are accepted and processed continuously. Please refer to the State Water Board's CWSRF website at: www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/grants loans/srf/index.shtml. The CWSRF Program is partially funded by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and requires additional "CEQA-Plus" environmental documentation and review. Three enclosures are included that further explain the CWSRF Program environmental review process and the additional federal requirements. For the complete environmental application package please visit: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/grants loans/srf/srf forms.shtml. The State Water Board is required to consult directly with agencies responsible for implementing federal environmental laws and regulations. Any environmental issues raised by federal agencies or their representatives will need to be resolved prior to State Water Board approval of a CWSRF financing commitment for the proposed Project. For further information on the CWSRF Program, please contact Mr. Ahmad Kashkoli, at (916) 341-5855. FELICIA MARCUS, CHAIR I THOMAS HOWARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 1001 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 I Mailing Address: P.O. Box 100, Sacramento, CA 95812-0100 I www.waterboards.ca.gov 271 Mr. Brian Leveille - 2 - It is important to note that prior to a CWSRF financing commitment, projects are subject to provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), and must obtain Section 7 clearance from the United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and/or the United States Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for any potential effects to special-status species. Please be advised that the State Water Board will consult with the USFWS, and/or the NMFS regarding all federal special-status species that the Project has the potential to impact if the Project is to be financed by the CWSRF Program. The City will need to identify whether the Project will involve any direct effects from construction activities, or indirect effects such as growth inducement, that may affect federally listed threatened, endangered, or candidate species that are known, or have a potential to occur in the Project site, in the surrounding areas, or in the service area, and to identify applicable conservation measures to reduce such effects. In addition, CWSRF projects must comply with federal laws pertaining to cultural resources, specifically Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106). The State Water Board has responsibility for ensuring compliance with Section 106, and must consult directly with the California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). SHPO consultation is initiated when sufficient information is provided by the CWSRF applicant. If the City decides to pursue CWSRF financing, please retain a consultant that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards (http://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/arch stnds 9.htm) to prepare a Section 106 compliance report. Note that the City will need to identify the Area of Potential Effects (APE), including construction and staging areas, and the depth of any excavation. The APE is three-dimensional and includes all areas that may be affected by the Project. The APE includes the surface area and extends below ground to the depth of any Project excavations. The records search request should extend to a �-mile beyond Project APE. The appropriate area varies for different projects but should be drawn large enough to provide information on what types of sites may exist in the vicinity. Other federal environmental requirements pertinent to the Project under the CWSRF Program include the following (for a complete list of all federal requirements please visit: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/grants loans/srf/docs/forms/application environmental package.pdf): A.An alternative analysis discussing environmental impacts of the project in either the CEQA document (Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration orEnvironmental Impact Report) or in a separate report. B.A public hearing or meeting must be held for adoption or certification of all projects except for those with little or no environmental impacts. 272 Mr. Brian Leveille - 3 - C.Compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act: (a) Provide air quality studies that may have been done for the Project; and (b) if the Project is in a nonattainment area or attainment area subject to a maintenance plan; (i) provide a summary of the estimated emissions(in tons per year) that are expected from both the construction and operation of the Project for each federal criteria pollutant in a nonattainment or maintenance area, and indicate if the nonattainment designation is moderate, serious, or severe (if applicable); (ii)if emissions are above the federal de minimis levels, but the Project is sized to meet only the needs of current population projections that are used in the approved State Implementation Plan for air quality, quantitatively indicate how the proposed capacity increase was calculated using population projections. D.Compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act: Identify whether the Project iswithin a coastal zone and the status of any coordination with the California Coastal Commission. E.Protection of Wetlands: Identify any portion of the proposed Project area that should be evaluated for wetlands or United States waters delineation by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), or requires a permit from the USAGE, and identify the status of coordination with the USAGE. F.Compliance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act: Identify whether the Project willresult in the conversion of farmland. State the status of farmland (Prime, Unique, or Local and Statewide Importance) in the Project area and determine if this area is under a Williamson Act Contract. G.Compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act: List any birds protected under this actthat may be impacted by the Project and identify conservation measures to minimize impacts. H.Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Act: Identify whether or not the Project isin a Flood Management Zone and include a copy of the Federal Emergency Management Agency flood zone maps for the area. I.Compliance with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act: Identify whether or not any Wild and Scenic Rivers would be potentially impacted by the Project and include conservation measures to minimize such impacts. Following are specific comments on the City's draft EIR: 1.Please provide copies of the species lists downloaded from the following websites: USFWS Species List http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/; California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/simple.html#ccl=CCA: and California Natural Diversity Database -CNDDB quick viewer species lists/maps https://map.dfg.ca.gov/bios/?tool=cnddbQuick. 2.As the Notice of Preparation for the Project was filed on October 13, 2015, after July 1, 2015, Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) relating to Native American consultation will apply. AB 52 requirements include a Native American consultation letter separate fromthe National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) Section 106 Native American consultation. Please reference the following link to find a sample AB 52 Notice Letter and the text of the bill to understand the requirements. The Native American consultation letter should include a description of the proposed project, a map showing the project location, and a point of contact, and shall include a request of a written reply within 30 days. https://www.opr.ca.gov/s ab52.php. 273 Mr. Brian Leveille - 4 - 3.Please provide a copy of a letter requesting a Sacred Lands File search and the response from the Native American Heritage Commission including the list of suggested Native American contacts, and copies of any written responses received. 4.If the City plans to go forward with a CWSRF application, please provide ti,e site records obtained from the Central Coast Information Center, and a map identifying all the site locations within a Yi mile of the APE in relation to the Project components. 5.In the Draft EIR, Section 3.3.5a, page 119, paragraph 3 states that the SLO WRRFproperty is not considered eligible as a City of San Luis Obispo historic or cultural resource. If the City plans to go forward with a CWSRF application, please prepare a draft letter to SHPO requesting a determination of eligibility for the SLO WRRF site and include an explanation that the Project will be seeking concurrence for a finding of "no adverse effect to historic properties." 6.Section 4.4.4a. regarding Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) states that "the USFWS will be contacted and informal consultation requested for listed species for which take may occur". Yet pages 32 and 33 of the Biological Assessment state that the project has potential to result in direct permanent impacts/effects toCalifornia Red-legged frog (CRLF) aquatic habitat as a result of the proposed project/action, and that Indirect impacts/effects to CRLF could result from general project-related disturbance. Also, page 36 of the Biological Assessment (under 810-7)states that Formal consultation with USFWS under Section 7 of the FESA shall beundertaken to obtain incidental take authorization for CRLF. Please clarify whether there is likely to be and adverse effect on CRLF, and whether USFWS consultation isplanned to be formal or informal. Please note that a project that requires an incidental take authorization will also need to provide a Statement of Overriding Consideration. Please provide us with the following documents applicable to the proposed Project following the City's California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process: (1) one copy of the draft and final EIR, (2) the resolution certifying the EIR and making CEQA findings, (3) all comments received during the review period and the City's response to those comments, (4) the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and (5) the Notice of Determination filed with the San Luis Obispo County Clerk and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse. In addition, we would appreciate notices of any hearings or meetings held regarding environmental review of any projects to be funded by the State Water Board. Thank you for the opportunity to review the City's draft EIR. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at (916) 341-5855 or by email at Susan.Stewart@waterboards.ca.gov, or contact Ahmad Kashkoli at (916) 341-5855, or by email at Ahmad.Kashkoli@waterboards.ca.gov. Sincerely, s. .1 .S:/u,_,�i: -. U/.J.t::/YI---" Susan Stewart Environmental Scientist 274 Mr. Brian Leveille - 5 - Enclosures (3) 1.Clean Water State Revolving Fund Environmental Review Requirements 2.Quick Reference Guide to CEQA Requirements for State Revolving Fund Loans 3.Basic Criteria for Cultural Resources Reports cc: State Clearinghouse (Re: SCH# 2015101044) P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 275 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 276 Letter 5 COMMENTER: Susan Stewart, Environmental Scientist, California State Water Resources Control Board DATE: June 2, 2016 RESPONSE: Response 5.1 The commenter states her understanding that the project is pursuing financing for the project through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). The commenter goes on to explain that the State Water Board’s Division of Financial Assistance is responsible for administering the CWSRF and describes the purpose of the CWSRF. This comment is noted. Response 5.2 The commenter states that the CWSRF Program is partially funded by USEPA and, therefore, requires “CEQA-Plus” environmental documentation and review. The commenter provides additional information related to CEQA-Plus as enclosures to the comment letter. As discussed in the Executive Summary of this EIR, this environmental document includes analysis which meets the requirements for “CEQA-Plus” documentation. Response 5.3 The commenter states that prior to a CWSRF funding commitment, projects are subject to provisions of the federal Endangered Species Act and must obtain Section 7 clearance from the USFWS and/or NMFS for any potential effects to special-status species. The commenter goes on to advise that the State Water Board will consult with the USFWS and/or NMFS regarding all federal special-status species impacts related to the project. The commenter goes on to note that the City will need to identify whether the project will involve direct or indirect effects to such species and identify applicable conservation measures to reduce such effects. The requirement for the project to comply with Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act and the required consultation is noted. The direct and indirect impacts of the proposed project on federal special-status species are described in detail in Section 3.2, Biological Resources, and Appendix C, Biological Resources Assessment, of this EIR. Applicable conservation measures to address any identified impacts are also identified in these sections. Response 5.4 The commenter states that project must comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and that SHPO consultation will be initiated when sufficient information is provided by the City. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 277 As described in Section 3.3, Cultural Resources, a cultural resource assessment report compliant with Section 106 for the proposed project was prepared and is included as Appendix D in this EIR. The report was provided as part of the Draft EIR and will be provided to the State Water Board as part of the CWSRF application package. The report preparers meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards. Response 5.5 The commenter states that the identification of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) is required along with a historical record search within a 0.5-mile radius of the edge of the APE. As described in Section 3.3, Cultural Resources, an APE was identified for the proposed project and is shown in on Figure 1 in the Cultural Resources Study in Appendix D of this EIR. As required a search of the cultural resource records housed at the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), Central Coast Information Center (CCIC) located at University of California, Santa Barbara was conducted on September 25, 2015. The search was conducted to identify all previous cultural resources work and previously recorded cultural resources within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site Also, as discussed in Section 3.3, an archaeological resources survey of the WRRF Project APE occurred on October 22, 2015 and an addition to the APE on January 18, 2016. The archaeological field survey found that the project APE has been heavily disturbed by previous development at the project site. Response 5.6 The commenter notes the project is also required to comply with additional federal environmental regulations. These requirements are discussed in Section 1.0, Introduction, of the EIR. Responses regarding compliance with each of the specific regulatory requirements identified are provided below. •An alternative analysis discussing environmental impacts of the project is provided in Section 5, Alternatives, of this EIR. A summary of the alternatives analysis is also provided in the Executive Summary of this document. •A public meeting to consider certification of the Final EIR and approval of the proposed project is currently planned for August 16, 2016 and will be noticed in accordance with the provisions of the Brown Act. •Section 3.1, Air Quality, in this EIR provides a summary of the estimated emissions that are expected from both the construction and operation of the proposed project. Appendix B includes the air quality modeling outputs. In addition, Appendix H includes a draft Federal Air Quality Conformity Analysis. See also Section 4.4.4.c. for further information regarding compliance with the federal Clean Air Act. •The project site is not located in the California Coastal Zone; therefore, coordination with the California Coastal Commission is not required and the project is not subject to the requirements of the Coastal Act Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 278 •Section 3.2, Biological Resources, and Appendix C, BRA, of this EIR contain information regarding the presence of wetlands and Waters of the U.S. at the site. As noted in Section 3.2, San Luis Obispo Creek exhibits a defined bed and bank, is hydrologically connected to the Pacific Ocean (a traditional navigable water), and is of value to special status wildlife species such as CRLF and steelhead. Therefore, this waterway would likely be considered Waters of U.S. and would be subject to regulation by the USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, though the final jurisdictional determination of the boundaries of wetlands and waters are made by the USACE, typically at the time that authorization to impact such features is requested. Coordination with the USACE is in its initial stage and will be led by the State Water Board as part of the CWSRF funding application process. •The majority of the project site is disturbed and contains either existing WRRF equipment and related uses or former water treatment infrastructure. It does not contain any agricultural uses and no Important Farmland is present. The proposed project would not result in the conversion of Important Farmland to non-agricultural use and the site would not be eligible for a Williamson Act contract. For further information see Section 3.10.2, Agriculture and Forest Resources, of this EIR. •The project’s compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is described in Section 4.4.4.e. As detailed there, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act prohibit the take of migratory birds (or any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird) and the take and commerce of eagles. EO 13168 requires that any project with federal involvement address impacts of federal actions of migratory birds. As described in Section 3.2, Biological Resources, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on nesting birds with implementation of the proposed Mitigation Measure BIO-1(j) if construction cannot be avoided during the nesting season. Thus, the lead agency would be in compliance with this EO. •The project’s compliance with the Floodplain Management Act is described in Section 4.4.4.d. As described there, the Floodplain Management Act (EO 11988) requires federal agencies to recognize the values of floodplains and to consider the public benefits from restoring and preserving floodplains. Based on recent HEC-RAS modeling efforts prepared by the Wallace Group (2014), the WRRF is within the 100-year flood zone, with the elevation of the flood zone changing across the site. The proposed project would not result in a further extension of infrastructure into the floodplain, but does include improvements that would protect existing facilities from inundation during a 100-year flood event. Similarly, new facilities would be designed to avoid inundation. These improvements would not result in an increase in flooding on adjacent properties and would improve flood protection and stormwater quality throughout the WRRF. As such, the lead agency would be in compliance with this EO. •No designated wild and scenic rivers have been documented at the project site. The majority of the aquatic features within the project site consist of man-made and heavily altered features. San Luis Obispo Creek runs just outside the majority of the eastern boundary of the site and is not designated a wild and scenic river. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 279 Response 5.7 The commenter requests copies of the species list downloaded from the following websites: USFWS Species List, California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory, and California Natural Diversity Database. As discussed in Section 3.2, Biological Resources, a list of special status species in the regional vicinity of the project site was compiled using these websites. A comprehensive list of the species identified on these lists is provided in Appendix C. In addition and in response to this comment, the downloads from the websites listed in this comment are provided at the end of this section. Response 5.8 The commenter suggests that since the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published after July 1, 2015, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 relating to Native American consultation applies. The commenter goes on to note that AB 52 requires a Native American consultation letter separate from the Section 106 consultation process. At the time the Notice of Preparation was published, the City of San Luis Obispo had received one letter from the Xolon-Salinian tribe requesting consultation under AB 52. As noted in Response 5.9, a comment letter on the project received from the Tribe indicates that the project is “outside the Tribe’s geographical affiliation territory boundaries” and they declined to consult on the project. As part of the EIR scoping process, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was requested to review the Sacred Lands File on September 25, 2015. In anticipation of the response from the NAHC, anticipatory letters were mailed to 24 tribal groups or individuals on October 7, 2015. These groups and individuals are known to have affiliations to the project APE and surrounding area. On November 3, 2015, a follow-up consultation by telephone was conducted to ensure a “good faith” effort at consultation. The NAHC responded to the Sacred Lands File search request on June 9, 2016, stating that the search results were negative (i.e., no sacred lands identified within the vicinity of the APE). Copies of the letters sent to the representatives to the identified tribal groups as well as the results of the telephone follow-up are included in Appendix B of the Cultural Resources Study included as Appendix D of this EIR. Response 5.9 The commenter requests a copy of the letter sent to the NAHC requesting a Sacred Lands File Search and the response received from the NAHC. The commenter also requests copies of any written responses received from tribal groups. In response to this comment the requested letters are included at the end of this section. One written response was received from Karen White, Council Chair of the Xolon-Salinan Tribe. She said the project is “outside the Tribe’s geographical affiliation territory boundaries and they decline from consult.” Mona Tucker of the Northern Chumash Tribe also responded in writing stating that she supports the cultural resources mitigation measures presented in the EIR. These letters are included in Appendix A of this EIR. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 280 Response 5.10 The commenter requests the site records from the Central Coast Information Center and a map of site locations within 0.5-mile of the APE. This confidential information was mailed to State Water Board Archaeologist Gary Scholze on November 3, 2015. This information will be provided to the State Water Board as part of the CWSRF application package. Response 5.11 The commenter restates the findings included in the Draft EIR that the WRRF property is not considered eligible as a City of San Luis Obispo historic or cultural resource. The commenter goes on to request a draft letter to SHPO be prepared requesting determination of eligibility for the WRRF site and explaining that the proposed project will be seeking concurrence of a finding of “no adverse effect to historic properties.” A draft letter has been prepared and will be provided to the State Water Board as requested. Response 5.12 The commenter requests clarification regarding the likelihood of an adverse effect on CRLF and whether consultation with the USFWS will be formal or informal. Potential direct effects to CRLF individuals include harassment, injury, or even mortality if they are present within the project area during implementation. However, direct effects in the form of mortality or injury would be avoided through implementation of avoidance and minimization measures specified in Section 3.2.3 of this EIR. Following implementation of the subject avoidance and minimization measures, the potential for direct effects in the form of harassment may occur through the capture and relocation of CRLF out of the work area, if any are encountered. Due to the small area of disturbance within habitat suitable for CRLF, only a small number of (if any) CRLFs are expected to be captured and relocated. This measure would increase the survivability of individuals and prevent mortality or injury due to proposed construction, however, harassment is considered “take” and therefore formal Section 7 consultation is required. Overall impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the required mitigation measures and a Statement of Overriding Considerations would not be required. In response to this comment the following clarification has been made on page 224 of the EIR: Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) requires Federal agencies, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of Federally-listed as threatened or endangered species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat for these species. Under Section 7, a Federal action that may result in take of a listed species (or result in destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat) must consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service. Section 3.2, Biological Resources, describes listed species that were observed or have the potential to occur in the action area. Where there is a potential for Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 281 listed species to occur, the standard project requirements and Mitigation Measures BIO- 1(a) through BIO-1(j) have been identified to reduce potential effects of the project. Therefore, the USFWS will be contacted and informal consultation requested for listed species for which take may occur. Response 5.13 The commenter requests that they be provided with various documents and hearing notices applicable to the project’s CEQA process. Each of the requested documents will be provided as they are available. 282 SCH# Project Title Lead Agency 2015101044 Document Details 'Report State Clearinghouse Data Base Water Resource Recovery Facility Project San Luis Obispo, City of 'Type EIR Draft EIR Description The proposed project includes upgrading the existing Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) in order to: (1) meet the standards outlined in the NPDES permit adopted by the RWQCB and SWRCB in late 2014; 2) provide a nominal increase in average dry weather flow (ADWF) capacity to serve the needs of the City, as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element; 3) increase production of recycled water; 4) incorporate interpretive features and public amenities; and 5) replace aging infrastructure and equipment Lead Agency Contact Name Agency Phone email Brian Leveille City of San Luis Obispo 805-781-7166 'Fax Address 35 Prado Road City San Luis Obispo State CA Zip 93401 Project Location County City Region San Luis Obispo Sa� Luis Obispo Lat/Long 35° 15' 14.98" N / 120°-40'27.08" W Cross .Streets CA SR 1 and Prado Road Parcel No. , 053-051-045 'Township Range Proximity to: Highways Hwy 1 Airports San Luis Obispo County Railways Amtrak Waterways San Luis Obispo Creek Schools Pacific Beach HS Section Land Use Water Resource Recovery Facility / Public Facilities / Public Base Project Issues Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic-Historic; Biological Resources; Drainage/Absorption; Flood Plain/Flooding; Forest Land/Fire Hazard; Geologic/Seismic; Minerals; Noise; Population/Housing Balance; Public Services; Recreation/Parks; Schools/Universities; Sewer Capacity; Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading; Solid Waste; Traffic/Circulation; Toxic/Hazardous; Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply; Wetland/Riparian; Growth Inducing; Landuse; Cumulative Effects; AestheticNisual Reviewing Resources Agency; Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 4; Department of Parks and Recreation; Agencies Department of Water Resources; Caltrans, District 5; State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water; State Water Resources Control Board, Divison of Financial Assistance; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 3; California Energy Commission; Native American Heritage Commission; Public Utilities Commission Date Received 04/18/2016 Start of Review 04/19/2016 End of Review 06/02/2016 283 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. 284 285 286 287 288 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 289 Letter 6 COMMENTER: Scott Morgan, Director, State Clearinghouse, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research DATE: June 3, 2016 RESPONSE: Response 6.1 In this letter the commenter provides information on which State agencies reviewed the Draft EIR and provides comments from the responding agencies (in this case the State Water Resources Control Board; see Letter 5 for responses). The commenter goes on to note that the City has complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. This comment is noted. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 290 Letter 7 COMMENTER: Verbal Comments Received at City of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission Meeting DATE: April 27, 2016 RESPONSE: Response 7.1 Commissioner Riggs requested further information regarding the ability of pedestrians and cyclists to use the Bob Jones Bike Trail during construction activities and whether they would be diverted to Prado Road. As discussed in Section 3.6, Recreation, and Section 3.10.7, Transportation/Traffic, a segment of the Bob Jones Bike Trail runs along the west side of the creek, and is located between the WRRF perimeter fencing and the edge of the riparian vegetation associated with the creek. The primarily undeveloped area to the southwest of the main facility also includes a portion of the Bob Jones Bike Trail. While it may be necessary to temporarily close or re-route portions of the Bob Jones Bike Trail during construction activities, it is the City’s intention to maintain access on the trail during construction to the extent feasible. Should closures be required during the cconstruction period these would be temporary only and for health and safety reasons primarily. These temporary closures would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding bicycle or pedestrian facilities and would also not decrease the performance or safety of the Bob Jones Bike Trail in the long-term. Therefore, impacts would less than significant as described in Section 3.10.7. In response to this comment the following clarification has been added to the text on page 215 of the EIR: Additionally, if the wetland cooling option is selected it would occur within the area immediately southwest of the main facility. Selection of the wetland cooling option would not require removal of the Bob Jones Bike Trail. Minor realignment may be required depending on the final layout of the wetland cooling option, if selected; however, continuity with the rest of the Bob Jones Bike Trail would be maintained. During construction activities short-term closures or realignments of the trail may be required depending on the activities being conducted and the construction phase. However, the City will minimize the time during which the trail will be closed and/or provide a temporary path through the construction area, when feasible. In addition, signage will be provided to make users aware of current and upcoming closures, as necessary. Information on any possible trail closures will also be posted on the City’s website, via social media, and notification will be provided to local bicycle groups. As such, the proposed project both during construction and operation would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. As noted previously, the proposed project includes improved access to the facility from Prado Road and would include improved internal access Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Draft EIR Section 7.0 Responses to Comments City of San Luis Obispo 291 throughout the facility and with the City’s corporation yard and bus facility. The proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access or increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses. Therefore, impacts related to transportation and traffic would be less than significant. Response 7.2 Commissioner Riggs requested further information regarding impacts on the transient community in the project area during construction activities and whether these should be discussed in the Population and Housing section of the EIR. Section 3.10.6, Population and Housing, of the EIR discusses the potential for the proposed project to result in a physical effect on the environment should the project result in the following: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); b)Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere; or c)Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. As described in Section 3.10.6, the proposed project would not induce substantial population growth in the City nor would it displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people resulting in the need to construct replacement housing elsewhere. The only potential for the type of displacement mentioned by the commenter is that of the Prado Day Center, the demolition of which is included in the proposed project. However, the Prado Day Center is currently scheduled for relocation to a nearby parcel on the north side of Prado Road and that relocation has already been reviewed and approved by the City, and is not part of this project. In addition, the existing facility would not be demolished until the new facility is open and operational. As a result impacts of the proposed project on population and housing would be less than significant as described in Section 3.10.6. With respect to the above comment, like any project in an urban area there is the potential for the transient community to be affected by the temporary disruption associated with construction of the proposed project. However, those affects would not constitute a physical impact on the environment under CEQA and as outlined in the CEQA Appendix G checklist. Nonetheless the concern regarding disruption to the transient community in the area has been forwarded to the Utilities Department and City decision-makers for consideration prior to project approval. United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office 2493 PORTOLA ROAD, SUITE B VENTURA, CA 93003 PHONE: (805)644-1766 FAX: (805)644-3958 Consultation Code: 08EVEN00-2015-SLI-0439 September 21, 2015 Event Code: 08EVEN00-2015-E-01973 Project Name: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: The enclosed list identifies species listed as threatened and endangered, species proposed for listing as threatened or endangered, designated and proposed critical habitat, and species that are candidates for listing that may occur within the boundary of the area you have indicated using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Information Planning and Conservation System (IPaC). The species list fulfills the requirements under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the species list should be verified after 90 days. We recommend that verification be completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists following the same process you used to receive the enclosed list. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter with any correspondence about the species list. Due to staff shortages and excessive workload, we are unable to provide an official list more specific to your area. Numerous other sources of information are available for you to narrow the list to the habitats and conditions of the site in which you are interested. For example, we recommend conducting a biological site assessment or surveys for plants and animals that could help refine the list. If a Federal agency is involved in the project, that agency has the responsibility to review its proposed activities and determine whether any listed species may be affected. If the project is a major construction project*, the Federal agency has the responsibility to prepare a biological assessment to make a determination of the effects of the action on the listed species or critical habitat. If the Federal agency determines that a listed species or critical habitat is likely to be adversely affected, it should request, in writing through our office, formal consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Act. Informal consultation may be used to exchange information and resolve conflicts with respect to threatened or endangered species or their critical habitat prior to a written request for formal consultation. During this review process, the Federal agency may engage in planning efforts but may not make any irreversible commitment of resources. Such a commitment could constitute a violation of section 7(d) of the Act. Federal agencies are required to confer with the Service, pursuant to section 7(a)(4) of the Act, when an agency action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any proposed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat (50 CFR 402.10(a)). A request for formal conference must be in writing and should include the same information that would be provided for a request for formal consultation. Conferences can also include discussions between the Service and the Federal agency to identify and resolve potential conflicts between an action and proposed species or proposed critical habitat early in the decision-making process. The Service recommends ways to minimize or avoid adverse effects of the action. These recommendations are advisory because the jeopardy prohibition of section 7(a)(2) of the Act does not apply until the species is listed or the proposed critical habitat is designated. The conference process fulfills the need to inform Federal agencies of possible steps that an agency might take at an early stage to adjust its actions to avoid jeopardizing a proposed species. When a proposed species or proposed critical habitat may be affected by an action, the lead Federal agency may elect to enter into formal conference with the Service even if the action is not likely to jeopardize or result in the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If the proposed species is listed or the proposed critical habitat is designated after completion of the conference, the Federal agency may ask the Service, in writing, to confirm the conference as a formal consultation. If the Service reviews the proposed action and finds that no significant changes in the action as planned or in the information used during the conference have occurred, the Service will confirm the conference as a formal consultation on the project and no further section 7 consultation will be necessary. Use of the formal conference process in this manner can prevent delays in the event the proposed species is listed or the proposed critical habitat is designated during project development or implementation. Candidate species are those species presently under review by the Service for consideration for Federal listing. Candidate species should be considered in the planning process because they may become listed or proposed for listing prior to project completion. Preparation of a biological assessment, as described in section 7(c) of the Act, is not required for candidate species. If early evaluation of your project indicates that it is likely to affect a candidate species, you may wish to request technical assistance from this office. Only listed species receive protection under the Act. However, sensitive species should be considered in the planning process in the event they become listed or proposed for listing prior to project completion. We recommend that you review information in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's Natural Diversity Data Base. You can contact the California Department of Fish and Wildlife at (916) 324-3812 for information on other sensitive species that may occur in this area. [*A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) 2 (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.] Attachment 3 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 09/21/2015 05:01 PM 1 Official Species List Provided by: Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office 2493 PORTOLA ROAD, SUITE B VENTURA, CA 93003 (805) 644-1766 Consultation Code: 08EVEN00-2015-SLI-0439 Event Code: 08EVEN00-2015-E-01973 Project Type: WASTEWATER FACILITY Project Name: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Project Description: The City owns and operates the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) located off Prado Road in the southern portion of the City. Highway 101 is located immediately west of the southern portionof the WRRF. The WRRF Project includes the following upgrades: 1. Lining of the existing flow equalization pond. 2. Improvements at the headworks, including new influent flow monitoring and odor control. 3. Rehabilitation of the existing primary clarifiers, including new weirs, new sweeps and arms Please Note: The FWS office may have modified the Project Name and/or Project Description, so it may be different from what was submitted in your previous request. If the Consultation Code matches, the FWS considers this to be the same project. Contact the office in the 'Provided by' section of your previous Official Species list if you have any questions or concerns. United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 09/21/2015 05:01 PM 2 Project Location Map: Project Coordinates: MULTIPOLYGON (((-120.67002339 35.2547738050001, -120.671896935 35.2536097240001, -120.673484802 35.2530840480001, -120.673441887 35.253434499, - 120.6757164 35.252453234, -120.678935051 35.24589948, -120.679879189 35.244812978, - 120.680522919 35.244567637, -120.681724548 35.244812978, -120.674343109 35.2566060070001, -120.67002339 35.2547738050001)), ((-120.67002339 35.2547738050001, - 120.669922829 35.2548362860001, -120.669922829 35.254731152, -120.67002339 35.2547738050001))) Project Counties: San Luis Obispo, CA United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 09/21/2015 05:01 PM 3 Endangered Species Act Species List There are a total of 25 threatened or endangered species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Critical habitats listed under the Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your project area section further below for critical habitat that lies within your project. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. Amphibians Status Has Critical Habitat Condition(s) California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) Population: Entire Threatened Final designated California tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense) Population: U.S.A. (Central CA DPS) Threatened Final designated Birds California Clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus) Population: Entire Endangered California Least tern (Sterna antillarum browni) Endangered California condor (Gymnogyps californianus) Population: Entire, except where listed as an experimental population Endangered Final designated Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) Population: Entire Endangered Final designated United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 09/21/2015 05:01 PM 4 Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) Population: CA, OR, WA Threatened Final designated Southwestern Willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) Population: Entire Endangered Final designated western snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus ssp. nivosus) Population: Pacific coastal pop. Threatened Final designated Crustaceans Vernal Pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) Population: Entire Threatened Final designated Fishes Tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi) Population: Entire Endangered Final designated Flowering Plants California jewelflower (Caulanthus californicus) Endangered Chorro Creek Bog thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense) Endangered Gambel's watercress (Rorippa gambellii) Endangered Indian Knob mountain balm (Eriodictyon altissimum) Endangered Marsh Sandwort (Arenaria paludicola) Endangered United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 09/21/2015 05:01 PM 5 Morro manzanita (Arctostaphylos morroensis) Threatened Pismo clarkia (Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata) Endangered Salt Marsh bird's-beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus) Endangered Spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis) Threatened Final designated Insects Kern Primrose Sphinx moth (Euproserpinus euterpe) Population: Entire Threatened Mammals Giant kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ingens) Population: Entire Endangered San Joaquin Kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) Population: wherever found Endangered Southern Sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis) Threatened Reptiles Blunt-Nosed Leopard lizard (Gambelia silus) Population: Entire Endangered United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 09/21/2015 05:01 PM 6 Critical habitats that lie within your project area There are no critical habitats within your project area. United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Scientific Name Common Name Family Lifeform Rare Plant Rank State Rank Global Rank CESA FESA Elevation High (meters) Elevation Low (meters) CA Endemic Abronia maritima red sand-verbena Nyctaginaceae perennial herb 4.2 S3S4 G4 None None 100 0 F Agrostis hooveri Hoover's bent grass Poaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 610 6 T Arctostaphylos cruzensis Arroyo de la Cruz manzanita Ericaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.2 S3 G3 None None 310 60 T Arctostaphylos luciana Santa Lucia manzanita Ericaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.2 S3 G3 None None 850 350 T Arctostaphylos morroensis Morro manzanita Ericaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.1 S2 G2 None FT 205 5 T Arctostaphylos obispoensis Bishop manzanita Ericaceae perennial evergreen shrub 4.3 S4 G4 None None 1005 150 T Arctostaphylos osoensis Oso manzanita Ericaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.2 S1 G1 None None 500 95 T Arctostaphylos pechoensis Pecho manzanita Ericaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 850 125 T Arctostaphylos pilosula Santa Margarita manzanita Ericaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.2 S3 G3 None None 1100 155 T Arctostaphylos rudis sand mesa manzanita Ericaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 322 25 T Arctostaphylos tomentosa ssp. daciticola dacite manzanita Ericaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.1 S1 G4T1 None None 300 100 T Arenaria paludicola marsh sandwort Caryophyllaceae perennial stoloniferous herb 1B.1 S1 G1 CE FE 170 3 F Aspidotis carlotta-halliae Carlotta Hall's lace fern Pteridaceae perennial rhizomatous herb 4.2 S3 G3 None None 1400 100 T Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus Miles' milk-vetch Fabaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G5T2 None None 90 20 T Astragalus nuttallii var. nuttallii ocean bluff milk-vetch Fabaceae perennial herb 4.2 S4 G4T4 None None 120 3 T Atriplex coulteri Coulter's saltbush Chenopodiaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 460 3 F Bryoria pseudocapillaris false gray horsehair lichen Parmeliaceae fruticose lichen (epiphytic) 3.2 S2 G3 None None 90 0 F Bryoria spiralifera twisted horsehair lichen Parmeliaceae fruticose lichen (epiphytic) 1B.1 S1S2 G3 None None 30 0 F Calandrinia breweri Brewer's calandrinia Montiaceae annual herb 4.2 S34 G4 None None 1220 10 F California macrophylla round-leaved filaree Geraniaceae annual herb 1B.2 S3? G3? None None 1200 15 F Calochortus catalinae Catalina mariposa lily Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 4.2 S4 G4 None None 700 15 T Calochortus clavatus var. clavatus club-haired mariposa lily Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 4.3 S3 G4T3 None None 1300 75 T Calochortus obispoensis San Luis mariposa lily Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 730 50 T Calochortus simulans La Panza mariposa lily Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 1B.3 S2 G2 None None 1150 380 T Calycadenia villosa dwarf calycadenia Asteraceae annual herb 1B.1 S3 G3 None None 1350 240 T Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis Cambria morning-glory Convolvulaceae perennial rhizomatous herb 4.2 S3 G3T3 None None 500 30 T Camissoniopsis hardhamiae Hardham's evening-primrose Onagraceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 945 140 T Carex obispoensis San Luis Obispo sedge Cyperaceae perennial rhizomatous herb 1B.2 S2S3 G2G3 None None 820 10 T Castilleja densiflora var. obispoensis San Luis Obispo owl's-clover Orobanchaceae annual herb (hemiparasitic) 1B.2 S2 G5T2 None None 400 10 T Ceanothus cuneatus var. fascicularis Lompoc ceanothus Rhamnaceae perennial evergreen shrub 4.2 S4 G5T4 None None 400 5 T Ceanothus rigidus Monterey ceanothus Rhamnaceae perennial evergreen shrub 4.2 S34 G4 None None 550 3 T Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii Congdon's tarplant Asteraceae annual herb 1B.1 S2 G3T2 None None 230 0 T Cercocarpus betuloides var. blancheae island mountain-mahogany Rosaceae perennial evergreen shrub 4.3 S4 G5T4 None None 600 30 T Chenopodium littoreum coastal goosefoot Chenopodiaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 30 10 T Chlorogalum pomeridianum var. minus dwarf soaproot Agavaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 1B.2 S2S3 G5T2T3 None None 1000 305 T Chloropyron maritimum ssp. maritimum salt marsh bird's-beak Orobanchaceae annual herb (hemiparasitic) 1B.2 S1 G4?T1 CE FE 30 0 F Chorizanthe breweri Brewer's spineflower Polygonaceae annual herb 1B.3 S2 G2 None None 800 45 T Chorizanthe douglasii Douglas' spineflower Polygonaceae annual herb 4.3 S4 G4 None None 1600 55 T CNPS List Scientific Name Common Name Family Lifeform Rare Plant Rank State Rank Global Rank CESA FESA Elevation High (meters) Elevation Low (meters) CA Endemic Chorizanthe leptotheca Peninsular spineflower Polygonaceae annual herb 4.2 S3 G3 None None 1900 300 F Chorizanthe palmeri Palmer's spineflower Polygonaceae annual herb 4.2 S4 G4? None None 945 60 T Chorizanthe rectispina straight-awned spineflower Polygonaceae annual herb 1B.3 S1 G1 None None 1035 85 T Chorizanthe ventricosa potbellied spineflower Polygonaceae annual herb 4.3 S4 G4 None None 1235 65 T Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense San Luis Obispo fountain thistle Asteraceae perennial herb 1B.2 S2 G2T2 CE FE 385 35 T Cirsium occidentale var. lucianum Cuesta Ridge thistle Asteraceae perennial herb 1B.2 S2 G3G4T2 None None 750 500 T Cirsium rhothophilum Surf thistle Asteraceae perennial herb 1B.2 S1 G1 CT None 60 3 T Cirsium scariosum var. loncholepis La Graciosa thistle Asteraceae perennial herb 1B.1 S1 G5T1 CT FE 220 4 T Cladonia firma popcorn lichen Cladoniaceae squamulose lichen (terricolous) 2B.1 S1 G4 None None 75 30 F Clarkia exilis slender clarkia Onagraceae annual herb 4.3 S4 G4 None None 1000 120 T Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata Pismo clarkia Onagraceae annual herb 1B.1 S1 G4T1 CR FE 185 25 T Clinopodium mimuloides monkey-flower savory Lamiaceae perennial herb 4.2 S3 G3 None None 1800 305 T Deinandra paniculata paniculate tarplant Asteraceae annual herb 4.2 S4 G4 None None 940 25 F Delphinium parryi ssp. blochmaniae dune larkspur Ranunculaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S2 G4T2 None None 200 0 T Delphinium parryi ssp. eastwoodiae Eastwood?s larkspur Ranunculaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S2 G4T2 None None 500 75 T Delphinium umbraculorum umbrella larkspur Ranunculaceae perennial herb 1B.3 S3 G3 None None 1600 400 T Dithyrea maritima beach spectaclepod Brassicaceae perennial rhizomatous herb 1B.1 S1 G2 CT None 50 3 F Dudleya abramsii ssp. bettinae Betty's dudleya Crassulaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S1 G4T1 None None 180 20 T Dudleya abramsii ssp. murina mouse-gray dudleya Crassulaceae perennial leaf succulent 1B.3 S2 G4T2 None None 525 90 T Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae Blochman's dudleya Crassulaceae perennial herb 1B.1 S2 G3T2 None None 450 5 F Eleocharis parvula small spikerush Cyperaceae perennial herb 4.3 S4 G5 None None 3020 1 F Eriastrum luteum yellow-flowered eriastrum Polemoniaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 1000 290 T Erigeron blochmaniae Blochman's leafy daisy Asteraceae perennial rhizomatous herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 45 3 T Eriodictyon altissimum Indian Knob mountainbalm Boraginaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.1 S1 G1 CE FE 270 80 T Eriogonum elegans elegant wild buckwheat Polygonaceae annual herb 4.3 S3 G3 None None 1525 200 T Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri Hoover's button-celery Apiaceae annual / perennial herb 1B.1 S1 G5T1 None None 45 3 T Erysimum suffrutescens suffrutescent wallflower Brassicaceae perennial herb 4.2 S3 G3 None None 150 0 T Extriplex joaquinana San Joaquin spearscale Chenopodiaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 835 1 T Fritillaria agrestis stinkbells Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 4.2 S3 G3 None None 1555 10 T Fritillaria ojaiensis Ojai fritillary Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 1B.2 S2? G2? None None 998 225 T Fritillaria viridea San Benito fritillary Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 1525 200 T Grindelia hirsutula var. maritima San Francisco gumplant Asteraceae perennial herb 3.2 S1 G5T1Q None None 400 15 T Horkelia cuneata var. puberula mesa horkelia Rosaceae perennial herb 1B.1 S1 G4T1 None None 810 70 T Horkelia cuneata var. sericea Kellogg's horkelia Rosaceae perennial herb 1B.1 S2? G4T2 None None 200 10 T Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields Asteraceae annual herb 1B.1 S2 G4T2 None None 1220 1 F Layia heterotricha pale-yellow layia Asteraceae annual herb 1B.1 S2 G2 None None 1705 300 T Layia jonesii Jones' layia Asteraceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 400 5 T Lomatium parvifolium small-leaved lomatium Apiaceae perennial herb 4.2 S4 G4 None None 700 20 T Lupinus ludovicianus San Luis Obispo County lupine Fabaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S1 G1 None None 525 50 T Malacothamnus gracilis slender bush-mallow Malvaceae perennial deciduous shrub 1B.1 S1 G1Q None None 575 190 T Malacothamnus jonesii Jones' bush-mallow Malvaceae perennial deciduous shrub 4.3 S4 G4 None None 1075 160 T Malacothamnus palmeri var. involucratus Carmel Valley bush-mallow Malvaceae perennial deciduous shrub 1B.2 S3 G3T3Q None None 1100 30 T Scientific Name Common Name Family Lifeform Rare Plant Rank State Rank Global Rank CESA FESA Elevation High (meters) Elevation Low (meters) CA Endemic Malacothamnus palmeri var. palmeri Santa Lucia bush-mallow Malvaceae perennial deciduous shrub 1B.2 S2 G3T2Q None None 360 60 T Monardella palmeri Palmer's monardella Lamiaceae perennial rhizomatous herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 800 200 T Monardella sinuata ssp. sinuata southern curly-leaved monardella Lamiaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G3T2 None None 300 0 T Monardella undulata ssp. undulata San Luis Obispo monardella Lamiaceae perennial rhizomatous herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 200 10 T Monolopia gracilens woodland woolythreads Asteraceae annual herb 1B.2 S3 G3 None None 1200 100 T Mucronea californica California spineflower Polygonaceae annual herb 4.2 S3 G3 None None 1400 0 T Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radians shining navarretia Polemoniaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G4T2 None None 1000 76 T Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata coast woolly-heads Polygonaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G3G4T2 None None 100 0 F Nemacladus secundiflorus var. secundiflorus large-flowered nemacladus Campanulaceae annual herb 4.3 S3? G3T3? None None 2000 200 T Perideridia pringlei adobe yampah Apiaceae perennial herb 4.3 S4 G4 None None 1800 300 T Piperia michaelii Michael's rein orchid Orchidaceae perennial herb 4.2 S3 G3 None None 915 3 T Plagiobothrys torreyi var. perplexans chaparral popcornflower Boraginaceae annual herb 4.3 S3 G4T3 None None 2745 1070 T Plagiobothrys uncinatus hooked popcorn-flower Boraginaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 760 300 T Poa diaboli Diablo Canyon blue grass Poaceae perennial rhizomatous herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 400 120 T Sanicula hoffmannii Hoffmann's sanicle Apiaceae perennial herb 4.3 S3 G3 None None 300 30 T Sanicula maritima adobe sanicle Apiaceae perennial herb 1B.1 S2 G2 CR None 240 30 T Scrophularia atrata black-flowered figwort Scrophulariaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S2S3 G2G3 None None 500 10 T Senecio aphanactis chaparral ragwort Asteraceae annual herb 2B.2 S2 G3? None None 800 15 F Senecio astephanus San Gabriel ragwort Asteraceae perennial herb 4.3 S3 G3 None None 1500 400 T Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. anomala Cuesta Pass checkerbloom Malvaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S1 G3T1 CR None 800 600 T Solidago guiradonis Guirado's goldenrod Asteraceae perennial rhizomatous herb 4.3 S3S4 G3G4 None None 1370 600 T Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus most beautiful jewel-flower Brassicaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G2T2 None None 1000 95 T Suaeda californica California seablite Chenopodiaceae perennial evergreen shrub 1B.1 S1 G1 None FE 15 0 T Sulcaria isidiifera splitting yarn lichen Alectoriaceae fruticose lichen (epiphytic) 1B.1 S1 G1 None None 30 20 T Trifolium hydrophilum saline clover Fabaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G2 None None 300 0 T Tropidocarpum capparideum caper-fruited tropidocarpum Brassicaceae annual herb 1B.1 S1 G1 None None 455 1 T Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Ablautus schlingeri Oso Flaco robber fly IIDIP42010 None None G1 S1 Accipiter cooperii Cooper's hawk ABNKC12040 None None G5 S4 WL Accipiter striatus sharp-shinned hawk ABNKC12020 None None G5 S4 WL Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird ABPBXB0020 None None G2G3 S1S2 SSC Agrostis hooveri Hoover's bent grass PMPOA040M0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Ammodramus savannarum grasshopper sparrow ABPBXA0020 None None G5 S3 SSC Anniella pulchra nigra black legless lizard ARACC01011 None None G3G4T2T3Q S2 SSC Anniella pulchra pulchra silvery legless lizard ARACC01012 None None G3G4T3T4Q S3 SSC Antrozous pallidus pallid bat AMACC10010 None None G5 S3 SSC Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle ABNKC22010 None None G5 S3 FP Arctostaphylos cruzensis Arroyo de la Cruz manzanita PDERI040B0 None None G3 S3 1B.2 Arctostaphylos luciana Santa Lucia manzanita PDERI040N0 None None G3 S3 1B.2 Arctostaphylos morroensis Morro manzanita PDERI040S0 Threatened None G2 S2 1B.1 Arctostaphylos osoensis Oso manzanita PDERI042S0 None None G1 S1 1B.2 Arctostaphylos pechoensis Pecho manzanita PDERI04140 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Arctostaphylos pilosula Santa Margarita manzanita PDERI04160 None None G3 S3 1B.2 Arctostaphylos rudis sand mesa manzanita PDERI041E0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Arctostaphylos tomentosa ssp. daciticola dacite manzanita PDERI041HD None None G4T1 S1 1B.1 Taxonomic Group is (Dune or Scrub or Herbaceous or Marsh or Riparian or Woodland or Forest or Alpine or Inland Waters or Marine or Estuarine or Riverine or Palustrine or Fish or Amphibians or Reptiles or Birds or Mammals or Mollusks or Arachnids or Crustaceans or Insects or Ferns or Gymnosperms or Monocots or Dicots or Lichens or Bryophytes) and Quad is (Arroyo Grande NE (3512025) or Atascadero (3512046) or Lopez Mtn. (3512035) or Morro Bay North (3512047) or Morro Bay South (3512037) or Oceano (3512015) or Pismo Beach (3512026) or Port San Luis (3512027) or San Luis Obispo (3512036) or Santa Margarita (3512045)) Query Criteria: Report Printed on Monday, September 21, 2015 Page 1 of 7Commercial Version -- Dated September, 1 2015 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 3/1/2016 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Arenaria paludicola marsh sandwort PDCAR040L0 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Areniscythris brachypteris Oso Flaco flightless moth IILEG49010 None None G1 S1 Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus Miles' milk-vetch PDFAB0F2X3 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2 Athene cunicularia burrowing owl ABNSB10010 None None G4 S3 SSC Atriplex coulteri Coulter's saltbush PDCHE040E0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Bombus caliginosus obscure bumble bee IIHYM24380 None None G4?S1S2 Branchinecta lynchi vernal pool fairy shrimp ICBRA03030 Threatened None G3 S2S3 Bryoria spiralifera twisted horsehair lichen NLTEST5460 None None G3 S1S2 1B.1 Buteo regalis ferruginous hawk ABNKC19120 None None G4 S3S4 WL California macrophylla round-leaved filaree PDGER01070 None None G3?S3?1B.2 Calochortus obispoensis San Luis mariposa-lily PMLIL0D110 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Calochortus simulans La Panza mariposa-lily PMLIL0D170 None None G2 S2 1B.3 Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis Cambria morning-glory PDCON040J1 None None G3T3 S3 4.2 Camissoniopsis hardhamiae Hardham's evening-primrose PDONA030N0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Carex obispoensis San Luis Obispo sedge PMCYP039J0 None None G2G3 S2S3 1B.2 Castilleja densiflora var. obispoensis San Luis Obispo owl's-clover PDSCR0D453 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2 Central Dune Scrub Central Dune Scrub CTT21320CA None None G2 S2.2 Central Foredunes Central Foredunes CTT21220CA None None G1 S1.2 Central Maritime Chaparral Central Maritime Chaparral CTT37C20CA None None G2 S2.2 Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii Congdon's tarplant PDAST4R0P1 None None G3T2 S2 1B.1 Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus western snowy plover ABNNB03031 Threatened None G3T3 S2 SSC Report Printed on Monday, September 21, 2015 Page 2 of 7Commercial Version -- Dated September, 1 2015 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 3/1/2016 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Chenopodium littoreum coastal goosefoot PDCHE091Z0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Chlorogalum pomeridianum var. minus dwarf soaproot PMLIL0G042 None None G5T2T3 S2S3 1B.2 Chloropyron maritimum ssp. maritimum salt marsh bird's-beak PDSCR0J0C2 Endangered Endangered G4?T1 S1 1B.2 Chlosyne leanira elegans Oso Flaco patch butterfly IILEPJA051 None None G4G5T1T2 S1S2 Chorizanthe breweri Brewer's spineflower PDPGN04050 None None G2 S2 1B.3 Chorizanthe rectispina straight-awned spineflower PDPGN040N0 None None G1 S1 1B.3 Cicindela hirticollis gravida sandy beach tiger beetle IICOL02101 None None G5T2 S1 Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense San Luis Obispo fountain thistle PDAST2E162 Endangered Endangered G2T2 S2 1B.2 Cirsium occidentale var. lucianum Cuesta Ridge thistle PDAST2E1Z6 None None G3G4T2 S2 1B.2 Cirsium rhothophilum surf thistle PDAST2E2J0 None Threatened G1 S1 1B.2 Cirsium scariosum var. loncholepis La Graciosa thistle PDAST2E1N0 Endangered Threatened G5T1 S1 1B.1 Cladium californicum California saw-grass PMCYP04010 None None G4 S2 2B.2 Cladonia firma popcorn lichen NLT0008460 None None G4 S1 2B.1 Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata Pismo clarkia PDONA05111 Endangered Rare G4T1 S1 1B.1 Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh CTT52410CA None None G3 S2.1 Coastal Brackish Marsh Coastal Brackish Marsh CTT52200CA None None G2 S2.1 Coccyzus americanus occidentalis western yellow-billed cuckoo ABNRB02022 Threatened Endangered G5T3Q S1 Coelus globosus globose dune beetle IICOL4A010 None None G1G2 S1S2 Corynorhinus townsendii Townsend's big-eared bat AMACC08010 None Candidate Threatened G3G4 S2 SSC Danaus plexippus pop. 1 monarch - California overwintering population IILEPP2012 None None G4T2T3 S2S3 Delphinium parryi ssp. blochmaniae dune larkspur PDRAN0B1B1 None None G4T2 S2 1B.2 Report Printed on Monday, September 21, 2015 Page 3 of 7Commercial Version -- Dated September, 1 2015 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 3/1/2016 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Delphinium parryi ssp. eastwoodiae Eastwood's larkspur PDRAN0B1B2 None None G4T2 S2 1B.2 Delphinium umbraculorum umbrella larkspur PDRAN0B1W0 None None G3 S3 1B.3 Dipodomys heermanni morroensis Morro Bay kangaroo rat AMAFD03063 Endangered Endangered G3G4TH SH FP Dithyrea maritima beach spectaclepod PDBRA10020 None Threatened G2 S1 1B.1 Dudleya abramsii ssp. bettinae Betty's dudleya PDCRA04011 None None G4T1 S1 1B.2 Dudleya abramsii ssp. murina mouse-gray dudleya PDCRA04012 None None G4T2 S2 1B.3 Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae Blochman's dudleya PDCRA04051 None None G3T2 S2 1B.1 Elanus leucurus white-tailed kite ABNKC06010 None None G5 S3S4 FP Emys marmorata western pond turtle ARAAD02030 None None G3G4 S3 SSC Eremophila alpestris actia California horned lark ABPAT02011 None None G5T3Q S3 WL Eriastrum luteum yellow-flowered eriastrum PDPLM03080 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Erigeron blochmaniae Blochman's leafy daisy PDAST3M5J0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Eriodictyon altissimum Indian Knob mountainbalm PDHYD04010 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri Hoover's button-celery PDAPI0Z043 None None G5T1 S1 1B.1 Eucyclogobius newberryi tidewater goby AFCQN04010 Endangered None G3 S3 SSC Eumops perotis californicus western mastiff bat AMACD02011 None None G5T4 S3S4 SSC Extriplex joaquinana San Joaquin spearscale PDCHE041F3 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Falco columbarius merlin ABNKD06030 None None G5 S3S4 WL Falco mexicanus prairie falcon ABNKD06090 None None G5 S4 WL Fritillaria ojaiensis Ojai fritillary PMLIL0V0N0 None None G2?S2?1B.2 Fritillaria viridea San Benito fritillary PMLIL0V0L0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Report Printed on Monday, September 21, 2015 Page 4 of 7Commercial Version -- Dated September, 1 2015 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 3/1/2016 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Helminthoglypta walkeriana Morro shoulderband (=banded dune) snail IMGASC2510 Endangered None G1 S1 Horkelia cuneata var. puberula mesa horkelia PDROS0W045 None None G4T1 S1 1B.1 Horkelia cuneata var. sericea Kellogg's horkelia PDROS0W043 None None G4T2 S2?1B.1 Lanius ludovicianus loggerhead shrike ABPBR01030 None None G4 S4 SSC Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields PDAST5L0A1 None None G4T2 S2 1B.1 Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus California black rail ABNME03041 None Threatened G3G4T1 S1 FP Layia heterotricha pale-yellow layia PDAST5N070 None None G2 S2 1B.1 Layia jonesii Jones' layia PDAST5N090 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Lichnanthe albipilosa white sand bear scarab beetle IICOL67010 None None G1 S1 Linderiella occidentalis California linderiella ICBRA06010 None None G2G3 S2S3 Lupinus ludovicianus San Luis Obispo County lupine PDFAB2B2G0 None None G1 S1 1B.2 Lupinus nipomensis Nipomo Mesa lupine PDFAB2B550 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Malacothamnus gracilis slender bush-mallow PDMAL0Q0J0 None None G1Q S1 1B.1 Malacothamnus palmeri var. palmeri Santa Lucia bush-mallow PDMAL0Q0B5 None None G3T2Q S2 1B.2 Monardella palmeri Palmer's monardella PDLAM180H0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Monardella sinuata ssp. sinuata southern curly-leaved monardella PDLAM18161 None None G3T2 S2 1B.2 Monardella undulata ssp. crispa crisp monardella PDLAM18070 None None G3T2 S2 1B.2 Monardella undulata ssp. undulata San Luis Obispo monardella PDLAM180X0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Monolopia gracilens woodland woollythreads PDAST6G010 None None G3 S3 1B.2 Nasturtium gambelii Gambel's water cress PDBRA270V0 Endangered Threatened G1 S1 1B.1 Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radians shining navarretia PDPLM0C0J2 None None G4T2 S2 1B.2 Report Printed on Monday, September 21, 2015 Page 5 of 7Commercial Version -- Dated September, 1 2015 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 3/1/2016 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata coast woolly-heads PDPGN0G011 None None G3G4T2 S2 1B.2 Neotoma lepida intermedia San Diego desert woodrat AMAFF08041 None None G5T3T4 S3S4 SSC Northern Coastal Salt Marsh Northern Coastal Salt Marsh CTT52110CA None None G3 S3.2 Northern Interior Cypress Forest Northern Interior Cypress Forest CTT83220CA None None G2 S2.2 Nyctinomops macrotis big free-tailed bat AMACD04020 None None G5 S3 SSC Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus steelhead - south-central California coast DPS AFCHA0209H Threatened None G5T2Q S2 SSC Orobanche parishii ssp. brachyloba short-lobed broomrape PDORO040A2 None None G4?T4 S3 4.2 Phrynosoma blainvillii coast horned lizard ARACF12100 None None G3G4 S3S4 SSC Plagiobothrys uncinatus hooked popcornflower PDBOR0V170 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Plebejus icarioides moroensis Morro Bay blue butterfly IILEPG801B None None G5T2 S2 Poa diaboli Diablo Canyon blue grass PMPOA4Z390 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Polyphylla nubila Atascadero June beetle IICOL68040 None None G1 S1 Progne subis purple martin ABPAU01010 None None G5 S3 SSC Pyrgulopsis taylori San Luis Obispo pyrg IMGASJ0A50 None None G1 S1 Rallus longirostris obsoletus California clapper rail ABNME05016 Endangered Endangered G5T1 S1 FP Rana boylii foothill yellow-legged frog AAABH01050 None None G3 S3 SSC Rana draytonii California red-legged frog AAABH01022 Threatened None G2G3 S2S3 SSC Sanicula maritima adobe sanicle PDAPI1Z0D0 None Rare G2 S2 1B.1 Scrophularia atrata black-flowered figwort PDSCR1S010 None None G2G3 S2S3 1B.2 Senecio aphanactis chaparral ragwort PDAST8H060 None None G3?S2 2B.2 Serpentine Bunchgrass Serpentine Bunchgrass CTT42130CA None None G2 S2.2 Report Printed on Monday, September 21, 2015 Page 6 of 7Commercial Version -- Dated September, 1 2015 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 3/1/2016 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. anomala Cuesta Pass checkerbloom PDMAL110A1 None Rare G3T1 S1 1B.2 Spea hammondii western spadefoot AAABF02020 None None G3 S3 SSC Sternula antillarum browni California least tern ABNNM08103 Endangered Endangered G4T2T3Q S2 FP Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus most beautiful jewelflower PDBRA2G012 None None G2T2 S2 1B.2 Suaeda californica California seablite PDCHE0P020 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1 Sulcaria isidiifera splitting yarn lichen NLTEST0020 None None G1 S1 1B.1 Symphyotrichum defoliatum San Bernardino aster PDASTE80C0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Taricha torosa Coast Range newt AAAAF02032 None None G4 S4 SSC Taxidea taxus American badger AMAJF04010 None None G5 S3 SSC Trifolium hydrophilum saline clover PDFAB400R5 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Tropidocarpum capparideum caper-fruited tropidocarpum PDBRA2R010 None None G1 S1 1B.1 Tryonia imitator mimic tryonia (=California brackishwater snail) IMGASJ7040 None None G2 S2 Valley Needlegrass Grassland Valley Needlegrass Grassland CTT42110CA None None G3 S3.1 Record Count: 136 Report Printed on Monday, September 21, 2015 Page 7 of 7Commercial Version -- Dated September, 1 2015 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 3/1/2016 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 915 Capitol Mall, RM 364 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 653-4082 (916) 657-5390 – Fax nahc@pacbell.net Information Below is Required for a Sacred Lands File Search Project: SLO Water Resource Recycling Facility County: San Luis Obispo USGS Quadrangle Name: Pismo Beach, CA and San Luis Obispo, CA Township 31S Range 12E Section(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, and 11 Company/Firm/Agency: Rincon Consultants, Inc. Contact Person: Kevin Hunt Street Address: 5135 Avenida Encinas Suite A City: Carlsbad, CA Zip: 92008 Phone: 760-918-9444 Fax: 760-918-9449 Email: khunt@rinconconsultants.com Project Description: The project proposes improvements to the existing Water Recycling Facility. Records Search Map ±0 2,0001,000 Feet Imagery provided by National Geographic Society, ESRI and its licensors © 2015. Pismo Beach Quadrangle & San Luis Obispo Quadrangle. T31S R12E S04 &T31S R12E S03 & T31S R12E S02 & T31S R12E S09 & T31S R12E S10 &T31S R12e S11. The topographic representation depicted in this map may notportray all of the features currently found in the vicinity today and/or featuresdepicted in this map may have changed since the original topographic mapwas assembled. Project Boundary Half-Mile Buffer 0 500250 Meters 1:24,000 City of San Luis Obispo Cultural Resources StudyWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo Table 3 Coordination with Local Native American Groups Native American Contact Letter Sent Follow-Up Results Beverly Salazar Folkes 1931 Shadybrook Drive Thousand Oaks, CA 91362 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Referred to Lei Lynn Odom (Chumash) Judith Bomar Grindstaff 63161 Argyle Road King City, CA 93930 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW No comment on project Lei Lynn Odom 1339 24th Street Oceano, CA 93445 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Recommends Native American monitoring Barbareno/Ventureno Band of Mission Indians Julie Lynn Tumamait- Stenslie 365 North Poli Ave. Ojai, CA 93023 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail San Luis Obispo County Chumash Council Chief Mark Steven Vigil 1030 Ritchie Road Grover Beach, CA 9333 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Peggy Odom 1339 24th Street Oceano, CA 93445 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Spoke to Lei Lynn Odom at same telephone number Salinan Tribe of Monterey, San Luis Obispo Counties John W. Burch, Traditional Chairperson 14650 Morro Road Atascadero, CA 93422 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Recommends Native American and archaeological monitoring due to a high likelihood of Native American sites in proximity to the stream Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Council Adelina Alva-Padilla, Chairwoman P.O. Box 365 Santa Ynez, CA 93640 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Wrong telephone # Randy Guzman-Folkes 6471 Cornell Circle Moorpark, CA 93021 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Defers to local tribes but expressed that caution should be taken Xolon Salinan Tribe Johnny R. Eddy Jr., Chairperson 3179 Garrity Way, #734 Richmond, CA 94806 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Defers to local tribes Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo Table 3 Coordination with Local Native American Groups Native American Contact Letter Sent Follow-Up Results Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Doug Alger, Cultural Resources Coordinator PO Box 56 Lockwood, CA 93932 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW No comment Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Robert Duckworth, Environmental Coordinator 4777 Driver Rd. Valley Springs, CA 95252 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW No telephone number provided – sent email to follow up Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Michael Cordero, Chairman P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW No answer – sent email to follow up yak tityu tityu – Northern Chumash Tribe Mona Olivas Tucker, Chairwoman 660 Camino Del Rey Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW No answer – sent email Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Vincent Armenta, Chairperson P.O. 517 Santa Ynez, CA 93460 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Forwarded to Freddie Romero; left voicemail for Mr. Romero Matthew Darian Goldman 495 Mentone Grover Beach, CA 93433 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW No answer Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Tribal Administrator/Counsel Sam Cohen P.O. Box 517 Santa Ynez, CA 93460 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Gregg Castro, Administrator 5225 Roeder Road San Jose, CA 95111 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Salinan-Chumash Nation Xielolixii 3901 Q Street, Suite 31B Bakersfield, CA 93301 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo Table 3 Coordination with Local Native American Groups Native American Contact Letter Sent Follow-Up Results Frank Arredondo P.O. Box 161 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW No telephone number provided Northern Chumash Tribal Council Fred Collins, Spokesperson 67 South Street San Luis Obispo, CA Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Resent letter via email per his request Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Council Freddie Romero, Cultural Preservation Consultant P.O. Box 365 Santa Ynez, CA 93460 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Kathleen Pappo 2762 Vista Mesa Drive Rancho Pales Verdes, CA 90275 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Raudel Joe Banuelos, Jr. 331 Mira Flores Court Camarillo, CA 93012 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Janet Darlene Garcia P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Crystal Baker P.O. Box 723 Atascadero, CA 93423 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Michael Cordero 5246 El Carro Lane Carpinteria, CA 93013 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Mia Lopez, Chairperson Cbcn.nahc.sb@gmail.com 805-324-0135 Email sent 11/6/15 11/06/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW. No response. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo Table 3 Coordination with Local Native American Groups Native American Contact Letter Sent Follow-Up Results Salinan Tribe of Monterey, San Luis Obispo Counties Pattie Dunton, Tribal Administrator 7070 Morro Road, Suite A Atascadero, CA 93422 salinantribe@aol.com 805-464-2650 N/A N/A See John Burch, Traditional Tribal Chairperson of Salinan Tribe of Monterey, San Luis Obispo Counties October 7, 2015 Beverly Salazar Folkes 1931 Shadybrook Drive Thousand Oaks, CA 91362 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Folkes: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Judith Bomar Grindstaff 63161 Argyle Road King City, CA 93930 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Grindstaff: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Julie Lynn Tumamait-Stennslie, Chair 365 North Poli Avenue Ojai, CA 93023 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Tumamait-Stennslie: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Lei Lynn Odom 1339 24th Street Oceano, CA 93445 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Odom: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 San Luis Obispo County Chumash Council Chief Mark Steven Vigil 1030 Ritchie Road Grover Beach, CA 93433 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Chief Vigil: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Peggy Odom 1339 24th Street Oceano, CA 93445 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Odom: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan Tribe of Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties Patty Dunton, Tribal Administrator 7070 Morro Road, Suite A Atascadero, CA 93422 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Dunton: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Randy Guzman-Folkes 4676 Walnut Avenue Simi Valley, CA 93063 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Guzman-Folkes: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Xolon-Salinan Tribe Johnny Eddy, Council Chairperson 950 Coral Ridge Circle Rodeo, CA 94572 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Eddy: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Cultural Resources Coordinator P.O. Box 56 Lockwood, CA 93932 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California To Whom It May Concern: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Robert Duckworth, Environmental Coordinator 4777 Driver Road Valley Springs, CA 95252 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Duckworth: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Michael Cordero, Chairperson P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Chairperson Cordero: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 yak tityu tityu – Northern Chumash Tribe Mona Olivas Tucker, Chairwoman 660 Camino Del Rey Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Chairwoman Tucker: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Matthew Darian Goldman 495 Mentone Grover Beach, CA 93433 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Goldman: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Gregg Castro, Administrator 5225 Roeder Road San Jose, CA 95111 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Castro: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan-Chumash Nation Xielolixii 3901 Q Street, Suite Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Xielolixii: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Northern Chumash Tribal Council Fred Collins, Spokesperson 67 South Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Collins: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Frank Arredondo P.O. Box 161 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Arredondo: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Council Freddie Romero, Cultural Preservation Consultant P.O. Box 365 Santa Ynez, CA 93460 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Romero: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Kathleen Pappo 2762 Vista Mesa Drive Rancho Pales, CA 90275 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Pappo: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Raudel Joe Banuelos, Jr. 331 Mira Flores Court Camarillo, CA 93012 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Banuelos: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Janet Darlene Garcia P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Garcia: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Crystal Baker P.O. Box 723 Atascadero, CA 93423 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Baker: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 PeuYoKo Perez 11465 Nardo Street Ventura, CA 93004 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Perez: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map Appendix A Notice of Preparation Notice of Preparation To: EIR & Notice of Preparation Mailing List SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report Lead Agency: Consulting Firm: (if applicable) Agency Name: City of San Luis Obispo EIR to be prepared by: Department Name: Utilities Department Firm Name: Rincon Consultants Street Address: 879 Morro Street Street Address: 1530 Monterey Street, Suite D City/State/Zip: San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 City/State/Zip: San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Contact: David Hix, 805-781-7039 Contact: Jennifer Haddow The City of San Luis Obispo will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information, which is germane to your agency’s statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for this project. The project description, location, and the potential environmental effects are summarized in the attachment. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date, but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to the attention of Brian Leveille, Senior Planner, in the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department at the address below. We will need the name of a contact person in your agency in any response provided. Attn: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 Email: bleveille@slocity.org Project Title: City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project Project Location: 35 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo, APN 053-051-045. Project Description: The proposed project includes upgrading the existing Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) in order to: (1) provide the nominal increase in average dry weather flow (ADWF) capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element; (2) meet the more stringent discharge requirements adopted by the RWQCB and SWRCB in late 2014; (3) replace aging equipment; (4) maximize the production of recycled water; and (5) incorporate interpretive features and public amenities. Date: _____________________________________________ Signature: _____________________________________________ Title: _____________________________________________ Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14 (CEQA Guidelines) Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375 (Revised October 1989) Page 2 NOTICE OF PREPARATION ATTACHMENT WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY PROJECT The City of San Luis Obispo, as Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), is requesting comments on the environmental impact report (EIR) scope of work for the proposed project, described below and in the Notice of Preparation, and commonly referred to as the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project. An initial study has not been prepared for this project. Instead all CEQA Appendix G Checklist Items will be addressed in the EIR. Project Location and Setting The City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) is located at 35 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (see Figures 1 and 2). The site occupies approximately 55 acres bounded by U.S. Highway 101 on the west, San Luis Obispo Creek on the east, Prado Road on the north, and Los Osos Valley Road on the south. The project site also includes the undeveloped area located immediately southwest of the main facility and adjacent to the Bob Jones Bike Trail and the location of the decommissioned chlorine contact channels adjacent to the existing ponds near the outfall or discharge point for the WRRF. Most of the project site is disturbed and contains the existing WRRF equipment and related uses. These include the headworks (influent receiving and coarse solids removal), primary treatment system (to separate solid material from effluent), secondary treatment system (mainly to remove organic material), disinfection, cooling, solids treatment, and various ponds, and other equipment. Some of this equipment is old and in need of replacement or back-up facilities and some will be retained and used in the updated WRRF design. San Luis Obispo Creek is located along the entire easterly boundary of the project site. The creek originates several miles northeast of the City, and enters the Pacific Ocean about seven miles downstream from the WRRF. A segment of the Bob Jones Bike Trail runs along the west side of the creek and through the southern portion of the project site. The project site contains other uses besides the WRRF. These other uses include the Prado Day Center, a small indoor shooting range, City transit bus facility, and a City corporation yard and storage area. The Prado Day Center is scheduled for relocation to a nearby parcel on the north side of Prado Road. The new Prado Day Center has already been reviewed and approved by the City, and that relocation is not part of this project. The shooting range will be removed. The existing City corporation yard, containing vehicle maintenance, parking, and related facilities would remain; however, a new entrance to the corporation yard would be created due to the planned construction of the Prado Road overpass. The existing bus facility will remain at the site. Project Description The WRRF is being upgraded to provide the nominal increase in average dry weather flow (ADWF) capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element. At the same time, the WRRF upgrade is necessary to meet the more stringent discharge requirements established by the RWQCB and SWRCB in late 2014, including strict limits on nitrate and disinfection byproducts, and handling wet weather flows without the need to overload or bypass steps in the treatment process. The City has identified the following project vision, mission, and objectives: Vision: Create a community asset that is recognized as supporting health, well-being and quality of life Page 3 Mission: Deliver a Water Resource Recovery Facility in partnership with stakeholders that provides economic, social and environmental value to the community Objectives and Performance Measures  Economic o Optimize capital investment and life cycle cost o Maximize value for ratepayers’ investment o Incorporate flexibility and scalability to adapt to future conditions o Simplify process flow and make treatment more robust o Optimize application of appropriate technology  Social o Create and sustain diverse partnerships that add value to the community o Provide an interpretive center and dedicated features to engage and educate the community o Be a good neighbor o Engender the trust of project stakeholders o Support the development and empowerment of City employees  Environmental o Develop and implement a holistic strategy to maximize sustainable resource recovery and manage salts, nutrients and environmental pollutants in the Basin o Incorporate sustainability practices in planning, design, construction, and operation o Maintain compliance and minimize impacts to operations and the community during construction o Sustain reliable compliance post-construction Project Characteristics. Details regarding the components of the project and their construction are summarized in the following paragraphs. Demolition of Existing Structures. During the WRRF upgrade certain structures would be demolished to make room for new and enlarged equipment. The Prado Day Center and indoor shooting range buildings would be removed, along with treatment facilities that are no longer required. Since the WRRF must continue operating during the upgrades, not all of the demolition would occur concurrently. Treatment Plant Upgrades. The proposed upgrades to the WRRF are summarized briefly as follows:  Flow Equalization. Upgrades to the existing equalization pond to enhance operations and maintenance and improve wet-weather performance.  Preliminary Treatment. Addition of a new flow monitoring system and odor control improvements, along with other mechanical and structural improvements to the existing headworks.  Primary Treatment. Rehabilitation of the primary clarifiers and upgrades to the supporting mechanical equipment.  Secondary Treatment. Upgraded and expanded secondary treatment system to remove nitrogen and organic components, necessary to meet the new Waste Discharge Requirements specifications.  Tertiary Treatment. Expansion of the filter capacity to meet peak flow requirements.  Cooling. Upgrades to effluent cooling system.  Disinfection. Construction of a new Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection unit to meet the new stringent discharge limits for disinfection byproducts.  Solids Thickening. Addition of new equipment to thicken the solids produced in the treatment process. Page 4  Anaerobic Digester. Construction of a new anaerobic digester.  Biosolids Dewatering. Replacement of the old belt filter press with a new screw press.  Sidestream Treatment/Return Stream Management. Several upgrades would be made in the handling and treatment of waste streams produced internally. These include filter backwash, thickening return fluid (sidestream), digester return fluid (sidestream), lagoon supernatant (from dewatering sidestream), sludge drying bed return fluid, and plant drain.  Odor Control. Odor control improvements would be installed at several locations.  Additional Electrical and Control Upgrades. Improved electrical service to meet the needs of new equipment, and improved instrumentation and controls for operation of the WRRF.  Stormwater Management. Construction of on-site drainage improvements and the addition of one new stormwater discharge point near the northeast corner of the WRRF.  Flood Protection Improvements. Construction of improvements to provide enhanced flood protection for key facilities.  Renewable Energy Improvements. Installation of solar photovoltaic panels and related equipment at various locations throughout the WRRF.  Public Amenities. Construction of a new Water Resource Center, and grading and restoration of land at the northeast corner of the WRRF after removal of the existing supernatant pond, which may ultimately be used for public park purposes under the direction of the City Parks and Recreation Department. The project would also include improvements to perimeter fencing and landscaping, particularly at the Prado Road frontage of the property, as well improvements for security, access control, and internal circulation. Discretionary Permits The following permits have been identified as possibly applying to the project. The list will be refined as detailed plans are developed.  Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 404. Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands.  California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and take authorization as applicable.  Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and take authorization as applicable.  California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Consultation and coordination with the NAHC.  Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 401. Water Quality Certification from Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB).  CWA, Section 402. NPDES General Permit from the CCRWQCB for general construction activities and General Permit for Discharges with Low Threat to Water Quality.  Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR)/Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for flood control improvements.  Caltrans Encroachment Permit.  San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District. Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate.  City building, grading, and encroachment permits, as appropriate.  Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). Approval for new power infrastructure to the site. Probable Environmental Effects/Issues Scoped for EIR The main resource areas anticipated to be potentially significant in the EIR include:  Air Quality  Biological Resources Page 5  Cultural Resources  Hazards and Hazardous Materials  Hydrology and Water Quality  Noise  Recreation  Public Services and Utilities Other issue areas that will be analyzed in the EIR include:  Aesthetics  Agriculture and Forestry Resources  Geology and Soils  Greenhouse Gas Emissions  Land Use and Planning  Mineral Resources  Population and Housing  Recreation  Transportation/Traffic Public Scoping Meeting A public scoping meeting has been scheduled to allow for any interested persons to supply input on issues to be discussed in the EIR: Date: TUESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2015 Time: 6:00 p.m. Place: 990 Palm Street (City Council Chamber upstairs), San Luis Obispo The meeting is an opportunity for City and consultant staffs to gather information from the public regarding the potential environmental impacts of the project that need to be evaluated in the EIR. It is not intended to be a hearing on the merits of the project. Therefore, members of the public should keep their comments focused on potential significant changes to the environment that may occur as a direct result of project development. Contact for Comments Please send your comments to the attention of Brian Leveille, Senior Planner, in the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department at the addresses below. Comments can be submitted either by email or hard copy and must be received no later than 5PM on November 13, 2015. Attn: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 Email: bleveille@slocity.org P.O. Box 7045, Spreckels, Ca. 93962 Karen R. White Council Chair blukat41@yahoo.com Robert Sims Council Vice Chair ziggyorjoyce@yahoo.com Francine Martinez Council Secretary – MLD/Monitor Coordinator sassysalinan@aol.com George Larson Council Treasurer smalltownfolks@sbcglobal.net Council Members: Thomas Ball - elder Linda Castle - elder Selena Castle Blaise Haro Tribal Headwoman Donna Haro – elder “AAKLETSE” xolonaakletse@aol.com November 13, 2015 Subject: Consult for City of SLO Water Resource Recovery Facility Project. Good Day Mr. Leveille, Based on information provided and reviewed, this is an area that falls into a back and forth gray area, partially within our geographical area of traditional and cultural affiliation boundaries. Therefore we are not aware of any Xolon Salinan cultural resources in this area, but please be aware that since this project is located along SLO creek or close to, there is a great possibility that they will encounter human remains at some time during this project. We have had many ancestors’ remains unearthed along creeks and rivers, so please handle with care during excavating these creek side areas. We appreciate your notification, if you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best Regards, Karen R. White, Council Chair Xolon Salinan Tribe Appendix B Air Quality Emissions Model Information Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 1" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes tertiary filtration, cooling, disinfection, and additional electrical and control upgrades. Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 1 work will include approx. 2 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 1 construction from 2017 Q4 through 2019 Q2 (18 months). Activity would total approx. 8.5 months, but would be distributed thoughtout 18-month construction period. Demolition - Estimated approximately 7,000 sf of building/hardscape demolition, based on site demolition plans. Architectural Coating - No interior architectural coating expected during this stage of construction. San Luis Obispo County, Annual SLO WRRF - UV & Filtration Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 2.00 Acre 2.00 87,120.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 1 of 31 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 130,680.00 0.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 20.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 200.00 220.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 4.00 6.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 2.00 4.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/25/2018 11/23/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/14/2018 9/13/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/28/2018 10/29/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 11/11/2017 11/10/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 10/28/2017 10/30/2017 tblGrading AcresOfGrading 3.00 2.00 tblGrading AcresOfGrading 6.00 3.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 2 of 31 2.1 Overall Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2017 0.0930 0.7144 0.5689 8.2000e- 004 0.0332 0.0422 0.0753 0.0131 0.0399 0.0530 0.0000 70.4494 70.4494 0.0148 0.0000 70.7600 2018 0.5554 2.0889 1.8570 3.0100e- 003 0.0399 0.1222 0.1621 0.0107 0.1170 0.1277 0.0000 249.9651 249.9651 0.0458 0.0000 250.9266 Total 0.6484 2.8033 2.4259 3.8300e- 003 0.0731 0.1644 0.2374 0.0239 0.1569 0.1808 0.0000 320.4145 320.4145 0.0606 0.0000 321.6866 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2017 0.0930 0.7144 0.5689 8.2000e- 004 0.0332 0.0422 0.0753 0.0131 0.0399 0.0530 0.0000 70.4493 70.4493 0.0148 0.0000 70.7599 2018 0.5554 2.0889 1.8570 3.0100e- 003 0.0399 0.1222 0.1621 0.0107 0.1170 0.1277 0.0000 249.9648 249.9648 0.0458 0.0000 250.9263 Total 0.6484 2.8033 2.4259 3.8300e- 003 0.0731 0.1644 0.2374 0.0239 0.1569 0.1808 0.0000 320.4141 320.4141 0.0606 0.0000 321.6863 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 3 of 31 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 0.4412 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.4412 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 Unmitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 4 of 31 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 0.4412 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.4412 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 5 of 31 Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 10/16/2017 10/27/2017 5 10 2 Grading Grading 10/30/2017 11/6/2017 5 6 3 Ext. Site Prep Site Preparation 11/7/2017 11/10/2017 5 4 4 Building Construction Building Construction 11/10/2017 9/13/2018 5 220 5 Paving Paving 9/14/2018 9/27/2018 5 10 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 10/29/2018 11/23/2018 5 20 OffRoad Equipment Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 43,560 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 2 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 6 of 31 Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7.00 97 0.37 Ext. Site Prep Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Ext. Site Prep Scrapers 1 8.00 361 0.48 Ext. Site Prep Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 2 7.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 125 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 7 of 31 3.2 Demolition - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 3.5600e- 003 0.0000 3.5600e- 003 5.4000e- 004 0.0000 5.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0136 0.1329 0.1044 1.2000e- 004 8.0300e- 003 8.0300e- 003 7.5100e- 003 7.5100e- 003 0.0000 11.1469 11.1469 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 11.2063 Total 0.0136 0.1329 0.1044 1.2000e- 004 3.5600e- 003 8.0300e- 003 0.0116 5.4000e- 004 7.5100e- 003 8.0500e- 003 0.0000 11.1469 11.1469 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 11.2063 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 5 13.00 0.00 32.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Ext. Site Prep 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 8 37.00 14.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 7.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 8 of 31 3.2 Demolition - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 3.8000e- 004 4.6600e- 003 3.9600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.7000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.0834 1.0834 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0836 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.5000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 3.5400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.3000e- 004 0.0000 6.3000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 0.5128 0.5128 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5134 Total 6.3000e- 004 5.0700e- 003 7.5000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 004 0.0000 1.5962 1.5962 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5970 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 3.5600e- 003 0.0000 3.5600e- 003 5.4000e- 004 0.0000 5.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0136 0.1329 0.1044 1.2000e- 004 8.0300e- 003 8.0300e- 003 7.5100e- 003 7.5100e- 003 0.0000 11.1469 11.1469 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 11.2063 Total 0.0136 0.1329 0.1044 1.2000e- 004 3.5600e- 003 8.0300e- 003 0.0116 5.4000e- 004 7.5100e- 003 8.0500e- 003 0.0000 11.1469 11.1469 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 11.2063 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 9 of 31 3.2 Demolition - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 3.8000e- 004 4.6600e- 003 3.9600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.7000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.0834 1.0834 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0836 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.5000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 3.5400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.3000e- 004 0.0000 6.3000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 0.5128 0.5128 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5134 Total 6.3000e- 004 5.0700e- 003 7.5000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 004 0.0000 1.5962 1.5962 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5970 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Grading - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0191 0.0000 0.0191 0.0101 0.0000 0.0101 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 8.0900e- 003 0.0845 0.0569 6.0000e- 005 4.6700e- 003 4.6700e- 003 4.2900e- 003 4.2900e- 003 0.0000 5.7277 5.7277 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 5.7646 Total 8.0900e- 003 0.0845 0.0569 6.0000e- 005 0.0191 4.6700e- 003 0.0238 0.0101 4.2900e- 003 0.0143 0.0000 5.7277 5.7277 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 5.7646 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 10 of 31 3.3 Grading - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.1000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.6300e- 003 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2367 0.2367 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2370 Total 1.1000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.6300e- 003 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2367 0.2367 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2370 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0191 0.0000 0.0191 0.0101 0.0000 0.0101 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 8.0900e- 003 0.0845 0.0569 6.0000e- 005 4.6700e- 003 4.6700e- 003 4.2900e- 003 4.2900e- 003 0.0000 5.7277 5.7277 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 5.7646 Total 8.0900e- 003 0.0845 0.0569 6.0000e- 005 0.0191 4.6700e- 003 0.0238 0.0101 4.2900e- 003 0.0143 0.0000 5.7277 5.7277 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 5.7646 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 11 of 31 3.3 Grading - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.1000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.6300e- 003 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2367 0.2367 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2370 Total 1.1000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.6300e- 003 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2367 0.2367 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2370 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Ext. Site Prep - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 1.5900e- 003 0.0000 1.5900e- 003 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.0600e- 003 0.0573 0.0343 5.0000e- 005 2.7900e- 003 2.7900e- 003 2.5700e- 003 2.5700e- 003 0.0000 4.4260 4.4260 1.3600e- 003 0.0000 4.4545 Total 5.0600e- 003 0.0573 0.0343 5.0000e- 005 1.5900e- 003 2.7900e- 003 4.3800e- 003 1.7000e- 004 2.5700e- 003 2.7400e- 003 0.0000 4.4260 4.4260 1.3600e- 003 0.0000 4.4545 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 12 of 31 3.4 Ext. Site Prep - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 8.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1262 0.1262 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1264 Total 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 8.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1262 0.1262 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1264 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 1.5900e- 003 0.0000 1.5900e- 003 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.0600e- 003 0.0573 0.0343 5.0000e- 005 2.7900e- 003 2.7900e- 003 2.5700e- 003 2.5700e- 003 0.0000 4.4260 4.4260 1.3600e- 003 0.0000 4.4545 Total 5.0600e- 003 0.0573 0.0343 5.0000e- 005 1.5900e- 003 2.7900e- 003 4.3800e- 003 1.7000e- 004 2.5700e- 003 2.7400e- 003 0.0000 4.4260 4.4260 1.3600e- 003 0.0000 4.4545 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 13 of 31 3.4 Ext. Site Prep - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 8.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1262 0.1262 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1264 Total 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 8.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1262 0.1262 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1264 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0599 0.4115 0.2925 4.5000e- 004 0.0263 0.0263 0.0252 0.0252 0.0000 38.1265 38.1265 8.4700e- 003 0.0000 38.3045 Total 0.0599 0.4115 0.2925 4.5000e- 004 0.0263 0.0263 0.0252 0.0252 0.0000 38.1265 38.1265 8.4700e- 003 0.0000 38.3045 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 14 of 31 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.0100e- 003 0.0187 0.0346 4.0000e- 005 1.1200e- 003 2.4000e- 004 1.3700e- 003 3.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 0.0000 3.8088 3.8088 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8095 Worker 2.5500e- 003 4.1500e- 003 0.0363 7.0000e- 005 6.4100e- 003 5.0000e- 005 6.4600e- 003 1.7000e- 003 4.0000e- 005 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 5.2543 5.2543 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 5.2604 Total 5.5600e- 003 0.0229 0.0709 1.1000e- 004 7.5300e- 003 2.9000e- 004 7.8300e- 003 2.0200e- 003 2.6000e- 004 2.3000e- 003 0.0000 9.0631 9.0631 3.2000e- 004 0.0000 9.0699 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0599 0.4115 0.2925 4.5000e- 004 0.0263 0.0263 0.0252 0.0252 0.0000 38.1265 38.1265 8.4700e- 003 0.0000 38.3044 Total 0.0599 0.4115 0.2925 4.5000e- 004 0.0263 0.0263 0.0252 0.0252 0.0000 38.1265 38.1265 8.4700e- 003 0.0000 38.3044 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 15 of 31 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.0100e- 003 0.0187 0.0346 4.0000e- 005 1.1200e- 003 2.4000e- 004 1.3700e- 003 3.2000e- 004 2.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 0.0000 3.8088 3.8088 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8095 Worker 2.5500e- 003 4.1500e- 003 0.0363 7.0000e- 005 6.4100e- 003 5.0000e- 005 6.4600e- 003 1.7000e- 003 4.0000e- 005 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 5.2543 5.2543 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 5.2604 Total 5.5600e- 003 0.0229 0.0709 1.1000e- 004 7.5300e- 003 2.9000e- 004 7.8300e- 003 2.0200e- 003 2.6000e- 004 2.3000e- 003 0.0000 9.0631 9.0631 3.2000e- 004 0.0000 9.0699 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.2668 1.8915 1.4411 2.2900e- 003 0.1151 0.1151 0.1103 0.1103 0.0000 193.3966 193.3966 0.0416 0.0000 194.2694 Total 0.2668 1.8915 1.4411 2.2900e- 003 0.1151 0.1151 0.1103 0.1103 0.0000 193.3966 193.3966 0.0416 0.0000 194.2694 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 16 of 31 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0148 0.0875 0.1715 2.2000e- 004 5.7400e- 003 1.1500e- 003 6.8900e- 003 1.6400e- 003 1.0600e- 003 2.7000e- 003 0.0000 19.1360 19.1360 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 19.1393 Worker 0.0111 0.0187 0.1600 3.7000e- 004 0.0328 2.3000e- 004 0.0330 8.7100e- 003 2.1000e- 004 8.9200e- 003 0.0000 25.8414 25.8414 1.3400e- 003 0.0000 25.8696 Total 0.0258 0.1062 0.3314 5.9000e- 004 0.0385 1.3800e- 003 0.0399 0.0104 1.2700e- 003 0.0116 0.0000 44.9774 44.9774 1.4900e- 003 0.0000 45.0089 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.2668 1.8915 1.4411 2.2900e- 003 0.1151 0.1151 0.1103 0.1103 0.0000 193.3963 193.3963 0.0416 0.0000 194.2691 Total 0.2668 1.8915 1.4411 2.2900e- 003 0.1151 0.1151 0.1103 0.1103 0.0000 193.3963 193.3963 0.0416 0.0000 194.2691 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 17 of 31 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0148 0.0875 0.1715 2.2000e- 004 5.7400e- 003 1.1500e- 003 6.8900e- 003 1.6400e- 003 1.0600e- 003 2.7000e- 003 0.0000 19.1360 19.1360 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 19.1393 Worker 0.0111 0.0187 0.1600 3.7000e- 004 0.0328 2.3000e- 004 0.0330 8.7100e- 003 2.1000e- 004 8.9200e- 003 0.0000 25.8414 25.8414 1.3400e- 003 0.0000 25.8696 Total 0.0258 0.1062 0.3314 5.9000e- 004 0.0385 1.3800e- 003 0.0399 0.0104 1.2700e- 003 0.0116 0.0000 44.9774 44.9774 1.4900e- 003 0.0000 45.0089 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 6.9400e- 003 0.0704 0.0591 9.0000e- 005 4.2100e- 003 4.2100e- 003 3.8800e- 003 3.8800e- 003 0.0000 7.9371 7.9371 2.4200e- 003 0.0000 7.9880 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 6.9400e- 003 0.0704 0.0591 9.0000e- 005 4.2100e- 003 4.2100e- 003 3.8800e- 003 3.8800e- 003 0.0000 7.9371 7.9371 2.4200e- 003 0.0000 7.9880 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 18 of 31 3.6 Paving - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.4000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 3.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.3000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 0.5694 0.5694 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5700 Total 2.4000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 3.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.3000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 0.5694 0.5694 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5700 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 6.9400e- 003 0.0704 0.0591 9.0000e- 005 4.2100e- 003 4.2100e- 003 3.8800e- 003 3.8800e- 003 0.0000 7.9371 7.9371 2.4200e- 003 0.0000 7.9880 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 6.9400e- 003 0.0704 0.0591 9.0000e- 005 4.2100e- 003 4.2100e- 003 3.8800e- 003 3.8800e- 003 0.0000 7.9371 7.9371 2.4200e- 003 0.0000 7.9880 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 19 of 31 3.6 Paving - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.4000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 3.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.3000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 0.5694 0.5694 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5700 Total 2.4000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 3.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.3000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 0.5694 0.5694 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5700 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 0.2524 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.9900e- 003 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e- 005 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.5584 Total 0.2554 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e- 005 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.5584 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 20 of 31 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.3000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 3.2900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.7000e- 004 0.0000 6.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 0.5314 0.5314 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5320 Total 2.3000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 3.2900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.7000e- 004 0.0000 6.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 0.5314 0.5314 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5320 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 0.2524 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.9900e- 003 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e- 005 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.5584 Total 0.2554 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e- 005 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.5584 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 21 of 31 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.3000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 3.2900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.7000e- 004 0.0000 6.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 0.5314 0.5314 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5320 Total 2.3000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 3.2900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.7000e- 004 0.0000 6.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 0.5314 0.5314 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5320 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 22 of 31 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 23 of 31 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 24 of 31 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 25 of 31 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.4412 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 Unmitigated 0.4412 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 26 of 31 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.1010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.3403 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 Total 0.4412 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.1010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.3403 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 Total 0.4412 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 27 of 31 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 28 of 31 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 8.0 Waste Detail Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Category/Year CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 29 of 31 8.2 Waste by Land Use Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 30 of 31 10.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:44 AMPage 31 of 31 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 1" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes tertiary filtration, cooling, disinfection, and additional electrical and control upgrades. Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 1 work will include approx. 2 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 1 construction from 2017 Q4 through 2019 Q2 (18 months). Activity would total approx. 8.5 months, but would be distributed thoughtout 18-month construction period. Demolition - Estimated approximately 7,000 sf of building/hardscape demolition, based on site demolition plans. Architectural Coating - No interior architectural coating expected during this stage of construction. San Luis Obispo County, Summer SLO WRRF - UV & Filtration Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 2.00 Acre 2.00 87,120.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 1 of 25 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 130,680.00 0.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 20.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 200.00 220.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 4.00 6.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 2.00 4.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/25/2018 11/23/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/14/2018 9/13/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/28/2018 10/29/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 11/11/2017 11/10/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 10/28/2017 10/30/2017 tblGrading AcresOfGrading 3.00 2.00 tblGrading AcresOfGrading 6.00 3.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 2 of 25 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2017 6.1762 52.7479 37.3383 0.0562 6.4745 2.8755 8.0302 3.3746 2.7001 4.8059 0.0000 5,415.714 6 5,415.714 6 1.2900 0.0000 5,442.804 8 2018 25.5590 21.6698 18.8663 0.0314 0.4296 1.2660 1.6956 0.1152 1.2130 1.3282 0.0000 2,869.666 0 2,869.666 0 0.5408 0.0000 2,881.022 7 Total 31.7352 74.4177 56.2046 0.0876 6.9040 4.1415 9.7258 3.4898 3.9131 6.1341 0.0000 8,285.380 5 8,285.380 5 1.8308 0.0000 8,323.827 5 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2017 6.1762 52.7479 37.3383 0.0562 6.4745 2.8755 8.0302 3.3746 2.7001 4.8059 0.0000 5,415.714 6 5,415.714 6 1.2900 0.0000 5,442.804 8 2018 25.5590 21.6698 18.8663 0.0314 0.4296 1.2660 1.6956 0.1152 1.2130 1.3282 0.0000 2,869.666 0 2,869.666 0 0.5408 0.0000 2,881.022 7 Total 31.7352 74.4177 56.2046 0.0876 6.9040 4.1415 9.7258 3.4898 3.9131 6.1341 0.0000 8,285.380 5 8,285.380 5 1.8308 0.0000 8,323.827 5 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 3 of 25 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 4 of 25 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 10/16/2017 10/27/2017 5 10 2 Grading Grading 10/30/2017 11/6/2017 5 6 3 Ext. Site Prep Site Preparation 11/7/2017 11/10/2017 5 4 4 Building Construction Building Construction 11/10/2017 9/13/2018 5 220 5 Paving Paving 9/14/2018 9/27/2018 5 10 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 10/29/2018 11/23/2018 5 20 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 43,560 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 2 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 5 of 25 Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7.00 97 0.37 Ext. Site Prep Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Ext. Site Prep Scrapers 1 8.00 361 0.48 Ext. Site Prep Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 2 7.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 125 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 6 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.7113 0.0000 0.7113 0.1077 0.0000 0.1077 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 1.6062 1.6062 1.5022 1.5022 2,457.468 2 2,457.468 2 0.6235 2,470.562 0 Total 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 0.7113 1.6062 2.3175 0.1077 1.5022 1.6100 2,457.468 2 2,457.468 2 0.6235 2,470.562 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 5 13.00 0.00 32.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Ext. Site Prep 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 8 37.00 14.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 7.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 7 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0697 0.9034 0.6345 2.4100e- 003 0.0557 0.0112 0.0669 0.0152 0.0103 0.0256 239.0872 239.0872 1.6100e- 003 239.1209 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0496 0.0727 0.7151 1.4700e- 003 0.1285 9.4000e- 004 0.1295 0.0341 8.6000e- 004 0.0349 117.6128 117.6128 6.2900e- 003 117.7449 Total 0.1193 0.9761 1.3496 3.8800e- 003 0.1842 0.0122 0.1964 0.0493 0.0112 0.0605 356.7000 356.7000 7.9000e- 003 356.8658 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.7113 0.0000 0.7113 0.1077 0.0000 0.1077 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 1.6062 1.6062 1.5022 1.5022 0.0000 2,457.468 2 2,457.468 2 0.6235 2,470.562 0 Total 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 0.7113 1.6062 2.3175 0.1077 1.5022 1.6100 0.0000 2,457.468 2 2,457.468 2 0.6235 2,470.562 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 8 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0697 0.9034 0.6345 2.4100e- 003 0.0557 0.0112 0.0669 0.0152 0.0103 0.0256 239.0872 239.0872 1.6100e- 003 239.1209 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0496 0.0727 0.7151 1.4700e- 003 0.1285 9.4000e- 004 0.1295 0.0341 8.6000e- 004 0.0349 117.6128 117.6128 6.2900e- 003 117.7449 Total 0.1193 0.9761 1.3496 3.8800e- 003 0.1842 0.0122 0.1964 0.0493 0.0112 0.0605 356.7000 356.7000 7.9000e- 003 356.8658 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Grading - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.3756 0.0000 6.3756 3.3484 0.0000 3.3484 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6973 28.1608 18.9679 0.0206 1.5550 1.5550 1.4306 1.4306 2,104.573 7 2,104.573 7 0.6448 2,118.115 3 Total 2.6973 28.1608 18.9679 0.0206 6.3756 1.5550 7.9306 3.3484 1.4306 4.7790 2,104.573 7 2,104.573 7 0.6448 2,118.115 3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 9 of 25 3.3 Grading - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0382 0.0559 0.5501 1.1300e- 003 0.0989 7.2000e- 004 0.0996 0.0262 6.6000e- 004 0.0269 90.4714 90.4714 4.8400e- 003 90.5730 Total 0.0382 0.0559 0.5501 1.1300e- 003 0.0989 7.2000e- 004 0.0996 0.0262 6.6000e- 004 0.0269 90.4714 90.4714 4.8400e- 003 90.5730 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.3756 0.0000 6.3756 3.3484 0.0000 3.3484 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6973 28.1608 18.9679 0.0206 1.5550 1.5550 1.4306 1.4306 0.0000 2,104.573 7 2,104.573 7 0.6448 2,118.115 3 Total 2.6973 28.1608 18.9679 0.0206 6.3756 1.5550 7.9306 3.3484 1.4306 4.7790 0.0000 2,104.573 7 2,104.573 7 0.6448 2,118.115 3 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 10 of 25 3.3 Grading - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0382 0.0559 0.5501 1.1300e- 003 0.0989 7.2000e- 004 0.0996 0.0262 6.6000e- 004 0.0269 90.4714 90.4714 4.8400e- 003 90.5730 Total 0.0382 0.0559 0.5501 1.1300e- 003 0.0989 7.2000e- 004 0.0996 0.0262 6.6000e- 004 0.0269 90.4714 90.4714 4.8400e- 003 90.5730 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Ext. Site Prep - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.7954 0.0000 0.7954 0.0859 0.0000 0.0859 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.5289 28.6230 17.1310 0.0238 1.3967 1.3967 1.2850 1.2850 2,439.436 0 2,439.436 0 0.7474 2,455.132 2 Total 2.5289 28.6230 17.1310 0.0238 0.7954 1.3967 2.1921 0.0859 1.2850 1.3709 2,439.436 0 2,439.436 0 0.7474 2,455.132 2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 11 of 25 3.4 Ext. Site Prep - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0306 0.0447 0.4401 9.0000e- 004 0.0791 5.8000e- 004 0.0797 0.0210 5.3000e- 004 0.0215 72.3771 72.3771 3.8700e- 003 72.4584 Total 0.0306 0.0447 0.4401 9.0000e- 004 0.0791 5.8000e- 004 0.0797 0.0210 5.3000e- 004 0.0215 72.3771 72.3771 3.8700e- 003 72.4584 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.7954 0.0000 0.7954 0.0859 0.0000 0.0859 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.5289 28.6230 17.1310 0.0238 1.3967 1.3967 1.2850 1.2850 0.0000 2,439.436 0 2,439.436 0 0.7474 2,455.132 2 Total 2.5289 28.6230 17.1310 0.0238 0.7954 1.3967 2.1921 0.0859 1.2850 1.3709 0.0000 2,439.436 0 2,439.436 0 0.7474 2,455.132 2 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 12 of 25 3.4 Ext. Site Prep - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0306 0.0447 0.4401 9.0000e- 004 0.0791 5.8000e- 004 0.0797 0.0210 5.3000e- 004 0.0215 72.3771 72.3771 3.8700e- 003 72.4584 Total 0.0306 0.0447 0.4401 9.0000e- 004 0.0791 5.8000e- 004 0.0797 0.0210 5.3000e- 004 0.0215 72.3771 72.3771 3.8700e- 003 72.4584 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 3.3275 22.8585 16.2492 0.0249 1.4621 1.4621 1.3998 1.3998 2,334.850 3 2,334.850 3 0.5189 2,345.747 9 Total 3.3275 22.8585 16.2492 0.0249 1.4621 1.4621 1.3998 1.3998 2,334.850 3 2,334.850 3 0.5189 2,345.747 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 13 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1479 1.0148 1.4827 2.3800e- 003 0.0638 0.0135 0.0772 0.0182 0.0124 0.0306 234.3071 234.3071 1.8700e- 003 234.3463 Worker 0.1413 0.2069 2.0354 4.1700e- 003 0.3658 2.6700e- 003 0.3685 0.0970 2.4400e- 003 0.0995 334.7441 334.7441 0.0179 335.1201 Total 0.2892 1.2217 3.5180 6.5500e- 003 0.4296 0.0161 0.4457 0.1152 0.0148 0.1300 569.0512 569.0512 0.0198 569.4664 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 3.3275 22.8585 16.2492 0.0249 1.4621 1.4621 1.3998 1.3998 0.0000 2,334.850 3 2,334.850 3 0.5189 2,345.747 9 Total 3.3275 22.8585 16.2492 0.0249 1.4621 1.4621 1.3998 1.3998 0.0000 2,334.850 3 2,334.850 3 0.5189 2,345.747 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 14 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1479 1.0148 1.4827 2.3800e- 003 0.0638 0.0135 0.0772 0.0182 0.0124 0.0306 234.3071 234.3071 1.8700e- 003 234.3463 Worker 0.1413 0.2069 2.0354 4.1700e- 003 0.3658 2.6700e- 003 0.3685 0.0970 2.4400e- 003 0.0995 334.7441 334.7441 0.0179 335.1201 Total 0.2892 1.2217 3.5180 6.5500e- 003 0.4296 0.0161 0.4457 0.1152 0.0148 0.1300 569.0512 569.0512 0.0198 569.4664 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.9004 20.5600 15.6637 0.0249 1.2511 1.2511 1.1992 1.1992 2,317.208 9 2,317.208 9 0.4980 2,327.666 4 Total 2.9004 20.5600 15.6637 0.0249 1.2511 1.2511 1.1992 1.1992 2,317.208 9 2,317.208 9 0.4980 2,327.666 4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 15 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1423 0.9277 1.4341 2.3800e- 003 0.0638 0.0124 0.0762 0.0182 0.0114 0.0296 230.3234 230.3234 1.8300e- 003 230.3618 Worker 0.1207 0.1820 1.7685 4.1700e- 003 0.3658 2.5200e- 003 0.3683 0.0970 2.3200e- 003 0.0993 322.1337 322.1337 0.0161 322.4721 Total 0.2630 1.1097 3.2026 6.5500e- 003 0.4296 0.0149 0.4445 0.1152 0.0137 0.1290 552.4571 552.4571 0.0179 552.8339 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.9004 20.5600 15.6637 0.0249 1.2511 1.2511 1.1992 1.1992 0.0000 2,317.208 9 2,317.208 9 0.4980 2,327.666 4 Total 2.9004 20.5600 15.6637 0.0249 1.2511 1.2511 1.1992 1.1992 0.0000 2,317.208 9 2,317.208 9 0.4980 2,327.666 4 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 16 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1423 0.9277 1.4341 2.3800e- 003 0.0638 0.0124 0.0762 0.0182 0.0114 0.0296 230.3234 230.3234 1.8300e- 003 230.3618 Worker 0.1207 0.1820 1.7685 4.1700e- 003 0.3658 2.5200e- 003 0.3683 0.0970 2.3200e- 003 0.0993 322.1337 322.1337 0.0161 322.4721 Total 0.2630 1.1097 3.2026 6.5500e- 003 0.4296 0.0149 0.4445 0.1152 0.0137 0.1290 552.4571 552.4571 0.0179 552.8339 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.3885 14.0727 11.8278 0.0176 0.8417 0.8417 0.7755 0.7755 1,749.833 4 1,749.833 4 0.5343 1,761.052 9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3885 14.0727 11.8278 0.0176 0.8417 0.8417 0.7755 0.7755 1,749.833 4 1,749.833 4 0.5343 1,761.052 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 17 of 25 3.6 Paving - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0489 0.0738 0.7170 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 130.5948 130.5948 6.5300e- 003 130.7319 Total 0.0489 0.0738 0.7170 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 130.5948 130.5948 6.5300e- 003 130.7319 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.3885 14.0727 11.8278 0.0176 0.8417 0.8417 0.7755 0.7755 0.0000 1,749.833 4 1,749.833 4 0.5343 1,761.052 9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3885 14.0727 11.8278 0.0176 0.8417 0.8417 0.7755 0.7755 0.0000 1,749.833 4 1,749.833 4 0.5343 1,761.052 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 18 of 25 3.6 Paving - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0489 0.0738 0.7170 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 130.5948 130.5948 6.5300e- 003 130.7319 Total 0.0489 0.0738 0.7170 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 130.5948 130.5948 6.5300e- 003 130.7319 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 25.2376 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e- 003 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.0102 Total 25.5362 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e- 003 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.0102 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 19 of 25 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0228 0.0344 0.3346 7.9000e- 004 0.0692 4.8000e- 004 0.0697 0.0184 4.4000e- 004 0.0188 60.9442 60.9442 3.0500e- 003 61.0082 Total 0.0228 0.0344 0.3346 7.9000e- 004 0.0692 4.8000e- 004 0.0697 0.0184 4.4000e- 004 0.0188 60.9442 60.9442 3.0500e- 003 61.0082 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 25.2376 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e- 003 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.0102 Total 25.5362 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e- 003 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.0102 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 20 of 25 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0228 0.0344 0.3346 7.9000e- 004 0.0692 4.8000e- 004 0.0697 0.0184 4.4000e- 004 0.0188 60.9442 60.9442 3.0500e- 003 61.0082 Total 0.0228 0.0344 0.3346 7.9000e- 004 0.0692 4.8000e- 004 0.0697 0.0184 4.4000e- 004 0.0188 60.9442 60.9442 3.0500e- 003 61.0082 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 21 of 25 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 22 of 25 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 23 of 25 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Unmitigated 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.5532 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.8644 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Total 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 24 of 25 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 8.0 Waste Detail 10.0 Vegetation 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Consumer Products 1.8644 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Architectural Coating 0.5532 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:42 AMPage 25 of 25 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 1" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes tertiary filtration, cooling, disinfection, and additional electrical and control upgrades. Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 1 work will include approx. 2 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 1 construction from 2017 Q4 through 2019 Q2 (18 months). Activity would total approx. 8.5 months, but would be distributed thoughtout 18-month construction period. Demolition - Estimated approximately 7,000 sf of building/hardscape demolition, based on site demolition plans. Architectural Coating - No interior architectural coating expected during this stage of construction. San Luis Obispo County, Winter SLO WRRF - UV & Filtration Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 2.00 Acre 2.00 87,120.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 1 of 25 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 130,680.00 0.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 20.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 200.00 220.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 4.00 6.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 2.00 4.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/25/2018 11/23/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/14/2018 9/13/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/28/2018 10/29/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 11/11/2017 11/10/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 10/28/2017 10/30/2017 tblGrading AcresOfGrading 3.00 2.00 tblGrading AcresOfGrading 6.00 3.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 2 of 25 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2017 6.2222 52.7972 38.0589 0.0559 6.4745 2.8757 8.0302 3.3746 2.7003 4.8059 0.0000 5,394.271 8 5,394.271 8 1.2901 0.0000 5,421.363 4 2018 25.5605 21.7084 19.5516 0.0312 0.4296 1.2662 1.6958 0.1152 1.2131 1.3284 0.0000 2,852.181 0 2,852.181 0 0.5408 0.0000 2,863.537 7 Total 31.7827 74.5055 57.6105 0.0872 6.9040 4.1420 9.7260 3.4898 3.9135 6.1343 0.0000 8,246.452 8 8,246.452 8 1.8309 0.0000 8,284.901 1 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2017 6.2222 52.7972 38.0589 0.0559 6.4745 2.8757 8.0302 3.3746 2.7003 4.8059 0.0000 5,394.271 8 5,394.271 8 1.2901 0.0000 5,421.363 4 2018 25.5605 21.7084 19.5516 0.0312 0.4296 1.2662 1.6958 0.1152 1.2131 1.3284 0.0000 2,852.181 0 2,852.181 0 0.5408 0.0000 2,863.537 7 Total 31.7827 74.5055 57.6105 0.0872 6.9040 4.1420 9.7260 3.4898 3.9135 6.1343 0.0000 8,246.452 8 8,246.452 8 1.8309 0.0000 8,284.901 1 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 3 of 25 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 4 of 25 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 10/16/2017 10/27/2017 5 10 2 Grading Grading 10/30/2017 11/6/2017 5 6 3 Ext. Site Prep Site Preparation 11/7/2017 11/10/2017 5 4 4 Building Construction Building Construction 11/10/2017 9/13/2018 5 220 5 Paving Paving 9/14/2018 9/27/2018 5 10 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 10/29/2018 11/23/2018 5 20 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 43,560 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 2 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 5 of 25 Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7.00 97 0.37 Ext. Site Prep Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Ext. Site Prep Scrapers 1 8.00 361 0.48 Ext. Site Prep Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 2 7.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 125 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 6 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.7113 0.0000 0.7113 0.1077 0.0000 0.1077 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 1.6062 1.6062 1.5022 1.5022 2,457.468 2 2,457.468 2 0.6235 2,470.562 0 Total 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 0.7113 1.6062 2.3175 0.1077 1.5022 1.6100 2,457.468 2 2,457.468 2 0.6235 2,470.562 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 5 13.00 0.00 32.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Ext. Site Prep 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 8 37.00 14.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 7.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 7 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0811 0.9247 0.8865 2.4100e- 003 0.0557 0.0113 0.0670 0.0152 0.0104 0.0256 238.5310 238.5310 1.6300e- 003 238.5652 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0531 0.0824 0.7184 1.4000e- 003 0.1285 9.4000e- 004 0.1295 0.0341 8.6000e- 004 0.0349 112.1460 112.1460 6.2900e- 003 112.2781 Total 0.1342 1.0071 1.6049 3.8100e- 003 0.1842 0.0122 0.1964 0.0493 0.0112 0.0606 350.6769 350.6769 7.9200e- 003 350.8432 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.7113 0.0000 0.7113 0.1077 0.0000 0.1077 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 1.6062 1.6062 1.5022 1.5022 0.0000 2,457.468 2 2,457.468 2 0.6235 2,470.562 0 Total 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 0.7113 1.6062 2.3175 0.1077 1.5022 1.6100 0.0000 2,457.468 2 2,457.468 2 0.6235 2,470.562 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 8 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0811 0.9247 0.8865 2.4100e- 003 0.0557 0.0113 0.0670 0.0152 0.0104 0.0256 238.5310 238.5310 1.6300e- 003 238.5652 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0531 0.0824 0.7184 1.4000e- 003 0.1285 9.4000e- 004 0.1295 0.0341 8.6000e- 004 0.0349 112.1460 112.1460 6.2900e- 003 112.2781 Total 0.1342 1.0071 1.6049 3.8100e- 003 0.1842 0.0122 0.1964 0.0493 0.0112 0.0606 350.6769 350.6769 7.9200e- 003 350.8432 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Grading - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.3756 0.0000 6.3756 3.3484 0.0000 3.3484 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6973 28.1608 18.9679 0.0206 1.5550 1.5550 1.4306 1.4306 2,104.573 7 2,104.573 7 0.6448 2,118.115 3 Total 2.6973 28.1608 18.9679 0.0206 6.3756 1.5550 7.9306 3.3484 1.4306 4.7790 2,104.573 7 2,104.573 7 0.6448 2,118.115 3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 9 of 25 3.3 Grading - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0408 0.0634 0.5526 1.0800e- 003 0.0989 7.2000e- 004 0.0996 0.0262 6.6000e- 004 0.0269 86.2661 86.2661 4.8400e- 003 86.3678 Total 0.0408 0.0634 0.5526 1.0800e- 003 0.0989 7.2000e- 004 0.0996 0.0262 6.6000e- 004 0.0269 86.2661 86.2661 4.8400e- 003 86.3678 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.3756 0.0000 6.3756 3.3484 0.0000 3.3484 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6973 28.1608 18.9679 0.0206 1.5550 1.5550 1.4306 1.4306 0.0000 2,104.573 7 2,104.573 7 0.6448 2,118.115 3 Total 2.6973 28.1608 18.9679 0.0206 6.3756 1.5550 7.9306 3.3484 1.4306 4.7790 0.0000 2,104.573 7 2,104.573 7 0.6448 2,118.115 3 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 10 of 25 3.3 Grading - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0408 0.0634 0.5526 1.0800e- 003 0.0989 7.2000e- 004 0.0996 0.0262 6.6000e- 004 0.0269 86.2661 86.2661 4.8400e- 003 86.3678 Total 0.0408 0.0634 0.5526 1.0800e- 003 0.0989 7.2000e- 004 0.0996 0.0262 6.6000e- 004 0.0269 86.2661 86.2661 4.8400e- 003 86.3678 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Ext. Site Prep - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.7954 0.0000 0.7954 0.0859 0.0000 0.0859 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.5289 28.6230 17.1310 0.0238 1.3967 1.3967 1.2850 1.2850 2,439.436 0 2,439.436 0 0.7474 2,455.132 2 Total 2.5289 28.6230 17.1310 0.0238 0.7954 1.3967 2.1921 0.0859 1.2850 1.3709 2,439.436 0 2,439.436 0 0.7474 2,455.132 2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 11 of 25 3.4 Ext. Site Prep - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0327 0.0507 0.4421 8.6000e- 004 0.0791 5.8000e- 004 0.0797 0.0210 5.3000e- 004 0.0215 69.0129 69.0129 3.8700e- 003 69.0942 Total 0.0327 0.0507 0.4421 8.6000e- 004 0.0791 5.8000e- 004 0.0797 0.0210 5.3000e- 004 0.0215 69.0129 69.0129 3.8700e- 003 69.0942 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.7954 0.0000 0.7954 0.0859 0.0000 0.0859 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.5289 28.6230 17.1310 0.0238 1.3967 1.3967 1.2850 1.2850 0.0000 2,439.436 0 2,439.436 0 0.7474 2,455.132 2 Total 2.5289 28.6230 17.1310 0.0238 0.7954 1.3967 2.1921 0.0859 1.2850 1.3709 0.0000 2,439.436 0 2,439.436 0 0.7474 2,455.132 2 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 12 of 25 3.4 Ext. Site Prep - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0327 0.0507 0.4421 8.6000e- 004 0.0791 5.8000e- 004 0.0797 0.0210 5.3000e- 004 0.0215 69.0129 69.0129 3.8700e- 003 69.0942 Total 0.0327 0.0507 0.4421 8.6000e- 004 0.0791 5.8000e- 004 0.0797 0.0210 5.3000e- 004 0.0215 69.0129 69.0129 3.8700e- 003 69.0942 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 3.3275 22.8585 16.2492 0.0249 1.4621 1.4621 1.3998 1.3998 2,334.850 3 2,334.850 3 0.5189 2,345.747 9 Total 3.3275 22.8585 16.2492 0.0249 1.4621 1.4621 1.3998 1.3998 2,334.850 3 2,334.850 3 0.5189 2,345.747 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 13 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1821 1.0305 2.1919 2.3700e- 003 0.0638 0.0137 0.0775 0.0182 0.0126 0.0308 231.7880 231.7880 1.9300e- 003 231.8285 Worker 0.1511 0.2345 2.0447 3.9800e- 003 0.3658 2.6700e- 003 0.3685 0.0970 2.4400e- 003 0.0995 319.1847 319.1847 0.0179 319.5607 Total 0.3332 1.2650 4.2366 6.3500e- 003 0.4296 0.0164 0.4459 0.1152 0.0150 0.1303 550.9727 550.9727 0.0198 551.3892 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 3.3275 22.8585 16.2492 0.0249 1.4621 1.4621 1.3998 1.3998 0.0000 2,334.850 3 2,334.850 3 0.5189 2,345.747 9 Total 3.3275 22.8585 16.2492 0.0249 1.4621 1.4621 1.3998 1.3998 0.0000 2,334.850 3 2,334.850 3 0.5189 2,345.747 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 14 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1821 1.0305 2.1919 2.3700e- 003 0.0638 0.0137 0.0775 0.0182 0.0126 0.0308 231.7880 231.7880 1.9300e- 003 231.8285 Worker 0.1511 0.2345 2.0447 3.9800e- 003 0.3658 2.6700e- 003 0.3685 0.0970 2.4400e- 003 0.0995 319.1847 319.1847 0.0179 319.5607 Total 0.3332 1.2650 4.2366 6.3500e- 003 0.4296 0.0164 0.4459 0.1152 0.0150 0.1303 550.9727 550.9727 0.0198 551.3892 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.9004 20.5600 15.6637 0.0249 1.2511 1.2511 1.1992 1.1992 2,317.208 9 2,317.208 9 0.4980 2,327.666 4 Total 2.9004 20.5600 15.6637 0.0249 1.2511 1.2511 1.1992 1.1992 2,317.208 9 2,317.208 9 0.4980 2,327.666 4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 15 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1747 0.9419 2.1284 2.3600e- 003 0.0638 0.0126 0.0764 0.0182 0.0116 0.0298 227.8408 227.8408 1.9000e- 003 227.8806 Worker 0.1282 0.2065 1.7595 3.9700e- 003 0.3658 2.5200e- 003 0.3683 0.0970 2.3200e- 003 0.0993 307.1313 307.1313 0.0161 307.4697 Total 0.3029 1.1483 3.8879 6.3300e- 003 0.4296 0.0152 0.4447 0.1152 0.0139 0.1292 534.9721 534.9721 0.0180 535.3503 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.9004 20.5600 15.6637 0.0249 1.2511 1.2511 1.1992 1.1992 0.0000 2,317.208 9 2,317.208 9 0.4980 2,327.666 4 Total 2.9004 20.5600 15.6637 0.0249 1.2511 1.2511 1.1992 1.1992 0.0000 2,317.208 9 2,317.208 9 0.4980 2,327.666 4 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 16 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1747 0.9419 2.1284 2.3600e- 003 0.0638 0.0126 0.0764 0.0182 0.0116 0.0298 227.8408 227.8408 1.9000e- 003 227.8806 Worker 0.1282 0.2065 1.7595 3.9700e- 003 0.3658 2.5200e- 003 0.3683 0.0970 2.3200e- 003 0.0993 307.1313 307.1313 0.0161 307.4697 Total 0.3029 1.1483 3.8879 6.3300e- 003 0.4296 0.0152 0.4447 0.1152 0.0139 0.1292 534.9721 534.9721 0.0180 535.3503 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.3885 14.0727 11.8278 0.0176 0.8417 0.8417 0.7755 0.7755 1,749.833 4 1,749.833 4 0.5343 1,761.052 9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3885 14.0727 11.8278 0.0176 0.8417 0.8417 0.7755 0.7755 1,749.833 4 1,749.833 4 0.5343 1,761.052 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 17 of 25 3.6 Paving - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0520 0.0837 0.7133 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 124.5127 124.5127 6.5300e- 003 124.6499 Total 0.0520 0.0837 0.7133 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 124.5127 124.5127 6.5300e- 003 124.6499 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.3885 14.0727 11.8278 0.0176 0.8417 0.8417 0.7755 0.7755 0.0000 1,749.833 4 1,749.833 4 0.5343 1,761.052 9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3885 14.0727 11.8278 0.0176 0.8417 0.8417 0.7755 0.7755 0.0000 1,749.833 4 1,749.833 4 0.5343 1,761.052 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 18 of 25 3.6 Paving - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0520 0.0837 0.7133 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 124.5127 124.5127 6.5300e- 003 124.6499 Total 0.0520 0.0837 0.7133 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 124.5127 124.5127 6.5300e- 003 124.6499 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 25.2376 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e- 003 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.0102 Total 25.5362 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e- 003 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.0102 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 19 of 25 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0243 0.0391 0.3329 7.5000e- 004 0.0692 4.8000e- 004 0.0697 0.0184 4.4000e- 004 0.0188 58.1059 58.1059 3.0500e- 003 58.1699 Total 0.0243 0.0391 0.3329 7.5000e- 004 0.0692 4.8000e- 004 0.0697 0.0184 4.4000e- 004 0.0188 58.1059 58.1059 3.0500e- 003 58.1699 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 25.2376 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e- 003 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.0102 Total 25.5362 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e- 003 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.0102 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 20 of 25 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0243 0.0391 0.3329 7.5000e- 004 0.0692 4.8000e- 004 0.0697 0.0184 4.4000e- 004 0.0188 58.1059 58.1059 3.0500e- 003 58.1699 Total 0.0243 0.0391 0.3329 7.5000e- 004 0.0692 4.8000e- 004 0.0697 0.0184 4.4000e- 004 0.0188 58.1059 58.1059 3.0500e- 003 58.1699 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 21 of 25 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 22 of 25 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 23 of 25 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Unmitigated 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.5532 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.8644 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Total 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 24 of 25 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 8.0 Waste Detail 10.0 Vegetation 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Consumer Products 1.8644 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Architectural Coating 0.5532 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.4175 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6000e- 004 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 9:46 AMPage 25 of 25 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 2" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes secondary treatment upgrade, primary clarifiers & sludge pumping, and paving of internal roadways. Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 2 work will include approx. 25 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 2 construction from 2018 Q4 through 2020 Q1 (15 months). Demolition - Estimated approximately 40,000 sf of building/hardscape demolition, based on site demolition plans. Architectural Coating - No interior architectural coating expected during this stage of construction. Grading - Assume no more than a single grading pass necessary. San Luis Obispo County, Annual SLO WRRF - Secondary Treatment Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 25.00 Acre 25.00 40,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 1 of 33 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 60,000.00 0.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 370.00 250.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 30.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 35.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 15.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 12/21/2018 12/20/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 12/8/2018 12/7/2018 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,089,000.00 40,000.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 2 of 33 2.1 Overall Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2018 0.1146 1.1880 0.9777 1.3200e- 003 0.1602 0.0585 0.2187 0.0724 0.0543 0.1266 0.0000 118.5673 118.5673 0.0316 0.0000 119.2306 2019 0.3207 2.7257 2.3881 3.8100e- 003 0.0248 0.1632 0.1880 6.6700e- 003 0.1534 0.1600 0.0000 328.2535 328.2535 0.0749 0.0000 329.8261 2020 0.1118 0.0314 0.0360 6.0000e- 005 5.3000e- 004 2.0600e- 003 2.5900e- 003 1.4000e- 004 2.0600e- 003 2.2000e- 003 0.0000 5.1132 5.1132 3.8000e- 004 0.0000 5.1213 Total 0.5472 3.9451 3.4018 5.1900e- 003 0.1856 0.2238 0.4094 0.0792 0.2097 0.2889 0.0000 451.9341 451.9341 0.1069 0.0000 454.1780 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2018 0.1146 1.1880 0.9777 1.3200e- 003 0.1602 0.0585 0.2187 0.0724 0.0543 0.1266 0.0000 118.5672 118.5672 0.0316 0.0000 119.2305 2019 0.3207 2.7257 2.3881 3.8100e- 003 0.0248 0.1632 0.1880 6.6700e- 003 0.1534 0.1600 0.0000 328.2532 328.2532 0.0749 0.0000 329.8258 2020 0.1118 0.0314 0.0360 6.0000e- 005 5.3000e- 004 2.0600e- 003 2.5900e- 003 1.4000e- 004 2.0600e- 003 2.2000e- 003 0.0000 5.1132 5.1132 3.8000e- 004 0.0000 5.1213 Total 0.5471 3.9451 3.4018 5.1900e- 003 0.1856 0.2238 0.4094 0.0792 0.2097 0.2889 0.0000 451.9336 451.9336 0.1069 0.0000 454.1775 Mitigated Construction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 3 of 33 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 0.2026 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2026 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 4 of 33 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 0.2026 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2026 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 5 of 33 Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 10/15/2018 11/23/2018 5 30 2 Ext. Site Prep Site Preparation 11/24/2018 12/7/2018 5 10 3 Grading Grading 12/7/2018 12/20/2018 5 10 4 Building Construction Building Construction 12/21/2018 12/5/2019 5 250 5 Paving Paving 12/6/2019 12/26/2019 5 15 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/27/2019 2/20/2020 5 40 OffRoad Equipment Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 20,000 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 25 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 6 of 33 Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 162 0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 162 0.38 Ext. Site Prep Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 255 0.40 Ext. Site Prep Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 361 0.48 Paving Pavers 2 8.00 125 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 7 of 33 3.2 Demolition - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0203 0.0000 0.0203 3.0800e- 003 0.0000 3.0800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0534 0.5525 0.4759 6.0000e- 004 0.0271 0.0271 0.0253 0.0253 0.0000 54.2042 54.2042 0.0150 0.0000 54.5190 Total 0.0534 0.5525 0.4759 6.0000e- 004 0.0203 0.0271 0.0475 3.0800e- 003 0.0253 0.0284 0.0000 54.2042 54.2042 0.0150 0.0000 54.5190 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 182.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Ext. Site Prep 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 17.00 7.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 3.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 8 of 33 3.2 Demolition - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 2.1500e- 003 0.0241 0.0222 7.0000e- 005 1.5500e- 003 3.2000e- 004 1.8600e- 003 4.2000e- 004 2.9000e- 004 7.1000e- 004 0.0000 6.0587 6.0587 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.0596 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.3000e- 004 1.2300e- 003 0.0106 2.0000e- 005 2.1700e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.1800e- 003 5.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.7081 1.7081 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.7100 Total 2.8800e- 003 0.0253 0.0328 9.0000e- 005 3.7200e- 003 3.4000e- 004 4.0400e- 003 1.0000e- 003 3.0000e- 004 1.3000e- 003 0.0000 7.7668 7.7668 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 7.7695 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0203 0.0000 0.0203 3.0800e- 003 0.0000 3.0800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0534 0.5525 0.4759 6.0000e- 004 0.0271 0.0271 0.0253 0.0253 0.0000 54.2042 54.2042 0.0150 0.0000 54.5189 Total 0.0534 0.5525 0.4759 6.0000e- 004 0.0203 0.0271 0.0475 3.0800e- 003 0.0253 0.0284 0.0000 54.2042 54.2042 0.0150 0.0000 54.5189 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 9 of 33 3.2 Demolition - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 2.1500e- 003 0.0241 0.0222 7.0000e- 005 1.5500e- 003 3.2000e- 004 1.8600e- 003 4.2000e- 004 2.9000e- 004 7.1000e- 004 0.0000 6.0587 6.0587 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.0596 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.3000e- 004 1.2300e- 003 0.0106 2.0000e- 005 2.1700e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.1800e- 003 5.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.7081 1.7081 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.7100 Total 2.8800e- 003 0.0253 0.0328 9.0000e- 005 3.7200e- 003 3.4000e- 004 4.0400e- 003 1.0000e- 003 3.0000e- 004 1.3000e- 003 0.0000 7.7668 7.7668 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 7.7695 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0903 0.0000 0.0903 0.0497 0.0000 0.0497 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0215 0.2280 0.1812 2.0000e- 004 0.0118 0.0118 0.0109 0.0109 0.0000 17.8705 17.8705 5.5600e- 003 0.0000 17.9873 Total 0.0215 0.2280 0.1812 2.0000e- 004 0.0903 0.0118 0.1022 0.0497 0.0109 0.0605 0.0000 17.8705 17.8705 5.5600e- 003 0.0000 17.9873 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 10 of 33 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.9000e- 004 4.9000e- 004 4.2300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.6832 0.6832 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6840 Total 2.9000e- 004 4.9000e- 004 4.2300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.6832 0.6832 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6840 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0903 0.0000 0.0903 0.0497 0.0000 0.0497 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0215 0.2280 0.1812 2.0000e- 004 0.0118 0.0118 0.0109 0.0109 0.0000 17.8705 17.8705 5.5600e- 003 0.0000 17.9873 Total 0.0215 0.2280 0.1812 2.0000e- 004 0.0903 0.0118 0.1022 0.0497 0.0109 0.0605 0.0000 17.8705 17.8705 5.5600e- 003 0.0000 17.9873 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 11 of 33 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.9000e- 004 4.9000e- 004 4.2300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.6832 0.6832 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6840 Total 2.9000e- 004 4.9000e- 004 4.2300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.6832 0.6832 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6840 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0434 0.0000 0.0434 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0265 0.2977 0.2115 3.1000e- 004 0.0139 0.0139 0.0128 0.0128 0.0000 28.1808 28.1808 8.7700e- 003 0.0000 28.3650 Total 0.0265 0.2977 0.2115 3.1000e- 004 0.0434 0.0139 0.0573 0.0180 0.0128 0.0308 0.0000 28.1808 28.1808 8.7700e- 003 0.0000 28.3650 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 12 of 33 3.4 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 4.7000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.7592 0.7592 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7600 Total 3.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 4.7000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.7592 0.7592 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7600 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0434 0.0000 0.0434 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0265 0.2977 0.2115 3.1000e- 004 0.0139 0.0139 0.0128 0.0128 0.0000 28.1808 28.1808 8.7700e- 003 0.0000 28.3650 Total 0.0265 0.2977 0.2115 3.1000e- 004 0.0434 0.0139 0.0573 0.0180 0.0128 0.0308 0.0000 28.1808 28.1808 8.7700e- 003 0.0000 28.3650 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 13 of 33 3.4 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 4.7000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.7592 0.7592 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7600 Total 3.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 4.7000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.7592 0.7592 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7600 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 9.3400e- 003 0.0814 0.0614 9.0000e- 005 5.2300e- 003 5.2300e- 003 4.9200e- 003 4.9200e- 003 0.0000 8.2869 8.2869 2.0300e- 003 0.0000 8.3295 Total 9.3400e- 003 0.0814 0.0614 9.0000e- 005 5.2300e- 003 5.2300e- 003 4.9200e- 003 4.9200e- 003 0.0000 8.2869 8.2869 2.0300e- 003 0.0000 8.3295 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 14 of 33 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.8000e- 004 1.6600e- 003 3.2600e- 003 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3640 0.3640 0.0000 0.0000 0.3641 Worker 1.9000e- 004 3.3000e- 004 2.8000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.8000e- 004 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.4517 0.4517 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.4522 Total 4.7000e- 004 1.9900e- 003 6.0600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 7.1000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.8157 0.8157 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.8163 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 9.3400e- 003 0.0814 0.0614 9.0000e- 005 5.2300e- 003 5.2300e- 003 4.9200e- 003 4.9200e- 003 0.0000 8.2869 8.2869 2.0300e- 003 0.0000 8.3295 Total 9.3400e- 003 0.0814 0.0614 9.0000e- 005 5.2300e- 003 5.2300e- 003 4.9200e- 003 4.9200e- 003 0.0000 8.2869 8.2869 2.0300e- 003 0.0000 8.3295 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 15 of 33 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.8000e- 004 1.6600e- 003 3.2600e- 003 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3640 0.3640 0.0000 0.0000 0.3641 Worker 1.9000e- 004 3.3000e- 004 2.8000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.8000e- 004 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.4517 0.4517 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.4522 Total 4.7000e- 004 1.9900e- 003 6.0600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 7.1000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.8157 0.8157 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.8163 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.2857 2.5473 2.0801 3.2600e- 003 0.1561 0.1561 0.1468 0.1468 0.0000 284.4592 284.4592 0.0692 0.0000 285.9126 Total 0.2857 2.5473 2.0801 3.2600e- 003 0.1561 0.1561 0.1468 0.1468 0.0000 284.4592 284.4592 0.0692 0.0000 285.9126 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 16 of 33 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 9.0100e- 003 0.0530 0.1071 1.4000e- 004 3.7900e- 003 7.0000e- 004 4.4900e- 003 1.0800e- 003 6.4000e- 004 1.7300e- 003 0.0000 12.4147 12.4147 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 12.4168 Worker 5.8500e- 003 0.0101 0.0855 2.2000e- 004 0.0199 1.4000e- 004 0.0200 5.2800e- 003 1.3000e- 004 5.4100e- 003 0.0000 15.1111 15.1111 7.5000e- 004 0.0000 15.1268 Total 0.0149 0.0631 0.1926 3.6000e- 004 0.0237 8.4000e- 004 0.0245 6.3600e- 003 7.7000e- 004 7.1400e- 003 0.0000 27.5258 27.5258 8.5000e- 004 0.0000 27.5436 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.2857 2.5473 2.0801 3.2600e- 003 0.1561 0.1561 0.1468 0.1468 0.0000 284.4588 284.4588 0.0692 0.0000 285.9122 Total 0.2857 2.5473 2.0801 3.2600e- 003 0.1561 0.1561 0.1468 0.1468 0.0000 284.4588 284.4588 0.0692 0.0000 285.9122 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 17 of 33 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 9.0100e- 003 0.0530 0.1071 1.4000e- 004 3.7900e- 003 7.0000e- 004 4.4900e- 003 1.0800e- 003 6.4000e- 004 1.7300e- 003 0.0000 12.4147 12.4147 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 12.4168 Worker 5.8500e- 003 0.0101 0.0855 2.2000e- 004 0.0199 1.4000e- 004 0.0200 5.2800e- 003 1.3000e- 004 5.4100e- 003 0.0000 15.1111 15.1111 7.5000e- 004 0.0000 15.1268 Total 0.0149 0.0631 0.1926 3.6000e- 004 0.0237 8.4000e- 004 0.0245 6.3600e- 003 7.7000e- 004 7.1400e- 003 0.0000 27.5258 27.5258 8.5000e- 004 0.0000 27.5436 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0107 0.1120 0.1077 1.7000e- 004 6.0700e- 003 6.0700e- 003 5.5900e- 003 5.5900e- 003 0.0000 15.0296 15.0296 4.7600e- 003 0.0000 15.1295 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0107 0.1120 0.1077 1.7000e- 004 6.0700e- 003 6.0700e- 003 5.5900e- 003 5.5900e- 003 0.0000 15.0296 15.0296 4.7600e- 003 0.0000 15.1295 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 18 of 33 3.6 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 4.6600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0900e- 003 2.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.8231 0.8231 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.8239 Total 3.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 4.6600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0900e- 003 2.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.8231 0.8231 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.8239 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0107 0.1120 0.1077 1.7000e- 004 6.0700e- 003 6.0700e- 003 5.5800e- 003 5.5800e- 003 0.0000 15.0296 15.0296 4.7600e- 003 0.0000 15.1294 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0107 0.1120 0.1077 1.7000e- 004 6.0700e- 003 6.0700e- 003 5.5800e- 003 5.5800e- 003 0.0000 15.0296 15.0296 4.7600e- 003 0.0000 15.1294 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 19 of 33 3.6 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 4.6600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0900e- 003 2.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.8231 0.8231 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.8239 Total 3.2000e- 004 5.5000e- 004 4.6600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0900e- 003 2.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.8231 0.8231 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.8239 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 8.6900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0000e- 004 2.7500e- 003 2.7600e- 003 0.0000 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.3830 0.3830 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3837 Total 9.0900e- 003 2.7500e- 003 2.7600e- 003 0.0000 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.3830 0.3830 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3837 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 20 of 33 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 0.0000 0.0330 Total 1.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 0.0000 0.0330 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 8.6900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0000e- 004 2.7500e- 003 2.7600e- 003 0.0000 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.3830 0.3830 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3837 Total 9.0900e- 003 2.7500e- 003 2.7600e- 003 0.0000 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.3830 0.3830 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3837 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 21 of 33 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 0.0000 0.0330 Total 1.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 0.0000 0.0330 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 0.1072 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.4800e- 003 0.0312 0.0339 5.0000e- 005 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 0.0000 4.7235 4.7235 3.7000e- 004 0.0000 4.7312 Total 0.1117 0.0312 0.0339 5.0000e- 005 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 0.0000 4.7235 4.7235 3.7000e- 004 0.0000 4.7312 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 22 of 33 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.3000e- 004 0.0000 5.4000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 0.3897 0.3897 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3901 Total 1.4000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.3000e- 004 0.0000 5.4000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 0.3897 0.3897 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3901 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 0.1072 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.4800e- 003 0.0312 0.0339 5.0000e- 005 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 0.0000 4.7235 4.7235 3.7000e- 004 0.0000 4.7312 Total 0.1117 0.0312 0.0339 5.0000e- 005 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e- 003 0.0000 4.7235 4.7235 3.7000e- 004 0.0000 4.7312 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 23 of 33 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.3000e- 004 0.0000 5.4000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 0.3897 0.3897 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3901 Total 1.4000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.3000e- 004 0.0000 5.4000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 0.3897 0.3897 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3901 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 24 of 33 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 25 of 33 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 26 of 33 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 27 of 33 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.2026 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Unmitigated 0.2026 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 28 of 33 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0464 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.1562 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Total 0.2026 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0464 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.1562 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Total 0.2026 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 29 of 33 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 30 of 33 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 8.0 Waste Detail Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Category/Year CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 31 of 33 8.2 Waste by Land Use Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 32 of 33 10.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:45 AMPage 33 of 33 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 2" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes secondary treatment upgrade, primary clarifiers & sludge pumping, and paving of internal roadways. Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 2 work will include approx. 25 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 2 construction from 2018 Q4 through 2020 Q1 (15 months). Demolition - Estimated approximately 40,000 sf of building/hardscape demolition, based on site demolition plans. Architectural Coating - No interior architectural coating expected during this stage of construction. Grading - Assume no more than a single grading pass necessary. San Luis Obispo County, Summer SLO WRRF - Secondary Treatment Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 25.00 Acre 25.00 40,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 1 of 28 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 60,000.00 0.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 370.00 250.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 30.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 35.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 15.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 12/21/2018 12/20/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 12/8/2018 12/7/2018 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,089,000.00 40,000.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 2 of 28 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2018 9.7056 105.3295 80.3577 0.1051 27.1153 5.1560 32.2713 13.6268 4.7435 18.3704 0.0000 10,483.41 73 10,483.41 73 3.1772 0.0000 10,550.13 82 2019 6.0688 21.4654 18.5081 0.0299 0.1999 1.2919 1.4918 0.0537 1.2146 1.2683 0.0000 2,836.552 8 2,836.552 8 0.7049 0.0000 2,851.355 0 2020 6.0437 1.6958 1.9463 3.3100e- 003 0.0297 0.1111 0.1408 7.8700e- 003 0.1111 0.1190 0.0000 305.6089 305.6089 0.0229 0.0000 306.0898 Total 21.8181 128.4907 100.8120 0.1383 27.3449 6.5590 33.9039 13.6884 6.0692 19.7576 0.0000 13,625.57 90 13,625.57 90 3.9050 0.0000 13,707.58 30 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2018 9.7056 105.3295 80.3577 0.1051 27.1153 5.1560 32.2713 13.6268 4.7435 18.3704 0.0000 10,483.41 73 10,483.41 73 3.1772 0.0000 10,550.13 82 2019 6.0688 21.4654 18.5081 0.0299 0.1999 1.2919 1.4918 0.0537 1.2146 1.2683 0.0000 2,836.552 8 2,836.552 8 0.7049 0.0000 2,851.355 0 2020 6.0437 1.6958 1.9463 3.3100e- 003 0.0297 0.1111 0.1408 7.8700e- 003 0.1111 0.1190 0.0000 305.6089 305.6089 0.0229 0.0000 306.0898 Total 21.8181 128.4907 100.8120 0.1383 27.3449 6.5590 33.9039 13.6884 6.0692 19.7576 0.0000 13,625.57 90 13,625.57 90 3.9050 0.0000 13,707.58 30 Mitigated Construction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 3 of 28 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 4 of 28 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.7800e- 003 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 5 of 28 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 10/15/2018 11/23/2018 5 30 2 Ext. Site Prep Site Preparation 11/24/2018 12/7/2018 5 10 3 Grading Grading 12/7/2018 12/20/2018 5 10 4 Building Construction Building Construction 12/21/2018 12/5/2019 5 250 5 Paving Paving 12/6/2019 12/26/2019 5 15 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/27/2019 2/20/2020 5 40 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 20,000 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 25 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 6 of 28 Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 162 0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 162 0.38 Ext. Site Prep Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 255 0.40 Ext. Site Prep Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 361 0.48 Paving Pavers 2 8.00 125 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 7 of 28 3.2 Demolition - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.3548 0.0000 1.3548 0.2052 0.0000 0.2052 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.5606 36.8310 31.7250 0.0399 1.8090 1.8090 1.6856 1.6856 3,983.328 2 3,983.328 2 1.1015 4,006.458 5 Total 3.5606 36.8310 31.7250 0.0399 1.3548 1.8090 3.1637 0.2052 1.6856 1.8908 3,983.328 2 3,983.328 2 1.1015 4,006.458 5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 182.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Ext. Site Prep 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 17.00 7.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 3.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 8 of 28 3.2 Demolition - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1314 1.5579 1.1870 4.5600e- 003 0.1056 0.0210 0.1265 0.0289 0.0193 0.0482 445.6730 445.6730 3.0400e- 003 445.7369 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0489 0.0738 0.7170 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 130.5948 130.5948 6.5300e- 003 130.7319 Total 0.1803 1.6316 1.9039 6.2500e- 003 0.2538 0.0220 0.2758 0.0682 0.0202 0.0885 576.2677 576.2677 9.5700e- 003 576.4688 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.3548 0.0000 1.3548 0.2052 0.0000 0.2052 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.5606 36.8310 31.7250 0.0399 1.8090 1.8090 1.6856 1.6856 0.0000 3,983.328 2 3,983.328 2 1.1015 4,006.458 5 Total 3.5606 36.8310 31.7250 0.0399 1.3548 1.8090 3.1637 0.2052 1.6856 1.8908 0.0000 3,983.328 2 3,983.328 2 1.1015 4,006.458 5 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 9 of 28 3.2 Demolition - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1314 1.5579 1.1870 4.5600e- 003 0.1056 0.0210 0.1265 0.0289 0.0193 0.0482 445.6730 445.6730 3.0400e- 003 445.7369 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0489 0.0738 0.7170 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 130.5948 130.5948 6.5300e- 003 130.7319 Total 0.1803 1.6316 1.9039 6.2500e- 003 0.2538 0.0220 0.2758 0.0682 0.0202 0.0885 576.2677 576.2677 9.5700e- 003 576.4688 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.2921 45.6088 36.2346 0.0391 2.3654 2.3654 2.1762 2.1762 3,939.773 1 3,939.773 1 1.2265 3,965.529 7 Total 4.2921 45.6088 36.2346 0.0391 18.0663 2.3654 20.4317 9.9307 2.1762 12.1069 3,939.773 1 3,939.773 1 1.2265 3,965.529 7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 10 of 28 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0587 0.0886 0.8604 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.2300e- 003 0.1792 0.0472 1.1300e- 003 0.0483 156.7137 156.7137 7.8400e- 003 156.8783 Total 0.0587 0.0886 0.8604 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.2300e- 003 0.1792 0.0472 1.1300e- 003 0.0483 156.7137 156.7137 7.8400e- 003 156.8783 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.2921 45.6088 36.2346 0.0391 2.3654 2.3654 2.1762 2.1762 0.0000 3,939.773 1 3,939.773 1 1.2265 3,965.529 7 Total 4.2921 45.6088 36.2346 0.0391 18.0663 2.3654 20.4317 9.9307 2.1762 12.1069 0.0000 3,939.773 1 3,939.773 1 1.2265 3,965.529 7 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 11 of 28 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0587 0.0886 0.8604 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.2300e- 003 0.1792 0.0472 1.1300e- 003 0.0483 156.7137 156.7137 7.8400e- 003 156.8783 Total 0.0587 0.0886 0.8604 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.2300e- 003 0.1792 0.0472 1.1300e- 003 0.0483 156.7137 156.7137 7.8400e- 003 156.8783 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.2895 59.5338 42.3068 0.0617 2.7880 2.7880 2.5650 2.5650 6,212.804 2 6,212.804 2 1.9341 6,253.420 9 Total 5.2895 59.5338 42.3068 0.0617 8.6733 2.7880 11.4614 3.5965 2.5650 6.1615 6,212.804 2 6,212.804 2 1.9341 6,253.420 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 12 of 28 3.4 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0652 0.0984 0.9559 2.2500e- 003 0.1977 1.3600e- 003 0.1991 0.0524 1.2600e- 003 0.0537 174.1263 174.1263 8.7100e- 003 174.3092 Total 0.0652 0.0984 0.9559 2.2500e- 003 0.1977 1.3600e- 003 0.1991 0.0524 1.2600e- 003 0.0537 174.1263 174.1263 8.7100e- 003 174.3092 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.2895 59.5338 42.3068 0.0617 2.7880 2.7880 2.5650 2.5650 0.0000 6,212.804 1 6,212.804 1 1.9341 6,253.420 9 Total 5.2895 59.5338 42.3068 0.0617 8.6733 2.7880 11.4614 3.5965 2.5650 6.1615 0.0000 6,212.804 1 6,212.804 1 1.9341 6,253.420 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 13 of 28 3.4 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0652 0.0984 0.9559 2.2500e- 003 0.1977 1.3600e- 003 0.1991 0.0524 1.2600e- 003 0.0537 174.1263 174.1263 8.7100e- 003 174.3092 Total 0.0652 0.0984 0.9559 2.2500e- 003 0.1977 1.3600e- 003 0.1991 0.0524 1.2600e- 003 0.0537 174.1263 174.1263 8.7100e- 003 174.3092 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.6687 23.2608 17.5327 0.0268 1.4943 1.4943 1.4048 1.4048 2,609.939 0 2,609.939 0 0.6387 2,623.351 7 Total 2.6687 23.2608 17.5327 0.0268 1.4943 1.4943 1.4048 1.4048 2,609.939 0 2,609.939 0 0.6387 2,623.351 7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 14 of 28 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0712 0.4639 0.7171 1.1900e- 003 0.0319 6.2100e- 003 0.0381 9.1000e- 003 5.7100e- 003 0.0148 115.1617 115.1617 9.1000e- 004 115.1809 Worker 0.0554 0.0836 0.8126 1.9100e- 003 0.1681 1.1600e- 003 0.1692 0.0446 1.0700e- 003 0.0456 148.0074 148.0074 7.4000e- 003 148.1629 Total 0.1266 0.5475 1.5296 3.1000e- 003 0.1999 7.3700e- 003 0.2073 0.0537 6.7800e- 003 0.0605 263.1691 263.1691 8.3100e- 003 263.3437 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.6687 23.2608 17.5327 0.0268 1.4943 1.4943 1.4048 1.4048 0.0000 2,609.938 9 2,609.938 9 0.6387 2,623.351 7 Total 2.6687 23.2608 17.5327 0.0268 1.4943 1.4943 1.4048 1.4048 0.0000 2,609.938 9 2,609.938 9 0.6387 2,623.351 7 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 15 of 28 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0712 0.4639 0.7171 1.1900e- 003 0.0319 6.2100e- 003 0.0381 9.1000e- 003 5.7100e- 003 0.0148 115.1617 115.1617 9.1000e- 004 115.1809 Worker 0.0554 0.0836 0.8126 1.9100e- 003 0.1681 1.1600e- 003 0.1692 0.0446 1.0700e- 003 0.0456 148.0074 148.0074 7.4000e- 003 148.1629 Total 0.1266 0.5475 1.5296 3.1000e- 003 0.1999 7.3700e- 003 0.2073 0.0537 6.7800e- 003 0.0605 263.1691 263.1691 8.3100e- 003 263.3437 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Total 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 16 of 28 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0661 0.4257 0.6677 1.1900e- 003 0.0319 5.7300e- 003 0.0376 9.1000e- 003 5.2700e- 003 0.0144 113.1464 113.1464 8.9000e- 004 113.1650 Worker 0.0486 0.0747 0.7200 1.9100e- 003 0.1681 1.1200e- 003 0.1692 0.0446 1.0300e- 003 0.0456 142.6447 142.6447 6.7700e- 003 142.7868 Total 0.1147 0.5004 1.3877 3.1000e- 003 0.1999 6.8500e- 003 0.2068 0.0537 6.3000e- 003 0.0600 255.7910 255.7910 7.6600e- 003 255.9518 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 0.0000 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Total 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 0.0000 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 17 of 28 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0661 0.4257 0.6677 1.1900e- 003 0.0319 5.7300e- 003 0.0376 9.1000e- 003 5.2700e- 003 0.0144 113.1464 113.1464 8.9000e- 004 113.1650 Worker 0.0486 0.0747 0.7200 1.9100e- 003 0.1681 1.1200e- 003 0.1692 0.0446 1.0300e- 003 0.0456 142.6447 142.6447 6.7700e- 003 142.7868 Total 0.1147 0.5004 1.3877 3.1000e- 003 0.1999 6.8500e- 003 0.2068 0.0537 6.3000e- 003 0.0600 255.7910 255.7910 7.6600e- 003 255.9518 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.4259 14.9353 14.3652 0.0223 0.8094 0.8094 0.7447 0.7447 2,208.973 1 2,208.973 1 0.6989 2,223.649 9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.4259 14.9353 14.3652 0.0223 0.8094 0.8094 0.7447 0.7447 2,208.973 1 2,208.973 1 0.6989 2,223.649 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 18 of 28 3.6 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0429 0.0659 0.6353 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 125.8629 125.8629 5.9700e- 003 125.9884 Total 0.0429 0.0659 0.6353 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 125.8629 125.8629 5.9700e- 003 125.9884 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.4259 14.9353 14.3652 0.0223 0.8094 0.8094 0.7447 0.7447 0.0000 2,208.973 1 2,208.973 1 0.6989 2,223.649 9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.4259 14.9353 14.3652 0.0223 0.8094 0.8094 0.7447 0.7447 0.0000 2,208.973 1 2,208.973 1 0.6989 2,223.649 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 19 of 28 3.6 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0429 0.0659 0.6353 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 125.8629 125.8629 5.9700e- 003 125.9884 Total 0.0429 0.0659 0.6353 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 125.8629 125.8629 5.9700e- 003 125.9884 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.7938 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 281.9473 Total 6.0602 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 281.9473 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 20 of 28 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 8.5800e- 003 0.0132 0.1271 3.4000e- 004 0.0297 2.0000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 25.1726 25.1726 1.1900e- 003 25.1977 Total 8.5800e- 003 0.0132 0.1271 3.4000e- 004 0.0297 2.0000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 25.1726 25.1726 1.1900e- 003 25.1977 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.7938 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 281.9473 Total 6.0602 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 281.9473 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 21 of 28 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 8.5800e- 003 0.0132 0.1271 3.4000e- 004 0.0297 2.0000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 25.1726 25.1726 1.1900e- 003 25.1977 Total 8.5800e- 003 0.0132 0.1271 3.4000e- 004 0.0297 2.0000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 25.1726 25.1726 1.1900e- 003 25.1977 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.7938 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2422 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Total 6.0359 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 22 of 28 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.7700e- 003 0.0120 0.1149 3.4000e- 004 0.0297 1.9000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 24.1609 24.1609 1.1100e- 003 24.1842 Total 7.7700e- 003 0.0120 0.1149 3.4000e- 004 0.0297 1.9000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 24.1609 24.1609 1.1100e- 003 24.1842 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.7938 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2422 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Total 6.0359 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 23 of 28 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.7700e- 003 0.0120 0.1149 3.4000e- 004 0.0297 1.9000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 24.1609 24.1609 1.1100e- 003 24.1842 Total 7.7700e- 003 0.0120 0.1149 3.4000e- 004 0.0297 1.9000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 24.1609 24.1609 1.1100e- 003 24.1842 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 24 of 28 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 25 of 28 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 26 of 28 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2540 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.8560 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Total 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 27 of 28 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 8.0 Waste Detail 10.0 Vegetation 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2540 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.8560 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Total 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:32 AMPage 28 of 28 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 2" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes secondary treatment upgrade, primary clarifiers & sludge pumping, and paving of internal roadways. Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 2 work will include approx. 25 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 2 construction from 2018 Q4 through 2020 Q1 (15 months). Demolition - Estimated approximately 40,000 sf of building/hardscape demolition, based on site demolition plans. Architectural Coating - No interior architectural coating expected during this stage of construction. Grading - Assume no more than a single grading pass necessary. San Luis Obispo County, Winter SLO WRRF - Secondary Treatment Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 25.00 Acre 25.00 40,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 1 of 28 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 60,000.00 0.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 370.00 250.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 30.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 35.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 15.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 12/21/2018 12/20/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 12/8/2018 12/7/2018 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,089,000.00 40,000.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 2 of 28 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2018 9.7133 105.3546 80.3484 0.1049 27.1153 5.1560 32.2713 13.6268 4.7435 18.3704 0.0000 10,468.00 94 10,468.00 94 3.1772 0.0000 10,534.73 03 2019 6.0693 21.4819 18.8435 0.0298 0.1999 1.2920 1.4919 0.0537 1.2147 1.2683 0.0000 2,828.676 2 2,828.676 2 0.7049 0.0000 2,843.478 4 2020 6.0441 1.6974 1.9442 3.2900e- 003 0.0297 0.1111 0.1408 7.8700e- 003 0.1111 0.1190 0.0000 304.4806 304.4806 0.0229 0.0000 304.9615 Total 21.8267 128.5339 101.1361 0.1380 27.3449 6.5591 33.9040 13.6884 6.0693 19.7577 0.0000 13,601.16 62 13,601.16 62 3.9050 0.0000 13,683.17 02 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2018 9.7133 105.3546 80.3484 0.1049 27.1153 5.1560 32.2713 13.6268 4.7435 18.3704 0.0000 10,468.00 94 10,468.00 94 3.1772 0.0000 10,534.73 03 2019 6.0693 21.4819 18.8435 0.0298 0.1999 1.2920 1.4919 0.0537 1.2147 1.2683 0.0000 2,828.676 2 2,828.676 2 0.7049 0.0000 2,843.478 4 2020 6.0441 1.6974 1.9442 3.2900e- 003 0.0297 0.1111 0.1408 7.8700e- 003 0.1111 0.1190 0.0000 304.4806 304.4806 0.0229 0.0000 304.9615 Total 21.8267 128.5339 101.1361 0.1380 27.3449 6.5591 33.9040 13.6884 6.0693 19.7577 0.0000 13,601.16 62 13,601.16 62 3.9050 0.0000 13,683.17 02 Mitigated Construction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 3 of 28 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 4 of 28 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.7800e- 003 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 5 of 28 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 10/15/2018 11/23/2018 5 30 2 Ext. Site Prep Site Preparation 11/24/2018 12/7/2018 5 10 3 Grading Grading 12/7/2018 12/20/2018 5 10 4 Building Construction Building Construction 12/21/2018 12/5/2019 5 250 5 Paving Paving 12/6/2019 12/26/2019 5 15 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/27/2019 2/20/2020 5 40 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 20,000 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 25 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 6 of 28 Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 162 0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 162 0.38 Ext. Site Prep Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 255 0.40 Ext. Site Prep Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 361 0.48 Paving Pavers 2 8.00 125 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 7 of 28 3.2 Demolition - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.3548 0.0000 1.3548 0.2052 0.0000 0.2052 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.5606 36.8310 31.7250 0.0399 1.8090 1.8090 1.6856 1.6856 3,983.328 2 3,983.328 2 1.1015 4,006.458 5 Total 3.5606 36.8310 31.7250 0.0399 1.3548 1.8090 3.1637 0.2052 1.6856 1.8908 3,983.328 2 3,983.328 2 1.1015 4,006.458 5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 182.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Ext. Site Prep 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 17.00 7.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 3.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 8 of 28 3.2 Demolition - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1528 1.5945 1.6600 4.5600e- 003 0.1056 0.0211 0.1266 0.0289 0.0194 0.0482 444.6352 444.6352 3.0900e- 003 444.7000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0520 0.0837 0.7133 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 124.5127 124.5127 6.5300e- 003 124.6499 Total 0.2048 1.6782 2.3733 6.1700e- 003 0.2538 0.0221 0.2759 0.0682 0.0203 0.0885 569.1479 569.1479 9.6200e- 003 569.3499 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.3548 0.0000 1.3548 0.2052 0.0000 0.2052 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.5606 36.8310 31.7250 0.0399 1.8090 1.8090 1.6856 1.6856 0.0000 3,983.328 2 3,983.328 2 1.1015 4,006.458 5 Total 3.5606 36.8310 31.7250 0.0399 1.3548 1.8090 3.1637 0.2052 1.6856 1.8908 0.0000 3,983.328 2 3,983.328 2 1.1015 4,006.458 5 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 9 of 28 3.2 Demolition - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1528 1.5945 1.6600 4.5600e- 003 0.1056 0.0211 0.1266 0.0289 0.0194 0.0482 444.6352 444.6352 3.0900e- 003 444.7000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0520 0.0837 0.7133 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 1.0200e- 003 0.1493 0.0393 9.4000e- 004 0.0403 124.5127 124.5127 6.5300e- 003 124.6499 Total 0.2048 1.6782 2.3733 6.1700e- 003 0.2538 0.0221 0.2759 0.0682 0.0203 0.0885 569.1479 569.1479 9.6200e- 003 569.3499 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.2921 45.6088 36.2346 0.0391 2.3654 2.3654 2.1762 2.1762 3,939.773 1 3,939.773 1 1.2265 3,965.529 7 Total 4.2921 45.6088 36.2346 0.0391 18.0663 2.3654 20.4317 9.9307 2.1762 12.1069 3,939.773 1 3,939.773 1 1.2265 3,965.529 7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 10 of 28 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0624 0.1004 0.8560 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.2300e- 003 0.1792 0.0472 1.1300e- 003 0.0483 149.4152 149.4152 7.8400e- 003 149.5798 Total 0.0624 0.1004 0.8560 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.2300e- 003 0.1792 0.0472 1.1300e- 003 0.0483 149.4152 149.4152 7.8400e- 003 149.5798 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.2921 45.6088 36.2346 0.0391 2.3654 2.3654 2.1762 2.1762 0.0000 3,939.773 1 3,939.773 1 1.2265 3,965.529 7 Total 4.2921 45.6088 36.2346 0.0391 18.0663 2.3654 20.4317 9.9307 2.1762 12.1069 0.0000 3,939.773 1 3,939.773 1 1.2265 3,965.529 7 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 11 of 28 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0624 0.1004 0.8560 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.2300e- 003 0.1792 0.0472 1.1300e- 003 0.0483 149.4152 149.4152 7.8400e- 003 149.5798 Total 0.0624 0.1004 0.8560 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.2300e- 003 0.1792 0.0472 1.1300e- 003 0.0483 149.4152 149.4152 7.8400e- 003 149.5798 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.2895 59.5338 42.3068 0.0617 2.7880 2.7880 2.5650 2.5650 6,212.804 2 6,212.804 2 1.9341 6,253.420 9 Total 5.2895 59.5338 42.3068 0.0617 8.6733 2.7880 11.4614 3.5965 2.5650 6.1615 6,212.804 2 6,212.804 2 1.9341 6,253.420 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 12 of 28 3.4 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0693 0.1116 0.9511 2.1500e- 003 0.1977 1.3600e- 003 0.1991 0.0524 1.2600e- 003 0.0537 166.0169 166.0169 8.7100e- 003 166.1998 Total 0.0693 0.1116 0.9511 2.1500e- 003 0.1977 1.3600e- 003 0.1991 0.0524 1.2600e- 003 0.0537 166.0169 166.0169 8.7100e- 003 166.1998 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.2895 59.5338 42.3068 0.0617 2.7880 2.7880 2.5650 2.5650 0.0000 6,212.804 1 6,212.804 1 1.9341 6,253.420 9 Total 5.2895 59.5338 42.3068 0.0617 8.6733 2.7880 11.4614 3.5965 2.5650 6.1615 0.0000 6,212.804 1 6,212.804 1 1.9341 6,253.420 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 13 of 28 3.4 Grading - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0693 0.1116 0.9511 2.1500e- 003 0.1977 1.3600e- 003 0.1991 0.0524 1.2600e- 003 0.0537 166.0169 166.0169 8.7100e- 003 166.1998 Total 0.0693 0.1116 0.9511 2.1500e- 003 0.1977 1.3600e- 003 0.1991 0.0524 1.2600e- 003 0.0537 166.0169 166.0169 8.7100e- 003 166.1998 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.6687 23.2608 17.5327 0.0268 1.4943 1.4943 1.4048 1.4048 2,609.939 0 2,609.939 0 0.6387 2,623.351 7 Total 2.6687 23.2608 17.5327 0.0268 1.4943 1.4943 1.4048 1.4048 2,609.939 0 2,609.939 0 0.6387 2,623.351 7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 14 of 28 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0874 0.4709 1.0642 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 6.3100e- 003 0.0382 9.1000e- 003 5.8000e- 003 0.0149 113.9204 113.9204 9.5000e- 004 113.9403 Worker 0.0589 0.0949 0.8084 1.8300e- 003 0.1681 1.1600e- 003 0.1692 0.0446 1.0700e- 003 0.0456 141.1144 141.1144 7.4000e- 003 141.2699 Total 0.1463 0.5658 1.8726 3.0100e- 003 0.1999 7.4700e- 003 0.2074 0.0537 6.8700e- 003 0.0606 255.0348 255.0348 8.3500e- 003 255.2102 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.6687 23.2608 17.5327 0.0268 1.4943 1.4943 1.4048 1.4048 0.0000 2,609.938 9 2,609.938 9 0.6387 2,623.351 7 Total 2.6687 23.2608 17.5327 0.0268 1.4943 1.4943 1.4048 1.4048 0.0000 2,609.938 9 2,609.938 9 0.6387 2,623.351 7 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 15 of 28 3.5 Building Construction - 2018 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0874 0.4709 1.0642 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 6.3100e- 003 0.0382 9.1000e- 003 5.8000e- 003 0.0149 113.9204 113.9204 9.5000e- 004 113.9403 Worker 0.0589 0.0949 0.8084 1.8300e- 003 0.1681 1.1600e- 003 0.1692 0.0446 1.0700e- 003 0.0456 141.1144 141.1144 7.4000e- 003 141.2699 Total 0.1463 0.5658 1.8726 3.0100e- 003 0.1999 7.4700e- 003 0.2074 0.0537 6.8700e- 003 0.0606 255.0348 255.0348 8.3500e- 003 255.2102 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Total 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 16 of 28 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0806 0.4321 1.0128 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 5.8200e- 003 0.0377 9.1000e- 003 5.3500e- 003 0.0145 111.9234 111.9234 9.2000e- 004 111.9428 Worker 0.0515 0.0848 0.7104 1.8200e- 003 0.1681 1.1200e- 003 0.1692 0.0446 1.0300e- 003 0.0456 135.9911 135.9911 6.7700e- 003 136.1332 Total 0.1320 0.5168 1.7232 3.0000e- 003 0.1999 6.9400e- 003 0.2069 0.0537 6.3800e- 003 0.0601 247.9144 247.9144 7.6900e- 003 248.0760 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 0.0000 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Total 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 0.0000 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 17 of 28 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0806 0.4321 1.0128 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 5.8200e- 003 0.0377 9.1000e- 003 5.3500e- 003 0.0145 111.9234 111.9234 9.2000e- 004 111.9428 Worker 0.0515 0.0848 0.7104 1.8200e- 003 0.1681 1.1200e- 003 0.1692 0.0446 1.0300e- 003 0.0456 135.9911 135.9911 6.7700e- 003 136.1332 Total 0.1320 0.5168 1.7232 3.0000e- 003 0.1999 6.9400e- 003 0.2069 0.0537 6.3800e- 003 0.0601 247.9144 247.9144 7.6900e- 003 248.0760 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.4259 14.9353 14.3652 0.0223 0.8094 0.8094 0.7447 0.7447 2,208.973 1 2,208.973 1 0.6989 2,223.649 9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.4259 14.9353 14.3652 0.0223 0.8094 0.8094 0.7447 0.7447 2,208.973 1 2,208.973 1 0.6989 2,223.649 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 18 of 28 3.6 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0454 0.0748 0.6268 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 119.9921 119.9921 5.9700e- 003 120.1175 Total 0.0454 0.0748 0.6268 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 119.9921 119.9921 5.9700e- 003 120.1175 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.4259 14.9353 14.3652 0.0223 0.8094 0.8094 0.7447 0.7447 0.0000 2,208.973 1 2,208.973 1 0.6989 2,223.649 9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.4259 14.9353 14.3652 0.0223 0.8094 0.8094 0.7447 0.7447 0.0000 2,208.973 1 2,208.973 1 0.6989 2,223.649 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 19 of 28 3.6 Paving - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0454 0.0748 0.6268 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 119.9921 119.9921 5.9700e- 003 120.1175 Total 0.0454 0.0748 0.6268 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 119.9921 119.9921 5.9700e- 003 120.1175 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.7938 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 281.9473 Total 6.0602 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 281.9473 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 20 of 28 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.0800e- 003 0.0150 0.1254 3.2000e- 004 0.0297 2.0000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 23.9984 23.9984 1.1900e- 003 24.0235 Total 9.0800e- 003 0.0150 0.1254 3.2000e- 004 0.0297 2.0000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 23.9984 23.9984 1.1900e- 003 24.0235 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.7938 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 281.9473 Total 6.0602 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e- 003 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 281.9473 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 21 of 28 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.0800e- 003 0.0150 0.1254 3.2000e- 004 0.0297 2.0000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 23.9984 23.9984 1.1900e- 003 24.0235 Total 9.0800e- 003 0.0150 0.1254 3.2000e- 004 0.0297 2.0000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 23.9984 23.9984 1.1900e- 003 24.0235 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.7938 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2422 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Total 6.0359 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 22 of 28 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 8.2000e- 003 0.0136 0.1128 3.2000e- 004 0.0297 1.9000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 23.0325 23.0325 1.1100e- 003 23.0559 Total 8.2000e- 003 0.0136 0.1128 3.2000e- 004 0.0297 1.9000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 23.0325 23.0325 1.1100e- 003 23.0559 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.7938 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2422 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Total 6.0359 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 23 of 28 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 8.2000e- 003 0.0136 0.1128 3.2000e- 004 0.0297 1.9000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 23.0325 23.0325 1.1100e- 003 23.0559 Total 8.2000e- 003 0.0136 0.1128 3.2000e- 004 0.0297 1.9000e- 004 0.0299 7.8700e- 003 1.8000e- 004 8.0500e- 003 23.0325 23.0325 1.1100e- 003 23.0559 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 24 of 28 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 25 of 28 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 26 of 28 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2540 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.8560 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Total 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 27 of 28 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 8.0 Waste Detail 10.0 Vegetation 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2540 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.8560 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Total 1.1102 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:30 AMPage 28 of 28 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 3" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes odor control, solids thickening, public amenities, flow equalization, flood protection improvements, renesable energy improvements, sidestream treatment/return stream management, and anaerobic digesters. Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 3 work will include approx. 25 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 3 construction from 2019 Q3 through 2020 Q4 (15 months). Demolition - Estimated approximately 43,000 sf of building/hardscape demolition, based on site demolition plans. Architectural Coating - Grading - Assume no more than a single grading pass necessary. San Luis Obispo County, Annual SLO WRRF - Secondary Treatment Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 25.00 Acre 25.00 43,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 1 of 31 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 370.00 250.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 30.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 35.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 15.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/3/2020 9/2/2020 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/20/2019 9/19/2019 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/20/2019 9/19/2019 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/7/2019 9/6/2019 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,089,000.00 43,000.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 2 of 31 2.1 Overall Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2019 0.1894 1.8135 1.5713 2.3300e- 003 0.1688 0.0961 0.2649 0.0745 0.0897 0.1642 0.0000 203.4999 203.4999 0.0508 0.0000 204.5668 2020 0.7097 1.8569 1.7655 2.8800e- 003 0.0199 0.1063 0.1261 5.3300e- 003 0.0999 0.1053 0.0000 244.0393 244.0393 0.0553 0.0000 245.2000 Total 0.8991 3.6704 3.3368 5.2100e- 003 0.1886 0.2024 0.3910 0.0798 0.1896 0.2694 0.0000 447.5392 447.5392 0.1061 0.0000 449.7668 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2019 0.1894 1.8135 1.5713 2.3300e- 003 0.1688 0.0961 0.2649 0.0745 0.0897 0.1642 0.0000 203.4996 203.4996 0.0508 0.0000 204.5666 2020 0.7097 1.8569 1.7655 2.8800e- 003 0.0199 0.1063 0.1261 5.3300e- 003 0.0999 0.1053 0.0000 244.0391 244.0391 0.0553 0.0000 245.1997 Total 0.8991 3.6704 3.3368 5.2100e- 003 0.1886 0.2024 0.3910 0.0798 0.1896 0.2694 0.0000 447.5387 447.5387 0.1061 0.0000 449.7663 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 3 of 31 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 0.2178 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2178 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Unmitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 4 of 31 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 0.2178 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2178 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 5 of 31 Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 7/15/2019 8/23/2019 5 30 2 Ext. Site Prep Site Preparation 8/24/2019 9/6/2019 5 10 3 Grading Grading 9/6/2019 9/19/2019 5 10 4 Building Construction Building Construction 9/19/2019 9/2/2020 5 250 5 Paving Paving 9/3/2020 9/23/2020 5 15 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/24/2020 11/18/2020 5 40 OffRoad Equipment Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 64,500; Non-Residential Outdoor: 21,500 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 25 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 6 of 31 Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 162 0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 162 0.38 Ext. Site Prep Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 255 0.40 Ext. Site Prep Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 361 0.48 Paving Pavers 2 8.00 125 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 7 of 31 3.2 Demolition - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0219 0.0000 0.0219 3.3100e- 003 0.0000 3.3100e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0498 0.5091 0.4621 6.0000e- 004 0.0247 0.0247 0.0230 0.0230 0.0000 53.4681 53.4681 0.0149 0.0000 53.7817 Total 0.0498 0.5091 0.4621 6.0000e- 004 0.0219 0.0247 0.0465 3.3100e- 003 0.0230 0.0263 0.0000 53.4681 53.4681 0.0149 0.0000 53.7817 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 196.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Ext. Site Prep 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 18.00 7.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 4.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 8 of 31 3.2 Demolition - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 2.2100e- 003 0.0238 0.0229 7.0000e- 005 1.6700e- 003 3.3000e- 004 2.0000e- 003 4.6000e- 004 3.1000e- 004 7.6000e- 004 0.0000 6.4122 6.4122 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.4131 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.4000e- 004 1.1000e- 003 9.3200e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.1700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.1800e- 003 5.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.6461 1.6461 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.6478 Total 2.8500e- 003 0.0249 0.0323 9.0000e- 005 3.8400e- 003 3.4000e- 004 4.1800e- 003 1.0400e- 003 3.2000e- 004 1.3500e- 003 0.0000 8.0583 8.0583 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 8.0609 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0219 0.0000 0.0219 3.3100e- 003 0.0000 3.3100e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0498 0.5091 0.4621 6.0000e- 004 0.0247 0.0247 0.0230 0.0230 0.0000 53.4680 53.4680 0.0149 0.0000 53.7816 Total 0.0498 0.5091 0.4621 6.0000e- 004 0.0219 0.0247 0.0465 3.3100e- 003 0.0230 0.0263 0.0000 53.4680 53.4680 0.0149 0.0000 53.7816 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 9 of 31 3.2 Demolition - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 2.2100e- 003 0.0238 0.0229 7.0000e- 005 1.6700e- 003 3.3000e- 004 2.0000e- 003 4.6000e- 004 3.1000e- 004 7.6000e- 004 0.0000 6.4122 6.4122 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.4131 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.4000e- 004 1.1000e- 003 9.3200e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.1700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.1800e- 003 5.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.6461 1.6461 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.6478 Total 2.8500e- 003 0.0249 0.0323 9.0000e- 005 3.8400e- 003 3.4000e- 004 4.1800e- 003 1.0400e- 003 3.2000e- 004 1.3500e- 003 0.0000 8.0583 8.0583 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 8.0609 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0903 0.0000 0.0903 0.0497 0.0000 0.0497 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0201 0.2125 0.1740 2.0000e- 004 0.0108 0.0108 9.8900e- 003 9.8900e- 003 0.0000 17.5845 17.5845 5.5600e- 003 0.0000 17.7014 Total 0.0201 0.2125 0.1740 2.0000e- 004 0.0903 0.0108 0.1011 0.0497 9.8900e- 003 0.0595 0.0000 17.5845 17.5845 5.5600e- 003 0.0000 17.7014 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 10 of 31 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.6000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 3.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.6584 0.6584 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6591 Total 2.6000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 3.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.6584 0.6584 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6591 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0903 0.0000 0.0903 0.0497 0.0000 0.0497 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0201 0.2125 0.1740 2.0000e- 004 0.0108 0.0108 9.8900e- 003 9.8900e- 003 0.0000 17.5845 17.5845 5.5600e- 003 0.0000 17.7013 Total 0.0201 0.2125 0.1740 2.0000e- 004 0.0903 0.0108 0.1011 0.0497 9.8900e- 003 0.0595 0.0000 17.5845 17.5845 5.5600e- 003 0.0000 17.7013 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 11 of 31 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.6000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 3.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.6584 0.6584 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6591 Total 2.6000e- 004 4.4000e- 004 3.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.6584 0.6584 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6591 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Grading - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0434 0.0000 0.0434 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0245 0.2710 0.2014 3.1000e- 004 0.0125 0.0125 0.0115 0.0115 0.0000 27.7205 27.7205 8.7700e- 003 0.0000 27.9046 Total 0.0245 0.2710 0.2014 3.1000e- 004 0.0434 0.0125 0.0559 0.0180 0.0115 0.0295 0.0000 27.7205 27.7205 8.7700e- 003 0.0000 27.9046 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 12 of 31 3.4 Grading - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.8000e- 004 4.9000e- 004 4.1400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.7316 0.7316 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7324 Total 2.8000e- 004 4.9000e- 004 4.1400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.7316 0.7316 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7324 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0434 0.0000 0.0434 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0245 0.2710 0.2014 3.1000e- 004 0.0125 0.0125 0.0115 0.0115 0.0000 27.7204 27.7204 8.7700e- 003 0.0000 27.9046 Total 0.0245 0.2710 0.2014 3.1000e- 004 0.0434 0.0125 0.0559 0.0180 0.0115 0.0295 0.0000 27.7204 27.7204 8.7700e- 003 0.0000 27.9046 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 13 of 31 3.4 Grading - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.8000e- 004 4.9000e- 004 4.1400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.7316 0.7316 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7324 Total 2.8000e- 004 4.9000e- 004 4.1400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.7316 0.7316 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7324 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0870 0.7757 0.6335 9.9000e- 004 0.0476 0.0476 0.0447 0.0447 0.0000 86.6254 86.6254 0.0211 0.0000 87.0680 Total 0.0870 0.7757 0.6335 9.9000e- 004 0.0476 0.0476 0.0447 0.0447 0.0000 86.6254 86.6254 0.0211 0.0000 87.0680 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 14 of 31 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.7400e- 003 0.0162 0.0326 4.0000e- 005 1.1500e- 003 2.1000e- 004 1.3700e- 003 3.3000e- 004 2.0000e- 004 5.3000e- 004 0.0000 3.7806 3.7806 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.7813 Worker 1.8900e- 003 3.2600e- 003 0.0276 7.0000e- 005 6.4100e- 003 4.0000e- 005 6.4600e- 003 1.7000e- 003 4.0000e- 005 1.7400e- 003 0.0000 4.8724 4.8724 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.8775 Total 4.6300e- 003 0.0194 0.0602 1.1000e- 004 7.5600e- 003 2.5000e- 004 7.8300e- 003 2.0300e- 003 2.4000e- 004 2.2700e- 003 0.0000 8.6530 8.6530 2.7000e- 004 0.0000 8.6587 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0870 0.7757 0.6335 9.9000e- 004 0.0476 0.0476 0.0447 0.0447 0.0000 86.6253 86.6253 0.0211 0.0000 87.0679 Total 0.0870 0.7757 0.6335 9.9000e- 004 0.0476 0.0476 0.0447 0.0447 0.0000 86.6253 86.6253 0.0211 0.0000 87.0679 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 15 of 31 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.7400e- 003 0.0162 0.0326 4.0000e- 005 1.1500e- 003 2.1000e- 004 1.3700e- 003 3.3000e- 004 2.0000e- 004 5.3000e- 004 0.0000 3.7806 3.7806 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.7813 Worker 1.8900e- 003 3.2600e- 003 0.0276 7.0000e- 005 6.4100e- 003 4.0000e- 005 6.4600e- 003 1.7000e- 003 4.0000e- 005 1.7400e- 003 0.0000 4.8724 4.8724 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.8775 Total 4.6300e- 003 0.0194 0.0602 1.1000e- 004 7.5600e- 003 2.5000e- 004 7.8300e- 003 2.0300e- 003 2.4000e- 004 2.2700e- 003 0.0000 8.6530 8.6530 2.7000e- 004 0.0000 8.6587 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.1858 1.6794 1.4791 2.3600e- 003 0.0979 0.0979 0.0921 0.0921 0.0000 202.9719 202.9719 0.0495 0.0000 204.0104 Total 0.1858 1.6794 1.4791 2.3600e- 003 0.0979 0.0979 0.0921 0.0921 0.0000 202.9719 202.9719 0.0495 0.0000 204.0104 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 16 of 31 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.2700e- 003 0.0325 0.0758 1.0000e- 004 2.7400e- 003 4.5000e- 004 3.1900e- 003 7.9000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 1.2000e- 003 0.0000 8.7856 8.7856 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 8.7870 Worker 4.0500e- 003 7.0500e- 003 0.0591 1.7000e- 004 0.0153 1.0000e- 004 0.0154 4.0500e- 003 9.0000e- 005 4.1500e- 003 0.0000 11.1222 11.1222 5.3000e- 004 0.0000 11.1334 Total 0.0103 0.0396 0.1349 2.7000e- 004 0.0180 5.5000e- 004 0.0185 4.8400e- 003 5.0000e- 004 5.3500e- 003 0.0000 19.9077 19.9077 6.0000e- 004 0.0000 19.9204 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.1858 1.6794 1.4791 2.3600e- 003 0.0979 0.0979 0.0921 0.0921 0.0000 202.9717 202.9717 0.0495 0.0000 204.0101 Total 0.1858 1.6794 1.4791 2.3600e- 003 0.0979 0.0979 0.0921 0.0921 0.0000 202.9717 202.9717 0.0495 0.0000 204.0101 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 17 of 31 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.2700e- 003 0.0325 0.0758 1.0000e- 004 2.7400e- 003 4.5000e- 004 3.1900e- 003 7.9000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 1.2000e- 003 0.0000 8.7856 8.7856 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 8.7870 Worker 4.0500e- 003 7.0500e- 003 0.0591 1.7000e- 004 0.0153 1.0000e- 004 0.0154 4.0500e- 003 9.0000e- 005 4.1500e- 003 0.0000 11.1222 11.1222 5.3000e- 004 0.0000 11.1334 Total 0.0103 0.0396 0.1349 2.7000e- 004 0.0180 5.5000e- 004 0.0185 4.8400e- 003 5.0000e- 004 5.3500e- 003 0.0000 19.9077 19.9077 6.0000e- 004 0.0000 19.9204 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 9.9800e- 003 0.1034 0.1076 1.7000e- 004 5.5400e- 003 5.5400e- 003 5.1000e- 003 5.1000e- 003 0.0000 14.7015 14.7015 4.7500e- 003 0.0000 14.8014 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.9800e- 003 0.1034 0.1076 1.7000e- 004 5.5400e- 003 5.5400e- 003 5.1000e- 003 5.1000e- 003 0.0000 14.7015 14.7015 4.7500e- 003 0.0000 14.8014 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 18 of 31 3.6 Paving - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.9000e- 004 5.0000e- 004 4.2000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0900e- 003 2.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.7899 0.7899 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7907 Total 2.9000e- 004 5.0000e- 004 4.2000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0900e- 003 2.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.7899 0.7899 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7907 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 9.9800e- 003 0.1034 0.1076 1.7000e- 004 5.5400e- 003 5.5400e- 003 5.1000e- 003 5.1000e- 003 0.0000 14.7015 14.7015 4.7500e- 003 0.0000 14.8014 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.9800e- 003 0.1034 0.1076 1.7000e- 004 5.5400e- 003 5.5400e- 003 5.1000e- 003 5.1000e- 003 0.0000 14.7015 14.7015 4.7500e- 003 0.0000 14.8014 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 19 of 31 3.6 Paving - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.9000e- 004 5.0000e- 004 4.2000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0900e- 003 2.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.7899 0.7899 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7907 Total 2.9000e- 004 5.0000e- 004 4.2000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0900e- 003 2.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.7899 0.7899 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7907 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 0.4983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.8400e- 003 0.0337 0.0366 6.0000e- 005 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 0.0000 5.1065 5.1065 4.0000e- 004 0.0000 5.1148 Total 0.5031 0.0337 0.0366 6.0000e- 005 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 0.0000 5.1065 5.1065 4.0000e- 004 0.0000 5.1148 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 20 of 31 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.0000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 2.9900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.5617 0.5617 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5623 Total 2.0000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 2.9900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.5617 0.5617 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5623 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 0.4983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.8400e- 003 0.0337 0.0366 6.0000e- 005 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 0.0000 5.1065 5.1065 4.0000e- 004 0.0000 5.1148 Total 0.5031 0.0337 0.0366 6.0000e- 005 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 2.2200e- 003 0.0000 5.1065 5.1065 4.0000e- 004 0.0000 5.1148 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 21 of 31 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.0000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 2.9900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.5617 0.5617 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5623 Total 2.0000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 2.9900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.5617 0.5617 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5623 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 22 of 31 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 23 of 31 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 24 of 31 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 25 of 31 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.2178 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Unmitigated 0.2178 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 26 of 31 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0498 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.1679 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Total 0.2178 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0498 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.1679 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Total 0.2178 0.0000 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 8.7000e- 004 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 27 of 31 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 28 of 31 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 8.0 Waste Detail Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Category/Year CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 29 of 31 8.2 Waste by Land Use Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 30 of 31 10.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 10:57 AMPage 31 of 31 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 3" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes odor control, solids thickening, public amenities, flow equalization, flood protection improvements, renesable energy improvements, sidestream treatment/return stream management, and anaerobic digesters. Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 3 work will include approx. 25 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 3 construction from 2019 Q3 through 2020 Q4 (15 months). Demolition - Estimated approximately 43,000 sf of building/hardscape demolition, based on site demolition plans. Architectural Coating - Grading - Assume no more than a single grading pass necessary. San Luis Obispo County, Summer SLO WRRF - Secondary Treatment Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 25.00 Acre 25.00 43,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 1 of 25 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 370.00 250.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 30.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 35.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 15.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/3/2020 9/2/2020 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/20/2019 9/19/2019 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/20/2019 9/19/2019 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/7/2019 9/6/2019 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,089,000.00 43,000.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 2 of 25 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2019 9.0187 96.8693 76.7070 0.1051 27.1153 4.6579 31.7731 13.6268 4.2853 17.9121 0.0000 10,306.88 82 10,306.88 82 3.1752 0.0000 10,373.56 82 2020 25.1657 19.5165 18.1476 0.0300 0.2098 1.1190 1.3289 0.0563 1.0522 1.1085 0.0000 2,797.999 1 2,797.999 1 0.7044 0.0000 2,812.791 3 Total 34.1844 116.3859 94.8545 0.1351 27.3251 5.7769 33.1020 13.6831 5.3374 19.0205 0.0000 13,104.88 73 13,104.88 73 3.8796 0.0000 13,186.35 94 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2019 9.0187 96.8693 76.7070 0.1051 27.1153 4.6579 31.7731 13.6268 4.2853 17.9121 0.0000 10,306.88 82 10,306.88 82 3.1752 0.0000 10,373.56 82 2020 25.1657 19.5165 18.1476 0.0300 0.2098 1.1190 1.3289 0.0563 1.0522 1.1085 0.0000 2,797.999 1 2,797.999 1 0.7044 0.0000 2,812.791 3 Total 34.1844 116.3859 94.8545 0.1351 27.3251 5.7769 33.1020 13.6831 5.3374 19.0205 0.0000 13,104.88 73 13,104.88 73 3.8796 0.0000 13,186.35 94 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 3 of 25 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.7800e- 003 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 4 of 25 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 7/15/2019 8/23/2019 5 30 2 Ext. Site Prep Site Preparation 8/24/2019 9/6/2019 5 10 3 Grading Grading 9/6/2019 9/19/2019 5 10 4 Building Construction Building Construction 9/19/2019 9/2/2020 5 250 5 Paving Paving 9/3/2020 9/23/2020 5 15 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/24/2020 11/18/2020 5 40 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 64,500; Non-Residential Outdoor: 21,500 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 25 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 5 of 25 Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 162 0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 162 0.38 Ext. Site Prep Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 255 0.40 Ext. Site Prep Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 361 0.48 Paving Pavers 2 8.00 125 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 6 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.4564 0.0000 1.4564 0.2206 0.0000 0.2206 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3224 33.9413 30.8050 0.0399 1.6448 1.6448 1.5316 1.5316 3,929.232 7 3,929.232 7 1.0974 3,952.277 4 Total 3.3224 33.9413 30.8050 0.0399 1.4564 1.6448 3.1012 0.2206 1.5316 1.7521 3,929.232 7 3,929.232 7 1.0974 3,952.277 4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 196.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Ext. Site Prep 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 18.00 7.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 4.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 7 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1353 1.5357 1.2088 4.9100e- 003 0.1137 0.0221 0.1358 0.0311 0.0204 0.0515 471.6782 471.6782 3.2500e- 003 471.7465 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0429 0.0659 0.6353 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 125.8629 125.8629 5.9700e- 003 125.9884 Total 0.1782 1.6016 1.8440 6.6000e- 003 0.2620 0.0231 0.2851 0.0704 0.0213 0.0917 597.5412 597.5412 9.2200e- 003 597.7349 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.4564 0.0000 1.4564 0.2206 0.0000 0.2206 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3224 33.9413 30.8050 0.0399 1.6448 1.6448 1.5316 1.5316 0.0000 3,929.232 7 3,929.232 7 1.0974 3,952.277 4 Total 3.3224 33.9413 30.8050 0.0399 1.4564 1.6448 3.1012 0.2206 1.5316 1.7521 0.0000 3,929.232 7 3,929.232 7 1.0974 3,952.277 4 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 8 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1353 1.5357 1.2088 4.9100e- 003 0.1137 0.0221 0.1358 0.0311 0.0204 0.0515 471.6782 471.6782 3.2500e- 003 471.7465 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0429 0.0659 0.6353 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 125.8629 125.8629 5.9700e- 003 125.9884 Total 0.1782 1.6016 1.8440 6.6000e- 003 0.2620 0.0231 0.2851 0.0704 0.0213 0.0917 597.5412 597.5412 9.2200e- 003 597.7349 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0188 42.5046 34.8088 0.0391 2.1505 2.1505 1.9784 1.9784 3,876.723 3 3,876.723 3 1.2266 3,902.481 0 Total 4.0188 42.5046 34.8088 0.0391 18.0663 2.1505 20.2167 9.9307 1.9784 11.9091 3,876.723 3 3,876.723 3 1.2266 3,902.481 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 9 of 25 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0515 0.0791 0.7623 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 151.0355 151.0355 7.1700e- 003 151.1860 Total 0.0515 0.0791 0.7623 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 151.0355 151.0355 7.1700e- 003 151.1860 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0188 42.5046 34.8088 0.0391 2.1505 2.1505 1.9784 1.9784 0.0000 3,876.723 3 3,876.723 3 1.2266 3,902.481 0 Total 4.0188 42.5046 34.8088 0.0391 18.0663 2.1505 20.2167 9.9307 1.9784 11.9091 0.0000 3,876.723 3 3,876.723 3 1.2266 3,902.481 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 10 of 25 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0515 0.0791 0.7623 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 151.0355 151.0355 7.1700e- 003 151.1860 Total 0.0515 0.0791 0.7623 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 151.0355 151.0355 7.1700e- 003 151.1860 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Grading - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.8912 54.1978 40.2888 0.0617 2.5049 2.5049 2.3045 2.3045 6,111.312 1 6,111.312 1 1.9336 6,151.916 7 Total 4.8912 54.1978 40.2888 0.0617 8.6733 2.5049 11.1783 3.5965 2.3045 5.9010 6,111.312 1 6,111.312 1 1.9336 6,151.916 7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 11 of 25 3.4 Grading - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0572 0.0879 0.8470 2.2500e- 003 0.1977 1.3100e- 003 0.1990 0.0524 1.2200e- 003 0.0537 167.8172 167.8172 7.9600e- 003 167.9845 Total 0.0572 0.0879 0.8470 2.2500e- 003 0.1977 1.3100e- 003 0.1990 0.0524 1.2200e- 003 0.0537 167.8172 167.8172 7.9600e- 003 167.9845 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.8912 54.1978 40.2888 0.0617 2.5049 2.5049 2.3045 2.3045 0.0000 6,111.312 1 6,111.312 1 1.9336 6,151.916 7 Total 4.8912 54.1978 40.2888 0.0617 8.6733 2.5049 11.1783 3.5965 2.3045 5.9010 0.0000 6,111.312 1 6,111.312 1 1.9336 6,151.916 7 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 12 of 25 3.4 Grading - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0572 0.0879 0.8470 2.2500e- 003 0.1977 1.3100e- 003 0.1990 0.0524 1.2200e- 003 0.0537 167.8172 167.8172 7.9600e- 003 167.9845 Total 0.0572 0.0879 0.8470 2.2500e- 003 0.1977 1.3100e- 003 0.1990 0.0524 1.2200e- 003 0.0537 167.8172 167.8172 7.9600e- 003 167.9845 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Total 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 13 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0661 0.4257 0.6677 1.1900e- 003 0.0319 5.7300e- 003 0.0376 9.1000e- 003 5.2700e- 003 0.0144 113.1464 113.1464 8.9000e- 004 113.1650 Worker 0.0515 0.0791 0.7623 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 151.0355 151.0355 7.1700e- 003 151.1860 Total 0.1176 0.5048 1.4301 3.2200e- 003 0.2098 6.9100e- 003 0.2167 0.0563 6.3700e- 003 0.0627 264.1819 264.1819 8.0600e- 003 264.3511 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 0.0000 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Total 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 0.0000 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 14 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0661 0.4257 0.6677 1.1900e- 003 0.0319 5.7300e- 003 0.0376 9.1000e- 003 5.2700e- 003 0.0144 113.1464 113.1464 8.9000e- 004 113.1650 Worker 0.0515 0.0791 0.7623 2.0300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 151.0355 151.0355 7.1700e- 003 151.1860 Total 0.1176 0.5048 1.4301 3.2200e- 003 0.2098 6.9100e- 003 0.2167 0.0563 6.3700e- 003 0.0627 264.1819 264.1819 8.0600e- 003 264.3511 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.1113 19.0839 16.8084 0.0268 1.1128 1.1128 1.0465 1.0465 2,542.479 9 2,542.479 9 0.6194 2,555.488 0 Total 2.1113 19.0839 16.8084 0.0268 1.1128 1.1128 1.0465 1.0465 2,542.479 9 2,542.479 9 0.6194 2,555.488 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 15 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0634 0.3607 0.6500 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 5.0300e- 003 0.0369 9.1000e- 003 4.6200e- 003 0.0137 110.5541 110.5541 8.6000e- 004 110.5721 Worker 0.0466 0.0719 0.6892 2.0200e- 003 0.1780 1.1600e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.0800e- 003 0.0483 144.9651 144.9651 6.6700e- 003 145.1051 Total 0.1101 0.4326 1.3391 3.2000e- 003 0.2098 6.1900e- 003 0.2160 0.0563 5.7000e- 003 0.0620 255.5192 255.5192 7.5300e- 003 255.6772 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.1113 19.0839 16.8084 0.0268 1.1128 1.1128 1.0465 1.0465 0.0000 2,542.479 9 2,542.479 9 0.6194 2,555.488 0 Total 2.1113 19.0839 16.8084 0.0268 1.1128 1.1128 1.0465 1.0465 0.0000 2,542.479 9 2,542.479 9 0.6194 2,555.488 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 16 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0634 0.3607 0.6500 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 5.0300e- 003 0.0369 9.1000e- 003 4.6200e- 003 0.0137 110.5541 110.5541 8.6000e- 004 110.5721 Worker 0.0466 0.0719 0.6892 2.0200e- 003 0.1780 1.1600e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.0800e- 003 0.0483 144.9651 144.9651 6.6700e- 003 145.1051 Total 0.1101 0.4326 1.3391 3.2000e- 003 0.2098 6.1900e- 003 0.2160 0.0563 5.7000e- 003 0.0620 255.5192 255.5192 7.5300e- 003 255.6772 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.3301 13.7845 14.3523 0.0223 0.7390 0.7390 0.6799 0.6799 2,160.757 1 2,160.757 1 0.6988 2,175.432 6 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3301 13.7845 14.3523 0.0223 0.7390 0.7390 0.6799 0.6799 2,160.757 1 2,160.757 1 0.6988 2,175.432 6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 17 of 25 3.6 Paving - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0389 0.0599 0.5743 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 120.8042 120.8042 5.5600e- 003 120.9209 Total 0.0389 0.0599 0.5743 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 120.8042 120.8042 5.5600e- 003 120.9209 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.3301 13.7845 14.3523 0.0223 0.7390 0.7390 0.6799 0.6799 0.0000 2,160.757 1 2,160.757 1 0.6988 2,175.432 6 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3301 13.7845 14.3523 0.0223 0.7390 0.7390 0.6799 0.6799 0.0000 2,160.757 1 2,160.757 1 0.6988 2,175.432 6 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 18 of 25 3.6 Paving - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0389 0.0599 0.5743 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 120.8042 120.8042 5.5600e- 003 120.9209 Total 0.0389 0.0599 0.5743 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 120.8042 120.8042 5.5600e- 003 120.9209 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 24.9131 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2422 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Total 25.1553 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 19 of 25 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0104 0.0160 0.1532 4.5000e- 004 0.0395 2.6000e- 004 0.0398 0.0105 2.4000e- 004 0.0107 32.2145 32.2145 1.4800e- 003 32.2456 Total 0.0104 0.0160 0.1532 4.5000e- 004 0.0395 2.6000e- 004 0.0398 0.0105 2.4000e- 004 0.0107 32.2145 32.2145 1.4800e- 003 32.2456 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 24.9131 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2422 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Total 25.1553 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 20 of 25 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0104 0.0160 0.1532 4.5000e- 004 0.0395 2.6000e- 004 0.0398 0.0105 2.4000e- 004 0.0107 32.2145 32.2145 1.4800e- 003 32.2456 Total 0.0104 0.0160 0.1532 4.5000e- 004 0.0395 2.6000e- 004 0.0398 0.0105 2.4000e- 004 0.0107 32.2145 32.2145 1.4800e- 003 32.2456 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 21 of 25 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 22 of 25 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 23 of 25 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2730 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.9202 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Total 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 24 of 25 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 8.0 Waste Detail 10.0 Vegetation 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Consumer Products 0.9202 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Architectural Coating 0.2730 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:06 AMPage 25 of 25 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 3" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes odor control, solids thickening, public amenities, flow equalization, flood protection improvements, renesable energy improvements, sidestream treatment/return stream management, and anaerobic digesters. Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 3 work will include approx. 25 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 3 construction from 2019 Q3 through 2020 Q4 (15 months). Demolition - Estimated approximately 43,000 sf of building/hardscape demolition, based on site demolition plans. Architectural Coating - Grading - Assume no more than a single grading pass necessary. San Luis Obispo County, Winter SLO WRRF - Secondary Treatment Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 25.00 Acre 25.00 43,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 1 of 25 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 370.00 250.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 30.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 35.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 15.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/3/2020 9/2/2020 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/20/2019 9/19/2019 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/20/2019 9/19/2019 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/7/2019 9/6/2019 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,089,000.00 43,000.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 2 of 25 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2019 9.0250 96.8918 76.6855 0.1049 27.1153 4.6579 31.7731 13.6268 4.2853 17.9121 0.0000 10,292.01 54 10,292.01 54 3.1752 0.0000 10,358.69 54 2020 25.1662 19.5316 18.4764 0.0299 0.2098 1.1191 1.3289 0.0563 1.0522 1.1085 0.0000 2,790.029 4 2,790.029 4 0.7044 0.0000 2,804.821 6 Total 34.1913 116.4234 95.1619 0.1348 27.3251 5.7770 33.1021 13.6831 5.3375 19.0206 0.0000 13,082.04 48 13,082.04 48 3.8796 0.0000 13,163.51 70 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2019 9.0250 96.8918 76.6855 0.1049 27.1153 4.6579 31.7731 13.6268 4.2853 17.9121 0.0000 10,292.01 54 10,292.01 54 3.1752 0.0000 10,358.69 54 2020 25.1662 19.5316 18.4764 0.0299 0.2098 1.1191 1.3289 0.0563 1.0522 1.1085 0.0000 2,790.029 4 2,790.029 4 0.7044 0.0000 2,804.821 6 Total 34.1913 116.4234 95.1619 0.1348 27.3251 5.7770 33.1021 13.6831 5.3375 19.0206 0.0000 13,082.04 48 13,082.04 48 3.8796 0.0000 13,163.51 70 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 3 of 25 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.7800e- 003 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 4 of 25 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 7/15/2019 8/23/2019 5 30 2 Ext. Site Prep Site Preparation 8/24/2019 9/6/2019 5 10 3 Grading Grading 9/6/2019 9/19/2019 5 10 4 Building Construction Building Construction 9/19/2019 9/2/2020 5 250 5 Paving Paving 9/3/2020 9/23/2020 5 15 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/24/2020 11/18/2020 5 40 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 64,500; Non-Residential Outdoor: 21,500 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 25 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 5 of 25 Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 162 0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 162 0.38 Ext. Site Prep Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 255 0.40 Ext. Site Prep Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 361 0.48 Paving Pavers 2 8.00 125 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 6 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.4564 0.0000 1.4564 0.2206 0.0000 0.2206 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3224 33.9413 30.8050 0.0399 1.6448 1.6448 1.5316 1.5316 3,929.232 7 3,929.232 7 1.0974 3,952.277 4 Total 3.3224 33.9413 30.8050 0.0399 1.4564 1.6448 3.1012 0.2206 1.5316 1.7521 3,929.232 7 3,929.232 7 1.0974 3,952.277 4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 196.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Ext. Site Prep 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 18.00 7.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 4.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 7 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1561 1.5718 1.7221 4.9000e- 003 0.1137 0.0222 0.1359 0.0311 0.0204 0.0515 470.5785 470.5785 3.3000e- 003 470.6478 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0454 0.0748 0.6268 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 119.9921 119.9921 5.9700e- 003 120.1175 Total 0.2015 1.6466 2.3489 6.5100e- 003 0.2620 0.0232 0.2852 0.0704 0.0213 0.0918 590.5706 590.5706 9.2700e- 003 590.7653 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.4564 0.0000 1.4564 0.2206 0.0000 0.2206 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3224 33.9413 30.8050 0.0399 1.6448 1.6448 1.5316 1.5316 0.0000 3,929.232 7 3,929.232 7 1.0974 3,952.277 4 Total 3.3224 33.9413 30.8050 0.0399 1.4564 1.6448 3.1012 0.2206 1.5316 1.7521 0.0000 3,929.232 7 3,929.232 7 1.0974 3,952.277 4 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 8 of 25 3.2 Demolition - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1561 1.5718 1.7221 4.9000e- 003 0.1137 0.0222 0.1359 0.0311 0.0204 0.0515 470.5785 470.5785 3.3000e- 003 470.6478 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0454 0.0748 0.6268 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.9000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.1000e- 004 0.0402 119.9921 119.9921 5.9700e- 003 120.1175 Total 0.2015 1.6466 2.3489 6.5100e- 003 0.2620 0.0232 0.2852 0.0704 0.0213 0.0918 590.5706 590.5706 9.2700e- 003 590.7653 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0188 42.5046 34.8088 0.0391 2.1505 2.1505 1.9784 1.9784 3,876.723 3 3,876.723 3 1.2266 3,902.481 0 Total 4.0188 42.5046 34.8088 0.0391 18.0663 2.1505 20.2167 9.9307 1.9784 11.9091 3,876.723 3 3,876.723 3 1.2266 3,902.481 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 9 of 25 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0545 0.0897 0.7522 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 143.9905 143.9905 7.1700e- 003 144.1410 Total 0.0545 0.0897 0.7522 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 143.9905 143.9905 7.1700e- 003 144.1410 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0188 42.5046 34.8088 0.0391 2.1505 2.1505 1.9784 1.9784 0.0000 3,876.723 3 3,876.723 3 1.2266 3,902.481 0 Total 4.0188 42.5046 34.8088 0.0391 18.0663 2.1505 20.2167 9.9307 1.9784 11.9091 0.0000 3,876.723 3 3,876.723 3 1.2266 3,902.481 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 10 of 25 3.3 Ext. Site Prep - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0545 0.0897 0.7522 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 143.9905 143.9905 7.1700e- 003 144.1410 Total 0.0545 0.0897 0.7522 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 143.9905 143.9905 7.1700e- 003 144.1410 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Grading - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.8912 54.1978 40.2888 0.0617 2.5049 2.5049 2.3045 2.3045 6,111.312 1 6,111.312 1 1.9336 6,151.916 7 Total 4.8912 54.1978 40.2888 0.0617 8.6733 2.5049 11.1783 3.5965 2.3045 5.9010 6,111.312 1 6,111.312 1 1.9336 6,151.916 7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 11 of 25 3.4 Grading - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0605 0.0997 0.8357 2.1500e- 003 0.1977 1.3100e- 003 0.1990 0.0524 1.2200e- 003 0.0537 159.9895 159.9895 7.9600e- 003 160.1567 Total 0.0605 0.0997 0.8357 2.1500e- 003 0.1977 1.3100e- 003 0.1990 0.0524 1.2200e- 003 0.0537 159.9895 159.9895 7.9600e- 003 160.1567 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.8912 54.1978 40.2888 0.0617 2.5049 2.5049 2.3045 2.3045 0.0000 6,111.312 1 6,111.312 1 1.9336 6,151.916 7 Total 4.8912 54.1978 40.2888 0.0617 8.6733 2.5049 11.1783 3.5965 2.3045 5.9010 0.0000 6,111.312 1 6,111.312 1 1.9336 6,151.916 7 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 12 of 25 3.4 Grading - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0605 0.0997 0.8357 2.1500e- 003 0.1977 1.3100e- 003 0.1990 0.0524 1.2200e- 003 0.0537 159.9895 159.9895 7.9600e- 003 160.1567 Total 0.0605 0.0997 0.8357 2.1500e- 003 0.1977 1.3100e- 003 0.1990 0.0524 1.2200e- 003 0.0537 159.9895 159.9895 7.9600e- 003 160.1567 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Total 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 13 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0806 0.4321 1.0128 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 5.8200e- 003 0.0377 9.1000e- 003 5.3500e- 003 0.0145 111.9234 111.9234 9.2000e- 004 111.9428 Worker 0.0545 0.0897 0.7522 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 143.9905 143.9905 7.1700e- 003 144.1410 Total 0.1351 0.5218 1.7650 3.1100e- 003 0.2098 7.0000e- 003 0.2168 0.0563 6.4500e- 003 0.0627 255.9139 255.9139 8.0900e- 003 256.0838 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 0.0000 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Total 2.3516 20.9650 17.1204 0.0268 1.2850 1.2850 1.2083 1.2083 0.0000 2,580.761 8 2,580.761 8 0.6279 2,593.947 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 14 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2019 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0806 0.4321 1.0128 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 5.8200e- 003 0.0377 9.1000e- 003 5.3500e- 003 0.0145 111.9234 111.9234 9.2000e- 004 111.9428 Worker 0.0545 0.0897 0.7522 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.1800e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.1000e- 003 0.0483 143.9905 143.9905 7.1700e- 003 144.1410 Total 0.1351 0.5218 1.7650 3.1100e- 003 0.2098 7.0000e- 003 0.2168 0.0563 6.4500e- 003 0.0627 255.9139 255.9139 8.0900e- 003 256.0838 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.1113 19.0839 16.8084 0.0268 1.1128 1.1128 1.0465 1.0465 2,542.479 9 2,542.479 9 0.6194 2,555.488 0 Total 2.1113 19.0839 16.8084 0.0268 1.1128 1.1128 1.0465 1.0465 2,542.479 9 2,542.479 9 0.6194 2,555.488 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 15 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0773 0.3662 0.9913 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 5.1100e- 003 0.0370 9.1000e- 003 4.7000e- 003 0.0138 109.3544 109.3544 8.9000e- 004 109.3731 Worker 0.0492 0.0815 0.6766 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.1600e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.0800e- 003 0.0483 138.1951 138.1951 6.6700e- 003 138.3351 Total 0.1265 0.4477 1.6680 3.1100e- 003 0.2098 6.2700e- 003 0.2161 0.0563 5.7800e- 003 0.0621 247.5495 247.5495 7.5600e- 003 247.7082 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.1113 19.0839 16.8084 0.0268 1.1128 1.1128 1.0465 1.0465 0.0000 2,542.479 9 2,542.479 9 0.6194 2,555.488 0 Total 2.1113 19.0839 16.8084 0.0268 1.1128 1.1128 1.0465 1.0465 0.0000 2,542.479 9 2,542.479 9 0.6194 2,555.488 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 16 of 25 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0773 0.3662 0.9913 1.1800e- 003 0.0319 5.1100e- 003 0.0370 9.1000e- 003 4.7000e- 003 0.0138 109.3544 109.3544 8.9000e- 004 109.3731 Worker 0.0492 0.0815 0.6766 1.9300e- 003 0.1780 1.1600e- 003 0.1791 0.0472 1.0800e- 003 0.0483 138.1951 138.1951 6.6700e- 003 138.3351 Total 0.1265 0.4477 1.6680 3.1100e- 003 0.2098 6.2700e- 003 0.2161 0.0563 5.7800e- 003 0.0621 247.5495 247.5495 7.5600e- 003 247.7082 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.3301 13.7845 14.3523 0.0223 0.7390 0.7390 0.6799 0.6799 2,160.757 1 2,160.757 1 0.6988 2,175.432 6 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3301 13.7845 14.3523 0.0223 0.7390 0.7390 0.6799 0.6799 2,160.757 1 2,160.757 1 0.6988 2,175.432 6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 17 of 25 3.6 Paving - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0410 0.0679 0.5639 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 115.1626 115.1626 5.5600e- 003 115.2793 Total 0.0410 0.0679 0.5639 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 115.1626 115.1626 5.5600e- 003 115.2793 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.3301 13.7845 14.3523 0.0223 0.7390 0.7390 0.6799 0.6799 0.0000 2,160.757 1 2,160.757 1 0.6988 2,175.432 6 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3301 13.7845 14.3523 0.0223 0.7390 0.7390 0.6799 0.6799 0.0000 2,160.757 1 2,160.757 1 0.6988 2,175.432 6 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 18 of 25 3.6 Paving - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0410 0.0679 0.5639 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 115.1626 115.1626 5.5600e- 003 115.2793 Total 0.0410 0.0679 0.5639 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 115.1626 115.1626 5.5600e- 003 115.2793 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 24.9131 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2422 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Total 25.1553 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 19 of 25 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0109 0.0181 0.1504 4.3000e- 004 0.0395 2.6000e- 004 0.0398 0.0105 2.4000e- 004 0.0107 30.7100 30.7100 1.4800e- 003 30.7411 Total 0.0109 0.0181 0.1504 4.3000e- 004 0.0395 2.6000e- 004 0.0398 0.0105 2.4000e- 004 0.0107 30.7100 30.7100 1.4800e- 003 30.7411 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 24.9131 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2422 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Total 25.1553 1.6838 1.8314 2.9700e- 003 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.1109 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0218 281.9057 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 20 of 25 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0109 0.0181 0.1504 4.3000e- 004 0.0395 2.6000e- 004 0.0398 0.0105 2.4000e- 004 0.0107 30.7100 30.7100 1.4800e- 003 30.7411 Total 0.0109 0.0181 0.1504 4.3000e- 004 0.0395 2.6000e- 004 0.0398 0.0105 2.4000e- 004 0.0107 30.7100 30.7100 1.4800e- 003 30.7411 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 21 of 25 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 22 of 25 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 23 of 25 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.2730 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.9202 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Total 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 24 of 25 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 8.0 Waste Detail 10.0 Vegetation 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Consumer Products 0.9202 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Architectural Coating 0.2730 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1935 2.0000e- 005 2.5800e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.4700e- 003 5.4700e- 003 1.0000e- 005 5.7800e- 003 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:08 AMPage 25 of 25 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 4" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes grading involved in removal of sludge drying beds and re-working of ponds (removal of supernatant pond, re-construction of equalization basin). Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 4 work will include approx. 8 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 3 grading through 2020 Q4 (1 month). Demolition - Architectural Coating - Grading - San Luis Obispo County, Annual SLO WRRF - Secondary Treatment Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 8.00 Acre 8.00 348,480.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics 2.0 Emissions Summary Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 1 of 16 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2020 0.0259 0.2596 0.2324 3.1000e- 004 0.0670 0.0137 0.0807 0.0341 0.0127 0.0467 0.0000 27.1769 27.1769 8.5000e- 003 0.0000 27.3553 Total 0.0259 0.2596 0.2324 3.1000e- 004 0.0670 0.0137 0.0807 0.0341 0.0127 0.0467 0.0000 27.1769 27.1769 8.5000e- 003 0.0000 27.3553 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2020 0.0259 0.2596 0.2324 3.1000e- 004 0.0670 0.0137 0.0807 0.0341 0.0127 0.0467 0.0000 27.1768 27.1768 8.5000e- 003 0.0000 27.3553 Total 0.0259 0.2596 0.2324 3.1000e- 004 0.0670 0.0137 0.0807 0.0341 0.0127 0.0467 0.0000 27.1768 27.1768 8.5000e- 003 0.0000 27.3553 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 2 of 16 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 1.7648 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.7648 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 Unmitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 3 of 16 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 1.7648 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.7648 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Grading Grading 11/1/2020 11/27/2020 5 20 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 4 of 16 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 10 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 5 of 16 3.2 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0655 0.0000 0.0655 0.0337 0.0000 0.0337 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0256 0.2590 0.2268 3.0000e- 004 0.0137 0.0137 0.0126 0.0126 0.0000 26.1236 26.1236 8.4500e- 003 0.0000 26.3010 Total 0.0256 0.2590 0.2268 3.0000e- 004 0.0655 0.0137 0.0793 0.0337 0.0126 0.0463 0.0000 26.1236 26.1236 8.4500e- 003 0.0000 26.3010 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.8000e- 004 6.7000e- 004 5.6000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.4400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4500e- 003 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.0532 1.0532 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0543 Total 3.8000e- 004 6.7000e- 004 5.6000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.4400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4500e- 003 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.0532 1.0532 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0543 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 6 of 16 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 3.2 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0655 0.0000 0.0655 0.0337 0.0000 0.0337 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0256 0.2590 0.2268 3.0000e- 004 0.0137 0.0137 0.0126 0.0126 0.0000 26.1236 26.1236 8.4500e- 003 0.0000 26.3010 Total 0.0256 0.2590 0.2268 3.0000e- 004 0.0655 0.0137 0.0793 0.0337 0.0126 0.0463 0.0000 26.1236 26.1236 8.4500e- 003 0.0000 26.3010 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.8000e- 004 6.7000e- 004 5.6000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.4400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4500e- 003 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.0532 1.0532 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0543 Total 3.8000e- 004 6.7000e- 004 5.6000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.4400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4500e- 003 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.0532 1.0532 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0543 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 7 of 16 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 8 of 16 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 9 of 16 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 10 of 16 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 1.7648 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 Unmitigated 1.7648 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 11 of 16 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.4038 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.3610 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 Total 1.7648 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.4038 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.3610 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 Total 1.7648 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 2.8000e- 004 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 12 of 16 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 13 of 16 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 8.0 Waste Detail Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Category/Year CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 14 of 16 8.2 Waste by Land Use Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 15 of 16 10.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:41 AMPage 16 of 16 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 4" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes grading involved in removal of sludge drying beds and re-working of ponds (removal of supernatant pond, re-construction of equalization basin). Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 4 work will include approx. 8 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 3 grading through 2020 Q4 (1 month). Demolition - Architectural Coating - Grading - San Luis Obispo County, Summer SLO WRRF - Secondary Treatment Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 8.00 Acre 8.00 348,480.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics 2.0 Emissions Summary Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 1 of 12 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2020 2.5939 25.9554 23.2559 0.0314 6.7006 1.3745 8.0751 3.4068 1.2645 4.6713 0.0000 3,000.439 5 3,000.439 5 0.9369 0.0000 3,020.114 1 Total 2.5939 25.9554 23.2559 0.0314 6.7006 1.3745 8.0751 3.4068 1.2645 4.6713 0.0000 3,000.439 5 3,000.439 5 0.9369 0.0000 3,020.114 1 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2020 2.5939 25.9554 23.2559 0.0314 6.7006 1.3745 8.0751 3.4068 1.2645 4.6713 0.0000 3,000.439 5 3,000.439 5 0.9369 0.0000 3,020.114 1 Total 2.5939 25.9554 23.2559 0.0314 6.7006 1.3745 8.0751 3.4068 1.2645 4.6713 0.0000 3,000.439 5 3,000.439 5 0.9369 0.0000 3,020.114 1 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 2 of 12 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 3 of 12 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Grading Grading 11/1/2020 11/27/2020 5 20 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 10 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 4 of 12 3.2 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.5523 0.0000 6.5523 3.3675 0.0000 3.3675 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.5551 25.8955 22.6816 0.0297 1.3735 1.3735 1.2636 1.2636 2,879.635 3 2,879.635 3 0.9313 2,899.193 2 Total 2.5551 25.8955 22.6816 0.0297 6.5523 1.3735 7.9258 3.3675 1.2636 4.6311 2,879.635 3 2,879.635 3 0.9313 2,899.193 2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0389 0.0599 0.5743 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 120.8042 120.8042 5.5600e- 003 120.9209 Total 0.0389 0.0599 0.5743 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 120.8042 120.8042 5.5600e- 003 120.9209 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 5 of 12 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 3.2 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.5523 0.0000 6.5523 3.3675 0.0000 3.3675 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.5551 25.8955 22.6816 0.0297 1.3735 1.3735 1.2636 1.2636 0.0000 2,879.635 3 2,879.635 3 0.9313 2,899.193 2 Total 2.5551 25.8955 22.6816 0.0297 6.5523 1.3735 7.9258 3.3675 1.2636 4.6311 0.0000 2,879.635 3 2,879.635 3 0.9313 2,899.193 2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0389 0.0599 0.5743 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 120.8042 120.8042 5.5600e- 003 120.9209 Total 0.0389 0.0599 0.5743 1.6900e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 120.8042 120.8042 5.5600e- 003 120.9209 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 6 of 12 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 7 of 12 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 8 of 12 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Unmitigated 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 9 of 12 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 2.2126 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 7.4575 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 8.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Total 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 2.2126 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 7.4575 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 8.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Total 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 10 of 12 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 10.0 Vegetation 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:39 AMPage 11 of 12 Project Characteristics - This collection of proposed improvements identified as "Stage 4" in the Facilities Plan (Chapter 13). Includes grading involved in removal of sludge drying beds and re-working of ponds (removal of supernatant pond, re-construction of equalization basin). Land Use - For construction estimates, improvements are classified as "Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces." Stage 4 work will include approx. 8 acres. Construction Phase - Stage 3 grading through 2020 Q4 (1 month). Demolition - Architectural Coating - Grading - San Luis Obispo County, Winter SLO WRRF - Secondary Treatment Facilities 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 8.00 Acre 8.00 348,480.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics 2.0 Emissions Summary Utility Company Southern California Edison 2019Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 630.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 1 of 12 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2020 2.5961 25.9634 23.2454 0.0313 6.7006 1.3745 8.0751 3.4068 1.2645 4.6713 0.0000 2,994.797 9 2,994.797 9 0.9369 0.0000 3,014.472 5 Total 2.5961 25.9634 23.2454 0.0313 6.7006 1.3745 8.0751 3.4068 1.2645 4.6713 0.0000 2,994.797 9 2,994.797 9 0.9369 0.0000 3,014.472 5 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2020 2.5961 25.9634 23.2454 0.0313 6.7006 1.3745 8.0751 3.4068 1.2645 4.6713 0.0000 2,994.797 9 2,994.797 9 0.9369 0.0000 3,014.472 5 Total 2.5961 25.9634 23.2454 0.0313 6.7006 1.3745 8.0751 3.4068 1.2645 4.6713 0.0000 2,994.797 9 2,994.797 9 0.9369 0.0000 3,014.472 5 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 2 of 12 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 3 of 12 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Grading Grading 11/1/2020 11/27/2020 5 20 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Grading Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 10 Acres of Paving: 0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 4 of 12 3.2 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.5523 0.0000 6.5523 3.3675 0.0000 3.3675 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.5551 25.8955 22.6816 0.0297 1.3735 1.3735 1.2636 1.2636 2,879.635 3 2,879.635 3 0.9313 2,899.193 2 Total 2.5551 25.8955 22.6816 0.0297 6.5523 1.3735 7.9258 3.3675 1.2636 4.6311 2,879.635 3 2,879.635 3 0.9313 2,899.193 2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0410 0.0679 0.5639 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 115.1626 115.1626 5.5600e- 003 115.2793 Total 0.0410 0.0679 0.5639 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 115.1626 115.1626 5.5600e- 003 115.2793 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 5 of 12 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 3.2 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.5523 0.0000 6.5523 3.3675 0.0000 3.3675 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.5551 25.8955 22.6816 0.0297 1.3735 1.3735 1.2636 1.2636 0.0000 2,879.635 3 2,879.635 3 0.9313 2,899.193 2 Total 2.5551 25.8955 22.6816 0.0297 6.5523 1.3735 7.9258 3.3675 1.2636 4.6311 0.0000 2,879.635 3 2,879.635 3 0.9313 2,899.193 2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0410 0.0679 0.5639 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 115.1626 115.1626 5.5600e- 003 115.2793 Total 0.0410 0.0679 0.5639 1.6100e- 003 0.1483 9.7000e- 004 0.1493 0.0393 9.0000e- 004 0.0402 115.1626 115.1626 5.5600e- 003 115.2793 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 6 of 12 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 5.0 Energy Detail4.4 Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.455742 0.042240 0.214741 0.150125 0.067745 0.009842 0.017929 0.023584 0.002328 0.001395 0.008801 0.000839 0.004689 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 7 of 12 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 8 of 12 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Unmitigated 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 9 of 12 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 2.2126 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 7.4575 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 8.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Total 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 2.2126 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 7.4575 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 8.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Total 9.6702 1.0000e- 005 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7500e- 003 1.7500e- 003 0.0000 1.8500e- 003 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 10 of 12 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 10.0 Vegetation 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 11/23/2015 11:38 AMPage 11 of 12 2000KW Standby Generator bhp @ 1/4 =839 Performance data for CAT 2000KW 3516C GenSet: http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/3516C/Download%20Performance%20Data%20.pdf bhp @ 1/2 =1,521 Performance data for CAT 2000KW 3516C GenSet: http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/3516C/Download%20Performance%20Data%20.pdf bhp @ 3/4 =2,212 Performance data for CAT 2000KW 3516C GenSet: http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/3516C/Download%20Performance%20Data%20.pdf 1000KW Standby Generator bhp @ 1/4 =420 Performance data for CAT 1000KW C32 GenSet: http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/C32/C32%201000KW%20C32DR38%20Performance%20Data.pdf bhp @ 1/2 =765 Performance data for CAT 1000KW C32 GenSet: http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/C32/C32%201000KW%20C32DR38%20Performance%20Data.pdf bhp @ 3/4 =1,116 Performance data for CAT 1000KW C32 GenSet: http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/C32/C32%201000KW%20C32DR38%20Performance%20Data.pdf total annual testing hrs (1/4 standby) =5.5 Assume 30 mins per generator per month at 1/4 standby, with one annual test at 1/2 standby. total annual testing hrs (1/2 standby) =0.5 worst case use hrs =1.9 PG&E six sustained outages since 2008, with longest of 178 min, next longest 114 min. Recommended average = 114 min once/year. HC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 Emissions factors (1/4 standby) (g-hp/hr)0.11 5.39 0.29 0.03 Emissions factors (1/2 standby) (g-hp/hr)0.11 5.39 0.29 0.03 Emissions factors (1/4 standby) (lb/hr)0.20 9.97 0.54 1.72 0.05 964.85 Emissions factors (1/2 standby) (lb/hr)0.37 18.07 0.97 3.12 0.09 1,749.15 Total lbs/year 1.30 63.87 3.44 11.02 0.31 0.30 9,620.33 average lbs/day 0.00 0.17 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 26.36 worst-case lbs/day 0.18 9.04 0.49 1.56 0.04 0.00 874.58 tons/year 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 4.81 MT/year 4.36 NOx, CO, HC, and PM10 factors from Specification Sheet for 2000KW 3516C GenSet: http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/3516C/Download%20Specification%20Sheets.pdf PM2.5 estimated as 97.6% of PM10 from diesel combustion, based on SCAQMD Final Methodology to Calculate PM2.5 and PM2.5 Significance Thresholds, October 2006. HC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 Emissions factors (1/4 standby) (g-hp/hr)0.01 4.93 0.13 0.02 Emissions factors (1/2 standby) (g-hp/hr)0.01 4.93 0.13 0.02 Emissions factors (1/4 standby) (lb/hr)0.01 4.56 0.12 0.86 0.02 483.00 Emissions factors (1/2 standby) (lb/hr)0.02 8.31 0.22 1.57 0.03 879.75 Total lbs/year 0.06 29.26 0.77 5.52 0.11 0.10 4,838.63 average lbs/day 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 13.26 worst-case lbs/day 0.01 4.16 0.11 0.78 0.02 0.00 439.88 tons/year 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.42 MT/year 2.19 NOx, CO, HC, and PM10 factors from Specification Sheet for 1000KW C32 GenSet: http://www.miltoncat.com/products/NewGenerators/Documents/C32/C32%201000KW%20Spec%20Sheet%20EPD0157-A.pdf PM2.5 estimated as 97.6% of PM10 from diesel combustion, based on SCAQMD Final Methodology to Calculate PM2.5 and PM2.5 Significance Thresholds, October 2006. HC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 Emissions factors (2000 KW GenSet at 3/4 standy) (g/hp-hr)0.11 5.39 0.29 0.03 Emissions factors (1000 KW GenSet at 3/4 standy) (g/hp-hr)0.01 4.93 0.13 0.02 Emissions factors (2000KW at 3/4 standby) (lb/hr)0.54 26.29 1.41 4.53 0.13 2,543.80 Emissions factors (1000KW at 3/4 standby) (lb/hr)0.02 12.13 0.32 2.29 0.04 1,283.40 Total lbs/year 1.07 72.99 3.29 12.96 0.33 0.32 7,271.68 average lbs/day 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 19.92 worst-case lbs/day 1.07 72.99 3.29 12.96 0.33 0.32 7,271.68 tons/year 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 3.64 MT/year 3.30 NOx, CO, HC, and PM10 factors from Specification Sheets, as above. PM2.5 estimated as 97.6% of PM10 from diesel combustion, based on SCAQMD Final Methodology to Calculate PM2.5 and PM2.5 Significance Thresholds, October 2006. Annual Testing of 2000KW GenSet CO2 & SOx factors from AP 42 Section 3.3: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch03/final/c03s03.pdf Worst Case Use of Emergency Generators (Combined 2000KW and 1000KW) CO2 & SOx factors from AP 42 Section 3.3: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch03/final/c03s03.pdf Annual Testing of 1000KW GenSet CO2 & SOx factors from AP 42 Section 3.3: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch03/final/c03s03.pdf Southern California Edison Energy Intensity factors from CalEEMod: CO2 Intensity Factor:630.89 lb/MWh CH4 Intensity Factor: 0.03 lb/MWh N2O Intensity Factor:0.01 lb/MWh Existing energy use:5,800 MWh Estimated buildout energy use:6,382 MWh Increase from Project:582 MWh CO2 367,177.98 lb/year 166.55 MT/year CH4 16.88 lb/year 0.01 MT/year N2O 3.59 lb/year 0.00 MT/year CH4 GWP:21 Source: LGOP N2O GWP:310 Source: LGOP Total CO2e:167.21 MT CO2e Follows methods described in Section 8 of Appendix A to the CalEEMod User Guide (Calculation Details) http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/caleemod-appendixa.pdf?sfvrsn=2 Volume of wastewater at buildout:5.4 mgd Baseline volume of wastewater:3.5 mgd Increase in wastewater resulting from Project:1.9 mgd CH4 emissions (MT) = Wastewater x Digester Gas x fraction of CH4 in biogas x density of CH4 at standards conditions x (1-CH4 destruction energy) x 0.0283 x 10E-03 x 10E-03 Volume of wastewater (gallons):1.90E+06 gallons Digester gas:0.01 ft^3 biogas / gallon wastewater US EPA 2008 fraction of CH4 in biogas:0.65 US EPA 2008 density of CH4 at standards conditions:662 g/m^3 LGOP default CH4 destruction efficiency:0.99 LGOP default conversion factor 0.0283 m^3/ft^3 conversion factor 1.00E-02 MT/kg conversion factor 1.00E-02 kg/g 0.23 = CH4 emissions (MT) Biogenic CO2 emissions (MT CO2) = Wastewater x Digester Gas x fraction of CH4 in biogas x EF / 2204.623 Volume of wastewater (gallons):1.90E+06 gallons Digester gas:0.01 ft^3 biogas / gallon wastewater US EPA 2008 fraction of CH4 in biogas:0.65 US EPA 2008 emissions factor for CH4 combustion:0.12 lb CO2 / ft^3 CH4 conversion factor 2204.623 lb CO2 to MT CO2 0.67 = biogenic CO2 emissions (MT) N2O emissions (MT) = Wastewater x 10E-06 x mass N discharged per volume wastewater x 44/28 x N2O effluent emission factor x 10E-03 Volume of wastewater (gallons):7.19E+06 liters conversion factor 1.00E-05 kg/mg mass N discharged per volume wastewater:26 mg / liter of wastewater US EPA 2013 (CA state avg) ratio of molecular weights for N2O and N2:1.571428571 US EPA 2008 N2O effluent emission factor:0.005 kg N2O / kg N conversion factor 1.00E-02 MT/kg 0.15 = N2O emissions (MT) CH4 GWP:21 LGOP N2O GWP:310 LGOP Total CO2e:51.08 MT CO2e CH4 emissions (MT) = Wastewater x Digester Gas x fraction of CH4 in biogas x density of CH4 at standards conditions x (1-CH4 destruction energy) x 0.0283 x 10E-03 x 10E-03 Appendix C Biological Resources Assessment City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/ Biological Assessment March 2016 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT/ BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY PROJECT, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Prepared by: Rincon Consultants, Inc. 1530 Monterey Street, Suite D San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 March 2016 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo i TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Project Location .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Project Description ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.0 Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 10 2.1 Regulatory Overview .............................................................................................................. 10 2.1.1 Environmental Statutes ................................................................................................... 10 2.1.2 Guidelines for Determining CEQA Significance ......................................................... 10 2.2 Literature Review ..................................................................................................................... 11 2.3 Field Reconnaissance Survey ................................................................................................. 12 2.4 Jurisdictional Delineation ....................................................................................................... 12 3.0 Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................................... 14 3.1 Physical Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 14 3.1.1 Watershed and Drainages ............................................................................................... 14 3.1.2 Soils .................................................................................................................................... 18 3.2 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................. 18 3.3 General Wildlife ....................................................................................................................... 21 4.0 Sensitive Biological Resources.................................................................................................... 22 4.1 Special Status Species .............................................................................................................. 22 4.1.1 Special Status Plant Species ............................................................................................ 22 4.1.2 Special Status Wildlife Species ....................................................................................... 23 4.2 Sensitive Plant Communities.................................................................................................. 27 4.3 Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands ...................................................................................... 28 4.4 Wildlife Movement .................................................................................................................. 28 4.5 Resources Protected By Local Policies and Ordinances ..................................................... 29 4.6 Adopted or Approved Plans .................................................................................................. 29 5.0 Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 30 5.1 Special Status Species .............................................................................................................. 30 5.2 Sensitive Plant Communities.................................................................................................. 39 5.3 Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands ...................................................................................... 41 5.4 Wildlife Movement .................................................................................................................. 43 5.5 Local Policies and Ordinances ............................................................................................... 43 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo ii 5.6 Adopted or Approved Plans .................................................................................................. 43 6.0 Conclusions and Effects Determination .................................................................................... 44 6.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 44 6.2 Determination ........................................................................................................................... 44 7.0 Limitations, Assumptions, and Use Reliance........................................................................... 45 8.0 References ..................................................................................................................................... 46 9.0 List of Preparers ........................................................................................................................... 49 Tables Table 1. Summary of Vegetation/Land Cover Types within the Biological Study Area ........ 18 Table 2. Sensitive Plant Communities Within the Vicinity of the BSA ...................................... 27 Table 3. Summary of Potentially Jurisdictional Wetlands, Waters and Riparian Habitats..... 28 Table 4. Summary of Impacts/Effects to California Red-legged Frog Habitat ........................ 33 Figures Figure 1. Regional Location ................................................................................................................. 4 Figure 2. Biological Study Area ........................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3. Vegetation Communities and Jurisdictions .................................................................... 15 Figure 4. Sensitive Species, Natural Communities, and Designated Critical Habitats ............. 17 Appendices Appendix A. Regulatory Guidance Appendix B. Site Photographs Appendix C. Plant and Animal Species Observed Within the Study Area During Reconnaissance Survey Appendix D. Special Status Species in the Regional Vicinity of the Project Site Appendix E. 2001 NMFS Biological Opinion for San Luis Obispo’s Water Reuse Project Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The project site is located at 35 Prado Road in the City of San Luis Obispo (City), California. The approximate center of the project site occurs at latitude 35°15'2.12"N and longitude 120°40'39.52"W (WGS-84 datum). The project site is bisected by the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California United States Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. The Public Land Survey System depicts the project site within the Mt. Diablo Meridian, Township 31S, Range 12E, Section 03. The Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) is being upgraded to meet a number of objectives, including providing a nominal increase in average dry weather flow capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element and upgrading/replacing aging infrastructure. At the same time, the WRRF upgrade is necessary to meet the more stringent discharge requirements established by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board and State Water Resources Control Board in late 2014. Finally, the proposed upgrades would increase the production of recycled water, provide a number of new public amenities, and position the City for potential future potable reuse. Habitat types in the project area include seasonal wetland, red willow thicket, sparsely vegetated streambed, groves and screens, non-native annual grassland, coastal scrub, and developed/landscaped/constructed. San Luis Obispo Creek runs just outside the majority of the BSA along the eastern boundary of the site. The Creek occurs within the BSA only at the proposed discharge location and traverses northeast-southwest Suitable habitat occurs within the Biological Study Area for eight plant species listed in the California Native Plant Society’s Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. None of these special status plant species are listed under the Federal or State Endangered Species Acts. Direct impacts to these plant species would be minimized and/or avoided with implementation of conservation measures described in Section 5 of this document; examples of these measures include clearance surveys and implementation of avoidance buffers if special status plant species are found. Two wildlife species that are Federally listed as Threatened have the potential to occur within the Biological Study Area: California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) and steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus). Direct effects to California red-legged frog and steelhead trout individuals would be minimized and/or avoided to the greatest extent feasible with implementation of measures described in Section 5; however, there remains the possibility for incidental take of California red-legged frog to occur. The Biological Study Area contains Federally designated critical habitat for steelhead trout, the proposed action is not expected to result in loss or fragmentation of Federally designated Critical Habitat for this species. Based upon the above, a Federal incidental take statement (permit) would be required from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act for California red-legged frog. The incidental take statement will be provided by the USFWS in a Biological Opinion that will be issued following consultation with the project sponsor (United States Environmental Protection Agency) and review of this Biological Assessment. The statement will identify restrictions based on specified life stage(s) and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 2 designate an allowable number of individuals for each life stage to which take can occur, in addition to providing terms and conditions to minimize and offset such take (i.e., Reasonable and Prudent Measures). Other wildlife species listed as Species of Special Concern by the State and determined to have potential to occur within the Biological Study Area include: Blainville’s horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvilli), western pond turtle (Actinemys [=Emys] marmorata), Coast Range newt (Taricha torosa) and loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). In addition, one State Fully Protected Species, white-tailed kite (Elanus luecurus), has the potential to occur in the Biological Study Area. Finally, on site vegetation offers potential nesting habitat for bird species that are protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code. Direct and indirect impacts to these species are not expected with proposed avoidance and minimization measures incorporated into the project. Recommended avoidance and minimization measures will also provide protection for other remaining species with potential to occur within the Biological Study Area during construction of the proposed project. This project is anticipated to require a Nationwide Permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and a Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Likewise, the proposed project is expected to require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The proposed project does not occur within the Coastal Zone and therefore, does not require a Coastal Development Permit. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) prepared this Biological Resources Assessment (BRA)/ Biological Assessment (BA) to document the existing conditions within the project site, evaluate the potential for project-related impacts to biological resources, and recommend measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to such resources prior to, during, and following implementation of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project (proposed project/action). The purpose of the BRA component of this document is to provide technical information and to review the proposed project in sufficient detail to determine to what extent the proposed project may impact special status species and sensitive natural communities. Specifically, the BRA component has been prepared to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental review process for biological resources and to facilitate issuance of State permits and authorizations. The purpose of the BA component of this document is to provide technical information and to review the proposed action in sufficient detail to determine to what extent the proposed action may affect species that are Federally listed as threatened or endangered, or proposed for Federal listing as threatened or endangered, and/or such species that have Federally designated critical habitat. The BA component has been prepared in accordance with legal requirements found in Section 7(a)(2) of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA; 16 U.S. C 1536(c)) and serves to facilitate Section 7 consultation between the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION The project site/action area is located at 35 Prado Road in the City of San Luis Obispo (City), California (Figure 1). The approximate center of the project site occurs at latitude 35°15'2.12"N and longitude 120°40'39.52"W (WGS-84 datum). The project site is bisected by the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. The Public Land Survey System depicts the project site within the Mt. Diablo Meridian, Township 31S, Range 12E, Section 03. The Biological Study Area (BSA) analyzed in this report is limited to all of the project components as outlined in the project description and encompasses roughly 66 acres (Figure 2). These components collectively comprise the disturbance area or project site for the proposed project. In addition, these components comprise the action area of the proposed action for analyses regarding Federally listed species. To streamline discussions in this document, the term “BSA” will be used to refer to the 66 acres potentially impacted by this project’s implementation. Project Site and Vicinity Figure 1 City of San Luis Obispo Imagery provided by ESRI and its licensors © 2015. Biological Resources Assessment/Biological AssessmentWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Study Area ± ^_ 0 4,0002,000 Feet 4 £¤101 SHigueraStPradoRd L o s O s o s V a ll e y Rd S a n L u i s O bisp o Creek Biological Study Area Figure 2 City of San Luis Obispo Biological Study Area Biological Resources Assessment/Biological AssessmentWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Study Area±0 800400 Feet 5 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 6 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The WRRF is being upgraded to meet a number of objectives, including meeting the more stringent discharge requirements established by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in late 2014. At the same time, the WRRF upgrade is necessary to provide the nominal increase in average dry weather flow capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element and upgrade/replace aging infrastructure. Finally, the proposed upgrades would increase the production of recycled water, provide a number of public amenities, and position the City for potential future potable reuse, as described below. The WRRF Facilities Plan provides details regarding the components of the project and their construction. These are summarized in the following paragraphs. a. Demolition of Existing Structures. During the WRRF upgrade certain structures would be demolished to make room for new and enlarged equipment. The Prado Day Center building would be removed, along with the small bore gun range, some sludge drying beds and other facilities. Since the WRRF must continue operating during the upgrades, not all of the demolition would occur concurrently and instead would be phased over the construction period. b. Treatment Upgrades. Section 7 in the WRRF Facilities Plan provides a detailed description of the proposed upgrades within the WRRF. The details of the equipment and processes identified for the WRRF upgrade are described below and are based on meeting various performance standards, so that the facility will comply with the discharge specifications set by the SWRCB. • Primary Treatment. Addition of a new flow monitoring system, along with other mechanical and structural improvements to the existing headworks. Rehabilitation of the primary clarifiers and upgrades to the supporting mechanical equipment. • Flow Equalization. Upgrades to the existing equalization pond (including an increase in capacity) to enhance operations and maintenance and improve wet weather performance. • Secondary Treatment. Upgraded and expanded secondary treatment system to remove nitrogen and organic components, necessary to meet the new Waste Discharge Requirements specifications. • Tertiary Treatment. Expansion of the filter capacity to meet peak flow requirements. Construction of a new Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection unit to meet the new stringent discharge limits for disinfection byproducts. • Solids and Liquids Handling Processes. o Solids Thickening. Addition of new equipment to thicken the solids produced in the treatment process. Upgrade would replace existing Dissolved Air Flotation Thickener, with a less energy intensive process. o Anaerobic Digester. Construction of a new anaerobic digester. o Biosolids Dewatering. Replacement of the old belt filter press with a new screw press. o Sidestream Treatment/Return Stream Management. Several upgrades would be made in the handling and treatment of waste streams produced internally. These Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 7 include filter backwash, thickening return fluid (sidestream), digester return fluid (sidestream), lagoon supernatant (from dewatering sidestream), sludge drying bed return fluid, and plant drain. c. Cooling. Upgrades to effluent cooling would be provided as part of the project, either through addition of cooling towers, wetland cooling or other methods. Additional cooling could be provided through a combination of cooling towers and/or heat exchangers. An alternate cooling method may include use of the undeveloped area immediately southwest of the main facility for development of a wetland cooling system. The concept of using wetlands for cooling and polishing effluent before discharge in lieu of using mechanical chillers has been modeled and determined to be a viable option for cooling at the site. The size of this area is sufficient to allow use of the wetland cooling option without requiring removal of the portion of Bob Jones Bike Trail present in that area of the site, though some realignment may be necessary. The following is a description of where a potential wetland cooling system would be located at the site, its conceptual design and operation overview. It should be noted that at this time the use of wetlands is being considered as an option for effluent cooling and that the decision on whether or not to include this feature in the final design has not yet been made. Concept Layout. The proposed project includes an option to create 17 acres of wetlands, across six proposed wetland cells, adjacent to San Luis Obispo Creek for about ½ mile between the creek and U.S. 101 and from the WRRF to just upstream of the confluence of the creek with the tributary from Laguna Lake. Approximately 10 acres would be new construction and 7 acres would incorporate the existing pond, triangle wetland, and the small wetland with interpretive signage located at the southerly end of the site. Some of the critical design criteria for cooling wetlands are as follows: • Pond water levels would be lowered to create an emergent wetland and the ponds would be planted with wetlands plants with minimal earthwork to create two zones of depth. Each cell will have a narrow deep zone ranging between 2 and 6 feet deep full length of the upstream end to distribute flow uniformly over the shallow zone and will have a similar deep zone to collect flow on the downstream end of each shallow zone. Shallow zones will have water depths varying between 2 inches to 18 inches, and average about 1 foot. The triangle wetland would operate at about the same average water depth as currently (approximately1 foot) and the interpretive wetland water depth would be in average approximately 1 foot. The new wetland cells will have slightly sloped bottoms and the largest deep zones while the existing wetland cells will have smaller deep zones to minimize disturbance of the existing vegetation. • All wetland features will be designed to be flooded briefly in large flood events. Portions of the wetlands will be contained with berms and portions will be fully in cut without berms. Berm configuration will consider flood flow passage. • All wetland cells would have water level control structures that allow independent adjustment of water level and range of water level fluctuations. • Part of the cooling function of wetlands comes from shade cover so the wetlands will generally have emergent vegetation but can also use shade from trees on the perimeter, on islands, and in shallow zones. Floating plants and submerged plants also reflect some solar radiation and will be used in specific areas such as in the deep zones. The mix of plants will include as much variety as possible with the native plant palettes available in Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 8 the region. Planting densities would be such that the wetlands would not become choked with vegetation. • The final wetland cell in the design would include a small manhole pump station near the existing outfall facilities and a submerged rotating screen inlet in a deep zone of about 5 feet. The screen would have approximately 50 openings per square inch to exclude tadpoles, insects, and organic matter. Operational Overview. Wetlands alone would provide enough effluent cooling in the fall and winter months (November through February) to meet discharge requirements, and wetlands followed by the existing and new cooling towers would be used in the spring and summer months (April through October). WRRF effluent would flow into and out of the wetlands in the winter at the rate that effluent is produced and the wetland water levels would remain fairly constant. In the summer the cooling towers (proposed to be located at the southern end of the site) would operate primarily at night to produce the coolest water for release into the stream during the evening and early morning hours when steelhead most often move up and down the creek. During warmer periods of the year (e.g. summer and late fall) the wetlands would be operated to provide storage of water for peak operation of the cooling towers at night. During this period the volume of the total wetland area will be reduced at night and will refill each day. However, water level fluctuations in each cell would be variable, with water levels in some cells held with constant water level, while others would fluctuate by more than 50%. The approximate minimum depth in any given cell during April through October would be 0.2 feet. During cooler periods (generally from November through February) the wetlands alone will provide enough cooling; the approximate minimum depth in any cell during this period would be 1.0 feet. During cooler periods in the fall it would be possible to drain the wetlands briefly to control invasive species while using cooling towers only for temperature control. During the day, WRRF effluent would be accumulated in the wetlands for initial cooling and stored until evening when the cooling towers would be used to remove additional heat before discharge to the creek. Some water that is cooled at night will be stored for release during the day to meet minimum flow requirements. In the spring and fall, conditions would allow use of fewer cooling towers and would allow reduced water level fluctuations in the wetlands. Effluent temperatures range from approximately 70 to 80°F in summer and approximately 60 to 70°F in winter. Temperature ranges across all ponds would range from approximately 65 to 80°F in summer and approximately 55 to 70°F in winter. The TDS of the effluent in the wetlands will be generally below 0.9 parts per thousand. The final turbidity level coming out of the system and into SLO Creek will be in line with the requirements of the facility’s Biological Opinion for steelhead. d. Stormwater Management/Flood Protection Improvements. The project would include internal drainage improvements. As part of the proposed project, stormwater discharges from the site would be managed using one of several options, including a) continuing to direct all stormwater to the existing discharge points, b) directing part or all of the onsite stormwater flow to the undeveloped area southwest of the main facility, if the wetland cooling option is selected, c) directing part of the stormwater flow to a new discharge point along San Luis Obispo Creek, possibly near the northeast corner of the WRRF, or d) a combination of the three options above. In addition, low impact development (LID), including Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 9 minor upgrades, such as reconfiguring existing vegetated areas to include LID features, to major upgrades, such as incorporating LID/stormwater collection features as part of newly constructed buildings and treatment facilities, may also be included as part of the internal stormwater management plan for the WRRF site to improve the quality of stormwater flows prior to discharge. In addition, planned flood protection improvements include construction of enhanced protection for key facilities, which includes raising concrete walls protecting some structures, and a new berm around the wet weather equalization pond. e. Public Amenities. Public amenities proposed at the site include construction of a new Water Resource Center, and grading and restoration of land at the northeast corner of the WRRF after removal of the existing supernatant lagoon, which may ultimately be used for public park purposes under the direction of the City Parks and Recreation Department. The Water Resource Center would serve staff needs while simultaneously engaging and educating the community on the water cycle and recycled water treatment. The Water Resource Center would consolidate all of the major buildings at the WRRF with the exception of the maintenance shop (due to noise concerns). Other amenity improvements include a learning center with a walking tour of the facility, interpretive exhibits, picnic areas, a small amphitheater and demonstration gardens and wetlands. The project would also include improvements to perimeter fencing and landscaping, particularly at the Prado Road frontage of the property, as well improvements for security, access control, and internal circulation. f. Research and Development. Cal Poly currently conducts water treatment research at the WRRF facility. Cal Poly would continue to conduct these types of activities in future at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All activities would be within the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. In addition, the City intends to test as yet unidentified pilot process and treatment technologies in future at the WRRF facility. These would occur at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All would be within the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. f. Other Proposed Improvements. The following is a list of other proposed upgrades/ improvements included as part of the WRRF Project. • Odor Control. Odor control improvements would be installed at several locations. • Internal Access Improvements. Design includes an improved, single access point from Prado Road and an internal street system that will maintain access to the bus maintenance yard and City corporation yard during construction and after the WRRF upgrade. • Additional Electrical and Control Upgrades. Improved electrical service to meet the needs of new equipment, and improved instrumentation and controls for operation of the WRRF. • Renewable Energy Improvements. Installation of solar photovoltaic panels and related equipment at various locations throughout the WRRF. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 10 2.0 METHODOLOGY 2.1 REGULATORY OVERVIEW Regulated or sensitive resources studied and analyzed herein include special status plant and wildlife species, nesting birds and raptors, sensitive plant communities, jurisdictional waters and wetlands, wildlife movement, and locally protected resources, such as protected trees. 2.1.1 Environmental Statutes For the purpose of this report, potential impacts to biological resources were analyzed based on the following statutes: • CEQA • FESA • California Endangered Species Act (CESA) • Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) • California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) • Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) • The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act • Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act See Appendix A for a discussion of the above regulations. 2.1.2 Guidelines for Determining CEQA Significance The following threshold criteria, as defined by the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Initial Study Checklist, were used to evaluate potential environmental effects on biological resources. Based on these criteria, the proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would: a) Have substantial adverse effects, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 11 d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan. 2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW Queries of the USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC; 2015b), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; 2015), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (2015) were conducted to obtain comprehensive information regarding State and Federally listed species, as well as other special status species, considered to have potential to occur within the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles and the surrounding eight quadrangles (Arroyo Grande NE, Atascadero, Lopez Mtn., Morro Bay North, Morro Bay South, Oceano, Port San Luis, and Santa Margarita). The results of these scientific database queries were compiled into a table that is presented as Appendix D (note that for CNDDB mapping purposes, a 5-mile search radius was used). In addition, the following resources were reviewed for information about the BSA: • Aerial photographs of the BSA and vicinity; • San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles; • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (2015); • USFWS IPaC list of Federally listed species with potential to occur within the BSA and vicinity (2015b); • USFWS Critical Habitat Portal (2015a); • CDFW CNDDB list of species status species documented within the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles and surrounding 8 quadrangles (2015); • CDFW CNDDB map of State and Federally listed species that have been previously documented within a 5-mile (8-kilometer) radius of the BSA (2015); and • CNPS California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) list of sensitive plant species with potential to occur within the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles and surrounding 8 quadrangles (2015). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 12 2.3 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY A field reconnaissance survey was conducted to document the existing site conditions and to evaluate the potential for presence of sensitive biological resources including sensitive plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities, potentially jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and wetlands, and habitat for Federal and State protected nesting birds. Field reconnaissance surveys were conducted by Rincon Senior Ecologist, Colby J. Boggs on September 19, 2015 and Rincon Associate Biologist, Jamie Deutsch on October 8, 2015. Weather conditions during both surveys included an average temperature range of 72-78 degrees Fahrenheit, with winds of five to ten miles per hour, and clear skies. Mr. Boggs and Mr. Deutsch surveyed the entire BSA on foot and recorded all biological resources encountered on site. During the surveys, an inventory of all plant and animal species observed was compiled (Appendix C) and an evaluation of potentially jurisdictional aquatic features was conducted. Plant species nomenclature and taxonomy followed The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition (Baldwin et al., 2012). All plant species encountered were noted and identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level. The vegetation classification system used for this analysis is based on A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition (Sawyer et al., 2009) and Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Communities of California (Holland, 1986), but has been modified as needed to accurately describe the existing habitats observed on site. These vegetation communities were mapped onto aerial imagery depicting the BSA and then later digitized using ArcGIS® (ESRI, 2013). Wildlife identification and nomenclature followed standard reference texts, including Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Western North America (Sibley, 2003), Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins, 2003), and Mammals of North America (Bowers et al., 2004). The habitat requirements for each regionally occurring special status species were assessed and compared to the type and quality of the habitats observed within the BSA/action area during the field survey. Several sensitive species were eliminated from consideration as having potential to occur on site due to lack of suitable habitat, lack of suitable soils/substrate, and/or knowledge of regional distribution. The relative density of fossorial mammal burrows and soil characteristics throughout the site were also noted. 2.4 JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION In addition to the field reconnaissance survey, Rincon Associate Biologist, Jamie Deutsch conducted a preliminary jurisdictional delineation within the BSA on October 8, 2015 and a formal jurisdictional delineation of San Luis Obispo Creek on January 11, 2016. A supplemental formal jurisdiction will be conducted within the seasonal wetland in the southern half of the project site prior to issuance of permits. All potentially jurisdictional features within the site were inspected to record existing conditions and determine jurisdictional limits. The lateral limits of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdiction (i.e., width) for non- wetland waters or “other waters” were determined by the presence of physical characteristics indicative of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). The OHWM was identified in Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 13 accordance with the methodologies presented in the aforementioned Federal regulations, guidance letter, and technical publications. CDFW jurisdictional limits were delineated to the top-of-bank or outer drip-line of associated riparian vegetation. Other waters were mapped using a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit. ArcGIS was then used to calculate the approximate acreages and/or linear feet of jurisdictional other waters. Data for other waters was entered on the Arid West Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams OHWM Datasheet. Areas dominated by Facultative Wet (FACW) or Obligate (OBL) species were documented and the boundary of the hydrophytic vegetation was delineated within the field. Topographic features such as low relief and concave areas were taken into consideration during the delineation. All potential wetlands were drawn onto aerial imagery and later digitized. ArcGIS was then used to calculate the approximate acreages and/or linear feet of the potential jurisdictional wetlands. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 14 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS This section summarizes the results of the reconnaissance-level field surveys, including the preliminary jurisdictional delineation. Discussions regarding the general environmental setting, vegetation communities present, plants and animals observed, potential special status species issues, and other possible constraints regarding the biological resources on site are presented below. A complete list of all plant and animal species observed on site during the field survey is presented as Appendix C and representative photographs of the BSA are provided in Appendix B. 3.1 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The BSA is located in San Luis Obispo County where the moderate climate typifies a Mediterranean climate throughout the year. The majority of rainfall occurs during the winter months. Currently the BSA consists of both developed and disturbed but undeveloped lands adjacent to San Luis Obispo Creek. The majority of the vegetation contained within the BSA has been disturbed by vegetation removal and trimming. The BSA is bordered by U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) to the west and San Luis Obispo Creek to the east. Lands surrounding the BSA consist of agriculture, rural residential and various developed mixed use commercial/industrial properties, as well as the U.S. 101 and Bob Jones Trail. The topography of the BSA is generally flat with gentle sloping towards San Luis Obispo Creek. Onsite elevations range from approximately 110 to 140 feet (ft) above mean sea level. The BSA is within the South Coast Ranges (SCoR) geographic subregion of California. The SCoR subregion is a component of the larger Central Western California Region, which occurs within the even larger California Floristic Province (Baldwin et al., 2012). 3.1.1 Watershed and Drainages The majority of the aquatic features within the BSA consist of man-made and heavily altered features. In general, these aquatic features consist of man-made ponds/basins, man-made wetlands, and other impoundments that do not have a direct hydrologic connection to San Luis Obispo Creek, which runs just outside the majority of the BSA along the eastern boundary of the site. The Creek occurs within the BSA only at the proposed discharge location and traverses northeast-southwest. These habitat types are visible on aerial photography. The extent of these aquatic habitats within the BSA are presented in Figure 3 and also discussed in greater detail below. Ponds/Basins In general, these aquatic features have remained in use as treatment facilities and consist of man-made ponds, basins, and other impoundments associated with the WRRF which are continually managed by the City. These features vary in size and depth as well as their suitability to support plant and wildlife species. None of the features within the active work area in the northern half of the BSA are considered suitable for special status species. £¤101 SHigueraStPradoRd Seasonal Wetland NorthernHolding Pond SouthernHolding Pond S a n L u i s O bispoCreek Vegetation Communities and Jurisdictional Features Figure 3 City of San Luis Obispo Imagery provided by Google and its licensors © 2016. Biological Resources Assessment/Biological AssessmentWater Resource Recovery Facility EIR Biological Study Area 36'' Pipe Outfall Pump Station Water Control Structure Jurisdictional Features CDFW/RWQCB Jurisdiction[0.45 ac] RWQCB Jurisdiction [1.11 ac] USACE Other Waters Jurisdiction[0.11 ac] Vegetation Community Coastal Scrub Developed / Landscaped /Constructed Non-native Annual Grassland Red Willow Thicket Seasonal Wetland Sparsely Vegetated Streambed Groves and Screens ±0 600300 Feet Inset Map Inset Map 15 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 16 The northern holding pond in the southern half of the BSA consists entirely of vegetation consisting primarily of arroyo and red willows (Salix lasiolepis and S. laevigata, respectively), tall flat sedge (Cyperus eragrostis), and California bulrush (Schoenoplectus californicus) with some patches of cattail (Typha sp.). The southern holding pond in the southern half of the BSA primarily contains open water with a small fringe of willows in its northern corner. The fringe of willows and surrounding riparian vegetation may be considered a sensitive habitat community by CDFW because it is a riparian vegetation community that has been known to host sensitive species. The CNDDB documents occurrences of both California red-legged frog (CRLF) (Rana draytonii) and western pond turtle (Actinemys [=Emys] marmorata) within and around these holding ponds (Figure 4). Wetlands A seasonal wetland was documented in the BSA that was constructed by the City in 2010. The constructed wetland was funded through the California Department of Transportation (Cal Trans) Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program to serve as enhanced mitigation for wetland impacts from Cal Trans improvement projects. The wetland displays hydrology that is primarily provided by treated water associated with the holding ponds in the southern portion of the BSA. Dominant species include horsetail (Equisetum hyemale), San Diego sedge (Carex spissa), and basket rush (Juncus textilis). Other species observed in the understory include sneezeweed (Helenium puberulum) and yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis). San Luis Obispo Creek Most of the eastern boundary of the BSA is situated adjacent to a NWI-mapped feature, San Luis Obispo Creek. The total length of the eastern side of the site, adjacent to the project boundary, contains an expanse of the San Luis Obispo Creek riparian corridor. San Luis Obispo Creek occurs within the BSA only at the proposed discharge location and traverses northeast- southwest as depicted in Figure 2. San Luis Obispo Creek is perennial with its headwaters located in the Santa Lucia Mountains near Cuesta Grade and empties into the Pacific Ocean just west of Avila Beach. The creek is approximately 15 miles long and drains approximately 84 square miles (Hydrologic Unit Code #18060006). No flow was observed during the site visit; however, pooling was observed within the BSA. Approximately 150 linear feet of San Luis Obispo Creek occurs with the BSA and the lateral extent of the OHWM within the BSA is 27 feet wide with an average depth of 18 inches. The average sediment texture within the creek is comprised of gravel and cobble. A small number of larger, scattered boulders are also present. Small patches of emergent vegetation were observed within the creek, and consisted primarily of herbaceous species such as bur chervil (Anthriscus caucalis), bristly ox-tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), and bitter cress (Cardamine oligosperma). Red and arroyo willow shrubs and Fremont cottonwood trees occur on the steep banks of the creek. 41 458 66 6010 61 32 22 54 15 10 15 15 23 55 54 59 59 10 54 59 59 32 54 59 57 48 10 10 54 59 57 37 57 57 5757 2 2 2 54 10 57 5757 59 22 54 57 5959 54 14 29 10 59 59 10 10 10 10 12 52 52 16 17 33 13 3135 3435 8 3 4918 44 27 27 56 27 3053 39 19 49 51 51 21 51 27 35 21 25 51 5147 39 21 1 5 21 35 25 13 34 17 1117 9 24 21 49 43 9 2128 24 35 44 39 44 34 44 47 44 53 35 45 9 39 38 9 47 9 20 26 34 17 3534 39 35 35 27 35 46 47 44 46 51 17 7 44 40 27 9 17 45 44 44 1 7 9 46 46 35 1 46 47 1 9 7 46 9 40 9 44 11 11 35 28 8 35 40 11 46 44 39 39 34 17 47 47 34 46 35 47 39 51 51 11 35 9 8 44 40 44 46 38 46 25 17 17 44 46 11 17 44 44 34 44 17 17 46 44 17 1 40 1 44 8 17 17 47 7 51 17 11 50 17 34 46 17 7 262444 47 35 35 46 9 2835 47 47 44 35 28 44 42 46 51 31 36 17 4946 25 17 44 1 35 35 44 443538 44 35 25 3544 44 24 9 44 44 9 1125 47 11 17 1111 17 11 47 47 11 25 17 3444 4644 46 44 1717 17 Sensitive Elements Reported in theCalifornia Natural Diversity Database and FederallyDesignated Critical Habitats Located within 5 miles Figure 4 City of San Luis Obispo Biological Resources Assessment/Biological AssessmentWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Imagery provided by ESRI and its licensors © 2015. Special status species data source: California Natural Diversity Database, September, 2015. Additional suppressed records reported by the CNDDB known to occur or potentially occur within this searchradius include: Monarch Butterfly. For more information please contact the Department of Fish and Game. Critical habitat datasource: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, September, 2015. Final critical habitat acquired via the USFWS Critical Habitat Portal. It is only a general representation of the data and does not include all designated critical habitat. Contact USFWS for more specific data. Project Location 5-Mile Buffer CNDDB Animals Plants Natural Communities Final Critical Habitat Steelhead California red-legged frog Tidewater goby 1 - adobe sanicle2 - American badger3 - Arroyo de la Cruz manzanita4 - Atascadero June beetle5 - Betty's dudleya6 - black legless lizard7 - black-flowered figwort8 - Blochman's dudleya9 - Brewer's spineflower10 - California red-legged frog11 - Cambria morning-glory12 - Central Maritime Chaparral13 - chaparral ragwort14 - coast horned lizard15 - Coast Range newt16 - Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh17 - Congdon's tarplant18 - Cuesta Ridge thistle19 - dune larkspur20 - dwarf soaproot21 - Eastwood's larkspur 22 - ferruginous hawk23 - foothill yellow-legged frog24 - Hoover's bent grass25 - Hoover's button-celery26 - Indian Knob mountainbalm27 - Jones' layia28 - La Panza mariposa-lily29 - loggerhead shrike30 - mesa horkelia31 - Miles' milk-vetch32 - monarch - California overwintering population33 - Morro manzanita34 - most beautiful jewelflower35 - mouse-gray dudleya36 - Ojai fritillary37 - pallid bat38 - Palmer's monardella39 - Pecho manzanita40 - Pismo clarkia41 - prairie falcon 42 - saline clover43 - San Benito fritillary44 - San Luis mariposa-lily45 - San Luis Obispo County lupine46 - San Luis Obispo fountain thistle47 - San Luis Obispo owl's-clover48 - San Luis Obispo pyrg49 - San Luis Obispo sedge50 - Santa Lucia manzanita51 - Santa Margarita manzanita52 - Serpentine Bunchgrass53 - southern curly-leaved monardella54 - steelhead - south-central California coast DPS55 - tidewater goby56 - umbrella larkspur57 - vernal pool fairy shrimp58 - western mastiff bat59 - western pond turtle60 - western yellow-billed cuckoo61 - white-tailed kite 0 1.80.9 Miles ± 17 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 18 3.1.2 Soils The NRCS Web Soil Survey delineates one soil map unit within the BSA: Salinas silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes (USDA-NRCS, 2015). Site specific soil observations are consistent with those mapped by the NRCS Web Soil Survey. The description of the soil map unit is presented below. Salinas silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes This soil map unit is not designated as a hydric soil in San Luis Obispo County (USDA-NRCS, 2015). Salinas silty clay loam is well drained soil that occurs on alluvial fans and alluvial flats. It is formed by alluvium derived from sedimentary rock. Water storage capacity is moderately high to more than 80 inches. A typical soil profile has silty clay loam to at least 29 inches and stratified loam to silty clay loam to at least 72 inches. 3.2 VEGETATION Seven terrestrial vegetation community or land cover types occur within the BSA: Developed/Landscaped/Constructed, Groves and Screens, Coastal Scrub, Non-native Annual Grassland, Red Willow Thicket, Seasonal Wetland, and Sparsely Vegetated Streambed. Vegetation was classified and mapped during biological resource surveys conducted on October 8, 2015 and January 11, 2016 to characterize the project site and is discussed in more detail below. A summary of vegetation/land cover types identified in the Biological Study Area (BSA) is presented in Table 1 and Figure 3 provides a map of these features. Habitat characterizations were based on the classification systems presented in A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition (MCV2; Sawyer et al., 2009) and Preliminary Description of Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland, 1986); but have been modified slightly to most accurately reflect the existing site conditions. California Vegetation (Holland and Keil, 1995) and California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) were also referenced for describing the habitat types within the BSA. Plant species nomenclature and taxonomy used for the BSA follow treatments within Baldwin et al. (2012). Table 1. Summary of Vegetation/Land Cover Types within the Biological Study Area Habitat Type Approximate Acreage Approximate Percent of Total Area Developed/Landscaped/Constructed, including: • Hardscape, buildings, and landscaping • Open water (constructed basins) • Riparian and wetland (constructed holding ponds) 50.0 75 Groves and Screens 4.4 6.6 Non-native Annual Grassland 10.4 15.6 Coastal Scrub 0.3 0.4 Red Willow Thicket 0.4 0.6 Seasonal Wetland 1.1 1.7 Sparsely Vegetated Streambed 0.1 0.1 TOTAL 66.7 100 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 19 Developed/Landscaped/Constructed A substantial portion of the BSA consists of existing water treatment facilities and supporting roads, structures, and parking areas, mapped as developed areas. Within areas mapped as developed, basins and holding ponds associated with the water treatment facility are present. These features are lined, water is artificially sourced, and several of these features lack vegetation. However, the holding ponds in the southern portion of the BSA have accumulated sediment and organic matter which has facilitated establishment of emergent wetland plants and riparian vegetation. These holding ponds are described along with developed areas because the features are constructed and hydrology is artificial. The developed/landscaped/constructed land cover type occupies approximately 50 acres of the BSA. Hardscape, buildings, and maintained landscape. These are areas that are largely devoid of vegetation, including paved areas, structures, and facilities associated with the water treatment operations, including sludge and drying beds. This land cover type includes parking areas, access areas, and storage areas. Some landscaping is present in planters and perimeters around the existing treatment plant facilities, including turf grass and landscaped trees and shrubs such as olive (Olea europa), oleander (Nerium oleander), and bank cat claw (Acacia redolens). Developed areas are not classified in the MCV2 classification system (Sawyer et al., 2009) or the Holland classification system (Holland, 1986), but are included in the CDFW CWHR as Urban (Mayer and Laudenslayer, 1988). Open water. Open water associated with treatment operations is present in some lined basins, including an equalization basin at the north end of the BSA, as well as the southern holding pond at the south end of the BSA. Open water associated with constructed basins and ponds, including water treatment facilities are not classified in the MCV2 classification system (Sawyer et al., 2009) or the Holland classification system (Holland, 1986). Riparian and emergent wetland. The northern holding pond in the south end of the BSA currently supports wetland vegetation and riparian trees and shrubs in sediment and organic matter that have accumulated within the lined pond. Riparian species include tall flat sedge, and arroyo and red willows. Predominant wetland species are California bulrush, with some patches of cattail. Both holding ponds are constructed and water is artificially sourced. Vegetation present has likely recruited from seed blown in from adjacent naturally occurring wetland and riparian habitats in the San Luis Obispo Creek riparian corridor. Although these features are the product of artificial water sources, the presence of perennial emergent wetland vegetation and riparian canopy provide some suitable habitat for wildlife, including nesting birds, waterfowl, amphibians, and pond turtles. Vegetation types supported by artificial water sources are not typically classified in the MCV2 classification system (Sawyer et al., 2009) or the Holland classification system (Holland, 1986). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 20 Groves and Screens Groves of planted native and introduced trees are present within the BSA. This vegetation type also includes vegetation screens along perimeters of the treatment facility and the Bob Jones trail. Vegetation in this category includes a mix of trees native in the vicinity of the BSA, such as coast live oak, as well as other species native to California but not known to occur naturally in the vicinity of the BSA, such as Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), and Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa). The majority of the trees are within younger age classes. However, smaller groves of mature trees were observed within the BSA as well. Other species observed include scattered individuals of Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), and Canary Island palm (Phoenix canariensis). These groves are not classified in the MCV2 classification system (Sawyer et al., 2009) or the Holland classification system (Holland, 1986), but provide some wildlife habitat, particularly for nesting birds. Coastal Scrub An isolated patch of coastal scrub is present in the southern half of the BSA. Coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) and arroyo willow are co-dominant within this vegetation type. Central Coast Riparian Scrub habitat type (Element Code #63200), as described by Holland (1986), and the Arroyo Willow Thicket community (Salix lasiolepis Alliance) described in MCV2 (Sawyer et al., 2009) most closely corresponds to the vegetation type occurring within the site. Non-native Annual Grassland Non-native annual grasslands were mapped within the BSA where non-native annual grasses are predominant. Evidence of routine mowing is present in fields and visible on aerial photos. Composition is variable and patchy. Ripgut brome, wild oat (Avena barbata), and foxtail (Hordeum murinum) are dominant in patches; mustards (Brassica nigra; Hirschfeldia incana) are common. This vegetation type had very few native plants present. This vegetation type most closely corresponds to non-native grassland type (Element Code #42200) described by Holland (1986) and includes areas that are consistent with two semi- natural herbaceous stands described in the MCV2: Avena (barbata, fatua) semi-natural stands and Bromus (diandrus, hordeaceus)-Brachypodium distachyon semi-natural stands (Sawyer et al., 2009). Red Willow Thicket Within the northeast corner of the BSA, red willow thickets occur on the banks on both sides of San Luis Obispo Creek. The upper canopy is dominated by red willow (Salix laevigata) and Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii). Occasional sycamores (Platanus racemosa) are present in the corridor. The canopy provides consistent tree cover; however, it does not fully shade San Luis Obispo Creek. The understory of this habitat type is well developed, and shrub layer dominants included red willow, arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), and giant wild rye (Elymus condensatus). Dominants occurring within the herb layer include bur Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 21 chervil, wild cucumber (Marah fabaceus var. agrestis), bristly ox-tongue, and sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare). The red willow thicket vegetation community within the project area most closely corresponds to element #61210 Central Coast Cottonwood-Sycamore Riparian Forest (Holland, 1986) and to Salix laevigata Shrubland Alliance in the Manual of California Vegetation system (Sawyer et al., 2009). Seasonal Wetland As previously mentioned, a seasonal wetland with hydrology primarily supplied by treated water is present in the BSA. Dominant species include horsetail, San Diego sedge, and basket rush. Other species observed in the understory include sneezeweed and yellow star thistle. The seasonal wetland vegetation community within the project area most closely corresponds to coastal and valley freshwater marsh (Element Code #52410) described by Holland (1986) and to Juncus arcticus (var. balticus, mexicanus) Herbaceous Alliance in the MCV2 (Sawyer et al., 2009). Sparsely Vegetated Streambed Running alongside the eastern end of the project site is the sparsely vegetated San Luis Obispo Creek streambed. The streambed traverses the BSA at the proposed stormwater discharge location in the northeast corner of the BSA. The majority of the streambed contains gravel and cobble; however, the streambed contained sparse annuals such as bristly ox-tongue, bitter cress and bur chervil that recruit after the water recedes in the early summer. During the winter months the annuals are washed away by floods as the creek becomes inundated with water. Given that this community type is not naturally occurring, it is also not described in either the Holland (1986) or Sawyer et al. (2009) classification systems. 3.3 GENERAL WILDLIFE Wildlife activity was moderate during the field reconnaissance survey. See Appendix C for a full list of species observed within the BSA. Avian species observed included the western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica) and turkey vulture (Cathartes aura). The wetland vegetation within and around the holding ponds within the southern half of the BSA provides habitat for several species of waterfowl. No raptor nests or other bird nests were detected within the BSA or within 500 feet of the BSA during the survey. Small mammal sign consisting of pocket gopher (Thomomys sp.) and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) burrows were found in all vegetation communities within the BSA. The value of this habitat for wildlife is limited, as the majority of the BSA is extremely disturbed and/or developed. Nevertheless, a large portion of the BSA is situated adjacent to San Luis Obispo Creek which borders the eastern boundary of the BSA and traverses it at the proposed stormwater discharge (outfall) location in the northeast corner. The riparian corridor associated with San Luis Obispo Creek functions as an important wildlife corridor within the region. . Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 22 4.0 SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Local, State, and Federal agencies regulate special status species and require an assessment of their presence or potential presence to be conducted on site prior to the approval of any proposed development on a property. This section discusses sensitive biological resources observed within the BSA, and evaluates the potential for the BSA to support other sensitive biological resources. Assessments for the potential occurrence of special status species are based upon known ranges and habitat preferences for the species, species occurrence records from the CNDDB for the BSA and other sites in the vicinity of the survey area, and previous reports for the BSA. The potential for each special status species to occur in the survey area was evaluated according to the following criteria: No Potential. Habitat on and adjacent to the site is clearly unsuitable for the species requirements (foraging, breeding, cover, substrate, elevation, hydrology, plant community, site history, disturbance regime). Low Potential. Few of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present, and/or the majority of habitat on and adjacent to the site is unsuitable or of very poor quality. The species is not likely to be found on the site. Moderate Potential. Some of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present, and/or only some of the habitat on or adjacent to the site is unsuitable. The species has a moderate probability of being found on the site. High Potential. All of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present and/or most of the habitat on or adjacent to the site is highly suitable. The species has a high probability of being found on the site. Present. Species is observed on the site or has been recorded (e.g., CNDDB, other reports) on the site recently (within the last five years). The evaluation of potential to occur for each species identified in the records search is presented in Appendix D. 4.1 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES Rincon staff determined that the BSA contains suitable habitat for seven special status animal species and eight special status plant species. CNDDB occurrences of special status plants, wildlife, and sensitive natural communities and Federally designated critical habitats within five miles of the BSA are illustrated on Figure 4. 4.1.1 Special Status Plant Species Based on the database and literature review of records from the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles and the surrounding eight quadrangles, as well as the USFWS IPaC list of Federally listed species, 116 special status plant Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 23 species are known or have the potential to occur within the vicinity of the BSA (Appendix D). Of these, eight special status plant species, none of which are listed under the FESA or CESA, may occur on site based on the presence of suitable habitat and are presumed extant within the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles and/or the surrounding eight quadrangles. These species include: • Miles milk-vetch (Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus) – CRPR List 1B.2 • Club-haired mariposa-lily (Calochortus clavatus var. Clavatus) – CRPR List 4.3 • San Luis mariposa lily (Calochortus obispoensis) – CRPR List 1B.2 • San Luis Obispo owl’s clover (Castilleja densiflora var. Obispoensis) – CRPR List 1B.2 • Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii) – CRPR List 1B.1 • Small spikerush (Eleocharis parvula) – CRPR List 4.3 • Hoover’s button celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri) – CRPR List 1B.1 • Adobe sanicle (Sanicula maritima) – CRPR List 1B.1 None of the special status plant species listed above were detected during the reconnaissance level survey; however, the survey was not conducted within the bloom periods for these species and as such, their potential to occur within the BSA is based solely on the presence of potentially suitable habitat and the proximity of the BSA to CNDDB documented occurrences. CRPR List 1B and List 2 plant species are typically regarded as rare, threatened, or endangered under the CEQA by lead CEQA agencies and were considered as such in this document. CRPR List 3 and List 4 plant species are typically not considered for analysis under CEQA except where they are designated as rare or otherwise protected by local governments. 4.1.2 Special Status Wildlife Species Fifty special status animal species were identified by using the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles and the surrounding eight quadrangles, as well as the USFWS IpaC list of Federally listed species and knowledge of the regionally occurring special status species, eighteen of which have been documented within five miles of the BSA (Figure 4). Of the 50 species, seven special status animal species were determined to have the potential to occur on site based on the presence of suitable habitat within or adjacent to the BSA and include: • California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) – Federal Threatened and State Species of Special Concern • South-central California Coast distinct population segment (DPS) steelhead (steelhead) (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) – Federal Threatened and State Species of Special Concern • Blainville’s horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvilli) – State Species of Special Concern • Western pond turtle (Actinemys [=Emys] marmorata) – State Species of Special Concern • Coast range newt (Taricha torosa) – State Species of Special Concern • White-tailed kite (Elanus luecurus) – State Fully Protected • Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) – State Species of Special Concern Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 24 No special status animal species were detected during the reconnaissance level survey. Even though definitive surveys for special status animal species were not conducted, no individuals or sign indicating the presence of these species were detected. As such, the following analysis of potential for occurrence is based on habitat suitability and CNDDB occurrences of these species in the vicinity. California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) – Federal Threatened and State Species of Special Concern: The California red-legged frog inhabits quiet pools of streams, marshes, and ponds. All life history stages are most likely to be encountered in and around breeding sites, which include coastal lagoons, marshes, springs, permanent and semi-permanent natural ponds, and ponded and backwater portions of streams, as well as artificial impoundments such as stock ponds, irrigation ponds, and siltation ponds. Eggs are typically deposited in permanent pools, attached to emergent vegetation. The BSA is located within the known range of CRLF in San Luis Obispo County based upon the current range depicted in the USFWS Recovery Plan for the California Red-legged Frog (USFWS, 2002). The BSA does not occur within Federally designated Critical Habitat for the CRLF. One CRLF occurrence (Occurrence #895) has been recorded by the CNDDB within the BSA. Other occurrences in the vicinity, but outside of the BSA, are depicted in Figure 4. All of these occurrences are within five miles of the BSA and all are within or around the San Luis Obispo Creek watershed. Portions of the holding ponds within the BSA contain potentially suitable breeding habitat for CRLF. Water depths within the inundated pond area are suitable for CRLF breeding and partially submerged willow with roots extending into the water may provide a suitable site for egg mass attachment. Potential CRLF breeding habitat also occurs within San Luis Obispo Creek which borders the eastern side of the BSA. San Luis Obispo Creek may also serve as a dispersal and foraging corridor for CRLF as they move through the region. Upland habitat quality within the BSA is generally poor due to the lack of suitable habitat and constant maintenance activities such as mowing. The upland and dispersal habitat in the northern half of the BSA is non-existent within the active facility. However, the southern half of the BSA does contain patches of higher quality habitat (i.e. wetland) surrounded by lower quality habitat. There is a low potential CRLF may disperse through the low quality habitat to reach areas of higher quality for foraging. Based upon the presence of suitable aquatic habitat within the BSA, as well as isolated patches of suitable upland habitat within the BSA, this species may occur onsite. South-central California Coast Steelhead (DPS) (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) – Federal Threatened and State Species of Special Concern: The south/central California Coast DPS of steelhead (steelhead) requires shaded pools within cool low-flow streams and warm water habitats below some dams or pipeline outfalls where summer releases provide high flows and fast-waters. This species requires gravel substrates with sufficient flow velocities to clean and oxygenate the substrates for spawning. Juveniles typically frequent streams that provide cover from overhanging banks within willow and/or cottonwood riparian forests, woodlands, and scrubs. Steelhead tend to spawn when winter rains have been substantial enough to raise Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 25 stream flows and breach any sandbars that formed in the dry season. Migration and spawning occur during the months of December through May. The portion of San Luis Obispo Creek within the BSA is considered suitable habitat for this species. The critical habitat rule for steelhead (Federal Register 70: 52488-52627) lists the following primary constituent elements (PCEs): (1) Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning, incubation and larval development. (2) Freshwater rearing sites with: (i) Water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; (ii) Water quality and forage supporting juvenile development; and (iii) Natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks. (3) Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction and excessive predation with water quantity and quality conditions and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival. (4) Estuarine areas free of obstruction and excessive predation with: (i) Water quality, water quantity, and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult physiological transitions between fresh- and saltwater; (ii) Natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels; and (iii) Juvenile and adult forage. The BSA was assessed for the potential to support this species in accordance with the most recent guidance provided by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Suitable habitat for steelhead within the BSA includes the San Luis Obispo Creek stream channel. According to the guidance provided in the NMFS Critical Habitat for Seven Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) of Salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) in California (2005), the BSA does contain several of the PCEs identified for steelhead (Federal Register Volume 70, No. 170-52488). Specifically, San Luis Obispo Creek is considered suitable spawning habitat for steelhead because it supports overhanging vegetation in certain regions, contains undercut banks/beaver dams, has a suitable gravel substrate, and sufficient water quality. As previously mentioned, most of the area surveyed within the stream channel was dry, except for pools within the BSA that were inundated. The BSA does fall within the designated critical habitat for steelhead. One Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 26 steelhead occurrence (Occurrence #27) has been recorded by the CNDDB in San Luis Obispo Creek just east of the BSA downstream of the proposed stormwater discharge location. Based upon the presence of suitable aquatic habitat within the BSA, San Luis Obispo Creek’s listing as critical habitat within the BSA, as well as a documented occurrence downstream of the BSA, this species may occur onsite. Blainville’s (Coast) horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) – State Species of Special Concern: Blainville’s horned lizards have been documented by the CNDDB southeast of and within five miles of the BSA. Blainville’s horned lizard can be found in grasslands, coniferous forests, woodlands, and chaparral, containing open areas and patches of loose soil. Horned lizard diets are specialized and almost exclusively consist of native ants (>94% by prey item [Suarez et al., 2000]). The grassland margins and coastal scrub habitats within the BSA provide suitable habitat for this species and therefore, this species may occur onsite. Western pond turtle (Actinemys (=Emys) marmorata) – State Species of Special Concern: This species is an aquatic turtle that occurs in ponds, marshes, rivers, streams and irrigation ditches that typically support aquatic vegetation. It requires downed logs, rocks, mats of vegetation, or exposed banks for basking. Western pond turtle lay their eggs in nests that are dug along the banks of streams or other uplands in sandy, friable soils. Western pond turtles, especially those that reside in creeks are also known to over winter in upland habitats. Upland movements can be quite extensive and individuals have been recorded nesting or overwintering hundreds of feet from aquatic habitats. The typical nesting season is usually from April through August; however, variation exists depending upon geographic location. No western pond turtles were observed during the site survey. However, the CNDDB documents an occurrence (Occurrence #1162) within one of the holding ponds in the southern half of the BSA. In addition, the adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek provides suitable habitat as it contains gently flowing water, suitable shoreline for basking and upland riparian areas for nesting. Therefore, this species may occur onsite. Coast Range newt (Taricha torosa) – State Species of Special Concern: The Coast Range newt occurs along the coast and within the Coast Range Mountains from Mendocino County south to San Diego County. A disjunct population occurs in the southern Sierra Nevada. Coast Range newt utilizes wet forests, oak woodlands, chaparral, and rolling grassland communities, but requires permanent or aquatic habitats such as ponds, reservoirs, and sluggish pools in streams for breeding. The Coast Range newt breeding season typically occurs during late December through February. Suitable habitat exists within the bordering San Luis Obispo Creek’s riparian corridor as well as within and around the holding ponds in the southern half of the BSA. There are no documented occurrences within the BSA; however, portions of the holding ponds may provide suitable breeding habitat for this species and there are three records in CNDDB of occurrences within the five-mile buffer (northeast of BSA). Portions of the annual grassland and wetland communities within the BSA are considered suitable upland habitat for foraging and aestivation and San Luis Obispo Creek and the southern holding pond contain appropriate breeding habitat for this species. Therefore, this species may occur onsite. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 27 White-tailed kite (Elanus luecurus) – State Fully Protected: The white-tailed kite has been recorded just within the northwestern edge of the five mile buffer (Figure 4) of the BSA. The annual grassland habitat within the BSA provides suitable foraging habitat for this species. The intermittent larger trees within the BSA and larger trees associated with the bordering San Luis Obispo Creek may provide suitable nest sites. Therefore, this species may occur onsite. Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) – State Species of Special Concern: The loggerhead shrike has been documented by the CNDDB within five miles of the BSA and is known to occur within the general vicinity. The annual grassland and grove habitats provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for this species. Therefore, this species may occur onsite. Nesting Birds: Various tree and shrub species present in and surrounding the BSA/action area provide suitable habitat for other potentially nesting bird species. Several species of birds common to the area that typically nest in the habitats found within the BSA, such as western scrub jay, were detected during the reconnaissance survey. Although no raptor nests were detected during focused surveys, any of the larger trees within and adjacent to the BSA could be utilized by raptors for nesting. 4.2 SENSITIVE PLANT COMMUNITIES The CNDDB lists eight sensitive natural communities in the ten quadrangles queried including and surrounding the BSA (Appendix D). None of the communities listed in Table 2 occur within the BSA. Table 2. Sensitive Plant Communities Within the Vicinity of the BSA Plant Community G-Rank/ S-Rank Potential for Impact Rationale Central dune scrub S2.2 No No dune scrub vegetation communities present within the study area. Central foredunes S1.2 No No central foredune habitat present within the study area. Central maritime chaparral S2.2 No No chaparral vegetation communities present within the study area. Coastal and valley freshwater marsh S2.1 No No Coastal and valley freshwater marsh habitat present within the study area. Coastal brackish marsh G2/S2.1 No No coastal brackish marsh habitat present within the study area Northern coastal salt marsh G3/S3.2 No No Northern coastal salt marsh habitat present within the study area Northern interior cypress forest G2/S2.2 No No Northern interior cypress forest present within the study area Valley needlegrass grassland S3.1 No No valley needlegrass grassland present within the study area. G-Rank/S-Rank = Global Rank and State Rank as per NatureServe and CDFW’s CNDDB RareFind5 The Sensitive Natural Communities List in the CNDDB is not currently maintained and no new information has been added. Therefore, vegetation types on site were also compared with the List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2010). According to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Vegetation Program, Alliances with State ranks of S1-S3 are considered to be imperiled, and thus, potentially of Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 28 special concern. No vegetation types with rank S1-S3 or otherwise designated as high priority or potentially rare in the hierarchical list are present in the project area. 4.3 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS AND WETLANDS All potentially jurisdictional features within the BSA were inspected to record existing conditions and determine limits of USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW jurisdictions within the BSA. A summary of potentially jurisdictional features identified in the BSA is presented below in Table 3 and Figure 3 provides a map of these features. Based upon the analysis of Rincon’s preliminary jurisdictional delineation, the site contains a seasonal wetland subject to RWQCB jurisdiction and a portion of San Luis Obispo Creek subject to CDFW, RWQCB, and USACE jurisdictions. The seasonal wetland will likely fall under the jurisdiction of the SWRCB and Central Coast RWQCB, which have jurisdiction over “waters of the State,” pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. As previously mentioned, a supplemental jurisdictional delineation of this feature will be conducted prior to issuance of permits. San Luis Obispo Creek within the BSA exhibits a defined bed and bank, is hydrologically connected to the Pacific Ocean (a traditional navigable water), and is of value to special status wildlife species such as CRLF and steelhead. Therefore, this waterway would likely be considered Waters of U.S. as well as Waters of the State and would be subject to regulation by the USACE as well as the RWQCB. In addition, the portion of the creek within the BSA area, including associated riparian habitat would likely fall under the jurisdiction of the CDFW. The final jurisdictional determinations of the boundaries of wetlands, waters, and riparian habitat are made by each agency, typically at the time that authorizations to impact such features are requested. Table 3. Summary of Potentially Jurisdictional Wetlands, Waters and Riparian Habitats Jurisdictional Features Jurisdictional Type Area (acres) Length (feet) Seasonal Wetland RWQCB Jurisdiction Waters of the State 1.11 N/A San Luis Obispo Creek USACE Jurisdiction Waters of the U.S. 0.11 150 San Luis Obispo Creek CDFW/RWQCB Jurisdiction Streambed and Riparian Habitats 0.45 150 4.4 WILDLIFE MOVEMENT Wildlife movement corridors, or habitat linkages, are generally defined as connections between habitat patches that allow for physical and genetic exchange between otherwise isolated animal populations. Such linkages may serve a local purpose, such as providing a linkage between foraging and denning areas, or they may be regional in nature. Some habitat linkages may serve as migration corridors, wherein animals periodically move away from an area and then subsequently return. Others may be important as dispersal corridors for young animals. A group of habitat linkages in an area can form a wildlife corridor network. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 29 The habitats within the link do not necessarily need to be the same as the habitats that are being linked. Rather, the link merely needs to contain sufficient cover and forage to allow temporary inhabitation by ground-dwelling species. Typically habitat linkages are contiguous strips of natural areas, though dense plantings of landscape vegetation can be used by certain disturbance-tolerant species. Depending upon the species using a corridor, specific physical resources (such as rock outcroppings, vernal pools, or oak trees) may need to be located within the habitat link at certain intervals to allow slower-moving species to traverse the link. For highly mobile or aerial species, habitat linkages may be discontinuous patches of suitable resources spaced sufficiently close together to permit travel along a route in a short period of time. Wildlife movement corridors can be both large and small scale. Regionally, the BSA is not located within an Essential Connectivity Area (ECA) as mapped in the report California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project: A Strategy for Conserving a Connected California (2010). ECAs represent principle connections between Natural Landscape Blocks. ECAs are regions in which land conservation and management actions should be prioritized to maintain and enhance ecological connectivity. ECAs are mapped based on coarse ecological condition indicators, rather than the needs of particular species and thus serve the majority of species in each region. Small scale habitat corridors are present on site and include drainages and other topographic features that facilitate movement. San Luis Obispo Creek borders the eastern boundary of the BSA and traverses the BSA at the proposed stormwater discharge location in the northeast corner of the BSA. The creek provides a suitable small scale corridor for wildlife to travel locally. 4.5 RESOURCES PROTECTED BY LOCAL POLICIES AND ORDINANCES The City regulates tree removal within its jurisdiction. Implementation of the proposed project may require removal of several trees onsite. If tree removal is required, a tree removal permit must be obtained from the City prior to the onset of these activities. Once the project plans have been finalized, the exact number, type, and locations of trees within the BSA to be removed can be determined and the associated tree removal permit may be obtained, if needed. 4.6 ADOPTED OR APPROVED PLANS Project-related elements within the BSA are influenced by the City’s Program Environmental Impact Report for the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (LUCE). The proposed upgrade to the WRRF is planned for multiple reasons: to meet the stricter discharge limits required by the Central Coast RWQCB; to provide a nominal increase in average dry weather flow capacity to serve the City’s population at General Plan buildout; to upgrade/replace aging infrastructure; and to increase the production of recycled water. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 30 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES This section discusses the possible adverse impacts to biological resources that may occur from implementation of the proposed project/proposed action and suggests appropriate avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures that would reduce those impacts to less than significant levels. The criteria used to evaluate potential project-related impacts/effects to biological resources were presented in Section 2.1.2. 5.1 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES The proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would: • Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Impact # 1 Special Status Species Special Status Plants The proposed project has potential to result in direct impacts to special status plants. Eight special status plant species were determined to have potential to occur within the BSA considering the presence of suitable habitat. The species determined to have potential to occur would be limited to the coastal scrub, non-native annual grassland and seasonal wetland habitats, and the northern holding pond in the southern half of the site.. Impacts to special status plant species may occur from ground disturbing activities associated with project components in these areas. Indirect impacts could occur due to the spread of invasive, non-native species from construction equipment or imported fill materials. Invasive, non-native plant species can out-compete native species and/or alter habitat towards a State that is unsuitable for special status species. For example, the spread of certain weed species can reduce the biodiversity of native habitats through displacement of vital pollinators, potentially eliminating special status plant species. Special Status Plant Recommended Mitigation Measures. BIO-1 would be required to reduce any potential impacts to special status plant species to a less than significant level. BIO-1 Special Status Plant Recommended Mitigation Measures. 1. Prior to the start of on-site construction activities and when the plants are in a phenological stage conducive to positive identification (i.e., usually during the blooming period for the species), an approved biologist will conduct surveys for special status plant species throughout suitable habitat within the BSA. 2. If special status plant species are discovered within the BSA, an approved biologist will flag and fence these locations before construction activities start to avoid impacts. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 31 3. If avoidance is not feasible, all impacts shall be mitigated at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (number of acres/individuals restored to number of acres/individuals impacted) for each species as a component of habitat restoration. A restoration plan shall be prepared and submitted to the City for approval. The restoration plan shall include, at a minimum, the following components: 1. Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); 2. Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; 3. Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values); 4. Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); 5. Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); 6. Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year, along with performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, and annual monitoring reports to be submitted to the City for a maximum of five years; 7. Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 30 percent relative cover by vegetation type; 8. An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address any shortcomings in meeting success criteria; 9. Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and 10. Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). Implementation of mitigation measure BIO-1 would reduce potential impacts to special status plant species to less than significant levels. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 32 Special Status Animals As discussed in Section 4.1.2, seven special status animal species have potential to occur in the BSA based upon known ranges, habitat preferences for the species, BSA species occurrence records, species occurrence records from other sites in the vicinity of the survey area from the CNDDB, and previous reports for areas in the vicinity of the BSA. Impacts/effects as well as recommended avoidance and minimization efforts for special status animals are discussed below. State Species of Special Concern Blainville’s horned lizard Suitable habitat occurs within the southern portion of the proposed disturbance area for Blainville’s horned lizard. This species has potential to occur within and around the coastal scrub, non-native annual grassland, and groves and screens land cover types within the BSA. Potential impacts to these species, if present, could occur during ground disturbance in the form of harassment and/or injury. Western pond turtle The southern holding ponds and adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek provide suitable habitat for the western pond turtle. Potential direct impacts to western pond turtle include harassment or injury of active as well as overwintering individuals as well as potential destruction of nests located in upland habitat if they are present within the BSA during implementation. Coast Range newt No evidence of Coast Range newt was found on site; however, suitable habitat is located within portions of the BSA. The bordering San Luis Obispo Creek riparian corridor provides suitable habitat for this species and the southern holding pond within the southern portion of the BSA may provide suitable breeding habitat for this species. As such, implementation of the proposed project may result in loss or fragmentation of Coast Range newt habitat and/or breeding sites. Direct impacts to this species could occur if it is foraging or aestivating onsite during construction activities. Impacts to special status animals due to implementation of the proposed project would be avoided with avoidance and minimization measures incorporated. Federal and State Listed Species California red-legged frog Implementation of the proposed project/action will not result in loss or fragmentation of any Federally designated critical habitat for CRLF. However, work is anticipated within potential aquatic habitat (i.e. southern holding pond), and therefore potential direct effects to CRLF and its habitat are anticipated. Construction of the stormwater outfall will occur within the bank of San Luis Obispo Creek, under no circumstance will construction or construction equipment enter or be operated within the bed of the creek. Therefore, no direct effects to aquatic habitat within San Luis Obispo Creek are expected. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 33 Potential direct effects to CRLF individuals include harassment or injury if they are present within the project area during implementation; however, effects would be avoided through implementation of avoidance and minimization measures. The majority of the upland habitat within the BSA is considered marginally suitable for CRLF; however, the wetland and riparian corridor surrounding San Luis Obispo Creek is considered suitable foraging habitat for this species. The majority of dispersing individuals are expected to occur within and around the holding ponds and San Luis Obispo Creek. The project has potential to result in direct permanent impacts/effects to CRLF aquatic habitat as a result of the proposed project/action. Direct permanent impacts/effects to upland habitat that could be used by CRLF would occur within the southern portion of the BSA during the development of the wetland cooling ponds as well as the riparian corridor surrounding San Luis Obispo Creek. Permanent and temporary impacts/effects to both aquatic and upland CRLF habitat are summarized in Table 4. Table 4. Summary of Impacts/Effects to California Red-legged Frog Habitat California Red-legged Frog Habitat Temporary Impacts Permanent Impacts Aquatic 0.0 acre 0.02 acre Upland 0.45 acre 0.12 acre Indirect impacts/effects to CRLF could result from general project-related disturbance and noise if individuals are foraging or aestivating within the BSA. Indirect impacts/effects may also occur as a result of water quality issues associated with the construction of the stormwater outfall and water level control structures. Potential direct and indirect impacts/effects to this species resulting from implementation of the proposed project/action would be avoided with avoidance and minimization measures incorporated. Steelhead Implementation of the proposed project/action may result in indirect impacts/effects to steelhead. Construction of the proposed stormwater outfall would result in up to 0.10 acre of permanent impacts and approximately 0.45 acre of temporary impacts to riparian vegetation adjacent to in-stream steelhead critical habitat. Indirect impacts/effects may also occur as a result of water quality issues associated with the construction of the outfall. The existing facility has a Biological Opinion for impacts to steelhead as a result of discharging effluent into San Luis Obispo Creek. As currently designed, the water is cooled via cooling towers for temperature control prior to being discharged into the creek. The concept of using wetlands for cooling and polishing effluent before discharge in lieu of using mechanical chillers has been modeled and determined to be a viable option for cooling at the site. The new design would adhere to all the stipulations within the existing Biological Opinion. To the maximum extent feasible, the project has been designed to avoid and minimize potential project-related impacts to steelhead. No equipment would enter or be used within the San Luis Obispo Creek bed and no construction would occur within the creek bed. Dewatering within the creek and/or water diversion activities would not be necessary and are not a component of Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 34 the proposed project. Potential indirect impacts/effects to this species resulting from implementation of the proposed project/action would be avoided with avoidance and minimization measures incorporated. Nesting Birds Suitable nesting habitat occurs within or in the vicinity of the BSA. As such, nesting birds have the potential to be present within the project limits. In addition, as mentioned in Section 4.1.2, one State Fully Protected bird species (white-tailed kite) and one State Species of Special Concern bird species (loggerhead shrike) have potential to occur or are known to occur in the vicinity of the BSA. Direct impacts to nesting birds may occur due to removal of trees and shrubs that may contain active nests. Construction within the BSA may result in indirect impacts to nesting bird species, should they be present in the vicinity of areas of disturbance at the time of construction. Impacts to nesting birds due to implementation of the proposed project could be avoided with avoidance and minimization measures incorporated. Special Status Animal Recommended Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures would be required to reduce any potential impacts to special status animal species to a less than significant level. BIO-2 General Wildlife Best Management Practices. The following general wildlife Best Management Practices are required: 1. No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the Project site. 2. All trash that may attract predators must be properly contained and removed from the work site. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. 3. All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from San Luis Obispo Creek and the holding ponds and in a location where a spill would not drain toward aquatic habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills prior to the onset of work activities. All workers shall be informed of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. 4. To control sedimentation during and after Project implementation, appropriate erosion control best management practices (i.e. use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects on adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek. No plastic monofilament netting shall be utilized on-site. 5. All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. 6. Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas. 7. Work shall be restricted to daylight hours. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 35 BIO-3 Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), all personnel associated with project construction shall attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training, conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer documenting they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. BIO-4 Blainville’s Horned Lizard Avoidance and Minimization Measures. A qualified biologist shall be present onsite during initial ground disturbance in areas determined to contain suitable habitat for this species. Any Blainville’s horned lizards that are unearthed during initial ground disturbance shall be relocated the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat not likely to be affected by activities associated with the proposed project. BIO-5 Western Pond Turtle Avoidance and Minimization Measures. The following measures will be implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to southern western pond turtle: 1. A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours prior to the onset of work activities within and around areas considered potential western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals are likely to be injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall be allowed sufficient time to move them from the project site before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any western pond turtle the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the proposed project. 2. Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to southern western pond turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 36 staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. BIO-6 Coast Range Newt Avoidance and Minimization Measures. Given that this species is an amphibian that utilizes similar habitats to CRLF; implementation of the recommended measures provided for CRLF in BIO-7 below are suitable and appropriate for this species. BIO-7 California Red-legged Frog (CRLF) Avoidance and Minimization Measures. Formal consultation with USFWS under Section 7 of the FESA shall be undertaken to obtain incidental take authorization for CRLF. A BA has been incorporated into this BRA prepared by Rincon Consultants to initiate the Section 7 consultation with the USFWS. The result of Section 7 consultation will be a BO issued by the USFWS that will include specified life stage(s) and allowable number of individuals for each life stage to which take can occur, in addition to terms and conditions to minimize and offset such take. The following measures are required to ensure that impacts to CRLF from the proposed project/action are reduced to less than significant levels and are proposed conservation measures as part of the Section 7 consultation. As such, these measures are likely to be included in the BO in addition to other requirements that may be determined by the USFWS: 1. Only USFWS-approved biologists shall participate in activities associated with the capture, handling, and monitoring of CRLF. 2. Ground disturbance shall not begin until written approval is received from the USFWS that the biologist is qualified to conduct the work. If the USFWS does not authorize the relocation of CRLF occurring within the project site, CRLF found within the project site shall be avoided with a 100-foot buffer and no activities shall occur within that buffer until the CRLF has left the project site on its own. 3. The project site shall be surrounded by a solid temporary exclusion fence (such as silt fence) that shall be buried into the ground and extend at least three feet above the ground and buried at least 6 inches to exclude CRLF from the project site. Plastic monofilament netting or other similar material will not be used. The location of the fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist. The fence shall remain in place throughout construction activities. Installation of the exclusion fencing shall be monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure that it is installed correctly. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 37 4. All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. 5. Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas. 6. Work shall be restricted to daylight hours. 7. To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the approved biologist, the fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force shall be followed at all times. 8. No pets or firearms shall be permitted on-site. BIO-8 Steelhead Avoidance and Minimization Measures. The following measures are required to reduce impacts to steelhead from the proposed project to a less than significant level. These measures are included in or are subsequent to the measures stipulated in the facility’s existing Biological Opinion (Appendix E). 1. Before any activities begin on the project, a qualified biologist will conduct a training session for all construction personnel. At a minimum, the training will include a description of the steelhead and its habitat, the specific measures that are being implemented to conserve this species for the current project, and the boundaries within which the project may be accomplished. Brochures, books, and briefings may be used in the training session, provided that a qualified person is on hand to answer any questions. 2. During the duration of project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained and secured, promptly removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from the work areas. 3. All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 100 feet from riparian habitat or bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). The monitor shall ensure that contamination of suitable habitat does not occur during such operations. Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. 4. The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area used for construction activities shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goals. 5. The City will attempt to schedule work within the immediate vicinity of San Luis Obispo Creek for times of the year when Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 38 potential impacts to steelhead would be minimal. To the maximum extent feasible, work should be restricted during the wet season (October 15 through April 30) and should ideally occur during the late summer and early fall. 6. To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, the City shall implement the following BMPs. If the BMPs are somehow ineffective, the City will work with NMFS to define actions to remedy the situation immediately. • It shall be the owner’s/contractor’s responsibility to maintain control of the entire construction operations and to keep the entire site in compliance. • The owner/contractor shall be responsible for monitoring erosion and sediment control measures (including but not limited to fiber rolls, inlet protections, silt fences, and gravel bags) prior, during and after storm events, monitoring includes maintaining a file documenting onsite inspections, problems encountered, corrective actions, and notes and a map of remedial implementation measures. • All earth stockpiles over 2.0 cubic yards shall be covered with a tarp and ringed with straw bales or silt fencing. The site shall be maintained so as to minimize sediment-laden runoff to any storm drainage system including existing drainage swales and/or sand watercourses. a. Construction operations shall be carried out in such a manner that erosion and water pollution will be minimized. b. State and local laws concerning pollution abatement shall be complied with. • If grading operations are expected to denude slopes, the slopes shall be protected with erosion control measures immediately following grading on the slopes. • Specifically, in order to prevent sedimentation and debris from entering San Luis Obispo Creek during construction, silt fencing shall be installed along the top of the banks on the west side of the channel prior to the onset of construction activities. 7. No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the project site. 8. The project biologist will monitor construction activities, in stream habitat, and overall performance of BMPs and sediment controls for the purpose of identifying and reconciling any condition that could adversely affect steelhead or their habitat. The biologist will halt work if necessary and will recommend site-specific measures to avoid adverse effects to steelhead and their habitat. 9. Equipment will be checked daily for leaks prior to the initiation of construction activities. A spill kit will be placed near the creek and will remain readily available during Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 39 construction in the event that any contaminant is accidentally released. In addition to these avoidance and minimization measures, the measures presented in Section 5.3 for Jurisdictional Waters would also ensure that potential indirect impacts to steelhead from this project are reduced as much as practicable. BIO-9 Nesting Bird Avoidance and Minimization Measures. The following measures will be implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to nesting birds. 1. For construction activities occurring during the nesting season (generally February 1 to September 15), surveys for nesting birds covered by the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to vegetation removal. The surveys shall include the entire disturbance area plus a 500-foot buffer around the site. If active nests are located, all construction work shall be conducted outside a buffer zone from the nest to be determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be a minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species and at least 300 feet for raptor species. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to removal of the buffer. 2. If feasible, removal of vegetation within suitable nesting bird habitats will be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 14), after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season. Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-2 through BIO-9 above would reduce potential impacts to special status animal species to less than significant levels. 5.2 SENSITIVE PLANT COMMUNITIES The proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would: b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service. The proposed project would result in impacts to the right, or west, bank of San Luis Obispo Creek and the associated riparian habitat which is likely under CDFW jurisdiction (Figure 3) Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 40 pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code and are considered under CEQA. Those impacts occurring within San Luis Obispo Creek’s riparian corridor are expected to consist of earth moving, grading and pouring rip-rap, which are activities associated with installing the outfall and rock slope. Several red willows and black cottonwoods are expected to be trimmed and/or removed as a result of the proposed project. Within the project area, permanent impacts to CDFW jurisdictional habitat would be up to 0.11 acre. Temporary impacts to riparian vegetation on the west bank of San Luis Obispo Creek, which is under CDFW jurisdiction, would be up to 0.45 acre. Indirect impacts which may occur as a result of implementation of the project would include impacts to water quality from earth moving activities. Project related impacts from the proposed project would be potentially significant and would require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW. BIO-10 Riparian Habitat. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide for at a minimum a 1:1 ratio for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian habitat. The HMMP will identify the specific mitigation sites and it will be implemented immediately following project completion. The HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following components: 1. Description of the project/impact site (i.e. location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); 2. Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; 3. Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation-site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation-site); 4. Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation-site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); 5. Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); 6. Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation-site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports); 7. Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent relative cover by vegetation type; Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 41 8. An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to restoration efforts; 9. Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and 10. Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). Furthermore, Mitigation Measure BIO-11, presented below for Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands is suitable and appropriate to ensure that minimal impacts to red willow thicket/riparian habitat would result from implementation of this project and that mitigation is satisfied for unavoidable impacts to such habitat. Implementation of mitigation measures BIO- 10 and BIO-11 would reduce potential impacts to riparian and sensitive habitats to less than significant levels. 5.3 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS AND WETLANDS The proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would: c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. The proposed project has potential to result in direct impacts to jurisdictional areas, including wetlands, other waters and riparian habitats. Approximately 1.11 acres of wetlands, 0.11 acre of other waters and 0.45 acres of streambed/riparian habitat were delineated onsite. Note the final jurisdictional determinations of the boundaries of wetlands, waters, and riparian habitat are made by each agency, typically at the time that authorizations to impact such features are requested. The project site contains features that likely fall under jurisdiction of the SWRCB and CCRWQCB, which has jurisdiction over “waters of the State” pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. A WDRs permit is also anticipated to be required. The proposed project is anticipated to require a Section 404 Nationwide Permit from the USACE and a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, under the CWA. Impacts to jurisdictional areas are potentially significant without mitigation incorporated. BIO-11 Jurisdictional Water and Wetlands Best Management Practices. The following BMPs shall be implemented: 1. To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control best management practices (i.e., installation of straw wattle, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects on jurisdictional areas in the vicinity of the project. Plastic monofilament erosion control matting will not be implemented onsite. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 42 2. Project activities within the jurisdictional areas shall occur during the dry season (typically between June 1 and November 1) in any given year, or as otherwise directed by the regulatory agencies. Deviations from this work window can be made with permission from the relevant regulatory agencies. 3. During construction, no litter or construction debris shall be placed within jurisdictional areas. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. In addition, all project-generated debris, building materials, and rubbish shall be removed from jurisdictional areas and from areas where such materials could be washed into them. 4. Any substances which could be hazardous to aquatic species resulting from project-related activities shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering jurisdictional areas. 5. All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-2 and BIO-11 would reduce potential impacts to federally protected wetlands, any riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural community to less than significant levels. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 43 5.4 WILDLIFE MOVEMENT The proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would: d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites. No impacts to wildlife movement are expected considering no work will occur within the bed of San Luis Obispo Creek and the majority of the construction will occur on previously disturbed land. The proposed outfall will be constructed within the riparian corridor on the west bank of San Luis Obispo Creek; however, the small scale of the outfall will not interfere with the movement of resident or migratory wildlife. Therefore, no measures are recommended. 5.5 LOCAL POLICIES AND ORDINANCES The proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would: e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. No conflicts with local policies and ordinance regarding biological resources are expected. Therefore, no measures are recommended. 5.6 ADOPTED OR APPROVED PLANS The proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would: f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. No conflicts with an adopted or approved plan are expected. Therefore, no measures are recommended. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 44 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND EFFECTS DETERMINATION 6.1 CONCLUSIONS The proposed action may result in tree removal and disturbances to San Luis Obispo Creek. Two Federally listed species, CRLF and steelhead were determined to have potential to occur based on the habitats on-site and in the vicinity as well as known occurrences in the region (see Appendix D for all Federally listed species evaluated). The site contains critical habitat for steelhead; however, no work will be conducted within the bed of San Luis Obispo Creek. Suitable breeding habitat for CRLF occurs within the action area (i.e., the southern holding pond on the south side of the site). Suitable foraging and dispersal habitat for CRLF occurs within the southern portion of the BSA and within the riparian corridor surrounding San Luis Obispo Creek. Direct and indirect effects to CRLF and steelhead individuals would be minimized and/or avoided with implementation of measures described in Chapter 5. 6.2 DETERMINATION Implementation of the proposed action may affect and is likely to adversely affect CRLF. This determination is based on: 1) the presence of suitable aquatic and upland habitat within the BSA for CRLF; 2) permanent and temporary impacts to suitable foraging habitat; and 3) implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures that have been incorporated into the proposed action as conservation measures. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 45 7.0 LIMITATIONS, ASSUMPTIONS, AND USE RELIANCE This BRA has been performed in accordance with professionally accepted biological investigation practices conducted at this time and in this geographic area. The biological investigation is limited by the scope of work performed. Biological surveys for the presence or absence of certain taxa have been conducted as part of this assessment, but were not performed during a particular blooming period, nesting period, or particular portion of the season when positive identification would be expected if present, and therefore, cannot be considered definitive. The biological surveys are limited also by the environmental conditions present at the time of the surveys. In addition, general biological (or protocol) surveys do not guarantee that the organisms are not present and will not be discovered in the future within the site. In particular, mobile wildlife species could occupy the site on a transient basis, or re-establish populations in the future. Our field studies were based on current industry practices, which change over time and may not be applicable in the future. No other guarantees or warranties, expressed or implied, are provided. The findings and opinions conveyed in this report are based on findings derived from site reconnaissance, jurisdictional areas, review of CNDDB RareFind5, and specified historical and literature sources. Standard data sources relied upon during the completion of this report, such as the CNDDB, may vary with regard to accuracy and completeness. In particular, the CNDDB is compiled from research and observations reported to CDFW that may or may not have been the result of comprehensive or site-specific field surveys. Although Rincon believes the data sources are reasonably reliable, Rincon cannot and does not guarantee the authenticity or reliability of the data sources it has used. Additionally, pursuant to our contract, the data sources reviewed included only those that are practically reviewable without the need for extraordinary research and analysis. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 46 8.0 REFERENCES Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, second edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. Bowers, N., R. Bowers, & K. Kaufman. 2004. Mammals of North America. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2010. List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations. Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, Sacramento, CA. September 2010. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2015. Special Animals List. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Natural Diversity Database. January 2011. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2015a. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), Rarefind 5 (online). Commercial Version. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2015b. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). http://bios.dfg.ca.gov California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2015c. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Natural Diversity Database. July 2014. California Native Plant Society. 2015. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. Online Edition, v8- 02. Available at www.rareplants.cnps.org. Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Nongame Heritage Program. 156 pgs. Mayer, K.E. and W.F. Laudenslayer, Jr., editors. 1988. A Guide to the Wildlife Habitats of California. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Sacramento, California. Sawyer, J. O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Stebbins, R. C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. 2nd ed. Houghton-Mifflin Company. Boston, Massachusetts. Suarez, A. V., Richmond, J. Q., & Case, T. J. 2000. Prey selection in horned lizards following the invasion of Argentine ants in southern California. Ecological Applications, 10(3), 711-725. Trenham, P.C. and H.B. Shaffer. 2005. Amphibian upland habitat use and its consequences for population viability. Ecological Applications 15(4): 1158-1168. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 47 U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2001. Final Summary Report: Guidelines for Jurisdictional Determinations for Waters of the United States in the Arid Southwest. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. San Francisco, California. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2004. Review of Ordinary High Water Mark Indicators for Delineating Arid Streams in the Southwest United States. Technical Report ERDC TR-04-1. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, New Hampshire. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2005. Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05-05: Ordinary High Water Mark Identification. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, D.C. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2006. Distribution of Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) Indicators and Their Reliability in Identifying the Limits of “Waters of the United States” in Arid Southwest Channels. Technical Report ERDC/CRREL TR-06-5. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, New Hampshire. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008a. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Technical Report ERDC/EL TR-08-28. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, Mississippi. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008b. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. Technical Report ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, New Hampshire. United States Department of Agricultural, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2015. Web Soil Survey. Soil Data version 8. Available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2014. Lists of Hydric Soils. National Cooperative Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture. March. Accessed via: http://soils.usda.gov/use/hydric/. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1973. The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.). United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Recovery plan for the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii). US Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005. Revised Guidance on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-legged Frog. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015a. Critical Habitat Portal. Available at: http://criticalhabitat.fws.gov Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 48 United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015b. Information, Planning, and Conservation System. Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo 49 9.0 LIST OF PREPARERS RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. Primary Author: o Jamie Deutsch, Associate Biologist Technical Review: o Colby J. Boggs, Principal/Senior Ecologist Graphics: o Katherine Warner, GIS Analyst Reconnaissance Survey: o Colby J. Boggs, Principal/Senior Ecologist o Jamie Deutsch, Associate Biologist Appendix A Regulatory Guidance Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo A-1 REGULATORY SETTING Special-status habitats are vegetation types, associations, or sub-associations that support concentrations of special-status plant or wildlife species, are of relatively limited distribution, or are of particular value to wildlife. Listed species are those taxa that are formally listed as endangered or threatened by the federal government (e.g. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]), pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) or as endangered, threatened, or rare (for plants only) by the State of California (i.e. California Fish and Game Commission), pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act or the California Native Plant Protection Act. Some species are considered rare (but not formally listed) by resource agencies, organizations with biological interests/expertise (e.g. Audubon Society, CNPS, The Wildlife Society), and the scientific community. The following is a brief summary of the regulatory context under which biological resources are managed at the Federal, State, and Local levels. A number of Federal and State statutes provide a regulatory structure that guides the protection of biological resources. Agencies with the responsibility for protection of biological resources within the BSA/action area include: • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (wetlands and other waters of the United States); • Regional Water Quality Control Board (waters of the State); • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Federally listed species and migratory birds); • California Department Fish and Wildlife (riparian areas and other waters of the State, State-listed species); U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Under Section 404 of the CWA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has authority to regulate activities that could discharge fill of material or otherwise adversely modify wetlands or other “waters of the United States.” Perennial and intermittent creeks are considered waters of the United States if they are hydrologically connected to other jurisdictional waters. The USACE also implements the Federal policy embodied in Executive Order 11990, which is intended to result in no net loss of wetland value or acres. In achieving the goals of the CWA, the USACE seeks to avoid adverse impacts and offset unavoidable adverse impacts on existing aquatic resources. Any fill or adverse modification of wetlands that are hydrologically connected to jurisdictional waters would require a permit from the USACE prior to the start of work. Typically, when a project involves impacts to waters of the United States, the goal of no net loss of wetland acres or values is met through compensatory mitigation involving creation or enhancement of similar habitats. Regional Water Quality Control Board. The SWRCB and the local CCRWQCB have jurisdiction over “waters of the State,” pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the State. The SWRCB has issued general (WDRs) regarding discharges to “isolated” waters of the State (Water Quality Order No. 2004-0004-DWQ, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Dredged or Fill Discharges to Waters Deemed by the (USACE)to be outside of Federal jurisdiction). The CCRWQCB enforces actions under this general order for isolated waters not subject to Federal jurisdiction, and is also responsible for Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo A-2 the issuance of water quality certifications pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA for waters subject to Federal jurisdiction. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The USFWS implements the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 United States Code [USC] Section 703-711) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC Section 668). The USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) share responsibility for implementing the (FESA) (16 USC § 153 et seq.). The USFWS generally implements the FESA for terrestrial and freshwater species, while the NMFS implements the FESA for marine and anadramous species. Projects that would result in “take” of any Federally listed threatened or endangered species are required to obtain permits from the USFWS or NMFS through either Section 7 (interagency consultation with a Federal nexus) or Section 10 (Habitat Conservation Plan) of FESA, depending on the involvement by the Federal government in permitting and/or funding of the project. The permitting process is used to determine if a project would jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and what measures would be required to avoid jeopardizing the species. “Take” under Federal definition means to harass, harm (which includes habitat modification), pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. Proposed or candidate species do not have the full protection of FESA; however, the USFWS and NMFS advise project applicants that they could be elevated to listed status at any time. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) derives its authority from the Fish and Game Code of California. The (CESA) (Fish and Game Code Section 2050 et. Seq.) prohibits take of State listed threatened, endangered or fully protected species. Take under CESA is restricted to direct mortality of a listed species and does not prohibit indirect harm by way of habitat modification. The CDFW also prohibits take for species designated as Fully Protected under the Code. California Fish and Game Code sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3511 describe unlawful take, possession, or destruction of birds, nests, and eggs. Fully protected birds (Section 3511) may not be taken or possessed except under specific permit. Section 3503.5 of the Code protects all birds- of-prey and their eggs and nests against take, possession, or destruction of nests or eggs. Species of Special Concern (SSC) is a category used by the CDFW for those species which are considered to be indicators of regional habitat changes or are considered to be potential future protected species. Species of Special Concern do not have any special legal status except that which may be afforded by the Fish and Game Code as noted above. Although being a SSC doesn't provide any special legal status under CDFW regulations, CEQA does require that any special status State or local species be considered in evaluation of impacts. The SSC category is intended by the CDFW for use as a management tool to include these species into special consideration when decisions are made concerning the development of natural lands. The CDFW also has authority to administer the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) (Fish and Game Code Section 1900 et seq.). The NPPA requires the CDFW to establish criteria for determining if a species, subspecies, or variety of native plant is endangered or rare. Under Section 1913(c) of the NPPA, the owner of land where a rare or endangered native plant is growing is required to notify the department at least 10 days in advance of changing the land use to allow for salvage of plant. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo A-3 Perennial and intermittent streams and associated riparian vegetation, when present, also fall under the jurisdiction of the CDFW. Section 1600 et seq. of the Fish and Game Code (Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements) gives the CDFW regulatory authority over work within the stream zone (which could extend to the 100-year flood plain) consisting of, but not limited to, the diversion or obstruction of the natural flow or changes in the channel, bed, or bank of any river, stream or lake. Appendix B Site Photographs Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo B-1 Photo 1. View of bed of San Luis Obispo Creek. The photo was taken facing southwest. Photo 2. View of bed of San Luis Obispo Creek. The photo was taken facing northeast. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo B-2 Photo 3. View of San Luis Obispo Creek. The photo was taken facing south. Photo 4. View of seasonal wetland vegetation community. The photo was taken facing northeast. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo B-3 Photo 5. View of non-native annual grassland vegetation community. The photo was taken facing north. Photo 6. View of groves and screens vegetation community. The photo was taken facing west. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo B-4 Photo 7. View of groves and screens vegetation community. The photo was taken facing northwest. Photo 8. View of larger trees outside the BSA associated with San Luis Creek. The photo was taken facing north. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo B-5 Photo 9. View of sludge drying beds in active facility. The photo was taken facing southeast. Photo 10. View of emergent vegetation in one of the holding ponds. The photo was taken facing south. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo B-6 Photo 11. View of open water in one of the holding ponds. The photo was taken facing south. Appendix C Plant and Animal Species Observed Within the Study Area During Reconnaissance Survey Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo C-1 Appendix C. Plant and Animal Species Observed Within the Study Area During Reconnaissance Survey. Scientific Name Common Name Status1 Origin (Native or Introduced)2 Plants Ferns Equisetum hyemale scouring rush None Native Trees Calocedrus decurrens incense cedar None Native (Planted) Hesperocyparis macrocarpus Monterey cypress None Native (Planted) Juglans californica Southern California black walnut None Native* Olea europaea Olive None Introduced; Cal-IPC – Limited Phoenix canariensis Canary Island date palm None Introduced; Cal-IPC – Limited Pinus sabiniana foothill pine None Native Pinus radiata Monterey pine None Native (Planted) Platanus racemosa California sycamore None Native Populus trichopodus Black cottonwood None Native Quercus agrifolia var. agrifolia Coast live oak None Native Salix laevigata red willow None Native Sequoia sempervirens coast redwood None Native (Planted) Shrubs Acacia redolens bank catclaw None Introduced Baccharis pilularis coyote brush None Native Nerium oleander Oleander None Introduced; Rubus ursinus blackberry None Native Salix lasiolepis arroyo willow None Native Sambucus nigra elderberry None Native Herbs Brassica nigra black mustard None Introduced; Cal-I–C - Moderate Anthriscus caucalis Bur chevril None Introduced Cardamine oligosperma Bitter cress None Native Carex spissa San Diego sedge None Native Centaurea solstitialis yellow star thistle None Introduced, Cal-IPC High Conium maculatum poison hemlock None Introduced; Cal-IPC - Moderate Cyperus eragrostis flat sedge None Native Cyperus involucratus umbrella sedge None Introduced Helminthotheca echioides bristly ox-tongue None Introduced; Cal-I–C - Limited Helenium puberulum sneezeweed None Native Hirschfeldia incana perennial mustard None Introduced, Cal-IPC Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo C-2 Appendix C. Plant and Animal Species Observed Within the Study Area During Reconnaissance Survey. Scientific Name Common Name Status1 Origin (Native or Introduced)2 Moderate Hordeum murinum Wall barley None Introduced, Cal-IPC Moderate Juncus sp. rush None Native Juncus textilis basket rush None Native Malva nicaeensis bull mallow None Introduced Melilotus albus white sweetclover None Introduced; Persicaria sp. smartweed None Native Plantago major common plantain None Introduced; Polygonum aviculare common knot weed None Introduced Rumex sp. dock None Schoenoplectus californicus California bulrush None Native Tropaeolum majus garden nasturtium None Introduced Typha sp. cattail None Native Grasses Avena barbata slender wild oats None Introduced; Cal-IPC - Moderate Polypogon monspeliensis rabbitsfoot grass None Introduced; Cal-IPC - Limited Stipa miliacea smilo grass None Introduced; Cal-IPC - Limited Wildlife Agelaius phoeniceus Red-winged blackbird None Native Anas platyrhynchos mallard None Native Aphelocoma californica Western scrub jay None Native Carpodacus mexicanus house finch None Native Cathartes aura Turkey vulture None Native Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow None native Larus californicus California gull None native Otospermphilus beecheyi California ground squirrel None Native Sceloperus occidentalis Western fence lizard None Native Sturnus vulgaris European starling None Non-native Thomomys sp. Gopher (sign) None Native Turdus migratorius American robin None Native Zenaida macroura mourning dove None Native 1CRPR – California Rare Plant Rank, defined in California Native Plant Society Online Inventory and CDFW California Natural Diveristy Database. Ranks are also fully listed and defined in Appendix D. 2Cal-IPC – California Invasive Plant Council Appendix D Special Status Species in the Regional Vicinity of the Project Site Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-1 Appendix D. Special Status Plant Species in the Regional Vicinity of the Project Site Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Natural Communities of Concern Central dune scrub S2.2 A dense coastal scrub community of scattered shrubs, subshrubs, and herbs generally less than 1m tall. Diagnostic species include Ericameria ericoides, Lupinus chamissonis, and Artemisia pycnocephala. None No dune scrub vegetation communities present within the study area. Central foredunes S1.2 Species in this habitat type include Abronia latifolia, ambrosia chamissonis, Elymus mollis, Camissonia cheiranthifolia, and Calystegia soldanella None No central foredune habitat present within the study area. Central maritime chaparral S2.2 A variable sclerophyll scrub of moderate to high cover (50-100%) dominated by forms of Arctostaphylos tomentosa (or A. crustacea) plus one or more other narrowly distributed manzanita. None No chaparral vegetation communities present within the study area. Coastal and valley freshwater marsh S2.1 Dominated by perennial, emergent monocots to 4-5m tall. Often forming completely closed canopies. Scirpus and Typha dominated types and their environmental and floristic distinctions require clarification. Quiet sites (lacking significant current) permanently flooded by fresh water (rather than brackish, alkaline, or variable). Prolonged saturation permits accumulation of deep, peaty soils. None No Coastal and valley freshwater marsh habitat present within the study area. Coastal brackish marsh G2/S2.1 Dominated by species indicative of coastal brackish marsh systems. None No coastal brackish marsh habitat present within the study area Northern coastal salt marsh G3/S3.2 Dominated by species indicative of Northern coastal salt marshes. None No Northern coastal salt marsh habitat present within the study area Northern interior cypress forest G2/S2.2 Dominated by species indicative of northern interior cypress forests. None No Northern interior cypress forest present within the study area Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-2 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Valley needlegrass grassland S3.1 Mid-height (up to 2 feet) grassland dominated by perennial, tussock-forming Stipa pulchra. Native and introduced annuals occur between the perennials, often actually exceeding the bunchgrasses in cover. None No valley needlegrass grassland present within the study area. Plants Abronia maritima Red sand-verbena -- / -- 4.2 G4 / S3S4 Perennial herb. Blooms Feb-Nov. Coastal dunes. Formerly fairly widespread, but habitat has shrunk, especially in Southern California. Elevations under 100m (330ft). None Suitable coastal dunes are not present in the BSA, and the species was not present during appropriately timed surveys. Agrostis hooveri Hoover's bent grass -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial herb. Blooms Apr-Jul. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, closed cone coniferous forest, valley and foothill grassland. Sandy sites. Elevations 60-610m (195-2000ft). None Suitable sandy sites not present within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Arctostaphylos cruzensis Arroyo de la Cruz manzanita -- / -- 1B.2 G3 / S3 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Dec-Mar. Broadleaved upland forest, coastal bluff scrub, closed- cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal scrub, and grassland. On sandy soils in several different habitat types from chaparral to coastal scrub to woodland. Elevations 60-310m (195-1015ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Arctostaphylos luciana Santa Lucia manzanita -- / -- 1B.2 G3/ S3 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Dec-Mar. Chaparral. On shale outcrops, on slopes, in chaparral. Elevations 350-850m (1150-2790ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Arctostaphylos morroensis Morro manzanita FT / -- 1B.1 G2 / S2 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Dec-Mar. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal dunes (pre-Flandrian), coastal scrub. On Baywood sands usually with chaparral associates. Elevations 5-205m (15-670ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-3 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Arctostaphylos obispoensis Bishop manzanita -- / -- 4.3 G4 / S4 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Feb –June. Serpentinite, rocky, closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland. Elevations 150-1025. None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Arctostaphylos osoensis Oso manzanita --/ -- 1B.2 G1 / S1 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Feb-Mar. Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Usually occurs in openings w/in oak woodland on dacite porphyry buttes. Elevations 180-275m (590-900ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Arctostaphylos pechoensis Pecho manzanita -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Dec-Mar. Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal scrub. Grows on siliceous shale with other chaparral associates. Elevations 150-850m (490-2790ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Arctostaphylos pilosula Santa Margarita manzanita -- / -- 1B.2 G3/ S3 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Dec-May. Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral. Shale outcrops and slopes; reported growing on decomposed granite or sandstone in SLO. Elevations 170-1100m (560- 3610ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Arctostaphylos rudis Sand Mesa manzanita --/ -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Nov-Feb. Chaparral, coastal scrub. On sandy soils in Lompoc/Nipomo area. Elevations 25-230m (80-755ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Arctostaphylos tomentosa ssp. daciticola Dacite manzanita --/ -- 1B.1 G4T1 / S1 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Mar-May. Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Only known from one site in SLO County on dacite porphyry buttes. Elevation about 120m (395ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Arenaria paludicola Marsh sandwort FE / SE 1B.1 G1 / S1 Perennial stoloniferous herb. Blooms May-Aug. Marshes and swamps. Growing up through dense mats of Typha, Juncus, Scirpus, etc. in freshwater marsh. Elevations 10-170m (33-560ft). None Not documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA and no suitable habitat present within the BSA. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-4 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Aspidotis carlotta-halliae Carlotta Hall's lace fern -- / -- 4.2 G3 / S3 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Bloom Jan-Dec. usually serpentine, chaparral, cismontane woodland. Elevations 100-1400m. None Suitable serpentine chaparral is not present in the BSA, and the species was not present during appropriately timed surveys. Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus Miles' milk-vetch -- / -- 1B.2 G5T2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Mar-Jun. Coastal scrub. Clay soils. Elevations 20-90m (65-295ft). Low Has a low potential to occur within the grassland and coastal scrub habitat within the BSA. Astragalus nuttallii var. nuttallii ocean bluff milk- vetch -- / -- 4.2 G4T4 / S4 Perennial herb. Blooms Jan-November. Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes. Elevations 3-120 meters. None Suitable coastal bluff scrub and coastal dunes are not present in the BSA, and the species was not present during appropriately timed surveys. Atriplex coulteri Coulter's saltbush -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial herb. Blooms Mar-Oct. Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Ocean bluffs, ridgetops, as well as alkaline low places. Elevations 10-440m (30-1445ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Atriplex joaquiniana San Joaquin spear scale -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms April-October. Alkaline, chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas, valley and foothill grassland. Elevations 1-835 m. None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Bryoria spiralifera twisted horsehair lichen -- / -- 1B.2 G3 / S1S2 Fruticose lichen (epiphytic). Usually on conifers. North Coast coniferous forest (immediate coast). Elevations 0-30m. None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Calandrinia breweri Brewer's calandrinia -- / -- 4.2 G4 / S34 Annual herb. Blooms Mar-Jun. Chaparral, coastal scrub. Sandy or loamy soils. Disturbed sites, burns. Elevations 150-1200m (490-3940ft). None Not observed within 5-miles of the BSA. No suitable habitat within the BSA. California macrophylla Round-leaved filaree -- / -- 1B.1 G2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Mar-May. Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Clay soils. Elevations 15-1200m (50-3935ft). None Suitable habitat and soils are not present within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-5 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Calochortus catalinae Catalina mariposa-lily -- / -- 4.2 G3 / S3.2 Perennial bulbiferous herb. Blooms Feb-Jun. Valley and foothill grassland, chaparral, coastal scrub, cismontane woodland. In heavy soils, open slopes, openings in brush. Elevations 30-700m (100-2295ft). None Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Calochortus clavatus var. clavatus Club-haired mariposa-lily -- / -- 4.3 G4T3 / S3 Perennial bulbiferous herb. Blooms May-Jun. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Generally on serpentine clay, rocky soils. Elevations 75-1300m (245-4265ft). Low Has a low potential to occur around patch of coastal scrub and around grassland within BSA. Calochortus obispoensis San Luis mariposa- lily -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / C126 Perennial bulbiferous herb. Blooms May-Jul. Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Often in serpentine grassland. Elevations 75-665m (245-2180ft). Low Has a low potential to occur around patch of coastal scrub and around grassland within BSA. Species has been documented by CNDDB within 1 mile of the BSA. Calochortus simulans La Panza mariposa-lily -- / -- 1B.3 G2 / S2 Perennial bulbiferous herb. Blooms Apr-Jun. Valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland, chaparral. Decomposed granite. Elevations 395-1100m (1295- 3610ft). None Suitable decomposed granite not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. BSA is below elevation range for this species. Calycadenia villosa Dwarf calycadenia -- / -- 1B.1 G3 / S3 Annual herb. Blooms May-Oct. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland, meadows and seeps. Open, dry meadows, hillsides, gravelly outwashes. Elevations 240-1350m (785-4430ft). None Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. BSA is below elevation range for this species. Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis Cambria morning-glory -- / -- 4.2 G3T3 / S3 Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Elevations 60-500m (200-1640ft). Low BSA is below elevation range for this species. Suitable habitat is not present in the BSA and the species was not observed during surveys. Camissoniopsis hardhamiae Hardham's evening-primrose -- / -- 1B.2 G1Q / S1 Annual herb. Blooms Mar-May. Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Decomposed carbonate. Elevations 330-500m (1080-1640ft). None BSA is below elevation range for this species. Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5-miles of the BSA. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-6 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Carex obispoensis San Luis Obispo sedge -- / -- 1B.2 G2G3 / S2S3 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms Apr-Jun. Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal prairie, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Usually in transition zone on sand, clay, or serpentine; in seeps. Elevations 5-790m (15- 2590ft). None Not known to occur in immediate vicinity of BSA. Not expected to occur. Castilleja densiflora var. obispoensis San Luis Obispo owl's clover -- / -- 1B.2 G5T2 / S2 Annual herb (hemi parasitic). Blooms Mar-May. Valley and foothill grassland. Elevations 10-215m (30- 705ft). Low Has a low chance to occur within grassland habitat within BSA. Species has been documented by CNDDB within 1 mile of the BSA. Caulanthus californicus California jewelflower FE / CE 1B.1 G1 / S1 Annual herb. Blooms Fe-May. Sandy. Chenopod scrub, pinyon and juniper woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Elevations 61-1000m. None No Suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Ceanothus cuneatus var. fascicularis Lompoc ceanothus -- / -- 4.2 G5T4 / S4 Perennial evergreen shrub Chaparral (sandy). Blooms Feb-April. Elevations 5-400 m. None No suitable habitat for this species occurs within the BSA. Ceanothus rigidus Monterey ceanothus -- / -- 4.2 G4 / S34 Perennial evergreen shrub. Bloom Feb-June. Sandy, closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal scrub. Elevations 3-550m. None Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5- miles of the BSA, not expected to occur. Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii Congdon's tarplant -- / -- 1B.1 G3T2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms May-Nov. Valley and foothill grassland. Alkaline soils, sometimes described as heavy clay. Elevations 1-230m (3-755ft). Low Has a low potential to occur in non-native annual grassland. Species has been documented by CNDDB within 1 mile of the BSA. Cercocarpus betuloides var. blancheae Island mountain- mahogany -- / -- 4.3 G5T4 /S4 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Feb-May. Chaparral. Elevations 40-600m (130-1970ft). None Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5- miles of the BSA, not expected to occur. Chenopodium littoreum coastal goosefoot -- / -- 1B.2 G2 /S2 Annual herb. Blooms April-August. Coastal dunes. Elevations 10-30m. None No coastal dunes occur within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Chlorogalum pomeridianum var. minus Dwarf soaproot -- / -- 1B.2 G5T2 / S2 Perennial bulbiferous herb. Blooms May-Aug. Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland. Serpentine. Elevations 240-970m (785-3180ft). None No serpentine sites within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-7 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Chloropyron maritimum ssp. maritimum Salt marsh bird's-beak FE / SE 1B.2 G4?T1 / S1 Annual herb (hemiparasitic). Blooms May-Oct. Coastal salt marsh, coastal dunes. Limited to the higher zones of the salt marsh habitat. Elevations 0-30m (0-100ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Chorizanthe breweri Brewer's spineflower -- / -- 1B.3 G2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Apr-Aug. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, closed-cone coniferous forest. Rocky or gravelly serpentine sites; usually in barren areas. Elevations 45-800m (150- 2625ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Chorizanthe rectispina Straight-awned spineflower -- / -- 1B.3 G1 / S1 Annual herb. Blooms Apr-Jul. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub. Often on granite in chaparral. Elevations 85-1035m (280-3395ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Chorizanthe douglasii Douglas' spineflower -- / -- 4.3 G4 / S4 Annual herb. Blooms April-July. Sandy or gravelly, Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, lower montane coniferous forest, valley and foothill grassland. Elevations 55-1600m. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Chorizanthe leptotheca Peninsular spineflower -- / -- 4.2 G3 / S3 Annual herb. Blooms May-August. Alluvial fan, granitic, chaparral, coastal scrub, lower montane coniferous forest. Elevations 300- 1900m. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Chorizanthe palmeri Palmer's spineflower -- / -- 4.2 G4 / S4 Annual herb. Blooms April-August. Rocky, serpentine, chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Elevations 60-945m. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Chorizanthe ventricosa Potbellied spineflower -- / -- 4.3 G4 / S4 Annual herb. Blooms May-Sep. Cismontane woodland. Valley and foothill grassland. Serpentine. Elevations 65-1235m None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-8 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense Chorro Creek Bog thistle FE / SE 1B.2 G2T2 / S2 Perennial herb. Blooms Feb-Sep. Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Serpentine seeps. Elevations 35-365m (115-120ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Cirsium occidentale var. lucianum Cuesta Ridge thistle -- / -- 1B.2 G3G4T2 / S2 Perennial herb. Blooms April-June. Serpentine. Often steep rocky slopes and disturbed roadsides, chaparral (openings). Elevations 500-700m. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Cirsium rhothophilum Surf thistle -- / ST 1B.2 G1/S1 Perennial herb. Blooms Apr-Jun. Coastal dunes, coastal bluff scrub. Open areas in central dune scrub; usually in coastal dunes. Elevations 3-60m (10-195ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Cirsium scariosum var. loncholepis La Graciosa thistle FE / ST 1B.1 G5T1 / S1 Perennial herb. Blooms May-Aug. Coastal dunes, brackish marshes, riparian scrub, valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland. Lake edges, riverbanks, other wetlands; often in dune areas. Mesic, sandy sites. Elevations 4-220 m (15-720ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Cladonia firma Firm cup lichen --/ -- 2B.1 G4/S1 Maritime habitats in Europe and North America. Stabilized sand dunes on the coast. On soil and detritus on stabilized sand dunes, in pure stands or intermixed with other lichens and mosses forming biotic soil crusts, covering areas up to several meters. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Clarkia exilis Slender clarkia --/ -- 4.3 G4/S4 Annual herb. Blooms April-May. Cismontane woodland. Elevations 120-1000m. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata Pismo clarkia FE / SR 1B.1 G4 / S4 Annual herb. Blooms May-Jul. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. On ancient sand dunes not far from the coast. Sandy soils, openings. Elevations 25-185m (80-605ft). None Species is not historically known to occur near the BSA. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-9 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Clinopodium mimuloides monkey-flower savory -- / -- 4.2 G3 / S4 Perennial herb. Blooms June- October. Streambanks, mesic, chaparral, North Coast coniferous forest. Elevations 305-1800. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. Maritimus Salt Marsh bird’s beak FE/SE 1B.2 Annual herb (hemiparasitic). Blooms May-October. Coastal dunes, marshes and swamps (coastal salt). Elevations 0-30m. None No Coastal dunes, marshes and swamps (coastal salt) within the BSA. Species was not observed within the BSA during the appropriately times survey. Not expected to occur. Deinandra paniculata Paniculate tarplant -- / -- 4.2 G4 / S4 Annual herb. Blooms April-November. Usually vernally mesic, sometimes sandy, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools. Elevations 25-940m. None Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5- miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Delphinium parryi ssp. blochmaniae Dune larkspur -- / -- 1B.2 G4T2 / S2 Perennial herb. Blooms Apr-Jun. Chaparral, coastal dunes (maritime). On rocky areas and dunes. Elevations 0-200m (0-655ft). None No coastal dunes within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Delphinium parryi ssp. eastwoodiae Eastwood larkspur -- / -- 1B.2 G4T2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms February-March. Serpentine, coastal, chaparral (openings), valley and foothill grassland. Elevations 75-500m. None No serpentine within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Delphinium umbraculorum Umbrella larkspur -- / -- 1B.3 G3 / S3 Perennial herb. Blooms Apr-Jun. Cismontane woodland. Mesic sites. Elevations 400-1600m (1310-5250ft). None BSA is outside of the known elevation range for this species. Dithyrea maritima Beach spectaclepod -- / ST 1B.1 G2 / S1 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms Mar-May. Coastal dunes, coastal scrub. Formerly more widespread in coastal habitats in So. Calif. Sea shores, on sand dunes, and sandy places near the shore. Elevations 3-50m (10-165ft). None BSA is outside known range for this species. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-10 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Dudleya abramsii ssp. bettinae Betty's dudleya -- / -- 1B.2 G3T1 / S1 Perennial herb. Blooms May-Jul. Coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, chaparral. On rocky, barren exposures of serpentine within scrub vegetation. Elevations 20-180 m (65-590ft). None No rocky, barren exposures of serpentine occur within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Dudleya abramsii ssp. murina Mouse-gray dudleya -- / -- 1B.3 G3T2 / S2 Perennial leaf succulent. Blooms May-Jun. Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Serpentine outcrops. Elevations 90-300m (295-985ft). None No serpentine outcrops occur within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae Blochman's dudleya -- / -- 1B.1 G2T2 / S2 Perennial herb. Blooms Apr-June. Coastal scrub, coastal bluff scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Open, rocky slopes; often in shallow clays over serpentine or in rocky areas with little soil. Elevations 5-450m (15-1475ft). None BSA does not contain rocky serpentine areas. Not expected to occur. Eleocharis parvula small spikerush -- / -- 4.3 G5 / S4 Perennial herb. Blooms April-September. Marshes and swamps. Elevations 1-3020m. None Species has a low potential to occur within the wetland and ponds within the southern half of the BSA. No impacts to potential habitat are expected. Eriastrum luteum Yellow-flowered eriastrum -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms May-Jun. Broadleaved upland forest, cismontane woodland, chaparral. On bare sandy decomposed granite slopes. Elevations 360-1000m (1180-3280ft). None No Suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Erigeron blochmaniae Blochman's leafy daisy -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms Jun-Aug. Coastal dunes. Sand dunes and hills. Elevations 3-185m (9-605ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Eriodictyon altissimum Indian Knob mountainbalm FE / SE 1B.1 G1 / S1 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms Mar-Jun. Chaparral (maritime), cismontane woodland, coastal scrub. Ridges in open, disturbed areas within chaparral on Pismo sandstone. Also occurs on Baywood sands. Elevations 80-270m (260-885ft). None No Pismo sandstone occurs within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-11 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Eriogonum elegans Elegant wild buckwheat -- / -- 4.3 G3 / S3 Annual herb. Blooms May-Nov. Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Usually in sandy or gravelly substrates; often in washes, sometimes roadsides. Elevations 200-1525m (655-5005ft). None Species not observed during appropriately timed survey. BSA is below elevation range for this species. Not expected to occur. Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri Hoover's button-celery -- / -- 1B.1 G5T1 / S1 Annual/perennial herb. Blooms Jul-Aug. Vernal pools. Alkaline depressions, vernal pools, roadside ditches and other wet places near the coast. Elevations 3-45 m (9- 145ft). Low BSA contains areas of moderately suitable habitat for this species. Has a low potential to occur. Erysimum suffrutescens Suffrutescent wallflower -- / -- 4.2 G3 / S3 Perennial herb. Blooms Jan-Jul. Coastal dunes, coastal scrub, coastal bluff scrub. Coastal dunes and bluffs. Elevations 0-150m (0-490ft). None Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Fritillaria agrestis Stinkbells -- / -- 4.2 G3 / S3 Perennial bulbiferous herb. Blooms Mar-Jun. Cismontane woodland, chaparral, valley and foothill grassland. Sometimes on serpentine; mostly found in nonnative or in grassy openings in clay soil. Elevations 10-1555m (30-5100ft). None Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Fritillaria ojaiensis Ojai fritillary -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial bulbiferous herb. Blooms Feb-May. Broadleaved upland forest (mesic), chaparral, lower montane coniferous forest. Rocky sites; one reported as "moist shale talus." Elevations 300-670m (985-2200ft). None No rocky sites occur within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Fritillaria viridea San Benito fritillary -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial bulbiferous herb. Blooms Mar-May. Chaparral. Serpentine slopes. Elevations 200-1525m (655- 5000ft). None No serpentine sites occur within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Grindelia hirsutula var. maritima San Francisco gumplant -- / -- 3.2 G5T1Q / S1 Perennial herb. Blooms Jun-Sep. Coastal scrub, coastal bluff scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Sandy or serpentine slopes, sea bluffs. Elevations 15-400m (50-1310ft). None Species is not known to occur in the region. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-12 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Horkelia cuneata var. puberula Mesa horkelia -- / -- 1B.1 G4T1 / S1 Perennial herb. Blooms Feb-Sept. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub. Sandy or gravelly sites. Elevations 70-810m (230- 2655ft). None Species not known to occur in direct vicinity of BSA. BSA lacks sandy and gravelly soils. Not expected to occur. Horkelia cuneata var. sericea Kellogg's horkelia -- / -- 1B.1 G4T2 / S2? Perennial herb. Blooms Apr-Sep. Closed-cone coniferous forest, coastal scrub, coastal dunes, chaparral. Old dunes, coastal sandhills; openings. Elevations 10-200m (30-655ft). None BSA does not contain suitable habitat for this species and it has not been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields -- / -- 1B.1 G4T2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Feb-Jun. Coastal salt marshes, playas, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools. Usually found on alkaline soils in playas, sinks, and grasslands. Elevations 1-1400m (3-4595ft). None BSA lacks alkaline soils. Not expected to occur. Layia heterotricha Pale-yellow layia -- / -- 1B.1 G2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Mar-Jun. Cismontane woodland, pinyon-juniper woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Alkaline or clay soils; open areas. Elevations 270-1365m (885-4480ft). None BSA lacks alkaline and clay soils. Not expected to occur. Layia jonesii Jones' layia -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Mar-May. Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland. Clay soils and serpentine outcrops. Elevations 5-400 m (15- 1310ft). None BSA lacks clay soils. Not expected to occur. Lomatium parvifolium small leaved lomatium -- / -- 4.2 G4 / S4 Perennial herb. Blooms January-June. Serpentine, Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal scrub, riparian woodland. Elevations 20-700m. None No serpentine occurs within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Lupinus ludovicianus San Luis Obispo County lupine -- / -- 1B.2 G1 / S1 Perennial herb. Blooms Apr-Jul. Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Open areas in sandy soil, Santa Margarita formation. Elevations 50-525m (165-1720ft). None Santa Margarita formation absent from the BSA. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-13 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Lupinus nipomensis Nipomo Mesa lupine FE / SE 1B.1 G1 / S1 Annual herb. Blooms Dec-May. Coastal dunes. Dry sandy flats, restricted to back dunes, assoc. with central dune scrub habitat - a rare community type. Elevations 10-50m (30-165ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Malacothamnus gracilis Davidson's bush-mallow -- / -- 1B.1 G1Q / S1 Perennial deciduous shrub. Blooms May-Oct. Usually rocky chaparral. Dry, rocky slopes. Elevations 190-575 m. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Malacothamnus jonesii Jones' bush-mallow -- / -- 1B.1 G1Q / S1 Perennial herb. Blooms March-Oct. Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Elevations 160-1075m. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Malacothamnus palmeri var. involucratus Carmel Valley bush-mallow -- / -- 1B.2 G3T3Q / S3 Perennial deciduous shrub. Blooms May-Oct. Cismontane woodland, chaparral. Talus hilltops and slopes, sometimes on serpentine. Burn dependent. Elevations 30-1100m (100-3610ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Malacothamnus palmeri var. palmeri Santa Lucia bush-mallow -- / -- 1B.2 G3T2Q / S2 Perennial deciduous shrub. Blooms May-Jul. Chaparral. Dry rocky slopes, mostly near summits, but occasionally extending down canyons to the sea. Elevations 60- 365m (200-1200ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Monardella palmeri Palmer's monardella -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms Jun-Aug. Cismontane woodland, chaparral. On serpentine, often found associated with Sargent cypress forests. Elevations 200-800m (655-2625ft). None No serpentine sites occur within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Monardella sinuata ssp. sinuata southern curly- leaved monardella --/ -- 1B.2 G3T2/S2 Coastal dunes, coastal scrub, chaparral, cismontane woodlands. Sandy soils. Elevations 0-300 m. None BSA lacks suitable sandy soils for this species. Not expected to occur. Monardella undulata ssp. crispa Crisp monardella -- / -- 1B.2 G3T2 / S2 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms Apr-Aug. Coastal dunes, coastal scrub. Often on the borders of open, sand areas, usually adjacent to typical backdune scrub vegetation. Elevations 5-120m (15-395ft). None Species limited to the immediate coast and not documented within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-14 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Monardella undulata ssp. undulata San Luis Obispo monardella -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms May-Sep. Coastal dunes, coastal scrub. Stabilized sand of the immediate coast. Elevations 10- 100m (30-330ft). None Limited to the immediate coast. Not expected to occur. Monolopia gracilens Woodland woollythreads -- / -- 1B.2 G2G3 / S2S3 Annual herb. Blooms Feb-Jul. Chaparral, valley and foothill grasslands (serpentine), cismontane woodland, broadleafed upland forests, north coast coniferous forest. Grassy sites, in openings; sandy to rocky soils. Often seen on serpentine after burns but may have only weak affinity to serpentine. Elevations 100-1200m (330-3940ft). None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Mucronea californica California spineflower -- / -- 4.2 G3 / S3 Annual herb. Blooms Mar-Aug. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Sandy soil. Elevations 0-1400m (0-4595ft). None Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Nasturtium gambelii Gambel's water cress FE / ST 1B.1 G1 / S1 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms Apr-Oct. Marshes and swamps. Freshwater and brackish marshes at the margins of lakes and along streams, in or just above the water level. Elevations 5-330 m (15-1080ft). None Not documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. No lakes, streams, marshes, or swamps within the BSA. Species was not observed within the BSA during the appropriately timed survey. Not expected to occur. Navarretia fossalis Spreading navarretia FT / -- 1B.1 G1 / S1 Annual herb. Blooms Apr-Jun. Vernal pools, chenopod scrub, marshes and swamps, playas. San Diego hardpan and San Diego claypan vernal pools; in swales and V.P's, often surr. by other habitat types. Elevations 30-665m (100-2180ft). None Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-15 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radians Shining navarretia -- / -- 1B.2 G4T2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Apr-Jul. Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools. Apparently in grassland, and not necessarily in vernal pools. Elevations 200-1000m (655-3280ft). None BSA is outside the known elevation range for this species. Not expected to occur. Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata Coast woolly-heads -- / -- 1B.2 G3G4T2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Apr-Sept. Coast dunes. Elevations 0-100m (0-330ft). None Species is limited to the immediate coast. Not expected to occur. Nemacladus secundiflorus var. secundiflorus Large-flowered nemacladus -- / -- 4.3 G3T3 / S3 Annual herb. Blooms Apr-Jun. Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland. Dry, sandy to gravelly flats and slopes. Elevations 200-2000m (655-6560ft). None BSA is outside the known elevation range for this species. Not expected to occur. Orobanche parishii ssp. brachyloba Short-lobed broomrape -- / -- 4.2 G4?T4 / S3 Perennial herb (parasitic). Blooms Apr-Oct. Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, coastal scrub. Sandy soil near beaches; reported to grow on Haplopappus, Atriplex californica. Elevations 3-170m (9-560ft). None Species is limited to the immediate coast. Not expected to occur. Perideridia pringlei adobe yampah -- / -- 4.3 G4 / S4 Perennial herb, Blooms June- August. Lower montane coniferous forest, meadows and seeps, upper montane coniferous forest. Elevations 1465-3000 meters None BSA is outside the known elevation range for this species. Not expected to occur. Piperia michaelii Michael's rein orchid -- / -- 4.2 G3 / S3 Perennial herb. Blooms Apr-Aug. Coastal bluff scrub, cismontane woodland, closed-cone coniferous forest, coastal scrub, lower montane coniferous forest. Mudstone and humus, generally dry sites. Elevations 3-915m (9-3000ft). None BSA does not contain suitable habitat for this species, not expected to occur. Plagiobothrys torreyi var.perplexans chaparral popcornflower -- / -- 4.3 G4T3 / S3 Annual herb. Blooms April-Sept. Burned areas, igneous soils. Chaparral, lower montane coniferous forest, meadows and seeps, upper montane coniferous forest. Elevations 1070-2745m None BSA does not contain suitable habitat for this species, not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-16 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Plagiobothrys uncinatus Hooked popcornflower --/ -- 1B.2 G2/S2 Annual herb. Blooms Apr-May. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Sandstone outcrops and canyon sides; often in burned or disturbed areas. Elevations 300-760m (985-2495ft). None BSA is outside known elevation range for this species. Not expected to occur. Poa diaboli diablo Canyon bluegrass -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms March-April. Shale; sometimes burned areas. Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral (mesic), cismontane woodland, coastal scrub. Elevations 120-400m. None No suitable habitat for this species occurs within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Sanicula hoffmannii Hoffmann's sanicle -- / -- 4.3 G3 / S3 Perennial herb. Blooms March-May. Often serpentine or clay. Broadleaved upland forest, coastal bluff scrub, chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, Lower montane coniferous forest. Elevations 30- 300m. None No serpentine or clay soils within the BSA, not expected to occur. Sanicula maritima Adobe sanicle -- / SR 1B.1 G2 / S2 Perennial herb. Blooms Feb-May. Meadows and seeps, valley and foothill grassland, chaparral, coastal prairie. Moist clay or ultramafic soils. Elevations 30-240m (100-790ft). Low Portions of the BSA contain suitable habitat for this species. Has a low potential to occur. Scrophularia atrata Black-flowered figwort -- / -- 1B.2 G2G3 / S2S3 Perennial herb. Blooms Mar-Jul. Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, riparian scrub. Sand, diatomaceous shales, and soils derived from other parent material; around swales and in sand dunes. Elevations 10-250m (30-820ft). None BSA does not contain suitable habitat for this species. Not expected to occur. Scutellaria lateriflora Side-flowering skullcap -- / -- 2B.2 G5 / S1 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms Jul-Sep. Meadows and seeps, marshes and swamps. Wet meadows and marshes. In the Delta, often found on logs. Elevations 3-500m (-9-1640ft). None Species is not known to occur within the area. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-17 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Sedum obtusatum ssp. paradisum Canyon Creek stonecrop -- / -- 1B.3 G4G5T2 / S2 Chaparral, lower montane coniferous forest, subalpine coniferous forest, broadleaved upland forest. Rock faces, in crevices of exposed granite. Elevations 300-1900m (984-6233ft). None No suitable habitat and BSA is outside known elevation range for this species. Senecio aphanactis Chaparral ragwort -- / -- 2B.2 G3? / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Jan-Apr. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub. Drying alkaline flats. Elevations 15-800m (50-2625ft). None Species is limited to dry alkaline site. BSA does not contain suitable habitat for this species. Senecio astephanus San Gabriel ragwort -- / -- 4.3 G3 / S3 Perennial herb. Blooms May-July. Rocky slopes. Coastal bluff scrub, chaparral Elevations 400-1500m. None No suitable habitat and BSA is outside known elevation range for this species. Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. anomala Cuesta Pass checkerbloom -- / -- 1B.2 G3T1 /S1 Perennial herb. Blooms May-Jun. Closed-cone coniferous forest. Rocky serpentine soil; associated with Sargent cypress forest. Elevations 600-800m (1970-2625ft). None No rocky serpentine occurs within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Solidago guiradonis Guirado's goldenrod -- / -- 4.3 G3G4 / S3S4 Perennial rhizomatic herb. Blooms Sept-Oct. Serpentine seeps, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Elevations 600-1370m. None No suitable habitat and BSA is outside known elevation range for this species. Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus Most beautiful jewel-flower -- / -- 1B.2 G2T2 / S2.2 Annual herb. Blooms Mar-Oct. Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland. Serpentine outcrops, on ridges and slopes. Elevations 120-730m (395- 2395ft). None No serpentine outcrops or ridgetops occur within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Suaeda californica California seablite FE / -- 1B.1 G1/S1 Perennial evergreen shrub. Blooms July-October. Found on the margins of coastal salt marshes and swamps. Elevations 0-15 meters (0- 50 feet). None No suitable habitat for this species occurs within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Sulcaria isidiifera Splitting yarn lichen -- / -- -- G1 / S1 Chaparral, cismontane woodland. On branches of oaks and shrubs. Elevations 20-30m (65-100ft). None No suitable habitat for this species occurs within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Biological Resources Assessment/Biological Assessment City of San Luis Obispo D-18 Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CRPR Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Symphyotrichum defoliatum San Bernardino aster -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Perennial rhizomatous herb. Blooms Jul-Nov. Meadows and seeps, marshes and swamps, coastal scrub, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest, grassland. Vernally mesic grassland or near ditches, streams and springs; disturbed areas. Elevations 2-2040m (6-6695ft). None Not document by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Not observed during appropriately timed surveys. Not expected to occur. Trifolium hydrophilum Saline clover -- / -- 1B.2 G2 / S2 Annual herb. Blooms Apr-Jun. Marshes and swamps, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools. Mesic, alkaline sites. Elevations 0-300m (0-985ft). None No alkaline sites occur within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Tropidocarpum capparideum Caper-fruited tropidocarpum -- / -- 1B.1 G1 / S1 Annual herb. Blooms Mar-Apr. Valley and foothill grassland. Alkaline clay. Elevations 1-455m (3-1495ft). None No alkaline sites occur within the BSA. Not expected to occur. Sources: CNDDB (CDFW, 2015); USFWS IPaC (2015), CDFW Special Plants List (2013), and CNPS Rare Plant Inventory (2015). *Vicinity refers to the quads where 2040 RTP-SCS transportation projects are located, as well as adjacent quads. FE = Federally Endangered FT = Federally Threatened DL = Delisted SE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened SR = State Rare G-Rank/S-Rank = Global Rank and State Rank as per NatureServe and CDFW’s CNDDB RareFind3. CRPR (California Rare Plant Rank): 1A=Presumed Extinct in California 1B=Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere 2=Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere 3=Need more information (a Review List) 4=Plants of Limited Distribution (a Watch List) CRPR Threat Code Extension: .1=Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat) .2=Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened) .3=Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened) Appendix D. Special Status Animal Species in the Regional Vicinity of the Project Site Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Mammals Antrozous pallidus Pallid bat --/-- G5/S3 SSC Deserts, grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, and forest. Most common in open, dry, habitats with rocky area for roosting. Roost must protect bats from high temperatures. Very sensitive to disturbance of roosting sites. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Corynorhinus townsendii Townsend's big-eared bat --/Candidate G3G4/S2 SSC Throughout California in a wide variety of habitats. Most common in mesic sites. Roosts in the open, hanging from walls & ceilings. Roosting sites limiting. Extremely sensitive to human disturbance. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Dipodomys heermanni morroensis Morro Bay kangaroo rat FE/SE G3G4TH3/SH SSC Coastal sage scrub on the south side of Morro Bay. Needs sandy soil, but not active dunes, prefers early seral stages. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Dipodomys ingens Giant Kangaroo rat FE / SE -- G1G2 /G1 S2 Annual grasslands on the western side of the San Joaquin Valley, marginal habitat in alkali scrub. Need level terrain and sandy loam soils for burrowing. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Enhydra lutrisnereis Southern Sea otter FT / -- FP G4T2 / S2 Nearshore marine environments from about Ano Nuevo, San Mateo co. to Point Sal, Santa Barbara Co. Needs canopies of giant kelp and bull kelp for rafting and feeding. Prefers rocky substrates with abundant invertebrates. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Eumops perotis californicus western mastiff bat --/-- G5T4/S3S4 SSC Many open, semi-arid to arid habitats, including conifer & deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, chaparral etc. Roosts in crevices in cliff faces, high buildings, trees & tunnels. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Neotoma lepida intermedia San Diego desert woodrat --/-- G5T3T4/S3S4 SSC Coastal scrub of Southern California from San Diego County to San Luis Obispo County. Moderate to dense canopies preferred. They are particularly abundant in rock outcrops & rocky cliffs & slopes. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Nyctinomops macrotis big free-tailed bat --/-- G5/S3 SSC Low-lying arid areas in Southern California. Need high cliffs or rocky outcrops for roosting sites. Feeds principally on large moths. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Taxidea taxus American badger --/-- G5/S3 SSC Most abundant in drier open stages of most shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats with friable soils. Needs sufficient food, friable soils, and open uncultivated ground. Cannot live in frequently plowed fields. Preys on burrowing rodents. None No burrows or individuals were observed during the field survey. Grassland is frequently mowed and not suitable for burrowing. Species is not expected to occur. Vulpes macrotis mutica San Joaquin Kit Fox FE/ST G4T2/S2 -- Occurs in annual grasslands or open stages with scattered shrubby vegetation. Requires loose sandy textured soils for burrowing. None No CNDDB documented occurrences within 5 miles of the BSA, no SJKF or associated burrows were observed within the BSA during the survey. Not expected to occur. Fish Eucyclogoblius newberryi Tidewater goby FE/-- G3/S3 SSC Brackish water habitats along the Calif coast from Agua Hedionda Lagoon, San Diego Co. to the mouth of the Smith River. Found in shallow lagoons and lower stream reaches, they need fairly still but not stagnant water & high oxygen levels. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus Steelhead – Central Valley DPS FT/-- G5T2Q/S2 -- Fresh water, fast flowing, highly oxygenated, clear, cool stream where riffles tend to predominate pools; small streams with high elevation headwaters close to the ocean that have no impassible barriers; spawning: high elevation headwaters. Low Suitable habitat occurs on site; however no construction will occur within the streambed, only the bank. Any impacts would be indirect. Invertebrates Branchinecta lynchi Vernal pool fairy shrimp FT/-- G3/S2S3 -- Endemic to the grasslands of the Central Valley, Central Coast Mountains, and South Coast Mountains. Inhabits, small clear-water sandstone-depression pools and grassed swale, earth slump, or basalt-flow depression pools. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Danaus plexippus pop. 1 monarch - California overwintering population /-- G4T2T3/S2S3 S Winter roost sites extend along the coast from northern Mendocino to Baja California, Mexico. Roosts located in wind-protected tree groves (eucalyptus, Monterey pine, cypress), with nectar and water sources nearby. None Not expected to occur on site. No eucalyptus occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Euproserpine Euterpe Kern Primrose Sphinx moth FT/ -- -- G1 / S1 Found in the Walker basin, Kern county, and several other scattered locations (Carrizo Plain, Pinnacles NM). Host plant is Camissonia contorta epilobiodes (evening primrose). None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Host plant (Camissonia contorta epilobiodes) was not detected on the site. Helminthoglypta walkeriana Morro shoulderband (=banded dune) snail FE/-- G1/S1 Restricted to the coastal strand in the immediate vicinity of Morro Bay. Inhabits the duff beneath Haplopappus, Salvia, Dudleya, and Mesembryanthemum. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Lichnanthe albipilosa white sand bear scarab beetle FE/-- G1/S1 -- Inhabit coastal sand dunes of San Luis Obispo County, in the vicinity of Dune Lakes. Found hovering close to the surface of the dunes near the lake, but some distance from the surf. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Linderiella occidentalis California linderiella --/-- G2G3/S2S3 SSC Seasonal pools in unplowed grasslands with old alluvial soils underlain by hardpan or in sandstone depressions. Water in the pools has very low alkalinity, conductivity, and TDS. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Reptiles Actinemys (=Emys) marmorata Western pond turtle --/-- G3G4/S3 SSC Rivers, ponds, freshwater marshes; nests in upland areas (sandy banks or grassy open fields) up to 1,640 feet from water. Medium Species has been documented within the holding pond in the southern half of the BSA. No impacts to the ponds are expected. The shoreline around the holding ponds and nearby San Luis Creek may provide basking and nesting sites for this species. No observations were made during the field survey. Anniella pulchra nigra Black legless lizard --/-- G3G4T2T3/S2 SSC Sand dunes and sandy soils in the Monterey Bay and Morro Bay regions. Inhabit sandy soil/dune areas with bush lupine and mock heather as dominant plants. Moist soil is essential. None BSA does not contain suitable habitat for this species. Not expected to occur. Anniella pulchra pulchra Silvery legless lizard --/-- G3G4T3T4/S3 SSC Sandy or loose loamy soils under sparse vegetation. Soil moisture is essential. They prefer soils with high moisture content. None Species has not been documented by the CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. BSA does not contain suitable habitat for this species. Not expected to occur. Gambelia silus Blunt-nosed leopard lizard FE / SE FP G1 / S1 Resident of sparsely vegetated alkali and desert scrub habitats, in areas of low topographic relief. Seeks cover in mammal burrows, under shrubs or structures such as fence posts; they do not excavate their own burrows. None Not expected to occur on site. No suitable habitat occurs on site and no observations were made during the survey. Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Phrynosoma blainvillii Blainvilles (=coast) horned lizard --/-- G3G4/S3S4 SSC Frequents a wide variety of habitats including grasslands and shrublands. Most common in lowlands along sandy washes with scattered low bushes. Open areas for sunning, bushes for cover, patches of loose soil for burial and abundant supply of ants and other insects. Low Species has been documented by the CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Has potential to occur within the coastal scrub within the BSA. No suitable habitat is present within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Amphibians Ambystoma californiense California tiger salamander FT/ST G2G3/S2S3 SSC Vernal and seasonal pools and associated grasslands, oak savanna, woodland, and coastal scrub. Needs underground refuges (i.e., small mammal burrows, pipes) in upland areas such as grassland and scrub habitats. None Species has not been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Rana boylii Foothill yellow- legged frog --/-- G3/S2S3 SSC Partly-shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Need at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying. Need at least 15 weeks to attain metamorphosis. None San Luis Creek does not have suitable substrate for this species. Not expected to occur. Rana draytonii California red-legged frog FT/-- G2G3/S2S3 SSC Semi-permanent or permanent water at least 2 feet deep, bordered by emergent or riparian vegetation, and upland grassland, forest or scrub habitats for estivation and dispersal. Medium Species has been documented near the holding ponds in the southern half of the BSA as well as nearby San Luis Creek. BSA contains aquatic and dispersal habitat. Species has potential to occur. Spea hammondii Western spadefoot --/-- G3/S3 SSC Occurs primarily in grassland habitats, but can be found in valley-foothill hardwood woodlands. Vernal pools are essential for breeding and egg-laying. None Species has not been documented within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Taricha torosa Coast Range newt --/-- G4/S4 SSC Occurs in coastal drainages from Mendocino County to San Diego County. Lives in terrestrial habitats & will migrate over 1 km to breed in ponds, reservoirs & slow moving Low Suitable habitat exists within the San Luis Creek riparian corridor. There are no documented occurrences within the BSA; however, portions of the holding ponds may provide suitable breeding habitat for this species. Birds Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperii --/-- G5/S4 WL Woodland, chiefly of open, interrupted or marginal type. Nest sites mainly in riparian growths of deciduous trees, as in canyon bottoms on river flood-plains; also, live oaks. None There are no documented occurrences of this species within 5-miles of the BSA by the CNDDB. Not expected to occur. Accipter striatus sharp-shinned hawk --/-- G5/S4 WL Ponderosa pine, black oak, riparian deciduous, mixed conifer & Jeffrey pine habitats. Prefers riparian. North-facing slopes, with plucking perches are critical requirements. Nests usually within 275 ft of water. None There are no documented occurrences of this species within 5-miles of the BSA by the CNDDB. Not expected to occur. Agelaius tricolor Tricolored blackbird --/SE G2G3/S1S2 SSC Requires open water, protected nesting substrate, and foraging area with insect prey within a few miles of the colony. None There are no documented occurrences by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. No impacts are expected to willows in the wetland and holding ponds. Ammodramus savannarum Grasshopper sparrow --/-- G5/S3 SSC Dense grasslands on rolling hills, lowland plains, in valleys & on hillsides on lower mountain slopes. Favors native grasslands with a mix of grasses, forbs & scattered shrubs. Loosely colonial when nesting. None No habitat exists within the BSA for this species. There are no documented occurrences of this species within 5-miles of the BSA by the CNDDB. Not expected to occur. Aquila chrysaetos Golden eagle --/-- G5/S3 FP Uncommon resident of mountainous and valley-foothill areas; nests on cliff ledges and overhangs or in large trees; forages in open terrain where small rodent prey is seen while soaring high above ground. None There is no suitable nesting or foraging habitat present within the BSA. Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Athene cunicularia Burrowing owl --/-- G4/S3 SSC Burrow sites in open dry annual or perennial grasslands, deserts and scrublands characterized by low growing vegetation. Also inhabits anthropogenic habitats such as campuses, golf courses, cemeteries, airports, and grazed pastures. None Species is not known to occur in this region and it has not been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Brachyramphus marmoratus Marbled murrlet FT / SE -- G3G4 / S1 Feeds near-shore; nests inland along coast from Eureka to Oregon border and from Half Moon Bay to Santa Cruz. Nests in old-growth redwood-dominated forests, up to six miles inland, often in Douglas- fir. None Species is not known to occur in this region and it has not been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Not expected to occur. Buteo regalis Ferruginous hawk --/ST G4/S3S4 WL Open grasslands, sagebrush flats, desert scrub, low foothills and fringes of pinyon and juniper habitats. None BSA may provide marginal foraging habitat for this species. No adequate nesting sites occur within the BSA. Charadrius alexandrines nivosus Western snowy plover FT/-- G3T3/S2 SSC Sandy beaches, salt pond levees & shores of large alkali lakes. Needs sandy, gravelly or friable soils for nesting. None Snowy plovers nest and forage on sandy beaches. There is no suitable sandy beach habitat for snowy plovers in the project site. Coccyzus americanus occidentalis western yellow-billed cuckoo FT/SE G5T3Q/S1 -- Riparian forest nester, along the broad, lower flood-bottoms of larger river systems None No suitable habitat for this species within the BSA. Moderately suitable habitat nearby in the San Luis Creek riparian corridor. Elanus leucurus White-tailed kite --/-- G5/S3S4 FP Occurs throughout most of California’s coastal and valley regions excluding the Cascade, Sierra Nevada, Mojave Desert, and Peninsular Ranges. Grasslands, dry farmed agricultural fields, savannahs and relatively open oak woodlands, and other relatively open lowland scrublands. Low BSA may provide foraging habitat for this species. Larger trees within and surrounding the BSA may provide moderately suitable nesting habitat. Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Empidonax traillii extimus Southwestern willow flycatcher FE / SE -- G5T1T2 / S1 Riparian woodlands in Southern California. None There are no documented occurrences by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. No impacts are expected to willows in the wetland and holding ponds. Eremophila alpestris actia California horned lark --/-- G3T3Q/S3 WL Marine intertidal & splash zone communities | Meadow & seep. Coastal regions, chiefly from Sonoma Co. to San Diego Co. Also main part of San Joaquin Valley & east to foothills. Short-grass prairie, "bald" hills, mountain meadows, open coastal plains, fallow grain fields, alkali flats. None Species is not known to occur in this area and there are no documented occurrences by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Falco columbarius merlin --/-- G5/S3S4 WL Seacoast, tidal estuaries, open woodlands, savannahs, edges of grasslands & deserts, farms & ranches. Clumps of trees or windbreaks are required for roosting in open country. None Species is not known to occur in this area and there are no documented occurrences by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. No roosting habitat present within the BSA. Falco mexicanus Prairie falcon --/-- G5/S4 WL Inhabits dry, open terrain, either level or hilly. Breeding sites located on cliffs. Forages far afield, even to marshlands and ocean shores. None BSA contains foraging habitat for this species. No nesting habitat exists within the BSA. Gymnogyps californianus California condor FE / SE FP G1 / S1 Require vast expanses of open savannah, grasslands, and foothill chaparral in mountain ranges of moderate altitude. Deep canyons containing clefts in the rocky walls provide nesting sites. forages up to 100 miles from roost/nest. None Extremely unlikely to occur. Marginal foraging habitat. Lanius ludovicianus Loggerhead shrike --/-- G4/S4 SSC Inhabits broken woodlands, savannah, pinyon-juniper, Joshua tree, & riparian woodlands, desert oases, scrub & washes. Prefers open country for hunting, with perches for scanning, and fairly dense shrubs and brush for nesting. Low Marginally suitable nesting and foraging habitat exists within the BSA. Species has been documented by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus California black rail --/ST G3G4T1/S1 FP Inhabits freshwater marshes, wet meadows and shallow margins of saltwater marshes bordering larger bays. Needs water depths of about one inch that does not fluctuate during the year and dense vegetation for nesting habitat. None Species is not known to occur in this area and there are no documented occurrences by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. No nesting habitat present within the BSA. No impacts are expected to willows in the wetland and holding ponds. Progne subis Purple martin --/-- G5/S3 SSC Inhabits woodlands, low elevation coniferous forest of Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, & Monterey pine. Nests in old woodpecker cavities mostly, also in human-made structures. Nest often located in tall, None There are no documented occurrences by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. No nesting habitat present within the BSA. No impacts are expected to willows in the wetland and holding ponds. Rallus longirostris obsoletus California clapper rail FE/SE G5T1/S1 FP Salt-water & brackish marshes traversed by tidal sloughs in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay. Associated with abundant growths of pickleweed, but feeds away from cover on invertebrates from mud-bottomed sloughs. None Species is not known to occur in this area and there are no documented occurrences by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. No nesting habitat present within the BSA. No impacts are expected to willows in the wetland and holding ponds. Sternula antillarum browni California least tern FE/SE G4T2T3Q /S2 FP Nests along the coast from San Francisco Bay south to northern Baja California. Colonial breeder on bare or sparsely vegetated, flat substrates: sand beaches, alkali flats, land fills, or paved areas. None No suitable habitat occurs within the BSA for this species. Not expected to occur. Scientific Name Common Name Status Fed/State ESA G-Rank/S-Rank CDFW Habitat Requirements Potential for Impact Rationale Vireo bellii pusillus Least Bell’s vireo FE / SE -- G5T2 / S2 Summer resident of Southern California in low riparian in vicinity of water or in dry river bottoms; below 2000 ft. Nests placed along margins of bushes or on twigs projecting into pathways, usually willow, Baccharis, mesquite. None Species is not known to occur in this area and there are no documented occurrences by CNDDB within 5 miles of the BSA. No nesting habitat present within the BSA. No impacts are expected to willows in the wetland and holding ponds. Sources: CNDDB (CDFW, 2015); USFWS IPaC (2015), CDFW Special Animals List (2015) . *Vicinity refers to the quads where 2040 RTP-SCS transportation projects are located, as well as adjacent quads. FT = Federally Threatened SE = State Endangered FC = Federal Candidate Species ST = State Threatened FE = Federally Endangered SR = State Rare FS = Federally Sensitive SS = State Sensitive DL = Delisted G-Rank/S-Rank = Global Rank and State Rank as per NatureServe and CDFW’s CNDDB RareFind3. SC = CDFW Species of Special Concern FP = Fully Protected Appendix E 2001 NMFS Biological Opinion for San Luis Obispo’s Water Reuse Project Appendix D Cultural Resources Technical Report City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Phase I Cultural Resources Study U.S.G.S. Pismo Beach, CA and San Luis Obispo, CA quadrangles Prepared for: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Prepared by: Rincon Consultants, Inc. 1530 Monterey Street, Suite D San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Authors: Hannah Haas, B.A., Breana Campbell, M. A., Shannon Carmack, B.A., Kevin Hunt, B.A., and Christopher Duran, M.A., RPA April 13, 2016 Keywords: Pismo Beach, CA quadrangle; San Luis Obispo, CA quadrangle; San Luis Obispo County; intensive pedestrian Survey; P-40-001449; no adverse effects Haas, H., B. Campbell, S. Carmack, K. Hunt, and C. Duran 2016 Phase I Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. Rincon Consultants Project No. 15-01667. Report on file at the Central Coast Information Center, University of California, Santa Barbara. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo i Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Table of Contents Page Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Project Site ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................................ 8 1.3.1 State ...................................................................................................................................... 8 1.3.2 Federal ................................................................................................................................. 9 1.3.3 City of San Luis Obispo ................................................................................................... 10 1.4 Area of Potential Effects ............................................................................................................. 12 1.5 Personnel ...................................................................................................................................... 12 2.0 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................................ 12 3.0 Cultural Setting ........................................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Prehistoric Setting ....................................................................................................................... 13 3.1.1 Paleo-Indian Period (ca. 10,000–8000 B.C.) ................................................................... 13 3.1.2 Millingstone Period (8000–3500 B.C.) ............................................................................ 14 3.1.3 Early Period (3500–600 B.C.) ........................................................................................... 15 3.1.4 Middle Period (600 B.C.–A.D. 1000) .............................................................................. 15 3.1.5 Middle-Late Transition Period (A.D. 1000–1250) ........................................................ 16 3.1.6 Late Period (A.D. 1250–Historic Contact) ..................................................................... 16 3.2 Ethnographic Overview ............................................................................................................. 17 3.3 Historical Overview .................................................................................................................... 18 3.3.1 Spanish Period (1769-1822) ............................................................................................. 18 3.3.2 Mexican Period (1822-1848) ............................................................................................ 18 3.3.3 American Period (1848-Present) .................................................................................... 19 4.0 Background Research ................................................................................................................. 20 4.1 California Historical Resources Information System ............................................................. 20 4.1.1 Previous Studies ............................................................................................................... 20 4.1.2 Previously Recorded Sites ............................................................................................... 24 4.2 Native American Heritage Commission.................................................................................. 25 4.3 Historic Consultation ................................................................................................................. 26 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo ii 4.4 Historic Map and Aerial Review .............................................................................................. 26 5.0 Methods ........................................................................................................................................ 26 5.1 Survey Methods .......................................................................................................................... 26 5.1.1 Archaeological Survey ..................................................................................................... 26 5.1.2 Built Environment Survey .............................................................................................. 27 5.2 Research Methods ....................................................................................................................... 27 6.0 Findings ........................................................................................................................................ 27 6.1 Archaeological Resources .......................................................................................................... 27 6.2 Built Environment Resources .................................................................................................... 29 6.2.1 Architectural Descriptions .............................................................................................. 31 6.2.2 Historic Evaluation .......................................................................................................... 37 7.0 Recommendations....................................................................................................................... 41 7.1 Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program ....................................................................... 42 7.2 Archaeological and Native American Monitoring ................................................................. 42 7.3 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources .................................................................... 43 7.4 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains ........................................................................ 43 8.0 References .................................................................................................................................... 44 Figures Figure 1. Area of Potential Effects ........................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2. Built Environment Map ............................................................................................................ 5 Table 1. Previous Studies Within a 0.5-Mile Radius of the APE ....................................................... 20 Table 2. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within a 0.25-Mile Radius of the APE ............ 24 Photographs Photograph 1. View of southern portion of project site, view to the southwest. ............................ 28 Photograph 2. View of southern portion of project site, view to the northwest. ............................ 29 Photograph 3. View of southern portion of project site facing south, with Bob Jones Trail crossing project APE. .................................................................................................................. 30 Photograph 4. View of north-central portion of project site, view to the north. ............................. 30 Photograph 5. View of pond in northeastern portion of project site, view to the west-southwest. ....................................................................................................................................................... 31 Photograph 6. View of Digester No. 3 and storage building, view to the east. .............................. 32 Photograph 7. View of Digesters No. 1 and 2, view to the north. ..................................................... 33 Photograph 8. View of Biofilters No. 1 (left) and 2 (right), view to the north. ................................ 33 Photograph 9. View of Biofilter No. 3, view to the northeast. ........................................................... 34 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo iii Photograph 10. View of the Control House, view to the northeast. ................................................. 35 Photograph 11. View of Clarifier No. 1 and No. 2, view to the northeast. ...................................... 35 Photograph 12. View of Clarifier No. 3, view to the west. ................................................................. 36 Photograph 13. View of Aeriation Basin Nos. 1 and 2, view to the northwest. .............................. 36 Photograph 14. View of the Chlorination Station/Office, view to the southwest. ......................... 37 Photograph 15. View of Garage. View to the northeast. .................................................................... 38 Photograph 16. View of Digester No. 3, storage room and original clarifier (demolished). Ca. 1926. .............................................................................................................................................. 39 Photograph 17. View of Biofilter No. 2 and Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2. 1945. ........................................ 40 Photograph 18. View of Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2 with Digester No. 3 in background. 1945. ........... 40 Appendices Appendix A. Non-Confidential Records Search Summary Appendix B. Native American Correspondence Appendix C. Local/ Interested Party Correspondence Appendix D. DPR Forms Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) was retained by the City of San Luis Obispo to conduct a Phase I cultural resources study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project (Project) located within the City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. This study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines, CEQA-Plus, and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval) and presents the results of a cultural resources records search of the project area and 0.5-mile buffer, consultation with Native American groups and individuals, local consultation, an intensive pedestrian survey of the Project site, and preparation of this technical report. The project area of potential effects (APE) is located at 35 Prado Road within the City of San Luis Obispo, California. The approximate center of the APE occurs at latitude 35°15'2.12"N and longitude 120°40'39.52"W (WGS-84 datum). The project site is bisected by the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California, United States Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. The Public Land Survey System depicts the project site within the Mt. Diablo Meridian, Township 31S, Range 12E, Section 03. One cultural resource (P-40-001449) was identified within the project APE as a result of the records search, Native American scoping, and pedestrian survey. Site P-40-001449 consisted of a historic trash dump that was removed from its original location and placed outside of the current APE in 1992, but portions of the site may remain with the APE. The WRRF facility was also recorded and evaluated as a cultural resource and recommended ineligible for the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under all criteria (1-4 and A-D, respectively). Further, the creek bed is considered especially sensitive for prehistoric archaeological resources. Based on the results of the study, Rincon recommends a finding of less than significant impact to historical resources under CEQA and no adverse effects to historic properties under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) for the current undertaking. To maintain this finding, Rincon recommends that an archaeological and Native American monitor be present during ground disturbing activities within and around the creek bed and that procedures be in place for unanticipated discoveries in the remainder of the APE. These measures are discussed in further detail below. WORKERS ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS PROGRAM Prior to project construction, the project operator shall retain a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for historic archaeology to conduct a Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) for all construction personnel working on the project. The training shall include an overview of potential cultural resources that could be encountered during ground disturbing activities to facilitate worker recognition, avoidance, and notification to a qualified archaeologist in the event of unanticipated discoveries. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATIVE AMERICAN MONITORING Rincon recommends archaeological and Native American monitoring of all project related ground disturbing activities within and around the creek bed by a qualified archaeologist and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 2 Native American representative. Archaeological monitoring should be performed under the direction of an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983). If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and the find be evaluated for significance under Section 106 of the NHPA and CEQA. UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during Project construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. Evaluation of significance for the find may include the determination of whether or not the find qualifies as an archaeological site. Isolated finds do not qualify as a historic property under the NHPA or as historical resources under CEQA and require no management consideration under either regulation. Should the resource(s) be determined to qualify as an archaeological site, an evaluation of eligibility for the NRHP and CRHR may be required through the development of a treatment plan including a research design plan and subsurface testing through the excavation of test units and shovel test pits. After effects to the find have been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Mitigation of effects to the find may include a damage assessment of the find, archival research, and/or data recovery to remove any identified archaeological deposits, as determined by a qualified archaeologist. UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbing activities. If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the San Luis Obispo coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the county coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) was retained by the City of San Luis Obispo to conduct a Phase I cultural resources study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project located within the City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Thus, this study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). Therefore, this report is completed in a CEQA-Plus format providing compliance with cultural resources component of CEQA and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). This cultural resources study includes a records search, Native American consultation, local consultation, an intensive pedestrian survey of the project site, evaluation of historic built environment resources, and preparation of this report. 1.1 PROJECT SITE The project site/action area is located at 35 Prado Road within the City of San Luis Obispo, California (Figure 1). The approximate center of the project site occurs at latitude 35°15'2.12"N and longitude 120°40'39.52"W (WGS-84 datum). The project site is bisected by the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California United States Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. The Public Land Survey System depicts the project site within the Mt. Diablo Meridian, Township 31S, Range 12E, Section 03. 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The WRRF is being upgraded to meet a number of objectives, including meeting the more stringent discharge requirements established by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and SWRCB in late 2014. At the same time, the WRRF upgrade is necessary to provide the nominal increase in average dry weather flow capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element and upgrade/replace aging infrastructure. Finally, the proposed upgrades would increase the production of recycled water, provide a number of public amenities, and position the City for potential future potable reuse, as described below. The WRRF Facilities Plan provides details regarding the components of the project and their construction. These are summarized in the following sections. a. Demolition of Existing Structures. During the WRRF upgrade certain structures would be demolished to make room for new and enlarged equipment. The Prado Day Center building would be removed, along with the small bore gun range, some sludge drying beds and other facilities. Since the WRRF must continue operating during the upgrades, not all of the demolition would occur concurrently. £¤101 £¤101 S Higuera St Prado Rd Tank Farm Rd Elks Ln Suburban Rd Calle Joaquin LongSt Zaca Ln Center Ln Maple Ln Hind Ln Cross St M arip o s a Dr Los Verdes Dr Las PraderasDr Short St Magnolia Dr Canterb e r r yDr SanSimeonDr S hefieldDr SHigueraSt Beech Creekside Linda Ln Birch Elm Dr City of San Luis Obispo Area of Potential Effects Figure 1 Imagery provided by Google and its licensors, 2015. Water Resource Recovery Facility ProjectCultural Resources Study ±0 380190 Feet Area of Potential Effects ! !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( £¤101 SHigueraStPradoRd S a n L u is O b i s p o Creek1 2 3 3 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1213 1415 16 16 17 17 1819202122 23 24 25 25 26 27 2829 30 31 32 33 34 35 4 Built Environment Map Figure 2 City of San Luis Obispo Imagery provided by Google and its licensors © 2015. Cultural Resources StudyWater Resource Recovery Facility Project Study Area ±0 300150 Feet 1 - Reclaimed Water Structures: 20072 - Disinfection Unit: 19913 - Clarifier #4 & #5: 19914 - Chlor Station: 19645 - Blower Building: 19916 - Aeration Basins (#1 & #2): 1964; Modified: 19917 - Switchgear Building: 19918 - Mech Shop: 19919 - Garage: 196410 - DAFT: 199111 - MCC G: 198312 - Digester #1: 195213 - Cogeneration: 2001514 - Digester #2: 194115 - Digester #3: 191516 - Biofilter #1 & #2: 194117 - Clarifier #1 & #2: 194118 - Belt Press Building: 1997; Modified 2014 19 - Sludge Drying Beds #7 & #8: 1915; #8 was removed in 201320 - MCC A: 199121 - Chemical Storage: 199122 - Headworks: 1964; Modified 198323 - Sludge Drying Beds #1 through #6: 199124 - Control House: 1964; Modified 1983 !25 - Bed #8 & 9A: ca. 1960s26 - Spernatant Lagoon: 199127 - Equalization Basin (EQ Basin): 198228 - Chemical Storage: 199129 - MCC B: 199130 - BioFilter #3: 196431 - Clarifier #3: 196432 - Air Gap Building: 200633 - Small Bore Gun Range: 196934 - Prado Day Center: 200735 - Sludge Drying Beds #10 through #16: 1982 MapExtent Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 6 b. Treatment Upgrades. Section 7 in the WRRF Facilities Plan provides a detailed description of the proposed upgrades within the WRRF. The details of the equipment and processes identified for the WRRF upgrade are described below and are based on meeting various performance standards, so that the facility will comply with the discharge specifications set by the SWRCB. • Primary Treatment. Addition of a new flow monitoring system, along with other mechanical and structural improvements to the existing headworks. Rehabilitation of the primary clarifiers and upgrades to the supporting mechanical equipment. • Flow Equalization. Upgrades to the existing equalization pond (including an increase in capacity) to enhance operations and maintenance and improve wet weather performance. • Secondary Treatment. Upgraded and expanded secondary treatment system to remove nitrogen and organic components, necessary to meet the new Waste Discharge Requirements specifications. • Tertiary Treatment and Disinfection. Expansion of the filtration capacity to meet peak flow requirements. Construction of a new Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection unit to meet the new disinfection requirements and the stringent discharge limits for disinfection byproducts. • Solids and Liquids Handling Processes. o Solids Thickening. Addition of new equipment to thicken the solids produced in the treatment process. Upgrade would replace existing Dissolved Air Flotation Thickener, with a less energy intensive process. o Anaerobic Digester. Construction of a new anaerobic digester. o Biosolids Dewatering. Replacement of the old belt filter press with a new screw press. o Sidestream Treatment/Return Stream Management. Several upgrades would be made in the handling and treatment of waste streams produced internally. These include filter backwash, thickening return fluid (sidestream), digester return fluid (sidestream), lagoon supernatant (from dewatering sidestream), sludge drying bed return fluid, and plant drain. c. Cooling. Upgrades to effluent cooling would be provided as part of the project, either through addition of cooling towers, wetland cooling or other methods. Additional cooling could be provided through a combination of cooling towers and/or heat exchangers. An alternate cooling method may include use of the undeveloped area immediately southwest of the main facility for development of a wetland cooling system. The concept of using wetlands for cooling and polishing effluent before discharge in lieu of using mechanical chillers has been modeled and determined to be a viable option for cooling at the site. The size of this area is sufficient to allow use of the wetland cooling option without requiring removal of the portion of Bob Jones Bike Trail present in that area of the site, though some realignment may be necessary. It should be noted that at this time the use of wetlands is being considered as an option for effluent cooling and that the decision on whether or not to include this feature in the final design has not yet been made. d. Stormwater Management/Flood Protection Improvements. The project would include internal drainage improvements. As part of the proposed project, stormwater Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 7 discharges from the site would be managed using one of several options, including a) continuing to direct all stormwater to the existing discharge points, b) directing part or all of the onsite stormwater flow to the undeveloped area southwest of the main facility, if the wetland cooling option is selected, c) directing part of the stormwater flow to a new discharge point along San Luis Obispo Creek, possibly near the northeast corner of the WRRF, or d) a combination of the three options above. In addition, low impact development (LID), including minor upgrades, such as reconfiguring existing vegetated areas to include LID features, to major upgrades, such as incorporating LID/stormwater collection features as part of newly constructed buildings and treatment facilities, may also be included as part of the internal stormwater management plan for the WRRF site to improve the quality of stormwater flows prior to discharge. In addition, planned flood protection improvements include construction of enhanced protection for key facilities, which includes raising concrete walls protecting some structures, and a new berm around the wet weather equalization pond. e. Public Amenities. Public amenities proposed at the site include construction of a new Water Resource Center, and grading and restoration of land at the northeast corner of the WRRF after removal of the existing supernatant lagoon, which may ultimately be used for public park purposes under the direction of the City Parks and Recreation Department. The Water Resource Center would serve staff needs while simultaneously engaging and educating the community on the water cycle and recycled water treatment. The Water Resource Center would consolidate all of the major buildings at the WRRF with the exception of the maintenance shop (due to noise concerns). Other amenity improvements include a learning center with a walking tour of the facility, interpretive exhibits, picnic areas, a small amphitheater and demonstration gardens and wetlands. The project would also include improvements to perimeter fencing and landscaping, particularly at the Prado Road frontage of the property, as well improvements for security, access control, and internal circulation. f. Research and Development. Cal Poly currently conducts water treatment research at the WRRF facility. Cal Poly would continue to conduct these types of activities in future at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All activities would be within the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. In addition, the City intends to test as yet unidentified pilot process and treatment technologies in future at the WRRF facility. These would occur at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All would be within the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. f. Other Proposed Improvements. The following is a list of other proposed upgrades/improvements included as part of the WRRF Project. • Odor Control. Odor control improvements would be installed at several locations. • Internal Access Improvements. Design includes an improved, single access point from Prado Road and an internal street system that will maintain access to the bus Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 8 maintenance yard and City corporation yard during construction and after the WRRF upgrade. • Additional Electrical and Control Upgrades. Improved electrical service to meet the needs of new equipment, and improved instrumentation and controls for operation of the WRRF. • Renewable Energy Improvements. Installation of solar photovoltaic panels and related equipment at various locations throughout the WRRF. 1.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK The current study is conducted under CEQA plus federal cross-cutting documentation in place of a NEPA document in what is termed “CEQA-Plus” documentation. In order to meet the requirements of a CEQA-Plus study, the current undertaking complies with CEQA regulations at the state level and Section 106 of the NHPA to complete the federal cross-cutting documentation. The state and federal regulations are discussed here. The Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo is also discussed in this section. 1.3.1 State CEQA requires a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on historical resources (Public Resources Code [PRC], Section 21084.1). A historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing, in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), a resource included in a local register of historical resources or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5[a][1-3]). A resource shall be considered historically significant if it meets any of the following criteria: 1) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; 2) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; 3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or 4) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. In addition, if it can be demonstrated that a project will cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC, Section 21083.2[a], [b], and [c]). PRC, Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: 1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 9 2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or 3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. 1.3.2 Federal This project may involve the use of funds provided by the federal government. Therefore, this project has been conducted according to the CEQA-Plus regulatory standards. Cultural resources are considered during federal undertakings chiefly under Section 106 of the NHPA of 1966 (as amended) through one of its implementing regulations, 36 CFR 800 (Protection of Historic Properties), as well as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to Native Americans are considered under Section 101(d)(6)(A) of NHPA. Other federal laws include the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) of 1978, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) of 1979, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1989, among others. Section 106 of the NHPA (16 United States Code [USC] 470f) requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings (36 CFR 800.1). Under Section 106, the significance of any adversely affected cultural resource is assessed and mitigation measures are proposed to reduce any impacts to an acceptable level. Significant cultural resources are those resources that are listed in or are eligible for listing in the NRHP per the criteria listed below (36 CFR 60.4). Cultural resources eligible for the NRHP are labeled as historic properties. The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and that: (a) Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or (b) Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or (c) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of installation, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (d) Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. PRC, Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 10 1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; 2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or 3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. 1.3.3 City of San Luis Obispo In 2010 the City of San Luis Obispo passed a Historic Preservation Ordinance to identify and protect important historic resources within the city (City of San Luis Obispo 2010). When determining if a property should be designated as a listed Historic or Cultural Resource, the Cultural Heritage Commission (CHC) and City Council are to consider this ordinance and SHPO standards. To be eligible for designation, the resource shall exhibit a high level of historic integrity, be at least fifty (50) years old (less than 50 if it can be demonstrated that enough time has passed to understand its historical importance) and satisfy at least one of the following criteria: A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values. (1) Style: Describes the form of a building, such as size, structural shape and details within that form (e.g. arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.). Building style will be evaluated as a measure of: a. The relative purity of a traditional style; b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the structure reflects a once popular style; c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles and how these styles are put together. (2) Design: Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic merit and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Reflects how well a particular style or combination of styles are expressed through compatibility and detailing of elements. Also, suggests degree to which the designer (e.g., carpenter-builder) accurately interpreted and conveyed the style(s). Building design will be evaluated as a measure of: a. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details and craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique); b. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders, although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior. (3) Architect: Describes the professional (an individual or firm) directly responsible for the building design and plans of the structure. The architect will be evaluated as a reference to: Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 11 a. A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced development of the city, state or nation. b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources, designed the house at 810 Osos - Frank Avila’s father’s home - built between 1927 – 30). B. Historic Criteria: (1) History – Person: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history. Historic person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which a person or group was: a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member, etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or nationally. b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early, unique, or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or institutions (e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen, railroad officials). (2) History – Event: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. Historic event will be evaluated as a measure of: a. A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether the impact of the event spread beyond the city. b. A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city (e.g., the Ah Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early San Luis Obispo history). (3) History-Context: Associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant patterns of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental, military, industrial, or religious history. Historic context will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which it reflects: a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building (e.g., County Museum). b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building (e.g., Park Hotel). C. Integrity: Authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Integrity will be evaluated by a measure of: (1) Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not the original foundation has been changed, if known. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 12 (2) The degree to which the structure has maintained enough of its historic character or appearance to be recognizable as an historic resource and to convey the reason(s) for its significance. (3) The degree to which the resource has retained its design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. 1.4 AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS The area of potential effects (APE) of an undertaking is defined in 36 CFR 800.16(d) as the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause changes in the character or use of historic properties if any such property exists.” Additionally, CEQA-Plus requires the APE to be considered as a three-dimensional space (depth, length, and width). The current proposed undertaking is limited to the WRRF located at 35 Prado Road in San Luis Obispo, California. The current undertaking will not expand the existing boundaries of the WRRF and will allow the facility to continue to function under its current use. Therefore, the 66-acre WRRF facility represents the horizontal APE (length and width). The vertical APE (depth) is limited to the depth of disturbance needed for the facility upgrades including buildings demolition and construction. The maximum depth of disturbance expected for the undertaking is 30 feet below the surface. See Figure 1 for an illustration of the APE for the current undertaking. 1.5 PERSONNEL Cultural Resources Principal Investigator Christopher Duran, M.A., RPA, served as principal investigator for the study. Mr. Duran meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology (NPS 1983). Rincon Architectural Historian Shannon Carmack served as the architectural historian for this study and served as a co-author of this report. Rincon Archaeologist Hannah Haas served as the primary author of this report and assisted with Native American consultation. Rincon Archaeologist Breana Campbell served as the co-author of this report. Rincon Senior Archaeologist Catherine Wright conducted all follow up consultation with Native American consultants. Rincon Cultural Resources Program Manager Kevin Hunt, B.A., managed this cultural resources study, provided program-level oversight, and conducted the pedestrian survey. Rincon GIS Analyst Marcus Klatt prepared the figures found in the report. Rincon Vice President Duane Vander Pluym, D. Env., reviewed this report for quality control. 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project APE is located within the corporate limits of the City of San Luis Obispo at an approximate elevation of 30-40 meters (98- 130 feet) above mean sea level. The project is located generally along U.S. Highway 101 between Los Osos Valley Road and Prado Road. Vegetation, where present within the project site, consists of non-native grass and valley oak savannah including valley oak and blue elderberry trees. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 13 3.0 CULTURAL SETTING 3.1 PREHISTORIC SETTING The project lies in the Central Coast archaeological region (Jones et al. 2007). The Central Coast has been defined as extending from south of San Francisco Bay to the northern edge of the California Bight (Jones et al. 2007:125). Following Jones et al. (2007:137), the prehistoric cultural chronology for the Central Coast can be generally divided into six periods: Paleo-Indian (ca. 10000–8000 B.C.), Millingstone/Early Archaic (8000-3500 B.C.), Early (3500-600 B.C.), Middle (600 B.C.- A.D. 1000), Middle-Late Transition (A.D. 1000-A.D. 1250), and Late (A.D. 1250-contact [ca. A.D. 1769]). Several chronological sequences have been devised to understand cultural changes along the Central Coast from the Millingstone period to contact. Jones (1993) and Jones and Waugh (1995) presented a Central Coast sequence that integrated data from archaeological studies conducted since the 1980s. Three periods are presented in their prehistoric sequence subsequent to the Millingstone period: Early, Middle, and Late periods. More recently, Jones and Ferneau (2002:213) updated the sequence following the Millingstone period as follows: Early, Early- Middle Transition, Middle, Middle-Late Transition, and Late periods. The archaeology of the Central Coast subsequent to the Millingstone period is distinct from that of the Bay Area and Central Valley, and the region has more in common with the Santa Barbara Channel area during the Middle and Middle-Late Transition periods, but few similarities during the Late period (Jones & Ferneau 2002:213). 3.1.1 Paleo-Indian Period (ca. 10,000–8000 B.C.) When Wallace developed the Early Man horizon (referred to herein as the Paleo-Indian Period) in the 1950s, little evidence of human presence was known for the southern California coast prior to 6000 B.C. Archaeological work in the intervening years has identified numerous sites older than this date, including coastal and Channel Islands sites (e.g., Erlandson 1991; Johnson et al. 2002; Moratto 1984). The earliest accepted dates for occupation are from two of the Northern Channel Islands, located off the southern coast of Santa Barbara County. On San Miguel Island, Daisy Cave clearly establishes the presence of people in this area approximately 10,000 years ago (Erlandson 1991:105). On Santa Rosa Island, human remains have been dated from the Arlington Springs site to approximately 13,000 years ago (Johnson et al. 2002). Only a few archaeological sites along the Central Coast are documented prior to 8,000 years ago. It is likely that most earlier coastal sites are presently under water because it is estimated that 10,000 years ago sea levels were 15 – 20 meters lower than today (Bickel 1978:7). Estimates place the shore in central and southern California during this period at approximately 10 kilometers farther west than today’s coastline (Breschini and Haversat 1991:126). Recent data from Paleo-Indian sites in southern California indicate that the economy was a diverse mixture of hunting and gathering, with a major emphasis on aquatic resources in many coastal areas (e.g., Jones et al. 2002) and on Pleistocene lake shores in eastern California (Moratto 1984:90–92). Although few Clovis-like or Folsom-like fluted points have been found in Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 14 southern California (e.g., Erlandson et al. 1987), it is generally considered that the emphasis on hunting may have been greater during the Paleo-Indian period than in later periods. A fluted point fragment was recovered from site CA-SBA-1951 on the Santa Barbara Channel coastal plain (Erlandson 1994:44; Erlandson et al. 1987). Another fluted point was reportedly found on the surface in Nipomo, San Luis Obispo County (Mills et al. 2005; Jones et al. 2007). Large side-notched points of the Central Coast Stemmed series in this area date to as early as 8,000 years ago (Justice 2002). Points of this type have been recovered at Diablo Canyon (CA- SLO-2; Greenwood 1972), Cross Creek (CA-SLO-1797; Fitzgerald 2000), Little Pico Creek (CA- SLO-175; Jones and Waugh 1995), and the Honda Beach site (CA-SBA-530; Glassow 1997), among others. At the Metcalf site (CA-SCL-178), in southern Santa Clara Valley, Hildebrandt (1983) recovered two large side-notched points associated with charcoal dates ranging from 9,960 – 8,500 years ago. Several recently investigated sites also provide clear evidence for human occupation of the Central Coast during the Paleo-Indian period. CA-SLO-1764 (Lebow et al. 2001) and Cross Creek (CA-SLO-1797; Fitzgerald 2000), both near Santa Margarita in San Luis Obispo County, and CA-SLO-832 ( Jones et al. 2001) near Pismo Beach, have produced radiocarbon dates from approximately 9,000 years ago (Jones and Ferneau 2002). 3.1.2 Millingstone Period (8000–3500 B.C.) The Millingstone period, as defined by Wallace (1955, 1978) and recognized on the Central Coast by Greenwood (1972), is characterized by an ecological adaptation to collecting suggested by the appearance and abundance of well-made milling implements. Millingstones occur in large numbers for the first time in the region’s archaeological record, and are even more numerous near the end of this period. Aside from millingstones, typical artifacts during this period include crude core and cobble-core tools, flake tools, large side-notched projectile points, and pitted stones (Jones et al. 2007). As testified by their toolkits and shell middens in coastal sites, people during this period practiced a mixed food procurement strategy. Subsistence patterns varied somewhat as groups became better adapted to their regional or local environments. Faunal remains identified at Millingstone sites point to broad-spectrum hunting and gathering of shellfish, fish, birds, and mammals, though large faunal assemblages are uncommon. The Millingstone period somewhat corresponds with King’s (1981, 1990) Early period of the Santa Barbara Channel area, although King’s Early period starts later and lasts longer (5500 – 1350 B.C.). The Cross Creek site (CA-SLO-1797) is a Millingstone occupation site in San Luis Obispo County that returned radiocarbon dates ranging between 9,500 – 4,700 years ago This site represents one of the oldest expressions of the pattern (Jones et al. 2007; Fitzgerald 2000:58). Along the Central Coast, Millingstone period sites are most common on terraces and knolls, typically set back from the current coastline (Glassow et al. 1988:68, Erlandson 1994:46). However, no less than 42 sites have been identified in various settings, including rocky coasts, estuaries, and nearshore interior valleys (Jones et al. 2007). The larger sites usually contain Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 15 extensive midden deposits, possible subterranean house pits, and cemeteries. Most of these sites probably reflect intermittent use over many years of local cultural habitation and resource exploitation. Erlandson has noted that the typical Millingstone tools are not common on contemporaneous Channel Island sites, possibly reflecting an alternate insular resource exploitation pattern (Erlandson 1994:47). 3.1.3 Early Period (3500–600 B.C.) An extensive series of shoreline midden deposits are within the Central Coast region dating to the Early period, signifying an increase in occupation of the open coast (Jones 1995; Jones and Waugh 1995, 1997). These include estuarine sites such as CA-SLO-165 and open-coast sites in Monterey Bay area, including CA-MNT-73, CA-MNT-108, and CA-MNT-1228. Sites dating to this period are marked by large lithic artifact assemblages that include Central Coast Stemmed Series and side-notched projectile points. Square-stemmed and side-notched points have also been found in deposits at Willow Creek in Big Sur (CA-MNT-282), and Little Pico II on the San Luis Obispo coast (CA-SLO-175) (Jones and Ferneau 2002). This trend, first identified by David Banks Rogers in 1929, was confirmed by Greenwood (1972) at Diablo Canyon and since that time it has become apparent at numerous sites throughout the Central Coast. In many cases, manifestations of this trend are associated with the establishment of new settlements (Jones et al. 2007). The material culture recovered from Early period sites within the Central Coast region provides evidence for continued exploitation of inland plant and coastal marine resources. Artifacts include milling slabs and handstones, as well as mortars and pestles, which were used for processing a variety of plant resources. Bipointed bone gorge hooks were used for fishing. Assemblages also include a suite of Olivella beads, bone tools, and pendants made from talc schist. Square abalone shell (Haliotis spp.) beads have been found in Monterey Bay, but not in the Big Sur or San Luis Obispo areas (Jones and Waugh 1997:122). Shell beads and obsidian are hallmarks of the trade and exchange networks of the central and southern California coasts. The archaeological record indicates a substantial increase in the abundance of obsidian at Early period sites in the Monterey Bay and San Luis Obispo areas (Jones and Waugh 1997:124–126). Obsidian trade continued to increase during the following the Middle period. 3.1.4 Middle Period (600 B.C.–A.D. 1000) A pronounced trend toward greater adaptation to regional or local resources occurred during the Middle period. For example, the remains of fish, land mammals, and sea mammals are increasingly abundant and diverse in archaeological deposits along the coast. Related chipped stone tools suitable for hunting were more abundant and diversified, and shell fishhooks became part of the toolkit during this period. Larger knives, a variety of flake scrapers, and drill-like implements are common during this period. Projectile points include large side- notched, stemmed, and lanceolate or leaf-shaped forms. Bone tools, including awls, are more numerous than in the preceding period, and the use of asphaltum adhesive became common. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 16 Sites from this period show a retention of stemmed points and the disappearance of the larger side-notched points (Jones and Klar 2007; Jones et al. 2007). Complex maritime technology also proliferated during this period. Notable introductions included circular shell fishhooks between 1000 and 500 B.C. (Jones and Klar 2007:466), the appearance of compound bone fishhooks between A.D. 300 and 900, and the development of the wooden plank canoe (tomol or tomolo) by at least A.D. 400–700 (Arnold 1995; Jones and Klar 2007:466; Kennett 1998:357; King 1990:87–88; Rick et al. 2002). Hand-hewn plank canoes, sewn together with cordage and then sealed with asphaltum, were “a uniquely sophisticated craft for prehistoric North America” (Jones and Klar 2007: 461). These large canoes were used extensively for travel and trade between the Channel Islands and the mainland; however, no evidence of their use north of Point Conception is known. The introduction of shell fishhooks and plank canoes, their subsequent modifications, and the increased use of other capture devices such as nets appear to have led to a substantial focus on fishing in most coastal areas. A seasonal round settlement pattern was still followed; however, large, permanently occupied settlements, particularly in coastal areas, appear to have been the norm by the end of the period (Kennett 1998). 3.1.5 Middle-Late Transition Period (A.D. 1000–1250) The Middle-Late Transition period is marked by relative instability and change, with major changes in diet, settlement patterns, and interregional exchange. The relatively ubiquitous Middle period shell midden sites found along the Central Coast were abandoned by the end of the Middle-Late Transition period, so most Transition period and Late period sites were first occupied during those periods (Jones and Ferneau 2002:213, 219). Site CA-SLO-239 has been tentatively dated to the Middle-Late Transition Period and contains the only residential feature, a circular house floor, dating to this time period (Jones et al. 2007; Mikkelsen et al. 2000). During the Middle-Late Transition period within the Central Coast region, projectile points diagnostic of both the Middle and Late periods are found (Jones and Ferneau 2002:217). The points include large, contracting-stemmed types typical of the Middle period, as well as Late period small, leaf-shaped points, which likely reflect the introduction of the bow and arrow. 3.1.6 Late Period (A.D. 1250–Historic Contact) Late period sites are marked by small, finely worked projectile points, such as Desert side- notched and Cottonwood points, as well as temporally diagnostic shell beads. The small projectile points are associated with bow and arrow technology and indicate influence from the Takic migration from the deserts into southern California. The Chumash only adopted useful technology from the Takic culture, as compared to the broad culture change that occurred to the south. Although shell beads were typical of coastal sites, trade brought many of these maritime artifacts to inland locations, especially during the latter part of the Late period (Jones et al. 2007). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 17 Common artifacts identified at Late Period sites include bifacial bead drills, bedrock mortars, hopper mortars, lipped and cupped Olivella shell beads, and steatite disk beads. The presence of beads and bead drills suggest that low-level bead production was widespread throughout the Central Coast region (Jones et al. 2007). Unlike the large Middle period shell middens, Late period sites are more frequently single- component deposits. There are also more inland sites, with fewer and less visible sites along the Pacific shore during the Late period. However, one Late Period shell midden has been identified on the coast in Morro Bay (CA-SLO-23). The settlement pattern and dietary reconstructions indicate a lesser reliance on marine resources than observed for the Middle and Middle-Late Transition periods, as well as an increased preference for deer and rabbit (Jones 1995). An increase in sites with bedrock mortars during the Late period further suggests that nuts and seeds began to take on a more significant dietary role (Jones et al. 2007). 3.2 ETHNOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW The project APE was historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash, so called after their historic period association with Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa (Gibson 1983; Kroeber 1925). The precise location of the boundary between the Chumashan-speaking Obispeño Chumash and their northern neighbors, the Hokan-speaking Salinan, is debatable (Milliken and Johnson 2005); however, Jones and Waugh (1995:8) note that “those boundaries may well have fluctuated through time in response to possible shifts in economic strategies and population movement.” The Chumash spoke six closely related Chumashan languages, which have been divided into two broad groups—Northern Chumash (consisting only of Obispeño) and Southern Chumash (Purisimeño, Ineseño, Barbareño, Ventureño, and Island Chumash) (Mithun 2004:389). The Chumashan language currently is considered an isolate stock with a long history in the Santa Barbara region (Mithun 2004:304). Groups neighboring the Chumash included the Salinan to the north, the Southern Valley Yokuts and Tataviam to the east, and the Gabrielino (Tongva) to the south. Chumash place names in the project vicinity include Pismu (Pismo Beach), Tematatimi (along Los Berros Creek), and Tilhini (near San Luis Obispo) (Greenwood 1978:520). Only a general outline of the lifeways of the Obispeño Chumash is known based on the little ethnographic information available (Greenwood 1978). Although their language was closer to Southern Chumash groups, the material culture and lifeways of the Northern Chumash appear to have been more similar to their northern neighbors, the Salinan. Accordingly, their populations in this area are thought to have been substantially lower than in the Santa Barbara Channel area, their villages smaller, and their livelihood less based on intensive use of marine fisheries (Glassow et al. 1988; Greenwood 1978). Permanent Chumash villages included hemispherical dwellings arranged in close groups, with the chief having the largest for social obligations (Brown 2001). Each Chumash village had a formal cemetery marked by tall painted poles and often with a defined entrance area (Gamble et al. 2001:191). Archaeological studies have identified separate sections for elite versus commoner families within the cemetery grounds (King 1969). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 18 The acorn was a dietary staple for the mainland Chumash, though its dominance varied by coastal or inland location. Chumash diet also included cattail roots, fruits and pads from cactus, and bulbs and tubers of plants such as amole (Miller 1988:89). On the coast, the wooden plank canoe (tomol) was employed in the pursuit of marine mammals and fish. The tomol not only facilitated marine resource procurement but also facilitated an active trade network maintained by frequent crossings between the mainland and the Channel Islands. Chumash populations were decimated by the effects of European colonization and missionization (Johnson 1987). Traditional lifeways largely gave way to laborer jobs on ranches and farms in the Mexican and early American periods. Today, the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians is the only federally recognized Chumash tribe, though many people of Chumash descent continue to live throughout their traditional territory. 3.3 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW Post-European contact history for the state of California is generally divided into three periods: the Spanish Period (1769–1822), the Mexican Period (1822–1848), and the American Period (1848–present). 3.3.1 Spanish Period (1769-1822) Initial European entry into the San Luis Obispo region began with the Juan Rodrigues Cabrillo Expedition in 1542. Cabrillo sailed along the coast, possibly landing in Morro Bay, and then continued as far north as San Francisco Bay (Chesnut 1993). In 1587, Pedro de Unamuno landed in what was most likely Morro Bay, but suffered casualties during an attack by Native Americans and left (Bean 1968). Sebastian Rodriguez Cermeño entered the San Luis Obispo region in 1595 as part of his exploration of the Alta California coast (Jones et al. 1994). The earliest detailed descriptions of the area come from members of Gaspar de Portolá’s land expedition, which passed through the region in 1769 (Squibb 1984). Early travelers in the Central Coast region reported seeing no large Native American villages like those noted in the Santa Barbara Channel area. Gaspar de Portolá and Franciscan Father Junípero Serra established the first Spanish settlement in Alta California at Mission San Diego de Alcalá in 1769. This was the first of 21 missions erected by the Spanish between 1769 and 1823. Portolá continued north, passing through the project vicinity and reaching San Francisco Bay in 1769. Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa was founded in 1772, the fifth of 21 missions established by the Spanish in the California (Rolle 2003). 3.3.2 Mexican Period (1822-1848) The Mexican Period commenced when news of the success of the Mexican Revolution (1810- 1821) against the Spanish crown reached California in 1822. This period saw the federalization of mission lands in California with the passage of the Secularization Act of 1833. This Act enabled Mexican governors in California to distribute former mission lands to individuals in the form of land grants. Successive Mexican governors made more than 700 land grants between Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 19 1822 and 1846, putting most of the state’s lands into private ownership for the first time (Shumway 2007). The secularization of the missions during the Mexican period resulted in approximately 500,000 acres of former mission lands being granted to Mexican citizens in San Luis Obispo County (San Luis Obispo 2006). Mexican governor Manuel Micheltorena granted six leagues to Pedro Narvaez in 1844. This grant came to be known as Paso de Robles (Shumway 2007). The project APE is located within this land grant. 3.3.3 American Period (1848-Present) The American Period began with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, in which the United States agreed to pay Mexico $15 million for the conquered territory, including California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming. This period saw increased settlement throughout the state. Many Mexican ranchos were sold or otherwise acquired by Americans, and most were subdivided into agricultural parcels or towns. Rancho Paso de Robles was patented in 1866 to Petronillo Rios who then sold the land to James H. Blackburn, Daniel Drew Blackburn, and Lazarus Godehaux in 1857 for $8,000 (Shumway 2007; City of Paso Robles 2014). The County of San Luis Obispo was founded in 1850 (San Luis Obispo 2006). Roads were constructed throughout the county in the 1870s, primarily by Chinese laborers, leading to increased mobility throughout the county. In 1872, Captain John Harford began construction on the Pacific Coast Railway. Dumke (1944) described San Luis Obispo County during the California land boom of the 1880s as “the great butter and cheese belt of southern California,” initially with land affordably priced between $18 and $25 per acre. By April 1887, an estimated 3,000 to 4,000 people inhabited the region, and land prices increased dramatically. In 1894, the Southern Pacific Railroad completed a line from San Jose to San Luis Obispo encouraging trade and further settlement of the region. In the early twentieth century Port Harford was renamed Port San Luis and oil from the Santa Maria and Taft-Coalinga fields was shipped beginning in 1907 and 1913, respectively. The California Polytechnic School was established in 1901 as a high school and eventually became California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly). The county’s agriculture and ranching production supplied U.S troops during World War I and helped its residents weather the Great Depression of the 1930s. At the start of World War II, the U.S. War Department transferred nearly 100,000 military personnel to bases at Morro Bay, Camp San Luis Obispo, Camp Roberts, and Cambria. 3.3.3.1 San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility The San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility was originally constructed during the 1910s as one of the first sewage treatment plants in the state. The original plant included a clarifier and floating top digester. In 1945, when Camp San Luis Obispo opened, the WRRF was expanded to include two additional clarifiers and biofilters. Since that time, the WRRF has been Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 20 expanded several times to accommodate population increases and comply with increasingly stringent wastewater discharge requirements (City of San Luis Obispo 2015). 4.0 BACKGROUND RESEARCH 4.1 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCES INFORMATION SYSTEM Rincon requested a search of the cultural resource records housed at the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), Central Coast Information Center (CCIC) located at University of California, Santa Barbara on September 25, 2015. The search was conducted to identify all previous cultural resources work and previously recorded cultural resources within a 0.25-mile radius of the project site. The CHRIS search included a review of the NRHP, the CRHR, the California Points of Historical Interest list, the California Historical Landmarks list, the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility list, and the California State Historic Resources Inventory list. The records search also included a review of all available historic USGS 7.5- and 15-minute quadrangle maps. The CCIC did not list any historic addresses within the search radius, nor did they possess any historical maps depicting the APE. 4.1.1 Previous Studies The CCIC records search identified 60 previous studies within a 0.5-mile radius of the APE, 20 of which include portions of the APE (Table 1). The National Archaeological Database listings for these studies are presented in Appendix A. Table 1. Previous Studies Within a 0.5-Mile Radius of the APE Report No. Author Year Study Proximity to APE SL-00052 Hoover, R 1977 Cultural Resources Evaluation City of San Luis Obispo Sewage Treatment Project Within SL-00086 Dills, C. 1980 Unidentified Trailer Park on Higuera between Creekside Park and Los Verdes Estates, an Archaeological Estimate Outside SL-00091 Dills, C. 1977 San Luis Mall, Archaeological Potential Outside SL-00095 Dills, C. 1978 Archaeological Potential at Elks Lane Bridge Project Outside SL-00138 Dills, C. 1975 Information to aid in Interpretive Planning Map for San Luis Obispo (city) and Environs Within SL-00140 Hoover, R. 1979 Archaeological Reconnaissance, Cheapskate Hill Subdivision, City of SLO Outside Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 21 Table 1. Previous Studies Within a 0.5-Mile Radius of the APE Report No. Author Year Study Proximity to APE SL-00235 Bente, V. 1980 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Early Warning System Cultural Resources Literature Search and Report on the Field Investigation of Selected Pole Sitings Outside SL-00311 Dills, C. 1975 Proposed Expansion of SLO Wastewater Treatment Plant and Repair of Arroyo Grande-Grover City-Oceano Wastewater Facility – Archaeological Impact Within SL-00339 Gibson, R. 1981 Archaeological Element of Environmental Impact Report for the San Luis Obispo Creek Modification Study Outside SL-00349 Osland, K. 1981 Proposed Project- An Extension of Los Osos Road, From Its Intersection with Highway 101 to an Existing Portion of Los Osos Road Outside SL-00352 Osland, K. 1981 Archaeological Survey Report for the Proposed Los Osos Valley Road Extension Project near San Luis Obispo 05-SLO-101-25.6/26.0 Outside SL-00437 Smith, C. 1981 Archaeological Survey Along Highway 101 from Marsh Road, South to Approximately .5 miles South of Madonna Road Within SL-00590 Gibson, R. 1987 Results of Archaeological Surface Survey for the Los Osos Valley Road Business Park, San Luis Obispo County, CA Outside SL-00719 Brock, J. and R. Wall 1986 A Cultural Resources Assessment of Selected Study Areas within the City of San Luis Obispo Within SL-01245 Singer, C. and J. Atwood 1988 Cultural Resources Survey and Impact Assessment for the Dalidio, Madonna, and McBride Properties near the City of San Luis Obispo, SLO County, CA Outside SL-01305 Singer, C. and J. Atwood 1989 Cultural Resources Survey and Impact Assessment for the City of San Luis Obispo Wastewater Plant, San Luis Obispo County, California Within SL-01643 Engineering-Science, Inc. 1988 Draft Hazardous Waste Management Plan, Environmental Impact Report Outside SL-01686 Dills, C. 1990 Archaeological Potential of Parcel at Prado Road and Higuera Street, San Luis Obispo Within SL-01759 Gibson, R. 1988 Results of Archaeological Surface Survey for the KSBY-TV/Periera Estate Project, SLO Co, CA Outside SL-02320 Parker, J. 1991 Archaeological Investigation of APN 053-041-034, San Luis Obispo, CA Outside SL-02363 Gibson, Robert O. 1993 Inventory of Cultural Resources for the Water Reclamation Project, City of San Luis Obispo, CA Within SL-02386 Levulett, V. 1991 Caltrans Archaeological Survey Report, Project SLO-101 26.0/26.9 Fence Installation Outside SL-02391 Anastasio, R. 1993 Re: Archaeological Monitoring of Subsurface Construction ant 293 El Portal, Lot 13, Block 7, Tract 57, El Pismo Manor #1 (APN 010-184-002) Within Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 22 Table 1. Previous Studies Within a 0.5-Mile Radius of the APE Report No. Author Year Study Proximity to APE SL-02529 Singer, C., J. Atwood, and J. Frierman 1993 It Came From Beneath the Streets: An Archaeological Report on the Expansion of the City of San Luis Obispo Wastewater Treatment System Within SL-02723 Gibson, R. 1993 Results of Phase One Archaeological Surface Survey of the Froom Ranch Property, Los Osos Valley Road, San Luis Obispo County, CA Outside SL-02917 Orlins, R., E. Barter, B. Rivers, and R. Gibson 1994 Coastal Branch, Phase II State Water Project Cultural Resources Survey, Reach 3 San Luis Obispo County, California 94296-0001 Within SL-02972 Parker, J. 1996 Cultural Resources Investigation of the Pereira-Garcia Property APN 053-161-010 and 067-241-021 Outside SL-03333 Conway, T. 1997 Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Spice Hunter Property, Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo Outside SL-03662 Parker, J. 1998 Cultural Resource Investigation of the San Simeon Creek Road Storm Damage Repair Project, P12K136 Within SL-03708 Bertrando, B. 1998 Historical Evaluation for the Froom Ranch Building Complex APN 67-241-019 San Luis Obispo County, CA (P-40-040991) Outside SL-03711 Bertrando, B. 1999 Historical Resources Inventory and Evaluation for the San Luis Marketplace Annexation: The Dalidio Property, San Luis Obispo, California Outside SL-03804 Bertrando, B. 1999 Historical Evaluation for the Existing Structures on the Proposed San Luis Obispo Marketplace Annexation Outside SL-03899 Cuevas, K. 1999 Cultural Resource Inventory Report, Calf Canyon Prescribed Fire Within SL-03922 McGowan, Dana 1999 Cultural Resource Inventory Report for Williams Communications, Inc. Fiber Optic Cable System Installation Project, San Luis Obispo to Los Osos Loop Within SL-03931 Conway, T. 1999 Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Farm Supply Annexation, Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, CA Outside SL-03934 Avina, M. 1999 Cultural Resources Inventory Report for Williams Communications, Inc. Fiber Optic Cable Installation Project, San Luis Obispo to Bakersfield Volume I Outside SL-04031 Wilson, K. 2000 Cultural Resources Study, State Route 101 Fence Replacement Within SL-04053 Nettles, W. 2000 Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Prado Road/Highway 101 Interchange, San Luis Obispo County, CA Within SL-04084 Parker, J. 2000 Cultural Resource RE-Evaluation of the Vineyard Community Church Project, Calle Joaquim, San Luis Obispo, APN 053-161-010 and 067-241-021 Outside Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 23 Table 1. Previous Studies Within a 0.5-Mile Radius of the APE Report No. Author Year Study Proximity to APE SL-04097 Gibson, R. 2000 Results of Archival Records Search and Phase One Archaeological Surface Survey for the Marriott Hotel Project, Calle Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, CA Outside SL-04110 Gibson, R. 2000 Results of Phase One Archaeological Surface Survey and Records Search for the McBride Parcels, San Luis Obispo Auto Park Plaza Project along Highway 101, City of San Luis Obispo, CA Outside SL-04136 Singer, C. A. 2000 Cultural Resources Survey and Impact Assessment for a Commercial Property on South Higuera Street in the City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Outside SL-04299 Parker, J. 2001 Archaeological Monitoring of the Trash Pile Removal at the Long/Bonetti Ranch, 3897 Higuera Street, San Luis Obispo Outside SL-04663 Conway, T. 2002 Cultural Resources Survey for the Costco/Froom Ranch EIR, San Luis Obispo, CA Outside SL-04706 Conway, T. 2002 Archaeological Background for the Los Osos Valley Road/Highway 101 Interchange PEAR Phase I Cultural Resources Survey, San Luis Obispo, CA Within SL-04818 Parker, J. 2002 South Higuera Street, Proposed Peoples Self Help Housing Project, Cultural Resource Investigation APN 053-034-002 and -003 Outside SL-05043 Martinez, A. 2002 Project Design Change for Sprint Facility SN45XC088F, “Elks Lodge,” San Luis Obispo Outside SL-05066 Maki, M. 2003 Cultural Resources Constraints Analysis for the Templeton-Atascadero Bikeway Project, San Luis Obispo County, California Within SL-05125 Baloian, R. 2004 Cultural Resources Studies for the City of San Luis Obispo Waste Water Treatment Plant Bypass Silt Removal Project near San Luis Obispo Creek Outside SL-05168 Laurie, L. 2004 Phase I Archaeological Inventory Survey of Cingular Site VY-945-03 San Luis Obispo County, California Outside SL-05332 Conway, T. 2004 An Archaeological Surface Survey for the Ocean Park Hotels Project, 1625 Calle Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Outside SL-05350 Singer, C. 2004 Cultural Resources Survey and Impact Assessment for a +/- acre Property in the City of San Luis Obispo County, California Outside SL-05410 Conway, T. 2004 An Archaeological Survey of 7.2 Acres at Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Outside SL-05589 Conway, T. 2005 An Archaeological Survey of the Long-Bonetti Ranch Commercial Project, Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo County, California Outside Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 24 Table 1. Previous Studies Within a 0.5-Mile Radius of the APE Report No. Author Year Study Proximity to APE SL-05669 Ogden, A. and T. Joslin 2002 Negative Archaeological Survey Report for the Changeable Message Signs Project Within SL-05729 Gibson, R.O. 2005 Archaeological Survey Report for the Bob Jones City to the Sea Bike Trail Segment 3 Project in the City of San Luis Obispo Area, San Luis Obispo County, CA Within SL-06133 Conway, T. 2007 Archaeological Surface Survey for the Prefumo Creek Commons Project, Los Osos Valley Road and Froom Ranch Way, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Outside SL-06148 Bonner, W. H., and J. M. Keasling 2006 Cultural Resources Records search Results and Site Visit for Cingular Telecommunications Facility Candidate SNBBCAL085B (KSBY Communications Inc.), 1772 Calle Joaquin, San Luis Obispo County, California Outside SL-06154 Conway, T. 2008 An Archaeological Surface Survey at the Unocal San Luis Obispo Tank Farm, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Outside SL-06181 Bertrando, E. 2007 Cultural Resource Inventory of the Ernie Ball Subdivision APN: 053-258-001; 155 Suburban Road, San Luis Obispo, CA Outside Source: Central Coast Information Center, October 2015. 4.1.2 Previously Recorded Sites The NWIC records search identified nine previously recorded cultural resources within a 0.5- mile radius of the project APE, one of which is located within the APE (P-40-001449; Table 2). Table 2. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within a 0.25-Mile Radius of the APE Resource Designation Description CRHR/NRHP Eligibility Status Recorded By and Year Proximity to APE 40-000124 Prehistoric midden Insufficient information C. N. G. 1952 Outside 40-000783 Bedrock milling site Insufficient information R. O. Gibson 1987 Outside 40-001365 Bedrock milling site Insufficient information R. O. Gibson 1988 Outside 40-001406 Prehistoric midden Insufficient information G. Fleshman 1976 Outside 40-001449 Historic San Luis Obispo City Dump Insufficient information C. Singer 1992 Within Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 25 Table 2. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within a 0.25-Mile Radius of the APE Resource Designation Description CRHR/NRHP Eligibility Status Recorded By and Year Proximity to APE 40-001780 Historic homestead and refuse deposit Insufficient information J. Parker 1996 Outside 40-002617 Historic Tank Farm property Insufficient information T. Conway 2007 Outside 40-038212 Isolated chert cobble Presumed ineligible W. Nettles 2000 Outside 40-040991 Froom Ranch Insufficient information B. Bertrando 1998 Outside Source: Central Coast Information Center, October 2015. 4.1.2.1 P-40-001449 Resource P-40-001449 consisted of the historical San Luis Obispo City Dump, which was removed in 1991 as part of an expansion of the WRRF. The deposit contained burnt and compacted refuse, including glass bottles, cans, auto parts, wood, ceramics, electrical cable, and other historical artifacts dating to ca. 1900-1945. When the WRRF was expanded in 1991, deposits were removed and redeposited in an area at the west end of the San Luis Obispo Airport that is located outside of the project APE. The original investigation (Singer et al. 1993) noted that the site may be larger than the disturbance area, but this was never confirmed through additional investigation (i.e., testing). Singer et al. recommended that any future construction activities and/or demolition of older facilities within the WRRF be inspected for the presence of additional deposits related to P-40-001449. 4.2 NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION Rincon Consultants contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a review of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) on September 25, 2015. In anticipation of the response from the NAHC, Rincon mailed anticipatory letters to 24 tribal groups or individuals on October 7, 2015. These groups and individuals are known to Rincon to have affiliations to the project APE and surrounding area. On November 3, 2015, Rincon Senior Archaeologist Catherine Wright conducted follow-up consultation by telephone. On November 3, 2015, Ms. Wright spoke with Ms. Lei Lynn Odom, a local NAHC-listed Obispeño Chumash representative. Ms. Odom recommended that a Native American monitor be present during all ground disturbance activities. On November 3, 2015, Ms. Wright spoke with Traditional Chairperson John W. Burch of the Salinan Tribe of Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties. Chairperson Burch recommended that a Native American Monitor and qualified archaeologist be present for all construction related activities due to the potential for archaeological sites to exist in proximity to San Luis Obispo Creek. On November 11, 2015, Fred Collins of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council replied via email to Kevin Hunt, Rincon Cultural Resources Program Manager. Mr. Collins stated in his email Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 26 that the project vicinity has contained cultural resources that have been relocated and recommends a Native American monitor if any cultural materials are identified. On November 13, 2015, Karen White, Council Chair of the Xolon Salinan Tribe sent a letter to the City of San Luis Obispo. Ms. White’s letter stated that they are not aware of any Xolon Salinan cultural resources in the project vicinity but that the area should be considered sensitive due to its proximity to San Luis Obispo Creek. As of April 2016, no additional responses have been received. 4.3 HISTORIC CONSULTATION Rincon Consultants mailed a letter to the San Luis Obispo History Center and to the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department between September 25th and 30th, 2015 to request information regarding historical resources within the project APE (Appendix C). As of April 2016, Rincon has not received any responses. 4.4 HISTORIC MAP AND AERIAL REVIEW Rincon reviewed historic aerials and topographic maps from internet sources to better understand the land use history of the project site. The 1967 San Luis Obispo, CA and the 1975 Pismo Beach, CA 15-minute topographic quadrangles, accessed using USGS TopoView, depict the WRRF within the APE. 5.0 METHODS 5.1 SURVEY METHODS 5.1.1 Archaeological Survey Rincon Program Manager Kevin Hunt conducted an archaeological resources survey of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project APE on October 22, 2015. Rincon archaeologist Ashlee Bailey conducted an archaeological survey of an addition to the APE encompassing a portion of the San Luis Obispo creek bed on January 18, 2016. The first survey consisted of walking transects oriented generally north to south and spaced no greater than 10 meters apart. The survey of the portion of the APE within the creek bed consisted of transects spaced less than 5 meters apart to cover approximately 95% of the riparian corridor. During the survey, the archaeologists examined all areas of exposed ground surface for prehistoric artifacts (e.g., chipped stone tools and production debris, stone milling tools, ceramics), historic debris (e.g., metal, glass, ceramics), or soil discoloration that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden. The archaeologists recorded project site characteristics and survey conditions using a field notebook and a digital camera. Copies of the field notes and digital photographs are on file with Rincon’s San Luis Obispo office. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 27 5.1.2 Built Environment Survey On October 6, 2015, Rincon Architectural Historian Shannon Carmack conducted an intensive- level built environment survey of the project area. The purpose of this survey was to identify and photograph any built environment resources that may be impacted by the proposed project. The field survey consisted of a visual inspection of all built environment features of the property, including buildings, structures, and associated features to assess the overall condition and integrity, and to identify and document any potential character-defining features. Field documentation included digital photographs of the property to support field observations. 5.2 RESEARCH METHODS Archival research was completed between September and November 2015. Research methodology focused on the review of a variety of primary and secondary source materials relating to the history and development of the project area. Sources included, but were not limited to, historic maps, aerial photographs, and written histories of the area. The following repositories, publications, and individuals were contacted to identify known historical land uses and the locations of research materials pertinent to the project site: • Archives, San Luis Obispo County Genealogical Society • Historic aerial photographs • United States Geological Survey Maps • Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Maps • City of San Luis Obispo, Utilities Department • Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Maps • Jim Autry, Former WRRF Superintendent • Other sources as noted in the references list 6.0 FINDINGS 6.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES No archaeological resources were identified during the pedestrian surveys. Large sections of the APE include pavement, limiting surface visibility. Several existing structures are also present within the APE. These structures were evaluated for their significance in the following section. Extensive landscaping has taken place within the boundaries of the APE and most open areas have been subject to scraping and dumping activities associated with the WRRF. The northern portion of the project APE is completely disturbed by the development of the existing WRRF. Surface visibility in open areas was poor; much of the open area is covered in dry vegetation and includes several ponds, wetlands, and numerous dirt piles. The Bob Jones Bike Trail is located adjacent to the project APE on the eastern boundary. The paved trail crosses into the APE near the middle of the project APE and traverses in a generally southwesterly direction towards U.S. Highway 101 which is west of the APE. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 28 One Olivella shell fragment was identified during the pedestrian survey; however no additional cultural resources were identified in association with the shell fragment suggesting the shell may be natural in origin. Glass fragments were noted throughout the project APE; however, none of these fragments were diagnostic and Rincon was unable to conclusively determine if these fragments were of historical age. Site P-40-001449 Site P-40-001449 consisted of a trash dump identified as the San Luis Obispo City Dump. The site was partially removed during an expansion of the WRRF in 1992. A 25 square meter (m2) area, 8 meters (m) in depth, was removed. The excavation occurred with an archeological monitor present. It was noted that historic trash deposits expanded immediately beyond the excavated area with a possible second deposit located approximately 350m south of Prado Street and 30m west of San Luis Obispo Creek. No investigations occurred to confirm the existence of the second deposit, but the location described by Singer et al. (1993) would place any remaining deposits outside of any proposed demolition areas. According to the original site record (Singer 1992), the portion of site P-40-001449 excavated in 1992 currently lies under a paved portion of the WRRF and existing facilities. Therefore, no surface manifestation of site P- 40-001449 could be identified and subsurface testing is impossible with the existing facilities in place. Although Singer et al. (1993) did not include a CRHR or NRHP eligibility recommendation, the site was noted to have no stratigraphic integrity with historic components mixed with modern trash. Singer noted that the components were also compacted and burned. Photograph 1. View of southern portion of project site, view to the southwest. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 29 6.2 BUILT ENVIRONMENT RESOURCES One property was identified during the field survey that contains built environment resources constructed more than 45 years ago (see Figure 2). The San Luis Obispo WRRF was established in 1917 and has grown over the subsequent decades. An evaluation of the buildings and structures constructed over 45 years ago is provided in the following section. The remaining buildings and structures within the APE were not evaluated, as they are contemporary in design and do not exhibit any exceptional qualities. Photograph 2. View of southern portion of project site, view to the northwest. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 30 Photograph 3. View of southern portion of project site, facing south with Bob Jones Trail crossing project APE. Photograph 4. View of north-central portion of project site, view to the north. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 31 Photograph 5. View of pond in northeastern portion of project site, view to the west-southwest. 6.2.1 Architectural Descriptions The San Luis Obispo WRRF is situated on a narrow 66-acre property located between the Cabrillo Highway to the west and Higuera Street to the east. Established during the 1910s to modernize the city’s waste water disposal system, the plant has expanded through the years to accommodate the need for increased capacity and to comply with increasingly stringent wastewater discharge requirements. The extant buildings and structures and features of the site were constructed between 1917 and 2007. 6.2.1.1 Digesters. The San Luis Obispo WRRF has three digesters that stabilize solids removed from the wastewater during the treatment process by initiating anaerobic digestion. The digesters are cylindrical in plan and are constructed of concrete. Each digester is capped with a steel lid that ensures the structure is airtight. The smallest, northernmost of the three structures is Digester No. 3. Constructed of board-formed concrete in 1917, it is the oldest structure at the plant facility (Photograph 6). Originally constructed as a floating top digester, it was later sealed to create a fixed top digester. Connected at the northern end of Digester No. 3 is a small storage room also constructed ca. 1917. The structure is rectangular in plan with concrete walls and has a flat parapet roof. The west and east elevations feature metal doors. Fixed aluminum frame windows are situated on each of the elevations. A ladder is fixed over the west elevation entry and provides access to the storage building roof. Digester No. 2, located in the center was constructed in 1941 and Digester No. 1 was constructed in 1952 (Photograph 7). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 32 6.2.1.2 Biofilters Located to the north of the digesters are Biofilter No.1 and 2, both constructed in 1941 (Photograph 8). The nearly identical structures are cylindrical in plan, with low concrete walls. There is no roof or cap. The interior of the structures are filled with a rock filter media. The center of each biofilter contains a pump connected to metal frame arms which evenly distribute the water over the filtration media. Subterranean pipes collect the influent and pass the effluent water through the system. Biofilter No. 3, constructed in 1964, is located to the northeast of Biofilter Nos. 1 and 2 (Photograph 9). Although similar in design and construction, Biofilter No. 3 is slightly larger than the original structures. The raised concrete walls are also taller and feature decorative scoring designed to resemble tile. Photograph 6. View of Digester No. 3 and storage building, view to the east. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 33 Photograph 7. View of Digesters No. 1 and 2, view to the north. Photograph 8. View of Biofilters No. 1 (left) and 2 (right), view to the north. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 34 Photograph 9. View of Biofilter No. 3, view to the northeast. 6.2.1.3 Control House Located to the east of Biofilter No. 3 is the Control House, constructed in 1964 (Photograph 10). The building is single-story and rectangular in plan. It has a flat roof with parapet and walls clad in smooth stucco. Archival research indicates the building underwent an extensive remodel in 1983. These alterations are clearly visible, as the windows, doors and stucco walls have been replaced. In addition, the western façade has been modified to include faux support columns and a Spanish tiled roof entrance. The building no longer retains sufficient integrity to convey its original construction or period of significance. 6.2.1.4 Clarifiers Clarifier No. 1 and 2 are located to the north of Biofilter No. 1 and 2 (Photograph 11). Constructed in 1941, both concrete cylindrical structures feature partial subterranean construction, so that the open air tanks are flush with the ground. The center of each clarifier contains metal frame arms which circulate water through the system skimming for solids to remove from the water. The interior of the structure is mounted with a metal-frame weir system that allows water to pass through the system. Clarifier No. 3, constructed in 1964 is located to the northwest of Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2 (Photograph 12). Clarifier No. 3 is similar in design and construction, but is slightly larger in width and not as deep as the original structures. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 35 Photograph 10. View of the Control House, view to the northeast. 6.2.1.5 Aeration Basins Aeration Basins No. 1 and No. 2 are located to the southwest of Clarifier No. 3 (Photograph 13). The narrow, parallel rectangular basins are constructed into the ground and are flush with the ground. Metal frame scaffolding and ramps frame and rest above the open basins providing access to the facilities. Photograph 11. View of Clarifier No. 1 and No. 2, view to the northeast. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 36 Photograph 12. View of Clarifier No. 3, view to the west. Photograph 13. View of Aeriation Basin Nos. 1 and 2, view to the northwest. 6.2.1.6 Chlorination Station/Office The Chlorination Station/Office, constructed in 1964 is located to the southwest of the aeration basins (Photograph 14). The small building is rectangular in plan and has a flat parapet roof and Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 37 concrete walls. A large wood frame shade structure extends off the west end of the building and provides shelter for small mechanical equipment. The entrance to the building is on the north elevation via a metal frame glass door flanked by a fixed metal frame window and transoms. This station was decommissioned and it is now used as a satellite workstation/lab for testing. 6.2.1.7 Garage The Garage is located to the southwest of Biofilter Nos. 1 and 2 (Photograph 15). The structure has a rectangular plan with a very low pitched side gabled roof. The walls and roof are clad in corrugated metal. The southern elevation features a pair of large open bays with rolling doors. A metal door is located in between the bays. The western elevation includes a pair of aluminum frame slider windows. 6.2.2 Historic Evaluation The City of San Luis Obispo did not have a municipal sewer system until the late 1800s. The lack of a formal sewage disposal system became a serious problem as the city population increased. Unregulated trenches meandered through the city, carrying waste to the nearby San Luis Obispo Creek, where it then washed out to sea. As residents became increasingly ill, community leaders initiated the first steps to improving the city’s sanitation problems (San Luis Tribune 1881, Autry 2014). Photograph 14. View of the Chlorination Station/Office, view to the southwest. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 38 Photograph 15. View of Garage. View to the northeast. In February 1890, the first sewer pipe was constructed along Chorro Street to the corner of Palm Street. While it was an improvement over the open air ditches, the pipe still emptied into San Luis Obispo Creek. As residents and leaders continued to argue the merits of a developed sewage plan, diphtheria consumed the city. Although numerous solutions were introduced, the city ultimately selected the plan introduced by sanitary engineer, Colonel George E. Waring, which proposed a series of pipes that delivered waste to a “sewage farm” to be located adjacent to the cemetery along South Higuera Street. A 15-inch main pipe would feed into a 1,000-gallon tank, which could overflow into a 10,000-gallon tank. The waste would be later used for crop fertilization and sent to the creek for disposal (Autry 2014). By the end of the 1890, Col. Waring’s wastewater collection system design was approved. He described his city sewer plan as follows: The little city of San Luis Obispo has recently adopted my plans for its sewerage and sewage- disposal. So far as the interior sewage of the town is concerned, there is nothing especially worthy of note. It is substantially the same system that has been carried out in San Diego. The only opportunity for direct discharge would be by delivery into a small stream running through the city and on a meandering course, mainly through agricultural county, for a distance of about twelve miles to the Pacific Ocean. The stream is much too slight, except at times during the rainy season to afford anything like the necessary dilution of the sewage, and its use by those living along the course is such to make its employment for this purpose impossible…The main sewer is 15 inches in diameter. After running 3,000 feet on a grade of 1 to 250, it enters a flush tank, which has a discharging height of 5 feet and of which the discharging capacity, including the set-back in the main sewer s 1,000 cubic feet. The tank is discharged by a ten-inch siphon delivering into a twelve-inch vitrified pipe 1,000 feet long (Waring 1896). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 39 Waring’s plan only provided a temporary solution, as the waste was still released into the creek. In September 1895, a local resident sued the City on the grounds that sewage should only be released into the creek during the wet season. This act prompted the city to purchase 10 acres of the current WRRF facility situated along San Luis Obispo Creek for use as a sewer farm. Originally known as the “Schow Place”, the land was purchased for $2,000. The site was used during summer months when the disposal fields were dry enough to absorb the sewage. During winter months the city returned to using the creek as the preferred waste disposal system (Autry 2014). This seasonal operation continued until 1917 when two city bonds were approved for the construction of a new waste collection system on the “Sewer Farm” property (Photograph 16). The facility was one of the first sewage treatment plants in the state. It included a preliminary clarifier and an open air digester (Digester No. 3). The Sludge from the clarifier was pumped into the digester and the digested sludge was spread and dried on open fields around the facility (Autry 2015). Photograph 16. View of Digester No. 3, storage room and original clarifier (demolished). Ca. 1926. Source: City of San Luis Obispo By the early 1940s the city’s population increased to more than 33,000 as result of World War II and the establishment of Camp San Luis Obispo. The city began efforts to upgrade the facility, now in its second decade of operation. A series of improvements were initiated in 1941 that included the expansion of the plant to 35 acres, construction of two additional clarifiers (Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2), a new digester (Digester No. 2), and two biofilters (Biofilter Nos. 1 and 2). The sludge from the digester was still spread on fields, known as “drying beds,” and the treated water (known as effluent) was discharged into San Luis Obispo Creek. In addition, treated water was used for growing sugar beets and alfalfa, which provided $1,750 in annual revenues, thus offsetting the energy costs for operating the plant (Autry 2015). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 40 Photograph 17. View of Biofilter No. 2 and Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2. 1945. Source: City of San Luis Obispo Photograph 18. View of Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2 with Digester No. 3 in background. 1945. Source: City of San Luis Obispo The treatment facility continued to expand and modernize over the subsequent decades to maintain the demands of the growing population. In 1952 a third digester was added (Digester No. 1). In 1964 a series of improvements were implemented, including construction of Aeriation Basins No. 1 and No. 2, the Control House, Biofilter No. 3 and Clarifier Nos. 3 and 4 (Autry 2015). During the 1980s and 1990s, improvements included the construction of new storage and maintenance facilities, a disinfection unit, an equalization pond with a control structure, additional sludge drying beds, and an effluent structure located south of the facility for chlorination and dechlorination (Autry 2015). In January 2014 the city announced plans for a large upgrade to the facility. In addition, it was renamed the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF). Today the WRRF operates 24 hours a day and is responsible for treating over 1.7 billion gallons of wastewater each year (Cornejo 2014). Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 41 The San Luis Obispo WWRF was established in 1917 and has been continuously upgraded since its initial construction to accommodate population increases and to comply with increasingly stringent wastewater discharge requirements. With the exception of the Control Room, which was substantially altered, the remaining buildings and structures retain integrity of design, materials, workmanship, location, association, feeling, and setting. However, the WRRF does not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP, the CRHR or as a local landmark. Although the property is associated with the development and advancement of the city’s sanitation system, and represents one of the earliest systems of its type in California, all that remains from the early period is Digester No. 3 and the attached storage structure. The property has continuously expanded over the years to accommodate the increased population needs and no longer resembles the original facility from the early twentieth century. The subsequent buildings and structures constructed between the 1940s and 1990s reflect a broader national and state-wide trend to increase urban sanitation; the WRRF was not instrumental in this pattern of history (Criteria A/1). The property has not been directly associated with persons significant in our past (Criteria B/2). The buildings and structures on the property are utilitarian resources that are ubiquitous to industrial operations; they do not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, represent the work of a master, nor do they represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction (Criteria C/3). Lastly, the property is not expected to yield important information about prehistory or history (Criteria D/4). Therefore the property is not considered a historic property, as defined in Section 106 of the NRHP, nor does it qualify as a historical resource under the California Environmental Quality Act. It is recommended that the appropriate California Historical Resources Status Code (Status Code) be “6Z, Found ineligible for the NRHP, CRHR, or Local designation through survey evaluation” be assigned (California Office of Historic Preservation 2003). For these same reasons, the property is not considered eligible as a City of San Luis Obispo historic or cultural resource. 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The results of the cultural resource records search yielded one previously recorded archaeological resource (P-40-001449) within the project APE. Resource P-40-001449 was partially excavated and removed during an expansion of the WRRF in 1992. The artifacts were associated with the San Luis Obispo Dump which operated roughly from 1900 to 1940. Although the site was not evaluated for CRHR or NRHP listing, it was noted that the site lacked integrity with components, compacted, mixed, and burned. Associated materials were removed from the project APE and dumped at the west end of the San Luis Obispo airport, which is located outside of the APE. During the removal of P-40-001449, it was noted that deposits from P-40-001449 may still exist within the WRRF along San Luis Obispo Creek and likely expand immediately beyond the excavated area. Currently, the excavated site location falls under standing facilities and pavement. No evidence of P-40-001449 can be seen on the surface, but remaining deposits may exist under the existing pavement and facilities. During the previous investigation of the site (Singer et al. 1993), it was suggested that any future development with the WRRF expect to encounter additional deposits related to P-40-001449. Given the locations of Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 42 the proposed demolitions and facility upgrades in proximity to the previously identified deposits, Rincon recommends that a cultural resources Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) be conducted prior ground disturbing activities. This is discussed in further detail below. No previously undocumented sites were identified as a result of the Native American consultation or the pedestrian survey. The Native American consultation did suggest the area surrounding the project APE may be sensitive for buried cultural materials due to the proximity of the project APE to San Luis Obispo Creek. Portions of the APE along the creek may also have a greater sensitivity for subsurface cultural materials. Given the sensitivity of the creek, Rincon recommends archaeological and Native American monitoring within and around the creek bed. This recommendation is discussed in further detail below. The WRRF was also evaluated for CRHR and NRHP listing under the current study and is recommended as ineligible for the CRHR under all four criteria (1-4) and ineligible for the NRHP under all four criteria (A-D). Site P-40-001449 was identified to be within the APE during the records search, but could not be identified or relocated during the current survey effort as any possible remaining deposits would exist under the existing facilities. Portions of the site were excavated and removed from the recorded location in 1992 as part of the expansion of the WRRF. Based on the results of the records search, Native American scoping, and field survey, and built environment study, Rincon recommends a finding of less than significant impact to historical resources under CEQA and no adverse effects to historic properties for the current undertaking under the NHPA. To maintain this finding, Rincon recommends that an archaeological and Native American monitor be present during ground disturbing activities within and around the creek bed and that procedures be in place for unanticipated discoveries in the remainder of the APE. These measures are discussed here. 7.1 WORKER’S ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS PROGRAM Prior to project construction, the project operator shall retain a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for historic archaeology to conduct a Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) for all construction personnel working on the project. The training shall include an overview of potential cultural resources that could be encountered during ground disturbing activities to facilitate worker recognition, avoidance, and notification to a qualified archaeologist in the event of unanticipated discoveries. The Native American monitor shall also be present at the WEAP training to provide the Native American perspective on cultural resources and potential project-related impacts, and to receive information regarding the project schedule, roles and responsibilities, and mitigation measures. 7.2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATIVE AMERICAN MONITORING Rincon recommends archaeological and Native American monitoring of all project related ground disturbing activities within 200 feet of the creek bed by a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative. Archaeological monitoring should be performed under the direction of an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983). The duration and timing of monitoring shall be Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 43 determined by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City and based on the grading plans and level of previous disturbance within work areas. If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and the find be evaluated for significance under Section 106 of the NHPA and CEQA. 7.3 UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during Project construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. Evaluation of significance for the find may include the determination of whether or not the find qualifies as an archaeological site. Isolated finds do not qualify as a historic property under the NHPA or as historical resources under CEQA and require no management consideration under either regulation. Should the resource(s) be determined to qualify as an archaeological site, an evaluation of eligibility for the NRHP and CRHR may be required through the development of a treatment plan including a research design plan and subsurface testing through the excavation of test units and shovel test pits. After effects to the find have been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Mitigation of effects to the find may include a damage assessment of the find, archival research, and/or data recovery to remove any identified archaeological deposits, as determined by a qualified archaeologist. 7.4 UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbing activities. If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the San Luis Obispo County coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 44 8.0 REFERENCES Arnold, Jeanne E. 1995 Transportation Innovation and Social Complexity among Maritime Hunter-Gathere Societies. American Anthropologist 97: 733-747. Autry, Jim. 2014 “Preface – City Sewer History” in Sewer System Management Plan Update. City of San Luis Obispo. 2014 Autry, Jim 2015 Personal Communication between Jim Autry, former supervisor of the WRRF and Jasmine Diaz, Water Systems Consulting, Inc. Via email. September 22, 2015. Bean, Walton 1968 California: An Interpretive History. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Bickel, P. McW. 1978 Changing Sea Levels along the California Coast: Anthropological Implications. Journal of California Anthropology 5:6-20. Breschini, Gary S., and Trudy Haversat 1991 Early Holocene Occupation of the Central California Coast. In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Roger H. Colten, pp.125-132. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Vol. 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Brown, Alan K. (editor) 2001 A Description of Distant Roads: Original Journals of the First Expedition into California, 1769-1770, by Juan Crespi. Translated by Alan K. Brown. San Diego State University Press, San Diego. California Office of Historic Preservation 2003 California Historical Resources Status Codes. Electronic document, http://www.ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/tab8.pdf. Accessed November 2, 2015. Chesnut, Merlyn 1993 The Gaviota Land: A Glimpse Into California History. Fithian Press, Santa Barbara, California. City of Paso Robles 2014 History of Paso Robles: The Land. Electronic document, http://www.prcity.com/about/history.asp, accessed January 5, 2015. City of San Luis Obispo 2010 Historic Preservation Ordinance. Electronic Document, http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4142, accessed November 2, 2015 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 45 Cornejo, AnnMarie 2014 “Upgrade to SLO’s Sewage Plant Will Save Energy, Cut Emissions” The Tribune. 30 January 2014. Electronic document, http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article39467097.html, accessed November 2, 2015. Crawford Multari and Clark Omni-Means and The City of Atascadero Community Development Department 2004 City of Atascadero General Plan 2025. Final Plan Update #1. Updated June 23, 2004. On file at the City of Atascadero. Dumke, Glenn S. 1944 The Boom of the Eighties in Southern California. Huntington Library Publications, San Marino, California. Erlandson, Jon M. 1991 Early Maritime Adaptations on the Northern Channel Islands. In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by J. M. Erlandson and R. Colten. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Vol. 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1994 Early Hunter-Gatherers of the California Coast. Plenum Press, New York. Erlandson, Jon M., Theodore Cooley, and Richard Carrico 1987 A Fluted Projectile Point Fragment from the Southern California Coast: Chronology and Context at CA-SBA-1951. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 9:120– 128. Fitzgerald, Richard T. 2000 Cross Creek: An Early Holocene/Millingstone Site. California State Water Project, Coastal Branch Series Paper Number 12. San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society, San Luis Obispo, California. Gamble, Lynn. H., Philip. L. Walker, and Glenn S. Russell 2001 Integrative Approach to Mortuary Analysis: Social and Symbolic Dimensions of Chumash Burial Practices. American Antiquity 66:185–212. Gibson, R. O. 1983 Ethnography of the Salinan People: A Systems Approach. Master’s Thesis, California State University, Hayward. Glassow, Michael A. 1997 Middle Holocene Cultural Development in the Central Santa Barbara Channel Region. In Archaeology of the California Coast during the Middle Holocene, edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Michael A. Glassow, pp.73–90. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Vol. 4. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Glassow, Michael A, L. Wilcoxen, and J. M. Erlandson 1988 Cultural and Environmental Change during the Early Period of Santa Barbara Channel Prehistory. In The Archaeology of Prehistoric Coastlines, edited by G. Bailey and J. Parkington pp. 64–77. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 46 Greenwood, Roberta S. 1972 9000 Years of Prehistory at Diablo Canyon, San Luis Obispo County, California. San Luis Obispo Historical Society Occasional Paper No. 7. 1978 Obispeño and Purisimeño Chumash. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 520–523. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William G. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. Hildebrandt, William 1983 Archaeological Research of the Southern Santa Clara Valley Project. California Department of Transportation, District 4, San Francisco. Johnson, John R. 1987 Chumash Social Organization: An Ethnohistoric Perspective. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara. Johnson, J. R., T. W. Stafford, Jr., H. O. Ajie, and D. P. Morris 2002 Arlington Springs Revisited. In Proceedings of the Fifth California Islands Symposium, edited by D. Browne, K. Mitchell, and H. Chaney, pp. 541–545. USDI Minerals Management Service and the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. Jones, Terry L. 1993 Big Sur: A Keystone in Central California Cultural History. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 29(1):1–78. 1995 Transitions in Prehistoric Diet, Mobility, Exchange, and Social Organization along California’s Big Sur Coast. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Davis. Jones, Terry L., K. Davis, G. Farris, S.D. Grantham, T.W. Fung, and B. Rivers 1994 Toward a Prehistory of Morro Bay: Phase II Archaeological Investigations for the Highway 41 Widening Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. Report prepared for Caltrans District 5, San Luis Obispo, California. Jones, D.A., C. Young, and W.R. Hildebrandt 2001 Phase II Archaeological Test Excavation at CA-SLO-832 and CA-SLO-1420, for the James Way/Price Street Road Improvement Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis California. Submitted to California Department of Transportation, San Luis Obispo. Jones, Terry L., and Jennifer A. Ferneau 2002 Deintensification along the Central California Coast. In Catalysts to Complexity, Late Holocene Societies of the California Coast, edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Terry L. Jones, pp. 205-232. Perspectives in California Archaeology Vol. 6. Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Jones, Terry L., Richard T. Fitzgerald, Douglas J. Kennett, Charles Miksicek, John L. Fagan, John Sharp, and Jon M. Erlandson 2002 The Cross Creek Site and Its Implications for New World Colonization. American Antiquity 67:213–230. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 47 Jones, Terry L. and Kathryn A. Klar 2007 California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland. Jones, Terry L., Nathan E. Stevens, Deborah A. Jones, Richard T. Fitzgerald, and Mark G. Hylkema 2007 The Central Coast: A Midlatitude Milieu. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, pp. 125–146. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland. Jones, Terry L. and Georgie Waugh 1995 Central California Prehistory: A View from Little Pico Creek. Perspectives in California Archaeology 3. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1997 Climatic Consequences of Population Pragmatism? A Middle Holocene Prehistory of the Central Coast. In Archaeology of the California Coast During the Middle Holocene, edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Michael A. Glassow, pp. 111–128. Perspectives in California Archaeology 4. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Justice, Noel D. 2002 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of California and the Great Basin. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana. Kennett, Douglas J. 1998 Behavioral Ecology and the Evolution of Hunter-Gatherer Societies on the Northern Channel Islands, California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara. King, Chester D. 1969 Approximate 1769 Chumash Village Locations and Populations. Annual Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey 11:3. Los Angeles, California. 1981 The Evolution of Chumash Society: A Comparative Study of Artifacts Used in Social System Maintenance in the Santa Barbara Channel Region Before A.D. 1804. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Davis. 1990 Evolution of Chumash Society: A Comparative Study of Artifacts Used in Social System Maintenance in the Santa Barbara Channel Region Before A.D. 1804. Revised Ph.D. dissertation with a new preface and updated bibliography. In The Evolution of North American Indians, edited by David Hurst Thomas. Garland Publishing, New York. Kroeber, Alfred J. 1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bulletin 78, Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Reprinted 1976 by Dover Publications, Inc., New York. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 48 Lebow , C., M.C. Baloian, D.R. Harro, R.L. Mckim, C. Denardo, J. Onken, E. Romanski, and B.A. Price 2001 Final Report of Archaeological Investigations for Reaches 5B and 6 Coastal Branch Aqueduct, Phase II. Applied EarthWorks Inc., Fresno, California. Submitted to Central Coast Water Authority, Buellton, California. Mikkelsen, P., W.R. Hildebrandt, and D. A. Jones 2000 Prehistoric Adaptations on the Shores of Morro Bay Estuary: Excavations at Site CA- SLO-165, Morro Bay, California. San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society Occasional Papers no. 14. Miller, Bruce W. 1988 Chumash: A Picture of Their World. Sand River Press, Los Osos, California. Milliken, R. T. and J. R. Johnson 2005 An Ethnography of Salinan and Northern Chumash-1769 to 1810. Report prepared for Caltrans District 5. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis. Copies available from California Department of Transportation, San Luis Obispo. Mills, Wayne, Michael F. Rondeau, and Terry L. Jones 2005 A Fluted Point from Nipomo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Journal of California and Great Basin Archaeology 25(2): 68-74. Mithun, Marianne 2004 The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Originally published 1999. Moratto, Michael 1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. Rick C., Torben, R. Vellanoweth, Jon M. Erlandson, and Douglas J. Kennett 2002 On the Antiquity of the Single-Piece Shell Fishhook: AMS Radiocarbon Evidence from the Southern California Coast. Journal of Archaeological Science 29:933–942. Rolle, Andrew 2003 California: A History. Revised and expanded sixth edition. Harlan Davidson, Inc., Wheeling, Illinois. San Luis Tribune 1881 "That Nasty Creek." Oct. 15, 1881, San Luis Tribune, San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo, City of 2006 A Brief History. Electronic document, www.ci.san-luis- obispo.ca.us/briefhistory.asp., accessed May 10, 2006. 2015 Treatment Plant History. Electronic document, http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities- department/wastewater/wastewater-treatment/treatment-plant-history, accessed September 25, 2015. Shumway, Burgess McK. 2007 California Ranchos. Second Edition. The Borgo Press. Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo 49 Singer, Clay 1992 Site Record for CA-SLO-1449H. On file at the SCCIC. 2005 Human Remains Discovered at Site CA-SLO-1077 in the City of Atascadero in San Luis Obispo County. On file at C. A. Singer and Associates, Inc. Singer, C, J.E. Atwood, and J. Frierman 1993 It Came from Beneath the Streets: An Archaeological Report on the Expansion of the City of San Luis Obispo Wastewater Treatment System. Squibb, Paul 1984 Captain Portola in San Luis Obispo County in 1769. Tabula Rasa Press, Morro Bay, California. Templeton Chamber of Commerce 2015 Templeton History. Electronic document, https://www.templetonchamber.com/content/templeton-history, accessed January 5, 2015. Templeton Historical Museum Society 2014 Early Templeton History. Electronic document, http://www.templetonmuseum.com/history.html, accessed January 5, 2014. Wallace, William 1955 Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11:214–230. 1978 Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 B.C. In California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 25–36. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. Waring, George E. 1896 Sewerage and Land Drainage. D. Van Norstrand Co., New York. Appendix A Records Search Summary Appendix B Native American Correspondence October 7, 2015 Beverly Salazar Folkes 1931 Shadybrook Drive Thousand Oaks, CA 91362 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Folkes: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Judith Bomar Grindstaff 63161 Argyle Road King City, CA 93930 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Grindstaff: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Julie Lynn Tumamait-Stennslie, Chair 365 North Poli Avenue Ojai, CA 93023 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Tumamait-Stennslie: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Lei Lynn Odom 1339 24th Street Oceano, CA 93445 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Odom: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 San Luis Obispo County Chumash Council Chief Mark Steven Vigil 1030 Ritchie Road Grover Beach, CA 93433 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Chief Vigil: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Peggy Odom 1339 24th Street Oceano, CA 93445 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Odom: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan Tribe of Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties Patty Dunton, Tribal Administrator 7070 Morro Road, Suite A Atascadero, CA 93422 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Dunton: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Randy Guzman-Folkes 4676 Walnut Avenue Simi Valley, CA 93063 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Guzman-Folkes: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Xolon-Salinan Tribe Johnny Eddy, Council Chairperson 950 Coral Ridge Circle Rodeo, CA 94572 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Eddy: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Cultural Resources Coordinator P.O. Box 56 Lockwood, CA 93932 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California To Whom It May Concern: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Robert Duckworth, Environmental Coordinator 4777 Driver Road Valley Springs, CA 95252 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Duckworth: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Michael Cordero, Chairperson P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Chairperson Cordero: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 yak tityu tityu – Northern Chumash Tribe Mona Olivas Tucker, Chairwoman 660 Camino Del Rey Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Chairwoman Tucker: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Matthew Darian Goldman 495 Mentone Grover Beach, CA 93433 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Goldman: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Gregg Castro, Administrator 5225 Roeder Road San Jose, CA 95111 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Castro: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Salinan-Chumash Nation Xielolixii 3901 Q Street, Suite Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Xielolixii: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Northern Chumash Tribal Council Fred Collins, Spokesperson 67 South Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Collins: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Frank Arredondo P.O. Box 161 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Arredondo: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Council Freddie Romero, Cultural Preservation Consultant P.O. Box 365 Santa Ynez, CA 93460 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Romero: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Kathleen Pappo 2762 Vista Mesa Drive Rancho Pales, CA 90275 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Pappo: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Raudel Joe Banuelos, Jr. 331 Mira Flores Court Camarillo, CA 93012 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Banuelos: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Janet Darlene Garcia P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Garcia: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Crystal Baker P.O. Box 723 Atascadero, CA 93423 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Ms. Baker: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 PeuYoKo Perez 11465 Nardo Street Ventura, CA 93004 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Perez: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map October 7, 2015 Mr. Fred Collins Tribal Spokesperson 67 South Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Collins: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or cwright@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (760) 889-0456. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Catherine A. Wright Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map November 6, 2015 Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Mia Lopez, Chairperson Cbcn.nahc.sb@gmail.com 805-324-0135 RE: Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Chairperson Lopez: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the proposed Water Resource Reclamation Facility Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed project entails upgrades to the existing plant in order to provide additional capacity and to meet more stringent discharge requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The project may require funding from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) administered by the SWRCB. Thus, this study is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes and guidelines and in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the event that a Federal nexus with the project is established (e.g., federal funding or permit/approval). As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon has not yet received a response to our request, but is aware that the project is within your area of interest. If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or khunt@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at (805) 547-0900, extension 107. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager Enclosure: Project Location Map Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo Table 3 Coordination with Local Native American Groups Native American Contact Letter Sent Follow-Up Results Beverly Salazar Folkes 1931 Shadybrook Drive Thousand Oaks, CA 91362 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2015, follow up by telephone by CAW Referred to Lei Lynn Odom (Chumash) Judith Bomar Grindstaff 63161 Argyle Road King City, CA 93930 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW No comment on project Lei Lynn Odom 1339 24th Street Oceano, CA 93445 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Recommends Native American monitoring Barbareno/Ventureno Band of Mission Indians Julie Lynn Tumamait- Stenslie 365 North Poli Ave. Ojai, CA 93023 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail San Luis Obispo County Chumash Council Chief Mark Steven Vigil 1030 Ritchie Road Grover Beach, CA 9333 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Peggy Odom 1339 24th Street Oceano, CA 93445 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Spoke to Lei Lynn Odom at same telephone number Salinan Tribe of Monterey, San Luis Obispo Counties John W. Burch, Traditional Chairperson 14650 Morro Road Atascadero, CA 93422 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Recommends Native American and archaeological monitoring due to a high likelihood of Native American sites in proximity to the stream Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Council Adelina Alva-Padilla, Chairwoman P.O. Box 365 Santa Ynez, CA 93640 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Wrong telephone # Randy Guzman-Folkes 6471 Cornell Circle Moorpark, CA 93021 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Defers to local tribes but expressed that caution should be taken Xolon Salinan Tribe Johnny R. Eddy Jr., Chairperson 3179 Garrity Way, #734 Richmond, CA 94806 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Defers to local tribes Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo Table 3 Coordination with Local Native American Groups Native American Contact Letter Sent Follow-Up Results Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Doug Alger, Cultural Resources Coordinator PO Box 56 Lockwood, CA 93932 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW No comment Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Robert Duckworth, Environmental Coordinator 4777 Driver Rd. Valley Springs, CA 95252 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW No telephone number provided – sent email to follow up Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Michael Cordero, Chairman P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW No answer – sent email to follow up yak tityu tityu – Northern Chumash Tribe Mona Olivas Tucker, Chairwoman 660 Camino Del Rey Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW No answer – sent email Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Vincent Armenta, Chairperson P.O. 517 Santa Ynez, CA 93460 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Forwarded to Freddie Romero; left voicemail for Mr. Romero Matthew Darian Goldman 495 Mentone Grover Beach, CA 93433 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW No answer Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Tribal Administrator/Counsel Sam Cohen P.O. Box 517 Santa Ynez, CA 93460 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association Gregg Castro, Administrator 5225 Roeder Road San Jose, CA 95111 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Salinan-Chumash Nation Xielolixii 3901 Q Street, Suite 31B Bakersfield, CA 93301 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo Table 3 Coordination with Local Native American Groups Native American Contact Letter Sent Follow-Up Results Frank Arredondo P.O. Box 161 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW No telephone number provided Northern Chumash Tribal Council Fred Collins, Spokesperson 67 South Street San Luis Obispo, CA Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Resent letter via email per his request Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Council Freddie Romero, Cultural Preservation Consultant P.O. Box 365 Santa Ynez, CA 93460 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Kathleen Pappo 2762 Vista Mesa Drive Rancho Pales Verdes, CA 90275 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Raudel Joe Banuelos, Jr. 331 Mira Flores Court Camarillo, CA 93012 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Janet Darlene Garcia P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Crystal Baker P.O. Box 723 Atascadero, CA 93423 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Michael Cordero 5246 El Carro Lane Carpinteria, CA 93013 Letter sent 10/7/2015 11/02/2013, follow up by telephone by CAW Left voicemail Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Mia Lopez, Chairperson Cbcn.nahc.sb@gmail.com 805-324-0135 Email sent 11/6/15 Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Cultural Resources Study City of San Luis Obispo Table 3 Coordination with Local Native American Groups Native American Contact Letter Sent Follow-Up Results Salinan Tribe of Monterey, San Luis Obispo Counties Pattie Dunton, Tribal Administrator 7070 Morro Road, Suite A Atascadero, CA 93422 salinantribe@aol.com 805-464-2650 N/A N/A See John Burch, Traditional Tribal Chairperson of Salinan Tribe of Monterey, San Luis Obispo Counties Appendix C Local/ Interested Parties Correspondence E n v i r o n m e n t a l S c i e n t i s t s P l a n n e r s E n g i n e e r s September 25, 2015 History Center of San Luis Obispo County 696 Monterey Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Initiation of the CEQA Plus Consultation Process for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California To whom it may concern: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The project proposes upgrades and improvements at the WRRF and is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). There is a possibility that a federal nexus with the project will be established, and thus our studies are also being conducted in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Rincon is currently working in the study area to identify any cultural resource issues for the proposed project. If you or your organization has any concerns regarding specific historic resources within the project area, please respond in writing at the above address or cduran@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at 805-644-4455. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Christopher Duran Cultural Resources Principal Investigator Enclosure: Project Location Map E n v i r o n m e n t a l S c i e n t i s t s P l a n n e r s E n g i n e e r s September 30, 2015 City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Initiation of the CEQA Plus Consultation Process for the Water Resource Recovery Facility, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California To whom it may concern: Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct a cultural resources study for the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project, in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The project proposes upgrades and improvements at the WRRF and is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). There is a possibility that a federal nexus with the project will be established, and thus our studies are also being conducted in consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Rincon is currently working in the study area to identify any cultural resource issues for the proposed project. If you or your organization has any concerns regarding specific historic resources within the project area, please respond in writing at the above address or scarmack@rinconconsultants.com, or by telephone at 805-644-4455. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Shannon Carmack Architectural Historian Enclosure: Project Location Map Appendix D DPR Forms State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 12 *Resource Name or #: SLO WRRF P1. Other Identifier: SLO WRRF *P2. Location:  Not for Publication  Unrestricted *a. County: San Luis Obispo and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Pismo Beach Date: T ; R ; ¼ of ¼ of Sec ; M.D. B.M. c. Address: 35 Prado Road City: San Luis Obispo Zip: 93401 d. UTM: Zone: ; mE/ mN (G.P.S.) e. Other Locational Data: City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility Elevation: Approximately 130 feet. *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The San Luis Obispo Water Recovery Facility was established in 1917 and has grown over the subsequent decades. The San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility is situated on a narrow 56-acre property located between the Cabrillo Highway to the west and Higuera Street to the east. Established during the 1910s to modernize the city’s waste water disposal system, the plant has expanded through the years to meet increasingly stringent discharge requirements, and to accommodate the need for increased capacity and new advancements in water treatment technologies. The extant buildings and structures and features of the site were constructed between 1917 and 2007. The San Luis Obispo Water recovery Facility includes 35 structures and ponds. *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP11: Engineering Structure *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: Historic Prehistoric Both *P7. Owner and Address: Wastewater Finance Department, City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 *P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, and address) Rincon Consultants, Inc. 1530 Monterey Street, Suite D San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 *P9. Date Recorded: October 6, 2015 *P10. Survey Type: Built Environment Inventory *P11. Report Citation: Haas, H., K. Hunt, S, Carmack, and C. Duran. 2015. Phase I Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. Rincon Consultants Project No. 15-01667. *Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record  Other (List): DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information P5a. Photo or Drawing DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of 12 *NRHP Status Code *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF B1. Historic Name: San Luis Obispo Water Recycle Recovery Facility B2. Common Name: Water Recycle Recovery Facility B3. Original Use: Water Recycle Recovery Facility B4. Present Use: Water Recycle Recovery Facility *B5. Architectural Style: Industrial *B6. Construction History: San Luis Obispo Water Recovery Facility was established in 1917 and has grown over the subsequent decades. Extant buildings and structures and features of the site were constructed between 1917 and 2007. *B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location: *B8. Related Features: Digesters, Biofilters, Control House, Clarifiers, Aeration basins, Chlor station and Garage Structures B9a. Architect: b. Builder: *B10. Significance: Theme: 20th Century Infrastructure Area: Period of Significance: 1917 to Present Property Type: Applicable Criteria: The San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility is situated on a narrow 66-acre property located between the Cabrillo Highway to the west and Higuera Street to the east. Established during the 1910s to modernize the city’s waste water disposal system, the plant has expanded through the years to accommodate the need for increased capacity and to comply with increasingly stringent wastewater discharge requirements. The extant buildings and structures and features of the site were constructed between 1917 and 2007. The City of San Luis Obispo did not have a municipal sewer system until the late 1800s. The lack of a formal sewage disposal system became a serious problem as the population increased. Unregulated trenches meandered through the city, carrying waste to the nearby San Luis Obispo Creek, where it then washed out to sea. As residents became increasingly ill, community leaders initiated the first steps to improving the city’s sanitation problems (San Luis Tribune 1881, Autry 2014). In February 1890, the first sewer pipe was constructed along Chorro Street to the corner of Palm Street. While it was an improvement over the open air ditches, the pipe was still emptied into San Luis Obispo Creek. As residents and leaders continued to argue the merits of a developed sewage plan, diphtheria consumed the city. Although numerous solutions were introduced, the city ultimately selected the plan introduced by the famed sanitary engineer, Colonel George E. Waring, which proposed a series of pipes that delivered waste to a “sewage farm” to be located adjacent to the cemetery along South Higuera Street. A 15-inch main pipe would feed into a 1,000-gallong tank, which could overflow into a 10,000-gallon tank. The waste would be later used for crop fertilization and sent to the creek for disposal (Autry 2014). (See Continuation Sheet) B11. Additional Resource Attributes: HP11: Engineering Structure *B12. References: Haas, H., K. Hunt, S, Carmack, and C. Duran. 2015. Phase I Cultural Resources Study for the Water Resource Recovery Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. B13. Remarks: *B14. Evaluator: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date of Evaluation: 10/6/2015 (This space reserved for official comments.) State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 3 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Recorded by: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information B10. Significance Continued. In February 1890, the first sewer pipe was construed along Chorro Street to the corner of Palm Street. While it was an improvement over the open air ditches, the pipe was still emptied into San Luis Obispo Creek. As residents and leaders continued to argue the merits of a developed sewage plan, diphtheria consumed the city. Although numerous solutions were introduced, the city ultimately selected the plan introduced by the famed sanitary engineer, Colonel George E. Waring, which proposed a series of pipes that delivered waste to a “sewage farm” to be located adjacent to the cemetery along South Higuera Street. A 15-inch main pipe would feed into a 1,000-gallong tank, which could overflow into a 10,000-gallon tank. The waste would be later used for crop fertilization and sent to the creek for disposal (Autry 2014). By the end of the 1890, Col. Waring’s wastewater collection system design was approved. He described his city sewer plan as follows: The little city of San Luis Obispo has recently adopted my plans for its sewerage and sewage-disposal. So far as the interior sewage of the town is concerned, there is nothing especially worthy of note. It is substantially the same system that has been carried out in San Diego. The only opportunity for direct discharge would be by delivery into a small stream running through the city and on a meandering course, mainly through agricultural county, for a distance of about twelve miles to the Pacific Ocean. The stream is much too slight, except at times during the rainy season to afford anything like the necessary dilution of the sewage, and its use by those living along the course is such to make its employment for this purpose impossible…The main sewer is 15 inches in diameter. After running 3,000 feet on a grade of 1 to 250, it enters a flush tank, which has a discharging height of 5 feet and of which the discharging capacity, including the set-back in the main sewer s 1,000 cubic feet. The tank is discharged by a ten-inch siphon delivering into a twelve-inch vitrified pipe 1,000 feet long (Waring 1896). Waring’s plan only provided a temporary solution, as the waste was still released into the creek. In September 1895, a local resident sued the City, on the grounds that sewage should only be released into the creek during the wet season. This act prompted the city to purchase 10 acres of the current WRRF facility situated along San Luis Obispo Creek for use as a sewer farm. Originally known as the “Schow Place”, the land was purchased for $2,000. The site was used during summer months when the disposal fields were dry enough to absorb the sewage. During winter months the city returned to using the creek as the preferred waste disposal system (Autry 2014). This seasonal operation continued until 1917 when two city bonds were approved for the construction of a new waste collection system on the “Sewer Farm” property. The facility was one of the first sewage treatment plants in the state. It included a preliminary clarifier and an open air digester (Digester No. 3). The Sludge from the clarifier was pumped into the digester and the digested sludge was spread and dried on open fields around the facility (Autry 2015). By the early 1940s the city’s population increased to more than 33,000 as result of World War II and the establishment of Camp San Luis Obispo. The city began efforts to upgrade the facility, now in its second decade of operation. A series of improvements were initiated 1941 that included the expansion of the plant to 35 acres, construction of two additional clarifiers (Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2), a new digester (Digester No. 2) and two biofilters (Biofilter Nos. 1 and 2). The sludge from the digester was still spread on fields, known as “drying beds” and the treated water (known as effluent) was now discharged into San Luis Obispo Creek. In addition, treated water was used for growing sugar beets and alfalfa, which provided $1,750, in annual revenues, thus offsetting the energy costs for operating the plant (Autry 2015). The treatment facility continued to expand and modernize over the subsequent decades to maintain the demands of the growing population. In 1952 a third digester was added (Digester No. 1). In 1964 a series of improvements were implemented, including construction of Aeriation Basins No. 1 and No. 2, the Control House, Biofilter No. 3 and Clarifier Nos. 3 and 4 were constructed (Autry 2015). During the 1980s and 1990s, improvements included the construction of new storage and maintenance facilities, a disinfection unity, an equalization pond with a control structure, additional sludge drying beds, and an effluent structure located south of the facility for chlorination and dechlorination (Autry 2015). In January 2014, the city announced plans for a large upgrade to the facility. In addition, it was renamed the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF). Today the WRRF operates 24 hours a day and is responsible for treating over 1.7 billion gallons of wastewater each year (Cornejo 2014). State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 4 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Recorded by: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information B10. Significance Continued. The San Luis Obispo WWRF was established in 1917 and has been continuously upgraded since its initial construction to accommodate population increases and to comply with increasingly stringent wastewater discharge requirements. With the exception of the Control Room which was substantially altered, the remaining buildings and structures retain integrity of design, materials, workmanship, location, association, feeling and setting. However, the WRRF does not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP, the CRHR or as a local landmark. Although the property is associated with the development and advancement of the city’s sanitation system, and represents one of the earliest systems of its type in California, all that remains from the early period is Digester No. 3 and the attached storage structure. The property has continuously expanded over the years to accommodate the increased population needs and no longer resembles the original facility from the early twentieth century. The subsequent buildings and structures constructed between the 1940s and 1990s reflect a broader national and state-wide trend to increase urban sanitation; the WRRF is not directly associated with this pattern of history (Criteria A/1). The property has not been directly associated with persons significant in our past (Criteria B/2). The buildings and structures on the property are utilitarian resources that are ubiquitous to industrial operations; they do not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, represent the work of a master, nor do they represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction (Criteria C/3). Lastly, the property is not expected to yield important information about prehistory or history (Criteria D/4). For these same reasons, the property is not eligible as a City of San Luis Obispo historic or cultural resource. Therefore the property is not considered a historic property, as defined in Section 106 of the National Register of Historic Places, nor does it qualify as a historical resource under the California Environmental Quality Act. It is recommended that the appropriate California Historical Resources Status Code (Status Code) be “6Z, Found ineligible for N[ational]R[egister], C[alifornia] R[egister], or Local designation through survey evaluation” be assigned (California Office of Historic Preservation 2003). Associated Buildings: Digesters. The SLO WRRF has three digesters, which serve to stabilize solids that are removed from the wastewater during the treatment process, by initiating anaerobic digestion. The digesters are cylindrical in plan and are constructed of concrete. Each digester is capped with a steel lid that ensures the structure is airtight. The smallest, northernmost of the three structures is Digester No. 3. Constructed of board-formed concrete in 1917, it is the oldest structure at the plant facility. Originally constructed as a floating top digester, it was later sealed to create a fixed top digester. Connected at the northern end of Digester No. 3 is a small storage room also constructed ca. 1917. The structure is rectangular in plan with concrete walls and has a flat parapet roof. The west and east elevations feature metal doors. Fixed aluminum frame windows are situated on each of the elevations. A ladder is fixed over the west elevation entry and provides access to the storage building roof. Digester No. 2, located in the center was constructed in 1941 and Digester No. 1 was constructed in 1952. Biofilters. Located to the north of the digesters are Biofilter No.1 and 2, both constructed in 1941. The nearly identical structures are cylindrical in plan, with low concrete walls. There is no roof or cap. The interior of the structures are filled with a rock filter media. The center of each biofilter contains a pump connected to metal frame arms which evenly distribute the water over the filtration media. Subterranean pipes collect the influent and pass the effluent water through the system. Biofilter No. 3, constructed in 1964, is located to the northeast of Biofilter Nos. 1 and 2. Although similar in design and construction, Biofilter No. 3 is slightly larger than the original structures. The raised concrete walls are also taller and feature decorative scoring designed to resemble tile. Control House. Located to the east of Biofilter No. 3, is the Control House, constructed in 1964. The building is single-story and rectangular in plan. It has a flat roof with parapet and walls clad in smooth stucco. Archival research indicates the building underwent an extensive remodel in 1983. These alterations are clearly visible, as the windows, doors and stucco walls have been replaced. In addition, the western façade has been modified to include faux support columns and a Spanish tiled roof entrance. The building no longer retains sufficient integrity to convey its original construction or period of significance. State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 5 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Recorded by: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information B10. Significance Continued. Clarifiers. Clarifier No. 1 and 2 are located to the north of Biofilter Nos. 1 and 2. Constructed in 1941, both concrete cylindrical structures feature partial subterranean construction, so that the open air tanks are flush with the ground. The center of each clarifier contains metal frame arms which circulate water through the system skimming for solids to remove from the water. The interior of the structure is mounted with a metal-frame weir system which allows water to pass through the system as it exits. Clarifier No. 3, constructed in 1964 is located to the northwest of Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2. Clarifier No. 3 is similar in design and construction, but is slightly larger in width and not as deep as the original structures. Aeration Basins. Aeration Basins No. 1 and No. 2 are located to the southwest of Clarifier No. 3. The narrow, parallel rectangular basins are constructed into the ground and are flush with the ground. Metal frame scaffolding and ramps frame and rest above the open basins providing access to the facilities. Chlorination Station/Office. The Chlorination Station/Office, constructed in 1964 is located to the southwest of the aeration basins. The small building is rectangular in plan and has a flat parapet roof and concrete walls. A large wood frame shade structure extends off the west end of the building and provides shelter for small mechanical equipment. The entrance to the building is on the north elevation via a metal frame glass door flanked by a fixed metal frame window and transoms.This station was decommissioned and it is now used as a satellite workstation/lab for testing. Garage. The Garage is located to the southwest of Biofilter Nos. 1 and 2. The structure has a rectangular plan with a very low pitched side gabled roof. The walls and roof are clad in corrugated metal. The southern elevation features a pair of large open bays with rolling doors. A metal door is located in between the bays. The western elevation includes a pair of aluminum frame slider windows. References: Autry, Jim. 2014 “Preface – City Sewer History” in Sewer System Management Plan Update. City of San Luis Obispo. 2014. Autry, Jim 2015 Personal Communication between Jim Autry, former supervisor of the WRRF and Jasmine Diaz, Water Systems Consulting, Inc. Via email. September 22, 2015. California Office of Historic Preservation 2003 California Historical Resources Status Codes. Electronic document, http://www.ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/tab8.pdf. Accessed November 2, 2015. Cornejo, AnnMarie 2014 “Upgrade to SLO’s Sewage Plant Will Save Energy, Cut Emissions” The Tribune. 30 January 2014. Electronic document, http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article39467097.html, accessed November 2, 2015. San Luis Tribune 1881 "That Nasty Creek." Oct. 15, 1881, San Luis Tribune, San Luis Obispo. Waring, George E. 1896 Sewerage and Land Drainage. D. Van Norstrand Co., New York. State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 6 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Recorded by: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information Aeriation Basins 1 and 2, C. 1964. View to the northwest. Biofilter No. 3, C. 1964. View to the northeast. State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 7 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Recorded by: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information Biofilters Nos. 1 and 2, C. 1941. View to the north. Chlorination Station/Office, C. 1964. View to the southwest. State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 8 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Recorded by: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information Clarifier No. 3, C. 1964. View to the west. Clarifiers Nos. 1 and 2, C. 1941. View to the west. State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 9 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Recorded by: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information Control House, C. 1964 and modified in 1983. View to the northeast. Digester Nos. 1 and 2. View to the south. State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 10 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Recorded by: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information Clarifier No. 3, C. 1964. View to the west. Clarifiers Nos. 1 and 2, C. 1941. View to the west. State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 11 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Recorded by: S. Carmack, Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015  Continuation  Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information Digester No. 3 and associated building. View to the east. Garage, C. 1964. View to the northeast. State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# SKETCH MAP Trinomial Page 12 of 12 *Resource Name or # SLO WRRF *Drawn By: Rincon Consultants Inc. *Date: 10/6/2015 DPR 523K (1/95) *Required information Appendix E Paleontological Resources Memorandum Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers November 05, 2015 Rincon Project No. 15-01667 Dave Hix Deputy Director, Wastewater City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subject: Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project, San Luis Obispo County, California Dear Mr. Hix: Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) has conducted a paleontological resources assessment for the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) project, in San Luis Obispo, California. The goal of the assessment was to identify the geologic units that may be disturbed by project development, determine the paleontological sensitivity of geologic units within the project area, assess potential for impacts to paleontological resources from development of the proposed project, and recommend mitigation measures to avoid or mitigate impacts to scientifically significant paleontological resources as necessary. This paleontological resource assessment consisted of a fossil locality record search, review of existing geologic maps, and a review of primary literature regarding fossiliferous geologic units within the project vicinity and region. No field survey was conducted. This paleontological assessment has been prepared to support environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). PROJECT LOCATION The project site/action area is located at 35 Prado Road in the City of San Luis Obispo (City), California (Figure 1). The approximate center of the project site occurs at latitude 35°15'2.12"N and longitude 120°40'39.52"W (WGS-84 datum). The project site is bisected by the San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, California United States Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. The Public Land Survey System depicts the project site within the Mt. Diablo Meridian, Township 31S, Range 12E, Section 03. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The WRRF is being upgraded to meet a number of objectives, including meeting the more stringent discharge requirements established by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and SWRCB in late 2014. At the same time, the WRRF upgrade is necessary to provide the nominal increase in average dry weather flow capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element and City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 2 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers upgrade/replace aging infrastructure. Finally, the proposed upgrades would increase the production of recycled water, provide a number of public amenities, and position the City for potential future potable reuse, as described below. The WRRF Facilities Plan provides details regarding the components of the project and their construction. These are summarized in the following sections. Demolition of Existing Structures. During the WRRF upgrade certain structures would be demolished to make room for new and enlarged equipment. The Prado Day Center building would be removed, along with the small bore gun range, some sludge drying beds and other facilities. Figure 2-3 shows a draft demolition plan, indicating the structures that are proposed to be demolished. Since the WRRF must continue operating during the upgrades, not all of the indicated demolition would occur concurrently. Treatment Upgrades. Section 7 in the WRRF Facilities Plan provides a detailed description of the proposed upgrades within the WRRF. The details of the equipment and processes identified for the WRRF upgrade are described below and are based on meeting various performance standards, so that the facility will comply with the discharge specifications set by the SWRCB. • Primary Treatment. Addition of a new flow monitoring system, along with other mechanical and structural improvements to the existing headworks. Rehabilitation of the primary clarifiers and upgrades to the supporting mechanical equipment. • Flow Equalization. Upgrades to the existing equalization pond (including an increase in capacity) to enhance operations and maintenance and improve wet weather performance. • Secondary Treatment. Upgraded and expanded secondary treatment system to remove nitrogen and organic components, necessary to meet the new Waste Discharge Requirements specifications. • Tertiary Treatment and Disinfection. Expansion of the filtration capacity to meet peak flow requirements. Construction of a new Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection unit to meet the disinfection requirements and meet the new stringent discharge limits for disinfection byproducts. • Solids and Liquids Handling Processes. o Solids Thickening. Addition of new equipment to thicken the solids produced in the treatment process. Upgrade would replace existing Dissolved Air Flotation Thickener, with a less energy intensive process. o Anaerobic Digester. Construction of a new anaerobic digester. o Biosolids Dewatering. Replacement of the old belt filter press with a new screw press. o Sidestream Treatment/Return Stream Management. Several upgrades would be made in the handling and treatment of waste streams produced internally. These include filter backwash, thickening return fluid (sidestream), digester return fluid (sidestream), lagoon supernatant (from dewatering sidestream), sludge drying bed return fluid, and plant drain. Cooling. Upgrades to effluent cooling would be provided as part of the project, either through addition of cooling towers, wetland cooling or other methods. Additional cooling could be City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 3 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers provided through a combination of cooling towers and/or heat exchangers. An alternate cooling method may include use of the undeveloped area immediately southwest of the main facility for development of a wetland cooling system. The concept of using wetlands for cooling and polishing effluent before discharge in lieu of using mechanical chillers has been modeled and determined to be a viable option for cooling at the site. The size of this area is sufficient to allow use of the wetland cooling option without requiring removal of the portion of Bob Jones Bike Trail present in that area of the site, though some realignment may be necessary. It should be noted that at this time the use of wetlands is being considered as an option for effluent cooling and that the decision on whether or not to include this feature in the final design has not yet been made. Stormwater Management/Flood Protection Improvements. The project would include internal drainage improvements. As part of the proposed project, stormwater discharges from the site would be managed using one of several options, including a) continuing to direct all stormwater to the existing discharge points, b) directing part or all of the onsite stormwater flow to the undeveloped area southwest of the main facility, if the wetland cooling option is selected, c) directing part of the stormwater flow to a new discharge point along San Luis Obispo Creek, possibly near the northeast corner of the WRRF, or d) a combination of the three options above. In addition, low impact development (LID), including minor upgrades, such as reconfiguring existing vegetated areas to include LID features, to major upgrades, such as incorporating LID/stormwater collection features as part of newly constructed buildings and treatment facilities, may also be included as part of the internal stormwater management plan for the WRRF site to improve the quality of stormwater flows prior to discharge. In addition, planned flood protection improvements include construction of enhanced protection for key facilities, which includes raising concrete walls protecting some structures, and a new berm around the wet weather equalization pond. Public Amenities. Public amenities proposed at the site include construction of a new Water Resource Center, and grading and restoration of land at the northeast corner of the WRRF after removal of the existing supernatant lagoon, which may ultimately be used for public park purposes under the direction of the City Parks and Recreation Department. The Water Resource Center would serve staff needs while simultaneously engaging and educating the community on the water cycle and recycled water treatment. Other amenity improvements include a learning center with a walking tour of the facility, interpretive exhibits, picnic areas, a small amphitheater and demonstration gardens and wetlands. The project would also include improvements to perimeter fencing and landscaping, particularly at the Prado Road frontage of the property, as well improvements for security, access control, and internal circulation. Research and Development. Cal Poly currently conducts water treatment research at the WRRF facility. Cal Poly would continue to conduct these types of activities in future at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All activities would be within the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 4 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers In addition, the City intends to test as yet unidentified pilot process and treatment technologies in future at the WRRF facility. These would occur at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All would be within the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. Other Proposed Improvements. The following is a list of other proposed upgrades/improvements included as part of the WRRF Project. • Odor Control. Odor control improvements would be installed at several locations. • Internal Access Improvements. Design includes an improved, single access point from Prado Road and an internal street system that will maintain access to the bus maintenance yard and City corporation yard during construction and after the WRRF upgrade. • Additional Electrical and Control Upgrades. Improved electrical service to meet the needs of new equipment, and improved instrumentation and controls for operation of the WRRF. • Renewable Energy Improvements. Installation of solar photovoltaic panels and related equipment at various locations throughout the WRRF. REGULATORY SETTING Federal Laws and Regulations A variety of federal statutes specifically address paleontological resources. They generally become applicable to specific projects if the project crosses federal lands. As this project is not on federal lands, federal statutes for paleontological resources do not apply. State and Local Laws and Regulations The following are California and local San Luis Obispo laws and regulations with respect to paleontological resources. California Environmental Quality Act. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Chapter 1, Section 21002) states that: It is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. The CEQA Guidelines (Article 1, Section 15002(a)(3)) state that CEQA is intended to prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible. If paleontological resources are identified during the Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report, or other initial project scoping studies (e.g., Preliminary Environmental Study), as being within the proposed project area, the sponsoring agency (City of San Luis City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 5 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers Obispo) must take those resources into consideration when evaluating project effects. The level of consideration may vary with the importance of the resource. Public Resources Code Section 5097.5. Section 5097.5 of the California Public Code Section states: No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor. As used in this section, “public lands” means lands owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the state, or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof. Consequently, local agencies are required to comply with PRC 5097.5 for their own activities, including construction and maintenance, as well as for permit actions (e.g., encroachment permits) undertaken by others. San Luis Obispo General Plan. The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan (2015) includes Policy 3.5.1, within the Cultural Resources section of its Conservation and Open Space Element, stating: The City shall provide for the protection of both known and potential archaeological resources. To avoid significant damage to important archaeological sites, all available measures, including purchase of the property in fee or easement, shall be explored at the time of a development proposal. Where such measures are not feasible and development would adversely affect identified archaeological or paleontological resources, mitigation shall be required pursuant to the Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines. GEOLOGIC SETTING The project area is depicted on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) San Luis Obispo and Pismo Beach, 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles (Wiegers 2010, 2011). The project is located in the San Luis Valley, between the San Luis Range to the west and the Santa Lucia Mountains to the east. These mountain ranges lie at the boundary of the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province to the south and the Coast Ranges geomorphic province to the north. These provinces are two of the 12 geomorphic provinces in the state, which are defined by lithologically distinct landscapes or landforms (CGS 2002). The San Luis Range and the Santa Lucia Mountains provide material for alluvial valley deposition within the San Luis Valley (Lettis et al. 2004). The project area itself overlies young alluvial flood-plain sediments of middle to early Holocene age (Figure 1; Wiegers 2010, 2011). These sediments consist of gravel, sand, and silts City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 6 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers deposited by San Luis Obispo Creek from material eroded from the Santa Lucia Mountains to the east. The project site includes one geologic unit mapped at the surface: Young alluvial flood-plain deposits (Qya2) (Wiegers 2010, 2011). PALEONTOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY Generally, only a highly trained paleontologist with specific expertise in a given type of fossil is qualified to determine the exact scientific significance of any given paleontological resources. However, a qualified paleontologist can evaluate the potential significance of fossil specimens and the paleontological sensitivity of given geologic units. The Society for Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) broadly defines significant paleontological resources as follows (SVP 2010:11): Fossils and fossiliferous deposits consisting of identifiable vertebrate fossils, large or small, uncommon invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils, and other data that provide taphonomic, taxonomic, phylogenetic, paleoecologic, stratigraphic, and/or biochronologic information. Paleontological resources are considered to be older than recorded human history and/or older than middle Holocene (i.e., older than about 5,000 radiocarbon years). Significant paleontological resources are determined to be fossils or assemblages of fossils that are unique, unusual, rare, uncommon, diagnostically important, or are common but have the potential to provide valuable scientific information for evaluating evolutionary patterns and processes, or which could improve our understanding of paleochronology, paleoecology, paleophylogeography or depositional histories. New or unique specimens can provide new insights into evolutionary history; however, additional specimens of even well represented lineages can be equally important for studying evolutionary pattern and process, evolutionary rates and paleophylogeography. Even unidentifiable material can provide useful data for dating geologic units if radiocarbon dating is possible. As such, common fossils (especially vertebrates) may be scientifically important, and therefore considered highly significant. The SVP (2010) describes sedimentary rock units as having a high, low, undetermined, or no potential for containing significant nonrenewable paleontological resources. This criterion is based on rock units within which vertebrate or significant invertebrate fossils have been determined by previous studies to be present or likely to be present. Significant paleontological resources are fossils or assemblages of fossils, which are unique, unusual, rare, uncommon, diagnostically or stratigraphically important, and those which add to an existing body of knowledge in specific areas, stratigraphically, taxonomically, or regionally. While these standards were specifically written to protect vertebrate paleontological resources, all fields of paleontology have adopted these guidelines. Rincon has evaluated the paleontological sensitivity of the proposed project site according to the following SVP (2010) categories: City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 7 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers I. High Potential (sensitivity) – Rock units from which significant vertebrate or significant invertebrate fossils or significant suites of plant fossils have been recovered are considered to have a high potential for containing significant non-renewable fossiliferous resources. These units include but are not limited to, sedimentary formations and some volcanic formations which contain significant nonrenewable paleontological resources anywhere within their geographical extent, and sedimentary rock units temporally or lithologically suitable for the preservation of fossils. Sensitivity comprises both (a) the potential for yielding abundant or significant vertebrate fossils or for yielding a few significant fossils, large or small, vertebrate, invertebrate, or botanical and (b) the importance of recovered evidence for new and significant taxonomic, phylogenetic, ecologic, or stratigraphic data. Areas which contain potentially datable organic remains older than Recent, including deposits associated with nests or middens, and areas which may contain new vertebrate deposits, traces, or trackways are also classified as significant. II. Low Potential (sensitivity) – Sedimentary rock units that are potentially fossiliferous, but have not yielded fossils in the past or contain common and/or widespread invertebrate fossils of well documented and understood taphonomic, phylogenetic species and habitat ecology. Reports in the paleontological literature or field surveys by a qualified vertebrate paleontologist may allow determination that some areas or units have low potentials for yielding significant fossils prior to the start of construction. Generally, these units will be poorly represented by specimens in institutional collections and will not require protection or salvage operations. However, as excavation for construction gets underway it is possible that significant and unanticipated paleontological resources might be encountered and require a change of classification from Low to High Potential and, thus, require monitoring and mitigation if the resources are found to be significant. III. Undetermined Potential (sensitivity) – Specific areas underlain by sedimentary rock units for which little information is available are considered to have undetermined fossiliferous potentials. Field surveys by a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to specifically determine the potentials of the rock units are required before programs of impact mitigation for such areas may be developed. IV. No Potential – Rock units of metamorphic or igneous origin are commonly classified as having no potential for containing significant paleontological resources. PALEONTOLOGICAL SENSITIVITIES OF MAPPED UNITS Middle to early Holocene young alluvium (Qya2) Middle to early Holocene young alluvial flood-plain deposits (Qya2) underlie the entire project area. These sediments consist of unconsolidated gravel, sand, and silt and fill a majority of the valley (Wiegers 2010, 2011). These sediments represent stream channel, alluvial fan, and debris flow deposits of material derived mainly from the Santa Lucia Mountains to the east. Most young alluvial sediments in the vicinity are only slightly dissected, with scant soil formation, suggesting a middle to early Holocene age. Because this corresponds to an age greater than City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 8 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers 5,000 years, these sediments could contain paleontological resources. As such, these sediments could contain significant paleontological resources, but this is more likely with increased depth in the subsurface, especially if Pleistocene-aged sediments are mantled. We consider sediments within the project area to have a low paleontological sensitivity at the surface, but to have an increased sensitivity with increased depth in the sub-surface. IMPACTS ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION The project area contains one mapped unit, which has low paleontological potential (sensitivity); middle to early Holocene young alluvium (Qya2). At the surface, this young alluvium is likely older than 5,000 years, and as such, could contain fossils. However, much of the project site is highly disturbed by past construction-related activities and so consists of artificial fill to unknown depths, which is unlikely to contain fossils. Throughout the entire project area all native sediments become older with depth (e.g., Pleistocene and older), where paleontological sensitivity becomes high. Pleistocene alluvium has a record of abundant and diverse vertebrate fauna throughout California (Agenbroad 2003; Macias et al. 2014; Springer et al. 2009) and is generally considered to have high paleontological sensitivity wherever it occurs. Overall, ground disturbance associated with the construction of the proposed project has a low potential to directly disturb geologic units with high paleontological sensitivity across the entire project site, even below approximately five feet. Impacts to paleontological resources resulting from ground disturbing construction activity could include the destruction of fossils, and would be considered a significant impact without mitigation. The following measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources within the project area to less than significant: • Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Program: Prior to construction activity a qualified paleontologist should prepare a Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Program to be implemented during project ground disturbance activity. This program should be based on the final project plans to identify specific areas where ground disturbing activity has the potential to impact scientifically significant paleontological resources and include the following details: 1) Outline the procedures for construction staff Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training; 2) Specify the extent, location and duration of paleontological monitoring based on proposed construction activity; 3) Specify the procedures for salvage and preparation of fossils; 4) Require a final mitigation and monitoring report; and 5) Specify the qualifications of a qualified paleontologist and paleontological monitors. City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 9 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers • Paleontological WEAP: Prior to the start of construction, construction personnel should be informed on the appearance of fossils and the procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction staff. • Paleontological Monitoring: Any excavations exceeding five feet in depth, including those in the young alluvium, should be monitored according to the specifications outlined in the PMMP. At a minimum, paleontological monitoring should be sufficient to evaluate the potential of newly exposed geologic units to contain fossils. If the qualified paleontologist determines that geologic units are unlikely to yield significant paleontological resources, monitoring may be discontinued. If ground disturbance activity is initiated in a new area or to a deeper depth than previous excavations, paleontological monitoring should be re-initiated. Monitoring should be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor as specified in the PMMP. Ground disturbing activity that does not exceed five feet in depth in young alluvium would not require paleontological monitoring. • Salvage of Fossils: If fossils are discovered, the qualified paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) should recover them. Typically fossils can be safely salvaged quickly by a single paleontologist and not disrupt construction activity. In some cases larger fossils (such as complete skeletons or large mammal fossils) require more extensive excavation and longer salvage periods. In this case the paleontologist should have the authority to temporarily direct, divert or halt construction activity to ensure that the fossil(s) can be removed in a safe and timely manner. • Preparation and Curation of Recovered Fossils: Once salvaged, fossils should be identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection (such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology or the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History), along with all pertinent field notes, photos, data, and maps. • Final Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Report: Upon completion of ground disturbing activity (and curation of fossils if necessary) the qualified paleontologist should prepare a final mitigation and monitoring report outlining the results of the mitigation and monitoring program. The report should include discussion of the location, duration and methods of the monitoring, stratigraphic sections, any recovered fossils, and the scientific significance of those fossils, and where fossils were curated. The Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Program should be supervised by a qualified paleontologist. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with an M.S. or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is experienced with paleontological procedures and techniques, who is knowledgeable in the geology of coastal California, and who has worked as a paleontological mitigation project supervisor for a least one year. Monitoring should be City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 10 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor, who is defined as an individual who has experience with collection and salvage of paleontological resources. Sincerely, RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. Kyle Brudvik, M.A. David Daitch, Ph.D. Paleontologist Professional Paleontologist/Program Manager Duane Vander Pluym, D.Env. Sr. Principal City of San Luis Obispo Paleontological Resources Assessment Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Page 11 of 11 Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers References Agenbroad, L.D. 2003. New localities, chronology, and comparisons for the pygmy mammoth (Mammuthus exilis). In J. Reumer (ed.), Advances in Mammoth Research, Proceedings of the 2nd International Mammoth Conference, Rotterdam, Netherlands. DEINSEA 9:1- 16. California Geological Survey (CGS). 2002. California Geomorphic Provinces. California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey Note 36. Lettis, W.R., K.L. Hanson, J.R. Unruh, M. McLaren, and W.U. Savage. 2004. Quaternary tectonic setting of the south-central coastal California. In M.A. Keller (ed.) Evolution of sedimentary basins/offshore oil and gas investigations-Santa Maria Province. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1995-AA, 21 pp. Macias, M.K., E.B. Kitao, and R.S. Gray. 2014. New Pleistocene megafauna localities in Santa Barbara County, California: Paleontological reconnaissance of the marine terrace deposits at Vandenberg Air Force Base. Paper presented at the Pacific Section AAPG/SEG/SEPM Joint Technical Conference, Bakersfield, CA (April 29, 2014). Reynolds, R.E. 1990. Paleontologic Mitigation Program, Cajon Pass Truck Escape Ramp, Cajon Summit, San Bernardino County, California. Caltrans, District 8, San Bernardino. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan. 2015. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). 2010. Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee, 11pp. Springer, K., E. Scott, J.C. Sagebiel, and L.K. Murray. 2009. The Diamond Valley Lake local fauna: Late Pleistocene vertebrates from inland southern California. In Albright, L.B. III (ed.), Papers on Geology, Vertebrate Paleontology, and Biostratigraphy in Honor of Michael O. Woodburne. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin 65:217-36. Wiegers, M.O. 2010. Geologic map of the San Luis Obispo 7.5’ quadrangle, San Luis Obispo County, California: A digital database, version 1.0. California Geological Survey, scale 1:24,000. _____. 2011. Preliminary geologic map of the Pismo Beach 7.5’ quadrangle, San Luis Obispo County, California: A digital database, version 1.0. California Geological Survey, scale 1:24,000. Appendix F Noise - Freq Weight : A- Time Weight : FAST- Level Range : 40-100- Max dB : 72.0 - 2009/05/09 00:03:57- Level Range : 40-100- SEL : 93.9- Leq : 64.4- No.s Date Time (dB) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2009/05/08 23:49:50 64.7 2 2009/05/08 23:49:51 65.4 3 2009/05/08 23:49:52 63.8 4 2009/05/08 23:49:53 65.1 5 2009/05/08 23:49:54 63.2 6 2009/05/08 23:49:55 63.3 7 2009/05/08 23:49:56 63.6 8 2009/05/08 23:49:57 63.3 9 2009/05/08 23:49:58 63.1 10 2009/05/08 23:49:59 64.5 11 2009/05/08 23:50:00 63.2 12 2009/05/08 23:50:01 65.0 13 2009/05/08 23:50:02 64.9 14 2009/05/08 23:50:03 64.8 15 2009/05/08 23:50:04 64.6 16 2009/05/08 23:50:05 65.5 17 2009/05/08 23:50:06 62.4 18 2009/05/08 23:50:07 66.1 19 2009/05/08 23:50:08 63.9 20 2009/05/08 23:50:09 63.1 21 2009/05/08 23:50:10 65.3 22 2009/05/08 23:50:11 62.2 23 2009/05/08 23:50:12 63.4 24 2009/05/08 23:50:13 61.9 25 2009/05/08 23:50:14 61.1 26 2009/05/08 23:50:15 61.7 27 2009/05/08 23:50:16 60.3 28 2009/05/08 23:50:17 60.0 29 2009/05/08 23:50:18 60.5 30 2009/05/08 23:50:19 61.4 31 2009/05/08 23:50:20 62.3 32 2009/05/08 23:50:21 61.4 33 2009/05/08 23:50:22 61.7 34 2009/05/08 23:50:23 61.4 35 2009/05/08 23:50:24 60.6 36 2009/05/08 23:50:25 61.2 37 2009/05/08 23:50:26 62.2 38 2009/05/08 23:50:27 63.1 39 2009/05/08 23:50:28 63.6 40 2009/05/08 23:50:29 62.3 41 2009/05/08 23:50:30 63.4 42 2009/05/08 23:50:31 64.5 43 2009/05/08 23:50:32 64.3 44 2009/05/08 23:50:33 66.2 45 2009/05/08 23:50:34 65.7 46 2009/05/08 23:50:35 64.7 47 2009/05/08 23:50:36 66.8 48 2009/05/08 23:50:37 64.9 49 2009/05/08 23:50:38 65.6 50 2009/05/08 23:50:39 63.0 51 2009/05/08 23:50:40 65.7 52 2009/05/08 23:50:41 66.2 53 2009/05/08 23:50:42 65.2 54 2009/05/08 23:50:43 64.0 55 2009/05/08 23:50:44 65.0 56 2009/05/08 23:50:45 64.7 57 2009/05/08 23:50:46 64.0 58 2009/05/08 23:50:47 66.4 59 2009/05/08 23:50:48 63.3 60 2009/05/08 23:50:49 65.5 61 2009/05/08 23:50:50 64.7 62 2009/05/08 23:50:51 63.2 63 2009/05/08 23:50:52 62.2 64 2009/05/08 23:50:53 63.9 65 2009/05/08 23:50:54 64.6 66 2009/05/08 23:50:55 64.0 67 2009/05/08 23:50:56 66.6 68 2009/05/08 23:50:57 65.2 69 2009/05/08 23:50:58 66.0 70 2009/05/08 23:50:59 63.8 71 2009/05/08 23:51:00 65.6 72 2009/05/08 23:51:01 65.0 73 2009/05/08 23:51:02 65.0 74 2009/05/08 23:51:03 65.0 75 2009/05/08 23:51:04 64.6 76 2009/05/08 23:51:05 65.3 77 2009/05/08 23:51:06 62.9 78 2009/05/08 23:51:07 62.7 79 2009/05/08 23:51:08 62.5 80 2009/05/08 23:51:09 62.7 81 2009/05/08 23:51:10 61.9 82 2009/05/08 23:51:11 63.2 83 2009/05/08 23:51:12 61.1 84 2009/05/08 23:51:13 61.2 85 2009/05/08 23:51:14 60.2 86 2009/05/08 23:51:15 60.8 87 2009/05/08 23:51:16 59.0 88 2009/05/08 23:51:17 61.1 89 2009/05/08 23:51:18 62.1 90 2009/05/08 23:51:19 62.7 91 2009/05/08 23:51:20 64.5 92 2009/05/08 23:51:21 65.7 93 2009/05/08 23:51:22 66.3 94 2009/05/08 23:51:23 66.9 95 2009/05/08 23:51:24 66.3 96 2009/05/08 23:51:25 66.7 97 2009/05/08 23:51:26 67.3 98 2009/05/08 23:51:27 68.1 99 2009/05/08 23:51:28 68.7 100 2009/05/08 23:51:29 67.5 101 2009/05/08 23:51:30 67.4 102 2009/05/08 23:51:31 65.1 103 2009/05/08 23:51:32 64.9 104 2009/05/08 23:51:33 67.1 105 2009/05/08 23:51:34 65.8 106 2009/05/08 23:51:35 66.0 107 2009/05/08 23:51:36 64.9 108 2009/05/08 23:51:37 66.0 109 2009/05/08 23:51:38 65.5 110 2009/05/08 23:51:39 64.9 111 2009/05/08 23:51:40 64.8 112 2009/05/08 23:51:41 65.3 113 2009/05/08 23:51:42 65.1 114 2009/05/08 23:51:43 64.4 115 2009/05/08 23:51:44 65.1 116 2009/05/08 23:51:45 63.9 117 2009/05/08 23:51:46 65.0 118 2009/05/08 23:51:47 66.7 119 2009/05/08 23:51:48 65.4 120 2009/05/08 23:51:49 66.0 121 2009/05/08 23:51:50 64.7 122 2009/05/08 23:51:51 64.5 123 2009/05/08 23:51:52 64.7 124 2009/05/08 23:51:53 64.1 125 2009/05/08 23:51:54 64.3 126 2009/05/08 23:51:55 64.8 127 2009/05/08 23:51:56 64.6 128 2009/05/08 23:51:57 63.2 129 2009/05/08 23:51:58 64.9 130 2009/05/08 23:51:59 64.9 131 2009/05/08 23:52:00 63.9 132 2009/05/08 23:52:01 64.4 133 2009/05/08 23:52:02 64.7 134 2009/05/08 23:52:03 64.7 135 2009/05/08 23:52:04 64.9 136 2009/05/08 23:52:05 64.7 137 2009/05/08 23:52:06 66.5 138 2009/05/08 23:52:07 66.8 139 2009/05/08 23:52:08 66.0 140 2009/05/08 23:52:09 66.0 141 2009/05/08 23:52:10 65.4 142 2009/05/08 23:52:11 64.7 143 2009/05/08 23:52:12 64.8 144 2009/05/08 23:52:13 66.0 145 2009/05/08 23:52:14 65.4 146 2009/05/08 23:52:15 63.8 147 2009/05/08 23:52:16 63.2 148 2009/05/08 23:52:17 62.4 149 2009/05/08 23:52:18 62.6 150 2009/05/08 23:52:19 61.8 151 2009/05/08 23:52:20 60.8 152 2009/05/08 23:52:21 62.6 153 2009/05/08 23:52:22 60.5 154 2009/05/08 23:52:23 61.5 155 2009/05/08 23:52:24 60.8 156 2009/05/08 23:52:25 64.0 157 2009/05/08 23:52:26 63.7 158 2009/05/08 23:52:27 63.7 159 2009/05/08 23:52:28 64.7 160 2009/05/08 23:52:29 63.7 161 2009/05/08 23:52:30 64.8 162 2009/05/08 23:52:31 64.6 163 2009/05/08 23:52:32 64.0 164 2009/05/08 23:52:33 64.1 165 2009/05/08 23:52:34 65.0 166 2009/05/08 23:52:35 64.2 167 2009/05/08 23:52:36 65.6 168 2009/05/08 23:52:37 66.5 169 2009/05/08 23:52:38 65.6 170 2009/05/08 23:52:39 66.8 171 2009/05/08 23:52:40 66.5 172 2009/05/08 23:52:41 67.2 173 2009/05/08 23:52:42 66.6 174 2009/05/08 23:52:43 66.3 175 2009/05/08 23:52:44 66.7 176 2009/05/08 23:52:45 65.3 177 2009/05/08 23:52:46 65.7 178 2009/05/08 23:52:47 66.1 179 2009/05/08 23:52:48 66.7 180 2009/05/08 23:52:49 66.8 181 2009/05/08 23:52:50 66.8 182 2009/05/08 23:52:51 66.8 183 2009/05/08 23:52:52 66.5 184 2009/05/08 23:52:53 66.8 185 2009/05/08 23:52:54 66.6 186 2009/05/08 23:52:55 65.2 187 2009/05/08 23:52:56 66.0 188 2009/05/08 23:52:57 66.7 189 2009/05/08 23:52:58 66.4 190 2009/05/08 23:52:59 64.5 191 2009/05/08 23:53:00 65.3 192 2009/05/08 23:53:01 64.9 193 2009/05/08 23:53:02 64.4 194 2009/05/08 23:53:03 62.9 195 2009/05/08 23:53:04 63.9 196 2009/05/08 23:53:05 64.0 197 2009/05/08 23:53:06 64.4 198 2009/05/08 23:53:07 65.8 199 2009/05/08 23:53:08 65.9 200 2009/05/08 23:53:09 66.6 201 2009/05/08 23:53:10 64.4 202 2009/05/08 23:53:11 65.5 203 2009/05/08 23:53:12 65.9 204 2009/05/08 23:53:13 66.1 205 2009/05/08 23:53:14 63.0 206 2009/05/08 23:53:15 66.6 207 2009/05/08 23:53:16 64.5 208 2009/05/08 23:53:17 63.8 209 2009/05/08 23:53:18 63.7 210 2009/05/08 23:53:19 65.4 211 2009/05/08 23:53:20 64.7 212 2009/05/08 23:53:21 65.3 213 2009/05/08 23:53:22 64.6 214 2009/05/08 23:53:23 63.9 215 2009/05/08 23:53:24 63.8 216 2009/05/08 23:53:25 64.9 217 2009/05/08 23:53:26 65.3 218 2009/05/08 23:53:27 64.8 219 2009/05/08 23:53:28 65.0 220 2009/05/08 23:53:29 65.4 221 2009/05/08 23:53:30 64.8 222 2009/05/08 23:53:31 64.7 223 2009/05/08 23:53:32 65.8 224 2009/05/08 23:53:33 64.9 225 2009/05/08 23:53:34 64.5 226 2009/05/08 23:53:35 64.0 227 2009/05/08 23:53:36 64.0 228 2009/05/08 23:53:37 63.6 229 2009/05/08 23:53:38 63.3 230 2009/05/08 23:53:39 64.9 231 2009/05/08 23:53:40 64.2 232 2009/05/08 23:53:41 63.0 233 2009/05/08 23:53:42 63.6 234 2009/05/08 23:53:43 63.6 235 2009/05/08 23:53:44 63.8 236 2009/05/08 23:53:45 63.5 237 2009/05/08 23:53:46 62.4 238 2009/05/08 23:53:47 60.7 239 2009/05/08 23:53:48 62.6 240 2009/05/08 23:53:49 62.8 241 2009/05/08 23:53:50 63.7 242 2009/05/08 23:53:51 62.6 243 2009/05/08 23:53:52 63.0 244 2009/05/08 23:53:53 62.2 245 2009/05/08 23:53:54 61.3 246 2009/05/08 23:53:55 60.6 247 2009/05/08 23:53:56 63.2 248 2009/05/08 23:53:57 61.2 249 2009/05/08 23:53:58 65.0 250 2009/05/08 23:53:59 65.3 251 2009/05/08 23:54:00 63.7 252 2009/05/08 23:54:01 63.4 253 2009/05/08 23:54:02 65.0 254 2009/05/08 23:54:03 64.7 255 2009/05/08 23:54:04 64.1 256 2009/05/08 23:54:05 64.3 257 2009/05/08 23:54:06 63.4 258 2009/05/08 23:54:07 63.4 259 2009/05/08 23:54:08 63.7 260 2009/05/08 23:54:09 64.3 261 2009/05/08 23:54:10 62.2 262 2009/05/08 23:54:11 64.2 263 2009/05/08 23:54:12 64.1 264 2009/05/08 23:54:13 63.7 265 2009/05/08 23:54:14 62.5 266 2009/05/08 23:54:15 62.4 267 2009/05/08 23:54:16 64.4 268 2009/05/08 23:54:17 62.8 269 2009/05/08 23:54:18 64.2 270 2009/05/08 23:54:19 64.8 271 2009/05/08 23:54:20 64.0 272 2009/05/08 23:54:21 61.8 273 2009/05/08 23:54:22 64.1 274 2009/05/08 23:54:23 62.0 275 2009/05/08 23:54:24 62.1 276 2009/05/08 23:54:25 61.9 277 2009/05/08 23:54:26 61.4 278 2009/05/08 23:54:27 61.6 279 2009/05/08 23:54:28 60.1 280 2009/05/08 23:54:29 60.9 281 2009/05/08 23:54:30 61.9 282 2009/05/08 23:54:31 61.6 283 2009/05/08 23:54:32 62.0 284 2009/05/08 23:54:33 62.8 285 2009/05/08 23:54:34 61.5 286 2009/05/08 23:54:35 63.5 287 2009/05/08 23:54:36 64.2 288 2009/05/08 23:54:37 66.1 289 2009/05/08 23:54:38 65.4 290 2009/05/08 23:54:39 63.1 291 2009/05/08 23:54:40 66.1 292 2009/05/08 23:54:41 65.2 293 2009/05/08 23:54:42 64.0 294 2009/05/08 23:54:43 65.4 295 2009/05/08 23:54:44 64.9 296 2009/05/08 23:54:45 64.5 297 2009/05/08 23:54:46 64.3 298 2009/05/08 23:54:47 64.7 299 2009/05/08 23:54:48 65.2 300 2009/05/08 23:54:49 65.7 301 2009/05/08 23:54:50 67.0 302 2009/05/08 23:54:51 65.2 303 2009/05/08 23:54:52 66.2 304 2009/05/08 23:54:53 64.3 305 2009/05/08 23:54:54 64.9 306 2009/05/08 23:54:55 65.5 307 2009/05/08 23:54:56 65.4 308 2009/05/08 23:54:57 67.0 309 2009/05/08 23:54:58 66.0 310 2009/05/08 23:54:59 65.9 311 2009/05/08 23:55:00 64.8 312 2009/05/08 23:55:01 66.3 313 2009/05/08 23:55:02 66.2 314 2009/05/08 23:55:03 65.3 315 2009/05/08 23:55:04 66.8 316 2009/05/08 23:55:05 65.7 317 2009/05/08 23:55:06 65.1 318 2009/05/08 23:55:07 65.3 319 2009/05/08 23:55:08 63.6 320 2009/05/08 23:55:09 64.4 321 2009/05/08 23:55:10 65.6 322 2009/05/08 23:55:11 64.9 323 2009/05/08 23:55:12 65.1 324 2009/05/08 23:55:13 65.5 325 2009/05/08 23:55:14 64.1 326 2009/05/08 23:55:15 64.1 327 2009/05/08 23:55:16 63.1 328 2009/05/08 23:55:17 64.2 329 2009/05/08 23:55:18 62.5 330 2009/05/08 23:55:19 64.8 331 2009/05/08 23:55:20 64.4 332 2009/05/08 23:55:21 65.3 333 2009/05/08 23:55:22 65.6 334 2009/05/08 23:55:23 64.4 335 2009/05/08 23:55:24 64.3 336 2009/05/08 23:55:25 65.1 337 2009/05/08 23:55:26 66.3 338 2009/05/08 23:55:27 65.5 339 2009/05/08 23:55:28 65.7 340 2009/05/08 23:55:29 66.0 341 2009/05/08 23:55:30 64.4 342 2009/05/08 23:55:31 66.9 343 2009/05/08 23:55:32 65.5 344 2009/05/08 23:55:33 65.9 345 2009/05/08 23:55:34 64.0 346 2009/05/08 23:55:35 63.1 347 2009/05/08 23:55:36 63.0 348 2009/05/08 23:55:37 63.6 349 2009/05/08 23:55:38 62.4 350 2009/05/08 23:55:39 63.9 351 2009/05/08 23:55:40 64.9 352 2009/05/08 23:55:41 62.9 353 2009/05/08 23:55:42 64.2 354 2009/05/08 23:55:43 66.3 355 2009/05/08 23:55:44 67.8 356 2009/05/08 23:55:45 66.0 357 2009/05/08 23:55:46 66.6 358 2009/05/08 23:55:47 66.5 359 2009/05/08 23:55:48 68.1 360 2009/05/08 23:55:49 67.1 361 2009/05/08 23:55:50 67.3 362 2009/05/08 23:55:51 66.7 363 2009/05/08 23:55:52 65.9 364 2009/05/08 23:55:53 66.2 365 2009/05/08 23:55:54 68.7 366 2009/05/08 23:55:55 66.7 367 2009/05/08 23:55:56 67.5 368 2009/05/08 23:55:57 67.7 369 2009/05/08 23:55:58 68.9 370 2009/05/08 23:55:59 68.5 371 2009/05/08 23:56:00 67.9 372 2009/05/08 23:56:01 67.0 373 2009/05/08 23:56:02 65.9 374 2009/05/08 23:56:03 66.0 375 2009/05/08 23:56:04 66.3 376 2009/05/08 23:56:05 67.3 377 2009/05/08 23:56:06 67.0 378 2009/05/08 23:56:07 69.7 379 2009/05/08 23:56:08 68.4 380 2009/05/08 23:56:09 67.8 381 2009/05/08 23:56:10 67.2 382 2009/05/08 23:56:11 67.2 383 2009/05/08 23:56:12 67.1 384 2009/05/08 23:56:13 65.7 385 2009/05/08 23:56:14 66.6 386 2009/05/08 23:56:15 65.1 387 2009/05/08 23:56:16 64.7 388 2009/05/08 23:56:17 65.3 389 2009/05/08 23:56:18 65.6 390 2009/05/08 23:56:19 66.1 391 2009/05/08 23:56:20 66.2 392 2009/05/08 23:56:21 64.9 393 2009/05/08 23:56:22 65.7 394 2009/05/08 23:56:23 64.6 395 2009/05/08 23:56:24 64.1 396 2009/05/08 23:56:25 64.2 397 2009/05/08 23:56:26 65.1 398 2009/05/08 23:56:27 64.5 399 2009/05/08 23:56:28 63.8 400 2009/05/08 23:56:29 63.7 401 2009/05/08 23:56:30 62.5 402 2009/05/08 23:56:31 62.6 403 2009/05/08 23:56:32 63.1 404 2009/05/08 23:56:33 62.1 405 2009/05/08 23:56:34 64.6 406 2009/05/08 23:56:35 61.5 407 2009/05/08 23:56:36 62.4 408 2009/05/08 23:56:37 64.4 409 2009/05/08 23:56:38 63.0 410 2009/05/08 23:56:39 64.1 411 2009/05/08 23:56:40 63.8 412 2009/05/08 23:56:41 64.6 413 2009/05/08 23:56:42 63.4 414 2009/05/08 23:56:43 65.3 415 2009/05/08 23:56:44 66.3 416 2009/05/08 23:56:45 62.1 417 2009/05/08 23:56:46 64.7 418 2009/05/08 23:56:47 66.2 419 2009/05/08 23:56:48 64.5 420 2009/05/08 23:56:49 64.7 421 2009/05/08 23:56:50 64.3 422 2009/05/08 23:56:51 61.4 423 2009/05/08 23:56:52 62.1 424 2009/05/08 23:56:53 62.2 425 2009/05/08 23:56:54 62.7 426 2009/05/08 23:56:55 61.3 427 2009/05/08 23:56:56 62.5 428 2009/05/08 23:56:57 62.1 429 2009/05/08 23:56:58 64.4 430 2009/05/08 23:56:59 61.9 431 2009/05/08 23:57:00 61.6 432 2009/05/08 23:57:01 62.6 433 2009/05/08 23:57:02 62.9 434 2009/05/08 23:57:03 62.8 435 2009/05/08 23:57:04 63.5 436 2009/05/08 23:57:05 65.0 437 2009/05/08 23:57:06 65.5 438 2009/05/08 23:57:07 63.5 439 2009/05/08 23:57:08 64.9 440 2009/05/08 23:57:09 65.5 441 2009/05/08 23:57:10 64.8 442 2009/05/08 23:57:11 63.6 443 2009/05/08 23:57:12 63.5 444 2009/05/08 23:57:13 63.2 445 2009/05/08 23:57:14 63.0 446 2009/05/08 23:57:15 61.4 447 2009/05/08 23:57:16 62.4 448 2009/05/08 23:57:17 62.8 449 2009/05/08 23:57:18 61.9 450 2009/05/08 23:57:19 60.1 451 2009/05/08 23:57:20 60.5 452 2009/05/08 23:57:21 60.2 453 2009/05/08 23:57:22 59.5 454 2009/05/08 23:57:23 58.5 455 2009/05/08 23:57:24 60.2 456 2009/05/08 23:57:25 60.2 457 2009/05/08 23:57:26 60.2 458 2009/05/08 23:57:27 59.4 459 2009/05/08 23:57:28 60.0 460 2009/05/08 23:57:29 59.0 461 2009/05/08 23:57:30 58.8 462 2009/05/08 23:57:31 58.9 463 2009/05/08 23:57:32 60.1 464 2009/05/08 23:57:33 60.2 465 2009/05/08 23:57:34 61.3 466 2009/05/08 23:57:35 63.4 467 2009/05/08 23:57:36 63.5 468 2009/05/08 23:57:37 65.2 469 2009/05/08 23:57:38 63.7 470 2009/05/08 23:57:39 64.0 471 2009/05/08 23:57:40 63.1 472 2009/05/08 23:57:41 63.3 473 2009/05/08 23:57:42 63.1 474 2009/05/08 23:57:43 62.5 475 2009/05/08 23:57:44 63.7 476 2009/05/08 23:57:45 62.6 477 2009/05/08 23:57:46 65.7 478 2009/05/08 23:57:47 64.6 479 2009/05/08 23:57:48 65.8 480 2009/05/08 23:57:49 64.8 481 2009/05/08 23:57:50 65.8 482 2009/05/08 23:57:51 65.5 483 2009/05/08 23:57:52 65.6 484 2009/05/08 23:57:53 64.5 485 2009/05/08 23:57:54 63.6 486 2009/05/08 23:57:55 62.2 487 2009/05/08 23:57:56 63.5 488 2009/05/08 23:57:57 63.5 489 2009/05/08 23:57:58 64.3 490 2009/05/08 23:57:59 64.7 491 2009/05/08 23:58:00 63.7 492 2009/05/08 23:58:01 63.8 493 2009/05/08 23:58:02 62.9 494 2009/05/08 23:58:03 64.5 495 2009/05/08 23:58:04 63.4 496 2009/05/08 23:58:05 62.9 497 2009/05/08 23:58:06 62.8 498 2009/05/08 23:58:07 63.3 499 2009/05/08 23:58:08 65.0 500 2009/05/08 23:58:09 62.0 501 2009/05/08 23:58:10 62.1 502 2009/05/08 23:58:11 61.8 503 2009/05/08 23:58:12 63.9 504 2009/05/08 23:58:13 63.7 505 2009/05/08 23:58:14 63.6 506 2009/05/08 23:58:15 65.5 507 2009/05/08 23:58:16 64.2 508 2009/05/08 23:58:17 66.7 509 2009/05/08 23:58:18 65.6 510 2009/05/08 23:58:19 64.5 511 2009/05/08 23:58:20 64.6 512 2009/05/08 23:58:21 66.1 513 2009/05/08 23:58:22 64.5 514 2009/05/08 23:58:23 65.8 515 2009/05/08 23:58:24 64.8 516 2009/05/08 23:58:25 66.0 517 2009/05/08 23:58:26 65.9 518 2009/05/08 23:58:27 66.9 519 2009/05/08 23:58:28 63.7 520 2009/05/08 23:58:29 64.1 521 2009/05/08 23:58:30 63.8 522 2009/05/08 23:58:31 62.6 523 2009/05/08 23:58:32 64.6 524 2009/05/08 23:58:33 64.3 525 2009/05/08 23:58:34 64.5 526 2009/05/08 23:58:35 64.7 527 2009/05/08 23:58:36 66.4 528 2009/05/08 23:58:37 66.6 529 2009/05/08 23:58:38 67.8 530 2009/05/08 23:58:39 66.5 531 2009/05/08 23:58:40 67.2 532 2009/05/08 23:58:41 64.1 533 2009/05/08 23:58:42 64.2 534 2009/05/08 23:58:43 63.7 535 2009/05/08 23:58:44 63.1 536 2009/05/08 23:58:45 64.3 537 2009/05/08 23:58:46 65.3 538 2009/05/08 23:58:47 63.6 539 2009/05/08 23:58:48 62.6 540 2009/05/08 23:58:49 64.0 541 2009/05/08 23:58:50 63.6 542 2009/05/08 23:58:51 61.8 543 2009/05/08 23:58:52 62.7 544 2009/05/08 23:58:53 66.0 545 2009/05/08 23:58:54 62.9 546 2009/05/08 23:58:55 64.0 547 2009/05/08 23:58:56 63.3 548 2009/05/08 23:58:57 63.9 549 2009/05/08 23:58:58 65.5 550 2009/05/08 23:58:59 64.3 551 2009/05/08 23:59:00 65.8 552 2009/05/08 23:59:01 66.2 553 2009/05/08 23:59:02 64.7 554 2009/05/08 23:59:03 64.7 555 2009/05/08 23:59:04 67.0 556 2009/05/08 23:59:05 65.6 557 2009/05/08 23:59:06 66.3 558 2009/05/08 23:59:07 65.2 559 2009/05/08 23:59:08 64.3 560 2009/05/08 23:59:09 63.5 561 2009/05/08 23:59:10 65.5 562 2009/05/08 23:59:11 64.0 563 2009/05/08 23:59:12 63.8 564 2009/05/08 23:59:13 63.6 565 2009/05/08 23:59:14 64.8 566 2009/05/08 23:59:15 64.5 567 2009/05/08 23:59:16 64.4 568 2009/05/08 23:59:17 63.6 569 2009/05/08 23:59:18 63.4 570 2009/05/08 23:59:19 64.0 571 2009/05/08 23:59:20 64.9 572 2009/05/08 23:59:21 65.0 573 2009/05/08 23:59:22 65.6 574 2009/05/08 23:59:23 66.7 575 2009/05/08 23:59:24 67.1 576 2009/05/08 23:59:25 67.5 577 2009/05/08 23:59:26 66.1 578 2009/05/08 23:59:27 64.7 579 2009/05/08 23:59:28 65.9 580 2009/05/08 23:59:29 65.6 581 2009/05/08 23:59:30 65.7 582 2009/05/08 23:59:31 62.5 583 2009/05/08 23:59:32 63.6 584 2009/05/08 23:59:33 64.4 585 2009/05/08 23:59:34 65.2 586 2009/05/08 23:59:35 65.9 587 2009/05/08 23:59:36 65.0 588 2009/05/08 23:59:37 64.6 589 2009/05/08 23:59:38 64.5 590 2009/05/08 23:59:39 65.1 591 2009/05/08 23:59:40 63.8 592 2009/05/08 23:59:41 64.3 593 2009/05/08 23:59:42 64.2 594 2009/05/08 23:59:43 64.6 595 2009/05/08 23:59:44 64.2 596 2009/05/08 23:59:45 62.5 597 2009/05/08 23:59:46 62.1 598 2009/05/08 23:59:47 62.3 599 2009/05/08 23:59:48 62.2 600 2009/05/08 23:59:49 62.5 601 2009/05/08 23:59:50 61.5 602 2009/05/08 23:59:51 61.5 603 2009/05/08 23:59:52 61.3 604 2009/05/08 23:59:53 61.6 605 2009/05/08 23:59:54 62.0 606 2009/05/08 23:59:55 62.7 607 2009/05/08 23:59:56 61.9 608 2009/05/08 23:59:57 61.0 609 2009/05/08 23:59:58 63.1 610 2009/05/08 23:59:59 63.9 611 2009/05/09 00:00:00 64.3 612 2009/05/09 00:00:01 63.2 613 2009/05/09 00:00:02 62.4 614 2009/05/09 00:00:03 62.5 615 2009/05/09 00:00:04 61.6 616 2009/05/09 00:00:05 62.0 617 2009/05/09 00:00:06 62.5 618 2009/05/09 00:00:07 60.8 619 2009/05/09 00:00:08 61.5 620 2009/05/09 00:00:09 62.2 621 2009/05/09 00:00:10 63.3 622 2009/05/09 00:00:11 62.1 623 2009/05/09 00:00:12 61.4 624 2009/05/09 00:00:13 61.1 625 2009/05/09 00:00:14 63.0 626 2009/05/09 00:00:15 63.3 627 2009/05/09 00:00:16 61.6 628 2009/05/09 00:00:17 61.1 629 2009/05/09 00:00:18 61.1 630 2009/05/09 00:00:19 61.7 631 2009/05/09 00:00:20 60.3 632 2009/05/09 00:00:21 61.3 633 2009/05/09 00:00:22 61.8 634 2009/05/09 00:00:23 62.3 635 2009/05/09 00:00:24 62.4 636 2009/05/09 00:00:25 61.6 637 2009/05/09 00:00:26 62.7 638 2009/05/09 00:00:27 64.3 639 2009/05/09 00:00:28 62.9 640 2009/05/09 00:00:29 60.7 641 2009/05/09 00:00:30 60.4 642 2009/05/09 00:00:31 60.7 643 2009/05/09 00:00:32 60.5 644 2009/05/09 00:00:33 61.0 645 2009/05/09 00:00:34 59.9 646 2009/05/09 00:00:35 59.0 647 2009/05/09 00:00:36 60.0 648 2009/05/09 00:00:37 60.7 649 2009/05/09 00:00:38 61.4 650 2009/05/09 00:00:39 61.9 651 2009/05/09 00:00:40 60.9 652 2009/05/09 00:00:41 60.9 653 2009/05/09 00:00:42 62.8 654 2009/05/09 00:00:43 61.6 655 2009/05/09 00:00:44 61.3 656 2009/05/09 00:00:45 62.1 657 2009/05/09 00:00:46 61.5 658 2009/05/09 00:00:47 61.9 659 2009/05/09 00:00:48 63.2 660 2009/05/09 00:00:49 63.1 661 2009/05/09 00:00:50 63.4 662 2009/05/09 00:00:51 63.4 663 2009/05/09 00:00:52 62.2 664 2009/05/09 00:00:53 63.3 665 2009/05/09 00:00:54 63.6 666 2009/05/09 00:00:55 64.1 667 2009/05/09 00:00:56 64.9 668 2009/05/09 00:00:57 65.1 669 2009/05/09 00:00:58 66.5 670 2009/05/09 00:00:59 65.1 671 2009/05/09 00:01:00 65.0 672 2009/05/09 00:01:01 63.7 673 2009/05/09 00:01:02 63.2 674 2009/05/09 00:01:03 62.8 675 2009/05/09 00:01:04 66.1 676 2009/05/09 00:01:05 63.9 677 2009/05/09 00:01:06 65.0 678 2009/05/09 00:01:07 64.1 679 2009/05/09 00:01:08 64.8 680 2009/05/09 00:01:09 64.2 681 2009/05/09 00:01:10 65.9 682 2009/05/09 00:01:11 65.5 683 2009/05/09 00:01:12 67.1 684 2009/05/09 00:01:13 63.8 685 2009/05/09 00:01:14 61.8 686 2009/05/09 00:01:15 62.7 687 2009/05/09 00:01:16 63.3 688 2009/05/09 00:01:17 63.6 689 2009/05/09 00:01:18 63.3 690 2009/05/09 00:01:19 63.3 691 2009/05/09 00:01:20 65.0 692 2009/05/09 00:01:21 64.4 693 2009/05/09 00:01:22 66.0 694 2009/05/09 00:01:23 64.4 695 2009/05/09 00:01:24 64.8 696 2009/05/09 00:01:25 63.1 697 2009/05/09 00:01:26 63.0 698 2009/05/09 00:01:27 62.4 699 2009/05/09 00:01:28 61.8 700 2009/05/09 00:01:29 63.2 701 2009/05/09 00:01:30 63.8 702 2009/05/09 00:01:31 64.5 703 2009/05/09 00:01:32 65.7 704 2009/05/09 00:01:33 65.1 705 2009/05/09 00:01:34 65.2 706 2009/05/09 00:01:35 64.8 707 2009/05/09 00:01:36 66.3 708 2009/05/09 00:01:37 64.7 709 2009/05/09 00:01:38 65.4 710 2009/05/09 00:01:39 64.6 711 2009/05/09 00:01:40 65.8 712 2009/05/09 00:01:41 64.3 713 2009/05/09 00:01:42 65.6 714 2009/05/09 00:01:43 66.7 715 2009/05/09 00:01:44 66.0 716 2009/05/09 00:01:45 65.6 717 2009/05/09 00:01:46 63.9 718 2009/05/09 00:01:47 64.9 719 2009/05/09 00:01:48 64.3 720 2009/05/09 00:01:49 64.8 721 2009/05/09 00:01:50 65.0 722 2009/05/09 00:01:51 63.9 723 2009/05/09 00:01:52 66.9 724 2009/05/09 00:01:53 65.3 725 2009/05/09 00:01:54 65.4 726 2009/05/09 00:01:55 66.6 727 2009/05/09 00:01:56 67.8 728 2009/05/09 00:01:57 66.5 729 2009/05/09 00:01:58 67.7 730 2009/05/09 00:01:59 65.0 731 2009/05/09 00:02:00 64.5 732 2009/05/09 00:02:01 63.7 733 2009/05/09 00:02:02 64.3 734 2009/05/09 00:02:03 65.9 735 2009/05/09 00:02:04 63.3 736 2009/05/09 00:02:05 65.2 737 2009/05/09 00:02:06 63.0 738 2009/05/09 00:02:07 66.3 739 2009/05/09 00:02:08 63.3 740 2009/05/09 00:02:09 65.3 741 2009/05/09 00:02:10 64.4 742 2009/05/09 00:02:11 64.7 743 2009/05/09 00:02:12 64.2 744 2009/05/09 00:02:13 63.7 745 2009/05/09 00:02:14 64.8 746 2009/05/09 00:02:15 62.9 747 2009/05/09 00:02:16 63.0 748 2009/05/09 00:02:17 62.9 749 2009/05/09 00:02:18 61.8 750 2009/05/09 00:02:19 61.7 751 2009/05/09 00:02:20 62.6 752 2009/05/09 00:02:21 61.5 753 2009/05/09 00:02:22 61.0 754 2009/05/09 00:02:23 62.2 755 2009/05/09 00:02:24 63.4 756 2009/05/09 00:02:25 62.9 757 2009/05/09 00:02:26 64.9 758 2009/05/09 00:02:27 64.9 759 2009/05/09 00:02:28 63.6 760 2009/05/09 00:02:29 64.5 761 2009/05/09 00:02:30 65.6 762 2009/05/09 00:02:31 65.7 763 2009/05/09 00:02:32 62.0 764 2009/05/09 00:02:33 61.4 765 2009/05/09 00:02:34 61.1 766 2009/05/09 00:02:35 62.5 767 2009/05/09 00:02:36 63.4 768 2009/05/09 00:02:37 62.7 769 2009/05/09 00:02:38 63.8 770 2009/05/09 00:02:39 63.6 771 2009/05/09 00:02:40 64.3 772 2009/05/09 00:02:41 63.8 773 2009/05/09 00:02:42 64.0 774 2009/05/09 00:02:43 63.8 775 2009/05/09 00:02:44 63.0 776 2009/05/09 00:02:45 62.4 777 2009/05/09 00:02:46 62.6 778 2009/05/09 00:02:47 62.7 779 2009/05/09 00:02:48 62.9 780 2009/05/09 00:02:49 63.3 781 2009/05/09 00:02:50 63.1 782 2009/05/09 00:02:51 63.7 783 2009/05/09 00:02:52 64.7 784 2009/05/09 00:02:53 63.7 785 2009/05/09 00:02:54 63.7 786 2009/05/09 00:02:55 62.5 787 2009/05/09 00:02:56 64.1 788 2009/05/09 00:02:57 62.9 789 2009/05/09 00:02:58 63.1 790 2009/05/09 00:02:59 64.5 791 2009/05/09 00:03:00 65.1 792 2009/05/09 00:03:01 63.8 793 2009/05/09 00:03:02 64.3 794 2009/05/09 00:03:03 65.7 795 2009/05/09 00:03:04 65.5 796 2009/05/09 00:03:05 66.4 797 2009/05/09 00:03:06 66.1 798 2009/05/09 00:03:07 66.1 799 2009/05/09 00:03:08 64.7 800 2009/05/09 00:03:09 66.0 801 2009/05/09 00:03:10 65.4 802 2009/05/09 00:03:11 63.7 803 2009/05/09 00:03:12 63.6 804 2009/05/09 00:03:13 63.5 805 2009/05/09 00:03:14 64.0 806 2009/05/09 00:03:15 63.7 807 2009/05/09 00:03:16 63.4 808 2009/05/09 00:03:17 62.7 809 2009/05/09 00:03:18 62.6 810 2009/05/09 00:03:19 62.7 811 2009/05/09 00:03:20 63.5 812 2009/05/09 00:03:21 64.7 813 2009/05/09 00:03:22 62.8 814 2009/05/09 00:03:23 65.7 815 2009/05/09 00:03:24 64.2 816 2009/05/09 00:03:25 63.5 817 2009/05/09 00:03:26 64.9 818 2009/05/09 00:03:27 64.4 819 2009/05/09 00:03:28 63.2 820 2009/05/09 00:03:29 64.4 821 2009/05/09 00:03:30 63.5 822 2009/05/09 00:03:31 62.7 823 2009/05/09 00:03:32 62.5 824 2009/05/09 00:03:33 62.7 825 2009/05/09 00:03:34 61.8 826 2009/05/09 00:03:35 62.0 827 2009/05/09 00:03:36 63.2 828 2009/05/09 00:03:37 63.2 829 2009/05/09 00:03:38 61.6 830 2009/05/09 00:03:39 65.1 831 2009/05/09 00:03:40 64.5 832 2009/05/09 00:03:41 63.9 833 2009/05/09 00:03:42 65.2 834 2009/05/09 00:03:43 65.2 835 2009/05/09 00:03:44 65.4 836 2009/05/09 00:03:45 64.0 837 2009/05/09 00:03:46 64.7 838 2009/05/09 00:03:47 65.6 839 2009/05/09 00:03:48 63.7 840 2009/05/09 00:03:49 67.5 841 2009/05/09 00:03:50 66.1 842 2009/05/09 00:03:51 67.2 843 2009/05/09 00:03:52 69.9 844 2009/05/09 00:03:53 67.7 845 2009/05/09 00:03:54 67.8 846 2009/05/09 00:03:55 67.7 847 2009/05/09 00:03:56 67.9 848 2009/05/09 00:03:57 67.5 849 2009/05/09 00:03:58 70.4 850 2009/05/09 00:03:59 64.5 851 2009/05/09 00:04:00 64.9 852 2009/05/09 00:04:01 65.4 853 2009/05/09 00:04:02 64.9 854 2009/05/09 00:04:03 65.0 855 2009/05/09 00:04:04 65.3 856 2009/05/09 00:04:05 63.7 857 2009/05/09 00:04:06 65.2 858 2009/05/09 00:04:07 62.8 859 2009/05/09 00:04:08 62.7 860 2009/05/09 00:04:09 63.2 861 2009/05/09 00:04:10 63.5 862 2009/05/09 00:04:11 62.6 863 2009/05/09 00:04:12 63.9 864 2009/05/09 00:04:13 62.1 865 2009/05/09 00:04:14 63.6 866 2009/05/09 00:04:15 61.1 867 2009/05/09 00:04:16 60.9 868 2009/05/09 00:04:17 61.4 869 2009/05/09 00:04:18 61.0 870 2009/05/09 00:04:19 60.4 871 2009/05/09 00:04:20 60.3 872 2009/05/09 00:04:21 60.5 873 2009/05/09 00:04:22 60.7 874 2009/05/09 00:04:23 60.3 875 2009/05/09 00:04:24 60.5 876 2009/05/09 00:04:25 62.6 877 2009/05/09 00:04:26 62.2 878 2009/05/09 00:04:27 63.1 879 2009/05/09 00:04:28 62.7 880 2009/05/09 00:04:29 64.9 881 2009/05/09 00:04:30 62.9 882 2009/05/09 00:04:31 63.2 883 2009/05/09 00:04:32 65.0 884 2009/05/09 00:04:33 63.7 885 2009/05/09 00:04:34 64.0 886 2009/05/09 00:04:35 63.9 887 2009/05/09 00:04:36 65.4 888 2009/05/09 00:04:37 65.1 889 2009/05/09 00:04:38 67.5 890 2009/05/09 00:04:39 66.0 891 2009/05/09 00:04:40 65.8 892 2009/05/09 00:04:41 64.5 893 2009/05/09 00:04:42 65.7 894 2009/05/09 00:04:43 65.5 895 2009/05/09 00:04:44 63.5 896 2009/05/09 00:04:45 62.8 897 2009/05/09 00:04:46 61.8 898 2009/05/09 00:04:47 61.6 899 2009/05/09 00:04:48 62.7 900 2009/05/09 00:04:49 61.2 - Freq Weight : A- Time Weight : FAST- Level Range : 40-100- Max dB : 82.0 - 2009/05/09 00:24:39- Level Range : 40-100- SEL : 92.7- Leq : 63.2- No.s Date Time (dB) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2009/05/09 00:20:50 63.2 2 2009/05/09 00:20:51 63.1 3 2009/05/09 00:20:52 62.5 4 2009/05/09 00:20:53 63.0 5 2009/05/09 00:20:54 63.3 6 2009/05/09 00:20:55 63.1 7 2009/05/09 00:20:56 63.3 8 2009/05/09 00:20:57 64.1 9 2009/05/09 00:20:58 62.7 10 2009/05/09 00:20:59 63.2 11 2009/05/09 00:21:00 62.8 12 2009/05/09 00:21:01 62.9 13 2009/05/09 00:21:02 62.6 14 2009/05/09 00:21:03 62.9 15 2009/05/09 00:21:04 62.7 16 2009/05/09 00:21:05 62.3 17 2009/05/09 00:21:06 62.1 18 2009/05/09 00:21:07 62.4 19 2009/05/09 00:21:08 61.8 20 2009/05/09 00:21:09 62.1 21 2009/05/09 00:21:10 61.9 22 2009/05/09 00:21:11 62.0 23 2009/05/09 00:21:12 61.8 24 2009/05/09 00:21:13 62.2 25 2009/05/09 00:21:14 61.6 26 2009/05/09 00:21:15 61.9 27 2009/05/09 00:21:16 61.5 28 2009/05/09 00:21:17 61.5 29 2009/05/09 00:21:18 61.2 30 2009/05/09 00:21:19 61.0 31 2009/05/09 00:21:20 61.4 32 2009/05/09 00:21:21 61.3 33 2009/05/09 00:21:22 61.6 34 2009/05/09 00:21:23 61.5 35 2009/05/09 00:21:24 61.9 36 2009/05/09 00:21:25 61.9 37 2009/05/09 00:21:26 61.1 38 2009/05/09 00:21:27 61.5 39 2009/05/09 00:21:28 61.0 40 2009/05/09 00:21:29 61.1 41 2009/05/09 00:21:30 61.6 42 2009/05/09 00:21:31 61.0 43 2009/05/09 00:21:32 61.8 44 2009/05/09 00:21:33 61.0 45 2009/05/09 00:21:34 61.1 46 2009/05/09 00:21:35 61.4 47 2009/05/09 00:21:36 61.2 48 2009/05/09 00:21:37 61.3 49 2009/05/09 00:21:38 61.7 50 2009/05/09 00:21:39 61.6 51 2009/05/09 00:21:40 62.4 52 2009/05/09 00:21:41 62.2 53 2009/05/09 00:21:42 61.8 54 2009/05/09 00:21:43 61.9 55 2009/05/09 00:21:44 62.0 56 2009/05/09 00:21:45 61.6 57 2009/05/09 00:21:46 62.0 58 2009/05/09 00:21:47 61.8 59 2009/05/09 00:21:48 62.1 60 2009/05/09 00:21:49 61.7 61 2009/05/09 00:21:50 61.9 62 2009/05/09 00:21:51 62.2 63 2009/05/09 00:21:52 62.0 64 2009/05/09 00:21:53 62.1 65 2009/05/09 00:21:54 61.3 66 2009/05/09 00:21:55 61.7 67 2009/05/09 00:21:56 62.1 68 2009/05/09 00:21:57 61.3 69 2009/05/09 00:21:58 61.4 70 2009/05/09 00:21:59 61.4 71 2009/05/09 00:22:00 61.5 72 2009/05/09 00:22:01 61.4 73 2009/05/09 00:22:02 61.8 74 2009/05/09 00:22:03 61.7 75 2009/05/09 00:22:04 61.8 76 2009/05/09 00:22:05 62.0 77 2009/05/09 00:22:06 61.8 78 2009/05/09 00:22:07 61.2 79 2009/05/09 00:22:08 61.2 80 2009/05/09 00:22:09 61.8 81 2009/05/09 00:22:10 63.7 82 2009/05/09 00:22:11 62.4 83 2009/05/09 00:22:12 61.9 84 2009/05/09 00:22:13 61.4 85 2009/05/09 00:22:14 62.0 86 2009/05/09 00:22:15 61.4 87 2009/05/09 00:22:16 61.7 88 2009/05/09 00:22:17 62.0 89 2009/05/09 00:22:18 62.3 90 2009/05/09 00:22:19 62.3 91 2009/05/09 00:22:20 62.6 92 2009/05/09 00:22:21 61.4 93 2009/05/09 00:22:22 61.7 94 2009/05/09 00:22:23 61.6 95 2009/05/09 00:22:24 61.3 96 2009/05/09 00:22:25 61.7 97 2009/05/09 00:22:26 60.7 98 2009/05/09 00:22:27 61.3 99 2009/05/09 00:22:28 61.3 100 2009/05/09 00:22:29 61.0 101 2009/05/09 00:22:30 61.2 102 2009/05/09 00:22:31 61.3 103 2009/05/09 00:22:32 61.6 104 2009/05/09 00:22:33 61.9 105 2009/05/09 00:22:34 61.7 106 2009/05/09 00:22:35 62.4 107 2009/05/09 00:22:36 61.5 108 2009/05/09 00:22:37 61.5 109 2009/05/09 00:22:38 61.6 110 2009/05/09 00:22:39 62.4 111 2009/05/09 00:22:40 62.4 112 2009/05/09 00:22:41 63.2 113 2009/05/09 00:22:42 62.5 114 2009/05/09 00:22:43 63.2 115 2009/05/09 00:22:44 63.2 116 2009/05/09 00:22:45 62.9 117 2009/05/09 00:22:46 62.6 118 2009/05/09 00:22:47 62.3 119 2009/05/09 00:22:48 62.1 120 2009/05/09 00:22:49 63.0 121 2009/05/09 00:22:50 63.6 122 2009/05/09 00:22:51 63.1 123 2009/05/09 00:22:52 62.9 124 2009/05/09 00:22:53 63.2 125 2009/05/09 00:22:54 63.1 126 2009/05/09 00:22:55 63.7 127 2009/05/09 00:22:56 63.3 128 2009/05/09 00:22:57 63.0 129 2009/05/09 00:22:58 62.8 130 2009/05/09 00:22:59 63.3 131 2009/05/09 00:23:00 62.4 132 2009/05/09 00:23:01 63.0 133 2009/05/09 00:23:02 62.9 134 2009/05/09 00:23:03 62.7 135 2009/05/09 00:23:04 62.6 136 2009/05/09 00:23:05 62.6 137 2009/05/09 00:23:06 63.1 138 2009/05/09 00:23:07 62.6 139 2009/05/09 00:23:08 62.8 140 2009/05/09 00:23:09 63.0 141 2009/05/09 00:23:10 62.4 142 2009/05/09 00:23:11 61.4 143 2009/05/09 00:23:12 61.9 144 2009/05/09 00:23:13 62.6 145 2009/05/09 00:23:14 61.6 146 2009/05/09 00:23:15 61.4 147 2009/05/09 00:23:16 61.3 148 2009/05/09 00:23:17 61.8 149 2009/05/09 00:23:18 61.0 150 2009/05/09 00:23:19 61.6 151 2009/05/09 00:23:20 61.0 152 2009/05/09 00:23:21 60.7 153 2009/05/09 00:23:22 61.0 154 2009/05/09 00:23:23 62.1 155 2009/05/09 00:23:24 62.3 156 2009/05/09 00:23:25 62.4 157 2009/05/09 00:23:26 62.9 158 2009/05/09 00:23:27 63.2 159 2009/05/09 00:23:28 62.8 160 2009/05/09 00:23:29 62.2 161 2009/05/09 00:23:30 62.6 162 2009/05/09 00:23:31 62.2 163 2009/05/09 00:23:32 61.8 164 2009/05/09 00:23:33 62.6 165 2009/05/09 00:23:34 62.4 166 2009/05/09 00:23:35 62.2 167 2009/05/09 00:23:36 62.4 168 2009/05/09 00:23:37 62.2 169 2009/05/09 00:23:38 62.2 170 2009/05/09 00:23:39 62.7 171 2009/05/09 00:23:40 62.6 172 2009/05/09 00:23:41 62.6 173 2009/05/09 00:23:42 62.9 174 2009/05/09 00:23:43 62.8 175 2009/05/09 00:23:44 62.6 176 2009/05/09 00:23:45 63.1 177 2009/05/09 00:23:46 62.7 178 2009/05/09 00:23:47 62.4 179 2009/05/09 00:23:48 61.5 180 2009/05/09 00:23:49 61.2 181 2009/05/09 00:23:50 62.0 182 2009/05/09 00:23:51 61.2 183 2009/05/09 00:23:52 61.6 184 2009/05/09 00:23:53 60.9 185 2009/05/09 00:23:54 61.2 186 2009/05/09 00:23:55 61.4 187 2009/05/09 00:23:56 61.1 188 2009/05/09 00:23:57 61.4 189 2009/05/09 00:23:58 61.4 190 2009/05/09 00:23:59 61.1 191 2009/05/09 00:24:00 62.1 192 2009/05/09 00:24:01 61.7 193 2009/05/09 00:24:02 61.8 194 2009/05/09 00:24:03 61.4 195 2009/05/09 00:24:04 62.2 196 2009/05/09 00:24:05 61.8 197 2009/05/09 00:24:06 61.9 198 2009/05/09 00:24:07 62.3 199 2009/05/09 00:24:08 61.5 200 2009/05/09 00:24:09 61.5 201 2009/05/09 00:24:10 61.9 202 2009/05/09 00:24:11 61.4 203 2009/05/09 00:24:12 61.8 204 2009/05/09 00:24:13 61.7 205 2009/05/09 00:24:14 61.8 206 2009/05/09 00:24:15 61.8 207 2009/05/09 00:24:16 61.9 208 2009/05/09 00:24:17 61.8 209 2009/05/09 00:24:18 61.7 210 2009/05/09 00:24:19 62.5 211 2009/05/09 00:24:20 61.4 212 2009/05/09 00:24:21 61.6 213 2009/05/09 00:24:22 61.9 214 2009/05/09 00:24:23 62.1 215 2009/05/09 00:24:24 62.4 216 2009/05/09 00:24:25 63.3 217 2009/05/09 00:24:26 62.7 218 2009/05/09 00:24:27 65.8 219 2009/05/09 00:24:28 67.5 220 2009/05/09 00:24:29 62.8 221 2009/05/09 00:24:30 67.4 222 2009/05/09 00:24:31 64.9 223 2009/05/09 00:24:32 65.2 224 2009/05/09 00:24:33 65.6 225 2009/05/09 00:24:34 64.7 226 2009/05/09 00:24:35 68.1 227 2009/05/09 00:24:36 68.5 228 2009/05/09 00:24:37 70.4 229 2009/05/09 00:24:38 76.7 230 2009/05/09 00:24:39 73.8 231 2009/05/09 00:24:40 71.8 232 2009/05/09 00:24:41 72.8 233 2009/05/09 00:24:42 74.9 234 2009/05/09 00:24:43 75.6 235 2009/05/09 00:24:44 73.9 236 2009/05/09 00:24:45 74.8 237 2009/05/09 00:24:46 69.2 238 2009/05/09 00:24:47 74.4 239 2009/05/09 00:24:48 70.9 240 2009/05/09 00:24:49 70.2 241 2009/05/09 00:24:50 68.4 242 2009/05/09 00:24:51 69.0 243 2009/05/09 00:24:52 68.8 244 2009/05/09 00:24:53 67.6 245 2009/05/09 00:24:54 67.3 246 2009/05/09 00:24:55 73.4 247 2009/05/09 00:24:56 68.5 248 2009/05/09 00:24:57 67.4 249 2009/05/09 00:24:58 72.8 250 2009/05/09 00:24:59 67.0 251 2009/05/09 00:25:00 68.7 252 2009/05/09 00:25:01 65.4 253 2009/05/09 00:25:02 64.4 254 2009/05/09 00:25:03 63.4 255 2009/05/09 00:25:04 62.9 256 2009/05/09 00:25:05 63.0 257 2009/05/09 00:25:06 62.0 258 2009/05/09 00:25:07 63.0 259 2009/05/09 00:25:08 62.7 260 2009/05/09 00:25:09 62.3 261 2009/05/09 00:25:10 61.9 262 2009/05/09 00:25:11 62.8 263 2009/05/09 00:25:12 62.1 264 2009/05/09 00:25:13 62.1 265 2009/05/09 00:25:14 62.8 266 2009/05/09 00:25:15 62.4 267 2009/05/09 00:25:16 62.4 268 2009/05/09 00:25:17 62.1 269 2009/05/09 00:25:18 62.2 270 2009/05/09 00:25:19 61.7 271 2009/05/09 00:25:20 62.4 272 2009/05/09 00:25:21 61.8 273 2009/05/09 00:25:22 62.0 274 2009/05/09 00:25:23 61.9 275 2009/05/09 00:25:24 61.5 276 2009/05/09 00:25:25 61.8 277 2009/05/09 00:25:26 61.7 278 2009/05/09 00:25:27 61.6 279 2009/05/09 00:25:28 61.5 280 2009/05/09 00:25:29 61.5 281 2009/05/09 00:25:30 62.1 282 2009/05/09 00:25:31 61.8 283 2009/05/09 00:25:32 61.9 284 2009/05/09 00:25:33 62.1 285 2009/05/09 00:25:34 63.9 286 2009/05/09 00:25:35 62.7 287 2009/05/09 00:25:36 62.3 288 2009/05/09 00:25:37 62.7 289 2009/05/09 00:25:38 62.8 290 2009/05/09 00:25:39 63.2 291 2009/05/09 00:25:40 62.9 292 2009/05/09 00:25:41 63.3 293 2009/05/09 00:25:42 62.1 294 2009/05/09 00:25:43 62.5 295 2009/05/09 00:25:44 62.9 296 2009/05/09 00:25:45 62.7 297 2009/05/09 00:25:46 62.9 298 2009/05/09 00:25:47 62.6 299 2009/05/09 00:25:48 62.9 300 2009/05/09 00:25:49 62.3 301 2009/05/09 00:25:50 63.0 302 2009/05/09 00:25:51 62.7 303 2009/05/09 00:25:52 63.7 304 2009/05/09 00:25:53 62.6 305 2009/05/09 00:25:54 62.1 306 2009/05/09 00:25:55 61.9 307 2009/05/09 00:25:56 61.5 308 2009/05/09 00:25:57 61.1 309 2009/05/09 00:25:58 61.2 310 2009/05/09 00:25:59 61.6 311 2009/05/09 00:26:00 61.2 312 2009/05/09 00:26:01 60.7 313 2009/05/09 00:26:02 62.4 314 2009/05/09 00:26:03 62.5 315 2009/05/09 00:26:04 62.6 316 2009/05/09 00:26:05 62.7 317 2009/05/09 00:26:06 62.8 318 2009/05/09 00:26:07 62.1 319 2009/05/09 00:26:08 63.0 320 2009/05/09 00:26:09 62.9 321 2009/05/09 00:26:10 62.6 322 2009/05/09 00:26:11 62.6 323 2009/05/09 00:26:12 63.9 324 2009/05/09 00:26:13 63.4 325 2009/05/09 00:26:14 62.4 326 2009/05/09 00:26:15 63.4 327 2009/05/09 00:26:16 64.3 328 2009/05/09 00:26:17 63.4 329 2009/05/09 00:26:18 62.9 330 2009/05/09 00:26:19 63.2 331 2009/05/09 00:26:20 62.3 332 2009/05/09 00:26:21 62.5 333 2009/05/09 00:26:22 62.8 334 2009/05/09 00:26:23 63.1 335 2009/05/09 00:26:24 63.0 336 2009/05/09 00:26:25 63.3 337 2009/05/09 00:26:26 62.2 338 2009/05/09 00:26:27 62.5 339 2009/05/09 00:26:28 61.1 340 2009/05/09 00:26:29 61.7 341 2009/05/09 00:26:30 61.6 342 2009/05/09 00:26:31 61.6 343 2009/05/09 00:26:32 61.7 344 2009/05/09 00:26:33 61.1 345 2009/05/09 00:26:34 60.9 346 2009/05/09 00:26:35 61.4 347 2009/05/09 00:26:36 61.8 348 2009/05/09 00:26:37 61.1 349 2009/05/09 00:26:38 61.4 350 2009/05/09 00:26:39 61.7 351 2009/05/09 00:26:40 61.1 352 2009/05/09 00:26:41 61.8 353 2009/05/09 00:26:42 61.3 354 2009/05/09 00:26:43 61.4 355 2009/05/09 00:26:44 63.7 356 2009/05/09 00:26:45 62.1 357 2009/05/09 00:26:46 62.0 358 2009/05/09 00:26:47 62.4 359 2009/05/09 00:26:48 63.4 360 2009/05/09 00:26:49 62.3 361 2009/05/09 00:26:50 61.7 362 2009/05/09 00:26:51 61.9 363 2009/05/09 00:26:52 61.7 364 2009/05/09 00:26:53 61.4 365 2009/05/09 00:26:54 60.9 366 2009/05/09 00:26:55 61.0 367 2009/05/09 00:26:56 60.6 368 2009/05/09 00:26:57 60.7 369 2009/05/09 00:26:58 61.0 370 2009/05/09 00:26:59 60.5 371 2009/05/09 00:27:00 61.9 372 2009/05/09 00:27:01 60.9 373 2009/05/09 00:27:02 61.5 374 2009/05/09 00:27:03 61.4 375 2009/05/09 00:27:04 61.6 376 2009/05/09 00:27:05 61.4 377 2009/05/09 00:27:06 61.2 378 2009/05/09 00:27:07 61.7 379 2009/05/09 00:27:08 62.3 380 2009/05/09 00:27:09 61.8 381 2009/05/09 00:27:10 61.6 382 2009/05/09 00:27:11 61.7 383 2009/05/09 00:27:12 62.2 384 2009/05/09 00:27:13 61.7 385 2009/05/09 00:27:14 63.4 386 2009/05/09 00:27:15 62.6 387 2009/05/09 00:27:16 61.7 388 2009/05/09 00:27:17 62.8 389 2009/05/09 00:27:18 61.6 390 2009/05/09 00:27:19 61.5 391 2009/05/09 00:27:20 61.6 392 2009/05/09 00:27:21 61.0 393 2009/05/09 00:27:22 61.4 394 2009/05/09 00:27:23 61.1 395 2009/05/09 00:27:24 61.6 396 2009/05/09 00:27:25 61.3 397 2009/05/09 00:27:26 61.7 398 2009/05/09 00:27:27 61.8 399 2009/05/09 00:27:28 61.9 400 2009/05/09 00:27:29 61.8 401 2009/05/09 00:27:30 61.4 402 2009/05/09 00:27:31 61.6 403 2009/05/09 00:27:32 60.7 404 2009/05/09 00:27:33 61.4 405 2009/05/09 00:27:34 60.8 406 2009/05/09 00:27:35 60.8 407 2009/05/09 00:27:36 60.5 408 2009/05/09 00:27:37 61.1 409 2009/05/09 00:27:38 60.8 410 2009/05/09 00:27:39 60.7 411 2009/05/09 00:27:40 61.6 412 2009/05/09 00:27:41 60.8 413 2009/05/09 00:27:42 61.3 414 2009/05/09 00:27:43 61.2 415 2009/05/09 00:27:44 61.3 416 2009/05/09 00:27:45 61.8 417 2009/05/09 00:27:46 61.7 418 2009/05/09 00:27:47 62.6 419 2009/05/09 00:27:48 61.6 420 2009/05/09 00:27:49 61.4 421 2009/05/09 00:27:50 61.6 422 2009/05/09 00:27:51 60.8 423 2009/05/09 00:27:52 61.4 424 2009/05/09 00:27:53 61.6 425 2009/05/09 00:27:54 62.1 426 2009/05/09 00:27:55 61.3 427 2009/05/09 00:27:56 61.1 428 2009/05/09 00:27:57 61.5 429 2009/05/09 00:27:58 62.0 430 2009/05/09 00:27:59 61.4 431 2009/05/09 00:28:00 61.9 432 2009/05/09 00:28:01 62.0 433 2009/05/09 00:28:02 61.6 434 2009/05/09 00:28:03 61.4 435 2009/05/09 00:28:04 61.7 436 2009/05/09 00:28:05 61.3 437 2009/05/09 00:28:06 61.8 438 2009/05/09 00:28:07 61.3 439 2009/05/09 00:28:08 60.9 440 2009/05/09 00:28:09 62.4 441 2009/05/09 00:28:10 61.6 442 2009/05/09 00:28:11 61.4 443 2009/05/09 00:28:12 62.0 444 2009/05/09 00:28:13 61.6 445 2009/05/09 00:28:14 62.3 446 2009/05/09 00:28:15 62.4 447 2009/05/09 00:28:16 62.0 448 2009/05/09 00:28:17 61.8 449 2009/05/09 00:28:18 62.3 450 2009/05/09 00:28:19 63.3 451 2009/05/09 00:28:20 63.1 452 2009/05/09 00:28:21 62.4 453 2009/05/09 00:28:22 62.1 454 2009/05/09 00:28:23 62.7 455 2009/05/09 00:28:24 63.0 456 2009/05/09 00:28:25 61.9 457 2009/05/09 00:28:26 62.1 458 2009/05/09 00:28:27 61.9 459 2009/05/09 00:28:28 62.3 460 2009/05/09 00:28:29 62.0 461 2009/05/09 00:28:30 61.8 462 2009/05/09 00:28:31 61.7 463 2009/05/09 00:28:32 62.0 464 2009/05/09 00:28:33 60.8 465 2009/05/09 00:28:34 61.1 466 2009/05/09 00:28:35 60.7 467 2009/05/09 00:28:36 61.4 468 2009/05/09 00:28:37 61.8 469 2009/05/09 00:28:38 63.0 470 2009/05/09 00:28:39 62.2 471 2009/05/09 00:28:40 63.0 472 2009/05/09 00:28:41 62.6 473 2009/05/09 00:28:42 63.0 474 2009/05/09 00:28:43 62.6 475 2009/05/09 00:28:44 62.0 476 2009/05/09 00:28:45 62.2 477 2009/05/09 00:28:46 62.2 478 2009/05/09 00:28:47 62.2 479 2009/05/09 00:28:48 62.0 480 2009/05/09 00:28:49 62.4 481 2009/05/09 00:28:50 63.0 482 2009/05/09 00:28:51 62.7 483 2009/05/09 00:28:52 62.2 484 2009/05/09 00:28:53 62.5 485 2009/05/09 00:28:54 61.7 486 2009/05/09 00:28:55 62.1 487 2009/05/09 00:28:56 62.1 488 2009/05/09 00:28:57 62.3 489 2009/05/09 00:28:58 62.3 490 2009/05/09 00:28:59 61.8 491 2009/05/09 00:29:00 61.2 492 2009/05/09 00:29:01 62.2 493 2009/05/09 00:29:02 62.1 494 2009/05/09 00:29:03 62.4 495 2009/05/09 00:29:04 61.2 496 2009/05/09 00:29:05 61.6 497 2009/05/09 00:29:06 61.4 498 2009/05/09 00:29:07 61.4 499 2009/05/09 00:29:08 61.2 500 2009/05/09 00:29:09 60.9 501 2009/05/09 00:29:10 60.9 502 2009/05/09 00:29:11 61.6 503 2009/05/09 00:29:12 61.3 504 2009/05/09 00:29:13 61.5 505 2009/05/09 00:29:14 61.2 506 2009/05/09 00:29:15 60.8 507 2009/05/09 00:29:16 61.0 508 2009/05/09 00:29:17 61.0 509 2009/05/09 00:29:18 60.9 510 2009/05/09 00:29:19 61.5 511 2009/05/09 00:29:20 61.2 512 2009/05/09 00:29:21 61.5 513 2009/05/09 00:29:22 61.2 514 2009/05/09 00:29:23 60.8 515 2009/05/09 00:29:24 60.4 516 2009/05/09 00:29:25 61.1 517 2009/05/09 00:29:26 61.3 518 2009/05/09 00:29:27 61.7 519 2009/05/09 00:29:28 61.5 520 2009/05/09 00:29:29 61.4 521 2009/05/09 00:29:30 61.5 522 2009/05/09 00:29:31 61.4 523 2009/05/09 00:29:32 61.8 524 2009/05/09 00:29:33 61.5 525 2009/05/09 00:29:34 61.3 526 2009/05/09 00:29:35 61.9 527 2009/05/09 00:29:36 61.1 528 2009/05/09 00:29:37 61.3 529 2009/05/09 00:29:38 61.1 530 2009/05/09 00:29:39 61.8 531 2009/05/09 00:29:40 61.7 532 2009/05/09 00:29:41 61.8 533 2009/05/09 00:29:42 61.5 534 2009/05/09 00:29:43 61.5 535 2009/05/09 00:29:44 61.2 536 2009/05/09 00:29:45 60.8 537 2009/05/09 00:29:46 60.8 538 2009/05/09 00:29:47 61.1 539 2009/05/09 00:29:48 61.4 540 2009/05/09 00:29:49 61.7 541 2009/05/09 00:29:50 61.4 542 2009/05/09 00:29:51 61.3 543 2009/05/09 00:29:52 61.4 544 2009/05/09 00:29:53 61.5 545 2009/05/09 00:29:54 61.3 546 2009/05/09 00:29:55 61.3 547 2009/05/09 00:29:56 62.0 548 2009/05/09 00:29:57 61.3 549 2009/05/09 00:29:58 61.6 550 2009/05/09 00:29:59 61.9 551 2009/05/09 00:30:00 61.5 552 2009/05/09 00:30:01 61.7 553 2009/05/09 00:30:02 61.5 554 2009/05/09 00:30:03 61.1 555 2009/05/09 00:30:04 61.2 556 2009/05/09 00:30:05 61.2 557 2009/05/09 00:30:06 61.4 558 2009/05/09 00:30:07 61.2 559 2009/05/09 00:30:08 61.5 560 2009/05/09 00:30:09 61.1 561 2009/05/09 00:30:10 61.3 562 2009/05/09 00:30:11 61.0 563 2009/05/09 00:30:12 61.1 564 2009/05/09 00:30:13 61.3 565 2009/05/09 00:30:14 60.8 566 2009/05/09 00:30:15 61.3 567 2009/05/09 00:30:16 61.7 568 2009/05/09 00:30:17 61.8 569 2009/05/09 00:30:18 61.5 570 2009/05/09 00:30:19 61.6 571 2009/05/09 00:30:20 61.3 572 2009/05/09 00:30:21 61.7 573 2009/05/09 00:30:22 61.4 574 2009/05/09 00:30:23 62.0 575 2009/05/09 00:30:24 61.4 576 2009/05/09 00:30:25 61.4 577 2009/05/09 00:30:26 62.1 578 2009/05/09 00:30:27 61.3 579 2009/05/09 00:30:28 61.5 580 2009/05/09 00:30:29 61.6 581 2009/05/09 00:30:30 61.2 582 2009/05/09 00:30:31 61.0 583 2009/05/09 00:30:32 61.3 584 2009/05/09 00:30:33 61.1 585 2009/05/09 00:30:34 60.7 586 2009/05/09 00:30:35 61.0 587 2009/05/09 00:30:36 61.1 588 2009/05/09 00:30:37 60.5 589 2009/05/09 00:30:38 60.9 590 2009/05/09 00:30:39 61.4 591 2009/05/09 00:30:40 61.3 592 2009/05/09 00:30:41 61.0 593 2009/05/09 00:30:42 60.6 594 2009/05/09 00:30:43 61.0 595 2009/05/09 00:30:44 61.0 596 2009/05/09 00:30:45 60.6 597 2009/05/09 00:30:46 61.5 598 2009/05/09 00:30:47 60.5 599 2009/05/09 00:30:48 60.9 600 2009/05/09 00:30:49 60.8 601 2009/05/09 00:30:50 61.1 602 2009/05/09 00:30:51 61.0 603 2009/05/09 00:30:52 60.9 604 2009/05/09 00:30:53 61.0 605 2009/05/09 00:30:54 60.6 606 2009/05/09 00:30:55 61.3 607 2009/05/09 00:30:56 61.4 608 2009/05/09 00:30:57 61.7 609 2009/05/09 00:30:58 61.7 610 2009/05/09 00:30:59 61.3 611 2009/05/09 00:31:00 61.4 612 2009/05/09 00:31:01 61.8 613 2009/05/09 00:31:02 61.6 614 2009/05/09 00:31:03 61.8 615 2009/05/09 00:31:04 61.7 616 2009/05/09 00:31:05 61.6 617 2009/05/09 00:31:06 61.6 618 2009/05/09 00:31:07 61.7 619 2009/05/09 00:31:08 61.8 620 2009/05/09 00:31:09 61.3 621 2009/05/09 00:31:10 61.6 622 2009/05/09 00:31:11 61.7 623 2009/05/09 00:31:12 62.1 624 2009/05/09 00:31:13 62.1 625 2009/05/09 00:31:14 63.2 626 2009/05/09 00:31:15 62.6 627 2009/05/09 00:31:16 63.4 628 2009/05/09 00:31:17 62.8 629 2009/05/09 00:31:18 62.9 630 2009/05/09 00:31:19 63.4 631 2009/05/09 00:31:20 62.5 632 2009/05/09 00:31:21 62.5 633 2009/05/09 00:31:22 62.2 634 2009/05/09 00:31:23 62.5 635 2009/05/09 00:31:24 63.0 636 2009/05/09 00:31:25 62.4 637 2009/05/09 00:31:26 62.3 638 2009/05/09 00:31:27 62.6 639 2009/05/09 00:31:28 62.5 640 2009/05/09 00:31:29 62.5 641 2009/05/09 00:31:30 62.3 642 2009/05/09 00:31:31 61.8 643 2009/05/09 00:31:32 62.2 644 2009/05/09 00:31:33 62.2 645 2009/05/09 00:31:34 62.1 646 2009/05/09 00:31:35 61.8 647 2009/05/09 00:31:36 62.4 648 2009/05/09 00:31:37 62.2 649 2009/05/09 00:31:38 62.3 650 2009/05/09 00:31:39 61.7 651 2009/05/09 00:31:40 61.9 652 2009/05/09 00:31:41 62.0 653 2009/05/09 00:31:42 61.6 654 2009/05/09 00:31:43 61.8 655 2009/05/09 00:31:44 61.4 656 2009/05/09 00:31:45 61.9 657 2009/05/09 00:31:46 62.0 658 2009/05/09 00:31:47 61.4 659 2009/05/09 00:31:48 62.4 660 2009/05/09 00:31:49 62.1 661 2009/05/09 00:31:50 62.2 662 2009/05/09 00:31:51 61.7 663 2009/05/09 00:31:52 61.8 664 2009/05/09 00:31:53 61.8 665 2009/05/09 00:31:54 61.5 666 2009/05/09 00:31:55 62.3 667 2009/05/09 00:31:56 61.9 668 2009/05/09 00:31:57 61.0 669 2009/05/09 00:31:58 61.3 670 2009/05/09 00:31:59 61.4 671 2009/05/09 00:32:00 61.4 672 2009/05/09 00:32:01 62.1 673 2009/05/09 00:32:02 61.9 674 2009/05/09 00:32:03 62.0 675 2009/05/09 00:32:04 62.3 676 2009/05/09 00:32:05 61.9 677 2009/05/09 00:32:06 62.8 678 2009/05/09 00:32:07 63.4 679 2009/05/09 00:32:08 61.9 680 2009/05/09 00:32:09 62.3 681 2009/05/09 00:32:10 62.1 682 2009/05/09 00:32:11 62.2 683 2009/05/09 00:32:12 63.3 684 2009/05/09 00:32:13 62.8 685 2009/05/09 00:32:14 61.7 686 2009/05/09 00:32:15 62.6 687 2009/05/09 00:32:16 61.6 688 2009/05/09 00:32:17 61.4 689 2009/05/09 00:32:18 61.9 690 2009/05/09 00:32:19 62.0 691 2009/05/09 00:32:20 62.2 692 2009/05/09 00:32:21 61.9 693 2009/05/09 00:32:22 62.2 694 2009/05/09 00:32:23 62.6 695 2009/05/09 00:32:24 62.3 696 2009/05/09 00:32:25 62.0 697 2009/05/09 00:32:26 62.2 698 2009/05/09 00:32:27 61.6 699 2009/05/09 00:32:28 62.0 700 2009/05/09 00:32:29 62.4 701 2009/05/09 00:32:30 62.1 702 2009/05/09 00:32:31 61.7 703 2009/05/09 00:32:32 61.4 704 2009/05/09 00:32:33 61.5 705 2009/05/09 00:32:34 61.7 706 2009/05/09 00:32:35 62.8 707 2009/05/09 00:32:36 62.8 708 2009/05/09 00:32:37 63.1 709 2009/05/09 00:32:38 63.2 710 2009/05/09 00:32:39 63.9 711 2009/05/09 00:32:40 63.7 712 2009/05/09 00:32:41 62.1 713 2009/05/09 00:32:42 62.1 714 2009/05/09 00:32:43 64.4 715 2009/05/09 00:32:44 61.9 716 2009/05/09 00:32:45 61.9 717 2009/05/09 00:32:46 61.5 718 2009/05/09 00:32:47 61.9 719 2009/05/09 00:32:48 61.5 720 2009/05/09 00:32:49 61.8 721 2009/05/09 00:32:50 61.5 722 2009/05/09 00:32:51 61.5 723 2009/05/09 00:32:52 61.7 724 2009/05/09 00:32:53 61.2 725 2009/05/09 00:32:54 61.9 726 2009/05/09 00:32:55 61.5 727 2009/05/09 00:32:56 61.6 728 2009/05/09 00:32:57 61.1 729 2009/05/09 00:32:58 61.9 730 2009/05/09 00:32:59 61.9 731 2009/05/09 00:33:00 61.3 732 2009/05/09 00:33:01 61.7 733 2009/05/09 00:33:02 61.6 734 2009/05/09 00:33:03 61.4 735 2009/05/09 00:33:04 61.4 736 2009/05/09 00:33:05 61.1 737 2009/05/09 00:33:06 60.7 738 2009/05/09 00:33:07 61.0 739 2009/05/09 00:33:08 60.5 740 2009/05/09 00:33:09 61.0 741 2009/05/09 00:33:10 61.3 742 2009/05/09 00:33:11 61.1 743 2009/05/09 00:33:12 61.1 744 2009/05/09 00:33:13 61.4 745 2009/05/09 00:33:14 61.2 746 2009/05/09 00:33:15 61.4 747 2009/05/09 00:33:16 61.6 748 2009/05/09 00:33:17 61.9 749 2009/05/09 00:33:18 61.7 750 2009/05/09 00:33:19 61.6 751 2009/05/09 00:33:20 61.4 752 2009/05/09 00:33:21 61.5 753 2009/05/09 00:33:22 61.8 754 2009/05/09 00:33:23 62.2 755 2009/05/09 00:33:24 61.3 756 2009/05/09 00:33:25 61.7 757 2009/05/09 00:33:26 61.3 758 2009/05/09 00:33:27 61.6 759 2009/05/09 00:33:28 62.1 760 2009/05/09 00:33:29 61.5 761 2009/05/09 00:33:30 61.6 762 2009/05/09 00:33:31 61.6 763 2009/05/09 00:33:32 61.4 764 2009/05/09 00:33:33 61.4 765 2009/05/09 00:33:34 61.1 766 2009/05/09 00:33:35 61.7 767 2009/05/09 00:33:36 61.9 768 2009/05/09 00:33:37 62.0 769 2009/05/09 00:33:38 62.5 770 2009/05/09 00:33:39 62.7 771 2009/05/09 00:33:40 62.0 772 2009/05/09 00:33:41 62.1 773 2009/05/09 00:33:42 62.4 774 2009/05/09 00:33:43 62.6 775 2009/05/09 00:33:44 63.4 776 2009/05/09 00:33:45 63.2 777 2009/05/09 00:33:46 62.9 778 2009/05/09 00:33:47 63.1 779 2009/05/09 00:33:48 63.0 780 2009/05/09 00:33:49 62.5 781 2009/05/09 00:33:50 63.3 782 2009/05/09 00:33:51 63.6 783 2009/05/09 00:33:52 63.2 784 2009/05/09 00:33:53 63.2 785 2009/05/09 00:33:54 63.8 786 2009/05/09 00:33:55 63.0 787 2009/05/09 00:33:56 62.7 788 2009/05/09 00:33:57 62.6 789 2009/05/09 00:33:58 63.4 790 2009/05/09 00:33:59 63.1 791 2009/05/09 00:34:00 62.7 792 2009/05/09 00:34:01 62.7 793 2009/05/09 00:34:02 63.5 794 2009/05/09 00:34:03 63.7 795 2009/05/09 00:34:04 63.2 796 2009/05/09 00:34:05 63.8 797 2009/05/09 00:34:06 63.1 798 2009/05/09 00:34:07 63.2 799 2009/05/09 00:34:08 62.6 800 2009/05/09 00:34:09 62.6 801 2009/05/09 00:34:10 62.5 802 2009/05/09 00:34:11 63.1 803 2009/05/09 00:34:12 62.8 804 2009/05/09 00:34:13 62.8 805 2009/05/09 00:34:14 62.6 806 2009/05/09 00:34:15 62.6 807 2009/05/09 00:34:16 62.5 808 2009/05/09 00:34:17 61.7 809 2009/05/09 00:34:18 61.8 810 2009/05/09 00:34:19 62.1 811 2009/05/09 00:34:20 63.1 812 2009/05/09 00:34:21 62.3 813 2009/05/09 00:34:22 61.9 814 2009/05/09 00:34:23 61.6 815 2009/05/09 00:34:24 61.4 816 2009/05/09 00:34:25 60.7 817 2009/05/09 00:34:26 60.5 818 2009/05/09 00:34:27 61.2 819 2009/05/09 00:34:28 61.3 820 2009/05/09 00:34:29 61.9 821 2009/05/09 00:34:30 62.3 822 2009/05/09 00:34:31 61.6 823 2009/05/09 00:34:32 62.3 824 2009/05/09 00:34:33 61.8 825 2009/05/09 00:34:34 62.5 826 2009/05/09 00:34:35 62.0 827 2009/05/09 00:34:36 62.1 828 2009/05/09 00:34:37 61.8 829 2009/05/09 00:34:38 61.5 830 2009/05/09 00:34:39 61.5 831 2009/05/09 00:34:40 61.7 832 2009/05/09 00:34:41 62.2 833 2009/05/09 00:34:42 61.6 834 2009/05/09 00:34:43 61.9 835 2009/05/09 00:34:44 61.5 836 2009/05/09 00:34:45 61.9 837 2009/05/09 00:34:46 61.7 838 2009/05/09 00:34:47 61.6 839 2009/05/09 00:34:48 61.1 840 2009/05/09 00:34:49 61.6 841 2009/05/09 00:34:50 61.5 842 2009/05/09 00:34:51 61.3 843 2009/05/09 00:34:52 61.7 844 2009/05/09 00:34:53 61.7 845 2009/05/09 00:34:54 61.0 846 2009/05/09 00:34:55 61.3 847 2009/05/09 00:34:56 61.8 848 2009/05/09 00:34:57 61.2 849 2009/05/09 00:34:58 61.2 850 2009/05/09 00:34:59 61.0 851 2009/05/09 00:35:00 61.4 852 2009/05/09 00:35:01 61.3 853 2009/05/09 00:35:02 61.2 854 2009/05/09 00:35:03 61.3 855 2009/05/09 00:35:04 60.9 856 2009/05/09 00:35:05 60.8 857 2009/05/09 00:35:06 60.9 858 2009/05/09 00:35:07 60.7 859 2009/05/09 00:35:08 61.2 860 2009/05/09 00:35:09 61.2 861 2009/05/09 00:35:10 61.0 862 2009/05/09 00:35:11 61.2 863 2009/05/09 00:35:12 60.9 864 2009/05/09 00:35:13 60.9 865 2009/05/09 00:35:14 60.9 866 2009/05/09 00:35:15 61.0 867 2009/05/09 00:35:16 60.8 868 2009/05/09 00:35:17 60.1 869 2009/05/09 00:35:18 61.4 870 2009/05/09 00:35:19 61.9 871 2009/05/09 00:35:20 61.2 872 2009/05/09 00:35:21 61.1 873 2009/05/09 00:35:22 60.7 874 2009/05/09 00:35:23 61.6 875 2009/05/09 00:35:24 61.6 876 2009/05/09 00:35:25 61.4 877 2009/05/09 00:35:26 61.7 878 2009/05/09 00:35:27 61.9 879 2009/05/09 00:35:28 61.2 880 2009/05/09 00:35:29 61.7 881 2009/05/09 00:35:30 61.5 882 2009/05/09 00:35:31 61.1 883 2009/05/09 00:35:32 61.1 884 2009/05/09 00:35:33 61.2 885 2009/05/09 00:35:34 61.0 886 2009/05/09 00:35:35 61.1 887 2009/05/09 00:35:36 61.0 888 2009/05/09 00:35:37 60.9 889 2009/05/09 00:35:38 60.7 890 2009/05/09 00:35:39 60.6 891 2009/05/09 00:35:40 60.5 892 2009/05/09 00:35:41 61.0 893 2009/05/09 00:35:42 61.6 894 2009/05/09 00:35:43 61.5 895 2009/05/09 00:35:44 61.4 896 2009/05/09 00:35:45 61.2 897 2009/05/09 00:35:46 61.0 898 2009/05/09 00:35:47 60.9 899 2009/05/09 00:35:48 61.0 900 2009/05/09 00:35:49 61.3 - Freq Weight : A- Time Weight : FAST- Level Range : 40-100- Max dB : 68.7 - 2009/05/09 00:46:36- Level Range : 40-100- SEL : 89.4- Leq : 59.9- No.s Date Time (dB) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2009/05/09 00:46:20 57.5 2 2009/05/09 00:46:21 57.8 3 2009/05/09 00:46:22 58.5 4 2009/05/09 00:46:23 58.7 5 2009/05/09 00:46:24 58.8 6 2009/05/09 00:46:25 58.9 7 2009/05/09 00:46:26 58.4 8 2009/05/09 00:46:27 58.6 9 2009/05/09 00:46:28 59.8 10 2009/05/09 00:46:29 59.7 11 2009/05/09 00:46:30 59.7 12 2009/05/09 00:46:31 59.8 13 2009/05/09 00:46:32 59.3 14 2009/05/09 00:46:33 59.3 15 2009/05/09 00:46:34 59.9 16 2009/05/09 00:46:35 58.3 17 2009/05/09 00:46:36 65.0 18 2009/05/09 00:46:37 58.5 19 2009/05/09 00:46:38 58.9 20 2009/05/09 00:46:39 60.0 21 2009/05/09 00:46:40 58.0 22 2009/05/09 00:46:41 59.7 23 2009/05/09 00:46:42 59.7 24 2009/05/09 00:46:43 59.5 25 2009/05/09 00:46:44 59.4 26 2009/05/09 00:46:45 58.7 27 2009/05/09 00:46:46 59.0 28 2009/05/09 00:46:47 58.4 29 2009/05/09 00:46:48 59.0 30 2009/05/09 00:46:49 57.9 31 2009/05/09 00:46:50 58.5 32 2009/05/09 00:46:51 59.1 33 2009/05/09 00:46:52 58.0 34 2009/05/09 00:46:53 58.0 35 2009/05/09 00:46:54 59.5 36 2009/05/09 00:46:55 60.5 37 2009/05/09 00:46:56 59.7 38 2009/05/09 00:46:57 59.7 39 2009/05/09 00:46:58 58.7 40 2009/05/09 00:46:59 58.1 41 2009/05/09 00:47:00 57.2 42 2009/05/09 00:47:01 58.3 43 2009/05/09 00:47:02 58.9 44 2009/05/09 00:47:03 58.3 45 2009/05/09 00:47:04 58.7 46 2009/05/09 00:47:05 58.1 47 2009/05/09 00:47:06 57.9 48 2009/05/09 00:47:07 58.4 49 2009/05/09 00:47:08 58.9 50 2009/05/09 00:47:09 58.7 51 2009/05/09 00:47:10 58.8 52 2009/05/09 00:47:11 59.4 53 2009/05/09 00:47:12 58.7 54 2009/05/09 00:47:13 62.6 55 2009/05/09 00:47:14 61.5 56 2009/05/09 00:47:15 59.4 57 2009/05/09 00:47:16 61.6 58 2009/05/09 00:47:17 60.4 59 2009/05/09 00:47:18 60.7 60 2009/05/09 00:47:19 61.2 61 2009/05/09 00:47:20 61.4 62 2009/05/09 00:47:21 61.4 63 2009/05/09 00:47:22 60.2 64 2009/05/09 00:47:23 61.1 65 2009/05/09 00:47:24 60.0 66 2009/05/09 00:47:25 60.3 67 2009/05/09 00:47:26 61.3 68 2009/05/09 00:47:27 60.8 69 2009/05/09 00:47:28 60.4 70 2009/05/09 00:47:29 59.1 71 2009/05/09 00:47:30 59.5 72 2009/05/09 00:47:31 60.5 73 2009/05/09 00:47:32 59.6 74 2009/05/09 00:47:33 59.6 75 2009/05/09 00:47:34 59.1 76 2009/05/09 00:47:35 59.9 77 2009/05/09 00:47:36 59.1 78 2009/05/09 00:47:37 59.6 79 2009/05/09 00:47:38 59.3 80 2009/05/09 00:47:39 59.6 81 2009/05/09 00:47:40 59.9 82 2009/05/09 00:47:41 60.3 83 2009/05/09 00:47:42 60.5 84 2009/05/09 00:47:43 60.2 85 2009/05/09 00:47:44 58.8 86 2009/05/09 00:47:45 59.3 87 2009/05/09 00:47:46 59.9 88 2009/05/09 00:47:47 60.8 89 2009/05/09 00:47:48 61.0 90 2009/05/09 00:47:49 60.8 91 2009/05/09 00:47:50 61.2 92 2009/05/09 00:47:51 61.3 93 2009/05/09 00:47:52 61.7 94 2009/05/09 00:47:53 62.2 95 2009/05/09 00:47:54 61.8 96 2009/05/09 00:47:55 60.4 97 2009/05/09 00:47:56 60.9 98 2009/05/09 00:47:57 62.3 99 2009/05/09 00:47:58 62.1 100 2009/05/09 00:47:59 60.8 101 2009/05/09 00:48:00 60.0 102 2009/05/09 00:48:01 60.0 103 2009/05/09 00:48:02 60.1 104 2009/05/09 00:48:03 59.5 105 2009/05/09 00:48:04 60.0 106 2009/05/09 00:48:05 60.2 107 2009/05/09 00:48:06 60.9 108 2009/05/09 00:48:07 59.3 109 2009/05/09 00:48:08 59.2 110 2009/05/09 00:48:09 59.9 111 2009/05/09 00:48:10 60.5 112 2009/05/09 00:48:11 59.0 113 2009/05/09 00:48:12 59.1 114 2009/05/09 00:48:13 60.5 115 2009/05/09 00:48:14 60.7 116 2009/05/09 00:48:15 58.8 117 2009/05/09 00:48:16 59.5 118 2009/05/09 00:48:17 61.0 119 2009/05/09 00:48:18 61.9 120 2009/05/09 00:48:19 61.9 121 2009/05/09 00:48:20 61.2 122 2009/05/09 00:48:21 61.2 123 2009/05/09 00:48:22 61.8 124 2009/05/09 00:48:23 62.7 125 2009/05/09 00:48:24 61.6 126 2009/05/09 00:48:25 64.1 127 2009/05/09 00:48:26 60.8 128 2009/05/09 00:48:27 62.5 129 2009/05/09 00:48:28 62.5 130 2009/05/09 00:48:29 62.3 131 2009/05/09 00:48:30 63.0 132 2009/05/09 00:48:31 62.0 133 2009/05/09 00:48:32 61.5 134 2009/05/09 00:48:33 61.8 135 2009/05/09 00:48:34 62.4 136 2009/05/09 00:48:35 59.9 137 2009/05/09 00:48:36 60.3 138 2009/05/09 00:48:37 59.5 139 2009/05/09 00:48:38 59.3 140 2009/05/09 00:48:39 58.8 141 2009/05/09 00:48:40 59.8 142 2009/05/09 00:48:41 60.3 143 2009/05/09 00:48:42 59.5 144 2009/05/09 00:48:43 59.8 145 2009/05/09 00:48:44 60.5 146 2009/05/09 00:48:45 59.2 147 2009/05/09 00:48:46 59.6 148 2009/05/09 00:48:47 59.0 149 2009/05/09 00:48:48 60.5 150 2009/05/09 00:48:49 60.9 151 2009/05/09 00:48:50 60.0 152 2009/05/09 00:48:51 60.2 153 2009/05/09 00:48:52 60.5 154 2009/05/09 00:48:53 60.6 155 2009/05/09 00:48:54 58.6 156 2009/05/09 00:48:55 57.7 157 2009/05/09 00:48:56 58.9 158 2009/05/09 00:48:57 60.3 159 2009/05/09 00:48:58 60.7 160 2009/05/09 00:48:59 58.5 161 2009/05/09 00:49:00 59.7 162 2009/05/09 00:49:01 58.9 163 2009/05/09 00:49:02 57.8 164 2009/05/09 00:49:03 58.1 165 2009/05/09 00:49:04 57.6 166 2009/05/09 00:49:05 56.9 167 2009/05/09 00:49:06 57.4 168 2009/05/09 00:49:07 57.0 169 2009/05/09 00:49:08 58.3 170 2009/05/09 00:49:09 58.7 171 2009/05/09 00:49:10 56.2 172 2009/05/09 00:49:11 57.9 173 2009/05/09 00:49:12 59.6 174 2009/05/09 00:49:13 59.5 175 2009/05/09 00:49:14 59.7 176 2009/05/09 00:49:15 60.7 177 2009/05/09 00:49:16 61.2 178 2009/05/09 00:49:17 58.9 179 2009/05/09 00:49:18 58.1 180 2009/05/09 00:49:19 58.5 181 2009/05/09 00:49:20 57.4 182 2009/05/09 00:49:21 57.3 183 2009/05/09 00:49:22 57.2 184 2009/05/09 00:49:23 57.7 185 2009/05/09 00:49:24 58.5 186 2009/05/09 00:49:25 59.6 187 2009/05/09 00:49:26 60.5 188 2009/05/09 00:49:27 59.9 189 2009/05/09 00:49:28 61.2 190 2009/05/09 00:49:29 61.0 191 2009/05/09 00:49:30 60.4 192 2009/05/09 00:49:31 61.7 193 2009/05/09 00:49:32 61.3 194 2009/05/09 00:49:33 61.1 195 2009/05/09 00:49:34 62.8 196 2009/05/09 00:49:35 61.7 197 2009/05/09 00:49:36 62.8 198 2009/05/09 00:49:37 61.8 199 2009/05/09 00:49:38 60.5 200 2009/05/09 00:49:39 59.2 201 2009/05/09 00:49:40 60.6 202 2009/05/09 00:49:41 62.2 203 2009/05/09 00:49:42 62.8 204 2009/05/09 00:49:43 62.3 205 2009/05/09 00:49:44 61.7 206 2009/05/09 00:49:45 62.9 207 2009/05/09 00:49:46 61.8 208 2009/05/09 00:49:47 61.9 209 2009/05/09 00:49:48 61.9 210 2009/05/09 00:49:49 61.4 211 2009/05/09 00:49:50 62.0 212 2009/05/09 00:49:51 62.3 213 2009/05/09 00:49:52 60.9 214 2009/05/09 00:49:53 61.9 215 2009/05/09 00:49:54 61.2 216 2009/05/09 00:49:55 61.3 217 2009/05/09 00:49:56 60.8 218 2009/05/09 00:49:57 60.4 219 2009/05/09 00:49:58 61.0 220 2009/05/09 00:49:59 59.2 221 2009/05/09 00:50:00 61.4 222 2009/05/09 00:50:01 61.9 223 2009/05/09 00:50:02 61.8 224 2009/05/09 00:50:03 61.2 225 2009/05/09 00:50:04 61.3 226 2009/05/09 00:50:05 59.9 227 2009/05/09 00:50:06 59.8 228 2009/05/09 00:50:07 58.6 229 2009/05/09 00:50:08 59.2 230 2009/05/09 00:50:09 61.0 231 2009/05/09 00:50:10 60.1 232 2009/05/09 00:50:11 60.0 233 2009/05/09 00:50:12 59.2 234 2009/05/09 00:50:13 58.7 235 2009/05/09 00:50:14 58.8 236 2009/05/09 00:50:15 58.7 237 2009/05/09 00:50:16 60.1 238 2009/05/09 00:50:17 60.1 239 2009/05/09 00:50:18 60.7 240 2009/05/09 00:50:19 60.6 241 2009/05/09 00:50:20 60.7 242 2009/05/09 00:50:21 61.0 243 2009/05/09 00:50:22 61.7 244 2009/05/09 00:50:23 61.5 245 2009/05/09 00:50:24 60.0 246 2009/05/09 00:50:25 60.2 247 2009/05/09 00:50:26 61.6 248 2009/05/09 00:50:27 61.8 249 2009/05/09 00:50:28 61.6 250 2009/05/09 00:50:29 60.8 251 2009/05/09 00:50:30 61.1 252 2009/05/09 00:50:31 60.8 253 2009/05/09 00:50:32 59.9 254 2009/05/09 00:50:33 61.4 255 2009/05/09 00:50:34 59.6 256 2009/05/09 00:50:35 58.9 257 2009/05/09 00:50:36 59.9 258 2009/05/09 00:50:37 59.0 259 2009/05/09 00:50:38 59.2 260 2009/05/09 00:50:39 60.0 261 2009/05/09 00:50:40 59.5 262 2009/05/09 00:50:41 60.8 263 2009/05/09 00:50:42 60.9 264 2009/05/09 00:50:43 60.0 265 2009/05/09 00:50:44 62.0 266 2009/05/09 00:50:45 62.2 267 2009/05/09 00:50:46 60.4 268 2009/05/09 00:50:47 61.2 269 2009/05/09 00:50:48 60.6 270 2009/05/09 00:50:49 60.5 271 2009/05/09 00:50:50 61.8 272 2009/05/09 00:50:51 60.0 273 2009/05/09 00:50:52 59.6 274 2009/05/09 00:50:53 60.1 275 2009/05/09 00:50:54 58.5 276 2009/05/09 00:50:55 58.6 277 2009/05/09 00:50:56 57.0 278 2009/05/09 00:50:57 60.3 279 2009/05/09 00:50:58 59.1 280 2009/05/09 00:50:59 60.0 281 2009/05/09 00:51:00 58.7 282 2009/05/09 00:51:01 59.5 283 2009/05/09 00:51:02 58.8 284 2009/05/09 00:51:03 58.7 285 2009/05/09 00:51:04 58.3 286 2009/05/09 00:51:05 58.3 287 2009/05/09 00:51:06 58.2 288 2009/05/09 00:51:07 59.3 289 2009/05/09 00:51:08 59.3 290 2009/05/09 00:51:09 58.8 291 2009/05/09 00:51:10 60.5 292 2009/05/09 00:51:11 60.9 293 2009/05/09 00:51:12 60.6 294 2009/05/09 00:51:13 59.1 295 2009/05/09 00:51:14 58.6 296 2009/05/09 00:51:15 58.1 297 2009/05/09 00:51:16 57.5 298 2009/05/09 00:51:17 59.9 299 2009/05/09 00:51:18 59.1 300 2009/05/09 00:51:19 58.9 301 2009/05/09 00:51:20 59.6 302 2009/05/09 00:51:21 58.8 303 2009/05/09 00:51:22 58.9 304 2009/05/09 00:51:23 59.6 305 2009/05/09 00:51:24 59.2 306 2009/05/09 00:51:25 60.2 307 2009/05/09 00:51:26 59.8 308 2009/05/09 00:51:27 60.5 309 2009/05/09 00:51:28 61.2 310 2009/05/09 00:51:29 62.3 311 2009/05/09 00:51:30 61.1 312 2009/05/09 00:51:31 60.0 313 2009/05/09 00:51:32 60.3 314 2009/05/09 00:51:33 60.9 315 2009/05/09 00:51:34 60.1 316 2009/05/09 00:51:35 60.7 317 2009/05/09 00:51:36 60.1 318 2009/05/09 00:51:37 59.9 319 2009/05/09 00:51:38 59.4 320 2009/05/09 00:51:39 59.2 321 2009/05/09 00:51:40 59.6 322 2009/05/09 00:51:41 58.9 323 2009/05/09 00:51:42 60.2 324 2009/05/09 00:51:43 58.7 325 2009/05/09 00:51:44 59.5 326 2009/05/09 00:51:45 60.2 327 2009/05/09 00:51:46 62.2 328 2009/05/09 00:51:47 59.4 329 2009/05/09 00:51:48 62.4 330 2009/05/09 00:51:49 60.4 331 2009/05/09 00:51:50 60.5 332 2009/05/09 00:51:51 59.9 333 2009/05/09 00:51:52 60.2 334 2009/05/09 00:51:53 59.9 335 2009/05/09 00:51:54 61.0 336 2009/05/09 00:51:55 62.4 337 2009/05/09 00:51:56 61.1 338 2009/05/09 00:51:57 62.7 339 2009/05/09 00:51:58 61.6 340 2009/05/09 00:51:59 60.2 341 2009/05/09 00:52:00 62.1 342 2009/05/09 00:52:01 59.9 343 2009/05/09 00:52:02 59.2 344 2009/05/09 00:52:03 60.2 345 2009/05/09 00:52:04 59.9 346 2009/05/09 00:52:05 60.3 347 2009/05/09 00:52:06 61.0 348 2009/05/09 00:52:07 59.6 349 2009/05/09 00:52:08 59.5 350 2009/05/09 00:52:09 61.1 351 2009/05/09 00:52:10 60.8 352 2009/05/09 00:52:11 61.3 353 2009/05/09 00:52:12 61.6 354 2009/05/09 00:52:13 60.8 355 2009/05/09 00:52:14 61.5 356 2009/05/09 00:52:15 60.6 357 2009/05/09 00:52:16 61.9 358 2009/05/09 00:52:17 62.1 359 2009/05/09 00:52:18 62.4 360 2009/05/09 00:52:19 63.4 361 2009/05/09 00:52:20 62.5 362 2009/05/09 00:52:21 63.9 363 2009/05/09 00:52:22 64.9 364 2009/05/09 00:52:23 62.8 365 2009/05/09 00:52:24 62.0 366 2009/05/09 00:52:25 60.1 367 2009/05/09 00:52:26 62.1 368 2009/05/09 00:52:27 61.4 369 2009/05/09 00:52:28 61.4 370 2009/05/09 00:52:29 60.0 371 2009/05/09 00:52:30 59.1 372 2009/05/09 00:52:31 59.1 373 2009/05/09 00:52:32 60.0 374 2009/05/09 00:52:33 59.4 375 2009/05/09 00:52:34 59.8 376 2009/05/09 00:52:35 59.5 377 2009/05/09 00:52:36 60.3 378 2009/05/09 00:52:37 59.3 379 2009/05/09 00:52:38 60.3 380 2009/05/09 00:52:39 60.7 381 2009/05/09 00:52:40 61.8 382 2009/05/09 00:52:41 60.5 383 2009/05/09 00:52:42 59.2 384 2009/05/09 00:52:43 59.5 385 2009/05/09 00:52:44 59.3 386 2009/05/09 00:52:45 58.9 387 2009/05/09 00:52:46 59.5 388 2009/05/09 00:52:47 61.3 389 2009/05/09 00:52:48 59.2 390 2009/05/09 00:52:49 58.8 391 2009/05/09 00:52:50 58.4 392 2009/05/09 00:52:51 59.3 393 2009/05/09 00:52:52 58.6 394 2009/05/09 00:52:53 60.5 395 2009/05/09 00:52:54 60.3 396 2009/05/09 00:52:55 60.3 397 2009/05/09 00:52:56 60.7 398 2009/05/09 00:52:57 61.0 399 2009/05/09 00:52:58 60.0 400 2009/05/09 00:52:59 60.6 401 2009/05/09 00:53:00 60.4 402 2009/05/09 00:53:01 59.7 403 2009/05/09 00:53:02 61.5 404 2009/05/09 00:53:03 59.9 405 2009/05/09 00:53:04 61.5 406 2009/05/09 00:53:05 62.0 407 2009/05/09 00:53:06 62.2 408 2009/05/09 00:53:07 61.2 409 2009/05/09 00:53:08 63.4 410 2009/05/09 00:53:09 60.9 411 2009/05/09 00:53:10 60.7 412 2009/05/09 00:53:11 61.8 413 2009/05/09 00:53:12 60.7 414 2009/05/09 00:53:13 60.1 415 2009/05/09 00:53:14 61.4 416 2009/05/09 00:53:15 60.5 417 2009/05/09 00:53:16 60.3 418 2009/05/09 00:53:17 60.5 419 2009/05/09 00:53:18 59.6 420 2009/05/09 00:53:19 59.6 421 2009/05/09 00:53:20 61.4 422 2009/05/09 00:53:21 60.8 423 2009/05/09 00:53:22 61.0 424 2009/05/09 00:53:23 60.9 425 2009/05/09 00:53:24 59.3 426 2009/05/09 00:53:25 60.1 427 2009/05/09 00:53:26 60.6 428 2009/05/09 00:53:27 59.9 429 2009/05/09 00:53:28 59.6 430 2009/05/09 00:53:29 60.7 431 2009/05/09 00:53:30 60.7 432 2009/05/09 00:53:31 59.6 433 2009/05/09 00:53:32 61.2 434 2009/05/09 00:53:33 61.1 435 2009/05/09 00:53:34 63.2 436 2009/05/09 00:53:35 60.8 437 2009/05/09 00:53:36 60.7 438 2009/05/09 00:53:37 59.2 439 2009/05/09 00:53:38 60.2 440 2009/05/09 00:53:39 59.8 441 2009/05/09 00:53:40 60.7 442 2009/05/09 00:53:41 59.7 443 2009/05/09 00:53:42 59.3 444 2009/05/09 00:53:43 59.3 445 2009/05/09 00:53:44 61.0 446 2009/05/09 00:53:45 59.8 447 2009/05/09 00:53:46 59.7 448 2009/05/09 00:53:47 59.7 449 2009/05/09 00:53:48 58.5 450 2009/05/09 00:53:49 58.9 451 2009/05/09 00:53:50 58.8 452 2009/05/09 00:53:51 59.2 453 2009/05/09 00:53:52 59.5 454 2009/05/09 00:53:53 60.4 455 2009/05/09 00:53:54 58.8 456 2009/05/09 00:53:55 57.6 457 2009/05/09 00:53:56 59.2 458 2009/05/09 00:53:57 58.3 459 2009/05/09 00:53:58 58.9 460 2009/05/09 00:53:59 57.7 461 2009/05/09 00:54:00 58.0 462 2009/05/09 00:54:01 58.7 463 2009/05/09 00:54:02 59.2 464 2009/05/09 00:54:03 58.0 465 2009/05/09 00:54:04 59.1 466 2009/05/09 00:54:05 57.4 467 2009/05/09 00:54:06 58.4 468 2009/05/09 00:54:07 58.3 469 2009/05/09 00:54:08 59.1 470 2009/05/09 00:54:09 57.0 471 2009/05/09 00:54:10 59.8 472 2009/05/09 00:54:11 57.9 473 2009/05/09 00:54:12 57.6 474 2009/05/09 00:54:13 57.5 475 2009/05/09 00:54:14 57.2 476 2009/05/09 00:54:15 59.8 477 2009/05/09 00:54:16 58.7 478 2009/05/09 00:54:17 59.1 479 2009/05/09 00:54:18 60.2 480 2009/05/09 00:54:19 58.8 481 2009/05/09 00:54:20 58.2 482 2009/05/09 00:54:21 57.3 483 2009/05/09 00:54:22 59.3 484 2009/05/09 00:54:23 57.6 485 2009/05/09 00:54:24 60.2 486 2009/05/09 00:54:25 57.7 487 2009/05/09 00:54:26 58.4 488 2009/05/09 00:54:27 58.4 489 2009/05/09 00:54:28 59.0 490 2009/05/09 00:54:29 58.1 491 2009/05/09 00:54:30 59.5 492 2009/05/09 00:54:31 58.0 493 2009/05/09 00:54:32 58.5 494 2009/05/09 00:54:33 59.1 495 2009/05/09 00:54:34 59.3 496 2009/05/09 00:54:35 58.7 497 2009/05/09 00:54:36 61.6 498 2009/05/09 00:54:37 59.2 499 2009/05/09 00:54:38 59.3 500 2009/05/09 00:54:39 59.8 501 2009/05/09 00:54:40 59.9 502 2009/05/09 00:54:41 59.3 503 2009/05/09 00:54:42 60.2 504 2009/05/09 00:54:43 60.0 505 2009/05/09 00:54:44 60.2 506 2009/05/09 00:54:45 58.7 507 2009/05/09 00:54:46 58.3 508 2009/05/09 00:54:47 56.4 509 2009/05/09 00:54:48 57.1 510 2009/05/09 00:54:49 58.6 511 2009/05/09 00:54:50 58.0 512 2009/05/09 00:54:51 58.9 513 2009/05/09 00:54:52 60.1 514 2009/05/09 00:54:53 59.2 515 2009/05/09 00:54:54 59.9 516 2009/05/09 00:54:55 60.8 517 2009/05/09 00:54:56 60.0 518 2009/05/09 00:54:57 60.9 519 2009/05/09 00:54:58 60.8 520 2009/05/09 00:54:59 60.6 521 2009/05/09 00:55:00 61.2 522 2009/05/09 00:55:01 61.1 523 2009/05/09 00:55:02 61.3 524 2009/05/09 00:55:03 60.5 525 2009/05/09 00:55:04 60.6 526 2009/05/09 00:55:05 61.1 527 2009/05/09 00:55:06 60.0 528 2009/05/09 00:55:07 60.1 529 2009/05/09 00:55:08 61.1 530 2009/05/09 00:55:09 60.4 531 2009/05/09 00:55:10 59.7 532 2009/05/09 00:55:11 60.5 533 2009/05/09 00:55:12 58.9 534 2009/05/09 00:55:13 59.0 535 2009/05/09 00:55:14 58.9 536 2009/05/09 00:55:15 58.7 537 2009/05/09 00:55:16 59.2 538 2009/05/09 00:55:17 59.9 539 2009/05/09 00:55:18 59.1 540 2009/05/09 00:55:19 62.0 541 2009/05/09 00:55:20 60.0 542 2009/05/09 00:55:21 60.1 543 2009/05/09 00:55:22 59.4 544 2009/05/09 00:55:23 58.4 545 2009/05/09 00:55:24 59.5 546 2009/05/09 00:55:25 60.2 547 2009/05/09 00:55:26 58.0 548 2009/05/09 00:55:27 58.1 549 2009/05/09 00:55:28 59.0 550 2009/05/09 00:55:29 58.9 551 2009/05/09 00:55:30 58.5 552 2009/05/09 00:55:31 58.6 553 2009/05/09 00:55:32 57.8 554 2009/05/09 00:55:33 57.9 555 2009/05/09 00:55:34 58.9 556 2009/05/09 00:55:35 58.4 557 2009/05/09 00:55:36 59.2 558 2009/05/09 00:55:37 58.4 559 2009/05/09 00:55:38 58.4 560 2009/05/09 00:55:39 57.7 561 2009/05/09 00:55:40 61.2 562 2009/05/09 00:55:41 58.9 563 2009/05/09 00:55:42 59.3 564 2009/05/09 00:55:43 59.2 565 2009/05/09 00:55:44 58.8 566 2009/05/09 00:55:45 59.6 567 2009/05/09 00:55:46 59.3 568 2009/05/09 00:55:47 59.8 569 2009/05/09 00:55:48 60.7 570 2009/05/09 00:55:49 61.1 571 2009/05/09 00:55:50 60.8 572 2009/05/09 00:55:51 60.4 573 2009/05/09 00:55:52 58.9 574 2009/05/09 00:55:53 59.6 575 2009/05/09 00:55:54 59.7 576 2009/05/09 00:55:55 62.0 577 2009/05/09 00:55:56 59.5 578 2009/05/09 00:55:57 61.0 579 2009/05/09 00:55:58 59.5 580 2009/05/09 00:55:59 59.3 581 2009/05/09 00:56:00 58.4 582 2009/05/09 00:56:01 58.8 583 2009/05/09 00:56:02 56.8 584 2009/05/09 00:56:03 57.4 585 2009/05/09 00:56:04 60.1 586 2009/05/09 00:56:05 56.6 587 2009/05/09 00:56:06 57.9 588 2009/05/09 00:56:07 58.4 589 2009/05/09 00:56:08 60.2 590 2009/05/09 00:56:09 59.0 591 2009/05/09 00:56:10 60.2 592 2009/05/09 00:56:11 60.7 593 2009/05/09 00:56:12 61.2 594 2009/05/09 00:56:13 60.2 595 2009/05/09 00:56:14 59.7 596 2009/05/09 00:56:15 61.9 597 2009/05/09 00:56:16 63.6 598 2009/05/09 00:56:17 60.3 599 2009/05/09 00:56:18 59.4 600 2009/05/09 00:56:19 61.8 601 2009/05/09 00:56:20 61.8 602 2009/05/09 00:56:21 58.6 603 2009/05/09 00:56:22 60.0 604 2009/05/09 00:56:23 59.7 605 2009/05/09 00:56:24 58.0 606 2009/05/09 00:56:25 58.5 607 2009/05/09 00:56:26 59.8 608 2009/05/09 00:56:27 60.6 609 2009/05/09 00:56:28 57.9 610 2009/05/09 00:56:29 58.1 611 2009/05/09 00:56:30 59.7 612 2009/05/09 00:56:31 61.3 613 2009/05/09 00:56:32 60.8 614 2009/05/09 00:56:33 63.0 615 2009/05/09 00:56:34 59.7 616 2009/05/09 00:56:35 58.8 617 2009/05/09 00:56:36 59.3 618 2009/05/09 00:56:37 58.2 619 2009/05/09 00:56:38 58.8 620 2009/05/09 00:56:39 59.2 621 2009/05/09 00:56:40 59.7 622 2009/05/09 00:56:41 59.9 623 2009/05/09 00:56:42 59.2 624 2009/05/09 00:56:43 58.9 625 2009/05/09 00:56:44 58.8 626 2009/05/09 00:56:45 59.8 627 2009/05/09 00:56:46 60.2 628 2009/05/09 00:56:47 59.8 629 2009/05/09 00:56:48 59.8 630 2009/05/09 00:56:49 59.1 631 2009/05/09 00:56:50 59.1 632 2009/05/09 00:56:51 59.8 633 2009/05/09 00:56:52 60.1 634 2009/05/09 00:56:53 60.1 635 2009/05/09 00:56:54 58.8 636 2009/05/09 00:56:55 60.4 637 2009/05/09 00:56:56 59.9 638 2009/05/09 00:56:57 60.7 639 2009/05/09 00:56:58 61.9 640 2009/05/09 00:56:59 60.2 641 2009/05/09 00:57:00 60.1 642 2009/05/09 00:57:01 59.9 643 2009/05/09 00:57:02 59.3 644 2009/05/09 00:57:03 58.4 645 2009/05/09 00:57:04 59.1 646 2009/05/09 00:57:05 59.2 647 2009/05/09 00:57:06 59.2 648 2009/05/09 00:57:07 58.5 649 2009/05/09 00:57:08 60.7 650 2009/05/09 00:57:09 60.6 651 2009/05/09 00:57:10 58.5 652 2009/05/09 00:57:11 59.9 653 2009/05/09 00:57:12 60.8 654 2009/05/09 00:57:13 61.9 655 2009/05/09 00:57:14 60.5 656 2009/05/09 00:57:15 60.4 657 2009/05/09 00:57:16 60.8 658 2009/05/09 00:57:17 60.3 659 2009/05/09 00:57:18 63.0 660 2009/05/09 00:57:19 63.4 661 2009/05/09 00:57:20 61.6 662 2009/05/09 00:57:21 59.9 663 2009/05/09 00:57:22 59.8 664 2009/05/09 00:57:23 60.8 665 2009/05/09 00:57:24 60.3 666 2009/05/09 00:57:25 59.3 667 2009/05/09 00:57:26 59.9 668 2009/05/09 00:57:27 60.4 669 2009/05/09 00:57:28 59.6 670 2009/05/09 00:57:29 59.5 671 2009/05/09 00:57:30 58.6 672 2009/05/09 00:57:31 58.3 673 2009/05/09 00:57:32 58.9 674 2009/05/09 00:57:33 59.5 675 2009/05/09 00:57:34 57.7 676 2009/05/09 00:57:35 58.3 677 2009/05/09 00:57:36 58.8 678 2009/05/09 00:57:37 58.5 679 2009/05/09 00:57:38 58.9 680 2009/05/09 00:57:39 58.5 681 2009/05/09 00:57:40 58.0 682 2009/05/09 00:57:41 59.4 683 2009/05/09 00:57:42 58.1 684 2009/05/09 00:57:43 59.2 685 2009/05/09 00:57:44 59.3 686 2009/05/09 00:57:45 60.4 687 2009/05/09 00:57:46 59.3 688 2009/05/09 00:57:47 64.2 689 2009/05/09 00:57:48 58.7 690 2009/05/09 00:57:49 57.8 691 2009/05/09 00:57:50 59.1 692 2009/05/09 00:57:51 59.2 693 2009/05/09 00:57:52 59.1 694 2009/05/09 00:57:53 58.8 695 2009/05/09 00:57:54 59.4 696 2009/05/09 00:57:55 59.5 697 2009/05/09 00:57:56 58.8 698 2009/05/09 00:57:57 58.6 699 2009/05/09 00:57:58 59.0 700 2009/05/09 00:57:59 59.2 701 2009/05/09 00:58:00 60.5 702 2009/05/09 00:58:01 59.3 703 2009/05/09 00:58:02 59.3 704 2009/05/09 00:58:03 58.6 705 2009/05/09 00:58:04 59.9 706 2009/05/09 00:58:05 58.3 707 2009/05/09 00:58:06 60.0 708 2009/05/09 00:58:07 58.8 709 2009/05/09 00:58:08 60.3 710 2009/05/09 00:58:09 61.7 711 2009/05/09 00:58:10 58.4 712 2009/05/09 00:58:11 59.6 713 2009/05/09 00:58:12 59.0 714 2009/05/09 00:58:13 58.2 715 2009/05/09 00:58:14 57.4 716 2009/05/09 00:58:15 57.8 717 2009/05/09 00:58:16 58.4 718 2009/05/09 00:58:17 59.4 719 2009/05/09 00:58:18 59.7 720 2009/05/09 00:58:19 59.8 721 2009/05/09 00:58:20 59.8 722 2009/05/09 00:58:21 59.3 723 2009/05/09 00:58:22 59.4 724 2009/05/09 00:58:23 59.9 725 2009/05/09 00:58:24 58.7 726 2009/05/09 00:58:25 58.7 727 2009/05/09 00:58:26 57.3 728 2009/05/09 00:58:27 58.2 729 2009/05/09 00:58:28 58.6 730 2009/05/09 00:58:29 59.5 731 2009/05/09 00:58:30 59.5 732 2009/05/09 00:58:31 60.7 733 2009/05/09 00:58:32 60.5 734 2009/05/09 00:58:33 60.9 735 2009/05/09 00:58:34 59.3 736 2009/05/09 00:58:35 60.0 737 2009/05/09 00:58:36 60.1 738 2009/05/09 00:58:37 58.7 739 2009/05/09 00:58:38 59.7 740 2009/05/09 00:58:39 59.9 741 2009/05/09 00:58:40 59.0 742 2009/05/09 00:58:41 58.5 743 2009/05/09 00:58:42 59.1 744 2009/05/09 00:58:43 59.6 745 2009/05/09 00:58:44 58.6 746 2009/05/09 00:58:45 58.2 747 2009/05/09 00:58:46 57.9 748 2009/05/09 00:58:47 58.1 749 2009/05/09 00:58:48 59.0 750 2009/05/09 00:58:49 57.8 751 2009/05/09 00:58:50 60.6 752 2009/05/09 00:58:51 58.4 753 2009/05/09 00:58:52 57.9 754 2009/05/09 00:58:53 58.2 755 2009/05/09 00:58:54 61.5 756 2009/05/09 00:58:55 59.8 757 2009/05/09 00:58:56 60.5 758 2009/05/09 00:58:57 59.2 759 2009/05/09 00:58:58 63.7 760 2009/05/09 00:58:59 67.8 761 2009/05/09 00:59:00 61.5 762 2009/05/09 00:59:01 58.2 763 2009/05/09 00:59:02 58.1 764 2009/05/09 00:59:03 58.4 765 2009/05/09 00:59:04 60.4 766 2009/05/09 00:59:05 62.3 767 2009/05/09 00:59:06 59.3 768 2009/05/09 00:59:07 59.3 769 2009/05/09 00:59:08 60.0 770 2009/05/09 00:59:09 60.6 771 2009/05/09 00:59:10 60.8 772 2009/05/09 00:59:11 60.0 773 2009/05/09 00:59:12 61.0 774 2009/05/09 00:59:13 62.1 775 2009/05/09 00:59:14 60.5 776 2009/05/09 00:59:15 58.8 777 2009/05/09 00:59:16 58.6 778 2009/05/09 00:59:17 59.3 779 2009/05/09 00:59:18 57.5 780 2009/05/09 00:59:19 56.8 781 2009/05/09 00:59:20 56.4 782 2009/05/09 00:59:21 57.3 783 2009/05/09 00:59:22 58.4 784 2009/05/09 00:59:23 57.6 785 2009/05/09 00:59:24 58.9 786 2009/05/09 00:59:25 59.2 787 2009/05/09 00:59:26 59.9 788 2009/05/09 00:59:27 59.0 789 2009/05/09 00:59:28 59.0 790 2009/05/09 00:59:29 58.8 791 2009/05/09 00:59:30 59.6 792 2009/05/09 00:59:31 61.0 793 2009/05/09 00:59:32 60.2 794 2009/05/09 00:59:33 60.7 795 2009/05/09 00:59:34 60.8 796 2009/05/09 00:59:35 58.3 797 2009/05/09 00:59:36 59.9 798 2009/05/09 00:59:37 60.2 799 2009/05/09 00:59:38 59.2 800 2009/05/09 00:59:39 61.4 801 2009/05/09 00:59:40 59.9 802 2009/05/09 00:59:41 60.1 803 2009/05/09 00:59:42 60.3 804 2009/05/09 00:59:43 60.0 805 2009/05/09 00:59:44 60.9 806 2009/05/09 00:59:45 59.7 807 2009/05/09 00:59:46 60.8 808 2009/05/09 00:59:47 59.8 809 2009/05/09 00:59:48 60.3 810 2009/05/09 00:59:49 59.5 811 2009/05/09 00:59:50 61.1 812 2009/05/09 00:59:51 59.3 813 2009/05/09 00:59:52 58.5 814 2009/05/09 00:59:53 57.7 815 2009/05/09 00:59:54 58.1 816 2009/05/09 00:59:55 59.4 817 2009/05/09 00:59:56 58.6 818 2009/05/09 00:59:57 59.9 819 2009/05/09 00:59:58 58.9 820 2009/05/09 00:59:59 59.5 821 2009/05/09 01:00:00 58.7 822 2009/05/09 01:00:01 56.8 823 2009/05/09 01:00:02 59.0 824 2009/05/09 01:00:03 60.0 825 2009/05/09 01:00:04 57.9 826 2009/05/09 01:00:05 58.1 827 2009/05/09 01:00:06 59.1 828 2009/05/09 01:00:07 58.9 829 2009/05/09 01:00:08 58.1 830 2009/05/09 01:00:09 58.0 831 2009/05/09 01:00:10 58.9 832 2009/05/09 01:00:11 58.6 833 2009/05/09 01:00:12 60.3 834 2009/05/09 01:00:13 59.3 835 2009/05/09 01:00:14 58.8 836 2009/05/09 01:00:15 59.5 837 2009/05/09 01:00:16 59.2 838 2009/05/09 01:00:17 58.7 839 2009/05/09 01:00:18 59.6 840 2009/05/09 01:00:19 59.9 841 2009/05/09 01:00:20 59.1 842 2009/05/09 01:00:21 57.8 843 2009/05/09 01:00:22 58.5 844 2009/05/09 01:00:23 57.6 845 2009/05/09 01:00:24 58.9 846 2009/05/09 01:00:25 58.6 847 2009/05/09 01:00:26 59.4 848 2009/05/09 01:00:27 57.6 849 2009/05/09 01:00:28 59.1 850 2009/05/09 01:00:29 59.2 851 2009/05/09 01:00:30 59.1 852 2009/05/09 01:00:31 59.6 853 2009/05/09 01:00:32 59.8 854 2009/05/09 01:00:33 60.7 855 2009/05/09 01:00:34 60.4 856 2009/05/09 01:00:35 60.0 857 2009/05/09 01:00:36 59.1 858 2009/05/09 01:00:37 59.3 859 2009/05/09 01:00:38 58.9 860 2009/05/09 01:00:39 57.7 861 2009/05/09 01:00:40 57.8 862 2009/05/09 01:00:41 57.8 863 2009/05/09 01:00:42 57.8 864 2009/05/09 01:00:43 57.9 865 2009/05/09 01:00:44 56.7 866 2009/05/09 01:00:45 57.2 867 2009/05/09 01:00:46 57.1 868 2009/05/09 01:00:47 56.8 869 2009/05/09 01:00:48 56.5 870 2009/05/09 01:00:49 57.4 871 2009/05/09 01:00:50 55.7 872 2009/05/09 01:00:51 56.5 873 2009/05/09 01:00:52 56.6 874 2009/05/09 01:00:53 57.8 875 2009/05/09 01:00:54 57.1 876 2009/05/09 01:00:55 57.0 877 2009/05/09 01:00:56 59.8 878 2009/05/09 01:00:57 57.2 879 2009/05/09 01:00:58 56.7 880 2009/05/09 01:00:59 57.6 881 2009/05/09 01:01:00 57.2 882 2009/05/09 01:01:01 56.6 883 2009/05/09 01:01:02 58.8 884 2009/05/09 01:01:03 57.9 885 2009/05/09 01:01:04 58.6 886 2009/05/09 01:01:05 58.3 887 2009/05/09 01:01:06 58.7 888 2009/05/09 01:01:07 58.8 889 2009/05/09 01:01:08 58.4 890 2009/05/09 01:01:09 58.6 891 2009/05/09 01:01:10 58.7 892 2009/05/09 01:01:11 58.5 893 2009/05/09 01:01:12 57.4 894 2009/05/09 01:01:13 57.1 895 2009/05/09 01:01:14 57.1 896 2009/05/09 01:01:15 58.5 897 2009/05/09 01:01:16 59.9 898 2009/05/09 01:01:17 58.8 899 2009/05/09 01:01:18 58.7 900 2009/05/09 01:01:19 59.2 - Freq Weight : A- Time Weight : FAST- Level Range : 40-100- Max dB : 73.5 - 2009/05/09 01:10:43- Level Range : 40-100- SEL : 95.8- Leq : 66.3- No.s Date Time (dB) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2009/05/09 01:09:06 67.3 2 2009/05/09 01:09:07 66.6 3 2009/05/09 01:09:08 65.1 4 2009/05/09 01:09:09 64.6 5 2009/05/09 01:09:10 63.5 6 2009/05/09 01:09:11 62.4 7 2009/05/09 01:09:12 63.7 8 2009/05/09 01:09:13 64.1 9 2009/05/09 01:09:14 65.8 10 2009/05/09 01:09:15 66.3 11 2009/05/09 01:09:16 65.4 12 2009/05/09 01:09:17 66.7 13 2009/05/09 01:09:18 67.9 14 2009/05/09 01:09:19 66.4 15 2009/05/09 01:09:20 66.7 16 2009/05/09 01:09:21 66.3 17 2009/05/09 01:09:22 66.4 18 2009/05/09 01:09:23 66.6 19 2009/05/09 01:09:24 65.5 20 2009/05/09 01:09:25 66.1 21 2009/05/09 01:09:26 66.8 22 2009/05/09 01:09:27 67.2 23 2009/05/09 01:09:28 67.9 24 2009/05/09 01:09:29 67.8 25 2009/05/09 01:09:30 67.6 26 2009/05/09 01:09:31 67.7 27 2009/05/09 01:09:32 67.2 28 2009/05/09 01:09:33 68.9 29 2009/05/09 01:09:34 68.6 30 2009/05/09 01:09:35 68.4 31 2009/05/09 01:09:36 68.6 32 2009/05/09 01:09:37 68.9 33 2009/05/09 01:09:38 68.2 34 2009/05/09 01:09:39 68.5 35 2009/05/09 01:09:40 67.5 36 2009/05/09 01:09:41 65.7 37 2009/05/09 01:09:42 65.5 38 2009/05/09 01:09:43 65.5 39 2009/05/09 01:09:44 66.5 40 2009/05/09 01:09:45 68.3 41 2009/05/09 01:09:46 67.4 42 2009/05/09 01:09:47 67.8 43 2009/05/09 01:09:48 67.1 44 2009/05/09 01:09:49 66.8 45 2009/05/09 01:09:50 68.7 46 2009/05/09 01:09:51 69.2 47 2009/05/09 01:09:52 68.8 48 2009/05/09 01:09:53 68.9 49 2009/05/09 01:09:54 68.6 50 2009/05/09 01:09:55 68.5 51 2009/05/09 01:09:56 70.1 52 2009/05/09 01:09:57 67.8 53 2009/05/09 01:09:58 66.3 54 2009/05/09 01:09:59 67.8 55 2009/05/09 01:10:00 66.9 56 2009/05/09 01:10:01 66.7 57 2009/05/09 01:10:02 68.0 58 2009/05/09 01:10:03 68.1 59 2009/05/09 01:10:04 67.8 60 2009/05/09 01:10:05 67.6 61 2009/05/09 01:10:06 67.8 62 2009/05/09 01:10:07 67.1 63 2009/05/09 01:10:08 67.2 64 2009/05/09 01:10:09 67.1 65 2009/05/09 01:10:10 68.0 66 2009/05/09 01:10:11 66.2 67 2009/05/09 01:10:12 66.7 68 2009/05/09 01:10:13 67.1 69 2009/05/09 01:10:14 66.4 70 2009/05/09 01:10:15 67.2 71 2009/05/09 01:10:16 67.1 72 2009/05/09 01:10:17 67.4 73 2009/05/09 01:10:18 67.4 74 2009/05/09 01:10:19 68.0 75 2009/05/09 01:10:20 68.5 76 2009/05/09 01:10:21 68.2 77 2009/05/09 01:10:22 70.3 78 2009/05/09 01:10:23 70.5 79 2009/05/09 01:10:24 69.7 80 2009/05/09 01:10:25 70.5 81 2009/05/09 01:10:26 70.0 82 2009/05/09 01:10:27 68.8 83 2009/05/09 01:10:28 68.0 84 2009/05/09 01:10:29 69.6 85 2009/05/09 01:10:30 70.2 86 2009/05/09 01:10:31 69.2 87 2009/05/09 01:10:32 70.0 88 2009/05/09 01:10:33 69.4 89 2009/05/09 01:10:34 69.9 90 2009/05/09 01:10:35 67.3 91 2009/05/09 01:10:36 68.2 92 2009/05/09 01:10:37 69.6 93 2009/05/09 01:10:38 69.9 94 2009/05/09 01:10:39 70.6 95 2009/05/09 01:10:40 71.4 96 2009/05/09 01:10:41 70.5 97 2009/05/09 01:10:42 71.5 98 2009/05/09 01:10:43 71.3 99 2009/05/09 01:10:44 71.6 100 2009/05/09 01:10:45 71.0 101 2009/05/09 01:10:46 70.5 102 2009/05/09 01:10:47 69.6 103 2009/05/09 01:10:48 69.7 104 2009/05/09 01:10:49 70.3 105 2009/05/09 01:10:50 70.3 106 2009/05/09 01:10:51 69.3 107 2009/05/09 01:10:52 69.5 108 2009/05/09 01:10:53 70.2 109 2009/05/09 01:10:54 68.6 110 2009/05/09 01:10:55 68.0 111 2009/05/09 01:10:56 69.2 112 2009/05/09 01:10:57 68.2 113 2009/05/09 01:10:58 68.0 114 2009/05/09 01:10:59 66.9 115 2009/05/09 01:11:00 66.2 116 2009/05/09 01:11:01 65.3 117 2009/05/09 01:11:02 67.0 118 2009/05/09 01:11:03 67.2 119 2009/05/09 01:11:04 67.3 120 2009/05/09 01:11:05 66.6 121 2009/05/09 01:11:06 67.1 122 2009/05/09 01:11:07 66.7 123 2009/05/09 01:11:08 66.6 124 2009/05/09 01:11:09 67.3 125 2009/05/09 01:11:10 67.3 126 2009/05/09 01:11:11 68.6 127 2009/05/09 01:11:12 68.8 128 2009/05/09 01:11:13 68.2 129 2009/05/09 01:11:14 66.7 130 2009/05/09 01:11:15 66.1 131 2009/05/09 01:11:16 65.3 132 2009/05/09 01:11:17 63.7 133 2009/05/09 01:11:18 65.8 134 2009/05/09 01:11:19 64.1 135 2009/05/09 01:11:20 64.3 136 2009/05/09 01:11:21 64.7 137 2009/05/09 01:11:22 63.5 138 2009/05/09 01:11:23 62.2 139 2009/05/09 01:11:24 63.0 140 2009/05/09 01:11:25 64.6 141 2009/05/09 01:11:26 66.6 142 2009/05/09 01:11:27 66.9 143 2009/05/09 01:11:28 65.8 144 2009/05/09 01:11:29 65.1 145 2009/05/09 01:11:30 66.3 146 2009/05/09 01:11:31 67.4 147 2009/05/09 01:11:32 66.4 148 2009/05/09 01:11:33 66.0 149 2009/05/09 01:11:34 64.2 150 2009/05/09 01:11:35 64.6 151 2009/05/09 01:11:36 66.1 152 2009/05/09 01:11:37 66.2 153 2009/05/09 01:11:38 66.1 154 2009/05/09 01:11:39 66.6 155 2009/05/09 01:11:40 65.0 156 2009/05/09 01:11:41 65.3 157 2009/05/09 01:11:42 65.3 158 2009/05/09 01:11:43 66.7 159 2009/05/09 01:11:44 67.2 160 2009/05/09 01:11:45 68.3 161 2009/05/09 01:11:46 69.1 162 2009/05/09 01:11:47 68.4 163 2009/05/09 01:11:48 69.0 164 2009/05/09 01:11:49 68.9 165 2009/05/09 01:11:50 68.3 166 2009/05/09 01:11:51 68.5 167 2009/05/09 01:11:52 71.2 168 2009/05/09 01:11:53 71.9 169 2009/05/09 01:11:54 69.7 170 2009/05/09 01:11:55 68.5 171 2009/05/09 01:11:56 68.0 172 2009/05/09 01:11:57 66.6 173 2009/05/09 01:11:58 67.0 174 2009/05/09 01:11:59 65.7 175 2009/05/09 01:12:00 66.2 176 2009/05/09 01:12:01 66.2 177 2009/05/09 01:12:02 65.4 178 2009/05/09 01:12:03 66.3 179 2009/05/09 01:12:04 67.8 180 2009/05/09 01:12:05 66.4 181 2009/05/09 01:12:06 68.0 182 2009/05/09 01:12:07 68.2 183 2009/05/09 01:12:08 69.0 184 2009/05/09 01:12:09 67.3 185 2009/05/09 01:12:10 66.2 186 2009/05/09 01:12:11 66.9 187 2009/05/09 01:12:12 67.2 188 2009/05/09 01:12:13 66.2 189 2009/05/09 01:12:14 66.9 190 2009/05/09 01:12:15 66.6 191 2009/05/09 01:12:16 66.5 192 2009/05/09 01:12:17 65.2 193 2009/05/09 01:12:18 65.0 194 2009/05/09 01:12:19 66.8 195 2009/05/09 01:12:20 65.9 196 2009/05/09 01:12:21 63.8 197 2009/05/09 01:12:22 63.5 198 2009/05/09 01:12:23 61.8 199 2009/05/09 01:12:24 60.8 200 2009/05/09 01:12:25 62.0 201 2009/05/09 01:12:26 61.1 202 2009/05/09 01:12:27 62.1 203 2009/05/09 01:12:28 63.0 204 2009/05/09 01:12:29 64.3 205 2009/05/09 01:12:30 66.2 206 2009/05/09 01:12:31 68.9 207 2009/05/09 01:12:32 66.3 208 2009/05/09 01:12:33 65.7 209 2009/05/09 01:12:34 65.0 210 2009/05/09 01:12:35 64.9 211 2009/05/09 01:12:36 66.3 212 2009/05/09 01:12:37 65.3 213 2009/05/09 01:12:38 66.1 214 2009/05/09 01:12:39 66.1 215 2009/05/09 01:12:40 66.3 216 2009/05/09 01:12:41 66.7 217 2009/05/09 01:12:42 64.2 218 2009/05/09 01:12:43 63.8 219 2009/05/09 01:12:44 63.6 220 2009/05/09 01:12:45 64.3 221 2009/05/09 01:12:46 66.0 222 2009/05/09 01:12:47 67.0 223 2009/05/09 01:12:48 67.5 224 2009/05/09 01:12:49 66.1 225 2009/05/09 01:12:50 65.6 226 2009/05/09 01:12:51 65.2 227 2009/05/09 01:12:52 65.1 228 2009/05/09 01:12:53 64.7 229 2009/05/09 01:12:54 64.1 230 2009/05/09 01:12:55 63.8 231 2009/05/09 01:12:56 66.4 232 2009/05/09 01:12:57 65.8 233 2009/05/09 01:12:58 66.3 234 2009/05/09 01:12:59 65.7 235 2009/05/09 01:13:00 67.2 236 2009/05/09 01:13:01 67.7 237 2009/05/09 01:13:02 67.7 238 2009/05/09 01:13:03 68.2 239 2009/05/09 01:13:04 66.3 240 2009/05/09 01:13:05 66.5 241 2009/05/09 01:13:06 65.5 242 2009/05/09 01:13:07 66.1 243 2009/05/09 01:13:08 66.2 244 2009/05/09 01:13:09 65.1 245 2009/05/09 01:13:10 63.0 246 2009/05/09 01:13:11 62.0 247 2009/05/09 01:13:12 62.3 248 2009/05/09 01:13:13 63.6 249 2009/05/09 01:13:14 64.6 250 2009/05/09 01:13:15 65.8 251 2009/05/09 01:13:16 64.7 252 2009/05/09 01:13:17 63.4 253 2009/05/09 01:13:18 64.2 254 2009/05/09 01:13:19 63.2 255 2009/05/09 01:13:20 65.1 256 2009/05/09 01:13:21 65.6 257 2009/05/09 01:13:22 66.7 258 2009/05/09 01:13:23 66.5 259 2009/05/09 01:13:24 66.5 260 2009/05/09 01:13:25 66.8 261 2009/05/09 01:13:26 64.4 262 2009/05/09 01:13:27 63.5 263 2009/05/09 01:13:28 63.3 264 2009/05/09 01:13:29 61.7 265 2009/05/09 01:13:30 61.4 266 2009/05/09 01:13:31 60.7 267 2009/05/09 01:13:32 63.7 268 2009/05/09 01:13:33 63.8 269 2009/05/09 01:13:34 63.6 270 2009/05/09 01:13:35 64.4 271 2009/05/09 01:13:36 64.6 272 2009/05/09 01:13:37 64.7 273 2009/05/09 01:13:38 64.9 274 2009/05/09 01:13:39 64.4 275 2009/05/09 01:13:40 62.4 276 2009/05/09 01:13:41 62.9 277 2009/05/09 01:13:42 64.3 278 2009/05/09 01:13:43 65.0 279 2009/05/09 01:13:44 65.8 280 2009/05/09 01:13:45 66.2 281 2009/05/09 01:13:46 63.9 282 2009/05/09 01:13:47 62.4 283 2009/05/09 01:13:48 61.5 284 2009/05/09 01:13:49 62.1 285 2009/05/09 01:13:50 60.5 286 2009/05/09 01:13:51 61.1 287 2009/05/09 01:13:52 60.6 288 2009/05/09 01:13:53 62.0 289 2009/05/09 01:13:54 63.3 290 2009/05/09 01:13:55 64.5 291 2009/05/09 01:13:56 63.2 292 2009/05/09 01:13:57 63.0 293 2009/05/09 01:13:58 62.9 294 2009/05/09 01:13:59 62.5 295 2009/05/09 01:14:00 63.5 296 2009/05/09 01:14:01 64.3 297 2009/05/09 01:14:02 65.7 298 2009/05/09 01:14:03 63.9 299 2009/05/09 01:14:04 63.6 300 2009/05/09 01:14:05 63.2 301 2009/05/09 01:14:06 63.7 302 2009/05/09 01:14:07 64.2 303 2009/05/09 01:14:08 63.4 304 2009/05/09 01:14:09 63.9 305 2009/05/09 01:14:10 65.0 306 2009/05/09 01:14:11 64.7 307 2009/05/09 01:14:12 66.7 308 2009/05/09 01:14:13 65.5 309 2009/05/09 01:14:14 63.6 310 2009/05/09 01:14:15 61.9 311 2009/05/09 01:14:16 61.6 312 2009/05/09 01:14:17 62.0 313 2009/05/09 01:14:18 62.2 314 2009/05/09 01:14:19 63.3 315 2009/05/09 01:14:20 64.4 316 2009/05/09 01:14:21 65.8 317 2009/05/09 01:14:22 66.5 318 2009/05/09 01:14:23 65.8 319 2009/05/09 01:14:24 66.1 320 2009/05/09 01:14:25 65.8 321 2009/05/09 01:14:26 66.9 322 2009/05/09 01:14:27 67.0 323 2009/05/09 01:14:28 67.4 324 2009/05/09 01:14:29 66.1 325 2009/05/09 01:14:30 65.4 326 2009/05/09 01:14:31 64.6 327 2009/05/09 01:14:32 64.8 328 2009/05/09 01:14:33 65.1 329 2009/05/09 01:14:34 64.8 330 2009/05/09 01:14:35 66.1 331 2009/05/09 01:14:36 65.5 332 2009/05/09 01:14:37 66.2 333 2009/05/09 01:14:38 66.6 334 2009/05/09 01:14:39 67.5 335 2009/05/09 01:14:40 66.5 336 2009/05/09 01:14:41 66.8 337 2009/05/09 01:14:42 66.8 338 2009/05/09 01:14:43 66.5 339 2009/05/09 01:14:44 66.9 340 2009/05/09 01:14:45 66.6 341 2009/05/09 01:14:46 68.0 342 2009/05/09 01:14:47 67.2 343 2009/05/09 01:14:48 66.6 344 2009/05/09 01:14:49 68.0 345 2009/05/09 01:14:50 69.5 346 2009/05/09 01:14:51 67.1 347 2009/05/09 01:14:52 68.1 348 2009/05/09 01:14:53 66.4 349 2009/05/09 01:14:54 66.0 350 2009/05/09 01:14:55 65.4 351 2009/05/09 01:14:56 64.3 352 2009/05/09 01:14:57 65.1 353 2009/05/09 01:14:58 65.8 354 2009/05/09 01:14:59 66.6 355 2009/05/09 01:15:00 67.1 356 2009/05/09 01:15:01 66.9 357 2009/05/09 01:15:02 66.2 358 2009/05/09 01:15:03 65.3 359 2009/05/09 01:15:04 66.0 360 2009/05/09 01:15:05 65.6 361 2009/05/09 01:15:06 64.6 362 2009/05/09 01:15:07 65.7 363 2009/05/09 01:15:08 64.3 364 2009/05/09 01:15:09 63.9 365 2009/05/09 01:15:10 64.3 366 2009/05/09 01:15:11 66.2 367 2009/05/09 01:15:12 65.8 368 2009/05/09 01:15:13 67.8 369 2009/05/09 01:15:14 68.0 370 2009/05/09 01:15:15 66.6 371 2009/05/09 01:15:16 65.9 372 2009/05/09 01:15:17 65.7 373 2009/05/09 01:15:18 66.7 374 2009/05/09 01:15:19 67.7 375 2009/05/09 01:15:20 67.2 376 2009/05/09 01:15:21 66.7 377 2009/05/09 01:15:22 66.9 378 2009/05/09 01:15:23 66.6 379 2009/05/09 01:15:24 66.2 380 2009/05/09 01:15:25 62.4 381 2009/05/09 01:15:26 61.1 382 2009/05/09 01:15:27 62.5 383 2009/05/09 01:15:28 61.1 384 2009/05/09 01:15:29 61.9 385 2009/05/09 01:15:30 65.9 386 2009/05/09 01:15:31 63.6 387 2009/05/09 01:15:32 64.1 388 2009/05/09 01:15:33 65.0 389 2009/05/09 01:15:34 66.3 390 2009/05/09 01:15:35 68.2 391 2009/05/09 01:15:36 67.4 392 2009/05/09 01:15:37 65.6 393 2009/05/09 01:15:38 64.7 394 2009/05/09 01:15:39 63.1 395 2009/05/09 01:15:40 63.0 396 2009/05/09 01:15:41 63.4 397 2009/05/09 01:15:42 63.4 398 2009/05/09 01:15:43 66.1 399 2009/05/09 01:15:44 64.0 400 2009/05/09 01:15:45 63.3 401 2009/05/09 01:15:46 61.6 402 2009/05/09 01:15:47 60.7 403 2009/05/09 01:15:48 60.5 404 2009/05/09 01:15:49 61.7 405 2009/05/09 01:15:50 63.1 406 2009/05/09 01:15:51 62.8 407 2009/05/09 01:15:52 61.8 408 2009/05/09 01:15:53 59.8 409 2009/05/09 01:15:54 60.5 410 2009/05/09 01:15:55 59.1 411 2009/05/09 01:15:56 60.4 412 2009/05/09 01:15:57 61.3 413 2009/05/09 01:15:58 61.9 414 2009/05/09 01:15:59 63.6 415 2009/05/09 01:16:00 65.5 416 2009/05/09 01:16:01 67.3 417 2009/05/09 01:16:02 67.5 418 2009/05/09 01:16:03 68.1 419 2009/05/09 01:16:04 67.9 420 2009/05/09 01:16:05 67.8 421 2009/05/09 01:16:06 66.4 422 2009/05/09 01:16:07 65.6 423 2009/05/09 01:16:08 65.7 424 2009/05/09 01:16:09 65.7 425 2009/05/09 01:16:10 67.5 426 2009/05/09 01:16:11 66.8 427 2009/05/09 01:16:12 66.9 428 2009/05/09 01:16:13 67.5 429 2009/05/09 01:16:14 67.5 430 2009/05/09 01:16:15 67.6 431 2009/05/09 01:16:16 68.7 432 2009/05/09 01:16:17 68.3 433 2009/05/09 01:16:18 68.8 434 2009/05/09 01:16:19 70.6 435 2009/05/09 01:16:20 69.1 436 2009/05/09 01:16:21 68.9 437 2009/05/09 01:16:22 69.6 438 2009/05/09 01:16:23 69.8 439 2009/05/09 01:16:24 70.7 440 2009/05/09 01:16:25 69.3 441 2009/05/09 01:16:26 68.1 442 2009/05/09 01:16:27 68.4 443 2009/05/09 01:16:28 66.6 444 2009/05/09 01:16:29 64.8 445 2009/05/09 01:16:30 63.6 446 2009/05/09 01:16:31 64.8 447 2009/05/09 01:16:32 66.0 448 2009/05/09 01:16:33 66.0 449 2009/05/09 01:16:34 67.4 450 2009/05/09 01:16:35 66.2 451 2009/05/09 01:16:36 65.3 452 2009/05/09 01:16:37 68.0 453 2009/05/09 01:16:38 68.5 454 2009/05/09 01:16:39 67.0 455 2009/05/09 01:16:40 67.0 456 2009/05/09 01:16:41 66.6 457 2009/05/09 01:16:42 66.7 458 2009/05/09 01:16:43 66.7 459 2009/05/09 01:16:44 67.0 460 2009/05/09 01:16:45 69.0 461 2009/05/09 01:16:46 69.9 462 2009/05/09 01:16:47 69.6 463 2009/05/09 01:16:48 69.4 464 2009/05/09 01:16:49 70.2 465 2009/05/09 01:16:50 69.5 466 2009/05/09 01:16:51 68.9 467 2009/05/09 01:16:52 67.8 468 2009/05/09 01:16:53 68.4 469 2009/05/09 01:16:54 69.3 470 2009/05/09 01:16:55 68.6 471 2009/05/09 01:16:56 69.3 472 2009/05/09 01:16:57 67.4 473 2009/05/09 01:16:58 67.5 474 2009/05/09 01:16:59 69.5 475 2009/05/09 01:17:00 69.6 476 2009/05/09 01:17:01 68.4 477 2009/05/09 01:17:02 67.4 478 2009/05/09 01:17:03 66.2 479 2009/05/09 01:17:04 64.0 480 2009/05/09 01:17:05 64.6 481 2009/05/09 01:17:06 64.5 482 2009/05/09 01:17:07 65.5 483 2009/05/09 01:17:08 62.8 484 2009/05/09 01:17:09 64.5 485 2009/05/09 01:17:10 63.5 486 2009/05/09 01:17:11 63.4 487 2009/05/09 01:17:12 62.8 488 2009/05/09 01:17:13 62.7 489 2009/05/09 01:17:14 63.7 490 2009/05/09 01:17:15 64.9 491 2009/05/09 01:17:16 66.5 492 2009/05/09 01:17:17 70.2 493 2009/05/09 01:17:18 64.5 494 2009/05/09 01:17:19 65.2 495 2009/05/09 01:17:20 66.6 496 2009/05/09 01:17:21 67.5 497 2009/05/09 01:17:22 66.8 498 2009/05/09 01:17:23 68.1 499 2009/05/09 01:17:24 67.7 500 2009/05/09 01:17:25 69.6 501 2009/05/09 01:17:26 68.7 502 2009/05/09 01:17:27 65.6 503 2009/05/09 01:17:28 67.1 504 2009/05/09 01:17:29 66.3 505 2009/05/09 01:17:30 65.8 506 2009/05/09 01:17:31 63.6 507 2009/05/09 01:17:32 62.7 508 2009/05/09 01:17:33 63.6 509 2009/05/09 01:17:34 61.6 510 2009/05/09 01:17:35 61.8 511 2009/05/09 01:17:36 63.5 512 2009/05/09 01:17:37 62.7 513 2009/05/09 01:17:38 63.8 514 2009/05/09 01:17:39 61.7 515 2009/05/09 01:17:40 60.9 516 2009/05/09 01:17:41 60.8 517 2009/05/09 01:17:42 61.4 518 2009/05/09 01:17:43 62.7 519 2009/05/09 01:17:44 64.9 520 2009/05/09 01:17:45 66.5 521 2009/05/09 01:17:46 66.6 522 2009/05/09 01:17:47 67.0 523 2009/05/09 01:17:48 67.6 524 2009/05/09 01:17:49 66.4 525 2009/05/09 01:17:50 66.2 526 2009/05/09 01:17:51 65.9 527 2009/05/09 01:17:52 65.9 528 2009/05/09 01:17:53 66.3 529 2009/05/09 01:17:54 67.5 530 2009/05/09 01:17:55 67.7 531 2009/05/09 01:17:56 68.0 532 2009/05/09 01:17:57 68.0 533 2009/05/09 01:17:58 68.6 534 2009/05/09 01:17:59 68.2 535 2009/05/09 01:18:00 67.8 536 2009/05/09 01:18:01 67.1 537 2009/05/09 01:18:02 67.0 538 2009/05/09 01:18:03 67.5 539 2009/05/09 01:18:04 67.2 540 2009/05/09 01:18:05 67.6 541 2009/05/09 01:18:06 68.9 542 2009/05/09 01:18:07 68.5 543 2009/05/09 01:18:08 68.6 544 2009/05/09 01:18:09 66.0 545 2009/05/09 01:18:10 64.3 546 2009/05/09 01:18:11 63.0 547 2009/05/09 01:18:12 61.4 548 2009/05/09 01:18:13 61.5 549 2009/05/09 01:18:14 60.5 550 2009/05/09 01:18:15 61.7 551 2009/05/09 01:18:16 60.9 552 2009/05/09 01:18:17 60.3 553 2009/05/09 01:18:18 59.7 554 2009/05/09 01:18:19 60.0 555 2009/05/09 01:18:20 63.7 556 2009/05/09 01:18:21 64.7 557 2009/05/09 01:18:22 65.5 558 2009/05/09 01:18:23 65.7 559 2009/05/09 01:18:24 67.5 560 2009/05/09 01:18:25 68.6 561 2009/05/09 01:18:26 71.0 562 2009/05/09 01:18:27 69.1 563 2009/05/09 01:18:28 69.5 564 2009/05/09 01:18:29 68.1 565 2009/05/09 01:18:30 66.0 566 2009/05/09 01:18:31 64.5 567 2009/05/09 01:18:32 65.2 568 2009/05/09 01:18:33 65.5 569 2009/05/09 01:18:34 65.7 570 2009/05/09 01:18:35 65.7 571 2009/05/09 01:18:36 66.8 572 2009/05/09 01:18:37 68.7 573 2009/05/09 01:18:38 70.2 574 2009/05/09 01:18:39 68.7 575 2009/05/09 01:18:40 67.2 576 2009/05/09 01:18:41 68.1 577 2009/05/09 01:18:42 66.6 578 2009/05/09 01:18:43 65.2 579 2009/05/09 01:18:44 63.7 580 2009/05/09 01:18:45 65.1 581 2009/05/09 01:18:46 65.7 582 2009/05/09 01:18:47 65.7 583 2009/05/09 01:18:48 66.1 584 2009/05/09 01:18:49 66.1 585 2009/05/09 01:18:50 66.9 586 2009/05/09 01:18:51 67.1 587 2009/05/09 01:18:52 66.4 588 2009/05/09 01:18:53 64.5 589 2009/05/09 01:18:54 63.3 590 2009/05/09 01:18:55 64.2 591 2009/05/09 01:18:56 64.8 592 2009/05/09 01:18:57 65.4 593 2009/05/09 01:18:58 66.4 594 2009/05/09 01:18:59 66.9 595 2009/05/09 01:19:00 65.3 596 2009/05/09 01:19:01 66.0 597 2009/05/09 01:19:02 65.5 598 2009/05/09 01:19:03 67.5 599 2009/05/09 01:19:04 68.4 600 2009/05/09 01:19:05 68.1 601 2009/05/09 01:19:06 67.8 602 2009/05/09 01:19:07 68.5 603 2009/05/09 01:19:08 65.8 604 2009/05/09 01:19:09 62.9 605 2009/05/09 01:19:10 62.8 606 2009/05/09 01:19:11 62.3 607 2009/05/09 01:19:12 62.5 608 2009/05/09 01:19:13 63.8 609 2009/05/09 01:19:14 64.2 610 2009/05/09 01:19:15 66.0 611 2009/05/09 01:19:16 65.0 612 2009/05/09 01:19:17 66.9 613 2009/05/09 01:19:18 68.0 614 2009/05/09 01:19:19 69.9 615 2009/05/09 01:19:20 68.6 616 2009/05/09 01:19:21 68.9 617 2009/05/09 01:19:22 68.5 618 2009/05/09 01:19:23 66.7 619 2009/05/09 01:19:24 67.2 620 2009/05/09 01:19:25 67.6 621 2009/05/09 01:19:26 67.7 622 2009/05/09 01:19:27 67.7 623 2009/05/09 01:19:28 66.0 624 2009/05/09 01:19:29 65.4 625 2009/05/09 01:19:30 66.8 626 2009/05/09 01:19:31 67.1 627 2009/05/09 01:19:32 66.1 628 2009/05/09 01:19:33 66.8 629 2009/05/09 01:19:34 67.3 630 2009/05/09 01:19:35 66.9 631 2009/05/09 01:19:36 65.1 632 2009/05/09 01:19:37 64.7 633 2009/05/09 01:19:38 65.7 634 2009/05/09 01:19:39 66.2 635 2009/05/09 01:19:40 68.8 636 2009/05/09 01:19:41 68.1 637 2009/05/09 01:19:42 66.7 638 2009/05/09 01:19:43 66.5 639 2009/05/09 01:19:44 66.0 640 2009/05/09 01:19:45 65.8 641 2009/05/09 01:19:46 64.6 642 2009/05/09 01:19:47 64.7 643 2009/05/09 01:19:48 64.9 644 2009/05/09 01:19:49 63.8 645 2009/05/09 01:19:50 64.2 646 2009/05/09 01:19:51 62.7 647 2009/05/09 01:19:52 62.7 648 2009/05/09 01:19:53 62.8 649 2009/05/09 01:19:54 63.1 650 2009/05/09 01:19:55 63.4 651 2009/05/09 01:19:56 62.4 652 2009/05/09 01:19:57 61.4 653 2009/05/09 01:19:58 61.8 654 2009/05/09 01:19:59 62.5 655 2009/05/09 01:20:00 63.9 656 2009/05/09 01:20:01 64.7 657 2009/05/09 01:20:02 64.6 658 2009/05/09 01:20:03 63.8 659 2009/05/09 01:20:04 63.3 660 2009/05/09 01:20:05 63.5 661 2009/05/09 01:20:06 63.5 662 2009/05/09 01:20:07 64.5 663 2009/05/09 01:20:08 66.6 664 2009/05/09 01:20:09 65.4 665 2009/05/09 01:20:10 65.2 666 2009/05/09 01:20:11 63.8 667 2009/05/09 01:20:12 62.7 668 2009/05/09 01:20:13 62.0 669 2009/05/09 01:20:14 63.1 670 2009/05/09 01:20:15 65.3 671 2009/05/09 01:20:16 65.9 672 2009/05/09 01:20:17 66.5 673 2009/05/09 01:20:18 67.2 674 2009/05/09 01:20:19 67.7 675 2009/05/09 01:20:20 65.5 676 2009/05/09 01:20:21 64.0 677 2009/05/09 01:20:22 64.2 678 2009/05/09 01:20:23 63.6 679 2009/05/09 01:20:24 63.5 680 2009/05/09 01:20:25 63.7 681 2009/05/09 01:20:26 64.8 682 2009/05/09 01:20:27 65.8 683 2009/05/09 01:20:28 62.9 684 2009/05/09 01:20:29 62.2 685 2009/05/09 01:20:30 63.3 686 2009/05/09 01:20:31 65.2 687 2009/05/09 01:20:32 64.7 688 2009/05/09 01:20:33 65.4 689 2009/05/09 01:20:34 66.0 690 2009/05/09 01:20:35 67.6 691 2009/05/09 01:20:36 66.1 692 2009/05/09 01:20:37 66.1 693 2009/05/09 01:20:38 65.6 694 2009/05/09 01:20:39 65.9 695 2009/05/09 01:20:40 66.3 696 2009/05/09 01:20:41 67.8 697 2009/05/09 01:20:42 69.6 698 2009/05/09 01:20:43 69.7 699 2009/05/09 01:20:44 72.2 700 2009/05/09 01:20:45 70.9 701 2009/05/09 01:20:46 69.5 702 2009/05/09 01:20:47 69.2 703 2009/05/09 01:20:48 69.2 704 2009/05/09 01:20:49 69.6 705 2009/05/09 01:20:50 71.8 706 2009/05/09 01:20:51 68.7 707 2009/05/09 01:20:52 68.9 708 2009/05/09 01:20:53 67.5 709 2009/05/09 01:20:54 67.0 710 2009/05/09 01:20:55 65.8 711 2009/05/09 01:20:56 66.1 712 2009/05/09 01:20:57 64.9 713 2009/05/09 01:20:58 64.0 714 2009/05/09 01:20:59 63.2 715 2009/05/09 01:21:00 63.6 716 2009/05/09 01:21:01 64.5 717 2009/05/09 01:21:02 64.6 718 2009/05/09 01:21:03 66.8 719 2009/05/09 01:21:04 66.9 720 2009/05/09 01:21:05 68.1 721 2009/05/09 01:21:06 68.6 722 2009/05/09 01:21:07 67.2 723 2009/05/09 01:21:08 65.2 724 2009/05/09 01:21:09 63.7 725 2009/05/09 01:21:10 65.0 726 2009/05/09 01:21:11 64.9 727 2009/05/09 01:21:12 63.3 728 2009/05/09 01:21:13 63.4 729 2009/05/09 01:21:14 63.1 730 2009/05/09 01:21:15 64.2 731 2009/05/09 01:21:16 66.0 732 2009/05/09 01:21:17 65.4 733 2009/05/09 01:21:18 64.7 734 2009/05/09 01:21:19 63.7 735 2009/05/09 01:21:20 62.2 736 2009/05/09 01:21:21 63.4 737 2009/05/09 01:21:22 64.6 738 2009/05/09 01:21:23 63.3 739 2009/05/09 01:21:24 64.4 740 2009/05/09 01:21:25 65.9 741 2009/05/09 01:21:26 64.9 742 2009/05/09 01:21:27 64.8 743 2009/05/09 01:21:28 64.9 744 2009/05/09 01:21:29 63.1 745 2009/05/09 01:21:30 62.1 746 2009/05/09 01:21:31 62.1 747 2009/05/09 01:21:32 63.3 748 2009/05/09 01:21:33 65.7 749 2009/05/09 01:21:34 66.6 750 2009/05/09 01:21:35 68.3 751 2009/05/09 01:21:36 67.0 752 2009/05/09 01:21:37 66.0 753 2009/05/09 01:21:38 66.9 754 2009/05/09 01:21:39 67.7 755 2009/05/09 01:21:40 68.1 756 2009/05/09 01:21:41 68.8 757 2009/05/09 01:21:42 68.3 758 2009/05/09 01:21:43 68.1 759 2009/05/09 01:21:44 67.6 760 2009/05/09 01:21:45 67.0 761 2009/05/09 01:21:46 66.3 762 2009/05/09 01:21:47 66.4 763 2009/05/09 01:21:48 65.7 764 2009/05/09 01:21:49 65.7 765 2009/05/09 01:21:50 65.1 766 2009/05/09 01:21:51 65.5 767 2009/05/09 01:21:52 65.6 768 2009/05/09 01:21:53 65.3 769 2009/05/09 01:21:54 64.3 770 2009/05/09 01:21:55 64.6 771 2009/05/09 01:21:56 65.6 772 2009/05/09 01:21:57 65.5 773 2009/05/09 01:21:58 64.8 774 2009/05/09 01:21:59 63.7 775 2009/05/09 01:22:00 64.6 776 2009/05/09 01:22:01 64.8 777 2009/05/09 01:22:02 64.3 778 2009/05/09 01:22:03 64.9 779 2009/05/09 01:22:04 65.4 780 2009/05/09 01:22:05 65.9 781 2009/05/09 01:22:06 65.8 782 2009/05/09 01:22:07 64.9 783 2009/05/09 01:22:08 67.1 784 2009/05/09 01:22:09 66.4 785 2009/05/09 01:22:10 66.4 786 2009/05/09 01:22:11 65.6 787 2009/05/09 01:22:12 64.2 788 2009/05/09 01:22:13 63.5 789 2009/05/09 01:22:14 64.4 790 2009/05/09 01:22:15 65.2 791 2009/05/09 01:22:16 64.5 792 2009/05/09 01:22:17 62.3 793 2009/05/09 01:22:18 63.0 794 2009/05/09 01:22:19 62.7 795 2009/05/09 01:22:20 63.6 796 2009/05/09 01:22:21 64.9 797 2009/05/09 01:22:22 64.1 798 2009/05/09 01:22:23 64.0 799 2009/05/09 01:22:24 64.9 800 2009/05/09 01:22:25 67.0 801 2009/05/09 01:22:26 67.1 802 2009/05/09 01:22:27 66.3 803 2009/05/09 01:22:28 66.1 804 2009/05/09 01:22:29 65.3 805 2009/05/09 01:22:30 64.1 806 2009/05/09 01:22:31 65.2 807 2009/05/09 01:22:32 65.3 808 2009/05/09 01:22:33 68.1 809 2009/05/09 01:22:34 66.5 810 2009/05/09 01:22:35 67.9 811 2009/05/09 01:22:36 66.9 812 2009/05/09 01:22:37 65.0 813 2009/05/09 01:22:38 63.6 814 2009/05/09 01:22:39 63.8 815 2009/05/09 01:22:40 63.5 816 2009/05/09 01:22:41 63.6 817 2009/05/09 01:22:42 63.0 818 2009/05/09 01:22:43 62.9 819 2009/05/09 01:22:44 62.9 820 2009/05/09 01:22:45 65.3 821 2009/05/09 01:22:46 65.8 822 2009/05/09 01:22:47 65.0 823 2009/05/09 01:22:48 64.5 824 2009/05/09 01:22:49 64.5 825 2009/05/09 01:22:50 63.6 826 2009/05/09 01:22:51 63.8 827 2009/05/09 01:22:52 64.3 828 2009/05/09 01:22:53 62.9 829 2009/05/09 01:22:54 62.7 830 2009/05/09 01:22:55 64.7 831 2009/05/09 01:22:56 63.7 832 2009/05/09 01:22:57 65.0 833 2009/05/09 01:22:58 64.1 834 2009/05/09 01:22:59 64.4 835 2009/05/09 01:23:00 63.9 836 2009/05/09 01:23:01 63.4 837 2009/05/09 01:23:02 62.6 838 2009/05/09 01:23:03 62.6 839 2009/05/09 01:23:04 63.4 840 2009/05/09 01:23:05 63.7 841 2009/05/09 01:23:06 64.0 842 2009/05/09 01:23:07 64.0 843 2009/05/09 01:23:08 62.9 844 2009/05/09 01:23:09 62.0 845 2009/05/09 01:23:10 62.4 846 2009/05/09 01:23:11 64.3 847 2009/05/09 01:23:12 63.1 848 2009/05/09 01:23:13 62.7 849 2009/05/09 01:23:14 61.3 850 2009/05/09 01:23:15 61.0 851 2009/05/09 01:23:16 62.6 852 2009/05/09 01:23:17 62.1 853 2009/05/09 01:23:18 62.5 854 2009/05/09 01:23:19 65.1 855 2009/05/09 01:23:20 65.3 856 2009/05/09 01:23:21 66.8 857 2009/05/09 01:23:22 67.1 858 2009/05/09 01:23:23 65.4 859 2009/05/09 01:23:24 65.9 860 2009/05/09 01:23:25 65.9 861 2009/05/09 01:23:26 66.3 862 2009/05/09 01:23:27 67.2 863 2009/05/09 01:23:28 66.5 864 2009/05/09 01:23:29 66.2 865 2009/05/09 01:23:30 66.0 866 2009/05/09 01:23:31 66.3 867 2009/05/09 01:23:32 66.0 868 2009/05/09 01:23:33 65.9 869 2009/05/09 01:23:34 67.7 870 2009/05/09 01:23:35 68.2 871 2009/05/09 01:23:36 66.3 872 2009/05/09 01:23:37 66.2 873 2009/05/09 01:23:38 65.6 874 2009/05/09 01:23:39 66.2 875 2009/05/09 01:23:40 66.3 876 2009/05/09 01:23:41 66.3 877 2009/05/09 01:23:42 67.1 878 2009/05/09 01:23:43 66.4 879 2009/05/09 01:23:44 66.5 880 2009/05/09 01:23:45 66.6 881 2009/05/09 01:23:46 65.9 882 2009/05/09 01:23:47 64.9 883 2009/05/09 01:23:48 64.6 884 2009/05/09 01:23:49 64.2 885 2009/05/09 01:23:50 63.5 886 2009/05/09 01:23:51 65.4 887 2009/05/09 01:23:52 64.4 888 2009/05/09 01:23:53 64.4 889 2009/05/09 01:23:54 65.4 890 2009/05/09 01:23:55 66.4 891 2009/05/09 01:23:56 66.3 892 2009/05/09 01:23:57 64.0 893 2009/05/09 01:23:58 63.8 894 2009/05/09 01:23:59 64.0 895 2009/05/09 01:24:00 62.9 896 2009/05/09 01:24:01 62.7 897 2009/05/09 01:24:02 63.2 898 2009/05/09 01:24:03 63.2 899 2009/05/09 01:24:04 63.7 900 2009/05/09 01:24:05 62.5 - Freq Weight : A- Time Weight : FAST- Level Range : 40-100- Max dB : 72.5 - 2009/05/09 01:59:59- Level Range : 40-100- SEL : 86.8- Leq : 57.3- No.s Date Time (dB) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2009/05/09 01:47:09 53.8 2 2009/05/09 01:47:10 53.7 3 2009/05/09 01:47:11 55.7 4 2009/05/09 01:47:12 55.5 5 2009/05/09 01:47:13 55.8 6 2009/05/09 01:47:14 54.6 7 2009/05/09 01:47:15 54.7 8 2009/05/09 01:47:16 54.2 9 2009/05/09 01:47:17 55.8 10 2009/05/09 01:47:18 55.6 11 2009/05/09 01:47:19 53.5 12 2009/05/09 01:47:20 54.1 13 2009/05/09 01:47:21 55.2 14 2009/05/09 01:47:22 54.8 15 2009/05/09 01:47:23 56.5 16 2009/05/09 01:47:24 57.6 17 2009/05/09 01:47:25 56.0 18 2009/05/09 01:47:26 57.2 19 2009/05/09 01:47:27 56.4 20 2009/05/09 01:47:28 56.5 21 2009/05/09 01:47:29 56.5 22 2009/05/09 01:47:30 59.1 23 2009/05/09 01:47:31 57.0 24 2009/05/09 01:47:32 55.6 25 2009/05/09 01:47:33 55.6 26 2009/05/09 01:47:34 55.8 27 2009/05/09 01:47:35 58.6 28 2009/05/09 01:47:36 55.0 29 2009/05/09 01:47:37 55.0 30 2009/05/09 01:47:38 56.8 31 2009/05/09 01:47:39 54.3 32 2009/05/09 01:47:40 54.2 33 2009/05/09 01:47:41 55.0 34 2009/05/09 01:47:42 54.5 35 2009/05/09 01:47:43 54.3 36 2009/05/09 01:47:44 54.6 37 2009/05/09 01:47:45 55.2 38 2009/05/09 01:47:46 56.0 39 2009/05/09 01:47:47 55.9 40 2009/05/09 01:47:48 56.3 41 2009/05/09 01:47:49 55.5 42 2009/05/09 01:47:50 54.9 43 2009/05/09 01:47:51 55.0 44 2009/05/09 01:47:52 54.5 45 2009/05/09 01:47:53 54.6 46 2009/05/09 01:47:54 55.2 47 2009/05/09 01:47:55 55.4 48 2009/05/09 01:47:56 55.5 49 2009/05/09 01:47:57 56.2 50 2009/05/09 01:47:58 56.4 51 2009/05/09 01:47:59 58.1 52 2009/05/09 01:48:00 57.3 53 2009/05/09 01:48:01 55.6 54 2009/05/09 01:48:02 54.4 55 2009/05/09 01:48:03 54.9 56 2009/05/09 01:48:04 55.0 57 2009/05/09 01:48:05 56.4 58 2009/05/09 01:48:06 56.7 59 2009/05/09 01:48:07 56.6 60 2009/05/09 01:48:08 57.2 61 2009/05/09 01:48:09 56.6 62 2009/05/09 01:48:10 56.1 63 2009/05/09 01:48:11 56.3 64 2009/05/09 01:48:12 56.8 65 2009/05/09 01:48:13 55.9 66 2009/05/09 01:48:14 57.1 67 2009/05/09 01:48:15 63.3 68 2009/05/09 01:48:16 65.1 69 2009/05/09 01:48:17 63.0 70 2009/05/09 01:48:18 58.8 71 2009/05/09 01:48:19 60.1 72 2009/05/09 01:48:20 59.3 73 2009/05/09 01:48:21 57.8 74 2009/05/09 01:48:22 56.6 75 2009/05/09 01:48:23 56.4 76 2009/05/09 01:48:24 56.0 77 2009/05/09 01:48:25 54.3 78 2009/05/09 01:48:26 54.7 79 2009/05/09 01:48:27 57.0 80 2009/05/09 01:48:28 55.7 81 2009/05/09 01:48:29 56.0 82 2009/05/09 01:48:30 55.9 83 2009/05/09 01:48:31 55.5 84 2009/05/09 01:48:32 56.1 85 2009/05/09 01:48:33 54.4 86 2009/05/09 01:48:34 55.6 87 2009/05/09 01:48:35 55.5 88 2009/05/09 01:48:36 54.2 89 2009/05/09 01:48:37 54.2 90 2009/05/09 01:48:38 53.5 91 2009/05/09 01:48:39 54.7 92 2009/05/09 01:48:40 56.2 93 2009/05/09 01:48:41 55.9 94 2009/05/09 01:48:42 55.2 95 2009/05/09 01:48:43 56.8 96 2009/05/09 01:48:44 55.4 97 2009/05/09 01:48:45 57.0 98 2009/05/09 01:48:46 55.4 99 2009/05/09 01:48:47 57.0 100 2009/05/09 01:48:48 57.6 101 2009/05/09 01:48:49 56.4 102 2009/05/09 01:48:50 55.1 103 2009/05/09 01:48:51 53.8 104 2009/05/09 01:48:52 55.5 105 2009/05/09 01:48:53 55.4 106 2009/05/09 01:48:54 56.6 107 2009/05/09 01:48:55 56.2 108 2009/05/09 01:48:56 56.2 109 2009/05/09 01:48:57 57.7 110 2009/05/09 01:48:58 57.9 111 2009/05/09 01:48:59 57.0 112 2009/05/09 01:49:00 57.2 113 2009/05/09 01:49:01 57.0 114 2009/05/09 01:49:02 57.3 115 2009/05/09 01:49:03 57.5 116 2009/05/09 01:49:04 58.1 117 2009/05/09 01:49:05 57.8 118 2009/05/09 01:49:06 57.8 119 2009/05/09 01:49:07 57.5 120 2009/05/09 01:49:08 57.5 121 2009/05/09 01:49:09 57.9 122 2009/05/09 01:49:10 58.4 123 2009/05/09 01:49:11 58.1 124 2009/05/09 01:49:12 57.6 125 2009/05/09 01:49:13 57.9 126 2009/05/09 01:49:14 56.7 127 2009/05/09 01:49:15 55.8 128 2009/05/09 01:49:16 55.9 129 2009/05/09 01:49:17 55.5 130 2009/05/09 01:49:18 56.2 131 2009/05/09 01:49:19 57.4 132 2009/05/09 01:49:20 56.8 133 2009/05/09 01:49:21 57.3 134 2009/05/09 01:49:22 56.7 135 2009/05/09 01:49:23 56.4 136 2009/05/09 01:49:24 57.6 137 2009/05/09 01:49:25 56.9 138 2009/05/09 01:49:26 56.9 139 2009/05/09 01:49:27 56.6 140 2009/05/09 01:49:28 56.8 141 2009/05/09 01:49:29 56.4 142 2009/05/09 01:49:30 57.6 143 2009/05/09 01:49:31 57.2 144 2009/05/09 01:49:32 57.3 145 2009/05/09 01:49:33 57.8 146 2009/05/09 01:49:34 55.4 147 2009/05/09 01:49:35 54.9 148 2009/05/09 01:49:36 53.4 149 2009/05/09 01:49:37 55.0 150 2009/05/09 01:49:38 56.3 151 2009/05/09 01:49:39 56.4 152 2009/05/09 01:49:40 56.3 153 2009/05/09 01:49:41 56.0 154 2009/05/09 01:49:42 55.2 155 2009/05/09 01:49:43 56.7 156 2009/05/09 01:49:44 57.2 157 2009/05/09 01:49:45 55.8 158 2009/05/09 01:49:46 55.9 159 2009/05/09 01:49:47 54.7 160 2009/05/09 01:49:48 54.9 161 2009/05/09 01:49:49 55.5 162 2009/05/09 01:49:50 53.9 163 2009/05/09 01:49:51 56.4 164 2009/05/09 01:49:52 55.4 165 2009/05/09 01:49:53 57.1 166 2009/05/09 01:49:54 58.3 167 2009/05/09 01:49:55 56.9 168 2009/05/09 01:49:56 55.0 169 2009/05/09 01:49:57 55.7 170 2009/05/09 01:49:58 56.0 171 2009/05/09 01:49:59 55.0 172 2009/05/09 01:50:00 54.5 173 2009/05/09 01:50:01 55.4 174 2009/05/09 01:50:02 54.9 175 2009/05/09 01:50:03 57.8 176 2009/05/09 01:50:04 55.8 177 2009/05/09 01:50:05 53.6 178 2009/05/09 01:50:06 53.7 179 2009/05/09 01:50:07 56.2 180 2009/05/09 01:50:08 56.7 181 2009/05/09 01:50:09 57.6 182 2009/05/09 01:50:10 55.8 183 2009/05/09 01:50:11 56.9 184 2009/05/09 01:50:12 57.2 185 2009/05/09 01:50:13 56.1 186 2009/05/09 01:50:14 56.9 187 2009/05/09 01:50:15 55.6 188 2009/05/09 01:50:16 55.8 189 2009/05/09 01:50:17 56.0 190 2009/05/09 01:50:18 56.9 191 2009/05/09 01:50:19 55.8 192 2009/05/09 01:50:20 55.8 193 2009/05/09 01:50:21 55.8 194 2009/05/09 01:50:22 56.7 195 2009/05/09 01:50:23 55.2 196 2009/05/09 01:50:24 56.6 197 2009/05/09 01:50:25 57.2 198 2009/05/09 01:50:26 57.2 199 2009/05/09 01:50:27 56.8 200 2009/05/09 01:50:28 57.5 201 2009/05/09 01:50:29 58.5 202 2009/05/09 01:50:30 58.4 203 2009/05/09 01:50:31 59.3 204 2009/05/09 01:50:32 63.4 205 2009/05/09 01:50:33 62.9 206 2009/05/09 01:50:34 61.0 207 2009/05/09 01:50:35 59.2 208 2009/05/09 01:50:36 58.2 209 2009/05/09 01:50:37 55.1 210 2009/05/09 01:50:38 55.0 211 2009/05/09 01:50:39 53.7 212 2009/05/09 01:50:40 54.7 213 2009/05/09 01:50:41 55.1 214 2009/05/09 01:50:42 54.7 215 2009/05/09 01:50:43 55.1 216 2009/05/09 01:50:44 55.5 217 2009/05/09 01:50:45 55.7 218 2009/05/09 01:50:46 55.9 219 2009/05/09 01:50:47 54.5 220 2009/05/09 01:50:48 54.6 221 2009/05/09 01:50:49 55.0 222 2009/05/09 01:50:50 54.9 223 2009/05/09 01:50:51 57.0 224 2009/05/09 01:50:52 56.9 225 2009/05/09 01:50:53 57.3 226 2009/05/09 01:50:54 57.5 227 2009/05/09 01:50:55 57.5 228 2009/05/09 01:50:56 59.1 229 2009/05/09 01:50:57 60.1 230 2009/05/09 01:50:58 58.3 231 2009/05/09 01:50:59 59.4 232 2009/05/09 01:51:00 59.3 233 2009/05/09 01:51:01 58.0 234 2009/05/09 01:51:02 56.6 235 2009/05/09 01:51:03 55.7 236 2009/05/09 01:51:04 57.4 237 2009/05/09 01:51:05 55.9 238 2009/05/09 01:51:06 56.1 239 2009/05/09 01:51:07 56.5 240 2009/05/09 01:51:08 57.3 241 2009/05/09 01:51:09 55.5 242 2009/05/09 01:51:10 55.6 243 2009/05/09 01:51:11 55.0 244 2009/05/09 01:51:12 55.0 245 2009/05/09 01:51:13 54.6 246 2009/05/09 01:51:14 54.7 247 2009/05/09 01:51:15 54.8 248 2009/05/09 01:51:16 55.1 249 2009/05/09 01:51:17 55.2 250 2009/05/09 01:51:18 55.3 251 2009/05/09 01:51:19 54.2 252 2009/05/09 01:51:20 55.5 253 2009/05/09 01:51:21 55.7 254 2009/05/09 01:51:22 54.6 255 2009/05/09 01:51:23 54.7 256 2009/05/09 01:51:24 54.8 257 2009/05/09 01:51:25 55.0 258 2009/05/09 01:51:26 56.9 259 2009/05/09 01:51:27 56.3 260 2009/05/09 01:51:28 57.2 261 2009/05/09 01:51:29 58.0 262 2009/05/09 01:51:30 57.2 263 2009/05/09 01:51:31 56.5 264 2009/05/09 01:51:32 57.0 265 2009/05/09 01:51:33 58.3 266 2009/05/09 01:51:34 58.8 267 2009/05/09 01:51:35 56.6 268 2009/05/09 01:51:36 55.8 269 2009/05/09 01:51:37 57.4 270 2009/05/09 01:51:38 58.6 271 2009/05/09 01:51:39 56.1 272 2009/05/09 01:51:40 56.2 273 2009/05/09 01:51:41 55.8 274 2009/05/09 01:51:42 55.9 275 2009/05/09 01:51:43 55.4 276 2009/05/09 01:51:44 57.4 277 2009/05/09 01:51:45 55.2 278 2009/05/09 01:51:46 56.5 279 2009/05/09 01:51:47 56.4 280 2009/05/09 01:51:48 54.7 281 2009/05/09 01:51:49 54.5 282 2009/05/09 01:51:50 54.7 283 2009/05/09 01:51:51 55.5 284 2009/05/09 01:51:52 55.4 285 2009/05/09 01:51:53 55.3 286 2009/05/09 01:51:54 56.3 287 2009/05/09 01:51:55 57.3 288 2009/05/09 01:51:56 55.9 289 2009/05/09 01:51:57 56.0 290 2009/05/09 01:51:58 56.4 291 2009/05/09 01:51:59 55.7 292 2009/05/09 01:52:00 53.3 293 2009/05/09 01:52:01 54.1 294 2009/05/09 01:52:02 54.4 295 2009/05/09 01:52:03 53.7 296 2009/05/09 01:52:04 54.2 297 2009/05/09 01:52:05 54.7 298 2009/05/09 01:52:06 54.8 299 2009/05/09 01:52:07 56.1 300 2009/05/09 01:52:08 54.8 301 2009/05/09 01:52:09 55.7 302 2009/05/09 01:52:10 57.1 303 2009/05/09 01:52:11 57.8 304 2009/05/09 01:52:12 57.6 305 2009/05/09 01:52:13 60.9 306 2009/05/09 01:52:14 59.5 307 2009/05/09 01:52:15 60.9 308 2009/05/09 01:52:16 58.1 309 2009/05/09 01:52:17 56.8 310 2009/05/09 01:52:18 58.3 311 2009/05/09 01:52:19 58.4 312 2009/05/09 01:52:20 62.8 313 2009/05/09 01:52:21 61.3 314 2009/05/09 01:52:22 59.4 315 2009/05/09 01:52:23 59.3 316 2009/05/09 01:52:24 60.4 317 2009/05/09 01:52:25 56.7 318 2009/05/09 01:52:26 56.4 319 2009/05/09 01:52:27 55.5 320 2009/05/09 01:52:28 56.6 321 2009/05/09 01:52:29 55.6 322 2009/05/09 01:52:30 55.9 323 2009/05/09 01:52:31 58.8 324 2009/05/09 01:52:32 61.6 325 2009/05/09 01:52:33 57.5 326 2009/05/09 01:52:34 59.5 327 2009/05/09 01:52:35 57.7 328 2009/05/09 01:52:36 58.4 329 2009/05/09 01:52:37 61.3 330 2009/05/09 01:52:38 60.0 331 2009/05/09 01:52:39 60.6 332 2009/05/09 01:52:40 58.2 333 2009/05/09 01:52:41 58.5 334 2009/05/09 01:52:42 57.5 335 2009/05/09 01:52:43 57.3 336 2009/05/09 01:52:44 56.0 337 2009/05/09 01:52:45 55.6 338 2009/05/09 01:52:46 55.1 339 2009/05/09 01:52:47 54.9 340 2009/05/09 01:52:48 55.1 341 2009/05/09 01:52:49 55.2 342 2009/05/09 01:52:50 54.1 343 2009/05/09 01:52:51 55.3 344 2009/05/09 01:52:52 56.2 345 2009/05/09 01:52:53 56.5 346 2009/05/09 01:52:54 55.8 347 2009/05/09 01:52:55 56.1 348 2009/05/09 01:52:56 56.9 349 2009/05/09 01:52:57 55.9 350 2009/05/09 01:52:58 56.1 351 2009/05/09 01:52:59 56.8 352 2009/05/09 01:53:00 56.0 353 2009/05/09 01:53:01 58.0 354 2009/05/09 01:53:02 57.5 355 2009/05/09 01:53:03 57.9 356 2009/05/09 01:53:04 58.9 357 2009/05/09 01:53:05 57.6 358 2009/05/09 01:53:06 59.6 359 2009/05/09 01:53:07 58.8 360 2009/05/09 01:53:08 59.1 361 2009/05/09 01:53:09 57.1 362 2009/05/09 01:53:10 57.2 363 2009/05/09 01:53:11 55.6 364 2009/05/09 01:53:12 57.5 365 2009/05/09 01:53:13 55.8 366 2009/05/09 01:53:14 56.4 367 2009/05/09 01:53:15 55.5 368 2009/05/09 01:53:16 54.5 369 2009/05/09 01:53:17 55.6 370 2009/05/09 01:53:18 54.9 371 2009/05/09 01:53:19 54.2 372 2009/05/09 01:53:20 55.0 373 2009/05/09 01:53:21 55.3 374 2009/05/09 01:53:22 54.8 375 2009/05/09 01:53:23 55.5 376 2009/05/09 01:53:24 55.9 377 2009/05/09 01:53:25 56.4 378 2009/05/09 01:53:26 57.2 379 2009/05/09 01:53:27 56.1 380 2009/05/09 01:53:28 55.7 381 2009/05/09 01:53:29 56.9 382 2009/05/09 01:53:30 54.3 383 2009/05/09 01:53:31 54.7 384 2009/05/09 01:53:32 54.8 385 2009/05/09 01:53:33 55.1 386 2009/05/09 01:53:34 57.7 387 2009/05/09 01:53:35 56.8 388 2009/05/09 01:53:36 56.1 389 2009/05/09 01:53:37 55.4 390 2009/05/09 01:53:38 56.3 391 2009/05/09 01:53:39 54.8 392 2009/05/09 01:53:40 55.5 393 2009/05/09 01:53:41 57.5 394 2009/05/09 01:53:42 57.1 395 2009/05/09 01:53:43 57.1 396 2009/05/09 01:53:44 57.7 397 2009/05/09 01:53:45 58.0 398 2009/05/09 01:53:46 58.5 399 2009/05/09 01:53:47 57.7 400 2009/05/09 01:53:48 58.1 401 2009/05/09 01:53:49 57.0 402 2009/05/09 01:53:50 58.5 403 2009/05/09 01:53:51 59.0 404 2009/05/09 01:53:52 60.2 405 2009/05/09 01:53:53 58.8 406 2009/05/09 01:53:54 57.7 407 2009/05/09 01:53:55 57.2 408 2009/05/09 01:53:56 57.2 409 2009/05/09 01:53:57 57.2 410 2009/05/09 01:53:58 57.5 411 2009/05/09 01:53:59 57.6 412 2009/05/09 01:54:00 58.3 413 2009/05/09 01:54:01 59.0 414 2009/05/09 01:54:02 57.8 415 2009/05/09 01:54:03 58.2 416 2009/05/09 01:54:04 58.0 417 2009/05/09 01:54:05 58.1 418 2009/05/09 01:54:06 58.3 419 2009/05/09 01:54:07 57.8 420 2009/05/09 01:54:08 55.8 421 2009/05/09 01:54:09 57.0 422 2009/05/09 01:54:10 57.2 423 2009/05/09 01:54:11 56.7 424 2009/05/09 01:54:12 56.6 425 2009/05/09 01:54:13 55.6 426 2009/05/09 01:54:14 57.0 427 2009/05/09 01:54:15 56.2 428 2009/05/09 01:54:16 56.0 429 2009/05/09 01:54:17 57.2 430 2009/05/09 01:54:18 55.6 431 2009/05/09 01:54:19 55.4 432 2009/05/09 01:54:20 54.9 433 2009/05/09 01:54:21 56.5 434 2009/05/09 01:54:22 56.6 435 2009/05/09 01:54:23 57.6 436 2009/05/09 01:54:24 56.5 437 2009/05/09 01:54:25 56.2 438 2009/05/09 01:54:26 55.9 439 2009/05/09 01:54:27 55.4 440 2009/05/09 01:54:28 55.7 441 2009/05/09 01:54:29 56.5 442 2009/05/09 01:54:30 56.6 443 2009/05/09 01:54:31 57.0 444 2009/05/09 01:54:32 55.6 445 2009/05/09 01:54:33 55.7 446 2009/05/09 01:54:34 56.1 447 2009/05/09 01:54:35 54.6 448 2009/05/09 01:54:36 56.0 449 2009/05/09 01:54:37 56.4 450 2009/05/09 01:54:38 55.9 451 2009/05/09 01:54:39 56.7 452 2009/05/09 01:54:40 55.7 453 2009/05/09 01:54:41 56.8 454 2009/05/09 01:54:42 58.5 455 2009/05/09 01:54:43 57.3 456 2009/05/09 01:54:44 57.6 457 2009/05/09 01:54:45 56.0 458 2009/05/09 01:54:46 56.1 459 2009/05/09 01:54:47 57.4 460 2009/05/09 01:54:48 56.5 461 2009/05/09 01:54:49 54.7 462 2009/05/09 01:54:50 56.6 463 2009/05/09 01:54:51 55.0 464 2009/05/09 01:54:52 56.2 465 2009/05/09 01:54:53 55.7 466 2009/05/09 01:54:54 56.1 467 2009/05/09 01:54:55 56.4 468 2009/05/09 01:54:56 56.1 469 2009/05/09 01:54:57 57.5 470 2009/05/09 01:54:58 59.5 471 2009/05/09 01:54:59 57.5 472 2009/05/09 01:55:00 57.4 473 2009/05/09 01:55:01 56.1 474 2009/05/09 01:55:02 56.1 475 2009/05/09 01:55:03 56.6 476 2009/05/09 01:55:04 56.6 477 2009/05/09 01:55:05 57.7 478 2009/05/09 01:55:06 56.3 479 2009/05/09 01:55:07 55.7 480 2009/05/09 01:55:08 56.7 481 2009/05/09 01:55:09 56.8 482 2009/05/09 01:55:10 56.9 483 2009/05/09 01:55:11 56.3 484 2009/05/09 01:55:12 55.8 485 2009/05/09 01:55:13 54.9 486 2009/05/09 01:55:14 57.1 487 2009/05/09 01:55:15 54.8 488 2009/05/09 01:55:16 55.0 489 2009/05/09 01:55:17 54.3 490 2009/05/09 01:55:18 54.5 491 2009/05/09 01:55:19 54.0 492 2009/05/09 01:55:20 56.9 493 2009/05/09 01:55:21 55.3 494 2009/05/09 01:55:22 56.2 495 2009/05/09 01:55:23 53.7 496 2009/05/09 01:55:24 53.6 497 2009/05/09 01:55:25 55.2 498 2009/05/09 01:55:26 53.6 499 2009/05/09 01:55:27 53.7 500 2009/05/09 01:55:28 53.3 501 2009/05/09 01:55:29 53.6 502 2009/05/09 01:55:30 52.9 503 2009/05/09 01:55:31 55.2 504 2009/05/09 01:55:32 54.6 505 2009/05/09 01:55:33 54.7 506 2009/05/09 01:55:34 54.6 507 2009/05/09 01:55:35 55.0 508 2009/05/09 01:55:36 56.2 509 2009/05/09 01:55:37 56.1 510 2009/05/09 01:55:38 58.7 511 2009/05/09 01:55:39 59.1 512 2009/05/09 01:55:40 57.7 513 2009/05/09 01:55:41 55.8 514 2009/05/09 01:55:42 54.8 515 2009/05/09 01:55:43 56.9 516 2009/05/09 01:55:44 63.1 517 2009/05/09 01:55:45 68.6 518 2009/05/09 01:55:46 69.8 519 2009/05/09 01:55:47 69.6 520 2009/05/09 01:55:48 68.2 521 2009/05/09 01:55:49 65.5 522 2009/05/09 01:55:50 66.9 523 2009/05/09 01:55:51 62.7 524 2009/05/09 01:55:52 59.6 525 2009/05/09 01:55:53 59.8 526 2009/05/09 01:55:54 58.6 527 2009/05/09 01:55:55 59.4 528 2009/05/09 01:55:56 60.1 529 2009/05/09 01:55:57 60.9 530 2009/05/09 01:55:58 59.8 531 2009/05/09 01:55:59 58.0 532 2009/05/09 01:56:00 56.3 533 2009/05/09 01:56:01 56.5 534 2009/05/09 01:56:02 57.5 535 2009/05/09 01:56:03 57.3 536 2009/05/09 01:56:04 56.9 537 2009/05/09 01:56:05 54.5 538 2009/05/09 01:56:06 54.9 539 2009/05/09 01:56:07 54.3 540 2009/05/09 01:56:08 53.6 541 2009/05/09 01:56:09 53.0 542 2009/05/09 01:56:10 54.7 543 2009/05/09 01:56:11 53.6 544 2009/05/09 01:56:12 53.9 545 2009/05/09 01:56:13 53.8 546 2009/05/09 01:56:14 53.7 547 2009/05/09 01:56:15 54.6 548 2009/05/09 01:56:16 55.2 549 2009/05/09 01:56:17 56.4 550 2009/05/09 01:56:18 55.6 551 2009/05/09 01:56:19 54.6 552 2009/05/09 01:56:20 53.4 553 2009/05/09 01:56:21 53.9 554 2009/05/09 01:56:22 53.5 555 2009/05/09 01:56:23 52.7 556 2009/05/09 01:56:24 53.0 557 2009/05/09 01:56:25 53.4 558 2009/05/09 01:56:26 52.9 559 2009/05/09 01:56:27 53.0 560 2009/05/09 01:56:28 53.0 561 2009/05/09 01:56:29 52.7 562 2009/05/09 01:56:30 54.1 563 2009/05/09 01:56:31 54.4 564 2009/05/09 01:56:32 53.9 565 2009/05/09 01:56:33 53.3 566 2009/05/09 01:56:34 54.2 567 2009/05/09 01:56:35 54.0 568 2009/05/09 01:56:36 54.4 569 2009/05/09 01:56:37 55.1 570 2009/05/09 01:56:38 54.5 571 2009/05/09 01:56:39 56.0 572 2009/05/09 01:56:40 53.7 573 2009/05/09 01:56:41 54.2 574 2009/05/09 01:56:42 53.9 575 2009/05/09 01:56:43 54.7 576 2009/05/09 01:56:44 55.8 577 2009/05/09 01:56:45 55.5 578 2009/05/09 01:56:46 57.1 579 2009/05/09 01:56:47 55.8 580 2009/05/09 01:56:48 56.8 581 2009/05/09 01:56:49 56.1 582 2009/05/09 01:56:50 56.1 583 2009/05/09 01:56:51 56.2 584 2009/05/09 01:56:52 56.8 585 2009/05/09 01:56:53 56.2 586 2009/05/09 01:56:54 55.8 587 2009/05/09 01:56:55 55.8 588 2009/05/09 01:56:56 55.2 589 2009/05/09 01:56:57 55.9 590 2009/05/09 01:56:58 55.9 591 2009/05/09 01:56:59 55.0 592 2009/05/09 01:57:00 54.2 593 2009/05/09 01:57:01 54.6 594 2009/05/09 01:57:02 54.3 595 2009/05/09 01:57:03 54.4 596 2009/05/09 01:57:04 54.6 597 2009/05/09 01:57:05 54.2 598 2009/05/09 01:57:06 54.3 599 2009/05/09 01:57:07 54.3 600 2009/05/09 01:57:08 55.1 601 2009/05/09 01:57:09 53.2 602 2009/05/09 01:57:10 53.3 603 2009/05/09 01:57:11 54.4 604 2009/05/09 01:57:12 59.0 605 2009/05/09 01:57:13 60.4 606 2009/05/09 01:57:14 55.4 607 2009/05/09 01:57:15 54.7 608 2009/05/09 01:57:16 55.9 609 2009/05/09 01:57:17 56.1 610 2009/05/09 01:57:18 56.3 611 2009/05/09 01:57:19 54.7 612 2009/05/09 01:57:20 55.2 613 2009/05/09 01:57:21 53.3 614 2009/05/09 01:57:22 52.9 615 2009/05/09 01:57:23 53.7 616 2009/05/09 01:57:24 54.1 617 2009/05/09 01:57:25 54.2 618 2009/05/09 01:57:26 53.6 619 2009/05/09 01:57:27 56.4 620 2009/05/09 01:57:28 55.6 621 2009/05/09 01:57:29 55.0 622 2009/05/09 01:57:30 56.2 623 2009/05/09 01:57:31 55.6 624 2009/05/09 01:57:32 57.0 625 2009/05/09 01:57:33 56.4 626 2009/05/09 01:57:34 56.0 627 2009/05/09 01:57:35 56.1 628 2009/05/09 01:57:36 57.1 629 2009/05/09 01:57:37 56.5 630 2009/05/09 01:57:38 55.7 631 2009/05/09 01:57:39 55.4 632 2009/05/09 01:57:40 55.1 633 2009/05/09 01:57:41 56.6 634 2009/05/09 01:57:42 56.8 635 2009/05/09 01:57:43 57.8 636 2009/05/09 01:57:44 57.6 637 2009/05/09 01:57:45 56.8 638 2009/05/09 01:57:46 56.9 639 2009/05/09 01:57:47 55.3 640 2009/05/09 01:57:48 56.1 641 2009/05/09 01:57:49 55.3 642 2009/05/09 01:57:50 53.5 643 2009/05/09 01:57:51 53.8 644 2009/05/09 01:57:52 54.1 645 2009/05/09 01:57:53 53.3 646 2009/05/09 01:57:54 54.1 647 2009/05/09 01:57:55 56.4 648 2009/05/09 01:57:56 56.3 649 2009/05/09 01:57:57 56.3 650 2009/05/09 01:57:58 56.8 651 2009/05/09 01:57:59 55.7 652 2009/05/09 01:58:00 54.8 653 2009/05/09 01:58:01 55.3 654 2009/05/09 01:58:02 56.1 655 2009/05/09 01:58:03 56.4 656 2009/05/09 01:58:04 59.5 657 2009/05/09 01:58:05 55.0 658 2009/05/09 01:58:06 54.2 659 2009/05/09 01:58:07 54.0 660 2009/05/09 01:58:08 55.8 661 2009/05/09 01:58:09 55.0 662 2009/05/09 01:58:10 56.1 663 2009/05/09 01:58:11 56.0 664 2009/05/09 01:58:12 55.5 665 2009/05/09 01:58:13 55.4 666 2009/05/09 01:58:14 55.5 667 2009/05/09 01:58:15 57.3 668 2009/05/09 01:58:16 56.0 669 2009/05/09 01:58:17 58.1 670 2009/05/09 01:58:18 56.8 671 2009/05/09 01:58:19 55.7 672 2009/05/09 01:58:20 55.8 673 2009/05/09 01:58:21 56.9 674 2009/05/09 01:58:22 55.9 675 2009/05/09 01:58:23 55.8 676 2009/05/09 01:58:24 55.9 677 2009/05/09 01:58:25 55.8 678 2009/05/09 01:58:26 56.5 679 2009/05/09 01:58:27 57.2 680 2009/05/09 01:58:28 57.1 681 2009/05/09 01:58:29 56.7 682 2009/05/09 01:58:30 57.4 683 2009/05/09 01:58:31 56.8 684 2009/05/09 01:58:32 57.1 685 2009/05/09 01:58:33 58.3 686 2009/05/09 01:58:34 56.6 687 2009/05/09 01:58:35 57.0 688 2009/05/09 01:58:36 56.0 689 2009/05/09 01:58:37 60.8 690 2009/05/09 01:58:38 56.5 691 2009/05/09 01:58:39 56.4 692 2009/05/09 01:58:40 56.0 693 2009/05/09 01:58:41 54.7 694 2009/05/09 01:58:42 55.3 695 2009/05/09 01:58:43 55.7 696 2009/05/09 01:58:44 55.7 697 2009/05/09 01:58:45 57.6 698 2009/05/09 01:58:46 55.8 699 2009/05/09 01:58:47 57.3 700 2009/05/09 01:58:48 56.0 701 2009/05/09 01:58:49 57.1 702 2009/05/09 01:58:50 55.8 703 2009/05/09 01:58:51 56.0 704 2009/05/09 01:58:52 55.2 705 2009/05/09 01:58:53 54.1 706 2009/05/09 01:58:54 55.0 707 2009/05/09 01:58:55 54.3 708 2009/05/09 01:58:56 55.0 709 2009/05/09 01:58:57 54.6 710 2009/05/09 01:58:58 56.3 711 2009/05/09 01:58:59 55.2 712 2009/05/09 01:59:00 56.3 713 2009/05/09 01:59:01 54.6 714 2009/05/09 01:59:02 54.4 715 2009/05/09 01:59:03 57.2 716 2009/05/09 01:59:04 54.4 717 2009/05/09 01:59:05 56.2 718 2009/05/09 01:59:06 54.0 719 2009/05/09 01:59:07 54.1 720 2009/05/09 01:59:08 54.9 721 2009/05/09 01:59:09 54.6 722 2009/05/09 01:59:10 53.6 723 2009/05/09 01:59:11 53.2 724 2009/05/09 01:59:12 53.6 725 2009/05/09 01:59:13 56.1 726 2009/05/09 01:59:14 53.9 727 2009/05/09 01:59:15 55.2 728 2009/05/09 01:59:16 57.6 729 2009/05/09 01:59:17 55.0 730 2009/05/09 01:59:18 55.3 731 2009/05/09 01:59:19 56.5 732 2009/05/09 01:59:20 55.6 733 2009/05/09 01:59:21 56.3 734 2009/05/09 01:59:22 55.9 735 2009/05/09 01:59:23 55.8 736 2009/05/09 01:59:24 55.8 737 2009/05/09 01:59:25 55.2 738 2009/05/09 01:59:26 54.8 739 2009/05/09 01:59:27 55.0 740 2009/05/09 01:59:28 55.0 741 2009/05/09 01:59:29 56.6 742 2009/05/09 01:59:30 57.5 743 2009/05/09 01:59:31 57.6 744 2009/05/09 01:59:32 58.7 745 2009/05/09 01:59:33 56.4 746 2009/05/09 01:59:34 56.5 747 2009/05/09 01:59:35 55.9 748 2009/05/09 01:59:36 56.4 749 2009/05/09 01:59:37 55.2 750 2009/05/09 01:59:38 56.3 751 2009/05/09 01:59:39 59.4 752 2009/05/09 01:59:40 58.2 753 2009/05/09 01:59:41 56.7 754 2009/05/09 01:59:42 57.2 755 2009/05/09 01:59:43 58.3 756 2009/05/09 01:59:44 59.1 757 2009/05/09 01:59:45 57.2 758 2009/05/09 01:59:46 56.7 759 2009/05/09 01:59:47 55.3 760 2009/05/09 01:59:48 56.2 761 2009/05/09 01:59:49 55.9 762 2009/05/09 01:59:50 57.2 763 2009/05/09 01:59:51 56.4 764 2009/05/09 01:59:52 58.2 765 2009/05/09 01:59:53 59.1 766 2009/05/09 01:59:54 62.8 767 2009/05/09 01:59:55 62.0 768 2009/05/09 01:59:56 63.3 769 2009/05/09 01:59:57 64.0 770 2009/05/09 01:59:58 66.2 771 2009/05/09 01:59:59 62.1 772 2009/05/09 02:00:00 59.8 773 2009/05/09 02:00:01 55.8 774 2009/05/09 02:00:02 56.5 775 2009/05/09 02:00:03 56.5 776 2009/05/09 02:00:04 55.9 777 2009/05/09 02:00:05 57.6 778 2009/05/09 02:00:06 59.9 779 2009/05/09 02:00:07 62.4 780 2009/05/09 02:00:08 60.6 781 2009/05/09 02:00:09 63.8 782 2009/05/09 02:00:10 60.0 783 2009/05/09 02:00:11 59.2 784 2009/05/09 02:00:12 60.5 785 2009/05/09 02:00:13 58.1 786 2009/05/09 02:00:14 59.2 787 2009/05/09 02:00:15 60.2 788 2009/05/09 02:00:16 60.6 789 2009/05/09 02:00:17 60.5 790 2009/05/09 02:00:18 59.0 791 2009/05/09 02:00:19 58.5 792 2009/05/09 02:00:20 59.2 793 2009/05/09 02:00:21 56.3 794 2009/05/09 02:00:22 56.3 795 2009/05/09 02:00:23 57.4 796 2009/05/09 02:00:24 53.7 797 2009/05/09 02:00:25 55.3 798 2009/05/09 02:00:26 55.9 799 2009/05/09 02:00:27 55.6 800 2009/05/09 02:00:28 55.2 801 2009/05/09 02:00:29 55.5 802 2009/05/09 02:00:30 56.6 803 2009/05/09 02:00:31 56.7 804 2009/05/09 02:00:32 56.3 805 2009/05/09 02:00:33 55.4 806 2009/05/09 02:00:34 55.7 807 2009/05/09 02:00:35 55.5 808 2009/05/09 02:00:36 56.1 809 2009/05/09 02:00:37 55.9 810 2009/05/09 02:00:38 55.1 811 2009/05/09 02:00:39 55.3 812 2009/05/09 02:00:40 57.5 813 2009/05/09 02:00:41 58.9 814 2009/05/09 02:00:42 57.5 815 2009/05/09 02:00:43 57.6 816 2009/05/09 02:00:44 57.0 817 2009/05/09 02:00:45 56.4 818 2009/05/09 02:00:46 57.8 819 2009/05/09 02:00:47 57.6 820 2009/05/09 02:00:48 58.1 821 2009/05/09 02:00:49 58.8 822 2009/05/09 02:00:50 58.5 823 2009/05/09 02:00:51 58.1 824 2009/05/09 02:00:52 56.5 825 2009/05/09 02:00:53 55.6 826 2009/05/09 02:00:54 56.8 827 2009/05/09 02:00:55 56.7 828 2009/05/09 02:00:56 56.5 829 2009/05/09 02:00:57 57.8 830 2009/05/09 02:00:58 58.9 831 2009/05/09 02:00:59 57.3 832 2009/05/09 02:01:00 57.9 833 2009/05/09 02:01:01 58.3 834 2009/05/09 02:01:02 58.3 835 2009/05/09 02:01:03 58.0 836 2009/05/09 02:01:04 56.6 837 2009/05/09 02:01:05 56.2 838 2009/05/09 02:01:06 56.3 839 2009/05/09 02:01:07 57.1 840 2009/05/09 02:01:08 58.7 841 2009/05/09 02:01:09 56.6 842 2009/05/09 02:01:10 56.9 843 2009/05/09 02:01:11 55.9 844 2009/05/09 02:01:12 57.6 845 2009/05/09 02:01:13 57.4 846 2009/05/09 02:01:14 57.2 847 2009/05/09 02:01:15 58.1 848 2009/05/09 02:01:16 57.5 849 2009/05/09 02:01:17 57.3 850 2009/05/09 02:01:18 58.7 851 2009/05/09 02:01:19 58.9 852 2009/05/09 02:01:20 61.2 853 2009/05/09 02:01:21 61.1 854 2009/05/09 02:01:22 59.5 855 2009/05/09 02:01:23 60.4 856 2009/05/09 02:01:24 59.2 857 2009/05/09 02:01:25 60.1 858 2009/05/09 02:01:26 57.5 859 2009/05/09 02:01:27 58.8 860 2009/05/09 02:01:28 57.7 861 2009/05/09 02:01:29 59.7 862 2009/05/09 02:01:30 59.5 863 2009/05/09 02:01:31 58.9 864 2009/05/09 02:01:32 56.5 865 2009/05/09 02:01:33 56.0 866 2009/05/09 02:01:34 58.2 867 2009/05/09 02:01:35 61.2 868 2009/05/09 02:01:36 56.5 869 2009/05/09 02:01:37 55.2 870 2009/05/09 02:01:38 57.0 871 2009/05/09 02:01:39 55.5 872 2009/05/09 02:01:40 55.5 873 2009/05/09 02:01:41 55.4 874 2009/05/09 02:01:42 54.4 875 2009/05/09 02:01:43 54.7 876 2009/05/09 02:01:44 53.9 877 2009/05/09 02:01:45 54.7 878 2009/05/09 02:01:46 55.9 879 2009/05/09 02:01:47 54.4 880 2009/05/09 02:01:48 55.3 881 2009/05/09 02:01:49 56.4 882 2009/05/09 02:01:50 54.2 883 2009/05/09 02:01:51 56.1 884 2009/05/09 02:01:52 53.1 885 2009/05/09 02:01:53 51.7 886 2009/05/09 02:01:54 55.5 887 2009/05/09 02:01:55 54.3 888 2009/05/09 02:01:56 53.1 889 2009/05/09 02:01:57 53.4 890 2009/05/09 02:01:58 53.1 891 2009/05/09 02:01:59 55.8 892 2009/05/09 02:02:00 55.6 893 2009/05/09 02:02:01 55.5 894 2009/05/09 02:02:02 56.8 895 2009/05/09 02:02:03 52.4 896 2009/05/09 02:02:04 53.6 897 2009/05/09 02:02:05 54.6 898 2009/05/09 02:02:06 53.7 899 2009/05/09 02:02:07 54.1 900 2009/05/09 02:02:08 54.8 - Freq Weight : A- Time Weight : FAST- Level Range : 40-100- Max dB : 76.0 - 2009/05/09 02:10:20- Level Range : 40-100- SEL : 88.9- Leq : 59.4- No.s Date Time (dB) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2009/05/09 02:06:22 54.5 2 2009/05/09 02:06:23 55.5 3 2009/05/09 02:06:24 55.8 4 2009/05/09 02:06:25 55.7 5 2009/05/09 02:06:26 56.8 6 2009/05/09 02:06:27 57.2 7 2009/05/09 02:06:28 55.8 8 2009/05/09 02:06:29 56.4 9 2009/05/09 02:06:30 56.7 10 2009/05/09 02:06:31 57.6 11 2009/05/09 02:06:32 58.0 12 2009/05/09 02:06:33 56.6 13 2009/05/09 02:06:34 56.4 14 2009/05/09 02:06:35 56.7 15 2009/05/09 02:06:36 58.3 16 2009/05/09 02:06:37 58.5 17 2009/05/09 02:06:38 62.9 18 2009/05/09 02:06:39 59.1 19 2009/05/09 02:06:40 58.4 20 2009/05/09 02:06:41 58.1 21 2009/05/09 02:06:42 57.0 22 2009/05/09 02:06:43 57.0 23 2009/05/09 02:06:44 57.1 24 2009/05/09 02:06:45 56.3 25 2009/05/09 02:06:46 57.2 26 2009/05/09 02:06:47 58.2 27 2009/05/09 02:06:48 58.4 28 2009/05/09 02:06:49 58.7 29 2009/05/09 02:06:50 58.2 30 2009/05/09 02:06:51 57.0 31 2009/05/09 02:06:52 58.8 32 2009/05/09 02:06:53 58.0 33 2009/05/09 02:06:54 58.8 34 2009/05/09 02:06:55 60.2 35 2009/05/09 02:06:56 58.6 36 2009/05/09 02:06:57 58.3 37 2009/05/09 02:06:58 58.4 38 2009/05/09 02:06:59 58.2 39 2009/05/09 02:07:00 57.4 40 2009/05/09 02:07:01 58.1 41 2009/05/09 02:07:02 57.4 42 2009/05/09 02:07:03 58.7 43 2009/05/09 02:07:04 57.6 44 2009/05/09 02:07:05 59.5 45 2009/05/09 02:07:06 57.4 46 2009/05/09 02:07:07 58.3 47 2009/05/09 02:07:08 57.5 48 2009/05/09 02:07:09 57.1 49 2009/05/09 02:07:10 56.5 50 2009/05/09 02:07:11 56.6 51 2009/05/09 02:07:12 59.3 52 2009/05/09 02:07:13 56.3 53 2009/05/09 02:07:14 54.5 54 2009/05/09 02:07:15 55.7 55 2009/05/09 02:07:16 56.9 56 2009/05/09 02:07:17 55.3 57 2009/05/09 02:07:18 57.0 58 2009/05/09 02:07:19 56.6 59 2009/05/09 02:07:20 56.1 60 2009/05/09 02:07:21 56.8 61 2009/05/09 02:07:22 56.1 62 2009/05/09 02:07:23 57.6 63 2009/05/09 02:07:24 57.2 64 2009/05/09 02:07:25 55.9 65 2009/05/09 02:07:26 56.8 66 2009/05/09 02:07:27 57.3 67 2009/05/09 02:07:28 55.9 68 2009/05/09 02:07:29 54.5 69 2009/05/09 02:07:30 55.7 70 2009/05/09 02:07:31 56.3 71 2009/05/09 02:07:32 56.4 72 2009/05/09 02:07:33 57.7 73 2009/05/09 02:07:34 60.4 74 2009/05/09 02:07:35 59.1 75 2009/05/09 02:07:36 56.2 76 2009/05/09 02:07:37 59.5 77 2009/05/09 02:07:38 58.3 78 2009/05/09 02:07:39 58.8 79 2009/05/09 02:07:40 57.8 80 2009/05/09 02:07:41 60.2 81 2009/05/09 02:07:42 59.0 82 2009/05/09 02:07:43 60.4 83 2009/05/09 02:07:44 58.2 84 2009/05/09 02:07:45 59.3 85 2009/05/09 02:07:46 60.0 86 2009/05/09 02:07:47 58.1 87 2009/05/09 02:07:48 58.6 88 2009/05/09 02:07:49 58.5 89 2009/05/09 02:07:50 58.8 90 2009/05/09 02:07:51 59.9 91 2009/05/09 02:07:52 58.3 92 2009/05/09 02:07:53 58.5 93 2009/05/09 02:07:54 59.9 94 2009/05/09 02:07:55 58.7 95 2009/05/09 02:07:56 58.3 96 2009/05/09 02:07:57 59.4 97 2009/05/09 02:07:58 59.0 98 2009/05/09 02:07:59 58.3 99 2009/05/09 02:08:00 57.8 100 2009/05/09 02:08:01 57.5 101 2009/05/09 02:08:02 57.3 102 2009/05/09 02:08:03 57.5 103 2009/05/09 02:08:04 58.3 104 2009/05/09 02:08:05 58.5 105 2009/05/09 02:08:06 60.3 106 2009/05/09 02:08:07 60.3 107 2009/05/09 02:08:08 59.1 108 2009/05/09 02:08:09 58.6 109 2009/05/09 02:08:10 60.2 110 2009/05/09 02:08:11 59.1 111 2009/05/09 02:08:12 59.6 112 2009/05/09 02:08:13 58.8 113 2009/05/09 02:08:14 58.4 114 2009/05/09 02:08:15 59.9 115 2009/05/09 02:08:16 60.5 116 2009/05/09 02:08:17 58.9 117 2009/05/09 02:08:18 58.8 118 2009/05/09 02:08:19 60.0 119 2009/05/09 02:08:20 59.4 120 2009/05/09 02:08:21 58.5 121 2009/05/09 02:08:22 56.7 122 2009/05/09 02:08:23 57.6 123 2009/05/09 02:08:24 56.3 124 2009/05/09 02:08:25 56.5 125 2009/05/09 02:08:26 57.3 126 2009/05/09 02:08:27 56.9 127 2009/05/09 02:08:28 57.7 128 2009/05/09 02:08:29 56.0 129 2009/05/09 02:08:30 56.8 130 2009/05/09 02:08:31 57.7 131 2009/05/09 02:08:32 57.9 132 2009/05/09 02:08:33 57.4 133 2009/05/09 02:08:34 57.2 134 2009/05/09 02:08:35 57.7 135 2009/05/09 02:08:36 58.2 136 2009/05/09 02:08:37 56.9 137 2009/05/09 02:08:38 57.9 138 2009/05/09 02:08:39 57.3 139 2009/05/09 02:08:40 56.1 140 2009/05/09 02:08:41 59.1 141 2009/05/09 02:08:42 56.7 142 2009/05/09 02:08:43 57.6 143 2009/05/09 02:08:44 57.2 144 2009/05/09 02:08:45 57.6 145 2009/05/09 02:08:46 57.9 146 2009/05/09 02:08:47 57.3 147 2009/05/09 02:08:48 57.3 148 2009/05/09 02:08:49 60.1 149 2009/05/09 02:08:50 59.8 150 2009/05/09 02:08:51 60.4 151 2009/05/09 02:08:52 62.3 152 2009/05/09 02:08:53 58.5 153 2009/05/09 02:08:54 57.5 154 2009/05/09 02:08:55 56.9 155 2009/05/09 02:08:56 57.1 156 2009/05/09 02:08:57 57.8 157 2009/05/09 02:08:58 56.9 158 2009/05/09 02:08:59 67.9 159 2009/05/09 02:09:00 62.4 160 2009/05/09 02:09:01 67.9 161 2009/05/09 02:09:02 66.8 162 2009/05/09 02:09:03 66.7 163 2009/05/09 02:09:04 70.2 164 2009/05/09 02:09:05 61.3 165 2009/05/09 02:09:06 57.4 166 2009/05/09 02:09:07 57.3 167 2009/05/09 02:09:08 58.2 168 2009/05/09 02:09:09 58.1 169 2009/05/09 02:09:10 58.7 170 2009/05/09 02:09:11 58.7 171 2009/05/09 02:09:12 58.5 172 2009/05/09 02:09:13 58.1 173 2009/05/09 02:09:14 58.5 174 2009/05/09 02:09:15 58.9 175 2009/05/09 02:09:16 58.6 176 2009/05/09 02:09:17 57.8 177 2009/05/09 02:09:18 58.6 178 2009/05/09 02:09:19 57.6 179 2009/05/09 02:09:20 57.3 180 2009/05/09 02:09:21 57.6 181 2009/05/09 02:09:22 57.0 182 2009/05/09 02:09:23 57.6 183 2009/05/09 02:09:24 58.7 184 2009/05/09 02:09:25 57.7 185 2009/05/09 02:09:26 56.8 186 2009/05/09 02:09:27 57.7 187 2009/05/09 02:09:28 57.6 188 2009/05/09 02:09:29 57.7 189 2009/05/09 02:09:30 56.9 190 2009/05/09 02:09:31 56.6 191 2009/05/09 02:09:32 56.7 192 2009/05/09 02:09:33 58.1 193 2009/05/09 02:09:34 60.3 194 2009/05/09 02:09:35 59.7 195 2009/05/09 02:09:36 61.8 196 2009/05/09 02:09:37 59.5 197 2009/05/09 02:09:38 59.0 198 2009/05/09 02:09:39 58.1 199 2009/05/09 02:09:40 59.3 200 2009/05/09 02:09:41 59.0 201 2009/05/09 02:09:42 59.0 202 2009/05/09 02:09:43 58.3 203 2009/05/09 02:09:44 58.3 204 2009/05/09 02:09:45 57.6 205 2009/05/09 02:09:46 57.9 206 2009/05/09 02:09:47 57.7 207 2009/05/09 02:09:48 58.3 208 2009/05/09 02:09:49 57.6 209 2009/05/09 02:09:50 57.1 210 2009/05/09 02:09:51 57.7 211 2009/05/09 02:09:52 58.7 212 2009/05/09 02:09:53 56.6 213 2009/05/09 02:09:54 57.3 214 2009/05/09 02:09:55 57.5 215 2009/05/09 02:09:56 58.3 216 2009/05/09 02:09:57 59.1 217 2009/05/09 02:09:58 58.5 218 2009/05/09 02:09:59 58.9 219 2009/05/09 02:10:00 58.7 220 2009/05/09 02:10:01 58.9 221 2009/05/09 02:10:02 57.3 222 2009/05/09 02:10:03 58.4 223 2009/05/09 02:10:04 58.6 224 2009/05/09 02:10:05 60.2 225 2009/05/09 02:10:06 60.5 226 2009/05/09 02:10:07 58.9 227 2009/05/09 02:10:08 61.2 228 2009/05/09 02:10:09 61.1 229 2009/05/09 02:10:10 62.4 230 2009/05/09 02:10:11 64.3 231 2009/05/09 02:10:12 66.1 232 2009/05/09 02:10:13 72.8 233 2009/05/09 02:10:14 66.1 234 2009/05/09 02:10:15 70.4 235 2009/05/09 02:10:16 68.7 236 2009/05/09 02:10:17 67.5 237 2009/05/09 02:10:18 71.5 238 2009/05/09 02:10:19 70.9 239 2009/05/09 02:10:20 73.3 240 2009/05/09 02:10:21 70.4 241 2009/05/09 02:10:22 71.9 242 2009/05/09 02:10:23 65.8 243 2009/05/09 02:10:24 69.1 244 2009/05/09 02:10:25 67.7 245 2009/05/09 02:10:26 61.8 246 2009/05/09 02:10:27 63.3 247 2009/05/09 02:10:28 67.4 248 2009/05/09 02:10:29 64.9 249 2009/05/09 02:10:30 60.9 250 2009/05/09 02:10:31 62.5 251 2009/05/09 02:10:32 60.4 252 2009/05/09 02:10:33 61.8 253 2009/05/09 02:10:34 59.1 254 2009/05/09 02:10:35 59.1 255 2009/05/09 02:10:36 59.5 256 2009/05/09 02:10:37 59.0 257 2009/05/09 02:10:38 60.1 258 2009/05/09 02:10:39 59.6 259 2009/05/09 02:10:40 57.7 260 2009/05/09 02:10:41 62.1 261 2009/05/09 02:10:42 58.5 262 2009/05/09 02:10:43 58.2 263 2009/05/09 02:10:44 58.6 264 2009/05/09 02:10:45 58.9 265 2009/05/09 02:10:46 59.7 266 2009/05/09 02:10:47 63.4 267 2009/05/09 02:10:48 67.4 268 2009/05/09 02:10:49 62.7 269 2009/05/09 02:10:50 58.0 270 2009/05/09 02:10:51 56.6 271 2009/05/09 02:10:52 57.5 272 2009/05/09 02:10:53 58.4 273 2009/05/09 02:10:54 57.5 274 2009/05/09 02:10:55 56.9 275 2009/05/09 02:10:56 58.3 276 2009/05/09 02:10:57 57.4 277 2009/05/09 02:10:58 58.4 278 2009/05/09 02:10:59 59.6 279 2009/05/09 02:11:00 60.0 280 2009/05/09 02:11:01 59.4 281 2009/05/09 02:11:02 58.9 282 2009/05/09 02:11:03 59.1 283 2009/05/09 02:11:04 58.8 284 2009/05/09 02:11:05 59.0 285 2009/05/09 02:11:06 57.7 286 2009/05/09 02:11:07 58.4 287 2009/05/09 02:11:08 57.8 288 2009/05/09 02:11:09 58.1 289 2009/05/09 02:11:10 58.6 290 2009/05/09 02:11:11 58.6 291 2009/05/09 02:11:12 57.2 292 2009/05/09 02:11:13 58.4 293 2009/05/09 02:11:14 58.0 294 2009/05/09 02:11:15 57.6 295 2009/05/09 02:11:16 58.8 296 2009/05/09 02:11:17 56.9 297 2009/05/09 02:11:18 59.2 298 2009/05/09 02:11:19 56.0 299 2009/05/09 02:11:20 57.4 300 2009/05/09 02:11:21 58.7 301 2009/05/09 02:11:22 57.1 302 2009/05/09 02:11:23 56.9 303 2009/05/09 02:11:24 56.6 304 2009/05/09 02:11:25 57.2 305 2009/05/09 02:11:26 58.1 306 2009/05/09 02:11:27 56.8 307 2009/05/09 02:11:28 56.4 308 2009/05/09 02:11:29 58.2 309 2009/05/09 02:11:30 56.3 310 2009/05/09 02:11:31 54.9 311 2009/05/09 02:11:32 55.2 312 2009/05/09 02:11:33 57.0 313 2009/05/09 02:11:34 57.9 314 2009/05/09 02:11:35 59.3 315 2009/05/09 02:11:36 56.2 316 2009/05/09 02:11:37 55.3 317 2009/05/09 02:11:38 55.3 318 2009/05/09 02:11:39 56.5 319 2009/05/09 02:11:40 55.8 320 2009/05/09 02:11:41 56.0 321 2009/05/09 02:11:42 55.2 322 2009/05/09 02:11:43 55.2 323 2009/05/09 02:11:44 55.6 324 2009/05/09 02:11:45 56.4 325 2009/05/09 02:11:46 56.1 326 2009/05/09 02:11:47 57.4 327 2009/05/09 02:11:48 56.2 328 2009/05/09 02:11:49 57.1 329 2009/05/09 02:11:50 54.9 330 2009/05/09 02:11:51 55.2 331 2009/05/09 02:11:52 57.0 332 2009/05/09 02:11:53 57.4 333 2009/05/09 02:11:54 59.3 334 2009/05/09 02:11:55 56.9 335 2009/05/09 02:11:56 57.3 336 2009/05/09 02:11:57 57.6 337 2009/05/09 02:11:58 57.3 338 2009/05/09 02:11:59 57.9 339 2009/05/09 02:12:00 57.9 340 2009/05/09 02:12:01 57.9 341 2009/05/09 02:12:02 58.4 342 2009/05/09 02:12:03 58.0 343 2009/05/09 02:12:04 58.0 344 2009/05/09 02:12:05 57.9 345 2009/05/09 02:12:06 58.6 346 2009/05/09 02:12:07 58.3 347 2009/05/09 02:12:08 56.8 348 2009/05/09 02:12:09 57.0 349 2009/05/09 02:12:10 56.9 350 2009/05/09 02:12:11 57.2 351 2009/05/09 02:12:12 57.7 352 2009/05/09 02:12:13 56.5 353 2009/05/09 02:12:14 56.9 354 2009/05/09 02:12:15 55.6 355 2009/05/09 02:12:16 57.3 356 2009/05/09 02:12:17 56.8 357 2009/05/09 02:12:18 56.4 358 2009/05/09 02:12:19 58.2 359 2009/05/09 02:12:20 59.0 360 2009/05/09 02:12:21 57.6 361 2009/05/09 02:12:22 56.7 362 2009/05/09 02:12:23 56.1 363 2009/05/09 02:12:24 56.7 364 2009/05/09 02:12:25 58.8 365 2009/05/09 02:12:26 56.4 366 2009/05/09 02:12:27 57.7 367 2009/05/09 02:12:28 59.3 368 2009/05/09 02:12:29 58.1 369 2009/05/09 02:12:30 57.9 370 2009/05/09 02:12:31 59.0 371 2009/05/09 02:12:32 58.9 372 2009/05/09 02:12:33 58.4 373 2009/05/09 02:12:34 58.9 374 2009/05/09 02:12:35 60.0 375 2009/05/09 02:12:36 62.6 376 2009/05/09 02:12:37 61.9 377 2009/05/09 02:12:38 59.7 378 2009/05/09 02:12:39 58.6 379 2009/05/09 02:12:40 65.2 380 2009/05/09 02:12:41 61.7 381 2009/05/09 02:12:42 61.5 382 2009/05/09 02:12:43 66.8 383 2009/05/09 02:12:44 60.2 384 2009/05/09 02:12:45 65.2 385 2009/05/09 02:12:46 64.6 386 2009/05/09 02:12:47 62.2 387 2009/05/09 02:12:48 65.5 388 2009/05/09 02:12:49 64.8 389 2009/05/09 02:12:50 62.2 390 2009/05/09 02:12:51 62.1 391 2009/05/09 02:12:52 61.0 392 2009/05/09 02:12:53 60.8 393 2009/05/09 02:12:54 62.5 394 2009/05/09 02:12:55 62.4 395 2009/05/09 02:12:56 61.7 396 2009/05/09 02:12:57 61.9 397 2009/05/09 02:12:58 60.6 398 2009/05/09 02:12:59 60.2 399 2009/05/09 02:13:00 59.1 400 2009/05/09 02:13:01 57.5 401 2009/05/09 02:13:02 56.7 402 2009/05/09 02:13:03 60.3 403 2009/05/09 02:13:04 60.3 404 2009/05/09 02:13:05 57.2 405 2009/05/09 02:13:06 57.2 406 2009/05/09 02:13:07 57.8 407 2009/05/09 02:13:08 57.2 408 2009/05/09 02:13:09 57.9 409 2009/05/09 02:13:10 56.8 410 2009/05/09 02:13:11 56.4 411 2009/05/09 02:13:12 55.1 412 2009/05/09 02:13:13 56.0 413 2009/05/09 02:13:14 57.6 414 2009/05/09 02:13:15 55.4 415 2009/05/09 02:13:16 55.5 416 2009/05/09 02:13:17 54.9 417 2009/05/09 02:13:18 53.9 418 2009/05/09 02:13:19 54.0 419 2009/05/09 02:13:20 55.6 420 2009/05/09 02:13:21 56.7 421 2009/05/09 02:13:22 56.4 422 2009/05/09 02:13:23 55.7 423 2009/05/09 02:13:24 55.3 424 2009/05/09 02:13:25 57.9 425 2009/05/09 02:13:26 55.9 426 2009/05/09 02:13:27 55.7 427 2009/05/09 02:13:28 57.7 428 2009/05/09 02:13:29 57.0 429 2009/05/09 02:13:30 55.7 430 2009/05/09 02:13:31 56.2 431 2009/05/09 02:13:32 55.4 432 2009/05/09 02:13:33 55.9 433 2009/05/09 02:13:34 55.1 434 2009/05/09 02:13:35 54.9 435 2009/05/09 02:13:36 55.2 436 2009/05/09 02:13:37 55.3 437 2009/05/09 02:13:38 55.9 438 2009/05/09 02:13:39 55.8 439 2009/05/09 02:13:40 55.2 440 2009/05/09 02:13:41 55.9 441 2009/05/09 02:13:42 54.8 442 2009/05/09 02:13:43 55.9 443 2009/05/09 02:13:44 56.7 444 2009/05/09 02:13:45 56.7 445 2009/05/09 02:13:46 55.3 446 2009/05/09 02:13:47 56.2 447 2009/05/09 02:13:48 57.0 448 2009/05/09 02:13:49 58.3 449 2009/05/09 02:13:50 56.0 450 2009/05/09 02:13:51 58.4 451 2009/05/09 02:13:52 56.0 452 2009/05/09 02:13:53 56.7 453 2009/05/09 02:13:54 57.1 454 2009/05/09 02:13:55 55.9 455 2009/05/09 02:13:56 56.7 456 2009/05/09 02:13:57 57.4 457 2009/05/09 02:13:58 57.5 458 2009/05/09 02:13:59 56.1 459 2009/05/09 02:14:00 56.9 460 2009/05/09 02:14:01 56.0 461 2009/05/09 02:14:02 56.2 462 2009/05/09 02:14:03 57.1 463 2009/05/09 02:14:04 56.4 464 2009/05/09 02:14:05 56.4 465 2009/05/09 02:14:06 55.7 466 2009/05/09 02:14:07 56.0 467 2009/05/09 02:14:08 54.7 468 2009/05/09 02:14:09 54.3 469 2009/05/09 02:14:10 55.2 470 2009/05/09 02:14:11 54.9 471 2009/05/09 02:14:12 54.0 472 2009/05/09 02:14:13 55.4 473 2009/05/09 02:14:14 55.0 474 2009/05/09 02:14:15 56.6 475 2009/05/09 02:14:16 55.6 476 2009/05/09 02:14:17 55.4 477 2009/05/09 02:14:18 56.2 478 2009/05/09 02:14:19 55.8 479 2009/05/09 02:14:20 55.2 480 2009/05/09 02:14:21 57.5 481 2009/05/09 02:14:22 56.2 482 2009/05/09 02:14:23 55.8 483 2009/05/09 02:14:24 56.0 484 2009/05/09 02:14:25 56.0 485 2009/05/09 02:14:26 56.0 486 2009/05/09 02:14:27 55.5 487 2009/05/09 02:14:28 55.5 488 2009/05/09 02:14:29 55.5 489 2009/05/09 02:14:30 54.3 490 2009/05/09 02:14:31 55.1 491 2009/05/09 02:14:32 54.5 492 2009/05/09 02:14:33 54.2 493 2009/05/09 02:14:34 54.9 494 2009/05/09 02:14:35 54.9 495 2009/05/09 02:14:36 54.9 496 2009/05/09 02:14:37 55.8 497 2009/05/09 02:14:38 53.9 498 2009/05/09 02:14:39 54.0 499 2009/05/09 02:14:40 54.4 500 2009/05/09 02:14:41 55.3 501 2009/05/09 02:14:42 54.4 502 2009/05/09 02:14:43 54.8 503 2009/05/09 02:14:44 54.8 504 2009/05/09 02:14:45 55.2 505 2009/05/09 02:14:46 54.2 506 2009/05/09 02:14:47 54.5 507 2009/05/09 02:14:48 54.8 508 2009/05/09 02:14:49 56.1 509 2009/05/09 02:14:50 54.3 510 2009/05/09 02:14:51 54.4 511 2009/05/09 02:14:52 54.2 512 2009/05/09 02:14:53 54.8 513 2009/05/09 02:14:54 55.4 514 2009/05/09 02:14:55 55.5 515 2009/05/09 02:14:56 55.5 516 2009/05/09 02:14:57 56.1 517 2009/05/09 02:14:58 56.6 518 2009/05/09 02:14:59 56.7 519 2009/05/09 02:15:00 56.1 520 2009/05/09 02:15:01 56.1 521 2009/05/09 02:15:02 56.2 522 2009/05/09 02:15:03 56.0 523 2009/05/09 02:15:04 56.3 524 2009/05/09 02:15:05 55.9 525 2009/05/09 02:15:06 55.6 526 2009/05/09 02:15:07 55.7 527 2009/05/09 02:15:08 56.8 528 2009/05/09 02:15:09 55.9 529 2009/05/09 02:15:10 56.4 530 2009/05/09 02:15:11 57.2 531 2009/05/09 02:15:12 56.1 532 2009/05/09 02:15:13 56.4 533 2009/05/09 02:15:14 56.0 534 2009/05/09 02:15:15 56.1 535 2009/05/09 02:15:16 55.5 536 2009/05/09 02:15:17 56.0 537 2009/05/09 02:15:18 55.4 538 2009/05/09 02:15:19 55.8 539 2009/05/09 02:15:20 55.0 540 2009/05/09 02:15:21 56.3 541 2009/05/09 02:15:22 56.9 542 2009/05/09 02:15:23 56.1 543 2009/05/09 02:15:24 56.2 544 2009/05/09 02:15:25 57.3 545 2009/05/09 02:15:26 55.3 546 2009/05/09 02:15:27 56.5 547 2009/05/09 02:15:28 55.6 548 2009/05/09 02:15:29 55.1 549 2009/05/09 02:15:30 55.0 550 2009/05/09 02:15:31 56.0 551 2009/05/09 02:15:32 56.4 552 2009/05/09 02:15:33 56.0 553 2009/05/09 02:15:34 56.6 554 2009/05/09 02:15:35 56.1 555 2009/05/09 02:15:36 56.7 556 2009/05/09 02:15:37 56.6 557 2009/05/09 02:15:38 56.8 558 2009/05/09 02:15:39 56.7 559 2009/05/09 02:15:40 58.1 560 2009/05/09 02:15:41 55.9 561 2009/05/09 02:15:42 56.2 562 2009/05/09 02:15:43 56.0 563 2009/05/09 02:15:44 54.7 564 2009/05/09 02:15:45 53.8 565 2009/05/09 02:15:46 55.4 566 2009/05/09 02:15:47 56.5 567 2009/05/09 02:15:48 56.9 568 2009/05/09 02:15:49 54.4 569 2009/05/09 02:15:50 53.8 570 2009/05/09 02:15:51 54.1 571 2009/05/09 02:15:52 55.5 572 2009/05/09 02:15:53 54.7 573 2009/05/09 02:15:54 55.4 574 2009/05/09 02:15:55 55.5 575 2009/05/09 02:15:56 55.5 576 2009/05/09 02:15:57 55.7 577 2009/05/09 02:15:58 56.7 578 2009/05/09 02:15:59 57.2 579 2009/05/09 02:16:00 56.8 580 2009/05/09 02:16:01 56.7 581 2009/05/09 02:16:02 58.1 582 2009/05/09 02:16:03 57.8 583 2009/05/09 02:16:04 57.7 584 2009/05/09 02:16:05 57.9 585 2009/05/09 02:16:06 58.1 586 2009/05/09 02:16:07 57.7 587 2009/05/09 02:16:08 58.4 588 2009/05/09 02:16:09 59.3 589 2009/05/09 02:16:10 58.6 590 2009/05/09 02:16:11 57.9 591 2009/05/09 02:16:12 57.5 592 2009/05/09 02:16:13 57.1 593 2009/05/09 02:16:14 57.7 594 2009/05/09 02:16:15 57.1 595 2009/05/09 02:16:16 57.1 596 2009/05/09 02:16:17 57.1 597 2009/05/09 02:16:18 56.9 598 2009/05/09 02:16:19 56.0 599 2009/05/09 02:16:20 57.3 600 2009/05/09 02:16:21 57.5 601 2009/05/09 02:16:22 56.6 602 2009/05/09 02:16:23 57.2 603 2009/05/09 02:16:24 57.6 604 2009/05/09 02:16:25 58.1 605 2009/05/09 02:16:26 58.8 606 2009/05/09 02:16:27 58.6 607 2009/05/09 02:16:28 59.5 608 2009/05/09 02:16:29 58.8 609 2009/05/09 02:16:30 58.5 610 2009/05/09 02:16:31 59.3 611 2009/05/09 02:16:32 59.3 612 2009/05/09 02:16:33 59.9 613 2009/05/09 02:16:34 60.9 614 2009/05/09 02:16:35 60.4 615 2009/05/09 02:16:36 60.8 616 2009/05/09 02:16:37 61.2 617 2009/05/09 02:16:38 61.5 618 2009/05/09 02:16:39 61.3 619 2009/05/09 02:16:40 61.4 620 2009/05/09 02:16:41 61.4 621 2009/05/09 02:16:42 60.2 622 2009/05/09 02:16:43 59.9 623 2009/05/09 02:16:44 59.1 624 2009/05/09 02:16:45 59.6 625 2009/05/09 02:16:46 59.9 626 2009/05/09 02:16:47 59.2 627 2009/05/09 02:16:48 59.3 628 2009/05/09 02:16:49 58.9 629 2009/05/09 02:16:50 58.3 630 2009/05/09 02:16:51 58.7 631 2009/05/09 02:16:52 59.0 632 2009/05/09 02:16:53 59.6 633 2009/05/09 02:16:54 58.9 634 2009/05/09 02:16:55 58.4 635 2009/05/09 02:16:56 57.8 636 2009/05/09 02:16:57 58.0 637 2009/05/09 02:16:58 57.4 638 2009/05/09 02:16:59 57.4 639 2009/05/09 02:17:00 58.3 640 2009/05/09 02:17:01 57.8 641 2009/05/09 02:17:02 59.5 642 2009/05/09 02:17:03 57.3 643 2009/05/09 02:17:04 57.3 644 2009/05/09 02:17:05 56.4 645 2009/05/09 02:17:06 57.6 646 2009/05/09 02:17:07 58.3 647 2009/05/09 02:17:08 57.5 648 2009/05/09 02:17:09 56.5 649 2009/05/09 02:17:10 56.1 650 2009/05/09 02:17:11 57.3 651 2009/05/09 02:17:12 56.2 652 2009/05/09 02:17:13 58.0 653 2009/05/09 02:17:14 58.5 654 2009/05/09 02:17:15 58.2 655 2009/05/09 02:17:16 57.2 656 2009/05/09 02:17:17 56.5 657 2009/05/09 02:17:18 58.1 658 2009/05/09 02:17:19 57.1 659 2009/05/09 02:17:20 57.7 660 2009/05/09 02:17:21 56.4 661 2009/05/09 02:17:22 56.1 662 2009/05/09 02:17:23 55.7 663 2009/05/09 02:17:24 55.6 664 2009/05/09 02:17:25 55.5 665 2009/05/09 02:17:26 56.1 666 2009/05/09 02:17:27 57.7 667 2009/05/09 02:17:28 58.1 668 2009/05/09 02:17:29 57.7 669 2009/05/09 02:17:30 58.4 670 2009/05/09 02:17:31 57.4 671 2009/05/09 02:17:32 57.0 672 2009/05/09 02:17:33 57.3 673 2009/05/09 02:17:34 57.4 674 2009/05/09 02:17:35 56.8 675 2009/05/09 02:17:36 56.6 676 2009/05/09 02:17:37 54.6 677 2009/05/09 02:17:38 57.1 678 2009/05/09 02:17:39 55.7 679 2009/05/09 02:17:40 55.0 680 2009/05/09 02:17:41 55.5 681 2009/05/09 02:17:42 55.9 682 2009/05/09 02:17:43 56.8 683 2009/05/09 02:17:44 57.9 684 2009/05/09 02:17:45 55.6 685 2009/05/09 02:17:46 57.7 686 2009/05/09 02:17:47 55.2 687 2009/05/09 02:17:48 56.0 688 2009/05/09 02:17:49 55.3 689 2009/05/09 02:17:50 56.9 690 2009/05/09 02:17:51 56.0 691 2009/05/09 02:17:52 54.8 692 2009/05/09 02:17:53 56.3 693 2009/05/09 02:17:54 54.1 694 2009/05/09 02:17:55 54.9 695 2009/05/09 02:17:56 55.3 696 2009/05/09 02:17:57 60.7 697 2009/05/09 02:17:58 62.7 698 2009/05/09 02:17:59 64.0 699 2009/05/09 02:18:00 64.6 700 2009/05/09 02:18:01 63.1 701 2009/05/09 02:18:02 61.9 702 2009/05/09 02:18:03 62.9 703 2009/05/09 02:18:04 63.2 704 2009/05/09 02:18:05 64.3 705 2009/05/09 02:18:06 64.8 706 2009/05/09 02:18:07 61.1 707 2009/05/09 02:18:08 65.1 708 2009/05/09 02:18:09 64.0 709 2009/05/09 02:18:10 65.0 710 2009/05/09 02:18:11 64.0 711 2009/05/09 02:18:12 62.3 712 2009/05/09 02:18:13 62.3 713 2009/05/09 02:18:14 63.7 714 2009/05/09 02:18:15 60.1 715 2009/05/09 02:18:16 59.3 716 2009/05/09 02:18:17 60.7 717 2009/05/09 02:18:18 63.9 718 2009/05/09 02:18:19 63.0 719 2009/05/09 02:18:20 61.8 720 2009/05/09 02:18:21 61.9 721 2009/05/09 02:18:22 61.3 722 2009/05/09 02:18:23 59.5 723 2009/05/09 02:18:24 63.5 724 2009/05/09 02:18:25 61.2 725 2009/05/09 02:18:26 60.8 726 2009/05/09 02:18:27 61.6 727 2009/05/09 02:18:28 60.9 728 2009/05/09 02:18:29 64.9 729 2009/05/09 02:18:30 58.8 730 2009/05/09 02:18:31 62.0 731 2009/05/09 02:18:32 64.0 732 2009/05/09 02:18:33 60.5 733 2009/05/09 02:18:34 59.2 734 2009/05/09 02:18:35 59.6 735 2009/05/09 02:18:36 59.5 736 2009/05/09 02:18:37 62.4 737 2009/05/09 02:18:38 64.7 738 2009/05/09 02:18:39 61.6 739 2009/05/09 02:18:40 57.8 740 2009/05/09 02:18:41 59.5 741 2009/05/09 02:18:42 59.4 742 2009/05/09 02:18:43 58.6 743 2009/05/09 02:18:44 61.9 744 2009/05/09 02:18:45 58.5 745 2009/05/09 02:18:46 57.8 746 2009/05/09 02:18:47 57.5 747 2009/05/09 02:18:48 57.1 748 2009/05/09 02:18:49 57.1 749 2009/05/09 02:18:50 56.2 750 2009/05/09 02:18:51 55.8 751 2009/05/09 02:18:52 56.7 752 2009/05/09 02:18:53 58.3 753 2009/05/09 02:18:54 59.3 754 2009/05/09 02:18:55 57.5 755 2009/05/09 02:18:56 57.7 756 2009/05/09 02:18:57 57.9 757 2009/05/09 02:18:58 57.5 758 2009/05/09 02:18:59 57.4 759 2009/05/09 02:19:00 58.4 760 2009/05/09 02:19:01 58.0 761 2009/05/09 02:19:02 57.0 762 2009/05/09 02:19:03 56.2 763 2009/05/09 02:19:04 56.2 764 2009/05/09 02:19:05 55.7 765 2009/05/09 02:19:06 55.3 766 2009/05/09 02:19:07 55.4 767 2009/05/09 02:19:08 55.8 768 2009/05/09 02:19:09 56.0 769 2009/05/09 02:19:10 56.3 770 2009/05/09 02:19:11 56.0 771 2009/05/09 02:19:12 56.3 772 2009/05/09 02:19:13 57.0 773 2009/05/09 02:19:14 56.7 774 2009/05/09 02:19:15 57.5 775 2009/05/09 02:19:16 57.5 776 2009/05/09 02:19:17 56.7 777 2009/05/09 02:19:18 56.4 778 2009/05/09 02:19:19 57.2 779 2009/05/09 02:19:20 56.7 780 2009/05/09 02:19:21 58.3 781 2009/05/09 02:19:22 58.6 782 2009/05/09 02:19:23 58.2 783 2009/05/09 02:19:24 58.4 784 2009/05/09 02:19:25 57.5 785 2009/05/09 02:19:26 58.1 786 2009/05/09 02:19:27 58.4 787 2009/05/09 02:19:28 57.6 788 2009/05/09 02:19:29 57.8 789 2009/05/09 02:19:30 57.5 790 2009/05/09 02:19:31 57.1 791 2009/05/09 02:19:32 57.3 792 2009/05/09 02:19:33 57.8 793 2009/05/09 02:19:34 57.7 794 2009/05/09 02:19:35 57.2 795 2009/05/09 02:19:36 57.1 796 2009/05/09 02:19:37 56.8 797 2009/05/09 02:19:38 57.6 798 2009/05/09 02:19:39 56.8 799 2009/05/09 02:19:40 55.9 800 2009/05/09 02:19:41 56.2 801 2009/05/09 02:19:42 57.2 802 2009/05/09 02:19:43 57.5 803 2009/05/09 02:19:44 57.9 804 2009/05/09 02:19:45 57.4 805 2009/05/09 02:19:46 58.9 806 2009/05/09 02:19:47 58.4 807 2009/05/09 02:19:48 57.8 808 2009/05/09 02:19:49 57.5 809 2009/05/09 02:19:50 57.2 810 2009/05/09 02:19:51 57.4 811 2009/05/09 02:19:52 57.3 812 2009/05/09 02:19:53 57.3 813 2009/05/09 02:19:54 57.9 814 2009/05/09 02:19:55 59.3 815 2009/05/09 02:19:56 58.2 816 2009/05/09 02:19:57 57.7 817 2009/05/09 02:19:58 56.8 818 2009/05/09 02:19:59 57.8 819 2009/05/09 02:20:00 56.9 820 2009/05/09 02:20:01 58.0 821 2009/05/09 02:20:02 58.6 822 2009/05/09 02:20:03 59.4 823 2009/05/09 02:20:04 57.0 824 2009/05/09 02:20:05 56.1 825 2009/05/09 02:20:06 54.9 826 2009/05/09 02:20:07 55.8 827 2009/05/09 02:20:08 56.7 828 2009/05/09 02:20:09 56.9 829 2009/05/09 02:20:10 55.7 830 2009/05/09 02:20:11 55.3 831 2009/05/09 02:20:12 56.0 832 2009/05/09 02:20:13 56.7 833 2009/05/09 02:20:14 57.8 834 2009/05/09 02:20:15 57.0 835 2009/05/09 02:20:16 56.6 836 2009/05/09 02:20:17 56.7 837 2009/05/09 02:20:18 56.8 838 2009/05/09 02:20:19 57.3 839 2009/05/09 02:20:20 55.8 840 2009/05/09 02:20:21 57.3 841 2009/05/09 02:20:22 57.3 842 2009/05/09 02:20:23 56.4 843 2009/05/09 02:20:24 56.7 844 2009/05/09 02:20:25 57.1 845 2009/05/09 02:20:26 57.0 846 2009/05/09 02:20:27 56.0 847 2009/05/09 02:20:28 56.2 848 2009/05/09 02:20:29 55.5 849 2009/05/09 02:20:30 55.3 850 2009/05/09 02:20:31 55.8 851 2009/05/09 02:20:32 55.9 852 2009/05/09 02:20:33 55.9 853 2009/05/09 02:20:34 55.2 854 2009/05/09 02:20:35 55.1 855 2009/05/09 02:20:36 56.3 856 2009/05/09 02:20:37 57.7 857 2009/05/09 02:20:38 56.6 858 2009/05/09 02:20:39 57.0 859 2009/05/09 02:20:40 57.2 860 2009/05/09 02:20:41 57.6 861 2009/05/09 02:20:42 58.9 862 2009/05/09 02:20:43 57.4 863 2009/05/09 02:20:44 58.0 864 2009/05/09 02:20:45 58.2 865 2009/05/09 02:20:46 57.8 866 2009/05/09 02:20:47 58.5 867 2009/05/09 02:20:48 58.1 868 2009/05/09 02:20:49 59.0 869 2009/05/09 02:20:50 58.9 870 2009/05/09 02:20:51 58.7 871 2009/05/09 02:20:52 60.0 872 2009/05/09 02:20:53 64.0 873 2009/05/09 02:20:54 63.8 874 2009/05/09 02:20:55 56.9 875 2009/05/09 02:20:56 57.5 876 2009/05/09 02:20:57 57.6 877 2009/05/09 02:20:58 56.9 878 2009/05/09 02:20:59 59.2 879 2009/05/09 02:21:00 56.9 880 2009/05/09 02:21:01 55.4 881 2009/05/09 02:21:02 55.6 882 2009/05/09 02:21:03 54.4 883 2009/05/09 02:21:04 54.4 884 2009/05/09 02:21:05 54.8 885 2009/05/09 02:21:06 54.2 886 2009/05/09 02:21:07 53.3 887 2009/05/09 02:21:08 53.8 888 2009/05/09 02:21:09 52.4 889 2009/05/09 02:21:10 53.6 890 2009/05/09 02:21:11 52.8 891 2009/05/09 02:21:12 53.3 892 2009/05/09 02:21:13 54.0 893 2009/05/09 02:21:14 54.8 894 2009/05/09 02:21:15 56.0 895 2009/05/09 02:21:16 56.3 896 2009/05/09 02:21:17 56.4 897 2009/05/09 02:21:18 56.7 898 2009/05/09 02:21:19 55.9 899 2009/05/09 02:21:20 55.9 900 2009/05/09 02:21:21 55.9 - Freq Weight : A- Time Weight : FAST- Level Range : 40-100- Max dB : 70.6 - 2009/05/09 02:31:19- Level Range : 40-100- SEL : 90.6- Leq : 61.1- No.s Date Time (dB) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2009/05/09 02:31:15 60.8 2 2009/05/09 02:31:16 60.3 3 2009/05/09 02:31:17 59.8 4 2009/05/09 02:31:18 60.3 5 2009/05/09 02:31:19 59.8 6 2009/05/09 02:31:20 60.4 7 2009/05/09 02:31:21 60.3 8 2009/05/09 02:31:22 59.8 9 2009/05/09 02:31:23 59.9 10 2009/05/09 02:31:24 61.0 11 2009/05/09 02:31:25 60.7 12 2009/05/09 02:31:26 60.8 13 2009/05/09 02:31:27 61.5 14 2009/05/09 02:31:28 61.0 15 2009/05/09 02:31:29 60.8 16 2009/05/09 02:31:30 61.7 17 2009/05/09 02:31:31 61.5 18 2009/05/09 02:31:32 60.5 19 2009/05/09 02:31:33 61.1 20 2009/05/09 02:31:34 61.0 21 2009/05/09 02:31:35 61.9 22 2009/05/09 02:31:36 62.3 23 2009/05/09 02:31:37 61.5 24 2009/05/09 02:31:38 61.5 25 2009/05/09 02:31:39 61.6 26 2009/05/09 02:31:40 61.8 27 2009/05/09 02:31:41 60.9 28 2009/05/09 02:31:42 61.7 29 2009/05/09 02:31:43 60.7 30 2009/05/09 02:31:44 61.5 31 2009/05/09 02:31:45 60.7 32 2009/05/09 02:31:46 59.8 33 2009/05/09 02:31:47 61.0 34 2009/05/09 02:31:48 60.2 35 2009/05/09 02:31:49 61.9 36 2009/05/09 02:31:50 60.2 37 2009/05/09 02:31:51 60.5 38 2009/05/09 02:31:52 59.2 39 2009/05/09 02:31:53 59.8 40 2009/05/09 02:31:54 60.1 41 2009/05/09 02:31:55 59.4 42 2009/05/09 02:31:56 58.6 43 2009/05/09 02:31:57 59.8 44 2009/05/09 02:31:58 60.0 45 2009/05/09 02:31:59 59.9 46 2009/05/09 02:32:00 59.1 47 2009/05/09 02:32:01 59.0 48 2009/05/09 02:32:02 59.4 49 2009/05/09 02:32:03 59.5 50 2009/05/09 02:32:04 59.9 51 2009/05/09 02:32:05 59.6 52 2009/05/09 02:32:06 59.7 53 2009/05/09 02:32:07 59.9 54 2009/05/09 02:32:08 59.8 55 2009/05/09 02:32:09 60.4 56 2009/05/09 02:32:10 61.1 57 2009/05/09 02:32:11 60.6 58 2009/05/09 02:32:12 60.5 59 2009/05/09 02:32:13 60.9 60 2009/05/09 02:32:14 61.3 61 2009/05/09 02:32:15 61.1 62 2009/05/09 02:32:16 60.3 63 2009/05/09 02:32:17 60.2 64 2009/05/09 02:32:18 61.0 65 2009/05/09 02:32:19 60.8 66 2009/05/09 02:32:20 61.0 67 2009/05/09 02:32:21 62.1 68 2009/05/09 02:32:22 60.4 69 2009/05/09 02:32:23 60.8 70 2009/05/09 02:32:24 61.2 71 2009/05/09 02:32:25 62.3 72 2009/05/09 02:32:26 61.1 73 2009/05/09 02:32:27 60.9 74 2009/05/09 02:32:28 60.7 75 2009/05/09 02:32:29 60.7 76 2009/05/09 02:32:30 61.2 77 2009/05/09 02:32:31 61.2 78 2009/05/09 02:32:32 61.1 79 2009/05/09 02:32:33 61.0 80 2009/05/09 02:32:34 61.1 81 2009/05/09 02:32:35 60.7 82 2009/05/09 02:32:36 61.8 83 2009/05/09 02:32:37 60.5 84 2009/05/09 02:32:38 60.8 85 2009/05/09 02:32:39 60.7 86 2009/05/09 02:32:40 60.1 87 2009/05/09 02:32:41 60.5 88 2009/05/09 02:32:42 60.5 89 2009/05/09 02:32:43 59.6 90 2009/05/09 02:32:44 59.7 91 2009/05/09 02:32:45 59.9 92 2009/05/09 02:32:46 60.1 93 2009/05/09 02:32:47 59.6 94 2009/05/09 02:32:48 59.2 95 2009/05/09 02:32:49 59.6 96 2009/05/09 02:32:50 59.4 97 2009/05/09 02:32:51 59.8 98 2009/05/09 02:32:52 58.7 99 2009/05/09 02:32:53 58.9 100 2009/05/09 02:32:54 59.5 101 2009/05/09 02:32:55 59.2 102 2009/05/09 02:32:56 59.3 103 2009/05/09 02:32:57 60.2 104 2009/05/09 02:32:58 60.5 105 2009/05/09 02:32:59 61.1 106 2009/05/09 02:33:00 60.8 107 2009/05/09 02:33:01 60.0 108 2009/05/09 02:33:02 60.1 109 2009/05/09 02:33:03 60.0 110 2009/05/09 02:33:04 61.1 111 2009/05/09 02:33:05 61.2 112 2009/05/09 02:33:06 59.8 113 2009/05/09 02:33:07 60.0 114 2009/05/09 02:33:08 60.3 115 2009/05/09 02:33:09 60.2 116 2009/05/09 02:33:10 59.4 117 2009/05/09 02:33:11 59.5 118 2009/05/09 02:33:12 59.9 119 2009/05/09 02:33:13 60.4 120 2009/05/09 02:33:14 60.4 121 2009/05/09 02:33:15 60.5 122 2009/05/09 02:33:16 61.1 123 2009/05/09 02:33:17 60.3 124 2009/05/09 02:33:18 61.4 125 2009/05/09 02:33:19 60.1 126 2009/05/09 02:33:20 60.6 127 2009/05/09 02:33:21 60.8 128 2009/05/09 02:33:22 61.2 129 2009/05/09 02:33:23 62.6 130 2009/05/09 02:33:24 61.0 131 2009/05/09 02:33:25 61.0 132 2009/05/09 02:33:26 60.9 133 2009/05/09 02:33:27 61.2 134 2009/05/09 02:33:28 59.9 135 2009/05/09 02:33:29 60.8 136 2009/05/09 02:33:30 60.2 137 2009/05/09 02:33:31 60.5 138 2009/05/09 02:33:32 60.5 139 2009/05/09 02:33:33 60.7 140 2009/05/09 02:33:34 60.4 141 2009/05/09 02:33:35 61.0 142 2009/05/09 02:33:36 60.3 143 2009/05/09 02:33:37 60.0 144 2009/05/09 02:33:38 60.4 145 2009/05/09 02:33:39 61.7 146 2009/05/09 02:33:40 60.1 147 2009/05/09 02:33:41 60.9 148 2009/05/09 02:33:42 60.0 149 2009/05/09 02:33:43 59.5 150 2009/05/09 02:33:44 59.8 151 2009/05/09 02:33:45 59.6 152 2009/05/09 02:33:46 59.5 153 2009/05/09 02:33:47 59.5 154 2009/05/09 02:33:48 59.5 155 2009/05/09 02:33:49 59.0 156 2009/05/09 02:33:50 59.4 157 2009/05/09 02:33:51 59.1 158 2009/05/09 02:33:52 59.6 159 2009/05/09 02:33:53 59.5 160 2009/05/09 02:33:54 59.1 161 2009/05/09 02:33:55 59.6 162 2009/05/09 02:33:56 59.7 163 2009/05/09 02:33:57 59.1 164 2009/05/09 02:33:58 60.4 165 2009/05/09 02:33:59 60.1 166 2009/05/09 02:34:00 60.0 167 2009/05/09 02:34:01 60.0 168 2009/05/09 02:34:02 59.5 169 2009/05/09 02:34:03 59.5 170 2009/05/09 02:34:04 60.2 171 2009/05/09 02:34:05 59.5 172 2009/05/09 02:34:06 59.6 173 2009/05/09 02:34:07 59.1 174 2009/05/09 02:34:08 59.4 175 2009/05/09 02:34:09 58.8 176 2009/05/09 02:34:10 59.3 177 2009/05/09 02:34:11 59.8 178 2009/05/09 02:34:12 59.7 179 2009/05/09 02:34:13 59.5 180 2009/05/09 02:34:14 58.9 181 2009/05/09 02:34:15 60.0 182 2009/05/09 02:34:16 59.3 183 2009/05/09 02:34:17 60.0 184 2009/05/09 02:34:18 59.6 185 2009/05/09 02:34:19 59.9 186 2009/05/09 02:34:20 62.1 187 2009/05/09 02:34:21 60.4 188 2009/05/09 02:34:22 61.2 189 2009/05/09 02:34:23 61.3 190 2009/05/09 02:34:24 61.2 191 2009/05/09 02:34:25 60.7 192 2009/05/09 02:34:26 61.2 193 2009/05/09 02:34:27 61.6 194 2009/05/09 02:34:28 61.1 195 2009/05/09 02:34:29 60.6 196 2009/05/09 02:34:30 61.8 197 2009/05/09 02:34:31 61.7 198 2009/05/09 02:34:32 61.8 199 2009/05/09 02:34:33 60.7 200 2009/05/09 02:34:34 60.7 201 2009/05/09 02:34:35 60.8 202 2009/05/09 02:34:36 61.6 203 2009/05/09 02:34:37 62.3 204 2009/05/09 02:34:38 61.5 205 2009/05/09 02:34:39 62.4 206 2009/05/09 02:34:40 61.7 207 2009/05/09 02:34:41 61.2 208 2009/05/09 02:34:42 60.7 209 2009/05/09 02:34:43 61.3 210 2009/05/09 02:34:44 62.0 211 2009/05/09 02:34:45 63.3 212 2009/05/09 02:34:46 62.3 213 2009/05/09 02:34:47 62.3 214 2009/05/09 02:34:48 62.1 215 2009/05/09 02:34:49 62.0 216 2009/05/09 02:34:50 62.1 217 2009/05/09 02:34:51 62.6 218 2009/05/09 02:34:52 61.8 219 2009/05/09 02:34:53 61.9 220 2009/05/09 02:34:54 63.3 221 2009/05/09 02:34:55 61.8 222 2009/05/09 02:34:56 62.9 223 2009/05/09 02:34:57 60.8 224 2009/05/09 02:34:58 61.0 225 2009/05/09 02:34:59 61.9 226 2009/05/09 02:35:00 61.1 227 2009/05/09 02:35:01 60.4 228 2009/05/09 02:35:02 61.2 229 2009/05/09 02:35:03 60.7 230 2009/05/09 02:35:04 60.4 231 2009/05/09 02:35:05 60.4 232 2009/05/09 02:35:06 60.0 233 2009/05/09 02:35:07 60.4 234 2009/05/09 02:35:08 60.9 235 2009/05/09 02:35:09 61.8 236 2009/05/09 02:35:10 60.0 237 2009/05/09 02:35:11 60.6 238 2009/05/09 02:35:12 61.6 239 2009/05/09 02:35:13 61.4 240 2009/05/09 02:35:14 61.4 241 2009/05/09 02:35:15 62.3 242 2009/05/09 02:35:16 62.2 243 2009/05/09 02:35:17 62.8 244 2009/05/09 02:35:18 61.3 245 2009/05/09 02:35:19 61.6 246 2009/05/09 02:35:20 60.6 247 2009/05/09 02:35:21 60.8 248 2009/05/09 02:35:22 59.6 249 2009/05/09 02:35:23 61.0 250 2009/05/09 02:35:24 59.8 251 2009/05/09 02:35:25 60.5 252 2009/05/09 02:35:26 60.0 253 2009/05/09 02:35:27 61.3 254 2009/05/09 02:35:28 61.8 255 2009/05/09 02:35:29 61.0 256 2009/05/09 02:35:30 61.5 257 2009/05/09 02:35:31 60.5 258 2009/05/09 02:35:32 60.2 259 2009/05/09 02:35:33 60.5 260 2009/05/09 02:35:34 60.2 261 2009/05/09 02:35:35 60.7 262 2009/05/09 02:35:36 60.8 263 2009/05/09 02:35:37 59.9 264 2009/05/09 02:35:38 59.1 265 2009/05/09 02:35:39 59.4 266 2009/05/09 02:35:40 59.3 267 2009/05/09 02:35:41 58.7 268 2009/05/09 02:35:42 58.0 269 2009/05/09 02:35:43 58.3 270 2009/05/09 02:35:44 58.8 271 2009/05/09 02:35:45 59.2 272 2009/05/09 02:35:46 59.3 273 2009/05/09 02:35:47 59.0 274 2009/05/09 02:35:48 58.7 275 2009/05/09 02:35:49 58.5 276 2009/05/09 02:35:50 58.8 277 2009/05/09 02:35:51 59.4 278 2009/05/09 02:35:52 59.4 279 2009/05/09 02:35:53 59.9 280 2009/05/09 02:35:54 60.9 281 2009/05/09 02:35:55 60.1 282 2009/05/09 02:35:56 60.4 283 2009/05/09 02:35:57 60.4 284 2009/05/09 02:35:58 60.1 285 2009/05/09 02:35:59 59.4 286 2009/05/09 02:36:00 60.3 287 2009/05/09 02:36:01 60.8 288 2009/05/09 02:36:02 59.9 289 2009/05/09 02:36:03 59.8 290 2009/05/09 02:36:04 59.4 291 2009/05/09 02:36:05 58.9 292 2009/05/09 02:36:06 59.6 293 2009/05/09 02:36:07 59.1 294 2009/05/09 02:36:08 59.3 295 2009/05/09 02:36:09 59.7 296 2009/05/09 02:36:10 58.9 297 2009/05/09 02:36:11 61.0 298 2009/05/09 02:36:12 58.7 299 2009/05/09 02:36:13 60.5 300 2009/05/09 02:36:14 60.2 301 2009/05/09 02:36:15 66.1 302 2009/05/09 02:36:16 59.8 303 2009/05/09 02:36:17 60.4 304 2009/05/09 02:36:18 59.8 305 2009/05/09 02:36:19 59.0 306 2009/05/09 02:36:20 58.9 307 2009/05/09 02:36:21 59.2 308 2009/05/09 02:36:22 59.1 309 2009/05/09 02:36:23 59.7 310 2009/05/09 02:36:24 58.9 311 2009/05/09 02:36:25 58.6 312 2009/05/09 02:36:26 58.5 313 2009/05/09 02:36:27 58.8 314 2009/05/09 02:36:28 59.7 315 2009/05/09 02:36:29 58.8 316 2009/05/09 02:36:30 59.7 317 2009/05/09 02:36:31 59.2 318 2009/05/09 02:36:32 59.1 319 2009/05/09 02:36:33 58.9 320 2009/05/09 02:36:34 58.5 321 2009/05/09 02:36:35 58.1 322 2009/05/09 02:36:36 58.4 323 2009/05/09 02:36:37 59.1 324 2009/05/09 02:36:38 58.8 325 2009/05/09 02:36:39 59.0 326 2009/05/09 02:36:40 58.9 327 2009/05/09 02:36:41 59.8 328 2009/05/09 02:36:42 59.6 329 2009/05/09 02:36:43 60.3 330 2009/05/09 02:36:44 60.5 331 2009/05/09 02:36:45 60.0 332 2009/05/09 02:36:46 61.7 333 2009/05/09 02:36:47 60.6 334 2009/05/09 02:36:48 59.9 335 2009/05/09 02:36:49 60.1 336 2009/05/09 02:36:50 59.7 337 2009/05/09 02:36:51 60.3 338 2009/05/09 02:36:52 60.8 339 2009/05/09 02:36:53 60.6 340 2009/05/09 02:36:54 60.7 341 2009/05/09 02:36:55 60.8 342 2009/05/09 02:36:56 60.3 343 2009/05/09 02:36:57 60.8 344 2009/05/09 02:36:58 61.6 345 2009/05/09 02:36:59 61.2 346 2009/05/09 02:37:00 61.8 347 2009/05/09 02:37:01 62.1 348 2009/05/09 02:37:02 61.6 349 2009/05/09 02:37:03 62.8 350 2009/05/09 02:37:04 61.4 351 2009/05/09 02:37:05 61.1 352 2009/05/09 02:37:06 59.8 353 2009/05/09 02:37:07 59.1 354 2009/05/09 02:37:08 58.7 355 2009/05/09 02:37:09 59.3 356 2009/05/09 02:37:10 59.5 357 2009/05/09 02:37:11 58.6 358 2009/05/09 02:37:12 59.3 359 2009/05/09 02:37:13 58.5 360 2009/05/09 02:37:14 58.9 361 2009/05/09 02:37:15 58.5 362 2009/05/09 02:37:16 59.7 363 2009/05/09 02:37:17 60.3 364 2009/05/09 02:37:18 59.0 365 2009/05/09 02:37:19 59.5 366 2009/05/09 02:37:20 59.9 367 2009/05/09 02:37:21 60.4 368 2009/05/09 02:37:22 60.7 369 2009/05/09 02:37:23 60.0 370 2009/05/09 02:37:24 61.3 371 2009/05/09 02:37:25 60.1 372 2009/05/09 02:37:26 61.7 373 2009/05/09 02:37:27 61.2 374 2009/05/09 02:37:28 61.5 375 2009/05/09 02:37:29 62.1 376 2009/05/09 02:37:30 61.0 377 2009/05/09 02:37:31 60.9 378 2009/05/09 02:37:32 60.9 379 2009/05/09 02:37:33 61.4 380 2009/05/09 02:37:34 61.2 381 2009/05/09 02:37:35 61.0 382 2009/05/09 02:37:36 61.4 383 2009/05/09 02:37:37 60.2 384 2009/05/09 02:37:38 60.7 385 2009/05/09 02:37:39 61.2 386 2009/05/09 02:37:40 61.2 387 2009/05/09 02:37:41 61.4 388 2009/05/09 02:37:42 61.3 389 2009/05/09 02:37:43 61.2 390 2009/05/09 02:37:44 61.4 391 2009/05/09 02:37:45 61.1 392 2009/05/09 02:37:46 60.6 393 2009/05/09 02:37:47 61.3 394 2009/05/09 02:37:48 62.8 395 2009/05/09 02:37:49 62.2 396 2009/05/09 02:37:50 62.0 397 2009/05/09 02:37:51 62.6 398 2009/05/09 02:37:52 62.8 399 2009/05/09 02:37:53 62.5 400 2009/05/09 02:37:54 61.2 401 2009/05/09 02:37:55 62.0 402 2009/05/09 02:37:56 61.5 403 2009/05/09 02:37:57 61.4 404 2009/05/09 02:37:58 61.6 405 2009/05/09 02:37:59 60.8 406 2009/05/09 02:38:00 61.9 407 2009/05/09 02:38:01 61.6 408 2009/05/09 02:38:02 60.1 409 2009/05/09 02:38:03 61.5 410 2009/05/09 02:38:04 60.6 411 2009/05/09 02:38:05 60.1 412 2009/05/09 02:38:06 59.8 413 2009/05/09 02:38:07 60.2 414 2009/05/09 02:38:08 62.6 415 2009/05/09 02:38:09 61.1 416 2009/05/09 02:38:10 61.3 417 2009/05/09 02:38:11 63.4 418 2009/05/09 02:38:12 61.9 419 2009/05/09 02:38:13 62.0 420 2009/05/09 02:38:14 61.7 421 2009/05/09 02:38:15 61.8 422 2009/05/09 02:38:16 62.1 423 2009/05/09 02:38:17 61.7 424 2009/05/09 02:38:18 61.3 425 2009/05/09 02:38:19 62.5 426 2009/05/09 02:38:20 62.2 427 2009/05/09 02:38:21 61.5 428 2009/05/09 02:38:22 61.2 429 2009/05/09 02:38:23 61.4 430 2009/05/09 02:38:24 61.1 431 2009/05/09 02:38:25 62.9 432 2009/05/09 02:38:26 61.4 433 2009/05/09 02:38:27 61.4 434 2009/05/09 02:38:28 61.8 435 2009/05/09 02:38:29 60.4 436 2009/05/09 02:38:30 61.8 437 2009/05/09 02:38:31 61.4 438 2009/05/09 02:38:32 61.1 439 2009/05/09 02:38:33 61.3 440 2009/05/09 02:38:34 61.3 441 2009/05/09 02:38:35 61.8 442 2009/05/09 02:38:36 61.6 443 2009/05/09 02:38:37 61.1 444 2009/05/09 02:38:38 60.2 445 2009/05/09 02:38:39 60.9 446 2009/05/09 02:38:40 59.9 447 2009/05/09 02:38:41 59.7 448 2009/05/09 02:38:42 59.6 449 2009/05/09 02:38:43 59.7 450 2009/05/09 02:38:44 59.4 451 2009/05/09 02:38:45 59.8 452 2009/05/09 02:38:46 59.2 453 2009/05/09 02:38:47 59.1 454 2009/05/09 02:38:48 61.1 455 2009/05/09 02:38:49 60.4 456 2009/05/09 02:38:50 59.5 457 2009/05/09 02:38:51 60.6 458 2009/05/09 02:38:52 60.2 459 2009/05/09 02:38:53 61.4 460 2009/05/09 02:38:54 61.0 461 2009/05/09 02:38:55 61.7 462 2009/05/09 02:38:56 61.4 463 2009/05/09 02:38:57 61.5 464 2009/05/09 02:38:58 61.0 465 2009/05/09 02:38:59 60.4 466 2009/05/09 02:39:00 60.5 467 2009/05/09 02:39:01 60.6 468 2009/05/09 02:39:02 60.1 469 2009/05/09 02:39:03 59.9 470 2009/05/09 02:39:04 59.6 471 2009/05/09 02:39:05 59.7 472 2009/05/09 02:39:06 58.8 473 2009/05/09 02:39:07 59.4 474 2009/05/09 02:39:08 59.6 475 2009/05/09 02:39:09 58.6 476 2009/05/09 02:39:10 58.6 477 2009/05/09 02:39:11 59.1 478 2009/05/09 02:39:12 60.9 479 2009/05/09 02:39:13 59.3 480 2009/05/09 02:39:14 59.3 481 2009/05/09 02:39:15 60.5 482 2009/05/09 02:39:16 59.3 483 2009/05/09 02:39:17 59.4 484 2009/05/09 02:39:18 59.7 485 2009/05/09 02:39:19 61.1 486 2009/05/09 02:39:20 61.4 487 2009/05/09 02:39:21 60.1 488 2009/05/09 02:39:22 59.4 489 2009/05/09 02:39:23 59.8 490 2009/05/09 02:39:24 61.4 491 2009/05/09 02:39:25 60.3 492 2009/05/09 02:39:26 60.4 493 2009/05/09 02:39:27 60.8 494 2009/05/09 02:39:28 59.9 495 2009/05/09 02:39:29 59.9 496 2009/05/09 02:39:30 59.7 497 2009/05/09 02:39:31 60.1 498 2009/05/09 02:39:32 59.8 499 2009/05/09 02:39:33 60.0 500 2009/05/09 02:39:34 59.7 501 2009/05/09 02:39:35 59.7 502 2009/05/09 02:39:36 60.3 503 2009/05/09 02:39:37 59.8 504 2009/05/09 02:39:38 60.4 505 2009/05/09 02:39:39 60.4 506 2009/05/09 02:39:40 61.5 507 2009/05/09 02:39:41 61.2 508 2009/05/09 02:39:42 60.2 509 2009/05/09 02:39:43 60.5 510 2009/05/09 02:39:44 61.2 511 2009/05/09 02:39:45 60.9 512 2009/05/09 02:39:46 61.1 513 2009/05/09 02:39:47 60.4 514 2009/05/09 02:39:48 60.4 515 2009/05/09 02:39:49 61.2 516 2009/05/09 02:39:50 61.3 517 2009/05/09 02:39:51 60.9 518 2009/05/09 02:39:52 60.0 519 2009/05/09 02:39:53 62.0 520 2009/05/09 02:39:54 60.5 521 2009/05/09 02:39:55 61.3 522 2009/05/09 02:39:56 59.5 523 2009/05/09 02:39:57 59.4 524 2009/05/09 02:39:58 60.6 525 2009/05/09 02:39:59 59.5 526 2009/05/09 02:40:00 59.1 527 2009/05/09 02:40:01 60.1 528 2009/05/09 02:40:02 59.2 529 2009/05/09 02:40:03 59.3 530 2009/05/09 02:40:04 59.2 531 2009/05/09 02:40:05 59.5 532 2009/05/09 02:40:06 59.6 533 2009/05/09 02:40:07 60.5 534 2009/05/09 02:40:08 60.4 535 2009/05/09 02:40:09 60.6 536 2009/05/09 02:40:10 60.3 537 2009/05/09 02:40:11 60.8 538 2009/05/09 02:40:12 60.0 539 2009/05/09 02:40:13 59.8 540 2009/05/09 02:40:14 60.4 541 2009/05/09 02:40:15 60.0 542 2009/05/09 02:40:16 60.5 543 2009/05/09 02:40:17 60.8 544 2009/05/09 02:40:18 59.8 545 2009/05/09 02:40:19 60.2 546 2009/05/09 02:40:20 60.1 547 2009/05/09 02:40:21 59.4 548 2009/05/09 02:40:22 59.3 549 2009/05/09 02:40:23 59.8 550 2009/05/09 02:40:24 59.4 551 2009/05/09 02:40:25 59.5 552 2009/05/09 02:40:26 59.9 553 2009/05/09 02:40:27 59.7 554 2009/05/09 02:40:28 59.4 555 2009/05/09 02:40:29 59.2 556 2009/05/09 02:40:30 59.1 557 2009/05/09 02:40:31 59.8 558 2009/05/09 02:40:32 58.9 559 2009/05/09 02:40:33 58.6 560 2009/05/09 02:40:34 59.1 561 2009/05/09 02:40:35 58.1 562 2009/05/09 02:40:36 58.3 563 2009/05/09 02:40:37 59.0 564 2009/05/09 02:40:38 59.6 565 2009/05/09 02:40:39 58.4 566 2009/05/09 02:40:40 58.4 567 2009/05/09 02:40:41 58.9 568 2009/05/09 02:40:42 58.2 569 2009/05/09 02:40:43 58.3 570 2009/05/09 02:40:44 59.6 571 2009/05/09 02:40:45 58.5 572 2009/05/09 02:40:46 60.1 573 2009/05/09 02:40:47 58.7 574 2009/05/09 02:40:48 59.7 575 2009/05/09 02:40:49 60.1 576 2009/05/09 02:40:50 59.4 577 2009/05/09 02:40:51 60.7 578 2009/05/09 02:40:52 60.5 579 2009/05/09 02:40:53 59.7 580 2009/05/09 02:40:54 60.2 581 2009/05/09 02:40:55 61.5 582 2009/05/09 02:40:56 60.1 583 2009/05/09 02:40:57 59.8 584 2009/05/09 02:40:58 60.3 585 2009/05/09 02:40:59 60.5 586 2009/05/09 02:41:00 62.0 587 2009/05/09 02:41:01 61.2 588 2009/05/09 02:41:02 60.3 589 2009/05/09 02:41:03 61.2 590 2009/05/09 02:41:04 61.3 591 2009/05/09 02:41:05 61.4 592 2009/05/09 02:41:06 61.8 593 2009/05/09 02:41:07 61.9 594 2009/05/09 02:41:08 61.8 595 2009/05/09 02:41:09 62.2 596 2009/05/09 02:41:10 62.0 597 2009/05/09 02:41:11 61.6 598 2009/05/09 02:41:12 61.6 599 2009/05/09 02:41:13 62.5 600 2009/05/09 02:41:14 61.8 601 2009/05/09 02:41:15 62.3 602 2009/05/09 02:41:16 62.7 603 2009/05/09 02:41:17 62.2 604 2009/05/09 02:41:18 62.2 605 2009/05/09 02:41:19 62.8 606 2009/05/09 02:41:20 61.6 607 2009/05/09 02:41:21 61.6 608 2009/05/09 02:41:22 61.9 609 2009/05/09 02:41:23 61.1 610 2009/05/09 02:41:24 62.0 611 2009/05/09 02:41:25 61.6 612 2009/05/09 02:41:26 61.2 613 2009/05/09 02:41:27 61.2 614 2009/05/09 02:41:28 60.4 615 2009/05/09 02:41:29 61.6 616 2009/05/09 02:41:30 61.9 617 2009/05/09 02:41:31 62.4 618 2009/05/09 02:41:32 63.3 619 2009/05/09 02:41:33 65.0 620 2009/05/09 02:41:34 63.9 621 2009/05/09 02:41:35 66.1 622 2009/05/09 02:41:36 65.0 623 2009/05/09 02:41:37 64.6 624 2009/05/09 02:41:38 65.7 625 2009/05/09 02:41:39 63.6 626 2009/05/09 02:41:40 63.9 627 2009/05/09 02:41:41 64.0 628 2009/05/09 02:41:42 63.7 629 2009/05/09 02:41:43 64.3 630 2009/05/09 02:41:44 63.2 631 2009/05/09 02:41:45 62.1 632 2009/05/09 02:41:46 63.1 633 2009/05/09 02:41:47 62.7 634 2009/05/09 02:41:48 62.0 635 2009/05/09 02:41:49 63.1 636 2009/05/09 02:41:50 62.1 637 2009/05/09 02:41:51 62.5 638 2009/05/09 02:41:52 61.8 639 2009/05/09 02:41:53 61.7 640 2009/05/09 02:41:54 61.7 641 2009/05/09 02:41:55 61.1 642 2009/05/09 02:41:56 61.0 643 2009/05/09 02:41:57 61.1 644 2009/05/09 02:41:58 60.4 645 2009/05/09 02:41:59 60.6 646 2009/05/09 02:42:00 61.1 647 2009/05/09 02:42:01 59.9 648 2009/05/09 02:42:02 60.2 649 2009/05/09 02:42:03 60.6 650 2009/05/09 02:42:04 60.5 651 2009/05/09 02:42:05 60.2 652 2009/05/09 02:42:06 60.3 653 2009/05/09 02:42:07 60.8 654 2009/05/09 02:42:08 61.0 655 2009/05/09 02:42:09 60.9 656 2009/05/09 02:42:10 61.6 657 2009/05/09 02:42:11 63.1 658 2009/05/09 02:42:12 60.6 659 2009/05/09 02:42:13 61.0 660 2009/05/09 02:42:14 62.0 661 2009/05/09 02:42:15 61.9 662 2009/05/09 02:42:16 62.2 663 2009/05/09 02:42:17 62.1 664 2009/05/09 02:42:18 61.8 665 2009/05/09 02:42:19 62.3 666 2009/05/09 02:42:20 62.3 667 2009/05/09 02:42:21 62.4 668 2009/05/09 02:42:22 61.8 669 2009/05/09 02:42:23 62.1 670 2009/05/09 02:42:24 63.0 671 2009/05/09 02:42:25 62.9 672 2009/05/09 02:42:26 66.2 673 2009/05/09 02:42:27 63.3 674 2009/05/09 02:42:28 62.7 675 2009/05/09 02:42:29 62.8 676 2009/05/09 02:42:30 64.3 677 2009/05/09 02:42:31 60.8 678 2009/05/09 02:42:32 62.1 679 2009/05/09 02:42:33 62.7 680 2009/05/09 02:42:34 63.1 681 2009/05/09 02:42:35 63.1 682 2009/05/09 02:42:36 62.3 683 2009/05/09 02:42:37 62.5 684 2009/05/09 02:42:38 63.0 685 2009/05/09 02:42:39 61.5 686 2009/05/09 02:42:40 61.9 687 2009/05/09 02:42:41 61.5 688 2009/05/09 02:42:42 61.4 689 2009/05/09 02:42:43 61.8 690 2009/05/09 02:42:44 61.3 691 2009/05/09 02:42:45 61.9 692 2009/05/09 02:42:46 61.5 693 2009/05/09 02:42:47 61.5 694 2009/05/09 02:42:48 60.4 695 2009/05/09 02:42:49 60.1 696 2009/05/09 02:42:50 60.7 697 2009/05/09 02:42:51 60.3 698 2009/05/09 02:42:52 61.6 699 2009/05/09 02:42:53 61.0 700 2009/05/09 02:42:54 61.5 701 2009/05/09 02:42:55 62.0 702 2009/05/09 02:42:56 61.3 703 2009/05/09 02:42:57 61.7 704 2009/05/09 02:42:58 60.8 705 2009/05/09 02:42:59 61.2 706 2009/05/09 02:43:00 60.7 707 2009/05/09 02:43:01 60.9 708 2009/05/09 02:43:02 60.3 709 2009/05/09 02:43:03 61.3 710 2009/05/09 02:43:04 60.8 711 2009/05/09 02:43:05 61.7 712 2009/05/09 02:43:06 60.6 713 2009/05/09 02:43:07 60.0 714 2009/05/09 02:43:08 60.4 715 2009/05/09 02:43:09 60.5 716 2009/05/09 02:43:10 60.2 717 2009/05/09 02:43:11 60.0 718 2009/05/09 02:43:12 60.1 719 2009/05/09 02:43:13 59.7 720 2009/05/09 02:43:14 59.1 721 2009/05/09 02:43:15 59.8 722 2009/05/09 02:43:16 60.3 723 2009/05/09 02:43:17 60.2 724 2009/05/09 02:43:18 60.5 725 2009/05/09 02:43:19 59.8 726 2009/05/09 02:43:20 60.3 727 2009/05/09 02:43:21 60.3 728 2009/05/09 02:43:22 61.1 729 2009/05/09 02:43:23 62.4 730 2009/05/09 02:43:24 62.4 731 2009/05/09 02:43:25 61.4 732 2009/05/09 02:43:26 62.9 733 2009/05/09 02:43:27 62.3 734 2009/05/09 02:43:28 62.0 735 2009/05/09 02:43:29 62.4 736 2009/05/09 02:43:30 62.3 737 2009/05/09 02:43:31 61.9 738 2009/05/09 02:43:32 62.3 739 2009/05/09 02:43:33 62.8 740 2009/05/09 02:43:34 62.0 741 2009/05/09 02:43:35 62.7 742 2009/05/09 02:43:36 62.6 743 2009/05/09 02:43:37 61.8 744 2009/05/09 02:43:38 62.2 745 2009/05/09 02:43:39 61.4 746 2009/05/09 02:43:40 61.4 747 2009/05/09 02:43:41 60.7 748 2009/05/09 02:43:42 60.4 749 2009/05/09 02:43:43 61.4 750 2009/05/09 02:43:44 62.1 751 2009/05/09 02:43:45 62.5 752 2009/05/09 02:43:46 61.5 753 2009/05/09 02:43:47 61.7 754 2009/05/09 02:43:48 63.7 755 2009/05/09 02:43:49 62.7 756 2009/05/09 02:43:50 62.3 757 2009/05/09 02:43:51 61.4 758 2009/05/09 02:43:52 61.9 759 2009/05/09 02:43:53 62.5 760 2009/05/09 02:43:54 62.6 761 2009/05/09 02:43:55 63.0 762 2009/05/09 02:43:56 62.4 763 2009/05/09 02:43:57 62.1 764 2009/05/09 02:43:58 63.5 765 2009/05/09 02:43:59 63.0 766 2009/05/09 02:44:00 63.2 767 2009/05/09 02:44:01 62.9 768 2009/05/09 02:44:02 63.1 769 2009/05/09 02:44:03 63.2 770 2009/05/09 02:44:04 63.5 771 2009/05/09 02:44:05 63.0 772 2009/05/09 02:44:06 63.1 773 2009/05/09 02:44:07 63.1 774 2009/05/09 02:44:08 63.9 775 2009/05/09 02:44:09 62.1 776 2009/05/09 02:44:10 62.3 777 2009/05/09 02:44:11 63.1 778 2009/05/09 02:44:12 63.5 779 2009/05/09 02:44:13 63.0 780 2009/05/09 02:44:14 62.6 781 2009/05/09 02:44:15 62.4 782 2009/05/09 02:44:16 63.6 783 2009/05/09 02:44:17 63.3 784 2009/05/09 02:44:18 61.8 785 2009/05/09 02:44:19 62.4 786 2009/05/09 02:44:20 62.4 787 2009/05/09 02:44:21 61.6 788 2009/05/09 02:44:22 63.6 789 2009/05/09 02:44:23 61.6 790 2009/05/09 02:44:24 61.7 791 2009/05/09 02:44:25 61.8 792 2009/05/09 02:44:26 62.2 793 2009/05/09 02:44:27 61.8 794 2009/05/09 02:44:28 61.8 795 2009/05/09 02:44:29 63.7 796 2009/05/09 02:44:30 63.7 797 2009/05/09 02:44:31 60.7 798 2009/05/09 02:44:32 61.0 799 2009/05/09 02:44:33 61.2 800 2009/05/09 02:44:34 60.6 801 2009/05/09 02:44:35 60.7 802 2009/05/09 02:44:36 60.4 803 2009/05/09 02:44:37 60.3 804 2009/05/09 02:44:38 61.2 805 2009/05/09 02:44:39 61.0 806 2009/05/09 02:44:40 60.3 807 2009/05/09 02:44:41 60.7 808 2009/05/09 02:44:42 59.7 809 2009/05/09 02:44:43 59.8 810 2009/05/09 02:44:44 60.2 811 2009/05/09 02:44:45 60.1 812 2009/05/09 02:44:46 59.2 813 2009/05/09 02:44:47 60.7 814 2009/05/09 02:44:48 61.0 815 2009/05/09 02:44:49 61.2 816 2009/05/09 02:44:50 60.9 817 2009/05/09 02:44:51 61.5 818 2009/05/09 02:44:52 61.3 819 2009/05/09 02:44:53 61.6 820 2009/05/09 02:44:54 59.8 821 2009/05/09 02:44:55 60.7 822 2009/05/09 02:44:56 61.0 823 2009/05/09 02:44:57 60.9 824 2009/05/09 02:44:58 61.7 825 2009/05/09 02:44:59 61.9 826 2009/05/09 02:45:00 61.7 827 2009/05/09 02:45:01 62.4 828 2009/05/09 02:45:02 61.7 829 2009/05/09 02:45:03 62.0 830 2009/05/09 02:45:04 62.7 831 2009/05/09 02:45:05 62.6 832 2009/05/09 02:45:06 61.5 833 2009/05/09 02:45:07 62.9 834 2009/05/09 02:45:08 61.9 835 2009/05/09 02:45:09 61.2 836 2009/05/09 02:45:10 62.8 837 2009/05/09 02:45:11 62.3 838 2009/05/09 02:45:12 62.7 839 2009/05/09 02:45:13 62.1 840 2009/05/09 02:45:14 62.6 841 2009/05/09 02:45:15 62.8 842 2009/05/09 02:45:16 63.1 843 2009/05/09 02:45:17 63.0 844 2009/05/09 02:45:18 62.7 845 2009/05/09 02:45:19 62.2 846 2009/05/09 02:45:20 63.3 847 2009/05/09 02:45:21 62.1 848 2009/05/09 02:45:22 62.5 849 2009/05/09 02:45:23 62.5 850 2009/05/09 02:45:24 63.3 851 2009/05/09 02:45:25 61.2 852 2009/05/09 02:45:26 60.7 853 2009/05/09 02:45:27 61.2 854 2009/05/09 02:45:28 61.6 855 2009/05/09 02:45:29 60.6 856 2009/05/09 02:45:30 60.6 857 2009/05/09 02:45:31 60.2 858 2009/05/09 02:45:32 61.0 859 2009/05/09 02:45:33 59.3 860 2009/05/09 02:45:34 60.2 861 2009/05/09 02:45:35 59.9 862 2009/05/09 02:45:36 60.7 863 2009/05/09 02:45:37 60.4 864 2009/05/09 02:45:38 60.5 865 2009/05/09 02:45:39 60.5 866 2009/05/09 02:45:40 60.9 867 2009/05/09 02:45:41 62.0 868 2009/05/09 02:45:42 61.1 869 2009/05/09 02:45:43 61.6 870 2009/05/09 02:45:44 62.6 871 2009/05/09 02:45:45 63.1 872 2009/05/09 02:45:46 62.2 873 2009/05/09 02:45:47 62.9 874 2009/05/09 02:45:48 63.2 875 2009/05/09 02:45:49 63.6 876 2009/05/09 02:45:50 63.0 877 2009/05/09 02:45:51 62.7 878 2009/05/09 02:45:52 63.8 879 2009/05/09 02:45:53 62.3 880 2009/05/09 02:45:54 61.6 881 2009/05/09 02:45:55 61.7 882 2009/05/09 02:45:56 63.0 883 2009/05/09 02:45:57 62.2 884 2009/05/09 02:45:58 62.2 885 2009/05/09 02:45:59 61.6 886 2009/05/09 02:46:00 61.8 887 2009/05/09 02:46:01 62.6 888 2009/05/09 02:46:02 63.9 889 2009/05/09 02:46:03 61.9 890 2009/05/09 02:46:04 61.8 891 2009/05/09 02:46:05 61.5 892 2009/05/09 02:46:06 60.8 893 2009/05/09 02:46:07 61.6 894 2009/05/09 02:46:08 62.9 895 2009/05/09 02:46:09 61.3 896 2009/05/09 02:46:10 60.6 897 2009/05/09 02:46:11 60.0 898 2009/05/09 02:46:12 60.8 899 2009/05/09 02:46:13 60.6 900 2009/05/09 02:46:14 60.9 Appendix G Hazards Table 1: GeoTracker Hazardous Materials Database Search Results SITE NAME GLOBAL ID STATUS ADDRESS CITY UNOCAL ‐ PIPELINE‐TANK FARM ROAD SL203031242 OPEN ‐ REMEDIATION TANK FARM RD SAN LUIS OBISPO CONOCOPHILLIPS SITE # 5143 T10000002287 OPEN ‐ SITE ASSESSMENT LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD SAN LUIS OBISPO UNOCAL ‐ TANK FARM RD BULK STORAGE SL203011375 OPEN ‐ SITE ASSESSMENT ‐ LAND USE RESTRICTIONS 276 TANK FARM RD SAN LUIS OBISPO UNOCAL PIPELINE ELKS LN SLT3S5691348 OPEN ‐ VERIFICATION MONITORING 0 ELKS LN SAN LUIS OBISPO DOHI FARMS ‐ RANCH 16 AGL020027718 ENROLLED 4433 OCTAGON WAY SAN LUIS OBISPO EDWARD QUARESMA &SONS ‐ PASQUINI  RANCH AGL020002462 ENROLLED 255 ELKS LANE SAN LUIS OBISPO LEWISFARMS ‐ DALIDO RANCH AGL020012582 ENROLLED 1037 MADONNA RD SAN LUIS OBISPO MARTINON FARMS ‐ MEISSNER FARM AGL020004316 ENROLLED 215 MEISSNER LANE SAN LUIS OBISPO SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY FARM ‐ SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY FARM AGL020021122 ENROLLED NORTHERN TERMINUS OF CALLE JOAQUIN SAN LUIS OBISPO TALLEY FARMS ‐ ELSWORTH RANCH AGL020027680 ENROLLED 245 MEISNER LANE SAN LUIS OBISPO TALLEY FARMS ‐ TF01 AGL020027578 ENROLLED BUCKLEY RD. SAN LUIS OBISPO TALLEY FARMS ‐ TF02 AGL020027579 ENROLLED BUCKLEY RD. SAN LUIS OBISPO  TALLEY FARMS ‐ TF03 AGL020027580 ENROLLED BUCKLEY RD. SAN LUIS OBISPO TALLEY FARMS ‐ TF04 AGL020027581 ENROLLED BUCKLEY RD. SAN LUIS OBISPO Y. HAYASHI AND SONS ‐ SAN LUIS OBISPO AGL020011162 ENROLLED BUCKLEY ROAD AND JESPERSON ROAD SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCO #6038 T0607900154 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 12424 LOS OSOS VALLEY RD SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCO #6038 T0607900093 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 12424 LOS OSOS VALLEY RD SAN LUIS OBISPO BULLOCK WAREHOUSE T0607900022 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 3428 BULLOCK LN SAN LUIS OBISPO BURKE CONSTRUCTION T0607900025 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 865 CAPITOLIO WY SAN LUIS OBISPO CHEVRON #98169 T0607900090 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 3180 BROAD ST SAN LUIS OBISPO CHEVRON USA T0607900052 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 1525 CALLE JOAQUIN SAN LUIS OBISPO CONTRACTOR'S GLASS GROUP T0607900013 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 56 PRADO RD SAN LUIS OBISPO DEWAR PROPERTY (SACRAMENTO) T0607900156 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 3482 SACRAMENTO DR SAN LUIS OBISPO FORMER MARTINELLI PROPERTY T10000001206 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED PRADO ROAD SAN LUIS OBISPO GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM T0607999979 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 950 ORCUTT RD SAN LUIS OBISPO HENDERSON PETROLEUM T10000003568 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 950 ORCUTT SAN LUIS  ROAD OBISPO HENDERSON PETROLEUM CORP T0607900015 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 950 ORCUTT RD SAN LUIS OBISPO J.B. DEWAR T0607909561 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 75 PRADO RD SAN LUIS OBISPO JBL SCIENTIFIC FACILITY SLT3S1561326 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 277 GRANADA DR SAN LUIS OBISPO JENSEN SALES T0607900035 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 3424 ROBERTO CT SAN LUIS OBISPO KIMBALL MOTORS T0607900152 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 1423 CALLE JOAQUIN SAN LUIS OBISPO LAGUNA LAKE SHELL T0607908385 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 11590 LOS OSOS VALLEY RD SAN LUIS OBISPO LAIDLAW TRANSIT FACILITY T0607900038 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 4155 SANTA FE RD SAN LUIS OBISPO PACIFIC BELL T0607925011 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 196 SUBURBAN SAN LUIS OBISPO PERRY FORD, LINCOLN, ETC. T060799382 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 12200 LOS OSOS VALLEY RD SAN LUIS OBISPO PRADO ROAD SERVICE T0607900040 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 253 ELKS LN SAN LUIS OBISPO S.L.O COUNTY FARM SUPPLY T0607900004 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 675 TANK FARM RD SAN LUIS OBISPO SAN LUIS TRUCK SERVICE GARAGE T0607985770 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 219 TANK FARM RD SAN LUIS OBISPO SBC (PAC BELL) T0607956723 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 196 SUBURBAN RD SAN LUIS OBISPO SHELL (FORMER TEXACO) T0607900147 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 12398 LOS OSOS VALLEY RD SAN LUIS OBISPO  SUNSET HONDA T0607900149 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 12250 LOS OSOS VALLEY RD SAN LUIS OBISPO UNITED PARCEL SERVICE T0607900066 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 3601 SACRAMENTO DR SAN LUIS OBISPO UNOCAL OLD PIPELINE NO. 2 SL0607995940 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 4325 S. HIGUERA STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO US POST OFFICE T0607900099 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 1655 DALIDIO DR SAN LUIS OBISPO WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT T0607900164 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 35 PRADO RD SAN LUIS OBISPO WINGS WEST AIRLINES INC T0607900123 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 835 AIRPORT DR SAN LUIS OBISPO ZUPAN'S EQUIPMENT RENTAL T0607900009 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED 635 TANK FARM RD SAN LUIS OBISPO COWAN (FORMER SERAFINO‐MARTINELLI) PROPERTY T10000002348 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED ‐ LAND USE RESTRICTIONS EAST PRADO ROAD SAN LUIS OBISPO MUSTANG MOVING T0607956893 COMPLETED ‐ CASE CLOSED ‐ LAND USE RESTRICTIONS 2885 HIGUERA STREET SOUTH SAN LUIS OBISPO DARWAY BROTHERS FARMING ‐ MAINO/BUNNELL AGL020017582 TERMINATED SOUTH HUIGERA STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO DARWAY BROTHERS FARMING ‐ RANCH #5 ‐ TANK FARM AGL020004421 TERMINATED VACHELL LANE SAN LUIS OBISPO EDNA VALLEY FARMING LLC ‐ ELSWORTH RANCH AGL020017822 TERMINATED 245 MEISNER LANE SAN LUIS OBISPO EDNA VALLEY FARMING LLC ‐ TANK FARM RANCH AGL020023623 TERMINATED BUCKLEY RD. SAN LUIS OBISPO TALLEY FARMS ‐ DALIDIO RANCH AGL020001364 TERMINATED 1035 SAN LUIS  MADONNA ROAD OBISPO TEST OPERATION ‐ EXAMPLE 1 AGL020027811 TERMINATED 895 AEROVISTA PLACE SAN LUIS OBISPO Y. HAYASHI AND SONS ‐ SAN LUIS OBISPO AGL020003977 TERMINATED W/SOUTH HIGUERA:W/CREEK SAN LUIS OBISPO Y. HAYASHI AND SONS ‐ SAN LUIS OBISPO AGL020011202 TERMINATED SOUTH OF  LOS OSOS VALLEY RD WEST OF HIGUERA RD SAN LUIS OBISPO         Figure 1: GeoTracker‐Listed Sited within the Project Area     Table 2: EnviroStor Hazardous Materials Database Search Results  ENVIROSTOR ID PROJECT NAME STATUS PROJECT TYPE ADDRESS CITY 71002836 Pacific West Circuits No Further Action Tiered Permit 189 Granada Drive San Luis Obispo 80000759 SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AIRPORT Active Military Evaluation   San Luis Obispo 60001343 San Luis Obispo PCE Plume Active State Response Los Osos Valley Road and Hwy. 101 San Luis Obispo              Figure 2: EnviroStor ‐Listed Sited within the Project Area    Appendix H Air Quality Conformity Analysis AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY DETERMINATION City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) WRRF Upgrade Project (Project) Introduction The City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Facilities Plan contains an extensive discussion of the background for the project, technical evaluations of various treatment options, and detailed descriptions and graphics for the various improvements proposed. The existing facility is currently rated for 5.1 million gallons per day (mgd) for average dry weather flow (ADWF) conditions.1 The WRRF Facilities Plan states that the plant currently treats an average of approximately 3.5 mgd under ADWF (without Cal Poly ADWF is 3.1 mgd) and 3.9 mgd under average annual flow (AAF) conditions (City of San Luis Obispo 2015: Section 1.1 and Table 5-1). The EIR for the City’s recent update of the Land Use and Circulation Element estimates the AAF at 4.39 mgd based on records for 2000 through 2012 (City of San Luis Obispo 2014: page 4-359). The difference between the two AAF condition estimates may reflect the influence of more recent drought conditions, including conservation measures implemented in response. In summary, the proposed project includes upgrading the existing WRRF in order to: (1) meet the more stringent discharge requirements adopted by the RWQCB and SWRCB in late 2014; (2) provide a nominal increase in ADWF capacity to serve the needs of the City as anticipated in the updated General Plan Land Use Element; (3) replace aging equipment; (4) maximize the production of recycled water; and (5) position the City for potential future potable reuse. Further detail on the proposed improvements and how they were selected are provided in the WRRF Facilities Plan. The City is applying to the State Water Board, Division of Financial Assistance for funds from the CWSRF Program to assist in financing the project. Project Objectives The City has identified the following project objectives for the proposed project (City of San Luis Obispo 2015: Section 1.3): • Economic o Optimize capital investment and life cycle cost o Maximize value for ratepayers’ investment o Incorporate flexibility and scalability to adapt to future conditions o Simplify process flow and make treatment more robust o Optimize application of appropriate technology • Social o Create and sustain diverse partnerships that add value to our community 1 Calculated based on three driest months of the year o Provide an interpretive center and dedicated features to engage and educate the community o Be a good neighbor o Engender the trust of project stakeholders o Support the development and empowerment of City employees • Environmental o Develop and implement a holistic strategy to maximize sustainable resource recovery and manage salts, nutrients and environmental pollutants in the Basin o Incorporate sustainability practices in planning, design, construction, and operation o Maintain compliance and minimize impacts to operations and the community during construction o Sustain reliable compliance post-construction Project Location The WRRF is located at 35 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. The WRRF facility occupies approximately 66 acres (along with other uses described below) between U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) on the west and San Luis Obispo Creek on the east. Most of the components of the WRRF are located within Assessor Parcel Number 053-051-045 (54.7 acres), which fronts Prado Road. The project site also includes the mostly undeveloped area to the southwest of the main facility site as well as the area containing the decommissioned chlorine contact channels and related equipment, approximately 0.5 mile south of the main facility. The decommissioned chlorine contact channels and equipment are located adjacent to existing ponds near the outfall or discharge point for the WRRF. In addition, San Luis Obispo Creek runs along the eastern boundary of the site, with a small portion of the Creek located within the project site near the existing supernatant lagoon. The effluent discharge point to San Luis Obispo Creek is located along the creek, downstream from the main facility, adjacent to the ponds. Staging of construction equipment for the proposed project would occur within the WRRF site. No offsite locations would be required to complete the proposed project. The project site contains other uses besides the WRRF. These other uses include the Prado Day Center, City transit bus facility, a City corporation yard and storage area and a small bore gun range. The Prado Day Center is scheduled for relocation to a nearby parcel on the north side of Prado Road. The new Prado Day Center has already been reviewed and approved by the City, and that relocation is not part of this project. The existing City corporation yard, containing vehicle maintenance, parking, and related facilities, would remain; however, a new entrance to the corporation yard would be created due to the planned construction of the Prado Road overpass. The building housing the small bore gun range would be demolished as part of the project. Project Description The WRRF Facilities Plan provides details regarding the components of the project and their construction. These are summarized in the following sections. Demolition of Existing Structures. During the WRRF upgrade certain structures would be demolished to make room for new and enlarged equipment. The Prado Day Center building would be removed, along with the small bore gun range, some sludge drying beds and other facilities. Treatment Upgrades. Section 7 in the WRRF Facilities Plan provides a detailed description of the proposed upgrades within the WRRF. The details of the equipment and processes identified for the WRRF upgrade are described below and are based on meeting various performance standards, so that the facility will comply with the discharge specifications set by the SWRCB. • Primary Treatment. Addition of a new flow monitoring system, along with other mechanical and structural improvements to the existing headworks. Rehabilitation of the primary clarifiers and upgrades to the supporting mechanical equipment. • Flow Equalization. Upgrades to the existing equalization pond (including an increase in capacity) to enhance operations and maintenance and improve wet weather performance. • Secondary Treatment. Upgraded and expanded secondary treatment system to remove nitrogen and organic components, necessary to meet the new Waste Discharge Requirements specifications. • Tertiary Treatment. Expansion of the filter capacity to meet peak flow requirements. Construction of a new Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection unit to meet the new stringent discharge limits for disinfection byproducts. • Solids and Liquids Handling Processes. o Solids Thickening. Addition of new equipment to thicken the solids produced in the treatment process. Upgrade would replace existing Dissolved Air Flotation Thickener, with a less energy intensive process. o Anaerobic Digester. Construction of a new anaerobic digester. o Biosolids Dewatering. Replacement of the old belt filter press with a new screw press. o Sidestream Treatment/Return Stream Management. Several upgrades would be made in the handling and treatment of waste streams produced internally. These include filter backwash, thickening return fluid (sidestream), digester return fluid (sidestream), lagoon supernatant (from dewatering sidestream), sludge drying bed return fluid, and plant drain. Cooling. Upgrades to effluent cooling would be provided as part of the project, either through addition of cooling towers, wetland cooling or other methods. Additional cooling could be provided through a combination of cooling towers and/or heat exchangers. An alternate cooling method may include use of the undeveloped area immediately southwest of the main facility for development of a wetland cooling system. The concept of using wetlands for cooling and polishing effluent before discharge in lieu of using mechanical chillers has been modeled and determined to be a viable option for cooling at the site. The size of this area is sufficient to allow use of the wetland cooling option without requiring removal of the portion of Bob Jones Bike Trail present in that area of the site, though some realignment may be necessary. It should be noted that at this time the use of wetlands is being considered as an option for effluent cooling and that the decision on whether or not to include this feature in the final design has not yet been made. Stormwater Management/Flood Protection Improvements. The project would include internal drainage improvements. As part of the proposed project, stormwater discharges from the site would be managed using one of several options, including a) continuing to direct all stormwater to the existing discharge points, b) directing part or all of the onsite stormwater flow to the undeveloped area southwest of the main facility, if the wetland cooling option is selected, c) directing part of the stormwater flow to a new discharge point along San Luis Obispo Creek, possibly near the northeast corner of the WRRF, or d) a combination of the three options above. In addition, low impact development (LID), including minor upgrades, such as reconfiguring existing vegetated areas to include LID features, to major upgrades, such as incorporating LID/stormwater collection features as part of newly constructed buildings and treatment facilities, may also be included as part of the internal stormwater management plan for the WRRF site to improve the quality of stormwater flows prior to discharge. In addition, planned flood protection improvements include construction of enhanced protection for key facilities, which includes raising concrete walls protecting some structures, and a new berm around the wet weather equalization pond. Public Amenities. Public amenities proposed at the site include construction of a new Water Resource Center, and grading and restoration of land at the northeast corner of the WRRF after removal of the existing supernatant lagoon, which may ultimately be used for public park purposes under the direction of the City Parks and Recreation Department. The Water Resource Center would serve staff needs while simultaneously engaging and educating the community on the water cycle and recycled water treatment. The Water Resource Center would consolidate all of the major buildings at the WRRF with the exception of the maintenance shop (due to noise concerns). Other amenity improvements include a learning center (in the repurposed administration building) with a walking tour of the facility, interpretive exhibits, picnic areas, a small amphitheater and demonstration gardens and wetlands. The project would also include improvements to perimeter fencing and landscaping, particularly at the Prado Road frontage of the property, as well improvements for security, access control, and internal circulation. Research and Development. Cal Poly currently conducts water treatment research at the WRRF facility. Cal Poly would continue to conduct these types of activities in future at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All activities would be within the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. In addition, the City intends to test as yet unidentified pilot process and treatment technologies in future at the WRRF facility. These would occur at various locations throughout the site, depending on the type of research being conducted. All would be within the footprint of the project considered in this document and would meet the requirements of the facility’s operational permits. Other Proposed Improvements. The following is a list of other proposed upgrades/improvements included as part of the WRRF Project. • Odor Control. Odor control improvements would be installed at several locations. • Internal Access Improvements. Design includes an improved, single access point from Prado Road and an internal street system that will maintain access to the bus maintenance yard and City corporation yard during construction and after the WRRF upgrade. • Additional Electrical and Control Upgrades. Improved electrical service to meet the needs of new equipment, and improved instrumentation and controls for operation of the WRRF. • Renewable Energy Improvements. Installation of solar photovoltaic panels and related equipment at various locations throughout the WRRF. Construction Sequencing and Schedule. The proposed project includes replacing existing structures unrelated to the WRRF as well as removal of existing, older equipment and installation of new structures/equipment in exchange. During the WRRF upgrade certain structures would be demolished to make room for new and enlarged equipment. The Prado Day Center and indoor shooting range buildings would be removed, along with treatment facilities that are no longer required. Since the WRRF must continue operating during the upgrades, not all of the demolition would occur concurrently but instead would be phased over the construction period. Construction activities are expected to start in fourth quarter of 2017. The deadline for most of the proposed upgrades required to meet the Time Schedule Order issued by the SWRCB, to comply with the new discharge requirements, is November 30, 2019. Other upgrades that would address capacity, condition and other facility needs are planned to be completed at a later date. Air Quality Conformity Determination This air quality conformity determination relies on the air quality analysis prepared for the project Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The project site is located within the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB) and is under the jurisdiction of the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). The SCCAB has been designated as a non-attainment area for both the federal and state standards for ozone and PM10. The SCCAB is in attainment for the state and federal standards for NO2 and CO. Table 1 shows the estimated project construction emissions in maximum tons per year. Table 2 shows the estimated project operational emissions in tons per year. Table 1 Worst Annual Construction Emissions (All Stages of Construction, tons per year) Year Pollutant ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 2017 0.09 0.71 0.57 0.00 0.08 0.05 2018 0.67 3.28 2.83 0.00 0.38 0.25 2019 0.51 4.54 3.96 0.01 0.45 0.32 2020 0.85 0.26 0.23 0.00 0.08 0.05 As shown in Table 1, the maximum annual project construction emissions would be 0.85 tons per year of reactive organic carbon (in 2020), 4.54 tons per year of oxides of nitrogen (in 2019), 3.96 tons per year of carbon monoxide (in 2019), and 0.45 tons per year of PM10 (in 2019). Table 2 Combined Annual Testing Emissions (tons per year) ROG NOX ROG+NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 Tons/year <0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 SLOAPCD Annual Threshold (tons/year) - - 25 - - 25 - Exceed Threshold? - - No - - No - As shown in Table 2, the maximum annual operational emissions would be <0.1 tons per year of reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, and PM10. Under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (U.S. EPA) general conformity rule (40 CFR Parts 53 and 91), a detailed analysis of conformity with State Implementation Plans is required if emissions from a federally controlled aspect of a project exceed the established de minimis level of emissions. The de minimis concept refers to a major source threshold below which projects are not subject to these requirements. The de minimis level for ozone precursors (ROG and NOX) is 25 tons per year, as it is a federal severe nonattainment pollutant. The de minimis levels for NOX, PM10, and CO, as attainment pollutants, are each 100 tons per year. The emissions for all criterial pollutants from the project, during both construction and operation, would be below the federal de minimis levels. In addition, the conformity rule requires that the proposed project must be consistent with emission growth factors (land use and population forecasts that were used to generate emission forecasts) contained in the local air district’s Clean Air Plan (in this instance the SLOAPCD’s 2001 Clean Air Plan). SLOAPCD used the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) population forecasts for the 2001 Clean Air Plan, and therefore for State Implementation Plan (SIP) development. The SLOCOG 2040 Population, Housing, and Employment Forecast (August, 2011) estimates a 2035 population for the City of San Luis Obispo of between 48,208 and 48,860 persons. The population projections used to size the planned expansion at the WRRF are based on the City’s more recently adopted 2035 Land Use Element (LUCE; December, 2014), which are based on California Department of Finance data and 1% annual growth projections. The LUCE projects a future 2035 City population of 56,686 (City of San Luis Obispo 2014: Table 3), with a slightly higher population of 57,200 if the City’s Urban Reserve Capacity is used. The LUCE was developed in part to respond to recent State guidance to shift future development away from rural areas and toward existing urbanized areas and transit corridors, shortening vehicle trip lengths and reducing regional air pollutant emissions associated with transportation. While the proposed improvements to the WRRF facility are designed to accommodate a population that exceeds the 2035 population estimated by the SLOCOG population forecast, the project does not include residential development and would not directly increase population growth. As such, the project would not conflict with the goals of the 2001 Clean Air Plan or the applicable SIP. References Air Pollution Control District San Luis Obispo County (SLOAPCD). 2002. 2001 Clean Air Plan. Available: http://www.slocleanair.org/business/regulations.php San Luis Obispo, City of. December 2014. General Plan Land Use Element. City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department, San Luis Obispo, CA. Obtained August 2015 at: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning- zoning/general-plan San Luis Obispo, City of. June 2015. Water Resource Recovery Facility Facilities Plan. Prepared by HDR for the City of San Luis Obispo, Utilities Department, San Luis Obispo, CA. Obtained July 2015 at: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities- department/wastewater/wastewater-treatment/wrrf-upgrade-project San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). 2011. Final Report San Luis Obispo County 2040 Population, Housing & Employment Forecast. Available at: https://library.slocog.org/PDFS/SPECIALPROJECTS/SLOCOUNTY2040REGIONALGROWTHFORECA ST_AUG2011.PDF