Initial Study and Draft Supplemental Mitigated Negative ... · Initial Study and Draft Supplemental...

Initial Study and Draft Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration to the

Freeport Regional Water Project Final Environmental Impact Report

State Clearinghouse No. 2002032132

Prepared for:

Freeport Regional Water Authority Sacramento County Water Agency

East Bay Municipal Utility District

Prepared by:

Jones & Stokes

2600 V Street

Sacramento, CA 95818-1914

Contact: Gregg Ellis

916/737-3000

February 2006

Jones & Stokes. 2006. Initial Study and Draft Supplemental Mitigated Negative

Declaration to the Freeport Regional Water Project Final Environmental Impact

Report. February. (J&S 03072.03.) Sacramento, CA.

Notice of Intent

to Adopt a Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration

Freeport Regional Water Authority

Sacramento and San Joaquin Counties, California

Freeport Regional Water Project

The Freeport Regional Water Authority (FRWA) is acting as the lead agency for a water

supply project in Sacramento and San Joaquin Counties, California. The FRWA’s basic

project purpose is to increase water service reliability for customers, reduce rationing

during droughts, and facilitate conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater supplies

in Central Sacramento County. The proposed project involves a 185 million gallon per

day-capacity (MGD) intake facility and pumping plant located on the Sacramento River,

a reservoir and water treatment plant, a terminal facility located at the point of delivery to

the Folsom South Canal (FSC), a canal pumping plant located at the FSC terminus, an

aqueduct pumping plant and pretreatment facility near the Mokelumne Aqueducts/

Camanche Reservoir area, and pipelines carrying the water from the intake facility to the

Zone 40 Surface Water Treatment Plant and to the Mokelumne Aqueducts. The Final

Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Freeport Regional Water Project (FRWP)

was certified in April 2004 (SCH# 2002032132). However, minor adjustments to the

project have been made since the Final FRWP EIR was certified that are described and

analyzed in this Initial Study and Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration

(IS/MND). The minor adjustments include a sediment return system at the intake

facility, a surge tank facility near the intersection of Gerber and Vineyard Roads to

control transient pressures in the conveyance system, and discharge of water to local

drainages during drainage of the pipelines.

Consistent with State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines

(Sections 15162 and 15163), FRWA reviewed the information regarding the minor

changes to the FRWP and has prepared an IS/MND for this project. The results of the

IS/MND indicate that mitigation measures would reduce all potential adverse impacts to

less-than-significant levels. The FRWA will take public comments and consider

certification of the IS/MND during a regularly scheduled Board meeting on April 13,

2006 at 10:00 a.m. at:

Sacramento County Administration Center

700 H Street, Room 1450

Sacramento, CA 95814

The FRWA will accept comments on the IS/MND from February 3. 2006 through March

4, 2006. Written comments may be submitted to:

Mr. Gregg Ellis


Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration Comment

Jones & Stokes

2600 V Street


Fax: (916) 737-3030

The IS/MND is available at the following local facilities for public review:

Belle Cooledge Community Library—5600 South Land Park Drive, Sacramento,

CA 95822

Elk Grove Community Library—8962 Elk Grove Boulevard, Elk Grove, CA

95624

Galt Neighborhood Library—1000 Caroline Avenue, Galt, CA 95632

Lodi Public Library—201 W. Locust Street, Lodi, CA 95240

Pannell Meadowview Community Center—2450 Meadowview Road,


Sacramento County Clerk/Recorder’s Office—600 Eighth Street, Sacramento, CA

95814

Sacramento County Water Agency—827 Seventh Street, Sacramento, CA 95814

Sacramento Central Library—828 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814

San Joaquin County Clerk/Recorder’s Office—6 South El Dorado Street,

Stockton, CA 95202

Southgate Community Library 6132 66th

Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95823

Valley Hi-North Laguna Library—6351 Mack Road, Sacramento, CA 95823

The IS/MND and all associated documents are available for public review at the Freeport

Regional Water Authority—2710 Gateway Oaks Drive, Ste. 320-South, Sacramento, CA

95833.

Initial Study and Draft Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration to the Freeport Regional Water Project Final Environmental Impact Report

i

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Contents

Page

Chapter 1 Introduction...........................................................................................1-1Background.............................................................................................1-1Project Purpose/Objectives and Need....................................................1-1Need .......................................................................................................1-1Purposes/Objectives...............................................................................1-2

Freeport Regional Water Project ......................................................1-2California Environmental Quality Act Process ........................................1-3

Purpose of Supplemental Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration ........................................................................1-5Document Organization ....................................................................1-6

Chapter 2 Project Description...............................................................................2-1Introduction.............................................................................................2-1Sediment Return at the Intake Facility....................................................2-1Surge Tank Facility at the Pipeline Bifurcation .......................................2-2Discharge to Local Drainages.................................................................2-3

Drainage of Continuous-Use Pipelines.............................................2-3Drainage of Intermittent-Use Pipelines .............................................2-6

Chapter 3 Environmental Setting and Impacts....................................................3-1Introduction.............................................................................................3-1Surge Tank Facility .................................................................................3-2Sediment Return to River .......................................................................3-6

Use of the Lower Sacramento River by Salmon...............................3-7Potential Sediment Effects on Salmon .............................................3-7

Surge Tank Facility .................................................................................3-9Discharge to Local Drainages.................................................................3-9Discharge to Local Drainages...............................................................3-15Sediment Return to the River ...............................................................3-20Discharge to Local Drainages...............................................................3-21Surge Tank Facility ...............................................................................3-25

County of Sacramento General Plan Noise Element......................3-26County of Sacramento Noise Ordinance ........................................3-26

Discharge to Local Drainages...............................................................3-32


ii

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Chapter 4 List of Preparers and References .......................................................4-1List of Preparers .....................................................................................4-1

Jones & Stokes.................................................................................4-1References .............................................................................................4-1

Printed References ...........................................................................4-1


iii

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Tables

Page

S-1 Summary of Previously Addressed Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures from the Adopted FRWP EIR for the Approved Alternative ..............................................................................1-4

S-2 Summary of Previously Addressed Less-than-Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures from the Adopted FRWP EIR for the Approved Alternative ..............................................................................1-4

1 FRWA Drainage Details..........................................................................2-5

2 FSCC Drainage Details ..........................................................................2-7

3 Noise Level Performance Standards for Residential Areas Affected by Non-Transportation Noise..................................................3-26

S-3 Summary of Previously Addressed Significant Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures from the Adopted FRWP EIR for the Approved Alternative .................................................................3-34


iv

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Figures

Follows Page

1 Service Areas .........................................................................................1-2

2 Process Flow Schematic ........................................................................2-2

3 Freeport Regional Water Agency (FRWA) Pipeline Alignment...............2-2

4 Freeport Regional Water Agency (FRWA) Pipeline Alignment (Continued) .............................................................................................2-2

5 Surge Tank Facility Approximate Elevation ............................................2-2

6 Typical Energy Dissipater .......................................................................2-4

7 Folsom South Canal Connection (FSCC) Pipeline Alignment ................2-6

8 General Run Timing of Adult and Juvenile Salmonids in the Sacramento River ...................................................................................3-8


v

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Adopted FRWP EIR Adopted Final Freeport Water Project Environmental Impact

Report

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act

CEQA California Enviro

nmental Quality Act

cfs cubic feet per second

EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District

EIR Environmental Impact Report

FRWA Freeport Regional Water Authority

FRWP Freeport Regional Water Project

FRWP Freeport Regional Water Project

FSC Folsom South Canal

FSCC Folsom South Canal Connection

IS/MND Initial Study and Draft Supplemental Mitigated Negative

Declaration

Mgd million gallons per day

Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation

RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board

SCWA Sacramento County Water Agency

SRCSD Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District

SWTP Surface Water Treatment Plant


1-1

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Chapter 1

Introduction

Minor adjustments to the Freeport Regional Water Project (FRWP) have been

made since the Final FRWP Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified

and adopted (Adopted FRWP EIR). This document evaluates the potential

impacts on the environment of these changes.

Background

The Freeport Regional Water Authority (FRWA) was created by exercise of a

joint powers agreement between the Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA)

and the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). FRWA’s basic project

purpose is to increase water service reliability for customers, reduce rationing

during droughts, and facilitate conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater

supplies in central Sacramento County. FRWA is proposing the Freeport

Regional Water Project (FRWP) to meet this basic project purpose and others

summarized under Project Purpose/Objectives and Need below.

Project Purpose/Objectives and Need

The FRWP is intended to contribute to meeting the objectives of SCWA and

EBMUD. The primary need for the project, and its purposes and objectives, are

discussed below.

Need

The project is needed because:

The SCWA Zone 40 Water Supply Master Plan is based on a conjunctive use

water supply program that will protect the long-term sustainable yield of the

central Sacramento County groundwater basin recommended by the

Sacramento Water Forum Agreement, and surface water is necessary to

fulfill that water supply program; and

EBMUD forecasts water shortages during drought periods, based on

maintenance of existing Mokelumne River basin supply or catastrophic

Freeport Regional Water Authority Chapter 1. Introduction


1-2

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

events exacerbated by increased flows for senior water right holders,

resource protection, and increasing population.

Purposes/Objectives

The purposes and objectives of the project are to:

support acquisition of additional SCWA surface water entitlements for a

conjunctive use program in its Zone 40 area, consistent with the Sacramento

Area Water Forum Agreement and County of Sacramento General Plan

policies;

provide facilities through which SCWA can deliver existing and anticipated

surface water entitlements to Zone 40 area;

provide facilities through which EBMUD can take delivery of a

supplemental supply of water that would substantially meet its need for water

and reduce existing and future customer deficiencies during droughts; and

improve EBMUD system reliability and operational flexibility during

droughts, catastrophic events, and scheduled major maintenance at Pardee

Dam or Reservoir and meet settlement agreements with Contra Costa Water

District and Santa Clara Valley Water District.


The FRWP is a water supply project to achieve the identified water delivery

needs of FRWA. The design capacity of the system is 185 million gallons per

day (mgd). Up to 85 mgd of water would be diverted under Sacramento

County’s existing Reclamation water service contract and other anticipated water

entitlements. This water would be used to meet municipal and industrial

demands in the Zone 40 area of south Sacramento County, consistent with the

Water Forum Agreement.

Up to 100 mgd of water also would be diverted under EBMUD’s amended

Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) water service contract. This supplemental

water would be used to reduce existing and future EBMUD customer

deficiencies to manageable levels during drought conditions and would provide

an alternative water supply in case of planned or unplanned outages at EBMUD’s

Mokelumne River diversion facilities. Figure 1 provides an overview of the

SCWA and EBMUD service areas and the general location of project facilities.

As more fully described in the Adopted FRWP EIR, the project consists of the

following components:

a 185 mgd–capacity intake facility (Freeport intake facility) and pumping

plant located on the Sacramento River near the community of Freeport;

Fig

ure

1

Se

rvic

e A

rea

s

03072.03 Neg Declaration (01/06)

Folsom

SouthCanal

Cosum

nes

Riv

er

No

rth

Fo

rkC

osu

mn

esR

iver

Mid

dle

Fo

rkC

osu

mn

esR

iver

So

uth

For

kC

osu

mn

esR

iver

M

okelum

ne

Riv

er

SacramentoRiver

A

meri

can

Riv

er

So

uth

Fo

rkA

mer

ica

nR

iver

Ca

lav

era

sR

iver

Sta

nis

lau

sR

ive r

Tu

olu

mn

eR

iver

North

ForkSta

nislausRiver Mid

dle

Fo

rkS

tan

isla

us

River

Mer

ce

dR

iver

Tu

olu

mn

eR

iver

Mid

dle

Fo

rkT

uo

lum

ne

Riv

er

So

uth

Fo

rkTu

olu

mn

eR

iver

NorthForkTuolumne

Riv

erS

ou

thF

ork

Sta

nis

lau

s

River

San Joaquin River

Old

Riv

er

Mid

d le River

Sout

hBa

yAq

ueduct

Sa

cra

men

toRiver

Sa

nJo

aqu

inR

iver

Cry

stal

Spr

ings

Res

ervo

ir

San

And

reas

Lake

Che

rry

Lake

Lak

eEl

eano

rH

etch

Het

chy

Res

ervo

ir

Pine

cres

tLa

ke

Don

nels

Res

ervo

ir

Uni

onR

es.

Lake

Alp

ine

Uti

caR

es.

Bea

rdsl

eyLa

ke

New

Mel

ones

Lake

Tullo

chR

eser

voir

Don

Pedr

oR

eser

voir

Lake

Mc C

lure

Turl

ock

Res

ervo

ir

Mod

esto

Res

ervo

ir

Woo

dwar

dR

eser

voir

Salt

Spr

ing

Val

ley

Res

.

Fols

omLa

ke

Lake

Nat

oma

Cal

aver

asR

es.

New

Hog

anR

es.

San

Ant

onio

Res

.

Silv

er L

ake

Cap

les

Lake

Pacific C

reek

Sout

h

Fork

Lick

ing

ForkM

iddl

eFo

rk

Fore

stC

reek

Blu

eC

reek

Col

eC

reek

Tiger

Creek

SummitCreek

Lake

Tabe

aud

Low

er B

ear

El. 5

820

Upp

er B

ear

El. 5

900

Blue

Lak

esEl

. 800

0

Hig

hlan

d La

keEl

. 850

0

Jeff

Dav

isEl

. 280

0

Scha

ad’s

El. 2

900

Pard

eeRes

ervo

irEl

. 568

Salt

Sprin

gsEl

. 404

1

Jack

son

Val

ley

Res

.

AQ

UE

DU

CT

S

Cam

anch

eRes

ervo

irEl

. 235

Yolo

Co

Solan

o Co

Nap

a Co

Sono

ma C

o

Mar

in C

o

Am

ador

Co

Cal

aver

as C

o

Con

tra

Cos

ta C

o

Ala

med

a C

o

San

Fran

cisco

Co

San

Mat

eo C

oSt

anisl

aus C

oM

erced

Co

Mar

ipos

a C

o

Tuol

umne

Co

Alpi

neC

o

El D

orad

o C

o

San

Joaq

uin

Co

Cross-DeltaCanal

Yose

mite

Nati

onal

Park

5

5

4

49

49

49

49

4

44

680

80

880

680

24

13

580

580

880

80

99

99

99

Mok

elum

ne R

iver

Fish

Hat

cher

y

88

88

26

12

26

12

88

88

88

80

205

80

80

5

89

89

4

4

4

UP

PER

SA

NLE

AN

DR

OW

TP

SO

BR

AN

TEW

TP

SA

N P

AB

LOW

TP

OR

IND

AW

TP

LAFA

YET

TEW

TPW

ALN

UT

CR

EEK

WTP

●

Pard

eePH

●

●El

ectr

a PH

Wes

t Poi

ntPH

●

● T

iger

Cree

kPH

Salt

Sprin

gs P

H●

An

gels

Cam

p●

Mu

rph

ys●

● S

on

ora

● S

an A

nd

reas

● C

amp

o S

eco

Jack

son

●

Pin

eG

rove

●

Pin

ecre

st●

Lo

ng

Bar

n●

Mo

des

to●

Man

teca ●

●Tr

acy

Liv

erm

ore

●P

leas

anto

n●

●D

ub

lin

●H

ayw

ard

San

Fran

cisc

o●

● V

alle

jo

San

Raf

ael

●

No

vato

●

Son

om

a●

Nap

a●

Fair

fiel

d●

Vac

avil

le●

Co

nco

rd●

●M

arti

nez

●P

itts

bu

rg

● A

nti

och

Dav

is●

● Sacr

amen

to

●R

ail

Ro

adFl

at●

Cla

y

Ion

e●

Dry

tow

n ●

Am

ado

r C

ity

●

Sutt

er C

reek

●

Bu

ena

Vis

ta●

●H

olt

●B

ixle

r

Lo

di●

●St

ock

ton

Au

bu

rn●

Rob

erts

Isla

nd

Low

er J

ones

Trac

t

Up

per

Jon

esTr

act

Bacon Island

Vic

tori

aIs

lan

d

Palm

Trac

t

Sarg

ent-

Bar

nh

art

Trac

t

Clif

ton

Cou

rtFo

reba

y

Bet

hany

Res

.

Del

ta-M

endo

ta C

anal

Calif

orni

a Aq

uedu

ct

Woo

d-

war

d I

slan

d

Chabot

Res

Lafa

yet

teRes

San

Pablo

Res

Bri

ones

Res

Contra

Cos

taCo.

Alam

eda

Co.

EB

MU

D S

ervi

ce A

rea

Det

ail

Serv

ice

Are

a

Ulti

mat

e Bo

unda

ry

Upper

San

Leandro

Res

Bays

ide

Loca

lG

roun

dwat

erPr

ojec

t

24

680

580

580

880

13

80

4

680

80

CR

OC

KE

TT

RIC

HM

ON

D

HE

RC

UL

ES

RO

DE

O

OR

IND

A

WA

LN

UT

CR

EE

K

AL

AM

O

DA

NV

ILL

E

MO

RA

GA

EL

CE

RR

ITO

AL

BA

NY

PIE

DM

ON

T

EM

ER

YV

ILL

E

SAN

RA

MO

N

CA

STR

OV

AL

LE

Y

SAN

LO

RE

NZ

O

SAN

LE

AN

DR

O

BE

RK

EL

EY

LA

FAY

ET

TE

PIN

OL

E

SAN

PA

BL

O

OA

KL

AN

D

AL

AM

ED

A

PAR

DEE

CEN

TER

Cam

anch

ePH

MO

KE

LU

MN

E

Zon

e 40

Bou

ndar

yZ

one

41 S

ervi

ce A

reas

SA

CR

AM

EN

TO

EL

K G

RO

VE

99

80

50

Amer

icanRive

r

FR

EE

PO

RT

5

Zon

e 40

Bou

ndar

yZ

one

41 S

ervi

ce A

rea

SCW

A Zo

ne 4

0 Se

rvic

e Ar

ea

FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL

Proj

ect P

ipel

ine

Alig

nmen

ts

Inta

keIn

take

LEGEN

D

Free

po

rt In

take

Fac

ility

to

Zo

ne

40 S

urfa

ce W

TP/F

SC

FSC

to

Mo

kelu

mn

eA

que

duc

ts

Sacr

amen

toC

o



1-3

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

a reservoir and a water treatment plant (known as the Zone 40 Surface Water

Treatment Plant [SWTP]) located in central Sacramento County;

a terminal facility located at the point of delivery to the Folsom South Canal

(FSC);

a canal pumping plant located at the FSC terminus;

a series of settling basins;

an aqueduct pumping plant and pretreatment facility situated near the

Mokelumne Aqueducts/Camanche Reservoir area; and

four pipelines carrying the water from the intake facility to the Zone 40

SWTP and to the Mokelumne Aqueducts:

a 185 mgd–capacity (84-inch) pipeline from the intake facility to the

turnout to the Zone 40 SWTP,

an 85 mgd–capacity (60-inch) pipeline from the turnout to the Zone 40

SWTP,

a 100 mgd–capacity (66-inch) pipeline from the turnout to FSC, and

a 100 mgd–capacity (66-inch) pipeline from the terminus of FSC to the

Mokelumne Aqueducts.

California Environmental Quality Act Process

FRWA has prepared extensive environmental documentation under the

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for its proposed FRWP. This

documentation includes:

The Draft EIR/EIS for the Freeport Regional Water Project (Jones and

Stokes Associates 2003) (State Clearinghouse number 2002032132); and

The Final EIR for the Freeport Regional Water Project (Jones and Stokes

Associates 2004)

CEQA requires that EIRs describe and evaluate reasonable alternatives to a

proposed action and describe an alternative that assumes that the proposed action

and alternatives would not be implemented. The Adopted FRWP EIR examined

the impacts of the proposed project and several alternatives in detail and

identified mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to less-than-significant

levels. Certain impacts could not be reduced to less-than-significant levels.

FRWA and its member agencies certified the Final FRWP EIR, with Alternative

5 being the approved project, and adopted CEQA Findings in April 2004.

Alternative 5 consists of the Freeport intake facility, Zone 40 Surface Water

Treatment Plant, Canal Pumping Plant, Aqueduct Pumping Plant and

Pretreatment Facility, and pipelines running primarily along Cosumnes River

Boulevard, Power Inn Road, Gerber Road, Clay Station Road, Elliott Road,



1-4

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Liberty Road, Buena Vista Road, and Cord Road. This constitutes the approved

project and is further described in Chapter 2.

The impacts and mitigation measures associated with the approved project and

previously addressed in the Adopted FRWP EIR are presented in Tables S-1 and

S-2. Table S-1 summarizes the significant environmental impacts in the Adopted

FRWP EIR, and Table S-2 summarizes the less-than-significant environmental

impacts in the Adopted FRWP EIR. The tables are organized to present impacts

by environmental topic area and to indicate the significance of each impact,

available mitigation measures, and the significance of each impact with

mitigation implemented. This information is provided for reference and to

summarize the environmental documentation conducted to date.

FRWA has incorporated certain mitigation measures into the project description

as environmental commitments. These commitments include preparation and

implementation of the measures listed below.

General construction measures to reduce or eliminate construction-related

effects, in particular those related to traffic disruptions and dust generation as

they may affect area residences and businesses.

Erosion and sediment control plan to control short-term and long-term

erosion and sedimentation effects and to restore soils and vegetation in areas

affected by construction activities.

Stormwater pollution prevention plan in compliance with the National

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.

Traffic control plan for construction activities to reduce construction-related

effects on the roadway system and traffic and circulation patterns throughout

the affected project area during the construction period.

Dust suppression plan to reduce fugitive emissions during construction

activities.

Fire control plan to ensure appropriate fire prevention and response methods.

Phase I and Phase II hazardous materials studies to identify existing

hazardous materials and, if necessary, manage hazardous materials within

construction areas.

Hazardous materials management plan, including the appropriate practices to

reduce the likelihood of a spill of toxic chemicals and other hazardous

materials during construction.

Channel and levee restoration plan to ensure levee flood protection and all

water channels and levees affected by project construction activities are

restored to preconstruction conditions.

Hydrologic simulation modeling and scour analysis to identify potential

effects and identify measures for minimizing or avoiding adverse effects

related to scour, erosion, and sedimentation.

Ta

ble

S-1

.S

um

mary

of P

revio

usly

Addre

ssed S

ignific

ant Im

pacts

and M

itig

ation M

easure

s fro

m the A

dopte

d F

RW

P E

IR

for

the A

ppro

ved A

ltern

ative

Page 1

of 5

Res

ourc

e T

opic

/Im

pac

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re

Lev

el o

f

Sig

nif

ican

ce

afte

r M

itig

atio

n

Hyd

rolo

gy, W

ate

r S

up

ply

, an

d P

ow

er—

No

sig

nif

ican

t im

pac

ts

Wate

r Q

uali

ty—

No s

ignif

ican

t im

pac

ts

Fis

h—

No s

ignif

ican

t im

pac

ts

Rec

reati

on

—N

o s

ignif

ican

t im

pac

ts

Veg

etati

on

an

d W

etla

nd

Res

ou

rces

Tem

pora

ry d

istu

rban

ce t

o o

r pote

nti

al l

oss

of

sen

siti

ve

veg

etat

ion a

nd

wet

land r

esourc

es n

ear

acti

ve

const

ruct

ion a

reas

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

7-1

: C

on

fin

e co

nst

ruct

ion

acti

vit

ies

and e

quip

men

t to

the

des

ignat

ed c

onst

ruct

ion

work

are

a

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

7-2

: A

void

an

d p

rote

ct

sensi

tive

veg

etat

ion a

nd w

etla

nd r

esourc

es n

ear

des

ignat

ed

const

ruct

ion w

ork

are

as

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

7-3

: R

eest

abli

sh

pre

con

stru

ctio

n s

ite

cond

itio

ns

to a

llow

nat

ura

l co

lon

izat

ion

of

pla

nt

spec

ies

and

res

eed

, if

nec

essa

ry

LS

Po

ten

tial

in

tro

du

ctio

n a

nd

spre

ad o

f n

ox

iou

s w

eed

s Im

ple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 7

-4:

Im

ple

men

t b

est

man

agem

ent

pra

ctic

es d

uri

ng c

onst

ruct

ion a

ctiv

itie

s

LS

Deg

rad

atio

n o

f b

lue

oak

wo

od

lan

ds

and l

oss

of

indiv

idual

lo

call

y

pro

tect

ed t

rees

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

7-5

: I

den

tify

an

d a

vo

id o

ak

woodla

nd a

nd i

ndiv

idual

lo

call

y p

rote

cted

tre

es

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion M

easu

re 7

-6:

Obta

in a

nd c

om

ply

wit

h c

ounty

tre

e re

moval

per

mit

s an

d i

mple

men

t co

ndit

ions

of

per

mit

s

LS

Lo

ss o

f o

r d

istu

rban

ce t

o r

ipar

ian

co

mm

un

itie

s Im

ple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 7

-7:

Est

abli

sh a

pro

tect

ion

buff

er a

round w

oody r

ipar

ian c

om

munit

ies

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

7-8

: C

om

pen

sate

for

unav

oid

able

rip

aria

n w

oodla

nd l

oss

es

LS

Ta

ble

S-1

. C

ontinued

Page 2

of 5

Res

ourc

e T

opic

/Im

pac

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re

Lev

el o

f

Sig

nif

ican

ce

afte

r M

itig

atio

n

Lo

ss o

f o

r d

istu

rban

ce t

o j

uri

sdic

tio

nal

wat

ers

of

the

Un

ited

Sta

tes,

incl

ud

ing

wet

lan

ds

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

7-9

: A

vo

id a

nd

min

imiz

e

impac

ts o

n j

uri

sdic

tional

wat

ers

of

the

Unit

ed S

tate

s,

incl

ud

ing

wet

lan

ds,

by

in

stal

lin

g p

rote

ctiv

e b

arri

ers

and

imp

lem

enti

ng

bes

t m

anag

emen

t p

ract

ices

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

7-1

0:

Ob

tain

and

co

mp

ly

wit

h s

tate

and f

eder

al w

etla

nd p

erm

its

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 7

-11:

Co

mp

ensa

te f

or

un

avo

idab

le i

mp

acts

on

juri

sdic

tio

nal

wat

ers

of

the

Un

ited

Sta

tes

LS

Po

ten

tial

lo

ss o

f sp

ecia

l-st

atu

s p

lan

t po

pu

lati

on

s Im

ple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 7

-12

: C

onduct

pre

con

stru

ctio

n s

urv

eys

in a

reas

not

pre

vio

usl

y i

nven

tori

ed

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

7-1

3:

Av

oid

know

n

spec

ial-

stat

us

pla

nt

po

pu

lati

ons

du

rin

g p

roje

ct d

esig

n

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 7

-14:

Co

mp

ensa

te f

or

impac

ts o

n s

pec

ial-

stat

us

pla

nt

popula

tions

LS

Wil

dli

fe

Loss

or

alte

rati

on o

f ver

nal

pools

, v

ern

al s

wal

es,

and

oth

er t

emp

ora

ry

po

nd

s th

at c

ou

ld p

rov

ide

hab

itat

fo

r ver

nal

pool

fair

y s

hri

mp

, ver

nal

pool

tadpole

shri

mp,

mid

val

ley f

airy

shri

mp,

and C

alif

orn

ia l

inder

iell

a

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

8-1

: C

on

du

ct s

urv

eys

and

dev

elo

p a

mit

igat

ion

pla

n f

or

ver

nal

po

ol

fair

y s

hri

mp

an

d

ver

nal

pool

tadpole

shri

mp

LS

Pote

nti

al m

ort

alit

y o

f, d

istu

rban

ce t

o, or

rem

oval

of

hab

itat

of

the

val

ley

elder

ber

ry l

onghorn

bee

tle

duri

ng c

onst

ruct

ion

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

8-2

: C

on

du

ct

pre

con

stru

ctio

n s

urv

eys

for

val

ley e

lder

ber

ry l

ong

horn

bee

tle

and

avo

id o

r co

mp

ensa

te f

or

loss

of

hab

itat

LS

Pote

nti

al m

ort

alit

y o

f, d

istu

rban

ce t

o, or

loss

of

hab

itat

for

gia

nt

gar

ter

snak

e an

d w

este

rn p

on

d t

urt

le

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

8-3

: A

vo

id, m

inim

ize,

an

d

com

pen

sate

fo

r u

nav

oid

able

im

pac

ts o

n j

uri

sdic

tio

nal

wat

ers

of

the

Unit

ed S

tate

s, i

ncl

udin

g w

etla

nds,

and

imple

men

t as

soci

ated

wil

dli

fe p

rote

ctio

n a

nd c

om

pen

sati

on

mea

sure

s

LS

Ta

ble

S-1

. C

ontinued

Page 3

of 5

Res

ourc

e T

opic

/Im

pac

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re

Lev

el o

f

Sig

nif

ican

ce

afte

r M

itig

atio

n

Pote

nti

al m

ort

alit

y o

f, d

istu

rban

ce t

o, or

loss

of

hab

itat

for

the

Cal

iforn

ia

tiger

sal

aman

der

an

d w

este

rn s

pad

efoot

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

8-4

: C

on

du

ct

pre

const

ruct

ion s

urv

eys

and c

om

pen

sate

for

loss

of

Cal

iforn

ia t

iger

sal

aman

der

and

wes

tern

spad

efoot

hab

itat

if

thes

e sp

ecie

s ar

e pre

sent

LS

Lo

ss o

f o

r d

istu

rban

ce t

o a

ctiv

e ra

pto

r n

ests

or

tric

olo

red

bla

ckb

ird n

ests

Im

ple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 8

-5:

Conduct

surv

eys

for

nes

ting r

apto

rs a

nd t

rico

lore

d b

lack

bir

ds

LS

Dis

turb

ance

of

nes

tin

g S

wai

nso

n’s

haw

ks

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

8-5

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

8-6

: C

onsu

lt w

ith t

he

Cal

ifo

rnia

Dep

artm

ent

of

Fis

h a

nd

Gam

e if

haw

ks

are

pre

sen

t an

d f

oll

ow

mit

igat

ion

gu

idel

ines

to

av

oid

dis

turb

ance

of

nes

tin

g h

awk

s an

d/o

r th

e re

mo

val

of

haw

ks’

nes

ting t

rees

LS

Lo

ss o

f S

wai

nso

n’s

haw

k a

nd

whit

e-ta

iled

kit

e fo

rag

ing

hab

itat

Im

ple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 8

-7:

Consu

lt w

ith

Cal

ifo

rnia

Dep

artm

ent

of

Fis

h a

nd

Gam

e an

d S

acra

men

to

Co

un

ty a

nd

com

pen

sate

fo

r lo

ss o

f fo

rag

ing

hab

itat

LS

Lo

ss o

f o

r d

istu

rban

ce t

o n

esti

ng

wes

tern

bu

rro

win

g o

wls

Im

ple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 8

-5

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

8-8

: C

onsu

lt w

ith

Cal

ifo

rnia

Dep

artm

ent

of

Fis

h a

nd

Gam

e an

d f

oll

ow

th

e

burr

ow

ing o

wl

mit

igat

ion g

uid

elin

es

LS

Pote

nti

al l

oss

of

hab

itat

fo

r S

acra

men

to a

nth

icid

bee

tle

and S

acra

men

to

val

ley t

iger

bee

tle

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

res

7-7

and 7

-8

LS

Geo

logy, S

oil

s, S

eism

icit

y, an

d G

rou

nd

wate

r—N

o s

ignif

ican

t im

pac

ts

La

nd

Use

—N

o s

ign

ific

ant

imp

acts

Agri

cult

ura

l R

esou

rces

Lo

ss o

r co

nv

ersi

on

of

pri

me

farm

land a

nd f

arm

land o

f st

atew

ide

imp

ort

ance

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 1

1-1

: C

om

ply

wit

h

Sac

ram

ento

County

Gen

eral

Pla

n r

equir

emen

ts

LS

Ta

ble

S-1

. C

ontinued

Page 4

of 5

Res

ourc

e T

opic

/Im

pac

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re

Lev

el o

f

Sig

nif

ican

ce

afte

r M

itig

atio

n

Tra

ffic

an

d T

ran

spo

rta

tio

n—

No s

ignif

ican

t im

pac

ts

Air

Qu

ali

ty

Short

-ter

m i

ncr

ease

in N

Ox a

nd C

O e

mis

sions

in S

acra

men

to C

ounty

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 1

3-1

: I

ncl

ude

air

qual

ity

mit

igat

ion

mea

sure

s as

par

t o

f th

e p

rop

ose

d p

roje

ct’s

con

stru

ctio

n m

anag

emen

t p

lan

LS

Short

-ter

m i

ncr

ease

in N

Ox e

mis

sions

in S

an J

oaq

uin

County

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 1

3-1

L

S

Short

-ter

m i

ncr

ease

in P

M10 e

mis

sions

in S

an J

oaq

uin

County

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 1

3-2

: C

om

ply

wit

h

Reg

ula

tio

n V

III

for

con

tro

l m

easu

res

of

fug

itiv

e P

M1

0

LS

No

ise

Short

-ter

m i

ncr

ease

s in

const

ruct

ion n

ois

e le

vel

s duri

ng d

ayti

me

hours

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion M

easu

re 1

4-1

: P

rovid

e publi

c noti

ce

of

pro

pose

d a

ctiv

itie

s an

d p

rovid

e nois

e sh

ield

ing t

o t

he

exte

nt

feas

ible

SU

Exposu

re o

f nois

e-se

nsi

tive

land u

ses

to g

ener

al c

onst

ruct

ion n

ois

e at

nig

ht

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

14

-1

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

sure

14-2

: M

inim

ize

nig

htt

ime

const

ruct

ion a

ctiv

ity

SU

Pu

bli

c H

ealt

h a

nd

Sa

fety

—N

o s

ignif

ican

t im

pac

ts

Vis

ua

l R

eso

urc

es

Adver

se i

mpac

ts o

n v

iew

s of

the

Zone

40 S

urf

ace

WT

P

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 1

6-1

: R

educe

vis

ual

intr

usi

on b

y p

repar

ing d

esig

n p

lans

consi

sten

t w

ith r

ura

l

vis

ual

ch

arac

ter,

pro

vid

ing

veg

etat

ive

bu

ffer

LS

Adver

se c

han

ge

to v

iew

s of

the

canal

pum

pin

g p

lan

t si

te

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 1

6-1

L

S

Ad

ver

se c

han

ge

to v

iew

s o

f th

e aq

ued

uct

pu

mp

ing

pla

nt

and

pre

trea

tmen

t

faci

lity

sit

e (C

aman

che

site

and o

pti

onal

Bra

ndt

site

)

Imp

lem

ent

Mit

igat

ion

Mea

ure

16-2

: I

mp

lem

ent

appro

pri

ate

aest

het

ic t

reat

men

t at

the

aqued

uct

pum

pin

g p

lant

and

pre

trea

tmen

t fa

cili

ty s

ite

LS

Ta

ble

S-1

. C

ontinued

Page 5

of 5

Res

ourc

e T

opic

/Im

pac

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re

Lev

el o

f

Sig

nif

ican

ce

afte

r M

itig

atio

n

Cu

ltu

ral

Res

ou

rces

Dis

turb

ance

of

know

n c

ult

ura

l re

sourc

es

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 1

7-1

: P

repar

e an

d

imple

men

t a

cult

ura

l re

sourc

es s

ignif

ican

ce e

val

uat

ion,

effe

cts

anal

ysi

s, a

nd m

itig

atio

n p

lan f

or

know

n c

ult

ura

l

reso

urc

es

LS

Dis

turb

ance

of

unid

enti

fied

cult

ura

l re

sourc

es

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 1

7-2

: P

repar

e an

d

imp

lem

ent

a cu

ltu

ral

reso

urc

es i

nv

ento

ry, si

gn

ific

ance

eval

uat

ion,

effe

cts

anal

ysi

s, a

nd m

itig

atio

n p

lan f

or

un

iden

tifi

ed c

ult

ura

l re

sou

rces

Imple

men

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re 1

7-3

: P

repar

e an

d

imp

lem

ent

a p

lan

fo

r u

nan

tici

pat

ed d

isco

ver

y o

f cu

ltu

ral

reso

urc

es

LS

LS

=

L

ess

than

sig

nif

ican

t

SU

=

S

ignif

ican

t an

d u

nav

oid

able

Table S-2. Summary of Previously Addressed Less-than-Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures from the Adopted FRWP EIR for the Approved Alternative

Page 1 of 4

Resource Topic/Impact Mitigation Measure

Hydrology, Water Supply, and Power

Changes in Upper Sacramento River Basin hydrologic conditions No mitigation required

Changes in Lower Sacramento River, Delta Inflow, and Delta Outflow

hydrologic conditions

No mitigation required

Changes in Mokelumne River Basin hydrologic conditions No mitigation required

Changes in south-of-Delta water supply delivery operations No mitigation required

Hydropower and energy production changes at CVP facilities No mitigation required

Water Quality

Potential contaminant discharges during construction could occur for

approximately 2 years, and disturbed construction areas would be exposed to

storms that could transport materials


Operational effects during reverse flow in the Sacramento River associated with

diversion of water from the Freeport intake facility could result in diluted

discharges


Operational effects on water quality in the Sacramento River downstream of the

diversion (the Freeport intake facility) could result due to reduced background

streamflow and increased SRWWTP effluent discharges


Changes to reservoir temperature patterns for Camanche and Pardee Reservoirs

attributable to project-related diversions of Sacramento River water


Increased inorganic mineral content and nutrients could incrementally increase

the frequency or duration of adverse taste and odor events in EBMUD terminal

reservoirs


Changes to Folsom South Canal water quality, attributable to project-related

diversions of Sacramento River water that will be discharged to the FSC


Operation effects on Delta water quality No mitigation required

Pipeline operation effects on surface drainages attributable to change in

discharge levels


Fish

Negative impact on spawning habitat of fish species from construction-related

activities


Negative impact on rearing habitat of fish species from construction-related

activities


Negative impact on migration habitat of fish species from construction-related

activities


Introduction of contaminants harmful to fish populations during construction No mitigation required

Creation of additional habitat for predators of native fish populations from

temporary structures


Direct injury to fish from construction activities No mitigation required

Table S-2. Continued Page 2 of 4


Adverse impacts on spawning habitat of fish resulting from decreased flows

during ongoing operations


Adverse impacts on rearing habitat of fish resulting from decreased flows



Adverse impacts on migration habitat of fish resulting from decreased flows



Adverse impacts on water temperature resulting from changes in reservoir

storage and river flow during operations


Potential risk of fish entrainment at the intake facility No mitigation required

Adverse impacts on fish habitat resulting from changes in reservoir storage

during project operations


Recreation

Temporary disruption to recreational opportunities during construction of the

intake facility



pipeline from the intake facility to Zone 40 Surface WTP/FSC


Temporary disruption to recreational opportunities along the Folsom South

Canal



pipeline from the Folsom South Canal to the Mokelumne Aqueducts


Change in water-dependent and water-enhanced recreation opportunities at

Shasta, Oroville, and Trinity Reservoirs and the Sacramento River


Change in water-dependent and water-enhanced recreation opportunities at

Folsom Reservoir


Change in water-dependent recreation opportunities on the lower American

River


Disruption to recreation opportunities on the Sacramento River associated with

location of the intake facility


Potential inconsistency with local plans and policies addressing recreation No mitigation required

Vegetation and Wetland Resources

Temporary disturbance to and permanent loss of developed areas, agricultural

land, eucalyptus stands, artificially created roadside drainage ditches, and

annual grassland habitat within construction corridor


Wildlife

Loss of or disturbance to developed and agricultural lands and associated

wildlife habitats


Temporary loss or alteration of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat No mitigation required

Temporary loss of San Joaquin pocket mouse habitat No mitigation required

Geology, Soils, Seismicity, and Groundwater

Localized erosion and sedimentation from construction-related activities No mitigation required

Threat of hydrological hazards from potential trench dewatering No mitigation required



Destruction of unique geological features from construction-related activities No mitigation required

Threat of ground shaking and fault rupture No mitigation required

Subsidence south of the Delta from increased groundwater pumping No mitigation required

Land Use

Construction-period conflicts with residential and urbanized land uses No mitigation required

Postconstruction conflicts with residential and urbanized land uses No mitigation required

Inconsistency with local plans and policies and land use designations No mitigation required

Conflicts with planned new land uses No mitigation required

Disproportionate impacts on low income residents and other environmental

justice considerations


Agricultural Resources

Loss of agricultural production No mitigation required

Nonrenewal or termination of Williamson Act Contracts No mitigation required

Reduction in agricultural productivity in the San Joaquin Valley No mitigation required

Traffic and Transportation

Alteration of present patterns of vehicular circulation, increased traffic delay,

and increased traffic hazards during construction of facilities


Damage to the roadway surface during construction of facilities No mitigation required

Disruption of rail traffic during construction No mitigation required

Interference with emergency response routes during construction No mitigation required

Interference with bicycle routes during construction No mitigation required

Congestion of roadways and the permanent alteration of present patterns of

vehicular circulation from the facility operations


Air Quality

Short-term increase in ROG and PM10 emissions in Sacramento County from

construction


Short-term increase in ROG and CO emissions in San Joaquin County from

construction


Long-term increase in emissions in Sacramento and San Joaquin Counties from

operations


Noise

Exposure of existing structures to vibration from pile driving activities No mitigation required

Increase in noise levels from facility operation No mitigation required

Public Health and Safety

Exposure of people to existing contamination No mitigation required

Contamination of soil and water during construction No mitigation required



Increased risk of fires during construction No mitigation required

Increased flooding along Sacramento River No mitigation required

Increased flooding during pipeline construction No mitigation required

Increased risk from use and storage of hazardous materials during operations at

water treatment plants and intake facility


Increased risk from transportation of hazardous materials during operations No mitigation required

Visual Resources

Short-term changes to views associated with construction of project components No mitigation required

Adverse changes to views of the intake facility site No mitigation required

Adverse changes to views along the pipeline from the intake facility to Zone 40

Surface WTP/FSC


Adverse changes to views along the pipeline from the FSC to the Mokelumne

Aqueducts


Cultural Resources—No less-than-significant impacts



1-5

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Agricultural land restoration to ensure agricultural lands that have been

disturbed during the construction process are returned to preproject levels of

production, where practicable.

Spoil disposal plan to ensure that spoil material from construction activities

is properly disposed of off site, or used in the construction process when

feasible.

Environmental training to ensure the avoidance and/or protection of sensitive

resources.

Access point/staging areas plan to minimize the extent of effects resulting

from construction activities.

Trench safety plan to minimize the amount of time that trenches are present

and ensure adequate safety.

Private property acquisition and access measures to notify, compensate, and

provide adequate access to private property owners.

Noise compliance with local ordinances for noise-generating facilities.

Coordinated operations among FRWA, Sacramento Regional County

Sanitation District (SRCSD), and the City of Sacramento to avoid potential

timing-related conflicts between diversions and discharges.

Project planning, coordination, and communication plan to provide

consistency with local agency policies and limit potential conflicts with other

local activities.

Purpose of Supplemental Initial Study andMitigated Negative Declaration

CEQA requires that state agencies consider the environmental consequences of

projects over which they have discretionary authority before taking action on

those projects. FRWA has complied with CEQA through certification of the

Final FRWP EIR as previously described. However, minor adjustments to the

project have been made since the Final FRWP EIR was certified. As a result,

FRWA has prepared this initial study to evaluate the potential impacts on the

environment of these changes.

The purpose of this initial study is to determine whether there are new significant

environmental effects, a substantial increase in the severity of previously

identified significant effects, or new information of substantial importance when

compared to the analysis in the Adopted FRWP EIR.

CEQA Guidelines state that a subsequent EIR shall not be prepared unless there

are new significant environmental effects, a substantial increase in the severity of

previously identified significant effects, or new information of substantial

importance (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162). A supplement to an EIR can be

prepared if only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the



1-6

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation (CEQA

Guidelines Section 15163).

Consistent with the State CEQA Guidelines (Sections 15162 and 15163), FRWA

has reviewed the information regarding the minor changes to the FRWP and

determined that it is appropriate to prepare a supplement to the Adopted Freeport

EIR in the form of an Initial Study and Draft Supplemental Mitigated Negative

Declaration (IS/MND). A mitigated negative declaration may be adopted if the

project would result in less-than-significant impacts with mitigation measures

incorporated into the project. The Adopted FRWP EIR is still relied on to

address the impacts associated with those aspects of the project adjustments that

do not result in new information or new significant impacts and associated

mitigation measures.

The modifications to the project that potentially may have effects on the

environment different from those described in the Adopted FRWP EIR are:

addition of sediment return to the Sacramento River at the intake facility,

addition of a surge tank facility at the pipeline bifurcation,

periodic discharge of water from the pipeline to local drainages as part of

operation and maintenance procedures.

The purpose of this IS/MND is to describe the changes to the project that have

been identified and to analyze their environmental impacts and identify

appropriate mitigation measures if needed.

Document Organization

Chapter 1 provides an overview of the project, describes the CEQA process to

date, and identifies the need to prepare an IS/MND. Chapter 2 contains the

Project Description, which describes the modifications to the FRWP, Chapter 3

discusses the environmental effects of these modifications and identifies

appropriate mitigation measures, and Chapter 4 lists references cited and

preparers.


2-1

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Chapter 2

Project Description

Introduction

Since adoption of the FRWP EIR, FRWA has refined the design of the FRWP

facilities and pipeline. FRWA has made minor modifications to the design of

some of the facilities, and some new facilities and activities have been identified.

This chapter describes those modifications to the project.

Sediment Return at the Intake Facility

The FRWP will divert up to 185 mgd of water from the Sacramento River. At its

maximum diversion and minimum river flow, this is up to 4.5% of the

Sacramento flow at Freeport. However, for at least 75% of the time the diversion

will be 1% or less of the total river flow. The diverted water will contain an

appreciable amount of suspended sediment, reflecting the background turbidity in

the river. To prevent sediment from entering the transmission pipeline where it

could settle out and create an operator and maintenance problem, the intake will

include a forebay structure designed to allow some sediment to settle out prior to

the water entering the transmission system. The forebay settling structure is

expected to capture relatively coarse sediments (sand totaling about one-third of

the sediment passing through the fish screens). The project originally planned to

manage this sediment in settling basins on the landside of the levee at the intake

facility.

The project has been changed to include the return of the sediment directly to the

Sacramento River before it enters the pumps. The sediment that settles out in the

forebay will be continuously removed by a chain and scraper collection system.

The chain and scraper system will move the settled sediment to hoppers where

sediment pumps will return the sediment to the Sacramento River just

downstream of the fish screens (Figure 2). The return flow depth will be at the

same depth range as the fish screens, the depth at which the material was

originally diverted.

No additional material will be introduced, and thus all returned sediment will be

material suspended in the Sacramento River flow that would otherwise be part of

the prevailing sediment load. The suspended sediment is only temporarily

Fig

ure

2

Pro

cess

Flo

w S

che

ma

tic

03072.03 Neg Declaration (1-06)

Sou

rce:

CH

2MH

ill

Freeport Regional Water Authority Chapter 2. Project Description


2-2

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

retained within the intake structure. The project is expected to create a

suspended plume of sediment below the diversion structure that will dissipate as

material is diluted by river flow.

The intake facility is located at the upstream end of an outside bend of the

Sacramento River (Figure 3). The sediment outfall will be located at the

downstream end of the intake facility, and the suspended sediment being returned

to the river will enter the river at approximately the edge of the higher-velocity

portion of the river flow.

Surge Tank Facility at the Pipeline Bifurcation

As previously described in Chapter 1, several facilities are associated with the

operation and maintenance of the FRWP, including the Freeport intake facility,

FRWA pipeline, Zone 40 SWTP, and a terminal facility at the FSC. It was

determined during design that an additional facility, a surge tank facility, is

needed to mitigate negative pressures in the pipeline extensions, downstream of

the bifurcation. While the exact location is not known at this time, the surge tank

facility will be located within 1,000 feet of the intersection of Gerber Road and

Vineyard Road (Figure 4). The surge tank and the valve assembly associated

with the bifurcation will be located on an approximately 1-acre site.

The purpose of the surge tank at the pipeline bifurcation is to control transient

pressures in the overall system.

The facility will consist of the following items:

steel surge tank approximately 10 feet in diameter by 40 feet long by 14 feet

above grade;

control building to enclose a motor control center, control equipment, air

compressor, and other associated equipment;

emergency generator, either in a separate building or a sound-dampening

enclosure;

belowground concrete vaults to access valves and flow meter;

security fence or wall around the perimeter of the facility; and

lighting for safety and security.

Figure 5 shows an approximate layout of the surge tank facility. The buildings

and perimeter fence or wall will be designed and constructed in a manner

consistent with structures in the surrounding area and will include landscape

vegetation to serve as a visual buffer.

Fig

ure

3

Fre

ep

ort

Re

gio

na

l Wa

ter

Ag

en

cy (

FR

WA

) P

ipe

lin

e A

lig

nm

en

t


Cit

y of

E

lk G

rove

GG

Cal

vine

Roa

d

5

Bruceville Road

Mea

dow

view

Roa

d

Sa

cr

am

en

toRiver

Free

port

Sac

ram

ento

Cou

nty

Reg

iona

l W

aste

Wat

er T

reat

men

t P

lant

Cos

umne

s Ri

ver

Blv

d.

Mac

k R

oad

Power Inn Rd

Elsie

Ave

Ger

ber

Roa

d

U.P.R.R.

Elk Grove-Florin Road

Franklin Boulevard

Cit

y of

Sac

ram

ento

Power Inn Road

Flor

in R

oad

Elde

r C

reek

Roa

d

Free

port

Int

ake

Faci

lity

84” Intake

facil

ity jo

int pipelin

e

84”

FRW

A pi

pelin

e (Se

gmen

t 1)

84” F

RWA p

ipeli

ne (S

egm

ent 2

)

De

scri

Mile

s

02

.51

99

MATCH LINE (see Fig 1b)

LE

GE

ND

Ap

pro

xim

ate

Dra

in L

ocat

ions

Segm

ent 1

– (

Stat

ion

10+

00 t

o 2

82+

64)

Segm

ent 2

– (

Stat

ion

400+

00 t

o 7

52+

53)

Fig

ure

4

Fre

ep

ort

Re

gio

na

l Wa

ter

Ag

en

cy (

FR

WA

) P

ipe

lin

e A

lig

nm

en

t (C

on

tin

ue

d)


ine

Road

alvi

neRo

adC

alvi

ne R

oad

Shel

don

Road

Elk Grove-Florin Road

Ger

ber

Road

Vineyard Road

Excelsior Road

Grant L

ine Road

FolsomSouth

Canal

Flor

in R

oad

C.T.C.R.R.

Elde

r C

reek

Roa

d

Bradshaw Road

Zon

e 40

Sur

face

WT

P

Surg

e Ta

nk F

acili

ty (

wit

hin

1,00

0 ft

rad

ius)

MATCH LINE (see Fig 1a)

72”

FRW

A pi

pelin

e (Se

gmen

t 3)

66 ” VRPE pipeline

(Segment 4)

84”

FRW

A pi

pelin

e (Se

gmen

t 2) c

ontin

ued

Mile

s

02

.51

LEG

END

Ap

pro

xim

ate

Dra

in L

ocat

ions

Segm

ent 3

– (

Stat

ion

800+

00 t

o 1

007+

55)

Segm

ent 2

– (

Stat

ion

400+

00 t

o 7

52+

53)

Segm

ent 4

– (

Stat

ion

1100

+00

to

115

5+40

)

Term

inal

Fac

ility

To Canal Pumping Plant

Fig

ure

5

Su

rge

Ta

nk

Fa

cili

ty

Ap

pro

xim

ate

Ele

va

tio

n

Sour

ce:

Kenn

edy/

Jenk

s Co

nsul

tant

s




2-3

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Discharge to Local Drainages

The FRWP will provide water to both SCWA and EBMUD service areas. The

project will provide a continuous supply of surface water to SCWA’s Zone 40

area and a supplemental supply to EBMUD’s service area only during periods of

drought. As a result, some project facilities will be in use all of the time while

other project facilities will be in use only periodically.

Facilities that will be in continuous use to provide the SCWA Zone 40 area with

surface water are the Freeport intake facility, the Zone 40 SWTP, and the

pipeline connecting the two (Segments 1, 2, and 4). Facilities that will be used

intermittently by the project are the FRWA pipeline segment extending beyond

the bifurcation structure to the FSC (Segment 3), the FSC, the Canal Pumping

Plant, the Folsom South Canal Connection (FSCC) pipeline, and the Aqueduct

Pumping Plant and Pretreatment Facility (Figures 3, 4, and 5).

All project pipelines must be able to be drained for maintenance and/or

emergency procedures. Additionally, the segments of pipeline that will only be

used intermittently need to be drained when not in use. In general, pipelines will

be drained to existing local drainages, primarily creeks in both Sacramento and

San Joaquin Counties.

Drainage of Continuous-Use Pipelines

Segments 1, 2, and 4 of the FRWA pipeline will be drained very infrequently for

occasional maintenance or in emergency situations (Figures 3 and 4). Drainage

points will be located strategically along the pipeline to provide for pipeline

draining.

The pipeline will be drained with a combination of two methods. A majority of

the water will be drained by gravity flow out of five major drain structures. Once

a majority of the water has been drained by gravity, the remaining water in the

pipeline will be pumped out via smaller drain structures located at low points or

other critical flushing points along the system, including appropriate drainage

crossings such as local storm sewers, drainage channels, and sanitary sewers.

Gravity Drainage Structure Design and Operation

The FRWA pipeline is expected to have five gravity drain structures along the

alignment (Figures 3 and 4). All four segments of the FRWA pipeline may drain

through these locations, with the exception of pumped drainages described under

Pumped Drainage Structure Design and Operation. Each gravity drain structure

will include an energy dissipation structure to limit the discharge velocity to a

level that will not result in excessive ground erosion (Figure 6).

Fig

ure

6

Ty

pic

al

En

erg

y D

issi

pa

ter


finis

h g

rad

efla

p g

ate

con

cret

e w

all

rip

rap

wat

erw

ay



2-4

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

During the infrequent drainage operation, water will flow through the five gravity

drain structures into Sump 28, Meadowview Drainage Channel, Morrison Creek,

Strawberry Creek, and Union House Creek. Drainage is expected to be

completed in an 8-hour period. Each drainage event will be closely coordinated

and scheduled with the local agencies that have jurisdiction over these drainage

channels.

Table 1 provides preliminary details about the discharge location, dimensions of

each drain structure outlet, the peak flow in cubic feet per second (cfs), and the

type of use (e.g., pipelines in continuous use will be drained very infrequently for

maintenance or during emergencies, pipelines in intermittent use will be drained

after each period of use).



2-5

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Table 1. FRWA Drainage Details

Discharge Location

Drain Diameter

(inches)

Peak Flow

Rate (cfs) Type of Use

Sump 28 42 83 Infrequent maintenance and

emergency

Meadowview

Drainage Channel

42 83 Infrequent maintenance and

emergency

Morrison Creek 42 83 Infrequent maintenance and

emergency

Strawberry Creek 36 55 Infrequent maintenance and

emergency

Union House Creek 36 55 Infrequent maintenance and

emergency

Station 533+50 2 <1 Infrequent maintenance and

emergency


emergency


emergency


emergency


emergency


emergency


emergency

Station 875+90 2 <1 Periodic based on

intermittent use of pipeline





Pumped Drainage Structure Design and Operation

Several pump drainage structures will be placed along the pipeline at low points

where portable pumps can be used to drain any water in the pipeline following

gravity drainage. For example, locations where the main pipeline will siphon

under existing utilities will result in a relatively short section of pipe that will

need to be pumped out during the drainage process. At these locations, a

submersible pump will be lowered down an approximately 10-inch riser to pump



2-6

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

out any water remaining in the pipeline. The discharge water will be directed to

a storm drain, sanitary sewer, or small drainage channel. When drainage

channels are used, the drainage point will be temporarily lined with geotextile

fabric and riprap to prevent erosion. The drainage process using portable pumps

along Segments 1, 2, and 4 will be for a short duration (less than 24 hours), and

flows will be less than 1 cfs at each discharge location.

Drainage of Intermittent-Use Pipelines

Segment 3 of the FRWA pipeline and the FSCC pipeline will need to be drained

periodically after each use (Figures 4 and 7). This is a result of these pipeline

segments conveying water on an intermittent basis to EBMUD during drought

conditions and annually transferring water to Contra Costa Water District.

Additionally, the capability to drain the pipeline is required for maintenance

and/or repair conditions. The majority of water in Segment 3 of the FRWA

pipeline will be drained into the Zone 40 SWTP through the Segment 4 pipeline

after each use. There are localized low points on Segment 3 that will be drained

by gravity or small pumps into local drainages along its alignment or the FSC.

The FSCC pipeline will be drained by gravity and/or pumped using small pumps

to existing drainages along its alignment after each use. If these pipeline

segments (Segment 3 and the FSCC pipeline, total volume of approximately 24

million gallons) are not drained after each use, the pH of the water will rise

quickly as a result of release of basic chemical constituents from the pipeline

mortar lining. In order to comply with low threat discharge requirements of the

Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the water should be released

within 2 weeks after the pipeline is removed from service.

Drainage Structure Design and Operation

Drains along Segment 3 are needed only for draining low points as the majority

of water will be drained by gravity to the Zone 40 SWTP or the FSC.

Approximately three pumped drainages are needed in this segment. These

drainages will be pumped following completion of the gravity drainage.

Drains along the FSCC will be installed at approximately 38 low points on the

pipeline. In addition, common header piping linking groups of the 38 drains will

be installed to collect drainage and convey it to approximately 10 discharge

points that will drain the water to existing channels such as small streams.

Portable pumps will be required to transfer drainage through the common header

piping system.

Drainage collection facilities include approximately 30,000 feet of small

diameter PVC pipe (6-inch to 12-inch), associated valves, and outlet structures

adjacent to streams. Drainage collection piping will be placed parallel to the

main pipeline within the permanent easement, except in a few locations totaling

about 3,000 feet. In those locations, the small-diameter PVC pipe will extend

Mok

elum

ne A

qued

ucts

88

12

Bord

en R

oad

Sa

cra

men

to C

ou

nty

Dr

yC

re

ek

Ang

rave

Roa

d

Clay Station Road

Libe

rty

Roa

d

Sa

n J

oa

qu

in C

ou

nty

Cam

anch

eR

eser

voir

Cord Road

Mo

ke

lu

mn

eR

iv

e

r

Can

al P

umpi

ng P

lant

Folso

m S

outh

Can

al

Aqu

educ

t Pu

mpi

ng P

lant

and

Pret

reat

men

t Fa

cilit

y

Fig

ure

7

Fo

lso

m S

ou

th C

an

al

Co

nn

ec

tio

n (

FS

CC

) P

ipe

lin

e A

lig

nm

en

t


LEG

END

Ap

pro

xim

ate

Dra

in L

ocat

ions

Mile

s

02

.51

66”

FSCC

pip

elin

e



2-7

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

perpendicular to the main pipeline in order to reach an acceptable drainage point

(Figure 6). Each drainage point will include an energy dissipater structure to

reduce discharge velocity to ensure that excessive ground erosion will not occur.

The FSCC pipeline will be drained in a sequenced manner, beginning with

gravity drainage and ending with pumped drainage. Additional sequencing will

occur within that drainage routine so that not all of the gravity drainages are

draining at any one time. Following completion of the gravity drainage, the

pumped drainage will begin. Similar to the gravity drainage routine, pumped

drainage will be sequenced so that not all of the pumped drainages are draining at

any one time. Sequencing is particularly relevant to the operation when there is

more than one drainage on a single stream, and the drainage routine will

accommodate that aspect. Table 2 provides details on FSCC discharge points

including name of creek, drain diameter, maximum discharge rate, and type of

drainage use. Drainage is expected to be completed within a 2-week period.

Drainage most likely will occur between December and March and will be

coordinated with the flood control agency having local jurisdiction, including

possible restrictions on discharges soon after a rain event.

Table 2. FSCC Drainage Details

Discharge Location

Drain Diameter

(inches)

Peak Flow

Rate (cfs) Type of Use

Skunk Creek 8 4 Periodic based on


Dry Creek 8 5.5 Periodic based on


Coyote Creek 8 4 Periodic based on


Coyote Creek 8 2.5 Periodic based on


Coyote Creek 6 2 Periodic based on


Mokelumne River 8 5.5 Periodic based on


Mokelumne River 8 2.5 Periodic based on


Bear Creek 8 2.5 Periodic based on


Tributary to Bear

Creek

6 1 Periodic based on


Tributary to Bear

Creek



Tributary to Bear

Creek





2-8

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


3-1

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Chapter 3

Environmental Setting and Impacts

Introduction

The environmental setting and impacts are described for the various resources

that could be affected by the project modifications. Significance criteria are

based on the CEQA Guidelines and are listed in the checklist tables for each

resource.

Freeport Regional Water Authority Chapter 3. Environmental Setting and Impacts


3-2

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

PotentiallySignificant

Impact

Less than Significant

withMitigation

Incorporated

Less-than-Significant

ImpactNo

Impact

I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:

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 along a scenic highway?

c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character

or quality of the site and its surroundings?

d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare

that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime

views in the area?

The term aesthetics typically refers to the perceived visual character of an area,

such as of a scenic view, open space, or architectural facade. The aesthetic value

of an area is a measure of its visual character and visual quality combined with

viewer response (Federal Highway Administration 1983). This combination may

be affected by the components of a project (e.g., buildings constructed at heights

that obstruct views, hillsides cut and graded, open space changed to an urban

setting), as well as variable elements such as light, weather, and the length and

frequency of viewer exposure to the setting. Aesthetic impacts are changes in

viewer response as a result of project construction and operation.

The project changes associated with returning sediment to the river at the intake

facility and discharging water to local drainages entail facilities that are

underground or within stream channels. Because the facilities will not generally

be visible they will not result in any impacts on aesthetic resources and are not

discussed further in this section.

Surge Tank Facility

In general, a mix of developed, agricultural, and natural landscapes characterizes

the area surrounding the proposed surge tank facility. Development consists of

“rural ranchettes” with various types of outbuildings supporting residential and

agricultural purposes, a golf course and clubhouse, overhead utility lines

supported by single wood poles, and roadways. Open space, consisting of

grazing lands with vernal pools and irrigated farmlands, is present throughout the

area.

Overall, views associated with the location of the surge tank facility have low-to-

moderate vividness because they are representative of the agricultural-residential



3-3

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

surroundings in the area and are relatively common and typical of the roadside

scenery in this area; they are moderately intact because the area is a mix of open

space rangelands and ranchettes with nearby encroaching elements; and they are

moderately unified because the existing landscape is congruent and harmonious

in terms of scale, color, and form with nearby encroaching elements.

However, this area is rapidly changing from a rural, pastoral landscape of

rangeland and open space to an urbanized landscape, with development of

planned communities and small commercial establishments, as identified in the

North Vineyard Station Specific Plan and the Vineyard Springs Comprehensive

Plan. Roadways are prevalent in the corridor area. Several development plans

are in progress for this particular area that will significantly change the visual

environment.

Impact VIS-1: Change in Views of the Surge Tank Facility Site

The surge tank facility will be located within 1,000 feet of the intersection of

Gerber Road and Vineyard Road. The facilities will be relatively low profile and

consistent with existing built elements in the area. Area residents and commuters

traveling along the roadways would have the most frequent views of the facility.

Exposure and sensitivity would be considered relatively high for residents and

low to moderate for commuters.

While placement of the new features along the roadway will change the views of

the site, the resultant changes in the viewscape will be minimized given the

similarity in appearance of the surge tank facility and other structures in the area,

the design and construction of the facility in a manner consistent with

surrounding structures, and the inclusion of landscape vegetation to serve as a

visual buffer. Building materials that do not create a source of glare will be used,

and lighting will be directed away from residential and roadway areas. Because

the proposed project will not substantially change any scenic vistas or the visual

character of the project area or create new sources of light and glare, this impact

is less than significant. No mitigation is required.



3-4

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In

determining whether impacts on agricultural

resources are significant environmental effects,

lead agencies may refer to the California

Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment

Model (1997) prepared by the California

Department of Conservation. Would the project:

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 non-agricultural

use?

b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or

conflict with a Williamson Act contract?

c. Involve other changes in the existing environment

that, due to their location or nature, could result in

conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?

The project modifications, including sediment return to the river, addition of a

surge tank facility, and discharge to local drainages, will not have any impacts on

agricultural resources beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted FRWP EIR.

Therefore, no additional discussion is provided in this IS/MND. Tables S-1 and

S-2, in Chapter 1 of this document, provide a summary of the impacts disclosed

and mitigation measures adopted in the Adopted FRWP EIR.



3-5

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

III. AIR QUALITY. When available, the significance

criteria established by the applicable air quality

management or air pollution control district may be

relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:

a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the

applicable air quality plan?

b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute

substantially to an existing or projected air quality

violation?

c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase

of any criteria pollutant for which the project

region is a nonattainment area for an applicable

federal or state ambient air quality standard

(including releasing emissions that exceed

quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?

d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant

concentrations?

e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial

number of people?



air quality beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted FRWP EIR.






3-6

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the

project:

a. 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 Game 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, or

regulations, or by the California Department of

Fish and Game or U.S. 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,

marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.)

through direct removal, filling, hydrological

interruption, or other means?

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?

Sediment Return to River

Fish are the only biological resources potentially affected by returning sediment

to the river at the intake facility, and salmonid are the fish species most likely to



3-7

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

be affected. Resident fish species, including delta smelt, are well adapted to a

highly turbid system in which suspended sediment varies across a large range.

Use of the Lower Sacramento River by Salmon

The Sacramento River supports four races of Chinook salmon and steelhead

trout. There are fall, late-fall, winter and spring runs of Chinook salmon

characterized by their adult return timing to the river (Figure 8). Sacramento

River winter-run Chinook salmon are listed as endangered, and the spring run is

listed as threatened. Central Valley steelhead return in late winter and are listed

as threatened.

The lower Sacramento River is used by salmon and steelhead primarily for adult

and juvenile migrations. There is also likely some juvenile growth and rearing,

especially for fall-run Chinook salmon and other ocean-type juvenile migrants.

Otherwise, all spawning and early juvenile rearing takes place above Freeport.

Figure 8 provides approximate timing of adult and juvenile migrations through

the lower Sacramento River based on Fisher (1994) and Snider and Titus (2000).

Potential Sediment Effects on Salmon

Bash et al. (2001) characterize the effects of suspended sediment and turbidity on

salmonids into three general categories:

Physiological Behavioral Habitat

Gill trauma Avoidance Reduction in spawning habitat

Osmoregulation Territoriality Effect on hyporheic upwelling

Blood chemistry Foraging and predation Reduction in benthic invertebrate habitat

Reproduction and growth Homing and migration Damage to redds

The effects of sediment on salmon depend on temperature, size, and angularity of

the particles and the life stage (Bash et al. 2001) . In general, adverse effects of

turbidity increase with temperature, are greater for juveniles than for adults, and

highly angular particles may have a greater adverse effect than smooth or

rounded particles (Lake and Hinch 1999).

Physiological effects of particular relevance to this project are gill trauma and

osmoregulation. Gill trauma occurs when gills are damaged by passing high

levels of sediment across the gill membranes. Lake and Hinch (1999) found that

highly angular particles caused greater damage to the gills of coho salmon than

did smooth particles although angularity was not related to mortality. An LC50

value (e.g., a lethal concentration of a substance which kills 50% of a sample

population in a given time) of sockeye salmon increased with particle size (i.e.,

smaller particles are worse than larger ones). In laboratory experiments, cough

frequency of juvenile coho salmon was elevated at 240 mg/L (Bash et al. 2001) .

Fig

ure

8

Ge

ne

ral

Ru

n T

imin

g o

f A

du

lt a

nd

Ju

ve

nil

e S

alm

on

ids

in

th

e S

acr

am

en

to R

ive

r


21-Sep

Sha

de

d b

loc

ks c

orre

spo

nd t

o p

erio

ds

of u

se b

y sa

lmo

nid

s.Th

e d

ark

est

/ta

llest

blo

cks

and

da

tes

rep

rese

nt p

ea

k us

e. T

here

is a

red

uce

d le

vel o

f use

with

ea

ch

blo

ck

sha

de

lig

hte

r/sh

ort

er.



3-8

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Osmoregulation is a concern for salmonid adult and smolt transformation

between fresh and salt water. The project is near the Delta, where juvenile fish

are entering the critical life history phase. During the transition period, juvenile

salmonids are more susceptible to sediment impacts than they are at other times.

During smoltification, LC50s have been reported to decline to 1,500 mg/L but

rise to 30,000 mg/L during other periods (Bash et al. 2001) .

Behavioral effects that could be a concern include avoidance of high levels of

sediment by adult and juvenile salmonids as well as possible effects on foraging

and predation. Avoidance is a difficult parameter to measure because it occurs

relative to the ambient level in the environment. In other words, in a clear stream

fish may avoid a level of suspended sediment that will have no effect in a more

turbid environment. However, fish often encounter areas of higher turbidity as

they migrate past river confluences. While little is known about the fine scale

movement of adult or juvenile salmon around sediment plumes, natural sediment

plumes from turbid tributaries, at least, do not appear to appreciably impair

salmon migration. Where fish are actively feeding, increased turbidity can

decrease success (Bash et al. 2001) . Conversely, increased turbidity can provide

protection for fish being preyed upon.

Impact BIO-1: Impacts on Special-Status Fish Species

The overall effect of the Freeport project on adult and juvenile salmonids is

likely to be minimal. The potential for effects on salmonids is likely greatest for

adult fall-run Chinook salmon because their migration occurs when the ambient

turbidity level in the river is typically at the lowest and when flow diversion and

sediment return are typically the greatest. Other salmonids pass by the intake

facility during winter and spring months when ambient turbidity levels are both

typically much higher and variable while flow diversion and sediment return are

lower. Therefore, potential changes to ambient conditions that may occur in the

fall have the most potential to affect salmonids.

Based on available information (CH2M HILL 2005) and review of relevant

literature:

Sediment returned to the river is extracted from the river flow and, therefore,

introduces no additional chemical pollutants to the river.

While salmon may be expected to avoid the highest levels of sediment near

the point of discharge, the sediment plume will rapidly dissipate, and dilution

will reach approximately 300:1 within 500 feet downstream of the intake

facility. Therefore, the plume will rapidly reach suspended sediment levels

only slightly higher than ambient levels in the river.

Because of the size of the particles being returned to the river, it is likely that

a very small proportion of the returned sediment would temporarily settle

along the constructed and riprapped levee, and another portion would move

low in the water column where any potential for effects on salmonids is

likely low.



3-9

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Although standard modeling techniques predict the plume may be up to 200

feet wide 800 feet downstream of the facility, the river is approximately 800

feet wide in this area, thereby leaving a substantial portion of the river

unaffected. At 800 feet downstream, the dilution ratio is predicted to

approach 450:1. Therefore sediment levels downstream of the release will

rapidly approach ambient levels. In addition, it is unlikely that the

measurable plume will reach the full calculated width because of the location

of the sediment outlet. Thalweg flow should force the plume to stay

generally along the eastern bank of the river and mix into the river along the

edge of the higher-velocity flow.

The plume is not expected to have any measurable effect on salmonids

because: (a) the returned material is no different from that in the ambient

turbidity; (b) it will likely be spatially confined by flow; (c) the suspended

sediment levels rapidly will dilute to levels approaching ambient levels; (d)

downstream of the sediment release, levels of suspended sediment in the

plume are within the range of suspended sediment already occurring in the

river; and (e) regardless, the plume could be easily avoided and bypassed by

salmonids.

Because of the relatively larger size of particles returned to the river, effects

on visible turbidity will be confined within a short distance of the return

facility. Therefore, fish will likely not be substantially affected by the

increased turbidity.

In conclusion, the effects on fish of returning sediment to the river are less than

significant. No mitigation is required.

Surge Tank Facility

The surge tank facility will not have any impacts on biological resources beyond

those already disclosed in the Adopted FRWP EIR. The types of impacts

disclosed include those on vegetation and wetland resources and wildlife

resources. Therefore, no additional discussion is provided in this IS/MND.

Tables S-1 and S-2, in Chapter 1 of this document, provide a summary of the

impacts disclosed and mitigation measures adopted in the Adopted FRWP EIR.


All project pipelines require the capability to be drained for scheduled

maintenance and/or emergency procedures. Additionally, the segments of

pipeline that will only be used intermittently need to be drained when not in use.

In general, pipelines will be drained to existing local drainages.

A majority of the water will be drained by gravity flow. Once a majority of the

water has been drained by gravity, the remaining water in the pipeline will be

pumped out via smaller drain structures located at low points or other critical

flushing points along the system. In some cases, this includes appropriate



3-10

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

drainage crossings such as local storm sewers, drainage channels, and sanitary

sewers.

Discharges will be required to meet several parameters required by the RWQCB,

including those for biochemical oxygen demand, total suspended solids,

settleable solids, pH, dissolved oxygen, temperature, and turbidity.

The biological communities in these local drainages vary, but they all provide

some level of habitat for various fish and/or wildlife species. Their condition

ranges from concrete-lined channels with minimal vegetation to natural streams

meandering through grasslands or oak woodlands, in some cases supporting

confined bands of riparian vegetation.

Impact BIO-2: Impacts on Biological Resources from Drainage of Continuous-Use Pipelines

The continuous-use pipelines will be drained only during infrequent periods of

scheduled maintenance or during an emergency. The majority of the water will

be drained by gravity into five stream channels. These five stream channels are a

key part of city and county local drainage systems and are regularly used to carry

substantial amounts of stormwater.

While the biological value of these streams varies to some degree, they are all

regularly maintained to ensure adequate capacity to convey stormwater. Some

channels are completely lined with concrete, some have concrete lining only on

the bottom of the channel and the side slopes support grasses and shrubs, and

others have no concrete lining and also support grasses and shrubs.

The channels that will receive the greatest volumes of water (Sump 28,

Meadowview Drainage Channel, Morrison Creek, Strawberry Creek, and Union

House Creek) will not be adversely affected by the proposed discharges. The

latter three, which support the most biological resources of the five, were

analyzed through a channel stability assessment for project design purposes.

Field observations conducted as a part of the study, as well as the hydraulic

analysis itself, conclude that the potential for long-term bed degradation and bed

scour is not significant. The hydraulic analysis considered flows ranging from

typical flood events up to the 500-year-flood event and concluded that the

channels were capable of handling the full range of events without resulting in

substantial changes to the stream channel or its vegetation. Discharges

associated with the project will be a small fraction of the floodflows analyzed in

the hydraulic analysis. Therefore, vegetation in these channels will not be

adversely affected by project discharges.

Since these flows will be well within the banks of these channels, any fish and

wildlife using the channels, including giant garter snake that may occupy

Morrison Creek, will not be displaced or otherwise adversely affected.



3-11

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

While the remaining channels are generally smaller in size than the

aforementioned channels, the discharges they will receive are very small relative

to natural runoff rates, and they will be confined to existing, well-defined stream

channels. Discharges will be for a short duration and will be a small fraction of

the stream channel capacity. The additional water will be neutral or beneficial

for riparian vegetation, and it will not harm or disrupt fish or wildlife using the

stream corridor. Vegetation, fish, and wildlife in these channels will not be


As further described below under Water Quality, the quality of the water will not

affect any beneficial uses, including fisheries. Water in the buried pipeline will

remain at a relatively constant, cool temperature and will maintain suitable

characteristics such as levels of dissolved oxygen and pH because of the short

amount of time the water will be in the pipeline.

Therefore, this impact is less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Impact BIO-3: Impacts on Biological Resources from Drainage of Intermittent-Use Pipelines

The drainage of intermittent-use pipelines will occur no more than once a year,

primarily between December and March.

The stream channels vary in size but are all well-defined channels and provide

moderate to good biological values. The stream channels run through oak

woodlands and grasslands and in some cases are surrounded by bands of riparian

vegetation.

There should be no adverse operations-related biological impacts from these

discharges because the volumes will be extremely small relative to natural runoff

rates and they will be confined to existing, well-defined stream channels.

Discharges will be for a short duration and will be a small fraction of the stream

channel capacity. The additional water will be neutral or beneficial for riparian

vegetation, and it will not harm or disrupt fish or wildlife using the stream

corridor.

As further described below under Water Quality, the quality of the water will not

affect any beneficial uses, including fisheries. Water in the buried pipeline will

remain at a relatively constant, cool temperature and will maintain suitable

characteristics such as levels of dissolved oxygen and pH because of the short

amount of time the water will be in the pipeline. Additionally, the percentage of

flow attributable to project discharges in streams supporting or potentially

supporting special-status fish species (Mokelumne River, Dry Creek) is

extremely low and will not substantially affect existing conditions.




3-12

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Impact BIO-4: Impacts on Riparian Vegetation from Construction of Drainage Facilities

Construction of the drainage facilities, including the energy dissipaters, will

cause the permanent loss of riparian habitat. Woody riparian communities

provide important functions and values, are regulated by state and federal

agencies, and are of concern to local planning departments. This impact is

significant. Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce

this impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure BIO-4a: Establish a Protection Buffer around Woody Riparian Communities To the extent feasible, a temporary construction buffer will be established for

each drainage in the project area that supports woody riparian vegetation and that

could be affected by construction activities. This buffer will be established in the

field and will generally extend from the outer edge of the riparian vegetation.

The width of the buffer will be identified before initiation of construction

activities and will be based on site-specific conditions, seasonal restrictions for

wildlife, local planning department specifications, and resource agency (e.g.,

USFWS and DFG) requirements. The outer edge of the designated riparian

protection buffer will be demarcated using flagging or temporary orange mesh

construction fencing.

Mitigation Measure BIO-4b: Compensate for Unavoidable Riparian Woodland Losses A combination of restoration and enhancement of degraded riparian sites will be

used to compensate for the very minor losses of this community that would result

from construction of the drainage facilities. Restoration will occur as close as

possible to the area affected, preferably along the same drainage that would

sustain the impacts.

Compensation for riparian community losses will encompass the goal of “no net

loss” of riparian habitat acres or values. Impacts on riparian communities will be

compensated for at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (2 acres restored for every 1 acre

affected). The ratio of trees and shrubs planted for each tree or shrub eliminated

will be determined on a site-by-site basis to ensure long-term replacement of

habitat functions and values. A revegetation plan will be prepared by a qualified

restoration ecologist and reviewed by the appropriate agencies. The revegetation

plan will specify the planting stock appropriate for the region and each site and

employ the most successful techniques available at the time of planting. Success

criteria will be established as part of the plan. Plantings will be monitored for 5

years to ensure they have established successfully. The riparian community

mitigation will be considered successful when sapling trees are established, no

longer require active management, and are arranged in groups that, when mature,

replicate the area, natural structure, and species composition of similar riparian

habitats in the region.



3-13

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the

significance of a historical resource as defined in

Section 15064.5?

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the

significance of an archaeological resource pursuant

to Section 15064.5?

c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique

paleontological resource or site or unique geologic

feature?

d. Disturb any human remains, including those

interred outside of formal cemeteries?



cultural resources beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted FRWP EIR.

Surveys previously conducted indicate no known cultural resources in areas

affected by new facilities. Therefore, no additional discussion is provided in this

IS/MND. Tables S-1 and S-2, in Chapter 1 of this document, provide a summary

of the impacts disclosed and mitigation measures adopted in the Adopted FRWP

EIR.



3-14

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:

a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial

adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or

death involving:

1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as

delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo

Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the

State Geologist for the area or based on other

substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to

Division of Mines and Geology Special

Publication 42.

2. Strong seismic groundshaking?

3. Seismic-related ground failure, including

liquefaction?

4. Landslides?

b. Result in 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 an onsite or offsite

landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,

liquefaction, or collapse?

d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table

18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),

creating substantial risks to life or property?

e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the

use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater

disposal systems in areas where sewers are not

available for the disposal of wastewater?


facility and adding the surge tank facility will not result in any impacts related to

geology and soils beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted FRWP EIR and

are not discussed further in this section.



3-15

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


As previously described, all project pipelines require the capability to be drained

for maintenance and/or emergency procedures. Additionally, the segments of

pipeline that will only be used intermittently need to be drained when not in use.

In general, pipelines will be drained to existing local drainages.

A majority of the water will be drained by gravity flow. Once a majority of the

water has been drained by gravity, the remaining water in the pipeline will be


flushing points along the system. In some cases, these points include appropriate


sewers.

The condition of the stream channels ranges from concrete-lined channels with

minimal vegetation to natural streams meandering through grasslands or oak

woodlands, in some cases supporting confined bands of riparian vegetation.

Impact GEO-1: Impacts on Stream Channels through Soil Erosion


maintenance or during an emergency. The majority of the water will be drained

by gravity into five stream channels. These five stream channels are a key part of

city and county local drainage systems and are regularly used to carry substantial

amounts of stormwater.

These streams are regularly maintained to ensure adequate capacity to convey

stormwater. Some channels are completely lined with concrete, some have

concrete lining only on the bottom of the channel and the side slopes support

grasses and shrubs, and others have no concrete lining and also support grasses

and shrubs.




latter three were analyzed through a channel stability assessment for project

design purposes. Field observations conducted as a part of the study, as well as

the hydraulic analysis itself, conclude that the potential for long-term bed

degradation and bed scour is not significant. The hydraulic analysis considered

flows ranging from typical flood events up to the 500-year-flood event and

concluded that the channels were capable of handling the full range of events

without resulting in substantial changes to the stream channel. Discharges

associated with the project will be a small fraction of the floodflows analyzed in

the hydraulic analysis and will not result in soil erosion. Therefore, geology and

soil resources in these channels will not be adversely affected by project

discharges.



3-16

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

While the remaining channels that will be used for infrequent and/or intermittent

drainage vary in size (e.g., Mokelumne River, Dry Creek, Skunk Creek, Coyote

Creek, Bear Creek, and unnamed tributaries), the discharges they will receive are

very small relative to natural runoff rates, and they will be confined to existing,

well-defined stream channels. Discharges will be for a short duration and will be

a small fraction of the stream channel capacity. These flows will not result in

soil erosion. Therefore, geology and soil resources in these channels will not be





3-17

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.

Would the project:

a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the

environment through the routine transport, use, or

disposal of hazardous materials?

b. 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?

c. Emit hazardous emissions or involve handling

hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,

substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an

existing or proposed school?

d. Be located on a site that 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?

e. Be located within an airport land use plan area or,

where such a plan has not been adopted, be within

two miles of a public airport or public use airport,

and result in a safety hazard for people residing or

working in the project area?

f. Be located within the vicinity of a private airstrip

and result in a safety hazard for people residing or

working in the project area?

g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere

with an adopted emergency response plan or

emergency evacuation plan?

h. 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?


surge tank facility, and discharge to local drainages, will not have any impacts

related to hazards and hazardous materials beyond those already disclosed in the



3-18

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Adopted FRWP EIR. Surveys previously conducted indicate no known

hazardous materials sites in areas affected by new facilities. Therefore, no

additional discussion is provided in this IS/MND. Tables S-1 and S-2, in Chapter

1 of this document, provide a summary of the impacts disclosed and mitigation

measures adopted in the Adopted FRWP EIR.



3-19

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.

Would the project:

a. Violate any water quality standards or waste

discharge requirements?

b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or

interfere substantially with groundwater recharge,

resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a

lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.,

the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells

would drop to a level that would not support

existing land uses or planned uses for which

permits have been granted)?

c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of

the site or area, including through the alteration of

the course of a stream or river, in a manner that

would result in substantial erosion or siltation

onsite or offsite?

d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of

the site or area, including through the alteration of

the course of a stream or river, or substantially

increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a

manner that would result in flooding onsite or

offsite?

e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed

the capacity of existing or planned stormwater

drainage systems or provide substantial additional

sources of polluted runoff?

f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?

g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area,

as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or

Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard

delineation map?

h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area

structures that would impede or redirect

floodflows?

i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of

loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including

flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?



3-20

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

j. Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or

mudflow?

Sediment Return to the River

The beneficial uses and water quality objectives for waters in the Sacramento

River Basin are established in the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for

the Central Valley RWQCB. Water quality objectives are designed to protect

beneficial uses such as agricultural, municipal, and industrial supply; fish and

wildlife; and body contact and noncontact recreation. The Basin Plan contains

numerical and narrative water quality objectives for physical and chemical

parameters. Returning sediment to the river will require approval by the

RWQCB.

The Intake Facility is within the legal boundaries of the Delta, but not within the

Central Delta. Water quality objectives are based accordingly. Water quality

objectives for sediment, settleable material, and suspended material are defined

by the Basin Plan to “not be altered in such a manner as to cause nuisance or

adversely affect beneficial uses.”

The average annual sediment quantity returned to the river will be about one-fifth

of 1% (0.2%) of the total average annual suspended sediment quantity in the

river. More than 75% of the time, the sediment quantity returned to the river will

be less than 0.33% of the total suspended sediment quantity in the river at the

time. Less than 2% of the time, the sediment quantity returned to the river will be

more than 1% of the total suspended sediment quantity in the river.

The reach of the Sacramento River at the Intake Facility is not impaired for

turbidity, sediment, settleable material, or suspended material, as defined by the

2002 Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments.

A zone of dilution will be needed for the greater-than-ambient sediment

concentrations to meet the criteria set in the Basin Plan. A minimum dilution of

at least 100:1 will occur within 250 feet of the point of return and 200:1 within

500 feet downstream of the intake facility. A mean dilution within the plume

will be about 150:1 in 250 feet and about 280:1 in 500 feet. Therefore, the plume

will rapidly reach suspended sediment levels only slightly higher than ambient

levels in the river.

The receiving water (Sacramento River) flow is substantially greater than the

FRWP proposed return flow, thereby ensuring substantial dilution, as described



3-21

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

above. Furthermore, the receiving water is not impaired by sediment or turbidity

and therefore has the assimilative capacity to accept the returned sediment while

not exceeding applicable water quality objectives at the edge of the mixing zone

or adversely affecting the river’s beneficial uses. The pH and temperature of the

return stream will be indistinguishable from river water.

Once the return flow is well mixed with the river flow, the actual effect of the

return flow system on river water quality will be inconsequential because the

quantity of sediment returned is very small relative to background. Sediment

collected in the intake forebay will have been in suspension in the river prior to

settling. Therefore, it should easily go back into suspension once returned to the

river.

In conclusion, the effects of returning sediment to the river on water quality are

less than significant. No mitigation is required.


As previously described, all project pipelines require the capability to be drained

for maintenance and/or emergency procedures. Additionally, the segments of

pipeline that will only be used intermittently need to be drained when not in use,

primarily between December and March. In general, pipelines will be drained to

existing local drainages.

A majority of the water will be drained by gravity backflow. Once a majority of

the water has been drained by gravity, the remaining water in the pipeline will be


flushing points along the system. In some cases, these points include appropriate


sewers.

Pipeline drainage will occur over a relatively short timeframe and will require up

to 2 weeks to complete.

Impact HYD-1: Degradation of Water Quality

There should be no substantial operations-related water quality impacts from

these discharges because the volumes will be small relative to natural runoff rates

and discharges will be conducted in a manner to meet regulatory requirements.

Project-related discharges will require authorization through the RWQCB

General Order for dewatering and other low-threat discharges to surface waters.

Discharges will be required to meet several parameters, including those for

biochemical oxygen demand, total suspended solids, settleable solids, pH,

dissolved oxygen, temperature, and turbidity. Discharges will be monitored and

regulated to meet these parameters as they relate to the quality of the receiving

waters.



3-22

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

This impact is less than significant because beneficial uses of water will not be

adversely affected, existing adopted water quality standards will not be exceeded,

and no substantive effect on public health or environmental receptors will be

produced. No mitigation is required.

Impact HYD-2: Drainage Patterns


maintenance or during an emergency. The majority of the water will be drained

by gravity into five stream channels. These five stream channels are a key part of

city and county local drainage systems and are regularly used to carry substantial

amounts of stormwater.

These streams are regularly maintained to ensure adequate capacity to convey

stormwater. Some channels are completely lined with concrete, some have

concrete lining only on the bottom of the channel and the side slopes support

grasses and shrubs, and others have no concrete lining and also support grasses

and shrubs.




latter three were analyzed through a channel stability assessment for project

design purposes. Field observations conducted as a part of the study, as well as

the hydraulic analysis itself, conclude that the potential for long-term bed

degradation and bed scour is not significant. The hydraulic analysis considered

flows up to the 500-year-flood event. Discharges associated with the project will

be a small fraction of these floodflows, will not result in soil erosion or siltation,

and will not come close to being bank full flows. Therefore, drainage patterns in

these channels will not be adversely affected by project discharges.

While the remaining channels that will be used for infrequent and/or intermittent

drainage vary in size (e.g., Mokelumne River, Dry Creek, Skunk Creek, Coyote

Creek, Bear Creek, and unnamed tributaries), the discharges they will receive are

very small relative to natural runoff rates and they will be confined to existing,

well-defined stream channels. Discharges will be for a short duration and will be

a small fraction of the stream channel capacity, remaining substantially below

bank full flows. These flows will not result in soil erosion, siltation, or alteration

of drainage patterns. Therefore, drainage patterns in these channels will not be





3-23

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the

project:

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, a general

plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning

ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or

mitigating an environmental effect?

c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation

plan or natural community conservation plan?



related to land use and planning beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted

FRWP EIR. The surge tank will represent a change in land use, but these types

of impacts were addressed in the Adopted FRWP EIR and found to be less than

significant. Therefore, no additional discussion is provided in this IS/MND.





3-24

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

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?

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?



mineral resources beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted FRWP EIR.






3-25

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

XI. NOISE. Would the project:

a. Expose persons to or generate noise levels in

excess of standards established in a local general

plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of

other agencies?

b. Expose persons to or generate excessive

groundborne vibration or groundborne noise

levels?

c. Result in a substantial permanent increase in

ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above

levels existing without the project?

d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic

increase in ambient noise levels in the project

vicinity above levels existing without the project?

e. Be located within an airport land use plan area, or,

where such a plan has not been adopted, within two

miles of a public airport or public use airport and

expose people residing or working in the project

area to excessive noise levels?

f. Be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and

expose people residing or working in the project

area to excessive noise levels?


facility and discharging water to local drainages will not result in any impacts

related to noise and are not discussed further in this section.

Surge Tank Facility

In general, a mix of developed, agricultural, and natural landscapes characterizes

the area surrounding the proposed surge tank facility. Development consists of

rural ranchettes with various types of outbuildings supporting residential and

agricultural purposes, a golf course and clubhouse, and roadways. Open space,

consisting of grazing lands with vernal pools and irrigated farmlands, is present

throughout the area.



3-26

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

The surge tank facility will be located in Sacramento County. Ambient noise

levels in this area could be as low as 35–40 dBA Ldn. The nearest existing

sensitive receptor is approximately 100 feet from the proposed surge tank

facility.

County of Sacramento General Plan Noise Element

The Sacramento County General Plan Noise Element states that noise created by

new non-transportation noise sources may not exceed the noise level standards

shown in Table 3, as measured immediately within the property line of any

affected residentially designated land.

Table 3. Noise Level Performance Standardsa for Residential Areas Affected by

Non-Transportation Noiseb

Exterior Noise Level Standards (dBA)

Statistical Noise

Level Descriptor Daytime

(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)

Nighttime

(10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)

L50 50 45

Lmax 70 65

a These standards are for planning purposes and may vary from standards of the

County Noise Ordinance, which are for enforcement purposes. b These standards apply to new or existing residential areas affected by new or existing

non-transportation sources.

County of Sacramento Noise Ordinance

The Sacramento County Noise Ordinance states that exterior noise limits shall

not exceed 50 dBA between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and 55 dBA between 7:00

a.m. and 10:00 p.m. for residential and agricultural areas. However, construction

activities between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 7:00

a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekends are exempt from this ordinance. Agricultural

operations that occur between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. are also exempt from the

ordinance.

Impact NOI-1: Increase in Noise Levels fromFacility Operation

The surge tank facility will require long-term operation of noise-generating

facilities, including the air compressor and, during power outages, the emergency

generator. As described in the Adopted FRWP EIR, FRWA has determined that

noise-generating facilities can be designed and constructed so that noise will



3-27

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

remain within 5 dB of existing noise levels at the nearest existing sensitive

receptor locations. This will be accomplished through design features such as

noise dampening enclosures.



3-28

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the

project:

a. Induce substantial population growth in an area,

either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and

businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of

roads or other infrastructure)?

b. Displace a substantial number of existing housing

units, necessitating the construction of replacement

housing elsewhere?

c. Displace a substantial number of people,

necessitating the construction of replacement

housing elsewhere?



related to population and housing beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted

FRWP EIR. Therefore, no additional discussion is provided in this IS/MND.





3-29

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:

a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts

associated with the provision of new or physically

altered governmental facilities or a 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 any of the following

public services:

Fire protection?

Police protection?

Schools?

Parks?

Other public facilities?



related to public services beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted FRWP

EIR. Therefore, no additional discussion is provided in this IS/MND. Tables S-1

and S-2, in Chapter 1 of this document, provide a summary of the impacts

disclosed and mitigation measures adopted in the Adopted FRWP EIR.



3-30

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:

a. 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?

b. Include recreational facilities or require the

construction or expansion of recreational facilities

that might have an adverse physical effect on the

environment?



recreation resources beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted FRWP EIR.






3-31

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the

project:

a. Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in

relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of

the street system (i.e., result in a substantial

increase in the number of vehicle trips, the volume-

to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at

intersections)?

b. Cause, either individually or cumulatively,

exceedance of a level-of-service standard

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 because of a design

feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous

intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm

equipment)?

e. Result in inadequate emergency access?

f. Result in inadequate parking capacity?

g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs

supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus

turnouts, bicycle racks)?



related to transportation or traffic beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted

FRWP EIR because none of the facilities are located in roadways or will generate

additional traffic. Returning sediment to the river will reduce the traffic

associated with removal of sediment from the settling basins. Therefore, no

additional discussion is provided in this IS/MND. Tables S-1 and S-2, in Chapter

1 of this document, provide a summary of the impacts disclosed and mitigation

measures adopted in the Adopted FRWP EIR.



3-32

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would

the project:

a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the

applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?

b. 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?

c. 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?

d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve

the project from existing entitlements and

resources, or would new or expanded entitlements

be needed?

e. Result in a determination by the wastewater

treatment provider that serves or may serve the

project that it has adequate capacity to serve the

project’s projected demand in addition to the

provider’s existing commitments?

f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted

capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste

disposal needs?

g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and

regulations related to solid waste?


facility and adding the surge tank facility will not result in any impacts related to

utilities and service systems and are not discussed further in this section.


All of the pipelines need to be drained for maintenance and emergencies. The

intermittent-use pipelines need to be drained after each use. The project includes

the construction of all of the necessary facilities to provide for this drainage up to



3-33

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

the point that the discharges reach existing, well-defined drainage channels such

as streams. Drainage facilities include piping and energy-dissipation structures.

In conclusion, no drainage facilities beyond those included in the project

description in the Adopted FRWP EIR are needed as a result of project

construction and operation. Therefore, this impact is less-than-significant. No

mitigation is required.



3-34

February 2006

J&S 03072.03


Impact


withMitigation

Incorporated


ImpactNo

Impact

XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF

SIGNIFICANCE.

a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the

quality of the environment, substantially reduce the

habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or

wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining

levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal

community, substantially reduce the number or

restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or

animal, or eliminate important examples of the

major periods of California history or prehistory?

b. Does the project have impacts that are individually

limited but cumulatively considerable?

(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the

incremental effects of a project are considerable

when viewed in connection with the effects of past

projects, the effects of other current projects, and

the effects of probable future projects.)

c. Does the project have environmental effects that

will cause substantial adverse effects on human

beings, either directly or indirectly?

The project modifications—sediment return to the river, addition of a surge tank

facility, and discharge to local drainages—will not have cumulatively

considerable impacts beyond those already disclosed in the Adopted FRWP EIR

and presented in Table S-3. Therefore, no additional discussion is provided in

this IS/MND.

Ta

ble

S-3

.S

um

mary

of P

revio

usly

Addre

ssed S

ignific

ant C

um

ula

tive Im

pacts

and M

itig

ation M

easure

s fro

m the A

dopte

d F

RW

P E

IR for

the

Appro

ved A

ltern

ative

Page 1

of 2

Res

ourc

e T

opic

/Im

pac

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re

Res

ult

Hyd

rolo

gy, W

ate

r S

up

ply

, an

d P

ow

er—

No p

roje

ct-

rela

ted c

ontr

ibuti

on

Wate

r Q

uali

ty—

No p

roje

ct-r

elat

ed c

ontr

ibuti

on

Fis

h—

No

pro

ject

-rel

ated

contr

ibu

tion

Rec

reati

on

—N

o p

roje

ct-r

elat

ed c

ontr

ibuti

on

Veg

etati

on

an

d W

etla

nd

Res

ou

rces

Eff

ects

of

loca

l an

d r

egio

nal

pro

ject

s an

d g

ener

al g

row

th i

n

the

reg

ion

, in

co

mb

inat

ion

wit

h t

he

FR

WP

, on

th

e

cum

ula

tive

loss

of

iden

tifi

ed s

ensi

tive

reso

urc

es,

incl

udin

g

wet

lan

ds

and

rip

aria

n w

oo

dla

nd

s.

Imp

lem

enti

ng

all

mit

igat

ion

mea

sure

s d

escr

ibed

in

Ch

apte

r

7,

“Veg

etat

ion a

nd W

etla

nd R

esourc

es,”

wil

l el

imin

ate

any

contr

ibuti

on t

o c

um

ula

tive

effe

cts.

No

t cu

mu

lati

vel

y c

on

sid

erab

le

Wil

dli

fe

Eff

ects

of

loca

l an

d r

egio

nal

pro

ject

s an

d g

ener

al g

row

th i

n

the

reg

ion

on

th

e cu

mu

lati

ve

loss

of

iden

tifi

ed s

ensi

tiv

e

reso

urc

es,

incl

udin

g h

abit

ats

for

sensi

tive

wil

dli

fe s

pec

ies.

Imp

lem

enti

ng

all

mit

igat

ion

mea

sure

s d

escr

ibed

in

Ch

apte

r

8,

“Wil

dli

fe,”

wil

l el

imin

ate

any c

ontr

ibuti

on t

o c

um

ula

tive

effe

cts.

No

t cu

mu

lati

vel

y c

on

sid

erab

le

Geo

logy, S

oil

s, S

eism

icit

y, an

d G

rou

nd

wate

r—N

o

signif

ican

t im

pac

ts

La

nd

Use

—N

o p

roje

ct-r

elat

ed c

on

trib

uti

on

Agri

cult

ura

l R

esou

rces

Eff

ects

of

loca

l an

d r

egio

nal

pro

ject

s an

d g

ener

al g

row

th i

n

the

reg

ion

, in

co

mb

inat

ion

wit

h t

he

FR

WP

, on

th

e

cum

ula

tive

loss

of

pri

me

agri

cult

ura

l la

nds.

No m

itig

atio

n a

vai

lable

to r

educe

eff

ect

to l

ess

than

cum

ula

tiv

ely c

on

sid

erab

le

SU

Tra

ffic

an

d T

ran

spo

rta

tio

n—

No p

roje

ct-r

elat

ed

con

trib

uti

on

Air

Qu

ali

ty—

No p

roje

ct-r

elat

ed c

ontr

ibuti

on

Ta

ble

S-3

. C

ontinued

Page 2

of

2

Res

ourc

e T

opic

/Im

pac

t M

itig

atio

n M

easu

re

Res

ult

No

ise—

No

pro

ject

-rel

ated

con

trib

uti

on

Pu

bli

c H

ealt

h a

nd

Sa

fety

—N

o p

roje

ct-r

elat

ed

con

trib

uti

on

Vis

ua

l R

eso

urc

es—

No

pro

ject

-rel

ated

con

trib

uti

on

Cu

ltu

ral

Res

ou

rces

Eff

ects

of

loca

l an

d r

egio

nal

pro

ject

s an

d g

ener

al g

row

th i

n

the

regio

n o

n t

he

cum

ula

tiv

e lo

ss o

f cu

ltura

l (a

rcheo

logic

al

and h

isto

ric)

res

ourc

es.

Imp

lem

enti

ng

all

mit

igat

ion

mea

sure

s d

escr

ibed

in

Ch

apte

r

17,

“Cult

ura

l R

esourc

es,”

wil

l el

imin

ate

any c

ontr

ibuti

on t

o

cum

ula

tive

effe

cts.

No

t cu

mu

lati

vel

y c

on

sid

erab

le

SU

=

S

ignif

ican

t an

d u

nav

oid

able


4-1

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

Chapter 4

List of Preparers and References

List of Preparers

Jones & Stokes

Gregg Ellis

Harlan Glines

Chip McConnahah

Andrea Mauro

Darle Tilly

References

Printed References

Bash, J., C. Berman, and S. Bolton. 2001. Effects of turbidity and suspended solids on salmonids. Prepared for Washington Department of Transportation

by University of Washington, Center for Streamside Studies, Seattle, WA;

Report, 74 pages.

Fisher, F. W. 1994. Past and present status of Central Valley Chinook salmon.

Conservation Biology 8:870-873.

Lake, R. G., and S. G. Hinch. 1999. Acute effects of suspended sediment

angularity on juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 56:862-867.

Snider, B., and R. G. Titus. 2000. Timing, composition and abundance of juvenile anadromous salmonid emigration in the Sacramento River near Knights Landing October 1997–September 1998. California Department of

Fish and Game Habitat Conservation Division, Sacramento, CA Stream

Evaluation Program Technical Report 00-05,70 pages



4-2

February 2006

J&S 03072.03

CH2M HILL. 2005. Freeport Regional Water Project—Sediment Return Flow

Analysis. Technical memorandum. October. Prepared for Freeport

Regional Water Authority.

WRECO. 2005. Channel stability assessment report, FRWA Pipeline Facilities Project, Sacramento County. October. Prepared for Freeport Regional

Water Authority and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants. Walnut Creek, CA.

Initial Study and Draft Supplemental Mitigated Negative ... · Initial Study and Draft Supplemental...

Documents

Transcript of Initial Study and Draft Supplemental Mitigated Negative ... · Initial Study and Draft Supplemental...