The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutIRWD SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED REVISED DRAFT EIR VOL 211111111 lill 111111111111111111111111111 lill III lill *NEW FILE* IRWD SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED REVISED DRAFT EIR VOL 2 Irvine Ranch Water District San Diego (reek Watershed NATURAI TRIATINT SYSTIM January 1004 state fT ENYIRONMENiAI IMPp(T REPORT onTerm (onsulting Ho. 2001021110 EM 0 • Appendix A Notices of Preparation and Responses to the Notices of Preparation • Notice of Preparation and Responses to the Notice of Preparation February 2002 U IRVI ERAIICg1Vi,T�RDI�TRIC 1SMSand CenyanAww #PO. Bw5=*/n*v,C4bmfe92619a70X-(949)45+,59W-»,wkAdcom February 20, 2002 Dear Interested Citizen/Agency: The Irvine Ranch Water District (1RWD) is the lead agency on a new chapter in protection of the San Diego Creek Watershed (Watershed) — the Natural Treatment System. The Natural Treatment System (NTS) is the next step in what has been more than a 20-year master planning process for this important area, which drains to the Upper Newport Bay. The NTS is being developed in close cooperation with the County of Orange and cities within the drainage area. Through the creation of man-made wetlands, the NTS will use natural ecosystems to remove sediment, nutrients, pathogens/germs and other contaminants from both low -flow and small storm runoff. hi addition, the NTS will provide a natural resource, riparian habitat and wildlife benefits throughout the Watershed. Enclosed is the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Natural Treatment System Program EIR for your review. We have scheduled three public scoping meetings in the next few weeks and invite you attend. At the scoping meetings the environmental consultant will provide an overview of the NTS Program as it will be studied in the Program EIR. We will provide an update on the NTS Program preparation status, review the initial list of sites, provide preliminary results from our technical analyses, invite comments, and answer questions from the community. Our goal is to ensure this is a collaborative process with community and watershed interests. Public scoping meetings will be held as follows: Tuesday, March 5 Irvine Ranch Water District 7:00 p.m. 15600 Sand Canyon Irvine, CA Wednesday, March 6 Santiago Elementary School 7:00 p.m. 24982 Rivendell Dr. Lake Forest, CA Thursday, March 14 Peters Canyon Elementary School 7:00 p.m. 26900 Peters Canyon Road Tustin, CA 0 • 0 IRWD looks forward to working with the community as we move forward with the NTS Program and welcome the community's input. Information on the NTS Program can be obtained by calling IRWD Community Relations at (949) 453-5300 or on-line by visiting the NTS Web site at www.naturaltreatmentsystem.org. Sincerely, Paul D. Jones, II General Manager Encl. • • NOTICE OF PREPARATION FOR PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGS DATE: PROGRAM: LEAD AGENCY: INTRODUCTION: February 20, 2002 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program Irvine Ranch Water District The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), a California Water District, is the Lead Agency and is preparing a Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program (NTS Program). We request your input and views as to the scope and content of the Program EIR with respect to your agency's statutory responsibilities or your organization's interests in connection with the proposed NTS Program. Where applicable, your agency may need to use the Program EIR for associated permits or approvals within your jurisdiction. IRWD also seeks input from the public regarding the scope and content of the Program EIR. The location, description and potential environmental effects of the NTS Program are summarized below. An Environmental Initial Study Checklist (IS) has been prepared to assess the potential scope and content of the EIR; the Initial Study Is on file and available for review at IRWD. Three public scoping meetings will be held to provide opportunities to learn more about the project and to comment on the scope of the environmental issues to be addressed in the Program EIR. The scoping meeting dates, times and locations are as follows: ➢ March 5, 2002 @ 7 PM at IRWD Headquarters;16600 Sand Canyon Avenue, Irvine ➢ March 6, 2002 @ 7 PM at Santiago Elementary School; 24962 Rivendell Drive, Lake Forest ➢ March 14, 2002 @ 7 PM at Peters Canyon Elementary School; 26900 Peters Canyon Road, Tustin PROGRAM LOCATION: The proposed NTS Program consists of improvements within the San Diego Creek watershed, a 122 square mile area located in central Orange County. Specifically, the watershed encompasses the Cities of Irvine and Tustin and portions of unincorporated • • Orange County and portions of the Cities of Lake Forest, Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, • Orange, Santa Ana, and Newport Beach. The watershed includes tributaries which drain into San Diego Creek and ultimately into Upper Newport Bay. The watershed is bounded by the Lomas de Santiago Hills to the north, the San Joaquin Hills to the south and the Santa Ana -Delhi watershed and the Pacific Ocean to the west. Drainages within the watershed include: Agua Chinon Wash, Bee Canyon, Bommer Canyon Creek, Bonita Canyon, Borrego Canyon, Hicks Canyon, Peters Canyon Wash, Rattlesnake Canyon, Round Canyon, Sand Canyon, San Diego Creek, Serrano Creek, Shady Canyon Creek, and Trabuco Channel. Refer to Figure 1 which is map of the San Diego Creek Watershed. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The proposed program that will be evaluated in the Program EIR is the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program (NTS Program) which has been prepared by IRWD. The Program includes a Master Plan which is being developed to describe the watershed -wide system for the natural treatment of low -flow and initial storm runoff generated within the San Diego Creek watershed. The proposed NTS Program consists of constructed water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofilters. These take advantage of naturally occurring physical, chemical, and biological resources to treat the runoff. The natural and man-made drainage features within the watershed all drain via San Diego Creek and its tributaries into Upper Newport Bay. These flows then enter Lower Newport Bay on their way to the Pacific Ocean. • The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified the San Diego Creek watershed as having impaired water quality pursuant to Section 303 (d) of the Federal Clean Water Act. To address this designated impairment, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) have been adopted by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) for designated pollutants including nutrients, sediment and pathogen indicators. The SARWQCB is in the process of developing TMDLs for toxic substances (pesticides and potentially heavy metals) and selenium. The County of Orange and co- permittee cities are also under a newly issued National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for discharges from the municipal separate stormwater system that requires the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce impacts of stormwater pollution. • The SARWQCB Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit requires the County and cities to institute BMPs to reduce pollutant loads in the watershed by: 1) reducing pollutants in storm system discharges to the "maximum extent practicable" and 2) complying with the established TMDLs. The NTS Program is a component of the Orange County watershed management strategy which is designed to comply with the MS4 Permit. The NTS Program is being proposed as one of the key elements to also comply with TMDL requirements as they proceed to implementation. The development of the NTS Program is being coordinated with the County and the applicable municipalities in the watershed. 2 The NTS Program describes the locations and preliminary designs for the utilization of three types of natural treatment systems that would be constructed at 37 locations throughout the San Diego Creek watershed: Type I —Existing or Proposed Off-line Water Quality Wetlands; Type II --Existing or Proposed In -Line Water Quality Wetlands; and Type III --Water Quality Wetlands within Existing or Proposed Detention Basins. These master plan elements, together with other BMPs being implemented by the County and other agencies within the watershed will reduce pollutant loadings and help meet adopted TMDLs and MS4 Permit requirements. Refer to Figure 2 which depicts the three NTS facility types. Refer also to Figure 3 which depicts the proposed locations of NTS Program sites. The NTS Program facilities will be designed to insure that the habitat and structural features of the program fully protect the flood protection capabilities and maintainability of the streams, channels and retarding basins, which are being utilized. The NTS Program is projected to result in an estimated 50 percent reduction in sediment (125,000 tons/year), an average nitrogen load reduction of 160,000 Ibs/year (50 percent reduction), an approximate 50 percent reduction in phosphorus, and a 20 percent reduction in the mean concentrations of fecal coliform (indicator for pathogens). It also would provide wildlife and open space benefits. in accordance with Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, IRWD has determined that a Program EIR is the appropriate environmental document to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of constructing, operating, and maintaining the 37 proposed NTS Program sites. The program -level of analysis will address the NTS Program impacts on . a regional and subregional scale within the San Diego Creek watershed. Eleven (11) of the proposed NTS sites will be evaluated at a project level of detail to obtain the necessary environmental clearances for early construction. SUMMARY OF PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: The probable environmental effects associated with the proposed NTS Program are described in the Environmental Initial Study Checklist (IS) which is on file at IRWD. All questions answered "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" in the IS will be analyzed further in the Program EIR. All questions answered "Less than Significant Impact" or "No Impact" will not be analyzed further in the Program EIR unless substantive evidence is provided during the (NOP) and scoping process. The following is a summary of the subject areas Identified in the IS that will be analyzed in the EIR and the areas of particular interest: 1. Agricultural Resources A number of the proposed NTS sites are located within or adjacent to existing agricultural fields. Removal of land currently used for agriculture or designated as prime farmlands could result in a significant impact to agricultural operations in Orange • County. Each NTS site will be evaluated at the program -level for the potential to impact future agricultural operations. 3 2. Biological Resources The proposed NTS Program is intended to have a beneficial effect on the water quality within the San Diego Creek watershed and in Upper Newport Bay. It will also result in a beneficial impact on aquatic plants and wildlife, and on avian species that use habitat areas in the watershed and in Upper Newport Bay for foraging and nesting activities. Implementation of the NTS sites may result in impacts to existing wetlands and upland habitats, sensitive plant and wildlife species, and transient or migratory wildlife. The direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to biological resources will be evaluated for proposed NTS sites in a focused Biological Resources Technical Study that will be incorporated into the Program EIR. Focused surveys and biological resources habitat mapping will be conducted as part of this study. The Biological Resources Technical Study and Program EIR will include an analysis of the long-term NTS site maintenance requirements. 3. Cultural Resources Implementation of NTS sites would require grading. The potential for impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources will be investigated by researching existing data bases, records searches and conducting a literature review. 4. Hydrology and Water Quality • The proposed NTS Program would provide a beneficial impact on water quality in San Diego Creek, in tributaries to the Creek, and ultimately to Upper Newport Bay which receives drainage from the watershed. The NTS sites would remove sediment, harmful nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous), pathogens and toxic pollutants, resulting in improved water quality within the watershed, Upper Newport Bay and ultimately in flows reaching the Pacific Ocean. The NTS Program would, however, result in a concentration of pollutants in constructed NTS sites that would require monitoring and removal. Potential hydrology and water quality impacts will be evaluated in the Program EIR. • 5. Public Safety (including vector control) The proposed NTS sites could present public health and safety concerns associated with open water bodies and the risk the sites present to human contact and vector attraction. The NTS Program includes recommendations to control mosquitoes and describes long-term vector and pest monitoring measures. 6. Other Concerns The following topics will also be evaluated in the NTS Program EIR: Aesthetics, Hazardous Materials Management, Utilities/Service Systems, and Noise Effects. Alternatives and other CEQA mandated sections will be included. 0 Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response to this NOP must be sent no later than 30 days after receipt of this notice; responses are due no later than March 22, 2002. Please send your response to the attention of Norris Brandt, P.E., NTS Program Manager, Irvine Ranch Water District, P.O. Box 57000, Irvine, California 92219-7000. Please include the name and phone number of a contact person with your agency. Signature: Norris Brandt Title: NTS Program Manager Telephone: (949) 453-5300 Date: February 20, 2002 n ICJ • is Site Location .—..—..—_�...r••...,/. \ Orange County Santa Ana 'jr:] �?� ` •� Tustin I RATTLESNAKE CANYON WASH ,�.�• /• Unincorporated + HICKS CANYON WASH io o 10 20 Mies jTustin ReuseArea sgyo Irvine El Toro OREF,f.OH / Reuse Ar a Z, '•�..�.. / 3 ��u � Lake Forest SAND CANYON WASH —�\ 00PNYO / \ `Z� R�0 / B O \• AOVP ` / G \ SERRPaO 1 f Newp San Diego Creek Watershed Boundary Beac \•.`9ONITA CANYOA� — OC PFRD Drainage Facilities s — City Boundaries f.— 1 �••I Laguna CH Channel `t(Jnincorporated San Diego Creek Watershed Figure t Natural Treatment System Plan Irvine Ranch Water District 1 o 1 2?Mee COCON ULTTIN Mood Control Channel Wafer Weaandr QuaBry S(orm Flow Diversion Struelurr True j— Existing or Proposed OfJline Community Area Water Quality Wetlands W. flwdw 1 ZMB Existing orPrepavedbi Lime WaWr QW11y WC hnk Co*tnrntryAem Flood Control Channel £,tlelixg ' Deioentfon Faril(ry �� Flow Type III Water Quality Wetlands within ETIstini or Proposed Retention Basin Proposed NTS Facility Types Natural Treatment System Program Irvine Ranch Water District Wolf 0 ppu�ootltry f nd CommunkvArea Figure 2 CONSULTING • n re 3 ons gram istrict ;+ :rshed ILTING 04/04/02 16:08 FAX 700 431 2618 FWS-CARLSBAD FWO QuuA United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 2M Laker Avenue west Carlsbad, California 92008 In Reply Refer To: FWS-OR-2750.1 Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, California 92219-7000 APR 4 2002 Re: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the San Diego Creek Natural Treatment Systems Program, Orange County, California Dear Mr. Brandt: We have reviewed the notice of preparation (NOP), received on February 27, 2002, for a draft environmental impact report (DEIR) for the San Diego Creek Natural Treatment Systems . Program in Orange County, California. The proposed project involves the creation of up to 37 Natural Treatment System (NTS) sites by the Irvine Ranch Water District. The sites would be distributed throughout the San Diego Creek watershed. NTS sites are created wetlands designed to reduce the pollutant load of water passing through them. The sites will consist of: 1) wetlands created outside existing storm flow channels, 2) wetlands created by expanding existing flood control channels, and 3) wetlands created within existing or proposed detention basins. We offer the following specific comments and recommendations regarding project -associated biological impacts based on our review of the NOP, our conversations with the Irvine Ranch Water District, and our knowledge of sensitive and declining habitats and species within Orange County. The creation of the proposed wetlands will likely impact existing vegetation and wildlife. Therefore, quantitative and qualitative assessments of the biological resources and habitat types that will be impacted by the proposed project and its alternatives should be conducted. Please assess all direct, indirect, and cumulative project impacts to fish and wildlife resources and associated habitats. This assessment should include a list of Federal candidate, proposed, or listed species, State -listed species, and locally sensitive species that are on or near the proposed NTS sites, including a detailed discussion of these species and information pertaining to their • local status and distribution. We are particularly interested in any and all information and data pertaining to potential impacts to populations of federally listed species, including 04/04/02 16:08 PAX 760 431 9618 FWS-CARLSBAD FWO W UU4 • E Norris Brandt (l WS-OR-2750.1) 2 the endangered least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii puvillus), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), and light fooled clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes). The analysis of impacts to biological resources and habitat types should include detailed maps and tables summarizing specific acreages and locations of all habitat types, as well as the number and distribution of all Federal candidate, proposed, or listed species; State - listed species; and locally sensitive species, on or near the project site that may be affected by the proposed project or project alternatives. 2. Created wetlands are likely to develop freshwater marsh and riparian vegetation which could attract sensitive and listed species, including the least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and light-footed clapper rail. Maintenance activities, particularly those involving vegetation removal., could result in negative impacts to these species. A detailed analysis of potential impacts to federally listed species and their habitat associated with maintenance activities should be included in the DEIR. 3. Because of the potential impacts to sensitive and listed species during maintenance activities, maintenance guidelines should be developed in coordination -with the U.S-Fish and Wildlife Service, Califomia Department of Fish and Game, and other appropriate agencies to avoid and minimize impacts to these species. 4, Based on preliminary discussions with Irvine Ranch Water District, potential impacts to sensitive habitat and species would be offset by creating areas of permanently preserved riparian and freshwater marsh. These areas would not be impacted by ongoing maintenance activities. We support this proposal and recommend that the project proponent compare the total amount of habitat that would be created to the total amount of habitat that could be impacted as a result of creating and maintaining the natural treatment systems. In addition to the above -listed recommendations specific to this project, we offer the following general recommendations for the preparation of the DER: L AeScribe the environment in the vicinity of the project from both a local and regional perspective, including an aerial photograph of the area with the project site outlined. 2. Provide a complete discussion of the purpose and need for the project and each of its alternatives. 3. Completely describe the proposed project, including the limits of development, grading, and vehicle staging areas. 4. Discuss in detail the measures to be taken to avoid, minimize, and offset impacts to biological resources. 04/04/02 16:08 FAIL 760 431 9618 FWS-CARLSBAD FWO WUU4 Norris Brandt (FWS-OR-2750.1) 3 5. Analyze in detail the impacts of the proposed project on the movement of wildlife and measures proposed to avoid, minimize, and offset impacts to wildlife movement. 6. Provide an assessment of potential impacts to wetlands and jutsdictional waters of the United States. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act prohibits the unauthorized discharge of dredged or fill material into such waters, including wetlands. This section also provides that the US. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) may issue permits for discharges of dredged or fill material into jurisdictional waters and wetlands. Potential areas of Corps jurisdiction should be evaluated and wetlands should be delineated using the methodology set forth in the Corps' Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The DE1R should disclose all impacts to jurisdictional waters and wetlands, and proposed measures to be taken to avoid and minimize impacts, and mitigate unavoidable impacts. We appreciate the Irvine Ranch Water District's coordination with our agency and your efforts to avoid and offset potential impacts to biological resources. If you should have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Jonathan Snyder of my staff at (760) 431-9440. Sincerely, re(Xmn A. Evans Assistant ]Field Supervisor cc: Brad Henderson, CDFG Donna Cobb, CDFG Fari Tabatabai, ACOE 11 STATE OF CALIFORNIA--- BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY _ GRAYDAVIS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION •DISTRICT 12 3337 Vichelson Drive Suite 380 Irvine, CA. M12-8894 March 25, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Irvine Ranch Water District P.Q. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 File: IGR/CEQA SCH#:2002021120 Log #: 1027 SR: 55,73,133,241 &261, 1-5,405 Subject: San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program — Revised Comment Letter Dear Mr. Brandt, Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Preparation dated 2120/02, for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program. The project sites are included within the 122 square mile San Diego Creek watershed in central Orange County. The watershed is bounded by Lomas de Santiago Hills to the north, the San Joaquin Hills to the south and the Santa Ana -Delhi • watershed and the Pacific Ocean to the west. The project consists of implementing a Master Plan to describe a system of natural treatment for low flow and initial stone runoff generated within the San Diego Creek watershed. This will include natural and man-made drainage features, some of which impact Caltrans Right of Way. The nearest State Routes are SR-55, 73,133.241 & 261; 1-6 and 405. Caltrans District 12 status is a reviewing agency on this project and has the following comments which have been slightly edited and added to based on additional functional unit analysis: Several of the NTS are near or within Caltrans Right of Way, and as District 12 has had exposure to these types of systems through our NPDES Unit we would be interested in coordinating closely with the IRWD on the plan development for these areas. A possible pre -draft discussion with several of the units that have responsibility over these areas may be held in order to clarify the projects scope within our Right of Way and identify for you the requirements/restrictions necessary for Caltrans permit approval. In addition to Mr. Lee Haber, coordination with Environmental Planning, Design-NPDES, Permits, Traffic Operations and Project Management Units is recommended. . 2. Figure 3 shows several propused NTS sites adjacent to SR 73,133, 261, 1-5, and 1405. If any project work (e.g. site access, flood channel work, sewer or storm drain connections, construction, equipment storage, etc.) occurs in the vicinity of the Caltrans Right of Way, an encroachment permit may be required and environmental concerns must ,be addressed. If March 28, 2002 Page 2 environmental concerns are not addressed in the environmental document (e.g. EIR), additional documentation will be required for the encroachment permit 3. There are numerous areas of the state right-of-way that contain sensitive areas of open space including coastal sage scrub. Coordination with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USMS) may be required for project activities rebuking in impacts to these areas of native habitat. In addition, habitat patches along the state right-of-way have been deemed suitable for use by the California gnatcatcher (Federally threatened, California Species of Special Concern). The USFWS should be added to the list of agencies involved in the review of this environmental document giveri that the California gnatoatcher is a species afforded protection by this federal agency. Project activities (Including noise; Impacts from ground disturbance activities) should be limited during the nesting season of sensitive Coastal sage scrub specks, impacts to migratory birds should be considered if the removal of vegetation is proposed for any project activities during the nesting season. • 4. According to Executive Order 13112, lnvashre Species, it is the policy of Caltrans to limit the use of invasive species within the state right-d--way. Environmental Planning recommends the limited use (and Best Management Practices to control the spread) of Invesive species within the project area aff11iated with the state right-of-way. Refer to the attachment for additional guldanoe on environmental requirements for enm3achment • pert . s. Any vegetation removal to complete project work (in addition to any ground disturbance activities) should be coordinated with Environmental Planning. 6. Caltrans Environmental Planning would appreciate a courtesy copy of the resource agency permit applications and habitat mapping reports proposed for this project (for areas within the state Right of Way). Any project proposals for biological surveys (within the state Right Of Way) should also be coordinated with Environmental Planning, 7. Whore the project impacts Caltrans, including but hot limited to discharge of permanent or temporary runoff entering the Caltrans ROW, the IRWD must coordinate And obtain the appropriate permits (e.g. NPDES permit, §401 Certification, DFO 1601 Agreement, etc). Applicable permits should be clearly stated in the environmental document. Copies and/or verification of the applicable resource agency permits must be included with encroachment permit applications. Please see our NPDES attachment for an in depth discussion of Caltrans requirements within our ROW. a. Any runoff draining into Caltrans Right of Way from construction operations, or from the resulting project, must fully conform to the current discharge requirements of the Regional Water quality Control Board to avoid impacting water quality. Also please clarify If state runoff will be treated by the proposed NTS facilities. Measures must be incorporated to • contain all vehicle loads and avoid any tracking of materials, which may fall or blow onto Caltrans roadways or facilities. March 28, 2002 •Page 3 s. Vector control is mentioned in the Public Safety section of the NOR Maintenance of these NTS' Is also an issue with vector control. io. A clear discussion of role of maintenance of the vegetation, which is a key in the effectiveness of the NTS, should be included. Also who will be responsible for providing maintenance and in what manner it is provided should be discussed — maintenance of wetlands will not be Caltrans' responsibility. 11. Please discuss any hydrological impacts to Caltrans ROW or existing facilities by installation and operation of these NTS. 12. Please notify Caltrans of any changes in project scope or activities. For example, coordination with Caltrans would be necessary if the project will require repeated access via the Caltrans ROW for the construction, maintenance and operation of the NTS program. Please continue to keep us Informed of this project and other future developments, which could potentially impact our transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please do not hesitate to call Maureen El Harake at (949) 724- • 2086. Sincer ly, Robert F. Jo ph, hief IGR/Commun nin Branch c: Terry Roberts, Office of Planning and Research Ron Helgeson, HQ IGR/Community Planning Lee Haber, Construction & Toll Road Construction Praveen Gupta, Environmental Planning Branch A Leslie Manderscheid, Environmental Planning Branch B Sylvia Vega, Biology Unit Roger Kao, Hydrology Grace Pina-Garrett, Design-NPDES Ahmed Abou-Abdou, Project Management Nooshin Yoosefl, Project Management Adrian Maiah, Project Management Vinh Pham, Project Management OVIRONtINMAt. REVIEW REWRtMENtS FOR EWROACHIMENT PERMITS Any Peaty, outside of Coltrane, that does work on a Stabs Highway or Interstate Hk#w ay In Cdfrxnia needs to apply far sn encroatdarwht paten, 'Yo ec*Am any encroad ment pemik metal oonoema must be addrarood. invirorxnax W review of w aoschment pwrit spplirmGm may take 3 waft if the application i, ownplets a kxlper N titre appNuanllon is kttwrthplate. For soil dNUNK actitriti to (e g. gaotg*kW bo*V. gWing, usage of w aved roach bm which dkt and other mhl*W may be tracked onto to SbtlbArbBlatal4 highways, at.), compliance vrph Wa* Qua* and C*ra) Rwmxcea Provisions are empha sizad. Surveys mays may rot be w"Wjft tg adIvibsa, neperding on the sb and survey method. A complete applicnttlonior envMnnim I faviswl kx*mI r the Pogawing: 1. if an e►wtrotsnentnl docterent (CE, ERiIEIS, Nb, u3to) has been oonMieled for titre pfojusct, ropy d the tktal, approved doow rot trust be aubnitted with the application. 2. WaWgaft ftidlMom AI) work wiktin the SMa Rlght of Way must ooMatm to Cairene ftNtdM ' Plans and Standard Stom Water PPoNA eabae m Plana kr eons tptod "af a Water � opy ofthegiotm Wollr PoWtll40 .PLO ft fBWPPPi kidudhng Beat Marmiternart Practices (8tals) to be kn wn niad for oonetrtam a*Aws k Vwling Celearha It M of Way. froparod for" as required by the NPDES StrMwitte Slam Wxlw Pa mitfor Canaan Corntrudktn Adlvitiea. N no SW PPP has treaty prepared for this pta)od, then the oppNctrht mural follow tfe IegliretrKlhta described in the abacted Weler Pollution Control Provision (phase we a llsolw mo). 3. CuNural lissottess praytelotss: If rot Nwiuded In the emkommrtel document, bafone pint approval and -project ecnrrinrctlorh, the ersaosclhttsertt tomtit applicant must cwq* tea Ammmut pt mm"t to Cdh m Envkonnwrfal Handbook. Vokune Z Appmft B-1, and Ede W 1, as amatrfed. The CWMvi Remumas Awasernertt ascertains the presence or absence of rarltural mmtm:ta aritiin a rtr wale r dus of No project was and evaluates the knpact to any t**XlcvlW b wl rasoutm. Guktsa l Rerexxcm kv*m a "Uhaw twauutum *Wkmt In American hillotY. art* O cbn, erohaeatogy, and C4:Ura, Induft NatvaA mkW Relgl uW (CallfMa EnvifonllMMAI PxWbo* Vokxne 2, Chapttrl, as a►reended)]. The Cnpurel Resource Aaaesarent must include: -^ a) a dear project description and map ktdmft project work, stepping areas, slle som ak etch • b) a Record Search oonduoiod st the Sit* Central Coastal Into ... Mm Centst (SC= located at Collfemle State tlni"mity, Fullerton. For W mhtd m call (114) 2Fa4M; c) Prod d Nallva MaMlean aaroultaYon. Cm* sSm krmhmo wntacting the Ndm American ttraNagt Co m aalon (NAli% requaelksg a search dt win Sacred Lands File, and fo mft tie recorra ndalbea provided by the NMO. For infornelion eat (816) 6634082; d) dodrterb lion of any hiebork properties (s g. prahhiaboric and historic aika, tw kiko. skucuxas, objects, or diahlah tined on. ellgibla ftr or potentially atigible for Mdkg on to National floglehr of Hisiodc Rem) within a ore mile radius of the project area; e) and a survey by quatiRad arohaeologistfor all wow that he" not been previously remarded. The SCC/C and NAHC hove an epprwrhnale tam arou W Mme of 2 weeks. 4. ftWW Romawross ProOdons: Work conducted within Caftm Right d Way shouid have the oppmptieta Plant and wild re anveya omosted by a qualMed NologiaL N the kdamaton is naL indurfed In rho wwkmnmW d ocumwt, Envlronn m, Ptanntog mRL4 m that the appNcvn sLtx* a copy of the blolog w laxly, survey, or taftlew report by a 001111ed Ndcytst that provides details cn the o ds*W vegetation and wildNfe at the project site and any vegelakn that Is to be renhoved dtmkhp pxWW mctl ea. OgidW lids min datahaats should also be consulted for seraitve 11 41 1 such ae the Califamla Natwal Dbrarlty Database and psis provided by the U.S. Fah and WNdlpe Swwkm and is Cattomia DWarinent of Fish and Game. Any impacts that attic! wratnnwraya and draft"es "or pupas space during construction, or ghat occur Itatrecty as a resit of tea project must be coa r nwo whh Me approlxrare meolaea agendas. Al guidance, we ask tihat the epplk:art ksckde: e) dear description of mciact activities and the project spa b) completed envhmomtel eisoftence checklist (nod jwt yes and no amblers, but a desmiplbn should be given n to the r�,ea„sm for the req once). P1 e) et&OWalaaege atw rh7tlrKi rot pruOd phla u, . d) Proposed time of year for work and duration of scWtime (with kdam &m avatlulk), e) any proposed mitigation (If appicable to the P►'c O. f) and a record of any prior frata er�a agency correlpordance (if applicable to to project). ATI'AC'HANNT • CALTRANS DISTRICT 12 NPDES'PROVTSTONS National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Any runoff draining into Caltrans Right of Way must frilly conform to the current discharge requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to avoid impacting water quality. Contractor shall fully conform to the requirements of the Caltrans Statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Storm Water Permit, Order No. 99-06-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000003, adopted by the State Water Resuutucs Control Board (SWRCB) on July 15, 1999, in addition to the BMPs specified in the Caltrans Storm Water Management Plan (SWNW), When applicable, the Penmittee shall also conform to the requirements of the General NPDES Permit for Construction Activities, Order No. 99-08-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002, SWRCB Resolution 2001-046, and any subsequent General Permits in effect at the time. These permits regulate storm water and non -storm water discharges associated with year-round construction activities. Please note that project activities should pay extra attention to stone water pollution control during the "Rainy Season" (October 1" — May 1°) and follow the Water Pollution Conuul BMPs to minimize impact to receiving waters. Measures must be incorporated to contain all vehicle loads and avoid any tracking of materials, which may fall or blow onto Caltrans Right of Way. For all projects resulting in 2 hectares (5 acres) or more of soil disturbance or otherwise subject •to the NPDES program, the Contractor will develop, implement, and maintain a Stone Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) conforming to the requirements of the Caltrans Specification Section 7-1.01G "Water Pollution Control", Caltrans Statewide NPDES Permit, the General NPDES Permit for Construction Activities, and the Caltrans Stone Water Quality Handbooks "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Water Pollution Control Program (WPCP) Preparation Mamie', and "Construction Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual" effective November 2000, and subsequent revisions. In addition, the SWPPP must conform to the requirements of the SWRCB Resolution No. 2001-046, the Sampling and Analytical Procedures (SAP) Plan. For all projects resulting in less than 2 hectares (5 acres) of soil disturbance or not otherwise subject to the requirements of the NPDES program, the Contractor will develop, implement, and maintain a Water Pollution Control Program (WPCP) conforming to the requirements of Caltrans Specifications Section 7-1-.oiG, "Water Pollution Control", and the Calmm Storm Water Quality Handbooks "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Water Pollution Control Program (WPCP) Preparation Manual", and "Construction Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual" effective November 2000, and subsequent revisions. Copies of the Permits and the Construction Contractor's Guide and Specifications of the Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbook may be obtained from the Department of Transportation, Material Operations Branch, Publication Distribution Unit, 1900 Royal Oaks Drive, Sacramento, California 95815, Telephone: (916) 445-3520. Copies of the Permits and • Handbook are also available for review at Caltrans Distract 12, 3347 Michelson Drive, Suite log, Irvine, California 92612, Telephone: (949) 724-2260. Electronic copies can be found at http://www.dot.caa. ov/hq/constmc/stormwater.htrul R"ik-A 10l2,7101 03/27/2002 15:21 8584674299 DFG SOUTH COAST REG PAGE 02 DEPARTMENTOF FISH AND GAME SouthComRopoa 4949VW*rl4eAvam SruDioao, Cetifomis92123 (259)467.4201 (8")467.4235FAx March26, 2002 NonisBrandt IrvincRamh WaterDistrict P,O.Box57000 one, Cslifomia92219-7000 Comments an the Notice of Preparation of a Wait Environmental Impact Report for the Sam Diego Creek Watershed Natand Treatment System Program (SCH112002021120) Dear Mr. Brandt: The Department of Fish and Go= (Department) appreciates this opportunity to comment on the above -referenced project, relative to impacts to biological resources. The Deponent is a Trustee Agency and a Responsible Agency pmsaent to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Sections 15386 and 15381 respectively. As a Trustee Agency, the Department must be consulted by the Lead Agency during the ptepsaation and public review for project -specific CEQA documents. As a Trustee Agency, the Department reviews proposed projects, comments on their impacts, and determines whether the mitigation measures or alternatives proposed are feasible and appropriate. Pursuant to Section 1802 of the Fish and Game Code, the Departmertt has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. Under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), it is the policy of the State to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance any endangered species or say threatened species and its habitat (Section 2052 of the Fish and Game Code). A CESA Permit (Section 2081 of the Fish and Game Code) or, if applicable, a Consistency Determination (Section 2080,1 of the Fish and Game Code), must be obtalned if the project has the potential to result in "take" of species of plaab or animals listed under CESA, either during cmgkuction or over the life of the project. CESA Permits are issued to conserve, protect, enhance, and restore State -Bated threatened or endangered species and their habitats. Early consultation is encouraged, a, significant modification to a project and mitigation measuros maybe required to obtain a CESA Permit.l The Department also administers the ROWIone to the Fish wW Gems Cods, etfeellve Jor%my 19aa, may ht»tuke than the bieWmot cow a saparate CEQA documwA for flre lea wm of a 2061 vnhm the pnelad CEQA dooxnent addresses aM pm)tct itrrpads to ided epedee and epedMs ■ �t tnotlgatng and teportlrrp program OW wit mast the mgWmrw is of a 2061 pwft. For these meaw s, the: a. dological m ftellon m Oukq and reporting propotek should be d suftent delatl and • 03/27/2002 15:21 8584674299 Mr. ]!Norris Brandt March 26; 2002 • Page 2 DFG SOUTH COAST REG Natural Community Conservation Planning Program (NCCP). Specific Comments PAGE 03 The Natural Treatment System (NTS) project proposes the creation of man-made wetlands to treat.low-flow and small storm runoff within the San Diego Creek watershed and Upper Newport Bay. We concur that the creation of these wetlands and associated riparian areas will also benefit wildlife by providing suitable habitats for foraging, dispersal and nesting. However, the DEIR should identify proposed basin locations and ensure that existing sensitive habitats are not impacted by construction or maintenance. The project should also specify an annual schedule to ensure that nesting seasons are not disrupted by maintenance activities. General Comments To enable the Department to adequately review and comment on the proposed project from the standpoint of the protection of plants, fish and wildlife, we recommend the following information be included in the DEIR- 1. A complete discussion of the purpose and need for, and description of, the proposed project, including all staging areas and access routes to the construction and staging areas. • 2. A complete list and assessment of the flora and fauna within and next to the project area, with particular emphasis upon identifying State or federally listed rare, threatened, endangered, or proposed candidate species, California Species -of -Special Concern and/or State Protected or Fully Protected species, and any locally unique species and sensitive habitats. Specifically, the DEIR should include: a. A thorough assessment of Rare Natural Communities on site and within the area of impact, following the Department's Guidelines for Assessing Impacts to Rare Plants and Rare Natural Communities (Attachment 1; revised May 8, 2000). b. A current inventory, of the biological resources associated with each habitat type on site and within the area of impact. The Department's California Natural Diversity Data Base in Sacramento should be contacted at (916) 327-5960 to obtain current information on any previously reported sensitive species and habitat, including Significant Natural Areas identified under Chapter 12 of the Fish and Game Code. C. An inventory of rare, threatened, and endangered species on site and within the area of impact Species to be addressed should include all those which meet the CEQA definition -(see CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380). • resolution to satisfy the requirements for a CESA Permit, and b. a Department -approved Mitigation Agreement and Mitigation Plan are required for plants listed as rare under the Native Plant Protection Act. 03/27/2002 15:21 8584674299 DFG SOUTH COAST REG PAGi: 84 Mr. Norris Brandt March 26, 2002 • Page 3 d.Discussions regarding seasonal variations in use by sensitive species of the project site as well as the area of impact on those species, using acceptable species-speoific survey procedures as determined through consultation with the Department Focused species - specific surveys, conducted in conformance with established protocols at the appropriate time of year and time of day when the sensitive species are active or otherwise identifiable, are required. 3. A thorough discussion of direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts expected to adversely affect biological resources. All facets of the project should be included in this assessment. Speoifically, the DER should provide: a. Specific acreage and descriptions of the types of wetlands, coastal sage scrub, and other sensitive habitats that will or may be affected by the proposed project or project altematives. baps and tables should be used to summarize such information, b.Discussions regarding the regional setting, pursusnt to the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15125(a), with special emphasis on resources that am rare or unique to the region that would be affected by the project This discussion is critical to an assessment of environmental impacts. e. Detailed discussions, including both qualitative and quantitative analyses, of the is potentially affected listed and sensitive species (fish, wildlife, pltj*), and their habitats on the proposed project site, area of impact, and altemstive sites, including information pertaining to their local status and distribution. The anticipated orreal igrpacts of the project on these species and habitats should be billy addressed. d.Discussions regarding indirect project impacts on biological resources, including resources in nearby public lands, open apace, adjacent natural habitats, riparian ecosystems, and any designated and/or proposed NCCP reserve lands, lmpects on, and maintenance of, wildlife corridor/movement areas, including access to undisturbed habitats in adjacent am", should be fully evaluated and provided. A discussion of potential adverse impacts from lighting, noise, human activity, exotic species, and drainage. The latter subject should address: project -related changes on drainage patterns on and downstream of the project site; the volume, velocity, and frequency ofexisting and post -project surface flows; polluted runoff; soil erosion and/or sedimentation in streams and water bodies; and post -project fate of runoff from the project site. e. Discussions regarding possible conflicts resulting from wildlife -human interactions at the interface between the development project and natural habitats. The zoning of areas for development projmu or other uses that are nearby or adjacent to natural areas may inadvertently contribute to wildlife -human interactions. f An analysis of cumulative effects, as described under CEQA Guidelines, Section 15130. 03/27/2002 15:21 8584674299 DFG SOUTH COAST REG PAGE 05 Mr. Norris Brandt March 26, 2002 • Page 4 General and specific plans, and past, present, and anticipated future projects, should be analyzed concerning their impacts on similar plant communities and wildlife habitats. g. An analysis of the effect that the project may have on implementation of the approved NCCP for Central/Coastal Orange County. Under Section 2800 through Section 2840 of the Fish and Game Code, the Department, through the NCCP program, has coordinated with local jurisdictions, landowners, and the Federal Government to preserve local and regional biological diversity. The Department recommends that the Lead Agency ensure that the development of this and other proposed projects do not preclude development of the preserve and that projects conform with other requirements of the NCCP program: Jurisdictions participating in the NCCP program should assess specific projects for consistency with the NCCP Conservation Guidelines. 4. Mitigation measures for adverse project -related impacts on sensitive plants, animals, and habitats. Measures to fully avoid and otherwise protect Rare Natural Communities (Attachment 2) from project -related impacts. The Department considers these communities as threatened habitats having both regional and local significance. Mitigation measures should emphasize avoidance, and where avoidance is infeasible, reduction of project impacts. For unavoidable impacts, off -site mitigation through • acquisition and preservation in perpetuity of the affected habitats should be addressed. The Department generally does not support the use of relocation, salvage, and/or transplantation as mitigation for impacts on rare, threatened, or endangered species. Studies have shown that these efforts are experimental in nature and largely unsuccessful. This discussion should include measures to perpetually protect the targeted habitat values where preservation and/or restoration is proposed. The objective should be to offset the project -induced qualitative and quantitative losses of wildlife habitat values. Issues that should be addressed include restrictions on access, proposed land dedications, monitoring and management programs, control of illegal dumping, water pollution, increased human intrusion, etc. Plans for restoration and revegetation should be prepared by persons with expertise in southern California ecosystems and native plant revegetatiou techniques. Each plan should include, at a minimum: (a) the location of the mitigation sites; (b) the plant species to be used; (c) a schematic depicting the mitigation area; (d) time of year that planting will occur; (e) a description of the irrigation methodology; (f) measures to control exotic vegetation on site; (g) success criteria; (h) a detailed monitoring program; (i) contingency measures should the success criteria not be met; and 0) identification of the entity(ies) that will guarantee achieving the success criteria and provide for conservation of the mitigation site in perpetuity. The NCCP did not address wetland and riparian habitats or the hydrologic processes that • maintain these habitats. Assessments of the project's impacts on both habitats and processes should be completed, with appropriate avoidance and mitigation proposed. Mitigation measures to alleviate indirect project impacts on biological resources must be 03/27/2002 15:21 8584674299 DrG SOUTH COAST REG PAGE 06 Mr. Norris Brandt March 265 2002 Page 5 • included, including measures to minimize changes in the hydrologic regimes on site, and means to convey runoff without damaging biological resources, including the morphology of on -site and downstream habitat,. 5. Descriptions and analyses of a range of alternatives to ensure that alternatives to the proposed project are fully considered and evaluated The analyses must include alternatives that avoid or otherwise reduce impacts to sensitive biological resources. Specific altemative locations should be evaluated in areas of lower resource sensitivity where Appropriate. The Department has responsibility for the conservation of wetland and riparian habitats. It is the policy of the Department to strongly discourage development in or conversion of wetlands. All wetlands and watercourses, whether intermittent or perennial, should be retained and provided with substantial setbacks which preserve the riparian and aquatic values and maintain their value to on -site and off site Wildlife populations. We oppose any development or conversion which would result in a reduction of wetland acreage or wetland habitat values, unless, at a minimum, project: mitigation assures there will be "no net lass„ of either wetland habitat values or acreage. Development and conversion include but are not limited to conversion to subsurface drains, placement of fill or building of structures within the wetland, and channelization or removal of materials from the sttemnbed. If appropriate, a jurisdictional delineation of lakes, streams, and associated riparian habitats • should be included in the EIR, including a wetland delineation pursuant to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service definition (Cowardin 1979) adopted by the Department Please rote that wetland and riparian habitats subject to the Department's authority may extend beyond the jurisdictional limits of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The proposed project may require a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA). The Department has direct authority under Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et req. regarding any proposed activity that would divert, obstruct, or affect the natural flow or change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake. The Department's issuance of a SAA for a project that is subject to CEQA requires CEQA o mplimm actions by the Department as a Responsible Agency. As a Responsible Agency under CEQA, the Department minty consider the Lead Agency's CEQA documentation. To minimize additional requirements by the Department pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. and/or under CEQA, the documentation Should fully identify the potential impacts to the lake, streaat or riparian resources and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, monitoring and reporting commitments for issuance of the agreement. A SAA notification form may be obtained by writing to the Department of Fish and Game, 4949 Viewtidge Avenue, San Diego, California 92123- 1662, or by calling (858) 636-3160, or by accessing the Depaztnees web site at www.dfg.oa.gov/l600. The Department's SAA Program holds regularly scheduled pre. project planning/early consultation meetings. To make an appointment, please call our • office at (858) 636-3160. 03/27/2002 15:21 8584674299 Mr. Norris Brandt March 26, 2002 • Page 6 • 0 DFG SOUTH COAST REG PAGE 07 The Department appreciates the opportunity to comment on this NOR We are available to work with your agency and consultants to obtain any necessary permits for the proposed project. Please contact Brad Henderson of the Department at (310) 214-9950 if you have any questions or comments concerning this letter. sincerely, ,�j�� William E. Tippets Environmental Program Manager Literature Cited Cowardin, Lewis M., V. Carter, G. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. RizT4'S'TStf� cc: Department of Fish and Game Files San Diego State Clearinghouse Sacramento Guidelines for Assessing the Effects -of Proposed Projects on hare, Threatened, and EndangeredPlauts andNutural Communities S4 is of CWiAxnia THE RESOURCES AGENCY Dq*runentOR* and G me • Demember9,1989 Ravbod May 8, 2WO The following recommendations are intended to help those who prepare and review environmental documents determine when a botanical survey is needed, who should be considered qualified to conduct such surveys, bow field surveys should be conducted, and what information should be contained in the survey report. The Department may recommend that lead agencies not accept the results of surveys that are not conducted according to these guidelines. 1. Botanical autveys ate conducted in order to determine the environmental effects of proposed projects on all tare, threatened, and endangered plants and plant communities. hare, threatened, and endangered plants are not necessarily limited to those species which have been "listed" by state and federal agencies but should include any species that, based on all available data, can be shown to be rare, threatened, and/or endangered under the following defmitions: A species, subspecies, or variety of plant is "endangered" when the prospects of its survival and reproduction ate in immediate jeopardy from one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, over -exploitation, predation, competition, or disease. A plot is "Qaedened" when it is liWy to become endangered in the foreseeable future in the absence of protection measures. A plant is "ram" when, although not presently threatened with extindiory the species, subspecies, or variety is found in such small numbers throughout its range that it may be endangered if its environment worsens. Rare natural communities are those communities that are of highly limited distribution. These communities may or may not contain tare, threatened, or endangered species. The most current version of the California Natural Diversity Database's List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities may be used as a guide to the names and is of communities. 2. R is appropriate to conduct* botanical field survey to determine if, or to the extent that, tare, threatened, or endangered plants will be affected by a proposed project when: a. Natural vegetation occurs on the site, it is ualmown if rare, threatened, or endangered plants or habitats occur on toe ask, and the project Lae the potential for direct or indirect effects on vegetation; or b. Rare plants have historically been identified on the project site, but adequate information for impact aaessment L lacking. . 3. BdWcol cwnsultmts should possess the following qualifications: a. Faperience conducting floristic field surveys; b. Knowledge of plant taxonomy and plot community ecology; C. Familiarity with the plants of the are, including rate, threatened, and endangered species; d. Familiarity with the apprgxiate state and federal Mutes related to plants and plant collecting; and, e. Experience with analyzing impacts of development on native plant species and communities. 4. Field surveys should be conducted in a manna that will locate any rate, threatened, or endangered species that may be present. specifically, rare, threatened, or endangered plant surveys should be: a. Conducted in the field at the proper time of yea when rare, threatened, or endangered species are both evident and identifiable. Usually, this Is when the plants are flowering. 0 When raze, threatened, or endangered plants are known to occur in the type(s) of habitat present in the project area, nearby accessible occurrences ofthe plants (reference sites) should be observed to determine that the species are identifiable at the time of the survey. • b. Floristic in nature. A floristic survey requires that every plant observedbe identified to the extent necessary to determine its rarity and listing status. In addition, a sufficient number of visits spaced throughout the growing season are necessary to accurately determine what plants exist on the site: in order to properly characterize the site and document the completeness of the survey, a complete list of plants observed on the site should be included in every botanical survey report. c. Conducted in a manner that is consistent with conservation ethics. Collections (voucher specimens) of raze, threatened, or endangered species, -or suspected rare, threatened, or endangered species should be made only when such actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of the population and in accordance with applicable state and federal permit requirements. A collecting permit from the Habitat Conservation Planning Branch of DFG is required for collection of state -listed plant species. Voucher specimens should be deposited at recognized public herbaria for future reference. Photography should be.used to document plant identification and habitatwhenever possible, but especially when the population cannot withstand collection of voucher specimens. d. Conducted using systematic field techniques in all habitats of the site to ensure a thorough coverage of potential impact areas. e. Well documented. When a rare, tbreatened, or endangered plant (or rare plant community) is located, a California Native Species (or Community) Field Survey Form or equivalent written form, accompanied by a copy of the appropriate portion of a 7.5 minute topographic map with the occurrence mapped, should be completed and submitted to the Natural Diversity Database. Locations may be best documented using global 'positioning systems (GPS) and presented in map and digital forms as these tools become more accessible. 5. Reports of botanical field surveys'should be included in or with environmental assessments, negative • declarations and mitigated negative declarations, Timber Harvesting Plans (THPs), ElWs, and E1S's, and should contain the following information: a. Project description, including a detailed map of the project location and study area. b. A written description of biological setting referencing the community nomenclature used and a vegetation . map. c. Detailed description of survey methodology. d. Dates of field surveys and total person -hours spent on field surveys. e. Results of field survey including detailed maps and specific location data for each plant population found. investigators are encouraged to provide GPS data and maps documenting population boundaries. E An assessment of potential impacts. This should include a map showing the distribution of plants in relation to proposed activities. g. Discussion of the significance of raze, threatened, or endangered plant populations in the project area considering nearby populations and total species distribution. h. Recommended measures to avoid impacts. i. A list of all plants observed on the project area. Plants should be identified to the taxonomic level necessary to determine whether or not they are rare, threatened or endangered. j. Description of refereuce sites) visited and phenological development of rare, threatened, or endangered plants) k. Copies of all California Native Species Field Survey Forms or Natural Community Field Survey Forms. 1. Name of field investigator(s). j. References ciiod, persons contacted, herbaria visited, and the location of voucher specimens. ATTACHMENT 2 Sensitivity of Top Priority Rare Natural Communities in Southern California Sensitivity rankings are determined by the Department of Fish and Game, California Natural Diversity Data Base and based on either number of known occurrences (locations) and/or amount of habitat remaining (acreage). The three rankings used for these top priority rare natural communities are as follows: Six Less than 6 known locations and/or on less than 2,000 acres of habitat remaining. S21 Occurs in 6-20 known locations and/or 2,000-10,000 acres of habitat remaining. 834 Occurs is 21-100-known locations and/or 10,000-50,000 acres of habitat remaining. The number to the right of the decimal point after the ranking refers to the degree of threat posed to that natural community regardless of the ranking. For example: Sl.j, = m9w aimed 52.Z 93.1 = no current threats known Sensitivity Rankings (February 1"2) • Rank Community Name 51.1 Mojave Riparian Forest Sonoran Cottonwood Willow Riparian Mesquite Bosque Elephant Tree Woodland Crucifixion Thoth Woodland Allthom woodland Arizonan Woodland Southern California Walnut Forest Mainland Cherry Forest Southern Bishop Pine Forest Torrey. Pine Forest Desert Mountain White Fir Forest SouthemDune Scrub Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub Maritime Succulent Scrub Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Southern Maritime Chaparral Valley Needlegrass Grassland Great Basin Grassland Mojave Desert Grassland Pebble Plains Southern Sedge Bog Cismontane Alkali Marsh CDFQ Attachment 2 for NOP Comment Letters Page 1 of 2 S L2 Southern Foredunes Mono Pumice Flat Southern Interior Basalt Flow Vernal Pool S2.1 Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Riversidean Upland Coastal Sage Scrub Riversidean Desert Sage Scrub Sagebrush Steppe Desert Sink Scrub Mafic'Southem Mixed Chaparral San Diego Mesa Hardpan Vernal Pool San Diego Mesa.Claypan Vernal Pool. Alkali Meadow Southern Coastal Salt Marsh', Coastal Brackish Marsh Transmontane Alkali Marsh Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh Southern Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest Southern Willow Scrub Modoc-Great Basin Cottonwood Willow Riparian Modoc-Great Basin Riparian Scrub • Mojave Desert Wash Scrub Engelmann Oak Woodland Open Engelman Oak Woodland Closed Engelmann Oak Woodland Island Oak Woodland California Walnut Woodland Island Ironwood Forest Island Cherry Forest Southern Interior Cypress Forest Bigoone Spruce -Canyon Oak Forest S2.2 Active Coastal Dunes Active Desert Dunes Stabilized and Partially Stabilized Desert Dunes Stabilized and Partially Stabilized Desert Sandfield Mojave Mixed Steppe Transmontane Freshwater Marsh Coulter Pine Forest Southern California Fellfield White Mountains Fellfield • S2.3 Bristlecone Pine Forest Limber Pine Forest r• CDFG Attachment 2 for NOP Comment Letters Page 2 of 2 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE -DAVIS- IRVINE- LOSANOELES- Campus & Environmental Planning Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 - RIVERSIDE - SAN OIE00 -SAN I SANTA RARRARA-SANTACRUZ 750 University Tower Irvine, CA 92697-2325 (949)824-6316 (949)824-1213 Fax March 22, 2002 Re: Notice of Preparation (NOP) for Program Environmental Impact Report, San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program Dear Mr. Brandt: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments for the preparation of the Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program. The University of California, Irvine (UCI) encompasses 1,477 acres within the San Diego Creek watershed. As depicted in the NOP, the NTS does not appear to include locations that will benefit UCI runoff. The EIR should clarify whether UCI runoff will be treated by the NTS, and any anticipated locations. According to the NOP, the NTS program is projected to result in an estimated 50 percent reduction in sediment, and 50 percent reduction in nitrogen, a 50 percent reduction in phosphorus, and 20 percent reduction in the mean concentrations of fecal conform. The EIR should include sufficient data from similar programs to support these figures. Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on this NOR You may contact me at 824-8692 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Ir;�� James M, Lawson Senior Planner • 0 C: Richard Demedian 0 California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (a H.Internet Address: hap://www.swrcb.ca.gov/mgcbg GrayDavis tan tar for 3737 Main Street, Suite 500, Riverside, California 92501.3348 Secretary for Governor Environmental phone (909) 782-4130 - FAX (909) 781-6288 Protection 77re energy cliallenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list ofsimple ways you can reduce denuad and cut your energy costs, see our website at w v.swrcb.ca.gov/rwgcb8. March 21, 2002 Norris Brandt Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF PREPARATION FOR PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT / San Diego CREEK WATERSHED NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM PROGRAM, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA! STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2002021120 Dear Mr. Brandt: Staff of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB), has reviewed the Notice of Preparation for the above referenced project. The proposed plan is the construction of water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofilters in the San Diego Creek Watershed to be known as Natural Treatment Systems (NTS). A series of water quality wetlands are proposed to be constructed in existing drainage channels (in -line), in existing or proposed off-line wetlands (off-line), •and in existing or proposed detention basins at 37 locations in the San Diego Creek Drainage area. The NTS will use naturally occurring physical, chemical, and biological resources to treat runoff. An estimated 50% reduction in sediment, nitrogen, phosphorus, and 20% reduction in fecal coliform is predicted to occur as a result of the NTS. It is hoped by the project proponent that the NTS will help meet the regulatory requirements of the Clean Water Act Section 303 (d) and the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS-4) Permit for this drainage area. The Staff of this Regional Board are encouraged by this proposal to improve water quality through a systematic drainage basin wide approach using proven methods. The proposed project has the potential to provide several water quality benefits for the area. To meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act Section 303 (d) (and the adopted Total Maximum Daily Loads for San Diego Creek and Newport Upper Bay) and of the MS-4 permit will take such a comprehensive effort. The Staff of this Regional Board have the following comments on this Notice of Preparation: 1. We encourage the construction of an adequate area and number of off-line water quality treatment wetlands. The wetlands must be of adequate size to treat the urban runoff of the area and to provide other appropriate water quality benefits. Off-line wetlands likely will be easier to maintain and more effective. Consider the construction of offsite wetlands in the historical water retention areas. Before the area was developed, runoff drained into empheral lakes and large marshes (the largest marsh was known as the Swamp of the Frogs) ("Historical Hydrographic and Hydrologic Changes in the Newport Bay -San Diego Creek Watershed", Stanley Trimble, 1998). 2. Limit the number and area of inline water quality treatment wetlands unless their construction restores the water way in some way (i.g., the concrete in a lined channel is removed as part of the construction of the wetland). The construction of in -line water quality treatment wetlands California Environmental Protection Agency %0 Recycled Paper Norris Brandt Irvine Ranch Water District March 21, 2002 Will impact waters of the United States and/or State. This action will require a Section 401 Water Quality Standard Certification from this Regional Board. Impacts to these waters should first and foremost be avoided. Where that is not practicable, Impacts to these waters should be minimized. Mitigation of unavoidable impacts must replace the full function and value of the Impacted waterbody. Please contact Kelly Schmoker of this office at (909) 782-4990 to discuss the project further. Impacts to the waters of the United States also require a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers and a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game. In -line systems will be subject to flood damage and likely will have extensive maintenance needs. In addition, NTS facilities may be considered waters of the state and maintenance activities could be restricted or subject to regulatory requirements. 3. Consider incorporating several water quality features Into the proposed constructed wetlands. Groundwater recharge, recreation, and riparian habitat could be feasible beneficial uses at certain constructed wetland sites especially if the wetland was modified somewhat. There is the opportunity to create some significant areas that would provide water quality benefits along with open space values. Possibly, these mutli-use wetland areas would be best managed by an Interagency coalition to assure effective management of the different beneficial uses. 4. Consider the impacts to downstream areas of channels as a result of water diversion. Impacts must be mitigated. 5. It has been proposed that much of the open space area presently located in the drainage area will be developed in the next several years. The construction of the NTS wetlands does not • relieve the proponents of future development from addressing water quality Impacts resulting from their development. Each future development project will be required to have incorporated Into the project appropriate water quality features to address the site -specific water quality impacts. 6. Mandate the use of best management practices (BMPs) during the construction of development in the area. Appropriate best management practices (BMPs) must be developed and implemented during and after construction to control the discharge of pollutants, prevent sewage spills, and to avoid discharge of sediments into the streets, storm water conveyance channels, or waterways and generally protect water quality standards and beneficial uses. 7. As a result of the 303 (d) listing of San Diego Creek and the Newport Bay, proposed projects In the drainage area will be subject to controls (specifically Total Maximum Daily Loads, or TMDLs) pursuant to state and federal regulation. Depending on the proposed project, these controls could include discharge prohibitions, revisions to discharge permits, or management plans to address water quality impacts. Environmental documents for proposed projects need to acknowledge that these additional requirements may be imposed in the future. Contact Doug Shibberu at (909) 782-7959 for further Information. u California Environmental Protection Agency �� Recycled Paper Norris Brandt Irvine Ranch Water District March 21, 2002 • If you should have any questions, please call me at (909) 782-7960 pr Mark G. Adelson at (909) 782- 3234. • • Sincerely, � ``� Davides�G�W"e,.l W Planning Section cc: Scott Morgan — State Clearinghouse California Environmental Protection Agency %P Recycled Paper March 20, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, California 92219-7000 RE: San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Dear Mr. Brandt: • The University of California Natural Reserve System (UCNRS) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System. As you know, under CEQA Guidelines (15386), the UCNRS is a "'Trustee Agency... a . state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California." Other Trustee Agencies include the California Department of Fish and Game, State Lands Commission, and the State Department of Parks and Recreation. The UCNRS administers its 33 Reserves in what was formerly known as the Natural Land and Water Reserves System, San Diego Creek passes through the UCNRS San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh Reserve, and one of the proposed treatment sites is adjacent the Reserve's southeastern boundary. Through the University of California, the Reserve System provides the opportunity for research and teaching, and manages its lands to be examples of natural habitat. The goal of reducing nutrients in San Diego Creek is laudable, and has been pursued for many years through reduction in point source pollution and in other ways. The UCNRS supports attempts to reduce nutrient loading in San Diego Creek and protection of the biological resources in the Newport Back Bay. Another laudatory feature of the NTS is the formation of a more natural habitat, on natural substrate, along the watershed. These features of the plan will provide substantial benefit to the natural environment and to our community. There are, however, a few issues of concern regarding the Natural Treatment System (NTS) proposal that should be addressed in the EIR. As we have discussed with you, the 1RWD-owned site adjacent the UCNRS San Joaquin Marsh Reserve was a low wetland habitat with pickle weed a dominant until recent years. The dedication of the site to an NTS with a "safe harbor" and . . "no surprises" designation is contradictory to the UCNRS management goal of sustaining naturalness in the adjacent Reserve. We do not support the establishment of such a site contiguous with the -Marsh Reserve, and it may also be limited by ongoing responsibilities to allow rare, sensitive, Threatened or Endangered species to inhabit the SAM site. Placing an NTS between and abutting these two habitats that welcome sensitive taxa is not compatible with the uses of these other sites. The former pickle weed habitat could be restored to a permanent low wetland habitat in which sensitive species would not be restricted, rather than a temporary cattail marsh subject to NTS management. It is also not clear where the water in such a system at that site would enter and exit the facility. The Reserve itself is a safe haven for many sensitive species, and it is our hope that there will be more in the future. Since each NTS site is a take of wetland and an elimination of future permanent wetland either through watershed based restorations or natural colonization, where is the necessary mitigation replacement going to be in the watershed and at what replacement ratio? It would be useful to provide some alternative mixtures of NTS and wetland and upland restoration sites, rather than dedicate all of the most promising areas in the watershed to NTS facilities. This forecloses restoration opportunities, and would be difficult to mitigate with permanent habitat either in acreage or connectedness. The NTS facilities may be predominantly plants in the cattail-bullrush • community, and establishing these facilities would mean a homogeneous sequence of sites in the watershed This reduces the possibilities for habitat diversity within the sites most opportune for restoration and development of permanent wetlands. The recently published National Academy of Science review, "Compensating for Wetland Losses Under the Clean Water Act," criticizes the lack of habitat diversity in created wetlands as a significant drawback in watershed mitigation and restorations. The IRWD has been exemplary in producing open water habitat and riparian woodland habitat at the Michelson Plant Site. As mitigation for the NTS, similar, additional riparian woodland and open water habitat could be incorporated into this watershed management plan to reduce the homogeneity of sites along the watershed and to produce refuge sites that would not be subject to periodic cleaning and disturbance? What are the water sources for the San Diego Creek watershed? How much reclaimed water is distributed in the watershed and how much nitrogen and phosphorous does this represent? Since the Michelson Plant is the source of both reclaimed water and its nutrients, further treatment and a reduction of 0 nutrients prior to distribution should be examined. What are the expansion plans for the Michelson Plant and how would they affect instream flow and nutrients in San Diego Creek in the future? Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comment on the NTS proposal in the San Diego Creek Watershed. We look forward to working with you in the EIR process and in the eventual improvement of water quality in the San Diego Creek Watershed. Sincerely, Peter A. Bowler Academic Coordinator UCNRS-UCI Reference: William L. Bretz Manager of Reserves UCNRS-UCI Timothy 1. Bradley Campus Director UCNRS-UCI Committee on Mitigating Wetland Losses, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Water Science and Technology Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council. 2001. Compensating for Wetland lasses Under the Clean Water Act. National Academy of Sciences. i • 0 NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION •915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 (916) 653.4082 (916) 657-5390 - Fax - '1 67 9riz •U March 13, 2002 C MARAGER Norris Brandt Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 RE: SCH# 2002021120 — San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program F Dear Mr. Brandt: The Native American Heritage Commission has reviewed the above mentioned NOP. To adequately assess and mitigate project -related impacts on archaeological resources, the Commission recommends the following actions be required: ✓ Contact the appropriate Information Center for a record search. The record search will determine: • If a part or all of the area of project effect (APE) has been previously surveyed for cultural resources. • If any known cultural resources have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE. • If the probability Is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE. • If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded, cultural resources are present. ✓ If an archaeological Inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey. • The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measurers should be • submitted immediately to the planning department. All Information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for pubic disclosure. • The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate regional archaeological Information Center. ✓ Contact the Native American Heritage Commission for: • A Sacred Lands File Check. • A list of appropriate Native American Contacts for consultation concerning the project site and to assist in the mitigation measures. ✓ Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their subsurface existence. • Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archeological resources, per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) §15064.5 (f). In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monitor all ground -disturbing activities. • Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the disposition of recovered artifacts, in consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans. • Lead agencies should Include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains in their mitigation plan. Health and Safety Code §7050.5, CEQA §15064.5 (e), and Public Resources Code §5097.98 mandates the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains In a location other than a dedicated cemetery. Sincerely, GJ S� Rob Wood Environmental Specialist III (916) 653-4040 • CC: State Clearinghouse STATE OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE of PLANNING AND RESEARCH Gray Davis GOVERNOR February25, 2002 State Clearinghouse Notice of Preparation To: Reviewing Agencies Re: San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program SCH# 2002021120 a5oaf f�*rr 4kGIN� .Steven A. DIRECTORW :11=0 .iV1- rV,:` ' 5 2U32 GDY�Po. P, tit ImER Attached for your review and comment is the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Responsible agencies must transmit their comments on the scope and content of the NOP, focusing on specific information related to their own statutory responsibility, within 30 days of receipt of the NOP from the Lead Aancy. This is a courtesy notice provided by the State Clearinghouse with a reminder for you to comment in a timely manner. We encourage other agencies to also respond to this notice and express their concerns early in the environmental review process. Please direct your comments to: Norris Brandt • Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 with a copy to the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Planning and Research. Please refer to the SCH number noted above in all correspondence concerning this project. If you have any questions about the environmental document review process, please call the State Clearinghouse at (916)445-0613. Sincerely S I/% v Scott Morgan Project Analyst, State Clearinghouse Attachments cc: Lead Agency 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAML•NTO, CALIFORNIA 95812.3044 91"45-0613 FAX 916323.3018 WWW.OPRC&GOVICLFARINGHOUSEHTML 6f p • Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2002021112 Project Title Crystal Cove Historic District Preservation and Public Use Plan • Lead Agency , Parks and Recreation, Department of Type NOP Notice of Preparation Description The California Department of Parks and Recreation (Department) is preparing the Crystal Cove Historic District Preservation and Public Use Plan (plan). This plan may require a General Plan Amendment to the Crystal Cove State Park General Plan. The plan will propose a range of uses for the Historic District and adjoining areas that include long-term goals and guidelines for the appropriate types, locations, and designs of facilities that may be proposed in the future as well as specific proposals that will be implemented with current or near -term funding. The proposed uses include park operations (visitor center, kiosk, restrooms, offices, maintenance, staff housing), overnight accommodations, utility upgrades, and educational or interpretive facilities. These uses will be in conformance with the Departments policies for adaptive use in a Historic District. The plan will also establish interpretive programsand activities proposed or approved by the Department. Lead Agency Contact ' Name Tina Robinson Agency Department of Parks and Recreation Phone 619-220-5300 Fax email Address Southern Service Center 8885 Rio San Diego Dr., Suite 270 City San Diego State CA Zip 92108 Project Location County Orange city • Region Cross Streets Newport Coast Drive and Pacific Coast Highway Parcel No. Township Range Section Base Proximity to: Highways Pacific Coast Hwy (Hwy 1) Airports Railways Waterways Schools Land Use State Park Project Issues Geologic/Seismic; Archaeologio•Historic; Sail Erosion/Compaction/Grading; Water Quality; Traffic/Circulation; AestheticfVisual; Biological Resources; Recreation/Parks; Other Issues Reviewing Resources Agency; California Highway Patrol; Department of Conservation; Department of Fish and Agencies Game, Region 5; Native American Heritage Commission; State Lands Commission; Caltrans, District 12; Department of Housing and Community Development; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Office of Historic Preservation; California Coastal Commission Date Received 02/25/2002 Start of Review 02/25/2002 End of Review 03/26/2002 L_J Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. NOP Distribution List Resources Ag lgv Fish and Game ROWUMM Agency ❑ Dept of Fish & Game Nedei Gayou Scott Rint Q DePL of Boating & Waterways Environmental Services LMv slon curry Q DspL of FM & Game 1 yB1u Donald Koch l� Califomta Co6/ts1 Commknion 13izabalh A. Fuchs Region 1 ❑ 1 apt of Flsh & Gams 2 ❑ Dept. of Conservation Banky Curtis Roseanne Taylor Room 2 © DspL Fish & Gams 3 Q Dept of Forestry & Fire of RobertFiostke Allen Robertson Region 3 Q office of Historic Hof r4 DeDe Lwidermilk Preservation Ham Kmftbwg Region4 1 D_ptof Pants & Recreation IIOPL of FWt & GarM a Oon Cit�vddc B. Noah Tigfsnan EnvironmentalStewardship � 5.HeblistConeavation s.cior ❑ Redanation Bond Q Dept or Fish & Game a Psm Bruner ❑ s.F. say conservation & Gsbdm Gatcbal Region 6. Habitat Conservation Program DweLComm. ❑ Dept of Fish & Garw 6 WA Steve McAdam Steve Tammy AUn Replan 8. InydMono, Habitat of Water Resources Conservation Program ResourcesAgencyQ Raptor Fish & Gans is tlatlei Goyou Tan NaPci Marine Region Health & Welfare Independent commissions Health &Welfare❑ Catifan E ne gyCommission Wayne Hubbardartl Dept. of HeaiNOrinkig Water EnvironcrientalOfllea HaUvsAmerkanFisritage Food & AGriculture Comm. Do" Treadway Q Q Public uumme commission Food & Agriculture Stava sfwffer Ken Lewis DspL of Food and agriculture / state Lands Conannission Betty she 0 Gevernwa, otka of "Waft & Research • State Clearinghouse Plasm County: 19Y(GiNW(/ Q Colorado River Board uQ Depk otTransportatfon 10 Gerald R. Zmmamnan C21ts Sayre District 10 Q Tahoe Regional Planning ❑ Dept of Transporhtlon 11 Agency (TRPA) Lou Salazar Lyn Barnett District 11 ❑ 011les of DspL of 7raroporradM 12 ANaen Kannedy 9ency ( Jahn Rowden, tanager D(strict'12 Q Delta Protection commission Debby Eddy ❑ Salta Monk* Mountains Pa� E to :,. •.• ., u• © D"LefIrmsportationl IGRIPknning District 1 Q DOP 2 Vkid Floe Local, Development Review. District 2 Q Dept of Tmnsporfatbn 3 Jatf Pulverman Disbi t3 ❑ Dept of Tfansportatim 4 Jean Ffmwy f�l District 4 L.s Dept.. at7ransportation5 James Kilmer District 5 Q Dept of Transportation is At= 8inbatrn District 6 DspL at Transportslian 7 Stapheni. lluswai District 7 ❑ Dept of 7ransp wiation a Mks sin District a Q Dept. of7rauptxWfon9 Colson 013do t DfsW 9 0 SCH# i-200209„ qSfaEe wale Rewureee Corrupt Greg Frantz DMalon of Water Oual ty ❑ StatewaterR_souess control. Board Mite Fakenstekn DMslo n of Water HigNs ❑ DeptofTaxicaft"ttcwcontro CEOATracikg Caner Q Housing & Community D1vaoprnant cathy Creswell Housing poky DiVision ❑ cattrans-mosimatAwmautics Sandy Hasnad Q C CallJforNaHlgttwayPetra; uile Page Chace of SpecW Projects Q LHTrrtpotfaflon Ran Coltrane - Planing ❑ Dept of Qsnnere! services Robert SWM Environmental SerAces Section Air Resources Board Q Airport Projects Jim Lerner ❑ Transpatafkn Projects Kurt Karpaos Q industrial Projects Mike Toiarup Q cawomiaMeyratedWaHs Management Beard Sueouary Q StMrwatlrRewtscescontroi Bond D(ansEdwards Meson of efean water Programs Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) ❑ RWOC81 cathieen Hudson North Cant Region (1) ❑ RWVAM2 EnvkonrnsrW Occurrent Coordinator San Francisco Bay Region (2) ❑ RWOCB3 Central Coaat Region (3) Q RWQCB4 Jonathan BWop Loa Angeles Region (4) 0 AWQC86a Central Valley Region (5) - U Rwocs 5F F'rssnoBre�rOffice (6) . Q RWQca aR Central Valley Region Redding BrandtOfte Branch (5) ❑ RWQCBa Lahottisn Region (6) ❑ RWOC86V Lahontan Region (6) Vi l wills Burch OMce Q RW=7 Colorado River Basin Region (n RWOCBa Santa Ana Region (a) ❑ RwQC89 San Diego Region (9) L_J RECEIVED Mt.n 2(i,012 CALIFORNIACnl��l I y,ISGF� March 8, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P.E. Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 ASSOCIATIONof RE: Comments on the Notice of Preparation for a Draft Environmental Impact Report M E GOVERNMENTS GOVERNMENTS for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System —SCAG No. 1 20020097 Main office Dear Mr. Brandt: 828 West Seventh Street 12th Floor Thank you for submitting the Notice of Preparation for a Draft Environmental Impact Los Angeles, California Report for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System to SCAG for review and comment. As areawide clearinghouse for regionally significant projects, SCAG goo17.3435 reviews the consistency of local plans, projects, and programs with regional plans. This activity is based on SCAG's responsibilities as a regional planning organization pursuant t (213) 236-1800 to state and federal laws and regulations. Guidance provided by these reviews is intended f(213)236.1825 to assist local agencies and project sponsors to take actions that contribute to the attainment of regional goals and policies. vnvw.scag.ca,8av >�ndang P �MD k,Gamty We have reviewed the Notice of Preparation for a Draft Environmental Impact Report for a Wnadin" • Hat wen PwMmh• the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System, and have determined that the mbv Nal Bavmn, lot Angela PwMmu Mpoe ha'Dm Ber Rrty. proposed Project is regionally significant per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) IwAlwlt. "h "a da` ""° "°na Guidelines (Section 15200). The proposed Project would affect sensitive wildlife habitats, such Input Connor'- H-1twPa lmpewl County as riparian lands, wetlands, bays, estuaries, marshes, and habitats for rate and endangered ina "`d''a Countrr-Y °^°° °^'b`n0v a"'° species. CEQA requires that EIRs discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed project ta Angela Comry • u+ are lmkyvrtite ngelu Cow" • Htar Udnd°• Ln Gtbrleh • Bunn and applicable general plans and regional plans (Section 15125 N). If there are saerotrr, welt. • Gearie sae. Bell • Hrl ,an a mAvg a•Babmana h,w man inconsistencies, an explanation and rationalization for such inconsistencies should be provided. • Gain Doulth, Puunout • la Anne Darcy. Lott b� `� n; nG�i w. x �e a• Policies of SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation d„ r;lry��o,,oMPlan, which may be applicable to your project, are outlined in the attachment. We expect the , q �•' „�,�; Draft EIR to specifically cite the appropriate SCAG policies and address the manner in Auto" • Saay Murphy, Bmbad • Pam which the Project is consistent with applicable core policies or supportive of applicable O'Comnr. Santa MoNm • NkY Pabnco, im A`�ka •'��'d�a•�'AOa•Ji°�'>'•10` ancillary policies. Please use our policy numbers to refer to them in your Draft EIR. Aoeb a sea gMild. Prop, Mm wren •MJt Mdlty• Hwma, lm Anela • Pa neon. ,°. Angeka • Also, wewould encourage you to use aside -by -side comparison of SCAG policies with �r"s;Wt. Wel"ut , hul nao,. �lut - a discussion of the consistency or support of the policy with the Proposed Project. Swbeyiyk"I.. Putdena•Jodmoho' 1. Aogda • Dmnk WubMoo. C hbua • Juk VAIu, Jn, Please provide a minimum of 45 days for SCAG to review the Draft EIR when this document is gDmg`tt wm"�'a•NCountyB available. If you have any questions regarding the attached comments, please contact me at '"babes Cow°.,'C �n •`.0 M.-Wn. MYauog, (213)236-1867. Thank you. loom Niguel • Mcbud Dian. lobe Porno -Mu D" U Palma • Shirley Mctredm. Aoabtlm - Ilia Peay.loc. -W Mdlptq,, Netrpou such Since ly Rhavide Comtyt sob 9mon ltl tdde County- Iton lantridga MrurMe • Gag hint• Cuhednl City- • son ltobw. Yeaoata • 1. Badman. •y Qi kf Cana • Chula white. Morenovalky w saaadlua Gouery, ,on Mlhelr. Sm J F . S IT , AICP bunudlvn Cauoty • Bill Alaanda, sanchn Cuamonga•Dold Brld...Pontam• hoA en r ann Gncla, Grand snob Horr""'`"'rill" Intergovernmental Review �G error.", Chun Hill, • Judith Valla. W`D Judy Mhdr. Vm.n County . . Sknl Valley • Co. De hok, ga 4toon ntua •TOWYoung. Port Huenane slaedde County Mrampowdon Commluiotc seblu lone, Hemet Rama County ibaupoaadoo CommWiam w Dadr. SlrolVdIr, March 8, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt • Page 2 COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM SCAG NO.1 20020097 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Project considers the creation of a watershed/natural treatment system. The proposed Project will use natural ecosystems to remove sediment, nutrients, pahtogenslgerms and other contaminants from both low -flow and small runoff. In addition, the proposed Project will provide a natural resource, riparian habitat and wildlife benefits throughout the watershed. CONSISTENCY WITH REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND GUIDE POLICIES The Growth Management Chapter (GMC) of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) contains the following policies that are particularly applicable and should be addressed in the Draft EIR for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System. 3.03 The timing, financing, and location of public facilities, utility systems, and transportation systems shall be used by SCAG to Implement the rbgion's growth Policies. The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) also has goals, objectives, policies and actions pertinent to this proposed project. This RTP links the goal of sustaining mobility with the goals of fostering economic development, enhancing the environment, reducing energy consumption, promoting transportation -friendly development patterns, and encouraging fair and equitable access to residents affected by socioeconomic, geographic and commercial limitations. Among the relevant goals, objectives, policies and actions of the RTP are the following: Core Regional Transportation Plan Policies 4.02 Transportation investments shall mitigate environmental impacts to an acceptable level, March 8, 2002 • Mr. Norris Brandt Page 3 4.04 Transportation Control Measures shall be a priority. 4.16 Maintaining and operating the existing transportation system will be a priority over expanding capacity. GMC POLICIES RELATED TO THE RCPG THE REGIONAL The Growth Management goals to develop urban forms that enable individuals to spend less income on housing cost, that minimize public and private development costs, and that enable firms to be more competitive, strengthen the regional strategic goal to stimulate the regional economy. The evaluation of the proposed project in relation to the following policies would be intended to guide efforts toward achievement of such goals and does not infer regional interference with local land use powers. 3.09 Support local jurisdictions' efforts to minimize the cost of infrastructure and public service delivery, and efforts to seek new sources of funding for development and • the provision of services. 3.10 Support local jurisdictions' actions to minimize red tape and expedite the permitting process to maintain economic vitality and competitiveness. GMC POLICIES RELATED TO THE RCPG GOAL TO IMPROVE THE REGIONAL The Growth Management goals to attain mobility and clean air goals and to develop urban forms that enhance quality of life, that accommodate a diversity of life styles, that preserve open space and natural resources, and that are aesthetically pleasing and preserve the character of communities, enhance the regional strategic goal of maintaining the regional quality of life. The evaluation of the proposed project in relation to the following policies would be intended to provide direction for plan implementation, and does not allude to regional mandates. 3.18 Encourage planned development in locations least likely to cause environmental impact. 3.20 Support the protection of vital resources such as wetlands, groundwater recharge areas, woodlands, production lands, and land containing unique and endangered • plants and animals. March 8, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 4 3.21 Encourage the implementation of measures aimed at the preservation and protection of recorded and unrecorded cultural resources and archaeological sites. 3.22 Discourage development, or encourage the use of special design requirements, in areas with steep slopes, high fire, flood, and seismic hazards. 3.23 Encourage mitigation measures that reduce noise in certain locations, measures aimed at preservation of biological and ecological resources, measures that would reduce exposure to seismic hazards, minimize earthquake damage, and to develop emergency response and recovery plans. GMC 1] The Growth Management Goal to develop urban forms that avoid economic and social polarization promotes the regional strategic goal of minimizing social and geographic disparities and of reaching equity among all segments of society. The evaluation of the proposed project in relation to the policy stated below is intended guide direction for the . accomplishment of this goal, and does not infer regional mandates and interference with local land use powers. 3.27 Support local jurisdictions and other service providers in their efforts to develop sustainable communities and provide, equally to all members of society, accessible and effective services such as. public education, housing, health care, social services, recreational facilities, law enforcement, and fire protection. AIR QUALITY CHAPTER CORE ACTIONS The Air Quality Chapter core actions related to the proposed project includes: 5.07 Determine specific programs and associated actions needed (e.g., indirect source rules, enhanced use of telecommunications, provision of community based shuttle services, provision of demand management based programs, or vehicle-miles- traveled/emission fees) so that options to command and control regulations can be assessed. 5.11 Through the environmental document review process, ensure that plans at all levels of government (regional, air basin, county, subregionai and locaq consider air quality, land use, transportation and economic relationships to ensure • March 8, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 5 consistency and minimize conflicts. WATER QUALITY CHAPTER RECOMMENDATIONS AND POLICY OPTIONS The Water Quality Chapter core recommendations and policy options relate to the two water quality goals: to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation's water; and, to achieve and maintain water quality objectives that are necessary to protect all beneficial uses of all waters. 11.02 Encourage "watershed management" programs. and strategies, recognizing the primary role of local governments in such efforts. 11.05 Support regional efforts to identify and cooperatively plan for wetlands to facilitate both sustaining the amount and quality of wetlands in the region and expediting the process for obtaining wetlands permits. 11.07 Encourage water reclamation throughout the region where it is cost-effective, feasible, and appropriate to reduce reliance on imported water and wastewater discharges. Current administrative impediments to increased use of wastewater . should be addressed. OPEN SPACE CHAPTER ANCILLARY GOALS Public Health and Safety 9.04 Maintain open space for adequate protection of lives and properties against natural and man-made hazards. 9.05 Minimize potentially hazardous developments in hillsides, canyons, areas susceptible to flooding, earthquakes, wildfire and other known hazards, and areas with limited access for emergency equipment. 9.06 Minimize public expenditure for infrastructure and facilities to support urban type uses in areas where public health and safety could not be guaranteed. Resource Protection 9.08 Develop well -managed viable ecosystems or known habitats of rare, threatened and endangered species, including wetlands. March 8, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 6 CONCLUSIONS All feasible measures needed to mitigate any potentially negative regional impacts associated with the proposed project should be implemented and monitored, as required by CEQA. 0 • 0 March 8, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 7 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Roles and Authorities THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG) is a Joint Powers Agency established under California Government Code Section 6502 at seq. Under.federal and state law, SCAG is designated as a Council of Governments (COG), a Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), and a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). SCAG's mandated roles and responsibilities include the following: SCAG is designated by the federal government as the Region's Metropolitan Planning Organization and mandated to maintain a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process resulting in a Regional Transportation Plan and a Regional Transportation Improvement Program pursuant to 23 U.S.C. '134, 49 U.S.C. '5301 at seq., 23 C.F.R.450, and 49 C.F.R.'613. SCAG is also the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency, and as such is responsible for both preparation of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)-and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) under California Government Code Section 65080 and 65082 respectively. SCAG is responsible for developing the demographic projections and the integrated land use, housing, employment, and transportation programs, measures, and strategies portions of the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan, pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 40460(b)-(c). SCAG is also designated under 42 U.S.C. '7504(a) as a Co -Lead Agency for air quality planning for the Central Coast and Southeast Desert Air Basin District. SCAG is responsible under the Federal Clean Air Act for determining Conformity of Projects, Plans and Programs to the State Implementation Plan, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.'7506. . Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65089.2, SCAG is responsible for reviewing all Congestion Management Plans (CMPs) for consistency with regional transportation plans required by Section 65080 of the Government Code. SCAG must also evaluate the consistency and compatibility of such programs within the region. SCAG is the authorized regional agency for Inter -Governmental Review of Programs proposed for federal financial assistance and direct development activities, pursuant to Presidential Executive Order 12,372 (replacing A-95 Review). SCAG reviews, pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087, Environmental Impacts Reports of projects of regional significance for consistency with regional plans [California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Sections 15206 and 15125(b)]. Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. '1288(a)(2) (Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act), SCAG is the authorized Areawide Waste TreatmentManagementPlanning Agency. SCAG is responsible for preparation of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65584(a). SCAG is responsible (with the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, and the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments) for preparing the Southern California Hazardous Waste Management Plan pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 25135.3. Revised July 2001 0 South Coast Air Quality Management District 71865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond'Bar, CA 91765-4182 ` (909) 396-2000 • http://www.agmd.gov February28, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P.E. Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P,O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219.7000 Dear Mr. Brandt: Notice of Preparation of a Environmental Impact Report for The South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above -mentioned document. The AQMD's comments are recommendations regarding the analysis of potential air quality impacts from the proposed project that should be included in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Air Quality Analysis The AQMD adopted its California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook in 1993 to assist other public agencies with the preparation of air quality analyses. The AQMD recommends that the 14" Agency use this Handbook as guidance when preparing its air quality analysis. Copies of the Handbook are available from the AQMD's Subscription Services Department by calling (909) 396-3720. The Lead Agency should identify any potential adverse air quality impacts that could occur from all phases of the project and all air pollutant sources related to the project. Air quality impacts from both construction and operations should be considered. Construction -related air quality impacts typically include, but are not limited to, emissions from the use of heavy-duty equipment from grading, earth-loadinglunloading, paving, architectural coatings, off -road mobile sources (e,g„ heavy-duty construction equipment) and on -road mobile sources (e,g„ construction worker vehicle trips, material transport trips). Operation -related air quality impacts may include, but are not limited to, emissions from stationary sources (e,g,, boilers), area sources (e.g., solvents and coatings), and vehicular trips (e.g., on- and off -road tailpipe emissions and entrained dust). Air quality impacts from indirect sources, that is, sources that generate or attract vehicular trips should be included in the evaluation. An analysis of all toxic air contaminant impacts due to the decommissioning or use of equipment potentially generating such air pollutants should also be included. • Mr. Norris Brandt, P.E. -2- February 28, 2002 . Miti¢ation Measures In the event that the project generates significant adverse air quality impacts, CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation measures be utilized during project construction and operation to minimize or eliminate significant adverse air quality impacts. To assist the Lead. Agency with identifying possible mitigation measures for the project, please refer to Chapter 11 of the AQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook for sample air quality mitigation measures. Additionally, AQMD's Rule 403 - Fugitive Dust, and the Implementation Handbook contain numerous measures for controlling construction related emissions that should be considered for use as CEQA mitigation if not otherwise required. Pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines §15126.4 (a)(1)(1)), any impacts resulting from mitigation measures must also be discussed. is Data Sources AQMD rules and relevant air quality reports and data are available by calling the AQMD's Public Information Center at (909) 396-2039. Much of the information available through the Public Information Center is also available via the AQMD's World Wide Web Homepage (h!M://www.ggmd.gov). The AQMD is willing to work with the Lead Agency to ensure that project -related emissions are accurately identified, categorized, and evaluated. Please call Dr. Charles Blankson, Transportation Specialist, CEQA Section, at (909) 396-3304 if you have any questions regarding this letter. SS:CB:li LACO20226-02LI Control Number Sincerely, 5�yk t Steve Smith, PhD. Program Supervisor, CEQA Section Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources MAR-27-2002 16:35 FROM: ENVIRON ENTRLPLNG 17148346132 To:+ County of Orange Planning & Aevelopment Services Department Match 27, 2002 Norris Brandt, P.B. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District F.Q. Box 17000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 THOMA3 B, MATHM. VMVc OR :00N. nOWERST. :iANTA AN& CAc MPMA MANNO ADDRe9l: P.O. WX 400 SANTA ANA, CA 927024041 NCL 02-21 SUBJECT: NOP of a DPEIR for the San Diego Crack Watershed Natural Treatment System Dear Mr. Brandt: The above referenced item is allotice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (DPEIR) for the Irvine Ranch Water District QRWD). The proposed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program consists of improvements within the San Diego Creek watershed, a 122 square mile area located in central Orange County. Through the creation of man made wetlands, the NTS will use natural ecosystems to remove sediment The County of Orange has reviewed the NOP and offers the following comments: WATMSHW 1. We recommend the following issues be addressed in the DEIR: A. An evaluation of the pollutant loading/concentration reductions attainable with the NTS relative to Total Maximum Daily Loads (TUDI.a) targeta and other water quality standards under storm and non storm conditions, B, Inclusion of a program to evaluate the effectiveness of the constructed NTS . relative to #1 above in conjunction with current monitoring efforts. 0 • C. An assessment of the fate ofpollutants removed by the NTS, including, but not • limited to, assimilation by plants, broakdown in sediments and mechanical removal and disposal. MAR-27-2002 16:35 FROM:ENVIRONMENTALPLNG 17148346132 TO:+ P.003/005 • D. Identification of watershed areas within San Diego Creek that will not have NTS projects and therefore will not experience water quality improvement. E. Inclusion of a programmatic timeline for project implementation. F. An evaluation of the compatibility of the NTS with prior sediment and flood control master plans. 2. Tho County of Orange, cities, and special districts (including IRWD) are cooperating in a Feasibility Study with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineering to evaluate streambed stability, water quality and ecosystem restoration problems and potential solutions in the Newport Bay/San Diego Creek watershed. The proposed project may utilize properties of the County of Orange and/or the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD). The DEIR should confirm that the proposed project, if utilizing said properties, should not conflict with or restrict the subsequent modification or use of the properties for additional purposes. . OPEN SPACEIRECREATION 3. Regional Recreation Facilities: The DEIR. should identify any short and/or long-term impacts to regional recreation facilities including, but not limited to, noise, safety, park operations, water quality, park flora and park infrastructure. Mitigation measures, as appropriate, should also be discussed within the DEJR. 4. Trails and Bikeways: The DEIR should address the impact of the subject project on riding and hiking trails, and Class 1(paved off -road) bikeways. Many local and regional trails and bikeways follow flood control channels and other waterways within the subject watershed. The project should be designed so as to preserve the continuity of these trails and bikeways, both existing and proposed, and discussed within -the DEIR. Regional Class I bikeways are depicted on the OCTA Strategic Plan for bikeways. Regional trails are depicted on the County's Master Plan of Regional Riding and Hiking Trails. Using Figure 3 provided within the NOP as a guide, it appears that the project could potentially impact the following regional trails and bikeways: • A. Peters Canyon Trail B. Peters Canyon Bikeway E MAR-27-2002 16:35 FROM: ENVIRONMENTPLPLNG 17148346132 TO:+ C. San Diego Crock Bikeway D. Jeffiey Bikeway l;. Bonita Canyon Bikeway F. Irvine Coast Trail G. Shady Canyon Bikcway H. Quail Hill Bikeway I. Borrego Canyon Bikeway J. Serrano Creek Trail K. AT & SF Bikeway (generally parallel to the Metrolink line) Moreover, in the County's reviews of the City of Irvine's Norther Sphere and III Toro MCAS Planning Areas, the County requested additional trails and bikeways in those areas. We recommend the project proponent work with the County's Trails Planning staff to avoid precluding these potential trails and bikeways. CULTURAUHISTORICAL 5. The San Diego Crock watershed is a large area that has both known archaeological sites and the possibility of discovery of previously unrecorded sites As well as paleontological resources. A cultural resources management program should be prepared as part of the DBIR to guide the development of the natural treattnant system to minimize porarmtlal impacts to cultural resources. 6. The cultural resources mitigation language used in the proposed DEIR should address current standards for artifact curation and long-term collection management, We encourage the Irvine Ranch Water District to follow the Board of Supervlaors example in requiring that cultural resource artifacts, which may be discovered during the site development, be donated to a suitable repository that will maintain the collection for future scientific study and exhibition "within Orange County." Prior to donation, the certified cultural resources consultant should prepare the collection "to the point of • identification." Ki MPR-27-2002 16:36 FROM: ENVIRONMENTRLPLNG 17149346132 TO:+ P.005/005 • 8. The project proponent should be prepared to pay "potential curation fees" to the County or other suitable repository for the long-term curation and maintenance of donated collections. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the MOP. Please send -one complete set of the WEIR (that we can reproduce) to me at the above address when it becomes available. If you have any questions, please contact Charlotte Idarryman at (714) 834-2522. OR Sincerely, C TimothyNeely,M ger el Environmental Planning Services Division. 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Match 27, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P. E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P. 0. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 VIA FACSIMILE Dear Mr. Brandt: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding the San Diego Creek Watershed • Natural Treatment System Program, and for agreeing to Assistant City Manager Sharon Wood's request to transmit Newport Beach's comments after the 30-day review period. The City of Newport Beach has an Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee (EQAC), which has reviewed and made comments on the subject NOP and Initial Study. The City Council. reviewed EQAC's comments on March 26, 2002, and authorized me to transmit this letter as the City's comments. 1. Project Location The EIR should recognize the project's proximity to and potential impacts on the City of Newport Beach. In addition, the NOP was not clear as to the boundaries of the San Diego Watershed and why runoff from the John Wayne Airport area and Santa Ana/Delhi Channel are not included. It would be helpful for the EIR to explain these issues more fully. 2. Project Descr)ption The EIR should provide more detail than is available in the NOP. For instance, our review of the NOP and Initial Study did not uncover any discussion about the source of the water for the project Discussion of the quantity and quality of the water also'should be included. City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard • Newport Beach, California 92663-3884 • The EIR should include a more thorough description of the project goals. Such goals are indispensable to ascertaining impacts, devising mitigation and determining which, if any, impacts warrant a statement of overriding considerations. The lack of specificity regarding project goals also affects the determination and criteria for the site selection for the individual treatment sites. The EIR should address the criteria for site selection and discuss how these criteria are.applied to each site selected. The NOP notes that IRWD has determined that a Program EIR is the appropriate document to conduct the environmental analysis for the 37 sites. However, the NOP continues that it will also conduct a "project level" analysis for 11 sites. The EIR should discuss the rationale for such a distinction and provide a differential analysis for the project level analysis. 3. - Setting and Surrounding Land Uses Although the NOP discusses surrounding land uses and topographic features in the San Diego Creek Watershed, it does not discuss water sources, including surface water and groundwater basins, within the watershed. For instance, IRWD's Sand Canyon Reservoir may discharge wastewater into the watershed. To the extent that these sources impact or will be impacted by the project, they should be discussed in the EIR. 4. Summary of Probable Environmental Effects • Aesthetic Resources The Initial Study checklist notes that the project may degrade existing visual quality. The explanation states that the project would result in replacing "existing agricultural features" (farms?) with improved visual resources. The aesthetic metric that supports this conclusion is not provided, and greater explanation is needed in the EIR. Biological Resources The checklist indicates that the project will have extensive potentially significant impacts on biological resources. The explanation notes that the project may disturb existing wetlands and have additional impacts on other biological resources, and these impacts (direct, indirect and cumulative) will be evaluated for site selection. As indicated above, the EIR should identify, discuss and evaluate the criteria for such site selection. Geological and Soils Resources The discussion of geologic and soils impacts states that the project will not create significant impacts to such resources, including no significant impacts to marshes and open water areas. However, the discussion of biological resources indicates that the project may have impacts to existing wetlands. Since marshes are wetlands, there . appears to be a conflict between these two conclusions, which should be reconciled in the EIR. 2 11 Public Safety Resources Figure 3 of the NOP displays several sites in and around the former MCAS El Toro. Based on the City's understanding that this facility may have soils and groundwater contamination, the EIR should discuss whether the project will have an impact on public safety, including soils and groundwater contamination. 51 Mandatory Findings of Signifieance The Initial Study checklist notes that the project may result in mitigable impacts, and the explanation discusses individual air quality impacts. Rowever, the explanation does not discuss the cumulative impacts on air quality. This discussion should be included in the EIR. 6. References If IRWD has drafted other environmental documents for projects that are similar to the subject project, the EIR should contain references to them. r1 The City of Newport Beach has indicated our support for the NTS project, and that position has not changed. I hope that these comments help IRWD to prepare a complete EIR that will support approval of the project. If you have questions on our comments, please direct them to Sharon Wood at 644-3222. • Sin, Homer L. udau City Manager Cc: City Council Environmental Quality Affairs Committee 0 Community Development Department City of Irvine, One Civic Center Plaza, P.O. Box 19575, Irvine, California 92623-9575 (949) 724-6000 March 22, 2002 Mr. Paul D. Jones, H General Manager Irvine Ranch Water District 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619-7000 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation for the Natural Treatment System Program EIR Dear Mr. Jones: The City of Irvine has received and reviewed the information on the above referenced project and • has no comments at this time. Thank you for the opportunity to review the project. We welcome any additional information regarding this project, should it become available. I can be reached at (949) 724-6546 if you have any questions or comments. Sinc ely, U, S Associate Planner cc: Leslie Aranda, Principal Planner My Documents\AWAR-IRWDNOPNTSI.ltr PRINTM ON RF:rYrl Fn PAPFR Public Works / 1=ngineering City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way March 21, 2002 Tustin, CA 92780.3715 (714)573-3150 FAX (714) 734.8991 Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619-7000 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF NOP FOR IRWD NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM' Dear Mr. Brandt: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Natural Treatment System (NTS) within the San Diego Creek Watershed. In a letter dated March 8, 2002, the City of Tustin,requested an • extension of time to provide comments on the Notice of Preparation. The extension was requested because the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study did not provide enough information for the City of Tustin to adequately Identify the potential environmental impacts and whether 1he City's concerns as communicated to IRWD have been adequately addressed. As an extension was not granted, the City of Tustin reviewed the documents provided and has identified the following concerns and issues that should be addressed at this time or in the Draft Environmental Impact Report: General Comment — The exhibits used In the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study documents inadequately describe the project, Figure 3 cannot be cross-referenced with the information contained in Table 1. Please revise the exhibits accordingly and provide the complete NTS program document for review. 2. Notice of Preparation, Pages 2 and 3 — The document does not adequately describe the proposed project. The document indicates that the NTS program is being coordinated with the County and the applicable municipalities. However, the proposed project includes proposed site Improvements that have not been fully described or characterized (Site 14, MCAS Tustin); therefore, the City of Tustin does not concur with the proposed project at that site. Until such concurrence has been received, the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) cannot assume- that a proposed site is a feasible project for the purposes: of -- CEQA.- -is -the-IRWD considering eminent domain in -conjunction with thjs.project?, If so, the project does not list ali.discretionary actions assoclated with tfsa propo;e4.pr9jed The Cit)r:ofTustin recommends that Site 14 be removed,from NTS-consideration. at this.time. • Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS NOP March 21, 2002 page 2 3. Notice of Preparation, Page 3 — It is stated that the Initial Study and Notice of Preparation are being prepared "to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of constructing, operating, and maintaining" the NTS sites, including the "early construction of eleven sites, including Site 14 at MCAS Tustin." However, there is no information provided within the documentation as to who or what agency will be required to perform the construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed NTS sites. This information is also required and should be provided prior to moving forward with the environmental process. 4. Initial Study, Table 1 — The Initial Study describes two levels of projects being analyzed by the IRWD. At least two of the projects within the City of Tustin are described as requiring "Project -Level Analysis." These projects include Site No. 14 (MCAS Tustin) and Site 55 (Santa Ana, Santa Fe Channel). There is insufficient information provided in the Initial Study to support development of an environmental document by the IRWD. CEQA Section 15063 requires that the project be sufficiently described to permit the Lead Agency (and other interested parties) to determine whether evidence exists that the project may cause a significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study documents prepared by the IRWD do not provide sufficient information to reasonably conclude or conceive of the • scope of environmental impact potentially caused by the implementation of the project. The project description should be revised to include a discussion of the project level construction methods, size, alternative sites, aesthetics, etc. and re -circulated for review and comment. 5. Initial Study, Page 5 — The project should, but does not, identify a "Potentially Significant Impact" on Land Use and Planning (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan would be significantly impacted by the implementation of Site No. 14), Transportation/Traffic and Public Services (Site 14 would potentially negatively impact the construction of necessary backbone infrastructure at MCAS Tustin required for the redevelopment of the former base, preventing full redevelopment of the base, lowering property tax revenues, affectively limiting the City's ability to provide police and fire services). If implemented, Site 14 could also potentially prevent the construction of a proposed 10-acre elementary school'and a 40-acre high school at the site. Also affected but not discussed are: Population and Housing (Site 14 could delay/prevent the construction of housing proposed at MCAS Tustin including the provision of affordable/homeless housing), Aesthetics (Site 14 could negatively impact the aesthetic harmony of development currently anticipated at MCAS Tustin), Recreation (Site 14 could prevent the development of two 5-acre neighborhood parks planned in the vicinity of the project). In the City's previous discussions with IRWD, the City has indicated a willingness to support the potential integration of NTS into any golf course developed at MCAS Tustin but does not at this time support construction, operation, or maintenance of any facility on Site 14 until the property is sold by the City, a developer selected, and golf course parcel designed. Given the significant financial obligations that have now been placed on the City recently by the Navy and to resolve • litigation, interim NTS developed commitments are not possible at this site. Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS NOP March 21, 2002 Page 3 6. Initial Study, Page 15 — The IRWD has inappropriately focused their review of impacts to property in its current condition. The IRWD has not discussed Impacts to planned improvements at NTS sites. The City of Tustin has prepared a Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin that is now being implemented. Construction activities could be permitted prior to the conclusion of the IRWD planning process, again emphasizing the need for IRWD to closely coordinate with affected property owners, the City of Tustin, and other local agencies. 7. Initial Study, Page 18 — Land Use and Planning — The proposed "Sites" are identified as located "within or adjacent to existing flood control channels, creeks, and tributaries.' Further, it is concluded that "the proposed marsh and open water areas would be compatible with existing and proposed land uses, " Also, the document states that the "sites would not conflict with any plans, policies or regulations established to protect the environment" However, no discussion is provided as to the serious potential for the project to cause a negative impact to community plans such as the implementation of a Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin. The document must be revised to address impacts to, Land Use and Planning In greater consultation with the City of Tustin. 8. The Draft Program Environmental Impact Report should fully address the potential for • short- term noise, traffic, and air quality impacts associated with construction activities. Mitigation measures should be Included to minimize these short-term impacts. For the Tustin sites, construction hours and noise should be required to be consistent with, or more restrictive than, the regulations contained in Tustin City Code Sections 4600 st seq. 9. Two of the four NTS sites proposed in the Tustin area are adjacent to existing residential communities, and the remaining sites are proposed to be within and adjacent to future neighborhoods. The City of Tustin encourages the Irvine Ranch Water District to solicit Input from the residents of these areas, Input should be considered early in the planning process through construction to ensure that any concerns are mitigated. The homeowners associations In these areas should be contacted at this stage in the planning process for possible informational meetings with representatives of IRWD. 10, The Draft Program Environmental Impact Report should provide property ownership Information for each of the proposed NTS Program sites and should detail from which sites IRWD has obtained property owner approval. Alternative sites within the same tributary area should be identified where property owner approval has not been obtained. 11. The Draft Program EIR should identify the minimum number of NTS sites necessary for the NTS program to meet its objectives, 0 • Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS NOP March 21, 2002 Page 4 1J 12. Initial. Study, Page 15 — It is stated that the NTS sites "vary between.twb'and 24 acres in size." This statement conflicts with information provided to- the City of Tustin, .which indicates larger sites would be pursued. The City of Tustin at this time does not commit its support to any specific acreage until additional documentation is provided and, in the case of MCAS-Tustin, a developer's site design is completed. 13: The Draft Program EIR should address the potential for illegal dumping at NTS sites and include appropriate mitigation measures. 14. The NTS Program Master Plan should be provided when the Draft Program EIR is released so that the public has the most information available to adequately analyze the potential for environmental impacts. 15. The NTS sites proposed in Tustin are all located in high profile or highly'visible areas to the existing community or to proposed development. Therefore, if .property owner approval is obtained and development of the treatment sites proceeds, aesthetics will be an important issue. High quality fencing, compatible landscaping, and aggressive maintenance programs would be essential to ensure that the facilities complement the character of the Tustin community. The City of Tustin appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on this project. I would appreciate receiving a copy of the Draft EIR and the NTS Master Plan when they become available. If you have any questions regarding the City's comments, please call Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner, at (714) 573-3016 or Dana Ogdon, Redevelopment Program Manager, at (714) 573-3116. Sincerely, fsiZ Tim�D. iSedet Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: Christine A. Shingleton Elizabeth A. Binsack Dana Kasdan Doug Anderson Dana Ogdon Scott Reekstin SRemm mentaNRWD NTS NOP Comment Lettectloc ,tiOF_W. hMM(Y�s CITY OF ORANGE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FAX (714) 744.7222 ADMINISTRATION (714)744,7240 March 20, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt NTS Program Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 r �v vwa Dear randt, PLANNING DIVISION (714)744,7220 BUILDING DIVISION (714)744.7200 Subject: Notice of Preparation for a Program EIR for the Irvine Ranch Water District's San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program The City of Orange (City) has received and reviewed the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Irvine Ranch Water District's San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program. The project consists of a Master Plan that establishes a system for the natural treatment of storm runoff within the San Diego Creek watershed. The system consists of the construction of wetlands and natural biofilters within several jurisdictions within the watershed, including the City of Orange. The Public Works Department and Community Development Department have reviewed the NOP and determined that two proposed NTS sites are located within our City limits or sphere of influence. The City recognizes that it may be responsible for issuing permits or other approvals related to the siting and/or construction of the proposed NTS improvements, and is therefore considered a potential responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act. As such, the City would appreciate consideration of the following comments. 1. The proposed NTS site on Hewes Street appears to be located within the El Modena Park basin property. Although this property is owned by the Orange County Flood Control District, it contains picnic tables and barbeque pits and is used by Orange residents for passive recreation. Therefore, the City has an interest in maintaining the site's existing open space and passive recreational amenities. The City requests that short-term and long-term effects to recreation 0 ORANGE CIVIC CENTER 300 E. CHAPMAN AVE. ORANGE, CA 92866.1591 P.O. BOX 449 � nw,euw,ravcunnaer, Mr. Norris Brandt March 20, 2002 Page 2 • resulting from the use of El Modena Park as an NTS site be evaluated as part of the environmental document. 2. The proposed NTS site adjacent to the Eastern Transportation Corridor appears to be located within a riparian area in the proposed Santiago Hills lI project area, located within the City's sphere of influence. A mitigation measure was adopted by the City Council with approval of that project requiring preparation of a runoff management plan (ROMP). Further, environmental review must be conducted on that ROMP. We would like to make it clear that, for purposes of the ROMP, the City of Orange intends to perform environmental review independently and does not intend to rely on the Program EIR that 1RWD is preparing for the Natural Treatment System Program. Since that NTS site is located within the drainage area covered by that ROMP and since there will undoubtedly be considerable overlap between the environmental documents to be prepared for each project, the City of Orange would like assurance that all necessary coordination will take place between IRWD and the City to achieve consistency between both efforts. Please feel free to contact Stan • Soo-Hoo, Planning Manager for the East Orange area for additional information. Mr. Soo-Hoo may be reached at (714) 744-7220. 3. Finally, the aforementioned NTS site appears to be located outside of the San Diego Creek Watershed boundary (please refer to Figure 3 of the NOP). It is important to note that this location drains primarily to Handy Creek and ultimately to Santiago Creek, not to San Diego Creek. The City requests that clarification be provided addressing the inclusion of this site as part of the San Diego Creek Watershed NTS. The above comments and observations are based on material provided in the NOP, including a map that shows two NTS within the Orange City limits or its sphere of influence. The City has noticed, however, that a separate document entitled "Q&A San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System" contains a map showing many additional sites within Orange's sphere of influence. If these additional sites indicate work to be undertaken as part of the project for which the NOP was prepared, we will need more detailed information in order to properly respond. The City of Orange appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above -referenced project and looks forward to reviewing the Draft EIR upon its completion. Please feel free to contact me at (714) 744-7220 should you have any questions. Mr. Norris Brandt March 20, 2002 Page 3 Sincerely, Oit'-4c Q�—� Alice Angus, AICP Community Development Director cc: Karen Sully, Planning Manager Stan Soo Hoo, East Orange Community Planning Manager Roger Hohnbaum, Assistant City Engineer Robert Von Schimelmann, Public Works Maintenance Division Manager Jennifer McDonald, Associate Planner/Environmental Review Coordinator E • 0 • • Community Development Department March 8, 2002 Irvine Ranch Water District Paul Jones, II, General Manager 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, California 92619-7000 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR EXTENDED REVIEW PERIOD Dear Mr. Jones: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 � (7 4) 573-3100 • /� O46 Thank you for providing the City of Tustin with a copy of the Notice of Preparation for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program. As noted in the Notice of Preparation and the Initial Study, the NTS project has the potential for significant environmental impacts, and four of the 37 proposed NTS Program sites would be located in Tustin. Because the information provided in the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study does not specifically describe what is proposed at individual sites and the City of Tustin has not received copies of the draft NTS Program reports, we are unable to adequately identify the potential environmental impacts and whether the City's concerns as communicated to IRWD to this date have been adequately addressed. Therefore, we request copies of all available background information and draft NTS Program reports and a review period of 45 days or more after receipt of the documents to provide adequate time to review the documents and provide comments on the Notice of Preparation. Thank you for considering our request. If you have any questions, please call me at (714) 573- 3031. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Binsack Director of Community Development cc: Christine Shingleton • Tim S Dana Ogd Ogdon Scott Reekstin SR:env1ron/1RWD NTS Extension Request Letter.doc Gary L. Granville Orange County Clerk -Recorder P. O. Box 238 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Office of the Orange County Clerk -Recorder Memorandum SUBJECT: Environmental Impact Reports Amendment of "Public Resources Code, Section 21092.3" The attached notice was received, filed and a copy was posted on 2 2(P d2 It remained posted for 20 (twenty) days. Gary L. Granville • County Clerk -Recorder of the State of California In and for thq."ftf�Oraraaa_ By: ""��uG� Deputy Public Resource Code 21092.3 The notices required pursuant to Sections 21080.4 and 21092 for an environmental Q r=d shall be posted In the office of the County Clerk of each county *** in which the be located and shall remain posted for a period of 30 days. The notice recuimd = All notices filed pursuant to this section shall be available for public inspection, and shall be posted ***within 24 hours of receipt in the office of the County Clerk. Each notice shall remain posted for a period of 30 days. ***Thereafter, the clerk shall return the notice to the local 11 ad agency ***within a notation of the period it was posted. The Iocaljud agency shall retain the notice for not less than nine months. Additions or changes by underline; deletions by *** .h 6*6 wSNB RANf1i WpPAaN�4T IRYINER CII WATER DISTRICT 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue •P.O. Box 57000 -Irvine, Caldoina 92619.70W •(949) 45353W-wmv.irwdam February 20, 2002 Dear Interested Citizen/Agency: The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) is the lead agency on a new chapter in protection of the San Diego Creek Watershed (Watershed) — the Natural Treatment System. The Natural Treatment System (NTS) is the next step in what has been more than a 20-year master planning process for this important area, which drains to the Upper Newport Bay. The NTS is being developed in close cooperation with the County of Orange and cities within the drainage area. Through the creation of man-made wetlands, the NTS will use natural ecosystems to remove sediment, nutrients, pathogens/germs and other contaminants from both low -flow and small storm runoff. In addition, the NTS will provide a natural resource, riparian habitat and wildlife benefits throughout the Watershed. • Enclosed is the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Natural Treatment System Program EIR for your review. We have scheduled three public scoping meetings in the next few weeks and invite you attend. At the scoping meetings the environmental consultant will provide an overview of the NTS Program as it will be studied in the Program EIR. We will provide an update on the NTS Program preparation status, review the initial list of sites, provide preliminary results from our technical analyses, invite comments, and answer questions from the community. Our goal is to ensure this is a collaborative process with community and watershed interests. Public scoping meetings will be held as follows: Tuesday, March 5 Irvine Ranch Water District 7:00 p.m. 15600 Sand Canyon Irvine, CA Wednesday, March 6 Santiago Elementary School 7:00 p.m. 24982 Rivendell Dr. Lake Forest, CA Thursday, March 14 Peters Canyon Elementary School 7:00 p.m. 26900 Peters Canyon Road Tustin, CA 0 1RWD looks forward to working with the community as we move forward with the NTS Program and welcoine the community's input. Information on the NTS Program can be obtained by calling IRWD Cpmmunity Relations at (949) 453-5300 or on-line by visiting the NTS Web site at www.naturaltreatmentsystem.org. Sincerely, Fm/ a�a Paul D. Jones, II General Manager Encl.'- 0 0 • • 11 NOTICE OF PREPARATION FOR PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) DATE: PROGRAM: LEAD AGENCY: AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGS February 20, 2002 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program p O S T E O Irvine Ranch Water District FEB a & 2002 INTRODUCTION: GARY RANVILLE,ClelkRecOltler BY —DEPUTY The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), a California Water District, is the Lead Agency and is preparing a Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program (NTS Program). We request your input and views as to the scope and content of the Program EIR with respect to your agency's statutory responsibilities or your organization's interests in connection with the proposed NTS Program. Where applicable, your agency may need to use the Program EIR for associated permits or approvals within your jurisdiction. IRWD also seeks input from the public regarding the scope and content of the Program EIR. The location, description and potential environmental effects of the NTS Program are summarized below. An Environmental Initial Study Checklist (IS) has been prepared to assess the potential scope and content of the EIR; the Initial Study is on file and available for review at IRWD. Three public scoping meetings will be held to provide opportunities to learn more about the project and to comment on the scope of the environmental issues to be addressed in the Program EIR. The scoping meeting dates, times and locations are as follows: March 5, 2002 @ 7 PM at IRWD Headquarters; 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue, Irvine D March 6, 2002 @ 7 PM at Santiago Elementary School; 24982 Rivendell Drive, Lake Forest March 14, 2002 @ 7 PM at Peters Canyon Elementary School; 26900 Peters Canyon Road, Tustin PROGRAM LOCATION: The proposed NTS Program consists of improvements within the San Diego Creek watershed, a 122 square mile area located in central Orange County. Specifically, the watershed encompasses the Cities of Irvine and Tustin and portions of unincorporated Orange County and portions of the Cities of Lake Forest, Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, Orange, Santa Ana, and Newport Beach. The watershed includes tributaries which drain into San Diego Creek and ultimately into Upper Newport Bay. The watershed is bounded by the Lomas de Santiago Hills to the north, the San Joaquin Hills to the south and the Santa Ana -Delhi watershed and the Pacific Ocean to the west. Drainages within the watershed include: Ague Chinon Wash, Bee Canyon, Bommer Canyon Creek, Bonita Canyon, Borrego Canyon, Hicks Canyon, Peters Canyon Wash, Rattlesnake Canyon, Round Canyon, Sand Canyon, San Diego Creek, Serrano Creek, Shady Canyon Creek, and Trabuco Channel. Refer to Figure 1 which is map of the San Diego Creek Watershed. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The proposed program that will be evaluated in the Program EIR is the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program (NTS Program) which has been prepared by 1RWD. The Program includes a Master Plan which is being developed to describe the watershed -wide system for the natural treatment of low -flow and initial storm runoff generated within the San Diego Creek watershed. The proposed NTS Program consists of constructed water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofifters. These take advantage of naturally occurring physical, chemical, and biological resources to treat the runoff. The natural and man-made drainage features within the watershed all drain via San Diego Creek and Its tributaries into Upper Newport Bay. These flows then enter Lower Newport Bay on their way to the Pacific Ocean. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified the San Diego Creek . Watershed as having impaired water quality pursuant to Section 303 (d) of the Federal Clean Water Act. To address this designated impairment, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) have been adopted by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) for designated pollutants including nutrients, sediment and pathogen indicators. The SARWQCB is in the process of developing TMDLs for toxic substances (pesticides and potentially heavy metals) and selenium. The County of Orange and co- permittee cities are also under a newly issued National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for discharges from the municipal separate stormwater system that requires the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce impacts of stormwater pollution. The SARWQCB Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit requires the County and cities to institute BMPs to reduce pollutant loads in the watershed by: 1) reducing pollutants in storm system discharges to the "maximum extent practicable" and 2) complying with the established TMDLs. The NTS Program is a component of the Orange County watershed management strategy which is designed to comply with the MS4 Permit. The NTS Program is being proposed as one of the key elements to also comply with TMDL requirements as they proceed to implementation. The development of the NTS Program is being coordinated with the County and the applicable municipalities in the watershed. 2 The NTS Program describes the locations and preliminary designs for the utilization of three types of natural treatment systems that would be constructed at 37 locations throughout the San Diego Creek watershed: Type I —Existing or Proposed Off-line Water Quality Wetlands; Type II —Existing or Proposed In -Line Water Quality Wetlands; and Type III —Water Quality Wetlands within Existing or Proposed Detention Basins. These master plan elements, together with other BMPs being implemented by the County and other agencies within the watershed will reduce pollutant loadings and help meet adopted TMDLs and MS4 Permit requirements.' Refer to Figure 2 which depicts 'the three NTS facility types. Refer also to Figure 3 which depicts the proposed locations of NTS Program sites. The NTS Program facilities will be designed to insure that the habitat and structural features of the program fully protect the flood protection capabilities and maintainability of the streams, channels and retarding basins, which are being utilized. The NTS Program is projected to result in an estimated 50 percent reduction in sediment (125,000 tons/year), an average nitrogen load reduction of 160,000 Ibs/year (50 percent reduction), an approximate 50 percent reduction in phosphorus, and a 20 percent reduction in the mean concentrations of fecal coliform (indicator for pathogens). It also would provide wildlife and open space benefits. In accordance with Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, IRWD has determined that a Program EIR is the appropriate environmental document to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of constructing, operating, and maintaining the 37 proposed NTS • Program sites. The program -level of analysis will address the NTS Program impacts on a regional and subregional scale within the San Diego Creek watershed. Eleven (11) of the proposed NTS sites will be evaluated at a project level of detail to obtain the necessary environmental clearances for early construction. SUMMARY OF PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: The probable environmental effects associated with the proposed NTS Program are described in the Environmental Initial Study Checklist (IS) which is on file at IRWD. All questions answered "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" in the IS will be analyzed further in the Program EIR. All questions answered "Less than Significant Impact" or "No Impact" will not be analyzed further in the Program EIR unless substantive evidence is provided during the (NOP) and scoping process. The following is a summary of the subject areas identified in the IS that will be analyzed in the EIR and the areas of particular interest: Agricultural Resources A number of the proposed NTS sites are located within or adjacent to existing agricultural fields. Removal of land currently used for agriculture or designated as prime . farmlands could result in a significant impact to agricultural operations in Orange County. Each NTS site will be evaluated at the program -level for the potential to impact future agricultural operations. 2. Biological Resources The proposed NTS Program is Intended to have a beneficial effect on the water quality Within the San Diego• Creek watershed and in Upper Newport Bay, It will also result in a beneficial impact on aquatic plants and wildlife, and on avian species that use habitat areas in the watershed and In Upper Newport Bay for foraging and nesting activities. Implementation of the NTS sites may result in Impacts to existing wetlands and upland habitats, sensitive plant and wildlife species, and transient or migratory wildlife. The direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to biological resources will be evaluated for proposed NTS sites in a focused Biological Resources Technical Study that will be incorporated into the Program EIR. Focused surveys and biological resources habitat mapping will be conducted as part of this study. The Biological Resources Technical Study and Program EIR will include an analysis of the long-term NTS site maintenance requirements. 3. Cultural Resources Implementation of NTS sites would require grading. The potential for impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources will be investigated by researching existing data bases, records searches and conducting a literature review. 4. Hydrology and Water Quality The proposed NTS Program would provide a beneficial impact on water quality in San • Diego Creek, In tributaries to the Creek, and ultimately to .Upper Newport Bay which receives drainage from the watershed. The NTS sites would remove sediment, harmful nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous), pathogens and toxic pollutants, resulting in improved water quality within the watershed, Upper Newport Bay and ultimately in flows reaching the Pacific Ocean. The NTS Program would, however, result in a concentration of pollutants in constructed NTS sites that would require monitoring and removal. Potential hydrology and water quality impacts will be evaluated in the Program EIR, 5. Public Safety (Including vector control) The proposed NTS sites could present public health and safety concerns associated With open water bodies and the risk the sites present to human contact and vector attraction. The NTS Program includes recommendations to control mosquitoes and describes long-term vector and pest monitoring measures. 6. Other Concerns The following topics will also be evaluated in the NTS Program EIR: Aesthetics, Hazardous Materials Management, Utilities/Service Systems, and Noise Effects. Alternatives and other CEQA mandated sections will be Included. • 4 Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response to this NOP must be sent • no later than 30 days after receipt of this notice; responses are due no later than March 22, 2002. Please send your response to the attention of Norris Brandt, P.E., NTS Program Manager, Irvine Ranch Water District, P.O. Box 57000, Irvine, California 92219-7000. Please include the name and phone number of a contact person with your agency. Signature: Date: February 20, 2002 Norris Brandt Title: NTS Program Manager Telephone: (949) 453-5300 E 0 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Plan Irvine Ranch Water District 2.25 a 225 wiles Q San Diego creek Watershed Q PortionofSantiegoCreek Watershad — Freeways and State Routes Channels and thainaW Features Figure 1 ,%w CONSULTING C�1 is • Tvne I Offline Water Quality Treatment Wetlands WAM Iwwn Wntom , Type II In -line Water Quality Treatment Wetlands Type III Water Quality Treatment Wetlands within Existing or Proposed Detention Basin Proposed NTS Facility Types Natural Treatment System Plan Irvine Ranch Water District Exhibit 2 CONSULTING Source: GaaSYntac Consultants, 2002. R\Projects\IRWDU001NOPS>thlb02 pof • • 0 Fi-' t'—C "i ED Nancy M Donaven 4831 Los Patos Avenue Huntington Beach, CA 92648 714/840 7496 March 6, 2002 Norris Brandt, P.E., NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619 Regarding: NTS Scoping meeting, 3/5/02 Dear Mr. Brandt, First, I want to thank you and the district for planning a "natural' treatmerrt system for urban runoff. A natural technique I believe needs to be considered first before we get into cement and machines. In some ways it seems sometimes that we have allowed our engineering talents to run amok! I have some questions related to the meeting last night and I suppose they would be appropriate for consideration in the EIR: 1) It seems to me that whatever is done upstream will affect what is happening downstream (probably a no-brainer). Therefore, in what order will the various sites be constructed? Will they be constructed starting at the top of the watershed, etc? 2) In terns of the effect of one site on another, will they be monitored at the entrance to a site and at the outflow point of a site? 3) I am assuming that the offline sites would not have a measurable effect on the on line sites. If this is not the case then I think their effect should be described. 4) I hope that there will be lots of monitoring for many types of contaminants in order to make this work useful for other communities which will need to be building on this experience. I would hike to be notified when the EIR is available. Thank you again. Sincerely, • Notice of Preparation and Responses to the Notice of Preparation November 2002 wAaomarr IRTR OCH WHER DISTRICT 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue • P.O. Box 57000 •Irvine, California 92619.7000 4533300 • wmuirwdcan To: Subject: MEMORANDUM November 15, 2002 NOP Recipient From: Paul D. Jones, II General Manager Transmittal of Revised Notice of Preparation (NOP) for San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program EIR. Dear NOP Recipient: The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) is the lead agency for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Plan. IRWD issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in February 2002. The NOP for this Program EIR has been revised and, is being re -issued due to changes in the project description that have occurred since the original NOP was issued. Specifically, three NTS sites have been eliminated, two new sites have been added and some sites have been renumbered. The • attached NOP also provides a description of the overall Plan, which has not changed from the February 2002 -NOP. As described in the attached NOP, changes in the locations of a few of the NTS sites have not resulted in a change to the scope of the EIR analysis identified previously in February 2002. The NTS Plan is the next step in what has been more than a 20-year master planning process for the San Diego Creek Watershed, which drains to the Upper Newport Bay. The NTS Plan is being developed in close cooperation with the County of Orange and cities within the drainage area. Through the creation of man-made wetlands, the NTS will use natural ecosystems to remove sediment, nutrients, pathogens/germs and other contaminants from both low -flow and small storm runoff. In addition, the NTS will provide a natural resource, riparian habitat and wildlife benefits throughout the Watershed. During the first NOP period, three public scoping meetings were held throughout the watershed study area, during which an overview of the NTS Plan that is now being studied in the Program EIR was provided. The scoping meetings were held on: Tuesday, March 5, 2002 at the IRWD Headquarters; Wednesday, March 6, 2002 at Santiago Elementary School in Lake Forest; and Thursday, March 14, 2002 at Peters Canyon Elementary School in Tustin Ranch. The meetings were held to provide the opportunity to receive public comments and for IRWD and its consultants to answer questions from the community. Input received from these scooping meetings has been incorporated into the EIR process in the intervening period. IRWD looks forward to working with the community as we move forward with the NTS Plan and welcome the community's input, Information on the NTS Plan can be obtained by calling IRWD • Community Relations at (949) 453-5300 or on-line by visiting the NTS Web site at www.naturaltreatmentsystem.oro. The revised Notice of Preparation 30-day public review period will end on December 15, 2002. IRWD encourages public comment on the NTS Program. Please send comments no later than December 15, 2002 to the attention of Norris Brandt, P.E., NTS Program Manager, Irvine Ranch Water District, P.O. Box 57000, Irvine, CA 92610. REVISED NOTICE OF PREPARATION FOR PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) • DATE: November 15, 2002 PROGRAM: San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Plan LEAD AGENCY: Irvine Ranch Water District INTRODUCTION: The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), a California Water District, is the Lead Agency and is preparing a Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Plan (NTS Plan). IRWD issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in February 2002. The NOP for this Program EIR is being re -issued due to changes in the project description that have occurred since the original NOP was issued. Specifically, some NTS sites have been eliminated, a few new sites have been added, and a portion of the City of Tustin within the former MCAS Tustin has been removed from the NTS Plan. This NOP supercedes the February 2002 NOP and provides more specific locations for the NTS Facility sites; however, the overall description of the Plan has not changed substantially from the February 2002 • NOR As described below, changes in the locations of a few of the NTS sites have not resulted in a change to the scope of the EIR analysis identified previously in February 2002. Additionally, this NOP summarizes several options being considered to provide species -related assurances necessary for the efficacy of the long-term maintenance program for NTS water quality facilities and the continuing function of any flood control facilities within which NTS water quality wetlands are proposed to be constructed. We request your input and views as to the scope and content of the Program EIR with respect to your agency's statutory responsibilities or your organization's interests in connection with the proposed NTS Plan. Where applicable, your agency may need to use the Program EIR for associated permits or approvals within your jurisdiction. IRWD also seeks input from the public regarding the scope and content of the Program EIR. The location, description and potential environmental effects of the NTS Plan are summarized below. An Environmental Initial Study Checklist (IS) has been prepared to assess the potential scope and content of the EIR; the Initial Study is on file and available for review at IRWD. During the first NOP period, three public scoping meetings were held throughout the watershed study area, during which an overview of the NTS plan that is now being studied in the Program EIR was provided. The scoping meetings were held on: Tuesday, March 5, 2002 at the IRWD Headquarters in Irvine; Wednesday, March 6, 2002 at Santiago Elementary School in Lake Forest; and Thursday, March 14, 2002 at Peters Canyon Elementary School in Tustin Ranch. The meetings were held to provide is the opportunity to receive public comments and for IRWD and its consultants to answer questions from the community. No new environmental topics beyond those described in the NOP were raised at the public scoping meetings in March 2002. • NTS PLAN LOCATION: The proposed NTS Plan consists of improvements within the San Diego Creek watershed, a 122 square mile area located in central Orange County. Specifically, the watershed encompasses the Cities of Irvine and portions of unincorporated Orange County and portions of the Cities of Lake Forest, Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin, and Newport Beach. The watershed includes tributaries which drain into San Diego Creek and ultimately into Upper Newport Bay. The watershed boundary is formed by the Lomas de Santiago Hills to the north, the San Joaquin Hills to the south, the Santa Ana -Delhi watershed and the Pacific Ocean to the west, and the Aliso Creek watershed to the east. Drainages within the watershed include: Agua Chinon Wash, Bee Canyon, Bommer Canyon Creek, Bonita Canyon, Borrego Canyon, Hicks Canyon, Peters Canyon Wash, Rattlesnake Canyon, Round Canyon, Sand Canyon, San Diego Creek, Serrano Creek, Shady Canyon Creek, and Trabuco Channel. Refer to Figure 1 which is a map of the San Diego Creek Watershed. The proposed NTS plan also includes facilities that would be located in a small portion of the Santiago Creek watershed draining primarily into Upper Peters Canyon Reservoir and to Santiago Creek. The drainage areas are within the East Orange General Plan area in close proximity to SR-241. • PLAN DESCRIPTION: The proposed plan that will be evaluated in the Program EIR is the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Plan (NTS Plan) which has been prepared by IRWD. The NTS Plan describes a watershed -wide system for the natural treatment of low -flow and initial storm runoff generated within the San Diego Creek Watershed and a small portion of the Santiago Creek watershed. The proposed NTS Plan consists of a system of constructed water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofilters. These take advantage of naturally occurring physical, chemical, and biological resources to treat the runoff. The natural and man-made drainage features within the San Diego Creek watershed all drain via San Diego Creek and its tributaries into Upper Newport Bay. These flows then enter Lower Newport Bay on their way to the Pacific Ocean. The portions of the project area located within the Santiago Creek watershed drain primarily into Upper Peters Canyon Reservoir and to Santiago Creek, a tributary of the Santa Ana River. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified the San Diego Creek watershed as having impaired water quality pursuant to Section 303 (d) of the Federal Clean Water Act. To address this designated impairment, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) have been adopted by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) for designated pollutants including nutrients, sediment and pathogen indicators, as well as for toxic substances (e.g., heavy metals) and selenium. The • County of Orange and co-permittee cities are also under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, issued January 18, 2002, for discharges from the K municipal separate stormwater system that requires the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce impacts of stormwater pollution. The SARWQCB Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit requires the • County and cities to institute BMPs to reduce pollutant loads in the watershed by: 1) reducing pollutants in storm system discharges to the "maximum extent practicable" and 2) complying with the established TMDLs. The NTS Plan is intended to function as a component of the Orange County watershed management strategy which is designed to comply with the MS4 Permit. The NTS Plan is being proposed as one of the key elements to also comply with TMDL requirements as they proceed to implementation. The development of the NTS Plan is being coordinated with the County and the applicable municipalities In the watershed. The City of Tustin has requested that sites on or adjacent to former Marine Corps Air Station Tustin (Tustin Base) be removed from further consideration, due to current uncertainty as to how Tustin Base redevelopment will proceed and how such redevelopment will be funded. The City does not want to add further encumbrances, perceived or real, to the Tustin Base property until the uncertainty is resolved. In an effort to comply with the City's request, under the Primary Plan, Site 14 (MCAS Tustin — Northeast, Runoff), Site 55 (Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel), the portion of Site 64 (Westpark In -Line) within the City of Tustin will not be included. However, to provide flexibility In implementation of the NTS Plan and also accommodate the City should it elect to participate in the NTS Plan in the future, these sites and areas are included in an Alternative Plan, which would also be evaluated within the scope of the Program EIR. Site 67 (Clenega de las Ranas) is currently expected to be constructed somewhere in the vicinity of Barranca Parkway and Harvard Avenue, which is within a mile of the Tustin Base. However the exact location has not been determined at this time and it could ultimately be located anywhere between Interstate 5 (upstream) and San Joaquin Marsh (downstream), and within one mile of the Peters Canyon/San Diego Creek Channels. Due to the preliminary, program -level nature of the siting information and the regional significance of this selenium removal facility, Site 67 remains in the Primary Plan. The Program EIR will address IRWD's intention to apply for one or more appropriate water rights permits for the diversion of water from drainages within the San Diego Creek and Santiago Creek watersheds to the water quality wetlands included within the NTS Plan. The water rights will assure IRWD's continued ability to operate the NTS should any persons seek to divert waters from the same streams in the future. IRWD will apply to the Division of Water Rights, State Water Resources Control Board to obtain such rights in addition to any riparian rights IRWD may have, which do not require a permit. The Program EIR will provide environmental Information to fulfill the requirements for environmental review in connection with the applications. The NTS Plan describes the locations and preliminary designs for the utilization of three types of natural treatment systems that could be constructed at 32 locations throughout • the San Diego Creek watershed and in a portion of the Santiago Creek watershed: 3 ■ Type I —Existing or Proposed Off-line Water Quality Wetlands; ■ Type II --Existing or Proposed In -Line Water Quality Wetlands; and ■ Type III --Water Quality Wetlands within Existing or Proposed Detention Basins. These master plan elements, together with other BMPs being implemented by the County and other agencies within the watershed will reduce pollutant loadings and help meet adopted TMDLs and MS4 Permit requirements. Refer to Figure 2 which depicts the three NTS facility types. 'Refer to Figures 3a and 3b which depict the proposed locations of Regional Retrofit Facilities and Local Facilities proposed for the NTS Plan. Refer also to Table 1 (attached) which lists all of the proposed NTS sites. The NTS Plan facilities will be designed to insure that the habitat and structural features of the plan fully protect the flood protection capabilities and functions of the streams, channels and retarding basins which are being utilized. The NTS Plan is projected to result in an estimated 23 to 32 percent (average 30 percent) reduction in sediment, from urban and open spaces (1,900 tons/year), an average nitrogen load reduction of 230,000 Ibs/year (over 50 percent reduction), an approximate 23 to 25 percent reduction in phosphorus, and an approximate over 25 percent reduction in the average concentrations of fecal coliform (indicator for pathogens) during storms. Fecal coliform levels would be reduced such that the 30-day average geometric mean concentrations TMDL standard would be met during the dry season. Total metal loads from urban and open land sources would be reduced by approximately 11 percent for copper and lead, and by approximately 18 percent for zinc. • The NTS Plan would also provide wildlife and open space benefits. In accordance with Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, IRWD has determined that a Program EIR is the appropriate environmental document to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of constructing, operating, and maintaining the 32 proposed NTS Plan sites. The program -level analysis will address the NTS Plan impacts on a regional and subregional scale within the San Diego Creek Watershed. As noted in Table 1, ten (10) of the proposed NTS sites will also be evaluated at a project -level of detail to obtain the necessary environmental clearances for early construction. Refer to Table 1 for a listing of NTS sites and the level of CEQA analysis proposed for the EIR. Future project -level analysis of potential environmental effects (pursuant to CEQA) for the Local Facilities and one Regional Retrofit Facility will rely partially on this program EIR. It is also anticipated that the EIR will be used in the future by responsible agencies with authority over certain aspects of the NTS Plan, including ,the California Department of Fish and Game (e.g., for 1601/1603 permits and NCCP purposes), the Santa Ana RWQCB (e.g., for 401 Certification), local agencies doing analysis of projects into which these NTS facilities are incorporated, as well as federal agencies for NEPA compliance (e:g., the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). The Program EIR will provide environmental information to fulfill the requirements for environmental review in connection with the applications. It should also be noted that the NTS project is being coordinated with the "Special Area • Management Plan (SAMP)" work being conducted for the San Diego Creek Watershed by the Los Angeles District of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (in 2 partnership with the California Department of Fish and Game). The SAMP is intended to provide a comprehensive aquatic resource plan to achieve a balance between aquatic resource protection and reasonable economic development. There are two • main goals of the SAMP process: to establish a watershed -wide aquatic resource reserve program, and to minimize individual and cumulative impacts of future projects in these watersheds. At the end of the SAMP process, there will be areas that will be protected and preserved, as well as areas where future activities would be allowed to occur, provided that they meet specific criteria developed for protection of the watersheds. The NTS project is consistent with and will likely enhance SAMP water quality objectives for the watershed. The NTS EIR, as well as the SAMP environmental documentation, will be used to acquire necessary permits from the affected regulatory agencies. SUMMARY OF PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: The probable environmental effects associated with the proposed NTS Plan are described in the Environmental Initial Study Checklist (IS) which is on file at IRWD. All questions answered "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" in the IS will be analyzed further in the Program EIR. All questions answered "Less than Significant Impact" or "No Impact" will not be analyzed further in the Program EIR unless substantive evidence is provided during the (NOP) review process. The following is a summary of the subject areas identified in the IS that will be analyzed in the EIR and the areas of particular interest: 1. Agricultural Resources is A number of the proposed NTS sites are located within or adjacent to existing agricultural fields. Removal of land currently used for agriculture or designated as prime farmlands could result in a significant impact to agricultural operations in Orange County. Each NTS site will be evaluated at the program -level for the potential to impact future agricultural operations. 2. Biological Resources The proposed NTS Plan is intended to have a beneficial effect on the water quality within the San Diego Creek watershed and in Upper Newport Bay. By improving water quality overall, the NTS is intended to result in a beneficial impact on aquatic plants and Wildlife, and on avian species that use habitat areas In the watershed and in Upper Newport Bay for foraging and nesting activities. Similar goals and benefits are Intended for the portions of the Santiago Creek watershed within which NTS facilities are proposed to be located. Given the projected benefits to species and associated habitats, the NTS is expected to enhance values within the two portions of the County of Orange NCCP/NCP reserve system addressed by the NTS — Upper Newport Bay and Upper Peters Canyon Reservoir. These potential benefits of the NTS Plan will be reviewed in the EIR. Implementation of the NTS sites may result in Impacts to existing wetlands and upland . habitats, sensitive plant and wildlife species, and transient or migratory wildlife. It is anticipated that emergent marsh and riparian habitat vegetation will be included at some 5 of the NTS sites. The direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to biological resources will be evaluated for proposed NTS sites in a focused Biological Resources Technical Study • that will be incorporated into the Program EIR. Focused surveys and biological resources habitat mapping will be conducted as part of this study. The EIR will also address biological issues associated with the creation and long-term maintenance of NTS water quality wetlands, including the habitat values of the wetlands themselves and potential species considerations associated with long-term maintenance of the NTS water quality wetlands required to assure their continuing efficacy and resultant benefits for downstream habitat areas. The EIR will also address IRWD's intent to obtain long-term assurance authorizations for the ongoing operation and maintenance of the Regional Retrofit and Local NTS sites through the provisions of a Major Amendment to the Central -Coastal Subregional Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) and associated NCCP/HCP Implementation Agreement. For species that are already considered "identified species" under the County of Orange Central and Coastal NCCP/HCP, the EIR will address any measures required by the NCCP/HCP Implementation Agreement with respect to such species. IRWD is a participating landowner in the NCCP/HCP. IRWD may pursue a major amendment to the NCCP/HCP to obtain authorization for conditional coverage of additional listed and non -listed species not currently included as "Identified Species" pursuant to Section 8.8 of the NCCP/HCP Implementation Agreement (IA). Such species coverage would apply only to NTS Plan facilities and would not be applicable to • any other portions of the NCCP plan area, including the Reserve System. The amendment would be accomplished in accordance with the requirements of Section 10.0 of the NCCP/HCP Implementation Agreement to amend the NCCP/HCP Adaptive Management to include the NTS program in consideration of the extensive water quality benefits to Upper Newport Bay and Upper Peters Canyon Reservoir portions of the NCCP/HCP Reserve System. The amendment would include the identification of the overall operating and maintenance program and any additional management or minimization measures determined necessaryto reduce the associated effects of these activities on the new "Identified Species." Additionally, under any of the above alternative approaches to assurances for long-term maintenance of the NTS program facilities, IRWD may seek to address any potential impacts on least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher under the conditionally covered species provisions of the NCCP/HCP as provided for in the NCCP/HCP Implementation Agreement. 3. Cultural Resources Implementation of NTS sites would require grading. The potential for impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources will be investigated by researching existing databases, records searches and conducting a literature review. A 4. Hydrology and Water Quality The proposed NTS Plan would provide a beneficial impact on water quality in San • Diego Creek, in tributaries to the Creek, and ultimately to Upper Newport Bay which receives drainage from the watershed, as well as portions of the Santiago Creek watershed. The NTS sites would remove sediment, harmful nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous), pathogens and toxic pollutants, resulting in improved water quality within the watershed, Upper Newport Bay and portions of the Santiago Creek watershed and ultimately in flows reaching the Pacific Ocean. The NTS Plan would, however, result in a concentration of pollutants in constructed NTS sites that would require monitoring and removal (e.g. disposal of sediments at a Class III sanitary landfill). Potential hydrology and water quality impacts will be evaluated in the Program EIR. 5. Public Safety (including vector control) The proposed NTS sites could present public health and safety concerns associated with open water bodies and the risk the sites could present to human contact and vector attraction. The NTS Plan includes recommendations to control mosquitoes and describes long-term vector and pest monitoring measures. Given current public health concerns, the EIR will examine any potential additional measures that might be required. 6. Other Concerns The following topics will also be evaluated in the NTS Program EIR: Aesthetics, • Hazardous Materials Management, Utilities/Service Systems, and Noise Effects. Alteratives and other CEQA mandated sections will be included. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response to this NOP must be sent no later than 30 days after receipt of this notice; responses are due no later than December 1512002. Please send your response to the attention of Norris Brandt, P.E., NTS Plan Manager, Irvine Ranch Water District, P.O. Box 57000, Irvine, Califomia 92219-7000. Please include the name and phone number of a contact person with your agency. Signature: Date: November 15, 2002 Norris Brandt Title: NTS Plan Manager Telephone: (9949) 453-5300 • 7 • Is • TABLE 1 NTS SITE LIST Regional Retrofit, Existing CEQA Site Facility Facility Name Facility Location Regional Analysis y No. Type or Local Facilities 25 1 Serrano Creek Lower E. comer of Bake Pkwyrroledo Regional Program/ Pro'ect 26 ll Woodbridge In -Line Between Alton Pkwy and Barranca p , E. of Culver Regional Program/ Project 27 I Barranca Off -Line N. of Barranca, E. of Jeffrey Regional Program/Project 46 1 San Joaquin Marsh — Existing NE comer Campus/University Regional Program/ Project 53 1 Caltrans SR133/1-5 Interchg. N. of 1-5/SR133 interchange Regional Program/ Project 54 1 Caltrans Dewatering Plant SE of Walnut Ave./Jamboree Rd. (within interch median Re tonal g Program/ Project II Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel Parallel to Santa Fe RR, between SR55 Regional Program/ Project 55* and Jamboree 56 III El Modena Park W. of Hewes St., N. of Fairhaven Av. Regional Program/ Project 62 I San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS I S. of Jamboree/Michelson Regional Program/Project 64* II West Park In -Line N. of Barranca Pkwy, E. of Jamboree Regional Program/ Project Cienega de Las Ranas (specific N of Barranca Pkwy./ Regional Program 67 I location to be determined) W of Harvard Ave. 13 III Rattlesnake Reservoir (no E. of Portola PkwyfW. of SR133 Existing Re Tonal Program/ Project chan es are proposed) 39 111 Sand Canyon Reservoir (no E. of Ridgeline/NE of Turtle Rock Drive Existing Regional Program/ Project changes are proposed) 6A- I Santiago Hills 11 (multiple basins) Santiago Canyon Rd., East Orange Local Program 6H 9 111 PA 1 — Eastfoot Retarding Basin NE of Portola Parkway Local Program 10 I PA 1 — Eastfoot Upper NE of Portola Parkway Local I Program 11 III PA 1 — Orchard Estates Retarding NE of Portola Parkway Local Program PA 1 — Lower Orchard Estates NE of Portola Parkway Local Program (multiple basins) I MCAS Tustin — Northeast, Runoff W. comer Jamboree/Edinger Local Program f I PA 1 — Eastfoot Lower NE of Portola Parkway Local Program III Trabuco Retarding Basin E. comer of Jeffrey Rd./Trabuco Rd. Local Program III Marshbum Retarding Basin NE of Irvine Blvd./SE of SR133 Local Program 31 III PA 17 West Basin SW of 1.405/Sand Canyon Av. Local Program 49 1 PA 17 Center Basin S. of 1405, E. of Shady Canyon Dr. Local Program 32 1 PA 17 East Basin SW of 1405/Laguna Canyon Local Program 42 1 PA 27 North Shady Canyon Drive Local Program 22 1 MCAS El Toro — Ague Chinon MCAS El Toro, NE of Barranca Pkwy Local Program 50 1 MCAS El Toro —Irvine Auto Ctr. E. of 1-5/S, of Bake Parkway Local Program 51 1 MCAS El Toro — Serrano S. of Muirlands Blvd/Alton Pkwy Local Program 52 1 MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon E. of 1-5/SR133 interchange Local Program 68 III PA 18 S. of 1405, east of Laguna Canyon Rd. Local Program 69 III PA 39 (multiple basins) S. of 1-405, east of SR 133 Local Program * All or portions of these sites are excluded from the Primary Plan but are included in the Altemative Plan. Tustin 8 a "41o44;6 r-i� s,k fanny SrldCa"n Wash W. Cyr Unincorporated �C,,�,, W..� d� 3• Lake Forest CanY� s�' Serrsno�' Laguna Hills San Diego Creek Watershed San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Plan FIR V. 225 0 I.2S Mlles Q San Diego Creek Watershed — Freeways and State Routes Channels and Drainage Features Figure 1 .. CONSULTING is • Tvne I Of line Water Quality Treatment Wetlands w,ve =A= wrn n Twe II In -line Water Quality Treatment Wetlands Type III Water Quality Treatment Wetlands within Existing or Proposed Detention Basin Proposed NTS Facility Types Natural Treatment System Plan Irvine Ranch Water District Sou¢o, GeoSpI..GorouIWnW.2002. Figure 2 CONSULTING • • • I OPM t I3 I'Alanui AYtnue� $ "Y�'• - If - SarN45Ve<C i - Gl� SFWk ite 6 Site 6H �� ej ' a cAaamad:w.enue ��' c'1 � 'L ✓ _ _ - F>mmorA � tie 6C - - - �T {{ _ Hospf� ct �1 I i y - �tI{�Ve.. A=ne,, H � d Sde 6 � Pwk e Site 6F Site 6D /, i 22 eke cavn•.r� Ar if j SrrE 66 tI ' Memorial ;{ , , f Site6 �pmeae Naui Aoa2park * a! �It`V I Site 12G illo s(11 °O 'i•; t COIuan6us I � Site 10 Site 9 Site 61 j Site 11 T TuslinRwch Site 12F 3 C+W CWISB Site12E 0, 17aonh0 o Site 12A SLte 12B r sr SITE 13 Raalcho ao'L �C�C' 0,iq�C aorrO�>Aa. R2M(CSrs3kC ° o4O QO�a �0�esc MeadgAood F�`° ftoservaar I - sr � c�milal S © T � - S'►te 12C _ ra'�0 o ° Park _ Qa a Tus:m °. Hid? Wildeaness ¢� Rese. l Lo\J Site 12D canYnn A<r,s, A°° P 1 Q -- 1 1 If // VC O Location of NTS Plan Facilities Natural Treatment System Plan Irvine Ranch Water District E s 0.75 0 0.75 1.5 Wiles • Project Level Sites — Watershed Boundary • Program Level Sites ® Potential Area for Locating Facility o Site 55 - Project Level Site; Site 67 - Program Level Site area is excluded from Primary Plan Region for Locating Site 14 - Program but included in Alternative Plan Level Site; area is excluded from o Site 64 (Tustin) - Project Level Site; Primary Plan but included in Alternative Plan area is excluded from Primary Plan but included in Alternative Plan Figure 3a CONSULTING :ems Eaae�xvrgooi as i��sa 01 u r-I U , b r , ,tee nj � Mw a '•,� Reserve ccrps SITE 64 (Tuttl " �R4 r w ,in to \ YrawsityaCaPJCrnie, Irvine Location of NTS Plan Facilities Natural Treatment System Plan Irvine Ranch Water District N W—< E s 0.75 0 0.75 1.5 Miles it ��e---Site 16 Ab .0 1 oak • , Creek Gdt Course Inane �alkry 'Couege Lakd�.. _ 27 r J Site 31—'° Unnowdia Site 32 uaive�° rty - R�aa Cm� it Site 49 o-- SITE 39 Ca Canyon �r^a Res`fxvoir Site 68 Site 42 SITE.53 • Project Level Sites — Watershed Boundary • Program Level Sites ® Potential Area for Locating Facility o Site 55 - Project Level Site; Site 67 - Program Level Site area is excluded from Primary Plan EJ Region for Locating Site 14 - Program but included in Alternative Plan Level Site; area is excluded from o Site 64 (Tustin) - Project Level Site; Primary Plan but included in Alternative Plan area is excluded from Primary Plan but included in Alternative Plan Site 18 6/1 BTao Maiine Corps Reserve Site 52 Site-22 Figure 3b CONSULTING 3kEaaasuawopot_3I,_JII WMeg Rar tlh vrjw essrark serntno Creek Scale �Arrea Seen UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE • • • BERKELEY•DAVIS •IRVINE• LOS ANGELES• MERCED. RIVERSIDE. SAN DIEGO. SAN FRANCISCO Ecology and Evoludonary Biology December 11, 2002 Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, California 92619 SANTA BARBARA• SANTACRUZ 321 Steinhaus Hall Irvine, CA 92697-2525 (949)824-6006 (949) 824-2181 FAX RE: Comment upon the NOP for the proposed San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Plan Dear Norris: The Natural Reserve System appreciates having the opportunity to comment upon the NOP for the proposed San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Plan. We have already forwarded two letters of comment, dated March 20, 2002 and October 15, 2002, and ask that they be included in the NOP and DEIR record. SanDiego Creek flows through lands owned separately by the University of California, Irvine and the UCNRS. One of the proposed NTS sites (Site 62) is immediately adjacent the UCNRS San Joaquin Marsh Reserve that UCNRS administers as a CEQA Trustee Agency. We look forward to having our concerns addressed and have a few comments upon the NOP itself. On page 3, paragraph 4, the NOP describes "IRWD's intention to apply for one or more appropriate water rights permits for the diversion of water from drainages within the San Diego Creek" for the NTS program. UCNRS has, and does exercise, a deeded right to divert water from San Diego Creek at its San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh Reserve property, and objectstoany infringement of these rights for purposes of establishing the NTS program. On pages 4 and 5 it is alleged (p. 5, paragraph 1) "...The NTS project is consistent with and will likely enhance SAW water quality objectives for the watershed." The Natural Reserve System is working with the Army Corps of Engineers in developing recommendations for habitat enhancement within the watershed and especially in the portion of San Diego Creek owned by the UCNRS and by the UCI Campus. In terms of habitat, facilities like an NTS are counter to SAMP habitat goals because they are facilities — not habitat themselves. The NTS facilities will be species poor, are doomed to be degraded sinks for human -originated pollutants, take up the instream areas most suited to restoration, and have a "safe harbors'T'no surprises" management strategy. While the NTS concept has valid application offline and could contribute to an upgraded water quality, it is counter to watershed restoration if the NTS facilities take habitat or sites where habitat could be created online. The UCNRS would be supportive of NTS efforts offline, at sites where there is no take of wetland or natural upland habitat. A location such as the SAM site (Site 62) is particularly problematic for the NRS because it takes riparian woodland and delineated wetlands in an area currently managed for wildlife as a preserve adjacent to a UCNRS Reserve, and represents a facility replacing habitat within an area zoned for Open Space. This area should not be considered at all, and would be virtually impossible to mitigate. In Figure 3b the UCNRS and UCI lands are incorrectly labeled. The UCNRS San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh should be listed where UCI Open Space Reserve appears (the Open Space Reserve or UCI Ecological Preserve is located adjacent the San Joaquin Corridor, the Chancellor's House and University Hills faculty/staff housing). The NRS requests that the boundary of the "Potential Area for Locating Facility Site 67 — Program Level Site" not include any UCNRS property. UCNRS requests that Site 62 be eliminated from the NTS program. As a Trustee Agency we will seek the highest standards possible for mitigation, if that site is pursued. The UCNRS would appreciate receiving a copy of the Environmental Initial Study Checklist, your biological analyses, and proposed mitigations. Our ability to perform Trustee Agency responsibilities at this stage has been hampered by not having already been provided with these documents. On page 6, paragraph 3, the IRWD states that it ",.,may pursue a major amendment to obtain authorization for conditional coverage of additional listed and non - listed species not currently included as "Identified Species ..... Such species coverage would apply only to NTS Plan facilities and would not be applicable to any other portions of the NCCP plan area, including the Reserve system." We assume that this is the UC Natural Reserve System and the enrolled portions of the University of California, Irvine campus. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide additional comments on the NTS NOP. Please include this letter and our previous correspondence in the DEIR and any NEPA documents you develop. We compliment IRWD for trying to find constructive ways to improve the water quality throughout the San Diego Creek watershed, and hope that an environmentally benign, offline, approach will be undertaken. Sincerely, Peter A. Bowler Academic Coordinator of the UCI Reserves William L. Bretz, Manager UCNRS San Joaquin Marsh Reserve I W) 19-41) Timothy J. Bradley Campus Director UCNRS-UCI n LJ 0 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE BERKELEY • DAVIS • IRVINE • LOS ANGELES Ecology and Evolutionary Biology October 15, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, California 92219-7000 RIVERSIDE • SAN DIEGO •SAN RE: San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Dear Mr. Brandt: I SANTA BARBARA•SANTA CRUZ 321 Steinhaus Hall Irvine, CA 92697-2525 (949)824-6006 (949) 824-2181 FAX • The University of California Natural Reserve System (UCNRS) appreciate's the opportunity to provide further comment on the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System. On March 20, 2002 we provided initial comments (attached for the record) based on discussions with you and your staff, and have not seen a draft document with specific proposals. In more recent meetings your staff presented some preliminary conceptual ideas about ap NTS on the SAM (Small Area Mitigation) site in the "San Joaquin Wildlife Sanctuary" adjacent the UCNRS San Joaquin Marsh Reserve, a site visit was undertaken, and we met again to discuss the issue further. We have still not seen a draft plan for the watershed nor for any proposed NTS site, including the SAM site, and therefore will have further comments when a draft plan is available for review. It is our hope that the issues we raised in our March 20 letter will be fully addressed when the draft plan is developed, thus in a sense we can only reiterate our concerns in the absence of any actual proposal to review. As a Trustee Agency, we have a number of concems with the concept of placing NTS facilities in the SAM site. Some of our concerns are expressed in our initial letter, and we would like to reiterate these and make others clear. We do not support taking wetland habitat for NTS purposes and hope that the Draft EIR will contain "off line" alternatives in which no wetland take occurs. As is the case for the development of other facilities, take of any wetland must see mitigation at substantive levels. A site such as the SAM site and other areas within the "San Joaquin Wildlife Sanctuary" on the west side of Campus Drive should be the last resort if ever seriously proposed. If the NTS system • works it is unclear why it would be necessary or how much additional treatment could occur at the bottom of the watershed, essentially at the upper limit of historic tidal influence at Campus Drive Bridge. Mitigation for the take of wetlands in the "Sanctuary" in this area must be very great. The NTS goal should be the provision of high quality water conditions throughout the watershed, not just when it enters Back Bay. The TMDL should be met throughout the watershed, so that wildlife and habitat will benefit from headwaters to confluence. We do not support the "safe harbor, no surprises" designation for any facility in the wetlands. This management strategy is completely contrary to our directives as Trustee Agency land managers, and it is our hope that more sensitive species will use, nest in, and inhabit the Reserve and the lands adjacent them. It is our obligation to protect these sensitive elements, other wildlife, and wetland habitat to the maximum extent we are able. In conclusion, in the absence of a draft document with specific and detailed proposed plans, we can only reiterate the broad concerns raised in previous comments, and look forward to reviewing speck plans in the future. The UCNRS does not support any development, including an NTS facility, of the wetlands on the west side of Campus Drive. As an area within the City's designated Open Space and a wetland adjacent the Natural Reserve System's Sap Joaquin Marsh Reserve, we cannot support a safe harbor, no surprises management strategy, or a NTS. If such a proposal is submitted, we can comment in depth about drainage issues, and others, but as a Trustee Agency under CEQA, we would develop rigorous mitigation requirements for any further loss of wetland or wetland habitat in the San Joaquin Wetland system. Toward this end, a review of the National Academy of Sciences (2001) examination of wetland mitigation suggests that it is questionable if there could be adequate, feasible or suitably sited mitigation for a take of wetland and habitat at this location. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comment, albeit before we have . seen a Draft EIR. We look forward to reviewing the DE1R when it appears. Please include this letter and our letter of March 20, 2002 (attached) in the San Diego Creek Watershed NTS record. Sincerely, Wiaw. (_ Peter A. Bowler William L Bretz Timothy J. Bradley Academic Coordinator Manager of Reserves Campus Director UCNRS - UCI UCNRS — UCI UCNRS - UCI Reference: Committee on Mitigating Wetland Losses, Board -on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Water Science and Technology Board, Division of Earth and life Studies, National Research Council 2001. Compensating for Wetland Losses Under the Clean Water Act. National Academy of Sciences. Attachment: • UCNRS Letter to Mr. Norris Brandt dated March 20, 2002 P Mr. Norris Brandt, RE. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, California 92219-7000 RE: San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System March 20, 2002 Dear Mr. Brandt: The University of California Natural Reserve System (UCNRS) appreciates the • opportunity to comment on the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System. As you know, under CEQA Guidelines (15386), the UCNRS is a "Trustee Agency... a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California." Other Trustee Agencies include the California Department of Fish and Game, State Lands Commission, and the State Department of Parks and Recreation. The UCNRS administers its 33 Reserves in what was formerly known as the Natural Land and Water Reserves System. San Diego Creek passes through the UCNRS San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh Reserve, and one of the proposed treatment sites is adjacent the Reserve's southeastern boundary. Through the University of California, the Reserve System provides the opportunity for research and teaching, and manages its lands to be examples of natural habitat. The goal of reducing nutrients in San Diego Creek is laudable, and has been pursued for many years through reduction in point source pollution and in other ways.. The UCNRS supports attempts to reduce nutrient loading in San Diego Creek and protection of the biological resources in the Newport Back Bay. Another laudatory feature of the NTS is the formation of a more natural habitat, on natural substrate, along the watershed. These features of the plan ill provide subser, a ant it benefit ssues of concernthnatural environment and to our community. There regarding the Natural Treatment System (NTS) proposal that should be addressed in the EIR. As we have discussed with you, the IRWD-owned site adjacent the UCNRS San • Joaquin Marsh Reserve was a low wetland habitat with pickle weed a dominant until recent years. The dedication of the site to an NTS with a "safe harbor" and "no surprises" designation is contradictory to the UCNRS management goal of sustaining naturalness in the adjacent Reserve. We do not support the establishment of such a site contiguous with the Marsh Reserve, and it may also be limited by ongoing responsibilities to allow rare, sensitive, Threatened or Endangered species to inhabit the SAM site. Placing an NTS between and abutting these two habitats that welcome sensitive taxa is not compatible with the uses of these other sites. The former pickle weed habitat could be restoredto a permanent low wetland habitat in which sensitive species would not be restricted, rather than a temporary cattail marsh subject to NTS management. It is also not clear where the water in such a system at that site would enter and exit the facility. The Reserve itself is a safe haven for many sensitive species, and it is our hope that there will be more in the future, Since each NTS site is a take of wetland and an elimination of future permanent wetland either through watershed based restorations or natural colonization, where is the necessary mitigation replacement going to be in the watershed and at what replacement ratio? It would be useful to provide some alternative mixtures of NTS and wetland and upland restoration sites, rather than dedicate all of the most promising areas in the watershed to NTS facilities. This forecloses restoration opportunities, and would be difficult to mitigate with permanent habitat either in acreage or connectedness. The NTS facilities may be predominantly plants in the cattail-bullrush • community, and establishing these facilities would mean a homogeneous sequence of sites in the watershed This reduces the possibilities for habitat diversity within the sites most opportune for restoration and development of permanent wetlands, The recently published National Academy of Science review, "Compensating for Wetland Losses Under the Clean Water Act," criticizes the lack of habitat diversity in created wetlands as a significant drawback in watershed mitigation and restorations. The 1RWD has been exemplary in producing open water habitat and riparian woodland habitat at the Michelson Plant Site. As mitigation for the NTS, similar, additional riparian woodland and open water habitat could be incorporated into this watershed management plan to reduce the homogeneity of sites along the watershed and to produce refuge sites that would not be subject to periodic cleaning and disturbance? What are the water sources for the San Diego Creek watershed? How much reclaimed water is distributed in the watershed and how much nitrogen and phosphorous does this represent? Since the Michelson Plant is the source of both reclaimed water and its nutrients, further treatment and a reduction of 0 nutrients prior to distribution should be examined. What are the expansion plans for the Michelson Plant and how would they affect instream flow and nutrients in San Diego Creek in the future? Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comment on the NTS proposal in the San Diego Creek Watershed. We look forward to working with you in the EIR process and in the eventual improvement of water quality in the San Diego Creek Watershed. Sincerely, q l/" Peter A. Bowler Academic Coordinator UCNRS-UCI Reference: WilliamL. Bretz Manager of Reserves UCNRS-UCI Timothy I Bradley Campus Director UCNRS-UCI Committee on Mitigating Wetland Losses, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Water Science and Technology Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council. 2001. Compensating for Wetland Losses Under the Clean Water Act. National Academy of Sciences. 0 v California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region IntemetAdth iess; tip9//bB www.swrcb.ca.goyrwgc• Winston ff. Iilckox Gray DaVIS 5eeretaryjnr 3737 Main Street, Suite 500,R8•crside. California 92501-3348 Gorrajormr Environmental Phone (909) 782.4130 - FAX (909) 781-6288 Protection Vie energy challenge farbtg CalOnua 1v reat Every Cal fonuat needs to take unutediate amen a+ redure energy runnumpliau Fora list ofstniple, ways you can reduce demand and rut war energy rots. see our web sue at ww•w. swrrb ra govft grbS December 18, 2002 Norris Brandt Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF PREPARATION FOR PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT / SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM PROGRAM, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA/STATE CLEARING HOUSE NUMBER 2002021120 Dear Mr. Brandt: Staff of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) has reviewed the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the above referenced project. The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) issued a NOP for the Natural Treatment System Program Environmental Impact Report in February 2002. The NOP for this Program EIR has been revised and is being re -issued due to changes in the project description that have occurred since the original NOP was issued. We provided comments on the original NOP on March 21, 2002. Please refer to those comments is the revised project. In addition, we have the following comment: The Biological Resources Technical Study and EIR should include an evaluation of the potential for bioaccumulative compounds to accumulate in NTS facilities at levels harmful to fish and wildlife. Based on currently available data and data provided in the report, "Sources of Selenium in the San Diego Creek Watershed," prepared by Dr. Barry Hibbs and Monica Lee of California State University of Los Angeles, dated June 27, 2000, at least seven of the NTS facilities are currently located in areas where selenium (Se) has been measured in surface waters at concentrations above the proposed Total Maximum Daily Load numeric target and California Toxic Rule criterion of 5 ug Se/L. These facilities are. - Site 26 Woodbridge In -Line Basins Site 46 San Joaquin Marsh - Enhancement Site 54 Westpark In -Line Basins Site 55 Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel In -Line Basins Site 62 San Joaquin Marsh - SAMS 1 Site 64 Westpark In -Line Basins Site 67 Las Cienegas De Las Ranas According to the NOP, Site 67 will be designed as a selenium removal system. The EIR should disscuss how the removal system will prevent selenium that has been sequestered from becoming bioavallable to fish and wildlife that may be present at the site. 0 California Environmental Protection Agency %4 Regcled Paper Norris Brandt Irvine Ranch Water District December 18, 2002 • If you should have any questions, please call Terri Reeder at (909) 782-4995, me at (909) 782-7960, or Mark Adelson at (909) 782-3224. • • Sincerely, J -�O w'-Q-V J David G. Woelfel Planning Section cc: Becky Frank —State Clearinghouse California Environmental Protection Agency Aid Recycled Paper STAY =N IEn NIp—g er DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION District 12 00 3337 Michelson Drive, Suite 380 Irvine, CA 92612-8894 Firx your paver+. PHONE (949)724-2010 Be energy efficient! FAX (949)724-2019 71 Y: (949) 756- 7813 -Fld4AM6 MAIL December 17, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P.E. File: IGRICEQA NTS Program Manager SCH#: 2002021120 Irvine Ranch Water District Log #: 1027-A P.C. BOX 57000 SR#: 261, 241, & 73, and Irvine, CA 92619 Interstates 5 & 405 Subject: Revised Notice of Preparation (NOP) for San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program EIR Dear Mr. Brandt; Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the revised NOP for the Program EIR dated November 15, 2002. Project description changes that have occurred since the original NOP dated . February 20, 2002, include: • Three NTS sites that were eliminated; • Two NTS sites that were added; • Species -related assurances toward long-term maintenance; and, • Proposed construction of flood control facilities within the NTS wetlands. Caltrans District 12 status is a reviewing agency and has no comments on the changes described in the above document. However, our previous comments submitted to you in a letter dated March 25, 2002, are attached and remain valid. Please continue to keep us informed of this project and other future developments that could potentially impact transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please do not hesitate to call Becky Shumway at (949) 440.4461. Sincerely, L ,) flvRobert F. Joseph, Chief � Advanced Planning Branch Attachments • cc: R. Helgeson/HQ, L. Manderscheid, B. Frank/SCH "Caltrans improves mobility across Calitiomie" STATE OF CAUFORNIA—BUSINESSTRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY _ MYDAVIS, Goven DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 12 � 3337 Mkhelson Drive SURe 380 Irvine, CA. 92612-BW March 25, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 File: IGR/CEQA SCH#:2002021120 Log M 1027 SR: 55,73,133,241 &261; 1-5, 405 Subject: San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program — Revised Comment Lefler Dear Mr. Brandt, Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Preparation dated 2120102, for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program. The project sites are included within the 122 square mile San Diego Creek watershed in central Orange County. The watershed is bounded by Lomas de Santiago Hills to the north, the San Joaquin Hills to the south and the Santa Ana -Delhi • watershed, and the Pacific Ocean to the west. The project consists of implementing a Master Plan to describe a system of natural treatment for low flow and initial storm runoff generated within the San Diego Creek watershed. This will include natural and man-made drainage features, some of which impact Caltrans Right of Way. The nearest State Routes are SR-55, 73,133,241 & 261;1.6 and 405. Caltrans District 12 status is a reviewing agency on this project and has the following comments which have been slightly edited and added to based on additional functional unit analysis: Several of the NTS are near or within Caltrans Right of Way, and as District 12 has had exposure to these types of systems through our NPDES Unit we would be interested in coordinating closely with the IRWD on the plan development for these areas. A possible pre -draft discussion with several of the units that have responsibility over these areas may be held in order to clarify the projects scope within our Right of Way and identify for you the requirements/restrictions necessary for Caltrans permit approval. In addition to Mr. Lee Haber, coordination with Environmental Planning, Design-NPDES, Permits, Traffic Operations and Project Management Units is recommended. 2. Figure 3 shows several proposed NTS sites adjacent to SR 73,133, 261, 1-5, and 1-405. If any project work (e.g. site access, flood channel work, sewer or storm drain connections, construction, equipment storage, etc.) occurs in the vicinity of the Caltrans Right of Way, an encroachment permit may be required and environmental concerns must be addressed. If 4 H� March 28, 2002 Pape 2 environmental concerns are not addressed in the environmental document (e.g. EIR), additional documentation will be required for the or croactxrient permit. 3. There are numerous areas of the state right-of-way that captain sensitive areas of open space including coastal sage scrub. Coordination with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) may be required for project activities resulting in impacts to these areas of native habitat. In addition, habitat patches along the state right-of-way have been deemed suitable for use by the California gnatcatcher (Federally threatened, California Species of Special Concern). The USFWS should be added to the list of agencies involved In the review of this environmental document given that the California gnatcatcher is a spades afforded protection by this federal agency. Project activities (including noise impacts from ground disturbance activities) should be limited during the nesting season of sensitive coastal sage scrub species. Impacts to migratory birds should be considered if the removal of vegetation is proposed for any project activities during the nesting season. 4. According to Executive Order 13112, Invasive Spades, It is the policy of Caltrans to limit the use of invasive species within the state right-of-way. Environmental Planning recommends the limited use (and Best Management Practices to control the spread) of } invasive species within the project areas affiliated with the state right-of-way. Re* to the . attachment for additional guidance on environmental requirements thr encroachment permits. 5. Any vegetation removal to complete project work (in addition to any ground disturbance activities) should be coordinated with Environmental Planning. 6. Caltrans Environmental Planning would appreciate a courtesy copy of the resource agency permit applications and habitat mapping reports proposed for this project (for areas within the state Right of Way). Any project proposals for biological surveys (within the state Right of Way) should also be coordinated with Environmental Planning. 7. Where the project impacts Caltrans, including but not limited to discharge of permanent or temporary runoff entering the Caltrans ROW, the IRWD must coordinate and obtain the appropriate permits (e.g. NPDES permit, §401 Certification, DFG 1601 Agreement, etc). Applicable permits should be dearly stated in the environmental document. Copies andlor verification of the applicable resource agency permits must be inducted with encroachment permit applications. Please see our NPDES attachment for an in depth discussion of Caltrans requirements within our ROW. s. Any runoff draining into Caltrans Right of Way from construction operations, or from the resulting project, must fully conform to the current discharge requirements of the Regional • Water Quality Control Board to avoid Impacting water quality. Also please clarify if state runoff will be treated by the proposed NTS facilities. Measures must be incorporated to contain all vehicle loads and avoid any tracking of materials, which may fall or blow onto Caltrans roadways or facilities. March 28, 2002 Page 3 9. Vector control is mentioned in the Public Safety section of the NOR Maintenance of these NTS' is also an issue with vector control. 1o. A clear discussion of role of maintenance of the vegetation, which is a key in the effectiveness of the NTS, should be included. Also who will be responsible for providing maintenance and in what manner it is provided should be discussed — maintenance of wetlands will not be Caltrans' responsibility. ii. Please discuss any hydrological impacts to Caltrans ROW or existing facilities by installation and operation of these NTS. 12. Please notify Caltrans of any changes in project scope or activities. For example, coordination with Caltrans would be necessary if the project will require repeated access via the Caltrans ROW for the construction, maintenance and operation of the NTS program. Please continue to keep us informed of this project and other future developments, which could potentially impact our transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please do not hesitate to call Maureen El Harake at (949) 724- 2086. Since Robert F. Jo ph, hief IGR/Commun nnin Branch c: Terry Roberts, Office of Planning and Research Ron Helgeson, HQ IGR/Community Planning Lee Haber, Construction & Toll Road Construction Praveen Gupta, Environmental Planning Branch A Leslie Manderscheid, Environmental Planning Branch B Sylvia Vega, Biology Unit Roger Kao, Hydrology Grace Pina-Garrett, Design-NPDES Ahmed Abou-Abdou, Project Management Nooshin Yoosefi, Project Management Adrian Maiah, Project Management Vinh Pham, Project Management ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS FOR ENCROACHMENT PERMITS Any Party, outside of Caltrans, that does work on a State Highway or Interstate Highway in California needs to apply for an encroachment permit. To acquire any encroachment permit, environmental concerns must be addressed. Environmental review of encroachment permit applications may take 3 weeks if the application is complete or longer if the application is incomplete. For soil disturbing activities (e.g. geotechnical borings, grading, usage of unpaved roads from which dirt and other materials may be tracked onto the State/Interstate highways, etc.), compliance with Water Quality and Cultural Resources Provisions are emphasized. Surveys may/ may not besoil-disturbing activities, depending on the site and survey method. A complete application for environmental review includes the following: 1. If an environmental document (CE, EIR/EIS, ND, etc,) has been completed for the project, copy of the final, approved document must be submitted with the application. 2. Water Quality Provision: All work within the State Right of Way must conform to Caltrans Standard Plans and Standard Specifications for Water Pollution Control including production of a Water Pollution Control Program or Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan as required. The applicant must provide Encroachments with a copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) including Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be Implemented for construction activities impacting Caltrans Right of Way, prepared for this as required by the NPDES Statewide Storm Water Permit for General Construction Activities, if no SWPPP has been prepared for this project, then the applicant must follow the requirements described In the attached Water Pollution Control Provisions (please see attachment). 3. Cultural Resources Provisions: If not Included in the environmental document, before permit approval and project construction, the encroachment permit applicant must complete a Cuftuml Resource Assessment pursuant to Caltrans Environmental Handbook, Volume 2, Appendix B-1, and Exhibit 1, as amended. The Cultural Resources Assessment ascertains the presence or absence of cultural resources within a one-mlle radius of the project area and evaluates the Impact to any historical/cultural resource. Cultural Resources Include "those resources significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture, including Native American Resources" (Caltrans Environmental Handbook, Volume 2, Chapterl, as amended)]. The Cultural Resource Assessment must include: a) a clear project description and map indicating project work, staging areas, site access, etc.; • b) a Record Search conducted at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located at California State University, Fullerton. For information call (714) 278.5395; c) proof of Native Amercan consultation. Consultation involves contacting the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), requesting a search of their Sacred Lands File, and following the recommendations provided by the NAHC. For Information call (916) 653.4082; d) documentation of any historic properties (e.g. prehistoric and historic sites, buildings, structures, objects, or districts listed on, eligible for, or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places) within a one mile radius of the project area; e) and a survey by qualified archaeologist for all areas that have not been previously researched. The SCCIC and NAHC have an approximate turn around time of 2 weeks. 4. Biological Resources Provisions: Work conducted within Caltrans Right of Way should have the appropriate plant and wildlife surveys completed by a qualified biologist. If the information is not Included in the environmental document, Environmental Planning requests that the applicant submit a copy of the biological study, survey, or technical report by a qualified biologist that provides details on the existing vegetation and wildlife at the project site and any vegetation that is to be removed during project activities. Official lists and databases should also be consulted for sensitive species such as the California Natural Diversity Database and lists provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. Any impacts that affect waterways and drainages and/or open space during construction, or that occur indirectly as a result of the project must be coordinated with the appropriate resource agencies. As guidance, we ask that the applicant include: a) clear description of project activities and the project site b) completed environmental significance checklist (notjust yes and no answers, but a description should be given as to the reason for the response), c) staging/storage areas noted on project plans, d) proposed time of year for work and duration of activities (with information available), • e) any proposed mitigation (if applicable to the project), 0 and a record of any prior resource agency correspondence (if applicable to the project). STATE OF CALIFORNIA —1 Governor's Office of Planning and Research V • o..,. State Clearinghouse ��°P`"' Gray Davis Tal Finney Governor Interim Director Notice of Preparation November 18, 2002 To: Reviewing Agencies Re: San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program SCH# 2002021120 Attached for your review and comment is the Notice ofPreparation (NOP) for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Responsible agencies must transmit their comments on the scope and content of the NOP, focusing on specific information related to their own statutory responsibility, within 30 days of receipt of the NOP from the Lead Agency. This is a courtesy notice provided by the State Clearinghouse with a reminder for you to comment in a timely manner. We encourage other agencies to also respond to this notice and express their concerns early in the environmental review process. • Please direct your comments to: Norris Brandt Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619 with a copy to the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Planning and Research. Please refer to the SCH number noted above in all correspondence concerning this project. If you have any questions about the environmental document review process, please call the State Clearinghouse at (916)445-0613. Sincerely, Becky Frank Project Analyst, State Clearinghouse Attachments cc: Lead Agency • 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812-3044 (916)445-0613 FAX(916)323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov .26 Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCHN 2002021120 Project T/de San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program Lead Agancy Irvine Ranch Water District Type NOP Notice of Preparation Description The proposed plan that will be evaluated in the Program MR Is the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program (NTS Program) which has been prepared by IRWD. The NTS Plan describes a watershed -wide system for the natural treatment of low -flow and initial stone runoff generated within the San Diego Creek Watershed and a small portion of the Santiago Creek watershed. The proposed NTS Plan consists of a system of constructed water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofilters. These take advantage of naturally occurring physical, chemical, and biological resources to treat the runoff. The natural and man-made drainage features within the San Diego Creek watershed all drain via San Diego Creek and its tributaries into Upper Newport Bay. These flows then enter Lower Newport Bay on their way to the Pacific Ocean. The portions of the project area located within the Santiago Creek watershed drain primarily into Upper Peters Canyon Resrevoir and to Santiago Creek, a tributary of the Santa Ana River. Lead Agency Contact Name Norris Brandt Agency Irvine Rench Water District Phone 949.453-M fax small Address P.O. Box 57000 City Irvine Step CA Zip 92619 Project Location County Orange City Irvine, Tustin, Lake Forest, Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, ... • Region Cross stria Party/ No. Township Range Section Bose Proximity to: Highways Airports Ralhvays Waterways Fourteen or more creeks, channels and tributaries Schools Land Use Pt*ct Issues Agricultural Land; Biological Resources; Water Quality; Other Issues Reviewing Resources Agency; California Coastal Commission; Department of Parks and Recreation; Department Agencies of Water Resources; Department of Fish and Game, Region 5; Native American Heritage Commission; State Lands Commission: Cahrans, District 12; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region a DateRacelved 11/18/2002 StartofRtviaw 11/18/2002 EndofRevkw 12/17/2002 • Note: Blanks in data fields result from Insufficient information provided by lead agency. •BrLt," NOP Distreion List County: Resources AOencv Fish and Game Colorado River Board ❑ Dept of Transportation 10 Gerald R. Zknmemran Tom Dumas Resources Agency ❑ Dept of Fish & Game ❑ Tahoe Regional Planning District 10 ❑ Dept of Transportation 11 Nadell Gayou 0 Dept of Boating & Waterways Scott Flint Environmental Services Division Agency(TRPA) Lyn Barnett BPI Figge Distdct 11 Bill Cully ❑ Dept of Fish & Game 1 91 Dept of Transportation 12 NIallfomia Coastal Donald Koch ❑ Office of Emergency Services Bob Joseph -tcommission Region 1 . John Rowden, Manager District 12 Elizabeth A. Fuchs ❑ Dept of Fish & Game 2 El Dept Conservation eCurtis of Roseanne Taylor R Reggioio n 2 Dept Fish & Game 3 ❑ Dept of Forestry & Fire of Protection Robert Roerke Region 3 Allen Robertson ❑ 13 Dept of Fish & Game 4 Ofnce of Historic Preservation William Laudermilk Hans Kreutzberg Region 4 j Dept of Fish & Game 5 Dept of Parks & Recreation S. Noah Tilghman Don Chadwick Environmental Stewardship Region 5. Habitat Conservatton Section Program ❑ Reclamation Board ❑ Dept of Fish & Game 6 Pam Bruner ❑ S.F. Bay Conservation & Sabrina Gatchel - Region 6. Habitat Conservation Program Devi Comm. Dept. of Fish & Game 611M ❑ P Steve McAdam Tammy Allen • ' Region 6. Inyo/Mono, Habitat Dept of Water Resources Conservation Program Resources Agency ❑Dept. of Fish &Game M Nadell Gayou Tom Napoli Marine Region Health & Welfare ❑ Health & Welfare Wayne Hubbard Dept of HealUVDdnktng Water Food & Agriculture ❑ Food & Agriculture Steve Shaffer Dept of Food and Agriculture Independent Commissions ❑ California Energy commission Environmental Office Native American Heritage Comm. Debbie Treadway ❑ Public Utilities Commission Ken Lewis State Lands Commission Betty Silva ❑ Governor's Office of Planning & Research State Cleadnghoiise Plaode"r ❑ Delta Protection Commission Debby Eddy ❑ Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy Paul Edelman Dent, of Transportation ❑ Dept of Transportation 1 Mike Eagan District 1 ❑ Dept of Transportation 2 Don Anderson District 2 ❑ Dept of Transportation 3 Jeff Pulvennan District 3 ❑ Dept of Transportation 4 Jean Finney District 4 ❑ Dept of Transportation 5 David Murray District 5 ❑ Dept of Transportation 6 Marc Birnbaum Distdct6 ❑ Dept of Transportation 7 Stephen J. Boswell Dlstdct7 0 Dept of Transportation a Linda Grimes, District 8 ❑ Dept of Transportation 9 KatyWafton District 9 Business. Trans & Housing SCH# 2 ❑ Housing & Community Development Cathy Creswell Housing Polley Division ❑ Caltrans- DivisionofAeronautics Sandy Hesnard ❑ California Highway Patrol Lt Julie Page Office of Special Projects ❑ Dept of Transportation Ron Helgeson Cailrans - Planning ❑ Dept of General Services Robert Sleppy Environmental Services Section Air Resources Board ❑ Airport Projects Jim Lemer ❑ Transportation Projects Kurt Karperos ❑ Industrial Projects Mike Tollstnrp ❑ California Integrated Waste Management Board Sue O'Leary ❑ State Water Resources Control Board Diane Edwards Division of Clean Water Programs ❑ State Water Resources Control Board Greg Frantz Division of Water Quality ❑ State Water Resouces Control Board Mike Falkenstein Division of Water Rights ® Dept of Toxic Substances Control CEQA Tracking Center Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) ❑ RWQCBI Cathleen Hudson North Coast Region (1) - ® RWQCB2 Environmental Document Coordinator San Francisco Bay Region (2) Ll RWQCB3 Central Coast Region (3) ® RWQCB4 Jonathan Bishop Los Angeles Region (4) ® RWQCB5S Central Valley Region (5) ❑ RWQCB 5F Central Valley Region (5) Fresno Branch Office ❑ RWGCB5R Central Valley Region (5) Redding Branch Office ❑ RWQCB6 - Lahontan Region (6) ❑ RWQCB 6V Lahontan Region (6) Victorvifle Branch Office ❑ RWQCB7 Colorado River Basin Region (7) le!rRWQCBa Santa Ana Region (8) El RWQCB9 San Diego Region (9) South Coast Air Quality Management District 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182 ' (909) 396-2000 - http://www.agmd.gov November 22, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Plan Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 Dear Mr. Brandt: Revised Notice of Preparation of a Program Environmental Impact Report for San Diego Creek Watersbed Natural Treatment Svstem Plan The South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above -mentioned document. The AQMD's comments are recommendations regarding the analysis of potential air quality impacts from the proposed project that should be • included in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Air Onality Analysis The AQMD adopted its California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook in 1993 to assist other public agencies with the preparation of air quality analyses, The AQMD recommends that the Lead agency use this Handbook as guidance when preparing its air quality analysis. Copies of the Handbook are available from the AQMD's Subscription Services Department by calling (909) 396.3720. The Lead Agency should identify any potential adverse air quality impacts that could occur from all phases of the project and all air pollutant sources related to the project. Air quality impacts from both construction and operations should be considered. Construction -related air quality impacts typically include, but are not limited to, emissions from the use of heavy-duty equipment from grading, earth-loading/unloading, paving, architectural coatings, off -road mobile sources (e.g., heavy-duty construction equipment) and on -road mobile sources (e.g., construction worker vehicle trips, material transport trips). Operation -related air quality impacts may include, but are not limited to, emissions from stationary sources (e.g., boilers), area sources (e.g., solvents and coatings), and vehicular trips (e.g., on- and off -road tailpipe emissions and entrained dust). Air quality impacts from indirect sources, that is, sources that generate or attract vehicular trips should be included in the evaluation. An analysis of all toxic air contaminant impacts due to the decommissioning or use of equipment potentially generating such air pollutants should also be included. 0 A& Norris Brandt -2- November 22, 2002 • Mitieation Measures In the event that the project generates significant adverse air quality impacts, CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation measures be utilized during project construction and operation to minimize or eliminate significant adverse air quality impacts. To assist the Lead Agency with identifying possible mitigation measures for the project, please refer to Chapter 11 of the AQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook for sample air quality mitigation measures. Additionally, AQMD's Rule 403 — Fugitive Dust, and the Implementation Handbook contain numerous measures for controlling construction -related emissions that should be considered for use as CEQA mitigation if not otherwise required. Pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines §15126.4 (a)(1)(D), any impacts resulting from mitigation measures must also be discussed. Data Sources AQMD rules and relevant air quality reports and data are available by calling the AQMD's Public Information Center at (909) 396-2039. Much of the information available through the Public Information Center is also available via the AQMD's World Wide Web Homepage (h=://www.ggmd. govl. The AQMD is willing to work with the Lead Agency to ensure that project -related emissions are accurately identified, categorized, and evaluated. Please call Dr. Charles Blankson, Transportation Specialist, CEQA Section, at (909) 396-3304 if you have any questions regarding this letter. 0 SS:CB:li ORCO21119-08LI Control Number 0 Sincerely, She S� Steve Smith, Ph.D. Program Supervisor, CEQA Section Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA December 10, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219.7000 ASSOCIATION of HE: Comments on the Revised Notice of Preparation for a Draft Environmental GOVERNMENTS Impact Report for the Son Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System — SCAG No, 120CM7 Main office Dear Mr. Brandt: W West Seventh Street lzth Floor Thank you for submitting the Revised Notice of Preparstion for a Draft Environmental Los Angeles, California Impact Report for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System to SCAG for review and comment. As areawide clearinghouse for regionally significant projects, 90017'3435 SCAG reviews the consistency of local plans, projects, and programs with regional plans. This activity is based on SCAG's responsibilities as a regional planning organization 1(213) 236-1800 pursuant to state and federal laws and regulations. Guidance provided by these reviews is f (213) ¢3628e5 intended to assist local agencies and project sponsors to take actions that contribute to the attainment of regional goals and policies. wNwscag.ca.gtry Although SCAG responded to a previous Notice of Preparation for the proposed Project, we have reviewed the current Revised Notice of Preparation for a Draft Environmental canes aann • Imvndina Impact Report for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System, and have . snuda Couar hn =r �aakk�H determined that the proposed Project is regionally significant per California Environmental Quailty Act (CEQA) Gukfelines (Section 16206). The proposed Project would affect sensitive wildlife habitats, such as riparian lands, wetlands, bays, estuaries, marshes, and habitats for �� Zc TM%k . s ; . rate and endangered species. CEQA requires that EIRs discuss any between Gamy • Mrhnk ""• tea°° • wnr the proposed project and applicable general plans and regional plans (Section 15125 (d)). Hdwlo. Bea Gabe • Hae Wma Ctna"a Gm,eHa HA•1w Wman.IaM,ek,•Mn If there are inconsistencies, an explanation and rationalization for such Inconsistencies should p GntwaIA11h. �•Iwbrnw«n.eMM a• Gtlk OaNrb, Mnmunt • Auh Gdma In be provided. Hrha I Ageb • Nut Mdde". L. Safi, daab,. 0 Bgmdo • Sna t La M,d,t • anow ww" lea, • Mm UC IhY. D,n,%q • Cady . W Mq: 1o, AAJ W • H N. • Mk Mdk/•Ibenun. Iu hnaena • Oe"1N,bhura. CWbwa • dnt Nkw. la An k, • dob ttnueAaa OhMJe • RuAe Cauan. Choirs Sw k 4onp CwnY Mo Wn.ImAl+m,ta• bake Huellmm�,nen awd •M Howe.lueu Wt •,oa baaYY,dn • 4U+6etM1 Cow.". Cau Nw • Cudu,n beYam,. Wt. Mhhn•rucb•rd W h A. •Ain Oute. ny h -• dMtkr MN N&P 1-th H+hr,a arse •Ad Hd,ew,A NMpol, aneh AkMW Cover Bob buao AMnde Couar• Mn 1,nid,e,M na&• Gt•, MBa Gdndril Cot • Bon Aobaa, Tmeah • Nh Mdaaa, Came•ChuhsWbut Maea vjq u, HraMia" Conmr Im wa w Watdlno Count, • bBl Alaander. Mnehn Coauan,a • Iawana Mk Mum •Ile Ann 0•nu.OHndhma• auwuIleaS"beuadl •Guy Oe,a Onwln+Oeb"rJ, M6twn,llWo "M Came MY Milk Pmtm Caaur Gm .earca. Sm Wet • Cad Mmdwae. Sn aoeanaw, •llvl Ymn,, ron Iluana aMNdb Coaaty Trwjwwlal Comminka Mien 1p .neau Policies of SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan, which may be applicable to your project, are outlined in the attachment. We expect the Draft EIR to specifically cite the appropriate SCAG policies and address the manner in which the Project is consistent with applicable core policies or supportive of applicable ancillary policies. Pesse use our policy numbers to refer to them In your Draft EIR. Also, we would encourage you to use a side -by -side comparison of SCAG policies with a discussion of the consistency or support of the policy with the Proposed Project. Please provide a minimum of 45 days for SCAG to review the Draft EIR when this document Is available. if you have any questions regarding the attached comments, please contact me at (213) 236-1667. Thank you. Sincere , �� a JE ITH, AICP Senior Regional Planner Intergovernmental Review • Vanua Cmty Tnmpw im Ca"awann QIMh,SnJWk, 6 huddan Kmm?pr halal/B] • December 10, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 2 COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM SCAG NO. 1 20020097 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Project considers the creation of a watershed/natural treatment system. The proposed Project will use natural ecosystems to remove sediment, nutrients, pahtogens/germs and other contaminants from both low -flow and small runoff. In addition, the proposed Project will provide a natural resource, riparian habitat and wildlife benefits throughout the watershed. CONSISTENCY WITH REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND GUIDE POLICIES • The Growth Management Chapter (GMC) of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) contains the following policies that are particularly applicable and should be addressed in the Draft EIR for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System. 3.03 The timing, financing, and location of public facilities, utility systems, and transportation systems shall be used by SCAG to implement the region's growth policies. The Growth Management goals to develop urban forms that enable individuals to spend less income on housing cost, that minimize public and private development costs, and that enable firms to be more competitive, strengthen the regional strategic goal to stimulate the regional economy. The evaluation of the proposed project in relation to the following policies would be intended to guide efforts toward achievement of such goals and does not infer regional interference with local land use powers. 3.09 Support local jurisdictions' efforts to minimize the cost of infrastructure and public service delivery, and efforts to seek new sources of funding for development and the provision of services. December 10, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 3 3.10 Support local jurisdictions' actions to minimize red tape and expedite the permitting process to maintain economic vitality and competitiveness. The Growth Management goals to attain mobility and clean air goals and to develop urban forms that enhance quality of life, that accommodate a diversity of life styles, that, preserve open space and natural resources, and that are aesthetically pleasing and preserve the character of communities, enhance the regional strategic goal of maintaining the regional quality of life. The evaluation of the proposed project in relation to the following policies would be intended to provide direction for plan implementation, and does not allude to regional mandates. 3.18 Encourage planned development in locations least likely to cause environmental impact • 3.20 Support the protection of vital resources such as wetlands, groundwater recharge . areas, woodlands, production lands, and land containing unique and endangered plants and animals. 3.21 Encourage the implementation of measures aimed at the preservation and protection of recorded and unrecorded cultural resources and archaeological sites. 3.22 Discourage development, or encourage the use of special design requirements, in areas with steep slopes, high tire, flood, and seismic hazards. 3.23 Encourage mitigation measures that reduce nolse in certain locations, measures aimed at preservation of biological and ecological resources, measures that would reduce exposure to seismic hazards, minimize earthquake damage, and to develop emergency response and recovery plans. The Growth Management Goal to develop urban forms that avoid economic and social polarization promotes the regional strategic goal of minimizing social and geographic disparities and of reaching equity among all segments of society. The evaluation of the proposed project in relation to the policy stated below is Intended guide direction for the December 10, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 4 accomplishment of this goal, and does not infer regional mandates and interference with local land' use powers. 3.27 Support local jurisdictions and other service providers in their efforts to develop sustainable communities and provide, equally to all members of society, accessible and effective services such as: public education, housing, health care, social services, recreational facilities, law enforcement, and fire protection. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) also has goals, objectives, policies and actions pertinent to this proposed project. This RTP links the goal of sustaining mobility with the goals of fostering economic development, enhancing the environment, reducing energy consumption, promoting transportation -friendly development patterns, and encouraging fair and equitable access to residents affected by socio-economic, geographic and commercial limitations. Among the relevant goals, objectives, policies and actions of the RTP are the following: • Core Regional Transportation Plan Policies 4.02 Transportation investments shall mitigate environmental impacts to an acceptable level. 4.04 Transportation Control Measures shall be a priority. 4.16 Maintaining and operating the existing transportation system will be a priority over expanding,capacity. AIR QUALITY CHAPTER CORE ACTIONS The Air Quality Chapter core actions related to the proposed project includes: 5.07 Determine specific programs and associated actions needed (e.g., indirect source rules, enhanced use of telecommunications, provision of community based shuttle services, provision of demand management based programs, or vehicle-miles- traveled/emission fees) so that options to command and control regulations can be assessed. 5,11 Through the environmental document review process, ensure that plans at all is levels of government (regional, air basin, county, subregional and local) consider December 10, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 5 air quality, land use, transportation and economic relationships to ensure consistency and minimize conflicts. OPEN SPACE CHAPTER ANCILLARY GOALS Public Health and Safety 9.04 Maintain open space for adequate protection of lives and properties against natural and man-made hazards. 9.05 Minimize potentially hazardous developments in hillsides, canyons, areas susceptible to flooding, earthquakes, wildfire and other known hazards, and areas with limited access for emergency equipment. 9.06 Minimize public expenditure for infrastructure and facilities to support urban type uses in areas where public health and safety could not be guaranteed. Resource Protection 9.08 Develop well -managed viable ecosystems or known habitats of rare, threatened and endangered species, including wetlands. WATER QUALITY CHAPTER RECOMMENDATIONS AND POLICY OPTIONS The Water Quality Chapter core recommendations and policy options relate to the two water quality goals: to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation's water, and, to achieve and maintain water quality objectives that are necessary to protect all beneficial uses of all waters. 11.02 Encourage "watershed management" programs and strategies, recognizing the primary role of local governments in such efforts. 11.05 Support regional efforts to identify and cooperatively plan for wetlands to facilitate both sustaining the amount and quality of wetlands in the region and expediting the process for obtaining wetlands permits. 11.07 Encourage water reclamation throughout the region where it is cost-effective, feasible, and appropriate to reduce reliance on imported water and wastewater discharges. Current administrative impediments to increased use of wastewater should be addressed. 40 10, • Mr. Nor s Bran 002 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 6 CONCLUSIONS All feasible measures needed to mitigate any potentially negative regional impacts associated with the proposed project should be implemented and monitored, as required by CEQA. 0 • December 10, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt • Page 7 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Roles and Authorities THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG) is a Joint Powers Agency established under California Government Code Section 6502 at seq. Under federal and state law, SCAG is designated as a Council of Governments (COG), a Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), and a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). SCAG's mandated roles and responsibilities include the following: SCAG is designated by the federal government as the Region's Metropollian Planning Organization and mandated to maintain a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process resulting in a Regional Transportation Plan and a Regional Transportation Improvement Program pursuant to 23 U.S.C.'134, 49 U.S.C. 16301 et seq., 23 C.F.R.'460, and 49 C.F.R. '613. SCAG Is also the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency, and as such is responsible for both preparation of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) under California Government Code Section 65080 and 66M respecttvely. SCAG Is responsible for developing the demographic projections and the Integrated land use, housing, employment, and transportation programs, measures, and strategies portions of the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan, pursuant to California Heafth and Safety Code Section 40460(b)-(c). SCAG is also designated under 42 U.S.C. 7504(a) as a Co -Land Agency for air quality planning for the Central Coast and Southeast Desert Air Basin District SCAG is responsible under the Federal Clean Air Act for determining Conformity of Projects, Plans and Programs to the State Implementation Plan, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 7506. • Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65W9.2, SCAG is responsible for reviewing all Congestion Managament Plans (CMPs) for consistency with regional transportation plans required by Section 65080 of the Government Code. SCAG must also evaluate the consistency and compatibility of such programs within the region. SCAG is the authorized regional agency for tntsr-Govemmental Review of Programs proposed for federal financial assistance and direct development activhles, pursuant to Presidential Executive Order 12,372 (replacing A-95 Review). SCAG reviews, pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21003 and 21087, Environmental Impacts Reports of projects of regional significance for consistency with regional plans (Ceiffomia Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Sections 15206 and 16125(b)]. Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. '1288(a)(2) (Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act), SCAG is the authorized Arsawide Waste Treatment Management Planning Agency. SCAG is responsible for preparation of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, pursuant to California Government Code Section 66584(a). SCAG is responsible (with the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, and the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments) for preparing the Southern California Hazardous Waste Management Plan pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 25135.3, Revised July 2001 MWD • ` ' METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Executive Office December 10, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619 Dear Mr. Brandt: Revised Notice of Preparation for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program Environmental Impact Report • The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) has received a copy of the revised Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) within the county of Orange. The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) is the lead agency for this project. The proposed project area comprises the San Diego Creek watershed, a 122-square mile area located in central Orange County. The watershed encompasses the city of Irvine, portions of unincorporated Orange County, and portions of the cities of Lake Forest, Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin, and Newport Beach. The proposed NTS plan consists of a system of constructed water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofilters at 32 locations throughout the San Diego Creek watershed and in a portion of the Santiago Creek watershed. The NTS plan describes the locations and preliminary designs for the utilization of three types of natural treatment systems that could be constructed at the 32 locations. Through the creation of man-made wetlands, the NTS will use natural ecosystems to remove sediment, nutrients, pathogens/germs, and other contaminants from both low -flow and small storm runoff. In addition, the NTS will provide a natural resource, riparian habitat, and wildlife benefits throughout the watershed. This letter contains Metropolitan's response to the NOP as a potentially affected agency. Metropolitan owns and operates several facilities within the boundaries of the proposed program area. Metropolitan's Orange County Feeder Extension, Orange County Feeder No. 2, West Orange County Feeder, East Orange County Feeder No. 2, Allen McColloch Pipeline, and Santa Ana Cross Feeder are within the boundaries of the proposed project area. While specific NTS sites where wetlands are proposed are not located adjacent to all of the pipelines listed above, • several sites do appear to be immediately adjacent to or in the vicinity of our facilities. 700 N. Alameda Street, Los Angeles, California 90012 • Mailing Address: Box 54153, Los Angeles, California 90054-0153 • Telephone (213) 217-6000 Mr. Norris Brandt Page 2 December 10, 2002 Specifically, Sites 6A, 6E, and 6F are immediately adjacent to the Allen McColloch Pipeline, Site 26 is immediately adjacent to the East Orange County Feeder No. 2, and Site 55 is in the vicinity of the East Orange County Feeder. Metropolitan is concerned with the impacts of the creation of wetlands on or adjacent to Metropolitan's facilities. Metropolitan must be allowed to maintain its rights -of -way and access to all its facilities at all times in order to repair and maintain the current condition of those facilities. Creation of wetland areas over our facilities and adjacent areas that provide access to our facilities would not be acceptable, as operations would be restricted. Moreover, wetlands may provide habitat for sensitive biological resources, including both plant and wildlife species, thus further restricting access to our facilities. Therefore, Metropolitan requests that the IRWD consider the facilities mentioned in the previous paragraph in its project planning and ensure that the implementation of the project does not impact our facilities or operations. In order to avoid potential conflicts with Metropolitan's rights -of -way, we require that any design plans for any activity in the area of Metropolitan's pipelines or facilities be submitted for our review and written approval. Approval of the project should be contingent on Metropolitan's approval of design plans for proposed sites that could impact its facilities. n LJ The applicant may obtain detailed prints of drawings of Metropolitan's pipelines and rights -of- • way by calling Metropolitan's Substructures Information Line at (213) 217-6564. To assist the applicant in preparing plans that are compatible with Metropolitan's facilities and easements, we have enclosed a copy of the "Guidelines for Developments in the Area of Facilities, Fee Properties, and/or Easements of The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California." Please note that all submitted designs or plans must clearly identify Metropolitan's facilities and rights - of -way. We appreciate the opportunity to provide input to your planning process and we look forward to receiving future environmental documentation on this project. If we can be of further assistance, please contact William Fong of the Environmental Planning Team at (213) 217-6899. Very truly yours, Laura J. Simdnek Manager, Asset Management and Facilities Planning Unit JAIVrdl (Public Fotdcm/EFU/Lettcts/I0AEG02B:doc—Nottis 13mult) Enclosure: Planning Guidelines • 1. Introduction a. The following general guidelines should be followed for the design of proposed facilities and developments in the area of Metropolitan's facilities, fee properties, and/or easements. b. we require that 3 copies of your tentative and final record maps, grading, paving, street improvement, landscape, storm drain, and utility plans be submitted for our review and written approval as they pertain to Metropolitan's facilities, fee properties and/or easements, prior to the commencement of any construction work. • 2. Plans, Parcel and Tract Maps The following are Metropolitan's requirements for the identification of its facilities, fee properties, and/or easements on your plans, parcel maps and tract maps: a. Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements and its pipelines and other facilities must be fully shown and identified as Metropolitan's on all applicable plans. b. Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements must be shown and identified as Metropolitan's with the official recording data on all applicable parcel and tract maps. C. Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements and existing survey monuments must be.dimensionally tied to the parcel or tract boundaries. d. Metropolitan's records of surveys must be referenced on the parcel and tract maps. 0 - 2 - 3. Maintenance of Access AloncarMetro olitanIs Ri hts-of-Wa a. Proposed cut or fill slopes exceeding 10 percent are normally not allowed within Metropolitan's fee properties or easements. This is required to facilitate the use of construction and maintenance equipment, and provide access to its aboveground and belowground facilities. b. We require that 16-foot-wide commercial -type driveway approaches be constructed on both sides of all streets crossing Metropolitan's sights -of -way, openings are required in any median island. Access ramps, if necessary, must be at least 16-feet-wide. Grades of ramps are normally not allowed to exceed 10 percent. If the slope of an access ramp must exceed 10 percent due to the topography, the ramp must be paved. We require a 40-foot-long level area on the driveway approach to access ramps where the ramp meets the street. At Metropolitan's fee properties, we may require fences and gates. C. The terms of Metropolitan's permanent easement deeds normally preclude the building or maintenance of structures of any nature or kind within its easements, to . ensure safety and avoid interference with operation and maintenance of Metropolitan's pipelines or other facilities. Metropolitan must have vehicular access along the easements at all times for inspection, patrolling, and for maintenance Of the pipelines and other. facilities on a routine basis. We require a 20-foot-wide clear zone around all above -ground facilities for this routine access. This clear zone should Slope away from our facility on a grade not to exceed .2 percent. We must also have access along the easements with construction equipment. An example of this is shown on Figure 1. d. The footings of any proposed buildings adjacent tc Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements must not encroach into the fee property or easement or impose additional loading on Metropolitan,a pipelines or other facilities therein. A typical situation is shown on, Figure 2. Prints of the detail plans of the footings for any building or structure adjacent to the fee property or easement must be submitted for our review and written approval as they pertain to the pipeline or other facilities therein. Also, roof eaves of buildings adjacent to the easement or fee property must not overhang into the fee property or easement area. 0 _ 3 e. Metropolitan's pipelines and other facilities, e.g. structures, manholes, equipment, survey monuments, etc. within its fee properties and/or easements"must be protected from damage by the easement holder on Metropolitan's property or the property owner where Metropolitan has an easement, at no expense to Metropolitan. If the facility is a cathodic protection station it shall be located prior to any grading or excavation. The exact location, description and way of protection shall be shown on the related plans: for the easement area. 4. Easements on Metropolitan's Property a. We encourage the use of Metropolitan's fee rights - of -way by governmental agencies for public street and utility purposes, provided that such use does not interfere with Metropolitan's use of the property, the entire width of the property is accepted into the agency's public street system and fair market value is paid for such use of the right-of-way. • b. Please contact the Director of Metropolitan's Right of Way and Land Division, telephone (213) 250-6302, concerning easements for landscaping, street, storm drain, sewer, water or other public facilities proposed within Metropolitan's fee properties. A map and legal description of the requested easements must be submitted. Also, written evidence must be submitted that shows the city or county will accept the easement for the specific purposes into its public system. The grant of the easement will be subject to Metropolitan's rights to use its land for water pipelines and related purposes to the same extent as if such grant had not been made. There will be a charge for the easement. Please note that, if entry is required on the property prior to issuance of the easement, an entry permit must be obtained. There will also be a charge for the entry permit. S. Landscaping Metropolitan's landscape guidelines for its fee properties and/or easements are as follows: a. A green belt may be allowed within Metropolitan's fee property or easement. b. All landscape plans shall show the location and size of Metropolitan's fee property and/or easement and the location and size of Metropolitan's pipeline or other facilities therein. 6. 7. - 4 - C. Absolutely no trees will be allowed within 15 feet of the centerline of Metropolitan's existing or future Pipelines and facilities. d. Deep-rooted trees are prohibited within Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements. Shallow. rooted trees are the only trees allowed. The shallow -rooted trees will not be permitted any closer than 15 feet from the centerline of the pipeline, and such trees shall not be taller than 25 feet with a root spread no greater than 20 feet in diameter at maturity. Shrubs, bushes, vines, and ground cover are permitted, but larger shrubs and bushes -should not be planted directly over our pipeline. Turf is acceptable. We require submittal of landscape plans for Metropolitan's prior review and written approval. (See Figure 3). e. The landscape plans must contain provisions for Metropolitan's vehicular access at all times along its rights -of -way to its pipelines or facilities therein. Gates capable of accepting Metropolitan's locks are required in any fences across its rights -of -way. Also, any walks or drainage facilities across its access route must be constructed to AASHT0 1-20 loading standards. f. Rights to landscape any of Metropolitan's fee Properties must be acquired from its Right of Nay and Land Division. Appropriate entry permits must be obtained prior to any entry on its property. There will be a charge for any entry permit or easements required. Fencing Metropolitan requires that perimeter fencing of its fee properties and facilities be construct*& of universal chain link, 6 feet in height and topped with 3 strands of barbed wire angled upward and outward at a 45 degree angle or an approved equal for a total fence height of 7 feet. Suitable substitute fencing may be considered by Metropolitan. (Please see Figure 5 for details). Metropolitan's policy for the alinement of utilities permitted within its fee properties and/or easements and street rights -of -way is as follows. 0 • C� • a. Permanent structures, including catch basins, manholes, power poles, telephone riser boxes, etc., shall not be located within its fee properties and/or easements. b. We request that permanent utility structures within public streets, in which Metropolitan's facilities are constructed under the Metropolitan Water District Act., be placed as far from our pipeline as possible, but not closer than 5 feet from the outside of our pipeline. C. The installation of utilities over or under Metropolitan's pipelines) must be in accordance with -the requirements shown on the enclosed prints of Drawings Nos. C-11632 and C-9547. Whenever possible we request a minimum of one foot clearance between Metropolitan's pipe and your facility. Temporary support of Metropolitan's pipe may also be required at undercrossings of its pipe in an open trench. The temporary support plans must be reviewed and approved by Metropolitan. d. Lateral utility crossings of Metropolitan's pipelines must be as perpendicular to its pipeline • alinement as practical. Prior to any excavation our pipeline shall be located manually and any excavation within two feet of our pipeline must be done by hand. This shall be noted on the appropriate drawings. e. Utilities constructed longitudinally within Metropolitan's rights -of -way must be located outside the theoretical trench prism for uncovering its pipeline and must be located parallel to and as close to its rights - of -way lines as practical. f. When piping is jacked or installed in jacked casing or tunnel under Metropolitan's pipe, there must be at least two feet of vertical clearance between the bottom of Metropolitan's pipe and the top of the jacked pipe, jacked casing or tunnel. We also require that detail drawings of.the shoring for the jacking or tunneling pits be submitted for our review and approval. Provisions must be made to grout any voids around the exterior of the jacked pipe, jacked casing or tunnel. If the piping is installed in a jacked casing or tunnel the annular space between the piping and the jacked casing or tunnel must be filled with grout. 0 - 5 - 0 g. Overhead electrical and telephone line requirements: to the California CState tpublic Uor tilities ces e litiesCtommissionn, General Order 95, for Overhead Electrical Line Construction or at a greater clearance if required by Metropolitan. Under no circumstances shall clearance be less than 35 feet. 2) A marker must be attached to the power pole showing the ground clearance and line voltage, to help Prevent damage to your facilities during maintenance or other work being done in the area. 3) Line clearance over Metropolitan's fee Properties and/or easements shall be shown on the drawing to indicate the lowest point of the line under the most adverse conditions including consideration of sag, wind load, temperature change, and support type. We require that overhead lines be located at least 30 feet laterally away from all above -ground structures on the pipelines. . 4) When underground electrical conduits, 120 volts or greater, are installed within Metropolitan's fee property and/or easement, the conduits must be incased in a minimum of three inches of red concrete. Where possible, above ground warning signs must also be placed at the right-of-way lines where the conduits enter and exit the right-of-way. h. The construction of sewerlines in Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements must conform to the California Department of sealth Services Criteria for the Separation of Water Mains and Sanitary Services and the local City or County Health Code Ordinance as it relates to installation of sewers in the vicinity of pressure waterlines. The construction of sewerlinex zbould also conform to these standards in street rt9hts-of- way. i. Cross sections shall be provided for all pipeline crossings showing Metropolitan's fee property and/or easement limits and the location of our pipeline(s). The exact locations of the crossing pipelines and their elevations shall be marked on as -built drawings for our information. 0 7 j. Potholing of Metropolitan's pipeline is required if the vertical clearance between a utility and Metropolitan's pipeline is indicated on the plan to be'one foot or less. If the indicated clearance is. between one and two feet, potholing is suggested. Metropolitan will provide a representative to assists others in locating and identifying its pipeline. Two -working days notice is requested. k. Adequate shoring and bracing is required for the full depth of the trench when the excavation encroaches within the zone shown on Figure 4. 1. The location of utilities within Metropolitan's fee property and/or easement shall be plainly marked to help prevent damage during maintenance or other work done in the area. Detectable tape over buried utilities should be placed a minimum of 12 inches above the utility and shall conform to the following requirements: 1) Water pipeline: A two-inch blue warning tape shall be imprinted with: • "CAUTION BURIED WATER PIPELINE" 2) Gas, oil, or chemical pipeline: A two-inch yellow warning tape shall be imprinted with: "CAUTION BURIED PIPELINE' 3) Sewer or storm drain pipeline: A two-inch green warning tape shall be imprinted with: "CAUTION BURIED PIPELINE" 4) Electric, street lighting, or traffic signals conduit: A two-inch red warning tape shall be imprinted with: "CAUTION BURIED CONDUIT" 5) Telephone, or television conduit: A two-inch orange warning tape shall be imprinted with: "CAUTION BURIED CONDUIT" L� • m. Cathodic Protection requirements: 1) If there is a cathodic protection station for Metropolitan's pipeline in the area of the proposed work, it shall be located prior to any grading or excavation. The exact location, description and manner of protection shall be shorn on All applicable plans. Please contact Metropolitan's Corrosion Engineering Section, located at Metropolitan's F. E. Weymouth Softening and Filtration Plant, 700 North Moreno Avenue, La Verne, California 91750, telephone (714) 593-74741 for the locations of Metropolitan's cathodic Protection stations. 2) If an induced -current cathodic protection system is to be installed on any pipeline crossing Metropolitan's pipeliner please contact Mr. Wayne r,. Risner at (714) 593-7474 or (213) 250-5085. se will review the proposed system and determine if any conflicts will arise with the existing cathodic Protection systems installed by Metropolitan. 3) within Metropolitan's rights -of -way, • pipelines and carrier, pipes (casings) shall be coated with an approved protective coating to conform to Metropolitan's requirements, and shall be maintained in a neat and orderly condition as directed by Metropolitan. The application and monitoring of cathodic protection on the pipeline and casing shall conform to Title 49 of the Code of Federal,Regulations, part 195. 4) If a steel carrier pipe (casing) is used: (a) Cathodic protection shall be provided by use of a sacrificial magnesium anode (a sketch showing the cathodic protection details can be Provided for thi designers information). (b) The steel carrier pipe shall be protected with a coal tar enamel coating inside and out in accordance with AWWA C203 specification. n. All trenches shall be excavated to comply with the CAL/OSHA Construction Safety Orders, Article 6, beginning with Sections 1539 through 1547. Trench backfill shall be placed in 8-inch lifts and shall be compacted to 95 percent relative compaction (ASTM D698) across roadways and through protective dikes. Trench backfill elsewhere will be . compacted to 90 percent relative compaction (ASTM D698). • - 9 - o. Control cables connected with the operation of Metropolitan's system are buried within streets, its fee properties and/or easements. The locations and elevations of these cables shall be shown on the drawings. The drawings shall note that prior to any excavation in the area, the control cables shall be located and measures shall be taken by the contractor to protect the cables in place. p. Metropolitan is a member of Underground Service Alert (USA). The contractor (excavator) shall contact USA at 1-800-422-4133 (Southern California) at'least 48 hours prior to starting any excavation work. The contractor will be liable for any damage to Metropolitan's facilities as a result of the construction. 8. Paramount Right Facilities constructed within Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements shall be subject to the paramount right of Metropolitan to use its fee properties • and/or easements for the purpose for which they were acquired. If at any time Metropolitan or its assigns should, in the exercise of their rights, find it necessary to remove any of the facilities ,from the fee properties and/or easements, such removal and replacement shall be at the expense of the owner of the facility. 9. Modification of Metropolitan's Facilities When a manhole or other of Metropolitan's facilities must be modified to accommodate your construction or recons- truction, Metropolitan will modify the facilities with its forces. This should be noted on the construction plans. The estimated cost to perform this modification will be given to you and we will require a deposit for this amount before the work is performed. Once the deposit is received, we will schedule the work. Our forces will coordinate the work with your contractor. Our final billing will be based on actual cost incurred, and will include materials, construction, engineering plan review, inspection, and administrative overhead charges calculated in accordance with Metropolitan's standard accounting practices. If the cost is less than the deposit, a refund will be made; however, if the cost exceeds the deposit, an invoice will be forwarded for payment of the additional amount. - 10 - n LJ 10. Drainage a. Residential or commercial development typically increases and concentrates the peak storm water runoff as well as the total yearly storm runoff from an area, thereby increasing the requirements for storm drain facilities downstream of the development. Also, throughout the year water from landscape irrigation, car washing, -and other outdoor domestic water uses flows into the storm drainage system resulting in weed abatement, insect infestation, obstructed access and other problems. Therefore, it is Metropolitan's usual practice not to approve plans that show discharge of drainage from developments onto its fee properties and/or easements. b. If water must be carried across or discharged onto Metropolitan's foe properties and/or easements, Metropolitan will insist that plans for development provide that it be carried by closed conduit or lined open channel approved in writing by Metropolitan. Also the drainage facilities must be maintained by others, e.g., city, county, homeowners association, etc. If the development proposes changes to existing drainage features, then the developer shall make provisions to provide for replacement and these changes must be approved by Metropol in writing. 11. Construction Coordination During construction, Metropolitan's field representative Will make periodic inspections. toe request that a stipulation be added to the plans or specifications for notification of Mr, of Metropolitan's Operations Services Branch, telep one ) 250- , at least two working days prior to any work in the viciFrI5; of our facilities. 12. Pipeline Loadina Restrictions a. Metropolitan's pipelines and conduits vary in structural strength, and some are not adequate for AASHTO H-20 loading. Therefore, specific loads over the specific sections of pipe or conduit must be reviewed and approved by Metropolitan. HoWevexi Metzopolitan's pipelines are typically adequate for AASHTO H-20 landing provided that the cover over the pipeline is not less than four feet or the cover is not substantially increased. if the temporary cover over the pipeline during construction is between three and four feet, equipment must restricted to that which imposes loads no greater than AASHTO H-10. If the cover is between two and three feet, equipment must be restricted to that of a Caterpillar D-4 tract -type tractor. If the cover is less than two feet, only hand -equipment may be used. Also, if the contractor plans to use any equipment over Metropolitan's pipeline which will impose loads greater than AASHTO H-201 it will be necessary to submit the specifications of such equipment for our review and approval at least one week prior to its use. More restrictive requirements may apply to the loading guideline over the San Diego Pipelines 1 and 2, portions of the Orange County Feeder, and the Colorado River Aqueduct. Please contact us for loading restrictions on all of Metropolitan's pipelines and conduits. b. The existing cover over the pipeline shall be maintained unless Metropolitan determines that proposed changes do not pose a hazard to the integrity of the pipeline or an impediment to its maintenance. 13. Blasting . a. At least 20 days prior to the start of any drilling for rock excavation blasting, or any blasting, in the vicinity of Metropolitan's facilities, a two-part preliminary conceptual plan shall be submitted to Metropolitan as follows: b. Part 1 of the conceptual plan shall include a complete summary of_proposed transportation, handling, storage, and use of explosions. C. Part 2 shall include the proposed general concept for blasting, including controlled blasting techniques and controls of.noise, fly rock, airblast, and ground vibration. 14. CEQA Requirements a. When Environmental Documents Have Not Been Prepared 1) Regulations implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) require that Metropolitan have an opportunity to consult with the agency or consultants preparing any environmental documentation. We are required to review and consider • the environmental effects of the project as shown in the'Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for your project before committing Metropolitan to approve your request. - 12 - U 2) In order to ensure compliance with the regulations implementing CEQA where Metropolitan is not the Dead Agency, the following minimum procedures to ensure compliance with the Act have been established: any determination that ahCategoriall be callExemption advised of applies to the project. The Lead Agency is to advise Metropolitan that it and other agencies Participating in the project have complied with the requirements of CEQA prior to Metropolitan's participation. b) Metropolitan is to be consulted during the preparation of the Negative Declaration or EIR. c) Metropolitan is to review and submit any necessary comments on the Negative Declaration or draft EIR. d) Metropolitan is to be indemnified for any costs or liability arising out of any • violation of any laws or regulations including but not limited to the California Environmental Quality Act and its implementing regulations. b. When Environmental Documents Have Been_Prepared If environmental documents have been prepared for your project, please furnish us a copy for our review and files in a timely manner so that we may have sufficient time to review and coem►ant. The following steps must also be accomplished:• 1) The bead Agency is to advise Metropolitan that it and other agencies participating in the project have complied with the requirements of CEQA prior to Metropolitan's,participation. 2) You must agree to indemnify Metropolitan, its officers, engineers, and agents for any costs or liability. arising out of any violation of any laws or regulations including but not limited to the California Environmental Quality Act and its implementing regulations. 15. Metropolitan's Plan -Review Cost a. An engineering review of your proposed facilities • and developments and the preparation of a letter response • - 13 - giving Metropolitan's comments, requirements and/or approval that will require 8 man-hours or less of effort is typically performed at no cost to the developer, unless a facility must be modified where Metropolitan has superior rights. If an engineering review and letter response requires more than 8 man-hours of effort by Metropolitan to determine if the proposed facility or development is, compatible with its facilities, or if modifications to Metropolitan's manhole(s) or other facilities will be required, then all of Metropolitan's costs associated with the project must be paid by the developer, unless the developer has superior rights. b. A deposit of funds will be required from the developer before Metropolitan, can begin its detailed engineering plan review that will exceed 8 hours. The amount of the required deposit will be determined after a cursory review of the plans for the proposed development. C. Metropolitan's final billing will be based on actual cost incurred, and will include engineering plan review, inspection, materials, construction, and administrative overhead charges calculated in accordance • with Metropolitan's standard accounting practices. If the cost is less than the deposit, a refund will be made; however, if the cost exceeds the deposit, an invoice will be forwarded for payment of the additional amount. Additional deposits may be required if the cost of Metropolitan's review exceeds the amount of the initial deposit. 16. Caution We advise you that Metropolitan's plan reviews and responses are based upon information available to Metropolitan which was prepared by or on behalf of Metropolitan for general record purposes only. Such information may not be sufficiently detailed or accurate for your purposes. No warranty of any kind, either express or implied, is attached to the information therein conveyed as to its accuracy, and no inference should be drawn from Metropolitan's failure to comment on any aspect of your project. You are therefore cautioned to make such surveys and other field investigations as you may deem prudent to assure yourself that any plans for your project are correct. • Should you require additional information, please contact: nmuzopvizzan water District of Southern California P.O. BOX $4153 Los Angeles, California 90054-0153 (213) 217-6000 JEH/MRW/lk ' Rev. January 22; 1999 Encl. • • I] t• Y BACKHOE OR TRENCHER---••'•- �� . M -y-LAYING CRANE ' NEEDED FOR TRENCHER •�"' �... ,• 21:d". . ALSO DUMP TRUCK PARKING MINIMUM WIDTH FOR \ t• p1� 9=0"1.0. X 20=0"LENOTH FULLY TIMBERED % WEIGHT 909000 LBS. TRENCH� THE M TTf0A0 ITAN WATE� 0f3TRlCT N JW WERN f/l1IMI 8-0" 28 -O" REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION AA=O" WIDTHS inins::.........�fffcatfmvwb ........................ aecwco ......................... FIGURE I .un+ no a. • ,vov u.,� oo. we, 0.,0, NO PERMANENT STRUCTURES PERM/TTED Z M.W.D. PERMANENT RIGHT ar WAY NO ROOF OVERHANG PERM/TIED -- r-C ' ev�co/NG FOOT/NG MUST NOT AO✓ACENT ENCROACH INTO TO RIGHT RIGHT OF WAY OF WAY j FiN�sH£D i � SURFACE I j FOOT/NGF s t 43 t i i E AMP. PIPELINE TW w i R'EOU/REMENTS FOR NOTE: AfWO. PIPEL/NE" S/ZE, DEPTH, LOCATION dMOINGS AND FOOTINGS ANO WIM OF PERMANENT RIGHT OF ADJACENT TO AL W.O. WAY VARIES. RIGHT OF WAY .e..ti.r fwu� i LANDSCAPE GU/DEY/NES FOR M.W D. R/GHT OF W. AY nctv^m hvn.............. _ ...... P--- N.1 14 1 1„11 11-6 -a N11, s, 1An, �� A VNy -ia• rrpicAL AM SHORING AND BRAC/NG FOR TH£ FULL DENTII OF rHE TRENCH WHEN THE EXCAVATION ENCROACHES WITHIN THIS ZONE--� 1N Ir � IMF UA1 P � Mn • f srRE£r SHORING AND BRACING REOLlREMENTS FIGURE 4 r AFY, (Ne) N seeh) �diNM/nraevbdww� i'Mi Jmh/nlrrd emrL7dvV I'mevmrwr rrn N «nhr ELEVAr/ON Ar SHALLOW ORA/N CNOSS/NOS (A6/NarWl DOUBLE SW/NC CATS DETAIL AplF. J/Ml l+ur ro N nelWM rI NP« rNn/1 r.e«dM It rYP/47L_ FENCE ON SLOPE (born wren/ 4a'd.I lsMnilM JAT€.C, .,FXF[NJ/ON ARMS hV/e'°rw'MI h� LrnpM of aPy . NMAdh—�a< MANN F,YA ,�.I,�, AW ., J A• L /A./I Ala Mr b (Nm/ rs arv/i/ .�.rm.L S/NCLE SW/NC CAFE DETAIL (Ay//saraW JFNIMAL NOW IAll mela A„Iell142 �17 me 4alh/ rah /.l arrvnr /,'Pr, t/0 HNTI awinpel JJm e.. 'eep/y end I rcvenA lops/w1lA P bncA //lI rYPI /� r/ Slur ACIw/ LEI W(Ai[•,pMMA/ /L�m/i1 OW «nw[a/Ae,µN«d maotdle a fMwq/rI's In M AirA b SON comb , /Ipbb��yew/rrjnM�.pl.�.pgyV//exd / K T 1! sT ebve4 lshl aq As wANAJMso/m lnA in 1.6 ner JAWIWro/ /! MI m wANArnd ��wiro�wii T! n K Iwo m 6rli NWI b IL,a'i Imnp rIINW /nN o«r /leiiW NYnC/AMd ! lwhy Nha ewr lviner ever J! t Mhwl//A / !lF! /I!7 Jmh psli hrlm/blw+ gehrr�ewpyn q AWmJnW[wro%� wi w:A'A) /J RFLs late e:.»mesh brmm�Ana h/rvr >!an[bl wAiyArr rh / hal It/ 1/J he ��iqM �ll tA« •rc• /i /4YY tan r A arar)e r . lnwi MAIN L•(NN FENCE CErA/LS FIGURE 5 x ej," ro/ded bM/w Jo/at . AAMrMM as, aVrechd by , , the Er0intertoto/ ro%me not ro onwd it the roam of the saAr00AMy wv// .,. Gorevete awgWrt we// to be P/oeed ogo/nst undis- Isrbed ground SECTION "A -A" /. Supporting wo// shot/ here o firm beorind to the subgrade and against the side of the exeovot/or. 2. PremO/dtd rxpansior Joint filler per ASTM D-/73/ 73 to At Used /n support for stet/ Pipe only. I If trench width is 4 feel or prooto m osured a/oV center/ire of At WA P/Pe,eonereto apport must be ca tructed. 4. /f french width is /ews than 4 feet, ckon word bock- fi//, oa "Wettd to 90x d flogy in oeeordonee w/h3 Me Provisions of ASTM Standard D-/137-70 mV bt-aged /n //eu of Me conerete &Wort wall. —_Drain. CROSS SECTION TYPICAL SUPPORT FOR M.W.D. PIPELINE I.N! MR[Mk-.�fCu-wlwe.r. M.W.D. SECTION r� 1 0 CROSS SECTION E 3"Preformed uponsion joint filler NOTES A This method to be•us&d where the utility line is 24'or greater in diameter and the clearance between the utility line and M.W.D. pipe is /2' of less. 2. Speaio/ protection may be required if the ulflfly line diameter is greater than M.WD. pipe or if the cover over the utility fine to the street surface is minimo/ and there is 12'or less clearance between M.IY.D. pipe and the atilfty line. J. Preformed expansion joint filler to comply with A STM designation 4. M.WD. requests /2'minimum cleoionce whenever possible. fmits expansfon r 0 OF Ito Community Development Department Cit, .f Wine. One Civic Center Plaza, PO Eox 19576. Irvine.:aliwrnia 92625•9573 (949) November 20, 2002 Mr. Paul D. Jones, II General Manager Irvine Ranch Water District 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619-7000 SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation revision for the Natural Treatment System Program Ella Dear Mr. Jones: The City of Irvine has received and reviewed the revision on the above referenced project and has no comments at this time. Thank you for the opportunity to review the project. We welcome any additional information regarding this project, should it become available. I can be reached at (949) 724-6546 if you have any questions or comments. Planner cc: Leslie Aranda, Principal Planner My DocumentslAUVAR IRWDNOPNTSI.revisionitrl t ral Ff•. . • a' . 9 ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY P.O. Box 86, Orange, CA 92856-0086.145 South Water St., Orange, CA 92866 Chip Prather, Fire Chief (714) 744-0400 December 4, 2002 Irvine Ranch Water District PO Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619 Attn: NTS Program Manager SUBJECT: NOP for San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program EIR (Revised) Dear NTS Program Manager: Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject document. Given the nature of the project, the impacts to the OCFA are not significant. While no additional public safety resources are anticipated as a result of this project, all standard conditions and guidelines will be applied to the project during the normal plan review process. We do have a couple of comments on the overall • project(s): • Please make every effort to keep or develop safe points of access for the fire department in the event of a water rescue in these areas. This includes the width, nature and method of securing the access point. • Please have your design professionals work with our Fire Prevention section to make sure that we can get rapid access to the appropriate points when someone is in need of help. It would be helpful if your design professionals kept in mind that we are most likely to access these areas during the rainy season and very often in the dark or poor light. • Please advise if you will be using any chemicals in these facilities as coordination with our Hazardous Materials Services Section is required. Thank you for providing us with this information. Please contact me at 714-744-0484 if you have any questions. Sincerely, G' ene F. B e 1 Battalion Chief, Strategic Services Mp:GFB Serving the Cities of. Aliso Viejo •Buena Park •Cypress .Dana Point •Irvine •Laguna Hills • Laguna Niguel •Laguna Woods •Lake Forest • La Palma Los Alamitos • Mission Viejo • Placentia • Rancho Santa Margarita • San Clemente . San Juan Capistrano . Seal Beach • Stanton . Tustin . Villa Park Westminster • Yorba Linda • and Unincorporated Areas of Orange County RESIDENTIAL SPRINKLERS AND SMOKE DETECTORS SAVE LIVES 6*44. w r4 �rO..C• •, ,(µ *,,.•,i�. CHT OF ORANGE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FAX (714) 744-7222 ADMINISTRATION PLANNING DIVISION BUILDING DIVISION (714)744.7240 (714)744.7920 (714)144.7900 December 5, 2002 #34-02 Mr. Norris Brandt NTS Program Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box $7000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 Re: Revised Notice of Preparation for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Plan Dear Mr. Brandt: Thank you for transmitting a copy of the revised Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Plan for Our review. The City understands that the NTS project description has been revised since the release of the original NOP, which was circulated for public review in February 2002. The scope of the proposed project appears to be very similar to that disclosed in the original NOP. Revisions to the project description include the elimination of three NTS sites, the addition of two NTS sites, and the renumbering of several NTS sites. The revised NOP also contains a more detailed NTS site location map. The City previously sent a comment letter, dated March 20, 2002, in response to the original NOP. A copy of that letter is attached and I request that those concerns again be noted and addressed in your process. I would like to particularly point out again, that a runoff management plan (ROMP) will be prepared for the Santiago Hills U project area and that environmental review will be part of that process. As to this ROMP, the City of Orange intends to perform environmental review independently and does not intend to rely on the Program EIR that IRWD is preparing for the Natural Treatment System Program. The City expects to retain an environmental consultant very soon for the Santiago Hills lI and East Orange development and part of the work to be done by this consultant will is • CJ ORANGE CIVIC CENTER 300 E. CHAPMAN AVE. ORANGE, CA 92666.1591 • P.O. BOX 449 10v 0WpEC WER Mr. Norris Brandt December 5, 2002 Page 2 • involve evaluating the ROMP. I would suggest that all necessary coordination take place to assure consistency between IRWD's environmental review efforts and that of the City of Orange. Stan Soo-Hoo is the Planning Manager for the East Orange area and is available to assist in this coordination effort. He may be reached at (714) 744-7220. Thank you this opportunity to review and comment on the revised NOR We look forward to reviewing the Draft EIR when it is available. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (714) 744-7220. Sincerely, Alice Angus, AICP Community Development Director • cc: Stan SooHoo, Community Planning Manager • CITY OF ORANGE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FAX (714) 744.7292 ADMINISTRATION PLANNING DIVISION BUILDING DIVISION (714) 744.7240 (714) 744-7220 (714) 744-72DO March 20, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt NTS Program Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA92219-7000 "�bVit,4 Deardt, Subject; Notice of Preparation for a Program EIR for the Irvine Ranch Water District's San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program • The City of Orange (City) has received and reviewed the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Irvine Ranch Water District's San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program. The project consists of a Master Plan that establishes a system for the natural treatment of storm runoff within the San Diego Creek watershed. The system consists of the construction of wetlands and natural biofilters within several jurisdictions within the watershed, including the City of Orange. The Public Works Department and Community Development Department have reviewed the NOP and determined that two proposed NTS sites are located within our City limits or sphere of influence. The City recognizes that it may be responsible for issuing permits or other approvals related to the siting and/or construction of the proposed NTS improvements, and is therefore considered a potential responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act. As such, the City would appreciate consideration of the following comments. 1..The proposed NTS site on Hewes Street appears to be located within the El Modena Park basin property. Although this property is owned by the Orange County Flood Control District, it contains picnic tables and barbeque pits and is used by Orange residents for passive recreation. Therefore, the City has an interest in maintaining the site's existing open space and passive recreational amenities. The City requests that short-term and long-term effects to recreation ORANGE CIVIC CENTER v• 300 E. CHAPMAN AVE. ORANGE, CA 92866.1591 P.O. BOX 449 ppw C" ecMomm Mr. Norris Brandt March 20, 2002 • Page 2 resulting from the use of El Modena Parkas an NTS site be evaluated as part of the environmental document. 2. The proposed NTS site adjacent to the Eastern Transportation Corridor appears to be located within a riparian area in the proposed Santiago Hills R project area, located within the City's sphere of influence. A mitigation measure was adopted by the City Council with approval of that project requiring preparation of a runoff management plan (ROMP). Further, environmental review must be conducted on that ROMP. We would like to make it clear that, for purposes of -the ROMP; the City of Orange intends to perform environmental review independently and does not intend to rely on the Program EIR that IRWD is preparing for the Natural Txeatment System Program. Since that NTS site is located within the drainage area covered by that ROMP and since there will undoubtedly be considerable overlap between the environmental documents to be prepared for each project, the City of Orange would like assurance that all necessary coordination will take place between IRWD and the City to achieve consistency between both efforts. Please feel free to contact Stan • Soo-Hoo, Planning Manager for the East Orange area for additional information. Mr. Soo-Hoo maybe reached at (714) 744-7220. 3. Finally, the aforementioned NTS site appears to be located outside of the San Diego Creek Watershed boundary (please refer to Figure 3 of the NOP). It is important to note that this location drains primarily to Handy Creek and ultimately to Santiago Creek, not to San Diego Creek. The City requests that clarification be provided addressing the inclusion of this site as part of the San Diego Creek Watershed NTS. The above comments and observations are based on material provided in the NOP, including a map that shows two NTS within the Orange City limits or its sphere of influence. The City has noticed, however, that a separate document entitled "Q&A San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System" contains a map showing many additional sites within Orange's sphere of influence. If these additional sites indicate work to be undertaken as'part of the project for which the NOP was prepared, we will need more detailed information in order to properly respond. The City of Orange appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above -referenced project and looks forward to reviewing the Draft EIR upon its completion. Please feel free to contact me at (714) 744-7220 should you have any questions. 0 Mr. Norris Brandt March 20, 2002 Page 3 Sincerely, 0';'C.-ez a�� Alice Angus, AICP Community Development Director cc: Karen Sully, Planning Manager Stan Soo Hoo, East Orange Community Planning Manager Roger Hohnbaum, Assistant City Engineer Robert Von Schimelmann, Public Works Maintenance Division Manager Jennifer McDonald, Associate Planner/Bnvironmental Review Coordinator 0 11 • From: To: Date: Subject: • 0 "Arnau, John" <John.Arnau@iwmd.ocgov.com> "'Norris Brandt"' <BRANDT@irwd.com> 12/5/02 8:04AM RE: Revised NOP for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Norris, I did receive the fax. I just went over the information with my boss, Bob Richmond. After reviewing the information, we agree that Sites 6D and 6H shouldn't result in any conflicts with closure construction activities at the Santiago Canyon Landfill, due to the distance between the proposed sites and the landfill. Thanks again Norris. ---Original Message — From: Norris Brandt [mailto:BRANDT@irwd.com] Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 7:49 AM To: John.Arnau@iwmd.ocgov.com Subject: Re: Revised NOP for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Terry Hartman, of the Irvine Company, faxed over to you a map yesterday that shows the locations of the two basins. It is a better map that shows contours, etc. These particular basins are being constructed by them as part of their development, but will be incorporated into our program once completed. Let me know if you don't have the fax. I can forward you a copy of what I got. If you have further questions, feel free to email me. It is usually the best way to get an answer. Thanks, Norris >>> "Arnau, John" <John.Arnau@iwmd.ocgov.com> 12/05/02 07:30AM >>> Norris, thank you for the e-mail. For new projects undergoing CEQA review, IWMD along with other County agencies submit comments to the County Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD) so that one response letter can then be sent out. My deadline for submittal to PDSD on your project is next Wednesday, December 11. Therefore, if GeoSyntec could mark up my fax with the correct locations of Sites•613 and 6H by the end of the day on Monday (December 9), 1 would really appreciate it, Thanks Norris. 0 Community Development Department • City of Tustin 3010 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 December 11, 2002 714.573.3100 Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619-7000 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF REVISED NOP FOR IRWD NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM Dear Mr. Brandt Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Revised Notice of • Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Natural Treatment System (NTS) within the San Diego Creek Watershed. The City of Tustin reviewed the document provided and has identified the following concerns and issues that should be addressed at this time or in the Draft Environmental Impact Report: General Comment — On March 21, 2002, and October 8, 2002, the City provided comments to the IRWD on the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the Screencheck Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, respectively, for the Natural Treatment System (NTS). The IRWD has prepared the Revised NOP partially based upon input provided by the City of Tustin, specifically related to the City's request that certain NTS sites be removed from the Master Plan. Several of the comments previously submitted by the City of Tustin have not been addressed. Therefore, the City's previous comments are being resubmitted as Attachment A to this letter. 2. Page 3 of the Revised NOP — The Irvine Ranch Water District's (IRWD) response to the City of Tustin's correspondence dated March 21, 2002, and October 8, 2002, indicated that IRWD has removed proposed Natural Treatment System Site 14, Site 55, and a portion of Site 64 from the Natural Treatment System (NTS) Plan. However, IRWD should not proceed with its stated plan to include the three sites in an "Alternative Plan" that is also to be evaluated as part of the scope of the proposed • Program Environmental Impact Report. For the reasons stated in our previous • Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS Revised NOP December 11, 2002 Page 2 correspondence, the City would prefer that the sites not be predetermihed but that they be removed from further consideration as part of the NTS Plan or within an Alternative Plan. In conjunction with approval from the City, future private property owners at the former Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin may independently elect to establish NTS sites at any location within their properties. Since the actual location of an elected site is currently unknown, inclusion in the proposed Program EIR would be unnecessary. Any election to establish an NTS site by a future private owner would require independent compliance with CEQA prior to implementation. 3. Figures 3a and 3b — The reference to the "Tustin Marine Corps Reserve" site is inaccurate and should be revised to read "Former Marine Corps Air Station Tustin. " 4. Figures 3a and 3b, page 3 of the Revised NOP, Table 1 — The facility location for Site 67 (Cienega de las Renas) is identified in Table 1 as north of Barranca Parkway to west of Harvard Avenue. The narrative on page 3 and the graphic depiction shown on Figures 3a and 3b indicates that Site 67 could be located anywhere in the • vicinity of Peters Canyon Channel from the Interstate 5 at the north to Campus Drive (San Joaquin Marsh) at the south. As stated in the City's October 8, 2002, correspondence, any proposal to implement Site 67 within the boundaries of the former MCAS Tustin would have significant negative impacts upon this community's ability to finance the new backbone infrastructure needed at the former base to ensure regional recovery from the economic impacts of base closure. Please remove any proposal to locate this site within the boundaries of the former MCAS Tustin. 5. Page 4 — The City of Tustin's October 8,. 2002, correspondence indicated that the Biological Resources Section had not yet been prepared. Page 4 of the Revised NOP indicates that the proposed NTS sites would include wetlands areas that may include "habitat" and "wildlife" space benefits. Will the implementation of the proposed project create new habitats for regionally protected flora or fauna that might preclude development of surrounding properties? The narrative provided in the Revised NOP cannot substitute for information that must be provided in the CEQA checklist and narrative. The IRWD should prepare an additional revised NOP that includes/provides the required missing Biological Resources Section, with proposed mitigation so that potential impacts and benefits of the proposed program can be better understood. In addition, program implementation costs and responsible parties should also be identified. L Mr. Norris Brandt . IRWD NTS Revised NOP December 11, 2002 Page 3 6. Regarding the vector control element of the program, the Revised NOP indicates the NTS plan includes recommendations to control mosquitoes and describes long-term vector and pest monitoring measures. It further indicates the EIR will examine any potential additional measures that may be required. In addition to the discussion on control and monitoring, the EIR should clearly identify the roles and responsible entities necessary to exercise proper vector control. The City of Tustin appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on this project. I would appreciate receiving a copy of the Draft EIR and the NTS Master Plan when they become available. If you have any questions regarding the City's comments, please call Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner, at (714) 573-3016 or Dana Ogdon, Redevelopment Program Manager, at (714) 573-3116. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Binsack • Director of Community Development Attachment A: Letters dated March 21, 2002 and October 8, 2002 cc: William A Huston Christine A. Shingleton Tim D. Serlet Dana Kasdan Doug Anderson Dana Ogdon Scott-Reekstin SR:environmenWURWD NTS Redeed NOP comment Letter.dx r� L J Community Development Department October 8, 2002 Norris Brandt, P.E. Assistant to the General Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619-7000 City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 714.573.3100 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY DRAFT SECTIONS OF THE SCREENCHECK EIR FOR IRWD NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM MASTER PLAN Dear Mr. Brandt: • Thank you -for the opportunity to provide comments on preliminary draft sections of the Screencheck Draft Program• Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Natural Treatment System (NTS) within the San Diego Creek Watershed. -*The City of Tustin has reviewed the documents provided and has identified the following concerns and issues that should be -addressed at this time or in the -Draft Environmental Impact Report: IRWD has requested "big picture" comments that address the policy issues related to NTS. City Management staff have had several meetings with IRWD Management staff and have communicated significant policy concerns regarding the proposed project and requested alteration of the project definition. The City of Tustin's previous concerns and comments have not been -incorporated into the Draft Program EIR. As a responsible Agency, we request that our comments and concerns result in modifications to the project and-EIR before it is publicly released. 2. Figure 1-2 — The Tustin Reuse Area boundaries are inaccurate as shown and should be revised to include the existing Marine Corps housing areas within Irvine known as Marble Mountain. 3. Page 2-4 and 2-5 — The section identifies a Natural Treatment System goal to maximize opportunities for use of the existing flood control and other facilities for Water Quality Treatment purposes including the introduction of wetlands into existing storm channels. The section indicates that it is IRWD's intent to ensure that potentially retrofitted channels continue to be effective in their current function of accommodating drainage from adjacent • properties. Please confirm that storm drain retrofits will be designed to carry the 100-year flood design required by the Orange County Flood Control District. If this assumption is not correct, the document should consider environmental impacts associated with potential flooding in adjoining existing neighborhoods. Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS Screencheck EIR October 8, 2002 Page 2 4. On pages 2-5 it states that IRWD's "statutory authority provides an assured funding source" for the. project. Page 2-47 of the document states that the Retrofit Facilities construction costs are to be- borne partially or wholly by rate payers and private developers. Details of the -cost• agtimates. have'•not yet -been provided by the IRWD. Details concerning the projected costs'as$ociated With the proposed project must be shared and -substantiated with the-publlc and implementing agencies prior to IRWD approval of the project. it is possible that the proposed funding source (rate payers and private developers) will not support the project'& Implementation, •especially - if the current cost estimates are significantly understated• or are Inaccurate. Many of the locations identified for Facility Retrofit are near the former Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin. The redevelopment of former military bases such as MCAS Tustin requires an onerous level of funding for new backbone Infrastructure and public facilities. This funding burden must also be placed upon private developers of the property (who ultimately assign these costs to the property's future residents and business owners). Implementation of the proposed project would add an additional layer of significant cost to the developer/resident at MCAS Tustin that would hamper regionally important redevelopment activities at the MCAS Tustin property. Therefore, the proposed Retrofit sites on or adjacent to MCAS Tustin should be eliminated • from further consideration. The IRWD Management. staff previously agreed in meetings with the City of Tustin that, until alternative and absolute sources of funding can be Identified, MCAS-Tustln would not be included. Certain sites within the MCAS-Tustin are owned b'yAhe City;- therefore, IRWD should provide an assessment of the implications of acquisition df opposed by a property owner. 5. Page 2-5 and 2-6, Section 2.3 — The document identifies the City of Tustin as a potentially responsible agency under. -CEQA in the discretionary implementation of the proposed program. Please Identify the implications to the proposed program should a responsible agency not implement actions needed to accomplish the proposed project. Please identify the alternatives that have been identified by the IRWD to accomplish the goals of the NTS through other means or at other altemative locations. Please identify the methods that have been considered to require or encourage local jurisdictions to implement the proposed program. 6. Page 2-10, Table 2.3-1 — Site number 55 (0.9 acres at the west leg of the Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel, estimated construction cost: $105,30d; estimated annual operation and maintenance cost: $62,200) Is currently identified as being owned by the U.S. Navy; however, Figure 2-6a and Figure 4 Indicate that no portion of the channel lies within the former MCAS Tustin property. In addition, page 2-20 indicates that the planned improvements could be Implemented in the "next three to six years." The ownership reference should be corrected. Please clarify that the proposed improvements will not be required to occur within any portion of the channel crossing the MCAS Tustin property. For the reasons cited in comment No. 4 above, please remove this site from further . consideration. • Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS Screencheck EIR October 8, 2002 Page 3 7. Page 2-11, Table 2.3-1 - Site number 64 (18.2 acres of Peters Canyon Channel located on and off the former MCAS Tustin,'estimated construction cost: $561,000; estimated annual operation and maintenance cost: $247,100) is identified as being owned by the OCFCD. Please correctthis table to note that the U.S. Navy currently owns the portion of the channel that traverses the former MCAS Tustin. For the -reasons cited in comment No. 2 above, please remove this site from further consideration. 8. Figure 2-6b — Site 67 (15.0 acres named Cienega de [as Renas, estimated construction cost: $3,628,000; estimated annual operation and -maintenance cost: $213,500) is1dentified on page 2-21 as located adjacent to Peters Canyon Wash near the confluence with San Diego Creek within the former MCAS Tustin "Marble Mountain" housing area in the City of Irvine. The economic redevelopment of MCAS Tustin regbires the commitment of significant funding resources that were expected to come from the, development of areas such as Marble Mountain. Any proposal to implement Site 67 would have regionally significant negative impacts upon the community's ability -to finance the new backbone infrastructure at MCAS Tustin needed to ensure regional recovery from the economic • impacts of base closure. For the reasons cited in comment No. 4.above, please remove this site from further consideration. 9. Page 2-12, -Table 2.3-1 — -Site 14 (unknown acreage at ,the former MCAS Tustin, cost unknown) is identified as being owned by the U.S. Navy: The property at this site was conveyed from the U.S. Navy to the City of Tustin on May 13, 2002. Page 2-20 indicates that the planned improvements could be implemented in the "next three to six years." The ownership reference should be corrected. For the reasons cited in comment No. 4 above, please remove this site from further consideration. 10.. Page 2-16 through 2-18 — This section indicates that the "Swamp of Frogs" area located near or at the former MCAS Tustin is a significant source of selenium, which is identified as a target pollutant to be removed from natural flows through the implementation of NTS Plan Site 67 (Marble Mountain site discussed in comment No. 6 above). The City of Tustin's approved Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin calls for the elimination of all. open dirt - lined channels from the. property, -which will likely decrease the leaching of selenium into storm water currently entering the Newport Bay. The document should include a discussion of the benefits from the planned elimination of these existing dirt or sandy bottom channels as an option to the requested elimination of NTS Sites 14, 55, 64 and 67. 11. Page 2-41 through 2-45 — This section indicates that developers, ratepayers and other sources will fund operation and maintenance of the NTS Plan including: inspection, • monitoring, reporting, vector control, etc. For the reasons cited in comment No. 4 above, please remove this site from further consideration. Mr. Norris Brandt •' IRWD NTS Screencheck EIR October 8, 2002 Page 4 12. Figure 3.1-1 depicts the existing land use at the former MCAS Tustin as "Commercial and Services," On October 30, 1996, the City of Tustin approved a Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin that calls for the redevelopment of the property for residential, commercial, light industrial and a number of publictinstitutional uses. Please revise the figure to reflect these uses consistent with the Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin. 13, Please revise Figure 3.1-2 to reflect accurately land uses'for the former base as identified in the Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin. For example, the figure incorrectly identifies a large portion of the base as being planned for "Open Space — Other" when the area is planned for "Goff Village" which includes: 2,383 residential units; a 10-acre elementary schooh, two 5-acre neighborhood parks; 272,420 sq. ft. of commercial use including a 500 room hotel; and, a commercial private golf course. 14. Page 3.1-25 — No impact discussion has been provided. Please provide adequate information for City review. The draft document should discuss the Impacts to Land Use from the proposed project on the Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin. The document should Identify alternative sites that would eliminate certain NTS sites as the City has .previously . discussed with IRWD. Any Land Use Impacts to the City of Tustin'should be identified and mitigated so that negative impacts to this community would be avoided. 15. Page 3.2-9 (Land Use) — Selenium mitigation is discussed in this section. Additional narrative should be provided in the document to analyze the potential alternative beneficial impacts from the planned elimination of unlined storm drain channels at MCAS Tustin, a source suspected of contributing selenium through natural leaching processes. Table 3.1-3 indicates that NTS sites '55 and 64 (existing channels) are consistent land uses. No consistency finding has been provided for Site 14, which is not consistent due to current uncertainties related to property ownership and site design. Please note that the proposed NTS Site 67 is not listed as a consistent land use within the City of Irvine. 16. Page 3.6-1 (Aesthetics) - Currently, no impact discussion has been drafted that could be reviewed by the City of Tustin. it is the City's position that the proposed NTS sites could be significantly inconsistent with the proposed land uses and aesthetic treatments that are currently envisioned to occur through implementation of the Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin, Therefore, NTS sites should be eliminated in Tustin uniessIRWD has written confirmation from Tustin that a site Is acceptable. The City is not prepared to discuss with IRWD specific sites until City review and approval of future developer initiated plans. The revised draft document should discuss the Impacts to aesthetics from the proposed project on the MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan. The document should also identify alternative sites that would eliminate all NTS sites at the former MCA$ Tustin. Aesthetic impacts to the City of Tustin should be clearly identified and mitigated so that any potentially negative impacts to this community would be fully avoided. • • Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS Screencheck EIR October 8, 2002 Page 5 '17. Page 4.2-6 (Water Quality) — Please identify the supporting data identified in Table 4.2-1 and the statement "N/A" regarding the presence or absence of groundwater below NTS Sites 55 and 64. 18. Page 4.3-1 (Biological Resources) — Please provide the data for City review. If certain Tustin NTS sites are not eliminated from inclusion to this program, please note the Final EIR for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin has assumed as project mitigation the removal of certain flora and fauna that may exist within the existing earthen channel's when redevelopment activities take place.. 19. The City of Tustin does not concur with the sites proposed on or adjacent to the MCAS Tustin. Until concurrence has been established, the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) cannot assume that a proposed site is a feasible project for the purposes of CEQA. Please identify if the IRWD is considering eminent domain in conjunction with this project. If so, the Draft Environmental Impact Report should address all discretionary actions associated with the proposed project, including property acquisifion. • 20. If agreement is reached on sites in, or adjacent to, Tustin, the Draft Environmental Impact Report should identify a "Potentially Significant Impacf on Land Use and Planning as follows: • The MCAS Tustin Specific Plan would be significantly impacted by the implementation of Site Nos. 14, 64, and 67. • Transportafion/Ttaffic and Public Services - Site 14 would negatively impact the construction of necessary backbone infrastructure at MCAS Tustin required for the redevelopment of the former base including: preventing full redevelopment of the base; lowering property tax revenues; limiting the City's ability to provide police and fire services. • If implemented, Site 14 could also prevent 'the construction of a proposed 10-acre elementary school and a 40-acre high school at the site. • Population'and Housing would also be affected as follows: Site 14 could delay/prevent the construction of housing proposed at MCAS Tustin including the provision of affordable/homeless housing. • Aesthetics (Site 14 could negatively impact the aesthetic harmony of development currently anticipated at MCAS Tustin), and Recreation (Site 14 could prevent the development of two 5-acre neighborhood parks planned in the vicinity of the project). 21. If agreement is reached on sites in, or adjacent to Tustin, the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report should address the potential for short- term noise, traffic, and air quality impacts associated with construction activities. Mitigation measures should be included to • minimize these short-term impacts. For the Tustin sites, construction hours and noise should be required to be consistent with, or more restrictive than, the regulations contained in Tustin City Code Sections 4600 et seq. Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS Screehcheck EIR October 8, 2002 Page 6 22. Two of the four NTS sites proposed in the Tustin area are adjacent to existing residential communities, and the remaining sites are proposed to be within and adjacent to future neighborhoods. If agreement is reached on sites in, or adjacent to Tustin, the City of Tustin encourages the Irvine Ranch Water District to solicit input from the residents of these areas. Input should be considered early in the planning process through construction to ensure that any concerns are mitigated. The homeowners associations In these areas should be contacted at this stage in the planning process for possible informational meetings with representatives of IRWD. 23. The Draft Program Environmental Impact Report should detail from which sites IRWD has obtained property owner approval. 24. The Draft Program EIR should identify, the minimum number of NTS sites necessary for the NTS program to meet Its objectives. 26. The Draft Program BIR should address the potential for illegal dumping at NTS sites and • Include appropriate mitigation measures. 26. The NTS sites proposed in Tustin are all located in high profile or highly visible areas to the existing community or to proposed development. Therefore, If property owner approval is obtained and development of the treatment sites proceeds, aesthetics will be an important Issue. High quality fencing, compatible landscaping, and aggressive maintenance programs would qe essential to ensure that the facilities complement the character of the Tustin community. 27. The subject document has provided greater detail in the project concept and related impacts for the in -line system proposed for the Santa Fe Channel parallel to the OCTA/SCRRA Railway Right -of -Way (Site 55) and the in -line system proposed for Peters Canyon Wash Channel located between the 1-5 Fwy and Barranca Parkway (Site 64). From review of the project level analysis of Site 55, the project scope may need to be revised to accommodate a future realignment and box channel modification necessary for the proposed undercrossing of Newport Avenue. To accommodate the street undercrossing, approximately 100 feet of the existing Santa Fe Channel will be modified to an underground box channel and realigned to bypass the roadway undercrossing. The channel bypass will rejoin the Santa Fe Channel approximately 100 feet downstream of the original alignment and transition back to the open channel. Please clarify the boundaries of Site 55 consistently throughout the Draft EIR. 28. At Sites 55 and 64, a combination of permanent and temporary weirs is proposed. These modifications need to be evaluated by the Orange County Flood Control District to . confirm that adequate channel capacity can be maintained during the maximum design storm event. The subject document should also be revised to correctly identify the • Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS Screencheck EIR October 8, 2002 Page 7 Orange County Flood Control District as the owner of the Santa Ana Santa Fe Channel (Site 55). 29. The operation and maintenance activities discussed in Section' 2.8 appear to be appropriate. However, the specific maintenance activities described in Table 2.8-2 do not address any type of vector control'for Sites 55 and 64. Since standing water will be held for extended time periods at each of these sites, the maintenance schedule should be revised to include some vector control effoft at these locations. 30. The consistency of page numbering needs to be verified throughout the document. The City of Tustin appreciates the opportunity to provide comments. on this project. I would appreciate receiving a copy of the Draft EIR and the NTS Master Plan when they become available. If you have any questions regarding the City's comments, please call Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner, at (714) 573-3016 or Dana Ogdon, Redevelopment Program Manager, at (714) 573-3116. Sincerely, • Elizabeth A. Binsack Director of Community Development cc: William A. Huston Christine A. Shingleton Tim Serlet Dana Kasdan Doug Anderson Dana Ogdon Scott Reekstin MenvironmentaNRW D NTS Screencheck EIR Comment Letter.doc 0 T Public Works / Engineering City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way March 21, 2002 Tustin, CA 92780-3715 (714) 573.3150 FAX (714) 734-8991 Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619-7000 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF NOP FOR IRWD NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM Dear Mr. Brandt: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Natural Treatment System (NTS) within the San Diego Creek Watershed. In a letter dated March 8, 2002, the City of Tustin.requested an • extension of time to provide comments on the Notice of Preparation. The extension was requested because the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study did not provide enough information for the City of Tustin to adequately identify the potential environmental imparts and whether -the City's concerns as communicated to IRWD have been adequately addressed. As an extension was not granted, the City of Tustin reviewed the documents• provided and has identified the following concerns and issues that should be addressed at this time or in the Draft Environmental Impact Report: 1. General Comment — The exhibits used in the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study documents inadequately describe the project. Figure 3 cannot be cross-referenced with the information contained in Table 1. Please revise the exhibits accordingly and provide the complete NTS program document for review. 2. Notice of Preparation, Pages 2 and 3 — The document does not adequately describe the proposed project. The document Indicates that the NTS program is being coordinated with the County and the applicable municipalities. However, the proposed project includes proposed site improvements that have not been fully described or characterized (Site 14, MCAS Tustin); therefore, the City of Tustin does not concur with the proposed project at that site. Until such concurrence has been received, the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) cannot assume that a proposed site is a feasible project for the purposes of CEQA. Is the IRWD considering eminent domain in conjunction with this project? If so, the project does not list all discretionary actions associated with the proposed project. The City of Tustin recommends that Site 14 be removed from NTS consideration at this time. . Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS NOP March 21, 2002 Page 2 3. Notice of Preparation, Page 3 —.It is stated that the Initial Study and Notice of Preparation are being prepared "to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of constructing, operating, and maintaining" the NTS sites, including the "early construction of eleven sites, including Site 14 at MCAS Tustin." However, there is no information provided within the documentation 'as to who or what agency will be required to perform the -construction, operation -and maintenance of the proposed NTS sites. This information is also required and should be -provided prior to moving forward with the environmental process. 4. Initial Study, Table 1 — The Initial Study describes two levels of projects being analyzed by. the IRWD. At least two of the projects within the City of Tustin are described as requiring "Project -Level Analysis." These projects include Site No. 14 (MCAS Tustin) and Site 55 (Santa Ana, Santa Fe Channel). There is insufficient information provided in the Initial Study to support development of an environmental document by the IRWD. CEQA Section 15063 requires.that the project be sufficiently described to permit the Lead Agency (and other interested parties) to determine whether evidence exists that the project may cause a significant effect on the environment. The Initial'Study documents prepared by • the IRWD do not provide sufficient information to reasonably conclude or conceive of the scope of environmental impact potentially caused by the implementation of the project. The project description should be revised to include a discussion of the project level construction methods, size, alternative sites, aesthetics, etc. and re -circulated for review and comment. 5. Initial Study, Page 5 — The project should, but does not, identify a "Potentially Significant Impact" on Land Use and Planning (MCAS Tustin Speck Plan would be significantly impacted by the implementation of Site'No. 14), Transportation/Traffic and Public Services (Site 14 would potentially negatively impact the construction of necessary backbone infrastructure at MCAS Tustin required for the redevelopment of the former base, preventing full redevelopment of the base, lowering property tax revenues, affectively limiting the City's ability to provide police and fire services). If implemented, Site 14 could also potentially prevent the construction of a proposed 10-acre elementary school and a 40-acre high school at the site. Also affected but not discussed are: Population and Housing (Site 14 could delay/prevent the construction of housing proposed at MCAS Tustin including the provision of affordable/homeless housing), Aesthetics (Site 14 could negatively impact the aesthetic harmony of development currently anticipated at MCAS Tustin), Recreation (Site 14 could prevent the development of two 5-acre neighborhood parks planned in the vicinity of the project). In the City's previous discussions -with IRWD, the City has indicated a willingness to support the potential integration of NTS into any golf course developed at MCAS-Tustin but does not at this time support construction, operation, or maintenance of any facility on Site 14 until the property is sold by the City, a developer selected, and golf course parcel designed. Given the significant financial obligations -that have now been placed on the City recently by the Navy and to resolve litigation, interim NTS developed commitments are not possible at this site. Mr. Norris Brandt • IRWD NTS NOP March 21, 2002 Page 3 6. Initial Study, Page 15 — The IRWD has inappropriately focused their review of impacts to property in its current condition. The IRWD has not discussed impacts to planned Improvements at NTS sites. The City of Tustin has prepared a Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin that is now being implemented. Construction activities could be permitted prior to the conclusion of the IRWD planning process, again emphasizing the need for IRWD to closely coordinate with affected property owners, the City of Tustin, and other local agencies. 7. Initial Study, Page IS — Land Use and Planning The proposed "Sites" are identified as located "within or adjacent to existing flood control channels, creeks, and tributaries.' Further, it is concluded that "the proposed marsh and open water areas would be compatible with existing and proposed land uses. " Also, the document states that the "sites would not conflict with any plans, policies or regulations established to protect the environment" However, no discussion is provided as to the serious potential for the project to cause a negative impact to community plans such as the implementation of a Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin. The document must be revised to address impacts to,Land Use and Planning in greater consultation with the City of Tustin. • 8. The Draft Program Environmental Impact Report should fully address the potential for short- term noise, traffic, and air quality impacts associated with construction activities. Mitigation measures should be included to minimize these short-term Impacts. For the Tustin sites, construction hours and noise should be required to be consistent with, or more restrictive than, the regulations contained In Tustin City Code Sections 4600 at seq. 9. Two of the four NTS sites proposed in the Tustin area are adjacent to existing residential communities, and the remaining sites are proposed to be within and adjacent to future neighborhoods. The City of Tustin encourages the Irvine Ranch Water District to solicit input from the residents of these areas. Input should be considered early in the planning process through construction to ensure that any concerns are mitigated. The homeowners associations In these areas should be contacted at this stage in the planning process for possible informational meetings with representatives of IRWD. 10. The Draft Program Environmental Impact Report should provide property ownership information for each of the proposed NTS Program sites and should detail from which sites IRWD has obtained property owner approval. Alternative sites within the same tributary area should be identified where property owner approval has not been obtained. 11. The Draft Program EIR should identify the minimum number of NTS sites necessary for the NTS program to meet its objectives. 0 • Mr. Norris Brandt IRWD NTS NOP March 21, 2002 Page 4 12. Initial Study, Page. 15 — It is stated that the NTS sites "vary between two and 24 acres in size." This statement conflicts with information provided to the City of Tustin, which indicates larger sites would be pursued. The City of Tustin at this time does not commit its support to any specific acreage until additional documentation is providedand, in the case of MCAS-Tustin, a developer's site design is completed. ' 13. The Draft Program EIR should address the potential for illegal dumping at NTS sites and include appropriate mitigation measures. 14. The NTS Program Master Plan should be provided when the Draft Program EIR is released so that the public has the most information available to adequately analyze the potential for environmental impacts. 15. The NTS sites proposed in Tustin are all located in high profile or highly.visible areas to the existing community or to proposed development: Therefore, if property owner approval is obtained and development of the treatment sites proceeds, aesthetics will be an important issue. High quality fencing, compatible .-landscaping, and aggressive • maintenance programs would be essential to ensure that the facilities complement the character of the Tustin community. The City of Tustin appreciates the opportunity to provide comments -on this project. I would appreciate receiving a copy of the. Draft EIR and the NTS Master Plan when they become available. If you have any questions regarding the City's comments, please call Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner, at (714) 573-3016 or Dana Ogdon, Redevelopment Program Manager, at (714) 573-3116. Sincerely, foiz Tim D. Serrlet Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: Christine A.:Shingleton :':EI¢alietta �:l8iusack Dana Kasdan Doug Anderson Dana Ogdon Scott Reekstin 0 SR:envimnmentaNRWD NTS NOP Comment Letterdoc pMsat (7141962.2411 t.e: 1714)969-MSB a vAt Aeow.ssm r.rr�.++r..•: ka Box 8127 fastsln Valley. CA 9272e-8127 108" Ellis Avenue faunas, VNky. CA 8270&7018 U8sisr M..oa.■ Max Anaheim area Buena park CAN'ess Fountain Volley Fullerton Girds: Grove ► witlrpan Besch Woe Le Hshrs Le Palma Los Alamitos IWwaom Beach Orange Placentia Sand Ana Saul Beach suntan Tuaon wits Park llxtie Linda BsrMf Of BneIa an" Districts Costa Mesa Mldwey C+ty VA"r Districts MWne Ponch ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT December 17, 2002 Norris Brandt, P.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District PO Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619 SUBJECT: Revised Notice of Preparation for San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program Environmental Impact Report This letter is in response to the above referenced notice of Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared by Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). The Natural Treatment System (NTS) Plan is a 20-year master planning process for the San Diego Creek Watershed, which drains to the Upper Newport Bay. The NTS Plan is being developed in close cooperation with the County of Orange and cities within the drainage area. Through the creation of man-made wetlands, the NTS will use natural ecosystems to remove sediment, nutrients, pathogens/germs and other contaminants from both low -flow and small storm runoff. In addition, the NTS will provide a natural resource, riparian habitat and wildlife benefits throughout the Watershed. In reviewing the NOP, it appears that mitigation measures will need to be developed to protect the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) facilities and access easements Within the proposed project area. Additionally, any impacts from dry weather diversions to OCSD sanitary system will need to be evaluated in the EIR. OCSD looks forward to working with IRW D as you move forward with the NTS Plan. Since we did not receive a copy of the original Notice of Preparation (NOP) Issued In February 2000, we would appreciate a copy of both the original NOP and Draft EIR when it becomes available. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed development. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact Jim Herberg or Angie Anderson at (714) 593-7310 or (714) 593-7305, respectively. David A. Ludwin, P.E. Director of Engineering DAL,.AA:sa G:1wp.dtalen90RS\2002URWD NOP SD Creek Watershed Natural Tteatdx c: Tom Meregillano Jim Burror CJ n LJ To maintain warid-class leadership In wastewater and water resource management �$ County of Orange Planning & Development Services Department lFOg December 16, 2002 Norris Brandt, P'.E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 THOMAS B. MATHEWS DIRECTOR 300N. FLOWERST. SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 4048 SANTA ANA, CA 92702.4048 NCL 02-140 SUBJECT: Revised NOP for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Dear Mr. Brandt: • The above referenced item is a Revised Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Program Environmental impact Report (DPEIR) for the Irvine Ranch Water District (1RWD). The proposed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program consists of improvements within the San Diego Creek watershed, a 122 square mile area located in central Orange County. Through the creation of man-made wetlands, the NTS will use natural ecosystems to remove sediment The County of Orange has reviewed the Revised NOP and offers the following comments: FLOOD 1. The DPEIR should describe the steps being taken including the mitigation measures being proposed by the IRWD to enable the NTS located within Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) and/or County right-of-way to function without adversely impacting the flood control uses and operation and maintenance of OCFCD's and the County's affected facilities. 2. The DPEIR should also describe the types of analyses, studies (i.e., hydrologic, 'hydraulic) and other documentation (e.g. regulatory permits, safe harbor or other arrangements that are proposed) that are to be provided to the County's Flood Control Division to demonstrate that the flood control uses and functions along with the operation and maintenance activities of the affected OCFCD and/or County facilities will not be • diminished or impaired by the presence of the IRWD's NTS related amenities. OPEN SPACE/RECREATION Regional Recreation Facilities: 3. Regional Recreation Facilities within the San Diego Creek Watershed include Upper Newport Bay Nature Preserve, Newport Dunes Aquatic Park, Mason Regional Park and Peters Canyon Regional Park. Natural Treatment System (NTS) sites are proposed near or upstream of these facilities. 4. The DPEIR should address any short and/or long-term impacts to subject regional recreation facilities and provide mitigation measures, as appropriate. Of particular concern are impacts to water quality and hydrology, sediment increases, nutrients and pathogen/germ impacts and other contaminants from both low -flow and small storm runoff proposed NTS facilities are to mitigate, but fail to do so. 5. Upper Newport Bay including Upper Newport Bay Nature Preserve, and Newport Dunes Aquatic Park at the southern end of the bay, in addition to Peters Canyon Reservoir within Peters Canyon Regional Park, may be susceptible to impacts and should be thoroughly analyzed within the DPEIR. Moreover impacts to flora, fauna, people, safety and infrastructure within these facilities should be addressed. NTS sites also represent public health concerns associated with open water bodies and the risk the sites could present to human contact and vector attraction. n U 6. Upper Newport Bay Nature Preserve is sited within Coastal NCCP Reserve, while Peters • Canyon Regional Park is located in Central NCCP Reserve. The DPEIR should identify any impacts to the Reserve within these facilities and provide mitigation measures as required for subject NCCP Reserve land. Trails and Bikeways: 7. The DPEIR should address the impact of subject project on riding and hiking trails, and Class I (paved off -road) bikeways. Many local and regional trails and bikeways follow flood control channels and other waterways within the subject watershed. The project must be designed so as to preserve the continuity of these trails and bikeways, both existing and proposed, and discussed within the DPEIR. 8. Regional Class I bikeways are depicted on the OCTA Strategic Plan for bikeways. Regional trails are depicted on the County's Master Plan of Regional Riding and Hiking Trails. Using Figures 3a and 3b provided within the Revised NOP as a guide, it appears that the project could potentially impact the following regional trails and bikeways: a. Peters Canyon Trail b. Peters Canyon Bikeway C. San Diego Creek Bikeway d. Jeffrey Bikeway • 2 e. Bonita Canyon Bikeway • f. Irvine Coast Trail g. Shady Canyon Bikeway h. Quail Hill Bikeway i. Borrego Canyon Bikeway j. Serrano Creek Trail k. AT & SF Bikeway (generally parallel to the Metrolink line) 9. Figure 1: The Foothill Transportation Corridor and the northern portion of the Eastern Transportation Corridor have been incorrectly labeled as "261". These sections are part of State Route 241. 10. The project should not preclude construction of the proposed Santiago Creek Trail and Santiago Creek Bikeway. 11. Regarding Site 67 (page 3), the project should provide for uninterrupted use of the existing San Diego Creek and Harvard Class I Bikeways. 12. In County reviews of the City of Irvine's Northern Sphere and El Toro MCAS Planning Areas, the County requested additional trails and bikeways in those areas. We recommend the project proponent work with the County's Trails Planning staff to avoid precluding subject trails and bikeways. • 13. We recognize and support the intent of the proposed NTS network as a component of Orange County watershed management strategy to comply with San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Municipal Separate Storm Water System (MS4) permit to reduce pollutant loads in the San Diego Creek Watershed. However, a thorough analysis of impacts and mitigation is required within the CEQA review process relative to Regional Recreation Facilities as well as Regional Riding and Hiking Trails, and Bikeways. CULTURAL/HISTORICAL 14. The San Diego Creek watershed is a large area that has both known archaeological sites and the possibility of discovery of previously unrecorded sites as well as paleontological resources. A cultural resources management program should be prepared as•part of the DPEIR to guide the development of the natural treatment system to minimize potential impacts to cultural resources. 15. The cultural resources mitigation language used in the proposed DPEIR should address current standards for artifact curation and long-term collection management. 16. We encourage the IRWD to follow the Board of Supervisors example in requiring that cultural resource artifacts, which may be discovered during the site development, be donated to a suitable repository that will maintain the collection for future scientific study • 3 and exhibition "within Orange County." Prior to donation, the certified cultural resources • consultant should prepare the collection ` to the point of identification." 17. The project proponent should be prepared to pay "potential curation fees' to the County or other suitable repository for the long -tern curation and maintenance of donated collections. WASTE MANAGEMENT Waste Diversion 18. The project may result in substantial quantities of construction -and demolition -generated waste (C&D). C&D waste is heavy, inert material. This material creates significant problems when disposed of in landfills; since C&D debris does not decompose, it takes up valuable landfill capacity. Additionally, since C&D debris is heavywhen compared with paper and plastic, it is more difficult for the County and cities to reduce the tonnage of disposed waste. For this reason, C&D waste debris has been specifically targeted by the State of California for diversion from the waste stream. Projects that will generate C&D waste should emphasize deconstruction and diversion planning, rather than demolition. Deconstruction is the planned, organized dismantling of the prior construction project, which allows maximum use of the deconstructed materials for recycling in other construction projects and sends a minimum of the deconstruction material to landfills. • We recommend that this project address a waste reduction plan for the C&D waste generated from this project. For sites located within incorporated cities, this plan should be coordinated with the recycling coordinators of those cities to help ensure AB 939 requirements are properly addressed. Thank you for the opportunity -to respond to the Revised NOP. Please send one complete set of the DPEIR to Charlotte Harryman at the above address when it becomes available. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Harryman at (714) 834-2522. ch Sincerely, Timothy Neely, ager Environmental Planning Services Division • 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 2Z/ December 17, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P. E. NTS Program Manager Irvin Ranch Water District P. O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219-7000 VIA FACSIMILE Dear Mr. Brandt: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the.Revised Notice of Preparation (NOP) • of a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural, Treatment System Program, and f6r agreeing to Assistant City Manager Sharon Wood's request to transmit Newport Beach's comments after the 30-day review period. The City's Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee (EQAC) has reviewed the Revised. NOP. The following comments prepared by EQAC are being transmitted as the City's comments. These comments on the Revised NOP incorporate our earlier comments on the original NOP for the Project. 1. Site Selection: We understand that the Revised NOP proposes several different sites for the Project: "Specifically, three NTS sites have been eliminated, two new sites have been added and some sites have been renumbered." As to the changed sites, the EIR's Project description should discuss the rationale for site selection including the -reasons for eliminating three sites and including two new sites. In addition, the EIR should also discuss the eliminated sites in the Alternatives section so • that the public may be able to understand the Project and the alternative sites. City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard • Newport Beach, California 92663-3884 www.city.newport-beach.ca.us The Revised NOP contains two nicely colored figures, Figures 3a and 5b. • Unfortunately, the Figures in the revised NOP do not match any of the figures in the original NOR This makes it difficult to understand the revisions in the Revised NOP. As indicated above, the EIR should provide a detailed explanation of these changes with understandable graphic images or figures. 2. Biological Resources: In addition to the above, the EIR should discuss fresh water flows in San Diego Creek during periods of low flows. This discussion should include low flows for a substantial period of time, e.g. 20 to 25 years, and any effects such flows have on the salinity of the salt water marsh of the Upper Newport Bay. In addition, the EIR should discuss any Project related impacts on salinity levels in the Bay. 3. Other Concerns: The Revised NOP's Table 1 identifies the changed sites; Figures 3a and 3b identify all sites including sites proposed to be eliminated from the Project. However, Site 14 is proposed to be eliminated but is not located on either figure. The EIR should include and locate Site 14 in the Alternatives analysis. As we indicated in our comments on the original NOP for the Project, the City has indicated our support for the NTS project. As before, nothing in these comments detracts from that support; these comments simply address the Revised NOP and our comments • on the scope of the EIR. As with our original comments, our goal is to assist in improving, if necessary, the environmental document and the Project. I hope that these comments help IRWD to prepare a complete EIR that will support approval of the project. If you have questions on our comments, please direct them to Sharon Wood at 644-3222. Sinc rely, Vdau Homer L. City Manager Cc: City Council Environmental Quality Affairs Committee • 2 San Joaquin Hills ConldorAgency • Chairwoman: Linda Lindholm Laguna Niguel January 3, 2003 FoothilllEastern Corridor Agency —^� �• Chairman: TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AGENCIES Scott Diehl San Clemente Mr. Norris Brandt, PE NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92619 Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program. Dear Mr. Brandt: • The Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) wishes to thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above -mentioned environmental notification. The TCA has reviewed the notification and has no comments at this time. However, we would be interested in reviewing the DEIR as results of the study may be of interest to the TCA on a cumulative project impact level. Should you have any questions or concerns regarding this information, please feel free to contact me at (949) 754-3475. Sincerely, Kimberly Peterson Environmental Analyst Environmental and Planning • Walter D. Kreutzen, Chief Executive Officer 125 PACIFICA, SUITE 100, 1RVINE CA 92518-3304 • P, 0. BOX 53770, IR14NE CA 92619-3770 • 94917543400 FAX 94917543467 www.thefollroads.com Members: Aliso Viejo • Anaheim • Costa Mesa • County of Orange • Dano Point • Irvine • Lake Forest • Laguna Hills • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods Mission Viejo • Orange • Newport Beach • Rancho Santa Margarita • Santa Ana • San Clemente • San Juan Capistrano • Tustin • Yorba Linda I$ Y,inxdm RM IW Poar 1 r] Appendix B Fact Sheets (Also in Appendices A and B of the NTS Plan) • Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites A Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites This appendix presents general information and planning level conceptual designs for the regional retrofit NTS facilities. The regional retrofit sites include 9 facilities selected for initial construction and three existing facilities. All initial implementation sites with the exception of site 67 will be evaluated at a CEQA project -level within the Program EIR. Detailed design information necessary to complete the project -level EIR evaluation is documented in the preliminary design report (PDR) for each facility, found in Volume II of this report. The site design fact sheets are ordered as follows: SITE 26: WOOD13RIDGE IN -LINE BASINS............................................................................................................... A-2 SITE 27: BARRANCA OFF-LINE WETLANDS........................................................................................................... A-7 SITE 46: SAN JOAQUIN MARSH— AUGMENTATION............................................................................................. A-12 SITE 53: CALTRANS SRI33/15 INTERCHANGE..................................................................................................... A-16 SITE 54: CALTRANS SR-261 SITE/WALNUT........................................................................................................ A-21 SITE 55: SANTA ANA/SANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS ............................................................................... A-26 SITE56: EL MODENA PARK................................................................................................................................ A-31 SITE62: SAN JOAQUIN MARSH— SAMS l.......................................................................................................... A-36 SITE64: WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS.................................................................................................................. A-41 SITE 67: CIENEGA (CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS)..................................................................................................... A-46 SITE 13: RATTLESNAKE RESERVOIR—EXISTING................................................................................................. A-50 • SITE 39: SAND CANYON RESERVOIR—EXISTING................................................................................................ A-52 r U San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-1 January 2004 Draft for Public Review She M: WoodbHdW In -Line Basins Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites 81te 26: Woodbridge In -Line Basins . General Information Drainage Region: San Diego Creek and tributaries upstream of Culver Drive Drainage Area: Approximately 41 square miles CEQA Facility Status: Project EM Program ❑ Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility ❑ Type It — In -Line Facility I@ Type III — Within Existing Facility CI Project Description: This site is located in the San Diego Creek channel between Culver Drive and Jeffrey Road. A series of grade -control structures currently exists along this channel reach. The channel and grade -control structures are owned and maintained by the Orange County Flood Control District. WQT wetlands are proposed behind a series of permanent gravel aad rock weirs for the treatment of dry and wet season low flows. The in -line WQT wetlands would be similar in appearance to the existing densely vegetated Peters Canyon Channel between Walnut Ave and I-5 (sec photos in site 64 fact sheet). The In -Line weirs would be designed to have no impact on the flood control function of the channel. A total of seven (7) 2-3-ft high weirs are proposed. The weirs at this location would mainly be confined to the low flow pilot channel (— 20 feet) and would not span the entire width of the channel. The WQT wetlands, therefore, would not span the entire bottom width of the channel. The weirs are spaced according to channel slope, • existing hydraulic structures, and areas of sufficient depth to support wetland vegetation. They would be located at sections between the existing grade control structures, but would not interfere with the function of these facilities. Sediment and plant accumulation behind the weirs would be inspected on an annual basis and removed as necessary. The effectiveness of the in -line treatment concept will be tested prior to full implementation of the in -line facilities. A test section of permanent in - line facilities is proposed to quantify the treatment effectiveness and to evaluate O& M constraints. A proposed test reach includes the three permanent weirs upstream from the drop structure at Creek Rd (sec figure). Flow Control: Not applicable Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow im Wet period low flow Im Small storm and first flush flows ❑ Facility Status: New Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: a Removal of accumulated trash, sediments, and vegetation, as needed. e Maintenance of gravel and rock weirs, as needed. • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-2 January 2IX04 Draft for Pubile Roviaw Site 26• Woodbridge In -Line Basins Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites • Site Location and Drainage Area • 1^�f` Tributary Area — Site 26, Woodbridge t / In -Line Basins 4 0 4 8 Mlles .: Location elan NZ •'� J - �q� rwyr}%, .>J .^'emu.•., .�,� h , p -tea �". • J,}7•f ��\'. t-•, ♦ F! T" �,5• Y � t �r �1,� / i v is ~�... t • • �,� A�� r I ';�....,J'�, _ I�• -' 't 1 �� -..� •.`la. / - is �!^ ... _ ✓n p o- San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-3 Draft for Public Review January 2004 r Site 26r Woodbridge In -Line Basins Appendix A— Site Design Fed Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout • Location and Features of Weir Structures Reach Reach Number of Weir Width of weir Wedandarea Wedandvolume Length (ft) stcuclures inreach location (1) top (ft) (acre) (acre-ft) Jefferey Road to Drop Structure at East Yale Loop 690 1 136+40 20 0.25 0.60 Downstream of Drop Structure it East Yale Loop 920 1 122+30 20 0.37 0.84 Upstream of Drop Structure at Creek Road 1,020 1 108+70 20 0.41 0.94 Drop Structure -at Creek Road to Drop Structure at Lake Avenue 1,322 2 96+00 20 0.23 0.65 90+00 20 0.23 0.65 Drop Structure at Lake Avenue to Drop Structure at West Yale Loop 1,740 2 79+20 20 0.37 0.85 71+20 20 0.37 0.85 (1) Stations based of OCFCD drawings F06-701-3 • Son Diego Creek NTS MssterPlah A-4 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • LI • Site 26• Woodbridge In -Line Basins Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Site Photographs Photo l & 2 - San Diego Creek, looking downstream at grade control structure between East Yale Loop and Creek Road. Photo 3 — San Diego Creek, looking upstream from grade control structure toward East Yale Loop overpass. Photo 4— San Diego Creek looking downstream from grade control structure at energy dissipaters. Additional photographs are presented in the Preliminary Design Report [August 20021 San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-5 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Site U., Woodbddpe In4.ina Basins Appendix A- SHe Design Fact Sheets g4anal Retrofit Sdes Conceptual Design (Additional design information is presented in the PDR) aCP V ° 4 Gravel and rock weir Section A•A' Design Parameters: Average dry season low flow = 1.37 cis Average wet season low flow = 2.23 cis Marsh area = — 2.2 acres Marsh volume = —3.3 acre-ft (average depth 1.5 ft) Average residence time (dry season) —1.2 days Average residence time (wet season) — 0.7 days No open water areas NN Not To Scale ooQ 0 1000 ft. d area with ent otants IN San Diego CreekMfSMesterPlan A-6 Januery2004 Drat for Public Review CJ • CJ 0 Site 27• Barrance Off -Line Wetlands Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Site 27: Barranca Off -Line Wetlands General Information Drainage Region: San Diego Creek Watershed, upstream of Jeffrey Road Drainage Area: Approximately 39 square miles CEQA Facility Status: Project O Program ❑ Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility Fxl Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: This area was historically a reach of San Diego Creek. It has recently been planted with native vegetation, including willows and cattails, as part of the mitigation for conservation of the new channelin Oak Creek (PA-12). The site is long and narrow, with approximate dimensions of 2500 ft by 250 ft. The site is divided by a berm into two cells: the east cell is approximately 11 acres in size and the west is approximately three acres. Currently there is a low flow diversion from San.Diego Creek that is operated by the City of Irvine to maintain the riparian habitat. The existing riparian habitat at the site contributes to the treatment of low flows that are diverted into the area. The concept is to maintain the existing riparian habitat at the site and to improve the treatment of small storm runoff by increasing the stormwater detention time with the installation of an extended detention riser outlet structure. This would have no impact to the • existing vegetation because periodic inundation is a component of the restoration plan. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow 0 Wet period low flow 0 Small storm and first flush.flows 10 Facility Status: New ❑ Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑N Maintenance: • Removal of accumulated trash, sediments, and vegetation, as needed • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-7 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Sift 27., Berronea OK -Line Wetlands AppendlxA- SHe Debign Precr Sheets, Regional ReWBf Skes Site Location and Drainage Area Location VIap r 4 f � � Site 27 Tributary Area — Barranca Oft- Line Wetlands \ V r a o a s tMies '_ y� _ Ns, v 61 San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-$ January 2004 brag for PuWlc Review Site 27• Barranca Off -Una Wetlands Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Reglonal Retrofit Sites Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout Fj E Me 21: Banance ONA* * WaWnds Appendix A— SMe Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retronl SMes Site Photographs Photos I and 2: Barranca Off -Line channel near Valley Oak Dr., looking northeast. Photo 3: Bartanca Off -Line channel, east drain near Jeffrey Rd., looking west at outlet from upstream cell. near Jeffrey Rd., looking west. Photo 4: Barranca Off -Lint channel, at east drain tear Jeffrey Rd., looking cast. Son Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-10 January 2004 Draft for Public Review 0 0 • • • Site 27• Barranca Off -Line Wetlands Appendix A- Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Conceptual Design Proposed perforated riser outlet structure Existing berm Low flow discharge _ and culverts to existing storm drain and return to San Diego Creek Approximate limit of existing basin for detention of stomwater runoff Existing 84-inch culvert to San Diego Creek for discharge of storm runoff Area subject to extended detention storage of small storm runoff N 0 500 ft. Modeling Parameters: Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.012 cfs Average wet season inflow = 0.013 cfs Area of.existing riparian habitat contributing to treatment -0.2 acres Residence time =1.5-2 days Stormwater conditions & treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff = 13.8 acres Stone water storage volume = 55.2 acre-ft (average depth = 4 ft) Detention time = 48 his Section A -A' Existing Existing low flow channel San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan Periodic Inundation from extended detention of small storm runoff Not To Scale A-11 Draft for Public Review Existing herbaceous riparian habitat Existing 90-inch storm drain i Existing diversion from San Diego Creek January 2004 She 46: San Joaquin Marsh-Augmentahon Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrokt Skew Site 46: San Joaquin Marsh - Augmentation 0 General Information Drainage Region: San Diego Creek Watershed, upstream from Michelson Drive Drainage Area: Approximately 99 square miles Outlets to: San Diego Creek CEQA Facility Status: Project IM Program ❑ Facility Type: Type 1—Off=lane Facility Im Type lI — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: The existing 380-acre San Joaquin Marsh includes six water quality treatment wetland cells constructed in 1997 by the IRWD. The wetlands are owned and operated by the IRWD. The water quality treatment wetlands contain about 45 acres of open water and about 11 acres of marshland vegetation. On average about 5 cfs is diverted from San Diego Creek into the IRWD wetlands. This site does not treat runoff from large storm events; the pumps are normally turned off during large storm flows to limit the amount of sediment that is pumped into the facility. Under the proposed NTS Plan the current diversion capacity would be increased to about 10 cfs. The additional capacity would be divided between the existing IRWD wetlands and the proposed SAMSI wetlands to the south of Campus Drive (see Site 62). Flow Control: Pumped inflow and outflow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow 0 • Wet period low flow 191 Small storm and first flush flows ❑ Facility Status: Now ❑ Existing El Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Removal of invasive plant species • Pump servicing • Mosquito control • Levee maintenance • Son Diego Creek MS Master Plan A-12 January 2004 Draft for public Review 1C K] Site 46• San Joaquin Marsh - Augmentation Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Site Location and Drainage Area Lncatinn Man Site 46 Tributary Area — Site 46, :. San Joaquin Marsh - Augmentation SITE 46 4 0 4 L AVm LEE AYr- j( .fie •'.'^� r+,.. �`''y`q� %,.,,�' 1 xaw> / K.•ie."=�Y+.tiNFVEL 4. 'Y'('o 6� ^.. a Imo- �,/� J h r •+`�_ T ,, �. ' H4rr 1, ti ,_ _ �a) '�\'�\r+.✓'•,�Y �' + .,�6'." `l „T. is •°� , �: rr.n i, A' � a�;., � _ CP C"N'K, :X,i.a. �::0 `'.: I 9`. .'*l�nT � •n'r iY 'i V .,,A � ,..t�^S a.�W ��l�y .i'�, Y �'-.>< VM.'.M il....,.{ ^a •-•mot/!a: ::/n:7i Y �� +alf '•,{i�Y Y: _,.a Le hy,1-- -r;J ��1%ill!•^ J rt\`l� p •,+ . • .'l•�a �.� : Kqt J' .I- XJ ya' O S'e r •. svf 0 �;•. �_'>'n^i�u:it i^ .:f.".^.45: tn, n �, Y..'.��"t San Diego Crook NTS Master Plan A-13 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Site 46• San Joaquin Marsh -Augmentation Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites • Site Photograph • E Photo 1— View over IRWD wetlands. Design and Modeling Parameters Low flow conditions and treatment: Average dry season inflow = 8.8 cfs Average wet season inflow = 8.8 cfs Wetland residence time = 1.3 days Marsh area = 11 aces Marsh volume = 22 acre -it Open water area = 45 acres Open water volume = 270 acre-ft Photo 2 — San Diego Creek looking upstream (northeast) at cross -channel riprap levee designed to create in -stream sedimentation basin. Intake for IRWD wetlands is near the concrete pad at the center of the levee. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-15 January 2004 Draft for Public Review SIN 53: ca trans SR13345lnhrohen" Appendix A— Site Design Feat Sheets, RegionslRetmR Sties Site 53: Caltrans SR133/15 Interchange General Information Drainage Region: Marshbum channel and tributaries upstream from the SR133/15 Interchange. Drainage Area: 7.4 square miles Outlets to: Marshbum Channel CEQA Facility Status: Project Program ❑ Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility 181 Type lI — In -Line Facility L7 Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: This site is located in an existing detention basin between the SR133 and I-5 interchange. The detention basin is owned and operated by Caltrans. The basin is currently used to treat small storm runoff from the SR133/15 interchange, and includes a rectangular concrete hazardous materials trap near the inlet. Effluent from the detention basin drains into the Marshbum Channel. If included in the NTS Plan, off-line WQT wetlands would be constructed within the existing detention basin for the treatment of dry weather low flows that are diverted from the Marshburn Channel. Pumping facilities would be required to divert low flow from the Marshbum channel. Treated effluent from the WQT wetlands would be returned to the Marshburn channel by gravity flow. The existing detention basin would continue to receive and treat small storm runoff from the SRI33/1-5 Interchange. Flow Control: Pumped inflow from the Marshburn channel (treatment of dry weather flows) Gravity inflow of small storm runoff from freeway interchange Gravity outflow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow 91 Wet period low flow Small storm and first flush flows Facility Status: Now Im Existing Cl Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: a Sediment and trash removal near inlet e Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets e Replanting during wetland establishment e Removal of invasive plant species e Maintain levees and pumping facilities e Mosquito control LJ San Milo Creek NTS MasterPlan A-16 Jenuery 2004 Draft for Public Review • • • Site 53• Caltrans SR13345 Interchange Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Site Location and Drainage Area --- Site 53 Tributary Area — r Caitrans SR133/I5 Interchange _ Marshburn Channel v 4 0 4 8 Mies T.nrnfinn Minn t.` � ^T '•.4 `.•. 'SAS °.i� � ,is yfq :�'�. �. \� r••.r _r. .• 51i� rya: '•?r . i • trLaRU�' •' :Cd y4r a••: <�✓ F,f op ago P , ^� ' "� •• � _�-•—•-^L { y¢ a Off, •F � •> Q'Y'`•<°�'P� '��- �� ;! o- .C} QM• .•`i—.r. I San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-17 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Site 53: Cohnna SRf3W5Inhwchange Appendix A— SO Design Fact Sheets, Regional Refrofit SHes Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout 200 9 200 400 San Diego Creek NTS MaslerPlen A-18 Jenusry 2004 Draft for Public Raview 1] • • Site 53: Cattrens SR133115 Interchange Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites • Site Photographs Photo 1: View to northeast of proposed site. Photo 3: De -silting basin at the upstream end of the site. Photo 2: View to southwest of proposed site. Photo 4: View to the southeast showing the Marshbum channel and the I5/SR133 connector. Additional photographs and construction designs of the existing facilities are presented in the PDR. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-19 January 2004 Draft for Public Review SIte 53: Qahrans SROWS Interchange Appendix A- Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Conceptual Design (Additional design information is presented in the PDR) Inflow from small storm runoff from \ F-71 Marsh area with emergent plants: Inundated 1.2 ft - Open water poo:s: Inundated 6 ft A, 0 150 ft. Stop log grade transition structure ChaI—' Design Parameters: Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.06 cfs Average writ season inflow = 0.07 cfs Residence time = 10 days Wetland area (marsh & open water) = 0.87 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 0.70 acres Marsh volume =1.34 acre-ft Open water area = 0.17 acres Open water storage volume =1.04 acre-ft Stormwater conditions & treatment: Area for detention of small storm runoff = 1.0 acres Storrnwater storage volume = 3.5 acre-ft Detention time = 3648 hrs water depth -1.2 ft open water pool dudnglowflow depth -6ftdun, conditions i low HgwcondiGc Sad Diego Creek NTS MaslerPien A-20 Draft for PUWlc Review small storm water g3�ryft pool, depth Not 7o Scale CI Site 54• Caltrans SR-261 Site/Walnut Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Site 54: Caltrans SR-261 SitelWalnut General Information Drainage Region: Peters Canyon Wash and tributaries upstream from Walnut Avenue. Drainage Area: Approximately 32 square miles Outlets to: Peters Canyon Wash CEQA Facility Status: Project MR Program ❑ Facility Type: Type 1— Off -Line Facility ❑x Type II —In -Line Facility ❑ Type III— Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: This site, similar to Site 53, is located in an existing detention basin owned and operated by Caltrans. The detention basin is located between Route 261 and Peters Canyon Wash and is used to treat small storm runoff from Route 261. Storm runoff is currently pumped into the detention basin, which discharges to Peters Canyon Wash after treatment. The concept for this site is to construct WQT wetlands within the existing detention basin for the treatment of dry weather low flows that are diverted from Peters Canyon Wash. A pumped dry weather diversion from Peters Canyon Wash would be required. In order to maintain the existing stormwater detention capacity of the existing basin, the WQT wetlands would be excavated into the floor of • the existing basin. The proposed wetlands are not intended to treat groundwater that is currently being treated in the Caltrans facility. The existing detention basin is also under consideration for a subsurface selenium treatment wetland pilot test (see Site 67 description). The pilot test is currently planned as a temporary facility and would not alter the proposed NTS usage for the site. Flow Control: Pumped inflow from the Peters Canyon Wash (treatment of dry weather flows); Pumped diversion of small storm runoff from Route 261 using existing Caltrans pumping facilities; Gravity outflow to Peters Canyon Wash Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow O Wet period low flow O Small storm and first flush flows O Facility Status: New MR Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Replanting during wetland establishment • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-21 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Site 54., Cekrotle SR-261 SNeAYalnut Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Site Location and Drainage Area Site 54 Tributary Area. Caittans Dewaternng Plant Site ,j`y ) 11• J J 4 a 4 8 M:lS Location Map `,_�: 1p {�.` YFI � '' wiMi'w/ ��•: �S y'Swp 4W pu. --sY. ••'� ?'!t"YA. A.4 ,'ice ,p ye' 4)�� ::inM'w r, �/ I` •i ��t. 1; yr• '\'+\'� .. +. •• (t .yam' � :�. y nfi c •� .. •., .d«ate•. .9• 'p+`� a WY ft :CC E rI 1 f • +lYY� ' •#/ • •.`::u:. X`�••-� ��" � ; ~. �_ rot' o- •+ h r., .i y . R 7r •T�4 � San Dkrgo Croak NTS Master Plan A-22 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • 0 F • • Site 54• Caltrans SR-261 Site/Walnut Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-23 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Site 54., Caltrans SR•261 ShWWalaut Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regfonef Retrofit Sites Site Photographs Photo 1- Caltrans plant looking west. Proposed site is to the left of the Caltrans Plant. SR-61 is in the background. Photo 2 - Caltrans plant, northwest comer. looking southwest, Proposed site is in the background. Photo 3 - Peters Canyon Wash at Walnut Avenue, looking northwest. Water would be diverted to the site near this location. Son Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-24 Jenuery 2004 Draft for Public ReWew 0 • • Site 54• Caltrans SR-261 Site/Walnut Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Conceptual Design (Additional design information is presented in the PDR) Storm and dry weather inflow I rom pump Splash hwith read house Y(I protection � \ /' Eexisting \ detention. basin Dry weather diversion from Peters Canyon Wash Marsh area with emergent plants; Inundated 1.2 ft open water pools: < Inundated &ft Existing concrete N drop structure 0 400 ft. Design Parameters: Low flow conditions & treatment: Perforated riser Q Average dry season inflow= 0.166 cfs outlet structure Average wet season inflow = 0.166 cfs Return to Peters Residence time = 10 days Canyon Wash Wetland area (marsh & open water) = 2.08 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area =1.66 acres Marsh volume = 3.29 acre-ft Open water area = 0.42 acres Open water storage volume = 2.5 acre-ft Stormwater conditions & treatment: Stormwater storage volume = 9.25 acre-ft Stormwater draw down time = 36.48 hrs Section A -A' open water pool Small storm water water depth — 1-24 depth — 6 ft during quality pool, depth Cattails & during low flow low flow conditions '3-4 ft • I Bulrushes conditions _....... ... ............... f141ln4tM90;+l� 1�11�1}4��tt tit4 r. • Not To Scale San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-25 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Site 55: Santa Ana4ants Fa Channel irkJoe Bastns Appendix A— Me Design Fact Sheets, Reglonat Retrofit Silos Site 55: Santa Anal3enta Fe Channel In -Line Basins 0 General Information Drainage Region: SantaAnatSanta Fe Channel upstream from the confluence with Peters Canyon Wash Drainage Area: 6.3 square miles CEQA Facility Status: Project l] Program ❑ Facility Type: Type I — Off -tine Facility ❑ Type 11— In -Line Facility Type III — Within existing Facility ❑ Project Description: Seasonal WQT wetlands are proposed within the Santa Ana/Santa Fe channel behind a series of weirs constructed with removable flashboards. The channel is operated by the OCFCD. The weirs are intended to create shallow water pools (1-2 feet deep), to promote the growth of emergent plants, primarily cattails and bulrushes. The in -line WQT wetlands would be similar in appearance to the existing densely vegetated Peters Canyon Channel between Walnut Ave and I-,5 (see photos in site 64 fact sheet). A total of 18 seasonal weirs are proposed. The weirs would be installed in the spring, at the start of the dry season and would be removed in the fail, prot to the beginning of the wet season. Any accumulation of trash, sediment, and vegetation behind the weirs during the dry season would be removed in the fall, concurrent with the removal of the flashboards. • The effectiveness of the in -line treatment concept will be tested prior to full implementation of the in -line facilities. A test section of seasonal in -line facilities is proposed to quantify the treatment effectiveness and to evaluate 0& M constraints associated with the installation and removal of the seasonal weirs. The pilot test reach is located in Peters Canyon Channel at Site 64 (see fact sheet for site 64) Flow Control: Not applicable Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow Im Wet period low flow ❑ Small storm and first flush flows ❑ Facility Status: New O Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Annual installation and removal of seasonal weirs • Removal of accumulated trash, sediment, and vegetation San Diego Croak NTS Master Plan A-26 January 2004 Draft for Public Raviow Site 55., Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel In -Line Basins Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites • Site Location and Drainage Area • • l Site 55 Tributary Area — Santa Ana/Santa J1 Fe Channel In -Line Basins r � Santa AnatSanta Fe :. 2 Channel /!N �•�o; + � Jd _ITE 55 Y 4 0 4 S Miles r Location Map San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-27 Draft for Public Review January 2004 (i :fir • • Site 55., Santa AnalSanta Fe Channel In•Line Basins Appendix A- Site Design Fact Sheets Regional Relrofit_Sites Location and Features of Seasonal Weir Structures Reach Reaolia=,;._ , Number•.of .Weir. Width.ofweir ,Wetlan&area Zeiigth'(ft} • , stiuofiire-isreacfi locafion (1)' 'Spacing (ft) top (ft) (acre). ' Newport Ave. to Red Hill Ave. 2,510 5 121+65 475 14 0.13 116+90 470 14 0.13 112+20 470 14 0.13 107+50 470 14 0.13 102+80 470 14 0.13 Red Hill Ave to Venta Spur 3,600 8 95+80 700 14 0.12 91+45 435 14 0.12 87+10 435 14 0.12 82+75 435 14 0.12 78+40 435 14 0.12 74+05 435 14 0.12 69+70 435 14 0.12 65+35 435 14 0,12 Venta Spur to Confluence with Peters Canyon Wash 3,070 5 56+80 855 14 0.15 50+90 590 14 0.15 45+00 590 14 0.15 39+10 590 14 0.15 33+20 14 0.15 (1) Stations based of OCFCD drawing F10-101-4-A San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-29 Draft for Public Review January 2004 She 55: San& AnwSsnta Fe Chanmllad.tm Basins Append&A— Stte Design Pact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Conceptual Design (Additional design in£omiation is presented in the PDR) Reinforced concrete grade control structure Design Parameters: Average dry season low flow = 1.1 cis Total marsh area - 2.3 acres Average marsh depth -1.6 ft. Marsh volume - 3.46 scre•ft Residence time -1.6 days (dry season) No open water areas Reinforced concrete grade control structure San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-30 January 2004 Draft for Public Review E 0 • • 0 • Site 56• El Modena Park Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Site 56: El Modena Park General Information Drainage Region: Residential and foothill area northeast of the El Modena Park Drainage Area: Approximately 1.6 square miles. Outlets to: El Modena -Irvine Channel CEQA Facility Status: Project N Program ❑ Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility ❑ Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility O Project Description: The El Modena Detention Basin is owned and operated by the OCFCD, and is currently designed to reduce peak flows in the El Modena Channel. It would be modified to provide water quality benefits by diverting dry weather and small storm flows into the basin. Modifications would include the construction of hydraulic facilities for gravity inflow and pumped outflow of low flow and small storm events, grading and placement of a synthetic clay liner to limit infiltration, establishment of WQT wetlands, and planting of riparian vegetation for habitat enhancement. Current flood retarding functions of the basin would not be impacted because all proposed modifications are below the current flood pool of the basin, within a planned water park area that was never implemented. Flow Control: Gravity inflow and pumped outflow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow 1] Wet period low flow ❑x Small storm and first flush flows ❑x Facility Status: New ❑ Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing M Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control • Replanting during wetland establishment San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-31 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Slh SO: E/ Modena Park Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, ReglonatRelrofit Sites Site Location and Drainage Area SITE_56 � Mqq � SI Et Modena Irvine Channel Site 56 Tributary Area — EI Modena Parr, 4 0 4 a Mlles Location Map Son Diego CreekNTS Master Plan A-32 January 2004 Draft for public Review • • • NUl mi A S/to ff., El Modaaa Park Appendix A -Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Site Photographs (Additional photographs are presented in the PDR) Photo 1 - El Modena Park north end, looking west at inlet weir. Photo 2 - Ef Modena -Irvine Channel. looking northeast - inlet weir on right Photos 3 and 4 - 91 Modena Park north end, looking south. Photo 5 - E1 Modena Park south end, looking north. Photo 6 - El Modena Park south end, EI Modenallrvine Channel and outlet structure. Son Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan A-34 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • • Site 56• El Modena Park Appendix A- Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites • Conceptual Design (Additional design information is presented in the PDR) Gravity diversion from El Modena / Design Parameters: Irvine Channel Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.066 cfs Average wet season inflow = 0.065 cfs Residence time (t) =10 days Wetland area (marsh & open water) = 0.82 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 0.66 acres Marsh volume = 1.29 acre-Y Open water area = 0.16 acres r Open water storage volume = 0.98 acre-ft Stormwater conditions & treatment: A A' Area available for detention of small storm runoff = 1.35 acres T Storm water storage volume = 2.7 acre-ft - ! Detention time = 36 hrs - t-" 1 B - B' Marsh area with emergent Approximate .� 1 • plants: Inundated 1-2 ft boundary of storm—�16 -_ water quality t storage pool Open water pools; � •r �.:'-4 Inundated 6 t i 00 0 ft. Island planted �_ - with riparian'' vegetation -- , • Pumped discharge to El Modena / Irvine Channel/ Section A -A' Section B-B' Cattails & Bulrushes Not To Scale open water pool Small storm water water depth -1.2 f•, depth - 6 ft quality pool, dunng low flow during low flow I I depth -2-4 conditions conditions :r r Son Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-35 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Site 02: Sett Joaquin Mash — SAMS 4 Appendix A— Site Design fact Sheets, Reglonel Reirorit Skes Site 62: San Joaquin Marsh - SAMS 1 General Information Drainage Region: San Diego Creek Watershed, upstream from Campus Drive Drainage Area: Approximately 99 square miles Outlets to: San Diego Creek CEQA Facility Status: Project rx-1 Program ❑ Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility Im Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: This site is located downstream from the existing IRWD wetlands at the San Joaquin Marsh. The site is on IRWD property, between an exiting mitigation area (SAMS 1) and the UC Natural Reserve System (UCNRS). Off -Line WQT wetlands are proposed at this site. The site would not encroach upon the existing SAMS I property but would be located immediately adjacent to SAMS 1 on IRWD property. The wetlands would be operated in parallel with the IRWD San Joaquin Marsh by using water pumped from San Diego Creek at the same diversion location that is currently used for the existing IRWD water quality treatment wetland in the San Joaquin Marsh. Similar to the existing IRWD WQT wetlands, this site would treat only dry and wet season low flow diverted from San Diego Creek. This site, as well as all other NTS sites, would not be used to treat recycled water. All NTS facilities are intended to improve the quality of water currently flowing in stream channels, ponds, and waterways, through the engineered application of natural treatment processes. The • proposed project includes a pumped outlet to San Diego Creek, or as an option, a gravity drainage outlet to the UCNRS facility to allow treated water service to UCRNS for management and operation of its wetland system. Water would only be provided to UCNRS upon request. In the final design studies, the feasibility of including spines and berms to create distinct wetland cells to permit rotational drying of the wetlands will be investigated. Rotational drying of the wetlands would enable amphibious species and other wildlife to move into and out of the, area being dried. Similar rotational drying operations are currently required at the existing San Joaquin Marsh WQT wetlands for the creation of shore bird habitat. The proposed preliminary design for this site includes potential habitat enhancement features,that will be considered and may be included in the final site design. These habitat enhancement features are intended to integrate the proposed and existing habitats and to improve the quality of the existing habitat. There are four habitat areas addressed in the potential Restoration and Enhancement Plan: 1. Mixed Riparian Scrub at the Peripheral Portion of the Cottonwood - Willow Riparian Forest — The establishment of tree, shrub, and herbaceous species would enhance the existing riparian woodland edge conditions and provide structural and species diversity suitable for the least Bell's vireo and the southwestern willow flycatcher. 2. Salt Marsh Restoration and Enhancement —The salt marsh portion of Site 62 is dominated by ruderal species such as black mustard, poison hemlock, shortpod mustard, Spanish sunflower, and malva species. Salt . San Dktgo Creek NTS Master Plan A-M Jenuery2004 Draft for Public Review • • • Site 62: San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS f Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Flow Control: Treatment Regimes: Facility Status: Maintenance: San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan marsh species that are present occur in small remnant patches or as individuals within the site and include pickleweed, coastal salt grass, shoregrass, among others. Restoration and enhancement treatments within the Site 62' design could include the eradication of the invasive plant species, and establishment of native salt marsh species. Pickleweed and salt grass will be salvaged from all areas affected by the installation of the NTS water quality treatment facility for relocation to the salt marsh restoration areas. 3. Coastal Sage Scrub Restoration and Enhancement on Upland Areas — The slope areas surrounding the site immediately adjacent to Campus Drive and the San Diego Creek OCFCD service road are dominated by invasive exotic plant species that currently serve as a weed source for the mitigation area. Coastal sage scrub species could be established throughout these slope areas along the southern and eastern portions of the site outside of road and OCFCD operating limits to eliminate adjacent weed sources and to enhance the overall habitat diversity of the mitigation area. Site preparation would include the eradication of all weed species and appropriate soil preparation tasks. Coastal sage scrub planting would include various native species. 4. Cottonwood -Willow Riparian Forest— Enhancement activities of this area could include the opening the canopy layer by removing some of the dead trees (selected at the discretion of IRWD), which would allow for the establishment of understory plant species. Understory plant species, in combination with the existing willow and cottonwood trees, could be planted to provide improved, habitat structure and overall habitat diversity, and provide suitable habitat opportunities for the vireo and flycatcher. The dead trees could be randomly placed within the forest and freshwater marsh areas to provide micro -habitat opportunities. Invasive weed species such as mustard; pampas grass, etc. should also be eradicated as part of the treatment. Pumped inflow and outflow, gravity drainage to the UCNRS upon request Dry period low flow rX-1 Wet period low flow rx-I Small storm and first flush flows ❑ New ❑X Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ • Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Removal of invasive plant species • Pump servicing • Mosquito control • Levee maintenance A-37 Draft for Public Review January 2004 SIM 62: San Joaquin Marsh SAM$ I Appendix A— S@e Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Skes Site Location and Drainage Area ea — San kmS9 e e 4 8 Wks � " •� ..j � M •1w we• Location Map San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan Draft for Public Review January 2004 •I •I Site 62• San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1 Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites • Aerial Photograph and' Conceptual Layout • 0 Pumped diversion f.�rn o..:�tinn in1�4u San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-39 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Sha fit: San Joaquin Marsh— SAMS f Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional RefroNt Sites Conceptual Design (Additional design information is presented in the PDR) • B, Design Parameters: Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season Inflow = -1.2 efs Average wet season Inflow = —1.2 cfs Residence time (t) —10 days Welland area (marsh & open water) acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 6A acres Marsh volume = —13 acre-ft (average depth -1 ft) Optional Open water area = —1.6 acres gravity Open water volume = —6.4 acre-ft (ave depth = 6 ft) drainage outlet to UCNRS Pumped return to San Oiego A! Creek Stop log grade ` transition structure A Rock Cope protection • O Marsh area with emergent plants; Inundated 1-2 ft [� Open water pools: N Pumped ": from SdanDiego n Inundated 6 ft , ? • Creek 0 300 ft. Section A -A' Section B-B' open water pool Cattai;s & water depth —1.2 ft depth — 6 ft Bulrushes during low flow I during low low conditions conditions i Not To Scale • San Diego Creek NTS MasfarPlen A40 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • Site 64• Westpark In•Une Basins Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites Site 64: Westpark In -Line Basins General Information Drainage Region: Peters Canyon Wash and tributaries upstream from Barranca Parkway Drainage Area: Approximately 46 square miles CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑R Program ❑ Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility ❑ Type H — In -Line Facility Fxl Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: WQT wetlands are proposed within the Peters Canyon Wash Channel betweenBarranca Parkway and the I-5 Freeway. Portions of the channel are owned by the OCFCD and the US Navy. The OCFCD operates and maintains the entire channel. WQT wetlands would be established behind a series of weirs constructed within the channel. The weirs are intended, to create shallow water pools (one to two feet deep) to promote the growth of emergent plants, primarily cattails. The wetlands would be similar in appearance to the existing densely vegetated Peters Canyon Channel between Walnut Ave and I-5 (see photos). This vegetation has established naturally behind a series of drop structures. The vegetation has not been cleared because there is sufficient flood conveyance capacity in this stretch. The existing in -line wetlands between Walnut Ave and I-5 would not be altered and would be operated and maintained as a WQT wetland in the NTS • Plan. Because there currently is adequate flood conveyance capacity, the existing wetlands would be maintained year round. Minor adjustments to plug or partially plug flows in the existing drop structures may be performed to increase ponding and enhance vegetation growth in portions of the existing in -line facility. The section of Peters Canyon Channel from Walnut Ave to Barranca Parkway does not have extensive vegetation growth because it is actively maintained by the OCFCD. This channel section does not have sufficient flood conveyance capacity to support the construction of permanent weir structures within the channel. Therefore, temporary seasonal weirs using removable stop logs are proposed. The seasonal weirs would be installed in the spring, at the start of the dry season and would be removed in the fall, prior to the beginning of the wet season. Accumulation of trash, sediment, and vegetation behind the weirs would be inspected annually and would be removed in the fall as necessary. A total of nine (9) seasonal weirs are proposed. One seasonal weir at the upstream end is within the City of Irvine. The remaining eight seasonal weirs are located within the MCAS Tustin property. These weirs would not be constructed until the disposition of Peters Canyon Channel has been determined and adequate flood carrying capacity of the channel has been assured. The effectiveness of the in -line treatment concept will be tested prior to full implementation of the in -line facilities. Performance monitoring of the existing in -line facility upstream of Walnut Ave will be conducted to quantify nutrient removal during the dry and wet seasons, and to determine if metals and selenium are accumulating within the wetlands. A test section of seasonal in -line facilities is proposed to quantify the • treatment effectiveness and to evaluate O& M constraints associated with the San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A41 January -Draft for Public Review Sae 61: tNeetp rk Indrne Basin# Appendix A — Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Reimfil Sties installation and removal of the seasonal weirs. An initially proposed test reach includes the three seasonal weirs at the downstream end between Batranca Parkway and Warner Ave. Flow Control: Not applicable Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow © at all locations Wet period low flow ® at all permanent locations Small storm and first flush flows ❑ Facility Status: New MI Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: a Removal of accumulated trash, sediments, and vegetation, as needed a Annual installation and removal of temporary weirs Site Photographs Photo 1- Existing in -line wetlands in Peter Cyn Wash. looking downstream at Warner Avenue overpass. Photo 3 - Peter Canyon Wash looking upstream from Warner Avenue overpass. Photo 2 -Existing in -line wetlands in Peter Cyr. Wash. looking upstream at drop structure from Warner Avenue overpass. Photo 4 - Peter Canyon Wash looking upstream near Edinger Avenue. San Dlego O"kNTS Master Plan A42 January2004 Graft for Public Review • • 0 Site 64• Westpark In -Line Basins Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites • Site Location and Drainage Area 0 Site 64 Tributary Area — '" Westpark In -Line Basins Y i 4 0 a a Miles Location Map • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-43 Draft for Public Review January2004 Silo 64: Wastparlr in -Lino Basins APPendlx A— SO Design Pact Sheets, Pegiona RetroNf Skes Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout In -Line Proposed reach for test of seasonal wetlands Location and Features of Proposed Seasonal Weir Structures Reach Reach Number of Weir Spacing (11) Gravel welt or Width of 'Wetland Len (fl) structures in teach location (1) wasonal weir weir to (ft) area (sere) El Modena Channel (Relocated) to Walnut Avenue 980 1 328+20 925 Seasonal weir 68 1.4 Edinger Avenue/Santa Ana Santa Fe Channel to El Modena Channel (Relocated) 1,750 2 310+50 850 Seasonal weir 69 1.3 302+00 850 Seasonal weir 69 1.3 Moffett Avenue to Edinger Avenue/Sants Ana Santa Fe Channel 870 1 291+00 800 Seasonal weir 86 1.6 Downstream of Mbftett Avenue 5110 5 274+50 1000 Seasonal weir 84 1.9 264+50 1000 Seasonal weir 84 1.9 254+50 1000 Seasonal weir 84 1.9 244+50 1000 Seasonal weir 84 1.9 234+50 1000 Seasonal weir 84 1.9 (1) Stations based of OCFCD drawibgs FOG-701-3, F06.101-SR, and F06.101.2A San Diego Creek NTS MasferPlen A-44 January2004 Draft for Public Ravim • 41 Site 64• Westpark In Line Basins Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites isConceptual Design • • El Modena Channel a Santa Ana / Santa o Channel A ' o Temporary weir structure a 0 0 Removable steel members (H beams) A removable 4"x12" wood timbers Cnnarata arcade San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan N f 0 4000 ft. i A-45 Draft for Public Review A'" January 2004 SNe 87. CMM* (C/enepe de Lu Rana*) AppendlxA— Sfte Design Fact Sheets, Regional Rokofit Shea Sfte 67: Clenega de Las Rana*) • (Clenoga General Information Drainage Region: Peters Canyon Wash & tributaries approximately upstream from confluence with San Diego Creek Drainage Area: Unknown; between 45-100 square miles, depending on location Outlets to: Peters Canyon Wash CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program IM Facility Type: Type I— Off -Line Facility Type 11— In -Line Facility ❑ Type Ill — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: An Off -Line subsurface flow wetland is proposed to remove selenium and nitrate from low flows diverted from Peters Canyon Wash or San Diego Creek. A specific location has not been identified. The general design goal is to construct selenium treatment wetlands on approximately 0 acres in lower Peters Canyon Wash, or adjacent to San Diego Creek below the confluence with Peters Canyon Channel. Regions under consideration are shown in the accompanying exhibit. A location in lower Peters Canyon Wash would be ideal for selenium treatment because of the proximity to the historical `Swamp of the Frogs.' The discharge of groundwater from this region to Peters Canyon Channel and its tributaries is a significant source of selenium in the San Diego Creek Watershed. A specific design for the subsurface flow wetlands has not been determined and will be based in large part on results from pilot studies, as • well as the ultimate location. A generic design is shown in this fact sheet. The concept is to divert aportion of the flow in the channel through a number of subsurface flow treatment cells. The treatment cells may contain a carbon supplying media and dense cattails stands growing in 2-6 feet of media substrate, with little or no open water on the surface. Other cells could contain alternative media types such as sand, and/or may not include cattails, but could be located beneath other ground cover such as grass fields, which potentially could be used for recreational purposes. Water would enter the treatment cells through an inlet zone of coarse gravel, flow horizontally (or potentially vertically) through the media substrate, and exit the cell through a slotted drainpipe in the outlet zone. The cells would be designed for a retention time of 2-10 days, depending on results from the pilot test. The type of substrate media and dimensions of the wetland cell will also be determined from pilot test results. Mesocosm tests of the selenium treatment concept have demonstrated encouraging results (See Appendix J for a full description). Based on these preliminary findings, the IRWD is currently preparing a grant application to State of California for partial funding of it field scale pilot test of the subsurface selenium treatment concept. There are two locations under consideration for the test site (see exhibit): 1) within an existing detention owned and operated by Caltrans between Route 261 and Peters Canyon Wash (see Site 54 description), and 2) a privately owned triangular shaped parcel adjacent to Peters Canyon Wash, north of Walnut Ave. The pilot test would consist of several small treatment cells, similar in concept to the generic design in this fact sheet. Currently the test cells are planned as • San Diego Creek NTS MasferPlan A-46 January 2004 Draft for Public Review 9 • CI Site 67• Clenega (Clonega de Las Ranas) Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites temporary facilities that would be removed at the completion of the test. The pilot test is intended to gain information about the overall treatment effectiveness, design variables, and O&M, constraints. This information is needed to substantiate that a full-scale system would be successful and could be effectively operated and managed. Flow Control: Pumped inflow, gravity outflow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow M Wet period low flow Ox Small storm and first flush flows ❑ Facility Status: New C] Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ M. San Di 00 140 • tiWfi- {Vt1 +;•,`' Site 67• Clenega (Clenegs de Las Ranas) Appendix A- Site Design Fact Sheets, Reglonal Retrofit Sites • Generic Design • 0 Pumped diversion from Peters Canyon Wash Inlet zone -3-5ft.1 s no open water Return flow to Peters Canyon Wash H Longitudinal and transverse cell dimensions to be determined from pilot studies based on retention time requirements gravels Water (depth Bed media: a combination of native soil, sand, and wetlands pipe Outlet zone Alternative ground cover- Turf/grass field or other surfaces, no open water -3-5 ft.1 San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-49 Draft for Public Review iM —► January 2004 She 13. Rattlesnake Reservoir -Existing Appendix A— She Design Fact Sheets, Regional RaWtSites ante 13: Rattlesnake Reservoir - Existing General Information Drainage Region: Rattlesnake Canyon Wash and tributaries upstream from Portola Parkway. Drainage Area: Approximately two square miles Outlets to: Rattlesnake Canyon Wash CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program Facility Type: Type I — Oki -Line Facility ❑ Type iI — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility IM Project Description: Rattlesnake Reservoir is an existing reservoir that formerly was used to supply water for agricultural irrigation. Currently the reservoir is a reclaimed water storage reservoir owned and operated by 1RWD. The drainage area is primarily open space and is to remain as open space in the assumed watershed build out condition. Portions of future residential neighborhoods adjacent to the Rattlesnake (expected with Planning Area-2 development) will drain to the reservoir. The reservoir retains and thereby effectively treats most dry and wet weather flows. No changes to the reservoir are envisioned as part of the NTS Plan. Flow Control: Not Applicable Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow Wet period low flow Small storm and first flush flows Facility Status: New ❑ Existing Im Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: a No changes to current maintenance practices Site Location and Drainage Area Tributary Area — ake Reservoir— Existing 4 e e Mau San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-50 January2004 bract for Public Review 0 • 0 Site 13• Rattlesnake Reservoir- Existing Appendix A— Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites 0 Location Map • Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-51 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Site 3D:Sand Canyon Resoryotr-Exist/ng Append/xA—Site Design Fact Shoots. Regional Retrofit Sites Site 39: Sand Canyon Reservoir - Existing General Information Drainage Region: Upper Sand Canyon Wash and tributaries Drainage Area: 5.7 square miles Outlets to: Sand Canyon Wash CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program IM Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility ❑ Type 1l—In-Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility M Project Description: Sand Canyon Reservoir is an existing reservoir that is owned and maintained by IRWD. The drainage region is primarily open space, but will be partially developed as a golf course residential community in the assumed watershed build -out condition. The reservoir retains all dry and most wet weather flows, which are filtered and used for irrigation along with reclaimed water, thereby effectively treating these flows. No changes to the reservoir are envisioned as part of the NTS Plan. Flow Control: Not Applicable Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow 91 Wet period low flow Ex Small storm and first flush flows [J Facility Status: New ❑ Existing 21 Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: a No changes to current maintenance practices San Dlego Crook NTS Master Plan A-52 January2004 Draft for Public Review LJ Site 39: Sand Canyon Reservoir- Existing Appendix A- Site Design Fact Sheets, Regional Retrofit Sites • Site Location and Drainage Area • 11 J Site 39 Tributary Area, Sand C�nvnn Ruconmir— Existing 4 0 4 8 Miles Location Map San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan A-53 January 2004 Draft for Public Review ` fJ i �a ' y ' sv .yV I Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • B Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • • This appendix presents general information and planning level conceptual designs for all local NTS facilities. Detailed project information will be developed during site design studies. The fact sheets are ordered as follows: SITE 9: PA 1 — EASTFOOT RETARDING BASIN........................................................................................................B-2 SITE 1 I: PA I — ORCHARD ESTATES RETARDING BASIN.......................................................................................B-6 SITES 10, 12 & 61: PA 1 — TYPE I FACILITIES (MULTIPLE BASINS) ............................................. ......................... B-11 SITE 16: TRABUCO RETARDING BASIN.................................................................................................................B-14 SITE 18: MARSHBURN RETARDING BASIN............................................................................................................B-20 SITE31: PA 17 — WEST BASIN.............................................................................................................................B-25 SITE49: PA 17 — CENTER BASIN.........................................................................................................................B-29 SITE32: PA 17 — EAST BASIN..............................................................................................................................B-32 SITE42: TURTLE RIDGE NORTH...........................................................................................................................B-36 SITES 68 & 69: PA 18 AND PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS)........................................................................................B-39 SITES 70 & 71: PA 6 — AQUA CHINON AND MARSHBURN CHANNEL...................................................................B-42 SITE 22: WAS EL TORO— AGUA CHINON LOWER.............................................................................................13-45 SITE 50: WAS EL TORO— IRVINE AUTO CENTER..............................................................................................B-49 SITE51: WAS EL TORO— SERRANO.................................................................................................................B-53 SITE 52: WAS EL TORO—BEE CANYON...........................................................................................................B-57 San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-1 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Site g: PA 1— EuNoot Retarding Bastn Appendix H— Ske Design Fact Sheets, Local SkeS Site 9: PA 1 - Eastfoot Retarding Basin • General Information Drainage Regions: Residential and open spaces in upper reaches of Peters Canyon Wash Drainage Area: 329 acres Outlets to: Joins Rattlesnake Canyon Wash South of Portola Parkway and then to Peters Canyon Wash in Northpark CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program 0 Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility ❑ Type 11— In -Line Facility ❑ Type III— Within Existing Facility IM Project Description: A multi -purpose Type 111 WQT wetland and flood control basin is currently planned for construction with the Irvine Company's PA 1 development located northeast of Portola Parkway near Northpark. The water quality basin is intended to treat dry and wet season low flows and small storm and first flush runoff. The retarding basin will be owned and maintained by the County (OCFCD). 1RWD would maintain the WQT wetlands. To insure that flood control functions of the proposed facility are not impacted, the WQT wetlands would be constructed in a separate water quality pool, below the required flood control pool. Open water areas are excluded from this site because influent flows during the dry season may not be sufficient. Instead, modular porous blocks would be used -to line the shallow water pools adjacent to the inlets and outlet, which would be designed as sediment traps. The modular porous blocks allow the growth of emergent plants such as • cattails, while reducing scour potential and simplifying sediment and vegetation removal in the forebay areas. All proposed construction of the Eastfoot Retarding Basin requires approval from the California Department of Safety of Dams. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow Wet period low flow Small storm and first flush flows 0 Facility Status: New 21 Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control 0 San Diego Creek 14TS Master Plan B•2 Januaty2004 Draft for Public Review • IE I• Site 9: PA f — Eastfoot Retarding Basin Appendix B — Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Site Location and Drainage Area 0 Site 9 Tributary Area, PA 9 -, Eastfoot Retarding Basin �f J r Rattlesnake Canyon n 4 0 4 8 Miles Location Map d 3 p`��M ^• ( i �`fn 1 /A/ DaL ri +^ . „ .va itartN 441, Yto �/ f•t NNilt, V+/ t 6J •t\\St AS �:` � Y. •''.AS 1ti�'•_.•� R tal.Ma<et :'tA,Y, ' 3 •i F, •�tlt�t • t•RIn/ YJ� i j.4�_ °' � ) � el•u • t ! ' Jt /.. .A \a1`";. cam+. � t i 1 l t41 ��q• �°ie:yr.i� :',�°n°l�' ' � � ' •rJ.-vc J 44�q Y' t'�hY ../ JN i � Xu'I. .I NrtNa� O:CJ'T1LY.. e'C..WT • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-3 Draft for Public Review January 2004 S& D: PA !— Esalloct Retarding Basin Appendfx B— Slte Design Fact Sheets, LOCaI SHes Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan D 4 January 2004 Draft for public Review E • • Site 9: PA 1- Easttoot Retarding Basin Appendix B- Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • Conceptual Design Inlet N t 0 200 ft. QMarsh area with emergent plants: Inundated 1.2 ft Marsh area with emergent plants, lined with modular porous blocks: Inundated 1-2 `t • Design Parameters: \ Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.013 cfs Average wet season inflow = 0.047 cfs Residence time (t) = 10 days Wetland area = 0.59 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 0.47 acres Marsh volume = 0.94 acre-ft Marsh area lined Wth porous blocks = 0.12 acres Stormwater conditions & treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff = 3.5 acres Storm water storage volume = 14 acre -it Maximum draw down time = 48 hrs • Channel / swale Inlet Perforated riser outlet structure Section A -A' Section B-B' water depth - 1-2 ft water depth -1-2 ft Small storm Cattails S during low flow water quality during low flow pool, depth Bulrushes Modular conditions conditions porous -3.4 ft blacks t All hA nA I �./ .. it `.I..-.}' i ir. air , San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan B-5 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Slh 11; PA 1— Orchard Estates Ralarding Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Styes Site I I a PA 7 - Orchard Estates Retarding Basin • General Information Drainage Regions: Residential and open spaces in upper reaches of Rattlesnake Canyon Wash Drainage Area: 398 acres Outlets to: Unnamed channel draining to Rattlesnake Canyon Wash (pipeline) and then to Peters Canyon Wash in Northpark CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program EM Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility Q Type 11— In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility I M Project Description: Orchard Estates Retarding Basin is an existing retarding basin owned by the Irvine Company. Ownership is expected to be transferred to the County (OCFCD) who will operate and maintain the retarding basin. WQT wetlands would be integrated into the bottom of the retarding basin for the treatment of dry and wet season low flows, and for treatment of runoff from small storm events. To mitigate potential impacts on the flood control functions of the facility, a depth of two to four feet would be excavated from the bottom of the basin to accommodate the volume needed for construction of the WQT wetlands. IRWD would maintain the WQT wetlands. Open water areas are excluded from this site because influent flows during the dry season may not be sufficient. Instead, modular porous blocks would be used to line the shallow water pools adjacent to the inlets and outlet. These areas would be designed as sediment traps. The modular porous blocks allow ffic growth of • emergent plants such as catcalls, while reducing scour potential and simplifying sediment and vegetation removal in the ferebay areas. All proposed modifications of the Orchard Estates Retarding Basin would require approval from the California Department of Safety of Dams. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: .Dry period low flow El Wet period low flow tm Small storm and first flush flows Facility Status: New ❑ Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control i San DIW Creek NTS Master Plan B-6 January 2004 [haft for Public Rovlew • I• Site 11: PA 1— Orchard Estates Retarding Basin Appendix B — Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Stes Site Location and Drainage Area Location Map h i� Site 11 Tributary Area, PA 1 — v �. Orchard Estates Retarding Basin i 44 ? r r Qo . r goes / 1 ti -m 4 0 4 8 Miles X` lin+u.n an'X"irtt �O'. s1 •awe] r ,:`' �''� got+y 4R 49• � y v — � •Y :LtSVSC' mot•:: N^e'7 "Y4;.'�¢o •,off V��;'q a»��: �, � �.. � OF i • j• , y..`��.%.yam'+O �.rLS�f i 4 ..�.` i1'.�.. �� 4�'u—r�wµ� ♦ � ).:':.. Vi4'01 `.TOT.]•u 9.0's X]ee .l San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-7 Draft for Public Review January 2004 She 1f: PA i — Orchard Eshhs Retarding O"In Appendix B— Ske Design Paid Sheets, Local Sties Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout 0 • 0 San DAW Creek NTS Master Plan B•8 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Site 11: PA 1— Orchard Estates Retarding Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • Site Photographs Photo 1: Panoramic view of Orchard Estates Retardin.- Basin. View is from the southeast comer lookin.- northwest. Bali - Photo 2: Upper Orchard Estates, overflow outlet spillway. "t - Photo 3: Upper Orchard Estates, outlet riser structure. • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-9 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Site 11: PA 1— Orchard Estates Retarding Bain Appendix B— Site Design Fact Shoals, Local Sites Conceptual Design Inset A Channel /Swale Q Marsh area with emergent plants. Inundated 1.2 ft ® Marsh area with emergent plants, lined with modular porous blacks: inundated 1.2 ft. Design Parameters: :. "• \ Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.015 cis Average wet season inflow = 0.058 cis Residence time =10 days Wetland area = 0.72 acres perforated riser Marsh (emergeot plants) area = 0.68 acres Oullet Perfo structure r Roe outlet Marsh volume =1.15 acre-ft Marsh area lined with porous blocks = 0.14 acres Stormwater conditions & treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff = 6.6 acres Stomtwater storage volume = 26.4 acre-ft Maximum draw down time = 48 hrs Section A -A' Small storm water water depth —1.2 ft Modular 4quality pool, depth Cattails & Bulrushes r during low now conditions porous �Wocks — it r i tl t . , n1,dlUn4 11 nA,/1A r rah , Not To Scale San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B•10 Draft for Public Ravtaw Inlet danuary2004 0 • • Sites 10, 12 & 61: PA 1— Type I Facilities (multiple basins) Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Sites 10, 12 & 61: PA 1 - Type 1 Facilities (multiple basins) General Information Drainage Regions: Residential and open spaces in PA 1, upper reaches of Rattlesnake Canyon Wash and Hicks Canyon Wash Drainage Area: A total of about two square miles for multiple sites Outlets to: Rattlesnake Canyon Wash and Hicks Canyon Wash and then to Peters Canyon Wash CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program (7 Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: These sites are Type I water quality basins that are part of the Irvine Company's proposed PA 1 development project located northeast of Portola Parkway near Northpark. WQT wetlands are integrated into stormwater retarding basins for the treatment of dry and wet season low flows and for the treatment of small storm and first flush runoff. The retarding basins and wetlands are expected to be owned by the master homeowners association for the community. IRWD would maintain the WQT wetlands. There are a total of nine (9) sites, which are grouped into a single fact sheet because they have common design elements and because each of the sites generally services a small local development area. A generic design included in this fact sheet • excludes open water areas in the constructed wetlands because the influent flows during the dry season may not be sufficient. Modular porous blocks would be used -to line the shallow water pools adjacent to the inlets and outlet, which would serve as sediment traps. The modular porous blocks allow the growth of emergent plants, while reducing scour potential and simplifying sediment and vegetation removal in the forebay areas. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow Wet period low flow ❑x Small storm and first flush flows ❑O Facility Status: New O Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-11 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Situ 10,12 6 61: PA 1— Type I FeelHBas (mulHPle bes/ns) Appendix 9— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sdes Site Location and Drainage Area Site tributary -areas for PA Moe I facilities tTE•o, �., Location Map (site locations are approximate) •'7i.: aid:' "' i �-_ ' OO® F. � , 0® San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-12 January 2004 Draft for Public Review 0 0 • Sites 10, 12 & 61: PA 1— Type ! Facilities (multiple basins) Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Design Parameters 7Ylbiitary` , reaaacres)s}rea,(acres), , Tof' ,Vetland:' ,: ;. Average;dry:.; season, Liflow:: . J Average wet' "seasoriintlow (cf's) StarmWater_ Defentioil f " Site 10 386 0.50 0.023 0.05 11.6 Site 12A 233 0.28 0.016 0.028 7.3 Site 12B 144 0.16 0.010 0.016 6.5 Site 12C 52 0.06 0.003 0.006 3.6 Site 12D 172 0.24 0.007 0.025 5.9 Site 12E 137 0.17 0.010 0.017 4.8 Site 12F 55 0.06 0.004 0.006 3.3 Site 12G 129 0.15 0.008 0.015 3.1 Site 61 133 0.14 0.009 0.016 4.7 Generic Design Modular Shallow water Open Shallow water water porous with emergent areas with emergent blocks Cattails r Bulrush Outlet & piping Extended //// detention Modular Shallow water Small storn water � riser porous of cks depth = t-2^. quality pool, depth. —3.4 ft. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-13 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Stte f & Tnebuco Retarding Bea1n Appendix B.- Site Design Pact Sheets, Local Skes Site 16: Trabuco Retarding Basin General Information Drainage Region: Central Irvine Channel tributary area Northeast of Jeffrey and Trabuco Roads Drainage Area: 3.2 square miles Outlets to: Central -Irvine Channel (Trabuco Road Channel) and then to Peters Canyon Wash CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program 21 Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility ❑ Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility Project Description: The existing Trabuco Retarding Basin is operated and maintained by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFD) as a regional flood control facility. The proposed WQT wetlands for the treatment of dry weather low flows would be integrated into the retarding basin without impacting the flood control function of the facility. A depth of four to eight feet would be excavated from the bottom of the basin to create a separate water quality pool. The excavated volume would also provide detention storage for treatment of runoff from small storm events. Because of the required excavation, outlet piping would be extended approximately 1000 R downstream to enable gravity flow from the facility. Inlet facilities and piping would also be modified in accordance with the lower basin. The WQT wetlands would be designed to minimize impacts on potential recreational uses within the remainder of the basin bottom area. Gated • channels arc included to provide flexibility in operating the wetlands and to enable maintenance access. All proposed modifications of the Trabuco Retarding Basin require approval from the California State Division of Safety of Dams and the OCFCD prior to construction. A conceptual habitat enhancement plan for Trabuco Basin is intended to establish habitat types, which together with the creation of emergent marsh component of the water quality treatment facility, will encourage use by and increase the long-term conservation values for the tricolored blackbird. The tricolored blackbird is a non -migratory nomadic species that nests, breeds and forages in large colonies in emergent marsh habitats containing open fresh water along with dense cattails and bulrush. This species also forages in grasslands and scrub habitats that are adjacent to and up to 5km from their nesting and breeding areas. For these reasons, the conceptual habitat enhancement plan for this site includes the following habitat types: • Annual Grassland/Scrub. The annual grassland/scrub enhancement element will include both native and non-native annual grass species together with coastal sage scrub species consistent with those typically found in the area. • Annual Grassland. The annual grassland element will include both native and non-native annual grass. • Woodland/Scrub. Representative species in the woodland/scrub habitat enhancement element include: Mexican Elderberry, Coast Live Oak, Sagebrush, Coast Goldeubush, and Buckwheat, as well as other species. • San Diego Creek NTS MesterPlan B-14 January 9004 Draft for Public Wow • E • Site 16: Trahuco Retarding Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow O Wet period low flow O Small storm and first flush flows ❑x Facility Status: New ❑ Retrofit to existing O Existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Replanting during wetland establishment • Removal of invasive plant species San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-15 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Me 16: Trobucc ReUMfng Baaln Appendix 8— She Design Fact Shoots, LocalShes Site Location and Drainage Area Site 16 Tributary Area - r` Trabuco Retarding Basin central Irvine r ' / Channel SITE.16 l a a "L'44OC� it �� ,a tr ,r•� ` r � 1 ,r =I_ �✓'. 4 0 4 0 Mlles Location .Map A • � i A i C ys 454; t ... •^ t �+ aY�K� fY J K p - e 74, V+�� a• •:vr: ..e • ;t.a ,Ta•• � l'l f Y L �• i tit• Ya+ San Mop Creek NTS Master Plan B-l6 January 2004 Draft for Public Review I 1 U • 1� u • • Site 16. Trabuco Retarding Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Conceptual Layout and Habitat Enhancement Plan Site Photographs Photo 1- Trabuco Basin, northwest corner inlet, looking north at channel (F25P05) and adjacent Jeffrey Road (left • of channel). Photo 2 - Trabuco Basin, looking west at outlet to Central -Irvine Channel (F25). San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-17 January 2004 Draft for Public Review She 16r Trabuao ReWWng Basin Appendlx B— S8e Design Pact Sheets, Local Sites Site Photographs - continued Photo 3 - Trabuco Basin, looking southeast into basin from north corner inlet. Photo 4 - Trabuco Basin, looking northwest into basin from golf driving range. Design Parameters and Features Low flow conditions and treatment Average dry season inflow = 0,079 efs Average wet season inflow = 0.18 cis Wetland residence time =10 days Total wetland area (marsh & open water) = 2.23 acres Marsh area =1.78 acres Marsh volume = 3.6 acre-ft Open water area = 0.45 acres Open water volume = 2.7 acre-ft Stormwater conditions and treatment Basin storage area (at crest) = 24.2 acres Basin storage area (at base) =16,2 acres Basin water quality storage volume = 81 acre-ft Basin flood volume = 390 acre-11 Maximum draw down time for extended water quality detention = 36 hours Stormwater conditions and treatment Modification of inlets and outlet facilities Excavation of basin by approximately 7 feet Extension of inlet and outlet piping • • • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan Dd 8 Januery 2004 Drat for Public Review Site 16. Trabuco Retarding Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Conceptual Design 0 Perforate( outlet stru Section A -A' Inlet Inlet Inlet ith emergent ited 1-2' Dols; Inundated 4-6' Not To Scale Flood Pool Small storm water Dry weather water Open water Cattails & quality pool, depth = 1-2' depth =4.6' Bulrushes depth — oft San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-19 Draft for Public Review Bottom of existing basin "'-- Proposed bottom of excavated basin January 2004 She 18: Marshbum Retardinif Basin Appendix S— Site Design Fact Shoots Local Sites Site 18: Matahburn Retarding Basin General information Drainage Region: Bee Canyon and Round Canyon, upstream froth Irvine Blvd Drainage Area: 5.7 square miles Outlets to: Marshbum Channel (Trabuco Rd. Channel) and then to San Diego Creek. CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program Facility Type: Type I —Off -Line Facility Ci Type E — In -Line Facility ❑ Type Ill — Within Existing Facility 0 Project DcscripUon: Marshburn Retarding Basin is an existing retarding basin that is operated and maintained by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) as a regional flood control facility. The basin is on MCAS property owned by the U.S. Navy. Currently, the basin drainage area is primarily open space and some agricultural lands. Portions of future residential and commercial developments expected in h-vine's PA 6 would drain to this basin. WQT wetlands are proposed in the bottom of the basin to treat dry and wet season low flows and runoff from small storm events. The wetlands would be integrated into the retarding basin without impacting the flood control functions of the facility. About eight (S) feet would be excavated from the bottom of the basin to create a separate water quality pool. All inlet and outlet works would be appropriately modified. All proposed modifications of the Marshbum Retarding Basin require approval from the California Division of Safety of Dams and the OCFCD prior to construction. . A conceptual habitat enhancement plan for Trabuco Basin is intended to establish habitat types, which together with the creation of emergent marsh component of the water quality treatment facility, will encourage use by and increase the long-term conservation values for the tricolored blackbird. The tricolored blackbird is a non -migratory nomadic species that nests, breeds and forages in large colonies in emergent marsh habitats containing open fresh water along with dense cattails and bulrush. This species also forages in grasslands and scrub habitats that are adjacent to and up to 5km from their nesting and breeding areas. For these reasons, the conceptual habitat enhancement plan for this site includes the following habitat types: • Annual Grassland/Scrub. The annual grassland/scrub enhancement element will include both native and non-native annual grass species together with coastal sage scrub species consistent with those typically found in the area. • Annual Grassland. The annual grassland element will include both native and non-native annual grass. • Woodland/Scrub. Representative species in the woodland/serub habitat enhancement element include: Mexican Elderberry, Coast Live Oak, Sagebrush, Coast Goldenbush, and Buckwheat, as well as other species. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow Im Wet period low flow Small storm and first flush flows © - San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-20 January 2004 Draft for Publlo Review • • Site 18: Marshbum Retarding Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Facility Status: New ❑ Retrofit to existing O Existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Replanting during wetland establishment • Removal of invasive plant species Site Location and Drainage Area Site 18 Tributary Area — Marshbum Retarding Basin b1aeFFn�n 4 0 4 a Miles San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-21 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Sih 10: Mashburn Retarding Basin Appendix H— SO Destgn Fact Shoats, Locel.Ves Location Man tl� /P. r M b� ...r 'Yr: yI • r �t r' j2 t•'�1 Conceptual Layout and Proposed Habitat Enhancement Son Diego Creek MIS MesterPlen B-22 January 2004 Draft for Public Review r� U 0 • • Site 18; Marshbum Retarding Basin Appendix B — Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Site Photographs Photo 1— Marshbum Retarding Basin, looking north into the basin and view of the Marshburn (northwest) inlet. Photo 2 — Marshbum Retarding Basin, looking northeast into the basin, and view of the northeast inlet. Design Parameters and Features Low flow conditions and treatment Average dry season inflow = 0.096 cfs Average wet season inflow = 0.5 cfs Wetland residence time =10 days Total wetland area = 6.11 acres Marsh area = 4.9 acres Marsh volume = 9.8 acre-ft Open water area =1.2 acres Open water volume = 4.8 acre-ft Storm water conditions and treatment Basin storage area (at crest) = 22.5 acres Basin storage area (at base) = 8.9 acres Basin water quality storage volume = 81 acre-ft Basin flood volume = 337 acre-fl Maximum draw down time for extended water quality detention = 36 hours Storm water conditions and treatment Excavation of basin by approximately 8 feet Modification of inlets and outlet facilities Extension of inlet and outlet piping San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-23 Draft for Public Review January 2004 She IS: Marshbum Retarding Seem Appendix 9- SHe design Fact Sheets, Local SneS Conceptual Design Northwest Perforated riser �. Inlet outlet structure \ _ n s A' Outlet Marshbum Channel E— Northeast Inlet 0 400 ft. QMarsh area with emergent plants; inundated 1-2 ft A Q Open water pools: a Inundated 4 R Bee Cyn Section A -A' ` storm drain Treat Erristing flood Pool Approximate - - `--------------`--------------- bottom of - / existing basin � Small storm water Dry weather water quality ,• Cattails t: depth =1.2' depth-"ft Bulrushes Proposed bottom Not To Scale of excavated Section B-B' basin Approximate Small storm water water depth ^ fbottorn of Modular quality pool. depth Cattails& existing basin rous -3w ft. Bulrushes 1.2 ft during low b of o u flow conditions p tt t Ii ~ , I+ I i nM i4r A I� t l n4t/t1 n1 If tr San Dkgo Creek NTS Master Plan B-24 January 2004 Draft for Publk Review • • CJ Site 31: PA 17— West Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Site 31: PA 17 - West Basin General Information Drainage Regions: Residential storm drains from PA 17 (Quail Hill) development areas Drainage Area: 376 acres Outlets to: OCFCD F-14 Channel to San Joaquin Channel, and then to San Diego Creek CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program ❑Q Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility ❑ Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility O Project Description: A multi -purpose Type I water quality treatment wetland and flood control basin is currently under construction with The Irvine Company's Quail Hill (PA 17) development. The basin provides peak flow reduction for flood protection downstream. The water quality function of the basin is intended to treat dry and wet season low flows and small storm and first flush runoff from a portion of the PA 17 development. The basin is located in the City of Irvine open space and will be operated and maintained as a City storm drainage facility. IRWD will maintain the WQT wetlands. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow O Wet period low flow 7 Small storm and first flush flows Facility Status: Now 0 Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Vc-etation removal near inlets and outlets • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-25 Draft for Public Revlew January 2004 Ske 31.,PA 17— N4st Basin Appendix B— SNa Design fact Sheets, Local S@es Site Location and Drainage Area 4 Q 4 8 Miss Location .Wap QY4uY /✓� 'aii� ^ i ..� • � � r �i •. .. o Iy I ;�� tom: ,. YY • vi:« .1.1. a J. X4. San Diego Creak NTS Master Plan B-26 Jenuary2t)01 Draft for Public Rwlaw • C11 0 0 • • Site 31: PA 17—West Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Site Photographs Photo 1: Panoramic view of PA17 West Basin, under construction, March 2002. View is to the west from Sand Canyon off ramp. Note that linear berms in the center of basin are to be realigned and curved as indicated in the conceptual design. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-27 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Sift 31: PA 17- West Basin Appendix B- Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Conceptual Design Outflow t0 storm OCFCD, F.14 channel k a - Marsh area with emergentHAA, \ plants; Inundated 1.2 ft NOpen water poois:_ inundated 6 ft Low flow notch cnberm 0 400 ft.berms Design Parameters: Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.01 efs Average wet season inflow = 0.021 efs Residence time (t) =10 days Wetland area (marsh & open water) = 0.26 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 0.21 acres Marsh volume = 0.42 acre-ft Open water area = 0.05 acres Open water storage volume = 0.20 acre-ft Stormwater conditions & treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff = 7.4 acres Storm water storage volume =14.7 acre-ft Max draw down time = 48 hrs Section A-N Section B-B, Cattails San Diego Crook NTS Master Plan B-28 Draft for Public Review .... ti •i{�4rLrL�4?{��••..M1 Rip rap •r•r.r•r•r•r•r.r h•M1•M1. 1•M1•M1• •j�1ti• .r• . Inflow from storm drains water depth ^ 1.2 ft during low Cow conditions Small stonnwater quality pool. �I Idepth -3.4 ft. Not To Scale January 2004 • • E • Site 49: PA 17— Center Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Site 49: PA 17 - Center Basin General Information Drainage Regions: Primarily storm drains from commercial and high -density residential areas in the PA 17 development, and some runoff from open space areas. Drainage Area: 62 acres Outlets to: Storm drain system outlets to Caltrans Channel, then to San Joaquin Channel, and then to San Diego Creek CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program ®R Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility L] Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: A water quality basin called the P-10 basin is located in the City of Irvine P-10 minor preservation area in open space adjacent to the I405 San Diego Freeway, east of Shady Canyon Drive, and near the commercial site (150,000 sq fl retail) associated with the PA 17 project. This basin serves to treat low flow and small storm runoff from three separate areas: a high -density apartment site north of'B" Street, a commercial area, and open space areas. The facility will be owned by the City of Irvine. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow ❑O Wet period low flow !7 Small storm and first flush flows O Facility Status: New M Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and rash removal near inlet and outlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-29 Draft for Public Review January 2004 SW 49: PA 17— CenterBaeln Appendix B— Ske Design Fect Sheets, local Ves Site Location and Drainage Area 4 0 4 8 miles Location Map I , M1 �•y San Dfego Creek NTS Master Ran B-30 January 2004 Draft toe Public Review 111 Site 49: PA 17— Center Basin Appendix B — Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout i . ' • WTI a : • K Y. - -- into: Grass Lined Basin i e y '1 • 100 0 100 200 300 Feet Design Parameters and Features Low flow conditions and treatment Average dry season inflow = 0.004 cfs Average wet season inflow = 0.008 cfs Grass -lined basin Stone water conditions and treatment Area available for detention of small storm runoff = 0.8 acres Small storm storage volume = 2.8 acre-ft (average depth = 4 ft) Maximum draw downtime = 36 hours • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-31 January 2004 Draft for Public Review 81(0a2: PA 17— Eaat Basin Append&B—Ve Deslgn Fact Sheets, Local Sties Site 32: PA 17 - East Basin General Information Drainage Regions: Residential storm drains from PA 17 development Drainage Area: 431 acres Outlets to: Caltrans storm drain system and then to Upper San Diego Creck CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program El Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility El Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: A multi -purpose Type I WQT wetlands are currently trader construction as part of The Irvine Company's Quail Hill (PA 17) development. The water quality basin is intended treat dry and wet season low flows and small storm and first flush runoff, from a portion of the PA 17 development. The basin will be owned and maintained by IRWD. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow El Wet period low flow El Small storm and first flush flows Facility Status: New Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control San Diego Crack NTS Mas(er Plan B-32 January 2004 Draft for Publlo Revlw • • Site 32. PA 17— East Basin Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites 0 Site Location and Drainage Area • Site 32 Tributary Area, f PA 17 — East Basin 3 V r. ` .San Joaquin Channel — J r 4 0 4 8 Miles Location Map San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-33 January 2004 Draft for Public Review SHa 32: PA 17— East Aadn Appendix 8— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local She Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout • • Son DhW Creek NTS Master Man B•34 January 2004 Draft for Public Review i CJ • Site 32: PA 17- East Basin Appendix B- Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sties Conceptual Design Discharge to Caltrars storm drain Marsh area with emergent -\\ plants; Inundated 1-2 t open water pools: •- '" Inundated 6 it \ "'W". N N% i A \. Design Parameters: 1 Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.012 cis Average wet season inflow = 0.042 cis B Residence time = 10 days Wetland area (marsh & open water) = 0.52 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 0.42 acres Marsh volume = 0.83 acre-ft Open water area = 0.1 acres Open water storage volume = 0.62 acre-ft Stormwater conditions & treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff -1 acre Stormwater storage volume =10.8 acre-ft Maximum draw down time = 48 hrs Inflow from V, Storm drainsi Section A -A' Section B-B' T 0 B. Cattails & water depth - 1-2 it open water pool Small storm Bulrushes during low flow depth -6ft water quality conditions dunng low flow pool, depth conditions I -3.4 IL ...-.......... __...__. _..........._.., .S_.. _._... _.. _...._......... ...._ Not To Scale San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-35 Draft for Public Review 000--'r"' Inflow from Storm drains January 2004 Slle 42: Turtle Ridge North Appendix B— Site Design Fact Shee(s, Local Sties Site 42: Tiortle Ridge North General Information Drainage Regions Residential storm drains from PA 27 (Turtle Ridge) development areas. Drainage Area 229 acres Outlets to: Storm drain system, then to Bonita Creek, and then to San Diego Creck. CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility Type II — in -Line Facility ❑ Type Ill— Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: This site is adjacent to Shady Canyon Drive, near the intersection of Shady Canyon Drive, Bonita Canyon Drive, and Culver Drive, A Type 1 water quality basin is currently under construction as part of The Irvine Company's Planning Area 27 development. The water quality basin will treat dry and wet season low flows and small storm and first flush runoff. The basin is within the City of Irvine open space dedication area. The City will own the basin. IXWD will maintain the WQT wetlands. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow Wet period low flow Im Small storm and first flush flows Qi Facility Status: New C] Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: a Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet a Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets a Removal of invasive plant species a Mosquito control Site Location and Drainage Area e e "H. tary Area, le Rkipe North San Dingo Creek NTS Master Flan B-36 January 2004 Draft for public Review 1] E • Site 42: Turtle Ridge North Appendix S— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites 9 Location Map • • Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-37 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Sift 42. Turde R*0 North Appond& B— Ske Design fact Sheets. Local Sites Conceptual Design Discharge to Storm drain system Marsh area with ereergtrt plants: Inundated 1.2 it Q Openwaterpools: Inundated 6 it B A Design Parameters: Low flow conditions &treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.006 cfs Average wet season inflow = 0.028cfs Residence time (t) = 10 days Wetland area (marsh & open water) = 0.34 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 0.27 acres Marsh volume = 0.5 acre-ft Open water area = 0.07 acres Open water storage volume = 0.5 acre-ft Stormwater conditions & treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff =1.6 acres Storm water storage volume = 6.4 scre•ft Detention time = 48 hrs Section A -A' Cattails & Bulrushes Section B• ' 2001t. N T Inflow from Storm drains water depth —1.2 ft open water pool Small stone during low sow depth — 6 ft water quality, conditions during low tlow pool, depth conditions � ��J.4g, tiT-, Not To Scale San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-38 January 2004 Draft for Public Review is Sites 68 & 69: PA 18 and PA 39 (multiple sites) Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Sites 68 & 69: PA 18 and PA 39 (multiple basins) General Information Drainage Regions: Local runoff from new development areas in PA 18 and PA 39 Drainage Area: Approximately 130 acres in PA 18 and 400 acres in PA 39 Outlets to: San Diego Creek CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program l] Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility El Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: Type I WQT wetlands are proposed within stormwater retarding basins serving The Irvine's Company's proposed development in PA 18 and PA 39. The Irvine Company would fund all construction costs of the facilities. The basins would be owned and maintained by the IRWD. WQT wetlands are integrated into stormwater retarding basin for the treatment of small storm and first flush runoff from the development area, as well as treatment of dry and wet season low flows. A generic design of this concept is included in this fact sheet. Detailed project designs have not been developed, but would likely be similar to those constructed in PA 17 (for Sites 31, 32) and in PA 27 (Site 42). Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow L] Wet period low flow ❑X Small storm and first flush flows El Facility Status: New 0 Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-39 Draft for Public Review January 2004 SHa 68 6 60. PA IS and PA 30 (muNplo sHas) Appohdix B— SHe Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Site Location and Drainage Area CI Site 68 & 69 tributary areas 6tonhe,,,� j Giyan t 1� SanE GY)Yn—Y.` n.`•� Q ��•• tti.� \�. _ GTE%A 1 \tom � c 4 • Location Map • San Diego Creek NTS Ma3lerPlan B40 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • Sites 68 & 69. PA 18 and PA 39 (multiple sites) Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Generic Design Shallow water Open water with emergent areas Cattails Inflow �-•. _ �- Open water pool, deoth = 4.6 ft. Modeling Parameters Shallow water with emergent Bulrush Shallow water Small storm water depth = 1-2 ft I I quality pool, depth Outlet structure & piping Outflow Extended detention riser Tributary area acres)_ Total wetland •aiea (acres) . ' Average.dry - seasoa,inf►oiv : ,Av . erage.wet; ' , ;treason"tnffow 'r `. Stormwater Detenfi, . Vol •(Ac'rgdt)_ Site 68 129 0.22 0.0050 0.0188 9.9 Site69W-A 75 0.023 0.0006 0.0022 6.2 Site69W-B 55 0.023 0.0005 0.0022 6.3 Site 69E-A 72 0.019 0.0006 0.0020 3.3 Site 69E B 82 0.021 0.0007 0.0021 3.7 Site 69E-C 1 68 0.017 0.0006 0.0017 3.1 San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-41 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Silks 70 6 71: PA a Type i Basins (muNoe silks) Appendix B— Ske Design Fact Sheets, Locsf Sties Shea 70 & 71: PA 6 - Aqua Chinon and Marshburn Channel General Information Drainage Regions: Local runoff from new development areas in PA 6 Drainage Area: Approximately 120 acres for Site 70 and 30 acres for Site 71 Outlets to; Aqua Chinon Wash (Site 70) and Marshburn Channel (Site 71) CBQAFacility Status: Project ❑ Program Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility El Type H — In•Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within existing Facility ❑ Project Description: Type I WQT wetlands are proposed within stormwater retarding basins serving The Irvine's Company's proposed development in PA 6. The Irvine Company would fund all construction costs of the facilities. The basins would be owned and maintained by the IRWD. WQT wetlands are integrated into stormwater retarding basin for the treatment of small storm and first flush runoff from the development area, as well as treatment of dry and wet season low flows, A generic design of this concept is included in this fact sheet. Detailed project designs have not been developed, but would likely be similar to those constructed in PA 17 (for Sites 31, 32) and in PA 27 (Site 42). Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow IO Wet period low flow d Small storm and first flush flows Facility Status: New M Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: a Sediment and trash removal near inlet and outlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Removal of invasive plant species • Mosquito control San 01w Creek NM Master Plan B42 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • • • • Sites 70 & 71: PA 6 Type I Basins (multiple sites) Appendix B — Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Site Location and Drainage Area Location Map San Dlegc ED Site 70 & 71 tributary areas N Sandc Sites: 70 6 71: PA t Typo l Baslas (mu" sites) Appendix B— Stte Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Generic Design Shallowwater waO er Shallow water wth emergent areas with emergent Cattails Bulrush Outlet structure piping to".ow Open water pool, depth = 4.3 ft. d a1 n a1 I @1.,x1 Modeling Parameters Extended detention Shaltowwater Smallstonnwaler / riser depth =1-2 ft I t quality pool, depth . _0 Tributary area (acret) Total wedsad area (serer) Average dry saflba ladow (cis) Average wet reWRIllillaw fats) Stormwater Deteation Vol (Acre-ft) Site 70A 20 0.02 0.0014 0.002 0.7 Site 70B 23 0.03 0,002 0.003 0.8 Site 70C 40 0.05 0.003 0.005 IA Site 71 32 0.01 010003 0.001 1.8 San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-44 January 2004 Draft for Public Review •I •I •I Site 22. MCAS El Toro— Ague Chinon Lower Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • Site 22a�MCAS El Toro -Aqua Chinon Lower General Information Drainage Region: Agua Chinon Wash and tributaries above Barranca Parkway. Drainage Area: About four square miles Outlets to: Agua Chinon Wash CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program O Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility O Type II —In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: This site is located on MCAS III Toro property adjacent to Agua Chinon Wash, which is a concrete trapezoidal channel at this location. During operation of the base, there was a diversion into an oil/water separator at this site. Off -Line WQT wetlands are proposed for the treatment of dry and wet season low flows. The wetlands would be integrated into a triangular shaped detention basin for treatment of small storm and first flush runoff. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow lR Wet period low flow rXI Small storm and first flush flows 0 Facility Status: New ❑R Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Replanting during wetland establishment • Removal of invasive plant species San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 1345 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Site 22: MCAS Ei Toro— Aqua Chinon Lower Appendix 9— SHe Design Facf Sheets, local SHeS Site Location and Drainage Area '— Site 22 Tributary Area, MCAS El Toro - Aqua Chinon Lower Location Map i AW FGaar aaraeet :rY,':40, :nra� mt 10 I> N NO � �y � • /(l .yam r ✓ V •` y .G 0 y„ Son Dkyo Creek NTS MesferPlan B46 January2004 Draft for Public Review •I •I Site 22: MCAS Et Toro — Agua Chinon Lower Appendix B — Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout .,.. �;- Gravity diversion .� ♦ y _ Open water;.« Outlet to Agua Chinon Wash n photo t f_,r J 5 Shallow water, _- .' c. a • ";�- ''t'`�'a.� =.'- emergent plants It detention area ^ y �'y Six'• _ ` ''�' "x�Y,-�. } Vw;^.i'i�. M� • 200 0 200 400 Feet Site Photographs �a 1 , 1 • �' .�. ..� �Y+1M Photo I - Agua Chinon looking northeast from Metro Link Train Station toward former El Toro airstrip .r. (former oil/water separator to left in photo) • Photo 2 - Agua Chinon looking southwest from Metro Link Train Station. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-47 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Slit 22: MCAS EI Toro -Aqua Chinon Lower Appendlx B- Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Conceptual Design Q Marsh area with emergent plahts: Inundated 1.2 ft Open water pools: Inundated 4.6 It N 0 200ft. Chinon Perforated Design Parameters: \ Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.07 cis Average wet season inflow= 0.033cfs Residence time (t) =10 days Wetland area (marsh & open water)= 4.08 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 3.25 acres Marsh volume = 6.5 acme ft Open water area = 0.82 acres Open water storage volume = 3.25 acre-ft Stormwe(er Conditions & treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff =10.7 acres Storm water storage volume = 42.8 acre-ft Detention time = 48 hrs Section A•A' water depth -1.2 ft Cattails & during lowt:ow ' % Bulrushes conditions Ili Section B-B' Dry weather open water I depth = 4-6 Gravity diversion from Aqua Chinon Wash -130ft Berms 'or stormwater storage pool Small storm water quality pool, depth -3-4 ft. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan BA8 January 2004 Draft for Public Review L 0 • 0 • • Site 50: MCAS El Toro— Irvine Auto Center Appendix B — Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Site SO: MCAS EI Toro - Irvine Auto Center General Information Drainage Region: San Diego Creek and tributaries above the I-5 Fwy Drainage Area: 1.7 square miles Outlets to: San Diego Creek CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program 1] Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility M Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III— Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: This site is located on MCAS El Toro property adjacent to San Diego Creek and the I-5 freeway. Off -Line WQT wetlands are proposed for the treatment of dry and wet season low flows. The wetlands would be integrated into a stormwater detention basin for treatment of small storm and first flush runoff. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow O Wet period low flow O Small storm and fast flush flows L] Facility Status: New ❑x Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Replanting during wetland establishment • Removal of invasive plant species Site Location and Drainage Area 4 0 4 a Wax San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B•49 Draft for Public Review i, MCAS El nter January 2004 S& 50: MCAS EI Toro— Irvine Auto Canter Appendix S — Sila Design Fact Sheets, Local Silas Location Map Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-50 January20W Draft for Public RevNw • 0 Site 50: MCAS El Toro — Irvine Auto Center Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • Site Photographs • Photo 1: View northeast from site showing culverted section of San Diego Creek, the primary source of water for proposed treatment, Photo 3: View to northeast looking upstream at confluence of San Diego Creek (to left in photo) and local drainage (to right in photo). San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan Photo 2: View southwest showing channel downstream of culvert. Photo 4: View south with channel in foreground (flow is to right) and agricultural lands that would be converted to water quality treatment wetlands. B-51 Draft for Public Review Silo 50: MCASR Toro- Irvine Auto Center Appendix B- Silo Design Fact Sheets, Local Slies Conceptual Design Gravity diversion from A San Diego Creek Return to San Diego Creek A' Perforated riser outlet structure Marsh area with emergent plants; Inundated 1.2 ft -40It = open water pools; N Inundated 4-6 ft B^ E 0 450 k. I • Design Parameters: Low flow conditions & treatment: germs for . Average dry season inflow = 0.036 cis stormwater-__,,r Average wet season inflow = 0.068 cfs storage pool Residence time (t) =10 days Wetland area (marsh & open water) = 0.85 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 0.68 acres Marsh volume =1.36 acre-ft Open water area = 0.17 acres Open water storage volume = 0.68 acre-ft Storrnwater conditions & treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff = 8.4 acres Storm water storage volume = 33.6 acre-ft Detention time = 48 hrs Section A -A' Section a-B' Cattails & Dry weather Small storm water SUlrUShea water depth -1.2 ft open water pool, quality pool, during tow Clow depth -oft I depth -3.4ft conditions Not To Scale • San Diego Creek HTS Master Plan B•52 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Site 51: MCAS El Toro — Serrano Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • Site 51: MCAS El Toro - Serrano General Information Drainage Region: Serrano Creek and tributaries, upstream of the intersection of Barranca and Alton Parkways Drainage Area: 6.8 square miles Outlets to: Serrano Creek CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program ❑X Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility O Type II— In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: This site is located on MCAS El Toro property adjacent to Serrano Creek, near the intersection of the I-5 and I-405 Freeways. Off -Line WQT wetlands are proposed for the treatment of dry and wet season low flows, The WQT wetlands would be integrated into a stormwater detention basin for the treatment of small storm and first flush runoff from small storm events. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow O Wet period low flow 0 Small storm and first flush flows ❑x Facility Status: New ❑x Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Replanting during wetland establishment • Removal of invasive plant species San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-53 January 2004 Draft for Public Review SIN 51: MCAS El Toro — Serano Appendix B•- She Design Fed Sheets, Local Styes Site Location and Drainage .Area n l Site 51 Tributary Area, 0 MCAS E! Toro —Serrano .ry y 4 0 4 e Mass •'" Location Man San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 5-54 Jenuery 2004 Graft for public Review •I •I •I Site 51: MCAS EI Toro— Serrano Appendix 8 — Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout • • 400 200 0 400 MO 1.200 X =eet we San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan Shr St: MCAS El Ybro- Serrano Appendix B- S8e Design Fact Sheets, Local Sties Conceptual Design Perforated riser outletsWcture Section A -A' Dryweather open water I depth --4 fL Creek I I /1" Low Stow inflowfrom Serrano Cdiversion I I N 0 400 ft. Marsh area with emergent t—� ptants: Inundated 1.2 R Openwaterpools: Inundated 6 ft Return to Serrano Modeling Parameters: Creek Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.08 ofs Average wet season Inflow = 0.26 cis Residence time (t) = 10 days Welland area (marsh & open water) = I$ acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 2.68 acres Marsh volume = 5.3 acre-ft Open water area = 0.67 acres Open water storage volume = 2.7 acre-ft, Stormwater conditions & treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff - 9.6 acres Stormwater storage volume -38 acre-ft Maximum draw down time = 48 hrs Dry weather water depth =1-2ft 1 Not To Scale Swat: storm water quality pool. depth -4 ft. Son Diego Creek NTS MasterPlan B-56 January 2M Draft for Public Review is 0 • Site 52— MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon Appendix B— Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • Site 52: MCAS El Toro - Bee Canyon General Information Drainage Region: Bee Canyon Wash, upstream of Interstate 5 and below the Bee Canyon Diversion Drainage Area: 1.5 square miles Outlets to: Bee Canyon Channel CEQA Facility Status: Project ❑ Program 1] Facility Type: Type I — Off -Line Facility El Type II — In -Line Facility ❑ Type III — Within Existing Facility ❑ Project Description: This site is located on MCAS property between the I-5 Fwy and the MCAS El Toro airfield. Off -Line WQT wetlands are proposed for the treatment of dry and wet season low flows. The wetlands would be integrated into a triangular shaped detention basin for treatment of small storm and first flush runoff. Flow Control: Gravity flow Treatment Regimes: Dry period low flow M Wet period low flow x❑ Small storm and first flush flows <] Facility Status: New L] Existing ❑ Retrofit to existing ❑ • Maintenance: • Sediment and trash removal near inlet • Vegetation removal near inlets and outlets • Replanting during wetland establishment • Removal of invasive plant species • Site Location and Drainage Area 4 0 4 e MINE San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan B-57 Draft for Public Review .a, canyon 1+1 January 2004 Site 52— MCAS tH Toro— Bee Canyon Appendix B— Me Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites Location Map Aerial Photograph and Conceptual Layout San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B•58 January 2004 Draft for Public Rovlaw • • 0 Site 52 - MCAS El Toro - Bee Canyon Appendix B - Site Design Fact Sheets, Local Sites • Conceptual Design 1] • Gravity diversion from Bee Canyon Channel Marsh area with emergent plants: Inundated 1-2 It Open water pools: Inundated 4-6 ft 0 450 ft. Return to Bee A Canyon Channel Design Parameters: Low flow conditions & treatment: Average dry season inflow = 0.039 cis Average wet season inflow = 0.067 cis Residence time (t) =10 days Wetland area (marsh & open water) = 0.83 acres Marsh (emergent plants) area = 0.66 acres Marsh volume =1.32 acre-ft Open water area = 0.17 acres Open water storage volume = 0.68 acre-ft Stormwater conditions &treatment: Area available for detention of small storm runoff = 3.7 acres Storm water storage volume =14.8 acre-ft Detention time = 48 hrs Section A -A' water depth -1-2 ft Small stone water during low low quality pool. conditions depth -3-4 ft.� ..................... _ --_..— _...._....-'---..- _....� . ,J .. Cattails & Bulrushes Not To Scale Section, B-S' Dry weather open water pool. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan B-59 Draft for Public Review January 2004 0 • Appendix C Table 3.1-1 — Land Use Information Table 3.1-2 — Existing and Surrounding Land Uses Table 3.1-3 — Land Use Policy Consistency Evaluation is • • San Diego Creek Watershed TABLE 3.14 NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM FACILITIES - LAND USE INFORMATION General Plan Farmland Site NameiLocation Facility T Land Use Designation Zoning Designation Unincorporated Orange County- Within City of Irvine Sphere of Influence g PA 1 — East Foot Retarding Basin Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve P — Prime - NE of Portola Pk U — Unique 10 PA 1 — East Foot Upper - NE of Portola P Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve P — Prime U — Unique 11 PA 1 Orchard Estates Retarding Basin Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve P — Prime - NE of Portola P U — Unique 12A PA 1— Lower Orchard Estates Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve P — Prime - NE of Portola P U — Unique P — Prime 12B PA 1 — Lower Orchard Estates NE of Portola Pkwy Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve U — Unique D — Urban and Built-U P — Prime 12C -PA 1 — Lower Orchard Estates Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve D — Urban and NE of Portola Pkwy Built-U P —Prime 12D PA 1 — Lower Orchard Estates Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve D — Urban and - NE of Portola Pkwy Built-U 12E PA 1 — Lower Orchard Estates Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve P — Prime - NE of Portola Pkwy 12F PA 1 — Lower Orchard Estates Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve P — Prime - NE of Portola Pkwy 12G PA 1 — Lower Orchard Estates Local • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve U — Unique - NE of Portola Pkwy 13 Rattlesnake Reservoir Existing Regional • Conservation/Open • 1.3 Conservation/Open W— Water - E of Portola PkwyM of SR-133 Retrofit Space -Water Bodies Space Reserve 16 Trabuco Detention Basin Local • Medium Density . 4.4 Commercial Recreation D — Urban and - E comer of Jeffrey Rd/rrabuco Rd. Residential Built-up 18 Marshbum Detention Basin Local • Recreation • 1.5 Recreation P — Prime NE of Irvine Blvd./SE of SR-33 22 MCAS El Toro —Agua Chinon Lower Local Public Facilities 5.5 Medical and Science D —Urban and - MCAS El Toro, NE of Barranca Built -Up 50 MCAS El Toro — Irvine Auto Center Local • Public Facilities • 4.3 Vehicle -Related P — Prime - E of 1-5/8 of Bake Pkwy Commercial 51 MCAS El Toro — Serrano Local • Public Facilities • 6.1 Institutional P — Prime S of Muirlands Blvd./Alton Pkwy X — Other 52 MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon Local •Public Facilities • 1.5 Recreation D — Urban and - E of 1-5/SR-133 Interchange Built-U R.1ProledsllRWDU=041EIR AppendimsU001 Apper d x C Table 31.1-011304 daa 53 61 70A 70B 70C 71 26 27 31 39 42 46 49 54 62 -Y V,P PA1- - r,IF of - IYG V PA6- -NEo PA6- -NEo PA6- - PIP n San Diego Creek WatershedNatuml Treatment System Revised Dra2EIR TABLE 3.14 (Continued) NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM FACILITIES — LAND USE INFORMATION basins) Regional Retrofit Local Local Local Local Local Woodbridge to -line Basins Regional Retrofit - between Alton and Barranca, E of Culver Barnmea Off-line Wetlands Regional Retrofit - N of Barranca, east of Jeffrey PA 17-West Basin Local - SW of W5/Sand Canyon Ave. PA 17- East Basin Local - SW of 1-4n5Ramma Canvnn Rd- - G u, IUUL,fC.uuy,\Gy, ,wuc nWqy, ncuuua Turtle Ridge North local - Shady Canyon Drive San Joaquin Marsh —Augmentation Regional Retrofit -NE comer CampustUniversity PA 17- CerderBasin Local - S of 1-405_ E of Shadv Canvnn Dr. -SE of Walnuttlamboree (wfm interchange Regional Retrofit median San Joaquin Marsh—SAMS 1 Regional Retrofit - S of JamboreelMichelson • Research and Industrial • 5.4 General industrial • Low Density Residential • 1.2 Development Reserve • Residential • 2.3K Medium Density Residential • Residential • 2.3K Medium Density Residential • Residential • 2.3K Medium Density Residential • Residential • 5.5 Medical and Science City of Irvine • Recreation • 1.5 Recreation • 1.5 Recreation • 1.3 Conservation/Open Space Reserve • 5.5c Medical and Science • 1.6 Water Bodies • 2.3 Medium Density Residential • Preservation • 1.3Conservation/Open S ace Reserve • Recreation • 1.4 Preservation • Research and Industrial • Unzoned • Preservation • 1.4 Preservation • Recreation • Preservation • Research and Industrial • Water Bodies • Medium Density Residential P — Prime P—Prime P — Prime P — Prime P— Prime Built-up X—Other P — Prime G—Grazing U — Unique X - Other W—Water X—Other X—Other U - Unique D — Urban and Built Up X — Other 167 • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural TABLE 3.1-1 (Continued) NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM FACILITIES — LAND USE INFORMATION Westpark In -line Basins - N of ATBSF Railroad, E of Jamboree Rd Regional Retrofit (also located within City of Tustin) Cienega (Cienega de las Ranas) 66 Eof: 69A PA 39 SE of 69B PA 39 -SEo 69C PA-39 -SEo 69D PA 39 -SEo 69E PA 39 Sr n W� 1155 II 64 - west of Hewes St. north of Fairhaven Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel - parallel to Santa Fe Railroad, between SR-55 and Jamboree Westpark In -line Basins - N of AT&SF Railroad, E of Jamboree Rd (also located within City of Irvine) Regional Retrofit Local Local Local Local Local Local Regional Retrofit Regional Retrofit Regional Retrofit • Irvine: Recreation • Tustin: MCASTustin Specific Plan • Recreation • Community Commercial • Research and Industrial • Military • Urban and Industrial • Public Facilities • Preservation • Commercial RPrreafinn • Commercial Recreation • Commercial Recreation • Commercial Recreation • Commercial Recreation City of Orange • OS — Open Space City of Tustin • P-C Commercial/ Business • P-C Residential • Irvine: Recreation • Tustin: MCAS Tustin Specific Plan • Irvine: -1.0 Conservation/Open Space Reserve • Irvine: 1.5 Recreation • Tustin: P&I (Public and Institutional) • 1.5 Recreation • 5.513 Medical and Science • 1.3 Conservation/Open Space Reserve • 1.2 Development Reserve • 7.1 Military • 6.1Institutional • 13 Cnnservatinn/Onen • 4A Commercial Recreation • 4.4 Commercial Recreation • 4.4 Commercial Recreation • 4.4 Commercial Recreation • 4.4 Commercial Recreation X — Other D — Urban and Built -Up S — Statewide Importance D — Urban and Built Up P — Prime O — Other EMi110T, D — Urban and Built -Up D — Urban and Built -Up D — Urban and Built -Up U - Unique X - Other • R-1-7 Single Family I D — Urban and • P&I — Public & Institutional D — Urban and • P-C— Residential Built -Up • P-C — Industrial • Irvine:1.3 Conservation/Open Space Reserve X—Other • Irvine: 1.5 Recreation D — Urban and • Tustin: P&I (Public and Built -Up Insfib Ifinnnil R 1Pr g1disVRWDUa G41EIR AppemlmsU001 Appendix C Taaa 3.1-1-011304 doe 3 Appendix C San Diego Creek Watershed Naturat Treatment System Revised DraftEIR TABLE 3.1-2 EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES NTS FACILITIES BYJURISDICTiON Site No. Facility Name Existing Land Uae Surrounding Existing Land Use Unincorporated Orange County— Within City of Irvine Sphere of Influence g PA 1—East Foot Retarding Agriculture butzoned for Agriculture Basin development 10 PA 1—East Foot Upper Agriculture but zoned for Agriculture to the west across SR-261, agriculture to the north, west and south development 11 PA 1— Orchard Estates Retarding basin butzoned for Agriculture, undeveloped Retarding Basin development PA 1— Lower Orchard Estates Agriculture, water well located in Residential uses to the south across Portola Parkway, agriculture to the west, 12A (multiple sites) center of site but zoned for north and east development 12B PA 1— Lower Orchard Estates Agriculture but zoned for Residential uses to the southwest across Portola Parkway, agriculture to the multi lesites development north and east agriculture maintenance area to the south 12C PA 1— Lower Orchard Estates Agriculture but zoned for Residential uses to the southwest across Portola Parkway, agriculture to the (multiple sites development north. east, and south. 12D PA 1— Lower Orchard Estates Agricultural operations storage Residential uses to the west across Portola Parkway agriculture to the north, (multiple sites)east, and south. 12E PA 1— Lower Orchard Estates Agriculture but zoned for Agriculture to the south, agriculture to the north, east and west (multiple sites development 12F PA 1—Lower Orchard Estates Agriculture but zoned for Residential uses to the west across Portola Parkway (multiple sites development 12G PA 1—Lower Orchard Estates Agriculture but zoned for SR-261 to the west agriculture to the north, west and south (multiple sites development 13 Rattlesnake Reservoir Reservoir Agricultural surrounds entire reservoir. Surrounding area has a Suburban Residential designation in the Orange County General Plan Jeffrey Road to the northwest Trabuco Road to the southwest agriculture to 16 Trabuco Retarding Basin Retarding basin and golf driving the northeast and southeast but zoned for development. Conversion of range agricultural resources was identified in Northern Sphere FEIR and a statement of overriding considerationswas adopted by the City of Irvine. Irvine Boulevard to the south, agriculture to the north, east and west but zoned 18 Marshbum Retarding Basin Retarding basin for development. Conversion of agricultural resources was identified in Northem Sphere FEIR and a statement of overriding considerations was adopted bthe City of Irvine. 22 MCAS EiToro —Agua Chinon Undeveloped p Ague Chinon Wash to the west, Metrolink rail line to the south, and vacant Lower MCAS El Toro to the northwest. so MCAS El Toro —Irvine Auto Agriculture San Diego Creek Channel to the northwest agriculture to the north, 1-5 to the Center southwest, and Irvine Auto Center to the east 51 MCAS El Toro —Serrano Agriculture Serrano Creek to the west agriculture and Muidands Boulevard to the north, and agriculture to the east and south. POPOv CT"114fi1130 dW San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraREIR TABLE 3.1-2 (Continued) EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES NTS FACILITIES BY JURISDICTION Site No. Faoility Name Existing Land Use Surrounding Existing Land Use 52 MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon Undeveloped Perimeter Road to the north and northwest, Bee Canyon Wash to the east, Metrolink rail line to the south. Undeveloped area used for SR-133 on and off -ramps to the north and south, SR-133 to the east, Caltrans 53 Caltrans SR-133/1-5 stonnwater control including a maintenance property to the south. Interchange rectangular concrete de -silting basin near the inlet. 61 PA 1— East Foot Lower Agriculture but zoned for SR-261 to the west, Portola Parkway to the south, and agriculture to the north - development and east 70A PA 6—Agua Chinon (multiple Agriculture but zoned for Agriculture to the north, east and west, Ague Chinon Retarding Basin to the basins) development south. 70B PA 6 —Agua Chinon (multiple Agriculture but zoned for Agriculture to the north, east and west, Ague Chinon Wash to the south. basins) development 70C PA 6 —Agua Chinon (multiple Agriculture but zoned for Agriculture to the north, east and west, Agua Chinon Wash to the south. basins) development 71 PA 6 — Marshbum Agriculture but zoned for -SR-133 to the west, Irvine Boulevard to the south, agriculture to the north and develo ment east City of Irvine Mix of residential, educational, senior residence, neighborhood commercial, 26 Woodbridge In -line Basins San Diego Creek Channel and community commercial to the north and south. The regional riding and hiking trait parallels the length of the channel. Mitigation area planted with Agriculture and Irvine Valley College to the north, agriculture and residential to 27 Barranca Off-line Wetlands native vegetation the east, Barranca Parkway and residential to the south, and Jeffrey Road and residential to the west. Water quality and flood control Shady Canyon Drive to the east, 1405 to the north, future PA 17 including 31 PA 17 West Basin basin constructed as part of community park use -and community commercial uses are under construction Planning Area 17 to'the east across Shady Canyon Drive. Low -flow water quality basin 1-405 to the north, Laguna Canyon Road to the east, SCE Easement to the 32 PA 17 East Basin constructed as part of Planning west. The area under construction to the south within PA 17 is residential. Area 17 Strawberry Farms Golf Club surrounds the entire reservoir. Turtle Rock community to the west, future estate residential and golf course (Planning 39 Sand Canyon Reservoir Reservoir Area 22) to the southeast, and Preservation Area (Planning Area 16) to the northeast. - 42 Turtle Ridge North Water quality basin constructed Residential -uses to the north across Shady Canyon Drive, surrounding area is as part of Planning Area 27. currently disturbed and is part of the PA 27 development. San Joaquin Wildlife Sanctuary to the north, Irvine Ranch Water District 46 San Joaquin Marsh- San Joaquin Marsh wetlands treatment Facility to the east, continuation of San Joaquin Marsh and Augmentation University of California Nature Reserve to the west across Campus Drive, and San Diego Creek Channel to the south. R.1Projects'dRVVDUan041EIR Append3m3U001 Appendix C TaNe 31-2-011304 doc 2 Appendix C San Diego Creek Watershed Naturai Treatment System Revised DrattE/R TABLE 3.1-2 (Continued) EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES NTS FACILITIES BY JURISDICTION Site No. Facility Name Existing Land Use Surrounding Existing Land Use Low -flow water quality basin 1.405 to the north, Shady Canyon Drive to the west, and agriculture to the 49 PA 17 Center Basin constructed as part of Planning south and east. Area 17 54 Caitrans SR-261/Wainut Ave. Undeveloped vacant land Caitrans dewatering plant to the north, existing and future office uses to the northwest across SR-261, Peters Canyon Wash and Harvard Park to the east. San Joaquin Marsh immediately to the north and to the east across Campus 62 San Joaquin MarshSAMS 1 San Joaquin Marsh wetlands Drive, University of California Nature Reserve to the west, and San Diego Creek Channel to the south. Adjacent to and within an e)dsffnq mitigation site. 64 (also located Peters Canyon Wash —improved The regional riding and hiking trail parallels the length of Peters Canyon Wash. in Tustin) Westpark in line Basins concrete channel A variety of land uses including residential, commercial, recreation, and MCAS Tustin surround the site. Undeveloped vacant land, San Generally surrounded by residential, public park, commercial, San Joaquin 67 Cienega de Las Ranas Diego Creek Channel, Marsh, and Irvine Ranch Water District facilities. (Final location TBD) abandoned military housing, San Joaquin Marsh basins 68 PA 18 Vacant Laguna Reservoir to the north and northwest, vacant land to the west, east, and south. 69A PA 39 (multiple basins) Developed Commercial recreation (Wild Rivers and Verizon Amphitheater) to the north, south, east and west. 69B PA 39 (multiple basins) Developed Commercial recreation (W7d Rivers) to the north, south and east; San -Diego Creek to the west. 69C PA 39 (multiple basins) Developed 1-405 to the north, commercial recreation (W7d Rivers) to the south and east, San Diego Creek to the west 69D PA 39 (multiple basins Agriculture Agriculture to the north, south and east, SR-133 to the west 69E PA 39 (multiple basins) Undeveloped 1.405 to the north, SR-133 to the west, agriculture to the south, undeveloped to the east. City of Orange Detention basin designated by El Modena Park surrounds the entire site. Public library and Headstart 56 El Modena Park the City of Orange as passive Educational program to the north, residential to the east, continuation of EI recreation Modena Park to the southeast across Hewes Street, residential uses to the south across Jordan Avenue, and Jordan Elementary School to the southwest City of Tustin Residential and commercial to the north, MCAS Tustin and commercial uses 55 Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel to the south across Edinger Avenue. AT&SF raiUoad tracks parallel the channel to the south. 6 4 (also located Peters Canyon Wash —improved ny The regional riding and hiking trail parallels the length of Peters Canyon Wash. Irvine) Westpark In tine Basins concrete nne{ A variety -of land uses including residential, commercial, recreation, and MCAS Tustin surround the site. RAPPK400UOGI AWKKKx GT"11.2-01136i.d= 3 4URVJOWt041E10 0 • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment system Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable NTS Sites I Consistency Evaluation" -Cons Ste A licable Plarinin Policy-_ City of Irvine General Plan Land Use Element Objective A-3 - Open Space Areas: Encourage land use development that preserves the beauty of the natural environment. Policy (b): Ensure development in the hillside areas Sites 31, 49, 32, 42, 9, Hillside development associated with Sites 31, 49, Yes retains the character and aesthetic value of the natural 10, 11, 12G , 68, and 32 and 42 was analyzed in prior approved CEQA landform through use of the Hillside Development 69A-E documents (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Ordinance. Draft EIR). Sites 68 and 69A-E are -located in the San Joaquin Hills Hillside Overlay district and will be developed in accordance with the Hillside Development Ordinance of the City of Irvine. Sites 9, 10, 11 and 12G are located in the Santiago Hills Hillside Overlay district and will be developed in accordance the Hillside development Ordinance of the City of Irvine. Policy (d): Ensure developments occurring in close Sites 46, 13, 39. 31, Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, 49, 42, 16. 18, 22, 50, 51, Yes proximity to NCCP/HCP implementation areas are 32, 49, 42, 16. 18, 22, 52, 70A-70C, 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62. 64, 67, 9, 10, consistent with the NCCP plan and/or implementing 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 6B, and 69A-69E are located agreement. 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, within the Central and Coastal NCCP/HCP 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- Subregion. Sites 13, 39, 46 and 62 are currently 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- designated as Non -Reserve Open Space in the 69E NCCP. None of the other sites are located within any of the NCCP Reserve classifications. Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71 were analyzed in prior approved CEQA documents. The proposed modifications to Sites 46, 13, 39, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E would be consistent with the NCCP plan and/or applicable implementing agreements. R 1PfofeddlRWDXJmO4TIR Append,Ms1J001 AppencrN C Tabla ll-U11304 DOG 1 Appendix C San Diego Creek WatershedNahxal Treatment System Revised DraREIR TABLE 3A-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Applicable IfrSSfts=r Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? City of Irvine General Plan Objective A-6: Land Use Compatibility: Achieve harmonious land use patterns throughout the City. Policy (0: Coordinate with the county, landowners, and Sites 46, 13, 39, 31. Land use compatibility issues associated with Yes other cities and agencies in developing compatible land 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, Sites 31. 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A- uses for areas adjacent to the City boundary. 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, 70C, and 71 were analyzed in prior approved 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62. CEQA documents (refer to Appendix M in the 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- Revised Draft EIR). IRWD, In cooperation with 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- the City of Irvine as well as other jurisdictions in 69E the San Diego Creek Watershed, has coordinated with the appropriate agencies to ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses. Cultural Resources Element Objective E-1 - Historical, Archaeological, Paleontological Surveys: Identify and obtain information on the existence and significance of historical, archaeological, and paleontological sites and encourage land use planning which Incorporates this Information. Policy (a): Require appropriate surveys -and necessary Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, Field surveys, records searches and literature Yes site investigations in conjunction with the earliest 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, reviews were conducted for the regional retrofit environmental document prepared for a project, in 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, sites (Sites 26, 27, 54, 62, and 64) and did not accordance with California Environmental Quardy Act 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, reveal anything of historical, archaeological or (CEQA) and the City'sCEQA procedures. 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- paleontological significance on the sites. Most 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- sites are highly disturbed. Sites 46, 13, and 39 69E are existing sites that were previously disturbed and no additional disturbance would be required. Sites 31, 49, 32, 42, 22, 50, 51, 52, 7OA-70C and 71 were analyzed in prior approved CEQA documentation (refer to Appendix M of this Revised DEIR). Preliminary cultural resource surveys conducted in the Planning Areas for which Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61. 68, and 69A- 69E are located indicate that cultural resources are not located directly within the NTS site locations. However, as described in Section 3.7, Cultural Resources, of the Revised Draft EIR, there is the possibility offinding unknown cultural resources. During excavation for construction of the NTS sites, if any significant materials are found, they will be transferred to the City of Irvine. Apprxix C T"3.1�M11M4.D0C • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment Pystern Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Appilcable'Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites T Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? City of Irvine General Plan Policy (c): Require a written report be submitted to the Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, Mitigation monitoring reports will be submitted to Yes City following a survey or Investigation describing the 32. 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, the City upon completion of construction of each findings and making recommendations as to the site's 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, NTS site within the City. significance, future disposition, and the amount of 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, further investigation which should be undertaken. 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- 69E Policy (d): Encourage, if appropriate, removal of all Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, Field surveys, records searches, and literature Yes materials collected during the survey/ investigation to 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, reviews were conducted for Sites 26, 27, 54, 62, local museums, universities, or other depositories 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, and 64 and did not reveal anything of historical, providing access for public review or scientific research. 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, archaeological or paleontological significance on 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- the sites. Most sites are highly disturbed. Sites 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- 46, 13, and 39 are existing sites that were 69E previously disturbed and no additional disturbance would be required. Sites 31, 49, 32, 42, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C and 71 were analyzed in prior approved CEQA documentation (refer to Appendix M of this Revised DEIR). Preliminary cultural resource surveys conducted in Irvine Planning Areas 1 and 2 for which Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E are located indicate that cultural resources are not located directly within the NTS site locations. However, as described in Section 3.7, Cultural Resources, of the Revised Draft EIR, during excavation of the NTS sites, if any significant materials are found, they will be transferred to the City of Irvine. Policy (f): Maintain information on areas surveyed, Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, The cultural resources technical report and Yes numbers of sites located, their status and the names of 32, 49, 42, 16, 18. 22, additonat preliminary cultural resources data addresses of individuals or organizations knowledgeable 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, documents all areas surveyed and all other of the sites. 71, 26, 27, 53, 64, 62, relevant information including the names of 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- individuals or organizations knowledgeable of the 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- sites. 69E R.Nr6jects%1RWDuan04\EIR AppentlicesUDOI Appendix C Table 313011304 DOC 3 Appendix C San Diego Creek Watershed Natvat Treatment System Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Wp-licable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites I Consistency Evaluation" Consistam- Consistent- City of Irvine General Plan City Policy (g): Maintain specific locations of unprotected Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, As previously indicated, the field surveys, records Yes sites as confidential information to avoid vandalism and 12, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, searches and literature reviews did not reveal the resultant irretrievable Toss of the historic and 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, anything of cultural resources significance on the prehistoric record of the community. 71. 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, sites. Should any materials of cultural resources 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A significance be discovered during excavation, 12G, 61, 68, and 69A appropriate measures, as specified -in Section 3.7 69E of the Revised Draft EIR, will be followed to protectthe confidentiality ofthe specific locations. Objective E-2 - Hazard Occurrence: Evaluate surveyed sites for their present and potential cultural, educational, recreational, and scientific value to the community and the region, and determine their proper disposition prior to approval of any project which could adversely affect them. Policy (g): Ensure that adverse impacts of a proposed Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, As previously indicated, no cultural resources of Yes project on cultural resources are mitigated in 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22. significance were found on Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, accordance with CEQA, as well as other appropriate 50, 51, 52. 70A-70C, 32. 49, 42, 16, 18. 22, 50. 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, City policies and procedures, where preservation of a 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, 26, 27. 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10. 11, 12A-12G, 61, significant site is not practical. 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- 68, and 69A-69E. However, appropriate 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- measures, as specified in Section 3.7 of the 69E Revised Draft EIR vnli be followed in the event any cultural resources of significance are discovered during excavation. Noise Element Objective F-2 - Stationary Noise: Ensure that City residents are not exposed to stationary noise levels in excess of the City Noise Ordinance standards. Policy (a): Require any new construction to meet the Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, Sites 46. 13 and 39 are existing facilities and no Yes City Noise Ordinance standards as a condition of 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, new physical modifications will occur at these building permit approval. 50, 51, 52, 70A 70C, sites. Sites 31, 49, 32, 42, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A- 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, 76C and 71 were analyzed in prior approved 64. 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- CEQA documentation (refer to Appendix M of this 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- Revised DEIR). Sites 31, 49, 32 and 42 have 69E since been constructed. Construction activities for the remaining NTS sites will occur during City of Irvine Noise Ordinance speciffed restrictions. Applicable licable Planning Policy _Applicable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? City of Irvine General Plan Policy (b): Require developers to depict, on any Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, Sites 46, 13 and 39 would not require any physical Yes appropriate development application review (zone 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, modifications to their current operations. Site 46 change, subdivisions, condition use permit, site plan, 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, would result in an increase in the cis from the San and building plans), any potential noise sources known 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, Joaquin Marsh to the San Diego Creek Channel,; at the time of submittal and mitigation measures that 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- however, the increase in pump noise is ensure these noise sources meet the City Noise 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- considered negligible. Sites 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, Ordinance standards. Such sources include, but are not 69E 22, 31, 32, 42, 49, 50, 51, 52, 61, 68, 69A-69E, limited to the following: 70A-70C and 71 will not result in long-term operational noise and will not require any onsite • Truck pickup and loading areas. mechanical equipment or structures. Sites 53, 54, • Mechanical and electrical equipment such as air and 56 will require onsite pumping equipment; condition, swimming pool pumps and filters, and however, the noise levels would be below spa,pumps. thresholds of significance as indicated in Chapter • Exterior nuisances such as speaker boxes and 7.0 of this Revised Draft EIR. Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, outdoor public address systems. 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 62, 70A-70C, and 71 were evaluated with prior approved CEQA documentation (refer to Appendix M in this Revised Draft EIR). However, short-term construction -noise will occur with implementation Integrated Waste Management Element of the Sites 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E. Construction activities will comply with City of Irvine Noise Ordinance restrictions. Objective H-3 - Waste Water: Control waste water and Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, Yes storm runoff in a manner to minimize impact on adjacent 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 52, 70A-70C, 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, existing or planned land uses. 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- 69E 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E are part of the overall NTS Master Plan which is a water quality improvement project. Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, and 71 were evaluated in approved CEQA documentation (refer to prior Appendix M in the Revised Draft EIR). 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E would incorporate changes that would slow storm runoff so that pollutants will be absorbed into the vegetation. Site 46 would remain unchanged with the exception of increasing the current flow diversion rate from the San Diego Creek Channel to the San Joaquin R.1Prgects11RWDUan041E1R AppeMimsUo01 Appanduc C Table 31-MI1304 DOC 5 Appendix C San -Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENGY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Polic licable NTS Sites Consistent Evaluation" Consistent? City of Irvine General Plan Marsh. Sites 13 and 39 are Existing Regional Facilities and would remain unchanged as they currently provides water quality enhancement benefits. For Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51. 52, 70A-70C, 71, 26, 27, 53. 54, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A- 69E, the effect on adjacent existing or planned land uses is considered negligible. Safety Element Objective J-1- Hazard Occurrence: Identify actions that the Sites 46. 13, 39, 31, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50. 51, 52. 70A- Yes City, in concert with other jurisdictions, must take to reduce 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 70C, and 71 were evaluated with prior approved the probability of hazard occurrence. 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C. CEQA documentation (refer to Appendix M in the 71, 26, 27, 53, 54. 62, Revised Draft EIR). General Plan level Policy (b): Apply appropriate standard conditions which 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- Information did not identify any hazardous require geologic testing and structural modification in 12G, 61, 68. and 69A- conditions affecting Sites 13. 26, 27, 46, 54, 62, areas with slope instability and landslide potential. 69E 64, 39. 9,10,11,12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E. Conservation and Open Soave Element Objective L-2 - Biotic Resources: Maintain and preserve areas with significant and diverse biotic communities. Policy (a): Utilize Figure L-4, which is derived from the Sites 46. 13, 39. 31, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A- Yes City's Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) biotic 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 70C, and 71 were evaluated in prior approved data base, resource map, and the City's land use impact 50, 51, 52, 704-70C, CEQA documentation (refer to Appendix M in the model in the development review process as 71, 26, 27, 53, 54. 62, Revised Draft EIR). Sites 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, 64, informational sources to determine the proximity and 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- 67, 68, and 69A-69E are not located in an area extent of biotic resources and potential level of impact 12G, 61. 68, and 69A- identified in the MEA as a_natural resource that is 69E viable and significant. Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61 are located in proximity to eucalyptus windrows identified in Figure L-4. However, implementation of these sites is not expected to directly affect the eucalyptus windrows. C • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmen�em Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites I Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? City of Irvine General Plan The Conservation and Open Space Element is - intended to preserve those natural resource areas identified in the Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) which are the most viable and significant. The protection of large, contiguous preservation areas containing the uses set forth in the Implementation Actions Program in Objective L-1 is deemed, on balance to better protect biotic resources then the protection of small, isolated resources within individual development areas. The Conservation and Open Space Element, through the Implementation Action -Program (Objective L-1), will preserve specific MEA biotic resource areas, in whole or in part, as depicted on the Biotic Resources Map (Figure L-4). Policy (d): Mitigation banks in the San Joaquin Marsh Sites 46 and 62 Sites 46 and 62 are located within the San Yes may be created for selected development in the City and Joaquin Marsh. Site 62 is located directly its sphere of influence. adjacent to the SAMS 1 mitigation bank but is not within the-SAMS 1 site boundary. However, these two NTS sites would not preclude use of the Marsh as future mitigation banks. Policy (a): Maintain significant riparian areas in Sites 46 and 62 Sites 46 and 62 are located in areas that are Yes preservation areas as natural corridors and sources of designated as preservation areas in the City of shelter, water, and food for wildlife, except where Irvine General Plan. Proposed modifications to required for infrastructure. Site 62 include enhancement of wetland and riparian habitat which would continue to provide shelter, water and food for wildlife. No physical modifications would occur at Site 46. The only change at Site 46 would be to increase the current flow diversion rate from the San Diego Creek Channel to the San Joaquin Marsh; however, this change would not preclude the Marsh from being a preservation area. R.lprgegsURWOUan041EIR AppeM¢es0001 Appendix C Table 3l,"11304 DOC 7 Appendix C San Diego Creek Watershed NahmatTreatment System Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Appilcable Planning Policy Appllc&b4o NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? Citit of Irvine General Plan Policy (g): Allow the enhancement of habitat areas, Sites 46 and 62 Sites 46 and 62 are designated as preservation Yes particularly riparian habitat, in all preservation areas as areas. Proposed modifications to Site 62 include mitigation for any development impacts in other areas. a restoration and enhancement plan that would Promote agreements between the California Department include salt marsh, freshwater marsh, and costal of Fish and Game and the landowner to accomplish the sage scrub restoration. Appropriate coordination creation of new habitat in preservation areas consistent with CDFG and landowners has occurred and is with applicable standards and procedures. ongoing. No physical modifications would occur at Site 46. The only charge at Site 46 would be to increase the current flow diversion rate from the San Diego Creek Channel to the San Joaquin Marsh. Objective L-3 - NCCP/HCP Implementation Areas: Participate in the Natural Communities Conservation PlardHabitat Conservation Plan (NCCPMCP) program to accomplish multi -species and mufti -habitat conservation. Policy (a): Review project proposals within the reserve Sites 46. 13, 3% 31, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51. 52, 70A- Yes system to assure consistency with the NCCP1HCP. 32, 49, 42, 16. 18, 22, 70C, and 71 were analyzed In prior approved 50, 51, 52, 70A 70C, CEQA documentation (refer to Appendix M of the Policy (c): Record and compile Coastal Sage Scrub 71. 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, Revised Draft EIR). Implementation of Sites 46, impacts within the jurisdicttion and report the data 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- 13, 39, 26. 27, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- annually to the County of Orange. 12G, 61, 68. and 69A- 12G, fit, 68. and 69A-69E will be consistent with 69E the NCCP/HCP objectives and policies. Please Policy (d): Ensure that NCCP construction related refer to Section 3.3, Biological Resources, in the minimization measures set forth in the NCCP are Revised Draft EIR for further discussion on enforced. consistency with the NCCPIHCP. Policy (g): Use the NCCP as a Program EIR for CEQA pu' rposes, applying the Coastal Sage Scrub impacts . ation mmeasures applicableto planned activities. WRWMkr44MRAM dkaWal AWKmft CTObW3.13011904DOC 0 A*C • 0 San -Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmeoem TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Poll c A licable NTS Sites I Consistency -Evaluation" Consistent? City of Irvine General Plan Objective L-4 - Geophysical Hazards: Minimize the danger to life and property from geophysical hazards including, but not limited to, unstable soils, liquefaction, steep slopes, and floodways. Policy (a): Continue to coordinate General Plan level Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A- Yes hazard information (i.e. Safety and Seismic Elements) to 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 70C, and 71 were analyzed in prior approved determine the level of hazardous condition(s) potentially 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, CEQA documentation (refer to Appendix M of the affecting any proposed development. 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, Revised Draft EIR). Sites 46, 13 and 39 are 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- Existing Regional Facilities and no physical 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- modifications would occur to these facilities. 69E General Plan level informationdidnot identify any hazardous conditions potentially affecting Sites 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E Policy (d): Apply the following actions to dam inundation areas as Identified in the City's Master Environmental Assessment: Require applicants to submit a statement which Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A- Yes assesses the effect of the project upon existing 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 70C, and 71 were analyzed in prior approved hazards. It should include revised dam inundation 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, CEQA documentation (refer to Appendix M of the maps reflecting changes, if any, resulting from the 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, Revised Draft EIR). Sites 46, 13 and 39 are proposed development and its effect upon existing 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- Existing Regional Facilities and no physical hazards and inundation boundaries. This should 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- modifications would occur to these facilities. The occur prior to issuance of grading permits within a 69E changes proposed with Sites 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, dam inundation area. 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E are designed to have no impact on the flood control objectives of the channels. Vegetation and installation of the weirs may reduce the flood control capacity in some cases where flood capacity is already limiting. Therefore, where flood control is likely to be significantly affected, vegetation and the weirs will be removed prior to the onset of winter and storm flows. RS DrcgoclsMRWDUen041E1R Appendices0001 Appendix C Table 3.V"113W DOC 9 Appendix C San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Dra2EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites I Consisumy Evaluation" CormleteW City of Irvine General Plan Objective L-5 - Geophysical Resources: Use and preserve geophysical resources, including, but not limited to, ridgelines, hillsides, and waterways, as part of the City's land use pattern. Policy (a): Apply the following action to all areas of the Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, General Plan level information and more detailed Yes City and its sphere of influence: 32. 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, information where applicable was used to 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, ascertain any resource potential with Sites 46, 13, • Continue to coordinate General Plan level resource 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62. 39, 31, 32, 49. 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A- Infomration (Land Use, Parks and Recreation, and 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- 70C, 71. 26, 27, 53, 64, 62, 64. 67, 9,10,11,12A- Cultural Resources Elements) to determine the 12G, 61, 68. and 69A- 12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E. Where applicable, this level and type of resource(s) potentially within arry 69E information is discussed In this table and in the proposed development relevant Revised Draft EIR sections. • Ensure environmental impact reports for future development to consider impacts to waterways. • Study where possible and practicable, the Sites 26, "and 67 The proposed changes at Sites 26 and 64 will not Yes appearance and ecology of certain ebsting natural introduce any new vegetation plantings into the drainage channels to determine which channels or channel. Minor removal of ebsting vegetation will portions of the channels, conservation measures result from the installation of the weir structures. shall be applied to. Channels or portions of However, most of the ebsting vegetation will channels determined to be suitable for preservation remain. Any new vegetation that appears in the purposes may be modified to enhance their channels will establish naturally. The overall ecology tong term viability and maintenance. appearance of the channel will remain. Materials Those channels or portions of channels shall be used in the construction of the weirs will, be either integrated into the design of the surrounding natural or natural in appearance. development Site 67 includes portions of the San Diego Creek Channel; however, final site locations would be located adjacent to the Channel and not within it Future CEQA analysis would be conducted when site locations have been finalized. E • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Poll c Ilcable NTS Sites r Consistency Evaluation" I Consistent? City of Irvine General Plan • Minimize alterations of major creek courses and Sites 26, 64 and 67 The proposed changes will minimally alter channel Yes bottoms. bottoms for in -line facilities and therefore the proposed changes will not alter the flood control capacity of the channels. Site 67 includes portions of the San Diego Creek Channel; however, final site locations would be located adjacent to the Channel and not within it. Future CEQA analysis would be conducted when site locations have been finalized. Policy (b): Apply the following actions to hillside areas Sites 31, 49, 32, 42, 9, Hillside development associated with Sites 31, 49, Yes within the City. 10, 11, 12G , 68, and 32 and 42 was analyzed in prior approved CEQA 69A-E documents (refer to Appendix M in the Revised • Prepare a detailed environmental impact report for Draft EIR). Sites 68 and 69A-E are located in the all proposed development in hillside areas. San Joaquin Hills Hillside Overlay district and will be developed in accordance with the Hillside Development Ordinance of the City of Irvine. Sites 9, 10, 11 and 12G are located in the Santiago Hills Hillside Overlay district and will be developed in accordance the Hillside development Ordinance of the City of Irvine. Policy (c): Ensure development in the hillside areas Sites 31, 49, 32, 42, 9, Hillside development associated with Sites 31, 49, Yes retains the character and aesthetic value of the natural 10, 11, 12G , 68, and 32 and 42 was analyzed in prior approved CEQA landform through use of the Hillside Development 69A-E documents (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Ordinance. Draft EIR). Sites 68 and 69A-E are located in the San Joaquin Hills Hillside Overlay district and will be developed in accordance with the Hillside Development Ordinance of the City of Irvine. Sites 9, 10, 11 and 12G are located in the Santiago Hills Hillside Overlay district and will be developed in accordance the Hillside development Ordinance of the City of Irvine. R 1ProjectsVRWDUMMTIR AppentlimsUwI Appends C Table 31d011304.DOC 11 Appendix C San Diego Creek Watershed Nahrar Treatment System RevisedDreft&R TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites 7 Consistency Evaluation'" Consistent? City of Irvine General Plan Objective L-6 — Preservation Areas: Maintain and preserve large, contiguous areas which contain significant multiple hazards and resources. Policy (a): Ensure that riparian vegetation is not Sites 46 and 62 Sites 46 and 62 are located in areas that are Yes significantly modified, except as necessary to provide identified as a Preservation Area in the City of fire protection, access roads, and flood control, Irvine General Plan. The only change to Site 46 is drainage, water, sewer and utility facilities, and except the increase in flow diversion from the San Diego where habitat is to be enhanced as part of a mitigation Creek Channel to the San Joaquin Marsh. Site 62 program approved by the California Department of Fish is located acgacent to the SAMS 1 mitigation she and Game. and will provide restoration and enhancement opportunities. Ongoing discussions with IRWD and the appropriate regulatory agencies is occurring regarding the proposed restoration and enhancement plan at Site 62. Policy (g): Participate In cooperative efforts with federal, Sites 46 and 62 IRWD, in cooperation with the City of Irvine as Yes state, and county agencies and land owners in planning well as other jurisdictions in the San Diego Creek and preserving regionally significant conservation and Watershed, has coordinated with the appropriate open space areas within the City and its sphere of agencies and landowners in planning and influence (Lomas Ridge, Bommer and Shady Canyons, preserving significant conservation and open and San Joaquin Marsh). space areas within the City and Us sphere of influence. Policy (k): Preserve and enhance the San Joaquin Sites 46 and 62 Sites 46 and 62 are included as part of the Yes Marsh as a habitat resource and mitigation bank through proposed NTS Master Plan project because of implementation of the 'San Joaquin Marsh Habitat their current use for water quality betterment The Enhancement and Wetlands Creation Program' only change to Site 46 is the increase in flow diversion from the San Diego Creek Channel to the San Joaquin Marsh. Site 62 is located adjacent to the SAMS 1 mitigation site and will provide restoration and enhancement opportunities. Including Sites 46 and 62 as part of the NTS Master Plan will not preclude the use of the Marsh as a mitigation bank. 0= Pppm5mU= rtppwXft C T*U* a13-0r 1 Jot.DOC • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Tmatment System Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy A Iicabie NTS Sites I Consistency Evaluation" Consibtent? City of Irvine General Plan Policy (I): Seek the least environmentally damaging and Sites 46 and 62 Sites 46 and 62 are included as part of the Yes feasible alternatives where modifications of the natural proposed NTS Master Plan project because of topography are necessary in preservation area. their current use for water quality betterment. The only change to Site 46 is the increase in flow diversions from the San Diego Creek Channel to the San Joaquin Marsh. No modifications to natural topography would occur with Site 46. Modifications to Site 62 would involve enhancement to the existing degraded salt marsh, freshwater marsh and coastal sage scrub. The project would also include salt marsh, cottonwood - Willow and CSS habitat enhancement to improve habitat suitable for the least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher, and other sensitive and non-sensifive wildlife species. Objective L-10 - Permanent Agriculture. Encourage the maintenance of agriculture in undeveloped areas of the City until the time of development, and in areas not available for comment. Policy (d): Permit agriculture uses, on an interim basis, 31, 32, 49, 42, 22. 50, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, and Yes on land designated for development, and consider 51, 52. 70A-70C, 71, 9, 71 were analyzed in prior approved CEQA agricultural uses as a part of the City's planning efforts 10. 11, 12A-12G, 61, documentation (refer to Appendix M of the for the re -use of MCAS El Toro. 68, and 69A-69E Revised Draft EIR). Since then, Sites 31, 32, 49 and 42 have been constructed. However, the remaining sites are currently or were previously in use for agricultural purposes, but these sites are located in areas identified for future development. These sites have been identified in prior CEQA documents (Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 22. 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71) and through conceptual level planning efforts (Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E) as water quality treatment facilities. RNrojeclsllRVJDUan04TIR Apperidmsli001 Appendx C Table 314011304 DOC 13 Appendix C San Diego Creek Watershed Natumaf Treatment System Revised DraftE/R TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Plannina Poiic Applicable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" Conais nt? City of Irvine General Plan Policy (f): Allow for conversion of interim and permanent 31, 32, 49, 42, 22, 50, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 22, 50. 51, 52, 70A-70C, and Yes agricultural uses to development to provide land for the 51, 52, 7CA-70C, 71, 9, 71 were analyzed in prior approved CEQA construction of housing units consistent with the land 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, documentation (refer to Appendix M of the Use and Housing Elements, and the development of 68, and 69A-69E Revised Draft EIR). Since then, Sites 31. 32, 49 commercial and industrial buildings consistent with the and 42 have been constructed. However, the provision of job opportunities as described in the Land, remaining sites are currently or were previously in Use Element, where such conversion does not conflict use for agricultural purposes, but these sites are with other L-10 polities. located in areas Identified for future development No conflicts with other L-10 policies are anticipated. Policy (g): Pursue the open space policies contained in 31, 32, 49, 42, 22, 50, Sites 31, 32, 49; 42, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C, and Yes the Conservation and Open Space Element and address 51, 52, 70A 70C, 71. 9, 71 were analyzed in prior approved CEQA any open space or aesthetic impacts from the 10, 11. 12A-12G, 61, documentation (refer to Appendix M of the conversion of interim and permanent agricultural uses to 68, and 69A-69E Revised Draft EIR). Since then, Sites 31, 32, 49 development as part of the CiVs exis0ng policies for the and 42 have been constructed. However, the preservation of open space and existing policies for remaining sites are currently or were previously in n0gation of views and aesthetic impacts under the use for agricultural purposes, but these sites are policies In the Conservation and Open Space Element. located in areas identified for future development Potential open space and aesthetic effects associated with conversion of agricultural uses to development have been evaluated in Sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Revised Draft EIR. These sections Identify that no land use conflicts associated with open space and aesthetics impacts would result from the proposed NTS Plan. Objective L-12 - Water: Coordinate land planning efforts with. -the appropriate federal, state & local agencies and land owners to encourage the integration of existing and future water sources (reservoirs, takes, and drainage courses) into development. Policy (a): Integrate water feature opportunities and Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, The proposed NTS Master Plan proposes to use Yes constraints through the development review process. 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22. the existing flood control channels, natural 50, 51, 52, 70A 70C, drainages, retention basins and detention basins 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 62, as an opportunity to improve waterquality. 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A- 12G, 61, 68, and 69A- 69E AWKKIX CTabW3,13-0113M000 u • 0 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites I Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? - City of Irvine General Plan Policy (b): Study, where possible and practicable, the Sites 26, 27, 64 and 67 The proposed changes at Sites 26 and 64 will not Yes appearance and ecology of certain existing natural introduce any new vegetation plantings into the drainage channels to determine which channels, or channel. Minor removal of existing vegetation will portions of channels, to which conservation measures result from the installation of the weir structures. shall be applied. Channels or portions of channels However, most of the existing vegetation will determined to be suitable for preservation purposes may remain. Any new vegetation that appears in the be modified to enhance their ecology, long-term viability channels will be established naturally. The overall and maintenance. Those channels or portions of appearance of the channel will remain. Materials channels shall be integrated into the design of the used in the construction of the weirs will be either surrounding development. natural or natural in appearance. At Site 27, an extended detention riser outlet pipe is proposed to extend the stormwater detention time. This approach would have no impact to the existing vegetation. Site 67 includes portions of the San Diego Creek Channel; however, final site locations would be located adjacent to the Channel and not within it. Future CEQA analysis would be conducted when site locations have been finalized. R1ProjeclsURWr)UwLUTIRAppeWimsVoet Appendz C Table 3.140113MMOC 15 San Dlego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DrahE/R TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning (cable NTS Sites I Consistency Evacuation" Consistent? City of Orange General Plan Land Use Element Goal 10.0: The City will continue to recognize the need to Site 56 With Site 56. the recreational nature of the park Yes maintain open space resources for the purpose of providing will remain and the passive uses will remain, recreational opportunities, protecting the public from safety including the picnic tables. Site 56 will require hazards and conserving natural resources, approAmately 2.6 acres of the 9.5-acre El Modena Park Approbmately 6.9 acres will remain in use for recreationat use. This is not considered a significant loss of recreational land because passive uses will Continue to remain on the perimeter of the basin. In addition, the portion of El Modena Park, located across Hewes Street will not be affected and park uses will remain. From a safety standpoint, fencing will be placed around the perimeter of the basin to alert the public of potential standing water. in addition, a benching design will be implemented in constructing the basin to prevent the public from stepping directly into the basin. Goal 13.0: The City will continue to recognize the need to coordinate planning efforts both within the City and with other jurisdictions in the region. Policy 13.2: Coordinate planning efforts with adjacent Site 56 The project applicant has consulted with the City Yes cities and agencies. of Orange and other affected jurisdictions in coordinating efforts associated with the NTS Master Plan. Open Space and Conservation Bement Goal 1.0: The City will continue to recognize the need to consider environmental issues in all aspects of land use planning, with special emphasis on regional air quality, surface and groundwater resources, and environmental pollution. sapoXd¢CTable 3.1i-0113MDOC • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmentystem Revlsed Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? City of Orange General Plan Policy 1.1: Cooperate with the South Coast Air Quality Site 56 Implementation of Site 56 will comply with Yes Management District (SCAQMD) and other regional appropriate SCAQMD regulations and with the agencies to implement and enforce regional air quality SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide management plans. policies related to air quality. Refer to Section 3.5 in the EIR for further discussion on the compliance with appropriate air quality regulations. land Use Element Policy I. Restrict and control development in flood Site 56 Hydraulic analysis was conducted for Site 56 and Yes hazard areas. indicates that the proposed project will not affect existing flood control capacity of the retarding e Require hydrologic analysis for all projects located basin or the El Modena -Irvine Channel. Refer to within flood hazard areas. Chapter 7.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant, for additional discussion on the hydraulic analysis. city of Orange Bikeways Master Plan Update Goal 2: To link residential areas to major activity centers Site 56 The City of Orange Bikeways Master Plan Update Yes including areas of employment, transit stations and transfer identifies a Class II bike lane on Hewes Street points, schools and education centers, shopping and which is adjacent to NTS-Site 56, Construction and recreation facilities. continued operations and maintenance of Site 56 will not preclude implementation of a bike lane on Objective 1.3: Formulate opportunities to accommodate Hewes Street because the NTS site will not result in bicyclists in future land use development. impacts to Hewes Street. Construction staging and construction operations will occur on the property adjacent to Hewes Street. Construction trucks may use Hewes Street; however, construction activities are scheduled to be completed in approximately 17 weeks from start of Site 56 construction. Construction activities will be coordinated with the City of Orange as applicable. Goal 3: To connect the City of Orange bikeways to trails and Site 56 Construction and continued operations and Yes paths in adjacent cities and provide linkages to the county- maintenance of Site 56 will not preclude the use of wide bicycle trails system including Santiago Creek, the a Class II bike lane on Hewes Street. Construction Santa Ana River, -and the Tustin Branch Trail. activities are considered short-term and temporary. Objective 1.1: Plan the trail system to connect to surrounding cities and unincorporated areas. R1PmieatsURWDUan0441R Appendims0001 Appendu C Table 3.43-011334 DOC 17 Appendix C San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Oran OR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Polic'Applicable NTS Sites Consistent Eva►uaUW* Corrsistsnt? City of Tustin General Plan Land Use Element Goat 1: Provide for a welt balanced land use pattern that accommodates existing and future needs for housing, commercial and industrial land, open space and community facilities and services, while maintaining a healthy, diversified economy adequate to provide future City services. Policy 1.10: Ensure that the distribution and intensity of Sites 55 and 64 Sites 55 and 64 are consistent with the existing Yes land uses are consistent with the Land Use Plan and uses as flood control channels. classification system. Goal 2: Ensure that future land use decisions are the result of sound and comprehensive planning. Policy 2.1: Consider all General Plan goals and policies, Sites 55 and 64 EN relevant General Plan goals and policies have Yes including those in other General Plan elements, in been considered and are presented here in Table evaluating proposed development projects for General 3.". Plan consistency. Policy 2.2 Maintain consistency between the Land Use Sites 55 and 64 Sites 55 and 64- are consistent with the existing Yes Element, Zoning Ordinances, and other City ordinances, uses as flood control channels. Consistency with regulations and standards. all applicable City ordinances (e.g. noise ordinance) will be adhered to. Goal 6: Improve urban design in Tustin to ensure development that is both architecturally and functionally compatible, and to create uniquely identifiable neighborhoods, commercial and business park districts. Policy 6.2: Encourage and promote high quality design Sites 55 and 64 Proposed design of the weirs will include materials Yes and physical appearance in all development projects. that are similar or are natural colored to match or blend with existing materials in the channels. Goal 8: Ensure that necessary public facilities and services should be available to accommodate development proposed on the Land Use Policy Map. Porcy ll.5: Continue to make Incremental improvements Sites 55 and 64 Sites 55 and 64 will assist in Improving water Yes to the flood control and drainage system. quality in theflood control channels and ultimately, In the overall San Dieao Creek Watershed. • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment Pystem Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Poll c licable NTS Sites I Consistency Evaluation' Consistent? City of Tustin General Plan Conservation. Open Space, and Recreation Element Goal 1: Reduce air pollution through proper land use, transportation, and energy use planning. Policy 1.1: Cooperate with the South Coast Air Quality Sites 55 and 64 Implementation of Sites 55 and 64 will comply with Yes Management District and the Southern California appropriate SCAQMD regulations and with the Association of Governments in their effort to implement SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide provisions of the region's Air Quality Management Plan, policies related to air quality. Refer to Section 3.5 as amended. in the Revised Draft EIR for further discussion on the compliance with appropriate air quality regulations. Policy 1.6: Cooperate and participate in regional air Sites 55 and 64 Implementation of Sites 55 and 64 will comply with Yes quality management plans, programs, and enforcement appropriate SCAQMD regulations and with the measures. SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide policies related to air quality. Refer to Section 3.5 in the Revised Draft EIR for further discussion on the compliance with appropriate air quality regulations. Goal 5: Protect water quality and conserve water supply. Policy 5.1: Local drainage courses, channels, and Sites-55 and 64 The proposed weirs will not affect existing Yes creeks should be improved to protect vegetation and vegetation which will remain in the channels. wildlife habitat wherever possible. However, new vegetation attributable to the weirs will be removed in the fall or summer before winter and the potential for flooding. Vegetation removal during this time period will also avoid impacts on wildlife. Policy 5.5: Protect water quality by responsible agency Sites 55 and 64 The proposed NTS Master Plan project is a water Yes support of enforcement of water quality standards for quality enhancement project and will improve water imported into the County, and to preserve the water quality in the San Diego Creek Watershed. quality of water inthegroundwater basin and streams. In addition, the project will complement ongoing County and City -led watershed management activities for compliance with TMDL targets and MS4Permit targets. R1ProlectsYRWDUmD41EIRAppendims0001 AppendixCTable 3.1-M11304.D0C 19 Appendix C San Diego Creek Watershed Nature! Treatment TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION icable Planning Policy icabte NTS Suss I Comislancy Evaluation" C0nsl5'W0 City of Tustin General Plan Policy 5.6: Coordinate water quality and supply Sites 55 and 64 The project applicant has coordinated with the Yes programs with all responsible water agencies, and appropriate responsible water quality agencies in cooperate and participate in plan preparation and ensuring that the NTS Master Plan project is programs. consistent with water quality and supply programs. Goal 7. Conserve and protect natural plant and animal communities. Policy 7.5: Where feasible and consistent with flood Site 64 The proposed improvements will use materials Yes control requirements, the treatment of Peters Canyon that are similar to materials existing in the flood Wash should retain a natural appearance by minimizing control channels. Where unnatural materials are concrete channelization, retaining or replanting proposed, mitigation has been implemented to indigenous vegetation and/or retaining open space ensure that the unnatural materials appear natural areas along the drainage course so they blend in with the flood control channel. Refer to Section 3.6, Landform Modification and Aesthetics, for further discussion on the proposed weir design and materials. Goal 12: Maintain and enhance the City's unique culturally and historically significant building sites or features. Policy 12.2: Retain and protect significant areas of Sites 55 and 64 Neither site has been identified to have significant Yes archaeological, paleontological, or historical value for areas of archaeological, paleontological, or education and scientific purposes. historical value for education and scientific purposes. Goal 13: Preserve Tustin's archaeological and paleontological resources. Policy 13.1: Require a site inspection by certified Sites 55 and 64 Field surveys, records searches, and literature Yes archaeologists or paleontologists for new development reviews were conducted and did not reveal in designated sensitive areas. anything of historical, archaeological or paleontological significance on the sites. However, as described in Section 3.7, Cultural Resources, of the Revised Draft EIR, during excavation for construction of the weirs, if any significant materials are found, they will be transferred to the City of Tustin and/or Irvine, depending on location of the find. r-aCuaaooC C San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftEIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Poll Ap iicoble NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? City of Tustin General Plan Policy 13.2: Require mitigation measures where Sites 55 and 64 Section 3.7 of the Revised Draft EIR identifies Yes development will affect archaeological or paleontological mitigation measures in the event that cultural resources. resources of significance are discovered during excavation activities. Goal 17: Operate and maintain existing and future parks and recreation facilities so they are safe, clean, and attractive to the public, and preserve, protect, and enhance both existing and potential natural recreation areas to ensure that long- term public investments and values are not unreasonably preempted, compromised, or prevented by neglect or short- term considerations. Policy 17.5: Utilize, where feasible, significant Site 64 Site 64 is located adjacent to a regional riding and Yes landscape features and drainage corridors/flood control hiking trail (Peters Canyon Regional Riding and channels (e.g. Peters Canyon Wash) as potential multi- Hiking Trail) and a Class I bikeway (Peters use trail rights -of -way and special -use trail rights -of -way Canyon Bikeway). Although both the trail and and special use recreation sites wherever possible. bikeway are constructed for the length of Site 64, they are both closed and inaccessible to the public due to needed trail improvements which require additional funding. However, proposed modifications with. Site 64 would not -preclude the opening of the trail and bikeway. Public Safety Element Goal 1: Reduce the risk to the community's inhabitants from flood hazards. Policy 1.7: Encourage the Orange County Flood Control Sites 55 and 64 Both sites will be inspected monthly, after any Yes District to maintain scheduled debris removal -from flood unexpected summer storm, or as frequently as channels. necessary. Debris will be removed and disposed of in accordance with accepted local practices. Goal 4: Reduce the risk to the community's inhabitants from exposure to hazardous materials and wastes. Policy 4.15: Coordinate with the County of Orange in Sites 55 and 64 Appropriate coordination is ongoing with the Yes the implementation of the National Pollution Discharge County of Orange regarding NPDES regulations. Elimination System Permits NPDES regulations. RAProJeS! IURWDWariO4W[RMPendims 1001 AppendzCTeWe31—"11304 DOC 21 San Diego Creek Watershed Nataral Treatment System Revised Draft ElR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy leable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" I Conslstent? City of Tustin General Plan Noise Element Goal 2: Incorporate noise considerations into land use planning decisions. Policy 2.3: Use noise4and use compatibility standards Sites 55 and 64 Sites 55 and 64 are consistent with the existing Yes as a guide for future planning and development flood control channel use. They will not produce any additional noise than what currently exists. Therefore; noise compatibility conflicts with existing and planned land uses are notexpected. Goal 3: Develop measures to control non -transportation noise impacts. Policy 3.2: Minimize the impacts of construction noise Sites 55 and 64 Proposed construction will occur within hours Yes on adjacent land uses through limiting the permitted specified in the City of Tustin and City of Irvine hours of activity, I noise ordinances. County of Orange General Plan Land Use Element Policy 7 — Creative Design Concepts: To encourage Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A Sites 16,18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C and 71 were Yes innovative concepts that contribute to the solution of 12G, 13, 16, 18. 22, analyzed in prior approved CEQA documents land use problems. 50, 5t, 52, 53, 61. 70A- (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Draft FIR). 70C and 71 Sites 9,10.11, and 12A-12G are proposed basins associated with future development in Irvine Planning Areas 1 and 2. These sites are located within the City of Irvine Sphere of influence. These sites will comply with standards and regulations applicable to water quardy treatment basins. Site 53 is an existing Caltrans retention basin installed to manage runoff originating from SR-133. Proposed modifications to Site53 will be consistent with the retention basin use. No changes are proposed with Site 13. CTeae31.i0113 AIDOC San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION AppFicable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? County of Oran a General Plan Policy 8 - Enhancement of Environment: To guide Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A- Sites 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 7OA-70C and 71 were Yes development so that the quality of the physical 12G, 13, 16, 18, 22, analyzed in prior approved CEQA documents environment is enhanced. 50, 51, 52, 53, 61, 70A- (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Draft EIR). 70C and 71 Sites 9, 10, 11, and M-12G are proposed basins associated with future development in Irvine Planning Areas 1 and 2. These sites are located within the City of Irvine Sphere of Influence. Proposed modifications to Site 53 will be consistent with its existing use as a retention basin. The site is in an area that is adjacent to berms used for on- and off -ramps for the SR-133. The site is also situated adjacent to Caltrans owned property that is used for storage and holding of maintenance vehicles and machinery. No changes are proposed to Site 13. Public Services and Facilities Element General Public Services and Facilities Goal 2: Encourage the funding and development of public services and facilities to meet the County's existing and future demand. Policy 3: Land Use Compatibility -To coordinate facility Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A- Sites 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C and 71 were Yes planning in a manner compatible with surrounding land 12G, 13, 16, 18, 22, analyzed in prior approved CEQA documents uses and to review planned land uses adjacent to 50, 51, 52, 53, 61, 70A- (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Draft EIR). facilities for their compatibilitywith facility operations. 70C and 71 Sites 9, 10, 11, and 12A-12G are proposed basins associated with future development in Irvine Planning Areas 1 and 2. These sites are located within the City of Irvine Sphere of Influence. These sites are consistent with adjacent land uses. Site 53 is an existing Caltrans retention basin installed to manage runoff originating from SR-133. Proposed modifications to Site 53 will be consistent with the retention basin use. No physical changes are proposed with Site 13. Policy 4: Intergovernmental Coordination - To Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A- IRWD, in cooperation with the County of Orange Yes encourage and support a cooperative effort among all 12G, 13, 16, 18, 22, as well as other jurisdictions in the San Diego agencies towards the implementation of necessary 50, 51, 52, 53, 61, 70A- Creek Watershed has coordinated with the public facilities through intergovernmental activities. 70C and 71 appropriate agencies to ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses. FL%PrgectsVRWDUanO41EIR Append=sU.MI Appwc1x CTeble 3.13011304.e0C 23 San Diego Creek Watershed NahxatTreatmentSystem RevisedOraftEIR TABLE 3.1-3(Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites T CoWstency Evaluation" Comb%% County of Orange General Plan Flood Control Goal 1: Provide effective and efficient food protection throughout Orange County. Policy 3: Intergovernmental Coordination — To Sites 9, 10. 11, 12A- IRWD, in cooperation with the County of Orange Yes encourage and enhance coordination between the Tri- 12G, 13. 16, 18, 22, as well as other jurisdictions in the San Diego County agencies and the StatetFederal agencies for 50, 51, 52, 53, 61, 70A- Creek Watershed has coordinated with the optimum flood prevention programs. 70C and 71 appropriate agencies to ensure effective and efficient flood protection throughout Orange County is maintained. Resources Element Natural Resources Goal 1: Protect wildlife and vegetation resources and promote development that preserves these resources. Policy 1: Wildlife and Vegetation — To identffy and Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A- Sites 16,18. 22, 50, 51, 52, 7OA-70C and 71 were Yes preserve the significant vAldlife and vegetation habitats 12G, 13, 16, 18, 22. analyzed in prior approved CEQA documents of the County. 60. 51, 52, 63, 61, 70A- (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Draft EIR). 70C and 71 Sites 9, 10. 11, 12A-12G, and 61 are located in areas used primarily for agricultural purposes and have low habitat values. Site 53 is currently used as a retention basin and significant wildlife or vegetation has not been identified on the site. No physical changes are proposed to Site 13. Open Space Goal 1: Retain the character and natural beauty of the environment through the preservation, conservation,andmaintenance of open • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Iicable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? - County of Orange General Plan Policy 1.1: To guide and regulate development of the Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A- Sites 16,18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A-70C and 71 were Yes unincorporated areas of the County to ensure that the 12G, 13, 16, 18, 22, analyzed in prior approved CEQA documents character and natural beauty of Orange County is 50, 51, 52, 53, 61, 70A- (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Draft EIR). retained. 70C and 71 Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, and 61 are located in areas used primarily for agricultural purposes and have low habitat values. The proposed modifications to these sites and to Site 53 include enhancing vegetation onsite to improve water quality benefits. Enhancing the vegetation and regular maintenance (e.g. vegetation and debris removal) of the facility will improve the overall appearance of the site. No physical changes are proposed to Site 13. Open Space Goal 4: Conserve open space lands needed for recreation, education, and scientific activities, as well as cultural -historic preservation. Policy 4.1: To plan for the acquisition, development, Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A- Sites 16, 18, 22, 50. 51, 52, 70A-70C and 71 were Yes maintenance, operation, and financing of open space 12G, 13, 16, 18, 22, analyzed in prior approved CEQA documents lands which provide recreational, scenic, aesthetic, 50, 51, 52, 53, 61, 70A- (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Draft EIR). scientific and educational opportunities. 70C and 71 Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 53 and 13 provide water quality betterment opportunities that will enhance water quality throughout the San Diego Creek Watershed. Cultural -Historic Resources Goal 2: To encourage through resource management effort the preservation of the county's cultural and historic heritage. R.Wryegsl RWDXJan041EIRAypendims0=1 Appendz C Table & -MM04 DOC 25 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft OR TABLE3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? County of General Plan General policies: • Identification of resources shall be completed at the Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A- Sites 16, 18, 22. 50, 51, 52, 7OA-70C and 71 were Yes earliest stage of project planning and review such 12G, 13, 16, 18, 22, analyzed in prior approved CEl1A documents as general plan amendment or zone change. 50, 61, 52, 53, 61, 70A- (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Draft EIR). • Evaluation of resources shall be completed at 70C and 71 Preliminary cultural resources assessments intermediate stages of project planning and review conducted for Irvine Planning Areas 1 and 2 of such as site plan review, subdivision map approval,. which Sites 9, 10. 11, 12A-12G, and 61 did not or atan earlier stage of project review. identify anything of historical, paleontological, or • Final preservation actions shall be completed at archaeological significance on these NTS sites. final stages of project planning and review such as However, as described in Section 3.7, Cultural grading, demortgon, or at an earlier stage of project Resources, of the EIR, if any significant materials review. are found, they will be transferred to the appropriate jurisdiction at the time of the find. A field survey, records search, and literature review were conducted for Site 53 and did not reveal anything of historical, paleontological, or archaeological significance on the site. However, as described in Section 3.7, Cultural Resources, of the EIR, if any significant materials are found, they will be transferred to the County of Orange. No changes are proposed to Site 13. AppwW1omUW1 Appr,ba CTMI* 3.13M130/ DOC 0 Ap&C • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Polley Applicable NTS Sites I Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? SCAG Regional Com rehensive Plan and Guide Growth Management Chapter 3.03 The timing, financing, and location of public facilities, Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, NTS Facilities are not regional facilities that would Yes utility systems, and transportation systems shall be used by 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, affect regional growth policies. SCAG to implement the region's growth policies. 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E 3.09 Support local jurisdictions' efforts to minimize the cost Sites 46,13. 39, 31, 32, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A- Yes of infrastructure and public service delivery, and efforts to 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 70C and 71 were analyzed in prior approved seek new sources of funding for development and the 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, CEQA documents (refer to Appendix M in the provision of services. 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, Revised Draft EIR). The proposed NTS project 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, will improve water quality and therefore assist 12A-12G, 61, 68, and jurisdictions in achieving compliance with TMDL 69A-69E requirements. If the requirements are not met now, future additional costs may be required to meet the goals. 3.10 Support local jurisdictions' actions to minimize red tape Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 60, 51, 52, 70A- Yes and expedite the permitting process to maintain economic 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 70C and 71 were analyzed in prior approved vitality and competitiveness. 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, CEQA documents (refer to Appendix M in the 26, 27, 53. 54, 55, 56, Revised Draft EIR). Although IRWD is the lead 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, agency, the affected jurisdictions within the 12A-12G, 61, 68, and watershed have been consulted in proposed site 69A-69E location and design to minimize future conflicts. 3.18 Encourage planned development in locations least Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, Several of the sites are located with existing Yes likely to cause environmental impact. 49, 42, 16, 18. 22, 50, drainages, flood control channels or detention 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, basins. All of these areas have been previously 26, 21, 53, 54, 55, 56, disturbed or as in the case of Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 7OA-70C and 71, these 12A-12G, 61, 68, and sites were analyzed in prior approved CEQA 69A-69E documents (refer to Appendix M in the Revised Draft EIR). The proposed modifications would create more biological diversity by enhancing existing vegetation and introducing freshwater marsh habitat where applicable. R.wro7ectsuRwpuara4lEiR Mpend3.WM apae+&xC TsMe 3. IW11304 pot 27 Appendbr C Son Diego Creek WatershedtVatund Treatment System RevisedOrattElR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applidable Plannirib Policy I Appucableisimsltn7Consistency Evaluation" Consistent? SCAG Regional Comprehenslve Plan and Guide 320 Support the protection of vital resources such as Sites 46,13, 39, 31, 32, Section 3.3, Biological Resources, of the EIR Yes wetlands, groundwater recharge areas, woodlands, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, provides detailed analysis of proposed project production lands, and land containing unique and 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, impacts to biological resources. The NTS Plan endangered plants and animals. 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, rehabilitates drainages with low biological values 62, 64, 67. 9, 10, 11, by introducing riparian and wetland vegetation and 12A-12G, 61, 68, and functions. This is proposed primarily through the 69A-69E creation of shallow pools that will promote the growth of naturally occurring seasonal emergent plants. The shallow water regions will support growth of emergent NTS vegetation, primarily cattails and bulrushes. 321 Encourage the implementation of measures aimed at Sites 46,13, 39.31, 32, Section 3.7 of the EIR identifies mitigation Yes the preservation and protection of recorded and unrecorded 49. 42, 16. 18, 22, 50, measures in the event that cultural resources of cultural resources and archaeological sides. 51. 52, 70A-70C, 71, significance are discovered during excavation 26, 27, 53. 54, 55, 56, activities. 62, 64, 67, 9, 10. 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E 3.22 Discourage development or encourage the use of Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 9, Hillside development associated with Sites 31, 49, Yes special design requirements. In areas with steep slopes, high 10. 11, 12A-12G, 61, 32 and-42 was analyzed in prior approved CEQA fire, flood, and seismic hazards. 68 and 69A-69E documents. Sites 68 and 69A-E are located in the San Joaquin Hills Hillside Overlay district and will be developed in accordance with the Hillside Development Ordinance of the City of Irvine. Sites 9, 10. 11 and 12G are located in the Santiago Hills Hillside Overlay district and will be developed in accordance the Hillside development Ordinance of the City of Irvine. 3.23 Encourage mitigation measures that reduce noise in Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, The analysis of various topical issues included in Yes certain locations, measures aimed at preservation of 49, 42, 16. 18, 22, 50. Chapter 3.0 of this Revised Draft EiR includes a biological and ecological resources, measures that would 51. 52, 70A 70C, 71. mitigation program to reduce potential impacts to reduce exposure to seismic hazards, minimize earthquake 26, 27, 53, 54, 56, 5% the extent feasible. As previously indicated, damage, and to develop emergency response and recovery 62, 64, 67. 9, 10, 11, construction activities will be in compliance with plans. 12A-12G, 61, 68, and the applicable jurisdictions noise standards. 69A-69E None of the proposed sites would affect any existin emergency response and recovelans. San Diego Creek Watershed Natural7reatmen�tem Revised Draft EIR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation- Consistent? SCAG Regional Com rehensive Plan and Guide 3.27 Support local jurisdictions and other service providers Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, Through the NTS Master Plan, water quality will Yes in their efforts to develop sustainable communities and 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, be enhanced for future generations. The NTS provide, equally to all members of society, accessible and 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, Master Plan will provide equally to all members of effective services such as: public education, housing, health 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, society that could be potentially affected, care, social services, recreational facilities, law enforcement, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, particularly in the San Diego Creek Watershed and fire protection. 12A-12G, 61, 68, and region. 69A-69E Air Quality Chanter 5.11 Through the environmental document review process, Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, An air quality technical report has been prepared Yes ensure that plans at all levels of government (regional, air 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, for the NTS Master Plan. The project will be in basin, county, subregional and local) consider air quality, 61, 52, 70A-70C, 71, compliance with appropriate SCAQMD regulations land use, transportation and economic relationships to 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, and with the SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan ensure consistency and minimize conflicts. 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, and Guide policies related to air quality and land 12A-12G, 61, 68, and use. The proposed project will not affect 69A-69E transportation or economic relationships. Water Quality Chapter 11.02 Encourage "watershed management" programs and Sites 46, 13, 30, 31, 32, The NTS Master Plan is a water quality Yes strategies, recognizing the primary role of local governments 49, 42, 16, 18, 22. 50, enhancement project for the entire San Diego in such efforts. 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, Creek Watershed. The project applicant has 26, 27, 63, 54, 55, 56, coordinated with the appropriate local 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, governments. 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E 11.05 Support regional efforts to identify and cooperatively Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, The NTS Plan will result in the creation of Yes plan for wetlands to facilitate both sustaining the amount and 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, wetlands to support water quality treatment. The quality of wetlands in the region and expediting the process 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, project applicant is coordinating with the for obtaining wetlands permits. 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, appropriate agencies for wetlands permitting. 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 6B, and 69A-69E R.1PfgectsVRWDUan041EIR Appenei=0001 Appendix C TaMe M.M11304 DOC 29 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft E/R TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION Applicable Planning Policy icable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation" Coralatent? SCAG Regional Com rehensive Plan and -Guide 11.07 Encourage water reclamation throughout the region Sites 46,13, 39, 31, 32, The NTS Master Plan is not a water reclamation Yes where it is cost-effective feasible, and appropriate to reduce 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, project. reliance on imported water and wastewater discharges. 51. 52, 70A-70C, 71. Current administrative impediments to increased use of 26, 27, 53. 54, 65, 56, wastewater should be -addressed. 62. 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E Open Space Chapter- Public Health and Safety 9.04 Maintain open space for adequate protection of lives Site 56 Site 56 is located in El Modena Park, an existing Yes and properties against natural and man-made hazards. flood detention basin currently used as a community park in the City of Orange. Approximately 2.6 acres of the 9.5 acre park will be used for the proposed project, leaving approximately 6.9 acres of park use. The basin will be fenced and appropriate signage placed warning the public of standing water. In addition, a benching design is proposed to increase safety near the standing water in the basin. Refer to Section 3.4 for additional discussion on the proposed safety features. 9.05 Minimize potentially hazardous developments in Sites 46,13, 39, 31, 32, Sites 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 51, 52, 70A Yes hillsides, canyons, areas susceptible to flooding, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, 70C and 71 were analyzed in prior approved earthquakes, wildlife and other known hazards, and areas 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, CEQA documents (refer to Appendix M in the with limited -access for emergency equipment. 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, Revised Draft EIR). Sites 26, 55, 66,64 and 67 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, are located within existing flood control facilities. 12A-12G, 61, 68, and The proposed design for each will not impact the 69A-69E flood control capacity the in -line channels, the El Modena -Irvine Retention Basin or the EPModena- Irvine channel. 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G, 61, 68, and 69A-69E are not in potentially hazardous areas. Sites 46, 13 and 39 are existing facilities and no physical modifications are proposed. rwvrX§X CTnW 3.1aar19a DOC C • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatments tem Revised Draft OR TABLE 3.1-3 (Continued) LAND USE POLICY CONSISTENCY EVALUATION licable Planning Policy Applicable NTS Sites Consistency Evaluation' Consistent? SCAG Regional Com rehensh; Plan and Guide 9.06 Minimize public expenditure for infrastructure and Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, Capital expenditures for the Regional Retrofit Yes facilities to support urban type uses in areas where public 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, Facilities that require construction are expected health and safety could not be guaranteed. 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, through public funding, including state/federal 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, grants, landowner dedications, and revenue bonds 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, reimbursed by ratepayers. The capital needed for 12A-12G, 61. 68, and the Local Facilities will be provided by private 69A-69E developers. Long-term operations, maintenance, and monitoring costs are anticipated to be funded by water and sewer frees collected by IRWD. In addition, the sites are not located in an area where public health and safety cannot be guaranteed. Open Space Chapter- Resource Protection 9.08. Develop well -managed viable ecosystems of known Sites 46, 13, 39, 31, 32, Weirs proposed with the in -line facilities will result Yes habitats of rare, threatened, and endangered species, 49, 42, 16, 18, 22, 50, in the creation of a series of linear shallow pools Including wetlands. 51, 52, 70A-70C, 71, that would promote the growth of naturally 26, 27, 53, 54, 55, 56, occurring seasonal emergent plants. The 62, 64, 67, 9, 10, 11, remainder of the sites would result in overall 12A-12G, 61, 6B, and enhancement to vegetation that would improve 69A-69E water quality. Sites 46, 13 and 39 are existing facilities and no physical modifications are proposed. R.NrajectsllRWDVan041EIR AppendicaW001 Appends C Table 3.13011304 DOG 31 Appendor C • Appendix D Water Quality Models and Modeling Results \Iso in Appendices D and E in the NTS Plan) is Appendix D— Water Qualify Models 10 D Water Quality Models - Approach and Assumptions DA Modeling Approach for Dry Weather Low Flow Conditions The following describes the approach, assumptions, and data requirements for water quality modeling of the NTS facilities during the dry and wet season low flow conditions. A description of the modeling approach for storm flow conditions follows in Section D.2. D.1.1 Load Reduction Estimates -Nutrients Nutrient load reduction at each wetland facility was estimated using a first -order kinetics model that accounts for background concentration, and assumes steady state plug flow conditions. The elements of this modeling approach are as follows: First -order kinetics model with background concentration - For each constituent, there is a concentration, or so-called background concentration, below which treatment is assumed not to be effective (sometimes referred to as an "irreducible" concentration). Removal mechanisms occurring in the wetlands were assumed to follow first -order kinetics, i.e., the reduction rate of a constituent is proportional to its concentration less the background concentration. This is expressed as: dC = _k(C — C*) • dt where: C and C* are the concentration and background concentration of the constituent of concern, respectively, and k is the first -order kinetics rate constant of the constituent. This model takes into account wetland volume, flow rate, and influent water quality in estimating treatment effectiveness. Plug flow reactor - In this type of model, a wetland is regarded as a plug flow reactor in which the flow is completely mixed across the reactor cross-section, but not in the longitudinal or flow direction. Steady state conditions - The model uses average conditions for each period. This assumption provides a simple model that addresses long term average performance of the wetlands. Based on these assumptions, the following equations were used to predict effluent flow and water quality from the wetlands [Kadlec and Knight, 1996]. Flow: QEFF _ QIN — QET — QI Water Quality: Afl-ET kHC * kHC * _ (ET + I)r � ET+/ •CEFF — kH—ET +(C'" — kH—ET)(1 H ) Son Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-I January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix D — Water Quality Models where: • QEFF and QIn are effluent and influent flows of a wetland, respectively Qrr is the water loss through evapotranspiration: [Qgr=ET (evapotranspiration rate) * A (wetland area)] Qr is the water loss through infiltration: [Qt =1(infiltration rate) * A (Welland area)] CEFF, Qv, and C* are effluent, influent, and background concentrations, respectively (mg/L) ET is evapotranspiration rate (feet/day) 1 is infiltration rate (feet/day) k is the volumetric first -order kinetics rate constant of constituent (11day) r is the residence time (day) H is the water depth (fl) Using these two equations, the effluent constituent load was calculated by the product: (QEFF*CsFF). The removal rate of a constituent in a wetland was then computed by the difference between the influent and effluent loads of the constituent. Load Reduction in the Subsurface Flow Wetlands — A subsurface wetland (Site 67) is proposed to target removal of selenium from dry weather base flows in Peters Canyon Wash. Along with selenium, the diverted flow will contain high levels of nitrates that will undergo treatment by a process similar to that occurring in the surface flow wetlands. Selenium treatability tests were conducted by IRWD to determine the level selenium and nitrate removal that is achievable with the subsurface wetland concept. Preliminary results (see Appendix J) indicate high levels of selenium and nitrate removal in the test mesocosms. Based on the preliminary pilot test results it was assumed that Site 67 would achieve an average TN effluent concentration of 1.0 mg/L. • D.1.2 Concentration Reduction Estimates -Pathogens The rate of fecal coliform removal in water quality treatment wetlands can also be approximately represented by a first -order rate expression, as long as inflow bacteria populations are high [Kadlec and Knight, 1996]. Kadlec and Knight [1996) suggest the use of an area -based rate constant, because inactivation by UV radiation is more dependent on surface area than volume. In addition, a background coliform concentration will persist in the marsh due to the presence of wildlife attracted to the wetlands, and other sources of pathogens in the watershed. Therefore, a lower limit on fecal coliform concentration in the effluent stream was specified. Based on these considerations, fecal coliform removal in the NTS facilities was evaluated with the following expression: kC* kC* (ET+1)z lsr+t� CEFF—k—ET +(Ct"—k—EJ1 H where: QEFF and QIN are effluent and influent flows of a wetland, respectively QsT is the water loss through evapotranspiration: [QET =ET (evapotranspiration rate) *A (wetland area)] Qr is the water loss through infiltration: [Qr=1(infiltration rate) * A (wetland area)] Cpx,- Cnv, and C* are effluent, influent, and background concentrations, respectively (mg/L) Son Diego Creek NTS Master plan D-2 January 2004 Draft for Publio Review Appendix D — Water Quality Models • ET is evapotranspiration rate (feet/day) 1 is infiltration rate (feet/day) k is the area -based first -order kinetics rate constant of constituent (fl/day) T is the residence time (day) H is the water depth (ft) D.1.3 Assumptions and Data Needs for Dry and Wet Season Low Flow Modeling The data requirements for the water quality model are: influent flow, evapotranspiration and infiltration rates, influent concentration, background concentration, fast -order kinetics rate constant, and residence time. Calculating the residence time further requires wetland area, water depth, and flows. In addition, land use data were used as a surrogate to help predict the flow and water quality entering the wetlands. The following paragraphs describe the modeling assumptions, the available data, and methods used to quantify the required model inputs and parameters. Steady State: Steady state average conditions that represent the dry and non -storm wet periods are assumed. Atmospheric sources: Atmospheric sources of water and pollutants falling directly on the wetlands were neglected because the sources are negligible compared with influent flows and loads. In_/luent,flows: Flows entering a wetland can be divided into two types, namely stream flows and diverted • flows: the first is for In -Line wetlands (Type II), and the latter is for Off -Line wetlands (Type I) and those within the existing or proposed flood control facilities (Type III). Stream flows: Influent flows to each wetland facility during dry and non -storm wet season conditions were estimated using average measured flow data collected by the OCPFRD. Continuous stream flow data are available at the four stations. Two of the stations are in Peters Canyon Channel, one station is in San Diego Creek Reach 1, and one station is in San Diego Creek, Reach 2. Mean flow values were computed for dry and wet season low -flows using available stream gage data from October 1991 to June 2000. Mean flow values are listed in Table D.I. Flows tended to be comparable for the dry and wet seasons, except in San Diego Creek at Culver, where wet season low flows were higher by about a factor of two. Table DA: Estimates of Average Streamflow Used in Modeling Dry and Non -Storm Wet Seasons Meah'dry season Mean wet season Location low flow (efs) 'low.flow (efs) El Modena/Irvine Channel 1.3 1.6 Peters Canyon Wash at Barranca 7.7 7.8 San Diego Creek at Culver 1.7 3.5 San Diego Creek at Campus 13.4 13.7 Due to the limited flow data (especially in the upland reaches) it was necessary to estimate flows at the proposed wetlands locations under build out conditions. The conceptual model used to estimate • flows assumed that urban irrigation (and other outside water uses) is the major source of base flow San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-3 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix D—Wafer Quality Models during both seasons, and that groundwater discharge is also important. Net contributions to stream flow from groundwater was apportioned within the watershed by defining regions of losing, gaining, and "local -groundwater -interaction" streams (sce Section 2 for discussion on losing and gaining streams). The hypothesis is that a significant fraction of water falling onto the region of losing streams infiltrates into the ground, and eventually exfiltrates back to the surface water system along the gaining streams. The "local -groundwater -interaction" streams refer to those areas where it is assumed that overland flow drains directly into the streams, or travels underground for only a short period of time and exfiltrates back to the streams. These regions are depicted in Figure D.1.1 and were delineated on the basis of available information on groundwater elevations and topography, from data collected by Hibbs and Lee [2000], and on soil type information [USCOE, April 2000]. ,-4 7 e 7 Irua Figure D.1.1: Regions of Significant Groundwater Recharge ('losing streams') and DIscharge ('gaining streams') used in the Estimation of Influent Flows to NTS Facilities Based on available flow data and information regarding land use and groundwater interaction, a multiple regression analysis was used to estimate influent flows to the NTS facilities. It was assumed that influent flows during the dry season are mainly dependent of the upstream irrigated and gaining stream area. The dry weather low flows during the wet season were assumed to be dependent on the upstream total pervious area and area of gaining streams region. The regression equations are: Dry Season Low Flow Flow = finlpW A ft.1a t fgalningAgafning * CDRV Wet Season Low Flow San Diego Creek NTS MasferPlan D-4 January 2p04 Draft for Putille Revlaw i • • • where Appendix D — Water Quality Models Flow= fpemiom Apervloas + fgalnmg Agalnmg +CIVET Flow is the flow rate in the dry or wet season (cfs) firngatad fp,rnow, andfgal„I„g are flow coefficients (cfs/acre) for irrigated, pervious, and discharge areas, respectively;fg„;„rng is different during dry and low -flow wet seasons. A ,..,gated is acreage of irrigated area, estimated by the sum of areas where irrigation is assumed: agricultural areas, parks, 10 percent of commercial and industrial areas, 50 percent of high -density, 60 percent of medium density, and 70 percent of low - density residential areas, based on experience elsewhere and literature review. A pervlauv is acreage of pervious areas, estimated by the sum of irrigated areas, vacant areas, and open space. A g„r„I„g is total acreage of discharge areas. CDRr and C{YET are constants for dry and low -flow wet season flows, respectively. The values for the coefficients in the regression equations are summarized in Table D.2 and illustrated in Figure D.1.2. The regression equations were used to predict flows at facilities with large watershed, consistent with the size the watersheds that were used to develop the regression coefficients. Smaller watersheds are outside the watershed size on which the regression equations are based. For some smaller watershed, the regression coefficients were adjusted to avoid negative flow estimates. As a check, the flow estimates at facility sites near the stream gauging stations were compared and measured flows. Estimated flows were generally consistent with the measured data. All estimated flows and wetland areas used in the model are presented in Table D.3. Table D.2: Flow Coefficients and Constants Used in Flow Estimation R e Conditions cfs/acre cfs%acre_ cfslacre Constant A irrigated > 3800 AC 0.000269 0.000732 -0.638 Dry season A irrigated < 3800 AC 0.000101 0.000732 0 Low -flow wet A pervious > 4400 AC - 0.000125 0.000908 0.218 season A pervious <4400 AC 0.000175 0.000908 0 Flows diverted to Off -Line wetlands: A portion of the streamflow is diverted to some of the Off -Line wetlands. At most sites dry and non -storm flows are diverted into the wetlands by gravity, but some sites will require a pumped diversion. The magnitude of stream diversions was based on the size of the facility and the desire to achieve a residence time of at least 10 days; however the diversion volume at most facilities was constrained to a maximum of 75 percent of the average streamflow. The diversion flow rate at Site 46 (San Joaquin Marsh - Enhancement) was set to a proposed maximum diversion 10 cfs. The current diversion rate is roughly four to five cfs. The additional diversion capacity will be used to increase treatment levels in the existing marsh, as well as to provide flows to the proposed Site 62 (San Joaquin Marsh - SAMS 1). A diversion flow of 10 cfs is equal to about 75 percent of the average dry season low flow at Campus Drive (see Table D.1). San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-5 Draft for Public Roview January 2004 Appendix D -Water Quality Models The diversion flow rate at Site 67 (Cienega) was estimated at approximately four cis for a 15•acre . site. The actual diversion flow rate will depend on the final size of the facility, the depth of the treatment cells, and the permeability of the treatment media. Field scale pilot tests are planned to quantify treatment capacity (see Appendix J) y—Agalning1000 0 Againing0 --ill^--Againing10D0 v Agalning2500 -Againing4000I 4 7�AgalningD000--f1—Againing000g --ir-AgalningMax — —limit Figure D.1.2: Results of Multiple Regressions for Flow Estimation during Low Flow Conditions LJ San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan D•6 January 2004 Draft for Public Rovlew 0 • • Appendix D - Water Quality Models Table D.3: Estimated Flows and Wetlands Areas used in the Low Flow Model Avellow (ets) 'Site SiteName Drainage Totd-Marsh- Marsh. Open 'Residence, No. -area` Dry Wet *46dand area vo►ame water water time (1cre6). seasoti" season' area (acres) (acSe area volume (dty) acre' ft acres Regional Retrofit Sites 13 Rattlesnake 1257 0.008 0.175 Reservoir -Existing 26 Woodbridge In -Line 26305 1.38 2.23 2.2 2.2 3.3 0 0 0.7-1.2 Basins 27 BatrancaOff--Line 24927 0.012 0.018 0.2 0.2 0.05 0 0 1.5-2 Wetlands 39 Sand Cyn Reservoir 3671 0,107 0.565 -- -- -- -- -- - -Existing 46 San Joaquin Marsh - 63267 8.825 8.825 56.0 11.0 22.0 45.0 270 1.3 Enhancement 53 Caltrans SRI33/15 4731 0.06 0.069 0.87 0.70 1.34 0.17 1.04 10 Interchange 54 Caltrans SR-261 20433 0.166 0.166 2.08 1.66 3.29 0.42 2.5 10 Site/Walnut Santa Ana/Santa Fe 55 Channel In -Line 4033 1.1 -- 2.3 2.3 3.45 0 0 1.2-1.5 Basins 56 El Modena Park 1003 0.066 0.065 0.82 0.66 1.29 0.16 0.98 10 62 San Joaquin Marsh- 63267 1,175 1.175 8 6.4 13 1.6 6.4 5.5 SAMSI 64 Westpark In -Line 29151 7.2 7.77 18.4 D 18.4 D 27.6 D 0 0 1.9 D Basins 3.3 W 3.3 W 5.0 W 0.3 W 67 Cienega de La Ranas 29151(I) 4.0 4.0 15 IS -- 0 0 3 subsurface flow Local Sites 9 PA I - Eastfoot Retarding Basin 329 0.013 0.047 0.59 0.47 0.94 0.12(2) 0 10 10 PA lU Eastfoot pper 386 0.017 0.038 0.5 0.4 0.35 0.1(2) 0 10 11 PA I - Orchard Estates Retarding Basin 398 0.015 0.058 0.72 0.58 1.15 0.14(2) 0 10 12A PA 1- Lower Orchard Estates 223 0.012 0.021 0.28 0.22 0.45 0.06(2) 0 10 12B PA I -Lower Orchard Estates 144 0.007 0.012 0.16 0.13 0.29 0.03(2) 0 10 12C PA I -Lower Orchard Estates 52 0.003 0.004 0.06 0.05 0.1 0.01(2) 0 10 12D PA I -Lower Orchard Estates 172 0.005 0.018 0.24 0.19 0.48 0.05(2) 0 10 12E PA I -Lower Orchard Estates 137 0.007 0.013 0.17 0.14 0.22 0.03(2) 0 10 12F PA I -Lower Orchard Estates 55 0.003 0.005 0.06 0.05 0.08 0.01(2) 0 10 12G PA I -Lower Orchard Estates 129 0.006 0.011 0.15 0.12 0.24 0.03(2) 0 10 16 Trabuco Retarding Basin 2078 0.079 0.18 2.23 1.78 3.6 0.45 2.7 10 18 Marshbum Retarding Basin 3626 0.096 0.493 6.11 4.9 9.8 1.2 4.8 10 22 MCAS El Toro- 2811 0.072 0.329 4.01 3.25 6.5 0.82 3.25 10 Appendix D - Water Duality Models NO.Area siteqBasiien e Name Drainage (Sens) Ave now (cG) Dry Wet tneaion seaaon Total wetland area acre Manh area (acra) Minh volame (Secs- ft Open water area (acres) Open water volume scre.ft Redder ce time (day) hinonLower 31 West Basin 376 0,006 0.031 0.26 0.21 0.42 0.05 0.2 10 32 �Enst Basin 431 0,009 0.031 0.52 0.42 0.84 0.1 0.62 10 42 Ridge North 229 0.004 0.021 0.34 0.27 0.5 0.07 0.5 10 49 CeacrBnsin G2 0.003 0,006 0.06 DAS 3 0 0 0 10 50$ElToro- Auto Center51 1102 0.036 0.068 0.85 0.68 1.36 0,17 0.68 10 S EI Toro- ermno52 4358 0,083 0.269 3.33 2,66 5.3 0.67 2.7 10 El Toro-� Bee an on61-Eastfool 985 0.039 0,067 0.83 0.66 1.32 0.17 0.68 10 ower68PA 139 0.007 0.012 0.14 0.11 0.2 0,03(2) 0 10 18 129 0.004 0.014 0.22 0.17 0.3 0,05 0.2 10 69APA 39 72 0.0005 0,001 0.019 0.016 0.032 0.03 0.12 10 69BPA 39 82 O.00D4 0,002 0.021 0.017 0.034 0.04 0.16 10 69C PA 39 68 0.0004 0,001 0.017 0.014 0.028 0,03 0.12 10 69D PA 39 75 0.0004 0.002 0.023 0.018 0.036 0.05 0.2 10 69E PA 39 55 0.0003 0.002 0.023 0,018 0,036 0.05 0.2 10 70A PA6-A uaChinon 20 0.001 UO2 0.024 0,02 0.04 0,004 1 0.016 ID 70B PA6-A uaChinon 23 0.001 0.002 0.028 0.023 0.045 --0.005-1 0.02 10 70C PA 6- A ua Chinon 40 0.002 0.004 0.04R 0.04 0.08 OA08 0.032 10 71 PA6-Marshbum1 32 1 0.0002 1 0.0004 O.D06 0.005 0.01 0.001 0.004 10 0 (1) Assumed drainage area. Site location is undetermined; thhroforo actual drainage area is unknown. (2) Areas adjacent to inlet/outlets are intended as shallow water sediment basins lined with porous (articulated) blocks. These • areas will support Welland vegetation with no open water (3) Grass lined basin, modeled as a marsh with 10-day residence time D- dry season W. wet season • San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan D•8 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix D- Water Qualky Models • Evapotranspiration rate: Evapotranspiration affects the flow and residence time in the marsh. Seasonal evapotranspiration losses were estimated with monthly average reference evapotranspiration rates from the California Irrigation Management Information System [1999]. S Water Losses at Site 46 (San Joaquin Marsh): A portion of the stream flow that is pumped into the existing IRWD wetlands at the San Joaquin Marsh is used to irrigate SAMS 2. To account for the irrigation losses in the model, the combined losses attributable to irrigation and ET were quantified by the difference between average daily inflow and effluent flows measured over a five-year period (see Table DA). The combined average ET and irrigation losses used in the model are 0.84 and 1.09 cfs during the dry and wet seasons, respectively. Table DA: Average Daily Influent and Effluent Flow Rates at the San Joaquin Marsh bry Season Wet Season Ave daily inflow to Sim' cfs Ave'daily outflow to SJM cfs Ave daily losses in 'SJM cfs Ave daily inflow to Sim cfs . Ave daily outflow to SJM cfs . Ave daily losses in Sim cfs 1998 5.68 4.09 1.59 5.66 5.38 0.28 1999 4.54 3.39 1.14 4.35 2.65 1.71 2000 3.29 2.57 0.72 2.27 1.10 1.16 2001 6.73 6.55 0.17 5.27 4.33 0.94 2002 (through Nov) 5.18 4.62 0.56 5.60 4.23 1.37 Averse 5.08 4.25 0.84 4.63 3.54 1.09 Infiltration rate: Similar to evapotranspiration, infiltration through the bottom of the wetland into the subsurface affects the flow and the residence time in the marsh. The initial infiltration rate depends on characteristics of the soils underlying the wetlands. Discussions with wetland specialists indicate that over time deposition of organic matter will limit, if not completely restrict, infiltration from the marsh. Also bottom liners will be used at sites with highly permeable soils. Therefore, infiltration losses were assumed to be negligible. Background concentration: Background concentrations are defined as the concentration of pollutants below which the treatment wetlands cannot achieve further removal. Background concentrations vary for each constituent of concern. The background IN concentration was assumed to be 1 mg/L, based on a literature review and available data. The background concentration of fecal coliform bacteria is often in the range of 10 to 500 MPN/100' mL [Kadlec and Knight, 1996]. A representative value for Newport Bay was assumed to be 50 MPN/l00 mL as suggested by the RWQCB. First -order kinetics rate constant: Kinetic rate constants are dependent on local site conditions and seasonal characteristics. IN removal data from the San Joaquin Marsh indicate a rate constant of about 0.2 day". Rate constants in the range of 0.3-0.5 day-, depending on temperature, were estimated for the Prado wetland, based on data from Reilly et al. [20003. From these estimates, as well as a literature review, basin wide rate constants for TN removal were assumed to be 0.55 and 0.25/day for the dry and non -storm wet periods, respectively. Seasonal rate constants were • determined to account for temperature affects. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-9 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix D — Water quality Models The area -based, first order rate constant for pathogen removal in surface -flow wetlands was assumed • to be 75 m/year. This value was based on data from numerous treatment wetlands presented in Kadlec and Knight [1996]. Residence tine: A wetland residence time of 7-14 days was considered optimal. This duration is regarded as an effective range for achieving de -nitrification and other biological treatment. Longer residence times were considered undesirable to avoid the promotion of stagnant water and mosquito habitat. A wetland porosity of 1.0 was assumed in calculations of residence time. This is considered a good `planning level' approximation of average wetland porosity values, which are usually greater than 0.95 [Kadlec and Knight,1996]. The porosity of the fully vegetated portion of a mature wetland has been reported to range from 0,65 to 0.75 [USEPA, September 2000]. Open Water Ratio: Open water areas within the marsh provide regions for settling of solids, ultra violet light penetration, habitat, and aesthetics. Unfortunately, open water also attracts birds that can adversely affect bacteria levels. Open water area was not included at sites where dry -weather flows are limited, or bird attraction is a potential safety concern. At sites that include open water, it was assumed that open water would occupy about 20 percent of the total wetland area, and SO percent would be shallow water areas with wetland vegetation. Water Depth: water depths within the NTS facilities depend on inflow conditions, wetland area, and residence time restrictions described above. Water depths of two feet or less were considered desirable to promote growth of wetland vegetation. Water depths in the range of 1-2 feet were • assumed for all NTS facilities. Water depths in open water areas were assumed to be 4-6 feet. Existing and build -out land use data: Existing and build -out land use projections were based primarily on land use information provided by 1RWD and the Irvine Company. Missing coverage was filled with land use and zoning information provided by various municipalities. The information provided by the municipalities was not consistent in teats of zoning definition, and some are not available in electronic forms. It was necessary to combine these pieces of information from hard copies by digitizing them and incorporating then into a G1S database to facilitate the analysis, As a result, the land use data presented in this report are only approximate. Network Effects: The NTS wetlands form a network such that the effluent from an upstream wetland would contribute to the influent of a downstream wetland, and so on. Therefore, the pollutant removal in an upstream wetland would reduce the influent load of others downstream, and thus effect their performance. A mass balance is applied to account for this phenomenon: mass removal rates (with a unit of mass/dme) in upstream wetlands are subtracted from the original mass loading (with a unit of mass/time) of a downstream wetland, resulting in an adjusted influent load concentration of the constituent entering the downstream wetland. Periods of operation of the wetlands: It was assumed that the NTS facilities will effectively function as WQT wetlands for 165 days during the dry season and for 150 days during the wet season. The down time is included to take into account equipment maintenance and storm events which, based on a review of flow data on San Diego Creek, occurs on average about 14 days/year. 0 Son Diego Creek NTS MablerPlan D-10 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix D — Water Quality Models Influent concentration: Water quality influent concentrations to each wetland facility were estimated from available water quality monitoring data reported by the OCPFRD [2000a,b]. Water quality influent concentrations were estimated from the most relevant available sampling points, such as those in nearby watersheds. In some channels, groundwater seepage is a significant source of certain constituents (e.g., nitrate -nitrogen, selenium), and this effect was assumed to be reasonably captured by using observed data. Pollutant sources from groundwater discharge are considered in as far as they are reflected in the monitoring data used to establish influent water quality concentrations. Figure D.1.3 shows average TN concentrations for low -flows in the dry and wet seasons at sampling stations monitored by the OCPFRD. These average concentrations were calculated from data collected between 1991-2000, although the period varies at each station. Comparison of average TN concentrations in the Upper San Diego Creek Watershed and Peters Canyon Wash (near their confluence) indicate that average concentrations are comparable (around 16-18 mg/L). The highest average IN concentrations (37 mg/L — dry; 81 mg/L — low -flow wet) were measured in the Trabuco Channel, which drains the Hines and El Modena nurseries. Overall loading is higher in Peters Canyon Wash because of higher discharges. Elevated average TN concentrations in Peters Canyon Wash are generally attributed to groundwater and nursery sources. The nursery sources, however, are assumed to be phased out and converted into residential and commercial areas under build -out projections. To reflect this in the model, a mean TN concentration of residential and commercial areas was used for all sites directly receiving discharges from the nursery sources (e.g. Site 16 located in the Central Irvine Channel). • In some facilities the source of dry weather low flows are urban catchments rather than stream flow. In these cases, TN data obtained by IRWD as part of their Residential Runoff Reduction (R3) study indicate a mean TN concentration of about 4 mg/L. This value was also used for the sites currently receiving discharges from nurseries (see the preceding paragraph). For pathogen modeling in San Diego Creek, time series data are preferred because the standards are couched in terms of time series. The primary source of pathogen time series data available for estimating pathogen concentrations was data collected by the OCPFRD at Campus Drive. These same data were then assumed to apply at upland NTS influent locations. Pathogen modeling was also conducted for the Santiago Hills (Phase H) / Area I project site located in the Santiago Creek Watershed. However, there is no available pathogen monitoring data in the Santiago Hills (Phase II) Watershed. The influent fecal coliform concentration was set to 1000 MPN/100mL. This assumption allows one to at least obtain a rough estimate of potential removal achieved in the NTS facilities. Groundwater sources: Groundwater discharge into streams appears to be a significant source of nitrate - nitrogen and selenium to some channels in the watershed. The model does not have a specific groundwater component and therefore does not explicitly predict the effects of groundwater contributions to stream flow. However, groundwater inflow to the streams was incorporated in the model though estimates of stream flow, which were based in part on discharge information reported by Hibbs and Lee [2000] and estimates of discharge and recharge areas. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-11 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Peters Canyon Wash El Modena! DRY.3.2 Irvine Ch. WET.- i DRY. 4.4 WEr: 4.6 Santa Ana / l_J DRY 14.1 Santa Fe Ch. I WFT . DRY. 1.9 WET�8.0 Bercanca Ch. Lana DRY. 7.6 WET: 8.9 18.2 —DRY 37.0 WET 61.0 DRY: 16.9 WET. - —0--S Ch. F08P08 DRY: 16.7 WET 17.6Seek 2 26 Appendix D— WelterQuallty Models Rattlesnake Cyn. Wash Trabuco Ch. Round Aqua Cyn. Chinon Serrano Bee Wash Cyn. Wash Crk Wash Cyn. arshbum Borrego Ch. Bee Cyn. Creek Diversion Wash 18 DRY 4.0 63 DRY 4.1 DRY 0.4 22 WET 4.7 61 WET.- Q WET 81 DRY. 11.3 WET 166 -4— San Diego Creek BRY.11.3 T San Joaquin Ch. WET 14.8 DRY:2.4 WET: 2 9 Sand Cyn Ch. UCI wash Facility Tvoes O Type I: oflline ❑ Type II: inline O Type III: within an existing flood facility Number in symbol is the numerical name of site I* a �Bonita Crk. KEY San Diego DRY. 3 8 Water Quality Monitoring Station Creek WET. 3 7 DRY: Dry season TN concentration (mglL) WET: non -storm wet To Upper season TN concentration (mgiL) IF Newport Bay Figore D.1.3: Average Nitrogen'Concentration Data from OCPT RD Monitoring San Diego Creak NTS MoslerPlan D-12 January 2004 Draft for Public Review 0 • C-A Appendix D — Water Quality Models Nursery loads: The three major nurseries (El Modena, Bordiers, and Hines) have NPDES permits, which require them to monitor non -storm flows and water quality. These loads are treated as point sources based on each nursery's monitoring data. It was assumed that there would be no nursery loads at build -out, as the nurseries are likely to be phased out during development of the watershed. Configuration of In -Line weirs at Site 64: There is a reach of Peters Canyon Channel in the vicinity of the Marine Corps Air Station -Tustin that is not currently improved to the capacity required by the Flood Control Master Plan for San Diego Creek. The existing channel conditions were used for purposes of designing the In -Line weirs as presented in the PDR, and for modeling purposes to evaluate treatment effectiveness. The construction of In -Line weirs in this reach will await the resolution of the final channel configuration by the OCFCD. Future upgrades of the channel capacity to conform to the Flood Control Master Plan will necessitate appropriate design modification of the proposed In -Line weirs. Such modifications are not expected to appreciably alter the estimated treatment efficiency for dry season low flows. D.2 Modeling Approach for Storm Events The effectiveness of NTS facilities for controlling pollutant runoff from storm events was assessed on an average annual basis. A 21-year period of rainfall was used to estimate the annual runoff quantities and resulting pollutant loads at each NTS facility, the pollutant removal in the NTS facilities, and the resultant pollutant loads to Upper Newport Bay. • D.2.1 Pollutant Reduction Modeling • Stormwater pollutant concentrations and now volumes were measured at several locations in the watershed as part of Orange County's ongoing monitoring program [OCPFRD, 2000a]. These data, although quite comprehensive, were never intended to represent pollutant loads at NTS facilities. Therefore, a combination of empirical and statistical approaches were used to estimate annual pollutant loads at all facilities. The Rational formula was used to estimate the average annual runoff volume at each NTS Plan facility under existing and build -out conditions: Q=R L4 where: Q is the annual runoff volume at the Plan facility (ft3/year); 1 is the annual rainfall depth at each Plan facility (ft/year); A is the drainage area of the Plan facility (ft); and R, is the mean runoff coefficient, a unit -less value that is a function of the imperviousness of the watershed. The runoff coefficient depends on land use in the facility drainage area. Pollutant concentrations in stormwater runoff were represented by an expected average pollutant concentration, called the event mean concentrations (EMC). The EMCs were estimated with monitoring data from watersheds with similar land uses to the San Diego Creek Watershed. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-13 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendfx D— Water Quality Models Flow and EMC estimates were used to quantify the yearly load of a pollutant from a given land use and sub -watershed using following equation: a Influent load (lbs/yr) = Q-(ft'lyr) x EMC (mg/L) x 6.2428 x 10's lms This gives the yearly load of apollutant for each land use within each facility sub -watershed. Using the above equations, pollutant loads and runoff volumes from each land use in a sub -watershed served by an NTS facility are summed. The average concentration is then estimated from the total load divided by the total runoff volume. This concentration is the estimated average influent concentration in storm runoff entering the NTS facility. Runoff volumes, pollutant loads, and pollutant concentrations for downstream facilities that receive treated effluent from upstream facilities are estimated in a similar manner, but also take into account the load reduction achieved in the upstream facility. D.2.2 Load Reduction Estimates The effectiveness of the NTS facilities during storm periods depends on two factors: the volume of water processed by each facility ("capture efficiency"), and the level of treatment achieved. The capture efficiency is the fraction of storm runoff that is diverted to and processed by the NTS facility. It is a function of the volume of the facility, the diversion capacity, and the magnitude of storm flows where the facility is located. Determination of the treatment effectiveness for the NTS facilities was based on effluent quality data • obtained from monitoring water quality basins compiled in the USEPA's Nationwide BMP database [ASCE, March 2001]. This database was developed to provide a centralized, easy -to -use, scientifically based tool for assessing the appropriateness of BMPs under various conditions. The capture efficiency and estimated effluent concentration were used to compute effluent loads from the facilities as follows: Effluent load (lbs/yr) = Q (ft'/yr) x capture efficieny x effluent concentration (mg/L) x 6.2428 x 10'6 lbs m The amount of pollutant removed by a NTS Plan facility was calculated by the difference between the estimated influent and effluent loads. D.2.3 Assumptions and Data Needs for Modeling Storm Events The following describes assumptions and approaches used to assemble data for modeling treatment of pollutant loads in stormwater runoff. Annual model: The model uses annual rainfall depths to estimate runoff volumes and resulting pollutant loads. Continuous simulation modeling was not performed. Watershed and Stream Channel Sediment Sources: The model was designed to address post -construction delivery of sediment from urban and other types of land uses. The model did not address sediment Son Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-14 January 2004 Draft for public Review • derived from channel down -cutting or slope instabilities. • • Appendix D- Water Quality Models Annual Rainfall Depth: Annual rainfall depths were determined from monthly rainfall records at four gauging stations within or near the San Diego Watershed (Appendix'F). The location of the gauging stations is shown in Figure 2.2. Because the sediment TMDL is based on a 10-year running average load, modeling was conducted for the 21-year period from 1978 to 1998. To obtain a complete rainfall record for this 21-year period, it was necessary to extend available data at the Costa Mesa rainfall gauge (for 1998) by correlating to data for the Villa Park Dam gauge. A portion of the storm events are not expected to produce appreciable stormwater runoff (i.e. storm events less than or equal to 0.1 inches depth). The annual rainfall totals were therefore reduced by a uniform correction factor that accounts for rainfall events that produce no appreciable runoff. This basin wide correction factor was determined by an analysis of hourly rainfall records from nine nearby National Climatic Data Service (NCDC) gauges using the SYNOP statistical rainfall analysis program [USEPA, 1989]. This program aggregates hourly data into individual storm events and computes event descriptive statistics, including duration, volume and intensity for individual storms, as well as average annual statistics. Storm events less than 0.1 inches are eliminated from the record as such storms do not generally contribute to runoff. Results from this analysis indicated that 3-10 percent of rainfall volumes do not contribute to stormwater runoff. Annual rainfall depths were correspondingly reduced by an assumed uniform correction factor of 5 percent. The resulting corrected annual rainfall depths at the four San Diego Creek Watershed rain gauges are presented in Table D.S. Table D.S: Corrected Annual Rainfall Depths (inches) used in Stormwater Runoff Modeling Water Year Costa Mesa; .EIToro Tustin7ryweR"ch VillaP.arkDam 1978 24.99 29.08 26.46 31.41 1979 15.66 18.03 15.77 17.59 1980 16.95 25.64 19.71 25.54 1981 8.73 7.26 8.05 8.98 1982 12.03 13.45 13.78 15.5 1983 23.28 26.51 25.68 27.83 1984 8.41 8.61 8.17 8.81 1985 9.22 11.65 9.69 11.77 1986 13.16 15.14 14.33 17.57 1987 5.38 7.17 7.9 7.94 1988 9.25 11.4 10.14 11.46 1989 6.14 8.37 7.58 9.54 1990 6.47 7.6 5.64 8.49 1991 9.93 11.48 10.66 11.7 1992 14.07 16.26 16.46 16.7 1993 20.91 27.95 25.59 28.39 1994 9.79 9.84 9.77 12.03 1995 18.68 26.67 23AS 26.04 1996 9.02 -9-.041 10.54 1, 10.83 1997 12.01 14.07 16.18 14.82 1998 25.68 35.99 32.53 32.27 21- earavera a 13.32 16.25 1 15.15 16.91 San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-15 January 2004 .Draft for Public Review Appendix D—Water Qualify Models Existing and Build -out conditions: Available land use data for the existing and projected build out • conditions were assumed to accurately represent the existing and ultimate land uses in the watershed. Land use estimates for build -out conditions shown in Table F.10 were consolidated into eight categories that are consistent with available stormwater land-uscd based EMC data from Los Angeles and Ventura Counties (see discussion below). The eight categories and groupings are: Categories used in Stormwater Modeling 1. Agriculture 2. Commercial 3. Industrial 4. Open Space 5. Residential 6. Mixed use 7. Roads 8, Water Catettories in Table F.10 Agriculture Commercial/Light Industrial Industrial Open space preserve, Open space other Residential - low, medium and high density Mixed use Roads/Transportation corridor Water Land -use acreages used for stormwater modeling are presented in Table D.6. Estimates of stormwater runoff volumes: It was assumed that the impervious area associated with each land use category is correlated to the runoff volumes. Accordingly, the runoff volume from each land use area was assumed to be a function of rainfall depth and a runoff coefficient, as expressed by the Rationale formula. Here, the runoff coefficient was assumed to be a linear function of the percent imperviousness (,„p), using [Driscoll et al.,1990]: RY = 0.7 fry, +0.1 where f,„p is the fraction of imperviousness. Table D.7 presents the imperviousness fraction and associated runoff coefficient assumed for each land use category. The Rationale formula and runoff coefftoients in Table D.7 were used to calculate runoff from land use areas listed in Table D.6. The total annual stormwater runoff at each NTS Plan facility was then computed as the sum of runoff from individual land use areas that are tributary to the facility. San Diego Crook NTS Master Plan 0-16 January 2004 Draft for Public Raviow • • • • J Appendix D — Water Quality Models Table D.6: Projected Land Use for Build Out Conditions in Tributary Areas of NTS Facilities 'Site Aericulture Commercial Industrial Open Space Residential 'Mixed Use Roads Water Total 9 0 0 188 0 0 0 329 10 0 0 320 0 2 0 386 11 0 0 217 0 0 0 398 12a 0 0 231 0 2 0 233 12b 0 0 1OM64 134 0 2 8 144 12c 0 0 48 0 4 0 52 12d 0 0 93 030 172 12e 0 0 137 0 0 0 137 12f 0 0 53 0 2 0 55 12 0 0 0 5 118 0 6 0 129 13 0 0 0 926 113 0 151 66 1256 16 0 447 0 398 979 68 162 25 2079 18 250 386 0 2085 646 9 250 0 3626 22 0 1 9 0 2268 346 55 133 0 2811 26 0 3808 0 3869 2127 856 1311 29 12000 27 0 0 0 0 300 0 0 0 300 31 0 33 0 128 178 0 37 0 376 32 0 113 0 145 140 0 33 0 431 39 0 0 0 2705 775 0 146 45 3671 42 0 0 1 0 107 85 0 37 0 229 46 0 1954 1503 842 1616 321 1109 26 7371 49 0 1 0 31 29 0 1 0 62 50 0 222 0 63 637 137 41 3 1103 51 0 1732 0 1135 1136 150 161 45 4359 52 0 92 0_ 468 0 323 103 0 986 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 95 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 28 55 0 1030 96 130 2085 131 561 0 4033 56 0' 0 0 0 1003 0 0 0 1003 61 0 0 0 0 133 0 6 0 139 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 0 2296 7 2543 10368 738 2595 32 18579 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 0 0 0 58 71 0 0 0 129 69A 0 63 0 5 0 0 4 0 72 69B 0 68 0 5 0 0 9 0 82 69C 0 60 0 4 0 0 4 0 68 69D 0 56 0 7 0 0 4 8 75 69E 0 45 01 8 0 0 2 0 55 70A 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 20 70B 0 0 0 0 23 0, 0 0 23 70C 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 40 71 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-17 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix D—Water Oualitymodels Table D.7: Imperviousness Fraction and Associated Runoff Coefficient by Land Use Category Land use Imperviousness fraction Runoff coefaclent Agriculture 0.0 0.1 Commercial 0.9 0.73 Industrial 0.9 0.73 Open Space 0.0 0.1 Residential 0.5 0.45 Mixed Use 0.7 0.59 Roads 0.9 0.73 Water 1.0 0.8 Representativeness of available monitoring data: Available runoff estimations and pollutant concentration data are assumed representative of existing runoff conditions for storm event wet weather conditions. Estimates of stormwater pollutant concentrations: It was assumed that land -use -based EMC values estimated from available local and regional stormwater monitoring data arc representative of pollutant concentrations in stormwater runoff from similar land uses in the San Diego Creek Watershed. A review of available water quality monitoring data in southern California was conducted to supplement available EMC information for the San Diego Creek Watershed. The counties of Los Angeles and Ventura have conducted numerous stormwater-monitoring studies. These data are distinct from those collected in Sand Diego Creek Watershed, in drat they are differentiated on the basis of land use in the monitored basin. In particular, data from Los Angeles County are among the most comprehensive in quality and quantity. Here, monitoring includes flow composite sampling at various "land use stations" that contain primarily one type of land use. Based on the targeted monitoring design and the quantity of available data, it is believed these data provide the best statistical characterization of the stormwater quality in the San Diego Creek Watershed. A similar rationale was the basis for using monitoring data from Ventura County to represent agricultural water quality in the San Diego Creek Watershed. The suitability of the monitoring data is discussed in Section D.2.5. Table D.8 displays the mean stormwater concentrations of pollutants from the Los Angeles and Ventura County monitoring data. These values were used to represent die stormwater EMC values in the San Diego Creek Watershed. The effluent from some NTS sites is tributary to other sites downstream. Therefore pollutant removal in an upstream site reduces pollutant load to any sites downstream. This is accounted for when summing pollutant loads tributary to a site that treats stormwater flows to estimate a resulting influent pollutant concentration. Son Diego Creek NTS MesterPlan D-18 lanuary 2004 Draft for Public Review 11 U • \ J Appendix D- Water Quality Models Table D.8: EMC Values Used to Represent Water Quality in Associated Land Uses Constituent Los An eles Corn Monitorin ina(11 Ventura County Commercial dndustrial Orion-, Residential Miaedusc I Roads A culttirsl TSS m /L 66 240 186 95 65 78 1176 TP m 0.39 0.41 0.16 0.39 0.33 0.44 2.70 TN m 4.04 3.97 1.89 3.84 3.61 2.65 18.8 Total Copper u L 39.4 32.0 14.6 14.9 29.0 55.7 132 Dissolved Copper u /L 14.2 19.6 2.50 8.46 13.2 32.6 31.5 Total Lead u L 18.0 17.3 2.50 9.66 14.7 10.3 46.9 Total Zinc u L 241 63.9 45.7 79.3 222 291 324 Dissolved Zinc u L 152 407 50.0 44.2 142 192 36.0 Fecal Coliform MPN/100mL 2 15,000 15,000 1,400 15,000 15,000 15,000 18,000 I - Los Angeles County data, mean values from LA County 1994-2000 stormwater monitoring Report 2 - Due to the limited pathogen, data available EMC values in the water quality model were represented with results compiled by the Center for Watershed Protection (CWP) in the Watershed Protection Techniques article "Microbes and Urban Watersheds: Concentrations, Sources, & Pathways", which included National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) data and results from 34 more recent urban runoff studies. Capture Efficiency: Capture efficiency is the fraction of stormwater flow diverted to the NTS facilities. An average annual capture efficiency for each NTS facility was estimated with hourly rainfall data from three NDCD stations in the vicinity of the San Diego Creek Watershed (Laguna Beach, Fullerton Dam, Silverado Ranger Station). The hourly data were used to develop information on the magnitude, duration, and sequence of storm events and the corresponding runoff volume for storm events greater than 0.1 inches. Average capture efficiencies were determined through an analysis of stormwater storage in the NTS facilities, employing assumptions about the facility capacity, diversion rate to the facility (if applicable) and drainage rate. Capture efficiencies were either based on the storage volume or the diversion rate to the sites, with the optimal diversion rate based in part on the storage capacity in order to detain runoff for a sufficient length of time to promote sedimentation. For volume based percent capture estimates, the available stormwater detention storage was assumed to equal the total storage capacity of the NTS facilities at the beginning of the analysis. An estimate of the potential storage depths for stormwater in the NTS facilities was made primarily on the topography of the sites and is shown in Table D.9. This table also shows the type of percent capture analysis conducted, basin storage capacity, flow rate, and percent capture results. Capture efficiencies were not decreased to account for the energy conservation schedule as this is in effect only from June to the beginning of October and it is unlikely that substantial storm flows will occur during this period (the dry season). The sequence of stormwater runoff volumes obtained from the hourly rainfall data was routed through the NTS facilities using the following rules for the sites classified as Type III and most local development sites: 1. If the time from the start of a storm event to the end of the preceding storm was greater than or equal to 36 hours (the proposed design draw down time of the basins) for most facilities or 48 hours for other facilities, then the Plan facility was considered "empty" at the beginning of a storm event. The Plan facility was then modeled as capturing the smaller of either the runoff volume of the storm event or the storage capacity of the basin. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-19 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Appendlx D - Wafer Quality Models Table D.9t NTS Site Stormwater Modeling Parameters site# Stormwater Footprint acres Stormwater Storsse acre-feet Mosimum Deteation Time rs Anaiysis Method Diversion Rate cis % Capture 9 111 3.50 12.25 48 volume 84.5% 10 1 3.60 11.64 36 volume 74.2% 11 Ill 6.60 23.10 48 volume 93.9% 12a 1 2.30 7.29 36 volume 70.7% 12b 1 1 1.93 1 6.54 36 volume 83.1% 12c I 0.72 3.62 36 volume 91.2% 12d 1 1.00 5.87 36 volume 85.8% 12e 1 1.13 4.77 36 volume 74.5% IN I 1.52 3.31 36 volume 88.8% 12g 1 1.14 3.06 36 volume 61.4% 13 111 46.60 nla terminal reservoir temrinal n/a 100% capture 16 111 18.20 81.00 36 volume 81.6% 18 111 10.10 81.00 36 1 volume 76.2% 22 1 10.10 35.35 48 volume 71.0% 27 1 10.00 10.00 48 volume 73.2% 31 111 7.40 14.80 48 volume 83.9% 32 1 1.00 3.50 48 volume 30.0% 39 111 46.40 n/a terminal reservoir terminal n/a 100.0% 42 1 1.60 5.60 48 volume 79.9% 49 1 0.80 2.80 1 36 volume 95.0% 50 i 8.40 29.40 48 volume 61.7% 51 I 3.70 38.00 48 volume 28.4% 52 I 3.70 12.95 48 volume 47.3% 53 1 1.00 3.90 40 volume 16.0 67.8% 54 I 2.70 9.25 48 flow 14.4 100.0% 56 III 2.70 2.70 36 volume 1 10.1% 61 1 1.20 4.71 36 volume 72.7% 68 1 2.9 36 volume 79.6% 69A 1 3.3 36 volume 75.1% 69B I 3.7 36 volume 74.30% 69C 1 3.1 36 volume 74.6o/a 69D I 2.8 36 volume 68.6% 69B 1 2.1 36 volume 71.4% 70A 1 0.71 36 1 volume 80A% 70B I 0.82 36 volume 80.5% 70C 1 1.4 36 volume 80.0% 71 I 1 1 1.79 36 volume 1 79.5% 2. if the inter -event time was less than 36 hours for project sites (48 hours for the others, e.g. site 56) then the capture volume was calculated in one of two ways depending on the size of the previous storm. A. if the runoff volume to the basin from the previous storm was larger than the storage capacity of the basin, then the basin was assumed to have filled completely. The available storage capacity of the basin at the time of the storm under evaluation was estimated by multiplying the time between the storms by 2.78 percent (or the San Diego Creak NTS Master Plan D-20 January 2004 Draft for public Revlaw • • 0 Appendix D — Water Quality Models • appropriate rate — lower for basins with 48 maximum draw -down) and the total basin capacity (the basins empty at a rate of about 2.78 percent per hour for a 36 hour draw down time). Basin Draw Storage volume x Down X Emptying Capacity (0) Time (hr) Rate (hr ) • B. If the runoff volume from the previous storm was less than the storage capacity of the Plan facility, then the available capacity immediately after the previous storm event was calculated as the difference between the storage capacity of the basin and the runoff volume from the previous storm. The total storage capacity was then calculated as the sum of the storage capacity at the end of the previous storm, plus the additional storage capacity created from draw down during the time between the storm events. The draw down rate was again based on the appropriate detention time (36 or 48 hours) for the basin under consideration. Available Runoff Draw Storage = Storage + C Volume x Down X Emptying Capacity Volume After (fe) Time (hr) Rate (bf ) Event (11) The percent capture of some NTS sites was based upon the rate at which stormwater flows are projected to be diverted to the sites. The appropriate rate of diversion was determined by plotting percent capture vs. flow rate results for each site and selecting a diversion flow rate that tended to optimize the capture efficiency (i.e. larger ratio of percent capture to flow rate). The diversion flow rate was limited to a maximum value of 35 cfs to limit pump station costs and in some instances also limited by the storage capacity of the facility to process diverted flows. In this instance the diversion flow rate was limited so that the basin would not fill in a time frame shorter than the average storm (12 hours). Percent capture was estimated for the Off -Line (Type I) sites based upon flow data collected at USGS gauging stations in Peters Canyon Wash and in San Diego Creek at Culver Drive and Campus Drive. Frequency discharge analyses were conducted on the available 15-minute flow data (collected from 07/01/97 to 06/30/00) for each of the gauges. The tributary area to the NTS sites analyzed for percent capture was normalized based on the impervious areas, as this is the primary contributor to stormwater flows. For example, if the tributary area to a site had 50 percent of the impervious area at the gauge used for the analysis then the flow rates to the site (in the frequency discharge curve) were assumed to be 50 percent of the intensity measured at the gauge. The analysis for each site was conducted with the gauge that contains the site in its tributary area. Smaller sites that were not contained within the drainage area of the available gauges, used data from the gauge at Culver Drive as this gauge had the lowest flow rates and was believed to be most representative of these smaller drainages. Percent capture analysis was conducted for each Type I facility (except the program sites that were analyzed as volume based sites) by calculating the amount of runoff that would be diverted for a range of pumping (or gravity diversion) rates. Pumping rates were assumed to occur only above a base in stream flow equal to the 25 h percentile flow rate for the normalized frequency distribution curves so as not to model a dewatered stream. A pumping rate and corresponding percent capture was San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-21 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix D—Water Qualfty Models selected for each site analyzed by this method based on the most cost effective value, with a . maximum value of 35 cfs for sites with pumped stormwater diversion. Estimates of BMP performance: Data available from the USEPA's Nationwide BMP database [ASCE, March 2001] was assumed to be representative of the treatment performance in the NTS facilities. The performance estimates are summarized in Table D.10. These performance estimates were based on database information for retention ponds (permanent wet pool) rather than wetlands because stormwater runoff will be detained in a similar fashion to retention ponds, and will not have sufficient residence time for removal processes unique to wetland systems. Table D.10: Median Outflow Concentrations for Wet Ponds Parameter Units Water Quality Basin Outflow Concentration (1) TSS m L 17.8 Total Phosphorus rti /L 0.17 Total Nitrogen m L 1.23 Total Copper u L 5.5 Dissolved Copper ti L 4.0 Total Lead u L 5.0 Total Zinc I u /L 29 Dissolved Zinc I u /L 15 Fecal Colifonn I MNP/100mL 5200 2 (1) Estimated from the National Stormwater Best Management Practices Database retention pond outflow concentration data; the median values of outflow data from all available studies for retention ponds was used in order to provide an estimate of facility performance. (2) Due to the limited pathogen data available the National Stormwater Best Management Practices Database effluent in the water quality model were represented with results compiled by the Center for Watershed Protection (CWP) in the Watershed Protection Techniques article "Microbes and Urban Watersheds: Ways to Kill `Em" D.2.4 Modeling Steps The following steps were used to estimate pollutant loads in stormwater runoff and to model treatment in the NTS facilities: 1. The total annual rainfall volume that contributes to stormwater runoff was estimated for each watershed area based on the proximity to one of the four rain gauges used. 2. The area of each land use category (associated percent imperviousness) was quantified in each watershed area for existing and build -out conditions. 3. The annual runoff volume to each Plan facility was calculated with the Rationale formula using runoff coefficients that were related to the estimated impervious fractions for specific land use types. 4. Pollutant concentrations in the stormwater runoff were estimated with average quantities of regional monitoring data (EMCs) from areas with similar land -use characteristics. 5. Pollutant loads were calculated by multiplying the pollutant concentration in stortriwater runoff San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan D-22 Janaery 2004 Draft for Public Review C J Appendix D — Water Quality Models and the predicted runoff volume. 6. General BMP treatment performance in terms of effluent water quality was estimated from performance records in the USEPA's Nationwide BW database. 7. Influent flows and loads at specific NTS facilities were estimated by summing flows and loads from individual sub -areas upstream of the facility, taking into account the capture efficiency of the facilities, as well as load reductions in upstream NTS facilities. 8. Load reduction at specific NTS facilities was calculated as the difference between calculated influent loads and estimated effluent loads. D.2.5 Suitability of Land Use Water Quality Data A key assumption in the modeling approach is that the sites from which runoff water quality data were obtained are reasonably representative of conditions for the San Diego Creek Watershed. The following describes the sites from which data were obtained and the extent to which these sites appear to be representative of the watershed conditions. Description of Ventura County Agricultural Site - Stormwater monitoring data collected by the Ventura Flood Control District were used to estimate effluent water quality from agriculture land uses. The selected data were collected between 1996-2000 at the Wood Road at Revolon Slough Station (A-1) in Oxnard, Ventura County. The catchment area is approximately 350 acres, used primarily for row crops, including strawberries that incorporate plastic mulch. The mix of row crops is similar to those grown in the San Diego Watershed; although at any given time, the specific crops are likely to vary. Irrigation and • mulching techniques also appear to be similar. The data set (10 sampling events) includes flow composite samples that have been taken over a range of storm events and is therefore reasonably robust. • Description of Los Angeles Urban Sites - Los Angeles County has been monitoring stormwater quality since the mid 1990s. The monitoring includes flow composite sampling at various "land use stations" that contain primarily one type of land use including single family, multi family, industrial, and mixed residential land uses. The LA County data also is comprehensive in that it generally contains 30-60 samples per site and most samples are above detection limits. This number of samples provides a more robust statistical characterization of the stormwater quality data. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan D-23 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix E— Modeling Results E Modeling Results and Sensitivity Analyses This appendix presents all modeling results for assessment of NTS facilities under build -out conditions (Section E.1). Additionally, this appendix presents the approach and results of parameter sensitivity analyses (Section E.2), and results from an analysis of land conversion effects (Section E.3). E.1 Tabulated Modeling Results Estimated TN Loads in San Diego Creek Dry -Season Low Flow— Complete NTS Plan............................................................. E-2 Estimated TN Loads in San Diego Creek Wet Season Low Flow —Complete NTS Plan............................................................ E-3 Estimated TN Loads in San Diego Creek Dry Season Low Flow —Initial Phase Scenario.......................................................... E-4 Estimated TN Loads in San Diego Creek Wet Season Low Flow —Initial Phase Scenario.......................................................... E-4 Measured and Estimated Pathogen Concentrations in San Diego Creek —Low Flow Conditions ................................................ E-5 Estimated Annual Sediment Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions — Complete NTS Plan .......................... E-6 Estimated Annual Sediment Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions— Initial Phase Scenario ....................... E-6 Estimated Annual TP Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions —Complete NTS Plan .................................... E-7 Estimated Annual TP Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions —Initial Phase Scenario .................................. E-7 Estimated Annual TN Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions — Complete NTS Plan .................................... E-8 Estimated Annual TN Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions— Initial Phase Scenario ................................. E-8 Estimated Annual Pathogen Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions —Complete NTS Plan .......................... E-9 Estimated Annual Pathogen Loads in Storrs Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions — Initial Phase Scenario ........................ E-9 Estimated Total Copper Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions— Complete NTS Plan ............................... E-10 Estimated Total Copper Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions— Initial Phase Scenario ............................ E-10 Estimated Dissolved Copper Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions— CompleteNTS Plan ....................... E-11 Estimated Dissolved Copper Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions— Initial Phase Scenario ..................... E-11 Estimated Total Lead Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions — Complete NTS Plan .................................. E-12 Estimated Total Lead Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions — Initial Phase Scenario ................................ E-12 Estimated Total Zinc Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions — Complete NTS Plan ................................... E-13 Estimated Total Zinc Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions — Initial Phase Scenario ................................ E-13 Estimated Dissolved Zinc Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions — Complete NTS Plan ............................ E-14 Estimated Dissolved Zinc Loads in Storrs Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions —Initial Phase Scenario ......................... E-14 • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E-1 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix E- Modeling Results Table E.1: EstImated TN Loads in San Diego Creek Dry Season Low flow - Complete NTS Plan sag TYPE "MGM FLOW Ih) IWEADW 2FF.PLOW (*I M M 10,19 MiTR[AM CONC. IRMOFF COW. m OM.COMO, EFF.CON➢, 111 94F. LOAD EFF. LOAD Qbvia LOAD REIACVID I MEOS7MAU to 01 ➢ve COM 0000 100 44 44 4A n 0 a FE11ROia 28 It 1117 10n lot 12 09 9.9 9,4 6.1 114U N0 AM 27 1 100 0.012 "It 19 12 ?A Its 11 o7 N 0 59 01 0107 Gist am 100 24 2A 2A us 0 In A0 I it 81s &a" I 10 15.0 150 $a 0A gigs? 0141 24M 0 1 CAD Colo a too 4.1 4A 19 t0 102 4a Be N 1 2574 O10 Otto 100 187 107 11E 1.1 2011 tot late 0 a fA load to" 1A 14t 141 14A OS 1➢7M 628L 140 so III out 0.00 ➢MD 100 4A 4A 44 to 2N M 204 W 1 fe692 1.175 Itle 6.S 152 150 66 to N62 1271 No M 0 Togs 72N ?➢0 1.9 Ito 1TO 118 a1 100002 amso elm 67 1 lost IOW 002 21 174 170 01 to 21M 2455 Iwo LOCH. 9 III 0A OD 00 too 40 40 4A I 45 a OG to 1 OA OA 00 100 44 4A 40 It at 11 49 At 111 OA 00 00 100 40 4.0 40 11 N 9 At M I 00 00 00 lob 40 40 40 10 M 9 M 120 1 OA 00 00 too 4A 40 40 10 25 5 20 12C I 00 00 00 lob at 40 40 10 9 2 7 VD 1 CA 00 00 100 40 40 40 11 1s 0 1s IM I OA OA 00 100 AA 4A 40 t0 28 5 21 IN I Do 00 00 100 40 40 40 10 10 2 a IM I 0o OA Do 10.0 40 40 40 10 22 6 to 61 I 04 at DO 10.0 44 40 40 10 25 6 20 1s III Olt at 01 100 4.0 4.0 4.0 10 200 57 29l 18 111 at at at 100 At 4A 4A 11 set 0 20 fl 111 00 00 00 100 40 40 40 11 21 4 17 12 1 00 00 00 100 4.0 40 40 1.1 31 6 a 49 1 do 00 04 too 40 40 40 10 10 2 a 42 1 OA 00 00 100 1A 16 1s 11 14 2 U 0 1 OA eA 00 10A 4.0 40 40 td 11 2 11 am 1 00 00 00 100 4.0 40 40 id 2 0 1 4K 1 00 ad to too 40 4A At I 1 a i MA I 00 0.0 QO 100 40 40 40 11 2 0 1 SN 1 do 00 00 too 4A 44 2.2 M 1 0 1 090 1 D.0 DA OA 100 4A 40 10 1.1 1 0 t 7OA I 0A 00 00 100 AA 4A 4.0 10 4 1 0 7" 1 0➢ 00 00 100 40 40 AO to 2 1 1 lot I OA 0.0 AO 100 4A 4.0 a6 1A 7 7 0 it 1 00 OA 00 too 4A 40 40 1.0 1 a 1 22 1 Qt 0.1 00 100 11.1 110 113 14 120 N 475 N 1 0A do 0.0 too 40 40 40 1.0 1M 28 tee at 1 Ot 0.1 Olt 100 40 44 40 to 2" 0 231 62 1 at 00 OA 100 44 04 M 10 221 01 IN TOTALWYOVAL 127306 t nQCAMFOSMWE Snood LOAb FR1ERINOMlWYORT 9AY IN" • 0 0 Diego Greek NTS Mesfet Plan E-2 January 2004 Draft for public Revlew • • Appendix E- Modeling Results Table E.2: Estimated TN Loads in San Diego Creek Wet Season Low Flow - Complete NTS Plan SITE INSTRI M TYPE FLOW W INF FLOW cN EFF.FLOW ch RESTIME & INSTREMI CORD T RUNOFF CONE. INF CONC. T EFF.CONC DIRLOAD b OFF, LOAD b LOAD REMOVED Ib dm REGIONAU 13 III 0.175 0175 0000 100 40 40 40 1.5 566 0 ME RETROFIT 26 It =1 2231 2,223 OT 11A 1fA 80 69 14491 1233E 210 22 1 Is'HI 0018 0012 13 90 96 60 40 82 62 20 39 III SEES 038E 0000 10.0 2.9 2.9 2.9 12 1325 0 132E 46 1 12003 062E 7.733 1.3 182 182 125 94 0918E 68990 M192 W 1 0514 000 0065 100 4.1 4.1 14 11 82 08 26 54 1 2.711 0168 0,10 100 178 17,6 10.1 24 2420 308 2118 55 II tAS2 IA52 1.452 12 14A 141 141 141 16E62 18582 0 56 III 0.122 000 am 100 40 4,6 46 13 242 W 126 62 1 11.611 1175 1141 55 152 182 125 3.9 11800 3658 am 64 11 1.720 7110 7.710 03 170 170 160 188 105285 10526E 0 62 1 2,710 400E 3946 341 12.0 17.0 111E 1.0 51491 3193 6120 LOCAL 9 III 00 00 00 100 40 40 4o 13 154 40 too 10 1 01 00 00 100 40 40 40 1.3 in 36 60 11 III 0.1 01 0.1 100 40 40 40 12 in 58 131 IZA 1 00 00 DO 10.0 40 4.0 40 1A 68 20 48 120 1 00 00 00 10.0 4.0 4.0 40 13 40 12 28 12C I DO 00 00 100 40 40 40 to 14 4 10 12D 1 00 00 0.0 9.5 4,0 4.0 40 13 0 18 41 12E 1 00 00 00 to 40 40 40 13 41 12 29 1TF 1 00 00 00 100 40 40 40 to 10 5 11 Im 1 00 00 00 100 4,0 4,0 40 13 32 11 20 61 1 00 DO 00 ME 40 4,0 40 13 39 12 28 16 IS 02 02 02 100 40 40 40 13 5E2 115 402 18 III 05 as 05 100 4.1 4.1 4.1 13 Two 497 1149 31 III 00 00 00 02 40 40 40 16 102 30 03 32 1 00 00 D0 100 40 40 40 to 102 30 12 49 1 00 00 00 10.0 40 40 40 13 21 6 14 Q 1 00 00 00 10.0 3,7 37 32 12 82 19 42 66 1 00 00 00 100 40 40 40 1A 46 14 32 69D 1 00 00 00 89 40 40 40 1J 5 2 4 ME 1 00 00 OD 09 40 40 40 13 5 2 4 69A I 00 00 00 100 40 40 40 Is 5 1 3 No 1 00 00 00 100 40 40 20 11 2 1 1 69C 1 00 00 010 89 40 40 32 12 3 1 2 TO# 1 00 00 00 82 00 OD 00 09 D 1 0 108 1 00 00 00 819 40 40 40 1.3 2 2 5 TOO 1 00 00 &0 89 40 4A 28 20 8 a 0 21 1 00 Do DO 69 4.1 4.1 4.1 12 1 0 1 22 1 04 03 0.3 100 RE 16.5 ISE 2,3 4309 583 3806 60 1 01 01 at 100 4.7 4.7 4.2 13 259 TU 159 51 1 04 • 02 03 100 4,7 47 4.2 12 ion 225 746 52 1 at 0.1 01 10.E 8.1 8.1 &1 t6 QT 81 351 TOTALTamtovM 181523 LO"ac"PUBDRIVE 110411 LOADENTERINGNEWPORTGAY 12UU San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan E-3 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Apnendiir E— Modetino Resuas Table E.3. Estimated TN Loads in San Diego Creek Dry Season Low Plow — Initial Phase Scenario 0 SITE TYPE D44lite M rLOW h IMP.FLOW EFF.PIAW RZ11WE d. 0 4 91411RUNI COIIC. ROROFF Cold IRF.CURC. EFFOMC. .0 OIP.LOAD UP. LCAO LOAD efM0Y617 REOIOKW 13 lit am am 01100 100 4D 44 40 n 0 29 RETROFIT 20 11 i431 IA3T IAN 12 99 OA 90 5A 12as no 54a 17 I Ills 0012 0011 19 72 72 12 34 n 32 4s a Its 0.10T 0to7 0000 100 2A 2A 2A us 0 22A 46 1 K722 062s 790 13 151 150 to 3A 60040 2111t 24M 63 1 am 04M 0053 IRA 41 41 1s IA 103 48 a a 1 25M 01a 0.160 IRA 107 It? 136 11 20" 141 In? 66 11 1A95 1005 t.on 1.0 141 NA 14A es 131" am 746a a In 0.011 am 0010 too 4A 44 44 14 2a a 2a 62 1 lone Ills file 8.6 I A 153 60 $3 /4,32 12r6 sasr 64 11 7229 7229 I'm Is 110 l7A 1sa 61 100542 W36 6I6N 07 1 I'm 4000 3A2 31 Ito 170 0.1 to 21649 3455 lam LOCAL I6 111 01 Ot 0.1 too 40 40 40 fA 2a 51 223 is DI of O.l 0.4 100 41 41 41 11 351 a 2" 31 11t 00 00 00 100 40 4A 40 11 91 4 ti a2 I OA 00 00 too 4A 40 40 it 31 6 26 A9 1 OA 04 as 104 4A 40 40 fA to 2 8 42 1 00 00 00 IRA 1a Sb is 11 14 2 12 10TALRDMOYAL I2a66 LOAOOCA7wu6111avE 61072 LOADFtI1E10R6R6Ye0NTMY Isla Table EAEstimated TN Loads In San Diego Creek Wet Season Low Plow—Intthd Phase Scenario an 1TPs iNivuwi PLOW a4 IWFLOW EFF.FLOW Ru1161a d. d4 11,1411RCAM CONC. ROROFP C011C INKOE C UP CONQ, IRF.LOAO SFF.LOAO LOAD REMOV0 REOIOtNU 11 In 0.175 oin am 16.0 4A 4D 40 15 me 0 W RETROFIT 29 II 22a 21a 22st OT Ila Ila 10.1 Et lien 16M J000 27 1 Isis 0218 0.017 13 92 94 9t 71 In 100 32 39 III OAOs 0sa am 100 2A 29 29 12 1325 0 1325 40 1 12612 as=s Tram 12 102 1s2 17A 67 170a sops 31231 63 1 0314 OAa 0060 100 4t AJ is it A2 es 25 54 1 Z717 blee aim 10.0 1rA ITA 1e2 24 2410 31D 21m b6 II IA52 IA52 i4u 12 141 141 141 141 16662 lam 0 Be III bin oA55 am too 44 44 40 13 242 a 176 u I it set IRIS 1.147 5s 112 1" 12s 40 122a 3765 Asia 14 O T.762 T.7n 776E 02 170 l7A I" lei INOM low 0 01 1 776E 41100 34a 21 Ilia Ito lei to bias V113 014s2 LOCH. 1s Its 02 02 02 100 44 4.0 4.0 U at2 175 407 is 11t oia as 05 100 41 41 4A 13 lead 467 We 31 111 on, 00 00 a,T 4A 40 46 14 102 39 a3 32 1 0.0 OA 00 100 40 44 40 13 109 30 72 49 1 ad do 0.0 too AA 40 40 13 91 a 14 42 1 00 00 00 too 3.1 37 37 12 62 19 42 IOTALRa110YAL IOD21A LOADQCAMPD WM 121616 LOAOAOWMONWW t"Y 132sINI E San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E4 January 2004 • Draft for Public Review Appendix E— Modeling Results • Table E.5: Measured and Estimated Pathogen Concentrations in San Diego Creek —Low Flow Conditions • Estimated Fecal Estimated Fecal Measured E. Assumed Coliform -Complete Collfoml -Initial Coll Focal Coliform NTS Plan Phase Scenario Date MPWI4NW MPW1aeN mpmaOml MPW7eeN Estimated 30 day Estimated 30 Assume Fecal geomelricmean. daygeemetric Numberof Colifonn 30-day Complete NTS moan -Inlual Samples geometric mean Plan Phase Scenario MPNIN.1 MP14100H NPW100m1 4/5/1999 74 93 72 73 4113/1999 2110 2638 1376 14074/19/1999 100 126 89 90 _5M 136 137 426/1999 100 125 89 90 5127 128 W4/1999 52 �� W ti 58 58 4_ V256 59 59 5/10/1999 41 51 51 51 5 98 995/17/1999 30 38 44 44 5 98 99524/1999 1 880 1475 761 797 __ 5 —»--114-- —_ 1146/1/1999 100 126 89 90 4167 0/19 9 -6114/1999 —148 100 185 125 120 89 121 90 4»--_ 5 �»1 151 - _165 _ - 103 �- -167_� IN 82411999 828/1999 173 190 »- __ 216 _» 125 136 89 138 90 4 5»» 143 ��-264 99 166� _ too.—. » 168 7/6/1999 1D0 125 89 90 .» 5 »_ 254 199 �» 166 —»._-140� 168 _ 141 _ 7J12/1999 1990 - --�?A88 »» 1299 1328 5 720/1999 M2611999 100 52 125 89 58 90 58 5 5 193 137 128 �--72 138 729 8/4/1999» 106 0 80 80 — 4 ---- 90 90 127 92 72— 92 BI7011999 - W5 62 W_ 78 85 65 4 8/16/1999 ._....»».. 623/1999 100 _..»...»__ 200 125 _�._»»»» 250 89 153 90 155 5 _..._...» 4 10D -tOD --_ » 98 .. 79 79 80 80 8/31/1999 9/911999» 31 722 » 39 ---153» 45 703 45 104 4 4 »- 66 -» 57 69 --� 5T v_ 69 »� 57» 9114/1999 9/22/1999 10 73» 13 91 32 72 31 72 5 ._-61— 5 83 __ 62-�-_ 67 62- 67 92811999 98 123 88 Be 4 _ _71 » 66 »187 .58—..— �� 1N511999 145 1811 137 141 5� 179 192 10/1411999 160 200 149 154 4 244 - 180 ----._169 185 10/19/1999 364 455 318 329 6 229 _ 174_ 1025/1099 173 216 160 165 5 » 239 176 .—»_183 181 11/7/1999 160 «» 200 149 154 5 ~ 250 �_ 189 11/3/1999 159 200 149 154 4 215 159 164 1111511999 199 249 181 887 5 241 176 182 11M22J1999 228 _ 285 20 2212 4 » 247 — �181 186 11/29/1999 228 y 285 205 212 5 197 149 153 12/6/1999 148 -�— 185 139 143 5 124 IF 108 12111/1999 63 79 69 70 4 101 90 91 12J20/1999 20 _ 25 34 33 5 _ 112 ____ _ 97 __�99 122711999 335 169 129 132 4 130 171 W»741 173 1/42000 231 289 208 215 4 187 Y141 145 11102000 Ills 231 170 175 4 187 145 1/1812000 86 »»- 108 88 90 4 654 405 v_»559 418 127J29_0 10462 13078 8654 9032 _ 3 __766 577 Z72000 250 V» 320 229 236 3 900 �� —1497 1557 2J1420D0 2035 25" 1697 1769 4 2376 --� 1608 1674 PJ24/2000 7270 sells 6019 6281 4 4282 2847 2970 228@000 3448 4310 2864 2987 5 2278 W�1210 1553 �860 1616 W62000 2700 37 35 2246 2342 5 � -- __.._ 890 3113=0 _ 146 _ 183 138 142 4 737 �» 529 546 3211 000 86 108 88 90 4 66 94 96 3292000 63 79 69 70 4 48 78 79 • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E-5 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix E- Modelling Results Table E.6: Estimated Annual Sediment Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - • Complete NTS Plan Facility Type BMPe TOWFlow Flowin AF AF Flow Out AF BYPASS Flow AF Carle Above nigh. cone Below moll. Total Load Wove lone Total Load below lone Loadin tone LoadOul tons Load Removed lone BYPASS Load tons %ofToW Load Removed Regional SUM 432 432 0 0 100 0 59 0 59 0 59 0 100% Regional shell 190 139 139 51 95 36 24 10 16 3 15 7 690A Regional 0030 962 982 0 0 120 0 157 0 457 0 157 0 100% Regional sIW53 87 69 59 28 78 37 9 4 8 1 5 3 52% Regional BRo54 20 20 26 0 78 18 3 1 3 1 2 0 77% Regional 24056 510 58 $0 512 is 87 73 67 7 1 8 66 e% local INe9 139 117 117 22 103 32 20 0 17 3 14 3 71% local allele 214 159 159 Be 98 89 29 11 21 4 17 1 61% local 0ell 153 163 153 10 109 23 24 5 23 4 19 1 19% local s8al2a 149 105 105 44 94 46 19 8 13 3 11 8 67% local sual2b 96 80 80 18 55 29 11 4 9 2 7 2 as% local elbl2e 35 32 32 3 93 24 4 1 4 1 3 0 74% local sltel2d 73 62 62 10 107 31 11 3 9 2 a 2 72% local 0612e 87 65 as 22 95 37 11 4 8 2 7 3 60% local dtal2f 36 32 32 4 94 26 5 1 4 1 3 1 72% local s8e129 82 50 50 32 04 47 10 5 8 1 5 4 0% kcal $[tole 1243 1015 1015 229 Be 30 141 $1 115 25 91 28 64% local SAM 1254 See 055 299 130 44 221 76 169 23 145 53 66% local 811*22 655 405 465 190 129 50 115 45 82 1t 70 33 61% local alte3l 182 152 152 29 95 30 23 7 20 4 18 4 68% local e1ta32 232 70 70 163 67 66 27 21 8 2 7 19 24% local slto42 107 a0 s8 22 101 35 15 5 12 2 10 3 so% local s6a49 22 21 21 1 109 22 3 1 3 1 3 0 79% local a1ta50 2805 1780 1780 1105 79 81 309 241 191 123 as 118 l2% Paall easel 801 227 227 573 82 42 89 46 26 -is 43 84 48% heal 911052 479 227 227 263 82 52 64 34 25 5 20 28 37% West $Noel 91 a8 66 25 93 38 11 5 8 2 7 3 59% local alIses 48 38 38 10 109 38 1 2 6 1 5 1 67% local sa69D 64 44 44 20 50 31 5 3 4 1 3 2 45% lent altestle 44 32 32 13 69 33 4 2 3 1 2 1 53% local OW894 62 47 41 16 88 30 8 3 4 1 3 1 55% local alta099 72 63 53 18 89 31 7 3 5 1 4 2 55% pal $1h690 89 44 44 15 a8 31 5 2 4 1 3 1 55% local $Ite70A 11 9 9 2 95 33 1 1 1 0 1 6 65% local $Its70a 13 11 11 3 95 33 2 1 1 0 1 0 65% local 11110700, 23 18 18 5 95 33 3 1 2 0 2 1 65% Pace! snail 29 23 23 8 58 28 3 1 2 1 2 1 88% Table E.I. Estimated Annual Sediment Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Initial Phase Scenario Facility Type BHP$ l Flow In Flow Out Total Flow AF AF AF BYPASS Flow AF ewe Above Mon. Cone Glow mwi- Total Load Won long Total Load b41aw tons Loadh Ions Lad Load Out Removed tons tore BYPASS Lead tent %of Total Lead Removed Regional e111113 4320 432.0 0.0 0.0 99.9 0.0 59 0 59 0 59 0 100.0% Regional 0147 190.3 1392 1392 51.0 94Z 334 24 10 18 3 15 7 59A% Regional alta39 001.6 901.6 0.0 all 1202 oil 15T 0 157 0 157 0 100.0% Regional 61I653 87.1 no 69.0 28.0 77.8 31.1 9 4 0 1 5 3 52.3% Re9bnal sIM54 25.8 25.8 25.8 ao 77.8 17A 3 1 3 1 2 0 77.1% Regional SM55 559.7 57.5 57.6 5122 04.6 68.8 73 67 7 1 8 a8 82% pal s9010 1243.3 1014.8 1014.6 225.9 63.7 29.9 141 61 115 25 91 26 042% local sW18 1254.4 055.6 0350 208.6 129.7 44A 221 78 189 23 145 63 65.7% local $Bs31 1512 152Z 152.5 293 94.8 30.2 23 7 20 4 18 4 6&1% local s8s32 2323 69.7 69.1 1626 BBB W.1 27 21 8 2 7 19 23.8% local e11442 107.1 $5.5 a" 216 101.5 34.6 15 5 12 2 10 3 65.9% local aN949 22.2 2M 2M 1.1 108.8 273 3 1 3 1 3 0 70.5% local skal Me 658 638 241 64.3 251 13 8 10 3 7 4 528% San Dlego Creek NTS Mos(erPlon E-6 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • Appendix IF- Modeling Results • Table E.8: Estimated Annual TP Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Complete NTS Plan Facility Type BMP# Total Flow Flowln Flow Out AF AF AF Bypass Flow AF Cone Above mon. Cone Below moll. Total Load above His Total Load below Ibs Loadin Ibs Load Out Ibs Load Removed Iba Bypass Load Ibs %of Total Load Removed Regional slto13 432 432 0 0 027 0.00 315 0 315 0 315 0 100% Regional site27 190 139 139 51 0.39 0.23 200 118 147 64 82 54 41% Regional s1te39 982 962 0 0 029 0.00 768 0 788 0 768 0 100% Regional site53 87 59 59 28 0.44 026 104 61 70 27 43 33 41% Regional site54 26 26 26 0 0.44 0.17 31 12 31 12 19 0 61% Regional site56 670 58 58 512 039 037 600 566 61 27 34 539 6% local sites 139 117 117 22 0.35 0.20 134 75 113 64 59 21 44% local sitefo 214 159 159 55 0.38 0.22 220 130 163 73 90 67 41% local sitell 163 153 153 10 0.35 0.18 156 80 146 71 75 10 48% local sllal2e 149 105 105 44 0.39 0.23 157 94 111 49 62 46 40% local sgel2b 96 80 8o 16 035 020 92 52 78 37 40 16 43% local sllol2c 35 32 32 3 0.39 0.19 37 18 34 15 19 3 52% local silol2d 73 62 62 10 036 020 70 39 60 29 31 10 45% local sllol2e 87 65 65 22 0.39 0.23 92 53 68 30 3B 23 42% fowl sne121 36 32 32 4 039 019 38 19 34 is 19 4 50% local sltel2g 82 50 50 32 039 025 86 57 53 23 30 33 35% local stela 1243 1015 1015 229 0.38 0.21 1268 702 1035 469 566 233 45% local silelB 1254 956 956 299 0.41 023 1398 772 1058 442 616 330 44% local sil022 655 465 465 190 0.29 021 519 365 369 215 164 151 30% local slle3l 182 152 152 29 0.38 020 186 100 156 70 86 30 46% local silo32 232 70 70 163 0.38 032 239 199 72 32 39 167 16% local sile42 107 86 86 22 031 021 108 61 87 40 47 22 43% local slte49 22 21 21 1 035 018 21 11 20, 10 10 1 49% local site50 2886 1780 1780 1105 037 0.31 2914 2466 1798 1349 449 1116 15% local sliest 801 227 227 573 0.38 025 824 544 234 46 280 590 34% local sito52 479 227 227 253 034 026 442 338 209 105 104 233 24% local sliest 91 66 66 25 039 023 96 57 70 30 40 26 41% [owl slt068 48 3B 38 10 035 021 46 27 36 18 19 9 41% local sitc69D 64 44 44 20 0.34 022 60 39 41 20 21 19 34% local sile69E 44 32 32 13 039 023 47 28 33 15 19 13 40% local site69A 62 47 47 16 0.39 023 67 38 50 22 28 17 43% local MOM 72 53 53 18 0.40 023 77 44 57 25 33 20 42% loml slle69C 59 44 64 15 0.39 023 64 37 47 21 27 16 42% local sge70A 11 9 9 2 039 0.21 12 7 10 4 5 2 45% local s110700 13 11 11 3 039 0.21 14 8 11 5 6 3 45% 1=1 sllo70C 23 18 18 5 0.39 021 24 13 19 B 11 5 45% local site7l 29 23 23 6 039 0.22 31 17 25 11 14 6 45% Table E.9: Estimated Annual TP Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Initial Phase Scenario Facility T e BMP# Total Flow Flowln Flow Out AF AF AF Bypass Flow AF Cone Above m Cone Below mall. Total Land above Ibs Total Load below Iba Loadin ]be Load Out Ibs Load Removed Ibe Bypass % afTotal Load Load Ibs Rann Regional silol3 432.0 432.0 00 0.0 63 0.0 315 0 315 0 315 0 100.0% Regional sito27 1903 139.3 139.3 510 0.4 02 200 lie 147 64 82 54 41.1% Regional site39 961.6 9616 0.0 00 0.3 0.0 768 0 768 0 768 0 100.0% Regional slte53 87.1 590 59.0 28.0 04 0.3 104 61 70 27 43 33 41.5% Regional Mesa 25.8 258 25.8 0.0 04 0.2 31 12 31 12 19 0 61.1% Regional site56 569.7 57.5 57.5 612.2 0.4 0.4 600 566 61 27 34 639 5.7% local sll016 1243.3 1014.6 10146 228.8 04 02 1268 702 1035 469 566 233 44.6% local sltol8 1254.4 955.8 9558 298.5 0.4 02 13BB 772 1058 442 616 330 444% local sliest 181.8 152.5 1625 293 0.4 o2 186 100 156 70 85 30 461% local silo32 232.3 69.7 69.7 1626 04 03 239 199 72 32 39 167 16.5% 1=1 siu42 107.1 95.5 855 214 0.4 02 108 61 87 40 47 22 43.4% local sde49 22.2 21.1 21.1 1.1 0.3 02 21 11 20 10 10 1 48.7% local sliest 905 658 658 24.7 04 o2 96 57 70 30 40 26 41.1% • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E-7 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix E- Modellno Results Table E.10: Estimated Annual TN Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Complete NTS Plan Total Total Bypass Conn Cono Load Loetl Lad Bypass %olTotal Facility Total Flow Flawln Flow Out Flow Above Below above below Loadln Lad Out Removed Load Load Type Bi AF AF AF AF move. mgR. the the Ibs The The 166 Removed Regional al1413 432 432 0 0 Zia 000 2538 0 2338 0 2538 0 f00% Regional S6e27 190 139 139 51 354 1.93 less 999 1455 488 989 533 50% Rog" WISH 902 962 0 0 2.80 0.00 7320 0 7320 0 7320 0 100% Ra9bnY sliest 87 59 59 28 265 1.69 827 399 425 197 298 202 36% Regional WlaS4 26 26 26 0 265 1.23 lea 85 196 Be 100 0 54% Ra9bluv saese 570 6o 58 512 384 3.88 69S2 $543 601 192 409 6351 7% local ske9 139 I17 111 22 3.50 1.69 4347 002 1138 393 745 209 55% local WIG% 284 159 169 55 3.75 1.88 2182 1094 1819 631 1088 663 80% local slWtt 163 153 163 10 0.54 1.37 is" 008 1473 612 961 96 01% load SM124 149 IDS 105 44 3.03 1.99 leis 604 1093 351 741 453 48% local ssel2b 96 80 80 is 3.46 tell 903 420 750 207 403 163 54% local s2et2c 35 32 32 3 3.70 IAA 340 136 317 105 212 31 6114 WA e8a12d 73 62 02 10 3.50 1155 694 307 $96 209 380 9B 56% local s2el2s a7 66 65 22 3.64 1.90 BUD 448 670 217 400 232 51% WA &Se121 38 32 32 4 3.77 1.61 31116 147 325 106 219 41 60% local silal2g 92 60 50 32 314 220 830 488 510 168 342 32a 41% local 1111915 1243 1016 1016 229 360 1.61 12157 5832 9928 3394 6535 2239 54% local &list$ 1254 956 95s 299 3.64 1.80 12430 8155 9472 3107 0275 2258 50% local d42 655 485 465 Igo 275 IV 4095 2973 3478 1555 1923 1420 39% load 0,31 182 152 152 29 348 119 1719 787 1442 610 032 277 54% bad ebe32 232 70 70 153 tall zoo 2288 1535 6se 233 453 1602 20% bad allo42 107 88 a 22 3,14 1.01 at$ 470 T31 28a 445 184 49% bad al11,49 22 21 21 1 3.46 134 209 81 198 71 128 10 61% local al1e50 2886 1780 1160 ties 3.72 3.01 20180 23019 17902 12451 5540 tile$ 19% WA Wiest 501 227 227 673 3.77 2.20 02M 4793 2329 -1D78 3407 6571 42% local 511252 470 227 227 253 3.28 ZM 4279 3013 2024 75S 1288 2255 30% local steel 91 66 66 25 3178 1.92 926 473 073 220 453 2S1 49% local site" 4s 38 38 10 3.54 1.70 459 220 305 127 238 04 62% load aaad9D 84 41 44 20 3,42 1.92 age 335 410 141 283 lea 44% load altaage 44 32 32 13 3.93 20o 474 241 339 106 233 136 49% load alle89A 62 47 47 16 3.94 1.90 am 323 502 157 345 166 52% load SK0408 72 53 53 1s 3.65 1.91 752 37t a58 178 381 103 at% load eaeb80 59 44 44 15 3.94 1.22 837 310 476 148 321 102 61% local alta70A it 9 9 2 3.64 1.74 110 64 95 31 65 23 65% local 21111700 13 11 11 3 3.84 1.74 130 62 110 35 75 27 55% bad W11760 23 1s 16 a 3.44 1.75 237 108 190 61 129 47 64% Iasi Sam 29 23 23 8 4.04 1.81 324 145 258 78 170 Be 55% Table E.11: Estimated Annual TN Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Initial Phase Scenario Facility TYPO a41Fe Total Flow Flow In Flow Out AF AF AF Bypass Flow AF Cana Above m on. Cono Below nuUL Total Loetl above Ibe Total Load balm The Load In Iba Lad Out lbs Lad Removed the Sypsu Load the %olTotal Lad Removed Regional al1e13 43LO 432.0 9.0 Go 22 0.0 2533 0 2538 0 253a 0 100.0% Regional IM27 1903 1393 1392 SID 38 1.9 19" 999 1455 466 069 633 49.8% Regional e8e39 901.8 9616 Go 0.0 28 0.0 7320 0 7320 0 732D 0 100.0% Re*" ueS3 67.1 59.0 59.0 28.0 26 1.7 627 399 425 197 228 2o2 303% Regional alta54 258 258 258 0.0 26 12 lea a8 lea 68 100 0 53.5% RepkxW WIM 569.7 575 57e 5122 3.8 3.5 5952 8543 set 192 409 5351 6.0% load $WIG 12433 1014 6 1014.d 223.8 3A 1.7 12187 5832 9928 3394 6535 2239 517% bad altai$ 1254,41 955E 9558 20.8 3.0 1.8 12430 alas 9472 3197 6275 2958 603% load SM31 lot.$ 1625 162a 293 3.5 18 1719 787 1442 SID 932 217 542% local SM12 2323 89.7 89.7 1625 3.8 29 2285 1335 one 233 453 1802 19.8% Taal alta42 107.1 85.5 ass 21.5 1.1 1.6 916 470 731 286 445 154 48.6% bad 811040 222 21A 21d 1.1 3.5 1.3 209 81 198 71 US 10 61.2% bad Weal 90.5 ass ass 247 38 1.9 926 473 673 220 453 253 Ass% San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E-8 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • • • Appendix E- Modeling Results Table E.12: Estimated Annual Pathogen Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Complete NTS Plan Bypass Cone Cane Totat Lead Toth Load Load Bypass %ot Total Fadlity Total Flow Flow In Flow Out Ft.. Above Bola. above below Load In Load Out Removed Load Load Z0 BM01 AF AF AF AF MPNIL MPNIL MPN r MPN/ r MPN r MP r MPN r MPN r Removed lmal Me13 4320 4320 OO 00 83E+04 00E+00 E+00 4.4E+13 00E+00 4AE+13 0044E+13 OOE+W 100% Re9mnal s1e27 190.3 1393 1393 51.0 15E+05 7,8E+04 3.6E+13 1.8E+13 2.6E+13 8.8E+12 1.7E+13 94E+12 46% Reponal ato39 016 961.6 00 0.0 9.5E+04 00E+00 1.1E+14 0.0E+00 IIE+14 ODE+00 1.1E+14 00E+00 100% Ro0loal adoed 87.1 SOD 590 280 1.5E+05 8.4E+04 1.6E+13 90E+12 1.1E+13 3.BE+12 7.1E+12 52E+12 44% Re9lmal vte54 258 258 25.8 00 1.5E+05 5.2E+04 46E+12 1.7E+12 48E+12 1.7E+12 3.7E+12 0.0E+00 65% ftional s1e58 669.7 57.6 575 5122 1.5E+05 1.4E+05 1.1E+14 95E+13 1.1E+13 3.7E+12 7.0E+12 95E+13 7% local MOO 139.0 117A 117.4 215 1.3E+05 64E+04 22E+13 1.1E+13 1.9E+13 7.5E+12 11E+13 35E+12 51% local ua10 214.1 158.8 168.8 652 1.4E+05 7.6E+04 38E+13 .30E+13 28E+13 1.0E+13 IaE++13 98E+12 47% local stall 1632 1532 1532 10.0 13E+05 57E+04 2.6E+13 1.1E+13 2.4E+13 98E+12 1AE+13 IGE+12 56% local a11012a 1486 1050 1050 435 1.5E+05 8.1E+04 2.7E+13 1.5E+13 1.8E+13 6.7E+12 1.3E+13 81E+12 46% pal MOM 96.1 798 798 182 1.4E+05 6.8E+04 16E+13 7.8E+12 1.3E+13 5.1E+12 a3E+12 .37E+12 51% local siel2e 346 31.5 313 3.0 ISE+05 6.1E+04 6.4E+12 2.6E+12 68E+12 20E02 3.0E+12 56E+11 60% local sle12d T28 62.5 625 103 1.3E+05 63E+04 12E+13 5.7E+12 IOE+13 40E+12 60E+12 17E+12 61% local O1.12o B09 64.7 647 222 1.5E+05 7.7E+04 1.6E+13 6.3E+12 1.2E+13 42E+12 7,8E+12 4.1E+12 40% bad stal2t 357 31.7 31.7 4.0 1.5E+05 63E+04 86E+12 .38E+12 59E+12 20E+12 38E+12 7.4E+11 58% local aeol29 817 50.2 602 31.5 1.5E+05 8.9E+04 1.5E+13 9.0E+12 92E+12 32E+12 6CE+12 58E+12 40A local sb18 12433 1014.6 1014.6 2286 14E+a5 6.8E+04 22E+14 1.0E+14 1.8E+14 6.5E+13 1.1E+14 40E+13 52% bad ub18 12M4 90.8 955.8 2985 1.2E+05 6.9E+04 1,9E+14 1.1E+14 1.4E+14 6.1E+13 82E+13 4.5E+13 44% local Mte22 054.6 4648 464.8 1898 9.1E+04 8.3E+04 73E+13 5.7E+13 5.2E+13 30E+13 22E+13 2.1E+13 30% local Ma31 IBi.8 1526 162.5 292 1.4E+05 66E+04 3.1E+1J 1.5E+13 2.6E+13 98E+12 1.6E+13 50E+12 52% local M1e32 232.3 69.7 69.7 1626 7.4E+05 1.1E+05 40E+13 3.2E+13 1,2E+13 45E+12 7.6E-12 2.0E+13 19% load u1e42 107.1 85.5 85.6 21.5 1.3E+05 8.8E+04 1.7E+13 9.0E+12 1.4E+13 55E+12 82E+12 35E+12 48% bad SIM9 222 21.1 21.1 1.1 13E+05 5.6E+04 3.5E+12 1.5E+12 3.3E+12 1.4E+12 1.9E+12 1.7E+11 56% local olaw 28855 17M4 1780A 11052 IAE+OS 12EQS 5.0E+14 4.1E+14 31 E+14 22E+14 89E+13 19E+14 18% leas Mp51 BOOS 227A =74 5734 1.5E+05 89E+04 15E+14 88E+13 4.1E+13 -1.7E+13 5,8E+13 1.0E+14 40% bal Ma52 4793 226.7 2267 2526 1.3E+05 95E+04 79E+13 56E+13 3.7E+13 1.5E+13 23E+13 42E+13 29% bad Vice% SO 65.8 656 247 1.5E+05 7.9E+04 17E+13 8.8E+12 12E+13 42E+12 8.0E+12 4.6E+12 47% 10.1 wteN 47.6 37.9 37.9 0.7 1.3E+0S 8.8E+04 7.6E+12 4.0E+12 60E+12 2.4E+12 36E+12 14E+12 46% local Wol 642 M.1 M1 202 13E+05 7.6E+04 1.0E+13 6.0E+12 7.0E+12 28E+12 42E+12 32E+12 41% local aeoESE 442 31.6 316 12.7 15E+05 79E+04 BDE+12 43E+12 5.7E+12 20E+12 3.7E+12 2.3E+12 46% pal ade69A 62A 458 46.8 155 1.5E+0S 7.6E+04 1.1E+13 59E+12 8.6E+12 3OE+12 56E+12 .38E+12 491b local sdo69B 71.0 532 532 18.4 1.5E+05 7.7E-04 1.3E+13 6.6E+12 9.8E+12 3.4E+12 63E+12 34E+12 48% local ada69C 595 M4 0.4 151 1.5E+05 7.7E-04 1.1E+13 5.6E+12 81E+12 .38E+12 53E+12 .35E+12 49% bad Mom itA 9A 9.1 2.2 1.5E+05 7.1E+04 2.1E+12 1.OE+12 1.7E+12 5.9E+11 1.1E+12 4.1E+1t 53% locll ado7OB 13.1 105 10.6 2.6 1.5E+05 7.1E+04 2.4E+12 1.1E+12 1.9E+12 8.7E+1t 13E+12 47E+11 53% bad ade7OC 22.7 182 102 4.5 1.5E+05 7.2E+04 4.2E+12 2.0E+12 34E+12 1.2E+12 22E+12 84E+11 52% deal 41071 295 M4 234 8.0 15E+05 72E+04 65E+12 26E+12 43E+12 1511+12 2BE+12 1IE+12 52% Table E.13: Estimated Annual Pathogen Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions -Initial Phase Scenario Facility BMPa Total Fin. AF now In AF Flow Out AF Bypass Flaw AF Cone Above MPNM1 Cone Below MPNIL ToMl Lead Total Lead oleo. bal.. MP Al Load In MPN r Load Out MP Load R..." MP r Bypass Lad MP %of Total Load Ramevad Ne9aal eat] 432A 4320 00 0.3E+04 ... 4AE+13 00E+00 44E+13 00E+00 64E+13 OOe OO 100% Rapona MIe27 1=3 1393 1392 51.0 1"" 78E+04 35E+13 1.8E+13 .36E+13 8BE+12 1.7E+13 94E+12 45% Raylad Ma39 016 9616 00 00 B5E+04 00E+00 1.1E+14 00E+00 1.1E+14 00E+OO 1.1E+14 00E+00 100% Re d s1a51 971 590 SOD 280 1.5E+05 aAE+04 16E+13 90E+12 1.1E-13 38E+12 7.1E-12 52E+12 M% RMnM IMS1 258 us 256 010 1.5E+OS 5.2E+04 4BE+12 17E+12 4OE+12 VE+12 3.1E+12 OOE+OO 0% Ra9aaal eta56 569.7 575 57.5 5122 1.5E-05 1AE+05 1.1E+14 9BE+13 1.1E+13 3.]E-12 79E+12 95E+13 7% bnl Vale 12433 10146 10146 2288 14E05 6.81! W 22E+14 1.0E+14 18E+14 85E+13 1,1E-14 4.0E+13 52% bad sale I2 A 955a 955a 2965 12E+05 8.9E+04 IAE+14 1.1E+14 14E+14 61E+13 83E+13 45E+13 0% bal M431 1810 1525 1524 293 1.4E-05 66E+04 31E+13 ISE+13 .36E+13 90E+12 1.6E-13 50E+12 52% load sllo32 2323 B97 69.7 1026 1.4E+05 1.1E+05 40E+13 3.3E+13 12E+13 45E+12 7.5E+12 2M-13 In bal e11s42 107.1 BSS US 215 13E05 6SE+04 17E+13 SOE+12 1.4E+13 SSE+12 8.3E+12 35E+13 48% loos sa49 M2 21.1 21.1 1.1 13E+05 SBE+04 3.5E+12 ISE+12 33E+12 14E+12 1.9E+12 1.7E-11 56% local 0b61 SO 656 658 247 15E+05 79E+04 17E+13 88E+12 12E-13 42E-12 8OE+12 46E+12 4]% San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E-9 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix E- Modeling Results Table E.14: Estimated Total Copper Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Complete NTS Plan Facility Type BMPa TotalFlow Flowln Flow Opt AF AF AF Bypass Flow AP caa Above ugn. Cone Below uWL Total Load above ibs Total Load below me Loodln ibe Lad Out Me Load Removed Ibs Bypass Lad ]be %otTOW Lead Removed Regional MGM 432.0 4370 0.0 010 2" 00 3110 0.0 31.0 00 31.0 0.0 100.014 Regional s8o27 190.3 139.3 139.3 5110 149 84 7.7 4A 58 21 0.8 21 462% Regional a11039 001.E 901.6 0.0 0.0 1918 0.0 6118 010 Gila OA 51.8 a.0 100.0% Regional 38053 67.1 69.0 69.0 2a.0 657 21.7 1319 51 BA Do $.1 42 01.11. Regional sit054 258 25.8 25.8 0.0 657 66 3.0 0.4 3.9 DA 3.5 0.0 90.1% Regional shosd 609.7 67.5 67.6 5122 149 1" 231 210 23 04 1.5 207 64'% [Deal 3009 139.0 117.4 117A 21.5 14.9 7.0 8.6 2.6 4.7 1.8 3.0 0.9 532% local 84010 214.1 168.8 168,8 55.2 16.3 0.0 89 4.7 0.6 24 42 2.3 476% local elleil 1632 1532 1632 lob 149 0.1 0.6 27 82 23 319 OA 5:11% local sltal2a 148.6 1050 105.0 416 15.5 04 62 3.4 44 14 28 1.8 45.614 local shol2b 90.1 790 70.8 102 14.4 7.0 3.0 1.8 3.1 1.2 1.0 06 51.3% lost sital2e 34.8 31.5 31.5 3.0 1DA 88 1.9 0.6 1,7 05 12 02 65.8% local sllal2d 72.8 02.6 62.6 1013 lea 7A 3.3 1A 28 09 119 0.6 67.4% teal shave 80.9 64.7 64.7 222 149 7.9 3.5 119 28 10 1.7 0.9 47.0% local s6e12t 35.7 31.7 31.7 4.0 172 0.8 1.7 07 16 0.6 1.0 0.2 60.6% loud ei1012g 81.7 602 502 31.6 185 1013 4.0 23 25 0.8 1.7 IS 42.G% local shale - 1243.3 1014.G 1014.E 228.8 282 9.7 95.2 327 77.1 162 626 17.5 05.7% local allots 1254.4 9358 9558 208.5 323 11.9 1102 40.5 $410 14.3 61.7 282 632'% low s4o22 654.E 464.8 464.8 109.8 23.6 10.0 420 19.1 20.0 7.0 22.9 12.9 54.6% local alle31 161.8 162.5 1525 29.3 205 8.9 13.2 4.4 119 23 8.8 21 66.6% local 26032 2329 69.7 60.7 1626 3t2 23.6 19.7 148 6.9 IA 40 13.6 24.7% 1=1 sl1D42 107.1 85.5 85.5 21.E 21A 103 8.5 3.0 BA 13 08 1.7 04.9% 1=1 al 222 21.1 21.1 1.1 176 a.1 11 OA 14 0.3 0,7 01 852% low s]lo5D 2885.5 1780.4 17804 11052 32.0 24.6 2511 102.1 1649 952 621 082 23.5% teal @]lost 8009 227A 2224 573A 2&0 13.3 60.6 20.1 101 •114 21.6 40.E 40.6% local eltc52 4703 226.7 226.7 252.0 343 20.7 443 270 212 34 17.8 23.0 39.7% local o0e81 Bole as$ 05.8 24.1 177 8.8 4A 22 3.2 1.0 22 12 SOMA heal a]te08 41.6 3T.9 37.0 9.7 145 7.4 19 10 t5 0.6 lb 04 60.1% local 58069D 042 44.1 44.1 202 350 148 6.1 28 42 0.7 3.6 1.9 57.8% local si1e69e 44.3 31.6 31.E 127 395 152 46 1.0 34 06 29 1.4 61.6% local s8e09A 024 48.8 40.8 15.5 Alai 14.1 a8 24 5.1 07 4A 1.7 845°S local see898 71A 63.2 532 18.4 41.1 14.0 8.0 28 59 05 5.1 21 64.3% loaf $11669C 69le 44A 444 16.1 402 14.3 a.$ 23 4.9 0.7 4.2 1.7 04.4'% local slloTOA 11.4 9.1 9.1 22 149 73 0.5 02 OA O.1 0.2 GA 50.7% local a80106 13.1 10.8 10.6 26 149 13 0.6 03 0.4 02 0.3 0.7 50.6% local 811070C 22.7 15.2 18.2 4.6 14.9 7A 0.8 0.6 0.7 09 0.8 0.2 50.5% local 811471 295 234 234 00 374 124 32 10 26 04 22 06 69.4% Table E.15: Estimated Total Copper Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Initial Phase Scenario Facility TYPO amps Taus now Flowln flawold AF AF AF Bypass Flow AF coma Above UgAl Cone Below u 0. Total Load above IDS Total Load balm Ibs Loadln Iba Lad Out Ibe Load Rammed the Bypass Load Ibs %o1ToW Load Removed Regional e11013 4320 4320 0.0 0.0 255 00 31.6 OA 3L6 0.0 31.0 0.0 100.0% Regional sYD27 1GD.3 139.3 1393 61.0 14b 9.0 7.7 4A 5.0 2.1 3.6 2.1 482% Regional SAM 901.6 061.0 00 00 19.8 0.0 515 0.0 51.6 00 51.6 Ob 10D.0% Regional show 87.1 69.0 62.0 28A 65.7 21.1 13.2 5.1 89 69 6.1 42 Gi.t% Regional DWI 25.8 25.8 25.8 0.0 W.7 55 39 04 30 04 3.6 00 90.1% Regional sgo55 669.7 67.6 67.6 $12.2 149 139 23,1 21.E 23 0.9 1.6 207 GA% local @Nola 1243.3 1014.0 1014.E 228.8 282 97 95.2 327 777 152 02le 17.5 65.7% local eltela 12644 055.8 953.8 2084 32.3 11.9 1102 40.6 6410 14.3 69.1 282 632% local WWI 181.0 162.E 1626 29.3 26A 8.0 13.2 4.4 110 2.3 80 Z1 WA% local sJW32 232.3 69.7 69.7 162.0 312 23.5 10.7 148 5.0 1.0 4.9 13.8 24,7% local e8o42 101.1 05.6 65.6 21.6 294 10.3 8.6 3.0 as 1.3 66 1.7 045% local s8e40 22.2 21.1 21.1 1.1 17.6 61 1.1 04 110 0.3 0.7 0.1 652% local elleel 90.5 0.0 0.0 D0.5 177 17.7 44 22 32 110 22 1.2 60.1% • San DlegoCreek NTSMasfarPlan E-10 January2004 • Oran for Public Review Appendix E-Modeling Results • Table E.16: Estimated Dissolved Copper Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Complete NTS Plan • • Facility Type BMP# Total Flow Flown AF AF Flow Out AF Bypass Flow AF Cone Above uqll. Cone Below ugtL Total Load above gas Total Load below Ibs Loadln Ibs Load Out gas Load Removed Ibs Bypass Load Ins %of Total Load Removed Regional sito13 4320 4320 0.0 00 13.9 0.0 16.3 00 163 00 163 0.0 1000% Regional site27 190.3 1393 139.3 510 8.5 5.2 44 2.7 32 1.5 1.7 1.2 38.6% Regional sIIe39 961.6 961.6 00 0.0 93 0.0 24.4 0.0 24.4 00 244 0.0 100.0% Regional sila53 87.1 690 59.0 280 326 132 7.73 3.1 52 06 4.6 2.5 59.5% Regional sde54 258 258 258 00 326 4.0 23 0.3 2.3 0.3 20 00 87.7% Regional s11e56 569.7 575 57.5 5122 8.5 8.0 13.1 124 1.3 0.6 0.7 118 5.3% jowl site9 1390 1174 117.4 215 7.6 46 29 17 24 1.3 12 0.4 40.1% local s1o10 214.1 158.8 158.8 55.2 8.4 6.1 4.9 3.0 36 1.7 1.9 13 39.0% 1=1 stall 163.2 1532 1632 100 7.6 42 3.3 1.9 31 17 1.5 0.2 44.0% local sitel2a 1486 105.0 1050 435 8.8 5.4 3.6 22 2.5 11 14 1.0 385% local silel21, 96.1 79.8 798 16.2 82 47 21 12 1.8 09 09 0A 42.5% local sIM12c 346 31.5 315 30 11.3 4.6 1.1 0.4 10 0.3 as 0.1 59.0% local sitel2d 72.8 625 625 10.3 8.6 4.7 1.7 09 15 0.7 08 0.2 45.9% local sdel2o 86.9 64.7 647 22.2 85 5.1 2.0 1.2 15 0.7 08 0.5 39.3% [owl sdol2f 35.7 317 31.7 40 9.9 4.7 10 05 0.8 03 0.5 0.1 52.6% local s0a129 61.7 50.2 50.2 31.5 102 64 23 14 1.4 05 09 0.9 37.4% local 51te16 1243.3 10146 1014.6 2288 130 57 44.1 19.1 35.0 110 24.9 8,1 56.6% local 5ae18 1254A 955.6 9556 298.5 139 6.3 47.3 21.7 36.1 104 257 11.3 542% local sile22 6546 464.8 4648 189.8 107 6.0 19.1 10.6 13.6 5.1 85 55 44.6% local silo31 181.8 152.5 1525 29.3 134 5.5 66 2.7 56 1.7 39 1.1 589% local site32 2323 69.7 69.7 162.6 137 10.8 8.7 6.8 26 08 1.8 6.1 21.3% local stto42 107.1 85.5 $5.5 21.5 16.2 65 47 19 3.8 09 2.8 0.9 60.2% local sro49 22.2 21.7 21.1 11 86 42 05 03 0.5 02 0.3 00 51.1% local site50 2885.5 1780.4 17804 11052 129 10.4 101.4 81.5 62.6 427 19.9 388 196% local sde51 8009 227.4 227A 5734 119 7.0 260 153 7.4 -3.3 10.7 18.6 41.0% local s1c52 479.3 226.7 226.7 2526 159 10.3 207 13.4 9.8 25 7.3 10.9 35A% local sliest 905 658 658 24.7 10.1 5.7 2.5 14 18 0.7 1.1 0.7 43.9% local micas 47.6 37.9 37.9 97 7.5 47 10 06 0.8 04 Q4 0.2 37.4% local sile69D 64.2 44.1 44.1 202 13.3 69 23 12 16 OS 1.1 07 48.0% local sile6912 44.3 31.6 316 12.7 147 7.1 1.3 09 13 0.3 0.9 0.6 51.9% local sile69A 624 468 468 156 15.2 68 26 1.1 1.9 06 14 0.6 553% local site6913 71.6 532 532 18.4 162 7.1 32 IA 23 as 1.8 08 56.0% [owl Ce69C 59.5 44.4 "A 15.1 15.2 69 25 1.1 1.8 05 1.4 0.6 55.0% local site70A 11.4 9.1 91 22 8.5 4.9 03 0.2 02 01 0.1 01 424% low[ sHe708 13.1 10.5 10.5 2.5 8.6 4.9 0.3 0.2 02 01 0.1 0.1 42.4% local sde70C 22.7 18.2 182 45 6.5 4.9 05 0.3 0.4 02 0.2 0.1 422% local elte71 29.5 23.4 234 60 14.2 6.1 1.1 0.5 0.9 03 06 02 57.1% Table E.17: Estimated Dissolved Copper Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Initial Phase Scenario Facility Type BMP# Tatar Flow Flow In AF AF Flow Out AF Bypass Flow AF Cone Above ua. cone Below ung. Total Load above Ibs Total Load below Ibs Loadln Ibs Load Out Ibs Load Removed Ibs Bypass %cfTotal Load Load gas Removed Regional sile03 432.0 4320 0.0 00 13.9 0.0 163 0.0 163 00 103 0.0 100.0% Regional site27 190.3 1393 1393 61.0 0.5 52 44 27 32 iS 1.7 1.2 38.6% Regional site39 961.6 961.6 00 00 9.3 0.0 244 0.0 24A 00 244 0.0 1000% Regional s[te53 87.1 590 590 280 32.6 132 7.7 3.1 52 06 4.6 25 59.5% Regional site54 25.8 25.8 25.8 00 32.6 40 23 0.3 23 03 20 00 87.7% Regional Me56 569.7 67.5 57.6 612.2 8.5 8.0 13.1 124 1.3 0.6 0.7 11.8 8.3% [awl shale 12433 1014.6 1014.6 228.8 13.0 5.7 44.1 19.1 36.0 11.0 24.9 8.1 566% local strata 1264.4 955.8 955.8 2985 13.9 63 473 21.7 361 104 257 11.3 542% local site3l 1818 152.5 162.5 29.3 13.4 55 66 2.7 5.6 1.7 3.9 1.1 58.9% local SI1032 2323 69.7 69.7 1626 13.7 108 87 6.8 26 0.6 1.8 6.1 21.3% local slte42 107.1 85.5 85.5 215 16.2 6s 4.7 1.9 38 09 28 0.9 602% local 5i1049 22.2 21.1 21.1 1.1 8.6 4.2 0.5 03 0.6 0.2 0.3 00 51.1% local sliest 90.5 658 658 24.7 10.1 57 25 14 18 07 1.1 0.7 43.9% San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E-11 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix E- Modellng R9sulfs Table E.18; Estimated Total Lead Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - • Complete NTS Plan Facility Typ# amp# Total Flow Flow in FlowOul AF AF AF Bypass Flow AF Cone Abova ugj Cone Below tiall. Total Load above The Total Load balm On Loadln Ibs Load Out Ibs Load Removed Ibs Bypass Load Iba %olTotal Lead Removed Regional s1413 4320 432.0 00 0.0 0.1 0.0 7.1 0.0 7.1 OA 7.1 0.0 1004% Regional 6e427 190.3 132.3 1399 61.0 9.7 62 $.a 3.2 3.7 1.9 1.8 1.3 35.3% Regional 043 961.0 901.6 00 00 0.0 0.0 17.1 00 17.7 0.0 17.7 00 100.6% Regional Mass 87.1 $90 &Ole 28.0 10.3 87 24 14 1.7 0.4 0.9 0.8 349% Regional 5054 258 25.0 25.8 0.0 103 s0 0.7 OA 0.7 OA 0.4 00 61A% Regional ado50 50.7 67.5 67.6 5124 9.7 92 150 142 1.5 0.8 0.7 Me 44% local she 1390 MA 117.4 21.9 SO 6.0 3.3 2.1 2a 1.6 12 6.5 356% kcal $[tale 214.1 158.8 158.5 55.2 9.4 CA 6.5 3.0 4.0 22 1.9 1A 346Y. local SIMI 1832 1532 1532 100 86 52 3.8 23 3.0 21 1.5 02 30.9% local sltel2a 148.E less 1050 43.5 97 6.4 3.9 28 28 1.4 1.3 1.1 34.1% local 511012b 06.1 796 79A 10.2 88 6.8 23 1.6 1.0 1A 0.8 0.4 357'% local s[lo12c 34.6 31.6 315 3.0 9.7 6A 0.9 0.6 0.8 OA 0.4 0A 44.4% local saol2d T2.8 as 026 101 8.0 6.5 4.7 1.1 1.6 0.8 06 0.2 30.1% local shol2a 68.9 64.7 64.7 222 9.7 02 23 1.5 1.7 0.9 0.8 0.0 359% local al6121 357 31.7 31.7 40 9.7 5.5 Co Ole 08 04 0.4 0.1 430% local s10122 817 602 602 31A 9.0 0.8 21 1.5 1.3 d.7 0.6 0.8 296% local Male 12433 10146 1014.8 228.8 122 62 41.3 21A 337 13.B 10.9 to 482% local shot$ 12644 955.e 0559 2085 11.8 Ole 39.6 22.4 302 13.0 17.2 94 434% local WW22 654.E 4048 4049 189.8 7.1 5.0 128 10.0 0.9 09 26 3.7 20.8% local afle31 181.5 1525 152.6 29A Me 5.0 62 29 4A 21 23 0.8 443% local 4032 2323 60.7 69.7 1026 129 10.6 6.2 0.7 2A 0.9 1.5 5.7 18,4% Iasi shall 107.1 ass 85.5 21.5 8.9 5.6 20 1.7 2.1 1.2 0.9 05 349% local s8M9 222 21.1 21A 4.1 8.0 62 0,5 OA 0.6 09 0.2 00 40.0% local alf0'A 2885.5 17804 17M4 11052 14.3 11.7 1123 918 69.3 48.5 20.8 430 18.5% local $]lost WOO 227A 227A 573A 12.7 7.9 27.0 17.3 7.0 •26 10.3 19.8 374% local al1e52 4709 226.7 226.1 252.0 129 92 109 120 8.0 31 4.9 8.9 290% local sliest 90.6 ass ass 247 0.7 0.3 24 1.6 1.7 0.9 Ole 0.7 352% local faces 47.6 37C 37.9 all 8.6 6.7 1.1 0.7 0.9 0.6 C4 02 31.1% local alla00D 642 44A 44.1 20.2 16.1 82 20 1A LB 0.0 1.2 0.8 459% loci 111089E 443 31.6 MA 12.7 17.3 8.5 21 1A 14 04 1.1 0.0 COA% [coal alk69A 624 46.8 40.8 Ill 17A 0.1 3.0 1.4 22 0.6 1.6 U:7 57.5% low swila 71e a= 532 184 170 8.1 3.3 18 25 07 1.7 0.6 62,4% local e110690 59.6 44.4 444 1611 17.4 8.1 28 1.3 21 O.e 1.5 07 632% kcal s$e70A 11.4 9.1 9.1 22 9.1 5.9 0.3 02 02 01 0.1 0.1 388% local asa70B 13.1 10.5 10.5 26 9.7 6.9 0.3 0.2 0.3 01 CA 0.1 sale% kcal sle70C 22.7 182 182 45 9.7 59 0.6 04 0.5 02 0.2 6.1 366% local sile7l 295 234 234 80 18.0 7.7 1.4 0.0 1.1 0.3 0.8 03 57.4% Table E.19: Estimated Total Lead Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Initial Phase Scenario Facility Type amp# Total Flow Flowin Flow Out AT AF AF Bypass Flow AF Cone About vatt. Cana Below u Total Load above [be Total Load balm Ibs Loadln Ibs Load Out Ibs Load Removed Ibs Bypass load Ibs %alToul Load Removed Regional $lots 4320 4320 SO 00 OA 0.0 7.1 0.0 7.1 00 7.1 0.0 1000% Regional $ho27 1903 139.3 139.3 M.0 9.7 02 5.0 32 3.7 1.9 1.8 1A 35.3% Regional axon gOIA 961.6 0.0 0.0 CA 0.0 17.7 0.0 17.7 OC 17.7 0.0 1000% Regional alid53 87.1 69.0 Me 20.0 10.3 87 24 1.0 1.7 0.6 0.0 Ole 349% Regional altc$4 258 218 25.3 0.0 10.3 5.0 0.7 OA 0.7 04 0.4 0.0 61.5% Regional sae50 563.7 81.5 67.5 5122 9.T 9.2 16,0 14.2 4.5 0.0 0.7 13.6 49% local SPA16 1243.3 1014.6 10140 2282 122 6.3 41.3 21A 33.7 13.8 10.9 7A 482% local altol8 1264A 9558 955.0 208A 11.$ 8.0 39.0 22.4 302 13.0 172 9A 43A% local a1431 18fA 152.6 /529 29.3 40.6 5.9 52 29 4A 21 23 08 44.1% local 0e32 2323 69.7 693 102.E 120 10.6 3.2 6.7 24 0.0 1.6 6.7 18.4% kcal alto42 107A 856 $5.5 21.6 b9 58 26 1.7 21 12 0.9 0.5 34914 local 41te49 222 21.1 21.1 td 88 52 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.0 40.9% local weal 9n5 658 L.58 24.7 97 8,s 24 1.6 1.7 0.9 08 07 35214 0 Son DlegoCreekNTSMasferPlan E-12 January2604 • Draft for Public Review Appendix E- Modeling Results aTable E.20: Estimated Total Zinc Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Complete NTS Plan • • Total Total Bypass Cone Cone Load Load Load Bypass %of Total Facility Total Flow Flowln Flow Out Flow Above Below above below Loadln Load Out Ramavad Lead Load T BMP0. AF AF AF AF u L u L Iba Iba Iba lb, lb, Ibs Removed Regronol allot, 432.0 432.0 0.0 0.0 131.8 00 1548 0.0 164.8 00 154.8 0.0 1000% Regional sit027 190.3 139.3 1393 51.0 79.3 42.5 410 22.0 30.0 it's 19.0 110 48.4% Regional sito3g 961.6 961.6 00 00 93.3 0.0 2439 00 243.9 00 2439 0.0 1000% Regional $11053 $7.1 590 590 28.0 291.4. 113.5 69.0 26.9 468 4.7 421 222 61.1% Rational slta54 25.8 25.8 258 00 2914 290 20.4 4.0 204 20 184 00 90.0% Regional si1o56 569.7 575 57.5 512.2 79.3 74.2 122.8 115.0 12A 4.5 7.9 m.4 6.4% local st09 1390 117A 117A 21.5 745 36.1 28.2 13.6 23.8 93 14.5 4A 51.6% local sio10 214.1 1588 1588 55.2 79.9 42.1 46.5 245 34.5 12.5 220 120 47.3% local silel1 1632 1532 1532 10.0 740 31.7 32.8 14.1 30.8 12.1 18.8 2.0 57.1% local slol2a 148.6 1050 105.0 43.5 82.2 44.6 33.2 18.0 23.5 8.3 15.2 9.7 458% local MOM 96.1 79.8 79.8 16.2 764 37.0 200 9.7 166 63 103 34 61.6% local silel2c 346 31.5 31.5 30 104.5 356 9.8 3.4 9.0 25 615 09 659% tool slloi2d 72.8 62.6 625 10.3 83.3 36.7 165 7.3 142 49 92 23 559% local shat2c 86.9 647 64.7 22.2 79.3 41.8 18.7 9.9 14.0 5.1 8.9 48 47.3% local sllol2f 35.7 31.7 31.7 4.0 91.5 36.0 8.9 3.5 7.9 25 54 1.0 60.7% local s9al2g 817 602 50.2 31.5 950 545 21.1 12.1 13.0 40 9.0 8.2 42.7% local slats 1243.3 10146 10146 228.8 161.2 53.3 545.0 180.3 444.7 80.0 364.7 100.3 66.9% local $[lets 1254A 955.6 9558 298.6 1640 61.1 559.4 2086 426.2 75.4 3509 1331 62.7% local s1e22 654.6 4648 464.8 189.8 115.3 640 205.2 96.2 145.7 36.7 109.1 59.6 '53.1% local sito31 1818 1625 162.5 29.3 143.1 47A 70.8 23.4 59.4 12.0 47.3 114 66.9% local sile32 2323 69.7 69.7 1626 176.9 1325 111.8 $3.7 33.5 55 280 782 25.1% loot $Ito42 107.1 85.5 85.5 21.5 150.0 533 43.7 15.5 34.9 67 281 8.8 64.4% local s1e49 222 211 21.1 id 889 320 6.4 1.9 5.1 1.7 34 03 64.0% Ioow slle5o 28855 17804 1780.4 11052 189.8 144.1 1489.1 1130.8 918.8 560.5 358.3 5703 24.1% local dto51 8009 227.4 227.4 573A 156.2 77.7 340.2 169.3 96.6 -74.3 170.2 2436 50.2% local %to52 479.3 226.7 226.7 252.6 217.4 1283 283A 167.2 134.0 17.9 1162 1493 41.0% loot Most 90.5 658 658 24.7 938 46.7 23.1 11.5 168 52 11.6 6.3 502% tool she68 47.6 37.9 37.9 9.7 741 38.2 96 50 76 30 47 20 485% local site690 64.2 44.1 44.1 20.2 2110 861 36.9 16.0 25.3 35 218 11.6 592% local sde69E 44.3 31.6 31.6 12.7 238.7 69.0 288 10.7 205 2.5 180 8.2 62.7% loot slto89A 62A 468 468 15.5 242.1 82.1 41.1 13.9 30.8 37 27A 102 66.1% local ffie698 71.6 532 532 18.4 2452 84.6 47.7 16.5 35.6 42 313 12.3 655% local sg069C 59.6 44.4 44.4 15.1 242.5 83.2 392 135 29.3 3.5 25.8 10.0 65.7% local sfto70A 11.4 9.1 9.1 2.2 79.3 38.9 2.4 1.2 2.0 0.7 1.2 05 51.0% local sita708 13.1 10.5 10.5 25 793 38.8 2.8 1.4 2.3 08 14 05 51.1% local sile70C 22.7 182 182 4.5 79.3 39.1 4.9 2.4 3.9 1A 2.5 1.0 503% tool dta71 29.5 234 234 6.0 241.1 72.5 19.3 6.8 154 1.8 135 40 69.9% Table E.21: Estimated Total Zinc Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Initial Phase Scenario Total Total Hype" Cone Cone Land Load Load Bypass %of Total Facility Total Flow Flow In Flow Out Flow Above Below above below Loadln Load Out Removed Load Load T e BMPa AF AF AF AF u L u Has tbs ?be Has lb. Ibs Removed Regional silal3 432.0 4320 00 0.0 131.8 0.0 154.8 0.0 154.8 0.0 1548 0.0 7000% Regional sito27 190.3 139.3 139.3 51.0 79.3 42.5 41.0 22.0 30.0 11.0 19.0 110 464% Regional d1e39 961.6 9616 0.0 00 933 00 243.9 00 243.9 00 2439 00 100.0% Regional s8o53 87.1 590 590 28.0 291A 113.5 69.0 26.9 46.8 4.7 42.1 222 61.1% Regonal dt054 258 258 258 0.0 291A 290 204 2.0 20.4 2.0 18A 0.0 900% Regional allo58 569.7 575 67.5 512.2 793 74.2 122.8 115.0 12.4 4.5 7.9 1104 6.4% local dto16 1243.3 1014.6 1014.6 22B8 161.2 53.3 5450 180.3 4447 800 364.7 100.3 66.9% local allots 1254.4 9558 9558 298.5 1640 61.1 5594 208.5 426.2 75.4 350.9 1331 62.7% tool sIM31 1818 1525 152.5 293 143.1 47.4 70.8 23.4 594 12-0 47.3 11.4 689% local $11032 232.3 69.7 69.7 1626 176.9 132.5 111.8 83.7 335 55 280 78.2 25.1% local SlIe42 107A 855 85.5 21.6 I50.0 53.3 437 15.5 34.9 6.7 28.1 88 644% loot oe49 222 21.1 21.1 1.1 869 32.0 54 1.9 5.1 1.7 3.4 0.3 64.0% tool 51tool 905 658 65.8 24.7 938 46.7 23.1 11.5 16.8 52 116 63 502A San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E-13 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix 15- Modeling Results Table E.22: Estimated Dissolved Zinc Loads In, Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Complete NTS Plan Facility Typo IMP Total Flow Flowln AF AF Flow Out AF eyplua Flow AF Oac Above vah. Cone Below UA Tool Load above Ibs Total Lad below ids Loadin Ibs Lbsd O4t Ibs Lad Removed Ibs Bypass Load Ibs %dfToUl Load Removed Regional sllol3 4370 4370 0.0 0.0 51.0 0.0 107.7 00 107.7 00 107.7 0.0 100.0.1; Regional slto27 100.3 139.3 135.3 silo 44.2 228 229 11.8 108 6.7 11.1 8,1 484'% Regional 611039 061.6 901.E 0.0 0.0 04A 09 USA OA 104 0.0 167.8 0.0 1600% Regional a11e53 87.1 Soo 59.0 200 f024 72.1 456 111 309 24 28.6 111 02.6% Ro9bnal alto54 25A 25.8 258 0.0 192.4 10.0 13.5 1.1 13.5 11 124 00 022% Regional a1U50 601 57.5 57.5 $122 442 41.3 6816 04.0 0.9 2s 48 01.8 6.7% ideal slide 139.0 117A 117.4 21.5 45.1 197 1710 7.4 144 48 9.6 28 60.4-5 local sitol0 214.1 168.8 15BA 652 45.9 23A 26.7 13.4 19.8 as 13.3 6.9 solo% local eltoti 163.2 153.2 163.2 10.0 451 lea 200 716 18.8 82 128 12 827% local 3e412a USA 105.0 late 43.6 40.3 24,2 187 0.8 132 43 8.0 6.9 47.6% loaf a6012b 96.1 79.8 798 16.2 43.3 10.8 119 52 9A S3 6.1 19 544% local allal2o 34.0 31.5 31.5 3.0 6119 10.1 6A 1.8 53 19 49 as 89.1% local sital2d 720 62.6 025 10.3 61A 20.2 102 4.0 87 25 82 14 60.7% local silal2a 809 84.7 04.7 22.2 442 22.5 105 6.3 7.8 28 SA 21 402% local SHOW 3S7 31.7 31.7 4.0 628 10.2 SA 19 4.6 13 33 0.6 63.0% Meal afo12o 81.7 602 602 31.5 655 30.6 123 0.8 7.8 20 6.6 48 446% local allele 1243.3 10140 1014.6 228.E 1011 30.8 WA 1049 2780 414 237.5 689 699% local altcib 1294.4 9386 960.8 298A 103A 381 353.2 123.1 2692 190 2302 84.1 052% local 0022 654.6 464.8 4048 180.8 020 34A 1400 OILS 103.0 1910 $4.7 423 68,01A local 211031 18/.6 162.5 ISM 29.3 9010 9712 448 134 37.0 02 31.3 7.2 70.0°14 local sile32 2323 69.7 697 1626 1124 83.2 71,0 628 21.3 28 18.6 49.7 20.0% local 511042 107.1 85.5 OSA 2118 97.7 310 284 0.2 22.7 35 192 5,7 67.0% local $11049 22.2 21.1 21.1 1.1 55.0 17.0 34 1.0 32 019 23 02 6915% local alto50 280546 178OA 17804 11052 1200 902 941.8 707.0 sett 3471 234.1 3W.7 24.0% local slt0511 8009 2274 227A 573A 06.7 403 210.6 1008 598 49.9 MIT 160.7 621% Idcot 911052 4193 2201 220,7 2$20 142.7 82.3 185.9 107.2 879 02 78.7 95.0 42.3% local gre01 90,6 65.8 08 24.7 543 257 134 6.3 9.7 27 TA 3.7 526% local slle86 47.0 '17.9 37.9 917 46.1 211 ge 27 4.7 1,6 3.1 12 53.1% local alla891) 64.2 44.1 44.1 202 133.0 523 234 9.1 100 18 142 7.3 6OA% local eltaGgE 44.3 31A 31.8 12.7 1514 6410 182 6.6 13k 13 10 6.2 84.3% local altagA 674 46.8 40.8 155 1634 456 26.0 84 19.5 19 17.6 05 67.8% local IIH4696 71.0 032 532 18.4 155.E 61.2 30.3 10.0 226 22 204 7.8 87.1% local 11110690 59.5 44A 44A 16.1 163.7 60.2 24.9 81 leg 18 10.7 8.3 67.3% local a6070A 1i4 9.1 9A 22 44.2 207 14 0.0 1.1 04 0,7 03 53,1% local dHa7Oe 13A 10.5 10.5 2.5 44.2 20.7 1R 0,7 12 04 08 (L3 $32% local slU760 227 18.2 182 4.6 44.2 20.8 27 1.3 22 97 IA 0.5 529% local $11071 295 234 234 6,0 1521 431 122 36 97 10 8.7 2s 71.7% Table E.23: Estimated Dissolved Zinc Loads in Storm Runoff with Average Rainfall Conditions - Initial Phase Scenario Facility TYPO BMPe Total Flow Malin AF AF Fluty Out AF Bypass Flow AF Cona Abow our. Cone Below u Told Load show lbs Total Load balm Iba Ladln Ibs Lad Losd Out Ramovad Ibs its Bypass Load IM %ofTotai Lad Remowd Regional sU13 432.0 432.0 0.0 0,0 91.6 0.0 107.7 0.0 107.7 00 107.7 0.0 100.0% Regional silo27 190.3 139.3 139.3 81.0 442 22.8 22.9 11.8 lea 5.7 11.1 8,1 46.4% Regional MOM 961.6 061A 00 0.0 649 0.0 1690 00 1618 00 189.6 00 100.0% Regional sit653 87.1 69.0 59.0 28.0 1024 72.1 45.0 11.1 30.9 24 285 147 62.6% Regional sitOS4 25.8 25.8 258 0.0 1924 15.0 135 1.1 105 IL1 12A 0.0 922% Regional dilate 669.7 57.5 57.6 612.2 44.2 41.3 a&$ 64.0 6.9 23 4.6 61.6 8.7% local alla18 1243.3 1014A 1014.0 228.8 1011 308 341.8 1049 2789 41A 2374 829 634% local dinlia 1254.4 055.8 956.E 298.8 103.5 $0.1 353.2 123.1 2692 39.0 230.2 84.1 652% local a11431 181.8 1525 ims 29.3 00.6 272 446 134 37.6 62 31.5 T2 700% local sito32 2323 69.7 6917 102.0 112.4 83.2 710 526 21.3 28 18.5 497 20.0Y. local s0e42 107.1 85.5 856 21.6 0717 316 26.6 92 227 3.5 192 0.7 67.6% local e8o49 22.2 21.1 21.1 1,1 659 17O 34 1.0 32 09 2.3 02 69.5% Iwal e0.01 905 85,8 658 747 643 25.7 its 62 91 27 70 37 626% • Son Diego Creek NTSMasterPlan 13-14 January2004 • Draft for Public Review Appendix E— Modeling Results 0 E.2 Uncertainty in Model Results Model results of treatment effectiveness in the NTS facilities are based on the mean annual water quality loads models using available monitoring information. These results should not be interpreted as representing absolute load reductions that will occur with implementation of the NTS Plan. There is uncertainty in the model predictions reflecting the inability to completely characterize actual site conditions of the planned wetlands serving future development and hydrologic conditions. This section is intended to provide an estimate of the range of uncertainty associated with the load reduction estimates. Uncertainty in the model results arise from two sources: 1. Model uncertainty — inaccuracy in the model representation of the key processes 2. Input data uncertainty — inaccuracy in the model input parameters Model uncertainty represents inaccuracies and/or omissions in properly characterizing the processes in the watershed and NTS system that affect hydrology, water quality, and loads. Traditionally model uncertainty is addressed in a model calibration and verification process, but this is not feasible in a planning level effort, and will not be addressed here. More detailed models (e.g., continuous hydrologic and water quality models) may be appropriate in the facility design phase of the NTS Plan. The second source of uncertainty is from the inability to accurately quantify the model inputs and parameters. Some model inputs include environmental parameters (e.g. streamflow and water quality) • that are variable and require large data sets to estimate statistically reliable means. Other model inputs are lumped parameters that aggregate processes. Parameter uncertainty was evaluated with sensitivity analyses whereby the input parameters are varied individually over a range of reasonable values. The associated range in model output provides a measure of the possible prediction uncertainty associated with the corresponding input. The degree to which the output changes relative to the change in the input is a measure of the sensitivity of the model to that input. Parameter sensitivity analyses were performed separately for the two models describing load reduction from low flow and storm flow conditions. Results from these sensitivity analyses indicate a range of possible model predictions associated with individual input parameters. • E.2.1 Uncertainty in Predicted of TN Removal from Dry and Wet Season Low Flow A parameter sensitivity analysis was performed for estimation of TN removal from dry and wet season low flows under the Complete NTS Plan. The selection of parameters for evaluation was based on knowledge regarding the adequacy of the data sources. The selected parameters were: • The first -order kinetics rate constant. This is a critical model parameter that describes the rate at which nitrogen is consumed in the wetland system Streamflow. Estimates for build -out conditions are required for each facility, however, long-term historical data is available at only three locations within the watershed Influent TN concentration. Required at each facility. Monitoring data are available throughout San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E-15 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendbr E— Modeling Results the watershed and can be correlated to land use 0 • Background TN concentrations. Disperse TN sources such as groundwater and nursery discharges are difficult to quantify, especially for build -out conditions The Selected model input parameters were varied individually over the range of values indicated in Table E.24. The associated range in model predictions for TN reduction is also presented in Table E.24. A series of graphs shown in Figure E.1 illustrates the sensitivity of predicted TN removal to changes in individual model input parameters. The more sensitive inputs are those that have the greater slopes in Figure E.1. Table E.24: Summary of the Sensitivity Analysis Results for TN. DRYSEASON WET SEASON Parameter unit value Range TN Load Value TN load used tibs/seaeon) used Ows"aon) Rate constant' day' 0.55 02-6.7 95,000-65,000 0.25 0.16-0Ad 137,000-113,000 Flow rate % 100 80-130 47,000 — 109,000 100 80-130 86,000-188,000 TN concentration. % 100 60-120 45,000 — 83,000 100 60-120 77.000-150,000 Background cone. mglL 1 0.2-2 65,000-76,000 1 1 0.2.2 123,000-129,000 Based on professional Judgment and data from Prado Weiland [Reilly J.F., 20001 The parameter sensitivity results shown in Figure E.1 reveal that model predictions of IN removal from • low flows in both the dry and wet seasons are most sensitive to the estimated input flow rate and the estimated TN concentration. The model results arc comparatively less sensitive to the rate constant and the background TN concentration. The results in Figure E.1 indicate that if actual TN loads to the NTS facilities are greater than the estimated loads, due to the under -specification of flow rate or TN concentration, then the actual TN load to Newport Bay will be larger than the predicted quantities. The reverse scenario is also possible; namely TN loads to Newport Bay will be substantially lower if actual in -stream TN loads are smaller than the estimated quantifies used in the model. The plots suggest that moderately large errors in estimates of the in -stream TN loads would need to occur to invalidate the outcome that the dry season TMDL is met through implementation of the NTS Plan. Small errors in the in -stream loads are needed to invalidate the prediction of compliance with the wet season TMDL. The total prediction error is the sum of errors from individual parameter inputs, which collectively may have cumulative or counteractive influence on the net model error. For example, if the actual average flow rate is higher than the estimated flow rate used in the model, and the actual in -stream TN concentration is lower, the net result on predicted Newport Bay loads may be unchanged. The model results are additionally affected by the validly of other modeling assumptions, including the assumption that the NTS Plan is fully implemented and that facilities are functional as modeled. The results of the parametric analysis are most valuable in that they show that the quality of model predictions for TN removal depend most strongly on the accuracy of estimated in -stream TN loads and estimated flows. 0 San Diego Creek NTS MastarPlan E-16 January 9004 Draft for Public Review C • Appendix E- Modelin0 Results Dry Season 250000 IF 0 m 200000 m N a 4 150000 in H C O 1 100000 z 0 4 50000 O J 0 -100% -50% 0% 50% 100% %CHANGEIN PARAMETER 250000 e 0 m 200000 d N N a 150000 in 0 O 1 100000 z O 50000 O J TMDL 2002:2000971bslseason TMDL 2007:1538611bslseason —,h—Rate Constant —3(—Flow Rate —M(-7N Concentration -�-�--Background Cancan TMIOL 201: -100% Figure E.1: Parameter Sensitivities for Model Estimates of TN Treatment San Diego Creek NTS MasferPlan E-17 January 2004 Draft for Public Review TMIOL 201: -100% Figure E.1: Parameter Sensitivities for Model Estimates of TN Treatment San Diego Creek NTS MasferPlan E-17 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix E— Modelina Results E.2.2 Uncertainty in Predicted of Sediment Removal During Storm Flow Conditions . A similar parameter sensitivity analysis was performed for the stormwater model. Model sensitivities were quantified for estimates of total suspended sediment (TSS), phosphorus, and heavy metals. Because similar results were obtained for all pollutants, only those for TSS and phosphorus removal are presented. The input parameters selected for parametric analysis were: • Event Mean Concentration (EMC), which is an estimate of the concentration of pollutant in runoff associated from a particular land use. The EMC values were established from monitoring data collected in Ventura and Los Angeles Counties. • Percent capture is the fraction of stormwatcr flow diverted from the channel to the NTS facility, It is a function of the storage capacity of the facility and the design detention period. • Effluent concentration defines the treatment effectives of the NTS facility. Effluent concentrations were estimated from information in the EPA's national database of BMP performance. Runoff" volume, as determined from variation in rainfall volume, The ranges of the parameters used in the stormwater sensitivity analysis were selected on the basis of reasonable values that could occur. Based on examination of available data, EMC values, effluent concentrations, and runoff volumes all exhibit a large range of values, with a range varying from 50 to 200 percent of the value used in the water quality model (i.e. from one-half to double the value), Estimates of percent capture are likely to be less variable. • The selected model input parameters were varied individually over the range of 50 to 200 percent of the value used in the water quality model. The associated ranges in model estimates for sediment and phosphorus removal are plotted in the graphs shown in Figure E.2. Note that the change in input parameter is plotted on a relative scale from —50 to 100 percent. The more sensitive inputs are those that have the higher slopes in Figure E.2. The results of the parametric analysis shown in Figure E.2 indicate that predictions of sediment and phosphorus removal from storm flows are most sensitive to the inputs for EMC and runoff volume, and are comparatively less sensitive to estimates of the effluent concentration and percent capture. These results are a product of the modeling methodology and the fact that the volume of stormwater processed by the NTS facilities is small relative to the total volume stormwater produced in the entire watershed. The range of variation in the volume of stormwater diverted to the NTS facilities (percent capture) and the effluent concentration from the facilities is small relative to the total stormwater volume and loads in the entire basin. Thus, these parameters have minor influence on the overall model predictions. Conversely, variations in the volume of stormwater and the concentration of pollutants (EMC) strongly influence of the performance assessment of the NTS Plan. Son Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan E-18 January 2004 Draft for Public RevieW 0 0 • 100% 75% m O N c E 50% N y C m -a 25% ti 9 d W 0% �U) m a -25% -50% *�- -50% 100% y 75% R E t°- w 50% C N N m o N 25% U = O u CL 0% a ° s a -25% -50% -50% TSS Sensitivity Analysis - Loads to Newport Bay —A Percent Capture —yF—EMC —A— Runoff Volume --F- Effluent Concentration -25% 0% 25% 50% 75% Percent Change in Input Parameter Appendix E- Modeling Results ME 6983 a E 5985 y c 0 O 4988 c c a Q R O 3990 m J 2993 Q --! 1995 100% Total Phosphorus Sensitivity Analysis - Loads to Newport Bay 35.4 -25% 0% 25% 50% 75% Percent Change in Input Parameter 31.0 H o` s 26.6 r ,. N ag 22.1 o Q J 17.7 rn 2 13.3 a 8.9 100% Figure E.2: Parameter Sensitivities for Model Predictions of Sediment and Phosphorus Removal From Storm Flows San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E-19 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Appendix E— Modelinn Results E,3 Land Conversion Effects on TMDL Constituents Performance of the NTS Plan was evaluated for the estimated build -out conditions in the watershed. The build -out conditions will be attained over time, primarily with the continued conversion of agricultural lands and land from the recently decommissioned WAS bases to urban uses and open spaces. These land use conversions will by themselves affect pollutant loads in the San Diego Creek watershed. To better understand these conversion effects, the stormwater flow model was used to quantify changes in pollutant loads solely attributable to land use conversions. This analysis was conducted only for pollutants associated with storm flow conditions: sediments, TP, and metals. An analysis of pollutants associated with low flow conditions was not conducted because there is insufficient low flow monitoring information that can be readily correlated with land use conditions. Available stormwater monitoring data from Ventura and Los Angeles Counties were used to quantify pollutant loads associated with specific land uses. These stormwater monitoring data were selected because the stormwater monitoring programs were specifically designed to characterize pollutant loads generated from areas of fairly uniform land -use. r1 Mean pollutant concentrations from the available monitoring data were used to estimate pollutant loads for each land use category included in the storm water quality model. An example of the available data is found in Table E.25, which shows the runoff volume and pollutant load generated from a single acre of land -use category, for average rainfall information from the El Toro rain gauge (16.3 inches/year), These estimates indicate that runoff volumes are greater for urban land uses than for agricultural and open space areas. Agricultural and industrial land uses are the greatest contributors of sediments, while commercial, industrial and transportation land uses are generally the greatest contributors of heavy metals and total • phosphorus. Agricultural practicds are also a major source of phosphorus loads. Table E.25: Estimated Stormwater Volume and Pollutant Loads Per Acre of Land -Use Category Land llsc Flow acre-ft TSS bs TP bsohs) Total Copper Total Lad Ibs Total Zinc bs Commercial 0.99 180 1.1 0.11 0.048 0.65 Residential 0.70 180 0.74 0.029 0.019 0.15 Transportation 1.08 230 1.3 0.16 0.030 0.86 Open Space 0.14 69 0.057 0,0054 0.00092 0.017 Agriculture 00.914 304 09 0 0017 01..172 LUdsustrial 65 009 0.047 Mde 14D 0.71 0.063 0,032 10.48 Information in Table E.25 was used to estimate the change in runoff volume and pollutant loads resulting from the conversion of open space and agricultural areas to urban land uses. Table E.26 presents the net changes in runoff volume and pollutant loads on a per acre basis of land use category. Estimates in this table indicate that urbanization of open space and agricultural land increases runoff volumes from all land use categories. Urbanization, in general, changes the hydrology of most watersheds as a result of greater impervious areas that increase runoff volume and decrease runoff times, resulting in shorter duration and higher intensity stormwater flows. Pollutant loads of all constituents are expected to increase with the conversion of open -space areas, with greater contributions coming from the conversion to commercial, San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan E•20 Jenuery 2004 Draft for Public Review • • E Appendix E- Modeling Results transportation, and industrial uses. Conversion of agricultural land reduces sediment loads from most land uses. Phosphorous loads are also predicted to decrease when converting agricultural lands to residential areas, but are estimated to increase for commercial, industrial, and transportation land uses. Metal loads similarly will increase with conversion to commercial, industrial, and transportation uses,'but exhibit reductions or small increases with conversion to open space and residential uses, respectively. Table E.26: Estimated Changes in Stormwater Volume and Pollutant Loads per Acre of Land -Use Category from Conversion of Open Space and Agriculture Areas Diffeiefi6o in loads relative to open sace Flow TSS TP Total copper Total lead Total zinc Land Use acre ft(lbs) bs bsOhs) . lbs Commercial 0.85 110 1.0 0.10 0.048 0.63 Residential 0.57 110 0.68 0.023 0.018 0.14 Transportation 0.95 160 1.2 0.16 0.029 0.84 Agriculture 0.00 370 0.94 0.043 0.016 0.10 Light Industrial 0.85 580 1.1 0.081 0.046 1.7 Mixed Use 0.66 72 0.65 0.058 0.031 0.47 - Difference In loads relative to,a riculture Flow TSS TP Total copper Total lead Total zinc Land Use acre-ft bs (lbs)(lbs)- bs lbs Commercial 0.85 -260 0.059 0.057 0.031 0.53 Residential 0.57 -250 -0.25 -0.020 0.0012 0.033 Transportation 0.95 -204 0.29 0.12 0.013 0.74 Open space 0.00 -370 -0.94 -0.043 -0.016 -0.10 Light Industrial 0.85 210 0.11 0.037 0.029 1.6 Mixed Use 0.66 -290 -0.28 0.014 0.015 0.36 The effect of land -use conversion on runoff volume and pollutant loads for the entire San Diego Creek Watershed was quantified with land -use data presented in Section 4 of the NTS Plan Report, and runoff and pollutant load estimates in Table E.25. Rainfall data from multiple rain gauges were used in this analysis to better represent potential variation in rainfall amounts within the San Diego Creek Watershed. Estimates presented in Table E.27 show that projected land -use changes from existing to build -out conditions will increase the average storm runoff volume by about 7000 acre-ft per year due to increased imperviousness. Total metal loads and fecal coliform concentrations in stormwater are estimated to increase, while TSS and TP from terrestrial sources are estimated to decrease. Table E.27: Estimated Changes in Stormwater Volume and Pollutant Loads due to Conversion from Existing to Build -Out Land Use Conditions. TP Total Copper Total'Lead Total Zinc Fecal Existing 37,160 7,340 23.3 3,295 1,422 20,540 13,700 Build -out 44,390 6,880 22.9 3,552 1,463 27,940 13,900 Change 7,230 -460 -0.4 257 41 7,400 200 Change per 0.60 -77 lbs acre acre-ft -0.07 lbs 0.022 lbs 0.003 lbs 0.62 lbs ---I 1 - coliform concentrations are not predicted to change appreciably on a per acre basis, however loads are expected to increase due to the increased Stormwater runoff volume San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan l -21 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Appendix E— Modeling Resulls The estimated changes in runoff volume and pollutant loads in Table E.27 were divided by the projected i area of urbanization to obtain a measure of the affects of urbanization on a per acre basis. Results shown in the last row in Table E.27 indicate that conversion to build -out conditions in the San Diego Creek Watershed will reduce sediment loads by about 751bs per acre of urbanization and TP loads by 0.07 lbs per acre of urbanization. Note that these estimated reductions reflect only terrestrial sources and do not include changes from in -stream sources that may result with increased storm runoff. Loads of total copper and lead increase slightly, by less than 10 percent, however, the roughly 20 percent increase in stormwater runoff volume results in net decrease in average pollutant concentrations for copper and lead. Total zinc loads in stonnwater have the largest growth, increasing by an estimated 0.62 lbs per acre of urbanization, or about 35 percent. Average total zinc concentrations are also estimated to increase by approximately 15 percent. SO Diego Creek NTS MaslerPlen E-22 Jenuery=4 Draft for Public Roview i i 0 • Appendix E Updated Biological Resources Technical Study Appendix E — Biological Resources Technical Study (Provided under separate cover as EIR Volume II) 11 Appendix F EDR Hazardous Materials Records Search Summaries r- Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Woodbridge Village Assoc. CA FID UST, Cortese, Leaking underground gasoline storage tank. Mixed waste oil sent to Remedial action 31 Creek Road LUST, HAZNET recycler. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. DBA Irvine Pet Complex HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. No action required. 34 Creek Road Irvine Beacon Bay Auto Wash HAZNET, LUST, UST, CA Gasoline leak from LUST onto soil. Aquifer affected. Contaminated Remedial action in Woodbridge FID UST, Cortese, HIST soil removed and disposed of in approved site. progress: (1) remove 4550-Barranca Parkway UST floating product from Irvine water table; (2) pump and treat ground water; and 3 vapor extraction Heritage Health Foundation HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Materials No action required. 33 Creek Road, Ste. 204 recycled. Irvine Dental Health Care, Dental HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents, metal sludge, and unspecified organic No action required. Group of Irvine liquid mixture. Materials sent to transfer station. 33 Creek Road, #260 Irvine Hollis & Associates, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of organic residues. Materials recycled. No action required. 4672 Barranca Parkway Irvine Sunny Fresh Cleaners #7 CA SLIC, RCRIS-SQG, TCE and PCE released to soil and groundwater. No action required. 4722 Barranca Parkway FINDS, Orange Co. Irvine Industrial Site, CLEANERS Mobil #18-837 UST, CA FID, UST, Gasoline leak from LUST onto soil. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Post remedial action 4800-Barranca Parkway Cortese, LUST, RCRIS- Disposal of oil/water sludge. Sludge sent to transfer station. monitoring in progress. Irvine SQG, HAZNET, HIST UST Irvine U.S.D. Warehouse RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Disposal of PCBs and unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials No action required. #2 Meadowbrook HAZNET sent to transfer station. Irvine Stone Creek Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Disposal of halogenated solvents and organic residues. Materials sent No action required. 4250 Barranca Parkway #P HAZNET, CLEANERS to recycler. Irvine Prime Pumping Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 4 Southwind Irvine Hoag Health Center, Irvine RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Disposal of metal sludge, photochemicals, and photoprocessing waste. No action required. 4870 Barranca Parkway HAZNET Materials sent to recycler. Irvine RMYojectsURWD1EDR Summary Tables0001 Site 26 Woodhddge ln•Line-091603 DOC 1 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 26 — WOODBRIDGE IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertyfAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Photo Bear RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Disposal of metal sludge, photochemicals, and photoprocessing waste. No action required. 3972 Banana Parkway, Ste B HAZNET Materials sent to recycier. Irvine Irvine U. S. D. Irvine Unified RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Self 311 West Yale Loop Irvine Sunnytresh Cleaners RCRISSQG, HAZNET, Disposal of -halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 5365 Alton Parkway CLEANERS Irvine Barranca/West Yale Loop CHMIRS Potassium hydroxide released onto ground. No action required. No Addres Provided Irvine Orange County Fire -Station UST, CA FiD UST Active underground storage tankfacility. No action required. #36 301 East Yale Loop Irvine St. Joseph Irvine Health Center RCRISSQG, FINDS, Disposal of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Materials sent No action required. 4050 Barranca Parkway HAZNET to recyder. Irvine Chevron UST, CA FID UST Active underground storage tank facility. No action required. 5425 Alton Parkway Irvine Birdsong at W. Yale Loop CHMIRS Motor oil released into the air. No action required. No Address Provided Irvine Barranca Cleaners RCRISSQG, FINDS, Disposal of halogenated organic compounds and solvents. Materials No action required. 4920 Barranca Parkway HAZNET, CLEANERS sent to recycfer. Irvine Alton at Sand Canyon CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto the ground. No action required. No Address Provided Irvine Orange County Fire Station LUST, RCRISSQG, Gasoline leak discovered during tank test Aquifer affected. Remedial action #36 FINDS, LUST compfeted ordeemed 301 East Yale Loop unnecessary. Irvine DPL Assoc., Inc. UST Active underground storage tank facility. No action required. 15435 Jeffrey Road Irvine SI:e29 WWdW4P Indlx091603 OCC • i San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 26 — WOODBRIDGE IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Texaco Star Mart #121832 UST Active underground storage tank facility. No action required. 3090 Main Street Irvine Rite Aid Corp #5765 RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 3875 Alton Parkway Irvine Irvine U.S.D. LUST Heater fuel leak from LUST onto soil. No action required. 0 Harvard Avenue Irvine West Park Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 3831 Alton Parkway CLEANERS Irvine No Name Provided ERNS No data provided. No data provided. 3765 Alton Parkway Irvine Mobil 18-VBK UST Active underground storage tank facility. No action required. 3765 Alton Parkway Irvine Pacific Bell RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Diesel leak from LUST onto soil. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Remedial action 4918 Irvine Center Drive FID UST, HIST UST, Contaminated soil removed and disposed in approved site. Inorganic completed or deemed Irvine LUST, HAZNET, Cortese solid waste and asbestos -containing waste sent to landfill. Organic unnecessary. residues sent to rec cler. PCB waste location not disclosed. Sunny Fresh Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of dry cleaning waste products. No action required. 5365 Alton Parkway, Suite E Orange Co. Industrial Site, Irvine CLEANERS Waste Oil UST LUST Heater fuel leak from LUST onto soil. No action required. 3323 Warner Avenue Santa Ana Saffeli & McAdam, Inc. HIST UST, UST, LUST, Gasoline leak into soil. Remedial action 2955 Main Street Cortese completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Coyote Canyon Sanitary SWF/LF Solid waste disposal site containing agricultural, construction/ No action required. Landfill demolition, mixed municipal, sludge (biosolids), tires, and other Coyote Canyon Road, South of designated waste. Bonita Canyon Drive Irvine Irvine Valley College CA FID UST, HIST UST, Disposal of oxygenated solvents, laboratory waste chemicals, and No action required. 5500 Irvine Center Drive HAZNET, UST I liquids with mercury. Materials sent to recycler or landfill. Active Irvine underground storage tank location. R.IE'rointAIRw01EOR SummaryTables0001 SO 26 Woodbnd9e lmLtn"91603.000 - 3 Append&F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 26 — WOODBRIDGE IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Mobile #1M24(Ron Siveros) HIST UST, RCRIS-SQG, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active Remedial action in 5533 University Drive FINDS, CA FID UST, underground storage tank location. Unleaded, regular, and premium progress. Irvine Cortese, UST, LUST gasoline and waste oil leak. Aquifer affected. No Name Provided CHMIRS Motoroil released onto the ground. No action required. 5175 Burgundy Irvine Mybar Printing Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of Remedialaction 2772 Main Street UST, HAZNET, Cortese, hydrocarbon solvents, organic liquid mixture, and waste and mixed oit. completed or deemed Irvine LUST, Materials sent to recycler or for treatment Leaking UST. Aquifer unnecessary. affected. Unocal #6839 UST, LUST, Ca FID, UST, Gasoline leak from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Pollution Assessment 15275 Culver Drive Cortese Contaminated soil excavated and disposed of in approved site. Free Report completed. Irvine floating product removed from water table. NoName-Provided CHMIRS Gasoline released onto ground. No action required. 4511 Park Glen Irvine Williamson Chevron #96698 CA FID UST, Cortese Leaking UST. No action required. 18002 Culver Drive Irvine Control Components/Met We LUST, Cortese Leaking UST released TCE into aquifer. No action required. 2567 Main Street Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Liquid asphalt compounds released onto tha ground. No action required. Rock View at Valley View Irvine Irvine Medical Center RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16022 Sand Canyon Avenue UST, CA FID UST, Irvine Cortese UP Landscaping LUST, Cortese Gasoline released from leaking UST onto soiL Remedial action 16261 Construction Circle completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Dewey's Rubbish Service RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Leaking UST. No action required. 16122 Construction Circle East FID UST, HIST UST, Disposal of waste oil and contaminated soil. Materials sent to recycler Irvine LUST, Cortese orfortreatment Southern Cafdomia Grading UST, HIST UST. LUST, Diesel fuel released onto soil. Contaminated soil excavated and Remedial action 16291 Construction Cirde East Cortese disposed of. completed or deemed Irvine I I I unnecessary. Savala EquipmentfConstruction CA FID UST, HIST UST, Disposal of organic residues and oil -containing waste. Leaking UST No action required. 16402 Construction Cirde East -HAZNET, Cortese released diesel fuel, regular gasoline, and waste oil. Irvine P LSURWOIFDRSummaryTaWesVObt Seta 26WoodW49e I Une-091603AOC • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenttm Revised Deft EIR SITE 26 — WOODBRIDGE IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address _ Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Channel Equipment Co. LUST, Cortese Release of diesel fuel onto soil. Contaminated soil removed and No action required. 16331 Construction Circle disposed of in approved site. Irvine El Camino Union RCRISSQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 5410 Walnut Avenue FID UST, HAZNET, waste and mixed oil, organic liquid mixture, and unspecirlied aqueous Irvine Cortese solution. Materials sent to recycler or transfer station. C & W Action Rentals CA FID UST, HAZNET, Active underground storage tank. Disposal of oil/water separation No action required. 16401 Construction Circle West Cortese sludge and waste and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine Western Waste Industries UST, HIST UST, LUST, Waste oil released from leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action 16281 Construction Circle West HAZNET, Cortese disposed of in approved site. Monitoring wells installed and monitored completed or deemed Irvine for one year. Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. unnecessary. Materials sent to transfer station. Atlas Catering LUST, Cortese Gasoline released from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE Remedial action 1622 Construction Circle detected. Groundwater monitoring well installed. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Transit Mix Concrete Co. HAZNET, Cortese Leaking UST. No action required. 16161 Construction Circle East Irvine Sunset Fibre LUST, Cortese Gasoline released from leaking UST. Remedial action 16182 Construction Circle West completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Gary Vale Readi-Mix Concrete HAZNET, Cortese Leaking UST. Disposal of oil/water separation sludge, aqueous No action required. Inc. solution with organic residues. Materials sent to transfer station. 16131 Construction Circle West Irvine Irvine Ranch — Plant 106 LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel release from leaking UST. Remedial action 0 Harvard Avenue completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Orange County Fire Station CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. No action required. #106 (Valencia) 4691 Walnut Avenue Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released from leaking UST. No action required. Irvine Center Drive @ Sand Canyon Irvine Osborne Prop. LUST, Cortese Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated Remedial action 17141 Murphy Avenue soil removed and treated. Free floating product removed from water completed or deemed Irvine table. unnecessary. R:1Pro]ec611RWDV2DR Summary Tables0001 Site 26 Woodbridge In-Une-091603 DOC Appendix F San Dlego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment SITE 26 — WOODBRIDGE IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Unocai #5492 Cortese Leaking UST. No action required. 2425 Main Street Irvine SwmmyTeb1e V-W1 8ite26WoodbitCge1MUm 816nD0C • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Draft E/R SITE 27 - BARRANCA OFF-LINE WETLANDS IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status D P L Assoc Inc UST No information provided. No information 15435 Jeffrey Rd. provided. Irvine Irvine Unified Schools RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline No action required. 5050 Barranca LUST released from leaking UST. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto ground. No action required. Alton @ Sand Canyon Irvine Barranca Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 4920 Barranca Parkway HAZNET, CLEANERS aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine Irvine Fire Station #36 CA FID UST, UST, LUST, Gasoline released from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Signed off, remedial 301 E Yale Loop Cortese action completed or Irvine deemed unnecessarv. Chevron UST, CA FID UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 5425 Alton Parkway Irvine Sunnyfresh Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, HAZNET, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 5365 Alton Parkway CLEANERS aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine Irvine Valley College CA FID UST, HIST UST, Disposal of oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. Disposal of No action required. 5500 Irvine Center Dr. HAZNET, UST laboratory waste chemicals, liquids with mercury > 20 mg/I. Irvine Contaminated soil from site clean-ups. Materials sent tolandfill. Irvine Unified School District LUST Heater fuel released from leaking UST Pollution assessment 0 Harvard Ave. report completed. Irvine Village One Day Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, HAZNET, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 15415 Jeffrey Rd. CLEANERS aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to transfer Irvine station. Hoag Health Center Irvine RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 4870 Barranca Parkway HAZNET liquids with pH <UN-> 12.5 with metals, and photochemicals and Irvine photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to treatment tank and recycler. Mobil (18-837) CA FID UST, Cortese Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE Detected. Post remedial action 4800 Barranca Parkway Contaminated soil removed and disposed of. Free floating product monitoring in Irvine removed from water table. Groundwater pumped and treated to remove progress. dissolved contaminants. Irvine Medical Center RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16200 Sand Canyon Ave. UST, CA FID UST, Irvine Cortese RlProOOMIRWD1EDR Summary TablesV001 Site 27 Savants Off-Une Wetlands-091993 DCC 1 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 27— BARRANCA OFF-LINE WETLANDS (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Irvine Ranch —Plant 106 LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel released from leaking UST. Signed off, remedial 0 Harvard Ave. action completed or Irvine deemed unnecessary. No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto ground. No action required. Irvine Center Dr. @ Sand Canyon Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Motor oil released on ground. No action required. 5175 Burgundy Irvine Pacific Bell RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Diesel fuel released from leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Signed off, remedial 4918 Irvine Center Dr. FID UST, HISTUST, disposed of. Disposal of inorganic solid waste, asbestos -containing action completed or Irvine LUST, HAZNET, Cortese waste, material containing PCBs, aqueous solution with less than 10% deemed unnecessary. total organic residues. Active UST location. Woodbridge Village Association CA FID UST, Cortese No information provided. No information 31 Creek Rd. provided. Irvine Woodbridge Auto Wash CA FID UST, Cortese No information provided. No information 4550 Barranca Parkway provided. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto ground. No action required. Sand Canyon @ Oak Canyon Irvine US Post Office CA FID UST, Cortese Active undergmund storage tank location. No action required. 15692 Sand Canyon Ave. Irvine Irvine Operation Support Fac. Notify65 No information provided. No information 15029 Sand Canyon provided. Irvine Traveland LUST, Cortese Waste oil released from leaking UST. Signed off, remedial 6442 Burt Rd. action completed or Irvine deemed unnecessary. El Camino Union RCRISSQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 5410 Walnut Ave. FID UST, HAZNET, unspecified organic liquid mixture, waste oil and mixed oil. Materials sent Irvine Cortese -to transfer station and reder. Active UST location. No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto ground. Muriatic acid released onto ground. No action required. NIB 1-5 14'S/Sand Canyon Rd. Irvine Keeline Wilcox LUST, Cortese Gasoline release from leaking UST. Signed off, remedial 6600 Marine Way action completed or Irvine deemed unnecessary. 40 0 • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Draft EIR SITE 27 — BARRANCA OFF-LINE WETLANDS (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto ground. No action required. Sand Canyon @ Irvine Center Irvine R.1Project ORWMEOR Summary Tables0001 Site 27 8arrenw Oft -Una Welland5991603 DOC • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Draft EIR SITE 46 — SAN JOAQUIN MARSH IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status UC Irvine — EH&S Office & HAZNET, CHMIRS, Disposal of other inorganic solid waste, halogenated solvents, and No action required. Central Plant FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, unspecified solvent mixture waste. Materials sent to transfer station. Campus/University RCRIS-TSD, Notify 65 Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics and other Irvine inorganic solid waste. Materials recycled. Liquid oil/hydraulic fluid releases into the ground. Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Handler transports wastes. All American Asphalt RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. University & Harvard St. Irvine Prudential (Former Beckman) LUST, Cortese Solvents leak from underground storage tank. Aquifer affected. Post remedial action 19000 Jamboree Contaminated soil excavated and disposed of in approved site. Pump monitoring in progress. Irvine and treat groundwater. Fire Station #i4 LUST Unleaded gasoline and diesel fuel leaks from underground storage Remedial investigation 2 California St. tanks. Aquifer affected. phase. Irvine UC Irvine Medical Center LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel leak form underground storage tank onto soil. Preliminary site 19172 Jamboree Rd. assessment underway. Irvine UC Irvine, Fleet Services LUST, CA FID UST, Active underground storage tank location. Gasoline leak from Final remediation plan 19182 Jamboree Cortese, UST underground storage tank. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. approved. Irvine Contaminated soil excavated and disposed of in approved site. Beckman Instruments Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. Campus Dr. at Jamboree Irvine Gen Invest. Funds Real Est. HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and materials containing PCB's. No action required. holding Co. Materials recycled. Disposal of asbestos -containing waste. Materials 18691 Jamboree sent to landfill. Irvine Mallincroft Medical FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 18691 Jamboree RCRIS-TSD, CORRACTS, Contamination of groundwater. Irvine CERC-NFRAP UC Irvine Grounds Maint. LUST Unleaded gasoline leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Pollution Assessment 1000 Physical Science Rd. Report completed. Irvine Fluor Technology, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Unleaded Remedial action 3333 Michelson Dr. HIST UST, LUST, Orange gasoline leak from underground storage tank. Aquifer affected. Pump completed or deemed Irvine Co. Industrial Site, Cortese and treat groundwater. Waste oil, diesel fuel, unleaded and regular unnecessary. gasoline leaks from underground storage tanks. Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste, hydrocarbon solvents, and other organic solids. Materials recycled. R 1Pro)eets\IRW MEOR Summary TablasWOI Site 46 San Joaquin Marsh-091603 DOG 1 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 46 — SAN JOAQUIN MARSH (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Irvine Technology Partners 1, HAZNET, LUST Location of leaking underground storage tank. Disposal of No action required. LLC polycWrinated biphenyls and material containing PCBs. Materials 2601 Campus Dr. recycled. Disposal of asbestos containing waste at landfill. Disposal Irvine method of polychlorinated biphenyls and material containing PCBs not reported. Hughes Aircraft Company RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Handier No action required. 2601 Campus Dr. CORRACTS, CERC- transports waste. Irvine NFRAP Rancho San Joaquin Golf HIST UST, LUST Location of leaking underground storage tank. Contaminated soil Remedial action Course excavated and disposed of in approved site. Unleaded gasoline completed or deemed #1 Sandburg Way leaking from underground storage tank. Aquifer/ groundwater affected. unnecessary. Irvine Koll Center Newport #4 CA FID UST, Cortese, Active underground storage tank location. Gasoline leak from Preliminary Site 4910 Birch St. LUST underground storage tank onto soil. Contaminated soil excavated and Assessment underway Newport Beach disposed of in approved site. No Name Provided CHMIRS Release of linseed oil. No action required. 4699 Jamboree Rd. Newport Beach Parker -Hannifin Corporation LUST, FINDS, RCRIS- Chlorinated hydrocarbons leak from underground storage tank. Aquifer Remedial action 18321 Jamboree Rd. LQG, HAZNET affected. MTBE detected. Large quantity generator of potentially (cleanup) in progress. Irvine hazardous material. Waste oil, perchlorethylene, trichioroethane, and TCE leaks from underground storage tanks. Groundwater affected. Disposal of other organic solids, unspecified solvent mixture waste, waste oil, and mixed oiL Materials recycled. Disposal of other organic solids at landfill. Disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and material containing PCBs through treatment/incineration. Koll Company KCN-10 Fast LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel leak from underground storage tank. Groundwater affected. Remedial action 4000 MacArthur Blvd. completed or deemed Newport Beach unnecessary. Allergen Inc. CA FID UST, HIST UST, Active underground storage lank location. Diesel fuel leak from No action required. 2525 Dupont Dr. Cortese underground storage tank. Irvine American Data Industries LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from underground storage tank. Aquifer affected. Remediataction 2465 Campus Dr. Contaminated soil excavated and disposed of in approved site. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary, Wastewater Reclamation PI Cortese, LUST Regular gasoline, diesel fuel, and gasoline leaks from underground Remedial action 3512 Michelson storage tanks onto soil. Groundwater affected. completed ordeemed Irvine unnecessary. Irvine Ranch Water District CA FID UST, Cortese Location of active underground storage tank. No action required. 3512 Michelson Dr. Irvine S46 46 San Joagin Marsh U61603,rlOG • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment�tem Revised Draft EIR SITE 46 — SAN JOAQUIN MARSH (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status VNT Partnership LUST Gasoline leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Remedial action 2361 Campus Dr. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Newport Nissan Cortese Location of active underground storage tank. No action required. 888 Dove St. Newport Beach Parker Bertea Aerospace CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. No action required. Group 18321 Jamboree Blvd. Irvine Audio Magnetics Corp RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Cal- Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material No action required. 2602 Michelson Dr. Sites Irvine Michelson Co. CA FID UST, Cortese Location of active underground storage tanks. No action required. 2600 Michelson Dr. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Release of Diesel fuel from aboveground container. No action required. 4100 Newport Place Newport Beach Campus Gas CA FID UST, Cortese Location of active underground storage tank. No action required. 4601 Campus Dr. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Release of TILT-EEZ from ground level container. No action required. 4695 MacArthur Court Irvine EJ Holtze Corp HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of waste oil and mixed oil. Materials recycled. Location of No -action required. 1301 Quail St. active underground storage tanks. Newport Beach 1X Koll Center Irvine #2 HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics at transfer No action required. 18500 Von Kerman station; unspecified organic liquid mixture at recycler; and paint sludge Irvine at rec cler. Location of active underground storage tanks. Texaco Service Station LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from underground storage tank. Other groundwater Remedial action 4678 Campus Dr. affected. MTBE detected (cleanup) in progress. Newport Beach Sanwa Bank Bldg. KCN #9 Cortese, LUST Diesel fuel leak from underground storage tank onto soil. No action required. 4400 MacArthur Blvd. Newport Rockwell International Corp CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 4311 Jamboree Rd. New ort Beach R 1ProiectsllRWD1EOR SummaryTablesld001 Site 46 San Joaquin Marsh-061603 DOC 3 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment SITE 46—SAN JOAQUIN MARSH (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In -Database Status Unocal #6404 Ca FID UST, Cortese Location of active underground storage tank. No action required. 18011 Culver Dr. Irvine Williamson Chevron #96698 CA FID UST, Cortese Location of active underground storage tank. No action required. 18002 culver Dr. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Release of gasoline. No action required. 1801 Dove St Newport Beach No Name Provided CHMIRS Release of corrosive adds onto ground. No action required 1-405 N/B Jamboree Rd. Irvine SHUWA Investments HAZNET, Cortese, LUST Diesel fuel leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Disposal of Remedial action 1500 Quail St tank bottom waste. Material recycled, completed or deemed Newport Beach unnecessary. Marriott Suites Hotel CA FID UST, Cortese Location of active underground storage tanks. No action required. 500 Bay View Cir. Newport Beach Beacon Bay Auto Wash CA FID UST, Cortese Location of active underground storage tanks. No action required. 4200 Birch St Newport Beach Budget Rent-A-Car LUST, Cortese Regulargasoiine leak from underground storage tank. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 2272 Michelson Dr. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. National Car Rental CA FID UST, LUST, Regular gasoline leak from underground storage tank. Groundwater Remedial action 2222 SE Bristol St Cortese affected completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary, Chevron #f9-9212 Cortese Location of active underground storage tanks. No action required. 2303 Bristol St Santa Ana Edler Industries Inc RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Waste oil Determining site status 2101 Dove St UST, HAZNET, Cortese, leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Disposal of oilfwater and notify state board. Newport LUST separation sludge, metal sludge, and waste oilimixed oil. Materials reavcled. Location of leaking underground storage tanks. Tallmantz-County of Orange UST, HIST UST, LUST, Solvents leak form underground storage tank. Aquifer affected. NITBE Pollution Assessment 19711 Airport S. Cortese detected. Report completed. Santa Ana Gladys Jackson Cortese Location of active underground storage tanks. action required. 2652 White r Irvine "orRWMDR Sommay1'aMesll001 Sde 48 SwJoaµiin Menh-091603.130C • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment l em SITE 46 - SAN JOAQUIN MARSH (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status UCO Air CA FID UST, Cortese Location of active underground storage tank. No action required. 19461 Campus Dr. Santa Ana No Name Provided CHMIRS Release of acid fumes into the air from an above ground container. No action required. 3767 Birch St. Newport Beach Chevron #9-5418 CA FID UST, Cortese Location of active underground storage tanks. No action required. 18692 MacArthur Blvd. Irvine Orange County Fire Station LUST, Cortese Miscellaneous. motor vehicle fuel leaks from underground storage Pollution Assessment #27 tanks onto soil. Report completed. 19459 Airport Way Shur-Lok Corp HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus inorganics and liquids No action required. 2451 White Rd. with pH <UN->2. Disposal of liquids with pH <UN->2. Material Irvine recycled. Disposal of liquids with halogenated organic compounds 1000 mgll. Materials sent to transfer station. Location of active underground storage tanks. Signature Flight Support RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Kerosene Pollution Assessment 19301 Campus Dr. FID UST, HIST UST, leak from underground storage tank. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Report completed. Santa Ana LUST, HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of oillwater separation sludge, waste oil and mixed oil. Material recycled. Disposal of aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to treatmentltank. Disposal method of other organic solids not reported. Disposal of other organic solids. Material sent to transfer station. Active underground storage tank location. Location of leaking underground storage tanks. R1ProjecIMIRMEOR Summary Tables0001 Site 46 San Joaquin AppendixF • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised DraftElR SITE 53 - SR-13311-5 INTERCHANGE IRVINE, CA Property/Address, Database Reason for Listing in Database Status USMC Air Station El Toro PADS, CERCLIS, FINDS, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Handler No action required. Let 33 4019 Long 117 43 43 NPL, RCRIS-LQG, transports wastes. Annual Workplan active site. Near El Toro RCRIS-TSD, RAATS, CORRACTS,ROD, CA BOND EXP. PLAN, Cal - Sites, AWP, Cortese Nursery HIST UST Historic underground storage tanks. No action required. 660 Marine Way Irvine Keeline-Wilcox Nurseries, Inc. HIST UST, LUST, Cortese Diesel and regular gasoline underground storage tanks. Gasoline Remedial action 6600 Marine Way leaking from underground storage tanks onto soil. complete or deemed Irvine unnecessary. No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel -fuel released from ground -level container. No action required. Sand Canyon @ Irvine Center Rd. Irvine Shepard Machinery Corp RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 6565 Burt Rd. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Acids, Muriatic released. No action required. 1-5 75' N/Sand Canyon Irvine Orange County Transit District FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 14736 Sand Canyon Ave. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released from ground -level container. No action required. N/B I-514' S/Sand Canyon Rd. Irvine Traveland LUST, Cortese Waste oil leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Remedial action 6442 Burt Rd. complete or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Fore Travel of Calif Inc. UST Underground storage tank No action required. 6441 Burt Rd. Irvine Irvine O S F Corp Yard City of RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline leak Remedial action 6427 Oak Canyon LUST, UST from underground storage tank onto soil. completed or deemed Irvine I unnecessary. Irvine Operational Support Notify 65, LUST Unleaded gasoline leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Remedial action Facility completed or deemed 15029 Sand Canyon unnecessary. Irvine R:1ProjectslIRWD1EDR SummaryTabInU001 Site 53 SR-1331-51ntemhanga-091603 DOC San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft E1R SITE 53 — SR-13311-5 INTERCHANGE (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status U.S. Past Office, Main Office, LUST, CA FID UST. Gasoline leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Remove Remedial action Irvine Cortese contaminated soil and dispose in approved site. MTSE detected, completed or deemed 15642 Sand Canyon Ave. unnecessary. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto ground. No action required. Sand Canyon@ Oak Canyon Irvine USA Gasoline #234 LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Aquifer Pollution Assessment 51421n St. affected. MTSE detected. Report completed. Santa Ana Treasure Farms/Irvine LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Remove Remedial action Company contaminated soil and dispose in approved site. completed ordeemed 0 Wind Machines unnecessary. Irvine Treasure Farm Windmachme, LUST Gasoline leak from underground storage tank. Aquifer affected. Preliminary site 208 assessment workplan 0 Culver Dr. submitted. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuelreleasedonto ground from ground -level container. No action required. Irvine Center Dr. @ Sand Canyon Irvine Orange County International Cal -Sites No information provided. No action required. Raceway 15000 Sand Canyon Ave. Irvine Irvine Ranch — Plant 106 LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Remedial action 0 Harvard Ave. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Unocal #4473 Cortese Leaking underground storage tank. No action required. 14886 Irvine Tustin Marine Corps Air Station CA BOND EXP. PLAN No information provided. No action required. No Address Provided Irvine Western Digital-LSI FAB II CA FID UST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tank facility. No action required. 1 Banting St. Irvine Exxon Service Station #3525 LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from LUST. Aquiferaffected. MTBE detected Pollution Assessment 14781 Sand Canyon Ave Report completed. Irvine MoW SR-133 1-5 InWOc ga01603= 0 '1 5 • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment SITE 53 — SR-133/1-5 INTERCHANGE (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status El Camino Union RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 5410 Walnut Ave. FID UST, HAZNET, unspecified organic liquid mixture, waste oil and mixed oil, and Irvine Cortese unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to transfer station and rec cler. Irvine Valencia Growers LUST, Cortese Hydrocarbons, gasoline, and diesel fuel leak from underground storage Preliminary site 13242 Jeffrey Rd. tank onto soil. assessment workplan Irvine submitted. No Name Provided CHMIRS Hypochorite solution released from above -ground container. No action required. I-5 S/B at Alton Parkway Irvine R.1Pmfects%IRWMrORSummaryTabIm0001 Site 53SR-1331-5 lnterchange-091609000 3 Appendix • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment tern Revised Draft EIR SITE 54 - CALTRANS SR-261MALNUT AVE. IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status American Arium HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 14811 Myford Rd. Tustin Sartodus HAZNET Disposal of laboratory waste chemicals. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 3002 Dow Ave. station. Tustin Petrospec Inc. HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Materials sent No action required. 3002 Dow Ave. #304 to recycler. Tustin Bedford Properties HAZNET Disposal of paint sludge. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 3002 Dow Ave. Tustin Nascal Interplex Inc. HAZNET Disposal of oil -containing waste, waste oil, and mixed oil. Materials No action required. 2961 Dow Ave. sent to transfer station. Tustin Protool Co. RCRIS=SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 14771-D Myford Rd. Tustin F D R Field Service RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 2942 Dow Ave. Tustin The Mainland Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 2911 Dow Ave. Tustin Becwar Engineering FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 14701-C Myford Rd. HAZNET metal sludge and aqueous solution with metals. Materials sent to Tustin rec cler or treatment tank. Perfect Lamination RCRIS-SQG, HAZNET Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 14701-C Myford Rd. unspecified sludge waste, metal sludge, and inorganic solid waste. Tustin Materials sent to landfill or transfer station. Dure Timber Construction Co. HIST UST Leak of regular and diesel fuel tank. No action required. 2841 Dow Ave. Tustin Cherokee International Inc. FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 2841 Dow Ave. HAZNET, UST off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, organic monomer waste, Tustin pesticide rinse water, and oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. ASINC, Incorporated RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14661-C Myford Rd. Tustin R.1ProjectsllRWDWR Summary TablesV001 Site 54 Caltrr4ns SR261-091603 DOC 1 Appendix F San D"a Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 54 — CALTRANS SR-261MALNUT AVE. (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Tustin Parcel D Cat -Sites Potential hazard or contamination site. No further action required Edinger AveJHarvard Ave. for DTSC. northwest quadrant Tustin NE Enterprises, Inc. UST No information provided No information provided. 3017 Edinger Ave. Tustin S&G Press Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2811 Dow Ave. Tustin Slemons Sports Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2805 Dow Ave. Tustin Printronix Inc. RCRIS-LOG, HAZNET Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14600 Myford Rd. unspecified solvent waste mixture, liquid with pH >2 with metals, and Tustin unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to recyclerortreatment tank.. Bloprobe International Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2842 Walnut Ave., Suite C Tustin Paltex Editing & Prod. Sys. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Ltd. 2752 Wainut Ave. Tustin Jiffy Lube #1406 RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required, 3087 Edinger Ave. HAZNET waste oil and mixed oil, and unspecified aqueous solution. Materials Tustin sent to recycler. Ironclad, Inc. RCRISSOG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2745 Dow Ave. Tustin Boehringer Mannheim Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2742 Dow Ave. Tustin Tustin Circuits, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2681 Ave. #4E Tustin Pacific Bell CA FID UST, Cortese, Active underground storage tank location. Leaking UST. No action required. 14451 Myford Rd. UST Tustin Summary Tae 66=1 Site 54 Calearn SR261-091603 DOG 0 • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 54 — CALTRANS SR-261MALNUT AVE. (Continued) IRVINE, CA Revised Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Smith Industries (Tungston- LUST Leaking UST released chlorinated hydrocarbons. Aquifer affected. Remedial action in Carbide) Contaminated soil removed and disposed of in approved site. progress. 14451 Myford Rd. Groundwater pumped and treated to remove dissolved contaminants. Tustin Second Source Computers, RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. Inc. HAZNET halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. 14712 Bentley Circle Tustin Pacific Bell c/o Packer Lep35 RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14451 Myford Rd, Tustin Unisen Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No data provided. 14741 Franklin Ave., Suite B Tustin Consolidated Beverage Dist. UST, HAZNET, LUST Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to Post remedial action 2681 Walnut Ave. transfer station. Leaking UST. Aquifer affected. monitoring in progress. Tustin No Name Provided CHMIRS Polymeric isocyanates released into air. No action required. 14741 Franklin #B Tustin Silicon Systems, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of dry cleaning waste products. Disposal of No action required. 14351 Myford Rd. UST, CA FID UST, HIST laboratory waste chemicals, asbestos -containing waste, unspecified Tustin UST, HAZNET organic liquid mixture, hydrocarbon solvents, and other organic solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. Active underground storage tank location. Pacific Manufacturing HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of hydrocarbon solvents. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 2681 Dow Ave. Tustin Perfect Lamination, -Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 14731, I -Franklin Ave. Tustin Circuit Tech RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small -quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 2640 Walnut Ave. Suite D&E HAZNET liquids with pH >2 with metals, and photochemicals and Tustin photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to treatment tank and recycler. Dynacast Incorporated RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 2652 Dow Ave. HAZNET metal sludge and oillwater separation sludge. Materials sent -to landfill Tustin or recycler. Mattes Griot Composites RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14450 Chambers Tustin R tProjectsllRWD1EDR Summary Tables=l Sile 54 Caltram SR261-091603 DOC 3 Appendix F San Dlego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System ReVised Draft EIR SITE 54—CALTRANS SR-261MALNUTAVE. (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Fisher Scientific Tustin RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2761 Walnut Ave. Tustin Automax Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14401 Franklin Ave. HAZNET unspecified aqueous solution, waste oil and mixed oil, and aqueous Tustin solutionwithorganirresidues. Materials sent to recycler. Heads Up Industries RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14352 Franklin Ave. HAZNET laboratory waste chemicals, waste oil and mixed oil, and adhesives. Tustin Bayer Corporation RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14791 Franklin Ave. HAZNET unspecified solvent mixture waste, laboratory waste chemicals, and Tustin liquids with DH>2. Materials sent to transfer station. Cheek Engineering RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14341 Franklin Ave. HAZNET unspecified solvent mixture waste, aqueous solution with organic Tustin residues, oil -containing waste, oxygenated solvents, and halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. and transfer station. Thennotech California RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Operations 14312 Franklin Ave. Tustin Renal Devices, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14281 Franklin Ave. Tustin Texaco, Inc. Cortese Leaking UST. No action required. 2472 Chambers St. Tustin Schick Moving and Storage LUST Gasoline release from Leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated No action required. 2721 Michelle Dr, soil removed and disposed of in approved site. TPH and fATBE Tustin detected. Wells installed. 1XArco Product Company HAZNET. Cortese Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to No action required. #3091 recycler. Leaking UST. 14439 Culver Dr. Irvine Arco #3091 UST, LUST Diesel fuel released onto soil. Contaminated soil excavated and Remedial action 14493 Culver Dr. disposed of. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary, Heritage Economy Inc. LUST, HAZNET, Cortese, Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Disposal of Remedial action 14446 Culver Dr. CAFID. UST waste all and mixed oil, tank bottom waste, and aqueous solution with completed or deemed Irvine organic residues. Materials sentiorecycler. unnecessary. R6rRWDTMRS nMWTab1ft%J 1S,1954CX-tr SR261-0916031x0: 0 • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 54 — CALTRANS SR-261MALNUT AVE. (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Shipley Company LLC FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator potential hazardous materials. Disposal of Facility or area was 2631 Michelle Dr. RCRIS-SQG, inorganic solid waste, aqueous solution with metals, and solvent assigned a low corrective Tustin CORRACTS, CERC- mixture waste. Materials sent to recycler and treatment tank. action priority. NFRAP Dynachem-div of Morton LUST Methyl ethyl ketones released from leaking UST. Remedial action Thiokol completed or deemed unnecessaTv. USMC Air Station Tustin PADS, CERCLIS, FINDS, Migration of contaminated groundwater is observed or expected. Facility or area assigned Centralize Storage Facility RECRIS-LQG, RCRIS- a high corrective action Bunker TSD, RAATS, priority. Tustin CORRACTS, ROD Unocal #6639 CA FID UST, Cortese Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE Detected. No action required. 15275 Culver Dr. Contaminated soil removed and disposed of. Free floating product Irvine removed from water table. No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto ground. No action required. 4162 Trabuco Irvine Tustin Acura RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator potential hazardous materials. Active Remedial action 9 Auto Center Dr. UST, CA FID UST, LUST, underground storage tank location. Disposal of aqueous solution with completed or deemed Tustin HAZNET, Cortese organic residues, unspecified aqueous solution, and oil -water unnecessary. separation sludge. Materials sent to recycler and transfer station. No Name Provided CHMIRS Gasoline released from leaking UST. No action required. 4511 Park Glen Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Unknown clear crystals released onto ground. No action required. 4531 Byran Irvine Dewey's Rubbish Service RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Leaking UST. No action required. 16122 Construction Circle East FID UST, HIST UST, Disposal of waste oil and contaminated soil. Materials sent to recycler Irvine LUST, Cortese or for treatment. Gary Vale Readi-Mix Concrete HAZNET, Cortese Leaking UST. Disposal of oil/water separation sludge, aqueous No action required. Inc. solution with organic residues. Materials sent to transfer station. 16131 Construction Circle West Irvine Transit Mix Concrete Co. HAZNET, Cortese Leaking UST. No action required. 16161 Construction Circle East Irvine UP Landscaping LUST, Cortese Gasoline released from leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action 16261 Construction Circle I treated. I completed or deemed I Irvine unnecessary. R TrojeMVRW D1EDR Summary TablesUO01 Sde 54 Calbans SR261-091603 DOC 5 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftElR SITE 54—CALTRANS SR-261MALNUT AVE. (Continued) IRVINE, CA Propertylkddress Database Reason for listing in Database status Sunset Fibre LUST. Cortese I Gasoline released from leaking UST. I Remedial action 16182 construction Circle West completed or deemed Irvine unnecessa . orRWDZDR9ffMMYTaWftA.=1 S4654 U"MS11261-091699 DOC 0 • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenttem Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 - SANTA ANA/SANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Chevron #9-0550 LUST Leaking UST released gasoline. Aquifer affected. MTBE affected. Free Post remedial action 2051 Edinger Ave. floating product removed from water table. Groundwater pumped and monitoring in progress. Santa Ana treated to remove0 dissolved contaminants. No Name Provided ERNS No information provided. No information provided. 1702 Edinger Ave. Tustin Sheppard Construction RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 1582 Parkway Loop #K Tustin City of Tustin RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 1472 Service Rd. Tustin Tustin Parcel A Cal -Sites Potential hazard or contamination site. No further action far 2300 Block Edinger Ave. DTSC. Tustin City of Tustin Maintenance HIST UST, LUST, UST, Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline. Soil No action required. FacilityNard HAZNET affected. Disposal of waste oil and mixed oil, and oxygenated solvents. 1472 Service Rd. Materials sent to recycler. Tustin Pacific Bell c/o Allen LE580 RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Release of No action required. 1472 Edinger Ave. LUST potentially hazardous material onto soil. Tustin Glass Brokers, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. RH Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 14591 Redhill Ave. HAZNET, CLEANERS halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. Tustin Pacific Bell Tustin Center UST, Orange Co. Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Active No action required. 1452-Edinger Ave. Industrial Site, RCRIS- underground storage tank location. Disposal of organic residues, and Tustin SQG, FINDS, HAZNET, waste oil and mixed all. Materials sent to recycler. CA FID UST Consolidated Thermoplastics HIST UST Release of unleaded and diesel fuel. No action required. Co. 1492 Santa Fe Dr. Tustin C.T. Film LUST, Cortese Release of waste oil from leaking UST into groundwater. Aquifer Remedial action 1492 Santa Fe Dr. affected. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Bayer Corporation RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14791 Franklin Ave. HAZNET solvents mixture, laboratory waste chemicals, and liquids with pH >2. Tustin Materials sent to transfer station. RtProlectsVRWD1EDR SummaryTables0001 Ste 55 Santa Ana -Santa Fe-091603.DOC San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraREIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Scher Tire Center#17 CA FID UST, UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 14611 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Chevron #3-0422 LUST, HIST UST, UST, Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline into No action required. 14501 Red Hill Ave. CA FID, UST groundwater. Tustin Cal Tronics RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 15421-B Red Hill Ave. Tustin Toyota Racing Development RCRISSQG, HAZNET Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of off- No action required. 1381 Valencia Ave. specification, aged, or surplus organics, waste oil or mixed oil, Tustin unspecified organic liquid mixture, and aqueous organic residues. Materals sent to transfer station. Tustin Unified School UST, RCRIS-SQG, Active underground storage tank location. Small quantity generator of No action required. DistrictlRyder Student FINDS, HAZNET, CA FID potential hazardous material. Disposal of aqueous organic residues. Transportation UST, HIST UST Materials sent to recycler. 1302 Service Rd. Tustin Gene Rogers Chevron RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of Facility was assigned a 14501 Red Hilt Ave. HAZNET aqueous organic residues, unspecified aqueous solution, and oil -water low corrective action Tustin separation slude. Materials sent to recyclerandtransferstation. priority. Foremost McKesson Inc! RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Facility or area was Chemical Corp. CORRACTS, CERC- assigned a low 1302Industrial Dr. NFRAP, Cal -Sites corrective action priority. Tustin MCAS Tustin UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 15500 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Dynacast Incorporated RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 2652 Dow Ave. HAZNET metal sludge and oilAvater separation sludge. Materials sent to landfill or Tustin recycler. Koms UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 1231 Edinger Ave. Tustin KSH Inc. LUST, Cortese, RCRIS- Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Leaking UST Remedial action 1221 Edinger Ave. -SQG, FINDS released gasoline onto soil. completed or deemed Tustin I Iunnecessary. CDI 3M Health Care RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action -required. 1311 Valencia Ave. Tustin ArF1W1XSDRSummuyTableSWQl&te65SantaAn&Zanta Fe-0916M000 40 Apff F • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenttoem Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Champion Distribution Center HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 1200 Edinger Ave. Tustin Creative/Recycled Office RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. Solutions HAZNET oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. 15551 Red Hill Ave. Suite C Tustin Texaco, Inc. Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 2471 Chambers St. Tustin Quality Beer Distributors CA FID UST, Cortese, Leaking UST released gasoline onto soil and into groundwater. Disposal Preliminary site 15201 Woodlawn Ave. LUST of unspecified solvent mixture waste and aqueous organic residues. assessment work plan Tustin Materials sent to rec cler. submitted. Pacific Manufacturing HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of,hydrocarbon solvents. Materials sent to recycler. Active No action required. 2681 Dow Ave. underground storage tank. Tustin Perfect Lamination RCRIS-SQG, HAZNET Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 14701-C Myford Rd. unspecified sludge waste, metal sludge, and inorganic solid waste. Tustin Materials sent to landfill or transfer station. Divajex, Inc. UST, HIST-UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 15551 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Circuit Tech RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 2640 Walnut Ave. Suite D&E HAZNET liquids with pH >2 with metals, and photochemicals and photoprocessing Tustin waste. Materials sent to treatment tank and rec cler. Thunderbird Irrigation, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14402 Chambers Rd. HAZNET waste oil and mixed oil. Materials sent to transfer station and treatment Tustin tank. Thomas & Betts Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14401 Chambers Rd. Tustin Unisen Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Polymeric No action required. 14741 Franklin Ave. Suite B CHMIRS isocyanates released into air. Tustin Consolidated Beverage Dist. UST, HAZNET, LUST Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to transfer Post remedial action 2681 Walnut Ave. station. Leaking UST. Aquifer affected. monitoring in progress. Tustin SR Bray Development Corp RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 1372 Valencia unspecified solvent mixture waste, laboratory waste chemicals, and Bustin liquids with pH >2. Materials sent to transfer station. R.1Propets11RWD1EDR Summary TablesV9ot Sile 55 Santa MaSanta Fe 91603.00C San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Kerr Glass UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 15171 Del Amo Ave. Tustin Second Source Computers, RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. Inc. HAZNET halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. 14712 Bentley Circle Tustin American Display Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1381 Valencia Ave. Tustin Automax Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14401 Franklin Ave. HAZNET unspecified aqueous solution, waste oil and mixed oil, and aqueous Tustin solution with organic residues. Materialssentto recycler. Tustin Circuits, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2681 Ave. 94E Tustin Shelly Associates Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14281 Chambers Rd. Tustin Weber Plywood UST, HIST UST, LUST, Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline. Aquifer Remedial action 15501 Mosher Ave. CA FID UST affected. MTBE detected. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Boehringer Mannheim Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2742-Dav Ave. Tustin Ironclad. Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generatorof potential hazardous material. No action required. 2745 Dow Ave_ Tustin Point 4 Data Corp. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 15442 Del Amo Tustin Heads Up industries RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14352 Franklin Ave. HAZNET laboratory waste chemicals, waste oil and mixed oil, and adhesives. Tustin Cheek Engineering RCRISSQG, FINDS. Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14341 Franklin Ave. HAZNET unspecified solvent mixture waste, aqueous solution with organic Tustin residues, oil -containing waste, oxygenated solvents, and halogenated solvents. Materials sent tor clerandtransferstation. California Yachts Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1402 Morgan Circle Tustin • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenteem Revised Drell EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Thermotech California RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Operations 14312 Franklin Ave. Tustin Melies Griot Composites RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14450 Chambers Tustin Momart Delux Cleaners RCRIS-AQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14241 Red Hill Ave. HAZNET, CLEANERS halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycier. Tustin Arco #3045 LUST Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. No action required. 14231 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Arco AM/PM Mini Mart (Walid HIST UST, UST, CA FID Active underground storage tank location. No action required. C. Daoud) UST, Cortese 14231 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Renal Devices, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14281 Franklin Ave. Tustin Sheldahl Inc., Orange County FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 15771 Red Hill Ave. HAZNET waste oil and mixed oil, oxygenated solvents, other inorganic solid waste, Tustin laboratory waste chemicals, and unspecified alkaline solutions. Materials sent to rec cler and transfer station. Paltex Editing & Productions RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Systems Ltd. 2752 Walnut Ave. Tustin Coors Distribution Facility LUST, Cortese, UST, Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Groundwater 'Remedial action 15471 Del Amo Ave. HIST UST pumped and treated to remove dissolved contaminants. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Truesdail Labs RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14201 Franklin Ave. HIST UST Tustin Mainland Company RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 15602 Mosher Ave. Tustin Slemons Sports Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2805 Dow Ave. Tustin R.1ProtectsVRINMEDR Summary TablesU091 Site 55 Santa Ana -Santa Fe.091693 ACC 5 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 55—SANTAANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Lockheed Martin Fairchild RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Systems 14251 Chambers Rd. UnitA Tustin S&G Press Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2811 Dow Ave. Tustin Total Circuit Mgf. Inc. RCRISSQG, HAZNET Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 1322 Bell Ave. Suite L-1 liquids with pH >2 with metals. Materials sent to recycler. Tustin CaseSwayne Co., Inc. LUST, Cortese Waste oil and diesel fuel released from leaking UST. Contaminated soil Remedial action 1021 EdingerAve. removed and disposed of an approved site. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Toshiba America Medical RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. Systems HAZNET waste oil and mixed oil, metal sludge, and photochemicals and 2441 Michelle Dr. photoprocessingwaste. Materials sent to transfer station and recycler. Tustin Texaco HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 14041 NewportAveJl-5 Tustin Cherokee Intemational Inc. FINDS, RCRISSQG, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 2841 Dow Ave. HAZNET, UST off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, organic monomer waste, Tustin pesticide rinse water, and oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to -transfer station. Dure Timber Construction Co. HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 2841 Dow Ave. Tustin Maintenance Engineers RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. Marine Corp Air Station #821-C Santa Ana Tustin Hospital Medical Center RCRISSQG, FINDS, CA Small quantify generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of Remedial action 14662 Newport Ave. FID UST, UST, HAZNET, aqueous organic residues. Materials sent to transfer station and completed or deemed Tustin Cortese, LUST treatment tank. Gasoline release from leaking UST. unnecessary. Exxon #7-0755 CA FID UST, Cortese, Release of gasoline from leaking UST. Remedial action 14082 Red H71 Ave. LUST completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. AeroJet Ordnance Tustin RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 2521 Michelle Dr. Tustin Sw!a Ana -Santa Fa091609.DOC 0 0 • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANA/SANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Printronix Inc. RCRIS-LQG, HAZNET Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14600 Mytord Rd. unspecified solvent waste mixture, liquid with pH >2 with metals, and Tustin unspecified oil -containing waste Materials sent to recycler or treatment tank. Moffat Trenches/Tustin MCAS SWFILF Solid waste disposal site. No action required. LF Jamboree and Edinger Tustin Pacific Bell CA FID UST, Cortese, Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 14451 Myford Rd. UST Tustin Smith Industries (Tungston- LUST Leaking UST released chlorinated hydrocarbons. Aquifer affected. Remedial action in Carbide) Contaminated soil removed and disposed of in approved site. progress. 14451 Myford Rd. Groundwater pumped and treated to remove dissolved contaminants. Tustin Union Oil Service Station #567 HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 14081 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Unocal #30955 UST No information provided. No information provided. 14081 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Tosco 76 Station #5678 LUST, HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. Gasoline release from leaking Remedial action 14081 Red Hill Ave. UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. (cleanup) in progress. Tustin Chevron #20-2022 UST No information provided. No information provided. 14082 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Exxon Service Station #0755 LUST Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Remedial action 14082 Red Hill Ave. Vapor extraction used to abate release. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. ASINC, Incorporated RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14661-C Myford Rd. Tustin Mutual Liquid Gas & Equipment RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 101 E. Edinger Ave. Tustin Fisher Scientific Tustin RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2761 Walnut Ave. Tustin RT,ojedsllRWDtEDRSummaryTable%JOOI Site 55Santa Ana -Santa F"91603 DCC 7 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Bloprobe International Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2842 Walnut Ave. Suite C Tustin Tustin MCAS Cal -Sites, AWP, Cortese Potential hazard or contamination site. Active site with annual Newport Freeway at Edinger work plan. Ave. Tustin Perfect Lamination, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 14731-1 Franklin Ave. Tustin Silicon Systems, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of dry cleaning waste products. Disposal of No action required. 14351 Myford Rd UST, CA FID UST, HIST laboratory waste chemicals, asbestos -containing waste, unspecified Tustin UST, HAZNET organic liquid -mixture, hydrocarbon solvents, and other organic solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. Active underground storage tank to on. Tustin Ranch Tire andAuto RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. Center HAZNET aqueous organic residues and unspecified aqueous solution. Materials 2541 EI Camino Real sent to transfer station and recycler. Tustin Protool Co. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 14771-D Myford Rd. Tustin The Mainland Co. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 2911 Dow Ave. Tustin Brittis Custom Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. HAZNET. CLEANERS halogenated organic compounds. Materials sent to transfer station. F D R Field Service RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 2942 Dow Ave. Tustin Shell #14042 LUST Gasoline release from leaking UST. Soil affected. Remedial action 4042 Red Hill -Ave. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Shell Service Station (Vice HIST UST, Cortese, UST, Active underground storage tank location. Leaking UST No action required. AntablianlAssaf) LUST 14042 Red H61 Ave. Tustin Pacific Bell efo Packer LEP35 RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 14451 Myford Rd. Tustin V$rN 4ECRSuwamyTabies M1&d 55 Santai%aSama Fe99=3 WC 0 %IP*F • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenttem Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA PropertytAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Mr. Best Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 14453 Newport HAZNET, CLEANERS halogenated solvents and halogenated organic compounds. Materials Tustin sent recycler. Becwar Engineering FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 14701-C Myford Rd. HAZNET metal sludge and aqueous solution with metals. Materials sent recycler. Tustin Exxon Service Station HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 14032 Red Hill Ave. Tustin A Vac Industries RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 1717 S. Boyd St. Santa Ana Ricoh Electronics, Inc. HIST UST, CA FID UST, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Active No action required. 2310 Red Hill Ave. Cortese, FINDS, RCRIS- underground storage tank location. Disposal of unspecified aqueous Santa Ana LQG, TRIS, HAZNET solution and other inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to recycler and land fill. GW Cleanup Cortese, CA W DS Cleanup or abatement orders that concern the discharge -of wastes that Facility with a 2320 Red Hill Ave. are hazardous materials. continuous or seasonal Santa Ana discharge that is under Waste Discharge Requirements. American Oil HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. No action -required. 14391 Newport Ave. Tustin A S Texaco CA FID UST, UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 14391 Newport Ave. Tustin U-Haul CA FID UST, HAZNET, Active underground storage tank location. Disposal if waste oil and No action required. 1431 El Camino Real UST mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. Tustin Shipley Company LLC HAZNET, Cortese, Disposal of inorganic solid waste, aqueous solution with metals, liquids Facility or area was 2631 Michelle Dr. FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, with pH > 2 with metals, and solvent mixture waste. Materials sent to assigned a low Tustin RCRIS-TSD, recycler and treatment tank. corrective action priority. CORRACTS,CERC- NFRAP Dynachem-Div. Of Morton LUST, HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. MEK release from leaking Remedial action Thiokol UST. Aquifer affected. completed or deemed 2631 Michelle Dr. unnecessary. Tustin R.noiecsllRWDIEDRSummaryTablesll001 Site SS Santa Ma -Santa Fe-091603.00C 9 AppendixF San Diego Creek Watershed Naturat Treatment System Revised Draf -ElR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Ricoh Electronics, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 1101 Bell Ave. Tustin A Pius Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 15882 Pasadena St. HAZNET, CLEANERS halogenated solvents. Materials sent recycler. Tustin R and S Piping, Inc. LUST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. Gasoline release from leaking Remedial action 1946 Occidental SL UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil removed and treated. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. Leasing Systems Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 1943 Pomona St. Santa Ana Texaco Service Station HIST UST, UST, LUST, Active underground -storage tank location. Gasoline release from leaking Remedial action 13931 Red HilVLaguna Cortese UST. Soil affected. completed ordeemed Tustin unnecessary. Union Oil Service Station #524 CA FID UST No information provided. No information provided. 2031 East Edinger Ave. Santa Ana Red Hill and El Camino Mobil RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 13872 Red Hill Ave. HAZNET organic liquid mixture and liquids with halogens. Materials sent recycler Tustin and transfer station. Chevron 92742 HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of gas scrubberwaste, organic solids, unspecified sludge waste, No action required. 13922 Red Hill Ave. and aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials incinerated or sent - Tustin to recycler. No dame Provided HISTUST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 13922 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Chevron #9-3742 UST, LUST Active underground storage tank location. Gasoline release from leaking Remedial action 13922 Red Hill Ave. UST. Aquifer affected. Vaporextraction. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Curley Elec. CA FID UST Inactive underground storage tank location. No action required. 1731 South Ritchie Santa Ana Union Oil Service Station #524 HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 2031 EastEdingerAve. Santa Ana Texaco StarMart#1160 LUST, UST, CA FID UST, Active underground storage tank location. Gasoline release. Soil Leak tieing confirmed. 2010 Edinger Ave. Cortese, HIST UST affected. MTBE detected. Santa Ana artsSs SwtaAnaSwia Fe491M DOc 0 • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenttem Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status 2603751 Gary La Morte HIST UST Active underground storage location. No action required. 17102 McFadden Ave. Tustin Schick Moving & Storage UST, HIST UST, RCRIS- Active underground storage location. Small quantity generator of Pollution Assessment 2721 Michelle Dr. SQG, FINDS, HAZNET, potential hazardous materials. Disposal of tank bottom waste, and waste Report completed. Tustin LUST oil and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. Release of gasoline from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. TPH and MTBE detected. Contaminated soil removed and disposed of in approved site. Koko's Shell (#7980-0201) LUST, Cortese, UST, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Gasoline Remedial action 13891 Red Hill Ave. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Groundwater pumped and completed or deemed Tustin FID UST, HIST UST treated. unnecessary. Honda Santa Ana RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Active No action required. 2114 East First St. FID UST underground storage tank location. Santa Ana Chevron HIST UST, CA FID UST Active underground storage location. No action required. 2051 East Edinger Ave. Santa Ana Unirule Inc. RCRIS-SQG, HAZNET Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 1961 East Edinger Ave. Santa Ana Sunny Hills Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 1999 South Ritchey CLEANERS Santa Ana Fletcher Cleaners RCRRS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 1981 South Ritchey HAZNET, CLEANERS halogenated solvents and liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Santa Ana Materials sent to recycler. Red Hill Car Wash Inc. UST, LUST, Cortese, CA Release of gasoline from leaking UST. Soil only. No action required. 13871 Red Hill Ave. FID UST Tustin Prestige Stations Inc. #505 HIST UST Active underground storage location. No action required. 14244 Newport Ave. Tustin Arco #1865 Cortese, CA FID UST, Active underground storage tank location. Release of unleaded gasoline. No action required. 14244 Newport -Ave. LUST Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Free floating product removed from Tustin water table. Groundwater pumped and treated. Vapor extraction. Mobile Station (18-H7Q) UST, HIST UST, CA FID Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline. Aquifer Remedial action 13872 Red Hill Ave. UST, Cortese affected. MTBE detected. (cleanup) in progress. Tustin Symbolic Displays Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 1917 St. Andrews Place HAZNET aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to transfer station. Santa Ana RdPro*1siRW D@DR summary TabIgUO01 Site 55 Santa Ma -Santa Fe-091603 ooc 11 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Tustin Lexus RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Active No action required. 45 Auto Center Dr. UST. CA FID UST, underground storage tank location. Disposal of halogenated solvents Tustin HAZNET and aqueous sotullon with organic residues. Materials sent to recycler and transfer station. McLean Motor Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 50 Auto Center Dr. HAZNET -aqueous solution with organic residues and oil -containing waste. Tustin Materials sent to transferstatian recycler. Bell Industries -Electronics FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. No action required. 1831 South Ritchey SL Santa Ana Villa Martinique Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 1425 Vilage Santa Ana Tustin Acura RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Release of No action required. 9 Auto Center Dr. UST, CA FID UST, LUST, gasoline from leaking UST. Soil affected. Disposal of aqueous solution Tustin HAZNET, Cortese with organic residues. Materials sent to recycler. Exxon Service Station #3573 LUST Release of gasoline from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE Remedial action 16851 McFadden Ave. detected. completed ordeemed Tustin unnecessary. USMC Air Station Tustin PADS, CERCLIS, FINDS, Potential hazard or contamination site. Active she with annual Centralized Storage Facility RCRIS-LQG, RCRIS- work plan. Bunker TSD, RAATS, Tustin CORRACTS, ROD Universal Circuits, Inc. Cal -Sites Potential hazard or contamination site. No further action for 1800 Newport Circle DTSC. Santa Ana Chevron Station #92079 CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Remedial action 14122 Newport Ave. leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. completed ordeemed Tustin unnecessary. O'Neal Moving Systems LUST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Remedial action 2061 Ritchey St. leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary, Unocal #5224 CA FID UST, LUST, Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Remedial action 16801 McFadden Ave. Cortese leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Vapor extraction completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Circle K#7851 (Thrifty #75) LUST Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Pollution Assessment 14121 Newport Ave. leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Report Completed. Tustin Premium Distributing Co. Prop. LUST Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Remedial action 15201 Woodmen Ave, I leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil removed and disposed of I completed or deemed Tustin in approved site. unnecessary. R M=ZDRSwna,WyT0N"U001 We 55SxnfaAna se Fe D91603 DOC 46 ApSF iSan Diego Creek Watershed Natural EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Arco #1077 LUST Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Remedial investigation 13742 Red Hill Ave. leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. phase. Tustin Exxon #7-3573 CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 16851 McFadden Ave. Tustin Southern Counties Oil Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Release of Remedial action 1011 El Camino Real LUST, HAZNET gasoline from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Free floating product completed or deemed Tustin removed and disposed of in approved site. Groundwater pumped and unnecessary. treated. Vapor extraction. Alta Dena Dairy CA Fid UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. Disposal of aqueous solution No action required. 14081 Newport Ave. with organic residues and organic liquids with metals. Materials sent to Tustin transfer station. Orco Tools and Equipment LUST Active underground storage tank location. Release of diesel fuel from No action required. 2100 Ritchey St. leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Santa Ana Byco, Inc. LUST, HAZNET Active underground storage tank location. Release of diesel fuel from Pollution Assessment 1711 Newport Circle Dr. leaking UST. Soil affected. Plan to excavate and remove soil to Report completed. Santa Ana approved site. Texaco USA LUST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Remedial action 14041 Newport Ave. leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Vapor extraction. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Unocal #4953 LUST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Remedial action 14011 Newport Ave. leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil removed, treated, and completed or deemed Tustin disposed of in approved site. unnecessary. Uitramar LUST Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Remedial investigation 14000 Newport Ave. leaking UST. Groundwater affected. phase. Tustin Ultramar UST, LUST Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Remedial investigation 14001 Newport Ave. leaking UST. Soil affected. phase. Tustin Aeromill Engineering Co., Inc. LUST Active underground storage tank location. Release of gasoline from Pollution Assessment 2344 Pullman St. leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Report completed. Santa Ana Tosco #30683 Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 2350 Pullman St. Santa Ana Tustin Dodge RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Release of Remedial action 40 Auto Center Dr. UST, Orange Co. waste oil from leaking UST. Soil affected. Disposal of unspecified completed or deemed Tustin Industrial Site, LUST, aqueous solution with organic residues and oil/water separation sludge. I unnecessary. HAZNET Materials sent to rec cler. RIProjects11RWMDR SummaryTablesV001 Site 55 Santa MaSantal`"91603AOC 13 Appendix-F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftEIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status No Name Provided CHMIRS Water soluble cutting oil released onto ground. No action required. 2321 South Pullman Santa Ana Cardiock Fuels LUST, UST Release of gasoline from leaking UST. Groundwater affected. Preliminary site 13922 Newport Ave. Groundwater affected. assessment work plan Tustin submitted. Southern Counties Ail Co. CA FIA UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 13922 Newport Ave. Tustin Berkeley Investments LUST, HAZNET, Cortese Release of gasoline from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated Remedial action 2209 Lyon St soil removed and treated. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary, Sunset Envir. Inc. TS/Resource SWFILF Large volume transfer and processing facility with construction. No action required. Rea. Fee. demolition, industrial, and mixed municipal waste 16122 Construction Circle West Irvine Sunset Fibre LUST, Cortese Gasoline released from leaking UST. Soil affected Remedial action 16182 Construction Circle West completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Gary Vale Readi-Mix Concrete HAZNET, Cortese Active underground storage tank. Disposal of oilfwater separation No action required. Inc. sludge, aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to transfer 16131 Construction Circle West station. Irvine Transit Mix Concrete Co. HAZNET, Cortese Active underground storage -tank. No action required. 16161 Construction Circle East Irvine Tustin Parcel D Cal -Sites Potential hazard or contamination site. No further action Edinger Ave./Harvard Ave. required for DTSC. northwest quadrant Tustin Atlas Catering LUST, Cortese Gasoline released from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE and Remedial action 16221 Construction Circle benzene detected. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Laidlaw LUST, Cortese Gasoline released from leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 1830 Wamer Ave. reproved and disposed of in approved site. completed or deemed Santa Ana I unnecessary. USARC Santa Ana Cal -Sites, AW P Potential hazard or contamination site. No further action for 2345 Barranca Parkway DTSC. Irvine Site65 SaaAeaSanta FeU916D.00C 0 RpjVF • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Deft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status The Stockland Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Release of Remedial action 2332 Barranca Rd. LUST, Cortese polyester resin from leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil completed or deemed Irvine removed and disposed of in approved site. unnecessary. Dewey's Rubbish Service RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Leaking UST. No action required. 16122 Construction Circle East FID UST, HIST UST, Disposal of waste oil and contaminated soil. Materials sent to recycler or Irvine LUST, Cortese for treatment. Irvine Business Center Inves. LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel released from leaking UST. Soil affected. Remedial action 16520 Aston St. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Western Waste Industries UST, HIST UST, LUST, Waste oil released from leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 16281 Construction Circle West HAZNET, Cortese removed and disposed of in approved site. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. UP Landscaping LUST, Cortese Gasoline released from leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 16261 Construction Circle removed and treated. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. University Copy HAZNET, Cortese Active underground storage tank. Disposal of photochemicals and No action required. 2805 Barranca photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to transfer station. Irvine Tustin Auto Wash CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 535 East Main St. Tustin Coca-Cola Bottling Company CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 2501 Pullman St. Santa Ana C & W Action Rentals CA FID UST, HAZNET, Active underground storage tank location. Disposal of oil -water No action required. 16401 Construction Circle West Cortese separation sludge, and mixed and waste oil. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine Channel Equipment Co. LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel release from leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil Post remedial action 16331 Construction Circle removed and treated. monitoring in progress. Irvine Astech Facility Cortese, LUST Release of acetone, gasoline, and polyester resin from leaking UST. Soil Determining site status. 16680 Armstrong Ave. affected. Irvine Southern California Grading UST, HIST UST, LUST, Diesel fuel release from leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 16291 Construction Circle East Cortese removed and treated. Minor groundwater contamination. completed or deemed Irvine I I unnecessary. Arco #3132 LUST, Cortese Gasoline release from -leaking UST. Soil affected. Remedial action 13662 Newport Ave. I I completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. R1ProjectsV11MEOR Summary TablesUOW Site 65 Santa Ma -Santa Fe091603 DOC 15 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftE1R SITE 55— SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Database Reason fortistingIn Database Status Property/Address Pacific Western Containers LUST, HAZNET, Cortese Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. No action required. 1535 EdtngerAve. Contaminated soil removed and treated. Minor groundwater Santa An contamination. Groundwater monitoring wells installed. Disposal of waste oil and mixed oil, and off-spermscation, aged, or surplus organics. Materials sent to recycler. Savala Equipment/Construction CA FID UST, HIST UST, Active underground storage tank. Disposal of organic residues and No action required. 16302 Construction Circle East HAZNET, Cortese unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine Applied Geosciences, Inc, LUST, Cortese Gasoline release from leaking UST. Soil affected. Remedial action 2661 Gates Ave. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Circuit One (Division of LH Cal -Sites Potential hazard or contamination site. No further action for Research) DTSC. 2101 Grand Ave. Santa Ana V.B. Anderson LUST, Cortese Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Remedial action 1645 Edinger Ave. Contaminated soil removed and treated. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. Copley Investors, LP CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 1522 East Warner Ave. Santa Ana ACL Technologies LUST, HAZNET, Cortese Gasoline release -from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 1505 WamerAve. removed and treated. Minor groundwater contamination. Disposal of completed or deemed Santa Ana asbestos -containing waste unnecessary. Cummins CalPacificInc. HAZNEf, Cortese Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution and organic residues. Materials No action required. 1939 Deere Ave. sent to recycler. Irvine Vision Sports Holding Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Acetone Remedial action 1931 Deere Ave. HISTUST, LUST, release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil removed completed or deemed Irvine Cortese and treated, unnecessary. QB Properties Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 1851 Deere Ave. Irvine Kaiser Rollmet LUST, HAZNET, Cortese Leaking UST. Disposal of liquids with metals and unspecified oil- Remedial action 1822 Deere Ave. containing waste. Materials sent to recycler. completed ordeemed Irvine unnecessary. S:E. Briggs & Sons LUST, Cortese Gasoline release from leaking UST. Soil affected. Remedial action 16662 Milliken Ave. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Santa Fe Pacific LUST, Cortese Heater fuel release from leaking UST. Soil affected. Remedial action 1500 Edinger Ave. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. No Name Provided CHMIRS Hydrochloric acid released onto ground. No action required. 1530 East Edinger#6 Santa Ana Model Glass Co. UST, HIST UST, LUST, Gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 16691 Cortese completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Fry Metals Inc. DBA Alpha HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, solvent waste, No action required. Metals Inc. and oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station and recycler. 16782 Von Karman Ave. Irvine Cirtel Cirpack Circuits RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous materials. Copper Remedial action Operations Orange Co. Industrial Site, release from leaking UST. Soil affected. completed or deemed 16692 Hale Ave. LUST, Cortese unnecessary. Irvine Leaverton Bros. CA Fid Ust, HIST UST, Active underground storage tank location. Gasoline release from leaking Remedial action 16721 Hale Ave. LUST, HAZNET, Cortese UST. Soil affected. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Building Storage LUST, Cortese Gasoline release from leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 922 Lyon St. removed and disposed of in approved site. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. Grande Manufacturing LUST, HAZNET, Cortese Unleaded gasoline release from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. MTBE Remedial investigation 1582 Browning Ave. detected. Contaminated -soil removed and disposed of in approved site. phase. Irvine Goodyear Tire Center#1658 LUST, Cortese Waste oil release from leaking UST. Soil affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 2705 Grand Ave. removed and disposed of in approved site. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. No Name Provided CHMIRS Industrial adhesive released onto ground. No action required. 16666 Von Kerman Irvine Holchem DBA Service FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Facility or area was Chemical RCRIS-TSD, assigned a high 1341 East Maywood St. CORRACTS, CERC- corrective action priority. Santa Ana NFRAP, CA SLIC Work Ian approved. Facility 11669, Site 20 Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 16901 Armstrong Irvine RAProlectsIIRWDIEDR Summary TablesU001 Site 55 Santa Ana -Santa F"91603 DOC 17 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 55 — SANTA ANAISANTA FE CHANNEL IN -LINE BASINS (Continued) TUSTIN, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Tre Metal Processing Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Facility orarea was 1900 East Deere Rd. CORRACTS, CERG assigned a low Santa Ana NFRAP corrective action priority. Arco Facility #206 Notify 65 No information provided. No information provided. 302 West First St. Santa Ana No Name Provided CHMIRS Orddizers and organic pesticides released onto ground. No action required. 1537 East McFadden Ave. Santa Ana Unocal #5386 CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 13348 Newport Ave. Tustin Rheem Metals Cat -Sites Potential hazard or contamination site. No further action for 1722 South Santa Fe St DTSC. Santa An Newport Hydraulics, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active Determining status of 1716 South Santa Fe FID UST, HIST UST, underground storage tank location. Waste oil release from leaking UST. leak. Santa Ana I LUST, Cortese 1 A uiter affected. WRMAEOR SummmyTab1ft 01 We 55SantsAn"mm Fe-0916M DOC • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 56 — EL MODENA PARK ORANGE, CA Revised Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Fire Station #4 HIST UST Diesel fuel underground storage tank. No action required. 201 S. Esplanade St. Orange Apartment Complex ERNS No information provided. No action required. 264 S. Esplanade Orange No Name Provided ERNS No information provided. No action required. 266 S. Esplanade Orange Mobil Oil Service Station #18- CA FID UST, HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste, mixed oil and waste oil, No action required. EEP unspecified aqueous solution, and other organic solids. Materials 4502 E. Chapman recycled and/or transported to a transfer station. Active underground Orange storage tank location. Fire Department, Station 4 CA FID UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 201 S. Esplanade Orange Pageant Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 4528 Chapman Cleaners Orange Pink Panther Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 4523 E. Chapman HAZNET, Cleaners halogenated solvents. Materials transported to recycler. Orange Santiago Hills Auto Spa Inc. UST Underground storage tank location. No action required. 8544-A E. Chapman Ave. Oren e Chapman Shell CA FID UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 4035 E. Chapman Ave. Orange Thrifty Clean RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 4010 Chapman Ave., Unit E HAZNET halogenated solvents. Materials transported to recycler. Oran e Thrifty Oil Station #058 HIST UST Active gasoline underground storage tanks location. No action required. 11751 E. Chapman Ave. Orange Coca Cola UST Underground storage tank location. No action required. 13151 Sussex Place Santa Ana Orange Canyon Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 7610 Chapman Ave. HAZNET, Cleaners halogenated solvents. Materials transported to recycler. Orange R.1PMjeutsVRWD1EDR Summary Tables\7001 Site 56 Summary San Dkgo Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft E1R SITE 56 — EL MODENA PARK (Continued) ORANGE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Orange Crest Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 7510 E. Chapman Ave. Unit C HAZNET, Cleaners halogenated solvents. Materials transported to recycler. Orange El Modena High School RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Waste oil Remedial action 3920 Spring SL LUST, Cortese leak from underground storage tank onto soil. completed or deemed Orange unnecessary. Unocal Service Station #4958 CA FID UST, LUST, Gasoline leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Disposal of Remedial action 3237 E. Chapman Ave. HAZNET, Cortese unspecified organic liquid mixture, aqueous solution, waste and mixed completed or deemed Orange oil, and contaminated soil. Materials transported to recycler, disposal unnecessary. landfill, and treatment tank. Active underground landfill. Unocal #5106 LUST, Cortese Gasoline teak from UST. Aquifer affected. MTSE detected. Remedial action 5344 Chapman Ave. (cleanup) in progress. Orange Cal -Mat Company LUST, Cortese Waste oil leak from LUST onto soil. Remedial action 454 Prospect St completed or deemed Orange unnecessary. Water Works District#8 Cortese, LUST Gasoline leak from LUST onto soil. Remedial action 11862 McPherson Rd. completed or deemed Oran a unnecessary. Shell Service Station Cortese, LUST Gasoline teak from LUST onto soil. Remedial investigation 4035 Chapman Ave. phase. Orange Grande Cleaners RCRiSSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 3345 Chapman Ave. HAZNE'f, Cortese, halogenated solvents. Materials transported to recycter. Orange Cleaners Texaco Service Station LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Remove Remedial action 3232 Chapman Ave, contaminated soil and dispose in approved site. completed or deemed Oran a unnecessary 6lobil #18•ENA LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from underground storage tank onto soil. Remove Remedial action 2011 Chapman Ave. contaminated soil and dispose in approved site. I completed or deemed Orange unnecessary, Thrifty Oil #058 Cortese, San Diego Small quantity generatorof potentially hazardous medical waste. No action required. 2937 Chapman Ave. County HMMD Oran e Apo • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenoem Revised Draft EIR SITE 62 - SAN JOAQUIN MARSH IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Maliinckrodt Medical FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Stabilization measures 18695 Jamboree Blvd. RCRIS-TSD, CORRACTS, implemented, Irvine CERC-NFRAP groundwater extraction and treatment, current human exposures under control. Hughes Aircraft Company RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Handier transports waste. No action required. 2601 Campus Dr. CORRACTS, CERC- NFRAP UCI FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous waste. Handier No action required. University Dr. RCRIS-TSD transports waste. Irvine All American Asphalt RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. University and Harvard Irvine Beckman Instruments Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. Campus Dr. at Jamboree Irvine American Biogenetics RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. Corporation 19732 MacArthur Blvd. Irvine Audio Magnetics Corporation RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Cal- Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 2602 Michelson Dr. Sites Irvine Gen. Invest. Funds Real Est. HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls, material containing PCBs, and No action required. 18691 Jamboree Blvd. asbestos containing waste. Materials recycled and/or transported to a Irvine landfill. Fluor Daniel Inc. Orange County Industrial Active underground storage tank. No action required. 3333 Michelson Dr. Site, Cortese Irvine Michelson Company CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 2600 Michelson Dr. Irvine Campus Gas CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 4601 Campus Dr. Irvine Parker Bertea Aerospace CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. Group 18321 Jamboree Blvd. Irvine R TroieclsllRWOIEOR SummaryTables0001 Site 62 San Joaquin Marah-091603.000 1 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natant Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 62 — SAN JOAQUIN MARSH (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Wastewater Reclamation PI Cortese, LUST Gasoline, diesel leaks from USTs onto soil and into groundwater. Remedial action 3512 Michelson Dr. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Irvine Ranch Water District CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 3512 Michelson Dr. Irvine Unocal#6404 CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 18011 Culver Dr. Irvine Williamson Chevron #96698 CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 18002 Culver Dr. Irvine UCI Medical Center LUST, Cortese, CA FID Diesel fuel leak from UST onto soil. Preliminary site 19172 Jamboree Rd. UST assessment underway. Irvine Koii Company KCN-10 East LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel teak from LUST onto soil. Remedial action 4000 MacArthur Blvd. completed or deemed Newport Beach unnecessary. Newport Nissan Cortese, LUST, UST, Gasoline leak from LUST onto soil. Remove contaminated soil and No action required. 888 Dove St HIST UST treat Newport Beach Rockwell international CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. Corporation 4311 Jamboree Rd. Newport Beach Ailergan Inc. CA FID UST, HIST UST, Active underground storage tank. Diesel UST. No action required. 2525 Dupont Dr. Cortese Irvine EJ Holtze Corporation HAZNET, Cortese Leaking UST. Disposal of mixed waste oil. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 1301 Quail St Newport Beach VNT Partnership LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from UST onto soil. Remedial action 2361 Campus Dr, completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary, Marriott Suites Hotel CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 500 Bay View Circle Newooft Beach Sanwa Bank Bldg KCN #9 LUST, Cortese Diesel leak from UST onto soil. Determining site status 4400 MacArthur Blvd, and notify state board. Newport Beach Mamb-091603AOC 0 Ap*P • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmen�em Revised Draft EIR SITE 62 — SAN JOAQUIN MARSH (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Shuwa Investments HAZNET, Cortese, LUST Diesel leak from UST onto soil. Disposal of tank bottom waste. Remedial action 1500 Quail St. Material sent to recycler. completed or deemed Newport Beach unnecessary. Texaco Service Station LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from UST affecting groundwater. Cleanup (remedial 4678 Campus Dr. action) in progress. Newport Beach 1X Koll Center Irvine #2 HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Materials sent No action required. 18500 Von Karman to transfer station. Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixtures and Irvine paint sludge. Materials sent to rec cler. Beacon Bay Auto Wash CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 4200 Birch St. Newport Beach National Car Rental CA FID UST, LUST, Gasoline teak from UST affecting ground water. Remedial action 2222 Bristol St. Cortese completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. Chevron #9-9212 Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 2303 Bristol St. Santa Ana Edler Industries, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Waste oil No action required. 2101 Dove St. UST, HAZNET, Cortese, leak from UST onto soil. Disposal of oiVwater separation sludge, metal Newport Beach LUST sludge, and mixed waste oil. Materials sent to rec cler. UCO Air CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 19461 Campus Dr. Santa Ana Tallmantz-County of Orange UST, HIST UST, LUST, Solvent leak from UST into aquifer. Pollution assessment 19711 Airport South Cortese report completed. Santa Ana Signature Flight Support RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Kerosene Pollution assessment 19301 Campus Dr. FID UST, HIST UST, leak from UST into aquifer. Disposal of oiVwater separation sludge, report completed. Santa Ana LUST, HAZNET, Cortese mixed waste oil, and other organic solids. Materials sent to rec cler. AMR Combs Fuel Farm Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 19301 Campus Dr. Santa Ana Budget Rent-A-Car LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from UST into aquifer. Remedial action 2272 Michelson Dr. completed or deemed Irvine 1 1 unnecessary. Orange County Fire Station LUST Cortese Motor vehicle fuel leak from UST onto soil Pollution assessment #27 report completed. 19459 Airport Way Santa Ana R.1WrojedsURWD\EDR Summary TabieA1001 Site 62 San Joaquin Mamh�91603.DOC 3 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Neturaf Treatment System Revised Draft FJR SITE 62— SAN JOAQUIN MARSH (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertyfAddreas Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Exxon Service Station #0769 LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from UST affecting ground water. Remedial action 2122 Bristol St. completed or deemed Newport Beach unnecessary. Newport Beach Exxon (7-0769) CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 2121 Bristol St. Newport Beach Chevron #9-5418 CA FID UST, Cortese Active underground storage tank. No action required. 18692 MacArthur Blvd. Irvine Central Plant Notify 65 No information provided. No action required. Bridge Rd. Irvine John Wayne Airport Fuel Notify65 No information provided No action required. Storage 19801 Airport Way South Santa Ana San Joaquin Landfill SWF/LF Solid waste disposal site. No action required. Southeast Comer of MacArthur Blvd. Irvine Fire Station #4 LUST Diesel fuel and gasoline released into aquifer. Remedial investigation 2 California SL in progress. Irvine UCI Grounds Merit LUST Unleaded gasoline leak from UST onto soil. Pollution Assessment 1000 Physical Science Rd. completed. Irvine UCI Fleet Seances LUST, UST Gasoline released into aquifer. Contaminated soil removed and Final remediation plan 19182 Jamboree Rd. disposed of in an approved site. approved. Irvine Prudential (Former Beckman) Cortese Solvents released from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated Post remedial action 19000 Jamboree Rd. soil removed and disposed of in approved site. monitoring in progress. Irvine Kali Center Newport —A-Proper CA FID. UST, Cortese, Gasoline leak from UST onto soil. Contaminated soil excavated and Preliminary site 4910 Birch St. LUST disposed in approved site. assessment underway. Newoort Beach Former Fletcher Jones Facility LUST Gasoline and waste oil leaks from LUST onto soil. Remediataction 1001 Quail SL completed or deemed Newport Beach Inecessary. Irvine Technology Partners I HAZNET, LUST Disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls, material containing PCBs and No action required. 2601 Campus Dr. asbestos containing waste. Materials recycled and/or transported to a Irvine landfill. San Joaquin Mush-C91603ACC 0 ApW F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Draft EIR SITE 62 - SAN JOAQUIN MARSH (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Beach Imports RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Gasoline Preliminary site 848 Dove St. UST, LUST, HAZNET leak from LUST onto soil. Mixed waste oil sent to the recycler. assessment underway. Newport Beach American Data Industries LUST, Cortese Gasoline leak from LUST release into aquifer. Contaminated soil Remedial action 2465 Campus Dr. excavated and removed. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. R IPWje*11RWD1EDR SummaryTablesV001 Ste 62 San Joaquin Mamh.091603 DOC 5 Appendix F • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status NE Enterprises Inc. UST No information provided No information provided 3017 Edinger Ave. Tustin Jiffy Lube No 1406 RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 3087 Edinger Ave. HAZNET waste oil, mixed oil, unspecified aqueous solution and unspecified Tustin aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Materials sent to rec cler. F D R Field Service FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2942 Dow Ave. Tustin The Mainland Company RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2911 Dow Ave. Tustin Cherokee International LLC HAZNET, UST, FINDS, Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, organic No action required. 2841 Dow Ave. RCRIS-LQG monomer waste, pesticide rinse water, and oxygenated solvents. Tustin Materials sent to transfer station. Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Dure Timber Construction Co. HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 2841 Dow Ave. Tustin S&G Press Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 28111 Dow Ave. Tustin Slemons Sports Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2805 Dow Ave. Tustin Ironclad, Inc. FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2745 Dow Ave. Tustin Boehringer Mannheim Corp. FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2742 Dow Ave. Tustin Protocol Co. FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14771-D Myford Rd. Tustin Pacific Manufacturing HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of hydrocarbon solvents. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 2681 Dow Ave. Tustin Perfect Lamination RCRIS-SQG, HAZNET Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14701-C Myford Rd. unspecified sludge waste, metal sludge, and other inorganic solid waste. Tustin Materials sent to land fill or to transfer station. R 1ProjectAIRW01EDR Summary Tablesv=l SNe 64 Westpark In-Im"91603 000 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Tustin Circuits Inc RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2681 Dow Ave., Ste4E HAZNET Tustin Dynacast Incorporated RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2652 Dow Ave. HAZNET metal sludge (sent to land fill) and oiilwater separation sludge (sent to Tustin recycler). ASINC, Incorporated FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14661-C Myford Rd. Tustin Becwar Engineering FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14701 C Myford Rd. LOG metal sludge and aqueous solution with metals. Material sent to Tustin recycler. Disposal of aqueous solution with metals. Materials sent to treatmenttank. Paltex Editing & Prod Sys Ltd RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2752 Walnut Ave. Tustin Printronix Inc. HAZNET, RCRIS-LOG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14600 Myforl Rd. unspecified solvent mixture waste and unspecified oil -containing waste. Tustin Material sent to recycler. Disposal of liquids with pH NN-> 2 with metals. Material sent to treatment tank. Unisen Inc RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14741 Franklin Ave., Ste. B Tustin Bfoprobe International Inc FINDS, RCRIS-LOG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2842 WainutAve., Ste. C Tustin Second Source Computers Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14712 Bentley Circle LQG halogenated solvents. Material sent to recycler. Tustin Rivets Investments Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 15275 Culver Dr. HAZNET aqueous solution with less than 105e total organic residues and Tustin unspecified solvent mixture waste. Material sent to transfer station. Dis osal of aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic -residues. Tosco Corporation SS #31212 UST No information provided. No information provided. 15275 Culver Dr. Tustin Union Oil Service Station #683 HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 15275 Culver Dr. Tustin R.Vo=R9xx=y Tabks\W01 Site 6iwes!;) A tnin"SIS 3AOC - Ap ' F LJ • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Draft EIR SITE 64 - WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Unocal #6B39 Cortese, LUST Gasoline released from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated Pollution assessment 15275 Culver Dr. soil removed and disposed of. Free floating product removed from water report completed. Tustin table. Giant Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of Additional 15333 Culver Dr. #230 HAZNET, Orange Co. liquids with halogenated organic compounds >1000 mgll and characterization Tustin Industrial Site, CA SLIC, halogenated solvents. Material sent to transfer station or recycler. underway. CLEANERS Disposal of hazardous materials-Perchloroethylene and Tetrachloroeth lene. Chevron #20-7139 UST Active UST location. No action required. 15425 Culver Dr. Irvine Consolidated Beverage Dist HAZNET, UST, LUST Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Material sent to transfer Post -remedial action 2681 Walnut Ave. station. Active UST location. Release of diesel fuel from leaking UST. monitoring in progress. Tustin Aquifer affected. No Name Provided CHMIRS Release of Insta Pak (Polymeric Isocyanates) in air. No action required. 14741 Franklin #B Tustin Perfect Lamination Inc FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14731 1 Franklin Ave. Tustin Bayer Corporation FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14791 Franklin Ave. LQG unspecified solvent mixture waste and laboratory waste chemicals. Tustin Disposal of laboratory waste chemicals and liquids with pH <UN-> 2. Material sent to transfer station. Circuit Tech RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2640 Walnut Ave., Ste D&E HAZNET liquids with pH <UN-> 2 with metals. Material sent to treatment tank. Tustin Disposal of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Material sent to rec cler. Pacific Bell UST, Cortese, CA FID Active UST location. No action required. 14451 Myford Rd. UST Tustin Smith Ind. (Tungston-Carbide) LUST Chlorinated hydrocarbons released from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 14451 Myford Rd. Contaminated soil removed and disposed of in approved site. (cleanup) in progress. Tustin Groundwater pumped and treated to remove dissolved contaminants. Viejo Leasing Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16092 Construction Circle East Irvine Hertz Equipment Rental CA FID UST, UST Active UST location. No action required. 16351 Construction Circle West Irvine R.1Pro*tsllRWD1EDR SummaryTabl%U{101 Site 64 Weslpark In•line-091603 DOC 3 appendix I- San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft ElR 3TPARK IN -LINE BASINS WINE AND TUSTIN, CA Reason for Listing in Database Status ntity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. T location. No action required. of laboratory waste chemicals, off -specification, aged, or No action required, ganics, waste oil and mixed oil, aqueous solution with less total organic residues and liquids with halogenated organics Is >1000 mg/l. Material sent to transfer station, not reported, recyder. entity generator of potential hazardous material. Waste oil Remedial action sy leaking UST. Contaminated sal removed and disposed of completed ordeemed :d site. unnecessary, ntity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. entity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. d aqueous solution, waste oil and mixed oil, and aqueous ith 10% or more total organic residues. mlity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. waste chemicals, asbestos -containing waste, other organic specified organic liquid mixture, and hydrocarbon solvents. ent to transfer station. Active UST location. ation provided. No information provided. mlity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. organic solid waste, asbestos -containing waste, and ded soil from site clean-ups. Material sent to land fill. Large infer/processinginsfer/processing facility, mlity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. waste chemicals, waste oiland mixed oil, and adhesives. antity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Remedial action ry leaking UST. Active UST location. completed or deemed unnecessary, A oillwater separation sludge, aqueous solution with less than No action required. organic residues. Material sent to transfer station. • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural rreatmen stem Revised Draft EIR SITE 64 - WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Cheek Engineering RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14341 Franklin HAZNET unspecified solvent mixture waste, unspecified oil -containing waste Tustin oxygenated solvents and halogenated solvents. Material sent to recycler. Disposal of aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to transfer station. Waste Oil UST LUST Waste oil released from leaking UST. Preliminary site 3323 Warner Ave. assessment workplan Santa Ana submitted. Western Waste Industries CA FID UST No information provided. No information provided. 16281 Construction Circle Irvine Cal -Mat Company Conrock Div. LUST Gasoline released from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 16282 Construction Circle completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Up Landscaping LUST, Cortese, CA FID Gasoline released from leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and No action required. 16261 Construction Circle UST disposed of in approved site. Active UST location. Irvine General Collision RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16161 Construction Circle West HAZNET oxygenated solvents. Material sent to transfer station. Irvine City Concrete UST Active UST location. No action required. 16161 Construction Circle East Irvine Transit Mix Concrete Co. HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, Disposal of other empty containers 30 gallons or more. Material sent to Remedial action 16161 Construction Circle -East UST recycler. Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Active UST location. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Southdown Concrete Products UST, LUST Active UST location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action Inc. completed or deemed 16161 Construction Circle East unnecessary. Irvine Up Landscape Storage Yard UST Active UST location. No action required. 16221 Construction Circle East Irvine Thermotech California RCRIS-LQG, FINDS Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Operations 14312 Franklin Ave. Tustin Golden State Auto Collision RCRIS-LQG, FINDS Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16191 Construction Circle Irvine 13•113rojectall MEDRSummaryTableWOGISite64WestparkbNme-097603.D0C 5 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revfsed Draft EIR SITE 64- WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property(Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Sunset Fibre Industries UST, LUST, Cortese, CA Active UST location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 16182 Construction Circle West FID UST completed or deemed Irvine nnecessary. Campbell Electric HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 16182 Construction Circle West Irvine Southern California Grading LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action Inc. completed or deemed 16291 Construction Circle unnecessary. Irvine Fisher Scientific Tustin RCRIS-LQG, FINDS Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2761 Walnut Ave. Tustin Renal Devices, Inc. RCRIS-LQG, FINDS Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14281 Franklin Ave. Tustin Mobil #18-BVC UST Active UST location. No action required. 14493 Culver Dr. Irvine Arco #3091 LUST, HAZNET, CA FID Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Disposal of Remedial action 14493 Culver Dr. UST, Cortese aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material completed or deemed Irvine sent to recycler. Active UST location. unnecessary. B & M Marketing Inc HIST UST, RCRIS-SQG, Active UST location. Small quantity generator of potential hazardous No action required. W93Culver Dr. FINDS material. Irvine Atlas Catering LUST, UST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Active UST Remediat action 16221 Construction Circle location. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Commercial Office and HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. Warehouse 16221 Construction Circle West Irvine J W Mitchell Co. LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. No action required. 16221 Construction Circle West Irvine United Premix Concrete Inc. CA FID UST, HIST UST, Active UST location. No action required. 16282 Construction Circle East UST Irvine Thunderbird Irrigation, Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14402 Chambers Rd. LQG I waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to transfer station or treatment I Tustin tank. WRWMEVRSemmwyTabin)J 01 SAe64We9lprk1n**-091W3= 40 Ap�xF • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Thomas & Betts Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14401 Chambers Rd. Tustin Channel Equipment Co. CA FID UST, LUST, Active UST location. Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Contaminated No action required. 16331 Construction Circle East Cortese, HAZNET, UST soil removed and disposed of in approved site. Disposal of aqueous Irvine solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to rec cler. Heritage One Day Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14450 Culver Dr. Irvine Heritage Economy Service / HIST UST, UST, LUST, Active UST location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer Remedial action Heritage Plaza Chevron HAZNET, CA FID UST, affected. Disposal of waste oil and mixed oil, tank bottom waste, and completed or deemed 14446 Culver Dr. Cortese aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material unnecessary. Irvine sent to rec cler. Sunset Property Services UST, RCRIS-SQG, Active UST location. Small quantity generator of potential hazardous No action required. 16251 Construction Circle West FINDS, CA FID UST material. Irvine Crown Construction Co., Inc. HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 16251 Construction Circle West Irvine Southem California Grading LUST, Cortese, UST, Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action 16291 Construction Circle East HIST UST, RCRIS-SQG, disposed of in approved site. Active UST location. Small quantity completed or deemed Irvine FINDS, HAZNET, CA FID generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of waste oil and unnecessary. UST mixed oil, and aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to rec cler or transfer station. Irvine Shop — CPC CA FID UST, UST Active UST location. No action required. 16282 Construction Circle West Irvine Waste Management /Western HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, Waste oil released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action Waste Industries UST, HIST UST disposed of in approved site. Disposal of aqueous solution with less completed or deemed 16281 Construction Circle West than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to transfer station. unnecessary. Irvine Laidlaw Irvine Transportation UST, Orange County Disposal of hazardous materials -organic compounds. Active UST No action required. 16281 Construction Circle West Industrial Site location. Irvine Truesdail Labs RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14201 Franklin Ave. HIST UST Tustin Catalina Pacific Concrete I RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16282 Construction Circle West Irvine R TmlectsURMEDR Summary TabImUO01 Site 64 WestpaAc Wine 091603 DOC San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA PropertytAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Cal Mat LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. No action required. 16282 Construction Circle -West Irvine Kennedy Pipeline Company HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 16331 Construction Circle East Irvine C & W Action Rentals HAZNET, Cortese, CA FID Disposal of ciUwater separation sludge, waste oil, and mixed oil. Post remedial action 16401 Construction Circle West UST, LUST, UST, HIST Material sent to recycier. Active UST location. Gasoline, diesel fuel, and monitoring in progress. Irvine UST waste oil released byleaking UST. A uiferaffected. Sunny Fresh Cleaners RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 5365 Alton Parkway, Ste. E Orange County Industrial hazardous matedals-Perchloroethylene, Tetrachloroethylene, Irvine Site, CLEANERS Trichlbroethylene, and Tfichloroethyane. Construction Circle Property UST, HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 16372 Construction Circle East Irvine Eurocar RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16372 Construction Circle East Irvine Shelly Associates Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14281 Chambers Rd. Tustin Chevron #9-0550 LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Free floating product removed from Post -remedial action 2051 Edinger Ave. water table. Groundwater pumped and treated to remove dissolved monitoring in progress. Santa Ana contaminants. Savala Equipment LUST, UST, HAZNET, Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Active UST location. Disposal of No action required. 16402 Construction Circle East Cortese, CA FID UST, aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues and Irvine HIST UST unspeciriedoil-containirKjwaste. Material senttorecycler. Lockheed Martin Fairchild RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Systems 1425T Chambers Rd., Unit A Tustin Schick Moving and Storage LUST, UST, HIST UST, Gasoline released by leaking -UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil No action required. 2721 Michelle Dr. RCRISSQG, FINDS, removed and disposed of in approved site. Active UST location. Small Tustin HAZNET, CA FID UST quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of tank bottom waste, and waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to recycler. Shipley Company LLC FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator potential hazardous materials. Disposal of Facility or area was 2631 Michelle Dr. RCRISSQG, inorganic solid waste, aqueous solution with metals, and solvent mixture assigned a tow Tustin CORRACTS, CERC- waste. Materials sent to recycler and treatment tank, corrective action priority: NFRAP,HAZNET, Cortese WmvomasummwyTawesUW1SIt G4waslpwkfn4ne0916a7Jx0C San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenotem Revised Deft E/R SITE 64 - WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for.Listing in Database Status Dynachem Corporation LUST, HIST UST Methyl ethyl ketones released from leaking UST. Active UST location. Remedial action 2631 Michelle Dr. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessa . Aerojet Ordnance Tustin RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2521 Michelle Dr. Tustin Barranca Car Wash/Shell Oil UST, CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. Company (121283) 3720 Barranca Parkway Irvine Irvine USD Irvine HIS RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 4321 Walnut HAZNET unspecified organic liquid mixture, polychlorinated biphenyls and Irvine materials containing PCBs, and asbestos -containing waste. Material sent to transfer station or rec cler. No Name Provided CHMIRS Gasoline released onto ground. No action required. 4511 Park Glen Irvine Toshiba America Medical RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. Systems HAZNET waste oil and mixed oil, other empty containers 30 gallons or more, 2441 Michelle Dr. metal sludge, and photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Material Tustin sent to transfer station or to recycler. -Value Clean Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14140 Culver Blvd. Irvine MAI Basic Four Corp. RCRIS-SQG, HAZNET, Large and small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 14101 Myford Rd. FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Disposal of off -specification, aged or surplus organics, latex waste, Tustin oxygenated solvents, and waste all and mixed oil. Disposal method not reported. Maintenance Engineers RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Marine Corp Air Ste Bldg 821 C Santa Ana Moffet Trenches/Tustin MCAS SW F/LF Solid waste disposal site. No action required. LF Jamboree and Edinger Tustin No Name Provided CHMIRS Motor oil released onto ground. No action required. Birdsong at West Yale Loop Irvine Orange County Fire Station #6 UST Active UST location. No action required. 3180 Barranca Parkway Irvine R1ProjedsVRWD1EDR Summary Tablesll001 Site 64 Westpark In-bne-091603 DOC 9 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Naturat Tmafinent System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64-WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Big Box Rental Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16642 Construction Way West Irvine St Joseph Irvine Health Center RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 4050 Barranca Parkway HAZNET photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Material sent to recycler. Irvine No Name Provided CHMIRS Potassium hydroxide released onto ground. No action required. Barranca at West Yale Loop Irvine Griswold Controls FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, UST Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active UST -No action required. 2803 Barranca Parkway location. Irvine American Sporting Goods UST Active UST location. No action required. 16542 Milliken Ave. Irvine Meade Instruments RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16542 Millikan Ave. HAZNET unspecified oil -containing waste, waste all and mixed oil, and Irvine unspecified aqueous solution. Material sent to transfer station or recycler. University Copy HAZNET, Cortese, LUST, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action 2805 Barranca Parkway UST disposed of in approved site. Active UST location. Disposal of completed or deemed Irvine photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Material sent to recycter. unnecessary. Chevron USA UST, CA FID UST, Active UST location. Small quantity generator of potential hazardous No action required. 80 Corporate Park RCRISSQG, FINDS, material. Disposal of aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic Irvine HAZNEr residues, aqueous solution with 10% or more totat organic residues, and hydrocarbon solvents. Material sent to recyclerortransfer station. Irvine USD Irvine Unified Self RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 311 West Yale Loop Irvine Sabrftec FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16631 Noyes Ave. LQG oilfwster separation sludge. Material sent to recycler. Irvine Tustin Mitsubishi RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 23 Auto Center Dr. Irvine American Automotive Service HAZNET, UST Active UST location. Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution, No action required. 16635 Noyes Ave. unspecified solvent mixture waste, aqueous solution with 10% or more Irvine total organic residues, aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, and waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to recycler or transfer station. We9pxk1n-9ne4)91603 DCC 0 SITE 64 - WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment tem Revised Draft EIR Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Ricoh Electronics UST, HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 2661 Gates Ave. Irvine Applied Geosciences, Inc. LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 2661 Gates Ave. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. K R K Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16661 Jamboree Blvd. HAZNET, UST other organic solids, paint sludge, and waste oil and mixed oil. Material Irvine sent to transfer station or rec cler. Active UST location. Corporate Plaza Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 95 Corporate Park Irvine Photo Bear RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 3972 Barranca, Unit B HAZNET -photochemicals and photoprocessing waste, and metal sludge. Material Irvine sent to rec cler. No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto ground. No action required. 4162 Trabuco Irvine Model Glass Co. LUST, Cortese, UST, Gasoline released from leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Active UST Remedial action 16691 Noyes Ave. HIST UST location. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. McLean Motor Co RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 50 Auto Center Dr. HAZNET aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, unspecified Tustin organic liquid mixture, and unspecified oil -containing waste. Material sent to rec clerortransferstation. Murai Farms HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 17255 Harvard Ave. Irvine Rite Aid Corp 5765 RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 3875 Alton Parkway Irvine Shell #4162 LUST, HIST UST, UST, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Active UST location. Disposal of No action required. 4162 Trabuco HAZNET, CA FID UST, empty containers less than 30 gallons. Material sent to land fill. Irvine Tustin Lexus RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 45 Auto Center Dr. HAZNET, UST, CA FID halogenated solvents, unspecified aqueous solution, and aqueous Tustin UST solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to rec cler or transfer station. Pacific Bell FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of I No action required. 2692 Beckman LOG, UST, HIST UST aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues. Material sent Irvine to recycler. Active UST location. R WmjeclsURW DWDR Summary TablesWD1 Site 64 Westpwk IMma091603.DOC 11 San Dkrgo Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraREIR SITE 64— WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Joe MacPherson Automotive UST, RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Active UST location. Small quantity generator of potential hazardous No action required. 5 Auto Center -Dr. material. Tustin Cosmotronic Corp. FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, TRIS Large quantity generatorof potential hazardous material. No action required 16721 Noyes Ave. Irvine Mobil 18-VBK UST Active UST location. No action required. 3765 Alton Parkway Irvine - R F Brace Transportation RCRIS-LQG, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 160 Granada BOG, FINDS Tustin WestPark Cleaners RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 3831 Alton Parkway CLEANERS, Orange hazardous materials-Perchloroethyfene and Tetrachloroethyfene. Irvine County -Industrial Site Tustin Infiniti RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 33 Auto Center Dr. Tustin Burke Commercial FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- -Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. Development LOG unspecified organic liquid mixture. Material sent to recycler. 42 Corporate Park, Ste. 210 Irvine RosemountAnalytical, Uniloc D RCRIS-LQG, FINDS Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2400 Barranca Parkway Irvine Briggs & Sons LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 16662 Milliken Ave. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Stone Creek Cleaners RCRISSQG. FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 4250 Barranca Parkway HAZNET, CLEANERS halogenated solvents and aqueous solution with less than 10% total Irvine organic residues. Material sent to recycler. USARC Santa Ana Cat -Sites, AWP Open military facility. No action required. 2345 Barran Parkway Irvine Cigna Healthplans of So. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. California 62 Corporate Park Irvine The Stoekland Co. HIST UST, FINDS, LUST, I Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active UST Remedial action 2332 Barranca Parkway Cortese, RCRIS-LQG I location. Polyester resin released by leaking UST. I completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. WRvrrneoaSW=WYT&WftU at Sne64weetWk1n*w*91W3DOC San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmen stem Revised Draft ElR SITE 64 - WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database _ Reason for Listing in Database Status Marcos! Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16753 Noyes Ave. Irvine Orange County Central Utility RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Facility 38 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana Tustin Nissan RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, UST Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active UST No action required: 30 Auto Center Dr. location. Tustin Irvine City Hall CA FID UST, LUST, UST Active UST location. Gasoline released from leaking UST. Remedial action 1 Civic Center Place completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Cirtel Cirpack Circuits FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. Operation LQG, CA SLIC still bottoms with halogenated organics. Material sent to transfer station. 2302 Barranca Parkway Irvine Joe MacPherson Toyota RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 44 Auto Center Dr. HAZNET, UST other organic solids, unspecified aqueous solution, and aqueous solution Tustin with 10% or more total organic residues. Material sent to recycler. Active UST location. General Service CA FID UST No information provided. No information provided. 34 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana Santa Ana Police Dept. HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 24 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana Santa Ana City Hall CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana County of Orange Hail of CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. Administration 10 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana Market Place Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2981 El Camino Real St. -HAZNET, CLEANERS halogenated solvents. Material sent to recycler or land fill. Tustin Sheppard Constructlon FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1582 Parkway Loop #K Tustin R 1PrejedslAWMEDR SummaryTablesU001 Site 64 Westpark h4ln"91663 DOC 13 Appendix F San Diego Creek -Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64-WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Database Reason for Listing In Database Status PropertylAddress N H Research RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16601 Hale Ave. Irvine Executive Pontiac UST Active UST location. No action required. 16 Auto Center Dr. Tustin Tustin Chevrolet GEO RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16 Auto Center Dr. HAZNET, UST aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, and waste Tustin oil and mixed oil. Material sent to transfer station. Active UST location. Claim Jumper LUST, UST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Active UST Preliminary site 16721 Claim Jumper location. assessment underway. Irvine Kad Suss Inc RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2691 Richter#103 Irvine Tustin Acura RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Remedial action 9 Auto Center Dr. HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, released by leaking UST. Disposal of aqueous solution with less than completed or deemed Tustin UST, CA FID UST 10% total organic residues, unspecified aqueous solution, and cillwater unnecessary. separation sludge. Material sent to recycler or transfer station. Active UST location. Program Data Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16632 Hale Ave. Irvine Joe MacPherson Ford CA FID UST, RCRIS- Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No information provided. 2 Auto Center Dr. SQG, FINDS, HAZNE'i', aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, aqueous Tustin UST solution with 1045 or more total organic residues, and unspecified solvent mixture waste. Material sent to transfer station or recycler. Tustin Dodge RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Waste oil Remedial action 40-Auto Center Dr. HAZNET, LUST, UST, released by leaking UST. Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution, completed or deemed Tustin Orange County Industrial oiltvrater separation sludge, and aqueous solution with less than 10% unnecessary. Site total organic residues. Material sent to recycler. Active UST location. LT Litho Printing Co Inc RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material Disposal of No action required. 16B11 Noyes Ave. HAZNET off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Material sent to transfer Irvine station. Paul Romain Inc. So Calif Coll RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 28 Auto Center Dr. Tustin McLean Cadillac UST Active UST location. No action required. 1 Auto Center Dr. Tustin S,%ea Wntpxkin-Vn&G9tea+Doc San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64 - WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA PropertyfAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Gunthers Printing Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16752 Milliken Ave. HAZNET other organic solids. Material sent to transfer station or recycler. Irvine AMF Electronics Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16722 Milliken Ave. Irvine Toyota Racing Development RCRIS-SQG, HAZNET Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 1382 Valencia Ave. off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, waste oil and mixed oil, Tustin unspecified organic liquid mixture, and aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to transfer station. Tustin Place Medical Group RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2775 El Camino Real HAZNET photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Material sent to recycler or Tustin transfer station. Beacon Bay Car Wash CA FID UST, UST Active UST location. No action required. 2762 El Camino Real Tustin Com Products Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16691 Hale Ave. Irvine Cirtel Cirpack Circuits RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Copper Remedial action Operations LUST, Cortese, Orange released by leaking UST. completed or deemed 16692 Hale Ave. County Industrial Site unnecessary. Irvine Tustin Ranch Tire and Auto Ctr RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2541 El Camino Real HAZNET aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues and Tustin unspecified aqueous solution. Tustin Buick Pontiac FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1 Auto Center Dr., Unit 12 3 4 Tustin Leaverton Bros HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Active UST location. Disposal of Remedial action 16721 Hale Ave. CA FID UST, HIST UST unspecified solvent mixture waste. Material sent to transfer station. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Glass Brokers Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 15032 Red Hill, Ste. E Tustin Bacon Ind Inc of CA FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity, generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16731 Hale Ave. LOG unspecified organic liquid mixture, off -specification, aged, or surplus Irvine organics, aqueous solution with metals, and other organic solids. Material sent to transfer station. R 1Projects11RW MDR Summary TobleAJ001 Site 64 Westpark IrvGn"91693 HOC 15 Appendix F PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Or Co Fire Station #26 Cortese, CA FID UST, Active UST location. Gasoline released from leaking UST. No action required. 4691 Walnut Ave. HISTUST, LUST Irvine Cal Tronics RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 164218 Red Hill Ave. Tustin C. T. Film LUST, Cortese, HIST UST Waste oil released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. No action required. 1492 Santa Fe Dr. Tustin Consolidated Thermoplastics HIST UST Activa UST location. No action required. 1492 Santa Fe Dr. Tustin City of Tustin RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action -required. 1472 Service Rd. Tustin Chevron;#201233 UST, RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active UST No action required. 2740 Bryan Ave. location. Tustin Tustin Parcel Cal -Sites; No information provided. No information provided. 2300 Block Edinger Ave. Tustin Berney Construction LUST, UST, CAFID UST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Active UST location. Remedial action 16750 Hate Ave. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. MCAF Tustin UST Active UST location. No action required. 15500 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Divajex Ina UST, HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 1555t Red H81 Ave. Tustin Pacific Bell LUST, FINDS, HAZNET, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Diesel fuel No action required. 4918 Irvine Center Dr. Cortese, RCRIS-LOG, CA released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and disposed of Irvine FID UST, HIST UST in approved site. Disposal of other inorganic solid waste, asbestos - containing waste, material containing PCBs, and aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to land fill, recycier or transfer station. Active UST location. Califoam Division of Mobay FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. Chemical Corporation 16661 Von Karmen Ave. Irvine 11RWO=FtSVn aYTab1e5UM1 Va64Wes4Wkt"n"9163ACC r' • •J San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment' fem Revised Draft E/R SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address _ Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Creative Office Solutions RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 15551 Red Hill Ave., Unit C HAZNET oxygenated solvents. Material sent to transfer station. Tustin Recycled Office Solutions RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 15551 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Pacific Bell C/O Allen LE580 FINDS, LUST, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1472 Edinger Ave. LQG Tustin Alyn Corporation RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16761 Hale Ave. HAZNET alkaline solution without metals, other inorganic solid waste, other solid Irvine waste, liquids with pH <UN-> 2, and aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. The Irvine Company FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, HIST Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active UST No action required. 13042 Milford Rd. UST location. Irvine CDI 3M Health Care RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1311 Valencia Ave. Tustin Von Kansan — Manufacturing HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 16702 Von Karman Ave. Irvine Del Mar Analytical HAZNET, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2852 Alton Ave. liquids with pH <UN-> 2 with metals, unspecified solvent mixture waste, Irvine and unspecified alkaline solution. Material sent to rec cler. PC World Orange County FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, CA Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active UST No action required. 16601 Armstrong Ave. SLIC, HIST UST location. Irvine City of Tustin Maintenance LUST, CA FID UST, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Active UST location. Disposal of Preliminary site Yard HAZNET, UST, HIST UST waste oil and mixed oil and oxygenated solvents. Material sent to assessment underway. 1472 Service Rd. recycler. Tustin The Baldwin -Company UST Active UST location. No action required. 16811 Hale Ave. Irvine Baldwin Fleet Service CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 16811 Hale Ave. Irvine R.1PmlectsNRW D\EDR Summary7ables0001 Site 64 Westperk In-I,n"91603 DOC San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64- WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Property/Address PaciflcBell Tustin Center UST, CA FID UST, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active UST No action required. 1452 Edinger Ave. Orange County Industrial location. Disposal of aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic Tustin Site, FINDS, HAZNET, residues, and waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to recycler. RCRIS-LQG Barcel Wire & Cable Corp FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2851 Alton Ave. LOG laboratory waste chemicals, off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, Irvine and other organic solids. Material sent to recyclerortotreatmenttanks. Parker Hannifin Corp FINDS, RCRIS-LOG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16666 Von Karmen Ave. Irvine Sheldahl Inc., Orange County FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 15771 Red Hilt Ave. LQG waste oil and mixed oil, oxygenated solvents, laboratory waste Tustin chemicals, other inorganic solid waste, and unspecified alkaline solution. Material sent to recyclerortransferstation. Irvine USD WHS RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. #2 Meadowbrook HAZNET material containing PCBs, unspecified oil -containing waste, and Irvine unspecified organic liquid mixture. Material sent to recycler or -transfer station. Omega Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 4200 Trabuco Rd., Ste. 100 HAZNET liquids with halogenated organics compounds, and halogenated Irvine solvents. Material sent to recyclerortransfer station. RH Cleaners RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14591 Red Hill Ave. HAZNET, CLEANERS halogenated solvents. Material sent to recycler. Tustin Beverly Hills Transfer Cortese, CA FID UST, Active UST location. No action required. 2481 Alton Ave. UST Irvine Gro Mor Diversified Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2491 DubridgeAve: Irvine Lockheed Martin Aeronutronic RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 17100 Murphy St Irvine S & M Moving LUST Diesel fuel and gasoline released by leaking UST. Groundwater and Remedial action 24a1 Alton Parkway aquifer affected. completed or deemed Irvine I lunnecessa . Shipley Co Inc. LUST Solvents released by leaking UST. Groundwater affected. Remedial action 16782 Von Kansan Ave. (cleanup) in progress. Irvine Vr �I & San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 64 - WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Revised Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Enthone Inc. FINDS, LUST, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Solvents Preliminary site 16782 Von Kerman Ave. LQG, TRIS, HIST UST released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Active UST location. assessment underway. Irvine Fry Metals Inc. HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, unspecified No action required. DBA Alpha Metals Inc. solvent mixture waste, and oxygenated solvents. Material sent to 16782 Von Kerman Ave. recycler or transfer station. Irvine American Zettler Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16881 Hale Ave. Irvine Western Design Corporation HAZNET, LUST, UST, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and No action required. 16952 Millikan Ave. Cortese disposed of in approved site. Disposal of off -specification, aged, or Irvine surplus organics, unspecified solvent mixture waste, and other inorganic solid waste. Material sent to transfer station. Active UST location. Astech Facility LUST, UST, Cortese Acetone, gasoline, and polyester resin released by leaking UST. Remedial action 16680 Armstrong Ave. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Scher Tire Inc #17 UST, CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 14511 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Chevron #9-0422 UST, CA FID UST, LUST Active UST location. Unknown clear crystals released by leaking UST. No action required. 14501 Red Hill Ave. Tustin California Yachts Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1402 Morgan Circle Tustin Gene Rogers Chevron RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14501 Red Hill Ave. HAZNET aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues, unspecified Tustin aqueous solution, and oillwater separation sludge. Material sent to rec clerortransferstation. Jacuzzi Whirlpool Bath Irvine RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 1922 Barranca Parkway HAZNET, UST, CA FID organic monomer waste, oxygenated solvents, and aqueous solution Irvine UST with less than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to recycler or transfer station. Active UST location. Woodbridge Auto Wash LUST, UST, Cortese, CA Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Free floating No action required. 4550 Barranca Parkway FID UST, HAZNET product removed from water table. Groundwater pumped and treated to Irvine remove dissolved contaminants. Active UST location. Disposal of hydrocarbon solvents. Material sent to treatment tank. SR Bray Development Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1372 Valencia Tustin R 1ProlectsllRWD1EDR SummaryTablwUOOI Site 64 Westpark Indine491603.D0C 19 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64— WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status The Irvine Company UST Active UST location. No action required. Culver/Bryan Irvine Foremost McKesson Inc. Cal -Sites, RCRISSQG, Small quantity generatorof potential hazardous material. Facility or area was McKesson Chem Co. FINDS, RCRIS-TSD, assigned a low 1302 Industrial Dr. CORRACTS, CERC- corrective action priority. Tustin NFRAP Ricoh Electronics, Ina HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 2310 Red Hill Ave. Santa Ana Ricoh Electronics, Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of Post remedial action 2320 Red Hill Ave. LOG, TRIS, FTTS, unspecified aqueous solution, other inorganic solid waste, and other monitoring in progress. Santa Ana Cortese, CA FID UST, organic solids. Material sent to recycler, land fill, or treatment. Active LUST, UST, TSCA UST location. Hydrocarbons released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Free floating product removed from water table. Groundwater pumped and treated to remove dissolved contaminants. GW Cleanup -SA, Redhill Cortese, CA WDS Facility has a continuous or seasonal discharge or contaminated ground No action required. 2320 Red Hill Ave. water that is under Waste Discharge Requirements. Santa Ana Quality Beer Distributors Cortese, CA FID UST, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Disposal of unspecified solvent Remedial action 15201 Woodlawn Ave. HAZNET, LUST, UST m'udure waste, and aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic completed or deemed Tustin residues. Material sent to recycler. unnecessa . American Display ina FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1382 Valencia Ave. Tustin Weber Plywood UST, HIST UST, LUST, Active UST location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer Remedial action 15501 Mosher Ave. CA FID UST affected. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Trabuco Cleaners RCRISSQG, FINDS, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 13925 Yale Ave. HAZNET, CLEANERS halogenated solvents. Material sent to recycter. Irvine Sterling Electric Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16752 Armstrong Ave. HAZNET oilhvater separation sludge, and unspecified oil -containing waste. Irvine Material sent to recycler or transfer station. Marshall Aluminum LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 2206 Alton Parkway completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. San Clemente Car -Wash LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Other groundwater affected. Remedial Investigation 1731 El Camino Real phase. San Clemente VRWO E%EDR &=nM Teb18S'AM Sne 66 Wespuk l"no 091603 WC u Property/Address Database -Reason for Listing in Database Status Lido Van and Storage Co., Inc. HIST UST, UST Active UST location. No action required. 2200 Alton Parkway Irvine Schiffman Enterprises HAZNET, LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Disposal, of unspecified oil- Remedial action 2200 Alton Parkway containing waste, and waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to recycler. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. USPS Irvine Branch RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 17192 Murphy St. Irvine Rogerson Aircraft Corp. HAZNET, UST, CA FID Disposal of photochemioals and photoprocessing waste, and aqueous No action required. 2201 Alton Parkway UST solution with less than 10% total organic residues. Material sent to Irvine transfer station. Active UST location. JSN Industries RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 17141 Murphy Ave. Irvine Kenneth G Osborne & Assoc HIST UST, LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action Inc. completed or deemed 17141 Murphy Ave. unnecessary. Irvine Mainland Company RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 15602 Mosher Ave. Tustin Total Circuit -Mfg Inc. RCRIS-SQG, HAZNET Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 1322 Bell Ave., Ste. L1 liquids with pH <UN-> 2 with metals. Material sent to recycler or Tustin treatment tank. Konis Site UST, LUST Active UST location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 1231 Edinger Ave. (cleanup) in progress. Tustin Tustin Unified School District UST, CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 1302 Service Tustin Ryder Student Transportation RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of -No action required. 1302 Service Rd. HAZNET oil/water separation sludge, aqueous solution with less than 10% total Tustin organic residues, -and aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues. Material sent to recycler or transfer station. Support Services Facility HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 1302 Service Rd. Tustin KSH Inc. LUST, Cortese, FINDS, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Remedial action 1221 Edinger Ave. RCRIS-LQG released by leaking UST. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. R.1PmJects11RWDXEDR SummaryTablesQNI Site 64 Weslp" 1Mine0916U3 DOC 21 - Appendi�rF San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Oraf EIR SITE 64— WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Hexco, Inc. LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Pollution assessment 16200 Aston St report completed. Irvine Sentry Medical Products RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 17171 Murphy Ave. Irvine Saffell & McAdam LUST, HIST UST, UST, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Active UST location. Remedial action 2955Main St Cortese completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Champion Building Products HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 1200 Edinger Ave. Tustin No Name Provided CHMIRS Dexter Nysol Industrial Adhesive released into air. No action required. 16666 Von Karman Irvine Arco AMIPM Mini Mart (Wand UST, Cortese, CA FID Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Active UST Remedial investigation C Daoud) UST, LUST, HIST UST location. phase. 14231 Red Hal Ave. Tustin General Tool RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2025 Alton Parkway HAZNET waste oil and mixed oil, unspecified oil -containing waste, and other Irvine vino anic solid waste. Material sent to recycler or transfer station. Irvine Station HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 17192 Murphy Ave. Irvine US Post Office UST, CA FID UST, LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Pollution assessment 17192 Murphy Ave. report completed. Irvine JTAlton Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16510 Aston St. Irvine Momart Delux Cleaners FINDS, HAZNEL RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14241 Red Hilt Ave. LQG, CLEANERS halogenated solvents. Material sent to recyder. Tustin Irvine Business Center Ines. HIST UST, UST, LUST, Active UST location. Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Remedial action 16520Aston St Cortese completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. WRWD%DR5ummBryT6b1ftU= Sim 64Wu1pKk1M1n"916MD0C 6 • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status No Name Provided CHMIRS Motor oil released on ground. No action required. 5175 Burgundy Irvine Cummings Cal Pacific Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of Remedial action 1939 Deere Ave. HAZNET, Cortese, LUST unspecified aqueous solution, aqueous solution with less than 10% total completed or deemed Irvine organic residues, and aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic unnecessary. residues. Methylene Chloride released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Coldwell Bank UST Active UST location. No action required. 1939 Deere Ave. Irvine Irvine Unified School District LUST Heater fuel released by leaking UST. Pollution assessment 0 Harvard Ave. report completed. Irvine Vision Sports Holding Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Acetone Remedial action 1931 Deere Ave. LUST, Cortese, HIST UST released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil removed completed or deemed Irvine and disposed of in approved site. unnecessary. Cycle Industries Inc. RCRIS-SQG Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1931 Deere Ave. Irvine Sunny Fresh Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 4722 Barranca Parkway Orange County Industrial hazardous materials-Perchloroethylene and Tetrachloroethylene. Irvine Site, CLEANERS Jamboree at Main, Ltd. LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 2772 Main St. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Mybar Printing Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2772 Main St. HAZNET, Cortese, UST hydrocarbon solvents, unspecified organic liquid mixture, and waste oil Irvine and mixed oil. Material sent to recycler or treatment tank. Active UST location. Container Corp of America CA FID UST, UST Active UST location. No action required. 1600 Barranca Rd. Irvine Maruchan Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 1902 Deere Ave. HAZNET waste oil and mixed oil, liquids with pH <UN-> 2, unspecified organic Irvine liquid mixture, laboratory waste chemicals, and empty containers less than 30 gallons. Material sent to treatment tank or transfer station. Woodbridge Village Association LUST, UST, Conese, CA Gasoline released from leaking UST. Active UST location. Remedial action Creek Rd. FID UST completed or deemed 13 Ir Irvine unnecessa . R TrojectsllMMDR SummaryTablesV001 Slla 64 Westpark InXn"91603 DOC 23 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draf EIR SITE 64- WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Lumsdaine Construction Inc. UST Active UST location. No action required. 16570 Aston St Irvine KendallAmerican McGaw Labs LUST, Cortese, HIST Active UST location. Large quantity generator of potential hazardous Remedial action Div. UST, FINDS, RCRIS-LQG material. Gasoline released by leaking UST. completed or deemed 2525 McGaw Ave. unnecessary. Irvine Flight Systems, Inc. FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2652 McGaw Ave. Irvine Woodbridge Mobil #18-837 LUST, Cortese, CA FID Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Post remedial action 4800 Barranca Parkway UST, RCRIS-SQG, released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Aquifer affected. monitoring in progress. Irvine FINDS, HAZNET, HIST Contaminated soil removed and disposed of in approved site. Free UST, UST floating product removed from water table. Groundwater pumped and treated to remove dissolved contaminants. Disposal of oillwater separation sludge. Material sent to transfer station. Active UST location. Kerr Glass UST Active UST location. No action required. 15171 Del Amo Ave. Tustin M K Products Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16882 Armstrong Ave. LQG, UST waste all and mixed oil, unspecified solvent nfudure waste, unspecified Irvine oil -containing waste, and oitMrater separation sludge. Material sent to transferstation. Rockwell Collins RCRISSQG, HAZNET Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 1833 Alton Ave. other inorganic solid waste, other organic solids, and organic solids with Irvine halogens. Material sent to transfer station or recycler. Coors Distributing Co. HIST UST, UST, LUST, Active UST location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer Remedial action 15471 Del Amo Ave. Cortese affected. Ground eater pumped and treated to remove dissolved completed ordeemed Tustin contaminants. unnecessary. Texaco HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 14041 Newport Ave It/ 1-5 Tustin Tech Spray Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 17352 Murphy Ave. LOG oxygenated solvents. Material sent to recycier. Irvine Liquid Handling Systems RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 17422 Murphy Ave. HAZNET aqueous solution with less than 10'/o total organic residues. Material Irvine I sent to transfer station. stefAwes;PxkIn iin"91w3moc • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status QB Properties LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 1851 Deere Ave. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Printronix, Incorporated/ FINDS, LUST, RCRIS- Active UST location. Large quantity generator of potential hazardous Post remedial action Barranca, Hammerbank LQG, HIST UST material. Chromic acid released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. monitoring in progress. Manufacturing Contaminated soil removed and disposed of in approved site. 1700 Barranca Parkway Irvine Facility 11669, Site 20 Cortese No information provided. No information provided. 16901 Armstrong Irvine Tronomed Inc. RCRIS-SQG Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2811 McGaw Ave. Irvine Unocal #30955 UST, HIST UST, Active UST location. No action required. 14081 Red Hill Ave. Tustin TOSCO — 76 Station #5678 LUST, CA FID UST Gasoline and waste oil released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 14081 Red Hill Ave. Active UST location. (cleanup) in progress. Tustin Exxon #7-0755 LUST, Cortese, CA Fib Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Active UST Remedial action 14082 Red Hill Ave. UST location. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Hoag Health Center Irvine RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 4870 Barranca Parkway HAZNET metal sludge, and photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Material Irvine sent torec cler. Chevron #20-2022 UST Active UST location. No action required. 14082 Red Hill Ave. Tustin American Bentley HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 2712 McGaw Ave. Irvine Kaiser Rollmet HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Remedial action 1822 Deere Ave. HIST UST, FINDS, released by leaking UST. Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. completed or deemed Irvine RCRIS-LQG Material sent to transfer station. unnecessa . Texaco Ring of Fire Site #12 UST Active UST location. No action required. 3090 Main St. Irvine Taco Bell Corporation RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 17901 Von Karmen Irvine R1Pro)WslIRWOlEOR SummaryTables0001 Site 64 Westpark In-6n"91603 OOC 25 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natures Treaf rent System Revked Draft EIR SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Psoperty/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status VHD Disc Manufacturing Co RCRIS-LQG, FINDS Large quantity generator of potentiathazardous material. No action required. 2602 McGaw Ave. Irvine Newport Corporation RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 1771 Deere Ave. HAZNEr liquids with pH <UN-> 2, liquids with halogenated organic compounds, Irvine off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, unspecified solvent mixture waste, and organic monomerwaste. Material sent to recycier or transfer station. Treasure Farms Main Yard/The LUST, UST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Active UST location. Preliminary site Irvine Company assessment underway. 13052 Old Myford Rd. Irvine Assaf Shell #14042 HIST UST, UST, LUST, Active UST location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 14042 Red H81 Ave. Cortese completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary, AT&T UST Active UST location. No action required. 1741 Afton Ave. SantaAna Integrated Aerospace Systems RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2036 and 2040 East Dyer Rd. Santa Ana Point 4 Data Corp RCRIS-LOG, FINDS Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 15442 Del Amo Tustin Faxon Service Station HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 14032 Red Hill Ave. Tustin The Irvine Company UST Active UST location. No action required.- 13042 Old Myford Rd. Irvine Packard -Hughes Interconnect UST, FINDS, HAZNET, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active UST Facility or area was -17150 Von Karmen Ave. LUST, Cortese, RCRIS- location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Disposal of other inorganic assigned a low Irvine LQG, RCRIS-TSD, CA solid waste, alkaline solution without metals (pH > 12.6), liquids with corrective action priority. SLIC, CA FID UST, halogenated organic compounds, and aqueous solution with 10% or CORRACTS. CERC- more total organic residues. Material sent to recycler or transfer station. NFRAP, HIST UST, Cat - Sites Jefferson Smurfit Corp FINDS, LUST, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Active UST Final remediallon plan 1600 Barranca Rd. LQG, HIST UST I location. Release of isopropyl alcohol by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. I approved. Irvine Groundwater pumped and treated to remove dissolved contaminants. San 64wmtpak h.ens09M3 DOD 0 ap�zr- • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenotem Revised Draft EIR SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Holly Sugar Corporation WMUDS/SWAT No information provided. No information provided. 15671 East Dyer Rd. Santa Ana Energy Products Division HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 2040 East Dyer Rd. Santa Ana BFM Energy Products LUST, HAZNET, CA FID Solvents released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 2040 Dyer Rd. UST removed and disposed of in approved site. Groundwater pumped and (cleanup) in progress. Santa Ana treated to remove dissolved contaminants. Disposal of other inorganic solid waste. Inactive UST location. EPC Land Inc. FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2040 East Dyer Rd. RAATS Santa Ana Irvine Fire Station #36 LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 301 Yale Loop completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Texaco HIST UST, UST, LUST, Active UST location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 13931 Red Hill / Laguna Cortese completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. The Printery RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 17155 Von Kerman, Unit 110 Irvine Red Hill and El Camino Mobil RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 13872 Red Hill Ave. HAZNET unspecified organic liquid mixture and organic liquids with halogens. Tustin Material sent to transfer station. Scan Optics Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 17201 Von Kerman Ave. Irvine Prime Pumping Co RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 4 Southwind Irvine Ricoh Electronics RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 1101 Bell Ave. Tustin Chevron 93742 HAZNET, Cortese, LUST, Disposal of gas scrubber waste, other organic solids, unspecified sludge Remedial action 13922 Red Hill Ave. UST, HIST UST waste, and aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. completed or deemed Tustin Material sent to recycler or treatment facility. Gasoline released from unnecessary. leaking UST. Active UST location. Hughes Aircraft Company RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2362 McGaw Ave. HAZNET I asbestos -containing waste and hydrocarbon solvents. Material sent to Irvine land fill or rec cler. R 1PmJects11RWD1EDR SummaryTables0001 Site 64 Weslpark In4ne-091603.000 27 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System RevisedDraltEIR SITE 64- WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA PropertyLAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Tustin Ranch Shell HAZNET, UST, Disposal of halogenated solvents and liquids with halogenated organic No action required. 13131 Jamboree Rd. CLEANERS compounds. Material sent to recycler or transfer station. Active UST Tustin location. U-Haul HAZNET, CA FID UST, Disposal of waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to recycler or transfer No action required. 1431 Ei Camino Real UST station. Active UST location. Tustin Prudential Overall Supply HIST UST Active UST location. No action required. 1661 Alton Parkway Irvine Western Digital Corp. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2802 Kelvin Irvine Shell LUST, UST, Cortese, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 13891 Red Hill Ave. HIST UST completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Pfizer Inc, Distribution Center FINDS, RCRIS•LQG Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 16700 Red HUI Ave. Irvine Red HiU Car Wash LUST, Cortese, UST Gasoline released by leaking UST. No action required. 13871 Red Hill Ave. Tustin Plaza Cleaners FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 6406 Walnut Ave., Unit C LOG, RCRISSQG, halogenated solvents. Material sent to recycler. Irvine CLEANERS Et Camino Union RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline No action required. 6410 Walnut Ave. HAZNET, Cortese, CA FID released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil removed Irvine UST, LUST, HIST UST, and disposed of in approved site. Disposal of unspecified organic liquid UST mixture, unspecified aqueous solution, and waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to transferstation or recycler. Active UST location. Mobil Station (18-H70) UST, HIST UST, Cortese, Active UST location. Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer Remedial action 13872 Red Hill Ave. CA FID UST, LUST affected. -(cleanup) in progress. Tustin Irvine Ranch Service Station LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 13042 Jamboree Rd. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. A. C. D. Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 2321 South Pullman Santa Ana sie64we$[Wk in-ene W1W3.D0C • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmen0em Revised Draft EIR SITE 64 - WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Gemini Ind Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2311 South Pullman St. HAZNET, TRIS, RCRIS- aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues and organic Santa Ana TSD, CORRACTS, CERC- liquids with metals. Material sent to transfer station. NFRAP, HIST UST Carioca Cleaners FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 13844 Red Hill Ave. LQG, CLEANERS halogenated solvents. Material sent to recycler. Tustin Pro Photo RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 17595 Harvard, Ste. 1 D Irvine Harvard Place Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. 17595 Harvard Ave., Ste. 8 Irvine Case Swayne Co. LUST Diesel fuel and waste oil released by leaking UST. Remedial action 1021 Edinger Ave. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc. LUST, HIST UST, CA FID Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Diesel fuel Remedial action 17353 Derian Ave. UST, Cortese, RCRIS- released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil removed completed or deemed Irvine SQG, FINDS, HAZNET, and disposed of in approved site. Disposal of aqueous solution with less unnecessary. UST than 10% total organic residues, unspecified organic liquid mixture, other organic solids, and waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to recycler or transfer station. Behr Process Corp. Cortese No information provided. No information provided. 1603 Alton Parkway Irvine Del Mar Avionics RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Remedial action 1601 Alton Ave. HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, released by leaking UST. Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution, completed or deemed Irvine UST, CA FID UST, HIST alkaline solution without metals, and waste ail and mixed oil. Material unnecessary. UST sent to transfer station or recycler. Active UST location. Grande Manufacturing HAZNET, LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Disposal of tank Pollution assessment 1582 Browning Ave. bottom waste. Material sent to recycler. report completed. Irvine Property Company of America LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 2712 Kelvin Ave. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Control Components/Met. Life LUST, Cortese TCE released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Preliminary site 2567 Main St. assessment underway. Irvine St. John Knits HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Active UST Remedial -investigation 17422 Derian St. CA FID UST location. phase. Irvine R.1PmjecIs11RWDMR SummaryTablesU001 Site 64 Westpark In4me,091603 DOC 29 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Drag EIR SITE 64— WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Arco #1077 LUST, CA FID UST, Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Active UST Preliminary site 13742 Red Hill Ave. Cortese location, assessmentworkpian Tustin submitted. Healthcare Medical Centerof RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Smalt quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Remedial action Tustin Hospital LUST, HAZNET, Cortese released by leaking UST. Disposal of aqueous solution with less than completed or deemed 14662 Newport Ave. 10% total organic residues. Material sent to transfer station or treatment unnecessary. Tustin tank. Tustin Marine Corps Air Station Cal -Sites, Cortese, AWP No information provided. Closed military facility. Newport Freeway at Edinger Tustin Aeromill Engineering Co., Inc. LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Pollution assessment 2344 Pullman St report completed. Santa Ana Tosoo #30683 Cortese No information provided. No information provided. 2350 Pullman St Santa Ana Great Lakes Chemical Corp. Cortese, Orange County Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Solvents Remedial action 17461 Darien Industrial Site, RCRIS- released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil removed (cleanup) in progress. Irene SQG, FINDS, RCRIS- and disposed of in approved site. Groundwater pumped and treated to TSD, LUST remove dissolved contaminants. Irvine Properties LUST, UST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Preliminary site 17352 Von Karman Ave. assessment workplan Irvine submitted. No Name Provided CHMIRS Water soluable cutting ai released onto ground. No action required. 2321 South Pullman Santa Ana Arbor Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 14775 Jeffrey Rd., Ste. A IWNET, SWF/LF, halogenated solvents and liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Irvine CLEANERS Material sent to recycler. Irvine Unified Schools —Print RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline No action required. 5050 Barranca Parkway LUST released by leaking UST. Irvine O'Neal Moving Systems LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 2061 Ritchey St completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary, The Irvine Company LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. No information provided. 13042 Myford Rd. Irvine sae64weupKx mar*-oals0a.D0C • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenotem Revised Draft EIR SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason -for Listing in Database Status Davey Roofing Inc RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Post remedial action 17182 Armstrong Ave. HAZNET, LUST released by leaking UST. Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture, monitoring in progress. Irvine aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, aqueous Solution with 10% or more total organic residues, waste oil, and mixed oil. Material sent to recycler, transfer station, or treatment tank. Armstrong Cascade / Caldwell LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action Company completed or deemed 17182 Armstrong Ave. unnecessary. Irvine Orco Tools and Equipment LUST Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Pollution assessment 2100 Ritchey St. report completed. Santa Ana Parker Hannifin LUST Gasoline released by leaking UST. Post remedial action 17352 Von Karman monitoring in progress. Irvine Unocal #5492 LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 2425 Main St. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Universal Circuits Inc. HAZNET, Cortese, Orange Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. Material sent to recycler. No action required. 1800 Newport County Industrial Site, CA Santa Ana SLIC, Cal -Sites R and S Piping, Inc. LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 1946 Occidental St. removed and treated. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. Modem Materials, Inc. LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 1681 Kettering St. removed and treated. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Byco, Inc. HAZNET, LUST Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Disposal of unspecified solvent Pollution assessment 1711 Newport Circle Dr, mixture, photochemicals and photoprocessing waste, and liquids with report completed. Santa Ana halogenated organic compounds. Material sent to transfer station or rec cler. Pacific Bell (LC392/IRVNCAII) Cortese, CA FID UST, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Diesel fuel Remedial action 2350 Main St. FINDS, HAZNET, LUST, released by leaking UST. Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste, completed or deemed Irvine RCRIS-LQG other empty containers 30 gallons or more, waste oil and mixed oil, and unnecessary. contaminated soil from site cleanups. Material sent to recycler. Active UST location. Tosco — 76 Station #6537 LUST, Cortese, CA FID Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil Post remedial "action 4760 Irvine Blvd. UST removed and disposed of in approved site. Groundwater pumped and monitoring in progress. ' Irvine treated to remove dissolved contaminants. R.1Pr0JWSVRWDIEDR Summary Tables0001 Site 64 Westpark Inline-091603 DOC 31 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Naturat Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64- WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status RB Furniture LUST Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action 2323 Main St. disposed of in approved site. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary, Arco #1865 / Newport Gas & LUST, UST, Cortese, CA Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Free floating Remedial action Smog FID UST product removed from water table. Groundwater pumped and treated to (cleanup) in progress. 14244 Newport Ave. remove dissolved contaminants. Active UST location. Cleanup or Tustin abatement orders that concern the discharge of wastes that are hazardous materials. Deft Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, LUST, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Methyl ethyl Remedial action 17451 Von Karman Ave. Cortese, RCRIS-LOG, ketones released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Disposal of completed or deemed Irvine TRIS, UST, CA FID UST, hydrocarbon solvents, oxygenated solvents, other organics solids, and unnecessary. HIST UST paint sludge Material sent to recycler or transfer station. Active UST location. Texaco LUST, Cortese, CA FID Diesel fuel released by leaking UST. No information provided. 2010 Edinger UST, Santa Ana Irvine Company Orange GV LUST Gasoline released from leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Pollution assessment #227 & 235 treated. report completed. 0 Trabuco Rd. Irvine Coca-Cola Bottling Company Cortese, CA FID UST No information provided. No information provided. 2501 Pullman St. Santa Ana Unocal #5017 / McCain Trust LUST Hydrocarbons released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated Remedial action 2302 Main St soil removed and treated. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. Berkeley Investments HAZNET. LUST. Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 2209 Lyons St removed and treated. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. Laidlaw LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action 1830-Warner Ave. disposed of in approved site. completed or deemed Santa Ana unnecessary. No Name Provided CHMIRS Diesel fuel released onto ground. No action required. Alton @ Sand Canyon Irvine Chevron Station #92079 Cortese, CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 14122 Newport Ave. Tustin Tre Metal Processing RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Facility orareawas 1900 East Deere Rd. RCRIS-TSD, CORRACTS, assigned a low Santa Ana CERC-NFRAP corrective action rlori . Sb 64Westprk 1"00-091608.W6 0 • Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Alta Dena Dairy Cortese, CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 14081 Newport Ave. Tustin Irvine Valencia Growers LUST, Cortese Hydrocarbons and gasoline released by leaking UST. Post remedial action 13242 Jeffrey Rd. monitoring in progress. Irvine Villa Martinique Cortese No information provided. No information provided. 1425 Village Santa Ana Texaco Service Station LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Post remedial action 14041 Newport Blvd. monitoring in progress. Tustin South Coast Printing HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of waste oil and mixed oil and unspecified solvent mixture No action required. 17462 Armstrong Ave. waste. Material sent to recycler or transfer station. Irvine Unocal #4953 LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action 14011 Newport Ave. treated. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary. Southern Counties Oil Co. Cortese, CA FID UST No information provided. No information provided. 13922 Newport Ave. Tustin Newport Adhesives and Cal -Sites No information provided. No information provided. Composites, Inc. 1822 Reynolds Ave. Irvine GW Cleanup -Santa Ana Cortese No information provided. No information provided. 2102 Main Irvine Unocal #5224 LUST, Cortese, CA FID Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Active UST Remedial action 16801 McFadden Ave. UST location. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessa . Exxon #7-3573 Cortese, CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 16851 McFadden Ave. Tustin American Bentley LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 17542 Armstrong Ave. removed and treated. Free floating product removed from water table. completed or deemed Irvine Groundwater pumped and treatedtoremove dissolved contaminants. unnecessary. Goodyear Tire Center#1658 LUST, Cortese Waste oil released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action 2705 Grand Ave. disposed of in approved site. completed or deemed Santa Ana I Iunnecessary. R1Projects11RMEDR SummaryTables=l Site 64 Wes1pA Wr1ne-091603 DOC 33 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed NaturafTmatment SITE 64- WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA EIR Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Kaiser Electropreclsion LUST. Cortese Waste oil and chlorinated hydrocarbons released by leaking UST. Remedial investigation 17000 Red Hill Ave. phi. Irvine Avco Financial Services RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Remedial action 17770 Cartwright Rd. HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Disposal of photochemicals, completed or deemed Irvine UST, CA FID UST photoprocessing waste, tank bottom waste, unspecified oil -containing unnecessary. Waste, aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, and other organic solids. Material sent to recycler, transfer station, or treatment tank. Copley Investors Limited Cortese, CA FID UST No information provided. No information provided. 1522 East Warner Ave. Santa Ana ACL Technologies HAZNET, LUST. Cortese Gasoline released by leafing UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 1505 Warner Ave. removed and disposed of in approved site. Disposal of asbestos- completed or deemed Santa Ana -containing waste. unnecessary. Gladys Jackson Cortese No information provided. No information provided. 2652 White Irvine Tustin Auto Wash Cortese. CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 535 East Main St Tustin GW Cleanup —Irvine, Main St Cortese No information provided. No information provided. 1980 Main Irvine Shur-tok Corporation HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus inorganics and organics, No action required. 2541 White Rd. liquids With pH <UN-> 2, and liquids with halogenated organic Irvine compounds. Material sent to transfer station orrer. Circuit One (Division of LH Cat -Sites No Information provided. No information provided. Research) 2101 Grand Ave. Santa Ana Arco #3132 LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 13662 Newport Ave. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessa . El Torito Restaurants, Inc. LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Remedial action 2450 White Rd. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. • 0 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 64 — WESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA EIR Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database_ Status No Name Provided CHMIRS Trim Sol released onto ground. No action required. 2185 South Grand Ave. Santa Ana Lusk Interiors HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Gasoline Remedial action 17500 Gillette Ave. CA FID UST released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Disposal of liquids with pH completed or deemed Irvine <UN-> 2, halogenated solvents, and organic solids with halogens. unnecessary. Material sent to rec cler or incinerator. Sorin Biomedical, Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, Cortese, Disposal of unspecified alkaline solution, halogenated solvents, other No action required. 17600 Gillette Ave. RCRIS-LQG, Orange organic solids, off -specification, aged or surplus organics, and polymeric Irvine Countir Industrial Site resin waste. Material sent to rec cler or transfer station. Wastewater Reclamation PI. LUST, Cortese, CA FID Gasoline and diesel fuel released by leaking UST. Remedial action 3512 Michelson UST completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. Precision Plastics (Division of Cortese, Orange County No information provided. No information provided. Pem Co.) Industrial Site 1352 Reynolds Irvine Holchem Service Chemical FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potential hazardous material. Facility or area was Company RCRIS-TSD, CA SLIC, assigned a high 1341 East Maywood St. CORRACTS, CERC- corrective action priority. Santa Ana NFRAP, Cal -Sites Smith Tool Division of Smith Cal -Sites, RCRIS-SQG, Small quantity generator of potential hazardous material. No action required. International FINDS, CERC-NFRAP 17871 Von Karman Ave. Irvine Embee Plating Cal -Sites No information provided. No information provided. 2144 South Hathaway Santa Ana Unocal SS#0517 Cortese No information provided. No information provided. 305 El Camino Real San Clemente Williamsons Chevron #96698 Cortese, CA FID UST No information provided. No information provided. 18002 Culver Dr. Irvine Pacific Western Containers HAZNET, LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil No action required. 1535 Edinger Ave. removed and disposed of in approved site. Disposal of off -specification, Santa Ana aged, or surplus organics, waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to rec cler. Unocal #6404 Cortese, CA FID UST No information provided. No information provided. 18011 Culver Dr. Irvine R.1PmjectsVRWMEDR Summary Tablet;UOD1 Site 64 Westpwk IMine-091603 DOC 35 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 64-1NESTPARK IN -LINE BASINS CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listiag in Database Status No Name Provided CHMIRS Wet storage facility filled with acid. No action required. 1-405 NB Jamboree Rd. Irvine Eroroon #7-3515 Cortese, CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 17551 MacArthur Blvd. Irvine Chevron USA Inc. #6405 Cortese, CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 17561 MacArthur Blvd. Irvine Hines Nurseries, Inc. LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Contaminated soil removed and Remedial action 12621 Jeffrey Rd. disposed of in approved site. completed or deemed Irvine unnecessary. V.B. Anderson LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Aquifer affected. Contaminated soil Remedial action 1545 EdingerAve. removed and disposed of in approved site. completed ordeemed Santa Ana unnecessary. Unocal #5386 Cortese, CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. 13348 NewportAve. Tustin Or Co Fire Station #28 (Irvine Cortese; CA FID UST Active UST location. No action required. Ind) 17862 Gillette Ave. Irvine Fluor Daniel Inc. Cortese, Orange County No information provided. No information provided. 3333 Michelson Industrial Site Irvine Orarige Co. Fire Station #21 LUST, Cortese Gasoline released by leaking UST. Remedial action 1241 Irvine Blvd. completed or deemed Tustin unnecessary, 0 • San Diego Creek Watershed SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status US Post Office, Irvine Branch CA FID UST, LUST, Active underground storage tank location. Leaking underground Remedial action 17192 Murphy Avenue RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, storage tanks. Gasoline leak, soil affected. Small quantity generator of completed. Irvine, CA 92614 HIST USTpotentially hazardous material. Kenneth G. Osbome & ' UST, HIST UST, LUST, Under ground storage tank on -site. Leaking underground storage Remedial action Associates, Inc. Cortese tanks. Gasoline leak, soil and water table affected. completed. 17141 Murphy Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 Harvest Station HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Material sent to No action required. 17192 Murphy treatment tank. Irvine, CA 92623 Sentry Medical Products RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 17171 Murphy Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Kendall LTP HAZNET Disposal of metal sludge. Material sent to recycler. No action required. 17171 Murphy Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 JSN Industries RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 17141 Murphy Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Case Pumps, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of latex waste, empty containers less than 30 gallons, alkaline No action required. 17322 Murphy Street solution without metals, and off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Irvine, CA 92614 Materials recycled, sent to transfer station, and/or sent to treatment tank. Tech Spray, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 17352 Murphy Avenue HAZNET, EMI oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. Emissions data not Irvine, CA 92614 reported. Lockheed Martin Fed Sys- HAZNET, RCRIS-SQG, Disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and material containing PCBs, No action required. Irvine Facility FINDS inorganic solid waste, organic solids, laboratory waste chemicals. 17100 Murphy Avenue Materials recycled or sent to transfer station. Small quantity generator Irvine, CA 92714 of potentially hazardous material. Barcel Wire & Cable Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2851 Alton Parkway HAZNET, EMI oxygenated solvents, waste and mixed oil, and unspecified solvent Irvine. CA 92606 mixture (waste). Materials sent to recycler or sent to treatment tank. Del Mar Analytical/Irvine HAZNET, RCRIS-LQG, Disposal of liquids with pH, halogenated solvents, unspecified solvent No action required. 2852 Alton Parkway FINDS waste mixture, waste and mixed oil, off -specification, aged or surplus Irvine, CA 92714 organics, laboratory waste chemicals, and liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Materials sent to treatment tank, recycler, transfer station or not reported. Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. R.Trolecis11RWMEDR Summary Tablesll001 Site 67 Qenega do las Ranas-112003 San 0ego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 67—CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddrass Database Reason for Listing in Database Status RC Designs International HAZNET, FINDS, EMI Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, hydrocarbon No action required. 17391 Murphy solvents, and other organic solids. Materials recycled or sent to Irvine, CA 92714 transfer station. Circuit Automation HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues. No action required. 17421 Murphy Avenue unspecified organic liquid mixture, laboratory waste chemicals, and Irvine, CA 92614 liquids with pH. Materials recycled, disposed of by "other' means, or sent to transfer station. Liquid Handling Systems RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 17422 Murphy Avenue HAZNET of aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, and Irvine, CA 92614 other organic solids. Materials recycled of sent to transferstation. Aftco Mfg. Co., Inc. HAZNET Disposal of organic solids. Materials sent to transfer station or "other" No action required. 17351-B Murphy Avenue disposal. Irvine, CA 92714 Biofem Company HAZNET Disposal of organic solids, baghouse waste, liquids with pH, laboratory No action required. 2891 Kelvin Avenue waste chemicals, and inorganic solid waste. Materials recycled or sent Irvine, CA 92714 to transfer station. Tronomed, Inc. RCRISSOG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 2811 McGaw Avenue Irvine. CA 92614 Product Technology, Inc. HAZNET, Orange County Disposal of halogenated solvents, and inorganic solid waste. Materials No actioarequired. 2811 McGaw B Industrial Site recycled. Irvine. CA Grumman Space Systems HAZNET Disposal of unidentified waste, liquids with chromium, laboratory waste No action required. 2352 Kelvin Avenue chemicals, unspecified solvent mixture (waste), liquids with pH, 2801 Kelvin Avenue photochemicalslphotoprocessing waste, and waste and mixed all. Irvine, CA 92714 Materials recycled or sent to transfer station. Irvine World Publishers HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil, inorganic solid waste, and off- No action required. 2712-McGaw specification, aged or surplus inorganics. Materials recycled or method Irvine. CA 92714 of d's csal not reported. American Bentley HIST UST Active underground storage tank location. No data provided. 2712 McGaw Avenue Irvine. CP.92714 County of Orange Hall of CA FID UST, HAZNET Active underground storage tank location. Disposal of aqueous No action required. Administration solution with organic residues. Materials sent to recycier. 10 Civic Center Drive Santa Ana, CA 92702 Santa Ana City Hall CA FID UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92703 RWRW0ZCRS==ryT8b16sU001 Si1a67GeM9ade1aSRar 112003.d0C AP F • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment) SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status City of Irvine LUST, CA FID UST, Leaking underground storage tank. Active underground storage tank No action required. 1 Civic Center Drive HAZNET on site. Disposal of liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Irvine, CA 92713 Materials sent to transfer station Department of General HAZNET Disposal of halogenated solvents, oxygenated solvents, liquids with No action required. Services halogenated organic compounds, and polychlorinated biphenyls and 28 Civic Center Plaza material containing PCBs. Materials recycled, sent to transfer station, Santa Ana, CA 92701 or land fill. Strottman International, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Materials sent No action required. 46 Corporate Park to recycler. Irvine. CA 92606 Flight Systems, Inc. RCRIS,SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 2652 McGaw Avenue Irvine, CA 92612 Storage Concepts HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to No action required. 2652 McGaw Avenue transfer station. Irvine, CA Orange County Central Utility RCRIS,SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. Facility 3B Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Beverly Hills Transfer Cortese, CA FID UST Active underground storage tank location. Leaking underground No data provided.- 2481 Alton Avenue storage tanks. Irvine, CA 92714 No Name Provided ERNS No data provided. -No data provided. Alton Parkway and Jamboree Road Irvine CA 92714 City of Santa Ana Police Dept. HAZNET Disposal of organic solids. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 60 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Western Digital Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 2802 Kelvin Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Burke Commercial RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. Development HAZNET unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials recycled. 42 Corporate Park, Ste. 210 Irvine, CA 92606 ATL Products HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, organic solids, No action required. Kelvin Street inorganic solid waste, and liquids with pH. Materials recycled or sent to 12801 Irvine, CA 92614 transfer station. RNmleclsllRWOlEDRSummeryTableeU001 Site 67 Cienega de In RmaA12003 dm 3 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revlsed Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddress Database Reason for Lisling to Database Status The Irvine Apartment HAZNET Disposal of organic solids. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. Communities 218 Murica Aisle Irvine, CA 92614 Advanced Controls HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials recycled. No action required. 16901 Jamboree Blvd. Irvine, CA 92606 VHD Disc Manufacturing -Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantify generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 2602 MaGaw Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Leplastrier Development Co, In CA SLIC No data provided. No data provided. 2602 McGaw Street Irvine, CA Cigna Healthplans of So Cal RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator -of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 62 Corporate Park Irvine, CA 92606 Friendly Hills Healthcare HAZNET -Disposal of organic solids, photochemicelstphotoprocessing waste, and No action required. Network off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Materials recycled or sent 62 Corporate Park to transfer station. Irvine, CA 92714 Charter Apartments HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, organic liquid No action required. 2750 Kelvin Avenue mixture, and latex waste. Materials sent to transfer station. Irvine, CA 92614 Continental Abrasives HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil, and off -specification, aged, or surplus No action required. 16871 Noyes Avenue organics. Materials recycled or sentto treatment tank. Irvine, CA 92606 Property Company of Amed & Cortese, LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Ground water affected. Case closed. Warehouse Site 2712 Kelvin Irvine. CA Acculine AOI Technologies HAZNET Disposal of liquids with metals. Materials recycled. No action required. 2691 Richter Ave., Ste 104 Irvine, CA 92714 Kad Suss, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 2691 Richter Avenue, Ste. 103 Irvine, CA 92614 Murai Farms HIST UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 17255 Harvard Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 Site 67 Cmwp dells R�112003 doc 0 ApGr- • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Property/Address Database _ Reason for Listing in Database Status Newport Stationers HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 72 Corporate Park transfer station. Irvine, CA 92714 SIMS RSP, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged or surplus organics. Materials sent No action required. 2552 McGaw Avenue to transfer station Irvine, CA 92614 Respiratory Support Products HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. No method of No action required. 2552 McGaw Avenue disposal given. Irvine, CA 92614 Pro Photo RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 17595 Harvard, Ste 1 D Irvine, CA 92614 Harvard Place Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 17595 Harvard Avenue, 8 Irvine, CA 92614 Chevron Station No. 201095 RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 80 Corporate Park HAZNET, UST unspecified oil -containing waste, aqueous solution with organic Irvine, CA 92606 residues, and hydrocarbon solvents. Materials sent to recycler and transfer station. Underground storage tank on -site. Precision Stamping & Tool, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil, organic solids, and liquids with No action required. 16841 Noyes Avenue halogenated organic compounds. Materials sent to transfer station or Irvine, CA 92714 recycler. Gish Biomedical, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 2681 Kelvin Avenue HAZNET, EMI halogenated solvents, oxygenated solvents, and waste and mixed oil. Irvine, CA 92614 Materials recycled or transfer station, or method of disposal not reported. SBC InternetDataCenter UST Underground storage tank on site. No data provided. 2681 Kelvin Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Nason Family Trust, S & M LUST, UST, HAZNET Leaking underground storage tank. Groundwater affected. Disposal of Case closed. Moving, Nathanson Family unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to recycler. Trust 2481 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA Sumitomo Bank HAZNET Disposal of empty containers 30 gallons or more, and waste and mixed No action required. 16952 Milliken Avenue oil. Method of disposal not reported. Irvine, CA 92714 Western Design HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste, inorganic solid waste, and Case closed. 16952 Milliken Avenue UST off -specification, aged or surplus organics. Materials sent to transfer Irvine, A station. Leaking underground storage tanks. Soil affected. Underground storage tank on site. R nojeas11RW DIEDR Summary TablesU001 Site 67 0enega de las Ranas-112003 duc San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftEIR SITE 67 - CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Prop"tAddress Database Reason for Listing In Database Stateis Kendall-McGaw LUST, Cortese, RCRIS- Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leaking. Small quantity Case closed. 2525 McGaw Avenue SQG, FINDS. generator of potentially hazardous materials. Irvine, CA B Braun Medical, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of halogenated solvents, hydrocarbon solvents, unspecified No anion required. 2525 McGaw Avenue waste solvents, and off -specification, aged or surplus organics. Irvine, CA 92714 Materials sent to transfer station. American McGaw HIST UST, EMI Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 2525 McGaw Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 LT Litho Printing Co, Inc, RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 16811 Noyes Avenue HAZNET of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Materials sent to transfer Irvine. CA 92614 station Unocal, Union Oil -Service Cortese, HIST UST -Leaking underground storage tanks. No data provided. Station #5492 2425 Main Irvine, CA Chevron USA CA FID UST, UST Active underground storage -tank location. No action required. 80 Corporate Park Irvine, CA 92714 Cosmotronic Corp. FINDS, RRIS-LQG, TRIS, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 16721 Noyes Avenue HAZNET of metal sludge, aqueous solution with metals, and unspecified alkaline - Irvine. CA 92606 solution. Materials recycled, not reported. or sent to treatment tank. Award Sign Company HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent waste mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 16842 Miilikan Avenue recycler. Irvine, CA 92714 Primary Color HAZNET Disposal of photochem'icals and photoprocessing waste. Materials sent No action required. 16841 Milfikan to reWder. Irvine. CA 92714 Pacific Bell clo Allen LC392 RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Remedial action 2350 Main Street HAZNET, LUST, HIST Underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tank, completed. Irvine, CA UST MTBE detected. Diesel oil leak into soil. Disposal of waste, unspecified oil -containing waste, aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, and mixed oil and empty containers 30 gallons or more. Materials sent to recyclerormethod of disposal not reported. RB Furniture UST, LUST, HIST UST Underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tank. Case closed. 2323 Main Street Diesel oil leak into soil. Irvine, CA92614 Robert& Michelle Tang HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of polychlorinated biphenyis and material containing PCBs. No data provided. 2323 Main Street Method of disposal not reported. Leaking underground storage tanks. Irvine, CA 92714 Site 6TCiene de In Ranes-112Mdoc • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmentoem Revised Draft OR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertytAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Control ComponentlMet.L LUST, Cortese, CA SLIC Leaking underground storage tank, aquifer affected. The site is under 2567 Main periodic groundwater _Irvine, CA monitoring program. Met Life — Century Center III CA SLIC, RCRIS-SQG, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Solvents Additional 2567 Main Street FINDS released. characterization Irvine, CA underway. Ashton, Howard — Discount LUST Leading underground storage tank, MTBE detected. Remedial action Steel completed. 2627 Main Street Santa Ana, CA Irvine Photographics, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged or surplus organics. Materials No action required. 19 Corporate Park recycled. Irvine, CA 92714 Nextel Communications AST No data provided. No data provided. 17275 Derian Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Sanmina Corporation HAZNET Disposal of baghouse waste. Materials recycled. No action required. 16753 N. Noyes Avenue Irvine, CA 92604 Marosi Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 16753 Noyes Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Kyowa of American RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. Corporation HAZNET, EMI unspecified organic liquid mixture and aqueous solution with organic 2500 SE Main Street residues. Materials recycled and sent to transfer station. Irvine. CA 92614 Acralight, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents, unspecified solvent mixture, and No action required. 2491 Du Bridge Avenue empty containers less than 30 gallons. Materials recycled and sent to Irvine, CA 92606 transfer station. Gro Mor Divers Fied Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2491 DuBridge Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc. LUST, Cortese, HAZNET, Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Case closed. 17353 Derian Avenue RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, tank. Diesel fuel leak into soil. Disposal of unspecified aqueous Irvine, CA 92714 UST, CA FID UST solution, latex waste, waste and mixed oil, organic solids, off - specification, aged, or surplus inorganics, and unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials recycled or sent to transfer station. Small uanti generator of potentially -hazardous material. Airtouch Cellular HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 3 Park Plaza 11 Irvine, CA 92614 R Wrojects\IRwD1EDR Summary Tables1.1001 Site 67 Cmnega do las Ronas-112003 doc San Diego Creek SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) EIR Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database States Nalco Chemical Company HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 3 Park Plaza recycler. Irvine. CA 92614 Universal Reprographics So, HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Materials No action required. Inc, recycled. 16781 Milliken Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 Golden Touch Cleaners, LLC HAZNET, Cleaners Disposal of liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Materials No action required. 2W Main Street sent to transfer station or method of disposal not reported. Irvine. CA 92714 Main Street Photo HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Materials sent No action required. 2W Main Street, #C to transfer station. Irvine, CA 92714 Corporate Plaza Cleaners RCRICSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 95 Corporate park HAZNET, Cleaners liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Materials sent to transfer Irvine, CA 92606 station or not reported. Pacific Hell RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 2692 Beckman Avenue HAZNET, UST, HIST UST of aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials recycled. Irvine, CA Underground storage tank on site. Printrcnix, Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste), waste oil and mixed oil, No action required. 17421 Derian Avenue LQG, UST and unspecified off -containing waste. Large quantity generator of Irvine. CA 92614 potentially hazardous materials. Underground storage tank on site. The Irvine Company Go HAZNET Disposal of asbestos -containing waste. Materials sent to land fill. No action required. Insignia-eSG 17421 Derian Avenue Irvine, CA 92612 St John Knits Dye Techniques Cortese, CA FID UST. Active underground storage tank location. Leaking underground Case dosed. 17422Dedan Avenue HAZNET, UST storageianks. Solvents and gasolneleaking. MTBE detected. Aquifer Irvine, CA 92714 affected. Disposal of inorganic solid waste, polychlorinated bipherryfs and material containing PCBs, and aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to recycler or transfer station. Kelvin Property VCP 2552 Kelvin Avenue is a vacant lot that was purchased by Essex A Preliminary 2552 Kelvin Avenue Property Trust, Inc. It is adjacent to a known contaminated property, Endangerment Irvine, CA 92614 the former Great Lakes Chemical Corporation (GLCC). A total of 31 Assessment and a samples have been collected from said monitoring well. Historical Border Zone Property sampling data from the said well indicated Ethyene Dibromide has been determination begun. presentin the groundwater at levels ranging from 0.05 ppb to 4.3 ppb. Work Plan expected a by the end of February 2003. alas Rena it wedw • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) EIR Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Great Lakes Chemical Cortese, Orange County Leaking underground storage tanks. Aquifer affected. Organic Interim remedial action Corporation Industrial Site, RCRIS- compounds on site. Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous in progress. 17461 Derian SQG, FINDS, RCRIS- materials. Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution, and organic Irvine, CA TSD, LUST, HAZNET solids. Materials transferred to treatment tank or given incineration treatment. Colyear Dev. Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 2300 Main Street HAZNET of polymeric resin waste, empty containers 30 gallons or more, Irvine, CA 92614 unspecified solvent mixture (waste), and liquids with pH. Materials sent to transfer station. ANMI Energy HAZNET Disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and material containing PCB's, No action required. 2300 Main Street and unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to recycler and Irvine, CA 92714 transfer station. The Dot Printer, Inc. HAZNET, EMI Disposal of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste, and No action required. 2424 McGaw Avenue unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to recycler, transfer Irvine, CA 92714 station, or method of disposal not reported. Gunthers Printing RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 16752 Millikan Avenue HAZNET of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste, aqueous solution with Irvine, CA 92614 metals, and organic solids. Materials sent to recycler, transfer station, or method of disposal not reported. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. HAZNET, UST Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. Century Centre Underground storage tank on site. 2601 Main Street Irvine, CA 92614 Model Glass Co. LUST, Cortese, UST, Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leaking. Ground waster Case closed. 16691 Noyes Avenue HIST UST and other ground water affected. Active underground storage tank on Irvine, CA 92606 site. The Image File RCRIS-SQG, FINDS. Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 2590 Main Street Irvine, CA 92618 American Zettler, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 16881 Hale Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 Great Western Printing Service HAZNET Disposal of metal sludge and photochemicals and photoprocessing No action required. 16881 Hale Avenue waste. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine, CA 92606 IT Corporation HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste and halogenated solvents. Materials No action required. 2655 Main Street recycled or sent to transfer station. Irvine, CA 92714 Moss & Co. HAZNET Disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and material containing PCBs. No action required. 2700 Main Street Method of disposal not given. Santa Ana, CA 92705 R IProledsVRWDIEDR SummaryTable IJ001 Site 67 Ctenega ee [as Ranas-112003 eoc San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) fropertytAddress Database Reasoa for Listing is Database States Kuypers Machine Co. Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 16842Hale station. Irvine, CA 927014 Robert Conner HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste and adhesives. Materials No action required. 16842 Hale Avenue sent to transfer station or method of disposal not given. Irvine. CA 92714 AMF Electronics, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 16722 Milliken Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 Claim Jumper UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 16721 Milliken Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 Diceon Electronics FINDS No data provided. No data provided. 16832 Hale Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 The Baldwin Company, UST, CA FID UST, Active underground storage tank on site. Disposal of latex waste, No action required. Baldwin Racing HAZNET contaminated soil from site clean-ups, unspecified organic liquid 16811 Hale Avenue mixture, unspecified, oll-containing waste, and off -specification, aged, Irvine, CA 92606 or surplus organics. Materials sent to transfer station, recycled of disposed of in "other" fashion. Big Box Rental Co. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 16642 Construction Circle West Irvine, CA92606 American Auto Service HAZNET, UST Underground storage tank on site. Disposal of oiliwater separation No action required. 16635 Noyes Avenue sludge, aqueous solution with organic residues, unspecified solvent Irvine, CA 92606 mixture (waste), and waste and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler or transfer station. Mybar Printing, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No data provided. 2772 Main Street HAZNET, Cortese, UST, hydrocarbon solvents, unspecified organic liquid mixture, and waste Irvine, CA92614 EMI and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler andior treatment tank. Leaking underground storage tanks. Jamboree at Main LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leaking. Case closed. 2772 Main Street Irvine, CA92714 Sabritec FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16631 Noyes Avenue LOG oillwater separation sludge. Materials recycled. Irvine, CA 92614 Alyn Corporation RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16761 Hale Avenue HAZNET alkaline solution without metals, inorganic solid waste, organic solids, Irvine, CA 92606 liquids with pH, and aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials recycled, sent to landfill, sent to transfer station. R'VRWOIEDRSt muy7aEksUW15Ne(rMwep dalas Ranas-112001dw • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Status 3und Caseclosed. No action required. ;at of !nt to No action required. id of No action required. ;al of rplus pH. No action required. :d oil Lctive anks. Case closed. iicals lure. No action required. tank. Case closed. :nt to No action required. aking Case closed. No action required. off- (aline No action required. Appendor F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraREIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Composite Unlimited HAZNET, EMI Disposal of hydrocarbon solvents and other organic solids. Materials No action required. 16452 Construction South sentto transfer station. Irvine, CA 92714 Orange County Fire Station #6 LUST, UST Underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tank. Case closed. 3180 Barranca Parkway Gasoline leak. "Other" ground water affected. Irvine. CA 92606 Dry Clean Express Orange County Industrial Perchlorethylene, tetrachloroethylene, trichlomethylene leaked into soil Additional 17595 Harvard H Site, CA SLIC and groundwater. characterization Irvine. CA underway. Program Data, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, EMI, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. f6632 Hale Avenue HAZNEr unspecified solvent mixture (waste), and halogenated solvents. Irvine, CA 92614 Materials sent to transfer station. Richey Electronics HAZNET Disposat of waste oil and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 16592 Milliken Avenue Irvine. CA 92714 Tares Valve Corporation FINDS No data provided. No data provided. 16591 Milliken Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 White Pearl Manufacturing HAZNET Disposal of waste all and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 16591 Milliken Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 GTJapan HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. No action required_ 16591 Milliken Avenue Irvine. CA 92714 Shell Oil Co. CA FID UST, UST Active underground storage tank location. Underground storage tank No action required. 3720 Barranca Parkway on site. Irvine, CA 92714 BanancaCar Wash #135 UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 3720 Barran Parkway Irvine, CA 92606 Applied Geosciences, Inc. LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leaked into soil. Case closed. 2661 Gates Irvine, CA 92705 Ricoh Electronics UST, HIST UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 2661 Gates Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 NH Research HAZNET, RCRISSQ1:000oisentally posal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste) and oxygenated No action required. 16601 Hale Avenue FINDS vents. Materials sent to transfer station. Small quantity generator of Irvine. CA 92714 hazardousmaterials. S=noyTabWSM1 SAe6TCWeg3d614SRa 112=,dw 0 n �J • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Pxoperty/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Irvine Industrial Co. UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 2 Park Plaza Irvine, CA 92614 Meade Instruments RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Disposal of No action required. 16542 Milliken Avenue HAZNET unspecified aqueous solution, other organic solids, and unspecified oil - Irvine, CA 92614 containing waste. Materials sent t0 transfer station or recycled. American Sporting Goods UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 16542 Milliken Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 Melles Griot HAZNET Disposal of liquids with pH, off -spec cation, aged, or surplus organics, No action required. 16542 Milliken Avenue aqueous solution with organic residues and unspecified organic liquid Irvine, CA mixture. Materials recycled. Display Works HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste), and paint sludge. No action required. 1921 E. Alton Materials sent to recycler, transfer station, or method of disposal not Irvine, CA 92714 reported. Leighton & Assoc. Corp. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to No action required. 2121 Alton Parkway recycler. Irvine, CA 92714 MPC Industries HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution, unspecified oil -containing No action required. 2150 McGaw waste, waste and mixed oil, and aqueous solution with organic Irvine, CA 92714 residues. Materials sent to recycler, transfer station or treatment tank. Hyatt Regency -Irvine ERNS, HAZNET UST Disposal of oxygenated solvents and unspecified organic liquid mixture. No action required. 17900 Jamboree Road Materials sent to transfer station or recycler. Underground storage tank Irvine, CA 92714 on site. Prudential California Realty HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Materials sent No action required. 17 Del Roma to recycler. Irvine, CA 92714 Protech, Inc. HAZNET Transfer of waste and mixed oil, off specification, aged, or surplus No action required. 2505 Da Vinchi inorganics, and unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to Irvine, CA 92714 transfer station. Lifetime Memory Products, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste, and organic solids. Materials sent to No action required. 2505 Da Vinci transfer station and landfill. Irvine, CA Curtis & Tompkins, Ltd. HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste, oxygenated solvents, organic solids No action required. 2495 Da Vinci Road and unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to recycler and Irvine, CA 92714 transfer station. Orange County Printing, Inc. Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture, unspecified aqueous No action required. 2485 Da Vinci [71 solution, aqueous solution with organic residues, and waste and mixed Irvine, CA 92714 oil. Materials recycled. R 1Puo)WsXIRWMEDR Summary TablesU001 Ste 67 Qenega da Ins Ranas-112003 doe San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Aran EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Packard -Hughes Interconnect UST, FINDS, HAZNET, Underground storage tank on site. Corrective action core events have Case closed. 17150 Von Kerman LUST, Cortese, RCRIS- occurred. Large quantity generator of hazardous materials. Large Irvine, CA 92714 LQG, RCRIS-TSD, CA quantity treatment, storage or disposal of waste. Leaking underground SLIC, CA FID UST, storage tank. Unleaded gasoline leak. Soil and groundwater affected. CORRAGTS, CERG Disposal of unspecified alkaline solution, aqueous solution with metals, NFRAP, HIST UST, EMI, waste oil and mixed oil, and off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. REF Materials recycled, sent to transfer station, or method of disposal unknown. Raw material drums are no ailetlzed. Delphi Connection Sys. TRIS Site released toxic chemical into the air, water and land in reportable No data provided. 17150 Von Kerman quantities. Irvine, CA 92614 Irvine Digital Graphics HAZNET Disposal of piwtochemical/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 17145 Von Kerman Ave., #101 transfer station. Irvine, CA 92714 Scan Optics, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generatorof potentially hazardous material. No action required. 17201 Von Kerman Irvine, CA 92614 Master Industries HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture, aqueous solution with No action required. 17222 Von Kerman organic residues, and unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials Irvine, CA 92614 recycled. The Irvine Company HAZNET Disposal of alkaline solution, off -specification, aged, or surplus No action required. 17221 Von Kerman Avenue inorganics, waste and mixed oil, and unspecified oil -containing waste. Irvine. CA 92614 Materials sentto transfer station or treatment tank. 3M Irvine Dental Products FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2111 Mc Gaw Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Embassy Suites Hotel UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 2120 Main Street Irvine, CA 92614 Savala Equipment/Construction HAZNET, Cortese, CA FID Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues, and unspecified oil- Preliminary site 16402 E. Construction Cl East UST, HIST UST, AST containing waste. Materials sent to recycler or method of disposal not assessment underway. Irvine, CA 92714 reported. Active underground storage tank location. Leaking underground storage tanks. Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Lido Van and Storage Co., Inc. HISTUST, HAZNET, Underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tanks. Case closed. 2200 Afton Parkway LUST, Cortese Diesel fuel leak, soil affected. Disposal of unspecified oil -containing Irvine. CA 927014 waste, and waste oil and mixed oil. Materials sentto recycler. C W Action Rentals LUST, HIST UST, Underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tank. Post remedial action 16401 Construction CL W HAZNET, Cortese, CA FID Aquifer affected. MTBE detected. Disposal ofwaste and mixed oil and monitoring in progress. Irvine, CA 92718 UST oittwater separation sludge. Materials sent to recycier or method of disposal not reported. Active storage tank on site. RerRWDUMRSwrAwyT&biu1. 0g1 s3ee7Ganegnd&iw Rm 112W3doc • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) EIR Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Nyala Screen Printing, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potenlially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 17352 Von Karman Avenue HAZNET of oxygenated solvents, unspecified organic liquid mixture, and Irvine, CA 92614 unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to transfer station. Irvine Properties UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 17352 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Construction Circle Property UST, HIST UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 16372 Construction Cir. E Irvine, CA 92606 Eurocar RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 16372 E. Construction Cir E Irvine, CA 92614 GW Cleanup -Santa Ana Cortese, CA W DS Facility that treats and/or disposes or liquid or semisolid wastes and No data provided. 2102 Main -poses a moderate threat to water. Irvine, CA XO California, Inc. AST Above -ground storage tank on site. No action required. 16842 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 Plan Hold Corporation HIST UST, EMI Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 17421 VonKarman Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 University Copy Systems HAZNET, Cortese, LUST, Disposal of photochemicals and photoprocessing waste. Materials sent Case closed. 2805 Barranca Parkway UST to transfer station. Underground storage tank on site. Leaking Irvine, CA 92606 underground storage tank. Leaking gasoline. Soil affected. Griswold Controls RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, UST Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. No action required. 2803 Barranca Parkway Underground storage tank on site. Irvine, CA 92606 Hertz Equipment Rental 936-00 AST, UST Above -ground storage tank on site. Underground storage tank on site. No action required. Construction Circle West Irvine, CA 92714 Enthone, Inc. FINDS, LUST, RCRIS, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials on site. Site work plan 16782 Von Karman Avenue LOG, TRIS, HIST UST Underground storage -tank on site. Site that releases toxic chemical into underway. Irvine, CA 92606 the air, water and land in reportable quantities. Leaking underground storage tank. Solvents leaked, aquifer affected. Fry Metals Inc. DBAAIpha HAZNET, CHMIRS, Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution, off -specification, aged, or No data provided. Metals, Inc. Cortese surplus organics, unspecified organic liquid mixture, and alkaline 16782 Von Kerman Avenue solution without metals. Materials recycled, sent for incineration Irvine, CA 92714 treatment, or method of disposal not reported. Nicklesulphate spilled from scrap line. R.1ProlectsMRWD1EDR Summary TablesUDOt Site 67 Cienega de las Raney.112003 doe 15 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Naturat Treatment SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Channel Equipment Co. HAZNEf, LUST, UST Underground storage tank. Leaking underground storage tanks. Case closed. 16331 Construction Cir. E Diesel fuel leaked, soil affected. Disposal of aqueous solution with Irvine, A 92606 organic residue, and organic solids. Materials sent to recycter, method of disoosal listed as other," and method of isposal not reported. Kennedy Pipeline Company HIST UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 16331 Construction Cir. E Irvine, CA 92714 Shipley Co, Inc. LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Solvents leaked, ground water No data provided. 16782 Von Kansan affected. Irvine, CA 92714 Deft, Inc. (Irvine Plant) HIST UST, FINDS, Underground storage tank on site. Inactive underground storage tank Case closed. 17451 Von Kerman Avenue HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, on site. Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Irvine, CA 92714 RCRIS-LOG, TRIS, UST, Leaking underground storage tank. Methyl Ethyl Ketones leaked, CA FID UST, EMI aquifer affected. Site that releases toxic chemical into the air, water and land in reportable quantities. Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, organic solids, paint sludge and unspecified organic liquid mixture. Matedalssenttorecycler. Smyth Company UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 2698 White Road Irvine, CA 92614 JSN Industries RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 17462 Von Kerman Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Marshall Aluminum LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tank. `Other' ground water affected. Case closed. 2206 Alton Parkway Irvine, A 92714 Rogerson Aircraft Corp. HAZNET, UST Disposal of photochemicais/photoprocessing waste, and aqueous No action required. 2201 Afton Parkway solution with organic residue. Materials sent to transfer station. Irvine. CA 92606 Underground stank on site. Strop Vac West RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2652 White Road Irvine, CA 92614 Gladys Jackson Cortese Leaking underground storage tanks. No data provided. 2652 White Irvine, CA 92714 Von Kerman— Manufacturing HISTUST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 16702 Von Karmen Avenue Irvine, CA • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment10m Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Parker Hannifin Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Large Case closed. 16702 Von Karmen Avenue RCRIS-LQG, LUST, HIST quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Underground Irvine, CA 92606 UST, EMI, HAZNET storage tank location. Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak, cutting oil leak, waste oil leak, perchlorethylene and tdchlomethylene leak, ground water and soil affected. Disposal of off - specification, aged, or surplus organics, alkaline solution without metals, unspecified solvent mixture (waste), latex waste and other or amc solids. Method of disposal not reported. Southern California Grading LUST, Cortese, UST, Underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tank. Case closed. 16291 Construction Cir E HIST UST, RCRIS-SQG, Gasoline leak into soil only. Disposal of waste oil and mixed oil, and Irvine, CA 92606 FINDS, HAZNET aqueous solution with organic residues. Active underground storage tank location. United Premix Concrete, Inc. HIST UST, UST, LUST Underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tank No data provided. National Ready Mixed on site. Concrete Co. 16282 Construction Cir. E. Irvine, CA 92714 New England Mutual Life Ins. UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 17502 Von Karmen Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Irvine Shop- CPC UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 16282 Construction Cir. W Irvine, CA 92606 Catalina Pacific Concrete RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 16282 Construction Cir. West Irvine, CA 92606 Cal Mat LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Soil affected. Case closed. 16282 Construction CI W Irvine, CA 92713 Cartwright Building UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 17770 Cartwright Road Irvine, CA Associates Information UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. Services, Inc. 17770 Cartwright Road Irvine, CA 92614 R 1ProjectORWD1EDR Summary Tables4001 Site 67 Cienega de las Ranas-112003 doe San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System RevisedDra$EiR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Avco Financial Services RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active Case closed. 17770 Cartwright Road HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, underground storage tank location. Leaking underground storage tank Irvine, CA 92614 UST CA FID UST "Other" ground water affected. Disposal of organic solids, aqueous solution with organic residues, tank bottom waste and photochemicals/ photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to recycler and to treatment tank. Western Waste industries HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, Leaking underground storage tank. Soil affected. Disposal of aqueous Case dosed. 16281 Construction Cir. W UST, HIST UST, CA FID solution with organic residues. Materials sent to transfer station. Irvine. CA 92606 UST - LaidlawTransit Services, Inc. UST, Orange County Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. Waste Management Industrial Site, FINDS, Underground storage tank. Disposal of aqueous solution with organic 16281 Construction Cir. -HAZNET, RCRIS-LQG residues and oilfwater separation sludge. Materials sent to transfer Irvine, CA 92606 station or reder. Califoam Div. of Mobay RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. Chemical Corporation 16661 Von Karmen Avenue Irvine, CA P&M Manufacturing RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. Plumbmaster 2592 White Road Irvine, CA 92614 Up Landscape Maintenance, UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. Inc. 16261 Construction Cir. E Irvine, CA 92606 The Printery RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 17155 Von Kerman Ave., Ste. 100 Irvine, CA 92614 United Premix Concrete Inc. CA FID UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 16282 Construction East CL Irvine, CA 92714 Irvine Shop —CPC HIST UST, CA FID UST Underground storage tank location. Active underground storage tank No action required. 16282 Construction Circle Est. location. Irvine, CA 92664 Irvine Hyatt Regency CA FID UST Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 17900 Jamboree Irvine, CA 92714 Crown Construction Co., Inc. HIST UST Underground storage tank location. No action required. 16251 Construction Cir. W Irvine, CA Site 67 Grange& Ws Rm 112MIC10C • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Sunset Properties RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active Site closed. 16251 Construction Cir. West FID UST, LUST, UST underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tanks Irvine, CA 92614 on site. Leak caused by corrosion. Shur-Lok Corp. HAZNET, Cortese, EMI, Disposal of organic solids, oil/water separation sludge, and liquids with No data provided. 2541 White Road RCRIS-SQG, FINDS pH. Materials recycled. Leaking underground storage tanks. Small Irvine, CA 92714 quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Olen Properties CA SLIC Groundwater contamination. Additional 2031 Main Street characterization Irvine, CA underway. VLI Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2031 Main Street Irvine, CA 92614 Miller Herman Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2900 McCabe Way Irvine, CA 92614 Smith Tool HIST UST Underground storage tank location. No action required. 2026 McGaw Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 No Name Provided CHMIRS Release of potentially hazardous materials. No data provided. 16666 Von Karmen Irvine, CA 92715 U P Landscaping LUST, Cortese, CA FID Active underground storage tank location. Leaking underground Case closed. 16261 Construction UST storage tank. Gasoline leaked into soil. Irvine, CA 92714 J. W. Mitchell Co. - LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak. Case closed. 16221 Construction Cl. W Irvine, CA 92714 Atlas Catering UST, LUST, Cortese Underground storage tank. Leaking underground storage tank. Case closed. 16221 Construction Cir. W Gasoline leak, aquifer affected. Irvine, CA 92606 Commercial Office and HIST UST Underground storage tank location. No action required. Warehouse 16221 Construction Cir. W Irvine, CA 92714 Rosemount Analytical, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2400 Barranca Parkway Irvine, CA 92606 Saffell & McAdam, Inc., Builder HIS UST, Cortese, LUST Underground storage tank location. Leaking underground storage Case closed. Main Street tanks. Gasoline leaked into soil. 112955 Irvine, CDA 92713 R-@rotedsRwD1EDR Summary Tables%J001 Site 67 Clenega de Ias R3nas•112603 doo San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System RevkedDraltEIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Main Street Photo RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2540 Main Street Irvine, CA 92612 Proficient Food Co. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Case closed. 17872 Cartwright Road HAZNET, LUST, HIST Underground storage tank location. Leaking underground storage Irvine, CA92614 UST tanks. Diesel fuel leak, "other' ground water affected. Disposal of waste and mixed oil, unspecified solvent mixture (waste), off - specification, aged, or surplus organics, and oxygenated solvents. Materials recycledorsent totransfer station. FJ Torito Restaurant, Inc. UST, HIST UST, CHMIRS, Underground storage tank location. Leaking underground storage Case closed. 2450 White Road Cortese tanks. Raw sewage leaked, storm drain affected. Leaking underground Irvine, CA 92614 sto a tank. Diesel fuel leak, ground water affected. Cal Pacific Warehouse HIST UST Underground storage tank location. No action required. No address provided Mobil 18-VBK UST, HAZNET, CHMIRS Disposal of contaminated soil from site clean-ups, unspecified oil- Case closed. 3765 Alton Parkway containing waste, and other inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to Irvine, A transfer station or to treatment tank. Release of potentially hazardous material, storm drain catch basin affected by surface spill caused by customer drive off. SunsetFibre LUST, Cortese, CA FID Active underground storage tank location. Leaking underground- Case closed. 16182 Construction Circle West UST, RCRISSQG, FINDS storage tanks. Gasoline leaked, soil affected. Small quantity generator Irvine, CA 92714 of votentially hazardous materials. Campbell Electric HIST UST, LUST Underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tanks. No data provided. 16182 Construction Cir. W Gasoline leaked into sal. Irvine, CA 92714 KR K, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 16661 Jamboree Road HAZNET, UST of paint sludge, other organic solids, and waste and mixed oil. Irvine, CA92614 Materials sent to transfer station or recycled. Underground storage tanks. Plan Hold Corporation RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 17621 Von Kansan Avenue Irvine, CA92614 Transit Mixed Concrete Co. LUST, UST. HAZNET, Active underground storage tank location. Underground storage tanks. Case closed. CEMEX Cortese, CA FID UST, Leaking underground storage tanks. Diesel fuel leaked, "other" ground City Concrete HIST UST water affected. Disposal of empty containers 30 gallon or more. Southdown Concrete Products, Materials sent to recycler or method of disposal not reported. Inc. 16161 Construction Cir. E Irvine, CA 92606 Ste 67 Vi og.dsbsllw -l12003AW 0 MU* • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment S s em Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertytAddress Database Reason for Listing In Database Status The Stockland Co. HIST UST, EMI, RCRIS- Underground storage tank on site. Small quantity generator of Case closed. 2332 Barranca Parkway SQG, FINDS, LUST, potentially hazardous materials. Leaking underground storage tanks. Irvine, CA 92714 Cortese Polyester resin leaked. General Collision RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 16161 Construction Cr. West HAZNET of oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. Irvine, CA 92606 Sheldahl Cirtel Circuits Orange County Industrial Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal Work plan for Phase II 2302 Barranca Site, RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, of still bottom with halogenated organics. Materials sent to transfer anticipated. Irvine, CA HAZNET, CA SLIC station. Release of solvents into groundwater and soil. Golden State Auto Collision RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 16191 Construction Cir. Irvine, CA 92606 Channel Equipment Co. Cortese Leaking underground storage tanks. No data provided. 16331 Construction Circle Irvine, CA 92714 Dewey's Rubbish Service RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active Case closed. 16122 Construction Circle East LUST, Cortese, CA FID underground storage tank location. Underground storage tanks. Irvine, CA 92606 UST Leaking underground storage tanks. Diesel fuel leak "other' ground water affected. Waste oil leak, soil affected. Waste Management of Orange AST, HAZNET, LUST, Above ground storage tank on site. Underground storage tank on site. No action required. County UST Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak. Disposal of off- 16122 Construction Cit. East specification, aged, or surplus organics, waste and mixed oil, aqueous Irvine, CA 92606 solution with organic residues, liquids with halogenated organic compounds, and contaminated soil from site clean-ups. Contaminated materials sent to land fill, other materials recycled. Smith Tools LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leaking. Case closed. 17871 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 Gary Vale Readi-Mix Concrete, HAZNET, LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak, soil affected. Case closed. Inc. Disposal of oil/water separation sludge and aqueous solution with 16131 Construction Circle West organic residues. Materials sent to transfer station or recycler. Irvine, CA 92606 General Tool RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 2025 Alton Parkway HAZNET of halogenated solids, inorganic solid waste, metal sludge, waste and Irvine, CA 92614 mixed oil, and unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to transfer station, land fill and rec cler. Sunset Envir. , Inc. SWF/LF, HAZNET, Large volume transfer/proc. facility. Disposal of construction/demolition, No action required. TS/Resource Rec Fac RCRIS-LQG industrial and mixed municipal waste. Transfer permitted. Large 16122 Construction Circle West quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of Irvine, CA inorganic solid waste, asbestos -containing waste and contaminated soil from site clean-ups. Materials sent to land fill. R 11ro*tsllRW D%DR Summary TablesU001 Site 67 Cienetia de [as Ranas-112003.doc 21 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Propertylkddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status West Park Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials., Disposal Additional -3831 Alton Parkway Orange County Industrial of liquids with halogenated organic compounds, and halogenated characterization Irvine, CA 92614 Site, Cleaners, HAZNET, solvents. Materials sent to transfer station or recycier. Release of underway. CA SLIC hazardous materials, soil and groundwater affected. Vejo Leasing, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 16092 Construction Cic East Irvine, CA 92614 Robertson's Ready Mix UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. 16081 Construction Cir. W Irvine, CA 92606 -Larson's Cleaners HAZNET, Cleaners Disposal of liquids with halogenated organic compounds, and solids or No action -required. 16585 Von Kerman sludges with halogenated organic compounds. Materials sent to Irvine, CA 92714 transfer station or recycler. M K Products, Inc. UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. 16882 Armstrong Avenue Irvine, CA92606 Michelson Water Reclamation LUST, HST UST, UST, Underground storage tank on site. Underground storage tanks. No action required. Plant Cortese; CHMIRS, EMI Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak, ground water 3512 Michelson Drive affected. Release of potentially hazardous materials, chlorine released. Irvine, CA 92612 Leak in hose between a truck and storage tank dripped on the ground and vaporized Workers had to evacuate, two went to clinic and were released. Underground storage tank on site. IrvineRanch Water District LUST, UST Underground storage tanks. Leaking underground storage tanks. Case dosed. 3512-Michelson Drive Gasoline leak, "other" ground water affected. MTBE detected. Irvine, CA Davey Roofing, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Case closed. 17182 Armstrong Avenue UST, HAZNET, LUST, Underground storage tanks. Leaking underground storage tanks. Irvine, CA 92614 Cortese Gasoline leak. Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture, aqueous solution with organic residues, and waste and mixed oil. Materials sent to transfer station, recycler. and treatment tank. The Caldwell Co. LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak, 'other" ground Case closed. 17182 Armstrong Avenue water affected. Irvine, CA 92714 The L.E. Myers Company, HIST UST Underground storage tanks on site. No action required. Gfisso 17182 Armstrong Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 Smith Toot Company UST, Orange County Underground storage tanks. Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 178T1 Von Kansan Avenue Industrial Site, HIST UST, Irvine, CA 92614 EMI Ste 67 Cmepde las Rwn 112000.dw • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Propertytkddress Database Reason for Listing In Database Status New Age Graphics RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Several Remedial action in 17871 Von Karman Avenue CERC-NFRAP, REF portions of the site have potential sources of hazardous materials. progress. Irvine, CA 92614 Potential for contaminated perched ground water beneath site to impact deep groundwater that is drinking water source. American Savings Bank UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 17875 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Coldwell Bank UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 1939 Deere Avenue Irvine, CA 92606 Cummins Cal Pacific, Inc. HAZNET, LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tanks. Methylene chloride leaked, Case closed. 1939 Deere Avenue aquifer affected. Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues, Irvine, CA 92606 and unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to recycler or transfer station. Astech Facility LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tanks. Polyester resin leak, soil affected. Case closed. 16680 Armstrong Avenue Gasoline leak, soil affected. Irvine, CA 90025 Bra Park Place, LLC UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 3337 Michelson Drive Irvine, CA 92612 Entrepreneur Magazine UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 2392 Morse Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Tapmatic Corporation HIST UST Underground storage tank location. No action required. 1851 Kettering Irvine, CA Flour Technology, Inc. HAZNET, Cortese, Orange Underground storage tank location. Leaking underground storage Case closed. 3333 Michelson Drive County Industrial Site, tanks. Gasoline leak, "other" ground water affected. Disposal of off - Irvine, CA 92730 LUST, RCRIS-SQG, specification, aged, or surplus organics, photochemicals/photo- FINDS, HIST UST, UST processing waste, asbestos -containing waste, and unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to transfer station, recycler, or land fill. Smaliquantity generatorof potentially hazardous materials. Winthrop Management UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 3333 Michelson Drive Irvine, CA 92612 Newport Precision Optics, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Case closed. 1931 Deere Avenue LUST, Cortese, HIST UST Underground storage tank location. Leaking underground storage Irvine, CA 92606 tanks. Acetone, etc., leaked, aquifer affected. Pacific Coast Retreaders SWF/LF Large volume transfer/proc. Facility. Waste fire site. No action required. 17622 Armstrong Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 R:1Projeats11RW01EDR Summary Tablesl.1001 Site 670enegadelas Ranaas112003dx 23 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Edwards Liiesciences CA SLIC Hazardous materials leaked, soil and groundwater affected. Additional 17502 Armstrong Avenue characterization Irvine. CA 92714 underway. Bentley Labs LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak "other" water Case closed. 17642 Armstrong Avenue affected. Irvine. CA 92714 Baxter Healthcare IV Systems UST, RCRIS-SQG, Underground storage tank. Small quantity generator of potentially Remedial action in Division FINDS, CA SLIC hazardous materials. Hazardous materials release, soil and progress. 17511 Armstrong Avenue groundwater affected. Irvine. CA PC World Orange County RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Additional f6601 Armstrong Avenue SLIC, HIST UST Underground storage tank location. Solvents released, soil and characterization Irvine. CA92614 groundwater affected. -underway. Thomas Transfer Co. UST Undergroundstorage tank. No action required. 17821 Gillette Avenue Irvine. CA 92614 Shell Mart 121832 &Texaco UST Underground storage tank. No action required. Ring of Fire Site #12 3090 Main Street Irvine, CA 92614 Intemationai & Manufacturing HIST UST Underground storage tank location. No action required. 17832 Gillette Avenue Irvine, CA 92714 Exodus Communications Corp. AST Above ground storage tank. No action required. 17836 Gillette Irvine. CA 92614 Newport Adhesives and VCP, RCRISSQG, Voluntary cleanup program. Proponents have requested that DTSC Preliminary assessment Composites, Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, CERC- oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to underway. 1822 Reynolds Avenue NFRAP,EMI provide coverage for DTSC costs. Small quantity generator of Irvine, CA 92714 potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of organic solids, waste and mixed oil, adhesives and aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to recycler, treatment tank and transfer station. The Crossroads Cleaners Cleaners No data provided. No data provided. 3972 Barranca Parkway frvine, CA92604 OB Properties LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak, aquifer affected. Case closed. 1851 Deere Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92714 Statfon #28 HIST UST, HAZNET, Underground storage tank location. Leaking underground storage Site work plan 17862 Gillette Avenue LUST, UST tanks. Gasoline leak, soil affected. Disposal ofwaste oil and mixed oil. submitted. Irvine. CA 92714 1 1 Materials sent to re der. Site 67 Cieneaa de rasRwn lINM doe • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment Stem Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Kaiser Rollmet CA SLIC, LUST, HIST Release of hazardous materials, soil and ground water affected. Additional 1822 Deere Avenue UST, FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Underground storage tank location. Leaking underground storage characterization Irvine, CA tanks. Gasoline released, soil affected. Large quantity generator of underway. potentially hazardous materials. AT & T UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 1741 Alton Avenue Santa Ana, CA New Construction UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 18001 Von-Karman Avenue Irvine, CA 92612 Irvine Marriott Hotel HAZNET, UST, HIST UST, Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to No action required. 18000 Von Kerman Avenue EMI treatment tank. Underground storage tank location. Irvine. CA 92612 Snyder Langstrom Builders UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 1761 Reynolds Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Ceracyne, Inc. CA SLIC Release of hazardous materials, ground water affected. Periodic groundwater 1741 Reynolds Avenue monitoring. Irvine, CA 92614 Aston Muller Associates Orange County Industrial Perchloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene and organic compounds Case closed. Property Site, CA SLIC released, soil and ground water affected. 1771 Deere Irvine, CA Orange County — Lane Road WMUDSISWAT Program tracking of waste management units. No action required. Lane/Culver Rds, Michelson Drive Irvine, CA Sun Chemical Company UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 1702 Kaiser Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Topcat Cleaners Cleaners No data provided. No data provided. 2967 Michelson Drive Irvine, CA 92612 Steve Anderson UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 1681 Kettering Irvine, CA 92614 Jacuzzi Whirlpool Bath, Irvine RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 1922 Barranca parkway HAZNET, UST, EMI of organic monomer waste, oxygenated solvents, and organic solids. Irvine. CA 92606 Materials sent to recycler, transfer station, or land fill. Underground storage tanks. R.TMjeCtSURWDIEDR SummaryTablesU001 SO 6TCienegaee las Ranas-112003 dw 25 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftE1R SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertyylAddress Database Reason forListiwg in Database States Prudential Overall Supply HIST UST, RCRISSQG, Underground storage tank location. Active underground storage tank No action required. 16901 Aston Street FINDS, HAZNET, UST, location. Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Irvine, CA 92614 CA FID UST, Cleaners, Disposal of paint sludge, aqueous solution with organic residues, waste EMI and mixed oils, and liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Materials sent to recycler, transfer station, or method of disposal not renorted. Modem Materials LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak, soil affected. Case closed 1681 Kettering Street Irvine, CA 92714 Lakeshore Towers, Ltd. UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 18101 Von Kansan Avenue Irvine, CA 92612 Parker Bertea Aerospace UST, LUST Active underground storage tanks on site. Leaking underground Remedial action in Group, Parker -Hannifin Corp. storage tank progress. 18321 Jamboree Rd. Irvine, CA 92612 Parker Hannifin Corp C S O FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 18331 Jamboree Rd LQG of unspecified alkaline solution, off specification, aged, or surplus Irvine, CA 92612 inorgan cics, hydrocarbon solvents, alkaline solution without metals, and unspecified solvent mixture Waste. Materials recycled, stored in tank or not reported. Hajara Property LUST Leaking underground storage tank Hydrocarbons leaking into soil. Preliminary site 1607 Main St. assessment underway. Santa Ana, CA 92706 Koll Center Irvine UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 18150 Von Karman Ave. Irvine, CA 92612 Isaac Main Plaza/Metro CW LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline affecting aquifer. Remedial action in 1801 Main St. progress - Santa Ana, CA 92707 Hexco, Inc. LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak into soil. Case closed. 16700 Aston St. Irvine, CA 92714 Del Mar Avionica RCRISSQD, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Leaking Case closed. 1601 Alton Ave. HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, underground storage tank Gasoline leak into soil. Disposal of Irvine, CA 92614 CA FID UST, HIST UST, unspecified aqueous solution, water of and mixed oil, tank bottom EMI waste, alkaline solution without metals. Material recycled or sent to transfer station. Williamsons Chevron #96698 LUST, Cortese, CA FID Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Pollution 18002 Culver Dr. UST, HIST UST tank. Gasoline leak affecting aquder. characterization Irvine, CA 92715 1 1underwa . Sde 67 Cienegade In Rwa$412Mdx • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatments em Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 - CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) .Property/Address Database_ Reason for Listing in Database Status Union Oil Service Station # HIST UST, LUST, UST Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Remedial action in 6404 tank. Gasoline leak affecting aquifer. progress. 18011 Culver Dr. Irvine, CA 92715 Allies Place UST Underground storage tank on site. No action required. 18011 Culver Dr. Irvine, CA 92612 Lane Rd. Disposal Station #21 SW F/LF Solid waste disposal site. Case closed. S of Michelson W of Harvard W of Culver Irvine, CA Trammel Crow LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Disposal of toluene, acetone, Case closed. 2602 Michelson Dr. methyl ethyl ketone. Irvine, CA 92714 Michelson Co., UST, LUST Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Post remedial action Audiomagnetics, Spieker tank. Solvents affecting aquifer. monitoring in progress. Properties 2600 Michelson Dr. Irvine, CA 92612 Lumsdaine Construction Inc. UST, HIST UST Active underground storage tank -on site. No action required. 16570 Aston Irvine, CA 92606 Grande Manufacturing LUST, UST Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Pollution 1582 Browning tank. Gasoline leak affecting aquifer. characterization in Irvine, CA 92606 progress. Tal Ar Corp DBA Univ. Park RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal Case closed. Center C HAZNET, OC Industrial of liquids with halogenated organic compounds, halogenated solvents. 18058 Culver Dr. Site, CA SLIC Materials recycled or sent to transfer station or landfill. Release of Irvine, CA 92612 perchloroethylene, tetrachloroeth lene, and halogenated solvents. Irvine Business Center LUST, HIST UST Leaking underground storage tank. Diesel leak into soil. Case closed. 16520 Aston Irvine, CA 92658 Shiley, Inc., Sorin Biomedical HIST UST, LUST, EMI, Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline affecting ground water. Case closed. Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, Cortese, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal 17600 Gillette Ave. RCRIS-LQG, OC Industrial of organic solids, off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, Irvine, CA 92714 Site unspecified solvent mixture waste, empty containers, perchloroethylene, and tetrachloroethylene. Materials sent to transfer station. RTroiedsVRWD1EDRSummwyTableaU001Site 67QenegadelasRanas-112003doe 27 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System RevlsedDraftE1R SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertytAddress Database Reason for Listing is Database StaWs Baxter Health Care, American UST, HIST UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. McGaw 1452.Alton Pkwy Irvine. Ca 92606 Center Irvine HISTUST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 18300 Von Kansan Ave. Irvine, CA 92715 Milcom HAZNET, LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tank. Unleaded gasoline leak into soil. Case closed. 17500 Gillette Ave. Disposal of halogenated solvents, organic solids with halogens. -Irvine. CA 92714 Materials-recycledortreated, incinerated. Lusk Homes, Lusk Co, Sabritec HIST UST, LUST, Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Remedial action in 17550 Gillette Ave. Cortese, CA FID UST, tank. Gasoline leak affecting ground water. Large quantity generator progress. Irvine, CA 92714 FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of off -specification, aged, LOG or surplus organics, oilhvater separation sludge, waste oil and mixed all, liquids with halogenated organic compounds, other inorganic solid waste. Materials recycledorsent totransfer station. Rancho San Joaquin Golf -HIST UST, HAZNET, Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline affecting ground water. Case closed. Course LUST, UST Disposal of aqueous -solution with less than 10%total organic residues. fft Sandburg Way Materials sent -to transfer station. Irvine, CA92715 Maffet Trenchesrrustin MCAS SWF/LF Solid Waste Disposal Site Closing. LF Jamboree and Edinger Tustin, CA Ultra Systems I & If UST Active underground storage -tank on site. No action required. 2400 Michelson Dr. Irvine, CA 92612 Lintronics CA SLIC Solvent contamination found in shallow groundwater. No action required. 17791 Sky Park Circle -Irvine. CA 92714 Stone Creek Cleaner RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 4250 Barranca Pkwy P HAZNET, Cleaners of halogenated solvents, aqueous solution with less than 10% total Irvine, CA 92614 organic residues. Materials recycled. Coyote Cyn Sanitary Landfill SWF/LF Solid Waste Disposal Site Case closed Coyote Cyn Rd. S. of Bonita Cyn Rd. Irvine, CA Cleregadelnlla I=Mdx 0 n U PropertyLAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Aluminum Company of HAZNET, RCRIS-LQG, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. America, Astech EMI, CHMIRS, HIST UST, of aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, 3030 S. Red Hill Ave. FINDS, HAZNET, OC contaminated soil from site clean-ups, polychlorinated biphenyls, and Santa Ana, CA 92705 Industrial Site, CA SLIC, materials containing PCBs, other inorganic solid waste, liquids with metals, unspecified aqueous solution, halogenated solvents. Materials recycled, treated and stored in tanks, or sent to landfill. Release of halogenated solvents. Nitric acid wastespilled. Tustin Marine Corps Air Station DOD No data provided. No action required. (Closed) Orange (County), CA Barranca, Hammerbank HIST UST - Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. Manufacturing 1700 Barranca Pkwy Irvine, CA 92713 Kaiser Electroprecision LUST, UST, Cortese, Leaking underground storage tank. Chlorinated hydrocarbons affecting No action required. 17000 Red Hill Ave. FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- aquifer. Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Irvine, CA 92614 LQG, EMI Disposal of halogenated solvents, other inorganic solid waste. Materials recycled, treated and incinerated, or sent to landfill. I Koll Center Irvine #2 HAZNET, LUST, Cortese -Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak into soil. Disposal of Case closed. 18500 Von Karman off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, unspecified organic liquid Irvine, CA 92715 mixture, paint sludge. Materials recycled or sent to transfer station. Sanmina/Elexsys Intem'l, Inc. CA SLIC, OC Industrial Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Solvents No action required. (Diceon) Site, HIST UST, EMI, affecting soil and groundwater. Active underground storage tank on 18522 Von Karman FINDS, RCRIS-LQG, TRIS site. Facility releases toxic chemicals to the air, water, and land in Irvine, CA 92715 reportable quantifies under SARA Title III, Section 3. North American Specialties Cal RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No No action required. Inc. CERC-NFRAP contamination was found, contamination was remove quickly without 17781 Sky Park Cir Ste A the need tobeplaced-on NPL, or not -serious enough contamination for Irvine, CA 92614 NPL consideration. Baxter Health Care Corp., UST, HIST UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. Allegiance Health Care Corp., Royalty Carpet Mills Inc 17111 Red Hill Ave Irvine, CA 92614 Terra Investments LUST,- HIST UST, UST, Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak into soil Pollution 17848 Sky Park Blvd. Cortese, CA FID UST characterization Irvine, CA92714 underwa . Chevron U S A Inc #6405 UST, HIST UST, LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak into soil. No action required. 17561 Macarthur Blvd. Irvine, CA 92614 R.1ProlectsIMMEOR Summary Tablesl10015M1e 67Clenegadelas Ranas-112003doe 29 Appenmx r- San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Budget Rent a Car Lust, UST Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Case closed. 2272Michelson tank. Gasoline affecting groundwater. Irvine. CA 92697 Exxon Co Rs 73515, Red H81 RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active Pollution Mobile, Machili Petroleum Inc. HIST UST, LUST underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage tank. characterization 17551 blacarthur Blvd. Gasoline affecting aquifer. underway. Irvine, CA 92614 Mazada N. America Inc. UST, CRCRISSQG, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active No action required. 1444&1424McGawAve. FINDS, HIST UST, LUST, undergmund storage tanks. Leaking underground storage tanks. Irvine, CA 92614 -EMI Gasoline leak affecting groundwater. Precision Plastics LUST, UST, Cortese, OC Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Post remedial action 1352 Reynolds Industrial Site tank. Waste oil and chlorinated hydrocarbons leak into groundwater. monitoring in progress. Irvine. CA 92714 Container Carp of America UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 1600 Barranca Pkwy Irvine, CA 92606 Holly Sugar Corporation WMUDS/SWAT The Waste Management Unit Database System is used for program No action required. 15671 E. Dyer Rd. tracking and inventory of waste management units. Irvine, CA 92707 American Hospital Supply UST, HIST UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 17201 Red Hill Ave. Irvine, CA 92614 Amethyst Cleaners HAZNET, Cleaners Disposal of liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Materials No action required. 2222 Michelson Dr. #220 sent to transfer station. Irvine, CA 92715 Integrated Aerospace Systems, RCRIS-LOG, AST, HIST Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active No action required. Trig Aerospace, Energy UST, FINDS, RAATS underground storage tank on site. A record based on enforcement Product Division, E P C Land actions issued under RCRA and pertaining to major violators. Inc. 2036 and 2040 E. Dyer Rd. Santa Ana, Ca 92705 WoodbridgeAutowash UST, HIST UST, LUST Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Remedial action in 4550 Barranca Pkwy tank. Gasoline leak affecting ground water. progress. Irvine. Ca 92604 Trig Aerospace, Energy AST, HIST UST, FINDS, Active underground storage tank on site. large quantity generator of No action required. Production Division, E P C RCRIS-LOG, RAATS potentially hazardous materials. A record based on enforcement Land Inc. actions issued under RCRA and pertaining to major violators. 2040 E. Dyer Rd. Santa Ana, CA 92705 dx • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment SySfem Revised Draft ER SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Federal Express HMIRS, HAZNET, UST, Active underground storage tank. Disposal of pain sludge, other No action required. 18651 Von Kerman Ave. organic solids, latex waste. Materials sent to transfer station. Materials Irvine, CA rec cled. Release of potentially hazardous materials. Airport Base Center LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak. Case closed. 17875 Sky Park Cir Irvine, CA 92714 Edwards Lffesciences LLC FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 17221 Red Hill Ave LQG of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics, unspecified solvent Irvine, CA 92614 mixture waste, laboratory waste chemicals, waste oil and mixed oil, oxvqenated solvents. Xerox Corporation, Mallinckrodt CA SLIC, FINDS, RCRIS- Solvents leaked into soil and groundwater. Large quantity generator of No action required. Medical LOG, RCRIS-TSD, potentially hazardous materials. Corrective action stabilization 18691 Jamboree Rd. Corrects, CERC-NFRAP measures implemented. Irvine, CA 92714 Transico Inc FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2807 Catherine Way Santa Ana, CA 92705 John Wayne Airport FINDS, HAZNET, AST, Active underground storage tank on site. Above ground storage tank No action required. 18601 Airport Way UST on site. Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials Santa Ana, CA 92707 recycled. Irvine PCS Switch, Pacific Bell AST, RCRIS-SQG, Above ground storage tank on site. Small quantity generator of No action required. 2592 Dupont Dr. FINDS, HAZNET, UST, potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of oil/water separation Irvine, CA 92612 HIST UST sludge. Materials sent to transfer station. Sunnyfresh Cleaners HAZNET, Cleaners, CA Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal Case closed. 4722 Barranca Pkwy SLIC, RCRIS-SQG, of halogenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. Release of Irvine, CA 92714 FINDS, OC Industrial Site, perchloroethylene, and tetrachloroethylene. Cleaners Dupont Cleaners, AI Phillips the RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. Cleaner Irvine Cleaners, HAZNET of liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Materials sent to 2636 Dupont Dr. transfer station. Irvine. CA 92612 Allergen Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Leaking Pollution 2525 Dupont Dr. UST, LUST, Cortese, CA underground storage tank. Diesel leak into soil. characterization Irvine, CA 92612 FID UST, HIST UST underway. University Community Assoc UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 4530 Sandburg Way Irvine, CA 92612 Newport Stationers LUST, Cortese, UST Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak into groundwater. Case closed. 1768Mitchell 1 Irvine, CA 92714 R.WrojectsllR MORSummaryTables0001Site67CienegadelasRanas-112003dw 31 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Dra@ EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Mobile Oil HIST UST, LUST, Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak into groundwater. Past remedial 4800 Barranca Pkwy Cortese, CA FID UST Active underground storage tank on site. action monitoring in Irvine, CA 92714 progress. Prudential LUST, Cortese, Leaking underground storage tank. Solvent leak affecting aquifer. Post remedial 19000 action monitoring in Irvine, CA 92715 progress.. Amway Corporation HIST UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 1800 E. Dyer Rd. Santa Ana, CA 92705 Circuit House RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous material. Active No action required. 17971 Skypark Circle HIST UST underground storage tank on site. Irvine, CA 92614 Wells Fargo Security Co. LUST, Cortese, UST, Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak into groundwater. Case closed. 17680 Cowen HIST UST Active underground storage tank on site. Irvine, CA 92714 The Toman Company, The UST, HIST UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. Arboretum 18002 Sky Park Circle Irvine, CA 92614 Tre Metal Processing Co. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Corrective No action required. 1900 East Deere Rd. RCRIS-TSD, Corrects, action assigned a low corrective action priority. Santa Ana, CA 92705 CERGNFRAP Calwestco Inc., Bryco Arms LUST, UST Leaking underground storage tank. Unleaded gasoline and diesel leak Case closed. 17692 Cowan into soil. Active underground storage tank on site. Irvine. CA 92714 Barranca Cleaner's RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 4920 Barranca Pkwy HAZNET, Cleaners of halogenated solvents, liquids and sofids or sludges with halogenated Irvine, CA 92604 organic compounds. halogenated solvents. Materials-irecycled. Ashland Nutritional Products, HAZNET, LUST, Cortese, Active underground storage tank on site. Leaking underground storage Case closed. Pacific Const And Interiors UST tank. Gasoline leak into soil. Disposal of alkal+ne- solution without Irvine, CA92614 metals, liquids with pH, oxygenated solvents, other inorganic solid waste. Materials recycled orsenttotransferstation. W.E. Hall Co. HIST UST, UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 17031 Daimler SL Irvine, CA 92714 American Flex Circuit of LA Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Active underground storage tank on site. Small quantity generator of No act on required. 17091 Daimler St. RCRIS-TSD, UST, HIST potentially hazardous materials. Irvine. CA 92614 UST International Sensor Tech UST, HIST UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 17771 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 Site67 Clamp delay RWn 112003.dac San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 67 - CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) EIR Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Meguiars Mirror Bright Polish HIST UST Active underground storage tanks on site. No action required. 17275 Daimler St. Irvine, CA 92713 Mc Donnel Douglas UST Active underground storage tanks on site. No action required. 17426 Daimler St. Irvine, CA 92614 Science Applications Intl RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. A record No action required. 18872 Bardeen Ave. RAATS based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA and pertaining to Irvine. CA 92612 -major violators. Ricoh Electronics TSCA, UST, HIST UST, Active underground storage tanks on site. Leaking underground Post remedial action 2320 Red Hill Ave. LUST, Cortese, CA FID storage tank. Hydrocarbons affecting aquifer. Large quantity generator monitoring in progress. Santa Ana, CA 92705 & UST, EMI, FINDS, of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of adhesives, other 17482 Pullman St HAZNET, RCRIS-LQG, organic solids, other inorganic solid waste, unspecified solvent mixture Irvine, CA 92614 TRIS waste, unspecified sludge waste, waste oil and mixed oil, metal dust — machining waste and alkaline solution. Materials recycle, or sent to landfill or transfer station. Drake Engineering LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tank. Waste oil, chlorinated No action required. -17502 Daimler St. hydrocarbons, and Stoddard solvent leaks into ground water. Irvine, CA 92714 ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. MLTS Possess or use radioactive materials. No action required. 2727 Campus Dr. Irvine, CA 92715 Amtech FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 17091 Daimler St Suite B LQG of metal sludge - alkaline solution, aqueous solution with metals, other Irvine, CA 92614 inorganic solid waste. Materials recycled. Chevron #9-5418 HIST UST, UST, LUST, Active underground storage tanks on site. Leaking underground No action required. 18692 Macarthur Blvd. HMIRS storage tank. Gasoline leaking into ground water. Release of Irvine, CA 92715 potentially hazardous materials. Irvine Unified Schools- Print RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Leaking Case closed. 5050 Barranca Pkwy LUST underground storage tanks. Leaking gasoline. Irvine, CA 92614 Hoover FinanciallWodd Invest UST Active underground storage tanks on site. No action required. 17821 Mitchell N Irvine, CA 92614 Sun Chemical Corporation LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tanks. Leaking gasoline. Case closed. 1072 Kaiser Ave. Irvine, CA92714 University of Calif. Irvine AST Above ground storage tank on site. No action required. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr. Irvine, CA 92697 R 1ProjecislIRMIEDR summary TablesV001 Site 67 Clenega de las Ranas•112003 doc 33 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertytAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Tycom FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 17862 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 Giant Golf Company HAZNET, LUST, Cortese Leaking underground storage tank. Leaking solvents affecting aquifer. Case closed. 17871 Mitchell St. Disposal of halogenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. Irvine, Ca 92614 Beechcraft West -Orange HIST UST, LUST Cortese Active underground storage tanks on site. Leaking underground Case closed. County storage tank. Leaking waste oil affecting aquifer. 18741 AirportWay Santa Ana, CA 92705 Pacific Soils Engineering Inc. UST Active underground storage tanks on site. No action required. 17909 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 Microelectronic Systems HIST UST Active underground storage tanks on site. No action required. Division 2601 Campus Dr. Irvine, CA 92715 Park Red Hill Partnership, The UST, LUST, HIST UST Active underground storage tanks on site. Leaking underground Case closed. Sammis Co. storage tank. Gasoline leak into soil. 17922 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 Woodcrest Development LUST, Cortese, UST Active underground storage tanks on site. Leaking underground. Case closed. 17911 Mitchell storage tank. Gasoline leak into soil. Irvine, CA 92714 Woodbridge Village Association LUST, UST Active underground storage tanks on site. Leaking underground Case closed. 31 Creek storage tank. Gasoline leak into soil. Irvine. Ca 92604 Rockford Aerospace Products RCRIS-SQG, finds. Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 17300 Red Hit Ave. Cortese, CERC-NFRAP, Irvine, CA 92614 REF Chevron #20-7139 UST Active underground storage tanks on site. No action required. 15425 Culver Dr. Irvine, CA 92604 Owl Companies, American HIST UST, UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. Data 2465 Campus Dr. Irvine. CA 92715 LNP Engineering (GE Plastics) CA SLIC, HAZNET, CA Active underground storage tank on site. Perchlorate released into soil Pollution 1831 Camegie FID UST, HIST UST and groundwater. Disposal of baghouse water, aqueous solution, characterization Santa Ana, Ca less than 10% total organic residues. Materials recycled, treated and underway. incinerated, orsentto transferstation. Site 670wegadoWe Ran 112663.dw • • San Dlego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment S em Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Main St. Sewage Pump Station UST Active underground storage tank on site. No action required. 1499 Main Library Irvine, CA 92697 Sheldahl Inc. FINDS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 15771 Red Hill Ave. LQG, EMI of waste oil and mixed oil, oxygenated solvent, other inorganic solid Tustin, CA 92780 waste, laboratory waste chemicals, unspecified alkaline solution. Materials recycled or sent to transfer station. Bayer Corporation RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 14791 Franklin Avenue HAZNET of unspecified solvent mixture Waste, laboratory waste chemicals, and Tustin, CA 92680 liquids with pH. Materials sent to transfer station or not reported. Texaco, Inc. Cortese Leaking underground storage tank onsite. No data provided. 2472 Chambers St. Tustin, CA 92680 Tustin Circuits, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2681 Dow Avenue 4E Tustin, CA 92680 Shelly Associates RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 14281 Chamber Road Tustin, CA 92680 Paltex Editing and Prod Sys Ltd RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2752 Walnut Avenue Tustin, CA 92680 Truesdell Labs RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active No action required. 14201 Franklin Avenue HIST UST underground storage tank onsite. Tustin, CA 92680 Toshiba America Medical RCRIS-SQD, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. Systems HAZNET of waste oil and mixed oil, other empty containers 30 gallons or more, 2441 Michelson Drive empty containers less than 30 gallons, metal sludge — Alkaline solution Tustin, CA 92681 with metals, and photochemicals/ photoprocessign waste. Materials rec cled, sent to transfer station, or not reported. Aerojet Ordnance Tustin RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2521 Michelle Drive Tustin, CA 92680 Fisher Scientific Tustin RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2761 Walnut Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 Silicon Systems RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active No action required. 14351 Myford Road UST, CA FID UST, HIST underground storage tank onsite. Disposal of laboratory waste Tustin, CA 92680 UST, HAZNET chemicals, asbestos -containing waste, other organic solids, unspecified organic liquid mixture, and hydrocarbon solvents. Materials sent to -transfer station. R1ProjectsURWD1EDR Summary TablesU001 Site 67 Cienega de Ins Rams-112003 dua 35 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Protool Company RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 14771-D Mylord Drive Tustin, CA92680 Pacific Bell C/O Packer LEP35 RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 14451 Mylord Road Tustin, CA 92680 Becwar Engineering FINDS, RCRISSQG, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 14701-C Myford Road HAZNET of metal sludge— Alkaline solution with metal and aqueous solution with Tustin, CA 92680 metals. Materials recycled, sent to treatment tank, or not reported. Tustin Acura RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Leaking Remedial action 9 Auto Center Drive UST, CA FID UST, LUST, underground storage tank onsite. Unleaded gasoline leaking Into soil, completed or deemed Tustin, CA 92680 HAZNET, Cortese Disposal of aqueous solution with less than 1045 total organic residues, unnecessary. unspecified aqueous solution, and oft-ater separation sludge. Materials recycled. sent to transfer station, or not reported. Tustin Dodge RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Leaking Remedial action 40 Auto Center Drive UST, OC Industrial Site, underground storage tank. Waste oil leaking into soil. Disposal of completed or deemed Tustin, CA 92680 LUST, HAZNEi' unspecified aqueous solution, ollfwater separation sludge, and aqueous unnecessary. solution with 10% o more total orcianic residues. Materials recicled. Tustin Parcel D Cal -Sites Site contains both knc rm and potentially hazardous substances. No action required. Edinder Ave./Harvard Ave. NW Quad. Tustin, CA 92680 Shipley Company LLC FINDS, RCRIS-QG, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. NFRAP No further remedial 2631 Michelle Drive RCRIS-TSD, CORRACTS, sites may be sites where, follmving an initial investigation, no action planned. Tustin. CA 92780 CERC-NFRAP contamination was found, contamination was removed quickly without the need for the Action or NPL consideration. KSH Incorporated LUST, Cortese, RCRIS- Small quantify generatorof potentially hazardous materials. Leaking Remedial action 1221 Moulton Parkway SQG, FINDS underground storage tank onsite. Gasoline teak into soil. completed or deemed 1221 Edinger Avenue unnecessary. Tustin, CA 92680 Thunderbird Irrigation, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 14402 Chambers Road HAZNET of waste oil and mixed oil. Material sent to transfer station or treatment Tustin. CA 92680 tank. Thomas & Betts Corp RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 14401 Chambers Road Tustin. CA 92680 Automax Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 14401 Franklin Avenue HAZNET of unspecified aqueous solution, waste oil and mixed oil, and aqueous Tustin, CA 92680 solution with 10°,b or more total organic residues. Materials re cied. R ir.10*ORSWM=Y7ab1MUM1 • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment SySRem Revised Draft OR SITE 67 — CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertyiAddress Database Reason fur Listing in Database Status Heads Up Industries RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 14352 Franklin Avenue HAZNET of laboratory waste chemicals, waste oil and mixed oil, and adhesives. Tustin, CA 92708 Materials were disposed. Cheek Engineering RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 14341 Franklin Avenue HAZNET of unspecified solvent mixture waste, aqueous solution with less than Tustin, CA 92680 10% total organic residues, unspecified oil containing waste, oxygenated solvents, and halogenated solvents. Materials recycled or sent to transfer station. Melles Griot Composites RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 14450 Chambers Road Tustin, CA 92680 Schick Moving & Storage Co. UST, HIST UST, CA FID Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials: Leaking No action required. 2721 Michelle Drive UST, RCRIS-QG, FINDS, underground storage tank onsite. Gasoline leak affecting ground water. Tustin, CA 92680 HAZNET, LUST Disposal of tank bottom waste and waste oil and mixed oil. Materials recycled. Tustin Lexus RCRIS-SW, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active No action required. 45 Auto Center Drive UST, CA FID UST, underground storage tank onsite. Disposal of halogenated solvents, Tustin, Ca 92680 HAZNET unspecified aqueous solution, and aqueous solution with less than 10% total or anic residues. Materials recycled and sent to transfer station. McLean Motor Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 50 Auto Center Drive HAZNET of aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues, Tustin, CA 92680 unspecified organic liquid mixture, and unspecified oil containing waste. Materials recycled or sent to transfer station. Dynacast Incorporated RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 2652 Dow Avenue HAZNET of metal sludge — alkaline with metals and oil/water separation sludge. Tustin, CA 92780 Materials sent to landfill, recycled, or sent to treatment tank.1 Perfect Lamination Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 14731, I — Franklin Avenue HAZNET of unspecified sludge waste, metal sludge — alkaline with metals, and 14701- C Myford Road other inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to transfer station. Tustin, CA 92780 Circuit Tech RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 2640 Walnut Avenue, Ste. D -HAZNET of liquids with pH with metals and photochemicals/photoprocessing Tustin. CA 92680 waste. Materials recycled or sent to treatment tank. Unisen Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 14741Franklin Avenue Tustin, CA 92680 Second Source Computers Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS,. Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 14712 Bentley Circle HAZNET of halogenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. Tustin, CA 92680 R.TrojeclsitRWn1EOR Summary TablesU061 Site 67Cienega de 1as Ranas-112003Aoc 37 Append&F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DrattEIR SITE 67—CIENEGA DE LAS RANAS IRVINE, CA (Continued) PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Boehringer Mannheim Corp. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2742 Dow Avenue Tustin, CA 92680 Ironclad, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2745 Dow Avenue Tustin, CA 92680 Slemons Sports Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2805 Dow Avenue Tustin. CA 92680 S&G Press Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2811 Dow Avenue Tustin, CA 92680 Asinc, Incorporated RCRIS-SQG. FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous -materials. No action required. 14661—C Word Road Tustin, CA 926B0 Bioprobe International Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2842 WalnutAvenue, Ste. C Tustin. CA 92680 Mainland Co., The RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2911 Dow Avenue Tustin, CA 92680 FDR Field Service RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 2942 Dow Avenue Tustin, CA 92680 Konis Site LUST Leafing undergroundstorage tank. Gasoline leak into soil. Remedial action in 1231 Edin erAvenue progress. Dynachem— Div of Morton LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Methyl ethyl ketones leak into soil. Preliminary assessment Thiokol underway. 2631 Michelle Drive Tustin. CA 92680 Cherokee Intemational LLC, HAZNET, UST, FINDS, Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active No action required. Dure Timber Construction Co. HIST UST, RCRIS-LOG underground storage tank onside. Disposal of off -specification, aged, or 2841 Dow Avenue surplus organics, organix monomer waste, pesticide rinse water, and Tustin, CA 92780 oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. Champion Distribution Center, HIST UST Underground storage tank onsite. No action required. Champion Building Products 1200 Edinger Avenue Tustin, CA 92680 Summary7abins=l Sfle67C="ade lea Ra V112MAOC • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITES 9, 10, 11, 12A-G AND 61 IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status One Hour Moto Photo HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 13209 Jamboree Road recycler. Tustin, CA 92680 Tustin Ranch Golf Course LUST Gasoline leak, soil affected. Remedial action 12442 Tustin Ranch Road completed. Tustin, CA 92680 Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary SWF/LF Active solid waste landfill. No action required. Landfill Bee Canyon Access Road Irvine, CA Southern California Edison HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. Irvine Substation Irvine, CA 92718 Mazda Motors of American UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 7755 Irvine Center Drive, #1 Irvine, CA Communications Stn. LF (El SWF/LF Solid waste disposal site. No action required. Toro MCAS #17) Irvine Blvd., and Trabuco Road Irvine, CA Victor M. Feld, DDS HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 15435 Jeffrey Road, Suite 140 transfer station. Irvine, CA 92720 Chevron #20-52222 UST Underground storage tank. No action required. 16221 Lake Forest Drive Irvine, CA Graphix HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 18008 Sky Park Circle, Ste. recycler. 210 Irvine, CA H & H Topsoil SWF/LF Active composting facility (green waste). No action required. "N" Street/Irvine Blvd. Irvine, CA Lexus Western Area HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Disposal method not No action required. 209 Technology Drive, Ste. 100 reported. Irvine, CA 92718 No Name Given ERNS Emergency response notification system. No data provided. No data provided. Teller Avenue and DuPont Street Construction Area Irvine, CA R.1ProfeclsllRMSDR Summary Tablesll001 Sites 9.10,11.12A.G.61-110403 DOC 1 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System RevisedDraft EIR SITES 9,1O,11,12A-G AND 61 (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Intown Properties, Inc./HUD HAZNET Disposal of household waste. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 1014 Cabrillo Park Dr., Apt. A 1440 Cabrillo Park Dr., Apt F Santa Ana, CN92705 MR[ Centers HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Method of No action required. 1930 Old Tustin Avenue disposal not reported. Santa Ana, CA 92705 Johnson & Father HAZNEr Disposal of waste oil and mixed oil andunspecifiedoil-containing No action required. Carter's Gear Box Shop waste. Materials sent to transfer station or recycler. 1320 E. Saint Andrew Place, Ste. K Santa Ana, CA 92705 County of Orange Public HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sentto No action required. Library recycler. 1501 E. Saint Andrew Place Santa Ana, CA 92705 Auto Dynamics HAZNET Disposal of halogenated solvents and unspecified solvent mixture No action required. 1330 E. Saint Andrew Place, (waste). Materials sent to recycler. unit 1 Santa Ana. CA 92705 Clark's Printing HAZNET Disposal of photochemicalsomtoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. Pacific Rim Contractors, Inc. recycler. 1315 E. Santa Andrew Place, Suite E & Suite A Santa Ana. CA 92705 Fox Auto Care HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sentto No action required. MRP Auto Inc., DBA Phillip's recycler. Auto 1311C B Saint Gertrude PI. Santa Ana, CA 92705 Gary M. Feinberg, DDS HAZNET Disposal of photochemicais/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 2441 N. Tustin Avenue, Ste. J recycler. Santa Ana, CA 92705 Karcher Environmental, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of hydrocarbon solvents. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 2624 N. Tustin Avenue,ApL C SantaAna, CA 92705 Thomas Hadin, M.D. HAZNET Disposal of metal sludge ormaterials not reported. Materials sent to No action required. Orange County Eye & Tissue recycler or method of disposal not reported. Bank 801 N. Tustin Avenue, Ste. 703 Santa Ana. CA 92705 RWMVC1XDRSummaryTabldU001&tnO.10.11.1TA-G,61.110W3 DCC 0 APft, • Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Dr. Margaret Pan, DDS HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 2040 N. Tustin Ave., Ste. A recycler. Santa Ana, CA 92705 Firestone Store #71 W6 HAZNET Disposal of pesticide rinse water. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 2005 N. Tustin Ave., Ste. A Santa Ana, CA 92705 North Tustin Sports Medicine HAZNET Disposal of metal sludge. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 720 N. Tustin Ave., Ste. 206 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Rite Aid, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to treatment No action required. 13862 Tustin Avenue tank. Santa Ana, CA 92705 Robert K. Zimmer, DDS HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 999 N. Tustin Ave., Ste. 9 station. Santa Ana, CA 92705 William C. Guard, DDS, A HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Method of No action required. PROFCORP disposal not reported. 1401 N. Tustin Ave., Suite 345 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Equilon Enterprises, LLC HAZNET Disposal of empty containers less than 30 gallons. Method of disposal No action required. 401 N. Tustin/4th not reported. Santa Ana, CA 92705 Tustin Imaging Center HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 18102 Irvine Blvd. Ste. 201 recycler. Tustin, CA 92680 Pacific Retail Trust HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Method of disposal not No action required. 400-1222 Irvine Blvd. reported. Tustin, CA 92680 Dr. Jeffry Persons, DDS HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 1442 Irvine Blvd., Ste. 225 recycler. Tustin, CA 92680 Meier Chiropractic HAZNET Disposal of metal sludge and photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. No action required. Michael J. Chen, DDS Materials sent to recycler or method of disposal not reported. 17842 Irvine Blvd., Ste.118 Ste. F Tustin, CA 92680 William Young, DDS HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Method of disposal No action required. 17502 Irvine Blvd., Ste. B not reported. Tustin, CA 92680 R.12rojacts%1RWD1EDR SummaryTable UOD1 Sites 9,10,11,12A.G,61.110403 DOC 3 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural SITES 9,10,11,12A•G AND 61 (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertyfAddr-ass Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Tustin Ranch Cleaners HAZNET Disposal of halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycter. No action required. 13313 Jamboree Rd. Tustin. CA 92680 1X Tustin Unified School Dist HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to recycter. No action required. Tustin High School No Address Given Tustin, CA 92680 HUD HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 15500 Tustin Village Way, A pL 40 Tustin, CA 92680 Any Stn. #378 UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. 101 N. Tustin Tustin, CA 92680 Tustin Honda UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. 100 N. Tustin Avenue Tustin. CA 92680 No Name Given ERNS Emergency response not cation system. No data provided. No data provided. 2761 Walnut Avenue Flammable Vault Area Tustin. CA 92680 Sdm 9. W,11.17A-G.61-11M DW • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment s em Revised Draft EIR SITE 68 - PA 18 IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Lake Hills Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 24401 Ridge Route Drive HAZNET of unknown hazardous materials. Materials sent to recycler. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Laguna Village HAZNET Disposal of asbestos -containing waste. Materials sent to land fill. No action required. 22092 Caminito Amor Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Laguna Village Owners HAZNET Disposal of paint sludge. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. Association 23300 Santa Vittoria Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 HUD HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 23335 Caminito Andreta Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Mural Farms Compost Facility SWF/LF Active composting facility (green waste). No action required. 16721 Laguna Canyon Rd. Irvine, CA Steve Scraggs HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 23532 Venisia recycler. Laguna Hills, CA 90000 Magellan -New American Asset HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to No action required. Mgmt. Services transfer station. 16261 Laguna Canyon Rd. Irvine, CA 92718 Accupath Diagnostic Lab HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 16255 Laguna Canyon Rd. recycler. Irvine, CA 92618 No Name Given ERNS Emergency response notification system. No data provided. 22991 Caminito Mar La una Hills, CA 92653 Irvine Oaks Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 16277 Laguna Canyon Road. Irvine, CA 92718 Autobody by Caldwell, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Method of disposal not No action required. 22681 Granite Way reported. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Alfa Performance Connection RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 22692 Granite Way La una Hills, CA 92653 Mechanical Mann, LLC HAZNET Disposal of unspecified -aqueous solution. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 22701 Granite Way La una Hills, CA 92653 R1Proleds%IRW DTOR SummaryTable UOUI Site 68 PA 18-110403.DOC 1 stppenoix r- San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITE 68 — PA 18 (Continued) (WINE, CA Property1Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status FHP Laguna Hills Medical Ctr. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 23330 Moulton Pkwy HAZNET of unspecified hazardous material. Method of disposal not reported. 22932AIcalde Drive Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Dunn -Edwards Corporation RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23002 Moulton Parkway La una Hills. CA 92653 Custom Finishing RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23011 Moulton Parkway D-6 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Autonation USA HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Method of disposal No action required. 9101 Research Dr. riot reported. Irvine, CA 92618 Viejo Moulton Leasing RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23552 Moulton Pkwy. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 The Radiator Shop RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. BIX Finishing and Stripping HAZNEr unspecified aqueous solution and unspecified solvent mixture (waste). 23011 Moulton Pkwy. Materials sentto recycler ormethod of disposal riot reported. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Spectrum Microgon, NC RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 23152 Verdugo Dr. HAZNET of unspecified solvent mixture (waste and empty containers 30 gallons Laquna Hills, CA 92653 ormore. Materials sent to transfer station. tuna Machine HAZNET Disposal of metal sludge. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 23192 Verdugo Dr. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Sir Speedy, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23131 Verdugo Dr. Laguna Hills. CA 92654 R C Westburg Engineering, Inc. HAZNET Disposat of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Method of disposal not No action required. 23282 Verdugo Drive reported. Laquna Hills, CA Medicenter Chiromed HAZNET Disposal of photochemicaVphotopmeessing waste. Method of disposal No action required. 23271 Verdugo Drive not reported. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 The Young Engineers, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 22951 Alcade Dr. Laguna Hills. CA 92654 Garrett Precision HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Materials sentto recycler. No action required. 22951 Alcalde Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 S=m yTaNed=t See68 PA 18-110/03 DOC • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment S• Revised Draft EIR SITE 68 — PA 18 (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for listing in Database Status Transit Mix Concrete — El Toro CA FID, LUST, UST, Active underground storage tank location. Leaking underground Remedial action in 9961 Valencia Ave. CorteseT storage tanks. Diesel leak, ground water affected. progress. Irvine, CA 92718 No Name Given CHMIRS Diesel fuel spill, ground affected. No data provided. Moulton Parkway No Santa Mara Avenue Unincorporated, CA Chup Corp. dba Color Digit HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 22981 Alcalde Dr. transfer station. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Zevco, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of hydrocarbon solvents. Method of disposal not reported. No action required. 22982 Alcalde Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 D J Scotts Mfg., Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23102 Terra Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Active Lifestyles RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23095 Terra Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Intra Trade Medical Group RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23082 Terra Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Surface Mount Techniques HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials -sent to No action required. 23052 Alcalde Dr., Ste. F recycler. Lacuna Hills, CA 92653 Laguna Hills Business Center HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 23012 Del Lego Dr. station. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Great American Printing Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23015 Del Lego Dr. Suite B-L Lactuna Hills, CA 92653 PFAHL Marine Products HAZNET Disposal of oillwater separation sludge. Materials sent to transfer No action required. Company station. 23122-A Alcalde Dr. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Viking Litho HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with metals. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 23282 Del Lego Dr. station. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Mission Pest Control HAZNET Disposal of solids or sludges with halogenated organic compounds. No action required. 23286 Del Lago Dr. Method of disposal not required. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 R.1Ptojects11RW DXrbR Summary Tables0001 Site 68 PA 15-110403.DOC 3 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftEIR SITE 68 — PA 18 (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Analytical Systems Division RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23162 La Cadena Drive Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Pro Tech Weatherproofing, Inc. HAZNET, Cortese, LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak, soil affected. Case closed. 23261 Del Lego Dr. Disposal of empty containers 30 gallons or more. Materials sent to Laguna Hills, CA 92669 transfer station. International Opthalm'ics Mfg. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23132 Lacadena, Suite F Lactuna Hills. CA 92653 Limited TS and Things, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action requited. 23197AIcalde Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Ricken Trucking RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23185 Lacadena, Ste.102 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Dynamic Electronics, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23142 Alcaide, Ste. D2 La una Hills. CA 92653 No Name Given CHMIRS Diesel fuel spill. No data provided. SIB f-5 300' Si1-t05 Irvine, CA Wright Oil #9 UST, HAZNET, CA INDS Underground storage tanks. Disposal of gas scrubber waste and waste No action required. G&M Oil and minced oil. Materials sent to recycler. Active waste treatment Texaco facility. GW Cleanup-L.Hlls, El Toro Rd. 1X DHC-Rossmoor Corp./Pronto Mktg. 23991 El Toro Blvd. La una Hills, CA 92653 Trans Tech Resources, Inc. CERC•NFRAP No data provided. No data provided. 23991 El Toro Rd. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Shell Oil Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Active Remedial action in 23971 El Tom/Carlota UST, CA FID, HAZNET, underground storage tanks. Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. progress. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 LUST, Cortese Materials sent to recycler. Waste oil leak The Cooksey Corp. HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Method of disposal not reported. No action required. 23191 Peralta Dr. Laguna Hills, CA SummaryTables0001 Site 68 PA 18.110403-DOC PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Property of Reg. de La Cuesta HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 23251 Peralta Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Contrast, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23282 Peralta Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Dylem, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 23342 Peralta Dr., Ste. 8 recycler. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Sares Ridges Group HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Method of disposal not No action required. 23352 Peralta Dr., Ste. 12 reported. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Lew Webbs Toyota UST, RCRIS-SQG, Active underground storage tanks. Small quantity generator of No action required. 30 Auto Center Dr. FINDS, CA FID, HAZNET potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of waste and mixed oil, and Irvine, CA unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to recycler or method of disposal not reported. EDI Components HAZNET Disposal of halogenated solvents. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 23251 Vista Grande Dr., Ste. A Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Spotless Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 23016 Lake Forest HAZNET of halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Qualitroniz RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23272 Vista Grande Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Printex HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 23024 Lake Forest Dr. recycler. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 1X Vicking Investors HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 23281 Vista Grande Dr. recycler. Laguna Hills, CA 92662 Q&B Photo RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal -No action required. 23028 Lake Forest Dr. HAZNET of metal sludge. Materials sent to recycler. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Saddleback Community HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Method of No action required. Chiroprac. disposal not reported. 23028 Lake Forest Dr., Ste. D Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Saddleback Suzuki HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. No action required. 23034 Lake Forest Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 R.1ProtepsVRW6WOR Summary TablesVWI Site 68 PA 16-11O4O3 00C 5 Appendix F San Diago Creek Watershed Natural SITE 68 — PA 18 (Continued) IRVINE, CA Revised DraBEIR PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Shell Oil Co. CA FID, HAZNET, LUST, Active underground storage tank location. Disposal of waste and mixed Remedial action in Saddleback Self Service & Car UST, Cortese oil. Materials sent to transferstation. Leaking underground storage progress. Wash tank. Gasoline leak, aquifer affected. 23038 Lake Forest Dr. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Mustang Printing HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to No action required. 23482 Peralta St. D-1 recyder. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Sir Speedy Printing Center HAZNET Disposal of photochemicalsfphotoprocessing waste. No action required. 23052 Lake Forest Dr., Ste. E2 Laguna -Hills. CA 92653 Tuttle Click, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal Case dosed. Freeway Auto Body HAZNET, LUST, CA FID of liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Disposal method not 40 Auto Center Dr. reported. Active underground storage tank location. Leaking Irvine, CA 92714 underqmund storage tank. Waste oil leak, soil affected. Joe Mac Pherson Chevrolet UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. Mac Howard Leasing 21 Auto Center Drive Irvine, CA 92714 Laguna Hills Chevron CA FID, LUST, Indus Site Active underground storage tanks. Leaking underground storage Remedial action in 24081 El Toro Rd. tanks. Groundwater affected. progress. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Unocal n5408 UST, LUST, HAZNET, Active uunderground storage tanks. Leaking underground storage Remedial action in Tosco Corporation Station "Cortese, CA FID tanks. Gasoline teak. Disposal of -aqueous solution with organic progress. Leisure World Union residues and unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to Leisure World Mobil transfer station, treatment tank or method of disposal not reported. 24032 El Toro Rd. La una Hills, CA 92653 S%iss-Micron, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged or surplus organics. Materials sent No action required. 23322 South Pointe Dr., No. A to recyder. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Energy Research Consultants HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics and waste or No action required. IX Fossil Energy Research mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. Corp. 23342 S. Pointe Dr. unaHills, CA 92653 w Webb's Irvine Nissan, Inc. HAZNET, UST, LUST, Disposal of oilfwater separation sludge. Method of disposal not Case closed. Auto Center Drive L44 RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, CA reported. Active underground storage tanks. Leaking underground ne, CA 92618 FID storage tanks. Gasoline leak, soil affected. Smalf quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. 18-110403 DOC • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenteem Revised Draft EIR SITE 68 — PA 18 (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Tuttle Click Ford UST, LUST, HAZNET, CA Active underground storage tank. Leaking underground storage tank. Case closed. Jim -Click Ford FID, RCRIS-SQG Gasoline leak, soil affected. Disposal of unspecified hazardous Jim Click Audi Jeep Renault materials and unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent for 43 Auto Center Drive incineration treatment. Small quantity generator of potentially Irvine, CA 92718 hazardous materials. Mobile Service Station #18 Cortese No data provided. No data provided. 24362 El Toro Rd. Laguna Hills, CA Tuttle Click Ford Trucks HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Method of disposal not reported. No action required. 14 Auto Center Drive Irvine, CA 92718 Sacramento Ethanol Partners FINDS Facility Index System. No action required. 23046 Avenida de la Ca_dota St. Gentre Labs, Inc. OMNI Source Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Irvine Mazda RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 1121 Auto Ctr. Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Ray Fladeboe Lin/Merc. LUST Leaking undergrouhd storage tanks. No data provided. 16-18-20 Auto Center Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Treasure Farms/Irvine LUST, Cortese. Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak, soil affected. Case closed. Company Wind Machines No address given Irvine, CA 92720 1X Rockfield Associates HAZNET Disposal of contaminated soil from site clean-ups. Method of disposal No action required. 51 Auto Center Drive not reported. Irvine, CA 92718 Volvo Irvine RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 42 Auto Center Dr. HAZNET of oil/water separation sludge. Method of disposal not reported. Irvine, CA 92718 International Sensor RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. Technology HAZNET off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Materials sent to transfer Unistructure, Inc. station. 3 Whatney Irvine, CA 92718 NGK Spark Plugs (USA) Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 6 Whatney station. Irvine, CA 92718 R.1Pro)ectstIRWOVEDR Summary TableAJ001 Site 68 PA 18.110403 DOC 7 Appendix F Son Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System RevisedDraREIR SITE 68 — PA 18 (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status New Source FINDS Fac7ty index system. No action required. 5 W hatney Irvine, CA 92718 Computer Peripherals HAZNET Disposal of unspecified hazardous waste and polymeric resin waste. No action required. International LLC Materials sent to recycler or method of disposal not reported. 1X Urethane Technologies 7 Whatney Irvine, CA 92718 Sateen Performance, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantify generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 9 Whatney HAZNET of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to transfer station Irvine, CA 92718 Rock & Waterscape Systems, HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. Inc. 11 Whatney Irvine, CA 92718 IQiory Realty Corporation HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, orsurpius organics. Materials sent No action required. 216 Technology Dc to recycler. Irvine, CA 92618 Subaru HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 12 Whatney Irvine, CA 92718 No Name Given HMiRS Hazardous materials incident report system. No action required. 12 McLaren Irvine, CA Saddleback Radiator, Inc. ERNS, HAZNET Emergency response notification system. Disposal of inorganiaso i No action required. 15795 Rockfteld Blvd. waste. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine, CA 92718 Best Printing HAZNET, RCRIS-SQG, Disposal of photochemicatslphotoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. General precision Industries FINDS transfer station. Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous 15791 Rockfield Blvd. materials. Irvine. CA 92718 Econo Lube n'Tune LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Solvents leak, soil affected. Case closed. 22861 Lake Forest Dr. Lake ForesL CA 92630 Td State Restoration, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of asbestos -containing waste. Materials sent to landfill. No action required. 23501 Ridge Route Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Co Censys RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. 213 Technology Dr. HAZNET Inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to transfer station. Irvine. CA 92718 R 11RW0'$ORSummary Teb;w%,W1 S.WOPAta•110103DOC 46 Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Hemosphere, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of laboratory waste chemicals. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 15251 Alton Parkway station. Irvine, CA 92618 Trans Star Properties HAZNET Disposal of unspecified alkaline solution and asbestos -containing No action required. 23521 Ridge Route Dr. waste. Materials sent to transfer station and land fill. La una Hills, CA 92653 Pind Testers, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of -potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 19B Thomas St. Irvine, CA 92718 Custom Color Photo Lab RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. Color Digit HAZNET of photochemicalsiphotoprocessing waste, unspecified solvent mixture Laguna Hills Autobody & Paint and unspecified hazardous materials. Materials sent to recycler, 23561 Ridge Route, Ste. A, E, transfer station or not reported. F, G. R, S Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Commercial Office and UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. Warehouse #2 Thomas #3 Faraday Irvine, CA 92714 Corvette Technology, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. Southland Automotive HAZNET of aqueous solution with organic residues and unspecified aqueous BJ's Automotive Repair solution. Materialssentto recycler. Import Masters Auto Painting 23551 Commerce Center Dr., Ste. I 8 McLaren, Ste. N Lacluna Hills, CA 92653 Laguna Auto Collision HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents. Method of disposal not reported. No action required. 23501 Commerce Center Dr., B Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Irvine BMW UST, RCRIS-SQG, Active underground storage tank location. Small quantity generator of No action required. Saddleback BMW FINDS, CA FID, HAZNET potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of aqueous solution with 45 Oldfield Rd. organic residues. Method of disposal not reported. Irvine, CA Baxter healthcare — Edwards HAZNET Disposal of laboratory waste chemicals. Method of disposal not No action required. Laguna reported. 23601 Ridge Route Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92696 R 1ProjntsVRWD1EDR SummaryTablesll001 Site 68 PA 18-110403 DOC 9 Appendix-F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment -System RevisedDraft EIR SITE 68 — PA 18 (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Arco CA FID Active underground storage tank. No action required. 24181 Moulton Parkway Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Interpore Intemational HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 181 Technology Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Beacon Bay Auto Wash/Lake UST. LUST Underground storage tanks. Leaking underground storage tanks. Preliminary site Forest Gasoline leak, soil affected. assessment. 23581 Rockfield Blvd. Lake Forest, CA HUD Intawn Properties HAZNET Disposal of household waste. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 145 Cinnamon Teal Aliso Viejo. CA 92656 Gene Schabet UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. 23462 Et Toro Rd. Laguna Hills. CA.92653 Cymerint Chiropractic Center HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 22821 Lake Forest Dr., Ste. transfer station. 106 Lake Forest. CA 92630 TKA, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generatorof potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 8 McLaren, Ste. N Irvine, CA 92718 The Vons Company HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to land fill. No action required. 24270 El Toro Rd. Laguna Hills. Ca 92653 Midas Muffler Shop RCRISSQG, FINDS, UST Small quantity generatorof potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 22752 Centre St. Underground storage tank location. El Toro, CA 92630 Executive Cleaners RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generatorof potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23600 Rockfield El Toro, CA 92630 Viking Independent, Ina RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23501 Commerce Center Drive, Ste. A Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Saddleback Collision & Glass RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23501 Commerce Center, Ste. B Laguna Hills, CA 92653 5te68PA 16.11M3.00G 0 Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Extend Microproducts HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 2 Faraday Irvine, CA 92618 Watkins Automotive RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23551 Commerce Dtr. Dr., Unit H Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Perkin Elmer Corp. HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus inorganics- Materials No action required. 10 Faraday sent to transfer station. Irvine, CA J. Hewitt, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 6 Faraday, Unit B Irvine, CA 92718 TNK Automotive HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution, and oil/water separation No action required. 23502 Commerce Center Drive sludge. Materials sent to recycler or method of disposal not reported. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Saddleback Valley Collision RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23502-A Commerce Center Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Golden Rain Found -Leis Cortese No data provided. No data provided. 24401 Moulton Pkwy. Laguna Hills, CA 92643 J. Showers, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 23512 Commerce Center Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Chevron UST, LUST Underground storage tanks. Leaking underground storage tanks. No action required. 23631 Rockfield Gasoline teak, soil affected. EI Toro, CA 92630 Superior Processing HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with metals. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 23552 Commerce Center Dr. La una Hills, CA 92653 Ushio America, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 14 Mason Irvine, CA 92612 Technion, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal -No action required. 14 Mason HAZNET of inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine, CA 92718 Sitaeg HAZNET Disposal of paint sludge. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 170 Technology Dr. Irvine, CA 92618 RAProreasllRWD1EDR Summary Tables0001 Site 68 PA 18-110403 DOC 11 - Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System RevlsedDraH EIR SITE 68 — PA 18 (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Biomed Medical Mfg., Ltd. HAZNET Disposal of halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 5 Wrigley Irvine, CA 92718 Promotional Signs, Inc. HAZNET, RCRISSQG, Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 8 Wrigley FINDS recycler. Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Irvine, CA 92718 S CS Metals Joining, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 9 Wrigley St., Unit E Irvine, CA 92713 Picker International, Inc. HAZNET, RCRIS-SQG Disposal of photochemicalslphotoprocessing waste and oxygenated No action required. Monarch Business Forms solvents. Materials sent to recycler and transfer station. Small quantity Oakley generator of potentially hazardous materials. 1 Marconi Irvine. CA92718 ComarcoWireless HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus inorganics. Materials No action required. Technologies sent to transfer station. 167 Technology Dr. Irvine, CA 92618 Texaco RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Case closed. FranKs Motorcars UST, HAZNET, LUST Underground storage tanks. Disposal of aqueous solution with organic FranKs Foreign Cats, Inc, dba residues, and unspecified aqueous solution. Leaking underground Irvine Suz storage tanks. Gasoline leak. 23652 Rockfietd 8 Lake Forest El Toro, CA 92630 Union Oil Service Station UST, HAZNET, ERNS, Underground storage tanks. Disposal of aqueous solution with organic Remedial investigation UNOCAL Cortese, LUST residues. Materials sent to recycler. Emergency response notification phase. 24201 El Toro Rd, system. Gasoline leak, soil affected. El Toro, CA 92630 Photo Sciences, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 6 Autry Irvine, CA92714 Chen Tech Industries, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified o@-containing waste. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 10 Autry Irvine, CA 92718 UCAR Composites, Inc. ERNS, HAZNET, RCRIS- Emergency response notification system. Disposal of inorganic solid No action required. Coast Composites, Inc, FINDS waste. Method of disposal not reported. Small quantity generator of 5 Burroughs potentially hazardous materials. Irvine, CA 927143 Associated Engineering Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 10 Thomas Irvine, CA 92718 RollRVD%EDR Summary Tat9m', 01 Sda 68 PA 184110403 DOC 0 • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment stem SITE 68 — PA 18 (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Neotherapeutics HAZNET Disposal of laboratory waste chemicals. Materials sent for incineration No action required. 157 Technology Dr. treatment. Irvine, CA 92618 Healthdyne Home Infusion RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. Therapy 18 Technology Dr., Ste. 110&111 Irvine, CA 92718 Hi Tech Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 16 Technology #172 Irvine, CA 92718 R Wrojeos11RWD1EDR SummaryTable U001 Site 68 PA 18-110403 DOC 13 • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment Stem Revised Draft EIR SITES 69A-69E - PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status USMC Air Station El Toro PADS, CERCLIS, Finds, Suspected off -base contamination of TCE in irrigation wells. Superfund Permanent remedy Lat. 33 40 19, Long. 17 43 43 NPL, RCRIS-LQG, RCRI- site. Listed on EPA database of major violators. Large quantity mandated. Near El Toro, CA 92709 TSD, RAATS, generator of potentially hazardous materials. Permanent remedy CORRACTS, ROD mandated. Irvine Oaks Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 16277 Laguna Canyon Rd. Irvine, CA 92718 Accupath Diagnostic Lab HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 16255 Laguna Canyon Rd. -recycler. Irvine, CA 92618 Magellan — New America Asset HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to No action required. Mgmt. Services transfer station. 16261 Laguna Canyon Rd. Irvine, CA 92718- Murai Farms Compost Facility SWF/LF Composting facility (green waste). No action required. 16721 Laguna Canyon Rd. Irvine, CA No Name Given CHMIRS Diesel fuel spill. No data provided. No Address Given Irvine, CA Autonation USA HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Method of disposal No action required. 9101 Research Dr. not reported. Irvine, CA 92618 Lake Hills Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 24401 Ridge Route Dr. HAZNET of aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to recycler. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Laguna Village Owners HAZNET Disposal of paint sludge. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. Association 23300 Santa Vittoria Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Laguna Village HAZNET Disposal of asbestos -containing waste. Materials sent to land fill. No action required. 22092 Caminito Amor La una Hills, CA 92653 No Name Given ERNS Emergency Response Notification System No data provided. 2291 Caminito Mar Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Kilory Realty Corporation HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Materials sent No data provided. 216 Technology Dr. to recycler. Irvine, CA 92618 R.1ProleclsVRW D1EDR SummaryTablesU001 Sues 69A.69E PA 39-1104D3 DOC San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITES 69A-69E— PA39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertyfAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Co Censys RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generatorof potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 213 Technology Dr. HAZNET of inorganic solid waste. Materials sentto transfer station. Irvine. CA 92718 HUD HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents. Materials sentto transfer station. No action required. 23335 Caminito Andreta Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Control Systems Division FINDS, RCRIS-LQG Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action -required. 14300 Alton Parkway Irvine. CA 92718 Interpore Intemational HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste. Materials sentto transfer station. No action required. 181 Technology Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Sitaeg HAZNET Disposal of paint sludge. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 170 Technology Dr. Irvine, CA 92618 Comarco Wireless -HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus inorganics. Materials No action required. Technologies sent to transfer station. 167 Technology Dr. Irvine, CA 92618 Treasure Farms/Irvine LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline leak, soil and aquifer Case closed. Company Wind Machines affected. No address given Irvine, CA 92720 Neotherapeutics HAZNET Disposal of laboratory waste chemicals. Materials sent for incineration No action required. 157 Technology Dr. treatment Irvine. CA 92618 Healthdyne Home Infusion RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. Therapy 18 Technology Dr., Ste. 110&111 Irvine. CA 92718 Hi Tech Cleaners RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 16 Technology #172 Irvine, CA92718 SL Jude Medical HAZNET Disposal of laboratory waste chemicals. Method of disposal not No action required. 2 Jenner reported. Irvine, CA 92718 Beckton Dickinson HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents. Method of disposal not reported. No action required. Microbiology Systems 4 Jenner Irvine, CA 92718 Sites 69A59EPA39410403 DCC 0 ,Apt • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment SITES 69A-69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Autobody by Caldwell, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Method of disposal not No action required. 22681 Granite Way reported. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Alfa Performance Connection RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 22692 Granite Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 No Name Given CHMIRS Diesel fuel spill. No data provided. SIB 1-5 300' SII-405 Irvine, CA Mechanics Mann, LLC HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to recycler. No data provided. 22701 Granite Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 ICU Medical HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to No data provided. 142 Technology Drive transfer station. Irvine, CA 92718 ER Squibb & Sons, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified -hazardous materials. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 17 Pasteur station. Irvine, CA 92718 Western Digital — LSI Fab 11 CA FID Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 1 Banting Street Irvine, CA 92718 Motorola MOS 10 UST, RCRIS-SQG, Underground storage tank location. Small quantity generator of No action required. Westex FINDS, TRIS, HAZNET, potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of inorganic solid waste and Western Digital Corp. RCRIS-LQG oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. Large quantity 1 Banting generator of potentially hazardous materials. Irvine, CA Alton Geoscience, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 25 Technology Dr., Unit A Irvine, CA 92718 Custom Finishing RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23011 Moulton Parkway D-6 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Hemosphere, Ind. HAZNET Disposal of laboratory waste chemicals. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 15251 Alton Parkway station. Irvine, CA 92618 Costco Wholesale #454 UST, HAZNET Underground storage tanks. Disposal of metal sludge. Materials sent No action required. 115 Technology Dr. to recycler. Irvine. CA 92718 Transit Mix Concrete — El Toro CA FID, LUST, UST, Active underground storage tank location. Leaking underground Remedial action in 9961 Valencia Ave. Cortese storage tanks. Diesel leak, ground water affected. progress. Irvine, CA 92718 R TmjedsllRWDtEDR Summary TablesV001 Sites 69A-69E PA 39-110403 DOC San Diego Creek WatershedNatwaf Treatment Systern Revised DraftEIR SITES 69A-69E —PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertyfAddress Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Steve Scraggs HAZNET Disposal of photochemicaWphotoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 23532 Venisia recycler. Laguna Hills, CA 90000 The Radiator Shop RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generatorof potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of No action required. SIX Finishing and Stripping HAZNET unspecified aqueous solution and unspecified solvent mixture (waste). 23011 Moulton Pkwy. Materials sent to recycler or method of disposal not reported. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Dunn -Edwards Corporation RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23002 Moulton Parkway Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Associated industries ERNS, HAZNET Emergency Response Notification System. Disposal of unspecified No action required. 15291 Barranca Parkway solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to transfer station. Irvine. CA 92713 Toxguard Fluid Tech, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. No action required. 30 Mauchly, Ste. A Irvine, CA 92718 GEC and Piessy HAZNET Disposal of alkaline solution withoutmetals. Method otdisposat not No action required. -Semiconductors, Inc. reported. 13900 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA 92718 Image Printing Solutions HAZNET Disposal of metal sludge. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 13865 Alton parkway Irvine, CA 92618 CortexPharmaceuticals, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of hazardous materials. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 15241 Barranca Parkway Irvine, CA 92718 lovision, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 34 Mauchly, Ste. B HAZNET of oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine, CA 92718 Neocrin Company HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to No action required. 312 Technology Dr. recycler. Irvine, CA Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. No action required. 2 Bantling Irvine. CA Sir Speedy, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23131 Verdugo Dr. La una Hills, CA 92654 F H P Laguna Hills Medical Ctr. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 23330 Moulton Pkwy. HAZNET of hazardous material. Method of disposal not reported. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 SunmaryT2btesM1 Stw69"SSPA39-110403 WC 0 AP 1_ • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenttgem Revised Draft OR SITES 69A-69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address, Database Reason for listing in Database Status Spectrum Microgon, NC RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. Spectrum Laboratories HAZNET of unspecified solvent mixture (waste and empty containers 30 gallons 23152 Verdugo Dr. or more. Materials sent to transfer station. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Jiffy Lube No. 1856 RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 8777 Irvine Center Drive HAZNET of aqueous solution with organic residue. Irvine, CA 92618 Luna Machine HAZNET Disposal of metal sludge. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 23192 Verdugo Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Intra Trade Medical Group RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23082 Terra Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 D J Scotts Mfg., Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23102 Terra Dr. La una Hills, CA 92653 Active Lifestyles RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23095 Terra Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Medicenter Chiromed HAZNET Disposal of photochemicallphotoprocessing waste. Method of disposal No action required. 23271 Verdugo Drive not reported. Laguna HMIs, CA 92653 R C Westburg Engineering, Inc. HAZNET -Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Method of disposal not No action required. 23282 Verdugo Drive reported. La una Hills, CA Laguna Hills Business Center HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 23012 DO Lago Dr. station. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 -Bircher Medical Systems HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 50 Technology Dr. station. Irvine, CA 92718 Rainbow Technologies HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 50 Technology Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Texaco UST, HAZNET Underground storage tanks. Disposal of aqueous solution with organic No action required. Star Mart residues. Disposal of materials not reported. 51 Technology Drive Irvine, CA R 1ProjectsXIRWD1EDR SummaryTables0001 Stec 69A.69E PA 39-110403.DOC San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITES 69A-69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Tuttle Click, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal Case closed. Freeway Auto Body HAZNET, LUST, CA-FID of liquids with halogenated organic compounds. Disposal method not '40 Auto Center Dr. reported. Active underground storage tank location. Leaking -Irvine, CA 92714 underground storage tank. Waste oil leak, sail affected. Eibach North American HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 15311 Barran Pkwy. recycler. Irvine, CA 92718 Tuttle Click Ford UST, LUST, HAZNET, CA Active underground storage tank. Leaking underground storage tank. Case closed. Jim Click Ford FID, RCRIS-SQG Gasoline leak, soil affected. Disposal of unspecified hazardous Jim Click Audi Jeep Renault materials and unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent for 43 Auto Center Drive Incineration treatment. Small quantity generator of potentially Irvine. CA 92718 hazardous materials. Lew Webbs Toyota UST, RCRIS-SQG, Active underground storage tanks. Small quantity generator of No action required. 30 Auto Center Dr. FINDS, CA FID, HAZNET potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of waste and mixed oil, and Irvine, CA unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to recycleror method of disposal not reported. Pind Testers, Inc, RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 19B Thomas St. Irvine, CA 92718 Western Digital Corp HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to treatment No action required. 15345 Barranca Pkwy. tank. Irvine, CA 92718 Pharmacia lovis4on, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of alkaline solution without metals. Method of disposal not No action required. 15350 Barranca Pkwy. reported. Irvine. CA 92718 The Young Engineers, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 22951 Alcade Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92654 Lew Webb's Irvine Nissan, Inc. HAZNET, UST, LUST, Disposal of oilfwaterseparation sludge. Method of disposal not Case closed. Irvine Datsun RCRISSQG, FINDS, CA reported. Active underground storage tanks. Leaking underground 44 Auto Center Drive FID storage tanks. Gasoline leak, soil affected. Small quantity generator of Irvine. CA92618 potentially hazardous materials. Signature Printing Company HAZNET Disposal of photochemicais/photoprocessing waste and pharmaceutical No action required. Pharma Pass, Inc. waste. Materials sent to transfer station. 15374 Barranca Pkwy. Irvine. CA Super (flask Inc./DM Proto HAZNET Disposal of liquids with pH, and inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to No action required. Source treatment tank or method of disposal not reported... Printworks 15375 Barran Pkwy Irvine, CA 92718 S1nW"9EPA39-11DMD0C 0 • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatmenteem Revised Draft EIR SITES 69A-69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Advanced Sterilization HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution wit organic residues. Method of disposal No action required. Products not reported. 33 Technology Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Great American Printing Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23015 Del Lago Dr. Suite B-L Lacuna Hills, CA 92653 Garrett Precision HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 22951 Aicalde Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Austin Company HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to No action required. 27 Technology Dr. transfer station. Irvine, CA 92718 Westamerica Graphics Corp. HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Method of No action required. 15321 Barranca Pkwy. disposal not reported. Irvine, CA The Irvine Company Property HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 15320 Barranca Pkwy. recycler. Irvine, CA 92618 Custom Color Photo Lab RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. Color Digit HAZNET of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste, unspecified solvent mixture Laguna Hills Autobody & Paint and unspecified hazardous materials. Materials sent to recycler, 23561 Ridge Route, Ste. A, E, transfer station or not reported. F. G, R, S La una Hills, CA 92653 Zevco, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of hydrocarbon solvents. Method of disposal not reported. No action required. 22982 Alcalde Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Pinnacle Micro HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 19 Technology Dr. recycler. Irvine, CA 92718 International Sensor RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. Technology 3 Whatney Irvine, CA 92718 Unistructure, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus organics. Materials sent No action required. 3 Whatney to transfer station. Irvine, CA 92718 Technion, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 14 Mason HAZNET of inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine, CA 92718 R1Profeo URWD1EDRSummaryTab1WU001 SRea69A.69EPA39-110403 DOC 7 AppendixF San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITES 69A-69E— PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA PropertylAddress Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Superior Processing HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with metals. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 23552 Commerce Center Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Ushfo America, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 14 Mason Irvine, CA 92612 NGK Spark Plugs (USA), Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 6 Whatney station. Irvine, CA 92718 Commercial Office and UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. Warehouse 3 Faraday Irvine, CA 92714 Analytical Systems Division RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23162 La Carlene Dr. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 New Source FINDS Facility Index system. No action required. 5 Whatney Irvine, CA 92718 Computer Peripherals HAZNET Disposal of unspecified hazardous waste and polymeric resin waste. No action required. International LLC Materials sent to recycler or method of disposal not reported. 1X Urethane Technologies 7 Whatney Irvine, CA 92718 Joe Mac Pherson Chevrolet UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. Mac Howard Leasing 21 Auto Center Drive Irvine, CA 92714 Saleen Performance, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 9 Whatney HAZNET of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to transfer station Irvine, CA 92718 Viejo Moulton Leasing RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23552 Moulton Pkwy. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 McKesson Water Products Co. HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to No action required. 2 Sterling treatment tank. Irvine, CA Rock & Waterscape Systems, HAZNET Disposal of inorganic solid waste. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. Inc, 11 Whatney Irvine, CA 92718 RWFW1DWRSwnmwyTabWs0001 SitnQX69E PA39-110401DW � AP F • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment S• Revised Draft OR SITES 69A-69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status Sparkletts Drinking Water Corp. UST, CA FID Active underground storage tanks. No action required. 2 Sterling Irvine, CA 92714 Cherokee International LLC HAZNET Disposal of oxygenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 15221 Barranca Pkwy. Irvine, CA 92718 Subaru HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 12 Watney Irvine, CA 92718 Western Telematic, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 5 Sterling HAZNET of halogenated solvents. Method of disposal not reported. Irvine. CA 92718 International Opthalmics, Mfg. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23132 LaCadena, Suite F Laguna Hills, CA 92653 1X Rockrield Associates HAZNET Disposal of contaminated soil from site clean-ups. Method of disposal No action required. 51 Auto Center Drive not reported. Irvine, CA 92718 Volvo Irvine RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 42 Auto Center Dr. HAZNET of oil/water separation sludge. Method of disposal hot reported. Irvine, CA 92718 Surface Mount Techniques HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to No action required. 23052 Alcalde Dr., Ste. F recycler. La una Hills, CA 92653 Ray Fladeboe Lin/Merc. LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. No data provided. 16-18-20 Auto Center Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Pacific Bell CA FID Active underground storage tank location. No action required. 9200 Irvine Center Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Associated Engineering Co. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 10 Thomas Irvine, CA 92718 Viking Litho HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with metals. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 23282 Del Lago Dr. station. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Mission Pest Control HAZNET Disposal of solids or sludges with halogenated organic compounds. No action required. 23286 Del Lago Dr. Method of disposal not required. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 R1Prolec AIRMEDR Summary Tables0001 Sites 69A-69E PA 39-110403.DOC San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DrattEIR SITES 69A.69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA Prapert*Address Database Reason for Listing In Database Status San Bar Corp. RCRISSQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required, Calsonic Wura Graphics, Inc. UST, HAZNET, Indus Underground storage tanks. Disposal of Colorgraphics, Inc. photochemicalslphotoprocessing waste. Materials sent to recycier. 9999 Muidands Parkway Irvine, CA 92718 Extend Microproducts HAZNET Disposal of unspeafied-aqueous solution. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 2 Faraday Irvine, CA 92618 Perkin Eimer Corp. HAZNET Disposal of off -specification, aged, or surplus inorganics. Materials No action required. 10 Faraday sentto transfer station. Irvine, CA J. Hewitt, Inc. RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 6 Faraday, Unit B Irvine, CA 92718 Western Marketing Company UST, LUST, Indus Site Underground storage tanks. Leaking underground storage tanks. Case closed. Irvine Co. (Ag. Div.) Gasoline leak, aquifer affected. 9000 Irvine Center Dr. Irvine, CA 92714 K & W Fauns UST Underground storage tanks. No action required. 9001 Irvine Center Dr. Irvine, CA 92714 Rickert Trucking RCRISSQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23185 Lacadena, Ste.102 Laguna Hills, CA92653 Picker Intemational, Inc. HAZNET, RCRISSQG Disposal of photochemicalstphotoprocessing waste and oxygenated No action required. Monarch Business Fors solvents. Materials sent to recycler and transfer station. Smalt quantity Oakley generatorof potentiaityhazardous materials. 1 Marconi Irvine, CA 92718 PFAHL Marine Products HAZNET Disposal of oillwater separation sludge. Materials sent to transfer No action required. Company station. 23122-A Aicalde Dr. Laquna Hills, CA 92653 Tuttle Click Ford Trucks HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oft. Method of disposal not reported. No action required. 14 Auto Center Drive Irvine. CA 92718 Straub Distributing Co. CA FID, HAZNET, UST, Active underground storage tanks. Underground storage tanks. Preliminary assessment 3 Holland 12 LUST Leaking underground storage tanks. Gasoline teak, soil affected. I underway. Irvine, CA 92718 Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues, and tank bottom waste. Materials sent to recycler. SmmxyTables000 U a69"9EPA39.11a403 DOC 0 AP*t' • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITES 69A-69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database treason for Listing in Database Status Pro Tech Weatherproofing, Inc. HAZNET, Cortese, LUST Leaking underground storage tank. Gasoline leak, soil affected. Case closed. 23261 Del Lago Dr. Disposal of empty containers 30 gallons or more. Materials sent to Laguna Hills, CA 92669 transfer station. Biomed Medical Mfg., Ltd. HAZNET Disposal of halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 5 Wrigley Irvine, CA 92718 Lion Country Safari, Inc. UST, CA FID, HAZNET Active underground storage tanks. Disposal of waste and mixed oil, No action required. 8800 Irvine Center Drive and unspecified oil -containing waste. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Irvine Mazda RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generatorof potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 1121 Auto Ctr. Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Promotional Signs, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 8 Wrigley recycler. Irvine, CA Spotless Cleaners RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 230% Lake Forest HAZNET of halogenated solvents. Materials sent to recycler. Laguna Hills. CA 92653 Dave Transportation Services HAZNET Disposal of oillwater separation sludge. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 8800 Irvine Center dr. Irvine, CA 27818 S CA Metals Joining, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 9 Wrigley St., Unit E Irvine, CA 92713 Ford Auto Care HAZNET Disposal of unspecified aqueous solution. Method of disposal not No action required. 8787 Irvine Center Dr. reported. Irvine, CA 92718 Promotional Signs, Inc. HAZNET, RCRIS-SQG, Disposal of unspecified organic liquid mixture. Materials sent to No action required. 8 Wrigley FINDS recycler. Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Irvine, CA 92718 Wild Rivers HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Materials sent to No action required. 8770 Irvine Center Dr. transfer station. Irvine, CA 92718 Neighborhood Service HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. Materials sent to No action required. 8767 Irvine Center Dr. recycler. Irvine, CA-92618 Printex HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 23024 Lake Forest Dr. recycler. La una Hills, CA 92653 R.NrojectsYRWD1ED11 SummaryTablesIJ001 Sites 69A-69E PA 39-110403 DOC 11 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR SITES 69A-69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Thermaprint RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 13645 Alton Pkwy. Irvine, CA 92718 Q&B Photo RCRIS-SQG, FINDS, Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Disposal No action required. 23028 Lake Forest Dr. HAZNET of metal sludge. Materials sent to recycler. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Saddleback Community HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Method of No action required. Chiroprec. disposal not reported. 23028 Lake Forest Dr., Ste. D Laguna Hills, CA 92653 No Name Given CHMIRS Hazardous materials release. No data given. Moulton Parkway n/o Santa Maria Avenue Unincorporated, CA Saddleback Suzuki HAZNET Disposal of aqueous solution with organic residues. No action required. 23034 Lake Forest Dr. Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Shelf 01 Co. CA FID, HAZNET, LUST, Active underground storage tank location. Disposal of waste and mixed Remedial action in Lake Forest Shell UST, Cortese oil. Materials sent to transfer station. Leaking underground storage progress. Saddleback Self Service & Car tank. Gasoline leak, aquifer affected. wash 23038 Lake Forest Dr. Laquna Hills. CA 92653 No Name Given HMIRS Hazardous materials incident report system. No action required. 12 McLaren Irvine, CA Best Printing HAZNET,RCRISSQG, Disposal of photochemicaWpiwtopmcessingwaste. Matedaissentto No action required. General Precision Industries FINDS transfer station. Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous 15791 Roctfield Blvd. materials. Irvine, CA 92718 Saddleback Radiator, Inc. ERNS, HAZNET Emergency response notification system. Disposal of inorganic sofid No action required. 15795 Rockfield Blvd. waste. Materials sent to recycler. Irvine, CA 92718 Sir Speedy Printing Center JHAZNET Disposal of photochemicais/photoprocessing waste. No action required. 23052 Lake Forest Dr., Ste. E2 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Tectron Engineering, Inc. HAZNET, RCRISSQG, Disposal of polymeric resin waste. Materials sent to recycler. Small No action required. 4 Mason Street FINDS quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. Irvine. CA 92713 ROVRWCrEORSummary Tab1 NkW154eseRA39EPA39-110403 DOC 0 • • San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Tieatmentoem Revised Draft EIR SITES 69A-69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA Property/Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status Parker Hannifin Control Sys. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified solvent mixture (waste). Method of disposal not No action required. Division reported. 14300 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA 92618 Limited TS and Things, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23197 Alcalde La una Hills, CA 92653 Pollution Control Engineering HAZNET Disposal of oil/water separation sludge. Materials sent to transfer No action required. 6 Autry station. Irvine, CA 92718 The Cooksey Corp HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Method of disposal not reported. No action required. 23191 Peralta Dr. Laguna Hills, CA Photo Sciences, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 6 Autry Irvine, CA 92714 Chen -Tech Industries, Inc. HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to recycler. No action required. 10 Autry Irvine, CA 92718 International Color Posters HAZNET Disposal of unspecified oil -containing waste. Materials sent to No action required. 8 Wrigley treatment tank. Irvine, CA No Name Given ERNS Emergency response notification system. No action required. #2 Wrigley Irvine, CA 92718 Irvine BMW UST, RCRIS-SQG, Active underground storage tank location. Small quantity generator of No action required. Saddleback BMW FINDS, CA FID, HAZNET potentially hazardous materials. Disposal of aqueous solution with 45 Oldfield Rd. organic residues. Method of disposal not reported. Irvine, CA Property of Reg de Is Cuesta HAZNET Disposal of waste and mixed oil. Materials sent to transfer station. No action required. 23251 Peralta Dr. -Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Dynamic Electronics, Inc. RCRIS-SQG, FINDS Small quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. 23142 Alcalde Ste. D2 Laguna Hills, CA PAR Center HAZNET Disposal of photochemicals/photoprocessing waste. Method of No action required. Bruce Albert MD disposal not reported. Women's Choice Health Pavilion 163000 Sand Canyon Avenue Irvine, CA 92707 R.1ProjntskIRWD1EOR SummaryTabImUO01 Sites 69A-69E PA 39-110403 DOC 13 Appendix F San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft E!R SITES 69A-69E — PA 39 (MULTIPLE BASINS) (Continued) IRVINE, CA Address Database Reason for Listing in Database Status ff RCRIS-LOG, FINDS Large quantity generator of potentially hazardous materials. No action required. rive 92653 PA 39•110403 DOC 0 r Pw rJ Appendix G Air Quality Report 40 • 0 IRWD SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM MASTER PLAN AIR QUALITY REPORT MARCH 2O03 Prepared by: JHA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, LLC 1101 Chautauqua Blvd. Pacific Palisades, CA 90272 Contact: Jo Anne H. Aplet 310/459-7358 • SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM MASTER PLAN AIR QUALITY REPORT DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The proposed project is a Master Plan for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Plan developed by the Irvine Ranch Water District. The plan encompasses natural treatment of low flow and small storm runoff generated within the San Diego Creek watershed in Orange County, primarily through constructed water treatment wetlands and natural biofilters. The Plan proposes three types of natural treatment systems at 31 locations in the watershed to take advantage of naturally occurring physical, chemical and biological resources to reduce sediment, nitrogen, phosphorus, and concentrations of fecal coliform in runoff that eventually flows into Newport Bay. The project would provide wildlife and open space benefits. The program -level environmental analysis addresses project impacts on a cumulative basis as they affect the regional and subregional environment. Quantified impacts have been generated for the short term construction phase and long term operations of the proposed Regional Retrofit Facilities and three Existing Regional Facilities being evaluated at a project level of analysis. The 12 regional (project -level) sites would be constructed between 2003 and 2006. The remaining sites would be constructed by 2013. • The 31 sites are shown in Table 1. • IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 1 TABLE 1 IRWD NTS SITE LIST or >Slee FadYq r LAMW CEQA IMw F 1�iti F 7 25 1 Sermno Creek Lower E.comer ofBake Pkwy/Tolcdo Regional Progam/ Project. 2G Il Woodbridge In -Line Basins Between Alton Pkwy and Barranca Pkwy, Regional Program/ E. of Culver pro ect 27 1 Barranca Off -Lint Wetlands N. of Barranca, E. of Jeffrey Regional Program/ Enhancement Project 53 1 Caltrans SR-133/I-5 Interchange N. of 1-5/SR133 interchange Regional Programt Project 54 1 Caltmns SR-261/Walnut Avenue SE of Walnut AveAtunborce Rd. (within interch , median Regional Program/ pro cet 55 II SantaAna/SantaFeChannel Parallel to Santa Fe RR, between SR55 Regional Program/ and Jamboree Project 56 III El Modena Park W. of Hewes St., N. of Fairhaven Av. Regional Program/ Project 62 I San Joaquin Marsh- SAMS I S. of Jamboree/Michelson Regional Program/ Project 64 11 West Park In -Line Basins N. of Alton Pkwy, E. of Jamboree Rd. Regional Program)/ Project 46 1 San Joaquin Marsh —Existing NE comer Campus/University Regional Program/ Project 13 ill Rattlesnake Reservoir E. of Portola "/W. of SR133 Regional Program/ Project 39 111 Sand Canyon Reservoir E. of Ridgeline/NE of Turtle Rock Drive Regional Program/ Project 1-6 I 1 Santiago Hills It (multiple sites Santiago Canyon Rd. East Orange Local Program 9 11I 1 PAI— EastfootRetardin Basin NE of Portola Parkway Local Program 10 I 1 PA I — Eastfnot Upper NE of Portola Parkway Local Program 11 111 PA I — Orchard Estates Retarding NE of Portola Parkway Local Program Basin 12A- 1 PA 1— Lower Orchard Estates NE of Portola Parkway Local Program 12G multi Ic sit2 61 I 1 PA i—Eastfoot Lower NE of Portola Parkway Local Program 16 III Tmbuco Retarding Basin E. comer of Jeffrey Rdfrmbuco Rd. Local Program 18 Ili Marshbum Retarding Basin NE of Irvine Blvd,/SE of SR133 Local Program 31 111 PA 17 West Basin SW of 1405/Sand Can on Av. Local Program 49 I PA 17 Center Basin S. of 1.405, E. of Shady Can on Dr. Local Program 32 1 PA 17 East Basin SW of 1405/Lagma Canyon Local program 42 I PA27North Shady Canyon Drive Local Program 22 1 MCAS El Toro— Agua Chinon MCAS El Toro, NE of Barmnca Pkwy Local Program Lower 50 I I MCAS El Toro -Irvine Auto Ctr. E. of I.5/S. of Bake Parkway Local Pragram 51 I MCAS El Toro — Serrano S. of Muhlands Blvd/Alton Pkwy Local Program 52 1 MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon E. of 1-5/SR133 interchange Local Program 67 1 Ciencga do Las Ranas (specific N of Barranca PkwyJ Regional Program location to be determined) W ofHarvard Ave. 68 111 PA 18 S. of I-0O5, cast of La una Canyon Rd. Local Program 69 1I1 PA 39 (multiple sites S. of 1-005, cast of SR 133 1 Local I Program Uj IRIYD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 2 • EXISTING CONDITIONS Reeional Setting The California Air Resources Board (CARB) divides the state into air basins that share similar meteorological and topographical features. Orange County is in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), a 6,600 square mile area comprised of Orange County and the non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The Basin's climate and topography are highly conducive to the formation and transport of air pollution. Peak ozone concentrations in the Basin over the last two decades have occurred at the base of the mountains around Azusa and Glendora in Los Angeles County and at Crestline in the mountain area above the City of San Bernardino. Ozone concentrations have been relatively low in Orange County in recent years. Both peak ozone concentrations and the number of days the standards were exceeded decreased everywhere in the SCAB throughout the 1990's. Carbon monoxide concentrations also dropped significantly throughout the air basin as a result of strict new emission controls and reformulated gasoline sold in winter months. State and Federal Regulatory and Planning Requirements Regionally, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) have responsibility under state law to prepare the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which contains measures to meet state and federal requirements. When approved by CARB and the federal EPA, the AQMP becomes part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). • Federal Attainment Status The SCAB, the nation's only "extreme" 03 non -attainment area, has until 2010 to achieve the national 1-hour ozone standard. Deadlines for CO and PMto attainment in the SCAB are 2000 and 2005, respectively. The national NO2 standard was regularly exceeded in Los Angeles County until 1992 and the SCAB was the only area in the nation still designated as non - attainment for the NO2 standard when EPA redesignated it to attainment. L In July 1997, the EPA promulgated a new 8-hour standard for ozone and a new standard for smaller particulates (PM2.5). The EPA is currently developing an implementation policy for the 8-hour ozone standard, with adoption of the policy anticipated sometime in 2003 and designation of non -attainment areas now scheduled for late 2003 or early 2004. Designation of PM2.5 non - attainment areas is expected in late 2004 or sometime in 2005. Until these designations are made and the clock for meeting these new standards starts running, the existing federal 1-hour ozone and PMto standards are the only ozone and PMto standards of reference. State Standards California standards are generally stricter than national standards, but have no penalty for non - attainment. California and national ambient air standards are shown on Table 2. IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 3 TABLE 2 ANffiIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS J1ir hil�lnt . S�M"` NratktrY 1r�a Haalth Diet Primary Secondary Ozone 0.09 ppm, I-hr 0.12 ppm, I-hr 0.12 ppm, 1-hr Aggravation of (03) avg, avg. avg, respiratory and 0,08 ppm,8-hr cardiovascular avg, diseases; Impaired cardiopulmonary function Carbon Monoxide 9.0 ppm, 8-hr. avg. 9 ppm, 8•Irr. avg. 9 ppm, 8-hr. avg. Aggravation of (CO) 20 ppm. 1-hr. avg. 35 ppm,1-hr. avg. 35 ppm, I-hr. avg, respiratory diseases asthma, emphysema) Nitrogen Dioxide 0.25 ppm, I-hr. 0.0534 ppm, 0.0534 ppm, Aggravation of (NO2)avg. annual avg. annual avg. respiratory illness Sulfur Dioxide .25 ppm 1-hr. 0.03 ppm, annual 0.50 ppm, 3-hr. Aggravation of (SO2) 0.04 ppm, 24-hr. avg. avg, respiratory diseases avg. 0.14 ppm, 24 hr. (asthma, emphysema) avg. Suspended 50 µi , 24-ht. 150 µg/m , 24-hr. 150 pg/m , 24hr. Increased cough and Particulate avg, avg. avg.; chest discomfort; Matter(PMIO) 30 pglm3 AGh1 50 µg/m3 AAM 50µg/m3 AAM Reduced lung function; Suspended Aggravation of Particulate Respiratory and Matter (PM2.5) cardio•respimtory diseases Sulfates 25 µghr , 24-hr Increased morbidity (SO4) avg, and mortality in conjunction with other pollutants Lead 1.5 pglm , monthly 1.5 µg/m , 1.5 µg/m Impaired blood (Ph) avg. calendar quarter and nerve function; Behavioral and hearing problems in children Hydrogen Sulfide 0.03 ppm,1-hr Toxic at very high H S avg. concentrations Vinyl Chloride 0.010 ppm, 24ht Carcinogenic avg. Visibility -Reducing In sufficient Particles amount to reduce prevailing visibility to less than 10 miles at relative humidity less than 700'n, 1 observation Note: ppm= parts per million by volume µglm3 - micrograms per cubic meter AAM = annual arithmetic mean AGM = annual geometric mean Source: California Air Resources Board, December 2001 C� i • IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 20031Page 4 State Planning isThe California Air Resources Board approves the regional plans for incorporation in the SIP. It also is responsible for preparing the portions of the plan related to mobile and many area source control measures. Regional Planning to Meet Standards Regionally, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) prepare the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which contains measures to meet state and federal requirements. When approved by CARB and the federal EPA, the AQMP becomes part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The agencies adopted new plans in 1989 to meet national standards and in 1991 to meet state standards. The SCAQMD revised these attainment plans in 1994 and 1997. The EPA approved the 1994 AQMP in 1996 as part of the SIP. The SCAQMD revised the 1997 AQMP in 1999 to address EPA concerns. The revised plan, now known as the 1999 AQMP, was approved by the EPA on May 10, 2000 and replaced the 1994 AQMP as the federally enforceable SIP for the air basin. The SCAQMD and SCAG are revising the 1999 AQMP and are expected to adopt a new revision in 2003. Existine Air Ouali The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is responsible for monitoring air quality in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), and for adopting controls, in conjunction with the • California Air Resources Board, to improve air quality. Overall air quality has improved considerably throughout the Basin since 1990. In that year, the peak ozone concentration in the Saddleback Valley was 0.19 ppm and the state ozone standard was exceeded 32 times. In 2000, the peak reading at that same station was 0.13 ppm and the state standard was exceeded 3 times. These improvements occurred despite extensive population growth in the Basin during the past decade. The EPA has adopted new standards for 8-hour ozone and fine particulates TWO. Neither standard is operational in the South Coast Air Basin until the 1-hour ozone standard is completed and the EPA completes its database on existing PM25 concentrations. The EPA expects to finalize the 8-hour ozone implementation procedures in 2003 and to designate non -attainment areas in late 2003 or early 2004. The agency expects to designate the PM2.5 non -attainment areas in 2004 or 2005. In the interim, the SCAQMD is monitoring levels of both 8-hour concentrations of ozone and of PM2.5. Where readings are available, the 8-hour ozone and the PM25 concentrations are shown in Table 2 for information purposes. The SCAQMD opened a second monitoring station in Source Receptor Area (SRA) 19 in 1999 to monitor PM25 and PMio• In 2000, the District also commenced monitoring at this station for ozone and carbon monoxide. Where there are readings from two stations, the first reading is from the old station, the second from the new station. Nitrogen dioxide levels are so low throughout SRA 19 that they are not monitored by the SCAQMD • Readings for SRA 19 for the past five years, together with the applicable state and national standards, are shown in Table 3. IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 5 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF AIR QUALITY DATA SADDLEBACK VALLEY (SRA 19) AIR MONITORING STATION Ozone (03) State standard (1-hr. avg. 0.09 ppm) National standard (1-hr avg. 0.12 ppm) National standard (8-hr avg 0.08 ppm) Maximum l-hrconcentration (in ppm) 0.13 0.16 0.10 0.13/0.15* 0.125 Maximum 8-hr concentration (in ppm) 0.10 0.11 0.08 0.1110.13* 0.098 Number of days state standard exceeded 8 15 2 3/25 10 Number of days national 1-hrstandard exceeded 2 2 0 1/2 1 Number ofdays national 8-hr standard exceeded 2 13 b 1 2/8 2 Carbon Monoxide (CO) State standard (I -hr. avg. 20 ppm) National standard (1-hr avg. 35 ppm) State standard (8-hr. avg. 9.0 ppm) National standard (8-hr avg. 9 ppm) Maximum concentration l-hrperiod (in ppm) 5 6* 4 5*/4* 3 Maximum concentration 8-hrperiod (in ppm) 3.6 3.1* 2.5 2.38/3.3* 2.38 Number of days statetnat'l 1-hr standards exceeded 0 0 0 0 0 Number ofdays state/nat'l8-hrstandardexceeded 0 0 0 0 0 Suspended Particulates (PM10) State standard (24-hr. avg. 50 µgtmr) National standard (24-hr avg.150 µl;10) Maximum 24-hr concentration 86* 70 111/56* 60*/98* 60 Percent samples exceeding state standard 7.1 10.2 10/3* 3/3 5 Percent samples exceeding national standard 0 0 0/0 010 0 Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) National standard (24-hr avg. 65 Petro) Maximum 24-hr concentration Nhi NM 56.6 94.7 53.4 Percent samples exceeding national standard 0 0.8 1 0 Ppm =parts per million µg/m3= micrograms per cubic meter NM= Not Monitored * = Not complete year's data Source: SCA MD Air Quality Data--1997throu h 2001 Summary Ozone concentrations in the Saddleback Valley vary somewhat from year to year, but have remained relatively constant over the past five years. Carbon monoxide concentrations are very low. Although the one -hour concentrations are relatively unchanged, there is a decline in the eight -hour levels over what was recorded the first two years of the period. PMto and PM2_5 concentrations are affected by meteorology. The state 24-hour PMro standard was exceeded once in 2000, but the national standard was never exceeded during the period. 0 • IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 6 • SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA A project's air quality impacts can be separated into short-term impacts due to construction and long-term permanent impacts from project operations. Determination of significant impact is the responsibility of the lead agency, which is the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). • The IRWD relies on significance thresholds recommended by the SCAQMD in its CEQA Air Quality Handbook, as revised in November 1993 and approved by the SCAQMD's Board of Directors. The SCAQMD is currently in the process of preparing a new Air Quality Handbook, to be titled the "AQMD Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook." Chapters 2, 3 and 4 related to air quality background information and the roles of regulatory agencies are available on the SCAQMD's web page at www.a md. ov. Other chapters will be posted on the web page as they become available. Revisions at the time this analysis was prepared do not include new significance thresholds or analysis methodologies. The SCAQMD's emission thresholds apply to all federally regulated air pollutants except lead, which is not exceeded in the SCAB. Construction and operational emissions are considered by the SCAQMD to be significant if they exceed the thresholds shown in Table 4. TABLE 4 F.MIRRTON THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE pol4thtnt -- _Constructtou: Operatiom,,-` Pounds/day tonstquarter pounds/day Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 24.75 550 Sulfur Oxides (SO.) 150 6.75 150 Particulate Matter (PM,o) 150 6.75 150 Nitrogen Oxides (NOJ 100 2.5 55 Volatile organic compounds (VOC) 75 2.5 55 Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993 Carbon monoxide concentrations in an area that already exceeds national or state CO standards are also considered signifidant if the increase exceeds one part per million (ppm) averaged over one hour or 0.45 ppm averaged over eight hours. In addition, the SCAQMD considers potential air quality impacts identified by the California Environmental Air Quality Act to also be significant. Appendix G to the Environmental Checklist Form from the California CEQA Guidelines Revisions states that, where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to determine if the project would: • Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? • Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? • • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state /RWO San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 7 ambient air quality standard (including release in emissions which exceed • quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? • Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? • Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Ambient air standards are established to protect the average person from health effects associated with air pollution. The standards include an "adequate margin of safety." However, some people are particularly sensitive to some pollutants. These sensitive people include persons with respiratory illnesses or impaired lung function because of other illnesses, the elderly, and children. Facilities and structures where these sensitive people live or spend considerable amounts of time are known as sensitive receptors. Chapter 4 of the SCAQMD's new Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook defines land uses considered to be sensitive receptors as long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers and athletic facilities. IWACT ANALYSIS The proposed NTS Plan includes implementation of a series of constructed water quality treatment wetlands, and minor improvements to existing detention basins, retarding basins or reservoirs for the purpose of enhancing existing water quality treatment benefits. No long-term air quality impacts are anticipated with the operation of these water quality treatment wetlands and basins. Long-term operation and maintenance of some of the facilities will require minor and major maintenance tasks such as weir removal, diversion structure repairs, vegetation removal, and sediment removal. These tasks, as well as the operating assumptions for the Regional • Retrofit Facilities and the Existing Regional Facility sites, are described in Section 2.8.3 of the Draft MR. These maintenance activities would typically require 14 persons each and would be performed separately, each task taking no more than several days at different times of the year. Truck and other vehicle trips would be combined where applicable, and these vehicle trips would be too few to have a measurable impact on regional air quality. The regional air quality management plan (AQMP) accounts for activities connected with maintaining essential services for the projected population. Bacillus thuringiensis israeliensis (bti) application would be used to control mosquitoes and other vectors in some of the Regional Retrofit Facilities and can be expected to be required as well for some of the Local Facilities. This material would be used in a manner that does not cause toxic impacts on human, animal or plant life. The NTS Plan's Vector Control Plan is described in Sections 3.4 and 4A in the Draft EIR. Construction Impacts The primary source for potential air quality impacts is associated with construction of each of the NTS Facilities. Short-term construction impacts may result from fugitive dust generated during grading and excavation for individual sites, construction vehicle and equipment emissions, and vehicle emissions associated with construction employee trips. The NTS Facilities would be constructed in various phases, with all but one of the Regional Retrofit Facilities anticipated to be constructed between 2003 and 2006. The exact schedule for construction of individual sites has not been determined; however, it is unlikely that multiple sites would be constructed simultaneously. However, two sites were selected to represent worst -case fugitive dust and vehicle emissions, based upon projected grading area and earthwork quantities. Each was IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 8 • analyzed independently and together. Given the lengthy schedule for implementation of all of the NTS Facilities, this analysis is considered to represent a worst -case air quality impact scenario for short-term impacts associated with construction of the remaining Local Facilities and Site 67. A number of factors were considered in determining which NTS projects would be constructed first. Some of the proposed NTS Facilities are existing reservoirs or basins that would not require construction or modification and would require only minor adjustments to facility operations or maintenance. Of the remaining sites, two were selected as representing worst -case construction impacts for all the projects. Site 54, Caltrans SR-261/Walnut Ave., and Site 56, El Modena Park, are off-line facilities that would include man-made wetlands with open water areas and marsh. They are representative of NTS facilities with substantial grading and higher numbers of construction workers. The worst -case analysis assumes that both would be constructed simultaneously, although that is not considered likely at this time. Total construction for each facility is assumed by the contractor to take 60 days for Site 54 and 85 days for Site 56. The following paragraphs describe the sources of construction -related emissions and the methodology used to determine these potential impacts. Grading and Excavation Soil may be disturbed during grading and excavation or while storing project -related equipment. Table A9-9 of the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that there would be 26.4 pounds of PM]o for each acre of graded surface. • The design of Regional NTS Facility Site 54 would include modifications to the Peters Canyon Wash Channel, dewatering plant, and detention basin. The facility would be divided into two general types of regions: shallow water and open water. Acreage to be disturbed would total approximately 3.7 acres. • Site 56 is a proposed Type III Combination facility that would be constructed in an existing retarding basin within the 9.5-acre El Modena Park. The NTS Facility is approximately 1.3 acres in size and includes the establishment of wetlands and an additional riparian area around the wetlands, as well as shallow and open water areas. The analysis assumes that total development, including additional landscaping, would utilize the full 1.3 acres and that this acreage would be exposed on the peak day and throughout the peak quarter. Together, the two sites would total five acres. Daily emissions for Site 54 are shown in Table 5; peak quarter emissions in Table 6; for Site 56 in Tables 7 and 8. Worst -case (two sites simultaneously) daily and quarter emissions are shown in Tables 9 and 10. Dirt Piling Both sites would require excavation and disposal of at least some of the excavated soil offsite and probable import of organic material. This would require temporary dirt piling on the site or direct loading onto dump trucks for removal. Fugitive dust emissions were calculated based on the hours of operation of the loaders removing the soil, consistent with formulas contained in Table A9-9-F in the South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Handbook (1993). IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 9 Based on this formula, each loader or dozer pushing dirt generates 21.8 pounds of PMto an hour. • No emissions are assumed for PMtc emissions lost in transport because the analysis assumes loads are fully mitigated by measures described in the Mitigation section. Site 54 would require 10 days for clearing the site and 30 days for earthworks, including excavation and filling. The contractor estimates that haul trucks would be requited to transport 11,900 cubic yards of excess soil over a period of 12 days. The one loader required for the project would be expected to operate for 8 hours a day during each of those 12 days. Site 56 would require approximately the same length of time to construct, but would require the import of 800 cubic yards of organic material and the export of 2,300 cubic yards of excess soil. Because the amount of loading required to transport the smaller amount of soil is approximately one quarter that of Site 54, the loader is assumed to operate 8 hours a day for 4 days instead of 12. Daily emissions for Site 54 are shown in Table 5; peak quarter emissions in Table 6. For Site 56, they are shown in Tables 7 and 8. Worst -case daily and quarter emissions are shown in Tables 9 and 10. Equipment Different equipment is in use for different phases of construction. Equipment emission estimates are derived from formulas contained in Tables A9-8-A and B in the South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Handbook (1993). The contractor estimates that Site 54 would require the following equipment: one loader, one dozer, one grader, one backhoe, one excavator, two generators, one air compressor, one • jackhammer, and one concrete drill. Not all equipment would be used on the peak day. The analysis assumes that the loader is in use for eight hours and the dozer, grader and excavator are in use for six hours on the peak day and throughout the construction period. The other equipment is assumed to average two hours a day throughout the construction period. Site 56 is projected to require one loader, one dozer, one grader, two backhoes, one compactor, two generators, one concrete saw, two jackhammers, one crane and one concrete drill. The analysis assumes that the loader, dozer, grader and compactor operate for an average of six hours throughout the peak quarter. The other equipment is assumed to average two hours a day throughout the quarter. In addition to the equipment specific to each site, the analysis assumes there would be one water truck at each site, operating for an average of two hours each day throughout the construction period. Daily emissions for Site 54 are shown in Table 5; peak quarter emissions in Table 6. For Site 56, they are shown in Tables 7 and 8. Worst -case daily and quarter emissions are shown in Tables 9 and 10. Trucks Site 54 requires 60 haul -truck round trips a day over a 12-day period, or a total of 720 round trips, to export soil. Truck trips are assumed at 20 miles one way. In addition, there would be an average of two heavy-duty truck trips a day for 60 days to deliver supplies and equipment. • 1RWO San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 10 • Site 56 would require a total of 160 round trips to remove soil. These trips are assumed to occur over a 4-day period. There would also be an average of two heavy-duty truck trips a day for 65 days to deliver supplies and equipment. Emission factors are from the CARB emission model, EMFAC 2001 Draft v.208, October 17, 2001 for summertime. Calculation sheets are contained in the Air Quality Technical Appendix. Daily emissions for Site 54 are shown in Table 5; peak quarter emissions in Table 6. For Site 56, they are shown in Tables 7 and 8. Worst -case daily and quarter emissions are shown in Tables 9 and 10. Employee Vehicles Different workers are on site at different phases of construction. Based on the contractor's estimates, there would be a maximum of 10 workers on the peak day at Site 54 and 15 workers on the peak day at Site 56, for a total of 25 construction workers on the peak day. The same number of workers is assumed for the 60- and 65-day construction peak construction quarters for Sites 54 and 56. Worker vehicle trips are assumed at the regional average vehicle ridership (AVR) of 1.135 and trip length of 11.2 miles each way listed in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Emission factors are from the CARB emission model, EMFAC 2001 Draft v.208, October 17, 2001 for summertime. Calculation sheets are contained in the Air Quality Technical Appendix. Daily emissions for Site 54 are shown in Table 5; peak quarter emissions in Table 6. For Site 56, they are shown in Tables 7 and 8. Worst -case daily and quarter emissions are shown in Tables 9 and 10. Sensitive Receptors • There are no sensitive receptors near Site 54. Site 56 is surrounded by sensitive receptors, including single-family residences and an elementary school, as well as a library, which is not listed by the SCAQMD as a sensitive receptor. Fugitive dust emissions atthis site would require mitigation. • Toxic Emissions There are no known previous uses of the two sites that would have contaminated the ground with toxic materials sufficient to cause an adverse impact on air quality when the soil is disturbed. Although both sites are known to have been in agricultural use in the past, this usage was discontinued prior to 1977 at Site 56 and prior to 1989 at Site 54. Both sites have been disturbed since agriculture was discontinued, and contaminated soils would have been exposed to the air prior to the proposed project. 1RWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 11 TABLES . SITE 54 MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS (in nounds ner dav) v - •-�+w+.itt'+tt�,:,� •»fir Volatile Carbon Organic Oxides of Oxides of Particulate Monoxide Compounds Nitrogen Sulfur Matter (CO) (VOC) (NOx) (Sox) (PM10) Earthmoving/ Grading 98 (Fugitive Dust) Dirt Piling 174 Diesel -Powered 152 9 49 5 3 Equipment Trucks 37 4 63 7 2 Employee Vehicles 4 0 0 0 0 MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION 193 13 111 12 277 EMISSIONS SCAQMD Significance 550 15 100 150 150 Thresholds for lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day Construction Significant? I NO I NO YES NO YES E • IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plait Alr Otality Report Mdreh 100312'age 12 • • TABLE 6 SITE 54 PEAK QUARTER CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS tin tans ner atr) Soµrcc:Crtegoz9,' PoUPtfnt- _ Volatile Carbon Organic Oxides of Oxides of Particulate Monoxide Compounds Nitrogen Sulfur Matter (CO) (VOC) (NOx) (Sox) (PM1e) Earthmoving/ Grading 2.93 (Fugitive Dust) Dirt Piling 1.05 Diesel -Powered 3.03 0.19 0.96 0.10 0.07 Equipment Trucks 0.25 0.03 0.40 0.05 0.01 Employee Vehicles 0.11 0.01 0.01 0 0 MAXIMUM QUARTER 3.39 0.23 1.37 0.15 4.06 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SCAQMD Significance 24.75 2.5 6.75 6.75 Thresholds for tons/gtr tons/qtr 2.5 tons/gtr tans/qtr tons/gtr Construction Significant? NO NO NO NO NO IRWD San Diego Cree, TABLE 7 SITE 56 MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS in pounds Per day) >s�llftfOPY Volatile Carbon Organic Oxides of Oxides of Particulate Monoxide Compounds Nitrogen Sulfur Matter(PM10 (CO) (VOC) (NOx) (Sox) ) Earthmoving/Gmding 34 (Fugitive Dust) Dirt Piling 174 Diesel -Powered 160 11 64 6 4 Equipment Trucks 38 4 63 1 2 Employee Vehicles 5 1 0 0 0 MAXIMUM DAILY 203 16 127 13 214 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SCAQMD Significance 5501b/day 75lb/day 100 lb/day 150lb/day 150lb/day Thresholds for Construction Significant? NO NO YES NO YES TABLE 8 • SITE 56 PEAK QUARTER CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS in tons ver tr Carbon Volatile Organic Oxides of Oxides Oxidesoff particulate Monoxide (CO) Compounds(V Nitrogen n (NOx) Sulfur (Sox) Matter (PMta) OC) Euthmoving/Grading 1.12 Dirt Piling 0.35 Diesel -Powered 4.83 0.35 1.58 0.15 0.11 Equipment Trucks 0.06 0.01 0.09 0.01 0.00 Employee Vehicles 0.17 0.02 0.02 0 0 MAXIMUM QUARTER 5.06 0.38 1.69 0.16 1.58 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SCAQMD Significance 24.75 Thresholds for tons/gtr 2.5tons/gtr 2.54ans/gtr 6.75 tons/gtr 6.75tons/gtr Construction Significant? NO I NO I NO NO NO IRWDSan Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 14 TABLE 9 WORST CASE (SITES 54 AND 56 COMBINED) MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS fin nnnndc-nerdav) o y, !f VolatileOrgani Oxides Oxides of Particulate CarbonMon c Compounds ofNitrogen Sulfur Matter(PMIO oxide (Co) (VOC) (NOx) (Sox) ) Earthmoving/Gmding 132 (Fugitive Dust) Dirt Piling 348 Diesel -Powered 312 20 112 11 7 Equipment Trucks 55 6 93 11 3 Employee Vehicles 9 1 0 0 0 MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION 376 27 205 22 490 EMISSIONS SCAQMD Significance Thresholds for 550lb/day 75lb/day 100lb/day 150lb/day 150lb/day Construction Significant? NO NO YES NO YES TABLE 10 • WORST CASE (SITES 54 AND 56 COMBINED) PEAK QUARTER CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS !in trine ner ntrl • Volatile Carbon Organic Oxides of Oxides of Monoxide Compounds(VO Nitrogen Sulfur Particulate (CO) C) (NOx) (Sox) Matter (PMjo) Earthmoving/ 4.05 Grading Dirt Piling 1.40 Diesel -Powered 4.86 0.54 2.54 0.25 0.18 Equipment Trucks 0.31 0.04 0.49 0.06 0.01 Employee Vehicles 0.28 0.03 0.03 0 0 MAXIMUM QUARTER 5.45 0.61 3.06 0.31 5.64 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SCAQMD Significance 24.75 2,5tons/gtr 2.5 tons/qtr 6.75 tons/qtr 6.75tons/qtr Thresholds for tons/qtr Construction Significant? NO NO YES NO NO IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 15 Summitry of Construction Impacts • Without mitigation, NOx and PMio emissions would be significant on the peak day and NOx for the peak quarter at both sites. NOx and PMio are significant on the peak day and NOx in the peak quarter for the two sites combined. There are no known toxic substances on either site that could be released during construction. Sensitive Receptors near Site 56 would require fugitive dust mitigation throughout construction. Operation Impacts Routine operation and maintenance activities for the two sites would include equipment and structure maintenance, trash and sediment removal, vegetation removal and disposal, and vegetation planting, where necessary. These tasks would require 1.4 persons each and would be performed separately, each task taking no more than several days at different times of the year. Truck and other vehicle trips would be combined whote applicable, and these vehicle trips would be too few to have a measurable impact on regional air quality. The regional air quality management plan (AQMP) accounts for activities connected with maintaining essential services for projected population. Bacillus thuringiensis ismeliensis (bti) application would be used to control mosquitoes and other vectors. This material would be used in a manner that does not cause toxic impacts on human, animal or plant life. The operation does not add new population to the region and is consistent with the growth forecasts contained in the regional AQW. Operational impacts are not significant and do not require mitigation. MITIGATION PROGRAM • Proiect Desien Features Applies to all Project -level NTS Sites 1. Planting and maintaining vegetation in shallow water regions would prevent fugitive dust erosion during the dry season and would also remove toxic compounds which could otherwise become windbome Mitigation Measures Apply to all Project -level NTS Sites., Fugitive Dust The following measures are recommended by the SCAQMD to control fugitive dust emissions during construction. They would reduce PMio emissions from grading and dirt piling by 601/o. The following measures would also reduce potential impacts to sensitive receptors surrounding NTS construction sites. 1. Moisten soil not more than 15 minutes prior to moving soil and three times a day or four times a day under windy conditions in order to maintain soil moisture of 12%. IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 1003/Page 16 • • 2. On the last day of active operations prior to a weekend or holiday, apply water or chemical stabilizer to maintain a stabilized surface. 3. Water excavated soil piles hourly or place temporary coverings on piles. 4. Cease grading during periods when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. 5. Moisten excavated soil prior to loading on trucks. 6. Cover all loads of dirt leaving the site or leave sufficient freeboard capacity in truck to prevent fugitive dust emissions en route to disposal site. Gaseous Emissions The following measure would reduce emissions from diesel equipment by 10%. 1. Turn off equipment when not in use for more than 5 minutes. Total emissions after mitigation are shown in Tables 11 through 16. IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 17 TABLE 11 • SITE 54 MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS AFTER MITIGATION fin nnrrnds ner dav) soap CMmry 1 Volatile Carbon Organic Oxides of Oxides Monoxide Compounds Nitrogen of Sulfur Particulate (CO) (VOC) (NOx) (SOx) Matter(PMio) Total Daily Emissions 193 13 111 12 277 Before Mitigation REDUCTIONS Earlhmoving/Gmding 59 (Fugitive Dust) Dirt piling 104 Dicscl-Powered Equipment 15 0 5 0 0 MAXIMUM DAILYCONSTRUCTION 178 13 106 12 114 EMISSIONS SCAQMD Significance 550lb/day 751b/day 100 lb/day I50 lb/day 1501b/day Thresholds for Construction Significant? NO I NO I YES I NO NO TABLE 12 SITE 54 PEAK QUARTER CONSTRUCTION AFTER MITIGATION fin tans ner nuarter) Str1a'oe Gory lodahat Volatile Carbon Organic Oxides of Oxides of Particulate Monoxide Compounds Nitrogen Sulfur Matter (CO) (VOC) (NOx) (SOX) (PM10) Total Peak Quarter Emissions Before 3.39 0.23 1.37 0.15 4.06 Mitigation REDUCTIONS Grading and Excavation 1.76 Dirt Piling 0.63 Diesel -Powered Equipment 0.30 0.02 0.10 0.01 0.01 PEAK QUARTER EMISSIONS AFTER 3.09 0.21 1.27 0.14 1.66 MITIGATION SCAQMD Significance 24.75 2.5 2.5 6.75 6.75 Thresholds for Construction Significant? NO NO NO NO NO J 1RWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 18 • TABLE 13 SITE 56 MAIOMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS AFTER MITIGATION /gin nnnnl�C nPM !)IaVi )Q'OIIYtfat Volatile Carbon Organic Oxides of Oxides of Particulate Monoxide Compounds Nitrogen Sulfur Matter (CO) (VOC) (NOx) (Sox) (PM10) Total Daily Emissions Before 193 17 111 12 215 Mitigation REDUCTIONS Earthmoving/Grading 20 (Fugitive Dust) Dirt Piling 104 Diesel -Powered Equipment 17 1 8 1 1 MAXIMUM DAILYCONSTRUCTION 176 16 103 11 90 EMISSIONS SCAQMD Significance 550lb/day 75lb/day 100 lb/day 150 lb/day 150lb/day Thresholds for Construction Significant? NO NO YES NO NO • TABLE 14 SITE 56 PEAK QUARTER CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS AFTER MITIGATION in tons er nuarterl 5opM rAtf -0jY Volatile Carbon Organic Oxides of Oxides of Particulate Monoxide Compounds Nitrogen Sulfur Matter (CO) (ROC) (NOx) (Sox) (PM10) Total Peak Quarter Emissions Before 5.59 0.43 2.59 0.27 2.72 Mitigation REDUCTIONS Grading and Excavation 1.12 Dirt Piling 0.27 Diesel -Powered Equipment 0.48 0.04 0.16 0.02 0.01 PEAK QUARTER EMISSIONS AFTER 5.22 0.39 2.43 0.25 1.32 MITIGATION SCAQMD Significance Thresholds for 24.75 2.5 2.5 6.75 6.75 Construction Significant? NO NO NO NO NO IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 19 TABLE 15 • WORST CASE (SITES 54 AND 56 COMBINED) MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS AFTER MITIGATION fin pounds per dav) Carbon Volatile Organic Oxides of Oxides of Particulate Monoxide Compounds Nitrogen Sulfur Matter (CO) (VOC) (NOx) (Sox) (PMia) Total Daily Emissions 376 27 205 22 490 Before Mitigation REDUCTIONS Earthmoving/Gmding 79 (Fugitive Dust) Dirt Piling 209 Diesel -Powered Equipment 31 2 11 i 1 MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION 345 25 194 21 201 EMISSIONS SCAQMD Significance Thresholds For Constmctioh 5501b/day I 75lb/day I 1001blday 150 I lb/day 150lb/day Significant? I NO I NO YES I NO YES TABLE 16 . WORST CASE (SITES 54 AND 56 COMBINED) PEAK QUARTER CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS AFTER MITIGATION in tons ver uarter tSwceGiik�ery ' IPalMtsat Carbon Monoxide (CO) Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Oxides of Sulfur (sox) Particulate Matter (PMio) Total Peak Quarter Emissions Before Mitigation 3.45 0.61 3.06 0.31 5.64 REDUCTIONS Grading and Excavation 2.43 Dirt Piling 0.84 Diesel -Powered Equipment 0.49ENO 0.25 0.03 0.02 PEAK QUARTER EMISSIONS AFTER MITIGATION 4.962.81 0.28 2.35 SCAQMD Significance Thresholds for Construction 24.752.5 6.75 6.75 Significant? NOYES I NO NO IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plait AirQualityReport March 20031Page 20 • SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Both Site 54 and Site 56 would have significant emissions of NOx on the peak day after mitigation. Emissions of PMto after mitigation would not be significant for either site on the peak day or in the peak quarter. Under worst -case conditions with simultaneous construction, emissions of both NOx and PMto would be significant on the peak day, and emissions of NOx would be significant in the peak quarter. NOx emissions at either site could be further reduced to less than significant by extending the grading and hauling period and reducing equipment usage on the peak day. Avoiding the worst - case scenario of simultaneous construction of more than one site would reduce all emissions to less than significant after mitigation, assuming that the construction schedule is revised to lengthen the period of excavation and soil removal. Potential impacts to sensitive receptors surrounding Site 56, as well as any other project -level NTS construction site, would be mitigated to below a level of significance by implementation of fugitive dust mitigation measures 1-6 listed previously. SUGGESTED MITIGATION FOR FUTURE PROGRAM -LEVEL NTS SITES Project Design Features Applies to All NTS Facilities with Planting Plans: Fugitive Dust • 1. Planting and, maintaining vegetation in shallow water regions would prevent fugitive dust erosion during the dry season and would also remove toxic compounds that could otherwise become windbome. Mitigation Measures Fugitive Dust The following measures are recommended by the SCAQMD to control fugitive dust emissions during construction. They would reduce PMto emissions from grading and dirt piling by 60%. 1. Moisten soil not more than 15 minutes prior to moving soil and three times a day or four times a day under windy conditions in order to maintain soil moisture of 12%. 2. On the last day of active operations prior to a weekend or holiday, apply water or chemical stabilizer to maintain a stabilized surface. 3. Water excavated soil piles hourly or place temporary coverings on piles. 4. Cease grading during periods when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. 5. Moisten excavated soil prior to loading on trucks. 6. Cover all loads of dirt leaving the site or leave sufficient freeboard capacity in truck to prevent fugitive dust emissions en route to disposal site. IRWD San Diego Creek Watershed Master Plan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 21 Gaseous Emissions . The following measure would reduce emissions from diesel equipment by 10%. 1. Turn off equipment when not in use for more than 5 minutes. Sensitive Receptors Proximity to sensitive receptors shall be assessed for each of the Local Facilities, and Site 67, during future site -specific CEQA review. E 0 /RWD San Diego Creek Watershed MasterPlan Air Quality Report March 2003/Page 22 • E Appendix H Cultural Resources Literature Study and Field Reconnaissance I• SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS A Cultural Resources Literature Study And Field Reconnaissance For The Natural Treatment System Master Plan Facilities, Orange County, California Prepared for Darnell Consulting 4822 Santa Monica Avenue MB 1410 San Diego, California 92107 and BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalrnus Drive Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California Prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants February 2003 ' `'�'�•r.>_i�-..�r".� ^��:a.o�4�+rar s•�.4� �raY.s�-�•��>..7•�-•�Y`.�' �- ."�.^_._.`f,-•J'-�:w.rr i'�;�j.j- �', atS�7"'»1r'",'�'.� , -`atl%;.'� -•�'.44,sv. "^�V'`'��"'� •C\ti Y� h Y`.: "4 4t Fa`.,%,lV.}Y`y•jAa.j• , r.n�.~..;"�4y s;•�s,• r,itQY. is ,}^,•��•..yiP•.�t �$'a'y��''fi .k�s<��#�M. J-`�^ivll3.•YY,•�!{�. '±y�+.�'�r•y<"T:',A5`."tJe`.ms.f7 `j-, 4Y"^ 4`• 421 _ W Nae�..� '~ µl/ •�r.;'�',,.k�s-`'.'^*1 Y'•„YM1r'a• S. 'Il• .i•^y'A�2:.� �. -•� i'i^•'r_`: e %• ryr xE` .x �1p:hy"iar�:f`.; .�i� �zz•,F"� Ta.,•,n�. s 'c � Y+ �`x`.��,, • . �!`z, .. t ;e '" �_'..�' I� �tr � .KM'l�jy5' ` �tl ,•}ii`r'V �r�•1• Y�.^� •, t \-H�... T- ^ • A Cultural Resources Literature Study And Field Reconnaissance For The Natural Treatment System Master Plan Facilities, Orange County, California Prepared for Darnell Consulting 4822 Santa Monica Avenue MB #410 San Diego, California 92107 • and BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California Prepared by c" tm� SWCA Environmental Consultants'' February 2003 • P1 10 N E J A CULTURAL RESOURCES LITERATURE STUDY AND FIELD RECONNAISSANCE FOR THE NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM MASTER PLAN FACILITIES, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Revised Prepared for Darnell Consulting 4822 Santa Monica Avenue MB #410 San Diego, California 92107 BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 Prepared by Joan Brown, RPA SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 23392 Madero, Suite L Mission Viejo, California 92691 (949)770-8042 www.swca.com USGS El Toro, Tustin, and Orange Quadrangles SWCA Project No. 6071-111 SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 598 February 2003 • TABLE OF CONTENTS Management Summary/Abstract................................................................................................... iv Introduction......................................................................................................................................I UndertakingInformation.................................................................................................................2 ProjectPersonnel.............................................................................................................................3 CulturalSetting................................................................................................................................ Prehistoric...................................................................................................................................3 Historic........................................................................................................................................7 PreviousResearch............................................................................................................................7 FieldMethods/Findings.................................................................................................................11 ProjectArea 25.........................................................................................................................11 ProjectArea 26........................................................................................................................A l ProjectArea 27.........................................................................................................................11 ProjectArea 46.........................................................................................................................11 ProjectArea 53.........................................................................................................................11 ProjectArea 54.........................................................................................................................11 ProjectArea 55.........................................................................................................................11 ProjectArea 56.........................................................................................................................12 ProjectArea 62.........................................................................................................................12 ProjectArea 64.........................................................................................................................12 Cultural Resources Discussion/Recommendations........................................................................12 • References Cited............................................................................................................................13 APPENDICIES • Appendix A: Project Location Maps Appendix B: Personnel Qualifications Appendix C: Record Search Bibliography SWCA Environmental Consultants III MANGEMENT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT Purpose and scope: The proposed project is part of the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program. The project consists of the construction of water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofilter areas. The purpose of this study was to locate, record, and describe any cultural resources that may be present and to provide management options for those resources. Findings: Many of the project areas are located in the vicinity of recorded prehistoric -t and/or historic archaeological sites. However, no artifactual material was observed during the field reconnaissance. Recommendations summary: Because the areas have been extensively disturbed, no further cultural resources study is recommended for Project Area 25 (Serrano Creek - Lower); Project Area 26 (Woodbridge in -Line); Project Area 27 (Barranca Off -Line); Project Area 53 (Caltrans SR133/I-5/Interchange); Project Area 54 (Caltrans SR- 261/Walnut Avenue); Project Area 55 (Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel); Project Area 56 (El Modena Park); or Project Area 64 (West Park In -Line) unless the project boundaries are changed. No additional cultural resources study is recommended for Project Area 46 (San Joaquin Marsh — Enhancement) because no changes are being considered to the project area. If those plans should change, it is recommended that a qualified archaeologist, prior to any disturbances, examine the project area. buried Because of the archaeological sensitivity of the area and the possibility that archaeological deposits could be,present, it is recommended that all ground disturbing activities at Project Area 62 (San Joaquin Marsh-SAMS 1) be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. Disposition of data: A copy of this report will be filed with the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton; Damell Consulting; BonTerra i Consulting; and SWCA Environmental Consultants. All field notes and photographs are on file at SWCA. I } SWCA Environmental Consultants IV • INTRODUCTION Contracting Data: SWCA Environmental Consultants was retained by Darnell Consulting and BonTerra Consulting to accomplish a cultural resource study to determine if cultural resources are present within the project areas and within a one mile radius of those areas, to provide a limited description of those resources, to ascertain if the proposed project will affect those resources, to summarize the work, and to make recommendations for additional study and/or monitoring, if warranted. The study was undertaken under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Section 106 process for implementation of the National Historic Preservation Act (NI -IPA). Public Resources Code SS5024.1, Section 15064.5 of the Guidelines and Sections 21083.2 and 21084.1 of the Statutes of CEQA were used as the basic guidelines for the cultural resources study (Govemor's Office of Planning and Research 1998). State Legal Context: State legal mandates fall under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Public Resources Code SS5024.1, Section 15064.5 of the Guidelines and Sections 21083.2 and 21084.1 of the Statutes of CEQA are the basic guidelines used for cultural resources studies (Governor's Office of Planning and • Research 1998). Public Resources Code SS5024.1 requires evaluation of historical resources to determine their eligibility for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. The purposes of the register are to maintain listings of the state's historicalresourcesand to indicate which properties are to be protected from substantial adverse change (Office of Historic Preservation 1995a:1). The criteria for listing resources on the California Register were expressly developed to be in accordance with previously established criteria developed for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). According to Section 15064.5(a)(3)(A-D) in the revised CEQA guidelines (Governor's Office of Planning and Research 1998), a resource is considered historically significant if it meets at least one of the following criteria: • (A) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage; (B) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; (C) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a.type, period, region or method of construction, or represents the work of an important, creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or (D) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. SWCA Environmental Consultants If a resource is negatively affected by a project, measures must be implemented to . mitigate the projects negative effect on the resources to less than a significant impact [Section 15064.5(b)(3)]. Mitigation measures can include avoidance of sites, deeding of sites to conservation easements, capping of sites with culturally sterile soil, incorporation of sites into open space, or excavation of those portions of sites effected by the project [Section 21083.2 (b & d)]. Federal Legal Context: The project also falls under the provisions of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA ). The NHPA authorizes the maintenance of a National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), which facilitates the preservation of properties that possess integrity and meet at least one of four criteria delineated at 36CFR60.4 (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 2000). The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association and: A. that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or . D. that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. The Undertaking: The proposed project is the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program. The project consists of the construction of water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofilter areas. I This study was undertaken to provide cultural resource information for nine of the regional project facilities that are proposed to be constructed within the next three to six ;Yr years. The nine NTS sites (# 25 Serrano Creek Lower, #26 Woodbridge In -Line Basins, # 27 Barranca Off -Line Wetlands, #53 SR 133/1-5 Interchange, # 54 Caltrans SR- 261/Walnut Avenue, # 55 Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel In -Line Basins), #56 El Modena Park, # 62 San Joaquin Marsh— SAMS-1, and # 64 West Park In -Line Basins were the subject of a record search and field examination. Area # 46 San Joaquin Marsh — Enhancement was only subjected to a record search since no surface disturbance is proposed. Because no changes are planned to two existing regional facilities (# 13 Rattlesnake Reservoir and # 39 Sand Canyon Reservoir) those areas were not included in the cultural resources study. Nineteen NTS Sites: # 6A-6H Santiago Hills H #9 PA 1 Eastfoot Retarding basin, # 10 PA 1— East Foot Upper, # 11 PA i Orchard Estates Retarding Basin, # 12A —12 G Lower Orchard Estates, # 61 PA 1— East Foot Lower, # 16 Trabuco Retarding Basin, is SWCA Environmental Consultants 2 • # 18 Marshbtun Retarding basin, # 31 PA 17 West Basin, # 49 PA 17 Center Basin, # 32 PA 17 East Basin, # 42 PA 27 North, # 22 MCAS El Toro — Agua Chion Lower, # 50 MCAS El Toro — Irvine Auto Ctr., # 51 MCAS El Toro Serrano, # 52 MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon, #67 Cienega de Las Ranas, #68 PA 18 and #69 PA 39 (multiple basins) were not included in the current cultural resources study. The cultural resources study areas are located within the San Diego Creek watershed in Orange County, California. Maps showing the project areas are contained in Appendix A of this report. Project Personnel: Joan C. Brown was the Principal Investigator for the project and was responsible for the literature review, field survey, and report preparation. Becky Allen assisted at the South Central Coastal information Center and Blanche Schmitz assisted with the field survey. Matt Phillips produced the maps in Appendix A. Personnel qualifications can be found in Appendix B. CULTURAL SETTING The current study area is inhabited by a Native American group ethnographically known as the Gabrielino. The names the Native American groups applied to themselves are largely unknown; they are known by the names the Spanish devised as they moved into Native American territories. The name "Gabrielino" identifies those people who were • under the control of the Spanish Mission San Gabriel. The Gabrielino language, as well as that of the Juaneno and Luiseno to the south, was derived from the Takic family, part of the Uto-Aztecan linguistic stock, which can be traced to the Great Basin area (Driver 1969). This language group represents an origin quite different from that of the Chumash to the north and the Ipai and Tipai further south. Their language is derived from the Hokan stock of the Yuman language family originating in the American southwest. Linguistic analysis suggests that at one time the entire southern California coastal region was populated by Hokan speakers who were gradually separated and displaced by Takic speaking immigrants from the Great Basin area. The timing and extent of the migrations and their impact on indigenous peoples is not well understood and any data related to it represents a valuable contribution tothe understanding of local prehistory. Prehistoric Era: The archaeological heritage of California is quite rich, probably more so than any other North American region north of Mexico. However, the archaeology of California is not well known. The native Californians were generally quite peaceful and did not often offer warlike resistance to European settlement. Consequently, they did not gain great notoriety during the settlement period. Also, the original Californians were fast under the control of the Spanish and then the Mexican governments and only later, after much of their culture had been destroyed by disease and displacement, did they come under the control of the United States government. There was only a minor Native • American presence remaining in California when it became a United States possession SWCA Environmental Consultants and massive development began. For this reason, very little interest in the natives and • their prehistory was initially generated. It was many years later before the size, complexity, and extent of archaeological deposits in the state became apparent. Homo Sapiens have been present in the New World since perhaps 10,000 to 11,000 years B.C. There is some evidence that humans were present long before this date, but it is inconclusive and has not yet been aecepted by most archaeologists. The earlier sites are all controversial in that they lack definite dateable context and material. Such sites can be interpreted in various ways, particularly in relationship to their age. The few generally accepted remains indicate a very small, mobile population apparently dependant on hunting of large game animals as the primary subsistence strategy. Other sources were exploited, but the bulk of the traces remaining today are related to game hunting (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984, Momtto 1984). The Chartkoffs identify the earliest portion of the archaeological sequence — to about 9,000 B.C. — as the Paleo-Indian Period (Warren's 1968 San Dieguito Tradition). The surviving material culture of this period consists primarily of large, extremely well made projectile points and large but crude tools such as scrapers and choppers. Encampments were probably not permanent, but were probably sited near a major kill. Occupation would have persisted only until the resources of that kill were exhausted. Such an economy, using only a small fraction of the available resources, would not have supported a large population; therefore, it is probable that the Paleo-Indians lived in groups no larger than extended families and that contact with other such groups was infrequent. . A general chronology has been developed for the Southern California coastal region by Wallace (1955) for the ensuing periods: The Millingstone Horizon [or Encinitas Tradition, as defined by Wallace (1968)] people (ca. 5500-1500 B.C.) practiced a mixed hunting and gathering foodproeurement strategy. Game hunting still played an important role in the economy, but by this time the Native Americans had learned to exploit the hard seed resources of the coastal sage scrub and chaparral ecological communities. The rapid extinction of the large mammals that the Paleo-Indian had previously been exploiting necessitated this shift in resource exploitation. The principle implements used to process the seeds, manos and metates, appear in large numbers for the first time in this horizon, and are especially numerous near the end of this tradition. Other specialized tools were developed to process the increased resources utilized by Millingstone peoples. Settlement size seems to have increased and an annual round of seasonal migrations may have been practiced as movements coincided with ripening vegetal resources. Some formal burials are also evident. The Intermediate Horizon, locally known as the Campbell Tradition (ca.1500 B.C. to A.D.1000), is characterized by a shift away from primarily vegetable food exploitation to a more maritime subsistence strategy. It is during this time that the mottar and pestle were introduced, enabling acorn processing to begin. SWCA Environmental Consultants 4 • In the Late Prehistoric Horizon (or Shoshonean Tradition, A.D. 1,000 to European contact), groups began to center around trade routes and there was a greater use of food resources with more mammal hunting to complement collecting. The pattern of life in this Late Horizon was more complex. More classes of artifacts were being produced and they exhibited a more sophisticated degree of workmanship. The recovery of a greater number of small, finely chipped projectile points suggests a greater utilization of the bow and arrow. Other items include steatite containers, shell fishhooks, perforated stones, bone tools, personal ornaments, asphalt adhesive, and elaborate mortuary customs. In addition, the population increased and larger villages evolved (Wallace 1955:223). It is during the Late Prehistoric that the emigrants from the Great Basin appeared in the Los Angeles and Orange County area. These people were very quick to adopt most of the local traits, because it is difficult to separate the archaeological assemblages of the emigrants from those of the indigenous peoples on the basis of artifact typology alone. • • The Moratto and Chartkoff chronologies are not the only ones in use and, in fact, are somewhat generalized because they address the entire state of California. The latest chronology to appear which has gained local acceptance is that of Koerper and Drover (1983). This chronology is based on extensive work at CA-ORA-119-A, a large multi - component site near the University of California, Irvine. The site contained archaeological evidence from the Millingstone to the Historic period. The Koerper and Drover chronology is summarized below. CHRONOLOGY, BASED ON KOERPER AND DROVER (1983) PERIOD` TEMPORAL SPAN MAJOR DIAGNOSTIC TRAITS Early Man or ? to 7500 B.C. Paleo-Indian +/- ? 1. Lack of grinding implements. 2. Large, well made projectile points. Characteristics and adaptations: 1. Subsistence through hunting of large Pleistocene game animals. 2. Temporary camps at large kills. 3. Group no larger than extended family. 4. Widespread. Covered most of North American continent, but no sites known locally. 5. Very small total population. Milling Stone 7500 B.C. +/- or Encinitas to 1000 B.C. +/- 250 1. Predominance of manos and metates. 2. Ornaments made of stone. 3. Large and often crude projectile points. 4. Cogstones and discoidals. 5. Charmstones. 6. Some mortars and pestles near end of period. SWCA Environmental Consultants 5 Characteristics and adaptations: 1. Heavy reliance on hunting in early part of period. Deer, rabbits and other small game associated with chaparral. 2. In middle to late part of period reliance was on hard seeds associated with chaparral, 3. Coastal groups utilized shellfish and near shore resources. 4. Seasonal round based on ripening vegetable resources rather than animal migrations. This caused increased isolation leading to noticeable differences in culture in much smaller geographic areas. 5. Probably about 50 persons in average group. 6. Very little noticeable change in last two thirds of period. 7. Colonization of Channel Islands near end of period. Intermediate 1000 B.C. +/- 1. Bone ornaments. or Campbell 250 to A.D. 750 2. Wide use of mortars and +/- 250 pestles along with mans and metates, 3. Use of steatite begins. 4. Many discoidals. S. Large projectile points trending to smaller in the last part of the period. Characteristics and adaptations: 1. Heavy reliance on acorns as food resource. Hard seeds, small animals and coastal resources continue to be used. 2. Many more beep water ocean resources utilized. 3. First permanently occupied villages. 4. Large increases in local population. 5. Atlad (spear thrower) in use. Bow and arrow probably introduced near end of period. 6. Some evidence of trade. Late A.D. 750 +/- 1. Shell ornaments. Prehistoric to Spanish 2. Mortar, pestle, mano and or Shoshonean contact metate use continues. 3. Small, finely worked projectile points. 4. Wide use of steatite. 5. Some pottery vessels appear near the end of the period. Characteristics and adaptations: 1. Increased exploitation of all resources. 2. Large populations, some villages had as many as 1,500 persons. 3. Great increase in art objects. 4. Much evidence of trade. SWCA Environmental Consultants 6 • Historic Era: Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo sailed along the coast of California in 1542 and, according to available records, stopping only at San Diego and the Channel Islands, was the first European to come into contact with the Gabrielino. Mission San Gabriel, in Los Angeles County, was founded in September 1771 and the Native Americans from the Los Angeles plain were persuaded to settle in its vicinity. The missions were charged with administering to the Indians within their areas. Mission life did give the Indians some skills needed to survive in their rapidly changing world, but the population was decimated by diseases for which they had no immunity: After 1810, mission population declined faster than it could be replenished. The Mexican Revolution, beginning in 1821, overthrew Spanish control and the new Mexican government had a very different outlook on mission activities. Secularization of the missions, planned under the Spanish, was greatly accelerated by the Mexican government. Plans to provide land, training, and living quarters for the Indians never developed and the mission lands were soon under the control of a relatively few influential Mexican families. The Mexican -American war ended on February 2°d , 1848 with the signing of the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The treaty established California as a United States possession. PREVIOUS STUDIES A literature review was completed by Joan Brown, assisted by Becky Allen, at the South • Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton to determine if prehistoric or historic sites were previously recorded within the project areas. In addition to the project areas, information regarding archaeological sites and investigations within a one mile radius -of the project areas was also compiled. A check was made of the historic maps, the National Register of Historic Places, the California State Historic Resources Inventory, and the listing of California Historic Landmarks. • One hundred and fifty-six cultural resource studies were previously accomplished within a one -mile radius of the project areas. A bibliography of those studies is in Appendix C. Fifty-six cultural resources are recorded within a one mile radius of the project areas. Those sites and the project areas are described in Table 1 below. Six studies (Breece and Padon 1986; Brown 1992; LSA 1981; Mason 1984; Stickle and Howard 1976; SRS 1978) include at least one of the current project areas. Project Area 27 was included in a cultural resource study of the Village 12 development area (LSA 1981) and also in a study of 11 parcels that were part of an open space project (Brown 1992). Project Areas 46 and 62 were included in a study of the University of California, Irvine land (Stickle and Howard 1976) and also in a study of portions of the San Diego Creek watershed area (SRS 1978). Project Area 62 was additionally examined during a study for a habitat enrichment project (Breece and Padon 1986). SWCA Environmental Consultants I I TAIU X.. 1 SITE DESCRIPTION SOURCE AND WITHIN ONE DATE MILE OF CA-ORA-38 Original site of Rancho do Los Anon (1949) Project Area 25 Alisos; "common artifacts found, Indian stone compass." "Most artifacts killed." CA-ORA-39 1148 killed stone artifacts %1 mile Anon (19490 Project Area 25 from camp on ranch of W. Osterman. The collection of W. Osterman is now in tho Bower Museum.' Update "Large undisturbed campsite---" Cottrell (1976) Update Site "potted'; access road through Bickford (1978) west portion, eastintact. CA-ORA-57/77 Shell mound. Briggs (1949) Project Area 46 Update and 62 Large shcU midden; cores, flakes, Macko (1985) and debitage. de Banos (1991) Residential base; pestle, manor, flaked tools, debitage, clam shell ornament. "Winterboumes' excavation produced shell beads, anowsbaft straighteners, incised stone, Gleymen's shell bracelet, pestles, mans, projectile points, cores, hammerstones, cogstones, and bone awls.' CA-ORA-77 "Shell midden, which, according to Eberharts (1949 Project Area 46 Winterboume, covers two knolls that and 62 overlook what was.formerly the marshes of Upper Newport Bay." Location of San Joaquin Gun Club. Chase 196 .Update CA-ORA-111 Village site was excavated by U.S.C. Eberhatt (1950) Project Area 46 in 1934/35 and Winterbourne is and 62 1938. Update This was also the location of an Mitchell (1977) adobe foundation and the Rancho San Joaquin beadostlers. CA-ORA 115 Shell midden with two loci. King (1963) Project Area 46 and 62 Update Shell, pestle, manor, bowl frag VanHook (1966) Update Appears to be a major occupation Brock (1985) area. CA-ORA-116 Shell Hidden. King (1963) Project Area 46 and 62 CA-ORA-117 Milling stone tools onsmface. King (1963) Project Area 46 and 62 CA-ORA-118 Occupation site. Abrams (1963) Project Area 46 and 62 • 11 SWCA Environmental Consultants 8 1 J SITE DESCRIPTION SOURCE AND WMEN ONE DATE MILE OF CA-ORA-119 Large site with multiple loci, Chartkoff (1966) Project Area 46 damaged by road and campus and 62 construction. CA-ORA-120 Shell midden; bowl and pestle Long and Swartz (1963) Project Area 62 fragments. CA-ORA-121 Shell midden on lagoon. Long and Swartz (1963) Project Area 46 CA-ORA-121 Multiple loci habitation site. Only Strudwick and King Project Area 46 Update part of the site has been tested. Site (1998) yielded burials, trade beads, many artifacts. CA-ORA-192 Shell midden with artifacts. Chace and Hafner (1966) Project Area 46 and 62 Update Shell and flakes eroding from slope. Brown 1991 CA-ORA-195 Shell, mans, points, debitage, McKinney, Bakker, and Project Area 46 metates knife, plummet fragments. Hafner 1967 CA-ORA-196 Milling stone site. Bakker, McKinney, and Haiher (1967) Project Area 46 Update Both historic and prehistoric, dates from the Jose Andres Sevulveda era. Stmdwick 1996 CA-ORA-197 Site on a small knoll. Hafner, Bakker, and McKinne 1967 Project Area 46 and 62 CA ORA-287 Small site. Hafner and McKinney 1970 Project Area 46 and 62 CA-ORA-300 Shell and artifacts includes steatite Sperry (1971) Project Area 55 bowl, incised stone, and pestles. CA-ORA-348 Heavy shell midden with artifacts. Boehmler (1972) Project Area 62 Update I Shell and flakes. Brown 1991 CA-ORA-353 Large stone bowl, pestle, pestle Nisson (1972) Project Area 55 fragments, and scraper. CA-ORA-384 Metates, manes, hammerstones, Houser (1972) Project Area 27 cores, debitage. CA-ORA-543 Fourteen artifacts Cottrell (1976) Project Area 26 and 27 Update No artifacts observed. Strudwick 1994 CA-ORA-552 Sparse shell, one artifact. Stickel, Pendleton (1976L Project Area 62 CA-ORA-553 Light shell scatter, one mano. Jones 197 Project Area 62 CA-ORA-575 Shell midden with artifacts including Ahlering (1975) Project Area 62 plummet or charmstone. Update Shell and artifacts. Gardener 1981 CA-ORA-594 Shallow site containing mettes, Tadlock (1977) Project Area 25 mans, choppers, stone bowls, debits e. CA-ORA-612 Prehistoric and historic artifacts Smith (1977) Project Area 25 scattered around Serrano -Whiting 1860 adobe house. CA-ORA-647 Knife, reamer, debitage, scrapers, Schuster et al. Project Area 25 hammers. SWCA Environmental Consultants SITE DESCRIPTION SOURCE AND WITHIN ONE DATE MILE OF Update Lithic scatter, over 3,000 artifacts. Brown 1994 CA-0RA-648 Light lithic scatter. Cottrell et al. (1977) Project Area 25 Update Site on bottom of canyon containing Brown (1994) 700+ artifacts including a "birdstone". CA-ORA-773 Manos, metate, bifaces, flakes, and Bickford (1978) Project Area 25 hammerstones. CA-ORA-828 Manes, cores and flakes. Oxendine ct al. 1979 Project Area 25 CA-ORA-1041 Sparse lithic quarry. Romani, Corbin (1983) Project Area 62 Update Site tested and covered with fill. Padon 1998 CA-ORA-1063 Lithic scatter Bissell(1984) Project Area 25 Update Site tested by RMW in 1988. Brown 1994 CA-ORA-1248 Site discovered during monitoring. Brown (1990) Project Area 46 Units•yielded 12 lithic artifacts, shell, and two shell beads. CA-ORA-1304 Five artifacts. Evans(1991) Project Area27 Update Found stockpiled dh no artifacts. Strudwick 1994 CA-ORA- Some prehistoric shell and historic, Smith and Duke (1998) Projcct Area 46 1488H circa 1880-1945, artifacts CA-ORA-1495 Great number of flakes and debitage; Bissell (1984) Project Area 25 could be redeposited. CA-ORA-1580 Redeposited shell scatter. Brown (2001) Project Area 26 and 27 30-156547 Serrano Adobe, circa 1863, listed on Irons (1976) Project Area 55 the National Reg, Of Historic Places. 30-157788 Irvine Blacksmith Shop, circa 1915, Wilson and Smith (1985) Project Area 53 listed on the National Register of Historic Places 30-160312 Lighter Than Air Hangers, Marine Kuci (1974) Project Area 55 Corps Air Station, Santa Ana, on the National Register of Historic Places. 3041889 Irvine Bean Growers Association Marsh and Wilson (1984) Project Area 53 Building, circa 189$, listed as a State of California Point of Historic Interest. 30-162289 Rancho San Joaquin Sepulveda Mitchell (1976) Project Area 46 Adobe Site, circa 1868, listed as a and 62 State of California Point of Historic Interest, 30-100309 Historic concrete feature. Bissell 1984 Project Area 25 30-100161 Historic ceramic fragment. Duke, McLean (1997) Project Area 46 and 62 30-100163 Historic ceramic fragment, Smith (1997) Project Area 46 and 62 30-100164 Historic ceramic fragment. Smith (1997) Project Area 46 and 62 30-100165 Historic ceramic and bone fragment. Smith (1997) Project Area 46 and 62 �J 0 SWCA Environmental Consultants 10 • FIELD METHODS/FINDINGS The project areas were examined in an opportunistic manner, depending upon their location and accessibility, by archaeologists Joan Brown and Blanche Schmitz. Project Area 25 (Serrano Creek -Lower) is located in the flood plain along Serrano Creek and was examined by the archaeologist walking along the creek bank in a single transect. The area, which currently consists of a flowing creek, is extensively disturbed. The ground along the creek contains piles of recently bulldozed earth and the creek channel has apparently been mechanically modified. Project Area 26 (Woodbridge in -Line), located in the San Diego Creek Channel, between Culver Drive and Jeffrey Road, consists of five separate locations. The archaeologist walked along the grass bank and examined each area. The creek has been mechanically channeled and both sides of the creek contain cut slopes that are planted with grass. Project Area 27 (Barranca Off -Line) is located on the north side of Barranca, east of Jeffrey Road. The project area, that consists of the San Diego Creek bed and watershed, contains recently planted native vegetation. The area is fenced off by a loosely constructed wire fence. The archaeologist examined the creek bed in an opportunistic • manner by gaining access through the fence in areas of sparser vegetation. Project Area 46 (San Joaquin Marsh — Enhancement) was not examined because it is an existing wetlands/treatment site and no changes are contemplated. Project Area 53 (Caltrans SR133/I-5/Interchange) is on Caltrans property between the SR133515 interchange and Marine Way. The project area, consisting of an excavated basin, was examined by the archaeologist walking on the graded dirt road adjacent to the basin. The area was extensively disturbed by excavation and construction of the existing basin. Project Area 54 (Caltrans SR-261/Walnut Avenue) is located on Caltrans property between Peters Canyon Wash and the I-5/Jamboree Road connector, south of Walnut Avenue. The project area, consisting of a previously excavated basin, was viewed through the wire fence. The area was extensively disturbed by excavation and construction of the existing basin. Project Area 55 (Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel) is located within the channel. The project area, consisting of a riprap and concrete lined channel, was viewed by the archaeologist walking along the side of the channel. The project area is extensively disturbed by modifications to the existing channel that included excavation and placement of riprap and concrete. • SWCA Environmental Consultants 11 Project Area 56 (El Modena Park) is located east of Hewes Street and north of Jordan • Avenue. The project area, consisting of a previously excavated basin, was examined by the archaeologist walking along the perimeter of the basin. The project area was highly disturbed by the previous excavation for the basin. Project Area 62 (San Joaquin Marsh-SAMS 1) is located within the San Joaquin Marsh between the UC Natural Reserve Area and an existing mitigation area. The archaeologists accessed the area by the dirt road extension of Riparian Drive. The area currently contains dense wetlands vegetation. The ground surface was not visible because of the dense vegetation. Project Area 64 (West Park In -Line) is located within the Peters Canyon Channel east of Jamboree Road, south of the I-5, and north of Barranca Parkway. The project area is located within the rip -rap and concrete lined channel. The project area was viewed by the archaeologist at open spaces and road crossings at multiple points along its length. This area was highly disturbed by excavations to the channel and by the placement of concrete and rip -rap. No artifactuaI material was observed by the archaeologists during the held reconnaissance of the project areas. DISCUSSIONMCOMMMNDATIONS The project areas are located in the vicinity of recorded prehistoric and/or historic archaeological sites (Table 1). However, many of the project areas have previously been subjected to extensive disturbances that would preclude the possibility of archaeological deposits being present. The following project areas are extensively disturbed and will require no additional archaeological studies, unless there are changes to the projects location: Project Area 25 (Serrano Creek -Lower); Project Area 26 (Woodbridge in -Line); Project Area 27 (Barranca Off -Line); Project Area 53 (Caltrans SR133/I 5/Interchange); Project Area 54 (Caltrans SR-26l/Walnut Avenue); Project Area 55 (Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel; Project Area 56 (El Modena Park); Project Area 64 (West Park In -Line). Because Project Area 46 (San Joaquin Marsh —Enhancement) is an existing wetlands/treatment site, no changes are being considered; therefore, no additional archaeological study is required. If those plans should change, it is recommended that a qualified archaeologist, prior to any disturbances, examine the project area. Project Area 62 (San Joaquin Marsh-SAMS 1) is located within one mile of 22 recorded archaeological sites. Because of dense vegetation, it was not possible to examine the ground surface of Project Area 62. • SWCA Environmental Consultants 12 • Because of the possibility that archaeological deposits could be present, it is recommended that all ground disturbing activities at Project Area 62 be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. L� • Joan C. Brown, RPA Senior Project Manager — Cultural Resources SWCA Environmental Consultants 13 0 Breece, Bill and Beth Padon 1986 Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment of the Habitat Enhancement Project. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton, California. Brown, JoanC. 1992 Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of 11 Parcels of Land Located in Newport Beach, Orange County, California. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton, California. Chartkoff, Joseph L. and Kona Kerry Chartkoff 1984 The Archaeology of California. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. Driver, Harold E. 1969 The Indians of North America, second edition, revised. The Universityof Chicago Press, Chicago and London. Govemor's Office of Planning and Research • 1998 California Environmental Quality Act Statues and Guidelines. Governor's Office of Planning and Research. Sacramento, California. Koerper, Henry C. and Christopher Drover 1983 Chronology Building for Coastal Orange County, the case from CA-ORA 119-A. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly, Vol.19, No. 2, pp.1-34. LSA 1981 Cultural Resources Assessment, Village 12 Development Site, Irvine, California. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton, California. Macko, M. 1985 Site Recording Form (CA-ORA-57). On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton, California. Mason, Roger D. 1984 Eastern Corridor Alignment Study, Orange County, California. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton, California. • SWCA Environmental Consultants 14 • Moratto, Michael J. 1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, San Diego. Office of Historic Preservation 1990 Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format. Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, California. SRS 1995 Proposed Guidelines for the Nomination of Properties. Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, California. 1978 Cultural Resources Report — Preliminary Assessment on the Proposed San Diego Creek Watershed Erosion and Sedimentary Control System in Hicks Canyon, Hicks Canyon Wash, Rattlesnake Creek Wash, San Diego Creek, and the San Joaquin Marsh Located in Orange County, California. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton, California. Stickle, Gary E. and Jerry Howard 1976 Final Report of a Cultural Resource Survey of the University of California, Irvine. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California . State University, Fullerton, California. • Wallace, William J. 1955 A Suggested Chronology for Southern California. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology Vol. 11 No.3, pp. 215-230. Warren, C.N. 1968 Cultural Traditions and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast. In Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States. Eastern New Mexico Contributions in Anthropology. Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 1-14 SWCA Environmental Consultants 15 APPENDIX A Project Location Maps 7 �J •N V � it . 1-., e�Q.. •` ,e {„L\ !,':n,:^ � {) ..-:`,^..\\ `'� ^ mow; �'.:'• ='fir •`'��p.' i' /' `4•�.0 \';, s. •/�•�'•`,,"�:• ;-, • �:/,•.:. __ C©�+, .•s•..•` u-may_`,-eS, -a•+T a['RCI •'•� • Cl 1 ^�':.',.%,i'•' astir!•' :. :.t '\ �i'^'�'� •::'ter 1-1yy' '�ijs{S "YOV .i �-.:� �-1 `:l' � Y'✓^.�, n �_ \' J 6 •.'f".4 :' /%' 'r1 ' ,i,}�' - -`,"% '^`: w ! '3+w:sx ,.�;;cr' :4�' �t - -J �<c �. `<,•!��':✓::- i�Hl' - J.: • _ H 'RA�C10 S.n .�tXrCOtf; .� _� � : G \! \ •.: i'. ,-,M, l{CUlIR3f,\��,. �c��- :�rWj K..� .: •jj a'•� F crv-t •t4'\\`'. -'�/Z n•`"ii' .••\ i`\• !. ,...-, ,. \ •.•h:e: ",•yri�.`'�-` � i SITE46 ..:6'� 4 �'°� `4 :'`, "' M1; • ,J', �9°%/�, APProximate '• __. ,,, '�}�_.:.'_;,:;� y',+:-�5.+f` _. : e' •• r. .., �, ` Yl , r LOCaiiOR :.u�'SL,-r',',::%::. •... :>•>`. �"fc` s^ �''._(e f4` j � , !''\, • t70CK.-'PON^S ��J ,r"':^ t ._=•':�"'�_'•,.c4_: ,.„_ - _�-I �,ewq^ •x-;`•. ^; r\. << r' SITE 62 ]F + -�,:t, ., .�� .:_-_ -__-• .:: Approximate •, : ---• : - v= Location '^ ' �•` "_J'�l VAS f ._ C' 'k .. n:;j4;l,y+ ;k.; �.`,`.` :v>.._ ;'t;<•��"t'^`'`-�• \'✓_•.. .`�.� •\+�, Aye`-:•-/�-h";'-� .-•i'y.`S :t?C %i i'> % .Otit•Vy TY`iJF,`tA' ,da -.`+>; `.::.: ,.� 'y. :' .M„ i `?�3 \ ! i. �`/!r ^' GJ„ -w•- t �'t"%-j\�\i u3]Y.' �'1 •`:._�—r ��`;i-':. ` ��'' `` .k./'\•'�::'� .-rs-••^�s�4Fp'c• 4•.t•�r,• FF•� �� .� y� '� • (((t me'µ h. JJ :�• 3. - \t:. ,'_ ' .`i`1; ; \�! ^�y1 %. � G41J. F,_ ` , \.V: ��\. � • ��"�`- r S�.'r _^:': /-.., ..:. ]\.�QaJ2,ir.• `'�_ / XLz NTS Wetlands Project QSites Area shown lies in Orange County, CA. Base Map Taken From USGS 7.5 Minute Tustin, CA (1965, Photorevised 1981) Quadrangle. c - / SWCA N Los Angeles Office 23392 Madero, Suite L Scale 1:24,000 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Tel (949) 770-8042 0 750 1,500 Fax (949) 458-9058 ®Feet info-losangeles@swca.com I 1'yyc. ,[� ' — •'�•:`b.: " %r `'•!{M 209 '•r1' 7 ••Y:all� W411 t °°�. tins rr• _ , i , > 41 -� =SITE SIT Aer - - :�.• 2 •.fir '•% ; „3�-�'" •_ - �� SITE 26 a Approximate e• �s _ Locations ' -�� • Ot06' 1,17 h�b Ni 'fit` • 1 �� w �''°. • J � "�`'•"'-.'� �'• r .may,, . 1• `. »,� .�04�51\ I NTS Wetlands Project Q Sites Area shown lies in Orange County, CA. Base Map Taken From USGS 7.5 Minute Tustin, CA (1965, Photorevised 1981) Quadrangle. SITE 27 a;rr �sY • Approximate Location N Scale 1:24,000 0 7601,600 ® Feet SWCA Los Angeles Office 23392 Madero, Suite L Mission Viejo, CA 92891 Tel (949)778-8842 Fax (949)458.9058 Info-losangeles&wca.com • CJ • �i I MAP 3 L ; 'err '•l iroi ' � St c.' .. t '°r'• ` �,\ g /.'.�.•� a/> Fie C_. ,, d``" ',' .J..-_. % :,. �'J�'l: .y _ y G �'r .f p .., `'��f 5_'i.Y,r.4 �1,:'S:,,.-s.�tu, r'i v -J �'% ♦'li.` 40r c raCi�p ��. ;ry�a•s"'rta�:'�,-`'-': �!•+.,w. :,�'. •-',.'o-",e� ;'• ,v 4 ;>; /r �-i b C1��,Yi�Ji�C;__�a'...� .:'tom' L", y„ \• 7��' r - `Y �'n:::°+'c'.Cr'��•,`,5,'' 4'rr•"/ VCR `b\'W'' ,�:. •',>��c`°MW. �':J ]Cm °:•A','-.^_-"T C,• �\ y, �wo"co SITE 55. °�9u'i �o- .,i•�• �- �,.YiS. qsy..+ ,: ° @ l w ^ to Approximate c Q ^. y.r, \ �;s✓ r'� 9Y Location , \ C•n`'r^tom>''�', ^ J b ` �.../ '.'f N t\y •\ 'c9'', dry >�-2 f It �zb �a� SITE54 N F y �.• . —,: . �, `` ( . • Approximate Location qw. s •✓ C�Well iZ YYY..JJ • :: `.. •jj:;y_ , p r �� / 2ii•55 �� ::nti Towe ��, \" k}� ;�f - :.. :.^.:ir�,Y': �c i'w�..' rr�"'%i o'.,• CORPS' a1R' _�'T'.RTtO\ -� <v \ ':,`»:,; s`::t-��t_f,'„„�4.-y' r•�. (HELf(PPTE:Zi \./'" V: / �* „ f��.,at..,`z.J '3-��C4.�a�'',.•�; Pl< ;;o • $.HOB y .�.. i' {. •,.,,. -^ _d:Ln,+t :�. %•l ��, u' % ea.;i tig,..-y-wa'.. ,...:.j�e•'.,y'a.r: s.;r\;q .i � . 1 'K" � 9 ._ '�.i4.r__.•`.'c.,.-:i, iKir•ir`a°""{�t, "%'rig Approximate \�: w.'l \-•f�'.. siP� t LOCdtion am.70 '"�w'Rio-.+--"r�.�_'�; '_ ;'-_��'•T wPo %r , �= �i rcm�++.Y�'AfiSir: •n,".i'_'u'_ � r:'�_ �.: ,� 'ti. .� f` ..d to-' .a • gyp' r..'...:� • ��.-,. ,t: f� .,a;:. ; ,-.,�; NTS Wetlands Project SWCA M Sites N Los Angeles Office Area shown lies in Orange County, CA, 23392 Madero, Suite L Scale 1:24,000 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Base Map Taken From USGS 7.5 Minute Tel (949) 770-8042 Tustin, CA (1965, Photorevised 0 750 1,500 Fax (949) 458-9058 1981) Quadrangle. ® Feet info-losangeles@swca.com MAP 4 ; UA .jam ]�=�f f .! ��,n • �/ ',�. •��`�.c,.'ti'�.`•�. 31 .• i..:. ...�' •. �, f•rw � .ice. ^ �': SITE Approximate Location �>:` �,�'•=�,`: - '•if � ��Y.�'��i i. ��..b 7. � •�i`•.'_.}4 +�r�:�<:Yi'� `•vim • P r:r � ��F�'3 rh'•t%:•' Y��., +'�. ',;,.'-'��• P . 7 rnw., q,s ?J+..Y"�-; / ..r: "�,• � T ��•_k_,`��,Y�y '��5 "lei[ N • .,��i �•- .a_•� 1�T �_y}� (...•w�esc 4 X r y'1 e � �t •. 1� 1� IOr 3 T+' q,v �� V�(.r...iY.^rp�. �y�•' WJ.•Y. Y • -�• ` !yilr�pl3i�f'r[•I .wi�� 1. ^la .S. �'�'�'^•�S a •�j, ' �1 ..,'+.va71i ?,_,�w! '�•�`;.: �"`Lw .,Q'��,-'k�''""p�` � ae...� '� ��y's'�`4'?'_ ..• �, � r r� . c; • � ge4 • __ w �,;- » :._•;:imp 93�y`�� ;;. ':""-'�.•'� "'`''—`.`•f•`!�1''�i4eedy'IKa:2l5�ib•.�'Ts': Y i R:.�. "A' NTS Wetlands Project SWCA a sites N Los Angeles Office Area shown ties in Orange County, CA, 23392 Madero, Suite L Scale 1.24,000 Mission Viejo, CA 92694 Base Map Taken From USGS 7.5 Minute Orange, CA (1965, Photorevised 0 750 1,500 ®Feet Tel (949) 7704"2 Fax (949) 456.9056 1981)Quadrangle. Info•tosangelss@swca.com n.rvnw...e_rwr•.e �\ / MAP 5 . s t; . � i `fT\CY ., ea��...••�`Y�i3"`�P r J � � s' �- :i "- •'i �• V s' `C,, 1 `%\�li� Jv�'\ rr i\t \.r � l� -� � ♦� P °c. .+-•" '�I: � ,� 1 �• '`^^r-;. ✓/..'' q _�=""' ` t�r..'y.-'�v �i.Cr'�}Y,L:' ):r'�'.r� {' �', t'4 i ' r `� "� 'f • r �L•/C � - :':t\�'.e. ✓��\ �/��'.� �y�.�/- y �+/� en , fn'� •,^ 'ice\\ '. ,^ •Kl odurtrmtF T `L/� \,';r✓`"1/t-�.,?a,�y.. t•t{//p rr Y `G '>� ?Z'i'—"tiirr)1✓�i,f �:r'G'_T'/�'YJ,y\",� ^\`'4,�� .✓3+i1� '.: \„l/ •fir P '` ,,,. �k�•'; ��„rw.�'��',t.- �i S �4 I l\\��...+. '`r.... I., \ 4r •tea � \ \/I .O- / r•->✓zi.:� �..; �.-q�.�'.�" -1 �.:id e�;t� C� \ 'rr; 2•!f%t \ ."�' ' .f",K',r..•..-a^'Y-•1•. �\ ,yam .. 2 �.i, �.✓ /+�6's:.°..: ^•�•4M _%��Yf f+„lr� , �'fti,��-,,_':..:....-'^.w:x:5rr',r.'•., °�.;r.... SITE25 � �L�,:<:''., r'I•S�%:a\,"a{' •Approximate �•'s�• a-�•+�'�.•�:� f ' '\'.�•, , \ Location �.•:,,�'' `\ \ � /:�� x =a.'y_.., Cam. j7 .tee �� L•` 'io/1. 1 \\✓,1�-^»—i,-•.r nT=i'i�... �• t�•: ` �, •. ti fA ';G �;,�q 1•"'.1•„ '�t�.-:`,Jj i ��.1..�i`GJ.:{?�``n'Y,7t'-`;.t�_',1_�"kiti t'"�.,�,.t�fiA F• "C:x'AY. aJ��y 7 \ n\ ,'C.,; .. ,r,�. 4. v„^:.=i�•�. •,d„�,i.�1?; ' n,.. a"�*r,':'.�,, j!.. �vrys:�Fn P,:- ��1=`J\ � i • q\\1111k ''iga;,S�'�,.s':.:`"rx. +may-:..' t�� r•Z,i��.`, �n •�' �-�''�:_;.i�.ti: .r: r'. (,x�••,r„�•>'�' ^•�,? "`\ I:./�I;�L i, .,.r--.rc:;�•tir +'d°. .`P %!;"'.i'V.", .. /,%i..'",-`�;...a/i-'�`r�.�n�".``�'..y.,cQ'�•�•.�•.�d�' ��, '�:+"��^c�w+ .!� v: ' / !`<_,�.:t a:'_. yl-^�-:v�--s?�.:e:�:%'l., .Ra^7��'l"_"i YN., t�+?{.`i.¢'.`•..L".1��5..-`�.:l•Yrr�+��.a ►_�i i\ ,3P.l i.d !� �>v"„•:'4 �� ?�.c#: _ _-,c. ?'3i%:ir%�i!i.'s c;�Ka*`:.ic- alq��.^ci. F:.t �',x,��+�^ -•' �: ufw ram.,, +.''1�=?''va�'�°," a t"••., `\.o],<^'"t", l.: :c^e rJ p* _,/`�--1 4 •' :.. K Y�.a' •C' ,;,_,�. `i::F a'%••�:,�wr>./'°'�� J d. y f;,1% q>;l; • '� .�� ;tii��y"ffr?, ••,c :• ...;�\ n'.',�Y`..•:��•:�.':..,�-zl�.)'�'n''° �'L'F•1 � f`Y'i i .�.T � L -1� � •�`•"�• Wd Y �u h'�jP-:mil � µT,'•}i['�}KYY',c.`Y.i�: " � f''�..:. 111 'mac 1..'*��' �•tz� y ?�. �.2i :` �::.. ••. r� .T' l r yt: .,y��S.' +�^-_.�%'..'•'5,�•`,4:..4a.i: �.r %'E". F'f`•� ...A.: y ;� z•?c, 7, .,�\1'.��s,�5?.,>n;n•j,.,..�:.fc°''�tb�/i•'''- �� .!/. ��.� .z t- `�,7'?y;<i...'•�I yam,, Jv.,�.1,,,:..`vY�^_•.. ,+,r,iv�y1. �,�/1 .t F:� w %;`,sr•'•`7-�.P ••r., SS •'L�it�G'/:., ;-' (. �L'r-•t"'1.4,:'9ie•�.. �.,,:-"'_+x,'. :< NTS Wetlands Project x- SWCA asites Los Angeles Office Area shown lies in Orange County, CA. N 23392 Madero, Suite L Scale 1:24,0t10 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Base Map Taken From USGS 7.5 Minute 0 750 1,500 Tel (949) 770-8042 El Toro, CA (1968, Photorevised Fax (949) sw . com 1982) Quadrangle. ®Feet info-losangeles@swca.com t `+ MAP 6 i fly�A ! j > ! (•ate: Q Wall n - 'S/iltd�+'y l • tt ♦ I Ake .�y''� T,�<{�,.Y"'• ', P e♦ 10 (ram..•.. �_. _ .. K. _ _ i SII �• �� 'D !• ' :< '�, Yyy.!%:� • it /1•i� �:' '.. _/p'�1�'t6 �� \fie' `'�w�+�•j9�f� �"` t .j+'.,Sv.r,7W:t��1�V t SITE 53 Approximate \ a ire j East urine•'.• Location r fi ♦ )ab9 wti `�4^��•� ryT1 il�F'" .•'� '. �'+s .Fr .4iti. 3N �t9 21'<_�..,�,Ct•� n "" ':`?• i^�.f'.',{ ail ^'n, <•,.�r Racra/ ; d ti.. �'+ \ ' � . �.^►e" :. 5 tii/4 sf ' 3 E . s�,. a ,� ti •SiS\ �; NTS Wetlands Project SWCA QSites N Las Angeles office Area shown lies In Orange County, CA 23392 Madera, Suite L Base Map Taken From USGS 7.5 Minute Scats 1:24,000 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 El Toro, CA (1988, Photorevised 0 750 1,500 Tel (949) 770.8042 Fax (949 1982) S Tustin, CA (1985, Photorevlsed ® Feet into osangeles��s905800m 1981) Quadrangles. 11-a 0 APPENDIX B Personnel Qualifications 7-4 ti 13P A I El -1 3 7 si I E I TOAN C. BROWN Office Address SWCA Environmental Consultants 23392 Madero, Suite L Mission Viejo, CA 92692 (949) 770-8042 e-mail: ibrown(a)swca.com Education 1988 M.A. Anthropology (emphasis in archaeology): Thesis research; avifaunas remains from archaeological sites. California State University, Fullerton. 1982 B.A. Anthropology. California State University Fullerton 1979 A.A. Social Science. Saddleback College, Mission Viejo, California. Areas of Expertise Ms. Brown has 24 years of experience as an archaeologist in California. She has been responsible for all phases of archaeological activities including proposal writing, site evaluation, mitigation, monitoring, and report writing. She has extensive experience in the analysis of faunal remains and identified over 3,100 avifaunal remains as a part of her thesis research. She has been a Project Manager and Principal Investigator for the past 14 years, and is currently a Senior Project Manager for SWCA. As Project Manager, Ms. Brown has successfully completed projects under the auspices of Caltrans, City and County governments, and Native American Tribal trusts. Ms. Brown is listed on the Register of Professional Archaeologist (RPA) and is certified by the Orange County Environmental Agency and by the counties of San Diego, Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Bernardino, and Riverside. She has been a Museum Associate of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Department of Vertebrate Paleontology, since 1979. Profession Experience 2001-02 Senior Project Manager. SWCA, Environmental Consultants, Los Angeles Cultural Resources. Responsibilities include writing proposals, project and staff management, research, faunal and artifact analysis, and report writing. 1988-2001 Senior Archaeologist/Project Manager. RMW Paleo Associates, Mission Viejo, California. Responsibilities included writing proposals, personnel supervision, field work (site surveying, excavation, mapping, monitoring) and report writing. 1987-88 Laboratory Technician. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Department of Vertebrate Paleontology. Responsibilities included molding and casting of fossils for the 75 ° anniversary of Ranch La Brea traveling exhibit. J Profession Experience continued . 1987 Field Director, Santa Fe Springs Heritage Park, Santa Fe Springs, California. Responsibilities included mitigation of historic sites prior to reconstruction of the Mission Era and Victorian Period remains. 1985 Faunal Analyst. Archaeological Associates, Sun City, California. Responsibilities consisted of the analysis of faunal remains from archaeological sites and production of technical reports. 1983-85 Paleontological Technician. RMW, Paleo Associates, Mission Viejo, California. -� Responsibilities consisted of monitoring, evaluation of and collection offossils. 1983-85 Archaeological Technician. Archaeological Resources Foundation, California State University, Fullerton, California. Responsibilities included surveying, site mitigation, and laboratory analysis of prehistoric lithic and faunal remains. 1982-83 Field Director. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society (avocational society), Orange County, California. Responsibilities included being in charge of (under the auspices of the State Archaeologist) over 30 volunteers during the survey and analysis of seven prehistoric -archaeology sites at Crystal Cove State Park, Corona Del Mar, California. 1982 Paleontological Technician, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (National Geographic Society Grant). Responsibilities included field salvage and laboratory • fossils from Miocene fossil deposit. preparation of a era marine 1981 Paleontological Technician. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (National " Science Foundation Grant). Responsibilities included laboratory preparation of fossils collected from the Sharketooth Hill fossil deposits, Kern County, California. 1980-81 Paleontological Technician, Scientific Resources Survey, Costa Mesa, California. Responsibilities consisted of monitoring, evaluation of and collection of fossils. 1978-79 Archaeological Field Technician. Christina Brewer and Co., Laguna Beach, California. Responsibilities consisted of archaeological field surveying. ' Recent Protects 2002 Project Manager, Darnell ConsultinQ/Bonterra Consultintt. Preparation of a Phase I �= cultural resources study,under CEQA Plus for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program. The project consists of the construction of water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofilter within the San Diego Creek watershed in Orange County California. Project Manager. City of San Juan Capistrano. Laboratory analysis and descriptive report of historic era artifacts and faunal material (associated with the Mission San Juan Capistrano) collected as a result of archaeological monitoring. . C ! _ Recent Proiects continued Laboratory Analyst/Report Writing. Pulte Homes. The project, conducted under CEQA regulations, consisted of the evaluation of a Milling Stone Horizon site discovered during archaeological monitoring of grading for a housing development. 2001 Project Manager. City of Santa Fe Springs, California. Evaluation of a prehistoric archaeological site located in Santa Fe Springs, California. The project was conducted a under the CEQA requirements. Project Manager. David Evans & Associates. Phase I archaeological study of 225 acres for a housing development. The project was conducted under the CEQA requirements. Project Manager. BRH Garver, Inc. Multiple projects involving archaeological and paleontological monitoring and mitigation of the excavation of sewer lines for the City of San Diego's compliance with the Clean Water Act Section 401. 2000 Project Manager. David Evans & Associates. Phase I cultural resources study of two five mile long routes. In conjunction with the Capistrano Valley Water Districts plan to extend their pipelines. The project was conducted under CEQA plus. SWCA will begin cultural resources and paleontological monitoring for the project July 2002. Project Manager. David Evans & Associates. Phase I cultural resources study for the construction of buildings and an access road for the Rancho Potrero Youth Leadership Academy for the Orange County Probation Department. The project was conducted under CEQA SWCA will begin cultural resources and paleontological monitoring for the project in the fall of 2002. Project Manager. City of Santa Fe Springs California. The project consisted of a Phase I resources study of undeveloped parcels and parcels scheduled for cultural redevelopment within the City. As a result of this study, conducted under CEQA, one prehistoric site was recorded, 17 historic properties were found eligible for listing under local ordinances, 29 properties were included within historic districts, and 20 properties were found eligible for special consideration in local planning. 1999 Project Manager. City of Palmdale. Phase I cultural resources study for the widening of Avenue S. As a result of the study (completed under CEQA regulations) five historic era i trash deposits and the circa 1888 Palmdale Cemetery were recorded as historic sites. 1998 Project Manager. Robert Bein William Frost & Associates in conjunction with the City ' of Simi Valley. Phase I cultural resources study of six areas for the construction of stone water detention basins. We subsequently performed archaeological and paleontological monitoring for the project. 1997 Project Manager. David Evans & Associates in conjunction with the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and the City of Palm Springs. The project was a Phase I cultural resources study of 640 acres. As a result of the study, 183 structural remains and 13 existing structures were recorded as historic sites. J. • • C� MATT PHILLIPS Laboratory Director - Paleontology / Graphics & GIS Manager EDUCATION B.A. Anthropology, California State University, Long Beach A.A., Marine Science, Saddleback Jr. College, Mission Viejo Laboratory curation and analysis Graphics & GIS Advanced database management IT administration SELECTED PROJECTS Foothill Transportation Corridor (SOCTHP) Toll road extension Paleontological sensitivity survey Laing, Camino Vera Cruz Survey and salvage Laguna Hills Community Center Survey and salvage Richland Homes, Chino Hills Survey and salvage Mr. Phillips has over thirteen years of experience in prehistoric archaeology and six years of experience in paleontology and paleo resource management. He earned a B.A. in Anthropology from the University of California, Long Beach in 1992, and is currently obtaining a GIS certification (due 2003). Mr. Phillips has had extensive field and curatorial experience on paleontological projects throughout Southern California as well as archaeological fieldwork in California, Arizona, and Colorado. He has advanced experience in graphics design, GIS, and database management. Mr. Phillips has worked on numerous regional paleontology and archaeology projects and is certified for both paleontology and archaeology in San Diego County. He is highly qualified in the areas of graphics design, mapping (GIS), lab curation, fossil analysis, all modes of archaeological and paleontological survey and excavation field methods, artifact and fossil illustration, and report writing. He is currently the Paleontological Lab Director and Graphics/GIS Manager at the Los Angeles office of SWCA. Mr. Phillips has supervised paleontological inventories, paleo salvage projects, and supervised and trained laboratory and field technicians in fossil and artifact analysis, fossil preparatory procedures, data base management, and network systems administration. 9 • Blanche A. Schmitz Archaeologist Professional Experience 2001—Present Archaeological site surveying, salvaging, laboratory analysis, and monitoring. SWCA Environmental Consultants. 1983 - 2001 Archaeological site surveying, salvaging and laboratory analysis. Paleontological field salvage and monitoring. RMW Paleo Associates, Inc. 1988 — Present Adjunct Instructor of Anthropology, Orange Coast College, Costa Mesa, CA. 1985 —1987 Archaeological salvage, Archaeological Resource Management Corporation (ARMC), Fullerton, CA. 1985 Archaeological salvage, Archaeological Research Foundation, California State University, Fullerton. 1978 —1980 Archaeological site surveying, Christine Brewer & Co., Laguna Beach, CA. Degrees & Certifications 1988 M.A. Anthropology, Emphasis in Archeology, California State University, Fullerton. 1984 B.A. Anthropology, California State University, Fullerton. 1981 A.A. Social Science, magna cum laude, Saddleback College, Mission Viejo, CA. Professional Organizations Pacific Coast Archaeology Society Society for California Archaeology • APPENDIX C Record Search Bibliography E Bibliography for Orange County A0ID#: OR1012 DATE: 1982 PAGES: 5 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth FIRM: LSA TITLE: BACK BAY ARCHAEOLOGY SITE INVENTORY/STATUS Evaluation AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-43, ORA44, ORA-45, ORA-46, ORA-47, ORA-48, CA-ORA-49, ORA-50, ORA-51, ORA-52, ORA-53, ORA-54, CA-ORA-55, ORA-64, ORA-66, ORA-67, ORA-68, ORA-69, CA-ORA-90, ORA-91, ORA-93, ORA-94, ORA-95, ORA-96, CA-ORA-97, ORA-98, ORA-99, ORA-100, ORA-150, ORA-151 QUADNAME: NEWPORT TUSTIN of uw IC IM: OR1046 DATE: 1990 AUTHOR: Jertberg, Patricia FIRM, LSA Associates, INC. • PAGES: 10 TITLE: Archaeological MONITORING RESULTS - AMHERST COURT PROJECT LETTER DEAR MS. GRIFFITHS AREA: 6 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1082 DATE: 1990 AUTHOR: Jertberg, Patricia R. FIRM: LSA TITLE: Archaeological MONITORING REPORT FOR RE MAP NO: 84-629, LOT 6-IRVINE, CALIFORNIA AREA: 25 ac SITES: CA-ORA-1274 QUADNAME: EL TORO MEMO: 0 Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1124 DATE: 1986 PAGES: 200 AUTHOR: CLEVENGER, JOYCE M. FIRM: WESTEC SERVICES, INC. TITLE: Archaeological Investigations AT CA-ORA-287 AMULTICOMPONENT SITE ONNEWPORT BAY. AREA: 1 ac SITES: ORA-287 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1150 DATE: 1977 PAGES: 5 AUTHOR: PERRY, ROBERT FIRM: Scientific Resource Survey, Inc. TITLE: Archaeological Survey REPORT ON APPROXIMATELY 200 ACRES of RANCHO DE LOS ALISOS LOCATED IN THE EL TORO AREA, COUNTY OF ORANGE AREA: 200 ac SITES: CA-ORA-693, ORA-694, ORA-695, ORA-696, ORA-697 QUADNAME: EL TORO MEMO: IC ID#: OR1276 DATE: 1993 PAGES: 37 AUTHOR: de BARROS, PHILIP FIRM: CHAMBERS GROUP, INC. TITLE: BOUNDARY DELINEATION of CA-ORA-196/H IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT DEMONSTRATION GARDENS PROJECT AREA: 7 ac SITES: CA-ORA-196/H QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: • .0 Bibliography for Orange County * ID#: OR1583 DATE: 1974 PAGES: 17 AUTHOR: Nicoll, Gerald A. FIRM: G.A. Nicoll and Associates TITLE: Archaeology and Paleontology Report for Rancho de los Alisos Area, Orange County, California AREA: 3000 ac SITES: sites present, no numbers given QUADNAME: El Toro MEMO: Indexed. No project location map provided. Sites present but no numbers or map given. IC ID#: OR1731 DATE: 1961 PAGES: 38 AUTHOR: Unknown FIRM: Unknown TITLE: Indox to the Artifacts Collected During the Second Part of the wPA Project AREA: 0 ac SITES: 30-000282,30-000183,30-000165,30-000197,30-000163,30-000124,30-000077,30-000280 ODNAME: Newport Laguna Beach Tustin MEMO: rc� IC ID#: OR1752 DATE: 1998 PAGES: 17 AUTHOR: Brechbiel, Brant A. FIRM: Chambers Group, Inc. TITLE: Cultural Resources Records Search and Literature Review Report For a Pacific Bell Mobile Services Telecommunications Facility: CM 410-11 In the City of lake Forest, California AREA: .25 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: El Toro MEMO: 0 Bibliography for Orange County IC Eft OR1785 DATE: 1998 PAGES: 23 AUTHOR: Brechbiel,BrantA. FIRM: Chambers Group, Inc. TITLE: Cultural Resources Records Search and Literature Review Report For a Pacific Bell Mobile Services Telecommunication Facility: CM 005-15 In the City of Irvine, California AREA:.25 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: ICION: OR1814 DATE: 1994 PAGES: 4 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth FIRM: Petra Resources Inc. TITLE: Archaeological MonitoringReport for One Park Place, Orange County AREA: 15 ac SITES: 30-000287 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR1916 DATE: 1998 PAGES: 118 AUTHOR: Sttudwick Ivaa II. FIRM: LSA TME: Results of Archaeological Testing at Site CA-ORA-121, Locus C, Near Upper Newport Bay Orange County, California AREA: 5 ac SITES: 30-M121 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: 0 • • i Bibliography for Orange County DO: OR277 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 4 AUTHOR: Cottrell, Marie G. FIRM: TITLE: Archaeological RECONNAISSANCE of THE SERRANO HIGHLandS, PROJECT AREA (RANCHO DE LOS ALISOS, UNITS 1 & 2) AREA: 200 ac SITES: CA-ORA-39, ORA-773 QUADNAME: El Toro MEMO: IC ID#: OR285 DATE: 1979 AUTHOR: Cottrell, Marie G. FIRM: Archaeological Resource Management Corp. PAGES: 63 TITLE: Archaeological Investigations Conducted at CA-ORA-196, Irvine, California AREA: none SITES: 30-000196 ODNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID& OR327 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 65 AUTHOR: Whitney-Desautels, Nancy `'• FIRM: Scientific Resource Survey, Inc. TITLE: THE ARCHAEOLOGY and HISTORY of HERITAGE HILL: A PROPOSED HISTORICAL COMPLEX OF SERRANO COMMUNITY PARK AREA: 2 ac SITES: CA-ORA-612H QUADNAME: El Toro MEMO: 0 Bibliography for Orange County _7 IC ID#: OR398 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 92 • ,., AUTHOR: KEARNS, TIMOTHY AND NANCY WHITNEY-DESAUTELS FIRM: Scientific Resource Survey, Inc, TITLE: Archeological REPORT ON Archeological SITES CA-ORA-693, ORA-694, ORA-695, ORA-696, ORA-697, AND ORA-699 LOCATED ON RANCIiO DE LOS ALISOS IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-693, ORA-694, ORA-695, ORA-696, ORA-697, r ORA-699 QUADNAME. EL TORO MEMO: 'L wn A y ^; IC ID#: OR465 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 4 j AUTHOR: DESAUTELS,ROGER L FIRM: Scientific Resource Survey, Inc. TITLE: Archaeological Survey REPORT ON IT 10789, LOCATED IN THE J� RANCHO SERRANO AREA OF THE COUNTY OP ORANGE AREA: 9 • SITES: none QUADNAME: EL TORO MEMO: IC ID#: OR471 DATE: 1980 PAGES: 14 AUTHOR: Whitney-Desautels, Nancy -, FIRM: Scientific Resource Survey, Inc. TITLE: Cultural ResourceS REPORT ON SITE PLAN NUMBER 79-26 LOCATED IN THE LAKE FOREST AREA OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE j AREA: 15 no ;.i SITES: CA-ORA-612 QUADNAME: , E1 Toro MEMO: j Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR520 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 6 AUTHOR: MABRY, THEO d FIRM: Archaeological PLANNING COLLABORATIVE / TITLE: Archaeological RECORDS SEARCH and RECONNAISSANCE Survey IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX -EAST PAHSE 2 AND 3 AREAS IRVINE, CA AREA: 600 ac SITES: ISOLATED ARTIFACTS ri sp �4 1 II II _.I ..j e QUADNAME: EL TORO MEMO: IC ID#: OR627 DATE: 1981 PAGES: 46 AUTHOR: Jertberg, Patricia FI M: TITLE: AN Archaeological TEST and SALVAGE INVESTIGATION of CA-ORA-39 AND CA-ORA-773, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: RTPF.Re CA-nRA-39. ORA-773 QUADNAME: EL TORO MEMO: IC ID#: OR697 DATE: 1983 PAGES: 4 AUTHOR: PADON, BETH FIRM: LSA TITLE: Archaeological RECORDS SEARCH and FIELD REVIEW of THE 30-ACRE PARCEL AT THE IIC-EAST Phase 3 PROJECT SITE FOR MONITORING AREA: 40 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: EL TORO MEMO: 3 Bibliography for Orange County _y IC IAk: OR738 DATE: 1984 PAGES: 18 AUTHOR: Bissell,RonaldM. FIRM: RMW TITLE: Cultural ResourceS Assessment Tentative TRACT 11986 ORANGE COUNTY, CALWORNIA AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-698, ORA-1058 QUADNAME: El Toro MEMO: :i A IC M#: OR74 DATE: 1976 PAGES: 4 ' AUTHOR: DESAUTELS, ROGER J. ,L FIRM: Scientific Resource Survey, Inc. TITLE: Archaeological Survey REPORT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY FOUNDRY of TENTATIVE TRACT NO.8461 IN THE EL TORO AREA OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P • AREA: SITES: none • QUADNAME: EL TORO MEMO: 1 IC DNf: OR753 DATE: 1984 PAGES- 9 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth —, FIRM: LARRY SEEMAN ASSOC., INC. i TITLE: Archaeological Resource Assessment WINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX EAST Phase IV, CITY OF IRVINE. d AREA: SITES: none QUADNAME: El Toro MEMO: I J '• Bibliography for Orange County Z • IC ID#: OR774 DATE: 1985 PAGES: 68 AUTHOR: Brock, James FIRM: TITLE: Archaeological, PALEONTOLOGICAL and HISTORICAL Resources ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR TEE U.C. IRVINE NORTH CAMPUS PROPERTY AREA: 114 ac SITES: CA-ORA-115AB, ORA-116, ORA-121B y QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR78 DATE: 1976 PAGES: 3 AUTHOR: Desautels, R. FIRM: Scientific Resource Survey, Inc. TITLE: AREA 16-13 LOCATED AT 25114 IRVINE BLVD. IN THE LAKE FOREST AREA OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 18 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: EL TORO MEMO: IC ID#: OR813 DATE: 1985 PAGES: 9 AUTHOR: Cottrell, Marie, Del Chario, Kathleen, Veda Drummy-Chapel, and John D. Cooper FIRM: Archaeological RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CORPORATION 7 TITLE: ARCAEOLOGICAL, HISTORICAL, andPALEONTOLOGICALAssessment of THE MUSICK FACILITY, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: none QUADNAME: EI Toro MEMO: f Bibliography for Orange County IC ED#: OR827 DATE: 1986 PAGES: 7 AUTHOR: D. Stephen Dibble FIRM: Archaeological Resource Management Corp. TITLE: The Archaeological Assessment of the Thurston Park Senior Housing Project Site s AREA: Sac SITES: none QUADNAME: Laguna Beach 0 MEMO: is 0 Bibliography for Orange County • IC ID#: OR1027 DATE: 1990 PAGES: 10 AUTHOR: Van Horn, David M. a FIRM: AA TITLE: Archaeological Survey REPORT: 20162 BIRCH STREET, SANTA ANA HEIGHTS, COUNTY OF ORANGE AREA: 2 ac SITES: CA-ORA-1223 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: ICID#: OR1068 DATE: 1991 PAGES: 24 a AUTHOR: Shinn, Juanita R. a FIRM: RMW PALEO Associates TITLE: Cultural Resources RECONNAISSANCE of THE 25 ACRE IRVINE PLANNING AREA 23 PROJECT ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-121a, OAA-287 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1123 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 46 AUTHOR: CLEVENGER, JOYCE M. FIRM: WESTEC SERVICES, INC. TITLE: Archaeological SALVAGE PROGRAM AT LOCUS B and THE PERIPHERAL SECTOR OF LOCUS A, ORA-287 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA. AREA: 1 ac SITES: ORA-287 ..1 9 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: j Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1143 DATE: 1990 PAGES: 26 AUTHOR: Bissell, Ronald M. FUM* RMW PALEO Associates, INCORPORATED TITLE: Cultural ResourceS RECONNAISSANCE of TWO SMALL PARCELS NEAR THE MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA and A LARGER THE MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA AREA: 120 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN NEWPORTBEACH MEMO: IC ID#: OR1350 DATE: 1993 PAGES: 192 AUTHOR: McKENNA, JEANETTE, AND PILIP DE BARROS FIRM: CHAMBERS GROUP, INC. TITLE: Archaeological Survey REPORT HISTORIC SITES ADDENDUM SAN JOAQUIN HILLS TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR 12-ORA-7312-102540 AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-13/H, ORA-57/H, ORA-107/11, ORA-225K ORA-1354H QUADNAME: DANA POINT LAGUNA BEACH MEMO: IC ID#: OR1351 DATE: 1993 PAGES: 132 AUTHOR: MCKENNA, JEANETTE, AND PHILIP DE BARROS FIRM: CHAMBERS GROUP, INC. TITLE: HISTORIC STUDY REPORT SAN JOAQUIN HILLS TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR 12-ORA-73 12-102540 AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-57/H, ORA-225/H, ORA-1353/H QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: 0 • 0 ,":1 Bibliography for Orange County * ID#: OR1515 DATE: 1996 PAGES: 5 AUTHOR: Allen, Kathleen C. (FIRM: Archaeological Resource Management Corporation TITLE: Archaeological Assesment of L.A. Cellular Site #686.10, Bonita Creek Park, Orange County, California AREA: 1 ac SITES: QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR1605 DATE: 1990 PAGES: 1166 AUTHOR: de Burros, Philip and Henry C. Koerper FIRM: Chambers Group, Inc. Santa Ana, California TITLE: Final Test Investigation Report and Request for Determination of Eligibility for 23 Sites Along the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor AREA: 2000 ac • SITES: 30-000389,30-001081,30-000336,30-001029,30-000736,30-000270,30-001092,30- 001091,30-001089,30-001088,30-000689,30-001082,30-001083,30-000930,30-000737, 30-000275,30-001085,30-000225,30.000181,30-001086,30-00057 QUADNAME: Dana Point Laguna Beach San Juan Capistrano, Tustin MEMO: 0 Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1708 DATE: 1989 PAGES: 193 AUTHOR: Hurd, Gary S. FIRM: The Keith Companies TITLE: TestProgtao Results, Significance Evaluations, and Recommendations for Mitigation of Impacts at CA-ORA-115A, -115B, -116, & -121B, University of California, Irvine, North Campus AREA: SITES: 30.000115A,30-000115B,30.000116,30.000121B QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: } .l r IC MU: OR1731 DATE: 1961 PAGES: 38 :1 AUTHOR: Unknown FIRM: Unknown I I -a I E I TITLE: index to the Artifacts Collected During the Second Part of the WPA Project AREA: 0 ac SITES: 30-000282,30-000183,30.000165,30-000197,30.000163,30.000124,30-000077,30-000280 QUADNAME: Newport Laguna Beach Tustin MEMO: IC M#: OR1733 DATE: 1998 PAGES, 5 AUTHOR: Broom, Joan C. FIRM: RMW Paleo Associates, Incorporated TITLE: Archaeological Monitoring During Excavation for the Green Acres Phase R Project Pipeline Extension into NewportBeach (Contract GA-97-1) AREA: 1.6 li mi SITES- 30-000054,30-000055,30-000056,30.000097,30-000100,30-000551,30.001240 QUADNAME: Newport Tustin MEMO: • • • J Bibliography for Orange County *ID#: OR1828 DATE: 1995 PAGES: 87 AUTHOR: Chace, Paul G. FIRM: The Keith Companies Cultural Resources Division TITLE: A Cultural/Scientific Resources Survey for the Irvine Planning Area 26, Bonita Canyon- Coyote Canyon, Zone Change 18903-ZC, in the City of Irvine, Orange County, California AREA: 996 ac SITES: 30-000106, 30-000219, 30-000107, 30-000209,30-000210, 30-000211, 30-000220, 30-000223, 30-000226, 30-000482, 30-000483 QUADNAME: Tustin, Laguna Beach MEMO: IC ID#: OR1883 DATE: 1998 PAGES: 38 AUTHOR: Getchell, Barbie and Atwood, John FIRM: Pacific Archaeological Sciences Team TITLE: Cultural Resources Survey of a 46 Acre Portion of the San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh Reserve, Irvine, Orange County, California AREA: 46 ac • SITES: 30-000077 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR1943 DATE: 1998 PAGES: 80 AUTHOR: Duke, Curt FIRM: LSA Associates, Inc. TITLE: Results of Archaeological Monitoring for the San Joaquin,Marsh Enhancement Plan Project, City of Irvine, Omage County, California AREA: 47 ac SITES: 30-001487,30-001488 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: 0 0 1 Bibliography for Orange County 71 Ir IC ID#: OR2060 DATE: 1999 PAGES: 8 AUTHOR: Duke, Curt FIRM: LSA TITLE: Cultural Resource Assessment fof the AT&T Wireless Services Facility Number R129, County of Orange, California AREA: <lac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR2171 DATE: 1999 PAGES: 28 AUTHOR: Getchell, Barbie FIRM: Pacific Archaeological Sciences Team TITLE: Archaeological Monitoring of the San Joaquin Reserve Enhancement Project in Irvine, Orange County AREA: 46 no SITES: 30-000057 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR246 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 7 AUTHOR: Cotrell, Marie G. FIRM: TITLE: REPORT of Archaeological ResourceS Assessment CONDUCTED FOR THE IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX -WEST AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-121, ORA-287 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: 0 0 J Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR284 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 25 —, AUTHOR: Cottrell, Marie FIRM: TITLE: TEST LEVEL INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED FOR SITE CA-ORA-287 i (ORA-121) AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-287 (ORA-121) a QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: :o '•I IC ID#: OR339 DATE: 1977 PAGES: 170 AUTHOR: Craib, John FIRM: TITLE: THE ARCHAEOLOGY of A LATE HORIZON MIDDEN (CA-ORA-197) ON NEWPORTBAY AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-197 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR531 DATE: 1980 PAGES: 22 AUTHOR: Hurd, Gary S. FIRM: TITLE: TEST EXCAVATIONFOR CA-ORA-I16 AREA: I ac a SITES: CA-ORA-116 •H •a j QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: J. 'Y. F Bibliography for Orange County IC IDM OR574 DATE: 1976 PAGES: 54 AUTHOR: Stickel, Gary E. and Jerry B. Howard FARM: TITLE: FINAL REPORT of A Cultural Resource Survey of THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE AREA: 1400 ae SPIES: CA-ORA-115, ORA-116, ORA-117, ORA-118, ORA-121, ORA-122, ORA-123, ORA-179, ORA-180, ORA-181, ORA-218 ORA-553, ORA-554 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC Eft OR589 DATE: 1976 PAGES: 129 AUTHOR: Kaldenberg, Russell L. FIRM: TITLE: Archaeological Investigations AT THE WORLD MEDICAL FOUNDATION SITE ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFOPM AREA: 1 ac SITES: CA-ORA-575 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC IDII: OR673 DATE: 1983 PAGES: 25 AUTHOR: PADON, BETH FIRM: LSA, INC. TITLE: Archaeological Assessment, PROPOSED UPPER NEWPORT BAY BICYCLEIEQUESTRIAN TRAIL, NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA AREA: 1 ll mi SITES: CA-ORA-170, ORA-192, ORA-193, ORA-347, ORA-348, CA-ORA-351 QUADNAME: NEWPORTBEACH TUSTIN MEMO: 0 • 0 Bibliography for Orange County • IC ID#: OR776 DATE: 1985 PAGES: 35 AUTHOR: Breece, William FIRM: LSA TITLE: LIMITED TEST -LEVEL INVESTIGATION AT CA-ORA-192 and CA-ORA-348, BAYVIEW PLANNED COMMUNITY, COUNTY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-192, ORA-348 ? QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: i i P J } IC ID#: OR815 DATE: 1985 PAGES: 128 AUTHOR: Breece, William H, and Laurel A. Harrison FIRM: LSA TITLE: Archaeological SALVAGE PROGRAM AT CA-ORA-348 and CA-ORA-192, BAYVIEW PLANNED COMMUNITY, COUNTY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-192, ORA-348 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: " Bibliography for Orange County , IC ID#: OR847 DATE: 1985 PAGES: 56 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth FIRM: LSA TITLE: Archaeological Resource INVENTORY City of IRVINE and ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AREA: 10500 ac SITES: CA-ORA-161, ORA-349, ORA-361, ORA-383, ORA-478, ORA-494, ORA-495, OPA-496, t ORA-499, ORA-545, ORA-601, ORA-734, ORA-735, ORA-767, ORA-803, ORA-804, r ORA-805, ORA-806, ORA-807, ORA-808, QUADNAME: Tustin Black Star Canyon r j MEMO: .; J IC ID#: OR856 DATE: PAGES: 13 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth FIRM: TITLE: Archeological and PALEONTOLOGICAL FIELD REVIEW, IRVWE BUSINESS COMPLEX, CITY OF WINE AREA: SITES: 40 ac CA-ORA-121 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: .j 'Y �1 r.� 0 • 0 i Bibliography for Orange County i H 0 I t.� i j j IC ID#: OR1016 DATE: 1975 PAGES: 8 AUTHOR: Leonard, N. Nelson, III FIRM: UNIV. OF CALIF., RIVERSIDE TITLE: ENVIRONMENTAL Impact Evaluation: ROUTE ALTERNATES BETWEEN THE MICHELSON TREATMENT PLANT AND PLANTS ON THE SANTA ANA RIVER, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 25 li mi SITES: CA-ORA-57, ORA-121, ORA-348, ORA-351, ORA-347, CA-ORA-193, ORA-164, ORA-170, ORA-174, ORA-76, CA-ORA-165 QUADNAME: NEWPORT BEACH MEMO: IC ID#: OR1087 AUTHOR: Dillon, Brian D. FIRM: DATE: 1990 PAGES: 60 TITLE: Archaeological RECORD SEARCH FOR THE GREEN ACRES Phase II PROJECT, ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, CITIES OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND NEWPORT BEACH, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 2 li mi SITES: CA-ORA-54, ORA-55, ORA-100, ORA-351, C QUADNAME: SEAL BEACH NEWPORTBEACH MEMO: IC II)#: OR111 AUTHOR: Anonymous FIRM: Scientific Resource TITLE: A 6.6 Acre Parcel of Le County of Orange AREA: 7 ac SITES: QUADNAME: Laguna Beach MEMO: Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1125 DATE: 1983 PAGES: 37 t AUTHOR: KOERPER, HENRY C. AND CHRISTOPHER E. DROVML FIRM: PACIFIC COAST Archaeological SOCIETY QUARTERLY TITLE: CHRONOLOGY BUILDING FOR COASTAL ORANGE COUNTY: THE CASE FROM CA-ORA-119-A. AREA: 1 ac SITES: ORA-119 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1131 DATE: 1966 PAGES: AUTHOR: FOLLETT, W.I. FIRM, UCLA AS TITLE: FISH REMAINS FROM Archaeological SITES AT 1RVINE ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-1 I8 A, ORA-119 A,B QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: ORI 139 DATE: 1990 PAGES: 2 AUTHOR: DEMCAK, CAROL FIRM: ARM TITLE: Cultural ResourceS Assessment FOR Phase I of THE PROPOSED AL1SO CREEK WILDLIFE HABITAT ENHANCEMENT PROJECT AREA: 1 ac SITES: CA-ORA-398, ORA-403, ORA-582 QUADNAME: SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO MEMO: 0 11 0 ,1 Is -'1 •.1 5 J� j Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1170 DATE: 1991 PAGES: 10 AUTHOR: ROSENTHAL, J. FIRM: LSA Associates, INC. TITLE: ADDENDUM TO Cultural ResourceS Assessment JAMBOREE ROAD WIDENING IRVINE, CALIFORNIA AREA: 1 ac SITES: CA-LAN-195 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1189 DATE: 1992 PAGES: 121 AUTHOR: BROWN, JOAN C. FIRM: RMW PALED Associates TITLE: Cultural ResourceS RECONNAISSANCE of 11 PARCELS of Land LOCATED IN NEWPORT BEACH, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AREA: 24 ac SITES: CA-ORA-48, ORA-49, ORA-50, ORA-51, ORA-52, ORA-57/77, ORA-64, ORA-66, ORA-70, ORA-99, ORA-100, ORA-136, ORA-186, ORA-216, ORA-518, ORA-1098 QUADNAME: TUSTIN NEWPORTBEACH MEMO: IC ID#: OR1380 DATE: 1994 PAGES: 65 AUTHOR: Mason, Roger D. FIRM: Chambers Group, Inc. TITLE: Treatment Program for ORA-1358 in the MacArthur Segment, San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Irvine, California Pursuant to 36 CFR 800.11 AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-1358 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: j Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1501 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 67 AUTHOR: COTTRELL, MARIE FIRM: Archaeological RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CORP. TITLE: Archaeological Investigations CONDUCTED AT CA-ORA 196 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA AREA: 8 ac SITES: ORA-196H QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: ICID#: OR1503 DATE: 1976 PAGES: 89 AUTHOR: COTTRELL, MARIE FIRM. Archaeological RESEARCH, INC. TITLE: TEST LEVEL Investigations CONDUCTED AT Archaeological SITES CA ORA 197 AREA: 3 ac SITES: ORA-196-7 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1591 DATE: 1986 PAGES: 10 AUTHOR: Breece, Bill and Beth Padon FIRM' LSA TITLE: Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment of the Habitat Enhancement Project AREA: 200 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: 0 • • Bibliography for Orange County • IC ID#: OR1614 DATE: 1997 PAGES: 5 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth FIRM: Petra Resources Inc. TITLE: Archaeological Monitoring of Preliminary Grading and Trenching for UCl/TIC University Research Park, Planning Area 25, Parcels 3 and 4, and Portions of Parcels 6,7, and 8 of Tentative Parcel Map No. 94-160 AREA: 19.7 ac SITES: None QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: Possible Isolate .4 .a ;i ICID#: OR1890 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 5 AUTHOR: Cottrell, Marie FIRM: Archaeological Resource Management Corp. TITLE: Preliminary Report of Test Level Investigations Conducted at Archaeological Site CA-Ora-687, Bristol Street, Orange County, California AREA: <1 ac SITES: 30-000687 QUADNAME: Newport Beach „s MEMO: .i' IC ID#: OR1952 DATE: 1996 PAGES: 33 AUTHOR: Anonymous FIRM: CALTRANS TITLE: Historic Property Survey Report, route 73 and I405 Improvements from Birch Street to I-405, From Bear Street to Euclid Street -3 AREA: 4.81 li mi SITES: none QUADNAME: Newport Beach, Tustin MEMO: J. Bibliography for Orange County IC Eft OR2256 DATE: 1999 PAGES: 90 AUTHOR: Demcak, Carol R FIRM: Archaeological Resource Management Corporation TITLE: CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS FOR ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISCTRICTS AREA: 340 ac SITES: 30-000277, 300, 352, 353, 381,1352, 83, 86,144, 84,289, 85, 87,288 QUADNAME: La Habra Yorba Linda, Los Alamitos, Anaheim, Orange, Seal Beach, Newport Beach, Tustin. MEMO: IC IDH: OR2283 DATE: 2000 PAGES: 16 AUTHOR: Duke, Curt FIRM: LSA TITLE: Cultural Resource Assessment for Modifications to Pacific Bell Wireless Facility CM 004-23, County of Orange, CA AREA: <1 no SITES: none QUADNAME: NewportBeach MEMO: 111 • • Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR252 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 50 AUTHOR: Desautels, Roger J. FIRM: Scientific Resource Survey, Inc. TITLE: Cultural ResourceS REPORT- PELIMINARY Assessment ON THE PROPOSED SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED EROSION and SEDIMENTARY CONTROL SYSTEM IN HICKS CANYON, HICKS CANYON WASH, RATTLESNAKE CREEK WASH, SAN DIEGO CREEK, and THE SAN JOAQUIN MARSH LOCATED IN ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-115, ORA-116, ORA-121, ORA-195, ORA-196, CA-ORA-197 ORA-284, ORA-478, ORA-511, ORA-513, CA-ORA-719 QUADNAME: EL TORO TUSTIN MEMO: IIC ID#: OR286 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 250 AUTHOR: BEAN, LOWELL JOHN FIRM: CULTURE SYSTEMS RESEARCH, INC. TITLE: Cultural ResourceS and THE HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINE FROM SAN ONOFRE TO SANTIAGO SUBSTATION AND BLACK STAR CANYON AREA: 681imi SITES: CA-ORA-1, ORA-2, ORA-3, ORA-4, ORA-5, ORA-7, ORA-11, ORA-12, ORA-13, ORA-14, ORA-15, ORA-16, ORA-17, ORA-18, ORA-19, ORA-20, ORA-21, ORA-22, ORA-23, ORA-24, ORA-25, ORA-26, ORA-27, ORA-28, ORA-29, ORA-30, ORA-31, ORA-32, ORA-33, ORA-34, ORA-37, QUADNAME: BLACK STAR CANYON CANADA GOBERNADORA MEMO: �5 I Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR353 DATE: 1973 PAGES: 61 AUTHOR: Ellis, Robert R. FIRM: TITLE: ARCHAE00GICAL TEST EXCAVATIONS AT SITE ORA-121, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-121 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR363 DATE: 1976 PAGES: 75 AUTHOR: Cottrell, Marie G. FIRM: Archaeological Research, Inc. TITLE: Test Level Investigations Conducted at Archaeological Sites CA-Ora-196 and CA-Ora-197 AREA: none SITES: 30-000196, 30-000197 QUADNAND Tustin MEMO: IC IDM OR364 DATE: 1977 PAGES: 24 AUTHOR: Rice, Glen .FIRM. TITLE: REPORT ON Archaeological Investigations AT CA-ORA-192 AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-192 -� QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: n L J 0 Bibliography for Orange County AA ID#: OR399 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 50 AUTHOR: Uknown FIRM: WESTEC SERVICES, INC. TITLE: Archaeological SALVAGE PROGRAM AT LOCUS B and THE PERIPHERAL SECTOR OF LOCUS A, ORA-287 (ORA-121), IRVINE, CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-287 (ORA-121) QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR406 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 63 AUTHOR: Cornell, Marie and David Jacobs FIRM: TITLE: Archaeological EXCAVATIONS CONDUCTED AT THE BRISTOL STREET SITE, CA-ORA-687, LOCUS I AND II AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-687 'ADNAME: Newport Beach MEMO: IC ID#: OR427 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 75 ;• AUTHOR: Mabry, Theo N. FIRM: Archaeological PLANNING COLLABORATIVE TITLE: TEST -LEVEL Investigations, NORTH BLUFFS of UPPER NEWPORT BAY, NEWPORT BEACH, CA. AREA: 1 ac SITES: CA-ORA-192, ORA-193, ORA-347, ORA-348 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: 0 Bibliography for Orange County IC IDM OR713 DATE: 1938 PAGES: 2 AUTHOR: Anonymous FMM: Unknown TITLE: Orange County California Anthropological Project San Joaquin Gun Club Site Ora-192, Ora-57 AREA: none SITES: 30-000192,30-000057 QUADNAME: NewportBoach MEMO: -1 3 IC IDH: OR726 DATE: 1984 PAGES: 26 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth A. FEM' LSA TITLE: Archaeological FIELD REVIEW VILLAGE 19A PROJECT, CITH OF IRVINE, CA. AREA: 150 ac SITES: CA-ORA-121, ORA-196, ORA-197 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: t3 .a ,3 ri .3 .1 Y • • Bibliography for Orange County WC ID#: OR1016 DATE: 1975 PAGES: 8 AUTHOR: Leonard, N. Nelson, III FIRM: UNIV. OF CALIF., RIVERSIDE TITLE: ENVIRONMENTAL impact Evaluation: ROUTE ALTERNATES BETWEEN THE MICHELSON TREATMENT PLANT AND PLANTS ON THE SANTA ANA RIVER, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 25 li mi SITES: CA-ORA-57, ORA-121, ORA-348, ORA-351, ORA-347, CA-ORA-193, ORA-164, ORA-170, ORA-174, ORA-76, CA-ORA-165 QUADNAME: NEWPORT BEACH MEMO: IC ID#: OR1097 DATE: 1991 PAGES: 90 AUTHOR: Brown, Joan C. FIRM: RMW PALED Associates, INC. TITLE: Cultural Resources RECONNAISSANCE of A 138 ACRE SECTION of • UPPERNEWPORT BAY REGIONAL PARK LOCATED IN NEWPORT BEACH, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 138 ac SITES: CA-ORA-44, ORA-45, ORA-56, ORA-171, ORA-90, ORA-347, ORA-96, ORA-164, ORA-166, ORA-168, ORA-172, ORA-191, ORA-192, ORA-348, ORA-351, ORA-193, ORA-43, ORA-170 QUADNAME: NEWPORT BEACH MEMO: 0 Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1099 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 21 AUTHOR: Cooley, Theodore FIRM: Archaeological RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CORP. TITLE: Archaeological Resources Assessment CONDUCTED FOR PROPOSED IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT PIPELINE RIGHT OF WAYS AREA: 26 li mi SITES: CA-ORA-556, ORA-349, ORA-383, ORA-344, ORA-382, ORA ORA-647, ORA-808, ORA 809, ORA-810, ORA-811, ORA-806 t ORA-807 QUADNAME: TUSTIN EL TORO MEMO: o., ny IC ID#: OR1357 DATE: 1993 PAGES: 13 AUTHOR: WHITE, ROBERT S., LAURIE S. WHITE FIRM: Archaeological Associates °l TITLE: AN EXTENDED LITERATURE and RECORDS SEARCH ADDRESSING PREHISTORICAL Archaeological ResourceS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES of • ' THE U.S. MARINE CORPS AM STATION (MCAS), TUSTIN ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 1500 ac SITES: CA-ORA-353, ORA-373, ORA-381 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: 11 ? IC ID#: OR1371 DATE: 1993 PAGES: 13 ' AUTHOR: Paden, Beth and Fran Govean l FIRM: Petra Resources, Inc. w TITLE: An Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment ofthe Proposed Planning Area 10Project, City of Irvine, Orange County AREA: 100 ac SITES: QUADNANM: Tustin MEMO: . Bibliography for Orange County ID#: OR1413 DATE: 1993 PAGES: 25 1 AUTHOR: WHITNEY DESAUTELS, NANCY A., DAVID A. KICE FIRM: SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE SURVEYS, INC. TITLE: Cultural Resources Assessment of THE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT ALTERNATE AQUEOUS WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY SITES, Orange County, California AREA: 25 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: EL TORO TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1628 DATE: 1994 PAGES: 19 AUTHOR: unnamed FIRM: LSA Associates, Inc. TITLE: CulturalResources Assesstment- Warner Avenue Bridge Over Peters Canyon Channel, Tustin, •Orange County, California AREA: 482 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR1902 DATE: 1985 AUTHOR: FIRM: CALTRANS TITLE: H9istoric Property Survey 070RA-133 AREA: 1300 ft SITES: QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: 0 PAGES: 16 Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR2200 DATE: 2000 PAGES: 54 AUTHOR: Atchley, Sara M. FIRM: Jones & Stokes TITLE: Culnual Resources Investigation for the Nextlink Fiber Optic Project, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, California AREA: SITES: QUADNAME: Pasadena, Burbank, Los Angeles, Hollywood, Anaheim, Newport, Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR2235 DATE: 2000 PAGES: 11 AUTHOR: Duke, Curt FIRM: LSA TITLE: Revised Cultural Resource assessment for AT&T Wireless Services Facility Number C940.1, County of Orange, CA AREA: <I ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC EM: OR2237 DATE: 2000 PAGES: 13 AUTHOR: Duke, Curt FIRM: LSA TITLE: Cultural Resource Assessment for AT&T Wireless Services Facility Number C580.4, County of Orange, CA AREA: <1 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: E • Bibliography for Orange County IC M#: OR2239 DATE: 2000 PAGES: 12 AUTHOR: Duke, Curt FIRM: LSA TITLE: Cultural resource Assessment for Pacific Bell Mobile Services Facilities CM 810-01 and CM 814-01, County of Orange, CA AREA: <1 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: is IC ID#: OR2249 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 3 AUTHOR: Schilz, Allan J. FIRM: Archaeological Resource Management Corporation TITLE: Archaeological Survey Conducted for Village 10 City of Irvine AREA: 40 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR246 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 7 AUTHOR: Cotrell, Marie G. Y FIRM: TITLE: REPORT of Archaeological ResourceS Assessment CONDUCTED FOR THE IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX -WEST ' AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-121, ORA-287 s QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: j Bibliography for Orange County IC Ill#: OR252 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 50 AUTHOR: Desautels, Roger J. FIRM: Scientiiqc Resource Survey, Inc. TITLE: Cultural ResourceS REPORT- PELRvriNARY Assessment ON THE PROPOSED SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED EROSION and SEDIMENTARY CONTROL SYSTEM IN HICKS CANYON, HICKS CANYON WASH, RATTLESNAKE CREEK WASH, SAN DIEGO CREEK, and THE SAN JOAQUIN MARSH LOCATED IN ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-115, ORA-116, ORA-121, ORA-195, ORA-196, CA-ORA-197 ORA-284, ORA-478, ORA-511, ORA-513, CA-ORA-719 QUADNAME: EL TORO TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR286 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 250 AUTHOR: BEAN, LOWELL JOHN FIRM: CULTURE SYSTEMS RESEARCH, INC. TITLE: Cultural ResourceS and THE HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINE FROM SAN ONOPRE TO SANTIAGO SUBSTATION AND BLACK STAR CANYON AREA: 68 li mi SITES: CA-ORA-I, ORA-2, ORA-3, ORA-4, ORA-5, ORA-7, ORA-11, ORA-12, ORA-13, ORA-14, ORA-15, ORA-16, ORA-17, ORA-18, ORA-19, ORA-20, ORA-21, ORA-22, ORA-23, ORA-24, ORA-25, ORA 26, ORA-27, ORA-28, ORA-29, ORA-30, ORA-31, ORA 32, ORA-33, ORA-34, ORA-37, QUADNAME: BLACK STAR CANYON CANADA GOBERNADORA MEMO: F Bibliography for Orange County ID#: OR609 DATE: 1981 PAGES: 15 AUTHOR: DESAUTELS, MARK FIRM: SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE SURVEYS, INC. TITLE: Cultural Resources REPORT ON 5 PROPOSED HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE SITES LOCATED IN NORTHERN ORANGE COUNTY, AREA: 51 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin Anaheim MEMO: IC ID#: OR684 DATE: AUTHOR: Cottrell, Mane FIRM: Archaeological RESOURCE D TITLE: A Cultural ResourceS Assessment C RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT j •ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMEN AREA: 110 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR746 DATE: AUTHOR: Bissell, Ronald M. FIRM: RMW TITLE: Cultural Resources Assessment MI) AREA, ORANGE COUNTY, CALI AREA: SITES: CA-ORA-1059 QUADNAME: El Toro MEMO: 0 Bibliography for Orange County IC H)9: OR752 DATE: 1984 PAGES: 250 • AUTHOR: Mason, Roger D. FIRM: SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE SURVEYS, INC. TITLE: EASTERN CORRIDOR ALIGNMENT STUDY, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIPORNIA; VOLUME 11: PREHISTORY AND HISTORY AREA: 16640 ac SITES: CA-ORA-184, ORA-303, ORA-304, ORA-321, ORA-513, ORA-541, ORA-546, ORA-547, ORA-556, ORA-557, ORA-584 ORA-585, ORA-586, ORA-587, ORA 588, ORA-589, ORA-590 ORA-591, ORA-592, ORA-626, ORA-770, ORA-771, ORA-772 ORA-793, ORA-794, ORA-795, ORA-818, CRA-819, ORA-820 QUADNAME: BLACK. STAR CANYON EL TORO MEMO: IC Eft OR814 DATE: 1982 PAGES: 20 AUTHOR: Romani, John FIRM: CALTRANS • TITLE: HISTORIC PROPERTY Survey ROUTE I-5 SANTA ANA TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR, ROUTE 405 IN ORANGE COUNTY TO ROUTE 605 IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY PM 21,30/4438; 0.0016,85 AREA: 301i mi SITES: none QUADNAME: El Toro Tustin MEMO: • Bibliography for Orange County -i • IC ID#: OR847 DATE: 1985 PAGES: 56 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth FIRM: LSA TITLE: Archaeological Resource INVENTORY City of IRVINE and ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AREA: 10500 ac SITES: CA-ORA-161, ORA-349, ORA-361, ORA-383, ORA-478, ORA-494, ORA-495, ORA-496, ORA-499, ORA-545, ORA-601, ORA-734, _ ORA-735, ORA-767, ORA-803, ORA-804, ORA-805, ORA-806, ORA-807, ORA-808, QUADNAME: Tustin Black Star Canyon MEMO: ,l J IC ID#: OR883 DATE: 1987 PAGES: 15 AUTHOR: Bissell, Ronald M. FIRM: RMW PALEO ASSOC. TITLE: Cultural Resources RECONNAISSANCE of Tentative TRACT 13053, A 25.2 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 25 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR897 DATE: 1988 PAGES: 5 l AUTHOR: Padon, Beth FIRM, LSA Associates TITLE: LETTER REPORT ON Archeological MONITORING FOR TRACT #13094 AREA: SUES: none ` QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR996 DATE' 1990 PAGES: 3 AUTHOR: 7ertberg,-Patricia FIRM: LSA Associates, INC. TITLE: REPORT ON Archaeological MONITORING SERVICES AT TRACTSS 13901 AND 13990, CITY OF TUSTIN, FOR AKINS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY: DR. MR. HAALAND AREA: SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: C11 • 0 Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1053 DATE: 1990 PAGES: 15 AUTHOR: Bissell, Ronald M. FIRM: R1vIW PALEO Associates, INC. TITLE: Cultural Resources RECONNAISSANCE of A 16 ACRE PARCEL ON THE MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, TUSTIN, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 16 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1282 DATE: 1992 PAGES: 21 AUTHOR: BABAL, MARIANNE, JANE ROSENTHAL, AND BETH PADON FIRM: LSA Associates,INC. TITLE: HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT CARETAKER HOUSE BRYAN ROAD, IRVINE CALIFORNIA AREA: 2 ac SITES: QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1355 DATE: 1984 PAGES: 7 AUTHOR: Cottrell, Marie FIRM: Archaeological RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CORPORATION TITLE: A Cultural Resources Assessment CONDUCTED FOR THE EXTENSION of PROJECT SITE A MARINE CORPS AIR STATION (H) TUSTIN AREA: 70 ac SITES: QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: Bibliography for Orange County , IC ID#: OR1396 DATE: 1994 PAGES: 20 . ..� AUTHOR: Steve Conkling FIRM: LSA Associates, Inc. TITLE: Cultural Resources Assessment - Warner Avenue Bridge Over Peters Canyon Channel, Tustin, -� Orange County, California AREA: 3 ac SITES: CA-ORA-373 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: ,I r .h IC IDii: OR1413 DATE: 1993 PAGES: 25 AUTHOR: WHITNEY DESAUTELS, NANCY A., DAVID A. KICE FIRM: SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE SURVEYS, INC. TITLE: Cultural ResourceS Assessment of THE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT ALTERNATE AQUEOUS WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY SITES, Orange County, California AREA: 25 no SITES. none • QUADNAME: EL TORO TUSTIN MEMO: IC DNF: OR1491 DATE: 1996 PAGES: 6 -, AUTHOR: MCLEAN, D. FIRM: LSA Associates, INC. TITLE: HISTORIC PROPERTY Survey REPORT - NEGATIVE FINDINGS NEWPORT/ STATE ROUTE-55 PROJECT, CITY OF TUSTIN, ORANGE COUNTY, CA. AREA: 90 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: j Bibliography for Orange County •IC ID#: OR1508 DATE: 1996 PAGES: 2 AUTHOR: Jertberg, Patricia FIRM: Petra Resources Inc. TITLE: Archaeological Monitoring Letter Report for Mini-U Storage Project, Warner Avenue at Jamboree Road, City of Tustin and City of Irvine AREA: 8 ac SITES: QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR1527 DATE: 1996 PAGES: 5 AUTHOR: Demcak, Carol R. FIRM: Archaeological Resource Management Corporation TITLE: Report of Archaeological Survey for L.A. Cellular Site #475.2, 1001 1/2, Edinger, Tustin, Orange County AREA: 1 ac SITES: QUADNAME: Tustin 75 MEMO: J IC ID#: OR1587 DATE: 1997 PAGES: 5 AUTHOR: Demcak, Carol R. FIRM: Archaeological Resource Management Corporation T3 TITLE: Report of an Archaeological Assessment for Civic Center Park, City of Irvine, Orange County, California •; a AREA: 25 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: i Bibliography for Orange County IC IDM OR1840 DATE: 1994 PAGES: 19 AUTHOR: Unknown FIRM: LSA TITLE: Cultural Resources Assessment -Warner Avenue Bridge Over Peters Canyon Channel, Tustin, Orange County, California AREA: <lac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: -3 3 x t� IC ID#: OR1844 DATE. 1991 PAGES: 356 i AUTHOR: Web, Lois .. FIRM: P&D Technologies TITLE: Request for Finding of Effect -for the Proposed Eastern Transportation Corridor AREA: SITES: 30.000303,30-000770,30-001068,30.001238,30-001246,30-161704,30-161858,30- 151776,30-000478,30-001241 QUADNAME: El Toro, Orange, Tustin MEMO: aG IC IDN: OR1856 DATE: AUTHOR: Ashby, Gladyce FIRM: -, TITLE: Historical and Unusual Trees i AREA: SITES: .r QUADNAME: MEMO: Unmappable 7j .S PAGES: • • Bibliography for Orange County • IC ID#: OR1902 DATE: 1985 AUTHOR: FIRM: CALTRANS TITLE: H9istoric Property Survey 070RA-133 AREA: 1300 8 SITES: "z QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: PAGES: 16 IC ID#: OR1973 DATE: 1999 PAGES: 7 AUTHOR: Duke, Curt FIRM: LSA Associates TITLE: Cultural Resource Assessment for Pacific Bell Mobile Services Facility CM 485-01, in the County of Orange, California AREA: < 1 ac SITES: none QUADNAN E: Tustin MEMO: IC IN: OR1986 DATE: 1999 PAGES: 6 AUTHOR: Duke, Curt v FIRM: LSA Associates TITLE: Cultural Resource Assessment for Pacific Bell Mobile Services Facility CM 485-02, County of Orange, California AREA: < 1 ac SITES: none .•a QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: fi i Bibliography for Orange County IC Mfl: OR2004 DATE: 1991 PAGES: 75 AUTHOR: Anonymous FIRM: McClelland Consultants (WEST), INC. TITLE: Environmental Analysis of Hazardous Waste Disposal and Underground Tanks Cultural Resources Real Estate Exchange between Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), Tustin and Orange County, California AREA: 120 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin, Newport MEMO: IC DDf: OR2023 DATE: 1999 PAGES: 13 AUTHOR: Drover, Christopher FIRM: The Meth Companies TITLE: A CulturalResources Inwentory, for Harvard Square Irvine, California AREA: 25 so. SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR2256 DATE: 1999 PAGES: 90 AUTHOR: Demonic, Carol R. FIRM: Archaeological Resource Management Corporation TITLE: CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS FOR ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISCTRICTS AREA: 340 ae SITES: 30-000277, 300, 352, 353, 381,1352, 83, 86,144, 84,289, 85, 87, 288 QUADNAME: La Habra Yorba Linda, Los Alamitos, Anaheim, Orange, Seal Beach, Newport Beach, Tustin MEMO: 0 • • Bibliography for Orange County ID#: OR314 DATE: 1978 PAGES: 3 AUTHOR: DESAUTELS, ROGER FIRM: Scientific Resource Survey, Inc. TITLE: Archaeological Survey REPORT ON 2.875 ACRES LOCATED ON MAIN STREET, IRVINE, COUNTY OF ORANGE AREA: 3 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR373 DATE: 1980 PAGES: AUTHOR: Unknown FIRM: Archaeological Planning Collaborative TITLE: An Archaeological Records Search and Reconnaissance Survey Laguna Heights Property Orange County, California AREA: 0 SITES: 30-000873,30-000477 QUADNAME: Laguna Beach MEMO: IC ID#: OR438 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 15 AUTHOR: Unknown FIRM: Archaeological Planning Collaborative TITLE: Historic Properly Survey Moulton Parkway/Irvine Center Drive Cities of Tustin and Irvine AREA: 21i mi SITES: QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: • Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR519 DATE: 1980 PAGES: 14 AUTHOR: Unknown FIRM: Archaeological Research Inc TITLE: Limited Testing on CA-ORA-373 Home Improvement Center City of Irvine, CA AREA: 0 no SITES: 30-000373 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR808 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 14 AUTHOR: UNKNOWN FIRM: CULP/WESNER/CULP TITLE: FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REGIONAL DOMESTIC WATER STORAGE AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES FROM DIEMER/SAC AND WELLFIELD SYSTEMS TO EXISTING DISTRIBUTION NETWORK AREA: 181imi SITES: 30-000349,30-000383,30.000344,30-000382 QUADNAME: EL TORO, SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO MEMO: OTHER RESOURCES LISTED BY NAME AND "ARMC#" IC ID#: OR906 DATE: 1988 PAGES: 43 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth and Pat Jertherg FIRM: LSA TITLE: Cultural ResourceS REPORT FOR THE SAN DIEGO CREEK DRAINAGE BASIN PROJECT LEVEL FACILITIES ORANGE COUNTY, AREA: 192 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: 0 • 0 Bibliography for Orange County * ID#: OR969 DATE: 1989 PAGES: 15 AUTHOR: Jertberg, Pat FIRM: LSA Associates TITLE: Cultural Resource Assessment JAMBOREE ROAD WIDENING AREA: 2 Ii mi SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN EFi IC ID#: OR997 DATE: 1990 PAGES: 3 AUTHOR: Jertberg, Patricia FIRM: LSA Associates TITLE: Archaeological MONITORING FOR Tentative PARCEL NO. 88-151, LOTS 1, A, 3, 4, AND 5 AREA: SITES: none &NAME: TUSTIN MEMO: Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1085 DATE: 1991 PAGES: 4 AUTHOR: Jertberg, Patricia FIRM' LSA TITLE: Archaeological MONITORING FOR THE STATE FARM PROJECT AREA AREA: 3. ac SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: c i #� ICID#: OR1096 DATE: 1990 PAGES: 2 AUTHOR: Breece, William H. FIRM: LSA TITLE: Archaeological MONITORING AT THE IUSD PROJECT SITE, IRVINE AREA: 1 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: . I q IC ID#: OR1099 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 21 AUTHOR: Cooley, Theodore FIRM: Archaeological RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CORP. TITLE: Archaeological ResourceS Assessment CONDUCTED FOR PROPOSED IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT PIPELINE RIGHT OF WAYS # AREA: 261i mi SITES: CA-ORA-556, ORA-349, ORA-383, ORA-344, ORA-382, ORA ORA-647, ORA-808, ORA-809, ORA-810, ORA-811, ORA-806 ORA-807 a QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: ELTORO T F Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1127 DATE: 1991 PAGES: 25 AUTHOR: ROSENTHAL, JANE FIRM: LSA Associates, INC. TITLE: PAST TO PRESENT: Cultural and SCIENTIFIC ResourceS, AN ARCHIVAL INVENTORY IRVINE RANCH OPEN SPACE RESERVE ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 16000 ac SITES: CA-ORA-79, ORA-184, ORA-273, ORA-310, ORA-311, ORA-312, ORA-345, ORA-384, ORA-386, ORA-476, ORA-494, ORA-495, ORA-496, ORA-501, ORA-502, ORA-523, ORA-524, ORA-547, ORA-557, ORA-705, ORA-706, ORA-707, ORA-709, ORA-720, ORA-731, QUADNAME: BLACK STAR CANYON EL TORO MEMO: PAGES: 30 IC ID#: OR1164 DATE: 1991 AUTHOR: EVANS, STUART A. FIRM: RMW PALEO Associates TITLE: A Cultural ResourceS RECONNAISSANCE of THE SAN DIEGO CREEK EVMROVEMENT/BARRANCA PARKWAY CONNECTION, APPROXIMATELY 70 ACRES IN IRVINE, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AREA: 70 ac SITES: CA-ORA-543, ORA-1304 AND ISOLATES QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: j i J Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR1214 DATE: 1986 PAGES: 43 AUTHOR: Del Chado, Kathleen C,and Merle G. Cottrell FIRM: ARMC TITLE: REPORT of CulturahSCIENTIFiC ResourceS Survey CONDUCED FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL STUDY AREA (ALIGNMENTS 72A, 73, 73A, AND 83A)EASTERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AREA: 9 R mi SITES: CA-ORA-1237, ORA-1246, ORA-601 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: i .y I V I I I f IC Ift OR1402 DATE: 1994 PAGES: 19 AUTHOR: BROCK, JAMS FIRM: Archaeological Advisory Group TITLE: Cultural ResourceS AssessmentFOR THE IRVINB DESALTBR PROJECT, IRVINE, CALIFORNIA AREA: 62 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: EL TORO TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR1419 DATE: 1994 AUTHOR: STRUDWICK, IVAN H., AND BRAD STURM FIRM: LSA Associates, INC. PAGES: 49 TITLE: Cultural Resource Assessment- PLANNING AREA 12, City of 1 IRVINE, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 244 no SITES: CA-ORA-543, ORA-1304 QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: • is i Bibliography for Orange County 0ID#: OR164 DATE: 1977 PAGES: 6 AUTHOR: Desautels, Roger L FIRM: SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE SURVEYS, INC. TITLE: Archaeological Survey REPORT ON A PARCEL of Land (S.C. #36), LOT #26 - TRACT #917 LOCATED IN THE PANORAMA HEIGHTS AREA of ORANGE COUNTY AREA: '1 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: ORANGE MEMO: IC ID#: OR1744 DATE: 1998 PAGES: 9 AUTHOR: Bonner, Wayne H. FIRM: Chambers Group TITLE: Cultural Resources Records Search and Literature Review Report for a Pacific Bell Mobile Services Telecommunications Facility: CM 390-19 in the City of Santa Ana, California AREA:.25 ac • SITES: none QUADNAME: Orange MEMO: IC ID#: OR1788 AUTHOR: Brechbiel, Brant A. DATE: 1998 PAGES: 22 FIRM: Chambers Group, Inc. TITLE: Cultural Resources Records Search and Literature Review Report For a Pacific Bell Mobile Services Telecommunications Facility: CM 202-03 In the City of Irvine, California AREA:.25 ac SITES: none 9 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: • A. Bibliography for Orange County ;i IC EN, OR2027 DATE: 1998 PAGES: 39 . „z AUTHOR: Drover, Christopher t FIRM: The Keith Companies, Inc. TITLE: A Cultural Resources Inventory of Planning Area 17, Irvine, California AREA: 700 ac SITES: 30-000161,-495,-499,-904,-1011,-1069,-1424,-1525,-1526,-1527,-1528 _1 t� QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC IDN: OR2261 DATE: 2000 PAGES: 23 AUTHOR: Brown, Joan C. FIRM: RMW Paleo Associates TITLE: Historic Property Survey Report for 1405/Jeffery Road Trail Overcrossing Project AREA: 3 ac SITES: 30-000178, 342, 378, 379, 384, 386, 543, 822,1304,1424,1525,1526 QUADNAME: Tustin • MEMO: IC IDN: OR233 DATE, 1977 PAGES: 30 AUTHOR: Cottrell, Marie G. FIRM: TITLE: Archaeological Survey REPORT FOR VILLAGE 12 and VILLAGE 14 (ORA-508 AND ORA-543) AREA: i SITES: CA-ORA-543, isolated artifacts 7 QUADNAME: Tustin A MEMO: I J J Bibliography for Orange County *ID#: OR286 DATE: 1979 PAGES: 250 AUTHOR: BEAN, LOWELL JOHN FIRM: CULTURE SYSTEMS RESEARCH, INC. TITLE: Cultural Resources and THE HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINE FROM SAN ONOFRE TO SANTIAGO SUBSTATION AND BLACK STAR CANYON AREA: 68 li mi SITES: CA-ORA-1, ORA-2, ORA-3, ORA-4, ORA-5, ORA-7, ORA-11, ORA-12, ORA-13, ORA-14, ORA-15, ORA-16, ORA-17, ORA-18, ORA-19, ORA-20, ORA-21, ORA-22, ORA-23, ORA-24, ORA-25, ORA-26, ORA-27, ORA-28, ORA-29, ORA-30, ORA-31, ORA-32, ORA-33, ORA-34, ORA-37, QUADNAME: BLACK STAR CANYON CANADA GOBERNADORA MEMO: IC ID#: OR48 DATE: 1977 AUTHOR: Whitney, Nancy A. FIRM: ARI • TITLE: Archaeological REPORT: CHAPMAN BYPASS F AREA: 300 ac SITES: CA-ORA-541, ORA-643, ORA-644 QUADNAME: ORANGE MEMO: IC ID#: OR486 DATE: 1976 AUTHOR: Mitchell, Laura Lee FIRM: TITLE: Woodbridge Observer Survey Project Report on F( By the Pacific Coast Archaeological Society AREA: 200 ac SITES: 30-000373 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: Numerous artifacts discussed - no map given 0 Bibliography for Orange County IC ID#: OR754 DATE: 1984 PAGES: 90 AUTHOR: PADON, EETH FIRM: LSA TITLE: Cultural -Resource Assessment, IRVINE CENTER PROJECT, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AREA: 400 no SITES: 1 TENANT RESIDENCE (1900'S) AND 18901S DUMPSITE QUADNAME: EL TORO TUSTIN MEMO: IC ID#: OR761 DATE: 1981 PAGES: 13 AUTHOR: Anonymous FIRM' LSA TITLE: Cultural Resource Assessment Village 12 Development Site Irvine, California AREA: 274 ac SITES: CA-Ora-543 QUADNAME: Tustin MEMO: IC ID#: OR8 DATE: 1973 PAGES: 4 AUTHOR: Gothold, Jane and Maguire, John FIRM: Pacific Coast Archaeological Society, Inc. TITLE: Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Survey Along the North Side of the Sea Diego Freeway AREA: 50 R. SITES: None QUADNAME: Tustin Ei Toro MEMO: 0 Bibliography for Orange County OID#: OR828 DATE: 1986 PAGES: 3 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth FIRM: LSA TITLE: Archaeological MONITORING FOR THE FAIRHAVEN ESTATES PROJECT, TRACT # 12489 AREA: 10 ac SITES: none QUADNAME: ORANGE MEMO: IC ID#: OR847 DATE: 1985 PAGES: 56 AUTHOR: Padon, Beth FIRM: LSA TITLE: Archaeological Resource INVENTORY City of IRVINE and ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AREA: 10500 ac • SITES: CA-ORA-161, ORA-349, ORA-361, ORA-383, ORA478, ORA494, ORA-495, ORA-496, ORA-499, ORA-545, ORA-6n1 nuA-714 ORA-735, ORA-767, ORA4 ORA-805, ORA-806, ORA4 QUADNAME: Tustin Black Star Canyon MEMO: 0 Bibliography for Orange County IC 10D#: OR867 DATE: 1987 PAGES: 1 AUTHOR: Brock, James FIRM' Archaeological Advisory Group TITLE: Archaeological MINITORING AT TBE CENTERSTONE PLAZA PROJECT, SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CULVER AND BARRANCA, IRVINE, CALIFORNIA AREA: SITES: none QUADNAME: TUSTIN MEMO: E • 0 • ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE STUDY FOR THE PROPOSED SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED NTS IN ORANGE COUNTY Project File 368-02 February 28, 2003 E Prepared for.• BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Wieland Associates, Inc. 23276 South Pointe Drive, Suite 114 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Tet 9491829-6722 Fax: 9491829-6670 www.wielandassoc.com • 0 Table of Contents EXECUTIVESUMMARY..............................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION/PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................ 3 NOISEDESCRIPTORS................................................................................................... 5 DECIBELS ....................... A -WEIGHTING ............... ....................................... 5 NOISECRITERIA........................................................................................................... 7 COUNTY OF ORANGE NOISE ORDINANCE ......................................... VI CITY OF IRVINE NOISE ORDINANCE................................................................................. 8 CITY OF LAKE FOREST NOISE ORDINANCE...................................................................... 9 CITYOF NEWPORT BEACH............................................................................................... 9 CITY OF ORANGE NOISE ORDINANCE............................................................................ 10 CITY OF TUSTIN NOISE ORDINANCE.............................................................................. 10 WILDLIFE HABITAT PROTECTION REGULATIONS........................................................... 11 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE..........................................................................11 EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT..........................................................................12 • NOISE -SENSITIVE RECEPTORS....................................................................................... 12 AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS................................................................ 13 AMBIENTNOISE LEVELS................................................................................................ 16 PROJECT -RELATED NOISE LEVELS.....................................................................16 CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES........................................................................................... 16 MAINTENANCEACTIVITIES............................................................................................ 18 PUMPINGACTIVITIES..................................................................................................... 18 ASSESSMENTOF IMPACT........................................................................................ 20 MITIGATIONMEASURES......................................................................................... 20 REFERENCES................................................................................................................ 21 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location of Project -Level NTS Sites ............................................... 4 Figure 2. Common Noise Sources and A -Weighted Noise Levels ..........................6 Figure 3. Location of Noise Measurement Positions ........................................ 14 Figure 4. Summary of Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ...................17 LIST OF APPENDICES • Appendix A. Ambient Noise Measurements BONTERRA CONSULTING Project File 368-02 • Executive Summary This report identifies and assesses the potential impacts associated with the construction, operation and maintenance of the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Program proposed by the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). When completed, the system will consist of 31 facilities located throughout the watershed. This report examines 12 of these facilities at the project level of analysis. The remaining 19 are existing or will be assessed at a program level. A number of noise descriptors developed by various State, Federal and local agencies have been reviewed for this study. Based on these reviews, the following thresholds of significance have been established for the project: • A significant impact will be assessed if the noise level generated by a pump station exceeds 45 dB(A) at a residence, apartment, hospital or convalescent home; 50 dB(A) at a school, daycare center, church or library; or 60 dB(A) at a wildlife habitat; or, • Construction and maintenance activities occur before 7:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, before 9:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a Federal holiday; or • Construction and maintenance activities generate a 1-hour Leq in excess of 60 dB(A) at a wildlife habitat during the nesting, breeding and dispersal period of protected • species. For this study, the following land uses are considered noise -sensitive: residences, hospitals, convalescent homes, schools, daycare centers, churches, libraries, and wildlife habitats. With the exception of Sites 53 and 13, noise -sensitive land uses are in the vicinity of each project -level NTS facility. • The proposed NTS sites are currently exposed to ambient noise generated by traffic, aircraft flights, train movements, and commercial/industrial activities in the area. In order to identify the existing noise environment, measurements were obtained at ten noise -sensitive locations in the vicinity of the 12 project -level sites. The results of the measurements indicate median (L50) noise levels of 38 to 59 dB(A) during the daytime, and 31 to 36 dB(A) during the nighttime. Implementation of the project will require construction at 9 of the 12 project -level NTS sites. (There will be no construction at NTS Sites 46, 13 and 39, which are existing facilities.) The length of the construction period will range from about three to 25 weeks, depending on the NTS site. All construction is scheduled to occur between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, and between 9:00 and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays (if necessary). In addition, at NTS Sites 25, 27 and 62, which are near habitats that may contain special status species, the construction will be scheduled with consideration to peak mating and breeding months. Therefore, it is concluded that construction activities will not create a significant impact. BONTERRA CONSULTING Project File 368.02 The ongoing operation of the NTS facilities will consist of periodic maintenance activities at each site, and pumping operations at sites 46, 53, 56, and 62. It is noted that maintenance activities for existing NTS sites 13, 39 and 46 will not change from current levels. Depending on the NTS site and type of activity, maintenance will occur on a monthly, quarterly, or annual basis, as well as on an as -needed basis (e.g., after a storm). As with construction, maintenance activities will only occur between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday (if necessary). In addition, at NTS Sites 25, 27 and 62, maintenance activities will be scheduled with consideration to peak mating and breeding months at the nearby habitats. Therefore, it is concluded that maintenance activities will not create a significant impact. At NTS Sites 46, 53, 56 and 62, pumps will be used to move water into or out of the facility. Based on manufacturers' data for similar pumps, it is estimated that they generate a sound power level of about 72 dB(A). Assuming these pumps will run continuously for at least an hour, an analysis was conducted to estimate the noise levels that will be experienced at the nearby noise -sensitive receptors. The results of the analysis indicate noise levels that are below the thresholds of significance established for the study. Therefore, the impact of the noise from the pump stations is not significant. Since there are no significant impacts associated with the proposed project, no mitigation measures are required. HONTERM CONSULTING Project File36M2 • 0 Introduction/Project Description The purpose of this study is to identify and assess potential noise impacts associated with the construction, operation and maintenance of the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Plan prepared by the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). The Plan, consisting of constructed water quality treatment wetlands and natural biofilters, provides for the natural treatment of low -flow and initial storm runoff generated within the San Diego Creek and portions of the Santiago Creek watersheds. Three types of natural treatment systems will be constructed at 31 facilities throughout the watershed: Type I, Type II, and Type III. The 31 facilities considered in this study are summarized as follows: Site Type Project- or Program -Le el? Jurisdiction 25 I Project Lake Forest 26 II Project Irvine 27 I Project Irvine 46 I Project Irvine 53 I Project Uninco orated 54 I Project Irvine 55 II Project Tustin 56 III Project Oran e 62 I Project Irvine 64 II Project Irvine/Tustin 67 I Program Irvine 13 III Project Uninco orated 39 III Project Irvine 6A-6H I Pro ram Unincorporated 9 III Program Unincorporated 10 I Program Unincorporated 11 III Program Unincorporated 12A-12G I Program Unincorporated 61 I Program Unincorporated 16 III Program unincorporated 18 III Program Unincorporated 31 III Program Irvine 49 I Program Irvine 32 I Program Irvine 42 I Program Irvine 22 I Program Irvine 50 I Program I Irvine 51 I Program Irvine 52 I Program Irvine 68 III Prom Irvine 69 III Program Irvine Figure 1 identifies the location of the 1 r4 +v � ra.� mvu�ne� t Rad e 7 '= 1 BRAW. I. _ �r TUSTIN SANTA = k a- ANA A, 4 •I . MARINE :21AfF ORPS 0a 4p axrf+ua; _as . <4° ' �7USTIN .:_._.� q4n IRVINE EL Tow JOHN 1?A+,','E .`' U.S. AIAR/NE CORPS 4'" dy AfRlrlFr �� ` AIR ' ,STi; WoV -_ IRVINE.' Aq LAKE JORES IRVINE X EL TOR �r cxCtie CORONA s r' S'$ LAGUNADEL P AR p 4 �� O L • .'.r r - \� - EMERALD -- BAY N7ELAND Location of Project -Level NTS Sites 1 ASSOCUTES, INC. !. 4 Noise Descriptors The following sections briefly describe the noise descriptors that will be used throughout this study: Decibels Sound pressures can be measured in units called microPascals (µPa). However, expressing sound levels in terms of µPa would be very cumbersome since it would require a wide range of very large numbers. For this reason, sound pressure levels are described in logarithmic units of ratios of actual sound pressures to a reference pressure squared. These units are called bels. In order to provide a finer resolution, a bel is subdivided into 10 decibels, abbreviated dB. Since decibels are logarithmic units, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted by ordinary arithmetic means. For example, if one equipment item produces a sound pressure level of 70 dB, two items operating simultaneously would not produce 140 dB. In fact, they would combine to produce 73 dB. A -Weighting Sound pressure level alone is not a reliable indicator of loudness. The frequency or pitch • of a sound also has a substantial effect on how humans will respond. While the intensity of the sound is a purely physical quantity, the loudness or human response depends on the characteristics of the human ear. Human hearing is limited not only to the range of audible frequencies, but also in the way it perceives the sound pressure level in that range. In general, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 Hz and 5,000 Hz, and perceives both higher and lower frequency sounds of the same magnitude with less intensity. In order to approximate the frequency response of the human ear, a series of sound pressure level adjustments are applied to the sound measured by a sound level meter. The adjustments, or weighting network, are frequency dependent. The A -scale of a sound level meter approximates the frequency weighting of the average young ear when listening to most everyday sounds. When people make relative judgments of the loudness or annoyance of a sound, their judgments correlate well with the A -weighted noise levels of those sounds. A range of noise levels associated with common in- and outdoor activities is shown in Figure 2. The A -weighted noise level of traffic and other long-term noise -producing activities within and around a community varies considerably with time. Measurements of this varying noise are accomplished by documenting statistical values of the A -weighted level during representative periods within a specified portion of the day. The various • jurisdictions within the study area consider the following A -weighted noise measures: BONTERRA CONSULTING Project File 368-02 Threshold of pain 120 dB(A) Disco 110 dB(A) Textile mill Printing plant 100 dB(A) Jackhammer at 50' Power lawn mower at 5' 90 dB(A) Heavy truck at 50' Concrete mixer at 50' 80 dB(A) ..................... ••••i Inside car at 40 mph 10 dB change generally perceived as twice or halt as loud Vacuum cleaner at 10' 70 dB(A) ......••• ........ Car, 60 mph at 100' Conversational speech 60 dB(A) """""""""""""" IS dB change generally Large transformer at 501 ............................lpercetved as quite noticeable Urban residence 50 dB(A) ."..................... €3 dB change is generally barely Small town residence perceptible 40 dB(A) ............................. I dB change is generally not Soft whisper at 6' noticeable 30 dB(A) North rim of Grand Canyon 20 dB(A) 10 dB(A) Threshold of hearing 0 dB(A) WIELAND Common Noise Sources ASSOCIATES, INC. and A -Weighted Noise Levels 2 •I C11 • P. • • • L2 - The noise level exceeded for more than one minute during a 1-hour measurement period. L8 - The noise level exceeded for more than five minutes during a 1-hour measurement period. L25 - The noise level exceeded for more than 15 minutes during a 1-hour measurement period. L50 - The noise level exceeded for more than 30 minutes during a 1-hour measurement period. Ley - The energy equivalent (i.e., average) noise level that occurs during the measurement period (typically 1 hour). L= - The maximum noise level that occurs during the measurement period. Noise Criteria The following sections discuss the various noise criteria that have been considered in this study. County of Orange Noise Ordinance Sections 4-6-5 and 4-6-6 of the Orange County Code identify the following noise level standards for intrusion onto residential properties: Noise level that may not be exceeded for more than ... Exterior Interior Daytime, 7:00 am to 10:00 Pat Nighttime, 10:00 Pm to 7:00 am Daytime, 7:00 am to 10:00 Pm Nighttime, 10:00 Pm to 7:00 am 30 minutes in an hour 50 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A) 15 minutes in an hour (L25) 60 dB(A) 55 dB(A) 5 minutes in an hour L8 65 dB(A) 60 dB(A) 55 dB(A) 45 dB(A) I minute in an hour L2 70 dB A 65 dB A) 60 dB A) 50 dB A At anytime(Lmax 75 dB( B A B A 70 dB(A) 65 dB(A) 1 55 dB A In the event the alleged offensive noise consists entirely of impact noise, simple tone noise, speech, music, or any combination thereof, each of the above noise standards shall be reduced by 5 dB(A). It is noted that the County's noise ordinance standards apply only to intrusions onto residential property. There are no standards for intrusions onto commercial, industrial or public property. However, Section 4-6-8 states that it shall be unlawful to create any noise which causes the noise level at any school, hospital or church while the same is in use to exceed the noise limits as specified in the above table, or which noise level unreasonably interferes with the use of such institutions or which unreasonably disturbs or annoys patients in the hospital. Noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property are exempted from the noise ordinance, provided such activities do not take BONTERRA CONSULTING Project Pile 36M2 place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or is any time on Sunday or a Federal holiday. Noise sources associated with the maintenance of any real prop6rty are exempted from the noise ordinance, provided such activities take place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p,m. on any day except Sunday or a Federal holiday, or between the flours of 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Sunday or a Federal holiday. City of Irvine Noise Ordinance Section 6-8-204 of the City's Municipal Code identifies the following noise standards for various zones within the city: Exterior Noise Level Standards Noise Levels for a Period Not Exceeding . 30 15 5 1 Min.IHr. MinJHr. Min./Hr. MinJHr. Any Time Land Use L50 L25 L8 L2 Lmax Residential, Hospitals, Libraries, Churches, Schools 7 am-10 pm 55 dB(A) 60 dB(A) 65 dB(A) 70 dB(A) 75 dB(A) 10 m— 7 am 50 dB(A) 55 dB(A) 60 dB A 65 d8 A 70 dB A Professional Office & Public Institution 55 dB(A) 60 dB(A) 65 dB(A) 70 dB(A) 75 d8(A) Commercial 60 dB(A) 65 dB(A) 70 dB(A) 75 dB(A)80 dH A Industrial 70 dB(A) 75 dB(A) 80 dB(A) 85 dB(A)90 dH A Interior Noise Level Standards Noise Levels for a Period Not Exceeding ... 30 15 5 1 MinJHr. Min./Hr. MinJHr. Min./Hr. Any Time Land Use L50 L25 L8 L2 Lmax Residential, Hospitals, Libraries, Churches, Schools 7 am-10 pm - 55 dB(A) 60 dB(A) 65 dB(A) 10 m— 7 am 45 dB(A) 50 dB(A) 55 dB A Professional Office & y 55 dB(A) 60 dB(A) 65 dl3(A) Public Institution Commercial 55 dB(A) 60 dB(A) 65 dB A Industrial 55 dB(A) 60 dB(A) 65 dB A Each of the above noise standards shall be reduced by 5 dB(A) for impact, or predominant tone noise or for noise consisting of speech or music. Construction activities are exempted from the noise ordinance provided they occur between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Mondays through Fridays, and between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction activities shall be permitted outside of these . BONTERRA CONSULTING Project Pile 368-02 hours or on Sundays and Federal holidays. Trucks, vehicles and equipment that are ismaking or are involved with material deliveries, loading, or transfer of materials, equipment service, maintenance of any devices or appurtenances for or within any construction project in the City shall not be operated or driven on City streets outside of these hours or on Sundays and Federal holidays. • Maintenance of real property operations may exceed the noise standards between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on any day except Sundays, or between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sundays or a Federal holiday. City of Lake Forest Noise Ordinance The City of Lake Forest's noise ordinance is identical to that for the County of Orange, as described above. City of Newport Beach Chapter 10.26 of the City's Municipal Code identifies the following noise standards for various zones throughout the City: Land Use 15-Minute Avera a Noise Level, Le Exterior Interior 7 a.m. — 10 P.M. 10 P.M. — 7 a.m. 7 a.m. — 10 p.m. 10 P.M. — 7 a.m. Residential 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A) 45 dB(A) 40 dB(A) Commercial 65 dB(A) 60 dB(A) Residential portion of mixed -use 60 dB(A) 50 dB(A) 45 dB(A) 40 dB(A) Industrial, manufacturing 70 dB(A) 70 dB(A) The maximum noise level standard within the City is 20 dB(A) higher than the levels identified in the above table. It is unlawful for any person to create any noise which causes the noise level at any school, day care center, hospital or similar health care institution, church, library or museum while the same is in use, to exceed the noise standards identified in the above table for residential uses. No person shall, while engaged in construction, grading, demolition or any other related building activity, operate any tool, equipment or machine in a manner which produces loud noise that disturbs, or could disturb, a person of normal sensitivity who works or resides in the vicinity, on any weekday except between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., nor on any Saturday except between the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., nor on any Sunday or Federal holiday at any time. The maintenance, repair or improvement of any public work or facility by public employees, by any person or persons acting pursuant to a public works contract, or by any person or persons performing such work or pursuant to the direction of, or on behalf of, any public agency is exempt from these construction hours. BONTERRA CONSULTING Project File 368-02 City of Orange Noise Ordinance The noise ordinance for the City of Orange is identical to that of the County of Orange, as described above. City of Tustin Noise Ordinance Chapter 6 of the City's Municipal Code identifies the following noise standards for various zones within the city: Exterior Noise Level Standards Noise Levels for a Period Not Exceedin . 30 5 1 MinJHr. MinJHr. Min./Hr. Any Time Land Use 50 L8 2 Lmax Residential EdB(A) r60 7 am-10 pm 55 dB(A)65 dB(A) 70 dB(A) 75 dB(A) 10 m-7 am 50 dB A 60 dB(A) 65 dB(A) 70 dB(A) Hospitals, convalescent homes, 55 dB(A) 60 dB(A) 65 dB(A) 70 dB(A) 75 dB(A) schools, libraries, churches Commercial 60 dB(A) 65 dB(A) 70 dB(A) 75 dB(A) 80 dB(A) Industrial 70 dB(A) 75 dB(A) 80 dB(A) 85 dB(A) 90 tiB A) Interior Noise Level Standards Noise Levels for a Period Not Exceedin . 30 15 5 1 MlnJHr. Min./Hr. MinJHr. MinJHr. Any Time Land Use L50 L25 L8 L2 Lmax Residential 7 am-10 pm - 55 dB(A) 60 dB(A) 65 dB(A) 10 m— 7 am 45 dB A 50 dB(A) 55 dB(A) Each of the above noise standards shall be reduced by 5 dB(A) for impact, or simple tone noise or for noise consisting of speech or music. Construction activities are exempted from the noise ordinance provided they occur between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Mondays through Fridays, and between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Trucks, vehicles and equipment that are making or are involved with material deliveries, loading, or transfer of materials, equipment service, maintenance of any devices or appurtenances to any construction project in the City shall not be operated on or adjacent to construction sites outside of these flours. Pile drivers, hammers, etc., the operation of a pile driver, power shovel, pneumatic hammer, grading and excavating machinery, paving equipment, or other appliance, the use of which is attended by loud or unusual noise is prohibited between any and all hours 10 BONTBRRA CONSULTING Project Pile 36M2 • E on Sundays and Federal holidays, between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, and between 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. on Saturdays. The use and operation of property maintenance equipment, the'use of which is attended by loud or unusual noise, is prohibited in residentially zoned areas any and all hours on Sundays and Federal holidays, before 7:00 a.m. and after 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and before 9:00 a.m. and after 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. In commercial and industrially zoned areas, the use of property maintenance equipment is prohibited any and all hours on Sundays and Federal holidays, before 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and before 9:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Wildlife Habitat Protection Regulations Construction and maintenance noise generated by the proposed project could potentially have a significant adverse effect on nesting grounds in the habitat adjacent to Sites 25, 27 and 62. Based on a study conducted by the San Diego Association of Govemments (SANDAG) in 1991, it was theoretically estimated that average noise levels (Leq) in excess of 60 dB(A) in bird habitats would mask a bird's song, subsequently reducing reproductive success during the breeding season, and its ability to defend its territory. Also, in 1991, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) recommended that noise levels not exceed 60 dB(A) to protect various bird species. • Thresholds of Significance Because the proposed project consists of multiple sites to be constructed, operated and maintained in multiple jurisdictions, it is considered appropriate to develop one set of noise criteria that will be applicable to each NTS site. These criteria, as described below, are based on the most stringent criteria of the multiple jurisdictions. Accordingly, a significant impact will be assessed if any of the following conditions occur: 1. The noise level generated by the operation of a pump station exceeds 45 dB(A) at the property line of a residence, apartment, hospital, or convalescent home; or 2. The noise level generated by the operation of a pump station exceeds 50 dB(A) at the property line of a school, day care center, church, or library; or 3. The noise level generated by the operation of a pump station exceeds 60 dB(A) at a wildlife habitat during the nesting, breeding, and dispersal period of protected species; or 4. Maintenance activity at the site occurs after 6:00 p.m. or before 7:00 a.m. on Monday through Friday, after 5:00 p.m. or before 9:00 a.m. on Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a Federal holiday; or 5. Construction activity at the site occurs after 6:00 p.m. or before 7:00 a.m. on Monday through Friday, after 5:00 p.m. or before 9:00 a.m. on Saturday, or at any time on • Sunday or a Federal holiday. 11 BONTERRA CONSULTING Project File 368.02 6. Construction or maintenance activity generates a 1-hour average noise (Leq) in excess of 60 dB(A) at a wildlife habitat during the nesting, breeding, and dispersal . period of protected species. Existing Noise Environment For the purposes of this study, ambient noise is defined as the sounds generated by sources near and far that currently exist at the exterior of the noise -sensitive properties near the project component sites. Existing noise is produced by traffic on nearby arterials, aircraft activities at John Wayne Airport, train movements on the OCTA Metrolink rail line, and commercial/industrial activities in the area. The following sections identify the existing ambient noise levels that have been measured. Noise -Sensitive Receptors Based on our review of the noise ordinances for the various jurisdictions affected by the proposed project, the land uses considered noise -sensitive for this study include: Residences (both single- and multi -family), hospitals, convalescent homes, schools, day care centers, churches, libraries and wildlife habitats. The following summarizes the noise -sensitive land uses in the vicinity of each project -level NTS site: NTS Site 25: Residential properties abut this site on the south and southeast. To the north and northeast across Serrano Creek, and to the southwest across Toledo Way are additional residential properties. The adjacent habitat is known to be occupied by . Cooper's hawk, and the habitat along Serrano Creek may be occupied by non -sensitive migrating birds during the breeding and nesting season. NTS Site 26: This site, which consists of multiple basins, is adjacent to apartments, two high schools, a child development center, Mardan School, Lakeview Senior Center, two assisted living centers, and several churches. NTS Site 27: The nearest noise -sensitive receptors to this site are some multi -family buildings to the southwest across Barranca Parkway, some single-family homes to the southwest across San Diego Creek, and some apartments to the east on Apricot Drive. The nearby Barranca mitigation area may contain habitats for special status species. NTS Site 46: Apartments and a church are located southeast of this site across the San Diego Creek. Additional apartments are located across University Drive. To the northwest, across the San Joaquin Wildlife Sanctuary, are future residential properties currently under construction. NTS Site 53: There are no noise -sensitive land uses in the vicinity of this site. NTS Site 54: The nearest noise -sensitive locations to this site are residential communities to the east across Harvard Avenue, and to the south of the Harvard Community Athletic Park. . 12 BONTERRA CONSULTING Frojcct File 36M2 • NTS Site 55: This site is bounded on the northeast by an existing residential community. In addition, to the southwest across Edinger Avenue is abandoned housing at the former MCAS(H) base. NTS Site 56: Residential properties and.a school abut this site on the west, while a library abuts it on the north. Additional residential properties are located to the east across Hewes Street and to the south across Jordan Avenue. NTS Site 62: The nearest noise -sensitive receptors to this site include UCI and some student housing to the southeast across San Diego Creek and University Drive. The adjacent habitat is known to be occupied by the least Bell's vireo, a protected species. NTS Site 64: The site directly abuts.some abandoned housing at the former MCAS(H) base and two single-family residential communities in Irvine. NTS Site 13: There are no noise -sensitive properties in the vicinity of this site. NTS Site 39: An existing residential community abuts this site to the west. Ambient Noise Measurement Locations Ambient noise measurements were obtained at 9 noise -sensitive locations in proximity to • the 12 project -level sites. Figure 3 provides the location of the measurement positions. At two of the locations, noise measurements were obtained over a continuous 24-hour period'. At the remaining seven'locations, the noise measurements were obtained for 20- minutes over three different time periods. The following provides a brief description of the receiver locations: Position #E-25: At the offset of the apartments at 24481 Copper Cliff Court in Lake Forest. This position is one of the nearest residential locations to NTS Site 25. The measurement was obtained over three 20-minute periods on May 28, 29 and 30, 2002 at a microphone height of 5'. Position #E-26: At the Lynnbrooke Assisted Living Center, 1 Witherspoon in Irvine. This position represents one of the nearest noise -sensitive locations to NTS Site 26. The measurement was obtained over three 20-minute periods on May 23, 24 and 25, 2002 at a microphone height of 5'. 1 24-hour measurements were not obtained at all locations because they are typically obtained only in residential back yards (for security reasons). This eliminated NTS sites that were not in the immediate • vicinity of a single-family community, as well as potential measurement locations where homeowners would not allow access to their back yards. 13 BONTERRA CONSULTING Pmjeet Pile 368-02 SANTA ANA A,-� a 7' Sr -7 � w - 7 0� h:*i Qr �•a'I':w� r 4C v ST • 4 �-� _ • TUSTIN r— M RlNE9 CORPS 9 TUSTNN,� IRVINE - I ��iJ .OFCAttr. � IRVlMF x ODE MAR 1 ly HULAND ASSOCUTES, INC, U.S MARINE CORPS `VI' AIR' SrA OV �K IRYINE. mq uas 114. - � q�ty . ' El. TOR hi._ EMERALD Location of Noise Measurement Positions 1 3 • is 14 Position #E-27: At the offset of the apartments at 7000 Apricot in Irvine. This position is one of the nearest noise -sensitive locations to the proposed NTS Site 27. Measurements were obtained at a microphone height of 5' over three 20-minute periods on May 23 and 24, 2002. Position #E-46: At the offset of the Mariposa Villa apartments, 3773 University Drive in Irvine. This position represents the nearest noise -sensitive location to the proposed NTS Site 46. The measurement was obtained over three 20-minute periods on May 24, 28 and 29, 2002 at a microphone height of 5'. Position #E-53: At the OCTA bus yard on Sand Canyon Avenue at Marine Way in Irvine. This position represents the nearest developed property to the proposed NTS Site 53. The measurement was obtained over three 20-minute periods on May 29 and 30, 2002 at a microphone height of 5'. Position #E-54/64: At the Harvard Community Athletic Park. This position represents the nearest developed property to the proposed NTS Sites 54 and 64. Measurements were obtained at a microphone height of 5' over three 20-minute periods on May 23 and 30, 2002. Position #E-55: In the rear yard of the residence at 1642 Green Meadow Avenue in Tustin. This position represents one of the nearest noise -sensitive locations to the proposed NTS Site 55. Measurements were obtained at a microphone height of 5' over a • continuous 24-hour period on May 22 and 23, 2002. Position #E-56: In the rear yard of the residence at 4443 Earlham Street in Orange. This position represents one of the nearest noise -sensitive locations to the proposed NTS Site 56. Measurements were obtained at a microphone height of 5' over a continuous 24-hour period on May 28 and 29, 2002. • Position #E-62: At the offset of the apartments at 4047 Pereira in Irvine. This position represents one of the nearest noise -sensitive locations to the proposed NTS Site 62. The measurement was obtained over three 20-minute periods on May 24, 28, and 29, 2002 at a microphone height of 5'. The instrumentation used to obtain the ambient noise measurements consisted of integrating sound level meters (Models 712 and 820), and an acoustic calibrator (Model CAL200) manufactured by Larson Davis Laboratories. All instruments were calibrated prior to use. The accuracy of the calibrator is maintained through a program established by the manufacturer, and is traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. All instrumentation meets the requirements of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) S1.4-1971. 15 BONTERRA CONSULTING Project File 368-02 Ambient Noise Levels As indicated previously, the primary ambient noise sources affecting the noise -sensitive locations are traffic on the nearby arterials, aircraft overflights, train movements, and commercial/industrial activities. The results of the ambient measurements are provided in Appendix A, and are summarized as follows: Measurement Location Quietest Noise Level Exceeded for More Than 30 Minutes in an Hour L50 Daytime 7a.m.-10 p.m. Nighttime 10 p.m.-7a.m. E-25 49.0 dB(A) E-26 46.6 dB(A) E-27 48.9 dB(A) ft E46 54.3 dB(A) E-53 58.6 dB(A) E-54/64 51.8 dB(A) E-55 44.3 dB(A)35.7 dB A E-56 38.0 dB(A)31.4 dB(A E-62 53.3 dB(A) Project -Related Noise Levels The noise sources associated with the proposed project can be separated into three • distinct categories: 1) construction activities; 2) maintenance activities; and 3) pumping activities. Each is described in more detail in the following sections. Construction Activities Implementation of the project will require construction at 9 of the 12 project -level NTS sites. (No construction will occur at NTS Sites 13, 39 and 46, which are existing facilities.) Depending on the site (refer to Table 2.8-1 of the DEIR), construction activities will include: • Earthwork operations (e.g., clearing and grubbing, excavations, placing of soil and organic material, etc.), • Construction of hydraulic structures (e.g., piping, catch basins, box inlet structures, etc.), • Construction of weir structures, • Installation of a pump system and associated piping, and • Vegetation planting. Figure 4 provides typical noise levels associated with construction. • 1T aONTERRACONSULTING Project File 368-02 • • • Figure 4. Summary of Typical Construction Equipment -Noise Levels foes, 200 HP Machine, 100 HP Loaders, 300 HP 180 HP s, 200 HP ar, 80 HP Crailer, 200 HP 125 HP, 150 HP ads Handling to Mixer to Pump Movable: 50 HP, 200 HP, 400 HP lift, 40 HP Boom, 200 HP er Truck, 500 HP try Equipment 1600 HP ssors: 100 HP, 200 HP ors: 20 HP, 400 HP, 1300 HP 25 HP, 200 HP, 350 HP Equipment ,tor, 20 HP Drivers (Peak Level) tmatic Tools k Drills m Boiler (Pile Driver) Equipment 50 HP, 80 HP 71 to 93 dB(A) 74 to 84 dB(A) 72 to 96 dB(A) 71 to 96 dB(A) 73 to 95 dB(A) 80 to 92 dB(A) 78 to 84 dB(A) 73 to 95 dB(A) 72 to 96 dB(A) 76 to 86 dB(A) 70 to 92 dB(A) 76 to 85 dB(A) 70 to 90 dB(A) 74 to 84 dB(A) 75 to 95 dB(A) 86 to 89 dB(A) 68 to 82 dB(A) 80 to 90 dB(A) 79 to 88 dB(A) 79 to 85 dB(A) 68 to 87 dB(A) 69 to 81 dB(A) 60 to 80 dB(A) 84 to 90 dB(A) 75 to 104 dB(X 90 to 104 dB(X 82 to 88 dB(A) 90 to 105 dB(A; 83 to 92 dB(A) 67 to 92 dB(A) 69 to 80 dB(A) 76 to 85 dB(A) 85 dB(A) 80 dB(A) 86 dB(A) 82 dB(A) 85 dB(A) 89 dB(A) 79 dB(A) 88 dB(A) 84 dB(A) 82 dB(A) 82 dB(A) 80, 82 dB(A) 85 dB(A) 82 dB(A) 76, 80, 83 dB(A) 88 dB(A) 80 dB(A) 85 dB(A) 84 dB(A) 82 dB(A) 78, 81 dB(A). 74, 81, 84 dB(A) 73, 76, 80 dB(A) 86 dB(A) 88 dB(A) 101 dB(A) 86 dB(A) 98 dB(A) 88 dB(A) 78 d 76 d ),.82 Source: "Handbook of Noise Control," 2nd Edition, Edited by Cyril M. Harris 17 The length of the construction period will range from about three to 25 weeks, depending • on the NTS site. All construction is scheduled to occur between 7:00 a.m. and 6.00 p.m. on weekdays and between 9:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday (if necessary). In addition, at NTS Sites 25, 27 and 62, which are near habitats that may contain special status species, the construction will be scheduled with consideration to peak mating and breeding months. Therefore, it is concluded that construction activities will not create a significant impact. Maintenance Activities The on -going operation of the NTS facilities will include periodic maintenance activities at each site. Referring to Table 2.8-2 of the DEIR, maintenance activities will include the following: Routine Activities Ma or Activities Removal and disposal of trash Structural repairs Inspection & maintenance of discharge structures Removal/disposal of sediment Vegetation removal Vegetation planting, removal and disposal Mosquito larvae management Weir repairs Inspection/maintenance of diversions Pump servicing Levee maintenance Equipment replacement Weir installation and removal It is noted that maintenance activities for existing NTS Sites 13, 39 and 46 will not . change from current levels. Depending on the location and activity, maintenance will occur on a monthly, quarterly, or annual basis, as well as on an as -needed basis (e.g., after a storm). As with construction, maintenance activities will only occur between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between 9.00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday (if necessary). In addition, at NTS Sites 25, 27 and 62, maintenance activities will be scheduled with consideration to peak mating and breeding months for sensitive bird species. Therefore, it is concluded that maintenance activities will not create a significant impact. Pumping Activities Pump stations will be constructed at NTS Sites 53, 56 and 62 in order to move water into or out of the site. Each station is briefly described in the following sections: NTS Site 53: At this site, a 5 HP submersible pump will be used to convey water from the Marshburn Channel into the NTS facility. The pump will be located at the bottom of a 17'-deep vault. There are no noise -sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site. NTS Site 56: Two submersible pumps, each 3-5 HP in size, will be usedto discharge water from the NTS facility back into the EMI Channel. One of the pumps will be used • 18 EONTERRA CONSULTING Project File 368-02 • during dry and wet season low flow conditions, and is anticipated to operate for one hour out of every three. The second pump will run continuously for about 36 hours during small storms. Both pumps will be located at the bottom of a 10'-deep vault. Based on the referenced Preliminary Design Report for the facility, th6 nearest noise -sensitive receptor is located about 160' from the pump vault. NTS Site 62: At this site, a 5 HP submersible pump will be used to convey treated water from the NTS facility back into the San Diego Creek Channel. As with the other sites, the pump will be located at the bottom of a vault. The nearest noise -sensitive receptor to the pump vault is the San Joaquin Marsh located at a distance of about 30 feet. In addition to the above three sites, there is a pump station located at existing NTS Site 46. However, since no changes will be made to the station as a result of the proposed project, it has not been included in this analysis. • Based on manufacturers' data obtained for other projects, it is estimated that 5 HP pumps generate a sound power level of 82 dB(A). However, this is for a pump operating above ground under free -field conditions (i.e., with no large reflector surfaces in the near vicinity). Since the pumps associated with the project will be submerged at all times, the actual source level will be considerably lower. As a conservative estimate, it has been assumed in this study that the source level for the submerged pumps will be 72 dB(A) (i.e., it has been assumed that submersion in at least 1 foot of water will reduce the pump noise level transmitted to the surrounding areas by about 10 dB). With the source levels established, the following table provides an analysis of the estimated noise levels that will be experienced at the noise -sensitive properties near NTS Sites 56 and 62: Parameter NTS Site 56' NTS Site 62 Estimated sound power level of submerged pump 72 dB(A) 72 dB(A) Increase due to proximity to reflective surfaces vault walls +12 dB +12 dB Decrease due to distance -45 dB -32.5 dB Estimated noise level at receptor 39 dB(A) 51.5 dB(A) The estimated noise level of 39 dB(A) at the nearest noise -sensitive receptor to NTS Site 56 is well below the 45 dB(A) significance criteria for residential properties. At the wildlife habitat in the vicinity of NTS Site 62, the estimated noise level of 51.5 dB(A) is also well below the 60 dB(A) significance criteria. No analysis has been provided for NTS Site 53 since there are no noise -sensitive receptors in the vicinity. 2 Assumes only one pump is operating at a time. 19 BONTERRA CONSULTING Project File 368.02 Assessment of Impact • Based on the thresholds of significance and the analytical results provided in this report, the following impacts are assessed for the proposed project: • There will be no significant construction noise impacts associated with the 12 project - level NTS sites. • There will be no significant maintenance noise impacts associated with the 12 project -level NTS sites. • There will be no significant noise impacts associated with the pump stations at NTS Sites 46, 53, 56 and 62. Mitigation Measures As indicated in the previous section, there are no significant noise -related impacts associated with the proposed project. Therefore, mitigation measures ate not required. • • 20 noNTERRA CONSULTING Project Tile 36M2 • References The following references were used in the preparation of this study: 1. Draft San Diego Creek Watershed NTS Master Plan prepared by GeoSyntec Consultants, March 2003. 2. Site Design Fact Sheets for NTS Sites 46, 13 and 39 prepared by GeoSyntec Consultants, March 2003. 3. "Natural Treatment System, San Diego Creek Watershed, Draft Preliminary Design Report, Regional Facility No. 25 — Serrano Creek", GeoSynteo Consultants; August 19, 2002. 4. "Natural Treatment System, San Diego Creek Watershed, Draft Preliminary Design Report, Regional Facility No. 26 — Woodbridge", GeoSyntec Consultants; August 19, 2002. 5. "Natural Treatment System, San Diego Creek Watershed, Draft Preliminary Design Report, Regional Facility No. 27 — Barranca", GeoSyntec Consultants; August 19, 2002. 6. "Natural Treatment System, San Diego Creek Watershed, Draft Preliminary Design Report, Regional Facility No. 53 — SRI33/15 Interchange", GeoSyntec Consultants; September 18, 2002. • 7. "Natural Treatment System, San Diego Creek Watershed, Draft Preliminary Design Report, Regional Facility No. 54 — Caltrans SR-26I/Walnut Ave.", GeoSyntec Consultants; September 19, 2002. 8. "Natural Treatment System, San Diego Creek Watershed, Draft Preliminary Design Report, Regional Facility No. 55 — Santa Ana/Santa Fe", GeoSyntec Consultants, August 19, 2002. 9. "Natural Treatment System, San Diego Creek Watershed, Draft Preliminary Design Report, Regional Facility No. 56 — El Modena -Irvine", GeoSyntec Consultants; August 19, 2002. 10. "Natural Treatment System, San Diego Creek Watershed, Draft Preliminary Design Report, Regional Facility No. 62 — San Joaquin Marsh (SAMI)", GeoSyntec Consultants; October 24, 2002. 11. "Natural Treatment System, San Diego Creek Watershed, Draft Preliminary Design Report, Regional Facility No. 64 — West Park", GeoSyntec Consultants; August 19, 2002. E 21 BONTERRA CONSULTING Project File 368-02 APPENDIX A Ambient Noise Measurements • L� • • Table E-25. Noise Survey Project: Irvine Ranch Water District Position: At the apartments at 24481 Copper Cliff Date: May 28, 29 & 30, 2002 Time: Noted Noise Source: Traffic Distance: Varies SLM Height: 5' LD 712 S/N: 0556 LD CAL200 Calibrator S/N: 2916 Operator: Cynthia M. Bordash 80.0 75.0 Q 70.0 9 65.0 d 60.0 a y 55.0 z 50.0 45.0 40.0 , 1 1 1 1 1 I I I r � I 1 r r I I I I 1 I I 1 , 1 1 1 , r I , 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent of Time Noise Level is Exceeded Measurement Period 8:56 AM to 9:18 AM 12:49 PM to 1:09 PM 6:19 PM to 6:41 PM n* Ln Ln Ln 2 69.9 54.2 61.7 8 69.9 52.4 53.4 25 69.7 j 50.5 52.1 50 63.1 49.0 50.9 90 99 Leq 66.4 49.9 53.2 Lmax 1 79.3 1 63.5 70.2 Lmin 1 44.3 1 44.8 49.0 Symbol: ♦ R A * Leq is the average sound level during the measurement period. Ln is the sound level exceeded n% of the time during the measurement period. Lmax and Lmin are the maximum and minimum sound levels during the measurement period. WIELAND ASSOCIATES, INC. Table E-26. Noise Survey Project: Irvine Ranch Water District Position: At the Lynnbrooke Assisting Living Center, I Witherspoon Date: May 23, 24 & 25, 2002 Time: Noted Noise Source: Traffic Distance: Varies SLM Height: 5' LD 712 SIN: 0556 LD CAL200 Calibrator S/N: 2916 Operator: Cynthia M. Bordash 80.0 --- —+- 75.0 - - g 70.0 — '. Ma 65.0 d 60.0 ' a ' o55.0500 ' - 45.0 40.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent of Time Noise Level is Exceeded Measurement Period 8:54 AM to 9:14 AM 1.-49 PM to 2:10 PM 6:40 PM to 7:01 PM n* Ln Ln Ln 2 52.8 59.5 53.7 8 51 A 55.5 52.0 25 48.3 52.4 50A 50 46.6 50.7 49A 90 99 Leg 48.0 52.5 50.0 Lmax 59.0 63.8 57.2 Lmin 43.3 Symbol: ♦ r * Leq is the average sound level during the measurement period. Ln is the sound level exceeded n% of the time during the measurement period. Lmax and Latin are the maximum and minimum sound levels during the measurement period. • CJ • WIELAND ASSOCIATES, INC. • Table E-27. Noise Survey Project: Irvine Ranch Water District Position: At the apartments, 7000 Apricot Date: May 23 & 24, 2002 Time: Noted Noise Source: Traffic Distance: Varies SLM Height: 5' LD 712 S/N: 0556 LD CAL200 • Calibrator S/N: 2916 Operator: Cynthia M. Bordash 80.0 1 I 1 1 I I , I I g 70.0 1 -J -I. -L 1 1 I I 9 65.0 ---- ---- '-- ---- I I 60.0 55.0- z 50.0 45.0 `- 1 1 � I 40.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent of Time Noise Level is Exceeded Measurement Period 8:15 AM to 8:41 AM 12:58 PM to 1:21 PM 6:03 PM to 6:24 PM n* Ln Ln Ln 2 52.4 57.5 55.0 8 51.2 55.2 53.0 25 50.1 52.9 51.3 50 48:9 51.7 49.9 90 99 Leq 49.3 52.7 50.7 Lmax 56.7 68.5 65.2 Lmin 44.5 48.4 45.8 Symbol: ♦ ■ A * Leq is the average sound level during the measurement period. Ln is the sound level exceeded n% of the time during the measurement period. Lmax and Lmin are the maximum and minimum sound levels during the measurement period. WIELAND ASSOCIATES, INC. Table E-46. Noise Surrey Project: Irvine Ranch Water District Position: At the Mariposa Villa Apartments, 3773 University Drive Date: May 24, 28 & 29, 2002 Time: Noted Noise Source: Traffic Distance: Varies SLM Height: 5' LD 712 SIN: 0556 LD CAL200 Calibrator S/N: 2916 Operator: Cynthia M. Bordash Mu C 70.0 65.0 - - 60.0 55.0 ---- -r o x 50.0 45.0 40.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent of Time Noise Level is Exceeded 1:44 Measurement Period 7:42 AM to 8:05 AM 10:47 AM to 11:10 AM 3:33 PM to 3:56 PM n* Ln Ln Ln 2 64.6 62.2 65.1 8 63.6 59.6 62.6 25 61.6 57.1 59.8 50 57.6 54.3 57.2 90 99 Leq 59.7 56.0 59.0 Lmax 70.7 66.7 1 71.5 Lorin 44.2 44.6 1 50.1 Symbol: ♦ al * Lcq is the average sound level during the measurement period. Ln is the sound level exceeded n°Jo of the time during the measurement period. Lmax and Lmin are the maximum and minimum sound levels during the measurement period. 40 WIELAND ASSOCIATES, INC. • • L_ J Table E-53. Noise Survey Project: Irvine Ranch Water District Position: At the OCTA Lost & Found Center Date: May 29 & 30, 2002 Time: Noted Noise Source: Traffic Distance: Varies SLM Height: 5' LD 712 S/N: 0556 LD CAL200 Calibrator SIN: 2916 Operator: Cynthia M. Bordash 80.0 70.0 65.0 ; -- '----- d60.0 ti •—� O 40.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent of Time Noise Level is Exceeded Measurement Period 8:22 AM to 8:43 AM 12:24 PM to 12:48 PM 5:40 PM to 6.03 PM n* Ln Ln Ln 2 67.1 63.8 61.7 8 66.2 61.6 60.6 25 64.8 60.1 59.4 50 63.6 59.0 58.6 90 99 Leq 63.9 59.6 59.0 Lmax 68.6 J 66.9 68.2 Lmin 57.3 1 55.0 1 55.5 Symbol: ♦ 0 A • Leq is the average sound level during the measurement period. Ln is the sound level exceeded n% of the time during the measurement period. Lmax and Lmin are the maximum and minimum sound levels during the measurement period. WIELAND ASSOCIATES, INC. Table E-54 & 64. Noise Survey Project: Irvine Ranch Water District Position: At Harvard Community Athletic Park Date: May 23 & 30, 2002 Time: Noted Noise Source: Traffic Distance: Varies SLM Height: 5' LD 712 SIN: 0556 LD CAL200 Calibrator SIN: 2916 Operator: Cynthia M. Bordash ou.0 75.0 r 70.0 --- ;_.. 65,0 60.0 q ---- r1 55.0 - - - - -- -• 45.0 ---- — 40.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent of Time Noise Level is Exceeded ' Lcq is the average sound level during the measurement period Ln is the sound level exceeded n% of the time during the mea Lmax and Lmin are the maximum and minimum sound levels Measurement Period 7:50 AM to 8:10 AM 1125 AM to 11.48 AM 4:48 PM to 5:09 PM n* Ln Ln Ln 2 58.7 58.4 57.3 8 55.9 55.2 55.3 25 54.3 53.3 53.9 50 1 52.8 51.8 52.7 90 99 Le 53.8 52.9 53.2 Lmax 70.3 64.3 64.4 Lmin 48.5 1 47.9 1 48.2 Symbol: ♦ ■ iurement period. during the measurement period. • • WIELAND ASSOCM TES, INC. • • • Table E-55a. Measured Community Noise Equivalent Level, CNEL Project: Irvine Ranch Water District Location: Rear yard at 1642 Green Meadow Avenue Date: May 22 & 23, 2002 Measurement Period Hourly Noise Level, dB(A) Measurement Period Hourly Noise Level, dB(A) 12:00 am - 1:00 am 40.6 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm 57.9 1:00 am - 2:00 am 40.7 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm 67.6 2:00 am - 3:00 am 37.7 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm 70.1 3:00 am - 4:00 am 47.8 3:00 pm- 4:00 pm 67.7 4:00 am - 5:00 am 55.3 4:00 pm - 5:00 pm 62.3 5:00 am - 6:00 am 55.8 5:00 pm - 6:00 pm 68.3 6:00 am - 7:00 am 61.9 6:00 pm - 7:00 pm 60.0 7:00 am - 8:00 am 65.0 7:00 pm - 8:00 pm 67.0 8:00 am - 9:00 am 62.1 8:00 pm - 9:00 pm 51.7 9:00 am - 10:00 am 64.7 9:00 pm - 10:00 pm 64.1 10:00 am-11:00-am 53.7 10:00 pm - 11:00 pm 52.6 11:00 am - 12.00 pm 67.9 11:00 pm - 12:00 am 50.5 CNEL: 66.1 9 75 b 70 d 65 d a 60 55 0 z 50 45 40 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I t__r_ I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I i I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 t I 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 _ _ I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 h 1 e i -I - i -I -I• 1 t 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 .1-A 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I a ro a a b 4 4� 40 4 4� 4� �� .ti , D�• Ci• 4i• .10• tiff' ti' �. �. g. tip' Time of Day WIELAND ASSOCIATES, INC. Table E-56a. Measured Community Noise Equivalent .Level, CNEL 0 Project: Irvine Ranch Water District Location: Rear yard at 4443 Earlham Date: May 28 & 29, 2002 Measurement Period Hourly Noise Level, dB(A) Measurement Period Hourly Noise Level, dB(A) 12:00 am -1:00 am 33.7 12:00 pm -1:00 pm 52.3 1:00 am - 2:00 am 34.3 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm 54.7 2:00 am - 3:00 am 45.2 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm 54.9 3:00 am - 4:00 am 32.8 3:00 pm- 4:00 pm 54.1 4:00 am - 5:00 am 34.5 4:00 pm - 5:00 pm 50.7 5:00 am - 6:00 am 43.3 5:00 pm - 6:00 pm 63.1 6:00 am - 7:00 am 54.5 6:00 pm - 7,00 pm 56.3 7:00 am - 8:00 am 50.1 7:00 pm - 8:00 pm 58.2 8:00 am - 9:00 am 54.9 8:00 pm - 9:00 pm 60.9 9:00 am - 10:00 am 51.3 9:00 pm -10:00 pm 49.4 10:00 am -11:00 am 52.7 10:00 pm -11:00 pm 43.5 11.00 am - 12:00 pm 51.3 11.00 pm - 12:00 am 35.6 CNEL: 57.8 75 1 1 I I I d 65 ; °1 60 d H ,FAO 55 ; � I ; 1 '•- -I- '- - - ;. ;- z 50 -ti- - -:.a --•- --• - �- I - --- I I - i 45 •--- - c 40 0' 0' aa 0. 4p. �0' $' R' a'$V �a �4. �4. Time of Day • E WIELAND ASSOCIATES, INC. • Table E-62. Noise Survey Project: Irvine Ranch Water District Position: At the apartments at 4047 Pereira Date: May 24, 28 & 29, 2002 Time: Noted Noise Source: Traffic Distance: Varies SLM Height: 5' LD 712 SIN: 0556 LD CAL200 • Calibrator S/N: 2916 Operator: Cynthia M. Bordash 80.0 70.0___________________-______L____. w 60.0----i-----i------------L ----- d, 55.0 - - ------ - - 0 45.0 -----1 '----- '------` — 40.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent of Time Noise Level is Exceeded Measurement Period 8:12 AM to 8:36 AM 10:10 AM to 10:33 AM 4:03 PM to 4:27 PM n* Ln Ln Ln 2 60.9 59.1 59.7 8 58.2 56.8 58.2 25 56.5 54.9 56.7 50 55.0 53.3 55.3 90 99 Leq 55.7 54.3 55.8 Lmax 64.6 67.0 63.4 Lmin 48.7 47.6 50.9 Symbol: ♦ ■ A * Leq is the average sound level during the measurement period. Ln is the sound level exceeded n°/u of the time during the measurement period. • Lmax and Lmin are the maximum and minimum sound levels during the measurement period. WIELAND ASSOCIATES, INC. • Appendix J Revised NTS Operations and Maintenance Plan (Chap 7 of NTS Plan) Operations and Maintenance Activities (Appendix L of NTS Plan) Revised NTS Monitoring and Reporting Plan (Chap 8 of NTS Plan Revised NTS Coordination and Agreements (Chap 9 of NTS Plan) E Section 7-Operation and Maintenance • 7 Operation and Maintenance 7.1 Objectives The objectives of the operation and maintenance (O&M) program are: 1. To optimize NTS facilities/WQT wetlands performance and the improvement of water quality leaving the wetlands 2. To minimize the impact ofNTS facilities on the integrity and function of underlying flood control facilities within which certain NTS facilities are constructed 3. To minimize adverse environmental impacts within or downstream of wetlands 4. To successfully integrate the aesthetic and environmental qualities of NTS facilities into the community Proposed maintenance activities are described below. Maintenance activities will be modified over time as experience is gained, monitoring results are obtained, and program evaluations are performed. 7.2 General Operation and Maintenance Activities For the purpose of discussion of operation and maintenance activities, there are eight groupings of NTS facilities/WQT wetlands in the NTS program (see Table 7.1). These groupings are based on the type of • basin proposed and any special circumstances associated with the respective basin. They are: 1. Special purpose basins — basins typically constructed in non -wetlands areas to serve solely as structural stormwater quality BMPs within new communities 2. Detention basins with pumping equipment — NTS facilities constructed within existing or future flood control basins; the underlying public agency landowners use them for flood control purposes; pumps are required to lift the water into and/or out of the basin 3. Detention basins without pumping equipment — same as Group 2, but no need for pumps 4. Existing IRWD Facilities — existing reservoirs (Sand Canyon and Rattlesnake Reservoirs) and an existing marsh (San Joaquin Marsh) that will continue to be operated and maintained with existing activities and measures, in accordance with existing permits; no changes to those O&M activities or measures are recommended or contemplated 5. In -channel basins — basins constructed within existing, engineered flood control channels 6. Barranca Off -Line Basin (Site 27) — an existing habitat mitigation area owned, operated and maintained by the City of Irvine under existing agreements and permits; no changes to the City's O&M activities or measures are recommended 7. San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1 — a basin constructed on disturbed land area adjacent to an existing habitat mitigation site (Small Area Mitigation Site 1); southerly of and across Campus Drive from IRWD's main San Joaquin Marsh, adjacent to the University of California Natural Reserve System (UCNRS) parcel. 8. Cienega (Cienega.de Ins Ranas)Selenium removal facility — the Cienega de las Ranas basin (Site • 67), a subterranean, submerged basin constructed with the specific purpose of removing selenium from San Diego Creek and Peters Canyon Wash San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 121 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7 -Operation and Maintenance A standard operations and maintenance program is described below. It indicates the types of activities • that typically are performed within each of the different types of areas within the basin or channel properties (e.g., wetland, mechanical equipment, access roads/paths). A more detailed description of activities for each NTS facility O&M group is provided in Appendix L. Some operation and maintenance activities require that special measures be taken to ensure the activities have minimal impact on surrounding sensitive habitats at specific sites. For example, these measures, called "project design features," or PDF's, will include avoidance of certain maintenance activities during the breeding and nesting seasons for special status species at selected sites and the principles of adaptive management for operation and maintenance activities. Table 7.2 below includes the sensitivity designation for each site. The operation and maintenance PDF's for each sensitivity designation are generally described in Section 7.8. They are described in more detail in Appendix L. As already stated above, existing IRWD facilities (Sand Canyon and Rattlesnake Reservoirs and San Joaquin Marsh — Augmentation) are already being operated and maintained under existing agreements and permits. No changes to the O&M activities and measures for these sites are proposed. Thus, they are not discussed further in this 0&M section. In addition, Site 27, the Barranca Off -Line Wetland, is an existing mitigation facility owned and operated by the City of Irvine. The only proposed change to the site is the addition of an extended detention outlet tower that will slow the draining of the basin after small storms. Thus, no changes to the O&M activities and measures for this site are proposed and the site is not discussed further in this O&M section. Due to the proximity of Site 62, San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1, to the UCNRS marsh site, IRWD will confer with UCNRS on proposed O&M activities and measures. This will be a topic of discussion when IkWD confers with UCNRS regarding design of Site 62. • San Diego Creek 14TS MosterPlan 122 January 2004 Draft for public Revlew Section 7-Operation and Maintenance I� • Table 7.1: Facility Operation & Maintenance Types site Number Facility Name O&M Grou # O&M'Basin Type 10 PA 1 — Eastfoot Upper I Sped I purpose basin 12 PA I — Lower Orchard Estates (multiple basins) 1 Special purpose basin 22 MCAS El Toro — Ague Chinon Lower 1 Special purpose basin 32 PA 17 —East Basin 1 Special purpose basin 42 PA 27 — Turtle Ridge North I Special u ose basin 49 PA 17 — Center Basin 1 Special purpose basin 50 MCAS El Toro — Irvine Auto Center I Special purpose basin 51 MCAS El Toro — Serrano I Sped I purpose basin 52 MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon 1 Special purpose basin 61 PA 1— Eastfoot Lower 1 Special urpose basin 68 PA 18 1 Special purpose basin 69 PA 39 (multiple basins) Special purpose basin 70 1 Ague Chinon (multiple basins) Special urposebasin 71 Marshbum ] Sp ecial u ' ose basin 53 Caltrans SR133/15 Interchange 2 Detention basin 54 Caltrans SR261/Walnut Basin 2 Detention basin 56 El Modena Park 2 Detention basin 9 PA I — Eastfoot Retarding Basin 3 Detention basin 11 PA I — Orchard Estates Retarding Basin 3 Detention basin 16 Tmbuco Retarding Basin 3 Detention basin 18 Marshburn Retarding Basin 3 Detention basin 31 PA 17 — West Basin 3 Detention basin 13 Rattlesnake Reservoir — Existing 4 Existing facility 39 Sand Canyon Reservoir— Existing 4 Existing facility 46 San Joaquin Marsh - Augmentation 4 Existing facility 26 Woodbridge In -Line Basins 5 In -channel basin 55 Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel In -Line Basins 5 In -channel basin 64 1 Wqtpark In -Line Basins 5 In -channel basin 27 Barranca Off -Line Wetlands 6 Existing facility 62 San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1 7 SAMS 1 67 Cienega (Cienega de Las Ranas) 8 Selenium removal Not Applicable; no proposed changes to existing O&M activities or measures There are three categories of O&M activities: routine, major, and emergency. Each category and its respective activities are summarized in the following sections. Again, more specific O&M activities for groupings of sites are described in Appendix L. Some activities/measures may require involvement by either a biologist or qualified specialist in biological issues. Section 7.8 describes these positions and their functions/duties in detail. 7.3 Routine Operation and Maintenance Activities Routine operation and maintenance activities are summarized below. IRWD staff will develop an 0&M checklist for each facility and all routine activities will be recorded in a maintenance log. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 123 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Section i- Operation and Malnfenance 7.3.1 Site Inspection . All NTS sites will be inspected on a regular, scheduled basis to ensure that the sites are operating properly, to record observations, and to initiate any actions that may be required, including those discussed below. While the frequency of site inspections may vary depending on the type of site, need to monitor it, and the season, it will typically be on a weekly basis. During the "establishment period" for a given site, more visits may be required to collect data, record observations and make adjustments to equipment and control structures (weir heights, valves, etc.). The frequency of visits may be adjusted if after 20-site visits it is evident that such adjustment is prudent. 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing Visits to NTS sites for water quality testing purposes will occur according to the monitoring plan discussed in Section 8. Typically, water quality testing will occur on a monthly basis, however field tests may be taken more often in conjunction with the site inspections described above or in accordance with Section 8. During establishment periods and storm events for selected sites, water quality testing may be performed on a daily basis, but this is not expected to occur on a regular basis. 7.3.3 Water Level Control Water level control will be required at sites where water is ponded. The purpose of the level control is to adjust detention times and to flood or dry basins as part of planned operation. Level control adjustments • will be made as needed to optimize the natural treatment processes and/or for vector control or other purposes. When fine adjustments are required, the frequency may be hourly or daily, while the frequency may be quarterly at some basins once they are fine tuned. No potable or reclaimed water will be added to any sites to supplement flows in order to maintain water levels. Levels will be maintained subject to the availability of natural or manmade flows that may exist in the tributary watercourses without such supplementation. 7.3A Trash & Debris Removal Litter may be picked up at any time during site visits. Regular, scheduled trash/debris removal will be performed at all sites on a quarterly basis and/or after storm events that result in heavy trash accumulations. Equipment will range from a single small pickup truck to a heavy duty, stakebed truck for hauling the trash/debris from the site. In selected locations, a small backhoe may be needed infrequently. In sensitive habitat areas, care will be taken to avoid damage by the crew, truck, or backhoe to plants or other areas that may be used as habitat. While this work is not expected to have any negative impacts on wildlife, such work will be conducted in accordance with any PDP's established by this Master Plan. 7.3.5 PumpNalve Inspection, Adjustment & Maintenance Some sites will require the use of pumps, valves and other mechanical equipment. Such equipment requires regular, scheduled preventive maintenance and adjustment to optimize its performance. In rare • occurrences, emergency repairs may be requited. The regular work would typically be performed in San Diego Crook NTS Master Plan 124 January 2004 Draft for Public litsview Section 7 - Operation and Maintenance • conjunction with the site inspections. At all sites, except the sensitive habitat sites, such work will be performed without restriction. At sensitive habitat sites, mechanical equipment will be installed in areas that minimize disturbance. Also at sensitive habitat sites, inspection, adjustment, and minor maintenance (e.g., seal/packing replacement, lubrication) or other work that can be accomplished without significant noise or disturbance to the surrounding habitat will be performed without restriction. Maintenance that could cause significant disturbance will be performed in accordance with any minimization measures established by this Master Plan. 7.3.6 Irrigation System Inspection & Adjustment Some NTS sites may require temporary or permanent irrigation systems for transitional vegetation areas or other non -wetland areas of the properties. At these sites, irrigation systems will be inspected and adjusted in conjunction with the regular, scheduled site inspection by the site inspector. This work is not expected to result in any negative impacts and will thus be performed without restriction at all NTS sites. 7.3.7 Inlet/Outlet Inspection & Maintenance All NTS sites have inlets and outlets. Generally, these features are "passive" in nature. That is, they are not complex and do not require significant operation or maintenance. The primary concern in inlet/outlet maintenance is the prevention of clogging or breakthrough. Most activity associated with clog prevention occurs just prior to the rainy season after vegetation has grown within the NTS facility, but minor • clogging can occur at any time. Breakthrough can occur any time water is flowing. The inlet/outlet will be inspected on,a regular basis as part of the site inspection activity. Maintenance will occur on an as needed basis. Most vegetation removal will be combined with the Minor and Major Vegetation Removal activities. 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal Weirs will be installed in the three In -Line basins. Weirs may also be used for water control within some of the other basins (to be determined during the detailed design phase). Some of the In -Line basin weirs will be installed/removed on a seasonal basis. Thus, the work in these areas of the basins may be performed twice each year, using minimization measures as needed. Weirs in other basins would be adjusted to control the flow of water into, within, or out of the basins. Such adjustments would be conducted on an as -needed basis. 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and Snag Removal Vegetation growth at inlets and outlets and along the perimeter of each NTS facility shall be inspected and removed or thinned as necessary. Vegetation at inlets and outlets will be manually or mechanically removed if vegetation is found to be clogging or otherwise affecting the operation of the facility. Access roads will remain clear of vegetation and obstructions. Fruit and nut trees will not be permitted on the • facility sites to limit rodent food supply. Vegetation removal will generally be conducted in the fall to San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 125 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7-Operation and Maintenance avoid impacts on wildlife. While typically only a stake bed truck will be required to remove the debris • from the site, on occasion a backhoe and dump track may be required to remove large or heavy amounts of vegetation. Significant vegetation removal is covered under the major maintenance activities section (7.4). At some NTS sites, grassland will be planted. While it is expected that maintenance will be minimized for these areas to allow the grassland to follow natural rainfall and growing cycles from year to year, they may be rejuvenated from time to time using dryland farming practices. The IRWD biologist will determine if or when such rejuvenation will be implemented. Snag removal typically includes the removal of sticks, dead branches, bushes and small trees that block water flow or otherwise interfere with the operation of the sites. In the special purpose basins, detention basins, in -channel basins, and existing reservoirs, the work also includes the removal of bushes and small trees that interfere with the natural water quality treatment, water flow, flood control, or water storage aspects of the basins. This work may be performed as needed using only as much equipment as is necessary, but may include a backhoe and dump truck for the largest items. At the SAMS 1 site, such removals would be done on a less frequent basis and only under the major vegetation removal activities described in the major operation and maintenance section below. This work would be performed on an annual basis, only when needed using only as much equipment as is necessary, but may include the use of a backhoe and dump truck. In these sensitive areas, this work would be performed during non -nesting seasons. A site assessment will be performed by a biologist in advance of • the work to ensure no species of concern will be disturbed or harmed by the work. 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal It is expected that at some sites there will be a minor amount of sediment deposition at points within the basins, primarily at inlet flow spreaders and in deep pools near the inlet(s). When such deposits obstruct water flow, reduce sedimentation performance, or if they are found to contain elevated levels of contaminants, the deposits will be removed. See the section on site monitoring for related information on sediments. Sediments and plants will likely accumulate behind the weirs in the in -channel basins. Some of these weirs are seasonal and will be installed each Spring and removed each Fall. To avoid flushing of sediments and plants downstream by winter storm flows after the seasonal weirs are removed, the accumulated sediments and vegetation may be removed annually in the fall, prior to the start of the wet season. Due to the low sediment content of dry weather flows, it is not expected that a significant amount of sediments will need to be removed while the weirs are in place. 7.3.11 Integrated Pest/Plant Management Any natural environment is susceptible to harmful insect invasion. Whether harmful to property, person, or wildlife, some insects will need to be managed. Management may include measures from taking no . San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 126 January2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7 -operation and Maintenance . action to using natural predators to chemical or biological spraying. Some methods that are more natural include intermittent flooding and' drying, vegetation thinning, and installation of "swallow boxes" and "bat boxes" to attract more swallows and bats, both of which feed voraciously on mosquitoes. While the more natural methods will be used to the degree such are practical, in more rare instances it may be necessary to use chemical or biological sprays. Any application of chemical or biological agents will be performed by certified pesticide applicators in accordance with manufacturer recommendations and applicable laws and regulations. USFWS and CDFG will be notified in advance of application of agents at sites considered by this Master Plan to be sensitive habitat. This work will be performed as often as weekly or as may be needed on a seasonal basis. A separate vector control plan has been developed in coordination with the Orange County Vector Control District (OCVCD). That plan is in Appendix G. IRWD will enter into an agreement with OCVCD for control of mosquitoes and other vectors at NTS sites. Vector control measures will be implemented by IRWD/OCVCD in accordance with that plan and this Master Plan. In the past, such an arrangement together with good facility design has successfully controlled mosquitoes at IRWD's existing San Joaquin Marsh facilities. It should be noted that OCVCD is an independent special district (governmental agency) with statutory authorities and responsibilities beyond the scope of these documents. Thus, it is not restricted from taking additional actions that it deems necessary to control vectors, following its practices and procedures. • Maintenance activities for the control of mosquitoes may entail 1) the monitoring and stocking of mosquito fish, 2) periodic flooding and/or drying of basins, and 3) the application of Bacillus thuringiensis israeliensus (Bti), a natural microbial pesticide. Other design features, such as installation of bat and swallow boxes have also been included in the plan. A detailed description of the Vector Control Plan for mosquitoes and other pests is found in Appendix G. Undesirable vegetation, especially non-native plant materials will typically be removed on a quarterly basis, although occasionally more frequent removal may be required to prevent establishment of undesirable seed banks or other propagation means. It is likely that this will be required more frequently during the establishment period for the NTS facilities. This work will be performed in conjunction with the trash/debris removal. In sensitive habitat areas, care will be taken to avoid damage by the crew or truck to plants or other areas that may be used as habitat. While this work is not expected to have any negative impacts on wildlife, such work will be conducted in accordance with any PDF's established in Appendix L. Additionally, if Arundo donax, or giant reed, is encountered on NTS sites, it will be eradicated using proven methods. 7.3.12 Mosquito Fish Stocking/Bti Application OCVCD will provide mosquito fish upon request and as they determine necessary during their inspections. Initially, about 2,000 mature mosquito fish will be stocked per acre in suitable wetlands. • Mature females measure about 2 to 2%2 inches long, and males from 1 to IV2 inches. Care should be exercised to avoid exposing the fish to changes in water temperature greater than 4°F within a 24-hour San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 127 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7-Operatlonand Maintenance period. To minimize temperature problems, mosquito fish will be stocked in pools with water depth greater than 1.5 feet. Mosquito fish will not require supplementary food. The planting of mosquito fish will be performed by OCVCD. Extra stocking of mosquito fish in the in -channel basins (Sites 26, 55, and 64) will be avoided to the extent it is practical to control mosquitoes without them. Mosquito larvae are not likely to be present in these areas due to greater water movement in these wetland cells. The higher water movement rates should preclude the need for additional stocking of non-native fish directly in San Diego Creek and its tributaries. Note that recent invertebrate surveys conducted at two of the In -line facility locations (Sites 26 and 55) showed that mosquito fish were present at all sampled locations (see Appendix K). Bti is a natural pesticide used to control mosquitoes. OCVCD will be responsible for applying Bti to the perimeter of all WQT wetlands. Bti is very effective against most species of mosquitoes, however, Bti has little persistence and mosquito populations can rebound in one to two weeks after treatment. As needed, Bti may be applied to potential mosquito breeding areas once per month during the winter and twice per month during the spring and summer months. It will be applied at rates no greater than recommended on the label (typically 5 lb/acre). The pesticide will be applied around the perimeter of small ponds using ground dispersal methods and into large cells using slug injection methods. A combination of liquid and granular formulations is recommended. 7.3.13 Intermittent Flooding/Drying On occasion, portions of or complete NTS facilities may need to be either flooded or dried out intentionally for vector control or maintenance purposes. The basins may also need to be dried to allow the planting and harvesting of a grass crop used for augmenting the natural carbon source in the wetland. Such "carbon seeding" improves the carbon:nitrogen ratio for optimized microbiological nutrient removal. Most of the basins will include deeper pools that will generally remain wet, thus allowing refuge for fish, amphibians, and other wildlife. In other areas, it will be possible to rotate portions of the basins, leaving one portion wet while the other is dried. This strategy has been used successfully in the San Joaquin Marsh WQT basins since they were completed in 1996. See Section 7.4.3 regarding the use of "rotation" used for vegetation and sediment removal. The "wet rotation" basins allow the intermittent flooding/drying to occur on a rotational basis while the drained rotation basins do not. Such flooding/drying will occur as needed, but is generally expected to occur no more than annually; similar to natural wet/dry cycles. The flooding/drying will be accomplished by adjustment of flow control structures, in some cases pumping with a portable pump, and limited by naturally available flows. 7.4 Major Operation and Maintenance Activities Major operation and maintenance activities are summarized below. All major maintenance activities will be recorded in maintenance logs. • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 128 January 2004 Draft for PUblle Review Section 7 - Operation and Maintenance • 7.4.1 Structural Modifications Structural modifications may be required at any of the sites. The purposes of such modifications could include improvement of NTS performance, upsizing or downsizing of facilities, or improvement of underlying uses such as flood control. Such modifications will be performed on an as needed basis. There is no expectation as to the size of crews or type/number of equipment, because no structural modifications are currently contemplated for NTS sites subsequent to integration into the NTS program. Plans for structural modifications will be submitted to appropriate regulatory agencies as required by any permits issued or agreements entered for NTS. 7.4.2 PumpNalve Removal & Replacement Any pipeline, mechanical or electrical equipment installed for NTS will have expected useful lives of I to 50 years or more. As a result, at some point in time all equipment will need to be removed and replaced or upgraded. It can be reasonably expected that such work may require a crew of one to five persons and the use of a crane/flatbed truck and associated light duty crew trucks. Such work will be scheduled outside nesting seasons of species of concern or the area will be assessed by a biologist prior to commencement of work to ensure no nests exist within 100 feet of the work area. However, it is possible that emergency removal/replacement may be required if such equipment fails suddenly and could cause potential human health or flooding problems. In Site 62, the SAMS1 site, appropriate project design features will be used as established by this Master Plan, to avoid impacts to habitat and/or species of concern. • 7.4.3 Major Vegetation Removal & Planting During the wetland establishment period or on a planned, recurring basis, there may be a need for vegetation removal and replacing or replanting species in order to achieve the desired mix and density of wetland plants, or to replace plants disturbed by maintenance activities. Wetland vegetation near inlets and at random locations within the wetlands will be tested and monitored for accumulation of pollutants, similar to sediment monitoring activities. If elevated pollutant levels are detected, the need for plant harvesting to reduce potential exposure to wildlife will be evaluated and performed if deemed necessary. Harvesting typically entails cutting the stalks of the wetland plants to remove edible parts of the plant, and to enhance pollutant volatilization from the roots. Disposal of harvested plants shall be in accordance with appropriate regulations and levels of pollutants. In special purpose basins and detention basins, major vegetation removal/replanting may occur on an annual basis if it is found by IRWD that such removal optimizes the water quality improvement aspects of the basins or if such removal is required to maintain adequate flood control capacity in the underlying facilities. Such removal will typically be performed in late fall or early spring to avoid nesting season, but may be performed at any time in some facilities. See the PDF's in Appendix L. IRWD's biologist will perform a site assessment prior to work being initiated. If signs of nesting birds or species of concern are detected during the assessment, IRWD will have a qualified specialist survey the site and determine • what measures may be required to prevent disturbance of the species. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 129 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7-Operation and Maintenance The primary purpose of the channels in which in -line basins are planned is flood control. As such, it may be necessary to remove the vegetative mass from the channels on an annual or more frequent basis to maintain that capacity. However, it is IRWD's intent to maximize the time the vegetation is in place to maximize the potential for continuation of the natural treatment processes. IRWD will conduct early trials to determine if vegetation can be left in place without significantly diminishing flood capacity. When the vegetation is removed, some root mass of beneficial plants may be left in place to allow for early growth during the growing season. In Site 62, San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1, after the establishment period, the major vegetation removals will be performed on a less frequent basis, from every two to five years, primarily to maintain reasonable water quality improvement capacity, remove invasive non-native species, and keep the site from becoming overgrown to the point of being non-functional or causing uncontrollable vector problems. This major vegetation work will be performed outside nesting season of species of concern. IRWD will survey the site for nesting birds or species of concern and determine what measures may be required to prevent disturbance of the species. If nests are found within 7 days prior to commencement of work, IRWD will consult a qualified specialist on further protective measures that may be required. Less invasive vegetation removal techniques will be employed to avoid disturbance of areas outside the immediate removal zone. During the establishment period, more frequent non-native vegetation removal is likely. At selected sites, basins will be configured to allow "rotational" vegetation removals by keeping at least 25% of the basin wet (assuming adequate inflows) and undisturbed at all times. This is referred to as "wet rotation" in Table 7.2 below, which identifies the type of rotational removal to be applied at each NTS site. On subsequent cycles, the disturbed and undisturbed areas will be "rotated." This allows . wildlife to move to undisturbed areas while maintenance activities proceed in other areas. An example of a wet rotation site is Site 31, PA 17 — West Basin, where two separate flow paths are being established using water flow control structures. During the rotational maintenance, one flow path will be drained while the other continues flowing during rotational vegetation removal. At 19 sites, it will be possible to remove portions of the vegetation on a rotational basis, but the basins may need to be temporarily drained during those removals, because it is not practical to configure them for wet rotation. At these basins, "drained rotation" will be implemented by keeping at least 25% of the basin/vegetation undisturbed during vegetation removal. Of the 19 drained rotation sites, 3 include multiple basins in proximity to one another. These multiple basins provide additional flexibility for wildlife to move to other vegetated areas during vegetation removal activities. These sites are signified by the label "multi -basin rotation" in Table 7.2. As previously mentioned, in -line basins in some reaches may require complete vegetation removals every year before the wet season for flood control purposes. However, if it is determined that all or portions of these basins can remain continuously vegetated for multiple years, then rotational removals will be planned to allow at least 25% of the site vegetated. At selected sites, grass and/or scrub vegetation may be added to enhance forage and nesting areas. These areas will be planted with seed and allowed to grow naturally with only natural rainfall and soil moisture. While it is intended that these vegetation areas will be left untended for multiple years, the grass areas San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan 130 January 2004 Draft for Public Rbview Section 7-Operation and Maintenance • may be plowed and replanted on an annual basis to ensure a healthy crop of grass using dryland farming practices or weeded to remove non-native vegetation. The scrub areas may be thinned on an annual basis, including the removal of plants with trunk diameters greater than 2 inches, measured 12 inches above the soil surface. Table 7.2 identifies the sites where these vegetation types will be planted. Table 7.2: Rotational Capabilities and Vegetation Enhancements Site Number Facility Name Sensitivity * Desi nation Rotational Capability Grassland/Scrub Planted Onsite 10 PA 1— Eastfoot Upper B Drained rotation Grassland 12 61 PA 1— Lower Orchard Estates (multiple basins) PA I — Eastfoot Lower B B Drained rotation; Multi -basin rotation Drained rotation Grassland Grassland 68 PA 18 B Drained rotation Grassland 69 PA 39 (multiple basins) B Drained rotation; Multi -basin rotation Grassland 70 Agua Chinon (multiple basins) B Drained rotation; Multi -basin rotation Grassland 71 Marshbum B Drained rotation Grassland 22 MCAS El Toro — A ua Chinon Lower C Drained rotation 32 PA 17 —East Basin B Drained rotation Grassland 42 PA 27 —Turtle Ridge North B Drained rotation None 49 PA 17 — Center Basin B Drained rotation Grassland 50 MCAS El Toro — Irvine Auto Center C Drained rotation None 51 MCAS El Toro-- Serrano C Drained rotation None 52 MCAS Et Toro — Bee Canyon C Drained rotation None 53 Caltrans SRI33/15 Interchange C Drained rotation Grassland 54 Caltrans SR261/Walnut Basin C Drained rotation None 56 El Modena Park B Drained rotation None 9 PA 1— Eastfoot Retarding Basin B Drained rotation Grassland 11 PA 1— Orchard Estates Retarding Basin B Drained rotation Grassland 16 Trabuco Retarding Basin B Wet rotation Grassland/Scrub 18 Marshbum Retarding Basin B Wet rotation Grassland/Scrub 31 PA17—West Basin B Wet rotation Grassland/Scrub 13 Rattlesnake Reservoir — Existing N/A N/A N/A 39 Sand Canyon Reservoir— Existing N/A N/A N/A 46 San Joaquin Marsh - Augmentation N/A N/A N/A 26 Woodbridge In -Line Basins B In -line basin None 55 Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel In -Line Basins B In -line basin None 64 Wes ark In -Line Basins B In -line basin one 27 Barranca Off -Line Wetlands N/A N/A N/A 62 San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS I A Wet rotation None 67 Cienega (Ciene a de Las Ranas) C N/A N/A ** For Sensitivity Designation definitions, see Section 7.8 Pollutant accumulation in plant tissue will be monitored. If elevated pollutant levels are found, the need for major vegetation removal and disposal to reduce pollutant levels and potential exposure to wildlife will be evaluated. Criteria to judge threshold pollutant levels are discussed in Section Error! Reference • source not found.. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan Draft for Public Review January 2004 Section 7- Operation and Maintenance 7AA Major Sediment Removal . Most facilities will be designed with a forebay, open water area, or other sediment trapping area just downstream of their inlets. These areas are designed as sediment "traps" where coarser sediments and gross pollutants will settle out and accumulate. Sediment accumulation will be monitored annually prior to the wet season. Sediments will be removed when accumulations approach about 25 percent of the designed forebay volume to maintain their sediment removal effectiveness and limit buildup of sediment in the remainder of NTS facilities. Experience elsewhere indicates that removal of sediment in Off -Line facilities is generally required every 10-15 years [City of Portland Oregon, March 1995]. More frequent sediment removal could be needed where upstream erosion control and/or bank protection is inadequate or fails during extreme events. Sediments will generally be removed from all in -Line basins when the seasonal weir structures are removed as needed prior to the wet season. It should be noted that major sediment removal may also be required by OCFCD as part of its operation of its flood control facilities. While such removal in OCFCD facilities is not expected to occur more frequently than every 5 years, it must be accommodated at any time in order to protect life and property. Media in the subsurface flow selenium treatment wetlands (Site 67) will be periodically replaced as they may eventually become clogged with finer sediments or lose treatment potential (e.g., carbon source is depleted), reducing their treatment efficiency. This is expected with this type of wetland treatment approach. The frequency of required media replacement is not known, but is expected to be on the order of every three to 10 years. The planned field demonstration has been designed to provide an indication of the rate of media clogging and loss of treatment efficiency. In addition the demonstration will be designed and operated with pretreatment filtration to remove fine particles from the flow stream before • entering the subsurface treatment media to reduce the need to replace the media due to clogging. Finally, carbon addition may be utilized to reduce the frequency of media replacement as well. The subsurface selenium treatment will be designed to minimize any use by wildlife, so no special timing of maintenance is anticipated. Pollutant accumulation in sediments will be monitored. If elevated pollutant levels are found in exposed sediments, the need for sediment removal to reduce pollutant levels and potential exposure to wildlife will be evaluated. Criteria to judge threshold pollutant levels are discussed in Section Errorl Reference source not found.. Where practical, sediment removal will be performed in conjunction with major vegetation removal/replacement using the same impact avoidance schedules/techniques as appropriate. However, sediment removal will be scheduled based on the amount of accumulation and/or the character of the sediment. All sediments will be tested for pollutants prior to removal. Sediment disposal shall follow appropriate regulations in accordance with detected levels of pollutants. Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) as appropriate will be used during sediment removal operations. Examples of such practices include bypassing flows around the sediment removal area, damming/detaining flows to isolate sediment within the sediment removal zone, filtering of water leaving the removal zone, or other standard practices. • San Diego Creek N7S Master Plan 132 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7- Operation and Maintenance • 7.5 Emergency Operation and Maintenance Activities On occasion, there may be a need to perform any of the operation and maintenance activities in order to protect person or property. This is especially true for any facilities with underlying flood control purposes. In such cases, IRWD will take reasonable measures in notifying regulatory agencies of the work, but of primary importance is the protection of public safety. Due to the unpredictable nature of emergencies, IRWD and any responding agencies will employ the use of as many people and as much equipment of any type as is necessary to adequately respond to the emergency and protect person and property. All facilities can be drained in cases of emergencies. Most facilities are equipped with valves or gates that permit drainage of the wetlands. Those without valves or gates can be drained with portable pumps. 7.6 Episodic Basin/Habitat Reconfigurations It is well recognized that watercourses and wetland/riparian areas are dynamic in nature. That is, in nature, in Southern California especially, these areas are constantly changing due to dramatic swings in runoff flows. In dry years, vegetation frequently dies back. When more water is available, the vegetation expands relative to that availability. Then, when severe flooding occurs, that same vegetation may be uprooted and washed away. This change in vegetation mass and landform is unpredictable and, depending on the location, may be unpreventable. While it is intended that NTS basins will be . maintained to conform to plans and procedures, there may be occasion when IRWD will need to adapt its practices to adjust to episodic changes in the basins. Also, IRWD cannot be responsible for incidental damages to habitat or species as a result of such episodes. 7.7 Spills of Hazardous Materials Accidental spills of hazardous materials such as fuels, other petroleum hydrocarbons, or other materials could potentially flow into the storm drain system, where they may come into contact with NTS facilities. IRWD does not regulate the source control of hazardous materials, nor the upstream storm drain systems. The emergency response to accidental spills is the responsibility of the County and cities. However, basins and channels that contain NTS facilities may inadvertently receive hazardous materials from accidental spills and could potentially be partially or entirely used to detain hazardous spills for clean up to reduce downstream impacts. Any NTS facility that is exposed to hazardous materials will be tested and evaluated, and will be repaired as necessary. The costs for testing and repairs will be applied to appropriate parties to the extent practical. The RWQCB, health care agencies, law enforcement, fire officials, city/county official, or other responsible agencies will be notified as appropriate. 7.8 Operation and Maintenance Minimization Measures When considering the potential impact of O&M activities on wildlife, it is important to assess the sensitivity of each site. During the NTS site selection process, several sites were eliminated from further isconsideration because they are already in or adjacent to existing sensitive habitat areas. The majority of the 31 sites selected for WQT wetlands are being constructed in areas that are not in or adjacent to habitat San Diego Creek NrS Master Plan 133 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7. operation and Maintenance where species of concern would be present. The following summarizes the levels of sensitivity of the sites. At sites that are or are likely to become sensitive, measures will be taken to avoid or minimize potential impacts from 0&M activities at those sites. Commonly referred to as minimization measures, these protections are incorporated into the NTS Master Plan as "project design features," or PDFs, and are described in detail in Appendix L. 22 of 31 NTS WQT wetlands (0&M Groups I thru 3) are or will be constructed in areas characterized as dry, disturbed upland prior to construction. The preconstruction habitat value of these areas is limited. So the introduction of WQT wetland is expected to increase the "net conservation benefit" of these areas. Further, on 15 of the 22 sites, grassland and/or scrub will be planted as part of the NTS program to assist in attracting Tricolored Blackbirds, which nest in emergent marsh vegetation and forage in nearby grassland. These sites may become populated, intermittently or permanently, by both sensitive and non - sensitive plant and animal species. However, it is recognized that but for the development of NTS facilities, there would be little or no valuable habitat available for sensitive species in these areas. It is also recognized that even though species on all or portions of some of these sites may be disturbed during O&M activities at any given time, through "rotation" of maintained areas and the fact that only some of the sites are maintained at any one time, there will remain a net increase of habitat available to them at any given time. As a result, the net conservation benefit continues even with periodic rotational maintenance activities occurring. 3 of the 31 sites (0&M Group 4) are existing IRWD facilities. Rattlesnake Reservoir (Site 13) and Sand Canyon Reservoir (Site 39) are existing open, recycled water reservoirs. IRWD's San Joaquin Marsh (Site 46) is an existing system of circulation ponds used to enhance water quality in San Diego Creek by pumping water into the ponds, allowing it to circulate, and then pump back into the creek, cleaner than before being circulated. No construction is planned for these sites and no changes in O&M activities or measures are proposed. Thus, there is no further discussion of 0&M regarding these sites. All of these sites are managed under existing agreements and permits. No changes to those instruments are proposed at this time. 3 of the 31 sites (0&M Group 5) are in -line basins where dry weather low flows will be temporarily detained longer within existing flood control channels. Currently, these channels are typically maintained with minimal vegetation. There are existing benthic areas within the channels, but due to the high maintenance and disturbance in these channels for flood control, the habitat value is typically low for species of concern. The introduction of NTS facilities to these sites is expected to increase the value of the habitat. PDFs for these sites will protect or enhance the value of the habitat, both existing and new. 1 of the 31 sites is an existing habitat mitigation site. The Barranca Off -Line Wetland (O&M Group 6— Site 27) is owned and operated by the City of Irvine. Due to the sensitive nature of this site, no changes in O&M for this site are proposed other than increasing water detention times. Thus, there is no further discussion of 0&M regarding this site. This site is managed under existing agreements and permits. No changes to those instruments are proposed at this time. I of the 31 sites, San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1 (Site 62-0&M Group 7), is in proximity to a variety of sensitive habitats, including alkali marsh, salt marsh, freshwater wetlands, and cottonwood -willow woodland. The site itself is currently predominantly ruderal, disturbed vegetation. It is proposed to be upgraded by the construction of an NTS wetland and enhancements to some of the adjacent habitats are Son Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 134 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7 - Operation and Maintenance • proposed. Thus, additional project design features are included in recognition of Site 62's potential sensitive nature. The precise location(s) of the remaining site, the Cienega site (Site 67—O&M Group 8), has not yet been identified, but the candidate area for the site is generally similar to O&M Groups 1 thru 3 in that it is dry, highly disturbed upland. Thus O&M activities and measures for Site 67 are similar to these groups, plus additional consideration of the selenium removal process aspects of the site. To minimize the risk to biota from the accumulated selenium, there is no planned habitat enhancement planned for this site. Table 7.3 describes three habitat sensitivity designations. The designations are generally listed in order of likelihood that a species of concern may be present during O&M activities once the sites are established The designations are A to C, with A being the most likely to have species present and C being the least likely. Table 7.1 lists the designation for each NTS site. Table 7.3: Habitat Sensitivity Designation Definitions Habitat Habitat Before Construction Habitat After Construction Presence of Species of Concern Designation A Existing sensitive habitat on or Sensitive habitat on or Species present or potentially adjacent to NTS facility adjacent to NTS facility present prior to and after construction B No existing habitat onsite; Grassland or scrub planted No species present prior to existing grassland in proximity onsite; grassland, riparian construction; species to selected sites; or, existing fringe and/or scrub in potentially present after flowing flood control channel proximity to site; or, construction with little or no vegetation. vegetated flood control channel C No existing habitat onsite or in Emergent marsh vegetation No species present prior to proximity only; or turf overlaying Site construction; little or no 67 (Cienega Site) likelihood of species present after construction Proper operation and maintenance of NTS sites is critical to the performance of the sites for the primary purpose of improving water quality within the San Diego Creek watershed, Newport Bay, and the NCCP. While IRWD will take reasonable care to avoid the disturbance of sensitive species, there is a possibility of incidental take of such species during routine or periodic activities. This section summarizes the measures that will be taken to minimize the disturbance of sensitive species by NTS operation and maintenance activities. More detailed descriptions will be provided in the NCCP and associated permits and agreements issued by the appropriate regulatory agencies. This section summarizes measures taken to avoid or minimize the take of sensitive species. It is not a comprehensive discussion of measures taken to mitigate potential environmental impacts associated with NTS. The complete discussion of such issues can be found in the NTS EIR. Appendix L also provides more details on project design features (PDFs), the measures taken to avoid impacts. The assignment of PDFs to respective designations generally corresponds to the likelihood that those activities may disturb existing sensitive species. Thus, the A designation sites will have more restrictive minimization measures, while the C designation sites will require less restrictive measures. The • following summarizes the PDFs for each designation. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 135 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7-Operation and Maintenance 7.8.1 Sensitivity Designation A Under baseline conditions, Designation A sites are either within or adjacent to existing sensitive habitat areas, where sensitive species are or could be present. As a result, more care will be taken to avoid disturbance of sensitive species during 0&M activities. The following measures will be undertaken as appropriate: • Ongoing awareness — An IRWD staff biologist, familiar with local habitat issues, will be involved with ongoing routine operation and maintenance of the NTS sites and will be able to recognize sensitive species that are observed within the sites during routine work at the sites. Routine activities that may harm the species or disturb an avian species during nesting season will be avoided within an appropriate distance of the species. • Advance site assessment Before major operation and maintenance activities are performed, the IRWD staff biologist will inspect the NTS site to determine if sensitive species are present. • Site survey/consultation — If the IRWD staff biologist is not certain as to the presence/absence of sensitive species, an independent, qualified specialist will be consulted and/or will be requested to perform a survey of the site to determine whether sensitive species are present. If sensitive species are present, then the qualified specialist will be asked to make appropriate recommendations to minimize the effects of the activity. • Nesting season avoidance — At Designation A sites, no significant flooding/drying, sediment or vegetation removal, or major construction activities will be performed during the breeding and nesting season. • SAMS I Site Coordination — Relative to the SAMS 1 site, IRWD staff will notify UCNRS staff in advance of major maintenance work to allow coordination of the work and preparation that may be needed to minimize or avoid impacts of that work on adjacent UCNRS property. The proposed preliminary design for the SAMS 1 Facility also includes a gravity drainage outlet to provide treated water to the UCNRS. Water will be only supplied to UCNRS upon request. 7.8.2 Sensitivity Designation B Designation B sites are considerably less likely to have species of concern present than Designation A sites. They are generally areas where some habitat will be added that may attract species of concern, but the certainty of such presence is not high. The general approach on these sites is to ensure species are not disturbed during O&M activities, primarily through awareness of their presence, and if they are present, reasonable care in the performance of those activities. The following measures will be undertaken as appropriate: • Ongoing awareness — An IRWD staff biologist, familiar with local habitat issues, will be involved with ongoing routine operation and maintenance of the NTS sites and will be able to recognize sensitive species that are observed within the sites during routine work at the sites. • Advance site assessment —Before major operation and maintenance activities are performed, the IRWD staff biologist will inspect the NTS site to determine if sensitive species are present. • Nesting season avoidance — At Designation B sites, no significant flooding/drying, sediment or vegetation removal, or major construction activities will be performed during the breeding and nesting season, if species of concern are present. If they are not present, such activities may be performed during that period. • Son Diego Creek NTS Masterplan 136 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7- Operation and Maintenance 0 7.8.3 Sensitivity Designation C Under baseline conditions, Designation C sites are primarily sites that are either planned for construction as part of new development areas or are existing flood detention basins. The selenium removal site (Site 67—Cienega de las Ranas) is also a Designation C site. The Designation C sites are generally existing dry, disturbed upland areas. While the specific location of the Cienega site has not yet been determined, it is expected to be constructed on land similar to the new development sites. Thus, there is generally little or no habitat for sensitive species within Designation C sites. The following measures will be undertaken as appropriate: • Ongoing awareness — An IRWD staff biologist, familiar with local habitat issues, will be involved with ongoing routine operation and maintenance of the NTS sites and will be able to recognize sensitive species that are observed within the sites during routine work at the sites. Routine activities that may harm the species or disturb an avian species during nesting season will be avoided within an appropriate distance of the species, if they are determined to be present. • Advance site assessixent — Before major operation and maintenance activities are performed, the IRWD staff biologist will inspect the NTS site to determine if sensitive species are present. If such species are present, then reasonable measures will be taken to prevent take of the species. Note that the subsurface selenium treatment at Site 67 will be designed to minimize any use by wildlife, so no special timing of maintenance is anticipated. 7.8.4 Biologist and Specialist Qualifications As part of its operation of NTS, IRWD uses the services of a biologist on an ongoing basis. The qualifications of that biologist, whether an IRWD staff member or contract consultant, are described below. The IRWD biologist must have a basic understanding of biology, ecology, botany, natural resources and wildlife management. The biologist should have knowledge of the sensitive and non -sensitive habitats and special status plant and wildlife species that are known to occur or have the potential to occur within the San Diego Creek Watershed, especially in and around the Irvine Ranch Water District San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment Systems water quality treatment facility sites. The IRWD biologist should also possess the following skills: • Strong field skills with the ability to perform vegetation/habitat assessments, plant species surveys, wildlife surveys including surveys for state- and/or federally -listed plant and wildlife species. • A general understanding of the natural treatment system water quality treatment operation and maintenance (O&M) and the ability to quickly assess biological resource conditions and prescribe the appropriate measures to avoid and/or minimize the potential effects of routine, major or emergency O&M activities on sensitive habitats, plant and wildlife species. • • A working knowledge of pertinent environmental regulations including California Environmental Quality Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Section 404, Section 401, Fish and Game Code San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 137 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 7.Operation and Maintenance Section 1600, the state and federal Endangered Species Acts, and the Central Coastal Subregional is Community Conservation Planning/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) program requirements. • Experience in identifying and resolving state and federal regulatory agency issues/conflicts that may result from the potential effects of on -going O&M activities on resources under their jurisdiction such as jurisdictional wetlands or listed plant or wildlife species. • An understanding of the principles of adaptive management which involves regular review of 0&M activities monitoring reports with respect to the presence of sensitive plant or wildlife species, the types of O&M activities undertaken, the effects of these activities on these species, and measures taken to avoid and/or minimize the effects of these activities on these species. The measures may include modifications to the facility design and/or one or more of the O&M activities. This adaptive management process would continue and changes made to O&M activities as necessary and practicable to avoid and/or minimizing the effects of these activities on sensitive species. • Experience in habitat creation, restoration and enhancement including the identification and treatment/management of exotic invasive plant and/or wildlife species. • Experience in managing biologists, restoration ecologists, or other biological resource technicians that may be contracted to assist the wildlife biologist/resource management specialist in the completion of surveys, monitoring site conditions, preparation of reports, plans or programs, or other biological services as required in the performance of his or her duties. • From time to time, the 1RWD biologist may desire or need the assistance of a qualified specialist in any of the above areas of expertise/experience. The 1RWD biologist will consider any findings or recommendations by the qualified specialist when taking actions, making recommendations and decisions or writing reports. • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 138 January 2004 Oran for public Review Appendix L — Operation & Maintenance Activities Operation & Maintenance Activities LA Operation & Maintenance Group Assignments NTS facilities are somewhat diverse in design, with each type of facility varying in its associated operations and maintenance (O&M) activities. Types of facilities also vary in the special considerations to be taken into account when O&M activities are performed. These considerations are primarily intended to accommodate habitat that is either existing or may become established as a result of development of the NTS facilities themselves. The considerations are better described as "project design features" or PDF's. This appendix describes those features and how they are applied to the various facilities types. For the purpose of applying PDF's, NTS facilities can be grouped according to the various types of facilities and what PDF's may be applied. The following is a description of the groups. Table L.1 identifies into which group each NTS site is categorized. O&M Group No. Group Description • Is 1 Special Purpose Basins 2 Detention Basins with Pumping Equipment 3 Detention Basins without Pumping Equipment 4 Existing IRWD Facilities 5 In -Channel Basins 6 Existing Barranca Off -Line Basin 7 San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1 8 Cienega (Cienega de las Ranas) Selenium Removal Site Table L.1: Operation & Maintenance Group Assignments Site Number Facility Name O&M Group Operation & Maintenance Type Sensitivity Designation" 10 PA 1— Eastfoot Upper 1 Special purpose basin B 12 PA 1 — Lower Orchard Estates (multiple basins 1 Special purpose basin B 22 WAS El Toro — Ague Chinon Lower I Special purpose basin C 32 PA 17 — East Basin 1 Special purpose basin B 42 PA 27 — Turtle Ridge North 1 Special purpose basin B 49 PA 17 — Center Basin 1 Special purpose basin B 50 WAS El Toro — Irvine Auto Center 1 Special purpose basin C 51 WAS El Toro - Serrano I Special purpose basin C 52 WAS El Toro — Bee Canyon I Special purpose basin C 61 PA 1— Eastfoot Lower I Special purpose basin B 68 PA 18 (multiple basins 1 Special purpose basin B 69 PA 39 (multiple basins 1 Special purpose basin B 70 A ua Chinon (multiple basins) 1 Special purpose basin B 71 Marshbum I Special purpose basin B 53 Caltrans SR133/15 Interchange 2 Detention basin C 54 Caltrans SR26I/Walnut Basin 2 Detention basin C 56 El Modena Park 2 Detention basin B San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 1.11 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appandlz L — Operation & Maintenance ActhWes Site Number Facility Name O&M Group Operation & Maintenance Type Sensitivity Designation** 9 PA I — Eastfoot Retarding Basin 3 Detention basin B 11 PA I — Orchard Estates Retarding Basin 3 Detention basin B 16 Trabuw Retarding Basin 3 Detention basin B 18 Marshburn Retarding Basin 3 Detention basin B 31 PA 17 —West Basin 3 Detention basin B 13 Rattlesnake Reservoir — Existin 4 1 Existing facility N/A* 39 Sand Canyon Reservoir— Existing 4 Existing facility N/A* 46 San Joaquin Marsh —Augmentation 4 Existing facility N/A* 26 Woodbrid a In -Line Basins 5 In -channel basin B 55 Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel In -Line Basins 5 In-chmncl basin B 64 Wes ark In -Line Basins 5 In•channel basin B 27 Barranca Off -Line Wetlands 6 Existing facili N/A* 62 San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1 7 1 SAMS 1 A 67 Ciene a Ciene a de Las Ranas 8 1 Selenium removal C * N/A =Not Applicable; no proposed changes to existing 0&M activities or measures ** For Sensitivity Designation definitions, see Section 7.8 L.1 Operation & Maintenance Project Design Features 0 The following is the list of PDF's that have been developed for the sites. The PDF number corresponds to the subsection number in Section 7 (Operation and Maintenance) to which the PDF applies. For instance PDF No. 7.3.3.1 is the first PDF that applies to Subsection 7.3.3 (Water Level Control). The following section of the Appendix identifies to whir* operation & maintenance group the PDF applies. Table L.2 Operation & Maintenance Project Design Features PDF No. O&M Activity Project Design Feature PDF Description 7.3.3.1 Water Level Water level control is not expected to be a routine activity. Once set, the water levels are generally Control expected to remain unchanged unless changes are required to facilitate maintenance or for pest/plant control. In basins with ponded water, minimum pools or flow levels will be maintained as refu is for fish or other aquatic species, subject to availability of natural or maturtado flows. 7.3.3.2 Water Level While salt marsh areas in the San Joaquin Marsh have been isolated from their salt sources by Control channelization, in areas identified as salt marsh restoration, water levels will be adjusted to enhance the aimropriate conditions for salt marsh health. 7.3.3.3 Water Level in other portions of the site not identified as NTS basin or salt marsh, water levels will be adjusted Control tooptimize the health of those areas. 7.3.4.1 Trash & Due to the isolation of the SAMS 1 site from the public and -urban runoff flows, trash and debris Debris accumulation is expected to be minimal. Removal of these materials will be performed as needed Removal to protect the health of the local habitat and prevent the material from migrating to other areas. 7.3.5.1 Pump/Valve Routine pump and valve activities will be conducted in conjunction with weekly site inspections. O&M 7.3.5.2 Pump/Valve Pump and valve locations will be located so as to minimize disruption of wildlife during operation O&M and maintenance activities. 7.3.8.1 Weir The weirs to be used in the inline basins are either permanent, gravel/rock darns or seasonal Installation dashboard arrangements. In either case, the seasonal weirs will be installed in the spring, prior to the dry season. Seasonal weirs will be removed in the fall, prior to the wet season. Prior to installation or removal, the 1RWD biologist will perform an assessment to ensure sensitive species that may be present will not be impacted by the thane in water elevation. 7.3.9.1 Minor The basin will be configured to allow "rotational maintenance." That is, vegetation may be San Olego Cteek NTS Master Plan L-2 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L — Operation & Maintenance Activitles PDF No. O&M Activity Project Design Feature PDF Description Vegetation removed or harvested from a portion of the basin while allowing the remainder to operate without i Maintenance disruption. At least 25% of the basin will be left undisturbed during this activity. See Section 7.4.3. 7.3.9.2 Minor Preferred vegetation removal is by cutting or thinning by hand to allow root stock to remain after Vegetation removal operations. Vegetation removal and any required replanting will generally occur between Maintenance September 15 and March 15. During the rest of the year, if an assessment conducted by the IRWD biologist within 72 hours prior to work determines no sensitive species will be impacted, then work may proceed. During this latter period, CDFG and USFWS will be notified in advance of work proceeding. 7.3.9.3 Minor At selected sites, grass and/or scrub vegetation may be added to enhance forage and nesting areas. Vegetation These areas will be planted with seed and allowed to grow naturally with only natural rainfall and Maintenance soil moisture. While it is intended that these vegetation areas will be left untended for multiple years, the grass areas maybe plowed and replanted on an annual basis to ensure a healthy crop of grass using dryland famvng practices. The scrub areas may be thinned on an annual basis, including the removal of plants with trunk diameters greater than 2 inches, measured 12 inches above the soil surface. Table 7.2 identifies the sites where these vegetation types will be planted. 7.3.10.1 Minor Each Spring, accumulated sediment, if any, will be tested for pollutants. Reasonable efforts will be Sediment made to remove sediment that is shown to have levels greater than those described in Section 8.3.5 Removal and Table 8.2. 7.3.13.1 Flooding/ Intermittent flooding/drying is used for vector control and pest/plant management on an as -needed Drying basis. Flooding/drying will generally be performed between September 15 and March 15. If flooding/drying is required' during the rest of the year, an assessment will be conducted by the IRWD biologist to ensure no sensitive species will be impacted. During this latter.period, CDFG and USFWS will be notified in advance of work proceeding. 7.4.1.1 Structural Structural modifications are not anticipated at the time of basin construction. Permitting agencies Modifications will be consulted prior to structural modifications to the basin affecting wildlife. Non -emergency work will be performed between September 15 and March 15, unless an assessment conducted by Am the IRWD biologist determines no sensitive species will be impacted by the work. 7.4.1.2 Structural IRWD will notify UCNRS, CDFG, the Corps, and USFWS prior to proceeding with non - Modifications emergency structural modifications. 7.4.2.1 Pump/Valve While failures may occur at any time thus resulting in removal/replacement, pumps are typically Replacement replaced every 5 years and valves are replaced every 25 years. This work will be performed without restriction between September 15 and March 15. During the rest of the year, if the IRWD biologist performs an assessment and determines that no sensitive species will be disturbed, the work will proceed without restriction. If the biologist determines that a species may be disturbed, a qualified specialist will be consulted to determine what measures may be taken to perform the work without disturbance, before proceeding. During this latter period, CDFG and USFWS will be notified in advance of work proceeding. 7.4.3.1 Major Each basin will be configured to allow "rotational maintenance." That is, vegetation may be Vegetation removed or harvested from a portion of the basin while allowing the remainder to operate without Removal disruption. At least 25% of the basin will be left undisturbed during this activity. See Section 7.4.3. 7.4.3.2 Major Major vegetation removal, thinning and planting is only expected to occur when vegetation grows Vegetation too thick to allow adequate flow of water or pollutant removal. Such removal is usually performed Removal by hand, but may require removal equipment after multiple years of growth. 7.4.3.3 Major Current plans call for cutting and/or removal of vegetation on an annual basis (between September Vegetation 1 and November 1) in the channels so as not to diminish flood control capacities of the channels. Removal Such work would generally be performed by hand, but may require some motorized equipment for removal of cuttings or removed materials. It should be noted that the NTS master plan calls for a trial to determine if the vegetation can remain for multiple seasons/years to enhance habitat and pollutant removal value of the basins at some locations. If it is determined that annual cutting/removal is not necessary, then major vegetation removal, thinning and planting is only expected to occur when vegetation grows too thick to allow adequate flow of water or pollutant removal. Such removal is usually performed by hand, but may require removal equipment after multiple years of growth. ft San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan L-3 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L— Operation B Maintenance Activilles PDF No. 0&M Activity Project Design Feature PDF Description 7.4.3.4 Major AtSAMS 1 (Site 62), thinning and planting is only expected to occur when vegetation grows too Vegetation thick to allow adequate flow of water or pollutant removal. Such removal is usually perforated by Removal hand, but may require removal equipment after multiple years of growth. IRWD will notify UCNRS, CDFG, the Corps, find USFWS prior to proceeding with major vegetation removal. 7A.4.1 Major While most NTS basins arc not expected to accumulate significant amounts of sediment, some of Sediment the basins may. If major sediment removal is required, the permitting agencies will be consulted Removal prior to initiation of non -emergency work on the site. Non -emergency work will be performed between September 15 and March IS, unless an assessment conducted by the IRWD biologist determines no sensitive species will be impacted by the work. If work proceeds outside this period, CDFG and USFWS will be notified in advance of work proceeding. 7.4.4.2 Major Due to the nature of detention basins, they tend to be the basins that are most likely to require Sediment major sediment removal. Basins directly downstream of open spaces are more likely to require Removal sediment removal than those surrounded by urbanized areas. If major sediment removal is required, the permitting agencies wilt be consulted prior to initiation of non -emergency worlcon the site. Non -emergency work will be performed between September 15 and March 15, unless an assessment conducted by the IRWD biologist determines no sensitive species will be impacted by the work. 7.4.4.3 Major Some portions of the in -line basins may require major sediment removal as part of the Sediment operation/maintenance of the channel for flood control purposes and for sediment trapping Removal purposes. Such removals will be performed by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD), or its designee, using current policies, regulations, practices, and permits. The existence of NTS facilities within these areas shall not hinder OCFCD from performing such work as needed. 7.4.4.4 Major Since any flow in SAMS 1 (Site 62) will be pumped into the basin, it is expected that sediment Sediment accumulation will be minimal. Thus, major sediment removal is expected to be very infrequent Removal (multiple years between removals). However, it should be noted that if significant pollutants (eg, Selenium) accumulate in the sediment such sediment may be removed more often. 7A.4.5 Major By design, the biofilter media in the Cienega site (Site 67) may need to be excavated and replaced Sediment periodically. When this occurs, a portion or all of the filter material may be removed. If the Removal surface is a wetland, the entire wetland may be removed and replaced. This work would be performed between September 15 and March 15. If it is turf, the turf will be reproved and replaced. This work can be performed at any time during the year. 7A.4.6 Major Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be used during sediment removal activities to Sediment ensure that sediment is not released into downstream water courses. Removal 7.5.1 Emergency Emergency repairs are unplanned activities performed for the protection of health, life and/or 0&M property. Should such activities be required by the landowner, IRWD, or any other party with such responsibilities as they relate to NTS facilities, they will be perforated with reasonable care for the environment. The parry performing the work will consult with permitting agencies early on, to the extent practicable, if it is reasonable that there may be risk to the environment. r� • San Dlego Crsek NTS Master Plan L-4 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBUC REVIEW Appendix L—Operation & Maintenance Activities L.1 Operation & Maintenance Activities by Group *he following tables describe the O&M activities that are expected to be performed in each of the operation & maintenance groups. The activity corresponds to the activities as described in Section 7 (Operation and Maintenance), with the Activity Number corresponding to the number of the subsection under which the activity is described. The table also describes in what area of the NTS facility the activity is performed, the probably average frequency, number of personnel involved, type of equipment used, and the PDF's applied to that activity. • • Table L.3: O&M Group 1- Special Purpose Basins ^W C ^ is �y2 E �, w w Activity Routine Operation & Maintenance 7.3.1 Site Inspection X I X X X I X Weekly, 1 Pickup 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing X I X Monthly I Picku 7.3.3 Water Level Control X I X X As needed 1 Pickup 7.3.3.1 7.3.4 Trash/Debris Removal X X X X X As needed by 1 to 5 Stakebed trash load 7.3.5 PumpNalve Inspection, Adjustment Not applicable & Maintenance 7.3.6 Irrigation System Inspection, X X Monthly 1 Pickup Adjustment & Maintenance (when applicable) 7.3.7 Inlet/Outlet Inspection & X X Monthly 1 Pickup Maintenance 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal Not applicable 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and X X X X X Semi-annually I Pickup 7.3.9.1, Snag Removal or as needed 7.3.9.2, 7.3.9:3 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal% X X Annually, if I to 10 Backhoe, 7.3.9.1, needed dump 7.3.10.1 truck, Stakebed 7.3.11 Integrated Pest/Plant Management X X X I X I If/as needed I 1 to 3 Picku 7.3.12 Mosquito,Fish Stocking/Bti X X If/as needed 1 to 3 Pickup Application 7.3.13 Intemtittent Flooding/Drying X IxTIf/as needed 1 Pickup 7.3.13.1 Major Maintenance 7.4.1 Structural Modifications X X X X If/as needed 7.4.1.1 7A.2 Pump/Valve Removal & Not applicable Replacement 7A.3 Major Vegetation Removal/Planting X X X X If/as needed I to 5 Stakebed 7.4.3.1, 7.4.3.2 7.4.4 Major Sediment Removal X X X If/as needed As As needed 7.4.3.1, needed 7.4.4.1, 7.4.4.6 Emer2ency Activities 7.5 Emergency Repairs & Maintenance X X I X X X If/as needed As As needed 7.5.1 needed San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan L-5 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L — Operation & Maintenance Activitles Table LA: O&M Group 2 — Detention Basins with Pumping Equipment i 21 D C b pea, d G PC w C w w Y A it D a■+1 y 0 1.�/ .q CU{ OO q R 7 y L} Y E ,QG, F a C6 y O apVi CO t+ d Y Activi 3 F C ^ �W �a adwa CL FW a.Aw Routine Operation & Maintenance 7.3.1 Site Inspection X X X X X Weekly 1 Pickup 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing X X Monthly 1 Pickup 7.3.3 Water Level Control X X X As needed 1 Pickup 7.3.3.1 7.3A Trash/Debris Removal X X X X X As heeded by I to 5 Stakebed trash load 7.3.5 Pump/Valve Inspection, Adjustment & X X Weekly 1 Pickup 7.3.5.1 Maintenance 7.3.6 Irrigation System Inspection, Adjustment X X Monthly 1 Pickup & Maintenance (when applicable) 7.3.7 Inlet/Outlet Inspection & Maintenance X X Monthly 1 Pickup 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal Not applicable 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and Snag X X X X X Semi -mutually 1 Pickup 7.3.9.1, Removal or as needed 7.3.9.2, 7.3.9.3 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal:. X X Annually, if I to 10 Backhoe, 7.3.9.1, needed dump 7.3.10.1 truck, stakcbed 7.3.11 Integrated Pest/Plant Mann omen t X X X X If/as needed 1 to 3 Picku 7.3.12 Mosquito Fish Stocking/Eti A lication X X If/as needed 1 to 3 Picku 7.3.13 Intermittent Flooding/Drying X I X If/as needed I 1 I Pickup 7.3.13.1 Major Maintenance 7.4.1 Structural Modifications X X X X Was needed 7A.1.1 7.4.2 PumpNalve Removal & Replacement X X As needed I to 3 Crane and 7.4.2.1 crew trucks 7A.3 Major Vegetation Removal/Pianting X X X X If/as needed I to 5 Stakebed 7.4.3.1, 7.4.3.2 7.4.4 Major Sediment Removal X X X Was needed As As needed 7.4.3.1, needed 7A.4.1 7.4A.2, 7.4.4.6 Emergency Activities 7.5 Emergency Repairs & Maintenance X X X X X Was needed As As needed 7.5.1 needed • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan L -6 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L — Operation & Maintenance Activities. Table L.S: O&M Group 3 — Detention Basins without Pumping Equipment G p, d 15, R R . o R O u 4 Vi w y� pC,p ty ¢x a�w wa E~w wA'w Activity Routine Operation & Maintenance 7.3.1 Site Inspection X X X X X Weekly 1 I Pickup 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing X X Monthly 1 Pickup 7.3.3 Water Level Control X X X As needed 1 Pickup 7.33.1. 7.3.4 Trash/Debris Removal As needed by 1 to 5 Stakebed trash load 7.3.5 Pump/Valve Inspection, Adjustment & Not applicable Maintenance 7.3.6 Irrigation System Inspection, Adjustment X X Monthly 1 Pickup & Maintenance when applicable 7.3.7 Inlet/Outlet Inspection & Maintenance X Ix I X I I Monthly 1 I Picku 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal Not applicable 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and Snag X X X X X Semi-annually I Pickup 7.3.9.1, Removal or as needed 7.3.9:2 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal% X X Annually, if 1 to 10 Backhoe, 7.3.9.1, needed dump 7.3.93, truck, 7.3.10.1 stakebed 7.3.11 Integrated Pest/Plant Management =x X X X If/as needed 1 to 3 Pickup Am 7.3.12 Mosquito Fish StockingtBti Application X X I If/as needed I I to 3 Pickup 3.13 Intermittent Floodin in X X If/as needed 1 Pickup 7.3.13.1 Major Maintenance 7.4.1 Structural Modifications If/as needed 7.4.1.1 '. 7.4.2 Pum Nalve Removal & Replacement Not applicable 7A.3 Major Vegetation Removal/Planting X X X X If/as needed 1 to 5 Stakebed 7.4.3.1, 7.4.3.2 7A.4 Major Sediment Removal X X X If/as needed As As needed 7A.3.1, " needed 7.4A.1, 7A.4.2, 7.4.4.6 Emergency Activities 7.5 Emergency Repairs & Maintenance X X I X X X If/as needed As As needed needed • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan L,7 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L — Operatlon & Ma1n(6nance AdIvidQS Table L.6: O&M Group 4 — Existing IRWD Facilities Activity a 3 F> d M a. 2 °a' mow. p; ffi a �a °i d o o a`.C'w �°«' a E q w"a: °1 - 1~w aar; Routine Operation & Maintenance See Special Notes Below 7.3.1 Site Inspection 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing 7.3.3 Water Level Control 7.3.4 Trash/DebrisRemoval 7.3.5 Pump/Valve Inspection, Adjustment & Maintenance 7.3.6 Irrigation System inspection, Adjustment & Maintenance when applicable) 7.3.7 Inlet/OUtlet Ins ection & Maintenance 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and Snag Removal 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal:. 7.3.11 Inte rated Pest/Plant Management 7.3.12 Mosquito Fish Stoeldn Bti Application 7.3.13 Intermittent Flooding/Drying Major Maintenance 7.4.1 Structural Modifications 7.4.2 Pump/Valve Removal & Replacement 7.4.3 Minor Vegetation Rctnovat/Plantin 7.4.4 Maier Sediment Removal Emergency Activities 7.5 Emergency Repairs & Maintenance Special Notes: 0&M Group 4 is composed of existing IRWD facilities (Rattesnake Reservoir, Sand Canyon Reservoir, and San Joaquin Marsh). No significant physical changes are proposed for these sites. These facilities will continue to be operated and maintained with the same practices currently used. L Son Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan L s January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L — Operation & Maintenance Activities 4 Table L.7: O&M Group 5 — In -Channel Basins u R N Y tzC R O R r tRJ 4 y pCa 7 3 H>" S �w atz w`Qw` w"a" 1:w aciw Activity Routine Operation & Maintenance 7.3.1 Site Inspection X X X Weekl 1 Pickup 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing X X Monthl 1 Pickup 7.3.3 Water Level Control X As needed 1 . ckup 7.3.3.1 7.3.4 Trash/Debris Removal X X X As needed by 1 to 5 Stakebed trash load 7.3.5 Pump/Valve Inspection, Adjustment & Not applicable Maintenance 7.3.6 Irrigation System Inspection, Adjustment Not applicable & Maintenance when applicable) 7.3.7 Inlet/Outlet Inspection & Maintenance X Monthly 1 Pickup 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal X X SprinWfall I Pickup 7.3.8.1 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and Snag X X X X Semi-annually 1 Pickup 7.3.9.2, Removal or as needed 7.3.9.3 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal:. X X Annually, if 1 to 10 Backhoe, 7.3.9.1, needed dump 7.3.10.1 truck, stakebed 7.3.11 Integrated Pest/Plant Management X X X X If/as needed 1 to 3 Picku 7.3.12 Mosquito Fish Stockin ti Application X X If/as needed 1 to 3 Picku .3.13 Intermittent Flooding/DryingX X If/as needed 1 Picku 7.3.13.1 Major Maintenance 7.4.1 Structural Modifications X X X LX If/as needed 7.4.1.1 7.4.2 Pump/valve Removal & Replacement Not applicable 7.4.3 Major Vegetation Removal/Planting X X X X If/as needed 1 to 5 Stakebed 7A.3.3 7.4.4 Major Sediment Removal X X X If/as needed As As needed 7.4.4.3, needed 7A.4.6 Emergency Activities 7.5 Emergency Repairs & Maintenance X X X X X If/as needed As As needed needed San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan L-9 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L — Operation & Maintenance AcdvlQes Table L.8: O&M Group 6 — Barranca Off -Line Basin Activity+ TJ F F pY � •ty �= E>W .7 p C fi dt a be Y adW Y ,r pia fi Fw to Routine Operation & Maintenance See p SSpecial Notes Below 7.3.1 Site Inspection 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing 7.3.3 Water Level Control 7.3.4 Trash/Debris Removal 7.3.5 Pump/Valvo Inspection, Adjustment & Maintenance 7.3.6 Irrigation System Inspection, Adjustment & Maintenance when applicable) 7.3.7 Inlet/Outlet Inspection & Maintenance 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and Snag Removal 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal:. 7.3.11 Integrated PesttPlant Manaement 7.3.12 Mosquito Fish Stockin Bti Application 7.3.13 Intermittent Flooding/Drying Major Maintenance 7.4.1 Structural Modifications 7.4.2 Pump/Valve Removal & Replacement 7.4.3 Major Vegetation Removal/Planting 7.4.4 Major Sediment Removal Emer chey Activities 7.5 Emergency Rc airs & Maintenance Special Notes: Site 27, Barranca Off -Line Wetlands is an existing mitigation site. One of the stated objectives of the original wetland restoration plan is the improvement of water quality in San Diego Creek as a result of the natural cleansing of water that is diverted from San Diego Creek and local storm drains through the site. However, the plan does not specify emergent marsh vegetation as a vegetation type in the plan. Thus, the resource agencies have recommended that such vegetation be limited to whatever extent it has already established itself in the site. To accommodate this recommendation, IRWD is only proposing that the outlet be modified to extend the retention of small storm flows from a few hours to approximately 36 hours. No construction is proposed within the wetlands aside from installation of a modified outlet riser and associated work Also, the resource agencies have recommended that operation and maintenance activities not be modified from current practices. IRWD will not perform any activities beyond those already performed by the landowner/manager of the site. • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 1.110 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L — Operation & Maintenance Activities Table L.9: O&M Group 7 — San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS1 N W G m A •C 0 at C' i O O � C. d Op C ' d .S m ,G F> w d P; W d w Activity3 Routine Operation & Maintenance 7.3.1 Site Inspection X X X X X Weekly 1 Pickup 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing X X Monthly 1 Pickup 7.3.3 Water Level Control X X As needed 1 Pickup 7.3.3.1, 7.3.3.2, 7.3.3.3 7.3.4 Trash/Debris Removal X X X X X As needed by 1 to 5 Stakebed 7.3.4.1 trash load 7.3.5 Pump/Valve Inspection, Adjustment & X X Weekly 1 Pickup 7.3.5.1, Maintenance 7.3.5.2 7.3.6 Irrigation System Inspection, Adjustment X X Monthly 1 Pickup & Maintenance when applicable) 7.3.7 Inlet/Outlet Inspection & Maintenance X X Monthl ] Picku 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal Not applicable 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and Snag X X X X X Semi-annually 1 Pickup 7.3.9.1, Removal or as needed 7.3.9.2 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal:. X X Annually, if 1 to 5 Backhoe, 7.3.9.1, needed dump 7.3.10.1 truck, Adk Stakebed .3.11 Integrated Pest/Plant Management X X X X If/as needed 1 to 3 1 Pickup 7.3.12 Mosquito Fish Stockin Bti Application X X I If/as needed I 1 to 3 Pickup 7.3.13 Intermittent Floodin 'ng X X If/as needed 1 Pickup 7.3.13.1 Major Maintenance 7.4.1 Structural Modifications If/as needed 7.4.1.1 7.4.2 Pump/Valve Removal & Replacement X X As needed 1 to 3 Crane and 7.3.5.1, crew 7.3.5.2, trucks 7.4.2.1 7.4.3 Major Vegetation Removal/Planting X X X X If/as needed 1 to 5 Stakebed 7.4.3.1, 7.4.3.2, 7.4.3.4 7.4.4 Major Sediment Removal If/as needed As As needed 7.4.3.1, needed 7.4.4.4, 7.4.4.6 Emergency Activities 7.5 Emergency Repairs & Maintenance as needed As needed 7.5.1 neeedd ed Special Notes: General: It is recognized that Site 62 — San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS i is a special site due to its location within the greater San Joaquin Marsh ecosystem and adjacency to the portion of the marsh operated and maintained by UCNRS . As such there are special considerations in the operation and maintenance of this site. This table summarizes the operation and maintenance activities. Specific details of the operation and maintenance of this site will be coordinated with UCNRS to minimize or avoid impacts • of this NTS site on the UCNRS property. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan L-11 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L —.Operation & Maintenance ActlWtles Table L.10: O&M Group 8 — Cienega (Cienega de Las Ranas) Selenium Removal Site Surface Wetland Option a e o ++ m ;� d h w d u .o c .� •C O G pp V O C ad. a o'o " a Activitya Ha w C04 a`C'w 44 E~w w`�w Routine Operation & Maintenance 7.3.1 Site Inspection X X X X X Weekly i Pickup 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing X X X Monthly I Pickup 7.3.3 Water Level Control X X X As needed 1 Pickup 7.3.3.1 7.3.4 Trash/Debris Removal X X X X X As needed by 1 to 5 Stakebed trash load 7.3.5 Pump/Valvc lnspecflon, Adjustment & X X Weekly I Pickup 7.3.5.1 Maintenance 7.3.6 Irrigation System Inspection, Adjustment X X Monthly 1 Pickup & Maintenance when applicable) 7.3.7 Inlet/Outlet Inspection & Maintenance X X Monthly I I Pickup 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal Not atinlicable 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and Snag X X X X X Semi-annually 1 Pickup 7.3.9.1, Removal or as needed 7.3.9.2, 7.3.9.3 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal:. X X Annually, if 1 to 5 Backhoe, 7.3.9.1, needed dump 7.3.10.1 truck, stakebed 7.3.11 Integrated Pest/Plant Managemet X X X If/as needed Io3 to u lic7.3.12 Mosquito Fish Stockin Bti A ation 1 X X If/as needed 1 3 Pickk 7.3.13 Intennittent Floodin in X I X If/as needed 1 ] 1 Pickup 7.3.13.1 Major Maintenance 7.4.1 Structural Modifications X X X X X If/as needed As needed I 7A.1.1 7A.2 Pump/Valve Removal & Replacement X X As needed 1 to 3 Crane and 7A.2.1 Crew trucks 7.4.3 Major Vegetation Removal/Planting X X X X If/as needed 1 to 5 Stakebed 7.4.3.1, 7A.3.2 7AA Major Sediment Removal if/as needed As As needed 7.4.3.1, needed 7AA.1, 7.4A.5, 7A.4.6 Emeracnev Activities 7.5 Emergency Repairs & Maintenance If/as needed As As needed 7.5.1 needed Special Notes: As proposed, the Cienega Selenium Removal Site (Site 67) may be covered with either a surface wetland or turf. In fact, the site could actually be separated into multiple sites, each with its own surface option. Under either situation, the surface treatment would be separated from the subterranean selenium removal process by soil and/or a barrier. Table L.10 is developed around the construction of a surface wetland, Asurface wetland would be managed similar to the Special Purpose Basins. if turf is used as the surface, then the site will be operated and maintained as a park or athletic field, with no habitat implications. Table L.11 is developed around the • construction of a turf surface. San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan L-12 January 2004 DRAFTFOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix L— Operation & Maintenance Activities Table L.11: O&M Group 8 — Cienega (Cienega de Las Ranas) Selenium Removal Site Turf Surface Option F N r w o R E a y o o cn o i m e E o E u o. u A �+ w w b0 � u R .moo s i p. 7 y� 'p 'm m y 3 W E~> y t w d`xO° p> 4<V. w"o: E~w a`pw Activity Routine Operation & Maintenance 7.3.1 Site Inspection X X X Weekly t Pickup 7.3.2 Water Quality Testing X X Monthly 1 Pickup 7.3.3 Water Level Control X X As needed 1 Pickup 7.3.3.1 7.3.4 Trash/Debris Removal X X X As needed by 1 to 5 Stakebed trash load 7.3.5 Pump/Valve Inspection, Adjustment & X X Weekly I Pickup 7.3.5.1 Maintenance 7.3.6 Irrigation System Inspection, Adjustment Not applicable & Maintenance when applicable) 7.3.7 Inlet/Outlet Inspection & Maintenance X Monthly 1 Pickup 7.3.8 Weir Installation & Removal Not applicable 7.3.9 Minor Vegetation Maintenance and Snag Not applicable Removal 7.3.10 Minor Sediment Removal% Not applicable 7.3.11 Integrated Pest/Plant Management Not applicable 7.3.12 Mosquito Fish Stockin Bti Application Not applicable 7.3.13 Intermittent FloodinglDrying Not applicable a'or Maintenance .4.1 Structural Modifications X1 X I X If/as needed As needed 7.4.1.1 7.4.2 PumpNalve Removal & Replacement X X As needed I to 3 Crane and 7.4.2.1 crew trucks 7.4.3 Major Vegetation Removal/Planting Not applicable 7.4.4 Major Sediment Removal If/as needed As As needed 7.4.3.1, needed 7.4.4.1, 7.4.4.5, 7.4.4.6 Emergency Activities 7.5 Emergency Repairs & Maintenance X X X I If/as needed As As needed needed • Special Notes: As proposed, the Cienega Selenium Removal Site (Site 67) may be covered with either a surface wetland or turf. In fact, the site could actually be separated into multiple sites, each with its own surface option. Under either situation, the surface treatment would be separated from the subterranean selenium removal process by soil and/or a barrier. Table L.10 is developed around the construction of a surface wetland. A surface wetland would be managed similar to the Special Purpose Basins. If turf is used as the surface, then the site will be operated and maintained as a park or athletic field, with no habitat implications. Table L.I I is developed around the construction of a turf surface. San Diego Creek NTS Master Pan L-13 January 2004• DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting • 8 Monitoring and Reporting 8.1 Objectives The monitoring and reporting program is to provide information that supports the following objectives: 1. General Site Management — Perform monitoring that enables IRWD to manage the operation and maintenance of the various NTS sites individually and as a system. This standardized monitoring also provides information used to assess general performance and identify potential impacts. 2. Detailed Performance — Conduct and document detailed performance monitoring of selected NTS facilities that represent the different facility types to evaluate their treatment effectiveness and operating constraints to enable IRWD to optimize performance of NTS and to determine the effectiveness of NTS basins as structural BMPs for San Diego Creek under the County of Orange M84 Permit. The initial sites selected for performance monitoring are: ■ El Modena Park (off-line dry and wet weather treatment system) ■ Woodbridge In -Line Basin (in -line dry weather treatment system) ■ Trabuco Retarding Basin (in -line dry and wet weather treatment system) • Cienega Basin (off-line dry weather selenium treatment system) ■ San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1 (off-line dry weather system) 3. Focused Impact Analysis — Perform tests and assessments to determine potential impacts, positive or negative, that operation and maintenance of the selected NTS sites may have on the environment and biota within and using the sites. While this focused analysis is primarily associated with • potential selenium impacts on the biota in the watershed, it will also provide early indication of unanticipated impacts, should any arise. 4. Documentation — Provide information to the County and the RWQCB to help determine and document the performance of the implementation of the entire NTS Plan, in combination with other BMPs, in terms of meeting TMDL, County/city MS4 NPDES permit, and other water quality goals. 0 8.2 Monitoring Strategy In order to meet the four monitoring objectives stated above, all sites will be monitored for management purposes. A few sites will be selected for more intensive performance monitoring. These sites are selected to provide data from a variety of basin types and are the basins of each type that are expected to be constructed first. While all sites will include impact analysis monitoring as part of the management monitoring, selected sites will also be monitored for more focused impact analyses related to selenium. A detailed monitoring plan will be developed that takes into account each new NTS site before it is constructed and operated. Included in the monitoring plan will be a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). Table 8.1 lists the selected sites and summarizes the monitoring information objectives that will be addressed for each site. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 139 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 0 - Monitoring and Reporting NTS sites will be monitored with a phased approach, The phases are: • • Baseline — Pre -Construction • Baseline —Startup • Startup (Years 1 through 3) • Ongoing (Years 4 and beyond) • Sediment Removal • Vegetation Harvesting • Emergency Monitoring 171 I] San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 140 January 2004 Draft for Pubilc Rertew Section a - Monitoring and Reporting • Table 8.1: NTS Sites and Proposed Monitoring Categories 0 Regional Monitoring Categories Site Facility Retrofit Number Facility Name Type or Local General site Detailed Focused Facility ty Management Performance Impact Analysis 26 Woodbridge In -Line Basins II Regional ✓ ✓ ✓ 27 Barranca Off -Line Wetlands I Regional ✓ ✓ 46 San Joaquin Marsh - I Regional ✓ ✓ Augmentation 53 Caltrans SR133/15 Interchange I Regional, ✓ 54 Caltrans SR-261 Site/Walnut I Regional ✓ ✓ 55 Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel II Regional ✓ ✓ In -Line Basins 56 El Modena Park III Regional ✓ ✓ ✓ 62 San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS 1 I Regional ✓ ✓ 64 Wes ark In -Line Basins II Regional ✓ 67 Cienega (Cienega de Las N/A* Regional ✓ ✓ Ranas) 13 Rattlesnake Reservoir— N/A* Regional ✓ Existing 39 Sand Canyon Reservoir— N/A* Regional ✓ Existing 9 PA 1 — Eastfoot Retarding III Local ✓ Basin 10 PA I — Eastfoot Upper I Local ✓ I 1 PA I — Orchard Estates III Local ✓ Retarding Basin 12 PA 1— Lower Orchard Estates I Local ✓ (multi le basins) 61 PA 1 — Eastfoot Lower I Local ✓ 16 Trabuco Retarding Basin III Local ✓ ✓ ✓ 18 Marshbum Retarding Basin III Local ✓ 31 PA 17 — West Basin III Local ✓ 32 PA 17 — East Basin I Local ✓ 49 PA 17 — Center Basin I Local ✓ 42 Turtle Ridge North I Local ✓ 68 PA 18 1 Local ✓ 69 PA 39 (multiple basins) I Local ✓ 22 MCAS El Toro — Agua Chinon 1 Local ✓ Lower 50 MCAS El Toro — Irvine Auto I Local ✓ Center 51 MCAS El Toro — Serrano I Local ✓ 52 MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon I Local ✓ 70 PA6—A uaChinon I Local ✓ 71 PA 6 — Marshbum Channel I Local ✓ San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 141 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting The general site management monitoring that will occur at each of the NTS sites is summarized in Table 8.2. It is important to note that this information will provide performance and impact analysis information as well as other management information for each site. The detailed performance and focused impact analysis sites have been selected to provide more detailed performance and impact assessment information. For the performance sites, Table 8.3 lists the detailed performance monitoring that will be completed in addition to the general site management monitoring. The additional monitoring that will be completed for the focused impact analysis is discussed in section 8.3.8. Table 8.2: NTS General Site Management Monitoring for All Sites Period/Phase Activity Purpose NN E e T Baseline — Pre -construction Field tests I X X X Basic pollutant suite I X I X Baseline — Startup (within 3 months of basin eompletion) Field tests X X X Basic pollutant suite X X Startup — Years 1 through 3 Monthly Site inspection X X_ X Spot flow rate --inlet s X Spot flow rate --outlet X Field tests X X X Vegetation inventory X Storm events >I" Site inspection X X Ongoing — Years 4+ Monthly Site inspection X X X Spot flow rate --inlet X Spot flow rate —outlet X Field tests X X X Storm events >I -inch) Site inspection X X End of Year 4 and every Fourth year thereafter Basic pollutant suite X X Expanded pollutant suite X X Sediment test X X Vegetation inventory X Plant tissue test X X Aquatic vertebrates X Aquatic invertebrates X Sediment Removal Sediment test X X Vegetation Harvesting Plant tissue test X X San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 142 January 2004 Draft for Public Review CJ 0 Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting . In addition to cyclical monitoring (monthly/annual) under the Startup and Ongoing phases, up to five storm events greater than 0.30-inch will be monitored each year to track performance at the detailed performance sites. is Due to the innovative nature of NTS, there may be developments that cannot be anticipated prior to construction and operation of the various facilities. Rather than implementing costly, unnecessary monitoring procedures to track hypothetical developments, monitoring activities are being established to track primary indicators. If it is found that additional monitoring is needed at any or all of the sites, additional monitoring will be provided in a "cascading" fashion. That is, the additional monitoring will be incremented into place in relation to the specific needs for that monitoring. Table 8.3: NTS Detailed Performance Monitoring at Selected Sites (in addition to General Site Management Monitoring) Sites C � Period / Phase Activity00 w ° y a O •y .D N C�. rn ur 3m I'm I v Baseline — Startup (within 3 months of basin completion) H draulic retention time ✓ - ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Startup — Years 1 through 3 Continuous Flow rate --inlet ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Flow rate --outlet ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Monthly —Dry Weather Basic pollutant suite ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Selenium — selenate and selenite ✓ , Semi-annual (spring/fall) Expanded pollutant suite ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Year-end (additional to monthly and Hydraulic retention time semi-annual tests) Storm events (>0.30") Basic pollutant suite ✓ ✓ ✓ Expanded pollutant suite (time or flow - weighted —max 5/year)✓ ✓ ✓ Ongoing — Years 4+ Continuous Flow rate --inlet ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Flow rate --outlet ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Semi-annual (summer/winter) Basic pollutant suite ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Similarly, over time it may become unnecessary to conduct some monitoring activities if the source of the pollution is abated, TMDLs are rescinded, there is sufficient evidence that the specific monitoring activity is not of significant value or is not cost effective, or if the monitoring is replaced by other means, whether by IRWD or other parties. • In addition to the monitoring required for the successful operation of NTS, opportunities may arise for San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 143 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 8 - Monitodng and Reporting research at NTS sites to enhance the body of knowledge available regarding such systems. That • additional research is not specifically part of the NTS Plan, but can be accommodated. Possible research topics include more detailed pollutant removal and effluent quality performance and processes, plant growth patterns, sediment trapping, and others. Research could be performed by outside agencies/organizations or by IRWD. Funding for this additional research is not included in the NTS budget and would need to be provided from either special funding through IRWD or from outside sources, such as research grants. 8.2.1 Baseline — Pre -Construction The purpose of this dry weather, non -storm monitoring is to characterize the existing water column quality of any waters that may be present at NTS sites. No monitoring will be conducted at sites where there is no existing water. In the case of In -Line facilities, a baseline assessment of any existing aquatic species will be attempted, though conditions are highly variable both spatially and temporally/seasonally. An example of such monitoring is the recently completed aquatic invertebrate surveys conducted at two of the three proposed locations for In -Line facilities. The survey report is presented in Appendix K and results are summarized in Section Error! Reference source not found.. 8.2.2 Baseline — Startup The purpose of this monitoring is to characterize water flow and water quality at all sites upon completion of NTS facilities at each site, but before the vegetation and natural processes have matured. In the case of in -channel basins, a baseline assessment of any existing aquatic species will be attempted, though • conditions are highly variable both spatially and temporally/seasonally. 8.2.3 Startup (years I through 3) Monitoring at the selected sites during the first three years of operation will be relatively frequent. Once the sites have been established and are shown to be successful and with minimal or no adverse environmental impact, the monitoring will become somewhat less intensive and more routine. If a particular site is not found to be adequately successful by IRWD, then the more intensive monitoring will be continued until the site does become successful by further maturation or through modification (i.e., adaptive management). It is expected that improvements will be applied to sites of similar type. Most of the performance monitoring would occur during years 1 to 3 to provide information that could be used to alter the design of facilities yet to be built or to the operations of existing facilities. 8.2.4 Ongoing (4 years and beyond) Monitoring at the selected sites will continue on a scheduled basis to track any performance changes or detect potential impacts that may require modifications in the wetland or its operation and maintenance. While the frequency of pollutant testing at the selected sites would be reduced, the sites will continue to be monitored on a regular basis with regard to other observation and testing. Monitoring at all other NTS sites will be performed for management purposes. In addition, extensive • San Diego Creok NTS Master Plan 144 January 2004 Oran for Public Review Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting • testing will be performed at all sites every four years to optimize the performance of the entire NTS and ensure any potential long-term impacts are recognized and corrected. 8.2.5 Sediment Removal When significant amounts of sediment are removed from NTS sites, prior to the removal, the sediment will be sampled and tested for contaminants to determine if any special handling or disposal is required. The contaminants for which the samples will be tested depends on the specific conditions of the site being monitored. For instance, in areas where selenium is present, the sediment will be tested for selenium content to determine if the sediment can be appropriately disposed in a county landfill or requires special handling. All sediment will be disposed in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. 8.2.6 Vegetation Harvesting It is expected that vegetation within the basins will need to be periodically "harvested" by hand crews or mechanical equipment. When major vegetation removal activities are conducted, the vegetation will be tested to determine if the tissue has accumulated pollutants and to determine if any special handling or disposal is required. All vegetation will be disposed in accordance with applicable laws.and regulations. 8.2.7 Emergency Monitoring . While it is not expected to occur frequently, on occasion there may be spills, either upstream of or within NTS basins, of materials that could be hazardous to humans or the environment. Should such events occur, IRWD will attempt to conduct testing/monitoring that would aid in identifying the material and/or ensure that any resulting impact is minimized and mitigated. IRWD will work cooperatively with other appropriate agencies or parties in regard to these efforts and any needed remediation work. The costs of such monitoring will be passed on to the party causing the spill to the extent practicable. 8.3 Monitoring Activities Within each monitoring phase, there are specific monitoring activities. The activities may be common to several monitoring phases as indicated in Table 8.2 and Table 8.3. 8.3.1 Visual Site Inspection The general state and operations of each NTS facility will be routinely visually inspected and documented. Inspections will include, but are not limited to, 1) the physical and functional appearance of the facility such as the integrity of berms and embankments, general water heights and pond sizes, the physical and operational condition of the diversion structures, and vegetative condition, accumulation, and distribution, etc, and 2) the aesthetic appearance of the facility such as the condition of landscaping vegetation, the accumulation and dumping of trash, and signs of vandalism. • General site inspections will be conducted monthly as part of the monthly operations and maintenance activities. Inspections will also be conducted after major storm events. On a semi-annual basis, San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 145 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting photographs will be taken to build a visual history of each site. • 8.3.2 Field Tests As part of the monthly site inspections, field tests will be conducted for water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, conductivity and salinity, using field test kits or meters. There will also be a visual observation, using a relative scale of occlusion, of the suspended sediment in the water. Photographs of influent and effluent will be taken if there is visual difference. This information will provide an ongoing record of wetland health and performance and indicate if any further, more complex testing may be required at a particular site. For example, if the above parameters change rapidly from prior site inspections, there may have been a discharge of pollutants upstream. In such cases, IRWD staff will determine what additional tests may be required. They will consult with RWQCB staff as needed. If there is a gradual change in parameters, it may indicate a need to adjust the design, operation, or maintenance of the facilities, in which case IRWD will review and implement such adjustments. Observation of high suspended sediment content in the water may indicate upstream construction impacts or creek disturbance. Such observations will be informally investigated by IRWD and reported to RWQCB if appropriate. 8.3.3 Basic Pollutant Suite Testing — Dry Weather Within the San Diego Creek Watershed, the most prominent pollutant indicators in dry weather flows are total nitrogen, fecal coliform, and E. eoli. Seasonal changes in nitrification/denitrification levels of nitrogen (a very soluble pollutant) in the creek are expected. Levels of fecal coliform and E. cold will vary as a result of animal waste and potentially pavement washing. Some have indicated a concern for potential increases in fecal coliform from birds that may use portions of the wetlands; bird usage will vary seasonally. Samples will be taken at the inlet and outlet of the respective facilities for analyses of these basic parameters Suspended sediment loads can also vary from month to month and even more rapidly, but such variations are generally tied to storm events and are tracked on a watershed -wide basis by the County of Orange. Sediment loads in dry weather runoff remain relatively constant. Any sudden changes detected by IRWD will be informally investigated by IRWD and/or reported to RWQCB, if appropriate. The other pollutants of concern (phosphorus and toxics) are not likely to vary greatly from month to month, thus they will not be tested at the same frequency as the basic pollutant suite. They have been included in the expanded pollutant suite. 8.3.4 Expanded Pollutant Suite Testing — Dry Weather The expanded pollutant suite includes the water column pollutants from the TMDL list that are not included in the Basic Pollutant Suite, but whose concentrations are expected to be impacted by NTS. That is, the purpose of the testing is to determine if the wetlands have removed all or portions of the following pollutants: . . Phosphorus (total and ortho) San Diego Creak NTS Master Plan 146 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting • . Total metals (copper, lead, zinc, cadmium, arsenic, mercury) • Dissolved metals (copper, lead, zinc, cadmium, arsenic, mercury) • Total selenium • Organophosphate pesticides • Organochlorine compounds • Oil and grease These pollutants will be monitored on a semi-annual basis in dry weather flows at detailed performance sites and on an annual basis at all other sites. Samples will be taken at the inlet, outlet, and selected locations in the middle of the respective facilities. 8.3.5 Aquatic Biology, Sediment, and Plant Tissue Monitoring Sediment accumulation will be measured monthly during the months when storms have occurred in all facilities by reading the depth of sediments of a permanent staff gauge in the forebay areas. As sediments in the forebay areas of the NTS systems with forebays fills, this information will be used to assess the need for clean -out based upon maintenance of fore -bay capacity. Visual observations of plant density in relationship to system hydraulics will also be made to ascertain whether vegetation needs to be removed for hydraulic functioning of the system. There is concern that pollutants can accumulate in WQT wetlands, increasing the risk of exposure to • wildlife and the food chain. There is also concern that accumulated pollutant -laden sediments and plants in the In -Line facilities could be flushed to Newport Bay by runoff from winter storm events. To address these concerns, sediment, plant tissue, and macro -invertebrate samples from all facilities will be tested periodically for constituents that are subject to bio-magnification and/or bioaccumulation, including trace metals, selenium, mercury, organochlorine pesticides, and PCBs. Sampling locations will be concentrated near. inlets, where the greatest pollutant accumulation is thought to occur [Strecker et al., 19921. Additional samples will be taken at representative locations in the middle of the basins. Sampling of plant tissue should focus on edible portions, such as seeds and leaves, and in the root zones, where a majority of the accumulation would likely occur (Shutes et al., 1993; EPRI, 1995, 2000]. Sampling protocols will be developed by IRWD staff and included in the detailed monitoring plan. Periodic removal of sediments and/or harvesting of plants may be necessary based on the results from sediment and plant tissue monitoring. However, there are no current guidelines or action limits for removal of pollutants from WQT wetlands (i.e. contaminated sediment or vegetation). To assist in determining if sediment and plant removal is warranted, Table 8.4 shows results from a search of available information on observed pollutant levels in WQT wetlands and as guidelines for levels of concern. The concentration levels of concern presented in this table are not intended as immediate action thresholds, but rather can be used as guidelines to assist in the determination of one criteria for harvesting frequencies of aquatic plants and soils in the NTS facilities (besides sediment volume or plant densities for example). Because there are several factors to consider when determining "action levels," it is difficult to set a "one • size fits all' threshold. Some of these factors include, concentrations in primary food sources of aquatic and terrestrial animals, vicinity of non -polluted food sources, cumulative effects of multiple San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 147 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting contaminants, biotic distribution of contaminants, contaminant speciation, and disposal site requirements. Habitat assessments of the WQT wetlands may be periodically required to determine some of these factors. Table 8.4: Accumulation Levels of Concern and Occurrence in Plants and Sediments for Selected Pollutants In Stormwater Marshes Poltutant In Sediment (mg/kZ dry weight) In Plants (mgAg dry weight) Guidelines: Canadian Observations: Guidelines: Observations: Various Sources Guidelines Various Various Various Sources Sources Sources Arsenic 8.2 5.9 5.9 -17 Cadmium 1.21,, 0.614 0.6 - 3.5 2.2 -12' 0.26 -1 Os Chlordane 0.004514 0.0045 - 0.0089 Chromium - 81', 37.314 37.3 - 90.0 30 - 300s Copper 34 - 270'-5, 35.714 35.7 -197 8.5 - 220s 20' 6 - 45' DDT (total) 0.0070014- 0.0465 0, 0.0012 - 0.0048 5 - 255 Diazinon 0:00192 Dieldrin 0.0028514, 0.0523 0.0029 - 0.0067 Lead 471, 3514 35.0 - 91.3 48 - 3000s 3 - 95s Mercury 0.15',0.17414 0.17 - 0.49 PAHs 4.0' 0.468-7.117 PCBs (total) 0.023', 0.03414 0.034 - 0.277 Selenium (total) t-45 0.1-40' 2-4U 1.7-1000""," Selenate + Selenite 0.01-1.010 0.1- 87513 Toxaphene 0.028Z, 0,000115 0.0001 - ? Zinc 150-410'•5,12314 123-315 40-900 150-3005 7-170s ' Effects Range Low (ERL) values (NOAA) in ECO Update EPA publication 540/F-95/038, Jan. 1996 I Sediment Quality Benchmark (SQB) values (EPA) in ECO Update EPA publication 540/F-95/038, Jan. 1996 3 Sediment Quality Criteria (SQC) values for freshwater sediments (EPA) in ECO Update EPA publication 540/F-95/038, Jan. 1996 4 Level of concern listed in the Regional Water Quality Control Board Draft Selenium (Se) TMDL for Newport Bay and San Diego Creek, Oct. 26, 2001 5 Level of concern listed in U.S. Dept, of Int. Guidelines for interpretation of the Biological Effects of Selected Constituents in Biota, Water, and Sediment, Nov. 1998 6 Lower limit is the Interim freshwater sediment quality guidelines (ISQGs), the upper limit is the Probable Effect Levels (PELs) published in Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life Summary Tables, 2001 update. 7 Values represent the sum of the limits of individual PAH chemicals. a Values reported from urban stormwater marshes in Treatment wetlands, Kadlec and Knight (1996), CRC Press. 9 Hansen et. al., 1998. Environmental Science and Technology 32:591-597 to Yu et. al.,1997. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16(2): 140.145 11 Bailey et. al., 1995. Chemosphere 30(3): 579-591 12 Pilon-Smits et. al., 1999. Journal ofEnviromnental Quality 28:1011-1018 13 Zayed et. al., 1998. Journal ofEnvironmental Quality 27:715.721 14 Freshwater Threshold Effects Limit (TEL) from NOAA Sediment Quality Guidelines [Buchman, 19991 15 New York Department of Environmental Conservation as referenced in USEPA (June 20021 As discussed above and presented in Table 8.2, macro invertebrates will be sampled periodically and tested for the accumulation of pollutants of concern. However, the abundance and diversity of invertebrate fauna in the stream channels also provides an indication of local water and habitat quality. Son Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 148 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • Section a - Monitonng and Reporting • Therefore, macro invertebrates will also be surveyed for quantity and diversity during the sampling and testing cycle. As an example, baseline aquatic invertebrate surveys were recently conducted at two of the three proposed locations for In -Line facilities. The survey report is presented in Appendix K, and results are summarized in Section Error! Reference source not found.. 8.3.6 Flow Monitoring and Hydraulic Retention Time A key condition for sustaining a healthy wetland is an adequate hydrologic regime throughout the year. Wetland facilities will be monitored for changes in the hydrologic regime over time and to assess the effects of any changes on wetland vegetation and performance. Hydrologic parameters to be monitored are influent and effluent flow rates, and water levels at key locations throughout the wetland. These data will be used to evaluate the water balance, mean residence time, and adequacy of flows to sustain the wetland vegetation. At the detailed performance sites, electronic telemetry will be installed to continuously monitor the flow rates. The purpose of the flow monitoring is to obtain evapotranspiration and percolation loss information and to measure storm flow rates to use in conjunction with storm water quality data. At other sites, flow rates will be measured on a spot basis during the monthly site inspections. At the detailed performance sites, hydraulic retention time will be measured at startup and annually during the break-in period. The purpose of this measurement is to ensure adequate retention of flow, circulation, and prevention of short-circuiting. The test can also be used for troubleshooting other basins • that may be demonstrating deficiencies in this area. 8.3.7 Selenium Removal Site - Selenium Monitoring Total selenium will be monitored at the inlet and outlet of the Cienega Basin (selenium removal) to monitor the performance of that facility, based upon a detailed monitoring plan that will be prepared when the site is designed. The sampling would be monthly during the start-up phase and would include measures of selenite and selenate. In addition, total nitrogen will also be monitored. Once a year, a fecal coliform test would also be performed to establish the subsurface wetlands effects on bacteria. Flow rates will be available for this system via the pumping records to utilize in establishment of the overall effectiveness of this system. Some monitoring within the system may be performed to ascertain the effects of residence time within the system depending on the final design. 8.3.8 Surface Wetland Sites - Selenium Monitoring There is concern that some of the NTS sites may be influenced by selenium in the soil and water column and may experience accumulation of this pollutant. Though not included in Tables 8.2 and 8.3, selenium will be monitored at these selected basins, based upon the Selenium Action Plan (see Appendices) prior to construction, monthly during the first two years of operation, and annually thereafter. Table 8.5 summarizes the monitoring described in the Selenium Action Plan. Monitoring will include water column testing, vegetation monitoring, sediment testing, and biota testing. A detailed selenium - monitoring plan will be developed prior to construction. An ecological risk management analysis will be developed based upon information derived from this effort, plus other available data from ongoing San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 149 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Sectlon B - Monitortng and Reporting studies. A specific detailed monitoring plan will be developed for this effort, which will include specific • sampling and analysis protocols. The plan will be reviewed with the SARWQCB prior to initiation. Table 8.5 summarizes the testing that would be completed as a part of the effort. The sites requiring this focused impact testing for selenium include: • Site 16—TrabucoRetarding Basin • Site 26 — Woodbridge In -Line Basin • Site 27 — Barranca Off -Line Wetlands • Site 46 -- San Joaquin Marsh —) nhancement • Site 54 — Caltrans SR261/Walnut Basin • Site 55 — Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel In -Line Basin • Site 64 — Westpark In -Line Basin Table 8.5t Detailed Selenium Testing Testing Type Location/Description a. Water column monitoring for I. Upstream and downstream selenium, including selenate, sclenite monitoring of inline wetlands water column selenium and organic fortes, both dissolved and levels monthly for two-year period in pilot in -line totals systems it. Within the wetland pool water column testing for off-line systems monthly for two - years. b. Sediment testing for total I. Composite sediment sample in selenium in -line systems quarterly for two years it. Composite sediment sample in forebay area of off-line treatment wetlands quarterly for one-year III, Composite sediment sample in selected reaches of channel with no NTS system C. Vegetation monitoring. Selected Two to three species, including at least one food species, wetlands vegetation at each site (in- will be monitoring for total selenium. Suggested species line, off-line, and selected reach of are: Cattails, Bulrush, Duckweed, and Algae. Samples channel with no NTS system) will be to include rhyzomes, seeds, stoms and roots. monitored. d. Invertebrate testing — Quarterly in Testing will include both selenium concentration and both NTS sites and in channels with invertebrate types and biomass. The focus will be on no NTS. chironomids. Other invertebrates such as crayfish or dragonfly would also be sampled if there is a significant number of these present. e. Mosquito fish testing— Quarterly If other fish are observed, then they would be tested also. in both NTS facilities and in channels Testing will be for selenium in tissues. with no NTS. f. Bird egg testing (if nests are Migratory Waterfowl Take Permits will likely be found) one time per year for 2 years in needed. Testing will be for selenium in tissues. both samples in NTS and in channels San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 150 January 2004 Draft for Public Review LJ • Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting • F I with no NTS. As described in Section 10.2 of the master plan, the in -line facilities will be constructed in phases with some smaller sections constructed first. The remaining construction would not be completed until the results of this detailed selenium monitoring program are completed or after one-year the results are conclusive that there does not appear to be an increase in risk. Studies are ongoing as to the origin of selenium in San Diego Creek. The RWQCB has requested that soil samples be collected from NTS basins where selenium is suspected to occur in the soils and analyzed for selenium content prior to NTS construction. Such samples will be collected from areas within these basins where NTS facilities will be situated, from both alluvium and parent material, where exposed. Results will be submitted to RWQCB. The basins to be tested are listed below. Other basins may be added based on consultation with RWQCB. • Site 9 — PAl — Eastfoot Retarding Basin • Site 10 — PAl — Eastfoot Upper • Site I I — PAl — Orchard Estates Retarding Basin • Site 12 — PAl — Lower Orchard Estates • Site 18—Marshburn Retarding Basin • Site 52 — WAS El Toro — Bee Canyon isIn addition to the NTS site management, performance, and impact analysis monitoring described in the Selenium Action Plan, if monitoring is conducted at NTS facilities with the intent of meeting applicable WQ objectives, including California Toxic Rule (CTR), such monitoring will be conducted in accordance those prescribed for those objectives. 0 8.3.9 Vegetation Monitoring Vegetation in all facilities will be monitored for plant type, density, extent, and general health. Corrective action will be pursued if plant growth does not meet expectations. These actions include: additional planting of wetland vegetation, manual removal of invasive plants, removal of species that overcrowd the basins, addition of substrate, or a temporary reduction of influent flows for up to several months which allows the soils to become oxygenated and plant growth to be stimulated. For those basins used as BMPs for new development, upstream flows must continue to be retained within the basin to meet on -site retention requirements for those developments. The RWQCB should be consulted regarding any exceptions to this principle. Vegetation will be monitored semi-annually during the four-year wetland establishment period, typically from three to five years. Vegetation will be monitored bi-annually thereafter. Vegetation concentrations will also be tested in conjunction with major vegetation removals. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 151 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 8 - Monfioting and Reporting 8.3.10 Vector and Pest Monitoring • IRWD and the OCVCD will monitor the effectiveness of vector and pest control activities. If monitoring reveals that preliminary control measures are not adequate to maintain tolerable pest populations, additional controls will be implemented. Wetlands can provide breeding habitat for numerous pests and vectors, most notably mosquitoes, which are the primary health concern. The OCVCD will sample mosquito larvae and monitor adult mosquito populations. Because of the rapidity and numbers associated with a mosquito hatch, OCVCD considers even minimal collections of i larva per 2 or 3 scoops of a hand net to trigger remedial action. OCVCD will determine if the preliminary control measures are adequate and if additional measures will be necessary. Monitoring results will be provided to IRWD staff for review and archiving. Mosquito fish population will be monitored to ensure population levels are adequate. Mosquito fish populations will be surveyed semi-annually (summer and winter) for the first four years. If the populations appear to be stable, annual surveys will be conducted (summer only). Other pests and/or vectors of concern are flies, rodents, waterfowl, and cowbirds. Most of these pests and vectors are not likely to pose serious health threats, however, the presence of droppings, nests, hair, or any other evidence of pest or vector infestation will be documented during each site visit. If a problem with pests appears to exist, a certified pest control expert will be contacted, if problems with flies occur, a combination of the control methods suggested in Appendix G will be implemented. 8.4 Performance Monitoring of NTS Facilities 0 Comprehensive monitoring and performance evaluation of individual NTS facilities is required to (1) establish the facility performance for comparison with the design level of treatment, and (2) collect information that can be used to improve the operation, maintenance, and design of current and future facilities. Comprehensive monitoring of each facility is not cost effective. Therefore, detailed performance monitoring will be conducted for a subset of the NTS facilities for three years, which is sufficient to obtain a statistically reliable data set. Five NTS facilities were selected for performance monitoring: . Site 16 — Trabuco Retarding Basin . Site 26 — Woodbridge In -Line Basin • Site 62 — San Joaquin Marsh — SAMS I . Site 56 — El Modena Park . Site 67 — Cienega (Cienega de Las Ranas) The primary objective is to test their performance in treating dry weather flows. Sites 16 and 56 will also be tested during storm flows. If the pumps at Site 62 are operated during dry weather flows, then it will be tested during storm flows as well, San Diego Creek NTS MasterP/an 152 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting . The criteria used to select these sites were: 1. Obtain performance monitoring information for a mix of facility types (Types I, II, III, and selenium treatment) 2. Acquire monitoring information throughout the watershed, with a variety of local and pollutant loading conditions 3. Enable the comparison of performance information from new and established wetlands (Existing IRWD Marsh and EPA/ASCE BMP Database) Activities and schedules for performance monitoring are listed in Table 8.2 and Table 8.3. The performance -monitoring program was developed from available guidance on BMP monitoring, taking local conditions into account. Relevant guidance information used in developing this program is found in: USEPA [September 1997]; Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District [1999]; and the USEPA/American Society of Civil Engineers [EPA, April 2002]. 8.5 Wildlife Monitoring As described in Appendix I, the operation and maintenance of NTS will be conducted under provisions of a major amendment to the Orange County Central/Coastal Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP). The proposed NCCP amendment declares the value of NTS in providing a valuable adaptive management tool to the existing NCCP by improving water quality and adding/enhancing aquatic habitat within the NCCP. The NCCP amendment also provides a framework under which NTS can be operated and maintained in compliance with federal and state endangered species regulations. IRWD will maintain a log of endangered species that are identified to be present on NTS sites. The log will include date/time, locations, observer name, and other information pertinent to sightings. The IRWD staff biologist will make notes of any identifications made during site inspections. Also, IRWD will retain any more detailed information or surveys findings that become available related to NTS that assist in documenting the effects of establishment of NTS facilities and NTS operations and maintenance. Of particular interest is the presence of the Tri-Colored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), which is a currently unlisted species that may be listed in the future. This species is the most likely sensitive species to be present in the emergent marsh vegetation proposed for NTS. Again, the presence of this species will be included in the IRWD staff biologist's field notes and wildlife logs. 8.6 Watershed Monitoring for TMDL Compliance The overall effectiveness of the combined NTS Plan and other watershed BMPs for meeting TMDL targets will be assessed by the County through ongoing watershed monitoring activities, including proposed monitoring activities of the NTS Plan 8.6.1 Current Watershed Monitoring Activities Regional Monitoring Program: The Newport Bay Watershed Committee directs a Regional Monitoring Program (RMP) that includes the San Diego Creek Watershed. The Committee consists of isrepresentatives from the agencies participating in the MS4 Program, the USCOE, and other interested parties. The RMP for the San Diego Creek Nutrient TMDL was initiated in February of 2000 at the San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 153 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 8-M60odnc and Reporting direction of the RWQCB. The OCPFRD currently conducts watershed monitoring as part of the RMP for compliance with its • NPDES Permit and TMDL requirements. Monitoring activities include: Dry and wet weather monitoring of flow and water quality (fixed station routine) • Nutrient concentrations and loads (week long intensive surveys) • Toxicity testing • Sediment quality testing OCPFRD sampling locations for fixed station monitoring are distributed throughout San Diego Creek Watershed and in Upper Newport Bay. The location of the flow and water quality sampling stations are indicated in Figure 8-1. The monitoring program conducted by the OCPFRD as part of their NPDES Pemtit was designed to help document the effects of management efforts in meeting the TMDL targets. This program is ideal for assessing the system wide performance of the NTS Plan in combination with BMPs under coordination of the Orange County Watershed Program. Orange County CoastKeeper Santa Ana River Watershed Monitoring. Orange County CoastKeeper, a non-profit environmental organization, is the lead agency in a recently initiated two-year monitoring program at thirty sites in the Santa Ana River Watershed. The program is funded by the USEPA through the State Water Board. The goal of the program is to collect "needed water quality data on streams in an area covering Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties" (wanv.eoastkeeyeenorg, visited May 20021. • The CoastKeeper Program includes six monitoring stations on San Diego Creek (see Figure 8-1): • San Diego Creek at Michelson • San Diego Creek at Civic Center • San Diego Creek at Woodbridge Park • San Diego Creek at Sand Canyon • San Diego Creek at 133 Fwy + San Diego Creek at Bake 0 San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 154 January 2004 Draft for Public Rovlaw Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting • iK f12MF 0 • Peters Wash El Modena/ Irvine Ch. Santa Ana / L' Santa Fe Ch. Barranca Ch. San Diego Creek Rattlesnake Cyn. Wash Hicks Cyn. Wash Trabuco Ch. Ague Round Chinon is Cyn.Cyn, Bee Wash Wash Cyn. Marshbum 7s Borrego Ch. Bee Cyn. Creek Como Ch. 71 Diversion Wash 18 F06P08 San Diego Creek UCI Wash To Upper Newport Bay San Joaquin Ch. Ch. Serrano Crk Facility Types O Type]: OfILLine ❑ Type Il: In -Line O Type III: within a flood facility Number in symbol is the numerical name of site Location of 2001/2002 OCPFRD Water Quality and Stormwater discharge monitoring stations for NPDES compliance and WARM spot monitoring Q CoastKeeper Monitoring Station Flow monitoring station for dry weather and stormwater discharges Recommended additional routine water quality monitoring and flow monitoring station Figure 8-1: Existing and Suggested Water Quality and Flow Monitoring Stations San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 155 Draft for Public Review January 2004 Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting The CoastKeeper stations are used to collect basic flow and water quality data (flow, pia, dissolved oxygen, temperature, turbidity), nutrient concentration data (ammonia, nitrate, orthophosphate), pathogen indicators (Fecal, E. Coli, Total Coliform bacteria, bioassessment), and metals. All water quality parameters will be sampled monthly, with the exception of the bioassessment parameter, which will be sampled seasonally, and metals, which will the sampled on an irregular basis. Data collected by the CoastKeeper monitoring program will be beneficial in establishing baseline conditions, prior to initiation of the NTS Plan 8.6.2 Future Watershed Monitoring Activities for TMDL Compliance The original RMP predates the NTS Plan and therefore is not designed to fully assess all aspects of the NTS Plan. Consequently, elements of the RMP will need to be reviewed and revised to achieve the goal of comprehensive assessment of the County's Watershed Program and the NTS Plan for achieving TMDL targets. These changes and enhancements of the RMP are described below. Sampling Locations: Additional flow and water quality monitoring stations are recommended at two locations shown in Figure 8-1. Additional routine flow and water quality monitoring for stormwater and low flows would be helpful on Serrano Creek just upstream of the confluence with San Diego Creek (Figure 8.1). The purpose of this station would be to quantify the contribution of sediments from this tributary and to assess the effectiveness of planned stream stabilization projects. Additional water quality monitoring would be helpful in Peters Canyon Wash to quantify and gain more information on pollutant sources from groundwater discharge, particularly selenium. The location of these monitoring stations should be determined with consideration of available information on groundwater mapping near stream channels and water quality measurements in the groundwater and adjacent stream channels. Constituent Selection and Sampling Methods: The RMP list of constituents includes nutrients, selected trace metals, sediments, and pathogens. The RMP could be broadened to include routine sampling and storm sampling of other toxics, especially selenium, mercury, and pesticides, in order to achieve a comprehensive assessment of the combined effectiveness of the NTS Plan and watershed -wide BNIPs. The County may want to consider changes in the RMP sampling methods to improve the capability of assessing TMDL compliance: 1. Sediment sampling using the Suspended Sediment Concentration (SSC) measurement along with Total Suspended Sediments (TSS) should be considered. The SSC test is thought to be a more accurate predictor of sediment load [Gray et at., 2000j. 2. The County should review the current sampling methods to ensure that sample compositing methods provide pollutant measurements that are consistent with TMDL load criteria. Specifically, flow -composite sampling should be considered as an alternative to the current time - composite method. Sampling periods: The NTS Plan addresses three hydrologic regimes: dry season low flows, wet season low flows, and small storm runoff flows. The current RMP, however, focuses on storm sampling of trace • metals, and storm and low flow sampling for nutrients. To effectively assess the combined performance San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 156 Jenuary 2004 Draft for Public Ravlow Section 8 - Monitoring and Reporting • of the NTS Plan and the County's Watershed Program, a sampling program that addresses the various hydrologic regimes defined in the TMDLs may be helpful. These flow regimes are: dry and wet season low flows for TN, storm flows for sediments and TP, and the four flow tiers defined in the TMDLs for selenium and trace metals. • 8.7 Reporting An annual monitoring report will be developed by IRWD and provided to interested agencies regarding operation and performance of the NTS facilities. The results will be provided to the OCPFRD for inclusion in its annual RMP Report. The monitoring report may include, but is not limited to: • Routine monitoring logs for each facility • Maintenance and operation logs of each facility • All detailed performance monitoring data San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 157 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 9 - Coordination and Agreements • 9 Coordination and Agreements 9.1 The Role of IRWD in Urban Runoff Water Quality Management In recent years, with new emphasis on water quality improvements to urban runoff as part of a new implementation phase of the federal Clean Water Act, progressive federal, state and local agencies have joined efforts to optimize use of public resources. Non -governmental organizations (NGO's) have also made valuable contributions to the planning of water quality improvement plans and projects. A comprehensive regional urban runoff water quality program can have many components. They include: planning, financing, designing, constructing, operating, maintaining and monitoring facilities; public outreach, water conservation, runoff treatment, regulation, inspection, enforcement, and others. Within the San Diego Creek watershed, as is true with most watersheds, there is no single agency that provides all of these components at a watershed level. As a water agency, IRWD has extensive experience in water management, including water treatment, water conservation, and water quality monitoring throughout the San Diego Creek watershed. Its service area approximates the watershed. Thus, unlike other public agencies that serve portions of the watershed is a logical choice to expand its services to urban runoff water quality management throughout the watershed. IRWD has volunteered to assist the County of Orange, watershed cities, and their residents by providing cost-effective urban runoff water quality treatment within the San Diego Creek watershed. The • County will continue to be responsible for flood protection and to be the principal permittee under the various urban runoff control permits and plans. Cities will continue to be copermittees and assist the County in the overall municipal stormwater program. IRWD will provide services that assist the County and cities in their compliance with the MS4 permit. IRWD operates drinking water treatment, reclaimed water treatment, and wastewater treatment facilities. More specific to NTS, IRWD also operates the approximately 70-acre urban runoff treatment ponds, at its San Joaquin Marsh for treatment of urban runoff diverted from and returned to San Diego Creek. By managing natural processes, the marsh removes the majority of nitrogen in the dry weather runoff and significant amounts of other pollutants. IRWD has an international reputation for its leading edge water conservation strategies and practices. For example, IRWD has been providing classroom water education programs within its service area since the 1970's. In 1991, IRWD implemented its "budget based tiered water rate" structure in response to several years of below -normal precipitation. That successful program has not only reduced the stress on fresh water supplies, but has resulted in significantly reduced flows of urban runoff into local storm drains. More recently, IRWD has been pilot -testing a new generation of irrigation sprinkler controllers that automatically adjust water usage based on actual, local evapotranspiration rates. Computerized weather stations transmit "pager" signals to the controllers to make the proper adjustments. The cooler and wetter the weather, the less water that is applied. With just the right amount of water being applied, runoff into the gutters and storm drains is minimized. • IRWD has its own modern, state -certified laboratory where thousands of water samples are analyzed each and every month. Whether it is drinking water, reclaimed water, runoff, or sewage, IRWD highly -trained, San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 158 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 9 -Coordination and Agreements cdllege.educated technicians can provide a clear assessment of its quality. This expertise is valuable in operating and evaluating the effectiveness of urban runoff treatment facilities. Through the conscientious management of habitat resources within the San Joaquin Marsh and various facilities in natural settings throughout its service area, IRWD has developed a reputation as a successful environmental steward. Based on all the above, IRWD has volunteered to be the "urban runoff treatment service provider" to the residents, businesses and agencies within the San Diego Creek watershed. This service provides a solution to one piece of the urban runoff puzzle. The following subsections describe the services to be provided, the role of this program in other local programs, and the coordination and agreements required. 9.2 IRWD's Authority to Treat Urban Runoff IRWD is a California Water District under the California Water Code. As such, the Water Code prescribes how IRWD is to operate as an independent governmental agency, including what services it is to provide and how it is to be governed. It also authorizes IRWD to collect revenues commensurate with the services it provides. In 2001, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 810 (John Campbell), which adds the diversion and treatment of urban runoff to the list of services that may be provided by IRWD and by Santa Margarita Water District, another California Water District in southern Orange County. This authority was granted as part of the Caifornia Water District Act in the Water Code. In 2002, Orange County Sanitation District was given similar authorities and responsibilities under separate legislation. 0 9.3 NTS Urban Runoff Treatment Services To Be Provided by IRWD The proposed urban runoff treatment services to be provided by IRWD are in three categories: Existine natural and urban areas: IItWD will construct, operate and maintain constructed wetlands to remove existing pollution from urban runoff emanating from these areas. These wetlands will be constructed and funded under IRWD's capital improvement program. Construction, operation and maintenance activities will be funded by residents and businesses benefiting from this service. Selenium removal: One or more sites will be specifically designed and constructed by IRWD for the purpose of removing selenium from the urban runoff flowing in San Diego Creek and/or Peters Canyon Wash. These facilities will be constructed and funded under IRWD's capital improvement program. Operation, maintenance, and monitoring activities will be funded by residents and businesses benefiting from this service. New development areas: These facilities will be constructed by landowners/developers as part of their developments. They are considered structural treatment BMP's required by regulatory bodies (e.g., cities, County, RWQCB) and in accordance with those bodies' standards and requirements. IRWD is not involved in the negotiation or approval of the regulatory bodies' standards or requirements. Developer -provider facilities must also be constructed in accordance with any IRWD standards and requirements that may exceed those of the regulatory bodies. Once the developer -provided facilities have been approved by the regulatory bodies and IRWD, San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 159 January 2004 Draft for Public Rbvlow Section 9 - Coordination and Agreements • IRWD will operate, maintain, and monitor the facilities as part of the NTS program. Operation, maintenance, and monitoring activities will be funded by residents benefiting from this service. P • IRWD will serve the greater community by providing these urban runoff treatment services to assist dischargers (County, cities, and others) within the watershed toward meeting their various discharge requirements. IRWD will not be responsible for reaching full compliance with any specific discharge requirement. However, NTS is expected to provide substantial progress toward that compliance on behalf of all dischargers. No specific arrangements as to the allocation of watershed -wide water quality improvements resulting from NTS have been contemplated or negotiated to date. Figure 9.1 depicts how the three categories of facilities fit into the overall San Diego Creek NTS regional plan. San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan 160 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 9 • Coordination and Agreements San Diego Creek NTS 0 0 Regional Plan 0 O Existing and Natural Ateas 0 0 � O o Do Selenium Removal 0 O00 0 0 0 0 New Development and 0 0.0 Significant Redevelopment 0 0 0 0 0 00 O Retrofit treatment control BMP constructed, operated , and maintained by IRWD to serve existing and natural areas. Retrofit treatment control BMP constructed, operated and maintained by IRWD to remove selenium. Regional treatment control BMP constructed by developer and O operated and maintained by IRWD to serve new development or significant redevelopment. Figure 9.1 San Diego Creek NTS Regional Plan — Services Provided and BMPs for theWQMP San Diego Creek NTS Master plan 161 January 2004 Draft for Public Review • • • Section 9 - Coordination and Agreements • 9.4 NTS and the County of Orange Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit The County of Orange MS4 permit (NPDES No. CAS618030) is issued by the RWQCB to the County as the principal pemrittee and to the cities in the County as co-permittees. The MS4 permit outlines various responsibilities and activities for permittees, including water quality monitoring, storm drain inspections, establishment of enforcement powers, emergency spill response, reporting, watershed -wide program coordination, promulgation and enforcement of new development standards, construction inspections, development and implementation of a Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and Water Quality Management Plans (WQMPs), and implementation of both non-structural and structural BMPs. Non- structural BMPs include public education, street sweeping, catch basin stenciling, etc. Structural BMPs include physical facilities, like NTS, constructed for the purpose of preventing contamination of waters of the state or removing pollutants from those waters. IRWD is not a permittee under the MS4 permit. However, as already described, IRWD is a service provider that proposes to operate, maintain, monitor, and in some instances construct, structural treatment control BMPs on behalf of the permittees. NTS facilities (treatment control BMPs) will provide a portion of the permittees' compliance with the MS4 permit, including TMDL provisions. In fact, going beyond what is specifically prescribed in the permit, IRWD is also proposing to proactively construct, operate and maintain facilities to clean up urban runoff from existing urban and natural areas and to remove naturally - occurring selenium from San Diego Creek and Peters Canyon Wash. . NTS facilities are being constructed, operated and maintained as structural treatment control BMPs under the MS4 permit. Therefore, no additional NPDES or discharge permits are required. IRWD will monitor the NTS facilities it operates and maintains as a system and provide information to the County to be included in the annual program status report submitted by the County to RWQCB, as required by the MS4 permit. 9.5 NTS, the Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP), and the Model Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) The County's DAMP, which is required by the MS4 permit, is the implementation plan that describes how the permittees will comply with the permit throughout the fourteen watersheds in the County. The Model WQMP more specifically describes how permittees are to address storm water quality BMPs in new development and significant redevelopment pursuant to Section 7 of the DAMP. Thus, the Model WQMP can be seen as an elaboration and implementation of Section 7 of the DAMP. It is referred to as a "model," because it provides the basis on which co-permittees are to develop their own local WQMPs. The San Diego Creek NTS was not specifically included in the September 2000 version of the County's DAMP, because it had not been contemplated at that time. However, it is expected to be specifically included in the next full -document revision as a component of the Newport Bay Watershed program description. • As required by the MS4 permit, Section 7 of the DAMP and the Model WQMP were revised and approved by the RWQCB in 2003. NTS is indirectly included as part of the revised Section 7 (New San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 162 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 9 - Coordlnetlon and Agreements Development/Significant Redevelopment) and as part of the Model WQMP in that NTS provides a regional plan into which "regional treatment control BMPs" can be incorporated. 0 The MS4 permit, the DAMP, and the Model WQMP recognize the synergistic value of planning for urban runoff treatment controls on a regional, watershed -wide basis rather than a piecemeal approach. While the WQMP is focused on new development or significant redevelopment, the regional nature of the NTS plan provides a large scale treatment system that not only incorporates the facilities required by the WQMP, but also provides treatment facilities for existing and natural areas and facilities for the removal of selenium from the runoff. This provides a more comprehensive approach to pollution prevention than simply depending on new development to handle its own runoff. In a watershed that is already mostly built out, like San Diego Creek, reliance on new development and significant redevelopment measures alone does little to remedy existing water pollution. Another advantage of the San Diego Creek NTS regional plan is that one public entity is responsible for operation and maintenance of the entire system, including both retrofit and new development facilities. Thus, there is more assurance that operation and maintenance will be consistent, ongoing, and adequately funded in the long term when compared to individual treatment control BMPs, required by the WQMP, that are not part of a regional plan. IRWD proposes to construct, operate and maintain the facilities that serve existing and natural areas and the selenium removal facilities. The facilities serving new development and significant redevelopment are expected to be constructed by the developer. They are included in the NTS regional plan to assess the expected regional benefits of such developer -donated facilities. When they are constructed, the facilities approved after the approval of the revised WQMP will be sized, designed and constructed in accordance • with the newly -developed WQMP requirements. IRWD is not responsible for compliance of the developments or their associated facilities with the WQMP. However, IRWD will operate and maintain them in accordance with established parameters for operation and maintenance. It should be noted that while they are expected to provide significant benefit, retrofit facilities to be constructed by IRWD are not expected to be sized or designed to accommodate all existing development and natural areas. Only those providing the greatest benefits and in practical locations are included. On the other hand, as required by Section 7.II-30 of the Model WQMP, new development and significant redevelopment facilities collectively will be sized and designed to accommodate their corresponding developments. They should also be sized "consistent with site constraints and opportunities with the goal of treating runoff volume (or flow rate) from the developed areas of the watershed in addition to new development or significant redevelopment" Also, the WQMP allows developers to use site -specific BMPs to supplement their designs for specific pollutants or site conditions in addition to or in place of regional treatment control BMPs. 9.6 Coordination With Other Programs/Organizations The NTS Plan is a component of the County's San Diego Creek Watershed Management Program. This program was developed by municipal and resources agencies to coordinate efforts in improving the environmental quality of the watershed. Pursuant to this philosophy, development of the NTS Plan was • coordinated with a variety of local agencies and organizations including: San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 163 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 9 - Coordination and Agreements • California Coastal Conservancy • California Department of Fish and Game • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) • California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region • California'State Water Resources Control Board • City of Irvine • City of Lake Forest • City of Newport Beach • City of Orange • City of Santa Ana • City of Tustin • Orange County Flood Control District • Orange County Public Facilities and Resource Department • Orange County Vector Control District • Nature Reserve of Orange County • Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers • U.S. Bureau of Reclamation • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • During the preparation of the NTS program, several private organizations were briefed on the program and requested to provide informal input. These organizations included, but were not limited to: • Defend the Bay • Friends of Harbors, Beaches and Parks • Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council • Newport Bay Naturalists and Friends • Orange County CoastKeeper • Stop Polluting Our Newport (SPON) • Surfrider Foundation The Irvine Company and the City of Irvine (relative to the development of the Great Park) also played important roles by committing to incorporate NTS facilities into planned development projects. Development of the NTS Plan was also coordinated with other planning efforts: • NPDES and TMDL Programs. The NTS Plan is intended to complement existing and future BMPs under coordination of the San Diego Creek Watershed Program for compliance with the TMDL requirements established by the RWQCB. The TMDLs reflect water quality objectives set forth in the Santa Ana River Basin Plan [RWQCB, 1995]. Evaluation of the NTS Plan alternatives was largely based on the NTS Plan's contribution to meeting the TMDL requirements. • • Corps of Engineers' Newport Bay/San Diego Creek Watershed Management Study. The NTS Plan creates opportunities for water quality and habitat enhancement that are consistent with the San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 164 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 9 - Coordination and Agreements objectives of the USCOE's reconnaissance study on identifying and prioritizing "opportunities to improve and/or enhance the overall health of the San Diego Creek Watershed through restoration, enhancement, or preservation of natural processes." IRWD has coordinated the work on the NTS Plan with the USCOE's study. No conflicts exist with the USCOE study as Currently presented. • Corps of Engineers' San Diego Creek Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) — The NTS Plan supports the goal of the SAW which is to "develop and implement a watershed -wide aquatic resource management plan and implementation program, which will include preservation, enhancement, and restoration of aquatic resources, while allowing reasonable and responsible economic development and activities within the watershed -wide study area" (USCOE, 1999). Both NTS and the SAMP are expected to be long term commitments. Once proposed, reviewed and approved, the SAW is expected to provide both an aquatic resource preservation plan as well as a protocol for renewal (currently a 5-year cycle) of permits for NTS operation and maintenance activities. The SAW and its associated environmental analyses are expected to be circulated for public comment in 2004. If the SAW does not proceed through final approval, NTS permitting will be processed using existing standard procedures. • Orange County Flood Control Master Plan. The NTS Plan was evaluated in terms of impacts on the existing flood control capacities as identified in the Flood Control Master Plan. All NTS facilities were designed to have no impact on flood control capacities 9.7 Cooperative Agreements Implementation of the NTS Plan will require formal agreements with a number of agencies, as described • below. Property Access and Easements. The NTS sites are located on property owned by various private organizations and governmental agencies. Formal agreements with property owners are needed for construction, operation, and maintenance access. Use of Flood Control Facilities. The use of any County of Orange, OCFCD, or the City of Irvine flood control facilities as part of the NTS Plan will be contingent on formal approval by the flood control agencies and on IRWD obtaining commitments from regulatory agencies that flood control activities will continue to be maintained, unimpeded and in a manner acceptable to the flood control agencies. Vector Control, Appendix G describes the NTS Vector Control Plan, which is to be jointly implemented by IRWD and the Orange County Vector Control District (OCVCD). There will be a agreement between IRWD and OCVCD to formalize the responsibilities of each agency in the joint implementation. Operation and Maintenance of Type III NTS Facilities. Type III NTS facilities involve retrofitting flood peak retarding basins to incorporate WQT wetlands. Maintaining these multi -purpose facilities will be shared among the agencies. The flood control agencies will continue to maintain the flood control features, and IRWD will be responsible for maintenance of the WQT wetlands. Cities with other functions (e.g., park) within which the NTS facilities are located also will play a role. A formal maintenance agreement between the flood control agencies and IRWD will be processed. As • part of this effort, a master manual will be developed that describes in detail the scope of the activities to San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 165 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Section 9 - Coordination and Agreements • be conducted, and the respective responsibilities of each agency. The scope of activities includes, but is not limited to: • Inspection and work items to be accomplished at sites before, during and after the storm season • Requirements and methods of notification prior to commencing work • Operation and maintenance of NTS features • Control structure operation • Structural maintenance/repairs • Landscape and irrigation system maintenance and repair • Weed abatement • Silt removal and disposal • Definition of "normal" flood control related maintenance activities . Identification of potential "extraordinary" flood control maintenance activities and responsibility for performance of such work Identification of special requirements (restricted maintenance periods, regulatory permit requirements, etc.) and responsibility for performance of such work • Hazardous response • Disposal of waste materials • Vector Control Amendment of the Central/Coastal NCCP. To effectively manage and maintain the NTS facilities, . IRWD and cooperating agencies need assurance that operation, maintenance, and monitoring activities could be conducted without incurring a "taking" under the FESA. The USFWS has developed a "Safe Harbor Policy" to encourage private and other non -Federal property owners to voluntarily undertake management activities on their property to enhance, restore, or maintain habitat for the benefit of federally listed species. Under this policy, property owners who undertake management activities that attract listed species onto their properties, or into areas affected by actions undertaken on their property, will not incur future property -use restrictions. Unfortunately, the CESA does not currently have a formal policy that parallels the federal Safe Harbor Policy. However, California can use NCCP's and HCP's for similar purposes and results. The State of California's NCCP Act has provisions that allow the CDFG to enter into agreements to promote the enhancement or establishment of habitat and at the same time provide the landowner certain long-term land use and mitigation assurances. USFWS is also party to such agreements when used. The NCCP approach was used to establish and provide for the management of the reserve system under the County of Orange Central and Coastal Subregional NCCP/HCP. After comparing several environmental regulatory approaches for NTS, the federal Safe Harbor Policy was initially selected for more detailed review of its application to the habitat preservation and maintenance accommodation issues. However, after further review of the Safe Harbor Policy, it was determined that the best approach for obtaining necessary maintenance assurances would be to construct and operate the NTS facilities under a Major Amendment of the successful Central/Coastal NCCP Implementation Agreement. That amendment would adapt the safe harbor concept into the application of • the NCCP to NTS. The proposed Major Amendment is presented in Appendix I and also in the DEIR. San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan 166 January 2004 Draft for Public Review 0 0 Appendix K Major Amendment Proposal Central/Coastal Orange County NCCP Appendix I— MajorAmendment Proposal • IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT San Diego Creek Natural Treatment System (NTS) Major Amendment Proposal — Central/Coastal Oranae County NCCP Irvine Ranch Water District's (IRWD) proposed San Diego Creek "Natural Treatment System" (NTS) is a comprehensive, watershed -scale program of 31 constructed wetlands intended to improve water quality throughout the environment of the San Diego Creek watershed and a portion of the Santa Ana River watershed. This improvement in water quality will provide direct benefits for riparian habitats and species in San Diego Creek, aquatic habitats and species in and around the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve, and other portions of the Nature Reserve of Orange County (Reserve). As such, it provides a significant new adaptive management tool for Reserve managers in their objectives of preservation and enhancement of the environment under the Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP). Therefore, IRWD proposes to construct and operate NTS under a Major Amendment to the Central/Coastal NCCP Implementation Agreement. In addition, the biological system and processes established in these constructed wetlands will provide for enhancing the habitat quality of significant areas within the NCCP Reserve System without extending or changing its boundaries. • Adaptive Management of the NCCP The NCCP promotes the use of adaptive management in its implementation. NTS is a valuable adaptive management tool that improves the NCCP through the improvement of the quality of water, which i$ vital to any habitat. The NCCP EIR/EIS describes Adaptive Management as follows: "The NCCP Conservation Guidelines recommend that an `adaptive management' regime should be implemented to manage biological resources within the subregion. As used in the NCCP/HCP, adaptive management is defined as a flexible, iterative approach to long- term management of biotic resources that is directed over time by the results of ongoing monitoring activities and other information. The NCCP Conservation Guidelines define the manner in which the creation and management of the Reserve System provide for assuring no net reduction in the ability of the subregion to maintain viable populations of target species:" `... subregional NCCPs will designate a system of interconnected reserves designed to: (1) promote bio-diversity, (2) provide for high likelihoods for persistence of target species in the subregion .... The NCCP will need to establish a wide range of habitat management and enhancement tools and incorporate a monitoring program to provide • guidance for ongoing management."' (NCCP Conservation Guidelines, p. 9, emphasis added) San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan 1-1 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix I—MalorAmendment Proposal NTS provides significant benefits to important elements of the Reserve, including Upper Newport Bay, Upper Peters Canyon Reservoir and Villa Park Dam. The NTS does not create habitat to be added to the NCCP reserve system. Rather the NTS provides a "wide range of habitat ... enhancement tools" that are directed toward enhancement of portions of the NCCP reserve system that `promote bio-diversity" through improved water quality. Therefore, NTS fits the functional definition of an element of the NCCP Adaptive Management Program. Evaluation of the Safe Harbor Concept IRWD supports and encourages the use of NTS wetlands by species and is willing to use practical management activities to minimize the impact of NTS operations and maintenance activities on these species. However, it must be recognized that these wetlands are primarily water quality features and will need to be maintained intensively at times. This maintenance may include complete removal and replacement of vegetation and sediment from large areas on a periodic basis. Additionally, NTS facilities overlay existing public land uses, such as flood control facilities. The owners of these existing facilities require that their operations not be restricted due to the addition of NTS features. To these ends, IRWD recommends the application of a "safe harbor" type arrangement regarding habitat enhancement and maintenance activities. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has developed a "Safe Harbor Policy" to encourage private and other non -Federal property owners to voluntarily undertake management activities on their property to enhance, restore, or maintain habitat for the benefit of federally - listed species. Under this policy, property owners who undertake management activities that • attract listed species onto their properties, or into areas affected by actions undertaken on their property, will not incur future property -use restrictions. As such, a "safe harbor" is provided to both the species and the landowner, although the policy only extends to presently listed species. Safe Harbor Agreements provide assurances to the property owner that allow alterations or modifications to enrolled property, even if such action results in the incidental take of a listed species or, in the future, returns the species back to an originally agreed -upon baseline condition. This type of arrangement is what is needed for the implementation of NTS. Unfortunately, the California Endangered Species Act does not currently have a formal policy that parallels the federal Safe Harbor Policy. However, California can use NCCP's and Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP's) for similar purposes and results. The State of California's Natural Communities Conservation Act has provisions which allow the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) to enter into agreements to promote the enhancement or establishment of habitat and at the same time provide the landowner certain long-term land use and mitigation assurances. USFWS is also party to such agreements when used. The NCCP approach was used to establish and provide for the management of the reserve system under the County of Orange Central and Coastal Subregional NCCP/HCP. Comparison of Safe Harbor and NCCP Approaches After comparing several environmental regulatory approaches for NTS, the federal Safe Harbor • Policy was initially selected for more detailed review of its application to the habitat preservation and maintenance accommodation issues. However, after further review of the Safe Harbor_ San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan I-2 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix I— Major Amendment Proposal . Policy, it was determined that the best approach would be the proposal of a "major amendment" to the existing, successful Central/Coastal NCCP. That amendment would adapt the safe harbor concept into the application of the NCCP to NTS. The following is a brief explanation of the reasons for this determination: Matching conservation benefit to the covered species -- A necessary component of the federal "Safe Harbor" process is the demonstration of "Net Conservation Benefit." Net conservation benefit is defined as an increase in the covered, listed species' population and/or the enhancement, restoration, or maintenance of the covered species' habitat within the enrolled property. The net conservation benefit must be sufficient to directly or indirectly contribute to recovery of the covered species. While NTS will provide a significant increase in habitat at over thirty locations throughout the Reserve, the type of habitat (cattails, bulrush and other emergent marsh vegetation) does not necessarily improve the likelihood of increase in population of the listed species (e.g., Least Bell's Vireo, Southwestern Willow Flycatcher) that might be included in any proposed Safe Harbor Agreement. The NCCP is structured to more readily recognize the connection between the addition of marsh habitat and the health of the NCCP as a whole. The species that are most likely to use the emergent marsh wetlands created by the NTS program are not presently listed or covered by the current NCCP. • Recognition of water quality improvement benefits — Clearly, there is a substantial long- term benefit to all species in the food web within the watershed from the improvement of water quality in San Diego Creek, which is the central purpose of NTS. Specifically, the State's Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve, operated by CDFG and included in the NCCP Reserve, will receive direct and very significant benefits from NTS. Other portions of the NCCP reserve system will also benefit from the NTS. This should be recognized by regulators and the public in the consideration of a safe harbor arrangement for NTS. No formal state Safe Harbor Policy -- California does not have a formal Safe Harbor Policy that matches the federal policy; thus, CDFG would not be a signatory to the federal Safe Harbor Agreement. It is not clear what policies/permits/processes, other than the NCCP/HCP, could be used to provide coverage that would parallel and/or complement the federal policy (even if the federal policy would suffice, which it does not). • Coverage for unlisted species -- The Safe Harbor Agreement would not provide coverage of species that are not presently listed, but may be listed in the future (e.g., Tri-Colored Blackbird). Hence, the species most likely to use the emergent marsh vegetation that will be the dominant vegetation type in the NTS wetlands, cannot be covered under the federal Safe Harbor Policy. It is expected that NTS facilities will be in place indefinitely, so IRWD is seeking to obtain long term assurances that it will be able to maintain these facilities without undue restriction. Since there are several species with declining populations in the region and that could potentially be listed, in the future, IRWD desires to obtain regulatory coverage for them as part of the assurances required for effective long-term maintenance of the NTS water quality wetlands. Such assurances are particularly important for NTS facilities . proposed to be located within existing flood control facilities, a component of the NTS that San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 1-3 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix I— MalorAmendment Proposal will provide a significant portion of the water quality benefits of the overall program. The . NCCP provides a mechanism for such coverage. Description of NTS Wetlands Proposed NTS wetlands are very similar, yet are different in some ways. There are three basic NTS facility configurations: Types I,11, and III. All three types are primarily designed to remove pollutants from dry weather flows, but allow for some treatment of small storm flows as well. Type I, the most common type, is an offline wetland that treats local urban runoff before it reaches the local flood control channel. Type II is an in -line wetland, within an existing flood control channel, that slows down the dry weather and low flows through meandering configuration or the installation of small seasonal (dry season) check dams within soft -bottom channels. Type III is similar to Type 1, with the exception that it is constructed within an existing or future flood control retarding basin. See the NTS master plan for more details. The majority of sites are currently dry upland areas that will be graded to allow the accumulation of urban runoff from neighboring communities. Several of the upstream facilities will simply be soggy fields most of the year, with minimal flows through them. These sites have baselines of zero sensitive species. A few of the sites are existing wet areas that will be enlarged or reconfigured to allow longer detention of the moisture. While there will be small areas of deeper water (2 to 6 feet deep) to the extent there is runoff available to fill them, the majority of wet areas will be of minimal depth (0 to 24 inches deep). Several of the upstream facilities will simply be soggy fields most of the year, with minimal flows through them. In these wetlands, the existence of sensitive species, both in variety and population, is expected to be limited, even as the habitat develops. Within the wetted areas, emergent marsh vegetation (cattails and bulrush) will be planted and tightly maintained to optimize the use of natural processes to remove pollutants from the water. It is expected the vegetation and any accumulated sediment will be removed on a periodic basis. Such removals will be accomplished on a rotational basis to the extent practical. Thus, it is not likely that all or even a substantial number of NTS sites in a geographical area would be involved in major maintenance activities at any given time. At a few locations where it is possible to do so, riparian vegetation may be planted on the periphery to provide aesthetic quality and habitat variation. Each site will be evaluated individually to determine where riparian species would be appropriate. In particular, wetlands and plantings within flood control facilities will be limited to low-lying emergent marsh species. On the other hand, at the few locations adjacent to existing habitat, more transitional habitat will be provided. At a few sites, grassland areas will be promoted to augment the existing grasslands in the region, which are utilized by Tri-colored Blackbirds for foraging. Pollutant Removal A predictive model of pollutant generation and removal within the San Diego Creek watershed indicates there will be significant improvement of water quality within San Diego Creek and the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve as a result of NTS. The model, developed by GeoSvntec Consultants, estimates the following pollutant removals attributed to NTS: San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 14 January 2004 ORAFr FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix 1—Ma/orAmendment Proposal Nitrogen 58% removal (126,000 pounds) Phosphorus 40% removal (21,000 pounds) Fecal Coliform 26% removal Copper 11%removal (1,500 pounds) Lead 11% removal (300 pounds) Zinc 18% removal (9,200 pounds) Coverage Sought Under the Central/Coastal NCCP As already stated, NTS facilities must be periodically maintained on a regular basis. Additionally, under conditions of major storm events, NTS wetlands may need to be intensely maintained and facilities repaired to maintain the effectiveness of the water quality treatment system. During this maintenance, there is potential for impacts on unlisted species that may be using the created habitat. Consequently, IRWD is seeking to obtain NCCP/HCP coverage for certain listed and unlisted species that might be affected by long-term NTS maintenance activities. The coverage that is sought would only be for the designated species and only with respect to NTS impacts. Thus, the species coverage would apply only to the areas where NTS facilities are located and only for actions taken with respect to those facilities. Species coverage would not apply anywhere else in the NCCP planning area. Under an NCCP major amendment, IRWD desires to obtain coverage for such incidental take through the term of the existing NCCP. These are the components of proposed coverage: • New Species Coverage Tri-colored blackbirds (Agelaius tricolor) are likely to use the created wetland areas or surrounding habitat for nesting and/or foraging. This unlisted species, not currently covered by the NCCP, is the most likely sensitive species to visit NTS facilities. This species is proposed for NCCP/HCP coverage and would be added to the NCCP/HCP as "conditionally covered" species for the NTS program only, with the conditions of coverage comprised of any minimization of impact measures agreed upon with USFWS and CDFG. Land Ownership and Operating Agreements All NTS sites will be under public agency ownership when they are activated. The NTS sites are or will ultimately be owned in fee by the Orange County Flood Control District, City of Irvine, City of Lake Forest, Caltrans, and IRWD. Sites not currently owned by these public agencies are currently privately owned, but will be transferred to public ownership before activation. For those sites not owned by IRWD in fee, operating agreements and right of way documents will be executed to give IRWD authority to carry out NTS obligations and responsibilities. Since the sites owned by other agencies are not.currently used for NTS purposes, these . other agencies would ordinarily not allow the establishment of any type of habitat. In allowing IRWD to develop NTS facilities at these sites, these agencies need to be assured they will not be encumbered in the operation of their underlying facilities by the San Dlego Creek NTS Master Plan I-5 January 2004 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW Appendix I — AMPrAmendment Proposal introduction of NTS facilities. For instance, the Orange County Flood Control District • must be allowed to operate its flood Control facilities for the purpose of public health and safety without additional restriction. MWD will take reasonable measures in protecting the habitat it establishes, but must allow the other public agencies to work independently. Construction impacts The majority of NTS sites are not within or in proximity to sensitive habitats. Thus, any potential construction impacts will be handled on a site specific basis. To the extent existing habitat of species currently covered by the NCCP/HCP may be impacted, such impacts will be handled under existing requirements of the NCCP, as noted above. Maintenance Activities Ongoing, periodic, routine maintenance of NTS facilities is vital to the success of the water quality treatment processes. More information regarding operation and maintenance activities are described in Section 7 of the NTS master plan. Sometimes, this activity will result in the temporary removal of habitat and/or may result in the incidental take of species to baseline populations, though such take is not likely. Such results must be covered by the Major Amendment and/or the NCCP. It is important to point out that such habitat and any species populations would not exist but for the construction of the NTS facilities. And, it is not likely that, once established, NTS facilities or species populations would ever be returned to baseline conditions. Thus, there is always a net increase in habitat and species. Operation and maintenance activities include: Site inspection Water quality testing Trash and debris removal Pump/valve inspection, adjustment & maintenance Irrigation system inspection & adjustment Weir installationtremoval Integrated pest plant management Minor vegetation removal Snag removal Minor sediment removal Integrated insect management Mosquito fish stocking Bti (biological mosquito control) application Intermittent flooding/drying Most ongoing maintenance is accomplished with small crews using hand tools and pickup trucks to move equipment, materials, and debris and is not expected to significantly disturb wildlife. Motorized equipment will be needed on an occasional basis for the more significant work tasks. Other than initial construction, it is not expected that more than two or three pieces of equipment would be utilized at any given time at any given site, though such activity could be required on a very infrequent basis. Mitigation/Minimization Measures It is expected that mitigation would only be required for impacts on existing habitat that may be incurred as a result of initial construction. Any other incidental impacts would be San Diego Creek NTS MaslerPlan 1-6 January 2064 DRAFT FOR PUBUC REVIEW n LJ L� Appendix 1—MajorAmendment Proposal • covered by the NCCP major amendment. Therefore, no future recurring mitigation of impacts is expected to be required. The majority of sites are not within or in proximity to existing habitat, thus no mitigation or "minimization measures," other than rotational scheduling of routine maintenance, will be required. Within the context of NTS, such minimization measures are referred to as "project design features" (PDFs), because they are incorporated into the project design. Where appropriate for a few sensitive sites, the implementation of PDFs will be required. PDFs for ongoing maintenance of specific sites would be determined in advance of and included in the NCCP Major Amendment or otherwise addressed through the existing NCCP conditions of coverage. On the non -sensitive NTS sites, IRWD staff will perform a preliminary site assessment prior to performing operation/maintenance activities to determine if an activity will have potential effect on wildlife species on or adjacent to the NTS site. If IRWD determines the activity will not likely cause impacts to species, the activity may proceed. No biological monitoring will be required. However, if IRWD determines the activity will have &potential impact, IRWD will have a qualified specialist conduct a site survey to determine the presence/absence of sensitive species and make recommendations to minimize effects of this activity. On sensitive NTS sites, to the extent practicable, vegetation removals and other major maintenance activities, will, be performed outside breeding and nesting season to is steps the effects of these activities on bird species. During these work periods, the steps in the above paragraph will also be followed. • USFWS and CDFG will be notified prior to the commencement of work in proximity to locations where sensitive species were encountered during IRWD's preliminary assessment. Emergency actions by IRWD or other landowners As noted previously, some NTS facilities will be located within or in proximity to existing flood control facilities or public utilities. As a result, there may be situations that require IRWD or other underlying landowners (e.g., Orange County Flood Control District) to take emergency actions in the interest of public health and safety that may result in potential species impacts. Such situations should also be covered under the NCCP major amendment. Natural, Episodic Habitat Disruption In their natural settings, drainage courses in Southern California are periodically exposed to high flood flows that reconfigure and even remove natural habitats. Due to the presence of runoff, controlled in some cases and uncontrolled in others, in and around NTS facilities, it can be expected that habitat will periodically be reconfigured or San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan I-7 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix I — Ma)orAmendment Proposal removed by flood flows. The Major Amendment needs to allow for such natural habitat • disruption and any resultant incidental take. Limited to Sites with NTS Facilities It should be pointed out that the above coverage provisions would only apply to the NTS facilities, any underlying flood control or other public facilities, and any inlet or outlet structures associated with those facilities. Existing sensitive habitat will be considered on a site specific basis when designating coverage areas. The Major Amendment will not change conditions of the IA as it applies to other areas within the NCCP Plan Area. Maior Amendment Procedures Changes to pmtions of the NCCP IA and the addition of a new Identified Species pursuant to Section 8.8 of the NCCP/HCP IA ("IA") requires a major amendment to the NCCP/HCP (IA 10.1(c)). It is presently contemplated that the NTS program would be amended into the NCCP Adaptive Management Program due to the extensive water quality benefits provided to Upper Newport Bay and other water courses within the NCCP reserve system. IRWD would be the agency proposing the Major Amendment. CDFG may wish to join IRWD in proposing the Major Amendment due to their ownership of resource areas that would be benefited by the IRWD NTS program.(i.e. Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve). Procedures/elements for a Major Amendment include the following: • Proposal -- Amendments to the NCCP/HCP may be proposed by any Party to the Implementation Agreement (IA). As a participating landowner, IRWD would submit the proposal. • ReasoW Jj'ect -- The party proposing the amendment (IRWD) must provide the NCCP/HCP Non -Profit (NROC), USPWS and CDFG a statement of the reason for the amendment and an analysis of the effect of the amendment on the Identified Species, coastal sage scrub and covered habitats and the implementation of the NCCP/HCP. • IA Amendment --Major amendments to the NCCP/I-ICP require an amendment to the IA and the applicable Section 10(a) amendments. It is expected the IA amendment will be less than one paragraph added to the Adaptive Management section. • NCCP Plan Amendment— The amendment to the Plan will include the details regarding the changes in the implementation of the NCCP. • Management Authorization --Amendment of the NCCP/HCP automatically amends the CDFG Management Authorization. • San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 1-8 January 2004 draft toff Public Review Appendix I — Ma/orAmendment Proposal • • Detailed Analysis —This detailed analysis, which may include wildlife surveys, provides the technical basis for the CEQA/NEPA review and any administrative actions/opinions rendered by IRWD and/or regulatory agencies. It is expected this analysis will be composed of the NTS Master Plan, EIR, surveys, and any special analyses required. • CEQA/NEPA Review -- A major amendment to the NCCP/HCP would require CEQA/NEPA review. The IRWD NTS EIR would address the NTS relationship to the NCCP/HCP and would provide the basis for CDFG approval of the NCCP/HCP major amendment in their role as a CEQA responsible agency under the IRWD NTS EIR. The IRWD NTS EIR would provide the substantive basis for drafting a NEPA EA for use by USFWS as a supplemental NEPA document to the Program EIR/EIS that was used for the original NCCP/HCP approval. • Biological Opinions — USFWS will prepare a Biological Opinion substantiating the actions they take regarding the NCCP Major Amendment. Federal Register Notice -- USFWS would publish the notice for the NCCP/HCP Amendment, proposed amendment of the Section 10(a) Permit and availability of the EA in the Federal Register. Under the NCCP/HCP IA, "USFWS shall make every effort to process the proposed amendment of the Section 10(a) Permits within 120 days of publication in the Federal Register." • Permits —Upon approval of the NCCP Major Amendment, it is expected several permits • will need to be issued prior to construction of NTS facilities. They include: o 1601 Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (CDFG) o 10(a) Take Permit (USFWS) o 401 Certification (Regional Water Quality Control Board) o 404 (US Army Corps of Engineers) • Future NTS Modifications It is anticipated that successful implementation of NTS and achievement of water quality goals within the San Diego Creek watershed may require future changes to the NTS and its relationship to the NCCP. Any addition or deletion of sites from the NTS program, and any associated site -specific conditions, should be accomplished through minor amendments to the NCCP. It is proposed that the amendment be constructed to accomplish this. San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan I-9 January 2004 Draft for Public Review Appendix l — MajorAmendment Proposal Conclusion Based on the above, IRWD proposes to prepare and process a Major Amendment to the NCCP Implementation Agreement. IRWD invites CDFG, USFWS, the County of Orange, and other NCCP participants to join its efforts in the establishment of the Natural Treatment System Plan as an invaluable tool in the holistic improvement of the environment within the watersheds addressed by the NTS program, with the resulting benefit of habitats contained within the NCCP/HCP Reserve System. Revised: January 13, 2004 File: Appendix 1-011604.DOC San Diego Creek NTS Master Plan 1-10 January 2004 Draft for public rtsview • 0 E • • Appendix L Alex J. Horne Selenium Technical Memorandum Irvine Ranch Water District Selenium Action Plan r� u TECHNICAL MEMO PREDICTED CHANGES IN BIOACCUMULATION AND TOXICITY OF SELENIUM FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF THE NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED RELATIVE TO THE CURRENT STATUS QUO Written by Alex J. Horne • Professor Emeritus, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley • Date of last revision: 06 January 2004 1 OC\637671.2 TECHNICAL SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS The current Se problem in the San Diego Creek Watershed. The concentration of selenium • (Se) in the central and lower parts of the San Diego Creek (SDC) watershed is high enough (1-30 ppb) for concern with regard to toxicity to wildlife, especially sensitive species of birds. The origin of the Se in SDC is groundwater seeping into the creek from natural historical accumulations. Preventing the seepage or removing Se from the groundwater would be a lengthy, major and costly undertaking since the volumes and concentrations of groundwater Se are large. in the wetlands at Kesterson Reservoir, the site of a previous major Se toxicity event, the blockage of farm drainage stopped Se inflow to the wetland. The 1,200-acre wetland at Kesterson was subsequently filled in with clean sediment. Tlus direct but costly solution was implemented with difficulty and financial losses to those farmers who depended on the drainage to Kesterson to prevent salt buildup on their farms. In SDC removal of Se inflows at the source is even more difficult and may be impossible because of the large and diffuse groundwater sources of Se. In any event, reducing groundwater flow of levels greater than 5 ppb into the creek will be costly and complicated and take a long time even if an innovative methodology can be found and employed. Therefore, other less ideal and less complete solutions to the Se pollution are needed, at least for a few decades. The relatively low Se content in the SDC watershed (— 20 times lower than Kesterson) may allow use of novel methods of Se and toxicity reduction. It is my opinion that a meaningful level of reduction in Se will occur in SDC, along with the reduction of other pollutants, in the proposed Natural Treatment System (NTS). Potential benefits of the NTS. The NTS is a generic method to remove pollutants using sustainable methods in an environmentally friendly fashion. In particular, the NTS is a mostly sustainable system that depends on renewable resources such as sunlight father than oil or gas. • The NTS Master Plan describes how much of several pollutants will be removed and the generally expected pollutant sinks. To the extent that Se is removed from the watershed and immobilized in the sediments in the NTS, the entire watershed will have a lower Se concentration. Also, to the extent that the NTS provides bird habitat that gives a net benefit to birds, the NTS will improve the existing situation. Expected improvement can be approximated from the current NTS site San Joaquin Marsh (SJM) and other Se -contaminated wetlands. Currently in the SJM about 30% of the Se is removed (-15% of Se in SDC). The entire NTS is more than three times the area of SJM and should be much more efficient (— 2-3 times) at removing Se from the water. The first reason for an expected net improvement is that more Se will be immobilized, sequestrated or removed in the NTS than in the current unmanaged system in SDC. The second reason for improvement is that most of the Se removed by the NTS will be less bioavailable to birds than the present situation in SDC. The Chevron Marsh located in Richmond, California has a similar Se inflow to the NTS and SDC in general ( 25 ppb). Despite a likelydetrimental effect of the Se on eggs and chicks, manipulation of habitats has resulted in a net environmental benefit for birds. In 2003, a small sample of seven eggs from three bird species nesting at SJM showed levels above background samples, but still relatively low levels of Se. The management horizontal layout of the Chevron site has reduced Se in bird eggs by over half between 1994 and 1999 resulting in a benefit to the wildlife. Similar horizontal zone management is part of the NTS design but is carried further with a vertical separation of the immobilized Se in the anoxic sediments and wildlife in the oxygen -rich upper layers. Somewhat comparable studies in the San • Joaquin Valley have been less successful than the Chevron marsh but were not managed in the 2 same way as either Chevron or the NTS. Finally, the strategy of water draw down as practiced in the IRWD San Joaquin Marsh NTS and most of the proposed NTS will reduce submerged • aquatic vegetation and lower the risk to birds that consume the plants and insects living among them. Potential disadvantages of the NTS. The downside to the NTS is that if it does not perform as expected by removing and immobilizing Se, the NTS wetlands will lead to an increase in Se - polluted wetlands in the watershed. Thus more wildlife, especially nesting birds, will be at risk. Several studies have shown that Se removal varies and that the percentage removal or the amount of Se volatilization cannot be guaranteed with current knowledge. It is certain that some of the NTS sites will have levels of Se in the food web that will be higher than those recommended by several federal and state agencies as "safe" for wildlife. However, if the NTS is successful in its management (for example decreasing submerged aquatic vegetation by draw down), the levels of Se should'be lower overall and Se less accessible to birds than the current situation in the SDC watershed. Monitoring of typical NTS sites as they are constructed should allow for adaptive management. Monitoring of the current NTS site (SJM) has shown a net wildlife benefit, but the other new NTS sites have some important differences and need to be carefully monitored. However, the design of most of the new NTS sites makes them less of a risk than the SJM site. Finally, the NTS sites can be modified to improve Se removal and further decrease wildlife access (for example, removing some open water) or even decommissioning poorly functioning NTS sites. Amount of improvements expected. The NTS will not, as currently configured, remove all Se from SDC and Newport Bay. However, it is likely that when completed, the NTS will reduce the • overall amount of bioavailable Se in SDC by between 30 and 70%. A reduction of this magnitude may move the watershed out of the threat of serious Se toxicity to birds and other wildlife. The maintenance of anoxic conditions in the NTS sediments is needed for the immobilization or removal of pollutants. Such anoxic conditions are characteristic of wetland sediments and do not pose a threat to wildlife that usually live in the other, oxygenated parts of both natural and constructed wetlands. The majority of the water in the NTS and most wetlands is oxygenated; only the sediments and the few inches of water above them are normally anoxic. All kinds of wildlife including fish, aquatic insects and birds are common in the 500 acre Prado Constructed Wetland (Riverside County) even though the anoxic sediments remove large amounts of nitrate pollution from the Santa Ana River as it passes though the wetland. Effect of no action (no construction of NTS). If the NTS or a similar system is not constructed in the SDC watershed, other less environmentally friendly and unsustainable methods of pollution control may have to be used. Such methods include drilling and "pump and treat" technologies, as well as grout curtains and in situ immobilization using injections of soluble carbon. These alternatives have not been formally studied, but are typical methods used for Se and other contaminant problems in groundwater. Such an example of the use of these methods would be the removal of Se during dewatering for construction of the new Cyprus Overpass in Oakland, California in the 1990s. Currently, some high nitrate and high -Se water is pumped from the groundwater to the ocean via the sewage treatment plant, a successful, if very costly solution to one small fraction of the Se -polluted region. All of these methods are costly, intrusive and unsustainable, unlike the NTS. Since many of the nation's watersheds are facing similar problems to SDC, an NTS-like approach deserves full consideration. • NON -TECHNICAL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Current situation. Today, SDC watershed is polluted with Se that is a threat to wildlife, especially nesting birds. The creeks, wetlands, and some of the bird food items in SDC have recently been shown to have quite high Se levels. Wildlife habitat in SDC watershed consists of unnatural concrete channels with vegetation, pools and wetlands in which animals and plants have become established without regard to possible toxic effects. The source of the Se is a natural accumulation in the ground that has been disturbed by the construction of drains and agricultural practices during the development of the region. Cures for such legacy pollutants include as yet undetermined conventional engineering but these will be costly and take a long time to implement. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that describes the proposed Natural Treatment System is unusual in that it seeks to solve existing problems in the watershed rather than justify the new discharge of a pollutant into an uncontaminated creek. Advantages of the NTS. The Natural Treatment System (NTS) Project as proposed in the EIR and NTS Master Plan is an environmentally friendly and sustainable method to reduce Se and other pollutant levels in the San Diego Creek watershed using the renewable energy sources in sunlight and plants. The NTS can be implemented now and will continue to benefit wildlife and remove other pollutants if and when a complete solution to Se inflows is implemented. The concept of the NTS is that it should not create any new environmental problems while removing much of the toxic Se. With the NTS some needed measure of management of creeks and wetlands will be achieved to the benefit of the San Diego Creek ecosystem. • There is an inherent conflict between toxics removal and wildlife, which can be mostly overcome by designing the NTS wetlands so that the toxicants are removed and immobilized from wildlife as quickly as possible. The current situation in SDC is that toxicants are always available to wildlife so, assuming the immobilization of toxicants works quickly, the NTS could only improve matters. The pollution reduction provided by the NTS will not necessarily be all that is needed and further sanitary actions may be required in the watershed. Drawbacks of the NTS, The main drawback with the NTS is that if it does not perform as expected it will increase the amount of Se -polluted wetlands and threats to birds. It is certain that some parts of the food chain in the NTS will be contaminated with Se at levels above those considered "safe" by several agencies. However, this is the situation now found in every part of SDC watershed. The possibly "unsafe" area of the NTS will be much smaller than the currently "unsafe" SDC, so overall toxicity is reduced. However, in the NTS the bird food in particular will be managed to be less accessible to birds or to have a safe Se level if consumed by birds. Thus area for area the NTS should be "safer" than the current situation. The proposed monitoring program is designed to determine any threats to wildlife before they cause harm. Modification to the NTS is possible to counter unforeseen events and drops in performance and has been used in other sites to give a net benefit to birds. Cl • CA TABLE OF CONTENTS Technical summary & conclusions 2 Non -technical summary & conclusions 4 Table of contents 5 1.0 Introduction 6 2.0 Properties of Selenium 9 2.1. Potential toxic effect 9 2.2. Factors important to potential toxicity 10 2.2.1. Forms of selenium present 10 2.2.2. Access to selenium by the food chain 11 2.2.3 Design elements: description of hydraulics of the NTS settling basins 21 2.2.4. Sites in North America where selenium has been an issue 24 2.2.5. Comparing and Using These Other Sites in NTS Analysis 30 3.0 Project description 32 3.1 Binning strategy 32 4.0. Engineering and design principles 36 4.1 Major principles 36 4.2 Application to various NTS Units 39 4.2.1 Bin 1 39 4.2.2 Bing 40 4.2.3 Bin 3 41 5.0. Risk Management 41 6.0 Athalassiohaline conditions 44 7.0 Immobilization and sequestration of selenium 44 8.0 Volatilization of selenium 45 9.0 Numbers of contaminated prey items for birds 46 9.1 The role of submerged aquatic vegetation 46 9.2 The role of the biofilm 46 9.3. Reduced accessibility to birds of remaining re items 47 9.4. Balancing risk of mosquito control and selenium in mos uitofish 49 10. Analysis 49 10.1. Threat of selenium toxicity with NTS project 49 10.2 Selenium partitioned from the food web 49 10.2.1 Immobilization & Sequestration I&S 49 10.2.2 Volatilization 50 10.2.3 Selenium managed 51 10.3 Possibility of no significant net impacts from selenium 52 11 Project design features 53 11.1. Monitoring to confirm reasonable expectations 53 11.2. Response action as appropriate 53 References 54 List of Tables Table 1. Surningy of selenium in San Diego Creek tro hic levels in 2002 13 Table 2. Selenium in bird eggs at various sites 18 Table 3. Historical selenium data from San Die o'Creek 19 Table 4. Guidelines used by USDI for remediation and managing selenium in irrigation waters 21 Table 5. Amounts of pollutants removed from urban storm water by a detention basin 21 Table 6. NTS sites and appropriate bin classifications 35 1.0 INTRODUCTION . The Natural Treatment System (NTS) Project on San Diego Creek (SDC) was proposed in 2001. Its purpose is to rehabilitate semi -natural but currently low -value drainage areas and construct new features to form a network of pollution control systems in SDC. A secondary feature of the NTS is the provision of a freshwater marsh and riparian vegetation where possible. The NTS is based on results from previous constructed local and national wetlands and uses similar environmentally friendly and sustainable techniques powered by the renewable energy of the sun and plants (Kadiec & Knight, 1994; USEPA, 1999: Mitch & Gosslelink, 2000; Reilly et at., 2000). Wetlands treatment is well -established and the Journal of Ecological Engineering as well as many others, publishes multiple peer -reviewed articles on the topic (e.g. Ecol. Eng, 2000). In a review of wetlands treatment in the late 1990s a leading US expert wrote: "About 1000 wetlands systems exist in North America and a comparable number in Europe. These treat a variety of wastewaters, including municipal, mine drainage, urban and agricultural storm water, sludges, leachates and various industrial effluents." (Kadlec, 1999). Treatment wetlands such as NTS are designed to remove pollutants and either destroy them (e.g. nitrate and some pesticides), transfer them to the atmosphere as part of their natural cycle (selenium (Se), nitrogen) or immobilize them in a biologically unavailable form in the sediments (e.g, heavy metals, Se, some pesticides). The removal of pollutants in surface waters would remove the need for NTS but prospects are poor for the removal of trace pollutants in large volumes of surface runoff from diffuse sources on urban and agricultural land. Today in the SDC many pollutants, including Se, are freely available to wildlife in the many creeks and wetlands that have formed as part of the drainage system. Many of these existing • sites are attractive, undisturbed and productive wetlands that stand out to wildlife in an otherwise barren setting. Water birds come to feed in SDC and ingest existing Se and other pollutants; I have studied wildlife abundance and Se -contamination in these channels and watched dozens of avocets and stilts as well as ducks, egrets and heron feed on the Se -contaminated insects, fish and crayfish in the water. The water is shallow, bird food abounds in some sites and people or dogs rarely disturb the birds. Naturally, birds are attracted to SDC as it exists today since they cannot detect its Se -contamination. I designed the NTS to reduce the overall toxicity of SDC to birds by creating managed systems using sedimentation and uptake, volatilization, and organic processes to remove particulate and soluble pollutants in wetlands. The NTS will be less attractive to wildlife than the existing wetlands in the SDC because, as compared to the SDC, the NTS sites will (i) contain fewer contaminated insects and other bird food due to regular water draw down that reduces submerged aquatic vegetation and the invertebrates that live there; the vector control management provisions in the NTS Plan will also reduce insects; (ii) reduce the availability of any remaining contaminated bird food by various means including restricting bird access to some parts of the NTS; (iii) encourage the growth of vegetation that can exist in the presence of Se but not pass it on from water or soil to the seeds and stems consumed by birds; (iv) sometimes be small and disconnected from other vegetation, habitat and food sources that attract wildlife; (v) designed to have less, even no, open water that allows birds to land and gain access to any contaminated food, and (vi) less isolated from disturbances from dogs and people. Further, the accumulation of Se in birds will be substantially reduced by provisions in the NTS that are not in place today in SDC. For example, the following management measures included in the NTS Plan will help limit existing Se accumulations: (a) monitoring and testing in the NTS sediments • R and removal of sediments when numerical limits identified in the NTS Plan.are met; (b) monitoring and testing of plant tissue and plant removal if certain standards are not met. • Selenium is a problematic toxicant since it cycles rapidly from biologically unavailable to bioavailable forms during wetting and drying cycles and has much more effect on water birds than on most other wildlife. Selenium has an unusually small range between that level needed for life's processes and the level causing toxicity. If the existing toxic situation in SDC is to be improved, transfer of bioavailable Se as quickly as possible from the water to•a permanently immobile state is needed. Such a transfer is not possible in the NTS without some exposure of wildlife to Se. Thus a second need is to enhance the habitat to balance any deleterious effects of Se to produce a net environmental benefit. Such net benefits have been achieved in constructed wetlands in California with approximately the same Se inflows (1-30 ppb) although there is still debate on the degree of net benefit. Balancing benefit with some cost provides a possible method to greatly improve the present situation. The essence of the NTS method to reduce harm to wildlife is that there is a spatial separation between pollutants and wildlife. Vertical spatial separation is present between the wildlife section (upper oxygenated waters, open ponds) and the pollution treatment section (anoxic lower sediment, dense vegetation) in both upper and lower wetlands. A good example of the process is the growth of plants such as bulrush or cattail that can grow on Se -rich sediments but whose aboveground seeds and stems do not contain Se. Mallard, a sensitive species to Se, feeds extensively on bulrush seeds. A horizontal separation also occurs since the relatively wildlife friendly sections are located at the downstream end of the NTS where pollutants are lower than at the inflow. Nonetheless, it is inevitable that any toxicant present in surface waters has the potential to enter the food web. In • the NTS this exposure time is designed to be shorter and the pollutant is destroyed or immobilized more rapidly (hours to days) than it would be in the current situation. At present, wildlife in the SDC is exposed to active forms of pollutants for long periods (weeks). Depending on location, Se is present in variable amounts in SDC and has the potential to cause harm to birds if it accumulates through the food chain. This memo discusses potential benefits and potential adverse impacts that might occur if the NTS system is used in the current SDC watershed. Selenium is a rare earth element discovered by the famous Swedish chemist J. J. Berzilius in 1817 and named after the moon (Greek = selen) due to the silvery color of one of its solid forms and its resemblance to another rare earth, tellurium. In 1645, the Welsh essayist and Member of Parliament for Yorkshire, James Howell, described moon people as "selenites." Today selenitic is used to describe flowers that only open under moonlight. It is quite a coincidence that the main uses of Se by humans is in terms of its light altering properties that were not known to Berzilius. Most people know Se as producing the red color in automobile taillights and as the vital ingredient in the photovoltaic cells now so common in our society. Selenium was formerly an ingredient in photocopiers. Described as a metalloid, Se has properties of both metals and non-metals. Se is vital for human health and many take dietary supplements containing Se. Se was identified as an environmental toxin when illnesses in horses ridden by the US Army in the Dakotas were noted (Madison, 1860; Franke, 1934). In contrast to its toxin -like characteristics, Se has also been identified as a trace element deficient from soils and vegetation in agricultural areas all over the world (NAS, 1983). In the Central Valley of California, both deficiency and excess of Se are present within a few miles of each other due to the geology of • the area. The Sierra Nevada Mountains forming the eastern boundary of the Central Valley are igneous granite and low in Se. The sedimentary western Coast Range lulls are former ocean deposits, patchily rich in Se, and the source of Se in the SDC watershed in Orange County. The origin of the Se in the sedimentary rocks of the Coast Range hills is marine biota, deposited as . sediment (Barnes, 1985). The ocean is rich in soluble Se relative to freshwaters and algae that comprise most of the biomass greatly concentrate the element before sinking to the sediments. In California, Se problems reported to date have generally been related to agricultural practices and oil refining. However, higher Se in the SDC appears to have been caused by changes in groundwater and watershed drainage. In SDC drainage the center of Se is the former Swamp of the Frogs (SOF). It is not clear if the wetland was a swamp (i.e. dominated by trees), a marsh (dominated by emergent macrophytes), but a combination of a willow thicket swamp and a cattail/bulrush marsh seems most likely judging from other wetlands in the area. The SOF was quite large and extended to areas above 100 feet elevation with slopes of 1 % (Trimble, 1998). Trimble infers that the SOF resulted from groundwater springs and seeps and did not drain to the rest of the watershed, although it may have partially dried up drought years. The Monterey Formation which underlies much of the area and outcrops in the NE of El Toro MCAS is a known source of Se (Reeder, pers. comm.). In order to use the land for farming and later the El Toro base, drainage of the SOF was necessary. At present the drainage of the groundwater flow, and perhaps nitrate concentrations, around the SOF apparently controls the Se flow to SDC. Irrigated agriculture in semi -arid climates, such as the Central Valley, causes Se to accumulate in soils and requires sub -surface drainage to prevent salt accumulation in the surface soils. Salts eventually build up and harm plants. The the drain effluent, essentially a soil leachate, is collected in evaporation ponds where dissolved Se then follows several interrelated paths. Much of the Se is reduced to insoluble forms in anoxic (meaning no oxygen) conditions of the pond . sediments. Another portion of the soluble Se is taken up by the base of the food chain (microbes including bacteria and algae as well as higher plants). Aquatic invertebrates such as insects and worms feed on the base of the food chain. Consumption of Se -rich plants and seeds or insects by birds can then lead to toxicity if Se has accumulated to high enough levels in the blota. Se will remain immobile in soils so long as they are either dry or anoxic if wet (NAS, 1983). However, irrigation can produce the combination of excess water, oxygen and nitrate that allows Se to mobilize in the shallow groundwater (up to 500 ppb over the background levels of <2 ppb; USBR,1986b). In addition, high nitrate levels (>20 ppm NO3-N) (typical of modern agriculture) inhibit Se reduction and removal from water (LBL, 1987a; Weres et al., 1989). High nitrate was found in the same area but with a slightly downstream source and presumably hinders any natural reduction and restoration of Se. The Reduction -Oxidation (redox) potential for selenate or selenite lies below that of nitrate. Therefore, in theory all nitrate must be totally reduced to nitrogen gas before the native bacteria reduce soluble and bioavailable selenate/selenite to insoluble and non -available Se metal. The redox level applies to both groundwater and surface water but, paradoxically, Se removal in a wetland does not depend on removal of the entire nitrate pool. In SJM about 25-45% of nitrate is removed and about 30% of the Se. For such removal to occur there must be spatial patchiness of the reducing zones. In SJM the shallow open water areas are often fully oxygenated in both water and surface sediments (M. Fleming - Singer, 2002 and OCWD monitoring data). In contrast, the deeper anti -predator trenches now often covered with floating mats of bulrush are anoxic for much of the time. Thus some nitrate and Se apparently pass through the system while in other areas, another fraction is reduced. Any natural organic matter, such as flows from dead vegetation or the soil organic fraction, could reduce selenate/selenite, but the readily available fraction is presumably being used up by nitrate instead in the SDC shallow groundwater. is 2.0 PROPERTIES OF SELENIUM 2.1 Potential Toxic Effect The Selenium (Se) atom is slightly larger than sulfur (S) but similar in many of its chemical properties. It is so similar that living organisms replace S with Se in their body biochemistry. If Se is substituted in S-containing amino acids, the resultant proteins and enzymes fail to work. This is because Se is slightly larger than S causing the resultant electrochemical "lock and key" mechanism to fail. Se is so rare that the body has no ability to protect from excess, even though Se is a needed element for healthy growth of animals. Therefore, when supplied in excess, Se bioaccumulates in the body and is only slowly depurated back to the ecosystem (Horne, 1994). Like many pollutants, the main route of Se in aquatic ecosystems to birds and the higher trophic levels is through the food chain. Soluble, bioavailable Se is rapidly taken up by the lower trophic levels, bacteria, algae and aquatic plants. Se is an element of concern because there is an unusually small range of concentrations (1-2 orders of magnitude) between the beneficial and no -effect levels and toxic levels. Animals feeding on Se -contaminated plants retain more Se than they excrete, resulting in bioaccumulation. In nature, bioaccumulation primarily depends on the average contamination of the food, the length of the life cycle, and species to species differences. The net result is that although the higher trophic level tend to contain the most Se, the highest Se concentrations can be found at any part of the food web. Selenium, like most • other metals, differs from fat-soluble organic compounds (DDT, PCB), which biomagnify considerably to the top trophic levels (often birds). Recent results indicate that biomagnification of Se may occur in Lake Macquarie, NSW, Australia (Barwick & Maher, 2003) but the mechanism for such increases remains unknown. Perhaps most important is that the degree and thus danger of biomagnification is much less for Se than for pesticides. Depending on how the food chain is defined and which organisms are selected for the food chain the extent of Se biomagnification by SDC food web in 2003 approximated —3 to + 15 (Horne, 2003). Once Se has bioaccumulated or biomagnified to harmful levels, there are numerous ways in which excess Se may show effects. They can be summarized as follows: In Humans:. Bioaccumulation symptoms include depression, hair and nail loss, a characteristic "garlic -like" breath, dental caries, ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis), and possibly birth defects. It should be noted that only four people have died by consuming excess Se in food -in the US. All were farm laborers in the dry central region that includes the Dakotas. They died of ALS having almost exclusively eaten locally grown produce high in Se for many years. In China, dozens of people showed hair loss, nail problems, and skin erythema and at least one died from exposure to food and water containing Se. • In Animals: Bioaccumulation symptoms include garlic breath, tremors, respiratory failure, death, and liver and kidney congestion (with blood). Some aquatic birds are particularly sensitive to excess Se and effects are shown most readily by reproductive • failure (eggs do not hatch, chicks have fatal birth defects or do not survive to adult stages). 2.2 Factors Important.to Potential Toxicity 2.2.1 Forms of Selenium Present 0 Se, like sulfur, has several stable chemical states that depend on the environmental conditions. In semi -arid soils such as the California Coast Range, Se is present in its most oxidized form of selenate (SeO4). In local areas the Se may be present as a dried crust on the soil in some form such as the sodium salt. When wetted the salt dissociates, producing soluble selenate (like sulfate) that can easily be transported with surface runoff or vadose zone (shallow, oxidized soil layer) groundwater to creeks such as San Diego Creek (SDC). In the Coast Range selenate is the most stable form of soluble Se in lakes and streams, as well as anywhere where there is a normal supply of dissolved oxygen (DO). However, if conditions for uptake are present selenate will be taken up into plants and may then be converted to organic Se. The uptake process is slow, however, as can be seen by the fact that soluble selenate in SDC remains for weeks as it passes downstream over sediments and through stands of plants. If DO falls to low levels, eventually reaching zero, selenate is converted to selenite (Se IV, HSeO3 and SCO3) and then to Se° (a metal usually as a distinctive reddish precipitate when sufficiently concentrated). In animal or plant tissues, selenate can be reduced to form various -Se-H linkages. The most important of these organo-selenium compounds are the gas, dimethylseletude, and the amino -acid, selenomethionine. In mammals and birds Se plays its most important function, that of co -factor in cancer prevention (thus the reason why humans take Se supplements). Glutathione peroxidase needs Se to function as its co -factor and is essential to removing cancer -causing free oxygen radicals in mammalian cell membranes. In global biogeochemical cycles, Se moves through the atmosphere primarily as . dimethylselenide (a gas (CH3-Se-CH3) similar to hydrogen sulfide (H-S-H)) and dimethlydiselenide. The gaseous form is the agent for the natural cycling of Se from soil and water to the atmosphere. However, in aquatic systems most Se normally accumulates in the sediments and not in the atmosphere. Se is anextremely mobile element in terms of rapid changes from one species to another [e.g., Se (IV) to Se(0) or more slowly in the reverse reaction]. Mixtures of different chemical forms of Se are often observed in water, sediments, and plant tissues (Zhi-Quing Lin, pens. com.). Wetting of oxidizing soils mobilizes the already soluble Se (IV and VI) forms. It is also reasonable to assume that a continuous supply of oxygenated or nitrate -containing waters low in organic carbon will also promote oxidation of Se (0) in soils but limited information is currently available on the kinetics of this reaction. Regardless of the exact mechanism, soluble and bioavailable Se is rapidly released from wetted soils. The release is the cause of the Se currently present in SDC. The reverse is also true in that soluble selenate is soon converted back to insoluble metallic Se if excreted in conditions of low DO, low nitrate, and high organic carbon. Wetlands, such as the SOF, are normally low in DO and nitrate, and high in organic carbon, and thus tend to trap Se as the metallic precipitate or as -Sc-H in dead tissue. The fate of reduced Se in body tissues under anoxic conditions is less well known but it is also held firmly under anoxic conditions. When oxidized, the SOF lost Se in a soluble form as Se metal was oxidized. That is presumably the situation at present and likely the scenario for millennia in the past as rainfall and drought cycles occurred. The different forms of Se have different toxicities and affect animals in laboratory cultures in different ways. However, in natural conditions such as Peters Canyon Wash (PCW), SDC, and the NTS, all conditions from fully oxidized to fully reduced occur and most Se species will be 10 present at various concentrations over time and will cycle from one form to another at varying rates. Selenomethionine is one of the most toxic Se forms and is generally considered to be the • form present in many food items. However, all forms can be important in toxicology (Fan & Cutter, 1998) because all forms present may potentially be converted to the more toxic species. In terms of Se in the various trophic levels, the initial water typically contains mostly selenate. Plants and animals, contain Se mostly in organic forms, and generally in the specific form of amino acid selenomethionine. This change is unimportant in comparing the different trophic levels since the algae and plants make the change from inorganic selenate or selenite to the organic selenomethane form. 2.2.2 Access to Selenium by the Food Chain Se can be taken up by animals and plants as several inorganic and organic forms but is usually present in water as the soluble selenate ion. In practice the lower parts of the food chain such as algae, higher plants and bacteria usually take up Se in the environment. Thus Se generally reaches the top of the food chain via the lower parts of the chain. It takes some months or years before equilibrium is reached so that Se concentrations measured in the water at any instance is not necessarily well related to the Se found at the same time in the higher organisms such as birds. The higher organisms' Se level relates to the food consumed which will change in Se content over time as the organisms switch from prey to prey or move from contaminated to uncontaminated sites. Se levels in nature seems to be distributed according to food preference, age of the animal, lifespan, Se excretion rates relative to intake, diet preferences, and the individual ability to store • Se (see table 1 below and Horne, 1994). Certainly this was true in Peters Canyon Nash (PCW) in 2002, where the highest Se was found in the lower to middle portion of the food web (chironomids) and not in the fish and predatory invertebrates (mosquito fish, dragonfly larvae). The situation in PCW may be explained by the likely diet of the predatory invertebrates. Studies of eastern mosquitofish showed that chironomid larvae comprised only 10% of their diet (Stober et al., 1998) and adult midges were 36% of the diet. Such findings correspond to the mostly surface feeding habits of mosquitofish. Adult midges live for only a week or so and the larvae spend most of their time in the sediments where mosquitofish may not forage. However, midge pupae are planktonic and float near the surface for some days where they would be possible targets for surface foragers. Se found in the mosquitofish in SDC was much lower than in chironomids, also suggesting that they are not the dominant source of food. Dragonfly and damselfly nymphs were also lower in Se than chironomid larvae and these two predatory nymphs may crawl around the sediments to feed on chironomids. From a bird toxicity viewpoint chironomids assume a more important role as they comprise for example, over 50% of the diet of pintail ducks and green -winged teal in spring prior to breeding in the Kern National Wildlife Refuges where "the majority of foods eaten in January and February are invertebrates, mainly chironomids larvae." (Euliss, 1984). Similar findings were made in Los Banos (Connelly & Chesmore, 1980; Beam & Gruenhagen, 1980), for three northern California wildlife refuges (Miller, 1984) and in more generalized food reports (Martin et al., 1951; Bellrose, 1978). However, mallard, a sensitive species with regard to Se toxicity (Ohlendorf, 2003), feeds mostly on seeds and plants and increases its insect food component only slightly in late winter prior to egg laying. • 11 In the marshes of Kesterson Reservoir, for similar species to the SDC watershed, there was no particular bioaccumulation or biomagnification pattern with all vegetation and all herbivores showing similar Se tissue levels (76 and 86 ppm dw respectively but with vegetation ranges of • 12-67 and some seeds to over 1,000 ppm dw and herbivores ranging from 8 to 263 ppm dw, Table 1). Lumped carnivores at Kesterson showed an increase of 2.6 times in Se to 214 ppm dw (range 107-276). SDC showed a similar trophic level distribution but with much lower Se concentrations-3.3 ppm dw for all vegetation, 11 ppm dw for all herbivores/detritivores, and 15.2 ppm dw for all carnivores (Table 1). Thus a gross biomagnification value of 4.6 was found (15.2/3.3). In the SDC Watershed chironomid (midge) larvae contained the highest Se levels. Chioonomid larvae are grouped in the herbivore category (middle trophic level) for comparative purposes because they ingest fine particulate food (Rutherford, 2000), In some senses chironomid larvae are detritivores but true detritus (dead organic matters such as fragments of leaves or plant stems are poor food compared with living algae or the biofilm (that coats most larger detritus particles). Very detailed studies of the food web of all the inhabitants of the Se -polluted marshes at Kesterson Reservoir, including gut analysis showed that living matter was the main source of food for chironomids (Horne & Roth, 1989; Home & Goldman, 1994 pg. 430, Fig. 18-2). The diet of chironomids in SDC may warrant such detailed examination since mosquito fish were the most common species in the carnivore category and were found to contain lower Se levels than chironomid larvae (Horne, 2003). However, this analysis is at the research level and may need to measure the stable isotope ratios (C 12/C13 and N14/N14) which is also a research level project. While included in the carnivore category (upper trophic level), mosquito fish may not be able to feed on chironomids except during their planktonic pupal phase or as adults. The overall mean values in Table 1 show a trend of increasing Se moving from the lower to • upper trophic levels. However, it is not clear if this trend indicates biomagnification of Se in the food web since some individual groups of herbivores and carnivores show both high and low Se content. Some species of plants and animals present in PCW did not occur in the Santa Fe Channel (SFC) and vice versa. Also it is difficult to separate the effects of exposure and feeding habits within the biota sampled. To make the best comparison biota from Kesterson were selected to be most similar to those found at either PCW or SFC. (Horne, 2003.) 12 • • Table 1. Summary of selenium (ppm dry weight) in the main trophic levels in the Se - contaminated section of San Diego Creek in fall 2002. Site/Organism San Diego Creek Kesterson Reservoir - marsh sections' Peters Canyon Wash Total Se in In water 30 5-350 Mean for vegetation 5.5 33-115 Mean for all herbivores 18.4 97-180 Mean for herbivores minus chironomid larvae 8.9 Mean for all carnivores 17.9 145-284 Santa Fe Channel Total Se in water 17 5-350 Mean for vegetation 1.0 27-128 Mean for all herbivores 3.7 8-57 Mean for all carnivores 12.5 145-284 All San Diego Creek sites combined (PCW + SFC) All vegetation 3.3 76 All herbivores 11 86 All carnivores 15.2 214 Highest values Algae 6.7 234 Plant seeds Not collectable 852-1,806s Plant stems 8.1 135 Animals 49.3 276 1 ' Data from Home & Roth, 1989 for Ponds 5 and 5A at Kesterson. 2 The average Se in water entering Kesterson has been estimated as — 300 ppb (Ohlendorf, 1989) who also quotes values of 106451 ppb for the inflowing San Luis Drain water (Ohlendorf, 2002). Also higher values (— 350 ppb) were recorded in the ephemeral pools (Pond 11) as late as February 1987 (synoptic studies for USBR by CH2M-Hill and the University of California at Berkeley). These higher values are probably due to the upward migration of water in winter leaching out high Se from the soil. 3 Chironomid larvae are grouped into this trophic level for comparative purposes. They feed on fine particulate matter that may include dead plant fragments (detritus) and also on the more nutritious algae that sink to the sediments. ° This category includes mosquitofish that are normally surface feeders and may not be able to reach the benthic chironomid larvae about 10-50 cm deep. However, chironomids have a planktonic pupal phase that would be available to mosquitofish. If chironomids are excluded from the diet of mosquitofish a small biomagnification is shown. 5 Data from the 0.5 and 1 foot excavation and flooding experiments in Pond 6 at Kesterson Reservoir in Feb -March 1988 (Horne & Roth, 1988. Report to USBR). — Base offood Chain. In almost any ecosystem the base of the food chain is made up of primary producers such as algae and plants. Algae and plants also contain the vast majority of the biomass of both living tissue (— 95%) and dead material that soon becomes part of the sediments. Thus most of the Se in any ecosystem will soon be found in the sediments. For example, in the marshes of Kesterson Reservoir about 95% (possibly greater) of all Se added was found in the sediments. Of the remaining 5% almost all was present in algae, bacteria and is aquatic plants. The higher trophic levels such as insects and fish contain very 13 little of the total ecosystem Se but can still be toxic to birds that feed on them. However, the concentration of Se varies from species to species and can be highest in any trophic level. However, a simple concentration factor from water . to tissue (dry wt.) for Se ranges from 1,000 to 10,000. Herbivores &Detritivores. Herbivores are animals that feed on bacteria, algae, or plants such as duckweed or cattails. Detritivores depend on fine particulate matter which may be both dead and living material with both plant and animal origins. Aquatic organisms including chironomids (midge larvae), some damselfly larvae, snails and caddisfly larvae are usually described as herbivores. However, it is difficult to be fully concise with the definition of a herbivore since some animals may eat both animals and plants (omnivores) and some eat only detritus that has a variable source (detritivores) and often includes nutritious live algae and plant fragments coated with living biofrlms. Chironomids (midges) are usually the most common visible invertebrates in many aquatic ecosystems. Chironomids and other herbivores feed and live in the sediments or on plants and graze the biofilm. A main route of uptake of Se in wetlands is likely to be from the water to the biofilm. In environments such as streams, the living biofilm is composed of a microbial matrix mostly of bacteria and attached algae. Also present are some simple fungi, protozoans, rotifets, and nematodes. Tile biofilm normally coats all particles in the stream, living and dead, including detritus of all kinds. In many cases " dead detritus" such as a leaf fragment and the living biofilm are present together. However, there is little nutritional value to be gained by stream insects or worms if they ingest detritus that is not coated by the biofilm. In fact they will actively reject such "clean" detritus and select that with a nutritious coating of living microbes (Kaushik, N. K. & N. B. Hynes, 1971; Horne & Goldman,1994 pp. 370-71 & Pig. 16-13). The role of pure precipitates of Se (normally very small reddish balls of Se' formed by bacteria) seems not to become part of the food chain. Such precipitates of Se are found only in anoxic sediments and long-term experiments (2.3 years) show that they are not re- incorporated into the food web (Horne, 1991). Particles of high (pure) -Se matter, perhaps originating upstream in SDC will not be favored by the biofilm organisms since there is no nutritional value in Se. However, any such high -Se particles could become covered by first a film of proteins, then bacteria, then algae and so on. Even substrates such as glass, tile, even ammunition boxes in streams follow this evolution from a clean surface to once covered with a living biofilm. Any biofilm that formed on a Se -rich detrital particle would take up Se if the Se were in a bioavailable farm. In this way the biofilm would become richer in Se just as if it were exposed to Se in the water column. In SDC both these processes may occur. In the NTS it is expected that more of the detrital and soluble Se will be immobilized in the permanently anoxic sediments relative to the current situation in the creek where Se is continually recycled with seasonal floods and low summer flows. - In PCW, chironomids were common in the mud that accumulated in the deeper pools at depths of 10-50 cm. Chironomids construct small tubes in the mud and the time spent there depends on food and temperature. The time taken before they . hatch out as aerial adult midges can range from less than a year in rich warm 14 waters to over 4 years in some oligotrophic polar lakes. In SDC it is probable that the chironomids live for 1-2 years before hatching and thus have ample time to • accumulate Se from their food. The most nutritious food for SDC chironomids is algae and living particulate matter falling to the sediments in the slower flow of the pools. Long-term observations of chironomids in shallow waters indicate that their growth patterns are dependent on the seasonal fluctuations of algae falling from the open waters (Jonasson, 1978). The same growth dynamic are likely in the pools of SDC. Furthermore, chironomids that occupy the mid -part of the food web in PCW had the most Se in their tissues (— 48 ppm dw). Submerged and semi -emergent plants, snails, and small shrimp -like creatures (scuds) had relatively low Se (7-10 ppm dw), while dragonfly larvae and mosquitofish had intermediate amounts of Se (14 & 30 ppm dw respectively) (dragonflies are carnivorous and mosquitofish are omnivorous). In contrast, the emergent vegetation and algae at that time had bio-accumulated little Se (3-7 ppm dw). At the time of collection the water contained about 30 ppb, a high level for natural waters. — Fish and predatory invertebrates. Fish and larger insect larvae such as dragonflies eat chironomids and other small invertebrates. In PCW, mosquitofish and dragonflies were quite common and provide a large morsel for birds to eat. Scuds were also common. In PCW, a bird switching its diet from chironomids to scuds in November 2002 would have lowered its Se exposure though the diet by about 80% (from — 48 ppm to —9 ppm). These two prey items were present within a few inches of each other at this site and equally available to birds. — Birds. As with most of the food web, birds acquire their Se from their food. The big difference between birds and all of the other aquatic components of the food web is that birds may not stay in one location to eat. However, breeding birds tend to forage in the vicinity of the nest and the foraging radius will vary with the species. In the case of shorebirds this radius can be relatively small leading to some extreme Se exposures if local diets are high in Se (S. Schwarzbach, pers. comm.). Although many stream insects drift to new sites during darkness, a snail or a midge larva may spend its entire aquatic life in a single pool. Thus birds may consume high Se -contaminated prey (chironomids) in pools in PCW and then fly to a golf course pond or the ocean and eat insects and other benthic invertebrates that contain negligible Se. It is possible that some birds or bird species in the San Diego Creek Watershed may limit their feeding inside or outside of the existing Se rich areas. In particular, the light-footed clapper rail, a rare species, prefer to remain in one area during nesting season but may range more widely in other seasons. Therefore, in general terms, the Se in birds represents the mosaic of Se in the entire area, not just one site. An exception can occur if the contaminated system is very large and very rich in food. For example, the marshes at Kesterson Reservoir covered over 1,200 acres and was designed and managed to produce food for birds. It was contaminated with Se inflows about 20 times higher than San Diego Creek (300 ppb versus 20 ppb). Much of the SDC watershed available to birds is contaminated with Se from the SOF site. The area of contamination • and its value as bird feeding habitat is not known. However, some large areas, for example the 100 acres of Irvine Lakes at Woodbridge is supplied by groundwater 15 that may not contain Se. Similarly, those ponds on golf courses and similar ornamental sites are supplied by low Se water from the IRWD recycling plant. The Irvine Lakes were estimated to produce as many at 12 million adult • chironomids each summer night (Home, 1995) and could supply a potentially low -Se diet to wildlife in the region. Birds are most susceptible to the Se during the late winter and early spring when their diet moves from only high-energy sources such as seeds to include a high protein diet needed to produce eggs (see earlier discussion above). Eating insects as well as vegetable matter and seeds provides high protein diets. Any Se in the insects or seeds consumed at this time may find its way into eggs that thus can be an indication for how much Se the birds are consuming at this critical time. Setting standards for "safe" levels of Se for consumption for birds based on Se in their eggs, water, or prey items is controversial at this time. There is much debate on this matter (Canton & Derveer,1997; Skorupa, 1998a b & 1999; Deforest et al., 1999; Fairbrother et al.,1999 & 2000, Ohlendorf, 2003). At present in SDC, the most concentrated source of Se is present in chironomids living in sediment 10-60 cm deep. Mallard and other ducks that feed by dabbling and shallow diving to less than 1 meter could be exposed to this source (Handbook of Birds, 1977), A very useful number for monitoring year-round effects of Se is the "safe' value for food. An estimated dietary exposure of 4.9 ppm was provided by Ohlendorf (2003) for mallard that are one of the most sensitive bird species for Se toxicity. Ohlendorf use the ECro (i.e. an effect less than death on 10% of the chicks) as his criteria but other numbers including EC5 or EC20 could also be used. If Ohlendorf s food value of — 5 ppm is true for SDC mallards then real harm is accumulating at present in the watershed since much potential mallard prey has values of Se up to 10 times his recommendation. However, mallard eggs from San Joaquin Marsh, the only NTS constructed so far contained only 4-7 ppm, above background but well below Ohlendorf s EC10 value of 12 ppm, despite being supplied with relatively high Se water (--15 ppb) from SDC. One possible answer is that main items of Mallard diet are likely to be the seeds of plants such as bulrush (Martin et al., 1951; Bellrose, 1978). Such seeds probably have very low Se in both SDC and SJM. Based on detailed studies at Kesterson Reservoir, most rooted macrophytes growing on high -Se soil do not pass Se further than the roots (Home & Roth, 1989 especially Figs. 5.1.6, 5.1.7, 5.3.6 & 5.4.5 therein). In addition, the relatively small size and low productivity of the San Joaquin Marsh may encourage foraging outside the marsh diluting the overall So input. There is a productive region between the SJM proper and the top of the berms that contains a good supply of terrestrial insects that is available to an opportunist forager such as mallard that often resorts to nesting sites distant from water. Further consideration of the effect on species of concern (usually birds) of low and medium levels of Se in water (e.g., the <2 to 31 ppb in the SDC watershed, Table 3) is needed in light of the latest finding from many sources. — In laboratory experiments. With a clear line of constant food and a constant • concentration of Se, various workers have arrived at recommendations for a 16 "safe" level of Se in bird eggs and bird food on the basis of studies with birds provided with a diet of known and constant Se composition. For bird eggs these • values vary from as low as 2 ppm dw (Skorupa, 1998) to 37 ppm dw (Fairbrother et al., 1999 p. 1251). This range covers many eggs assayed for Se, and overlaps some at highly contaminated sites such as Kesterson (Table 2). A recent work (Fairbrother et al., 1999) using more sophisticated toxicity analysis indicates that a commonly used toxicity effects threshold the LCIO or LC20 (one that is lethal to, i.e. kills 10 or 20% of the chick population) is 16 and 21 ppm dw for the eggs. These relatively high values used the most sensitive test, chick mortality. Other workers using different bird species have arrived at somewhat lower EC]o values for mallard eggs of 12-15 ppm (Adams et al., 2003) and 12.5 ppm (Ohlendorf, 2003). Mallard are considered to be sensitive to Se. Numerical guidelines such as LC and EC can be set at very low levels such as a Se level that would affect only 0.1% or 1% of the population. The reason that lower percentage values are not used is that other factors also result in chick deaths. The problems of extrapolating the effects of low doses of a potential toxicant from those measured at higher levels are insurmountable for mathematical and practical reasons (Horne, 2003). At low doses thousands of chicks would have to be exposed at each dose in order to find the effect (since the chick population has a natural range of tolerance for Se). Even when millions of individuals are exposed, there will still be uncertainty in the shape of the dose response curve for low levels of exposure due to natural variation in the population. 17 Table 2. Selenium in eggs of birds in various sites. The relationship between Se in water and that in eggs is not simple and possibly depends on the diet of the birds (compare Kesterson and Wyoming). • Bird species Se in egg (ppm) Se in water b Ref. Marshes at Kesterson Overall in 1986 2.83 79-2421 1 Stilts,1983-85 25-36 (means) 79-2422 2 Stilts, 1986 44 mean 1 Avocet, 1983-86 7-32 (means) 2 Avocet, 1986 38 mean I Killdeer, 1984-85 33-47 means 2 Killdeer, 1986 32 mean I Mallard,1983-85 12-15 means 2 Westlake Farms evaporation basins,1987-96 Avocet 5-7 means 3-12 3 Avocet 1-10 (range) 3 Stilts 3-10 (range) 3 Wyoming Grassland Redwing blackbird 13-22 1 340450 4 Stewart Lake, Utah Black -crowned night heron 18 5 (lake) —100 drains 5 Cinnamon teal 10 5 Western Grebe 25 5 Canada Goose 4 5 Yellow headed blackbird 6 5 San Francisco Day All birds 2.7 (mean of 98 eggs) Range =1-8 Variable but low 6 Song sparrows 24.5 7 San Joaquin Marsh (existingNTS site Avocet 11.2, 17.2 — 15 8 Black -necked Stilt 3.4 8 Killdeer 2.6, 7.1 8 Mallard 4.0, 6.7, 8 Grasslands California Ducks,1984 4.5 50 2 Avocets,1984 5.8 2 I.F. Pavoeglio, USFWS, September 1997.2. Ohlendorf & Hothem, 2003.3 Gordus, 1999.4. Ramerez & Rogers, 2002.5. Stephens et al., 1992.6. CALFED/Schwarzback & Adelsbach 2002. 7. Observer 128 Spring 2002. 8. Byatd, 2003, a. Mange in the largest pond (#5) 79-242 ppb (November 1985 to May 1986 = period over which birds would be feeding and nesting) with values dropping rapidly during this time. M 0 • • Table 3. Historical selenium data from San Diego Creek. Data collected by the Orange County PF&RD (probably at Campus Drive). Table taken from Horne 2003, report to Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, May 2003. Analytical methods used are not known at this time. • • Date Se b # Composites June 1973 26 1 1973 22 1 -Aug. 74 18 1 -January 1974 18 1 -July 1975 31 1 -Jan. July 1975 14 1 5-6 April 76 5 25 Jan 17-18 1977 5 24 Jan 181977 31 1 1977 21 1 -July 30-31 Oct. 1978 _ <2 25 1979 4 1 -October 5-6 May 1980 5 1 24 6 May 1980 5 1 6-7 Oct. 1980 < 2 25 11-12 Nov. 1981 10 26 7-8 July 1982 20 22 Nov.1982 <10 1 May 1983 <5 1 10-11 Oct. 1983 5 24 May 1984 13 1 13-14 Nov. 1984 <5 25 Nov. 1984 15 1 Oct. 1985 15 1 1986 <20 1 -Oct. Ma 1987 20 1 Mean for all days 13.5 N 26 Std dev 9.2 Mean for dry periods'11.9 22 Mean or wet season 21.3 4 Mean for October 9.2 5 Mean for November 11.3 4 1 The wet season is assumed to be the three-month period of January -March Other more recent measurements show dry weather flow averages of 20-30 ppb in Peters Canyon Wash (PCW) in the upper part of the lower watershed between Como Channel and SDC. Below the junction of SDC and PCW concentrations of Se fell to 13-20 ppb (Reeder, SARWQCB, pers. comm.). Thus the recent dry weather flows appear to exceed the historical values by about a relatively small amount (1 to 8 ppb). Values shown as> were taken as =to; i.e. > 2 was taken to =2 rather than half the detection or PQL. 19 In -field experiments. When birds feed in their natural environment they select animal or plant prey in varying amounts and with varying Se contents (see earlier discussion). As mentioned previously, any correlation between Se in prey and • eggs or toxicity is much more difficult to make than with lab studies, and this issue is a topic of active debate and controversy in the literature. Probably because the dose (prey Se) is variable, investigators have suggested lower Se threshold values for "safe" Se in eggs (the response) than was found for the lab studies where the dose is well defined. For example, Skorupa (1999) states that <10 ppm Se dw for'bird eggs is an appropriate safe exposure based on both laboratory and field data. The Se value of 4.9 ppm in food for and BC10 for mallard egg hatchability was discussed earlier (Ohlendorf, 2003). Because mallard are a sensitive species using Ohlendorf s value of 4.9 for food could be used as a "benchmark" protective for other birds. However, given the need to consider the foods actually eaten by mallard (many bulrush seeds likely to have low Se) compared with coryxids eaten by avocet that are likely to have a higher Se value, some flexibility is needed in setting an overall food benchmark for Se. b: prey. The NTS was designed so that the number of such attractive prey and their pollution body burden would decrease, thus lowering the overall toxicity in the watershed. The number of attractive prey will be reduced by measures in the NTS that include reduction in submerged aquatic vegetation and open water areas relative to the existing situation in SDC. The lowering of the overall toxicity of the watershed will occur since Se immobilized and sequestrated in the sediments of the NTS will not become available again while that in SDC is currently re- mobilized by each flood and wetting and drying cycle. Prudent engineering • design and monitoring ensures that potential toxicity will be detected at an early stage and properly managed. The proposed project includes monitoring of Se in the food web as described in the Master Plan (2003, Table 7.2). The concept of adaptive management is clear in the NTS (Master Plan, 2003, Chap. 1, p. 11; Chap. 7.6, p. 131 & Chap. 11 pp. 157-160) and the extensive monitoring of key bins is the feedback loop that ensures that toxicity will be minimized. Other guidelines. The US Department of the Interior, an agency that includes both the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Reclamation has produced a series of general guidelines for Se for use in irrigation drainwater management (Table 4). It can be seen that most of the SDC watershed below the SOF seeps would be higher in all components (media in Table 4) than the guidelines. • 20 49 Table 4. Guidelines used by the USDI for remediation and managing selenium in irrigation drainwater in USBR rojects. Recommended Ecological Risk Guidelines for Selenium Medium Effects on Units No effect Level of Toxicity concern Warmwater fish, whole Growth, survival, Ppm dw <4 4-9 >9 body condition Vegetation in diet Bird reproduction, Ppm dw <3 3-7 >7 Invertebrates in diet Bird reproduction Ppm dw <3 3-7 >7 Sediment Fish & bird Ppm cw <2 2-4 >4 reproduction Water (total recoverable Se) Fish & bird Ppb < 2 2-5 >5 reproduction via food chain Avian egg Egg hatchability P m dw <6 16.10 >10 2.2.3 Design Elements: Description of hydraulics of NTS settling basins and wetlands where Se can be removed and immobilized or bio-accumulated Dead -End Evaporative Systems. The majority of the Se -contaminated areas in California are agricultural sumps where contaminated groundwater from tile drains is stored until it evaporates. Many industrial chemicals are still treated in this fashion. Kesterson Reservoir was also an evaporative sump although some water did also pass down into the groundwater. More contaminant will accumulate in a sump than in a flow -through system. The NTS are not sumps but flow -though wetlands with 1-2 weeks of hydraulic residence time. • Storm water Systems. All NTS facilities are intended to treat low flows and with the exception of the in -line basins, NTS sites are also designed to treat runoff from small storm events. The design consists of a detention basin at the uppermost end of the NTS followed by a wetland. Detention basins remove pollutants by slowing the flow of water down so that particles fall out and are held as sediments. Not very much of a decrease in water current is needed to settle out particles. The amount of removal of particles depends on the size and density of the particles, flow rates, and system scale. Large and heavy particles fall out in hours; smaller, lighter ones may require days. Detention basins have a hydraulic residence time for water that varies from a few hours to a few days, depending on the size of the basin and the size of the storm flow. Some idea of the amounts of suspended matter that can be removed using detention basins for urban storms is shown in Table-5. • Table 5. Amounts of pollutants removed from urban storm runoff by a detention basin with a mean hydraulic residence time of 18 hours. From Whipple & Randall, 1983. Pollutant type Percentage removal Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 60 Total phosphorus 45 Hydrocarbons 60 BOD 45 Lead 60 Copper 45 21 Based on extensive studies in Panoche and Silver Creeks by the USGS (see North State Resources & Stetson Engineering. 1999) it is expected that about half of the total Se in the storm water (the coarser particles) entering the smaller upstream NTS in the SDC watershed will be in the particulate form. There is expected to be much less particulate Se in the lower sections of the is watershed and soluble Se will dominate. In addition, some particles in the NTS will be detained by flocculation or entanglement with the biofihn of the NTS wetlands sections. The NTS is designed to deal with small storms and low flows, though of course the cumulative effect of several NTS facilities on the same stream will have a somewhat greater effect. Particulate and soluble matter in the larger storms will pass through the NTS, often by design since only the first flush will be captured at most NTS sites. According to Mount (1995) the effect of large floods on sediment transport in California streams is exaggerated. His work indicates that although large infrequent storms undoubtedly move large amounts of sediment, over decades the sediment moved by the more frequent annual storms is of equal magnitude. Given the small size of the overall NTS they are expected to remove minor amounts of the overall large sediment load transported in SDC. In SDC sediment transport is very large but is caused by down cutting of the creek bed due to land use changes upstream. That larger load must be reduced by better land use practices or other means. Flow -Through Systems. All of the NTS sites are flow -through systems but the in -line basins will have a more rapid flow following storms. Since the current is higher in the in -line NTS, there will be less sedimentation of all particles, including those containing Se. The amount of contaminant, such as Se, that will be removed and immobilized will depend on the amount of Se present, its form (particulate or soluble), the season (more removal expected in summer), the retention time of the water (longer retention = greater removal) acid the kinds of plants and algae in the wetland section of the NTS. The existing IRWD SJM removed about 30% of the Se • passing through it when operating with a 1-2 week hydraulic residence time (Draft Master Plan, March 2003, pp. 89-90, especially Fig. 4.17). In addition, bird eggs from this site showed Se levels below those considered harmful. Similar removals can be expected for the other NTS systems. In contrast, the Chevron Marsh removed up to 70% of the Se passing through, a better value than SJM, but Se in some bird egg rose to undesirable levels (Skorupa, 1998). In this case at least some of the inflowing Se passed through the marsh food web. However, the improved nesting habitat created by the Chevron Marsh gave a net benefit with more birds surviving than without the Se inflow (Ohlendorf, 2003). The Chevron marsh is quite large (-90 acres) and may have some properties that are dissimilar from the SJM. Thus further monitoring of the SJM is needed over time. Persistent Dry Weather Flows. These flows are likely to be the most problematic with regard to Se toxicity since the dry spring -fall period is when plants and algae grow best and take up Se. The Se in persistent dry weather flows has been documented for only a few recent years by Hibbs & Lee (2000) and also in the long-term record (Table 3). Over the last 30 years Se in SDC has varied from less than 2 ppb to 31 ppb (Table 3), the latter levels being closer to the current values found by Hibbs and Lee (2000). Hibbs suspects that the low Se values in SDC are associated with storm events, a reasonable assumption if clean rain water dilutes the overall discharge. However, increased rains could also flush out Se not otherwise mobilized. Storms that last for a few days are not the same as wet season flows but the historical Se data (Table 3) does not directly support Hibbs's contention. In the wet season the historical average (21.3 ppb) is almost twice the value of the dry season flows (11.9 ppb). It is not clear what controls Se in • persistent dry weather flows. In addition, the end of the dry season shows much lower Se values 22 (9- 11 ppb, Table 3) indicating that the source of Se maybe running out after a summer of leaching. High Se Seeps. It is of concern to the Regional Board that the highest concentrations of Se are near shallow groundwater seeps during dry weather. If the concentration of Se from the seeps is fairly constant over time, organisms at the base of the food chain that take up Se will be exposed to a constant Se high source. Under these special conditions Se in the lower and less mobile higher trophic levels (algae, bacteria, plants) will be directly related to the Se in the water. If this is true of the high Se seeps, some of which may exceed 100 ppb, then a greater risk of potential toxicity will be present at these sites that are generally near the junction of Como Channel and PCW. It is less likely that higher trophic levels that occur near the seeps will be as highly contaminated because of lack of habitat and mobility. My observations of the existing biota in the immediate areas of the seeps (i. e. before dilution by the main flow of water in the channels) did not show the high Se concentrations that would be expected if high Se water from the seeps directly bathed the plants and animals nearby. One reason is that there is little good habitat near most seeps and that the overall biomass of algae and plants likely to be highly contaminated is small. Since there is little food, mobile animals such as crayfish or scuds appear to move through or go directly past the habitat and do not equilibrate with the potentially high Se levels in the algae and plants. However, the seep situation is unique to SDC and will not be replicated in the NTS. Nonetheless, it is part of the NTS design that the inflowing Se will flow into sections where birds are no encouraged by the layout of the wetland. If the NTS system is not constructed, the situation of very high Se near seeps and lower amounts elsewhere will remain as it is and any toxic threat will remain. If the NTS is constructed, the • higher levels of Se in water emanating from the seeps will be lowed by removal processes occurring in the NTS facilities further down the watershed. Furthermore, high -Se seeps will soon be diluted, even in dry weather, by the cleaner main flows. Work by Professors Hibbs and Mixner has begun to map the groundwater and surface water concentrations of nitrate and Se in the SDC watershed. Based on data up to the quarterly report of July 10, 2003, their hypothesis that SOF is the immediate source of Se seems to be sustained. The source of nitrate is presently envisaged as a separate anthropogenic accumulation slightly downstream of the estimated location of the SOF. A likely scenario over the millennia is that the anoxic conditions of SOF acted to precipitate at least some of any soluble selenate passing downstream. An interesting finding by Hibbs & Mixner is the possible source of the original Se. Although the ultimate source was the ocean and thus the general hillsides of the Coast Range, rainfall over the millennia has apparently moved much Se into submerged sites. Such sites may surface as springs with Se concentrated from a large area. A preliminary finding by Hibbs & Mixner is that Tomato Springs to the east of SOF is a candidate for the original source of flows containing elevated levels of Se measured in the SOF. It is thought that Tomato Springs drains from marine strata in the uplands that is seleniferous; these strata are therefore a possible source of the Se in SOF. Thus the natural removal mechanisms of Se that occurred in SOF between Tomato Springs may be mimicked by the NTS. In terms of concentrations in the most contaminated seeps, a hot spot of over 90 ppb Se (and nitrate > 35 mg/L-N) in the groundwater was found exactly at the confluence of PCW and Como Channel (the site of the Nov. 2002 Se in biota measurements). NTS site 64, Westpark In -line Basins will contain surface water flows the currently average 20-30 ppb Se. A circular storm • drain (Edinger Drain), located between Moffett and Edinger Avenues, discharges water to PCW 23 that has been measured at — 125 ppb. A storm drain located on the east side of PCW just north of Warner Avenue discharges water containing — 85 ppb. The NTS will reduce the discharge in the • creeks by less than 1.5% so there will be little chance of a concentration increase in Se offsetting the Se removed by the NTS. This small effect is due to the relatively small area of evapotranspiration area of all new proposed wetlands (— 40 acres upstream of SJM). The 40 acres of new wetlands would produce an annual (summer) evapotranspiration of about 120 acre- feet (assumes a of/y). This volume can be compared with the average dry season flow in SDC of 8,100 of/y (assumes 15 cfs dry flows, 9 months dry season). In addition, Ohlendorf (pers. comm.) emphasizes that it was not evaporation and concentration that was responsible for the Se problem in the marshes at Kesterson Reservoir. 2.2.4 Sites in North America where Selenium has been an Issue Sites where Se has been an issue include semi -arid sites such as the marshes at Kesterson Reservoir, Panoche Creek and the Chevron oil refinery treatment wetlands near San Francisco Bay in California. In addition Se has been implicated in fish toxicity in deeper water lakes, such as Belews Lake in North Carolina. These sites have been well documented and were used as a basis to glean insight to assist in the proper design of the NTS System in terms of the effects of Se. Se is only one of several pollutants that are expected to be reduced by the NTS system. Other information relating to heavy metals, organics (such as pesticides), nitrate, and phosphate was also used. The upper section of SDC consists of natural channels, some eroded due to increased water runoff in recent years. Large trapezoid concrete channels that contain pools and a riparian zone growing on meters -thick accumulations of sediment, dominate the lower section. Some of these areas, for example the Junction of Como Channel and PCW are attractive wildlife habitats. In addition, SDC near Woodside and its smaller tributaries contain a considerable amount of fine sand that is a generally poor habitat for wildlife. The net result is that SDC and its tributaries contain a mixture of small wetlands, shallow pools, open channels with running water and some riparian vegetation. The examples discussed below relate to some or all of these habitats that will also be reproduced in the NTS. San Joaquin Marsh (SM. There are two wetlands that are referred to within the overall rubric of SJM. They are the IRWD-constructed wetland built in 1997 and supplied by water pumped from San Diego Creek, and the University of Califomia Natural Reserve wetland where some smaller ponds were dug in approximately 2000 and also are supplied with water pumped from SDC. In some ways the IRWD SJM is similar to some parts of the proposed NTS. However, there will be much less open water in the NTS than in the IRWD SJM. The existing IRWD-constructed SJM is operated as a shore bird sanctuary and nitrate removal facility. In particular, it has large areas of open water (-90%) with small areas of bulrush (-10%) along the shoreline and on the islands. Most of the five large ponds of SJM are drawn down a few times each years to expose the sediments and allow small wading birds to feed. However, the most of the mud remains damp and is not fully dried out as would occur in a true seasonal wetland. The SJM was designed to remove nitrate and the removal of other pollutants such as Se or heavy metals is incidental since Se was not an issue of importance in 1995 when the marsh was • designed. However, since Se has recently become an issue, the fate of Se in the IRWD- 24 constructed SJM is of concern. As shown in the Draft Master Plan (March 2003, Fig. 4.17, pp. 90-91) the IRWD-constructed SJM removes a considerable amount (— 30%) of Se from SDC inflow. An estimate of about 56 lbs of Se removed for a calendar year can be made from the 10 months of Se -specific data (shown in Fig. 4.17). About one-third to one half of the dry weather flow of the SDC is pumped into the IRWD-constructed SJM, which therefore removed about 10- 15% of the Se in the creek in 2002. The fate of the Se removed from SJM is not known but based on other studies; anoxic areas of sediments could play a role. It is also possible that the suspended algae that grow in the open waters of the SJM remove Se (Fan et al., 1998). In addition, much lower rates of volatilization and bioaccumulation in the food web are also likely fates for the Se removed. Samples of all available non -avian biota for the IRWD-constructed SJM were collected in April 2003 when biota was most abundant. However, there were relatively few aquatic organisms present, despite the large size of SJM. The paucity of biota compared with other sites such as PCW and some parts of SDC may be due to the lack of submerged aquatic vegetation in the IRWD-constructed SJM. Assays for Se are currently under way. A total of seven bird eggs from the IRWD-constructed SJM were collected and analyzed for Se in 2002. Although the sample size does not permit a statistically significant evaluation, the Se was below levels associated with measurable toxicity for mallard, stilt, killdeer and avocet. There is no reason to believe that these 7 eggs are not representative of the entire populations. There are numerous birds nesting at SJM and more egg sample could be collected if needed and if the appropriate permits are acquired. The amount of Se removed by the University of California Natural Reserve System's San • Joaquin Marsh ponds and wetlands is not known. Also unknown are the amounts of bioaccumulation and toxicity of Se to wildlife, including bird egg Se levels. The UC marsh is operated somewhat differently from its IRWD companion so results may be difficult to predict from one site to the next. Chevron Oil Refinery. Chevron Oil Refinery is located in Richmond, California on the shores of San Francisco Bay. It has been at this site since 1912 (as Standard Oil) and uses high sulfur (which means high Se) oil from the Central Valley of California, not far from Kesterson Reservoir. A series of freshwater ponds covering about 90 acres was created to treat the refinery's wastewater prior to discharge to SF Bay. Studies of the system with regard to Se have shown that as much as 70% of the Se passing into the treatment wetland does not reach the exit. The input of Se into the Chevron site was primarily selenite (Se IV) not selenate (Se VI) as is found in most agricultural drainage and in SDC. Although the daily rates of removal were variable, measurements over a 16-week period in the summer of 1995 showed a very constant percentage removal of 89% from test sites where the actual emission of the Se gas was measured (Hansen, 2000). Innovative studies by Professor Norman Terry and his former doctoral student, Drew Hansen, indicated that volatilization of dimethylselenide was a likely pathway for at least some of the losses (10-30%) of Se at Chevron (Hansen 2000; Hansen et al., 1998). Recent discussion with Dr. Hansen indicates that cattails are a site of Se volatilization but that his Chevron Marsh site for cattails was atypical since the site was too high above the water table for optimal Se volatilization. Thus it is possible that greater Se volatilization may occur in the NTS wetlands than occurred with cattails at the Chevron site. Se that was not volatilized at Chevron • would move to the biota or sediments but the fraction in each compartment is not known. Monitoring at typical NTS sites is needed to determine this fractionation. 25 Se entering the Chevron marsh in the wastewater effluent was only 10-30 ppb, similar to SDC but low relative to 300 ppb at Kesterson. Water in the marsh averaged 8-18 ppb and sediment data is not available. Food chain organisms contained about 10.45 ppm Se or about 10 times normal levels. The normal rate of deformation in these species is estimated at 1%. Randomly Is selected eggs of black -neck stilt at Chevron initially averaged 20-30 ppb Se (— 8-12 x normal) and can be compared with 25-37 ppm at Kesterson. About 18% of the stilt nests contained at least on inviable egg relative to 9% in San Joaquin Valley control sites that had normal background exposure to Se. Non -randomly sampled inviable eggs of stilts, avocets, mallards and coot contained about 15-60 ppm Se. Embryo tetragenesis was documented for mallards, coot and possibly stilts (CH2M-Hill,1994: Medlin,1994). The accumulation of Se in wildlife at Chevron produced deformities in embryos (10% coot, 30% mallard; Skorupa, 1998). The greater effect of Se at Chevron was attributed to the discharge of selenite from the reservoir relative to selenate at Kesterson. However, changes in the management of the marsh, though not the amount of selenite, have reduced Se in eggs. Recently the Se in stilt eggs at the Chevron Marsh has fallen to 11.2 ppm, less than one half of that in 1994 (26 ppm). It is possible that the management changes, not a change in Se or Se speciation, has caused the reduction. Since bioconversion of Se to any of its forms is expected to occur in a short period (hours to days) it is not clear why one form should persist when thermodynamics dictate an alternative. Another explanation based on controlled studies at Kesterson Reservoir is the occurrence of drying down and re -wetting of the Chevron site, Some kinds of drying and re -wetting could drive even low levels of Se into the food web rather than into the sediments. In the marshes at Kesterson Reservoir during the recovery phase Se in the water fell to < 3 ppb. However, various drying and re -flooding cycles occurred in some of the ponds and were followed by an increase of Se in the water to 50 ppb and that in biota up to 50 ppm (Home & Roth, 1989). Other studies indicate • that as much as 1,000 ppb in water and over 2,000 ppm in seeds can occur in some drying re - wetting of Se -rich soil (Zawislanski,1997; UCB/LBL report to USBR on Pond 6 re -flooding). It is likely that the Se in SAC is in the selenate form that would seem to reduce effects on birds, but further monitoring of Se species and some studies on the effects of drying and re -wetting should be made at NTS sites since the levels of waterborne Se are similar to those at Chevron. Despite accumulated Se in bird eggs and an increased rate of deformities at the Chevron marsh, there has been a net benefit to wildlife. Primarily by manipulating the locations of bird friendly and bird unfriendly habitat (as is proposed in the NTS) Ohlendorf (2000) concluded that a net environmental benefit had occurred: • "Selenium concentrations in stilt eggs were high enough to reduce hatchability of eggs and may cause some reduction of post -hatch survival among chicks. However, concentrations of selenium in food chain biota should not affect survival of adult birds." • "The (Chevron Marsh) received significant bird use during the nesting season. Management activities by Chevron (e.g., maintaining constant water levels during the nesting season, predator control) contributed to the high nesting success found at the (Chevron Marsh), more than counterbalanced any potential reduction in hatchability and post -hatch chick survival that may be caused by selenium in eggs or diet (i.e., the Chevron Marsh was providing a net environmental benefit)." 26 This finding by Ohlendorf, if confirmed by other studies, provides an avenue that can be exploited to the benefit of wildlife in areas such as SDC where other options are few. In • particular, improvements in the management of the Chevron marsh appear exportable to other sites such as the NTS and SDC. The discovery of high rates of volatilization of Se at the Chevron marsh is important since enhancing volatilization permanently reduces the risk of Se poisoning. Other studies indicate that the rhizosphere (the zone around the roots of the wetland plants) is the main site of initial volatilization (Terry pers. comm.). Furthermore, it has been shown that bacteria and fungi in the sediments or algae in the water can volatilize Se. These kinds of habitat (rhizosphere, microbes in water and sediments) are expected to be present in the NTS. While Se volatilization in the NTS facilities as currently envisaged is not expected to be a major removal mechanism, the Chevron results support the contention that some of the Se entering the NTS sites will be completely removed from the SDC watershed by volatilization. Studies on a constructed wetland at Corcoran indicated a 69% removal of Se (9% volatilized, 5% in living plant tissues, 50% unknown, presumably in the sediments; Lin & Terry, 2003). The Corcoran wetland has some similarities as well as differences from the NTS sites, but supports some long-term Se removal by volatilization. Panoche and Silver Creeks. These two creeks drain parts of the east side of the Coast Range in the Central Valley of California. They are the main source of Se in the San Joaquin River which flows north to SF Bay. Selenium was naturally present in the formerly marine sediments that formed the Coast Range. Over time Se was washed out from the upper reaches and deposited in the flood plain. Due to massive overdraft of the groundwater by local farmers, the Central • Valley floor has sunk as much as 60 feet in this region. Thus Panoche and Silver Creeks are now eroding down their beds to establish a new hydraulic equilibrium with their junction as the valley floor. The concentration of Se in storm flows was measured by the USGS at 60 ppb (50:50 soluble: particulates, Presser et al., 1990). The resulting Se flows both into the San Joaquin River and can flood nearby marshes and wildlife reserves. A solution to the Se problem in the area, especially in high flood years, has been proposed using very large and very shallow constructed detention basins that will not be wet for more than two weeks. Thus wetlands will not become established. Similar reasoning, but with even shorter hydroperiods lies behind the design of the NTS. Even so, the situation at Panoche and Silver Creeks is so extreme that the soil will be high in Se. To avoid toxicity,.a special dry land systems was proposed using non-bio accumulating plants so that Se can be stored in the soils without causing toxicity to wildlife (North State Resources, 1999). This design was based on studies at the dryer sites at Kesterson Reservoir (Horne, reports to USBR 1985-88). For a sustainable solution the design calls for gradual removal by volatilization using planted and irrigated terrestrial crops. Belews Lake. Belews Lake is located in North Carolina and presents an early case of Se poisoning, although in a lake rather than a wetland. Belews Lake was poisoned by Se - contaminated water from a fly ash settling basin associated with a nearby power plant. Many power plants in the US use high-S coal or oil. Since S is so similar to Se, high S often means high Se. Since the 1960s, US and European smoke stacks have used electrostatic precipitators and other devices to retain most of the particles (fly ash) that would otherwise be emitted following the combustion of fuels in order to prevent widespread pollution. The process • produces large volumes of fly ash, which is collected from the smoke stacks and then must be disposed of in some fashion. Fly ash contains many heavy metals as well as Se and should be 27 disposed of in a safe manner, but in the 1960s was often used in road construction and general land fills. It is thus not surprising that the fly ash settling basin at Bellows Lake was a source of pollutants, including Se, and that these passed easily into an adjacent wetland and the lake. Because Se is more easily leached than most other metals, it was present in very large amounts in the drainage from the fly ash basin (100-200 ppb in the leachate). Selenium was soon found in the biota (Harrell et al., 1978; Rodgers et al., 1978, Cherry et al., 1979). Two years after the introduction of the leacbate into the lake, only two of the original 20 fish species were present (Sorenson et al., 1984). Although many western fish such as Sacramento Blackfish, white sturgeon, rainbow trout and Chinook salmon are apparently not very susceptible to Se -poisoning (Brown, 1985), eastern fish such as the sunfish are susceptible. There is only one sunfish native to west of the Rocky Mountains (Sacramento Perch) and it is unlikely to be common in SDC. However, many sunfish species have been introduced into the west, usually by careless disposal of bait fish, to the detriment of native fishes. It is likely that green sunfish have been introduced to SDC and could thus be affected by high Se. Deformed fish were one symptom of Se poisoning in Belews Lake. Partially based on the experiences at Belews Lake a 5 ppb criterion for Se was established for lakes and reservoirs containing centrachid fish. However, more recently a lower value for Se in water had been recommended as follows: "Waterborne selenium concentrations of 2 ug/L or greater should be considered hazardous to the health and long-term survival of fish and wildlife populations because of the high potential for food -chain bioaccumulation, dietary toxicity, and reproductive effects." Lemly, 1996. Kesterson Reservoir. Kesterson Reservoir was located in the Central Valley of California near Los Banos. It consisted of 1,200 acres of land enclosed by a low berm. The name of the . reservoir is a confusing misnomer since it was a marsh and not a reservoir in the normal sense of the word. It was constructed as a holding facility for agricultural tile drain water but was used for the full disposal of that water because the construction of the San Luis Drain was not completed. In the original plan the water was to be discharged to the Pacific Ocean via San Pablo Bay. At the time it was not known that Se was present in large amounts in the drain water and tests had shown no obvious toxic effects of the drain water (Brown, 1985). Originally the presence of large amounts of water and a large land area made the construction of a wildlife reserve an ideal solution. The site was therefore jointly managed for water disposal and as a national wildlife refuge. In this respect the marsh habitat at Kesterson Reservoir is similar to the IRWD SJM that functions to remove nitrate and act as a shorebird habitat. Both systems have Se present as a contaminant and both removed nitrate that was introduced at high concentrations. However, Kesterson was mostly evaporative wetlands while SJM is a flow -through wetland. Although water evaporated from Kesterson, there is no reason to believe that the problems due to Se at Kesterson were due to concentration by evaporation. Much general information is available about Kesterson Reservoir (see the major series of reports by LBL to the USBR 1985- 1988, the USBR EIR and revisions, 1996-1998; A series of post -closure studies by CH2M-Hill in Sacramento, books by Frankenberger and Benson, 1994 and articles or reports by Home & Roth,1989; Home,1991,1994; Ohlendorf, 1989,2003, Newsweek, 1987). A few years after construction abnormalities were found in bird eggs and were tentatively attributed to high Se (Ohlendorf et al., 1986a-b). When constructed, the fact that Se was present in elevated concentrations in the drain water was overlooked. Several factors led to this oversight. The first factor was that a series of comprehensive egg -to -egg bioassays using full- 28 strength tile drain water with native fish and crustaceans showed no effect (Brown, 1985). Califomia-native fish and crustacean showed little effect of Se, but aquatic birds and some fish (not tested) are very sensitive to the toxic effects from Se. The organisms were tested before it was known that the tile drain water contained Se but subsequent analysis indicated 100-200 ppb Se (Brown, 1985). The fish that were unaffected by this level of Se in the Kesterson drain water were Sacramento blackfish, mosquitofish, rainbow trout, Chinook salmon, white catfish, golden shiner (Brown, 1985). Tests carried out over 4-28 days showed not acute toxicity to Se (MBL, 1983). Second, Se was not easily assayed in 1969 when the tests were done and a new, simpler method was used for Se that showed none present (unfortunately, the method was not working correctly in the salty water of the tile drains). About seven years after construction began, bird deaths and malformed embryos, as well as the disappearance of some species of fish, showed that a problem had occurred. Evaporation Ponds and test vegetated wetlands in the San Joaquin Valley, California. These four ponds include Tulare Lake Drainage District (TLDD), Hacienda Ranch and South Ponds, as well as Bowman and Pryse ponds of the Alpaugh Group (Moore et al., 1990). The TLDD ponds were flow through systems using the same influent water that would otherwise have been ponded at the South and Hacienda Ranch evaporation ponds (S. Detwiler, pers com.). All four ponds contained elevated Se concentration in the sediments (> 0.5 ppm dw in the top 3 inches of sediment). Some food chain organisms, including benthic invertebrates, showed Se levels above a conservative standard of>7 ppm. In addition, statistically or biologically significant, adverse effects were found (Moore et al., 1990). Measured Se losses by volatilization were small at this site, as they were in the marshes of Kesterson Reservoir in early studies (Frankenberger, 1990). . A series of test cells or mesocosms were set up by Professor Normal Terry and his students at Cocran, a part of the TLDD (Terry, 1998). The wetland cells used similar Se -rich irrigation water (— 28 ppb) as the evaporation ponds studied by Moore et al. (1990). The total Se in the inflows ranged from 8-24 ppb and was mostly selenate (Se VI)1, but between 1 and 6 ppb of selenite (Se IV) was present. Using various kinds of emergent vegetation planted in a dense array with hydraulic residence times of 5-20 days, the reported Se removal ranged between 10 and 65% with most removal in the cooler months of February and March. In terms of removal, the cattail/tule(bulrush)/widgeon grass cell was most effective in Se removal (61%) while the chord grass, open water control, and salt grass cells were less effective (1-26%; Tanji et al., 1998). These ftndings are similar to those shown for nitrate removal in wetlands, probably for the same reason —the provision of labile organic carbon (Bachand & Horne, 2000a-b). With the exception of widgeon grass (1-8 ppm Se), the aboveground parts of most plants showed low Se (<1— 2 ppm) while the roots ranged from <1 to 14 ppm Se. Terry (1998) measured volatilization of Se and showed that it was dependent on the microbial biomass, a finding also made by Frankenberger (1990). Rates of volatilization of Se were lower than at Chevron partially because of the low microbial biomass in the new cells, but also possibly because of the inflow of selenite at the Chevron Marsh and selenate at the TLDD Cocran site. However, given the propensity of Se to change oxidation states it is not clear that species of Se plays a major role in volatilization in wetlands. The improvement of volatilization of Se in wetlands is not fully understood. The studies by Terry show that rabbitfoot grass volatilized more Se than cattails and salt grass while others • showed that plant species do not affect volatilization rates (Zhi-Qunig Lin, pers. com.). Studies by others at the same site indicated 7-10% volatilization rates in SAV (Wu, 1998) but SAV will 29 be discouraged in the NTS systems by draw down. However, it is not the living plants that remove most of the Se but the microbial biofllm in the sediments. Denitriftcation in wetlands, a process akin to Se volatilization, indicates that there are methods of managing the sediments to • encourage nitrate conversion into nitrate. It is possible that these methods, including the use of denser and older stands of cattails and some aquatic grasses that would also enhance volatilization. 2.2.5 Comparing and Using These Other Sites in NTS Analysis. For Se, the existing conditions are described for recent years in various papers by Professors Hibbs and lvlixner (see Fig. 3.2.1 in Hibbs & Mixner, July 10, 2003) and by previous work on Se concentrations in SDC and its tributaries. Isolated seeps have shown Se values over 200 ppb and the hot spot with a plume of >60 ppb, which occupies much of the old SOF. For a longer timeframe, the monitoring of Orange County PR & RD (see Table 3 of this memo) shows the wide range of variations (<2 to 31 ppb Se) that can occur over 30 years. Lower readings may be associated with storm events if clean rain water dilutes a constant groundwater flow (Hibbs, pers. comm.) and higher values seem to occur in the dry season (Table 3). Soluble Se is relatively low in the upper watershed (— 1 ppb dry weather flows), but increases downstream where values of 10-30 ppb are common in some years. This was expected because of the concentrated source of Se in the mid -section of SDC. Five points from Kesterson (discussed above) are important in assessing the risk of potential Se toxicity in SDC, and in particular, the toxicity of the NTS wetlands. First, the concentration of Se inflow to Kesterson was very high, 10-200 times higher than in SDC. Second, the Se inflow to Kesterson Reservoir was always high (200-400 ppb) while Se in SDC over the 17 years between 1970 and 1987 ranged seasonally from < 2 to only 31 ppb. Third, and perhaps most . important, Kesterson Reservoir was a very large single piece of land (1,200 acres) while the entire NTS system, if fully built, would be only 205 acres and would contain over 30 separate sites. The IRWD SJM occupies approximately 57 of these acres. Fourth, Kesterson Reservoir was managed to enhance habitat water birds. Its depth and mosaic of vegetation provided a variety of habitats for waterfowl and other wildlife. Finally, Kesterson Reservoir was a very productive large wetland because it was supplied with agricultural tile drain flows that contained huge amounts of plant nutrients (— 100 mg/L nitrate-N, — 20 mg/L phosphorus). These concentrations are greater than those in SDC (-5-15 mg/L nitrate-N, —0.1 mg/L), which can be compared with the normal values for water which floods most wetlands (— 0.5 to 1 mg/L nitrate- N; — 0.1 mg/L phosphorus). In addition, the hydroperiod or water level management was a seasonal type with the majority of the marshes thoroughly dried out for much of the summer. Although this is a good method to maximize the production of birds for hunting, it unfortunately maximizes the amount of Se recycled in the wetland. The original design of Kesterson Reservoir presented the best of all possibilities for the birds and the worst of all possibilities when Se poisoning occurred. The lesson to be learned is that almost all other Se -related problems should be much less severe than in Kesterson. The SDC watershed contains between 5-15 mg/L nitrate-N at present so it will be at the lower end of the nitrogen pollution situation relative to the marshes at Kesterson Reservoir. The NTS will also experience this nitrate. Crucially, however, SDC lacks phosphorus (— 0.2 mg/L), relative to nitrate -nitrogen, unlike Kesterson (— 20 mg/L). San Deigo Creek in the mid- 1990s had a summer mean of 146 ug/L for soluble ortho-phosphorus and about • 200 ug/L for total-P (Regional Board TMDL monitoring program). Since phosphorus is about im 100 times lower in the NTS than was found at Kesterson, the biological productivity of the NTS will be much lower than at Kesterson. Much less bird food (toxic or otherwise) will be produced • in the NTS than at Kesterson. Since the Belews Lake case is an example of careless environmental sanitation that is not likely to be permitted in California today, the story has little relevance for the NTS projects in SDC. In addition, Belews Lake contained large populations of several species of eastern Se -sensitive fish and these are unlikely to be present in the small creeks and wetlands of SDC. Many western fish were tested for toxic effects of Se in agricultural drain water (Brown, 1985) but were found to be unaffected at levels higher than those in SDC. However, Se may adversely affect some introduced eastern sunfish that may be present in SDC. These sunfish are a great threat to many native fish in the region including the endangered Santa Ana Sucker. Belews Lake is a much better habitat for fish being deeper and larger compared to the small pools, flow -through areas and wetlands that are proposed for the NTS. The stormwater Se data from Panoche and Silver creeks on the Coast Range shows a 50:50 distribution of soluble and particulate forms. There are similarities in the soils and slope of this region and the steeper upper SDC watershed both areas. Preliminary data in the lower channels of SDC surveyed by Hibbs & Mixner indicates that >95% of the total suspended Se in the lower reaches is in the dissolved form. There is only a little direct information from the upper watershed streams of the SDC where more particulate matter is likely to be suspended (see section 3a below). Collectively, the current information suggests that in the SDC system the upper NTS will potentially remove more Se in particulate form while the NTS facilities in the lower portion of the watershed will potentially remove more soluble forms. However, removal • of Se by sedimentation in the upper watershed is not a primary function of the NTS. Only a small portion of Se will be held by the small NTS in the upper watershed. An exception may occur for small storms. Although there are mixed signals from the Chevron treatment wetland it appears to be a good indicator of potential volatilization (10-30%, Hansen et al., 1998). The Chevron marsh is also helpful in determining some aspects of the risk to wildlife in most NTS sites (Ohlendorf & Gala, 2000). Almost 90% of Se was removed consistently in the summer months at the Chevron site and 30% is being removed currently at the IRWD SJM. The higher removal of the Chevron site could be due to differences in the Se species that dominate the influent flows to the Chevron marsh (selenite) as well as the larger amounts of large emergent vegetation at that site versus the SJM. Most of the remaining NTS sites will have vegetation cover more like that at Chevron so they should remove more than 30% and potentially up to 90% of the Se flowing in. The Chevron site showed that most of the Se input was,retained in the sediments or the food web, although possibilities for increased volatilization do not appear to have been fully exploited. It would be desirable to have quantification at the Chevron site for the distribution of Se in sediments versus the living food web. At Kesterson, 90-95% of the Se retained was located in the sediments when these were maintained in a permanently flooded and anoxic condition. At Chevron the wetland was dried out causing the liberation of previously bound Se on re -flooding. Nevertheless, there was a considerable loss (10-301/o) of Se by volatilization - a desirable means to fully remove the toxicant. Lower percentage values for volatilization (-9%) were found in the Corcoran ponds (Lin & Terry, 2003) but this wetland is less like the Chevron marsh and most of the NTS sites. Similar volatilization (9-30%) could occur in the NTS sites. The • concentrations of Se at Chevron (-20-30 ppb) were similar to the higher concentrations reported 31 in SDC over the last 30 years (2-31 ppb). Thus the percentage of Se removals maybe similar where the NTS and Chevron sites have similar vegetation cover and species composition, although treatment performance in the two systems will also be influenced to some extent by the • differences in the dominant Se species in the influent flows and the flow rates. If selenite dominance in the water enhances Se volatilization then the NTS sites will tend to the lower end of the 9-30% removal rates (Zayed et al. 2000). Discussion of the management of the Chevron marsh has provided a net environmental benefit to the nesting birds (Ohlendorf & Gala, 2000) despite an inflow of Se that was discussed earlier. The management actions at Chevron marsh are similar to those proposed in the NTS. The tests in the evaporation ponds and test cells at TLDD have some common features with the NTS systems. However, there is the proviso that the methods to reduce Se toxicity to birds and to enhance volatilization are part of the NTS system and not part of the TLDD systems. As previously mentioned it is inevitable that Se will accumulate in the food web of the NTS. If conservative standards used for normally unpolluted waters are used, the NTS will not meet these standards. The question is whether the NTS will do more harm than good. Based on the data at TLDD the NTS will remove, immobilize and sequestrate Se, as expected in the design and supported by the 30% removal of Se in SJM. The lower volatilization rates at the Cocran test cells (— 10%) evidences a possibly lower rate that may be reached in the NTS. In the TMDL process a removal of 10% of Se will certainly assist in reaching the eventual goals, Volatilization reviewed. The ability of volatilization to balance even modest inputs of Se inflow is still controversial. From the early work of Frankenberger (1990) at Kesterson, to the Chevron and Cocran work by Terry and his associates, understanding the methods needed to enhance . volatilization has proven difficult. However, it was only recently that the enhancement of the equivalent process of nitrogen volatilization (de -nitrification of nitrate to nitrogen gas) was first used in large scale clean-ups (Reilly et al., 2000). Prior to this time many workers believed that nitrate removal was primarily due to uptake and storage in living plants (Gersberg, et al., 1983). Therefore although Se volatilization can range from a small to large process, in terms of environmental cleanup, volatilization of Se can be considered an additional benefit to the main process of immobilization and sequestration of Se in anoxic sediments. 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION To simplify the consideration of Se dynamics in the complex watershed, a binning strategy has been used. The NTS sites have been divided into three zones or bins (Table 6): • The upper watershed sites where storm water is the main source of Se. • In -line facilities where Se is mostly supplied via groundwater seeps. • The large terminal NTS sites at the San Joaquin Marsh. 3.1.Binning Strategy Upper Watershed/Storm water Sites. Se dynamics are less well-known in the upper watershed sites since there is less data. From the data available it appears that Se entering these sites will be about 1 ppb in dry weather flows, rising to 10 ppb in storm flows. The distribution of solid is soluble Se is important here since the removal methods for each differ. There is 32 practically no data on the fraction of soluble Se to particulate for these sites but the dry flows are likely all soluble Se, based on a large body of data collected in the lower part of the watershed. • A single Se sample collected in Upper Rattlesnake Canyon indicates that solid to soluble Se ratios of 50:50 are possible in dry weather flows in the upper watershed. The well -studied and Se -polluted Panoche Creek on the east side of the Coast Range discussed earlier suggests storm water flows from the steep upper watershed can be expected to contain about 50:50 particulate Se to soluble Se. For small storms any Se associated with larger particles will settle in the pre - wetland detention basins and be removed as needed. Up to 50% of Se (the particulate form) could be removed but only from the smaller storms. A much smaller fraction of the Se will be contained in the larger storms (10 or 25-year storms). In -Line Facilities. These sites are located in existing parts of SDC but will have low weirs constructed to increase hydraulic residence time and• allow for more pollutant treatment. Se here will be mostly in the soluble selenate form. Any Se removal will occur in the anoxic parts of this habitat and some will accumulate in the biota and sediment. However, the kind of plants that currently grow in the areas of SDC that most resemble the in -line basins do not accumulate much Se and/or are not a part of most animal diets (e.g. cattails). SJM (Site # 62). This large wetland is the existing flagship for the NTS. It has mostly open water with shallow, well -oxygenated water. Under these circumstances, most Se will remain in solution and be taken up by algae or bacteria or pass through the wetland unchanged. However, DO falls to low levels beneath the bulrushes that have grown out over the anti -predator trenches. It is also possible that the sediments underlying the majority of the open water zones may experience low nocturnal DO when algal photosynthesis stops but respiration continues. Under • these conditions of low or no oxygen, some soluble Se could be converted to insoluble metal Se. However, unlike the case with denitrification of nitrate, diel (24 hour) cycles of DO are thought to have minimal impact on Se concentrations in the water (T. Tokunaga, pers. comm.). The long-term retention of any Se in SJM depends on the mixing conditions in the sediments, but some immobilization and long-term storage appears to have occurred according to the initial approximate mass balances for SJM (Master Plan, March 2003, p. 91, Fig 4.17). The fate of the Se sequestered in the Marsh is currently unknown but the monitoring program and some on- going studies will measure how much of the Se is partitioning into the sediments and biota. Sediment samples taken to date show that Se in the sediments of SJM were below 1 mg/Kg (Master Plan, March 2003, pp. 87-89). However, these grab samples were collected from the center of the ponds. This region is mostly well oxygenated. Further studies have shown that the deeper edge sections of SJM are most likely to be anoxic and thus are potential sites for increased Se accumulations. Direct monitoring of Se volatilization is possible and, along with deep sediment measurements, may be needed to determine the fate of Se at SJM and the other NTS sites. Such monitoring is a research project requiring the setting up of large temperature - controlled field gas samplers and is beyond any monitoring plan. However, the monitoring of the sediments and biota may give some idea of Se volatilization by difference. Site 67 SAMS-1. This site has been specifically designed to remove Se. The final details of the construction are not complete but it will have a very limited wildlife component only if reeds are planted over the system for aesthetic reasons. SAMS-1 is designed as a subsurface wetland with no surface water and thus no transfer of material from the deep gravel -organic matter bed to the • surface. This wetland has been designed to be anoxic. Such systems, normally more oxygenated than SAMS-1 and with or without an overlying cover of cattails, are common in Europe and 33 some parts of the US (1AWQ, 1966; Mulamoottil et al., 1999). Subsurface wetlands are mostly used to treat high levels of toxic wastes such as landfill leachates where potential toxicity overrules wildlife enhancement. 0 0 34 • Table 6. NTS sites and appropriate bin classification as used above. site Number Facility Name FType Bin Type 26 Woodbridge In -Line Basins II 2 27 Barranca Off -Line Wetlands I 1 46 San Joaquin Marsh - Augmentation I 3 53 Caltrans SR133/15 Interchange I 1 54 Caltrans SR-261 Site/Walnut I 1 55 Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel In -Line Basins II 2 56 El Modena Park III 1 62 San Joa uin Marsh — SAMS 1 I 3 64 Wes ark In -Line Basins II 2 67 Ciene a Ciene a de Las Ranas) N/A* Subsurface wetland 13 Rattlesnake Reservoir — Existing N/A* Terminal reservoir 39 Sand Canyon Reservoir — Existing N/A* Terminal reservoir 6 Santia o Hills (multiple basins I 1 9 PA 1—Eastfoot Retarding Basin III i 10 PA I — Eastfoot Upper I 1 11 PA I — Orchard Estates Retarding Basin III 1 12 PA I — Lower Orchard Estates (multiple basins I 1 61 PA 1— Eastfoot Lower I 1 16 Trabuco Retarding Basin III 1 18 Marshburn Retarding Basin III 1 • 31 PA 17 — West Basin III 1 32 PA 17 —East Basin I 1 49 PA 17 —Center Basin I Grass -lined basin 42 Turtle Ridge North I 1 68 PA 18 I 1 69 13A 39 muUi le basins) I 1 22 MCAS El Toro — Agua Chinon Lower I 1 50 MCAS El Toro — Irvine Auto Center I 1 51 MCAS El Toro — Serrano I 1 52 MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon I 1 70 Agua Chinon I 1 71 Marshburn • 35 4.0 ENGINEERING AND DESIGN PRINCIPLES 4.1. Major principles • There are two major principles in the design of the NTS units for pollution control: sediment control and soluble matter control. Sediment control. First, for low flows and small storms, most large or heavy particles are removed in the initial inlet sedimentation basin (see Draft Master Plan March 2003, Fig. 5.1, p. 98). The first part of the bin 1 NTS system contains a sedimentation basin (referred to as an "inlet basin" in Fig. 5.1) and is similar to normal sedimentation or retention basins used throughout the US and the rest of the world for stormwater sediments. Second, the sections after the detention basin (wetland) will retain some or all of the smaller and lighter particles (again, see Draft Master Plan March 2003, Fig. 5.1, p. 98). In general, most NTS facilities will not remove a large quantity of sediments because they are primarily intended to treat dry weather flows and runoff from small storms; the vast majority of sediments are transported by large storm flows. Sediment control is being addressed through the watershed Sediment Control Plan. Wetlands should not be used as a means of inorganic sediment control since that would cause them to fill in and cease to function. However, sediment that enters the NTS facilities in smaller flows will be removed by the settling mechanisms in the first basins which are the un-vegetated detentionbasins described above. Soluble matter control. Treatment wetlands work by providing a suitable site for bacteria that transform pollutants in various ways. In addition some pollution is absorbed during passage through the wetland. In both cases it is the dead plant matter grown in the wetland that provides the driving force for pollution control. External sources of detritus and other material are mostly unnecessary and often unwanted in treatment wetlands, although P-removal is enhanced by the presence of small quantities of clay washed in from upstream. The second or wetland section of most NTS systems contains a large area of surfaces such as plant stems, fallen stems, leaves, and sediments formed from the plants as they die. Soluble pollutant matter may be transformed into harmless end products such as nitrate -4 nitrogen gas; some pesticides a carbon dioxide; heavy metal ions -4 insoluble minerals (usually sulfides), partially transformed as in the case of some pesticides, or absorbed into the humic acid matrix of the sediments (some pesticides and organics). In most cases the NTS wetlands are designed to combine the various soluble pollutant removal mechanisms. For example, nitrate, heavy metals and some pesticides are best removed by a more active marsh such as one dominated by cattails (see first wetland cell in Draft Master Plan March 2003, Fig. 5.1, p. 98). Others such as pesticides and some organics are best removed in more peat generating wetlands such as a bulrush stand (see second wetland cell in Draft Master Plan March 2003, Fig. 5.1, p. 98). Reduction of exposure to wildlife by pollutants in the NTS. The NTS wetlands are designed to transform, destroy or immobilize all kinds of pollutants, including Se and heavy metals (see section 4.9 in the Draft Master Plan, March 2003, pp. 79-96). As mentioned earlier, since pollutants including Se are now ubiquitous throughout much of SDC, there will be a period when wildlife in the NTS will be exposed to the pollution. This exposure of wildlife to pollutants occurs everywhere in SDC at present so the initial situation in the NTS is no different from that in SDC. To reduce exposure of wildlife in the NTS, those sections of the wetlands designed to remove pollutants are also designed to discourage wildlife access, especially birds. This is 36 shown in the Master Plan fig 5.1 where the open water area is small and mostly needed for hydraulic mixing. Wetlands that are attractive to birds are mostly open water but this is not the • case for the NTS where most of the area will be in plant cover to provide the carbon food and energy for bacteria to metabolize pollutants. There has been mixed success in reducing wildlife access to ponds and wetlands. In particular, the use of propane cannon and 4-wheel riders firing shotguns in the air was only temporarily successful in the marshes at Kesterson Reservoir. However, some other, less active, measures are already part of the NTS Plan or can be taken to make the NTS wetlands less attractive to birds. In detail, where Se is present at high levels, the NTS generic design can be modified as follows: (i) The area of open water can be reduced or even eliminated to prevent bird access and reduce the attractiveness for nesting. (ii) The water level in the open water in the NTS is designed to be raised and lowered several times each year. This will prevent the growth of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) that attracts and feeds birds. (iii) The dense stands of emergent vegetation essential for pollution treatment in the NTS do not provide easy foraging sites for birds compared with the open SAV rich SDC at present. (iv) The use of cattails for much of the NTS does not provide as good a food source as other sites in SDC. (v) Physical barriers to wildlife access such as wire fences can be used where there is no internal site for birds to land (e.g. where there are no permanent ponds). • Wetlands are often designed to be bird -friendly. Typically a large area of open water is intermingled with small islands and clumps of emergent macrophytes such as bulrush that have ample edible seeds. Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) comprised of submerged macrophytes such as pondweed normally provides habitat for high concentrations of aquatic invertebrates like damselflies and midge larvae. Most birds can easily access the invertebrates living in and on SAV. Thus SAV is normally encouraged in bird -friendly wetlands and lakes. The presence of seed -bearing SAV such as widgeon grass is also encouraged. In the treatment and immobilization sections of the NTS this wildlife -friendly concept is reversed. For example, in the upper sections of the NTS there is almost no open water for birds to land (Draft Master Plan, March 2003, Fig. 5.1, bearing in mind.that the uppermost stormwater detention basin will normally dry). Dense cattail stands with their minimal food value to most birds replaces open water and mixed bulrush in the upper NTS. Where open water is present, management of NTS wetlands involves water drawdowns that discourage both SAV and floating vegetation such as lilies that are also good habitat for aquatic insect larvae. Such a draw down strategy has been effective at eliminating SAV and associated aquatic invertebrates at the existing NTS SJM site where there are large areas of open water. Other more dramatic measures to reduce exposure to wildlife in the NTS sites are possible, including excavation of the Se -contaminated sediment and vegetation and the temporary or permanent closure of some sites. Such measures could be implemented in the SDC but at present are not. In addition, the NTS sites, being small and easily accessed, allow removal of • sediment more easily and plant matter if needed. Normally the NTS systems do not require 37 excavation for accumulated sediments for at least 30-60 years, depending on the rate of plant growth. The sediments in the NTS are expected to immobilize and sequester toxicant for long periods without attention, so long as they are kept wet and anoxic. • Monitoring and Management. The monitoring already carried out in 2002-03 in the IRWD SJM and two sites in SDC will provide an indication of the potential water quality benefits of the NTS over the current unmanaged system. Althoughnot an exact model of the proposed NTS facilities, monitoring data from the existing SJM shows significant reductions in pollutants of concern. For example, nitrate, a major pollutant in SAC and the agent responsible for seaweed blooms in Upper Newport Bay, is transformed in the wetland to harmless nitrogen gas that is returned to the atmosphere. Based on the results from other wetlands (Kadlec & Knight,1994) it is expected that heavy metals such as copper or zinc will be immobilized as the insoluble sulfide and then sequestered in the anoxic sediments of the wetlands. In contrast, aquatic surveys in two existing channel reaches of SDC suggest relatively high Se in the biota and poor habitat and biodiversity in the studied reaches (draft report to SARWQCB, Horne, 2003). The exact levels and abundance of biota in the various sections of the NTS treatment system cannot be predicted exactly in advance. In part this is because the levels of pollutants and Se cycle over time (Table 3 shows changes in water in SDC over 30 years). Therefore, the NTS Plan includes additional extensive monitoring of aquatic diversity and monitoring of Se levels in the water, sediments, vegetation, aquatic invertebrates and bird eggs as needed. The purpose of this monitoring is to alert managers of the potential for Se bioaccumulation. Should monitoring results indicate Se levels of concern, the NTS Plan includes provisions for sediment and vegetation clearing to alleviate the potential for bioaccumulation. Pond drawdowns. The short-term wetting and drying cycles in the SJM do no liberate soluble Se even though there is a potential to return sequestered Se to the water in soluble and bioavailable form. In contrast, long-term wetting and drying cycles, such as those used in seasonal wetlands used for water bird production by Ducks Unlimited, do tend to remobilize Se. Experiments with full summer dry down and seasonal flooding with rising groundwater were carried out in the seasonal wetland sites at Kesterson Reservoir. The tests in the shallow sites at Pond 6 showed that by far the most toxic site at Kesterson Reservoir was this kind of seasonal wetland. Here, Se in early winter water exceeded 2,000 ppb and Ruppia (widgeon grass) seeds exceeded 1,800 ppm (LBL(UCB joint excavation test studies for USBR and Zawislanski et al., 1997). In addition, the synoptic surveys in February 1987 (CH2M-Hill) showed less than 25 ppb Se in water in the permanently flooded Ponds 1-2 but almost 350 ppb in the ephemeral pools of Pond 1 I that hold water for less than three months. However, in earlier years the highest Se was often found in permanently flooded Ponds 1-5 that received contaminated inflow year round (Schuler et al., 1990). The current wetlands in SDC do partially dry out in summer but some also have a small but continuous supply of water, so it is not clear which of the lessons from Kesterson is most applicable. The NTS open water areas are designed to be drawn down to reduce submerged macrophyte growth but will not be dried out. Wetting and drying cycles only mobilize Se if the soils dry out and then continue to dry for at least a month longer. In seasonal wetlands the drying period is several months. Following closure and filling of most low areas at Kesterson Reservoir with clean soil, monitoring continued and included the small temporary pools that still form after winter rains. Se concentrations over time have been followed in these pools. In these pools oxidation of Se occurs during the dry period (late spring — early fall) and is followed by reduction in wet winters. The Se concentrations at the beginning of each wet season rise to high . levels (10-1000 ppb) similar to the Pond 6 example discussed above. However, the Se levels M. then quickly fall to lower levels (1-50 ppb) due to dilution by rainfall and transfer -reduction into the sediments (Zawislanski et al., 1997). • It is a misnomer that the NTS site at the IRWD SJM and most of the bin 1-2 NTS sites drying out. These sites have periodic water fluctuations, but the soil does not dry and oxidize Se before the next wetting cycle occurs. Therefore, Se re -mobilization is not expected to occur, or to occur only in small amounts. Once again, to the extent that the NTS reduces Se in the entire watershed the re -mobilization of Se in the non-NTS sites will be reduced since overall Se concentrations will be reduced by the NTS. Currently the IRWD NTS reduces Se by about 30% annually (Draft Master Plan March 2003. Fig. 4.17, pg. 91); four of the ponds undergo regular up and down water level cycles. The removal of Se may be more or less in the NTS than in SJM and currently the accuracy of the 30% removal value found from earlier work is being evaluated for 2002-2003 (part of the difficulty in estimating removal is how the data is logged since the hydraulic residence time of the ponds is 1-2 weeks; thus inflow and outflow at any instant are out of phase). The low Se found in initial samples of bird eggs taken at an IRWD NTS site provide an indication of immobilization and sequestration of Se with the current variable water level at this existing NTS site. Because of the relatively small sample of eggs collected (n = 7) from the SJM, further data are needed on bird egg Se content at this site before conclusive findings can be reached. The monitoring plan includes the collection of egg samples in the future which will validate these assumptions or trigger adaptive management measures such as sediment removal, changes in inflow, and vegetation removal if the assumptions are found to be incorrect. 4.2. Application to Various NTS Units • 4.2.1 Bin 1 Design. The design is as shown in the Draft Master Plan (March 2003, Fig. 5.1, p.98). The first part of the bin 1 NTS contains a sedimentation basin (referred to as "inlet basin" in Fig. 5.1). Good examples of the mostly stormwater and low dry flow wetlands are Site 16, Trabuco (Draft Master Plan March 2003, pp. B-17 to 21), the small multiple sites at Sites 10, 12, and 61 (Master Plan pp. B-14 to 16), and Site 11, Orchard Estates (Master Plan pp. B-9 to B-13). Se washed from the soil in the form of larger particles will sediment out in the first basin along with much of the load of heavy metals and any organics such as PAHs or some pesticides that also stick to particles. Most organic pollutants are associated with fine and organic sediment and will not be removed by short residence time basins. Overall, organic pollution removal may not be substantial. However, almost complete removal of pesticides, including chlorpyrifos, from storm runoff from farm fields has been reported for storm treatment wetlands with only a few hours or days retention time (Schultz & Peal, 2001). • The wetlands section of the bin 1 NTS system will contain, immobilize, and sequestrate an unknown amount of Se, but this is expected to be smaller than that retained in the sedimentation basin, as the hydraulic residence time (HRT)of the stormwater will be low so most soluble Se will pass downstream during storms. Dry weather flows will have a longer HRT but a lower Se content (—I ppb), so only a small Se mass will be removed. im Operation, Operation is passive for the storm water basins. The basins have been designed to have a sufficient hydraulic residence time so that larger particles will sediment out. 0 Maintenance. Sediment will be excavated and disposed (see Draft Master Plan March 2003, table 7.2, column 5, lines 13 & 22 titled minor or major sediment removal). Summer maintenance of any dry sediment remaining is not expected (see Draft Master Plan March 2003, table 7.2, column 5, lines 13 & 22 titled minor or major sediment removal). Also included in the maintenance is testing (see O & M plan of October 2003). 4.2.2 Bin 2 Design. Low barriers will be added (depending on the site) to act as dams during the dry season. Slowing down the flow will allow for the removal and immobilization of several patticulate-bound pollutants including sediments, heavy metals and Se. A good example of the design of the in -line NTS is shown in the Draft Master Plan (March 2003, pp. A-6 to A-10, Woodbridge in -line basins, Site 26). In this case, permanent low rock weirs that will not affect flood control performance are proposed. As the system stabilizes with the retention of water, aquatic plants such as cattail and bulrush are expected to become dominant, since they already form the main vegetation in similar, already existing pools in SDC near or at the sites of the in -fine bin 2 NTS. A key design feature is to ensure that on average the water level is higher than it would have been without the low weirs but still shallow enough that emergent macrophytes such as cattail will not be excluded. This depth is about 2 feet on . average. Emergent macrophyte vegetation is already present in SDC where the in - line basins are to be located and some increase in that vegetation may occur. No SAV is present in most of these sites that are shallow and fluctuate with the changes in flow. The more stable but still fluctuating water levels will encourage more anoxia in the sediments, especially those under the macrophytes. These sites are likely to increase the removal of soluble pollutants such as nitrate and Se. Operation. The in -line basins are a large part of the entire NTS system since they are already carrying pollutants. The operation of the in -line bin 2 basins will be to maximize pollutant removal. Operation will consist of keeping the water level between a, few inches to about 2 feet, on average. It is expected that most Se will be lost to the sediments with the same fraction moving into the food web as occurs at present. The removal of pollutants such as nitrate and Se will occur without farther assistance for those fractions lost from the aquatic ecosystem in gaseous fotm. Monitoring of the biota is required to determine the location of Se that is not volatilized. Where needed and to prevent growth of SAV, the weirs have notches with which the water level can be lowered or raised by adding flashboards. Maintenance. The maintenance of the bin 2 in -line NTS will occur when sediment has filled the basin or if plant removal is needed as part of flood control needs. Under the Draft NTS Plan (pg 126) it is expected that excess sediments and vegetation in the in - line facilities will be cleared annually in the fall. Sediments containing Se or heavy metals will be excavated and disposed (see Draft Master Plan March 2003, p. 123, • table 7.2, column 5, lines 13 & 22 titled minor or major sediment removal). The 40 major Se removal from SDC is expected to be via sediments since the fate of Se in well -characterized wetlands is in the sediments (Home & Roth, 1989 Fig. 5.1.8 pg. • 25). However, any sedimentary Se in the overall sediment mass is not likely to elevate Se very much simply because large amounts of uncontaminated sediments and sand are major components of the total sediment load in SDC and will dilute the small mass of Se -rich matter. Summer maintenance is not expected other than occasional draining to reduce submerged aquatic vegetation. For flood control, sediments and vegetation will be removed as in other non-NTS systems. Any Se immobilized and sequestrated in the sediments or emergent plants will be removed at that time. Also included in the maintenance is testing (see O & M plan of October 2003). 4.2.3 Bin 3 Design. The two large wetlands, IRWD SJM 62/SAMS-1, are designed for the water to be drawn down frequently (weeks to months). The SJM has operated 4 of its 5 ponds in this fashion for several years. Such a frequent draw down schedule is a common in -lake management tool for suppression of SAV. The suppression of SAV reduces habitat and thus biomass of aquatic invertebrates such as chironomids and also reduces the biomass of the biofrlm growing on SAV. Because the biofrlm takes up Se, and chironomids are good food for birds, any reduction in SAV will reduce Se toxicity. The concentrations of Se in biota in SJM are not known at this time but SJM has no SAV, even though SAV is common in Peters Canyon Wash (PCW). In addition, based on limited sampling in November 2002 and May 2003, the numbers • of chironomids in SJM sediments were estimated at over 100 times less than in PCW. Operation. The two terminal bin 3 basins will be operated in the same fashion as the IRWD SJM. Depending on the results of the on -going monitoring program, all SAMS-1 cells may be operated with a frequent, two -week draw down -fill cycle, similar to the IRWD SJM cells 3-4 (see Draft Master Plan March 2003, pp. A-40 to A- 41 and table 7.2, p. 123). Maintenance. The maintenance of the two bin 3 NTS units will be the same as the present IRWD SJM. The present arrangement has been in operation since 1999 and has been shown to remove 30% of the Se passing thought it. No maintenance of the sediments has been needed so far but this may be required depending on the fate of the intercepted Se (volatilized, sediments or food web). Depending on the results from the April 2003 monitoring, some sediment removal from the anti -predator trenches may be needed. It is expected but yet to be documented, that this location in the deepest water with the most anoxic mud will be the main sequestration site for Se lost during passage (see Draft Master Plan March 2003, pp. A-40 to A-41 & p. 123, table 7.2, column 5, lines 13 & 22 titled minor or major sediment removal). Also included in the maintenance is testing (see O & M plan of October 2003). 5.0 RISK MANAGEMENT Current situation. Higher than desirable levels of Se in SDC have been known for some time. In • 2002 relatively high levels of Se were recorded in two sites in the lower SDC watershed (Horne, 2003). At present there is no management of the watershed to reduce the risk of Se poisoning to 41 wildlife, especially birds. Records going back to the 1970s show Se in the lower reaches of the creek varying from less than 2 ppb to 31 ppb (see Table 2). It is likely that the lower readings may be due to dilution by clean rain water in storm events (B. Hibbs, pers. comm.), although the historical data presented in Table 3 indicates that overall winter values of Se are generally higher than summer. Currently, Se in the watershed is totally uncontrolled and varies with season, water year and changes in groundwater due to such events as the pumping during and after the construction of highways. For example, at present CALTRANS pumps 0.8 MOD of groundwater containing nitrate and Se into the sanitary sewers. This pumping is needed to avoid flooding of some freeways. Partial management of the Se risk is possible with the proposed NTS project. A chronic criterion for Se in water has been set for California at 5 ppb by the USEPA as part of its California Toxics Rule (CTR). Thus SDC often exceeds this water quality standard. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board is implementing the 5 ppb CTR chronic criterion for point source discharges in the watershed as permits come up for revision. However, most Se in the creek appears to be coming from non -point sources that must be regulated by a TMDL process. In the SDC watershed, the relationship between Se in food or water at one site and toxicity to wildlife is difficult to define at lower Se levels since the dose of Se varies depending on the food eaten at any one time. In small systems such as SDC with other non - contaminated waters also present nearby, mobile animals may move between sites. Understanding the wildlife risk of low and intermediate Se levels in the SDC watershed require further monitoring, both present and future, in the creek and NTS sites. Known risk reduction and possible risk increases. If the NTS project is constructed, the results from other sites indicate the possibility that large amounts of Se that otherwise would pass uncontrolled down San Diego Creek and into Newport Bay will be controlled, immobilized, and . made non -toxic and sequestrated away from wildlife. In addition, some direct loss of Se will occur without damage to humans or wildlife due to volatilization directly to the atmosphere. The existing NTS has already reduced the risk of Se poisoning in SDC since it removes about 15% of the total Se flowing to Newport Bay. The NTS at SJM removes about 30% of the Se in the water passing through it. The SJM diverts about 50% of the high -Se base flow of the creek at this point and returns the lower -Se water a few hundred yards downstream. Therefore about 15% of the SDC Se is removed. Overall Se in the creek is reduced by 15% and the uptake of Se into the food web is approximately proportional to the Se concentration. Therefore the risk of Se poisoning in wildlife feeding below the NTS will be reduced by about the same percentage. It is expected that all NTS sites will reduce Se by some amount depending on inflow Se, size and residence time. Therefore there is a strong indication that the overall risk to wildlife from Se poisoning will be reduced following the construction of the entire NTS array. This risk reduction must be balanced by a possible risk increase due to Se accumulated in the food web by the NTS themselves. Monitoring of the food web and birds will assist in making this balance positive for a net wildlife benefit. A key to reducing the risk of Se toxicity is the role of immobilization and sequestration (I&S). It is expected that for Se and other pollutants, the NTS will do a better job of I&S than the existing unmanaged streams, pools, wetlands and riparian corridors that now exist in the SDC. Most Se in water finds its way to the sediments. The better management of the sediments in the NTS will assure that, once in the sediments, Se does not easily find its way back into the water column. Management actions to ensure that the NTS does not cycle Se as easily as SDC include: • 42 (i) Sediment in the NTS will not be flushed down the creek in floods as currently occurs in SDC. Wetlands are excellent sites for sedimentation and the dense plant roots and • thick stems reduce sediment transport downstream. In addition, the bin 1 and bin 3 NTS sites are off-line so water velocity is restricted to that below sediment disturbing levels. (ii) The NTS sites will be maintained with permanently wet and anoxic sediments unless otherwise needed. Anoxic sediments trap Se while oxidized sediments release Se. At present the SDC sediments wet and dry out over the summer and in between rains, ensuring high Se mobility. (iii) The detention basins will be excavated when sediment accumulates. Some absorbed particulate or absorbed soluble Se, will be present in the detention basin sediments and will be removed by routine maintenance. In comparing risks it should be noted that the IRWD SJM site has a number of differences from the other NTS sites that would tend to increase the risk of Se toxicity. The sites have very different areas of open water (-90% for SJM) and 10% emergent vegetation such as bulrush (� 10% for SJM). The opposite will be true for the bin 1 NTS, and the bin 2 NTS will only be intermediate. The SAMS-1 bin 3 site will resemble the bin 1 sites with mostly vegetation. The uptake and equilibrium concentration of Se in aquatic biota is expected to be similar in all NTS systems as well as in the unmanaged SDC, since tissue levels reflect the long-term Se exposure in the water and aquatic animals, as well as the concentration and mass of bioavailable Se. The availability of any Se -contaminated biota, the access of this biota to birds, and the abundance of the potentially Se -contaminated biota is anticipated to be different in SJM and the other NTS sites. The other NTS sites are predicted to have a lower Se risk than the SJM. The Chevron . marsh with its similar inflow of — 25 ppb Se currently can be considered to provide a net benefit for birds with a known risk of Se toxicity being more than balanced by an improved habitat for bird nesting. A similar net balance may be required at NTS sites and may need some further improvement in the bird -friendly lower sections depending on the monitoring results. Adaptive management actions to ensure a net positive balance would include those similar to ones carried out at the Chevron Marsh (reduction of predation to nests and chicks, removal of bird -friendly areas at the upper and higher Se sections of the NTS, increased vegetation density (and thus Se removal in the upper ends and perhaps all of the site), use of water levels that favor bird foraging in the lower Se sections, (Ohlendorf & Gala, 2003)). The TLDD site in the San Joaquin Valley (see earlier) is comparable to the NTS in that up to 60% of the Se was removed (Tanji, 1998). In addition, the TLDD site has shown some plants, food chain items and bird eggs with undesirably high Se. However, the TLDD site was not designed to minimize Se exposure to wildlife, unlike the NTS. The risks to wildlife at the TLDD site are not directly a comparable situation to the NTS since, as far as I know, it was partially designed as an evaporation basin. Test wetland sites at the TLDD were also designed for experiments on Se removal not to prevent wildlife access or to immobilize and sequestrate Se in the sediments. In fact, mobilization of Se through the food web to encourage volatilization of Se was a major part of the TLDD project. Such a consideration is not part of the NTS design, although incidental Se volatilization that does not increase food web exposure to Se is expected in the NTS. In a recent study of the remaining risk at the restored Kesterson Reservoir marshes, Byron et al., 2003, conclude. "The Ecological Risk Assessment Model yielded the following conclusions: • Predicted selenium concentrations in bird dietary items (composed of aquatic invertebrates, terrestrial invertebrates, or terrestrial plants) exceeded dietary levels of concern for reproductive 43 impairment in black -necked stilt and killdeer and exceeded levels of concern 16-43% of the time for mallards. However, no evidence of toxicological impact has been observed for these species in the 12 years of the Kesterson Reservoir Biological Monitoring Program, including the results for 1997-98, the year of highest ponding at Kesterson.. —The average number of black -necked stilt and killdeer hens expected to have one or more eggs fail to hatch due to elevated selenium exposure to the Kesterson Reservoir ephemeral pools was expected to be fewer than two hens for 99% of modeled years." (Byron et al., 2003). Se in the temporary pools measured by Byron et al. in this study exceeded 1,000 ppb initially and aquatic invertebrates had levels of Se comparable to those found in SDC (water mean, 6-8 ppb; aquatic invertebrates 15-27 ppm, Byron et al., 2003). 6.0. ATHALASSOHALINE CONDITIONS. Athalassohaline waters are salty lakes not formed by desiccating seawater. Athalassohaline conditions are present when the minerals present in the water are derived from the land and not the sea (athalasso = not marine), and when the water becomes salty (salty = ltaline; usually defined as above 3 ppt or 3,000 mg/L TDS). Inland lakes such as the Great Salt Lake in Utah or Pyramid Lake in Nevada are classic athalassohaline lakes. It is not clear that the salinity of the groundwater in SDC drainage is sufficiently saline for inclusion. In addition, the salt mix from the Coast Range may be more saline than freshwater. 7.0 IMMOBILIZATION & SEQUESTRATION (I&S) OF SELENIUM With the exception of nitrate, some Se and some pesticides, immobilization followed by sequestration is the main method of reduction of pollutants anticipated in the NTS systems. These three will be metabolized to varying extents and gaseous products (nitrogen, dimethyselenide, carbon dioxide) released to the atmosphere. I&S follows three pathways: (i) From solid sediment -bound forms (potentially bioavailable after chemical reactions in SAC) to storage in the sediments of the detention basins (to be removed as needed). (ii) From bioavailable soluble form to the sediments, where it will become an unavailable solid mineral (removal may not be needed for many years). (iii) From soluble or bound particulate form to the sediments, where it will become unavailable by strong sorption with humic substances formed from wetland plant decay. Only i and ii apply for Se in SDC. The risk involved is that some of the Se (as with other pollutants) will be bioavailable in the time between entering the NTS and I&S. Thus there is a definite risk that some wetlands biota may become contaminated and pass Se higher up the food chain to sensitive bird species such as mallard that may potentially be attracted to habitat created by the NTS. This is an unavoidable risk but is a much smaller and controlled risk than allowing the Se to flow uncontrolled down SDC as in the existing situation. The November 2002 studies have shown that at present in SDC, Se can be accumulated in large amounts by biota (e. g. chironomids, fish, dragonfly larvae) that are potentially available to mallards, avocets, and stilts feeding there. Because the NTS may potentially increase the risk . of Se bioaccumulation, the NTS Plan includes extensive monitoring and provisions for 44 sediment and vegetation clearing should levels of concern be detected. In particular, if habitat for the most sensitive species such as mallard by the NTS is improved, there is a risk • of producing an attractive nuisance with some of the NTS sites. The balance between improved habitat and toxicity from increased Se availability (if it occurs in the NTS) must be tilted towards the birds. The example at Chevron or SJM are examples of relatively minor management strategies available. 8.0 VOLATILIZATION OF SELENIUM Although most Se in the NTS systems is designed to follow I&S and end up in the sediments, some Se will be lost by volatilization. In the context of Se biogeochemistry, volatilization is the natural process whereby a gaseous form of Se called dimethylselenide is produced by microorganisms and finds its way to the atmosphere. In nature, Se is lost from soils all over the world by volatilization. Se volatilization is favored in damp or wet soils where reducing conditions temporarily occur. Thus the resultant gas concentration peaks in the atmosphere in the damp conditions of late spring and early summer when damp soils and warm temperatures coincide. It is inevitable that some Se will be lost from the NTS systems by volatilization. At this time the amounts of loss by volatilization in the NTS based on other studies range from 9 to 30% (Lin & Terry, 2003, Hansen et al. 1999). In many ways Se lost by volatilization is the preferred course of events since the Se will be removed permanently from SDC with no cost other than operation of the NTS. However, volatilization is not as well known a process as denitrification of nitrate to nitrogen gas, and the rate of Se gas loss cannot be accurately predicted. In particular, it is not known how to stimulate Se volatilization rates in the field to meaningful levels though some methods hold promise (Frankenberger & Benson, 1994). The Chevron case discussed earlier provides some evidence that up to 70% of the Se was lost from the overall system and as much as,89% in some test sites. It is highly unlikely, but not impossible, that such high rates will be achieved in the NTS in SDC. There are already a number of sites in SDC with some of the characteristics of NTS (cattails, anoxic sediments) even if these do not occur in the same spatial arrangement as NTS. If volatilization was the primary removal pathway, both Se and nitrate would soon be lost in SDC and would not pose the current problem. There are, however, some vegetation management techniques that can improve the volatilization of Se in the NTS system and even the currently uncontrolled SDC. Such techniques are not yet developed for practical use, but could be investigated if other means do not provide a suitable answer to the TMDL targets in SDC and Upper Newport Bay. The volatile gas emitted, dimethylselenide, is toxic when inhaled above certain levels. The toxicity of dimethylselenide was considered by the California State Water Resources Control Board when volatilization was proposed as a method to clean up Kesterson Reservoir by the USBR and its contractor Dr. Frankenberger (UC Riverside). Although Dr. Frankenberger was unable to achieve adequate rates for clean up at that time, the Board's preliminary conclusion was that there would be sufficient dilution of dimethylselenide by clean air at any conceivable volatilization rate. Many plants and microbes all over the state and the world release dimethylselenide naturally, but these rates too are minute compared with the toxic levels. The Chevron site not only showed a large percentage loss by Se volatilization but also an improvement in wildlife. As a result of the adaptive management at Chevron, the Se concentrations in the eggs of black -necked stilts has fallen to less than one-half. In 1994 the • eggs contained 25.8 ppm Se but only 11.2 ppm in 1999. This decrease in Se in the eggs results 45 in a substantial reduction in the likelihood of Se -caused reproduction impairment (Ohlendorf & Gala, 2003). 9.0 NUMBERS OF CONTAMINATED PREY ITEMS FOR BIRDS 9.1 The role of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV). The reduction in risk by using the controlled NTS system of Se removal can be approximated relative to the existing uncontrolled watershed. For a first approximation the reduced numbers of bird prey items can be used to determine risk reduction in the NTS. The availability of contaminated bird food items, such as chironomids, should be reduced in the NTS design. In spring 2003 the existing NTS at SJM showed very low chironomid population densities relative to those found in SDC in November 2002. It is not known if the difference persists over most of the year but further monitoring should determine the answer. The NTS systems are designed to have little to no submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). The SAV habitat is well recognized as having much denser biota than most other habitats. Surveys made in 2002-2003 in PCW and the Santa Fe Channel found considerable amounts of SAV in both the deeper pools and the shallow concrete lined -channels. The SAV can actually grow in very shallow water (< 5 cm) although the upper leaves are usually out of the water. Under these conditions, the rest of the plant is submerged and proved a good habitat for several aquatic invertebrates in PCW in November 2002. By discouraging the growth of SAV by water draw down, much of the bird food (especially the epifauna = chironomids, dragonfly and damselfly nymphs) will not develop robustly. The risk to birds in consuming Se -rich epifauna will be decreased greatly when SAV is absent or much reduced. is 9.2. The role of the biofilm. The biomass of the biofilm on SAV is normally so large compared with the biomass of planktonic microbes that most Se uptake in wetlands occurs in the living biofilm of the sediments and SAV. For example, in the permanent wetlands at Kesterson Reservoir the biofilm biomass (— i kg/m2) approximately equaled that of the standing SAV. The planktonic component was estimated at less than 1/1000 of this mass (i, e. chlorophyll a < 50 ug/L; Horne & Roth, 1989). The concentration of Se in both SAV and the biofilm at Kesterson was similar (� 60 ppm in May 1986). In the biofilm, soluble Se is either reduced to inert Se metal or metabolized to selenomethionine in living tissues. Passage of incoming Se from initial transformation to higher trophic levels in the food web is much more likely in SAV biofilm than the sediments. The sediment biofilm is more likely to be reducing (due to decomposition and respiration) while SAV biofilm is more likely to be oxidizing (due to diatom photosynthesis and contact with surface water). Thus the sediment biofilm is more prone to produce Se° precipitate while SAV biofilm is more prone to produce organic Se, some of which is long lasting and toxic as it passes up the food web to birds. In Kesterson Reservoir, most of the highly contaminated living biomass was found in SAV (—> 99% epiflora and epifauna; Home & Roth,1989 p. 92 and Table 5.6.2 therein). Contaminated living biomass did occur in the sediments but in the permanently flooded areas typical of the NTS, this biomass was small compared with that in the SAV. The measured distribution of • living biomass in many of the permanently flooded sites was determined by the low dissolved 46 oxygen, which restricted most life to the upper water. In those sites where dissolved oxygen at the sediments was adequate, usually the seasonal and ephemeral wetlands, contaminated aquatic . insect larvae were present in vegetation and sediments. Many bird prey items, in particular larger damselfly, dragonfly larvae, and some chironomids, prefer the better -oxygenated and sheltered SAV habitat. The largest NTS system, the IRWD SJM (bin 3 system), has no SAV other than the barnyard grass deliberately planted to provide carbon for denitrification. The proposed smaller NTS bin 1 systems will also have little or no SAV since the design calls for about 90% plantings of dense stands of large emergent macrophyte cattails and bulrush (Master Plan, March 2003, Fig 5.1, p 98, Fig. 5.2 p. 103). Large emergent plants shade out SAV. In the flow -through bin 2 NTS the amount of SAV will be reduced by occasional water level reduction (as in SAMS-1 in bin 3) and the expected overgrowth of cattails and bulrush since the water levels will be shallow (— 2 feet or less). For a first approximation, the reduced percentage of SAV coverage in the uncontrolled and controlled habitats (90%) can be used to determine risk reduction in the NTS. Some support for this estimate can be gained by considering the numbers of chironomids, a prime food for many birds, in the existing NTS system (IRWD SJM) relative to that in PCW. Measurements made in 1992- 93 show that there about 200 large red chironomids in the rich mud in the deeper parts of the PCW pools but less than one in both the deep and shallow sites at the IRWD SJM. In addition, scuds and crawfish were abundant in the shallow water of Santa Fe Channel and PCW, but were virtually absent in similar areas of SJM. Finally, dragonfly and damselfly nymphs were common in PCW but were rare in SJM waters. The question then arises as to how Se is removed in the current NTS site, the SJM Although • more monitoring is needed at partial answer can be given based on the monitoring results to date. SJM removes about 30% of inflowing Se and 30-50% of inflowing nitrate (ranges depend on how the inflows are time averaged). In theory and if the marsh was a fully stirred tank reactor, the entire nitrate pool would have to be depleted before it was thermodynamically possible for Se reduction to occur. The SJM is deliberately a simple system with shallow open water with no vegetation in the majority of the wetland and deeper anti -predator trench with an attached and partially floating bulrush stand around the perimeter. Preliminary observations show that the open water sediments are normally well oxidized while anoxia is at least sometimes present in the deeper sediments under the bulrush root mat. Therefore the most likely explanation of the observed Se and nitrate removal in SJM is that the anoxic macrophyte perimeter areas deplete both nitrate and Se while the shallower regions may only deplete small amounts of nitrate. The projections made for nitrate removal at SJM prior to its construction estimated that only about one-third of the maximum rate would be achieved due to the low amount of macrophytes planted (Horne, 1995a). This prediction has been confirmed by the current nitrate removal process and also explains the observed Se removal rate. In the NTS a larger Se and nitrate removal is anticipated since there will be a much greater coverage by macrophytes. 9.3 Reduced accessibility to birds of remaining potentially contaminated bird prey items/Exposure of birds to contaminated prey items. The biofilm forms on (i) SAV, (ii) the dead leaf detritus at the base of emergent macrophyte stems and (iii) sediments. Se can be taken up from the water by the biofilm at any of these sites. However, the SAV biofilm is much larger and very much more accessible to the invertebrates • that are food for birds than are the two other biofilms. It is a deliberate design decision to make 47 the NTS sediments and deepest water anoxic but the waters above this layer oxic. Few organisms can live under the anoxic conditions that are most desirable in the surface sediments of treatment wetlands. Even the red chironomids that live in sediments in SDC require at least . 20% DO (— 2 mg/L). Other potential bird food such as planktonic copepods cannot tolerate below 2 mg/L DO. The minimum DOES for nitrate reduction is 0.5 mg/L DO so it can be seen that the low DO habitat of potential bird food and the sites of pollution immobilization and sequestration do not overlap. This point is crucial in reducing the risk of birds when treating Se or any other toxic material in treatment wetlands. The reduction in the amount and availability of a Se -contaminated biofilm to bird prey was described above. Risk in the controlled NTS relative to the uncontrolled SDC will be further reduced by the design of some of the NTS systems as shown in the Master Plan (March 2003, Fig 5.1, p. 98 that shows the generic wetland). The design for pollution removal in the wetlands sections of the NTS normally has a method for spatial isolation of contaminated biota and birds. The wildlife is normally expected to be in the upper, oxygenated water. The biofilm that takes up and immobilized Se is in the lower, anoxic zone. Some Se will be removed in the upper oxygenated component and this Se may still be available to birds. however, this biofilm will be similar to biofilm already extant in SDC. It may be necessary to further reduce the area friendly to birds by several methods described in this memo. Thus the generic figure 5.1 does not represent all possibilities of bird habitat and does not represent the likely distribution of aquatic birds where their prey may be Se -rich and available. The reduction in risk will occur passively in those NTS sites where dense vegetation and small open water areas restrict the access of many birds. Specifically, these are the bin 1 NTS Units and those bin 2 wetlands where macrophytes spread over much of the sediment area. Approximately 30% of the NTS will fit the above description of low bird accessibility. The remainder will approximate the SIM where Se bioavailability is suspected to be low based on the Se found in 7 eggs collected thus far. Other measures of reducing the availability of some wetland and ponds sites to birds are available. A component of lake management is the problem caused by birds such as Canada geese and coots to smaller lakes and lawns or golf courses. Considerable effort has gone into this area of lake management. One form of small-scale restriction of bird movement that has had success in England is the erection of small fences between water and land. Given the design of the NTS with dense areas of high emergent plants, birds cannot easily land in the marsh. Birds landing elsewhere can be prevented from walking into the wetlands by fencing. Since flying over the top of the fence and landing inside the fully vegetated wetland is not possible, exclusion can result in the upper wetlands where most treatment and toxic removal is expected to occur. Such strategies will only work for large birds such as ducks, but these are probably the most at risk from Se. 9.4 Balancing risks of mosquito control and selenium in mosquitofish, Mosquito control is normally carried out using fish, especially mosquitofish that are supplied by the local vector control district. however, mosquitofish sometimes contain relatively high amounts of Se and are abundant in some circumstances (e.g., pools in Peters Canyon Wash). It is not clear how many birds use mosquitofish as a main part of their diet, but herons, eagrets and kingfishers are know to take them (Ohlendorf, pers. comm.). It is possible that mosquitofish will • m be a food source for other birds in which case they pose a serious risk in SDC, assuming that the birds feed often at this kind of site. 10 ANALYSIS 10.1 Threat of Selenium Toxicity with NTS Project. No ereater than now? Based on the results from several other Se -containing sites discussed above, especially the Chevron site and IRWD's SJM, it can be proposed, using the controlled NTS, that the threat of Se toxicity to SDC and Newport Bay will not be greater than the uncontrolled system now extant. At the Chevron marsh the management of the bird and prey habitat has resulted in a "net benefit" to birds despite acknowledged negative effects of Se to bird eggs and chicks (Ohlenorf & Gala, 2000). The amount of Se in both Chevron effluent and SDC are similar and well above the currently proposed 5 ppb for SDC. The situation so far at the existing NTS site, SJM, is that no effect of Se in the water has been shown in the 7 eggs collected thus far. In both cases the situation is not ideal. The reduction of Se to lower levels is still the most desirable, if difficult to envisage, solution. However, if additional monitoring in SDC and SJM continues to show a large risk in the uncontrolled creek wetlands, the possibility exists that the controlled wetlands of the NTS will improve the situation. The reservation is that to the extent that new wetlands are created by the NTS there will be a greater potential area for Se uptake. Monitoring should ensure that the bioavailability of Se in the new NTS remains lower than an equivalent area of SDC. • Probably reduced? Based on results from several other Se -containing sites discussed above, especially the Chevron site and IRWD's SJM, there is good evidence, using the controlled NTS, to support the contention that the threat of Se toxicity to SDC and Newport Bay will be less than the current uncontrolled system. The reduction in bioavailable Se to the entire watershed is approximately 30-70% as measured by anticipated Se removal. 10.2 Selenium partitioned from the food web. 10.2.1 Immobilization & Sequestration (I&S). The design of the NTS Project is to either destroy pollutants (e.g., nitrate, as is occurring now in the IRWD NTS or the Orange County Water District's Prado Wetland on the Santa Ana River) or immobilize and sequestrate them in the sediments (Draft Master Plan, March 2003, p. 115 section 6.4.2). Once I&S has occurred (a few hours to weeks, e. g. Kesterson Reservoir, Site Pond 5A isolation site), the resulting Se (as with other pollutants) is separated from the food web in three ways. • First, the Se is held in a biologically unavailable fashion (Sep metal or as a -Se-H group in organic sediments). • Second, the NTS sediments are deliberately kept anoxic (no oxygen) both to provide the conditions needed to initially assist in the I&S and to be an inhospitable place for aquatic invertebrates. • Dense vegetation and no open water areas restrict the access of birds to the potentially • contaminated Se transfer area (soluble Se � Se°). Wet sediments are normally anoxic since the definition of a wetland is that it contains hydric or reducing soils. However, in some circumstances such as the presence of flocculent sediments, • winds, and low oxygen demand, oxygen can be introduced to otherwise immobilized Se. Additional risk could arise after I&S if such an oxygenation occurred or if reduced Se entered the food web (Luoma et at., 1992). However, the 2.3-year experiment at Kesterson showed that all highly contaminated biota became very much lower in Se over time and that the base of the food web had reached 2-3 ppb in 2 years. In addition, there is a decrease rather than an increase in Se in the water in the outflow from the SJM, the main ponds of which are drawn down to wet sediments several times per year. This result indicates that little or no Se moved from the sediments to the biota relative to that which moved from biota to sediments. It can be expected that a similar trend will be followed in the NTS but monitoring will be required to ensure and measure any releases of Se from wet sediments. The sediments in the NTS are specifically designed to not provide food for most aquatic invertebrates (again a partial function of anoxia but also the kind of sediments created). The sediments are designed by choosing the kinds of plants in the NTS and the hydroperiod or water regimes. In the NTS the designated main plants are cattail and bulrush (Draft Master Plan March 2003, Fig. 5.1, p.98). Although it is possible for dense cattail and bulrush stands to support dragonfly and damselfly larvae they are not common in the bulrush stands of SJM, though common in SAV of SDC. It is also much more difficult, but not impossible, for a large bird such as a duck to penetrate and feed effectively in the kind of very dense macrophytes needed for good pollution treatment. That is the reason why in many cases, ponds are added as separate features to assist the birds in landing near and access to the treatment macrophytes. In the NTS such ponds may have to be limited or removed if Se is found to be problem after monitoring. Most I&S for soluble Se is expected to occur in the more active cattail cells that are designed as the cell following the Sedimentation or detention basin cell (Draft Master Plan March 2003, Fig. 5.1, p.98). Cattails were selected since they release most of their soluble labile organic carbon relatively quickly, within a matter of weeks. This carbon will power the bacteria to carry out I&S of Se (the process must be thermodynamically favored by the sediment conditions but the rates of reaction are dependent on bacterial action and sediment conditions; Hume et al., 2002). It should be emphasized that flooded soils soon become anoxic no matter if the water bearing oxygen is flowing stagnant. Hydric soil results from extended anoxia and is one of the three components of the federal definition of a wetland. The situation in streams is the same, anoxic soil, but with the proviso that gravel and rocks with high porosity to lateral flow will remain oxygenated. The respiration of the bacteria in the sediments (most sediments are dead and decaying cattail leaves and stems) ensures anoxia. Keeping the site flooded (fully aquatic hydroperiod) ensures that anoxia remains. Few aquatic creatures of any kind find attractive anoxic sediments composed of carbon and nutrient depleted plant stems. In particular, insect larvae and other aquatic invertebrates large enough to be bird food cannot survive and actively avoid the anoxic sediments. A few insects such as the red chironomid larvae can survive in almost anoxic conditions due to special hemoglobin that loads and unloads oxygen at low oxygen concentrations. However, these chironomids ate normally found in rich organic mud where food is plentiful, not in the almost peat -like infertility of the NTS sediments. Nonetheless, there will be a few potential bird food items in the sediments • where they have at least potential access to Se if the system were to suddenly dry out and re- 50 flood over a few weeks. That is a small but unavoidable risk for Se. For example, the April 2003 survey of the IRWD SJM indicates that the numbers of red chironomids in the anoxic sediments are about 600 times less than those in the apparently richer mud of Peters Canyon Wash. Immobilization and sequestration of Se in the sediments under stands of cattails or bulrushes is assisted by the phenomenon of non -transport of Se from roots to rhizomes, stems, leaves or seeds. In the wetlands at Kesterson Marsh contaminated soil contained a mean concentration of as much as 126 ppm dry weight. However, at the same time (summer 1998) cattails growing on these highly contaminated sediments showed low values in tissues (leaves = 0.5 ppm, stems =0.1 ppm, rhizomes =1.3 ppm), while roots remained relatively high (9.9 ppm; Horne & Roth, 1989). Thus it is possible to grow cattails or bulrush on Se contaminated waterlogged sediments without risk to wildlife feeding directly on the plants (other than the roots). In the NTS systems the dense stands of cattail and bulrush assist in the sequestration of Se by not transmitting the stored Se to the food web (it is expected that cattails and bulrush will comprise over 90% of all living biomass in the NTS after 1 year (cattails) and 2-3 years.(bulmsh)). 10.2.2 Volatilization. The dimethylselenide that is the volatile product of Se metabolism is relatively insoluble in water and simply bubbles or diffuses out from the root zone to the air. It is unlikely that there would be enough dimethylselenide to form its own bubbles; in wetlands, bubbles of the more common nitrogen or methane act as convenient carriers of other trace gasses such as dimethylselenide. A small fraction of the dimethylselenide will dissolve and may be oxidized and taken up by bacteria and thus enter the open food chain. Reduction of this avenue of contamination in the NTS system is primarily by the encouragement of denitrification (to • provide carrier bubbles and speed passage through the water) and a shallow water column of about two feet so that little time is spent in the open water (see Draft Master Plan March 2003, Fig. 5. 1, p. 98). A good example that dimethylselenide is likely to pass into the food web is given by the detailed studies in the experimental 1-acre Pond 5A at Kesterson Reservoir. Here the highly contaminated water (initially —300 ppb; — 60 ppb at start of experiment) and biota (initially up to 400 ppm dry weight; up to 130 ppm at start of experiment) were exposed to a relatively low Se groundwater source (— 1-2 ppb total Se). After only three weeks, Se had fallen from over 60 to < 5 ppb. Over the next 2.3 years, Se in 22 biotic compartments that included every living aquatic organism fell steadily to a small fraction of the original value (final value depended on species and lifespan). It is known that dimethylselenide was produced in Pond 5A since it has a characteristic odor and experiments showing dimethylselenide release were carried out nearby by Dr. Frankenberger (UC Riverside). 10.2.3 Selenium managed. Se management as described in the Master Plan (March 2003, pp. 114-116, Section 6.4) is relatively simple. With the plant palate to be used in the NTS systems (dense cattails, dense bulrush), Se will not bioaccumulate tohighlevels in the above ground parts (especially the seeds) and become a problem. It is estimated that Se in these plants will be low in all parts (stems, seeds, leaves >1 —2 ppm) but that the roots.may have relatively high Se levels (> 5 ppm). This conclusion is supported by the values found in PCW where sites were deliberately chosen to be near high -Se seeps (water > 100 ppb). For example, tissue concentrations for cattails in PCW in November 2002 were 1.1 to 2.3 ppm dry weight, less than any published criteria for safe consumption as the sole diet for wildlife. For comparison, Se in • the water at that time in PCW was 30 ppb, about as high as can be expected and equivalent to the 17 year maximum in the lower reaches of SDC (Table 1). 51 The Se in plant tissue, as well as that in the sediments, invertebrates and bird eggs, will be monitored as part of the management plan. The level of action for adaptive management or even closure of an NTS site will depend on the results of the monitoring. However, it is certain that . the levels of Se in some parts of the food web will be above the guidelines for agricultural drain water (see Table 4). It is part of the NTS design that those parts of the food web that are most important for birds (e.g. bulrush seeds for mallard) will be low. 10.3 Possibility of no significant net Impacts from selenium. At NTS Facilities. Impacts from Se in the NTS will occur if Se in the water is incorporated into the food web and is sufficiently bioavailable to birds so that developmental or other defects occur in the eggs, hatchability, or chick survival. The NTS is designed to prevent this in the following ways: • Selenium in the water will primarily be taken up and either immobilized or sequestrated in the sediments rather than passing intothesurface food web. The NTS sites provide good anoxia that drives Se to the immobile form. The NTS sites are mostly covered with emergent aquatic plants that do not transfer Se from the sediments to the edible seeds, leaves and stems. • A second level of protection is provided by the vertical separation of any bird food items from the majority of the Se immobilized in the sediments. The anoxic, acid sediments are poor habitat for most bird food items (aquatic insects) that require at least some oxygen dissolved in the water. • A third level of protection is provided by the horizontal separation of any bird food items from bird access. The bird friendly sites are at the downstream end of the sites and access may be restricted to the upper sites by fences. • A forth level of protection is provided by the reduction in SAV. SAV is the prime habitat for animal bird foods such as chironomids, dragon and damselfly nymphs, and snails. In the open water NTS sites, regular but short water level fluctuations eliminate SAV. Overall, I&S is expected to remove most Se from the realm of biotic availability. However, the Se in the blota in the NTS facilities will include biota migrating or washed down from other uncontrolled sites and may show higher Se than desired. It will only be possible to determine if these organisms are from upstream if there is no suitable habitat for them in the NTS wetland. Downwash of contaminated biota should be mostly confined to the in -line basins (bin 2). However, the undesirable levels of Se in these biota derive from exposure at locations outside the NTS units, and are not a project impact. To the extent that the NTS will remove Se and provide additional wildlife habitat, a net improvement is expected (as at the Chevron marsh). However, there are only a few existing habitats that have had the task of mixing Se and wildlife so predictions are necessarily less well founded than those for some otherpollutant removal sites (e.g. the thousands of wet storm detention ponds that mix heavy metals, pesticides, PAHs and oils with wildlife). • 52 In watershed caused by NTS Facilities. • On balance the impacts from Se in the NTS may be expected to result in a net positive effect. The main beneficial effect will be an overall reduction in bioavailable Se throughout the watershed. It is expected that bioaccumulation of Se will occur in the NTS systems, just as it does in SDC at present. To the extent that the NTS reduces overall Se in the system, an overall improvement will occur. Since the existing NTS at SJM reduces 15% of all the Se in SDC (30% in the diversion to the marsh) it is reasonable to expect that the larger area of the entire NTS will take up more of the Se in the entire system than currently removed. The bioaccumulation of some Se in NTS food web cannot be prevented, just as it cannot be prevented in the current SDC. The difference is that the NTS design for Se and other pollutants such as heavy metals is to immobilize and sequestrate or volatilize (IS&V) much more Se than the current system. Potential damage to birds due to Se entering the food web in the NTS is anticipated to be more than offset by the amount of IS&V carried out by the NTS. The reduction will primarily be due to the controlled immobilization and sequestration of Se in the NTS combined with some removal of Se via volatilization in the NTS. The toxic impact of the remaining Se not removed or bound in the NTS will be reduced in proportion to the success of the NTS. Thus a beneficial effect is expected in the remainder of the watershed including Upper Newport Bay, which is the home of a rare form of the California Clapper Rail. 11. PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES 11.1 Monitoring to Confirm Reasonable Expectations. • The uptake of Se into biota and its immobilization and sequestration into the sediments has been well studied. The volatilization and permanent loss of Se in wetlands is known to occur but is less well known in terms of predicting rates. However, it is well known that Se is rapidly taken up into aquatic biota in circumstances similar to those in the NTS. It is also well known that the depuration or loss rate of Se in aquatic biota (months -years) in natural systems is very much slower than uptake (days -weeks). Typical half-lives for Se in aquatic biota range from months to years in natural systems where Se recycles and about 30 days in laboratories where excreted Se is continuously removed. Therefore the monitoring program (Draft Master Plan, March 2003, table 8-1) more than meets expectations that any Se problems will be identified in the NTS. 11.2 Response Actions as Appropriate. As with most facilities, a good monitoring program is the best way to be certain that predictions of harm orreduction of harm are going as planned. For the NTS Project, a monitoring program at selected typical sites has been proposed (Draft Master Plan, March 2003: Section 8). In particular, comprehensive and extensive collections of aquatic invertebrates has been detailed for the baseline pre -construction, 3 months after startup, years 1-3 after startup, and +4 years after startup (Draft Master Plan, March 2003, table 8-1). A separate selenium action plan has been developed (see NTS Draft EIR appendices) to address specific monitoring measures and consequential measures to be taken should the early monitoring indicate such preventive measures are needed. With the benefit of hindsight, if a program of monitoring for Se as suggested in the NTS Master Plan had been carried out in Kesterson Reservoir in 1978-79 (the first year of full operation), the Se in the chironomids would have given full warning that bird toxicity was soon to follow. 53 REFERENCES • Bachand, P. A. M. & A. J. Horne. 2000a. Denitrification in constructed free -surface wetlands I. Very high nitrate removal rates in a macrocosm study. Ecological Engineering 14: 9-15. Bachand, P. A. M. & A. J. Horne. 2000b. Denitrification in -constructed free -surface wetlands II. Vegetation community effects. Ecological Engineering 14:17-32. Barnes, I. 1985. Sources of Selenium (in the Central Valley of California). Ppp. 41-51 in Selenium and Agricultural Drainage, Proc. V" Symp. Berkeley CA. Beam, J & N. Gtuenhagen,1980, Feeding ecology of pintails, Anas acuta, wintering on the Los Banos Wildlife Area, Merced Co., California. Job Progress Report. W-40-D-1.23 pp. Belrose, F.C. 1978. Ducks, Geese and Swans of North America. Stack -pole Books. Harrisburg, PA. 540 p. Brown, R. L.1985. The aquacultural potential of sub -surface agricultural drainage from the San Joaquin Valley, California. Ph. D. dissertation, Ecology Dept., University of California, Davis. Byard, J. L. 2003. Selenium concentrations in waterfowl eggs from the San Joaquin Wildlife Refuge: a preliminary assessment of the potential hazard to aquatic biota. Prepared for the Irvine Company, January 2003. Byron, E. R,, H.M. Ohlendorf, G. M. Santolo, S.M. Benson, P. T. Zawislandski, T. K. Tokunaga & M. Delamore. 2003. pp. 985-1012 in D. J. Hoffman, B.A. Rattner, G. A Burton & J. Cairns (Eds.) Handbook of Toxicology. Lewis, Boca Raton, Florida. Canton, S.P. & W. D. van Derveer. 1997. Selenium toxicity to aquatic life: an argument for sediment - based quality criteria. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 16: 1255. Cherry, D.S., Guthrie, R.K., F.F. Sherberger & S.R. Larrick. 1979. The influence of coal ash and thermal discharges on the distribution and bioaccumulation of aquatic invertebrates. Hydrobiologia, 62: 257.262. Connelly D. P & D.L. Chesmore,1980. Food habits of pintails, Anas acuta, wintering on seasonally flooded wetlands in northern San Joaquin Valley, California, Calif Fish & Game, 66: 233-237. CH214Hill, 1994. Bird use and reproduction at the Richmond refinery water enhancement wetland. Prepared for the Richmond Refinery by CH2M-Hill, Oakland, California. Novmeber 1994. DeForest , D.K., K. V. Brix & W.J. Adams. 1999. Critical review of proposed residue -based selenium toxicity thresholds for freshwater fish. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 6: 1187-1228. Ecol. Eng. 2000. This edition of the Journal of Ecological Engineering was devoted to the removal of nitrogen and phosphorus and includes papers on Prado Wetland, a large constructed system on the border of Orange and Riverside Counties. Other editions cover removal of many other pollutants. Euliss, N.H.1984. The feeding ecology of pintail and green -winged teal wintering on Kern National Wildlife Refuge. Master of Science thesis, Humbolt State University, Calif. March 1984,187 p. Fairbrother, et al., 1999. Egg selenium concentrations as predictors of avian toxicity. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 5: 1229-1253. Fairbrother, et al., 2000. Egg selenium thresholds for birds: a response to J. Skompa's critique of Fairbrother et a1.,Hum, Ecol. Risk Assess. 6: 203 Fan, T. & G. Cutter. 1998. Comments in "Report on the peer consultation workshop on selenium aquatic toxicity and bioaccumulation. USEPA workshop, Sept. 1998. Wash DC. Fan, T., R. M. Higashi & E. Rejmankova. 1999. In situ selenium bioremdiation utilizing biochemical transformation by aquatic photoautotrophs, pp. 168-179 in UC Salnity/Drainage Program Annual Report 1997-98. Centers for water and Wildland Reseach, Sept. 1998, Fleming -Singer, M.2002. Ph. D. dissertation. Dept. Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley. Frankenberger, W. T.1990. Dissipation of soil selenium by microbial volatilization. In Frankenberger Jr. & S. Benson (Eds.)1994. Selenium in the Environment. Frankenberger W. T. & S. Benson (Eds.) 1994, Selenium in the Environment. Marcel Dekker, NY. 54 Franke, K. W. 1934. A new toxicant occurring in certain samples of plant foodstuffs. I. Results obtained in preliminary feeding trials. J. Nutr. 8: 609. • Gersberg, R. M., B.V. Elkins, & C. R. Goldman. 1983. Use of artificial wetlands to remove nitrogen from wastewater. J. Wat. Poll. Cont. Fed. 56:152-156. Handbook of Birds. 1977. Handbook of birds of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. Birds of the Western Palearctic Vol. 1.Ostrich to ducks. Oxford University Press. 722 p. Hansen, D. J., P. J. Duda, A.Z. Zayed & N. Terry. 1998. Selenium removal by constructed wetlands: the role of biological volatilization. Evir. Sci. Technol. 20: 530-6. Hansen, D. J. 2000. Selenium volatilization in constructed wetlands. Ph. D. dissertation, Dept. Agricultural and Environmental Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley. 85 pp. Hansen, D. J., P. J. Duda, A.Z. Zayed & N. Terry. 1998. Selenium removal by constructed wetlands: the role of biological volatilization. Environ. Sci. Technol. 32: 591-597. Harrell, R.D., R.L. Fuller & T.J. Edwards. 1978. An investigation of the fish community of Belews Lake, North Carolina. Duke Power Co. Tech. Rept. Ser. No. 78-07. Charlotte NC. Home, A. J. 1995a. Revised design criteria nitrate removal: The Irvine Ranch Water District Wetlands Water Supply Project. pp. E-1 to E-9 in Appendix E, Wetlands Nitrate Removal, Analysis Vol. II. Appendices to Draft Environmental Impact Report. IRWD State Clearinghouse No. 95011047, Prepared by C112-M-Hill (Santa Ana), June 1995. Horne, A. J. 1995b. Initial review of water quality management at the North and South Irvine Lakes at Woodbridge Village. Rept. to Black & Veach Irvine CA & Woodbridge Village Lake Assoc. Irvine CA. 22 pp. June 1995. Horne, A. J. 1991. Selenium detoxification in wetlands by permanent flooding I. Effects on a macroalga, an epiphytic herbivore, and an invertebrate predator in the long-term mesocosm experiment at Kesterson Reservoir..Water, Air, and Soil Poll. 57-58: 43-52. Home, A. J. 1994. Kinetics of Selenium uptake and loss and seasonal cycling or selenium by the aquatic microbial community in the Kesterson Wetlands. pp 9-1 to 9-14 in W. T. Frankenburger and S. • Benson (Eds.) Selenium in the Environment. Marcel Dekker, NY. Horne, A. J. & C. R. Goldman. 1994. Limnology (2"' Edition). McGraw-Hill. New York. 576 pp. Horne, A. J. 2003. Selenium concentrations in the biota from the selenium -contaminated sections of San Diego Creek in fall 2002. Draft report of 25 May 2003. Alex Horne Associates, El Cerrito California. 27 p. Horne, A.J. 2003. Class Reader for CE 213B, Research Methods & Ethics. University of California, Berkeley Dept. Civil & Environmental Engineering. 136 p. Hume, N.P., M.S. Fleming & A. J. Horne. 2002. Plant carbohydrate limitation on nitrate reduction in wetland microcosms. Water Research 36: 577-584. IAWQ. 1997. Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control in 1966. International Association on Water Quality. Wat. Sci. Tech. Vol. 35. No. 35 Whole issues of journal devoted to wetlands treatment systems including several articles on sub -surface wetlands. Jonasson. P. M. 1978. Zoobenthos of Lakes. Yerh. Int. Yer. Limno. 20: 13-37. Kaushik, N.K. & H.B.N. Hynes. 1971. The fate of dead leaves that fall into streams. Arch. Hydrobiol. 64: 465-515. Lemly, A. D. 1996. Selenium in aquatic organisms. pp. 427445 in W. N. Beyer, G.H. Heinz, A.W. Redmon Norwood (eds.) Environmental Contaminants in ff <ldlife - Interpreting the tissue concentrations. Martin, A.C., H. S. Zim & A. L. Nelson. 1961. American Wildlife & Plants. A guide to wildlife food habits. Dover Books, NY. 500 p. Miller, M. M.1984. Fall and winter foods of northern pintails on three northern California wildlife refuges. US. Fish & Wildlife Service, Dixon CA. Draft report, 5 July 1984. Approx. 30 p. Moore, S.B., J. Winkel, S.J. Detwiler, S.A. Klasing, P.A. Gaul, N. R. Kanim, B. E. Kesser, A.B. DeBevec, K. Beardsley & L.K. Puckett. 1990. Fish and Wildlife Resources and Agricultural . Drainage in the San Joaquin Valley Drainage Program. Sacramento CA, pp. 4.14.444. 55 Mount, J. 1995. California Rivers and Streams: the conflict between fluvial processes and land use. University of California Press. Berkeley. 359 p. MBL. 1983. Aquatic bioassays for the San Luis Drain Central Valley Project, California Vol. 1, Main • Report. Marine Bioassay Laboratories prepared for USBR, Sacramento. NAS. 1983. Selenium in Nutrition. (revised edition). National Academy of Sciences. Washington DC. Newsweek, 1987. Man-made dangers invade wildlife refuges. March 16. LBL.1897a. Hydrological, geochemical and ecological characterization of Kesterson Reservoir. Fifth Progress Report, January-March,1987, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley. LBLID-1291. LBL 1985-1989. A series of 11 quarterly and annual reports with the common title: Hydrological, geochemical and ecological characterization of Kesterson Reservoir. Luoma. S. et al. 1992. Envir. Sci. Technnol. 26: 485.491, Medlin,1994. Report on Chevron Marsh. Mulamoottil, G., E. A. McBean & F. Rovers (eds.).1999. Constructed Wetlands for the Treatment of Landfill Leachates. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida. Since leachate volumes are usually small and sometimes contain high concentrations of toxics, sub -surface wetlands are often favored, especially in Europe (e.g. Robinson et a., 1999) North State Resources & Stetson Engineering. 1999. Panoche Creek Corridor Project Feasibility Study. Draft Report to US Bureau of Replamation, February 81999. Stetson Engineering, San Rafael California. Ohlendorf, H.M. 1989. Bioaccumulation and effects of selenium in wildlife. In L.W. Jacobs (Ed.) Selenium in agriculture and the environment. Soil Sci Amer. Sp. Publ. 23. Madison WI. Oblendorf, H.M. 2003. Ecotoxicology of Selenium pp. 465-500 in D. J. Hoffman, B.A. Rattner, G. A Burton & J. Cairns (Eds.) Handbook of Toxicology. Lewis, Boca Raton, Florida Ohlendorf, H.M. & W. R. Gala. 2000. Selenium and Chevron Richmond Refinery water enhancement wetland: A response to A.D.Lemly,1999. Human & Ecol. RiskAssessment 6:903-905. Ohlendorf, H.M., D. J. Hoffman, M.K. Salk & T. W. Aldrich.1986a. Embryonic mortalities and abnormalities of aquatic birds: apparent impacts by selenium form irrigation drainwater. Sci. Total Environ. 52: 49-63. Ohlendorf, H.M., R.L. Hothem, C. M. bunk, T.W. Aldrich & J.F. Moore.1986b. Relationships between selenium concentrations and avian reproduction. Trans. N. Amer. Wildlife Nat. Resources Conf. 51:330-342. Presser, T. S., W. C. Swain, R. R. Tidball & R.C. Severson,1990. Geological sources, mobilization and transport of selenium from the California Coast Ranges to the western San Joaquin Valley: a reconnaissance study. US Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California. Reilly, J. F., A. J. Horne & C. D. Miller. 2000 Nitrogen removal in large-scale free -surface constructed wetlands used for pre-treatment to artificial recharge of groundwater. Ecological Engineering 14:33-47. Robinson, H., G. Harris, M. carville, M. Barr & S. Last. 1999. The use of an engineered reed bed system to treat leachate at Monument Hill landfill site, southern England. pp 71- 97 in Mulamoottil, G., E. A. McBean & F. Rovers (eds.).1999. Constructed Wetlands for the Treatment of Landfill Leachates. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida. Rodgers, J. H. D. S. Cherry & R.K. Guthrie.1978. Cycling of elements in duckweed (Lemna perpusilla) in an ash settling basin and swamp drainage. Water Research.12: 765-770. Schulz & Peal. 2001. Envir, Sci. Tech. 35: 422. Skorupa, J. P. 1998. Selenium poisoning of fish and wildlife in natureL lesons from twelve real -world examples. Ppp. 315-354 in W. T. Frankenberger & R.A. Engberg (eds.) Environmental Chemistry of Selenium. Marcel Dekker Inc. NY. Skorupa, J. P. 1999. Beware of missing data and undernourished statistical models. Hum. Ecoi. Risk. Assess. 5: 1255. Skorupa, J. P.1998. Risk assessment for the biota database of the National Irrigation Water Quality Program. Prepared for the NIWDP, US Dept. Interior, Washington DC. . 56 Sorenson, E.M.B, P. M. Cumbie, T.L. Bauer, J.S. Bell & C.W. Harlan. 1984. Histopathological, hematological, condition factor and organ weight changes associated with selenium accumulation • in fish from Belews Lake, North Carolina. Arch. Envir. Contam. Toxicol. 13, 153. Stober, J., D. Scheidt, R. Jones, K. Thornton, L. Gandy, D. Stevens, J. Trexler & S. Rathbun. 1998. South Florida Ecosystem Assessment, Vol. 1. Final Technical Report Phase 1. Monitoring for adaptive management: Implications for Ecosystem Restoration. EPA 904-R-98-002. Tamjo. K. K., D. Peters & S.Gao. 1998. TLDD flow -through wetlands system: inflows and outflows of water and Se, TEAPs Se chemistry. pp. 56-112 in UC Salnity/Drainage Program Annual Report 1997-98. Centers for water and Wildland Reseach, Sept. 1998. Terry, N. 1998. Use of flow -through constructed wetlands for the remediation of selenium in agricultural tile -drainage water. pp. 113-131 in UC Salnity/Drainage Program Annual Report 1997-98. Centers for water and Wildland Reseach, Sept. 1998. Trimble, S. W. 1998. Historical, hydrographic and hydrological changes in Newport Bay -San Diego Creek Watershed. Rept. To Orange County PF & RD. USBR, 1986b. Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Kesterson Program, Technical Background report. April 1986, 170 p. USEPA. 1999. Manual. Constructed wetlands treatment of municipal wastewaters. US. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinetti, Ohio. EPA/625/R-99/010. September 1999. Weres, O. et al., 1989. Appl. Geochem. Whipple, W. & C. W. Randall. 1983. Detention and flow retardation devices. Storm water Management in Ubanizing areas. Englewood Cliffs, NY. Prentice -Hall. Wu, L.L. 1998. Study of application of submerged wetland macrophyte plant species for reduction of selenium concentrations in agricultural drainwater. pp. 149-158 in UC Salnity/Drainage Program Annual Report 1997-98. Centers for water and Wildland Reseach, Sept. 1998. Zayed, A.M, C. M. Lytle & N. Terry. 1998. Accumulation and volatilization of different chemical species of selenium by plants. Plants. Zayed, A., E. Pilon-Smits, M. De-Sourza, Z-Q Lin & N. Terry. 2000. Remediation of selenium polluted soils and waters by photovolatilization. In G. Terry & G. Banuelos (dds.) Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soil and Water. CRC Press. Lewis Publishers. Boca Raton, Florida. Zawislanski, P., T. Tokunaga, S. Benson, S. Mountford, T. Sears, H. Wong, D. King & J. Oldfather. 1997. Hydrological and Geochemical Investigations of Selenium Behaviour at Kesterson Reservoir. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Report LBNL-41027 UC-000.Oct. 1997. • 57 Irvine Ranch Water District San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Surface Wetland Selenium Monitoring/Action Plan (Selenium Action Plan) January 2004 • 0 • Irvine Ranch Water District San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System (NTS) Surface Wetland Selenium Monitoring/Action Plan (Selenium Action Plan) January 7, 2004 As part of its Phase II implementation of the Clean Water Act, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control (SARWQCB) has identified water bodies polluted by urban runoff within its jurisdiction and has begun assigning Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) to them. San Diego Creek, in central Orange County, California, has assigned to it four TMDLs: sediment, nutrients, pathogens, and toxics. Selenium, a naturally occurring element, has been identified as one of the toxic substances in the water within the watershed. Water quality in San Diego Creek is critical because it is the major contributor of fresh water to the Upper Newport Bay, the largest estuary remaining in Southern California. Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), a local water agency responsible for providing, potable water, non potable water, and sewage collection/treatment service, has volunteered to also provide treatment of urban runoff within the San Diego Creek watershed. In fact, IRWD worked with the California Legislature to add urban runoff treatment to the list of services provided by IRWD under the California Water Code. • IRWD proposes to provide a network of 31 wetlands, distributed throughout the watershed to treat urban runoff as close to sources of pollution as possible. As part of its Natural Treatment System (NTS) master plan, IRWD is specifically addressing selenium in two ways. First, IRWD is taking deliberate action to remove selenium from the water column in San Diego Creek, and thus from Upper Newport Bay, by constructing facilities that sequester selenium in underground, anaerobic biofilters, to which wildlife have no access. Second, it is.taking special care to ensure that selenium that may be accumulated in its other surface wetlands does not become a hazard for wildlife. Detailed information on the planning, design, construction, operation and monitoring of the selenium removal facilities can be found in the NTS master plan and Draft EIR. Those aspects of the selenium removal facilities are not discussed in detail in this Selenium Action Plan. The purpose of this Selenium Action Plan is to address what steps will be taken to ensure that the construction and operation of NTS surface wetlands will not increase the exposure of wildlife to selenium to detrimental levels and document :how NTS reduces selenium within the watershed. It is important to note that IRWD's actions are intended to diminish the level of pollutants, including selenium, in San Diego Creek. Without IRWD's actions, SARWQCB, the County of Orange, and watershed cities are limited to using source and treatment controls on future development, along with source controls for existing areas in • attempting to clean up existing pollution. Such controls are critical for halting an Selenium Action Plan Page 1 Revised: 01/07/04 increase in pollutant loading and perhaps can reduce some existing sources of pollution, • but they would not be expected to be effective at removing large amounts of existing pollution, especially selenium. The sources of selenium are primarily from natural seepage of local, shallow groundwater into drains and charnels that would be unaffected by most source controls. The NTS surface wetlands will include primarily heavily vegetated areas, with some pools, to allow for treatment of nitrogen, fecal coliform, and other pollutants during dry weather. A number of the facilities will also provide treatment of stormwater flows, primarily through sedimentation as well as contact with plants and soils. Some facilities will be "in -line" in the channels or in flood basins that are `on-line", while others are off- line from the channels. In any wetlands systems, there will be areas which are anoxic and therefore could accumulate selenium into sediments. In addition, in some of the wetlands captured sediments from upstream natural areas may also contain selenium. The facility designs and planned operations and maintenance of the facilities has been planned to minimize the possibility that exposure to selenium (or other trapped pollutants) would be increased as compared to present conditions. In fact they have been designed along with the selenium removal facilities to reduce potential for selenium impacts on a watershed basis. It is recognized that there does not currently exist a large body of information on potential for selenium to accumulate to levels that may be of concern. It is also recognized that data on selenium toxicity within the San Diego Creek watershed is also • very limited. However, it is important for IRWD's NTS to move forward because it will provide great benefit to the overall health of the watershed. Therefore, this Selenium Action Plan has been developed to specifically define the steps that will be taken to assess the potential risk to biota from selenium and actions that would be taken in a step -wise fashion to address unacceptable selenium levels that either cause a significant increase in risk or a detrimental situation arises. Neither of these is expected to occur, but this plan provides for monitoring to confirm this and a logical set of progressive actions if a problem does occur. In the process of developing the Selenium Action Plan, Dr. Alex Home prepared a paper status ono, Dr. Alex Horne, November, 2003, Prepared for IRWDI that summarizes the issues of selenium in general and how that knowledge base can be applied to IRWD's NTS in particular. That paper was circulated for peer review by several experts in various aspects of selenium in surface runoff and potential risk to wildlife. That paper was updated by Dr. Home, taking the peer reviewers' comments into consideration. That paper was used as a basis for development of this Selenium Action Plan. CJ Selenium Action Plan Page 2 Revised: 01/07/04 • The Selenium Action Plan to address the potential for selenium to accumulate in the NTS in -line and off-line surface wetland systems includes the following four elements: • Targeted monitoring • Phased construction and testing approach for in -line systems • Development and implementation of a ecological risk assessment supported by monitoring data • Specific list of phased management actions should the selenium levels and resulting risk to biota be at potentially unacceptable levels, including the decommissioning/removal of problem sites, if necessary. IRWD will develop a detailed monitoring plan working with the SARWQCB. The elements of the targeted monitoring for selenium to be included in the plan are presented below: I. Targeted monitoring for Selenium Monitoring to assess potential issues with selenium will be conducted as outlined below. This effort would be coordinated with the other San Diego Creek TMDL efforts, including the effort, proposed by SARWQCB, to develop a site specific selenium • standard for the creek. If that effort goes forward, it will be collecting data that could be compared to that proposed to be collected in this action plan. The following monitoring efforts will be conducted for a two-year period after construction of the first NTS surface wetland within or downstream of Peters Canyon Wash. This period may be extended by IRWD if vegetation growth or wetland maturation is slower than expected. a. Water column monitoring for selenium, including selenate, selenite and organic forms, both dissolved and total. i. Upstream and downstream monitoring of inline wetlands water column selenium levels monthly for a two-year period in pilot in -line systems ii. Monitoring within the wetland pool water column testing for off-line systems monthly for two -years. iii. Flow rate measurement at the inlet and outlet. b. Sediment testing for total selenium iv. Composite sediment sample in in -line systems quarterly for two years V. Composite sediment sample in forebay area of off-line treatment wetlands quarterly for two years • vi. Composite sediment sample in selected reaches of channel with no NTS system quarterly for two years Selenium Action Plan Page 3 Revised: 01/07/04 vii. Soils should also be characterized as to Total Organic Carbon (TOC) • levels and particle size distribution c. Vegetation monitoring. Selected wetlands vegetation at each site (in -line, off- line, and selected reach of channel with no NTS system) will be monitored. Two to three species, including at least one food species, will be monitored for total selenium. Suggested species are: cattails, bulrush, duckweed, and algae. Composite samples of seeds, rhizomes, roots, and stems and roots should be tested. d. Invertebrate testing — Quarterly tests for two years in both NTS sites and in channels with no NTS. Testing will include both selenium concentration and invertebrate types and biomass. The focus will be on chironomids, but other invertebrates such as crayfish or dragonfly would also be sampled if there is a significant number of these present. e. Mosquito fish testing— Quarterly tests for two years in both NTS and in channels with no NTS. If other fish are observed, then they would be tested also. Testing will be for selenium in tissues. f. Bird egg testing (if nests are found) one time per year for two years in both samples in NTS and in channels with no NTS. This work should be coordinated with the resource agencies. A Migratory Waterfowl Take permit will likely be required. g. Each quarter a quarterly monitoring report will be issued and shared with . SARWQCB. On an annual basis a more formal report would be prepared and incorporated as an appendix to the County of Orange's annual water quality report. h. A detailed monitoring plan would be developed that would include detailed monitoring protocols as well as training for staff to ensure that data are uniformly and correctly collected. The proposed facilities for this specific monitoring are shown in Table 1. They represent the wetlands with the highest potential for selenium accumulation due to their locations in the watershed relative to selenium sources. We have also selected a facility that will receive sediments from significant hillside areas (Trabuco Retarding Basin). 1] Selenium Action Plan Page 4 Revised: 01/07/04 • Table 1. NTS sites and "bin classification" from Horne Paper. Site Number Facility Name Facility Type Bin Type (as defined in a er from A. Horne 26 Woodbridge In -Line Basins 11 2 27 Barranca Off -Line Wetlands I 1 46 San Joaquin Marsh - Enhancement I 3 54 Caltrans SR-261 Site/Walnut I 1 55 Santa Ana/Santa Fe Channel In -Line Basins II 2 64 Wes ark In -Line Basins II 2 16 Trabuco Retarding Basin III 1 Bins: 1= Upper Watershed/Stormwater Sites, 2 = In -Line Facilities, 3 = Off-line downstream dry - weather flow systems. II. Development and implementation of an ecological risk management analysis supported by monitoring data Based upon the monitoring data above, on an annual basis, an evaluation will be made of the potential ecological risk to biota that inhabit or feed in the NTS system. This analysis will be coordinated with SARWQCB efforts and use other data that may be available from others as well. The purpose of this analysis is to assist management in determining: • Do concentrations in the water, sediment, or food chain indicate unacceptable • risks and are these available to biota? • Do direct measures such as bird eggs indicate an exposure that might impair reproduction of migratory birds? • • Does the risk to biota appear to be greater or reduced overall, to the extent there is enough available data due to implementation of the NTS program as compared to the potential risk to biota that is present today? Selenium Action Plan Revised: O1/07/04 Page 5 Phased construction and testing approach forin-line systems • The NTS master plan includes the provision to construct smaller portions of the in -line facilities as described in Table 2: Table 2. Location of Phase 1 and Phase 2 In -Line Facilities Site Phase 1 Phase 2 Site 26 — Woodbridge In- 3 permanent weirs, upstream of 4 permanent weirs, Line Basins drop structure at Creek Road downstream of drop structure (Stations 136+40,122+30, at Creek Road 108+70, see Fact sheet, Appendix A Site 55 — Santa Ana/Santa Fe 3 seasonal weirs immediately Remaining 15 downstream Channel In -Line Basins downstream from Newport seasonal weirs. Ave (Stations 121+65,116+90, 112+20,see Fact sheet, Appendix A Site 64 — Westpark In -Line 3 permanent weirs and 1 Remaining 8 seasonal weirs Basins seasonal weir upstream of El downstream of the El Modena Modena Channel (Stations Channel 359+85, 350+20, 341+50, 328+20,see Fact sheet, Appendix A The construction of the remainder of these facilities would not occur until the two-year • monitoring program is completed or after one-year if monitoring results are conclusive that there does not appear to be an increase in risk. III. Specific list of phased management actions should selenium levels and risk to biota be at levels of Risk that exceed existing conditions. If a problem is noted with selenium at levels or risks that are above those within San Diego Creek today, then the following management actions would be initiated to address the potential problem. SARWQCB staff will be consulted in planning and implementing such actions. Potential actions in order of increasing severity include: i. Conduct additional monitoring to further characterize and substantiate risk potential j. Develop additional design alternatives to minimize wildlife access to selenium, including reduction in open water areas, reduction of aquatic plants that attract wildlife and food species (submerged vegetation), reduction in access to the wetlands, etc. k. Develop and implement maintenance schedule to remove potential "hot spots" materials, including sediments and plant materials. • Selenium Action Plan Page 6 Revised, 01/07/04 • I. Develop potential designs for sub -surface selenium removal areas within or upstream of the NTS facilities m. Implement a program to locate and target individual seeps for selenium treatment systems to reduce selenium concentrations in the main flows. n. For off -channel NTS systems, develop extended detention dry basin alternatives that do not remove selenium from dry -weather flows. o. Develop and implement efforts to decommission problem NTS sites that cannot successfully reduce selenium caused problems to acceptable levels. • • Selenium Action Plan Revised: 01/07/04 Page 7 0 Appendix M Previously Certified CEQA Documentation Summaries • E SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED CEQA DOCUMENTATION SUMMARIES Submitted to: Irvine Ranch Water District 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue Irvine, CA 92618 Contact: Norris Brandt, P.E. Assistant to the General Manager (949) 453-5590 Prepared by: BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Contact: Thomas E. Smith, Jr., AICP Principal (714) 444-9199 January 5, 2004 San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Pane Section1.0Introduction...........................................................................................................1 Section2.0 Prior CEQA Document Summaries......................................................................1 2.1 Planning Area 17 Zone Change and Master Plan EIR ..............................1 2.1.1 Agricultural Resources..................................................................2 2.1.2 Air Quality.....................................................................................2 2.1.3 Biological Resources....................................................................3 2.1.4 Cultural Resources.......................................................................8 2.1.5 Hydrology/Water Quality.............................................................10 2.1.6 Noise..........................................................................................10 2.2 Planning Area 27 Zone Change and Master Plan EIR ............................11 2.2.1 Hydrology...................................................................................11 2.2.2 Air Quality...................................................................................12 2.2.3 Biological Resources..................................................................13 2.2.4 Noise..........................................................................................15 2.2.5 Cultural Resources.....................................................................16 2.3 Northern Sphere Area General Plan Amendment and Zone Change Final EIR.........................................................................................................17 2.3.1 Agricultural Resources................................................................18 2.3.2 Air Quality ...................................................................................18 2.3.3 Biological Resources..................................................................19 2.3.4 Cultural Resources.....................................................................27 2.3.5 HydrologyMater Quality.............................................................32 2.3.6 Land Use/Planning.....................................................................35 2.3.7 Noise..........................................................................................35 2.4 Orange County Great Park Final Environmental Impact Report .............36 2.4.1 Agricultural Resources................................................................36 2.4.2 Air Quality ...................................................................................37 2.4.3 Biological Resources..................................................................38 2.4.4 Cultural Resources.....................................................................39 2.4.5 Hydrology/Water Quality.............................................................41 2.4.6 Paleontological Resources.........................................................42 2.5 City of Irvine General Plan Amendment 16 FEIR....................................43 2.5.1 Agricultural Resources................................................................43 Section3.0 Conclusion..........................................................................................................44 R PmjedsVRWDVen040R AppendlmsUD01 AppendixM-010504 DOC f Appendix M San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR • • SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION The information presented in this appendix is a summary of several CEQA documents that were previously certified by their respective local lead agencies. The NTS Plan includes 31 NTS sites, 17 of which were previously evaluated in these prior certified CEQA documents listed and described below. Site No. Site Name 'CEQA Document 31 32 PA 17 West Basin PA 17 East Basin Planning Area 17 Zone Change and Master Plan Final EIR 49 PA 17 Center Basin 42 Turtle Ridge North Planning Area 27 Zone Change and Master Plan Final EIR 16 Trabuco Retarding Basin Northern Sphere Area General Plan Amendment and Zone Change Final EIR 18 Marshbum Retarding Basin 7OA-70C PA 6—Ague Chinon (multiple basins) 71 PA 6 — Marshbum 22 MCAS Ell Toro —Agua Chinon Lower Orange County Great Park (Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Zoning and Related Actions) Final EIR 50 MCAS El Toro— Irvine Auto Center 51 MCAS El Toro —Serrano 52 MCAS El Toro — Bee Canyon 9 PA 1 — Eastfoot Retarding Basin City of Irvine General Plan Amendment 16 EIR 11 PA 1 — Orchard Estates Retarding Basin 10 PA 1 — Eastfoot Upper 12A-12G PA 1 — Lower Orchard Estates (multiple basins) 61 PA 1— Eastfoot Lower These 17 sites were evaluated in the five CEQA documents and their analysis and significance findings and after review of these documents; IRWD concluded that the 17 sites were adequately addressed for construction in these documents. The summaries provided below are of each of the aforementioned CEQA documents. The summaries provided a summary of impacts and findings for those environmental topics that are relevant to the NTS plan sites. For those environmental topics that are not relevant, they are listed but a summary of their impacts and findings is not provided. SECTION 2.0 PRIOR CEQA DOCUMENT SUMMARIES 2.1 PLANNING AREA 17 ZONE CHANGE AND MASTER PLAN EIR The Planning Area 17 Zone Change and Master Plan Final EIR (SCH No. 2000021051), which includes NTS Sites 31 (PA 17 West Basin), 32 (PA 17 East Basin) and 49 (PA 17 Center Basin), was certified by the Irvine City Council on September 26, 2000. The Planning Area 17 Zone Change and Master Plan Final EIR (PA 17 FEIR) Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations were also adopted. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was . adopted for the following significant adverse impacts: construction air quality and agricultural R.1ProJeds0WDUsn041EIR Appendims0001 AppendA M-010504 DOC 1 Appendix Son Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR resources. These significant adverse impacts addressed the construction of'NTS Sites 31, 32, and 49. . Findings from the PA 17 FEIR that are applicable to the proposed NTS Facility at Sites 31, 32, and 49 include the following: Agricultural Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hydrology/Water Quality, and Noise. The findings and associated mitigation measures for the environmental issues of Aesthetics, Geology/Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use/Planning, Population/Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation/ Traffic and Utilities/Service Systems were found to not be applicable to construction of Sites 31, 32, and 49. Mitigation measures from the PA 17 FEIR that are relevant to Sites 31, 32, and 49 are listed below. 2.1.1 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES The PA 17 FEIR identified that the PA 17 project would result in the loss of 522 acres of land in agricultural production. The finding was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact; however, the PA 17 FEIR indicated that this impact was previously addressed and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was previously adopted as part of the Comprehensive General Plan Update — Phase 2 and Zoning Ordinance Update — Phase VI Master EIR. No mitigation measures were required. 2.1.2 AIR QUALITY The PA 17 FEIR identified that the PA 17 project would result in significant construction -related air quality impacts due to emissions that exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds. Emissions of PM,a and NOX were projected to . exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance during construction. Although Mitigation Measure 3.1 (listed below) was proposed to reduce construction -related air quality impacts, the Impacts were expected to remain significant and unavoidable. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted in which the City Council determined that this impact was acceptable because of specific overriding considerations. Mitigation measures from the PA 17 FEIR that applied to the construction of Sites 31, 32, and 49 are: PA 17 FEIR Air Quality Mitigation Measure 3.1: 3.1 The proposed project shall include suppression measures for fugitive dust and those associated with construction equipment in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 and other AQMD requirements. Prior to the issuance of grading permits the project applicant shall include a note on all grading plans which requires the construction contractor to Implement the following measures during grading. These measures shall also be discussed at the pregrade conference. a. Application of extra water during clearing, grading and construction capable of achieving a minimum of 12 percent soil moisture in the top 6-inch soil stratum. b. Termination of soil disturbance during the occurrence of high winds (>25 mph) to prevent dust plumes on the San Diego (1-405) Freeway. C. Minimization of construction interference with regional non -project traffic movement. Measures recommended for Inclusion are: • Scheduling receipt of construction materials to non -peak travel periods. • ■ Routing site access traffic through areas of least impact sensitivity. • Limiting lane closures and detours to off-peak travel periods. nw,qKuVRWDU"MRapp«miW5UW1AWKKIX wlosw.00c 2 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR d. Reducing "spill -over" effects by preventing soil erosion, washing vehicles • entering public roadways from dirt off -road project areas, and washing/sweeping project access to public roadways on an adequate schedule. e. Requiring emissions control from on -site equipment through a routine mandatory program of low -emissions tune-ups. f. Incorporating mitigation strategies into a construction impact reduction plan with clearly defined responsibilities for plan implementation and supervision. g. Conducting periodic site surveillance by a mitigation monitor during grading to verify that the dust mitigation plan is being optimally implemented. 2.1.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Natural Veaetation/Aaricu/ture. The PA 17 FEIR identified that the PA 17 project would result in the loss of 20.56 acres of natural vegetation types and 522.21 acres of agriculture and associated facilities, and the modification of streams including the deposition of fill due to mass grading activities. The FEIR found that mitigation measures were feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen these potentially significant effects to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures from the PA 17 FEIR that applied to construction of Sites 31, 32, and 49, as they relate to loss of natural vegetation, agriculture and associated facilities are: 4.1 This project will involve removal of native plant communities and wildlife habitat. Prior to the issuance of permits for any grading activity including, but not limited to clearing, grubbing, mowing, discing, trenching, grading, fuel modification, agriculture planting activity and/or related construction activity, the applicant shall obtain written authorization from Federal, State, and local agencies that said activity complies with the regulations enforced by those agencies. Additionally, any mitigation requirements set forth by such agencies shall be incorporated into the project's final design plans. This written authorization, along with' plans and mitigation measures, shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development for review and shall have been approved prior to any grading activity. (Standard Condition 2.6.) 4.2 Prior to the issuance of precise grading permits the applicant shall submit, and the Director of Community Development shall have approved, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The WQMP shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on the site to control predictable pollutant runoff. (Standard Condition 2.10.) 4.3 Wetland impacts shall be mitigated by the creation of wetland habitat on -site and/or off - site in consultation with state and federal agencies. Off -site mitigation may be in the form of credits in the San Joaquin Marsh Mitigation Bank. Prior to the issuance of permits for any grading activity, the project applicant will prepare and implement a habitat creation and restoration plan for wetland, stream and riparian habitats as mitigation for impacts to resources under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) pursuant to Section 1603 of the Califomia Fish and Game Code. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant will submit documentation from the ACOE and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) indicating approval of the habitat creation and restoration plan. The habitat creation and restoration plan will, at a minimum, include the following: • Specific details for the restoration or creation of riparian and wetland habitats at a • site within PA 17/13A 28 or at an off -site location within the same watershed that will provide ecological functions equal to or greater than the functions of the riparian and R:1PrcJW5URWD4en041E1R Appendims1J001 Appendx M-010504 DOC 3 Appendix San Diego creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft OR wetland habitats affected by the project and this will replace habitat at least on a one- to-one basis. • • Specific methods for grading and otherwise preparing the site to support hydrology, plant, and soil conditions appropriate for riparian and wetland habitats. • Best management practices erosion control measures to reduce or prevent adverse effects on aquatic resources during construction. • Methods for the planting and maintaining of wetland species in creation and restoration areas. • Specific performance criteria that can be used to measure the successful establishment of ecological function (e.g., frequency and duration of flooding, ponding, or saturation; vegetative composition and cover; planting survivorship; wildlife composition or use levels). • Sufficient replacement to loss ratio on an area basis to allow for the potential failure of a portion for the restoration effort, based on known success rates for similar habitat restoration efforts. • A 5-year monitoring program that includes measurements directly related to performance criteria, remedial measure if criteria are not met, and reporting requirements, and is of sufficient duration to ensure that habitat functions will continue beyond the monitoring period. Funding for implementation, maintenance, monitoring, and remedial actions, which may include a bond or letter of credit in favor of the Corps of Engineers. 4.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall 1) develop a riparian restoration plan for the ACOE and CDFG (The objective of the riparian restoration plan is to ensure no net loss of habitat values from the project); and 2) provide a copy of the riparian restoration plan along with evidence that all necessary permits have been obtained from the State Department of Fish and Game (pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of the Fish and Game Code) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act) or that no such permits are required, In a manner meeting the approval of the City of Irvine Community Development Department. If a Section 404 Permit from the ACOE is required, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification will also be required from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana region. Prior to implementation, a detailed restoration program shall be developed and shall contain the following terms: a. Responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to Implement and supervise the plan. The responsibilities of the landowner, specialists and maintenance personnel that will supervise and implement the plan will be specified. b. Site Selection. The site for mitigation will be determined in coordination with the project applicant and resource agencies. The site will either be located on the project site in a dedicated open space area or land will be purchased off site. c. Site preparation and planting implementation. The site preparation will include: • 1) protection of existing native species, 2) trash and weed removal, 3) native species salvage and reuse (i.e., duff), 4) soil treatments (i.e., Imprinting, decompacting), R.1Pmoct$URWDQ*VUT-JAA WONSV001APWdzM-01OW4DOC 4 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR 5) temporary irrigation installation, 6) erosion control measures (i.e., rice or willow • wattles), 7) seed mix application, and 8) container species. d. Schedule. A schedule will be developed which includes planting to occur in late fall and early winter, between October and January 30. e. 'Maintenance plan/guidelines. The maintenance plan will include: 1) weed control, 2) herbivory control, 3) trash removal, 4) irrigation system maintenance, 5) maintenance training, and 6) replacement planting. Monitoring Plan. The monitoring plan will include: 1) qualitative monitoring (i.e., photographs and general observations), 2) quantitative monitoring (i.e., randomly placed transects), 3) performance criteria as approved by the resource agencies, 4) monthly reports for the first year, and bimonthly thereafter, 5) annual reports for three to five years, which will be submitted to the resources agencies on an annual basis. The site will be monitored and maintained for five years to ensure successful establishment of riparian habitat within the restored and created area; however, if there is successful coverage prior to five years, the project applicant may request to be released from monitoring requirements by the ACOE and CDFG. Successful coverage is defined as the performance criteria agreed to by the ACOE, CDFG, and the client which will be a minimum of 2:1. g. Long -Term Preservation. Long -Term Preservation of the site will also be outlined in the conceptual mitigation plan to ensure the mitigation site is not impacted by future development. • NCCP/Onen Space Reserve. The PA 17 FEIR identified that construction and development of the PA 17 project may result in secondary impacts to the proposed NCCP/Open Space Reserve (Implementation District "I"). The FEIR found that mitigation measures were feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen these potentially significant effects to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures from the PA 17 FEIR that applied to construction of Sites 31, 32, and 49, as they relate to secondary impacts to the proposed NCCP/Open Space Reserve (Implementation District "I") are: 4.5 Prior to the issuance of the first preliminary or precise grading permit, the applicant shall provide letters from a USFWS/CDFG approved biologist. The letters shall state that these individuals have been retained by the applicant, and that the consultant(s) will monitor all grading and other significant ground disturbing activities in or adjacent to areas of coastal sage scrub or NCCP reserve areas. The consultant(s) shall monitor these activities to ensure that the applicant complies with the NCCP/HCP Implementing agreement (IA) which specifies measures that must be taken to minimize impacts to the reserve areas during construction including: a. To the maximum extent practicable, no grading of CSS habitat that is occupied by nesting gnatcatchers will occur during the breeding season (February 15 through July 15). It is expressly understood that this provision and the remaining provisions of these "construction -related minimization measures," are subject to public and safety considerations. These considerations include unexpected slope stabilization, erosion control measure and emergency facility repairs. In the . event of such public health and safety circumstances, land owners or public agencies/utilities will be provided USFWS/CDFG with the maximum practicable notice (or such notice as is specified in the NCCP/HCP) to allow for capture or R.%ProjeUsVRWOVen04T[RAppendimsV001 AppendzM410504.000 5 Appendix Son Diego Creek Watershed Natural T®atment System Revised Draft EIR gnatcatchers, cactus wrens, and any other CBS Identified Species that are not otherwise flushed and will carry out the following measures only to the extent as practicable in the context of the public health and safety considerations. b. Prior to the commencement of grading operations or other activities involving significant soil disturbance, all areas of CBS habitat to be avoided under the provisions of the NCCP/HCP, shall be identified with temporary fencing or other markers clearly visible to construction personnel. Additionally, prior to the commencement of grading operations or other activities involving disturbance of CBS, a survey will be conducted to locate gnatcatchers and cactus wrens within 100 feet of the outer extent of projected soil disturbance activities and the locations of any such species shall be clearly marked and identified on the construction/grading plans. c. A monitoring biologist, acceptable to the USFWS/CDFG will be onsite during any clearing of CBS. The landowner or relevant public agency/utility will advise USFWS/CDFG at least seven calendar days (and preferably 14 calendar days) prior to the clearing of any habitat occupied by Identified Species to allow USFWS/CDFG to work with the monitoring biologist In connection with bird flushing capture activities. The monitoring biologist will flush Identified Species (avian or other mobile Identified Species) from occupied habitat areas Immediately prior to brush -clearing and earth -moving activities. If birds cannot be flushed, they will be captured in mist nets, if feasible, and relocated to areas of the site to be protected or to the'NCCP/HCP reserve system. it will be the responsibility of the monitoring biologist to assure that Identified bird species will not be directly impacted by brush -clearing and earth -moving equipment in a manner that also allows for construction activities on a timely basis. • d. Following the completion of initial grading/earth-movement activities, all areas of CBS habitat to be avoided by construction equipment and personnel will be marked with temporary fencing or other appropriate markers clearly visible to construction personnel. No construction access, parking, or storage or equipment will be permitted within such marked areas. e. in areas bordering the NCCP reserve system or Special linkage/Special Management areas containing significant CBS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection, vehicle transportation routes between cut -and fill locations will be restricted to a minimum number during construction consistent with project construction requirements. Waste dirt or rubble will not be deposited on adjacent CBS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection. Pre -construction meetings Involving the monitoring biologist, construction supervisors and equipment operators will be conducted and documented to ensure maximum practicable adherence to these measures. f. CBS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection and located within the likely dust drift radius of construction areas shall be periodically sprayed with water to reduce accumulated dust on the leaves as recommended by the monitoring biologist. 4.6 Prior to approval of the Master Trails/Access Plan required in conjunction with the first tentative map, the applicant shall identify methods to reduce intrusion of humans and . domestic pets into the NCCP/Open Space Reserve, through fencing, landscaping, signage and/or other means. awroHwuawoun04TJRA p«,aceeuoo AWVXuµalosaoo0 6 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR 4.7 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit, and the Director of • Community Development shall have approved, a wildland interface brochure (to be obtained from The Nature Reserve of Orange County) to educate homeowners of the responsibilities associated with living at the wildland interface. The approved wildland interface brochure, along with its attachments, shall be included as part of the rental/lease agreements and as part of the sales literature for the project. The brochure shall address relevant issues, including the role of natural predators in the wildiands and how to minimize impacts of humans and, domestic pets on native communities and their inhabitants. 4.8 Prior to the approval of the Master Plan, the applicant shall submit the plant palette for the fuel modification zone. Invasive exotic plan species, as listed in the project biological report, shall be excluded from the fuel modification zone to reduce the risk that these species will become established in the Reserve. The fuel modification zone shall include plants listed on the Orange County Fire Authority's (OCFA's) approved plant list for fuel modification zones subject to the review by the Director of Community Services. Active Raptor Nest. The PA 17 FEIR identified that the PA 17 project would result in the potential for the loss of an active raptor nest. The FEIR found that a mitigation measure was feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen these potentially significant effects to a less than significant level. The mitigation measure from the PA 17 FEIR that applied to construction of Sites 31, 32, and 49, as they relate to loss of an active raptor nest is: 4.9 This project will involve removal of native plant communities and -wildlife habitat. Prior to • the issuance of permits for any grading activity including but not limited to clearing, grubbing, mowing, discing, trenching, grading, fuel modification, agriculture planting activity and/or other related construction activity, a qualified biologist with appropriate resource agency permits shall survey the construction limits for the presence of occupied nests and/or burrows. The survey shall ,be submitted by the applicant to the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of grading permits. In compliance with Section 3505.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, any occupied nests/burrows found during survey efforts shall be mapped on the construction plans and protected until nesting activity has ended. Nesting activity for raptors in the region of the project site normally occurs from February 1 to June 30. To protect any nest/burrow site, the following restrictions on construction are required between February 1 and June 30 (or unless nest/burrows are no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist): 1) clearing limits will be established a minimum of 100 feet in any direction from any occupied nest/burrow; 2) access and surveying will not be allowed within 50 feet of any occupied nest/burrow. Construction during the non -nesting season, the nest/burrow site will be monitored by a qualified biologist, and when the raptor is away from the nest/burrow, the biologist will flush any raptor to open space areas. The biologist will then remove the nest site or excavate the burrow site with hand tools or fill with soil so owls cannot return to burrow site. • NCCP/Open Space Reserve. The PA 17 FEIR identified that the PA 17 project may result in impacts to the proposed NCCP/Open Space Reserve (Implementation District "I") through human intrusion. The FEIR found that a mitigation measure was feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen these potentially significant effects to a less than significant level. PLWm1ectsVRWDUwD41EIR Appendices0001 Appenda M-010504.DOC 7 Appendix Son Diego Creek Watershed Neloral Treatment System Revised Draft EIR A mitigation measure from the PA 17 FEIR that applied to construction of Sites 31, 32, and 49, as they relate to human intrusion Impacts to the proposed NCCP/Open Space Reserve (Implementation District "i") is: 4.10 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, except for model homes, the applicant shall provide to the Director of Community Development for review and approval language which prohibits individual homeowners from cutting or altering their fencing to provide gates or opening into fuel modification zones or open space areas. The approved language shall be incorporated into the development's Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs). 2.1.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES The PA 17 FEIR Identified that the PA 17 project would directly impact recorded sites 30-000161, 30-000499, 30-000904, 30-001011, 30-01069, 30-001424, 30-001625, 30-001526, 30-001527, and 30-001528. The FEIR found that Mitigation measures were feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant cultural resources impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures from the PA 17 FEIR that applied to the construction of Sites 31, 32, and 49 are: 5.1 Prior to issuance of the first preliminary or precise grading permit, and for any subsequent permit involving excavation to increased depth, the applicant shall provide letters from an archaeologist and/or paleontologist. The letters shall state that these individuals have been retained by the applicant, and that the consultant(s) will be on call during all grading and other significant ground disturbing activities. Determination of the need for these consultants shall be based on the environmental analysis for the project. These consultants shall be selected from the roll of qualified archaeologist and paleontologists maintained by the County of Orange Environmental Management Agency. The archaeologist and/or paleontologist shall meet with the Community Development staff, and shall submit written recommendations specifying procedures for cultural/scientific resource surveillance. These recommendations shall have been reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of the grading permit and prior to any surface disturbance on the project site. Should any cultural/scientific resources be discovered, no further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Director of Community Development Is satisfied that adequate provisions are in place to protect these resources. (Standard Condition 2.1) 5.3 Prior to issuance of the first preliminary or precise grading permit, sites 30-000495 and 30-000499 shall be reexamined and reevaluated conclusively by a qualified archaeologist to determine their importance according to the criteria in Appendix K of the State CEQA Guidelines. The archaeologist shall meet with the Community Development staff, and shall submit written recommendations for these sites. These recommendations shall have been reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of the grading permit and prior to any surface disturbance on the project site. 5.4 Prior to issuance of the first preliminary or precise grading permit, data recovery excavations shall be performed for archaeological sites 30-000161, -904, -1011, -1069, -1525, -1526, -1527, -1528 by a qualified archaeologist. Testing of the site must include • the following: 1) posthole excavations to determine boundaries and depth; 2) controlled unit excavation to determine classes of artifacts present; 3) plotting and collection of awrq.aavRWM*M+Jakpn 1NA=iAMW XM•o+osa.00d 8 AppendlxM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR surface artifacts; 4) artifact analysis; 5) chronometric analysis of selected artifacts; 6) statement of site's potential to address regional research questions; 7) recommendations for final mitigation measures for each site prior to development. The data from this effort shall be compiled in an analytical report which describes the site's potential to fulfill the criteria for importance as set forth in Appendix K of the State CEQA Guidelines. The applicant shall submit this report to the City for review and approval by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of the grading permit and prior to any surface disturbance on the project site. 5.5 Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Cetacean remains occurring at Locality 1 shall be excavated and prepared by a qualified paleontologist. Additional quarrying shall be completed immediately adjacent to the existing Cetacean specimens to determine if additional associated remains are present. These shall be collected simultaneously. The unweathered surfaces of the specimens shall be prepared to aid in identification. The findings/recommendations shall be compiled in a written report and submitted to the City for review and approval by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of the grading permit and prior to any surface disturbance on the project site. 5.6 Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the following note shall be placed on the cover sheet, and discussed at the pre -grade meeting. Fossils found by the owners of the property, their agents, contractors, or subcontractors during the development of the property, shall be reported immediately to the qualified paleontologic monitor. If significant fossils (those having potential to increase scientific knowledge; including all identifiable vertebrate remains) are encountered on the property during development the following mitigation procedures shall be implemented: • a. The paleontologist retained for the project shall immediately evaluate the fossils which have been discovered to determine if they are significant and, if so, to develop a plan to collect and study them for the purpose of mitigation. b. The paleontologic monitor must be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect excavation equipment if fossils are found to allow evaluation and removal of them if necessary. The monitor should be equipped to speedily collect specimens if they are encountered. C. The monitor, with assistance if necessary, shall collect individual fossils and/or samples of fossil bearing sediments. If specimens of small animal species are encountered, the most time and cost efficient method of recovery is to remove a selected volume of fossil bearing earth from the grading area and screen wash it off -site. d. Fossils recovered during earthmoving or as a result of screen -washing of sediment samples shall be cleaned and prepared sufficiently to allow identification. This allows the fossils to be described in a report of findings and reduces the volume of matrix around specimens prior to storage, thus reducing storage costs. e. A report of findings shall be prepared and submitted to the public agency responsible for overseeing developments and mitigation of environmental impacts upon completion of mitigation. This report would minimally include a • statement of the type of paleontologic resources found, the methods and procedures used to recover them, an inventory of the specimens recovered, and a statement of their scientific significance. R NrojectsURWDUan041EIR AppeM¢esU001 Appendw M-010504 D00 9 Appendix Son Diego Creek Watershed Natural7reatrnent System Revised Draft E/R The paleontological or archaeological specimens recovered as a result of mitigation shall be donated to a qualified scientific institution approved by the Director of Community Services where they would be afforded long term preservation to allow future scientific study. 2.1.5 HYDROLOGYMATER QUALITY The PA 17 FEIR Identified that the PA 17 project would increase the amount of Impervious surfaces on the site and would therefore increase surface water flows Into the San Diego Creek. The increase was projected to be approximately 23 cis for a 25 year storm. However, the FEIR identified a decrease of approximately 992 cfs for the 100 year storm. The FEIR found that mitigation measures were feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant hydrology impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures from the PA 17 FEIR that applied to the construction of Sites 31, 32, and 49 are. PA 17 FEIR Hydrology/Water Quality Mitigation Measures 8.1 and 8A 8.4 This subdivision necessitates the construction of public and/or private infrastructure Improvements. Prior to release of a final map by the City, the applicant shall construct, or enter into an agreement and post security, in a form and amount acceptable to the City Engineer, guaranteeing the construction of the following public and/or private improvements in conformance with applicable City standards and the City's Capital Improvement Policy: Storm drain facilities, including detention basins, in accordance with the approved Drainage Concept Plan. (Standard Condition 1.1) 8.5 Prior to the issuance of precise grading permits, the applicant shall submit, and the Director of Community Development shall have approved, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The WQMP shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on the site to control predictable pollutant runoff. (Standard Condition 2.10) 2.1.6 NOISE The PA 17 FEIR identified that the PA 17 project would result in short-term construction noise impacts. The FEIR found that mitigation measures were feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant hydrology impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures from the PA 17 FEIR that applied to the construction of Sites 31, 32, and 49 are: PA 17 FEIR Noise Mitigation Measures 10.2 and 10.3: 10.2 Prior to Issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall incorporate the requirements of the Noise Ordinance as a note on the grading plan cover sheet, for review and approval by the Director of Community Development. Section 6-8-205 limits construction related activities to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday, and prohibits work on Sundays and holidays, unless prior approval is received from the City of Irvine. In addition, the Noise Ordinance . requirements shall be discussed at the pre -grade meeting, and implemented during construction. fL%P1 •ct&VRWVJvQ EIRAwrAces=1M wOxM4105WA00 10 AppendixM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft OR 10.3 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the applicant shall incorporate the following measures as a note on the grading plan cover sheet to ensure that the greatest distance 40 between noise sources and sensitive receptors during construction activities has been achieved. This language shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. a. Construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be maintained in proper operating condition with approved noise mufflers. b. Construction staging areas shall be located away from off -site receptors and occupied buildings on site during the later phases of project development. C. Stationary equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from residential areas to the greatest extent feasible. d. Construction access routes shall be selected to minimize truck traffic near existing residential uses where reasonably feasible. With implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures from the PA 17 FEIR, construction impacts related to NTS Sites 31, 32, and 49 were mitigated to below a level of significance with the exception of agricultural resources and air quality. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted and determined adequate for these significant unavoidable impacts (Irvine City Council Resolution No. 00-114, dated September 26, 2000). IRWD has evaluated the information, findings and statement of overriding considerations adopted for the PA 17 FEIR and is in agreement with the findings and statement of overriding considerations as they relate to the construction impacts of NTS Sites 31, 32, and 49. 2.2 PLANNING AREA_27 ZONE CHANGE AND MASTER PLAN EIR The Planning Area 27 Zone Change and Master Plan Final EIR (PA 27 FEIR), which includes . NTS Site 42 (Turtle Ridge North), was certified by the Irvine City Council on August 24, 1999. Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations were also adopted for the PA 27 FEIR. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the following significant adverse impact: construction air quality. This significant adverse impact addressed the construction of NTS Site 42. • Findings from the PA 27-FEIR that are applicable to NTS Site 42 are summarized below. Impacts and mitigation measures identified for the following environmental issues are applicable to the proposed NTS Facility at Site 42 and include the following: Hydrology, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Noise and Cultural Resources. The findings and associated mitigation measures for the environmental issues of Land Use, Population and Housing, Soils and Geology, Transportation and Circulation, Environmental Hazards, Public Services, Utilities and Service Systems, Aesthetics and Recreation were found to not be applicable to construction of NTS Site 42. Mitigation measures from the PA 27 FEIR that are relevant to Site 42 are listed below. Z2.1 HYDROLOGY The PA 27 FEIR identified that the PA 27 project would increase the amount of impervious surfaces on the site and would therefore increase surface water flows into the Bonita Canyon Channel. The increase was projected to be approximately 89 cfs (seven percent) at Node 339 and 476 cis (25 percent) at Node 350. The FEIR found that mitigation measures were feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant hydrology impacts to a less than significant level. R.lprojodaURWDUan04�1EIR Appendiwsl 001 Appendix M410504=10 11 Appendix M San DAW Creek Watershed Nature! Treatment System Revised Dreff E!R Mitigation measures from the PA 27 FEIR that applied to the construction of Site 42 are: PA 27 FEIR Hydrology Mitigation Measure 5: 5. Prior to issuance of rough grading permits, the applicant shall submit, and the Director of Community Development shall have approved, a Water Quality Management Plan Identifying a program for the implementation of "routine" and/or "special" structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) for individual tracts to address water quality issues associated with construction and development. The WQMP and associated measures shall be prepared in accordance with City criteria and the County- wide NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan, 2.2.2 AIR QUALITY The PA 27 FEIR identified that the PA 27 project would result in significant construction -related air quality impacts due to emissions that would exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds. Emissions of PM10, ROG, and NOx were projected to exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance during construction. Although Air Quality Mitigation Measure 1 (listed below) would reduce construction -related air quality impacts, the impacts were expected to remain significant and unavoidable. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted in which the City determined that this impact was acceptable because of specific overriding considerations. Mitigation measures from the PA 27 FEIR that applied to the construction of Site 42 are: PA 27 FEIR Air Quality Mitigation Measure 1: 1. The proposed project shall include suppression measures for fugitive dust and those associated with construction equipment in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 and other AQMD requirements. Prior to the issuance of grading permits the project applicant shall submit a fugitive dust control plan to the Community Development Department for review and approval. The fugitive dust control plan shall require the construction contractor to implement measures which may include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Application of extra water during clearing, grading and construction, b. Termination of soil disturbance when high winds (>25 mph) make dust control difficult to prevent dust plumes on the SJHTC. C. Reducing "spill -over effects by preventing soil erosion, washing vehicles entering public roadways from dirt off -road project areas, and washing/sweeping project access to public roadways on an adequate schedule. d. Scheduling receipt of construction materials to non -peak travel periods. e. Routing site access traffic to Bonita Canyon Road (west of Culver Drive), Newport Coast Drive, and Culver Drive to avoid construction traffic passing through residential neighborhoods. f. Limiting lane closures and detours to off-peak travel periods, if required by the City. g. Requiring emissions control from on -site equipment through a routine mandatory program of low -emissions tune-ups. h. Incorporating mitigation strategies into a construction impact reduction plan with clearly defined responsibilities for plan implementation and supervision. I. Conducting periodic site surveillance by a mitigation monitor during grading to verify that the dust mitigation plan is being optimally implemented. 0 R.%PM*bVRWDWn04%F1RAq»r 04001A M4XM4105DIDOC 12 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR 2.2.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES • Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat. The PA 27 FOR identified that the project site includes approximately 1,570 acres of mostly undeveloped land, which approximately 690 acres will be impacted by landscaping, fuel modification and remedial grading. PA 27 project implementation will result in an impact to coastal sage scrub habitat considered to be home territory of four pairs of California gnatcatchers to such as an extent that there will be an incidental take in terms of habitat impacts that constitute "harm" under the ESA. The FEIR found that mitigation measures were feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant biological resources impacts to a less than significant level. PA 27 FEIR Biological Resources Mitigation Measures 1, 2, 3, and 4: This project will involve removal of native plant communities and wildlife habitat. Prior to the issuance of permits for any grading activity including but not limited to clearing, grubbing, mowing, discing, trenching, grading, fuel modification, agriculture planting activity and/or other related construction activity, the applicant shall obtain written authorization from the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies that said activity complies with the regulations enforced by those agencies. Additionally, any mitigation requirements set forth by such agencies shall be incorporated into the project's final design plans. This written authorization, along with plans and mitigation measures, shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development for review and shall have been approved prior to any grading activity. (Standard Condition A.11.) 2. Wetland impacts shall be mitigated by the creation of wetland habitat on -site and/or off - site in consultation with state and federal agencies. Off -site mitigation may be in the form of credit's in the San Joaquin Marsh Mitigation Bank. The project applicant will prepare and implement a habitat creation and restoration plan for wetland, stream and riparian habitats as mitigation for impacts to resources under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 1603 of the California Fish and Game Code. Prior to construction, the applicant will submit the plan to ACOE and CDFG for approval The habitat creation and restoration plan will, at a minimum, include the following: • Specific details for the restoration or creation of riparian and wetland habitats at a site within PA 27/PA 28 or at an off -site location within the same watershed that will provide ecological functions equal to or greater than the functions of the riparian and wetland habitats affected by the project and that will replace habitat at least on a one-to-one basis. • Specific methods for grading and otherwise preparing the site to support hydrology, plant, and soil conditions appropriate for riparian and wetland habitats, • Best management practices erosion control measures to reduce or prevent adverse effect on aquatic resources during construction. • Methods for the planting and maintaining of wetland species in creation and restoration areas. • Specific performance criteria that can be used to measure the successful • establishment of ecological function (e.g., frequency and duration of flooding, ponding, or saturation; vegetative composition and cover; planting survivorship; wildlife composition or use levels. Rl2ro1edsuRVMUanG41E1RAppendicesuoolAppendwM-01050400c 13 Appendix Son Dlego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Reylsed Drell EIR • Sufficient replacement to loss ratio on an area basis to allow for the potential failure of a portion for the restoration effort, based on known success rates for similar habitat restoration efforts. A 5-year monitoring program that includes measurements directly related to performance criteria, remedial measure if criteria are not met, and reporting requirements, and is of sufficient duration to ensure that habitat functions will continue beyond the monitoring period. Funding for implementation, maintenance, monitoring, and remedial actions, which may include a bond or letter of credit in favor of the Corps of Engineers. 3. Pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act, a Section 10(a) permit or Section 7 consultation shall be required in order to "take" California gnatcatchers or their habitat. A copy of the Section 10(a) permit or Section 7 consultation shall be submitted to the Community Development Director prior to issuance of grading permits. 4. The project applicant shall dedicate all Preservation Areas, including NCCP lands, located within the project site in compliance with the adopted Nature Reserve of Orange County NCCP/HCP, associated documents, the existing Open Space Agreement between the City of Irvine and The Irvine Company, and the General Plan. NCCP/Open Space Reserve. The proposed NCCP/Open Space Reserve (Implementation District "L") may be subject to secondary impacts related to increased residential development within Planning Area 27. The FEIR found that mitigation measures were feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant NCCP/Open Space Reserve impacts to a • less than significant level. PA 27 FEIR Biological Resources Mitigation Measures 5, 6, 7, and 8: 5. All residential lots located adjacent to the NCCP/Open Space Reserve shall be fenced to reduce intrusion of humans and domestic pets into the NCCP/Open Space Reserve. 6. The project applicant or subsequent homebuilder shall distribute a wiidland interface brochure to all lot purchasers (to be obtained from The Nature Reserve of Orange County) educating homeowners of the responsibilities associated with living at the wiidland interface. The brochure addresses relevant Issues, including the role of natural predators in the wildlands and how to minimize impacts of humans and domestic pets on native communities and their inhabitants. This information shall be posted on appropriate signage at all trail heads located adjacent to the development. The property owner shall be responsible for posting appropriate signage. 7. Invasive exotic plant species, as listed in the project biological report, shall be excluded from the fuel modification zone to reduce the risk that these species will become established in the Reserve. All plants in the fuel modification zone shall be subject to approval by the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). 8. The project applicant shall comply with the NCCP/HCP Implementing Agreement (IA) which specifies measures that must be taken to minimize impacts to the reserve areas including: a. In areas bordering the NCCP Reserve System or Special Linkage/Existing Land • Use Areas containing significant CSS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection, awmpwLRwouMa%EiR ool=i NwaIftMb16604.600 14 Appendix M San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR vehicle transportation routes between cut and fill locations will be restricted to a . minimum number during construction consistent with project construction requirements. Waste dirt or rubble will not be deposited on adjacent CSS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection. Pre -construction meetings involving the monitoring biologist, construction supervisors and equipment operators will be conducted and documented to ensure maximum practicable adherence to these measures. (Section 10.1 [5]) b. CSS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection and located within the likely dust drift radius shall be periodically sprayed with water to reduce accumulated dust on the leaves as recommended by the monitoring biologist. (Section 10.1 [6]) Blue -Line Streams. The PA 27 FEIR identified that the PA 27 project would result in modification to three "blue -line" streams including the depositions of fill due to mass grading activities. The FOR found that mitigation measures were feasible and would avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant blue -line stream impacts to a less than significant level. PA 27 FOR Biological Resources Mitigation Measures 9, 10, 11, and 12: 9. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide evidence that all necessary permits have been obtained from the State Department of Fish and Game (pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of the Fish and Game Code) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act) or that no such permits are required, in a manner meeting the approval of the City of Irvine Community Development Department. If a Section 404 Permit from the ACOE is required, a . Section 401 Water Quality Certification will also be required from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 10. The project applicant shall comply with the NCCP/HCP Implementing Agreement, the City of Irvine SWPPP and all applicable NPDES requirements of the RWQCB, to reduce entry of sediment resulting from construction into drainage courses. 11. Potential biological impacts associated with the relocation of the Laidlaw Transmission Line within the NCCP/HCP Reserve Area shall be avoided by abandoning the line with the poles in place. • 12. The relocation of the utility poles associated with the Laidlaw Transmission Line shall utilize existing access roads which run parallel to the proposed line during construction of the proposed, relocation, to the maximum extent feasible. The route of the proposed line shall be adjusted to avoid impacts to coastal sage scrub, where feasible, in consultation with the project biologist, and subject to the approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2.2.4 NOISE The PA 27 FEIR identified that the PA 27 project would result in short-term construction noise impacts. The FEIR found that mitigation measures were feasible and that would avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant hydrology impacts to a less than significant level. R1Pro1eds11RWDUan041EIR Append¢es=1 Append% W10504 DOC 15 AppendocM Son Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftEIR Mitigation measures from the PA 27 F8IR that applied to construction of Site 42 are: PA 27 Noise Mitigation Measures 2 and 3: 2. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall incorporate the requirements of the Noise Ordinance as a note on the grading plan cover sheet, for review and approval by the Director of Community Development. Section 6-8-205 limits construction related activities to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday, and prohibits work on Sundays and holidays, unless prior approval is received from the City of Irvine to do so. in addition, the Noise Ordinance requirements shall be discussed at the pre -grade meeting, and implemented during construction. 3. Prior to Issuance of each grading permit, the applicant shall incorporate the following measures as a note on the grading plan cover sheet to ensure that the greatest distance between noise sources and sensitive receptors during construction activities has been achieved. This language shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. i� a. Construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be maintained in proper operating condition with approved noise mufflers. b. Construction staging areas shall be located away from off -site receptors and occupied buildings on site during the later phases of project development. C. Stationary equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from residential areas to the greatest extent feasible. d. Construction access routes shall be selected to minimize truck traffic near existing residential uses where reasonably feasible. 40 2.2.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES The PA 27 FEIR identified that the PA 27 project would directly affect recorded sites CA-ORA- 269 and 30-001485. The FEIR found that mitigation measures were feasible and that would avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant cultural resources impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures from the PA 27 FEIR that applied to construction of Site 42 are: PA 27 Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 1. This project is located on land that includes potentially significant archaeological and/or paleontological sites, which have not been addressed by a condition on the underlying subdivision map. Prior to issuance of the first preliminary or precise grading permit, and for any subsequent permit involving excavation to Increased depth, the applicant shall provide letters from an archaeologist and/or paleontologist. The letters shall state that these individuals have been retained by the applicant, and that the consultant(s) will be on call during all grading and other significant ground disturbing activities. Determination of the need for these consultants shall be based on the environmental analysis for the project. These consultants shall be selected from the roll of qualified archaeologist and paleontologists maintained by the County of Orange Environmental Management Agency. The archaeologist and/or paleontologist shall meet with the Community Development staff, and shall submit written recommendations specifying procedures for . cultural/scientific resource surveillance. ILIP*WVR=UW*4GRAPPKW *2'JW1AppxMxM4106D1DOC is Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR These recommendations shall have been reviewed and approved by the 'Director of • Community Development prior to issuance of the grading permit and priorto any surface disturbance on the project site. Should any cultural/scientific resources be discovered, no further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Director of Community Development is satisfied that adequate provisions are in place to protect these resources. (Standard Condition A.6) 2. Prior to the opening of the Implementation District "L" open space area for public use, a cultural resources reconnaissance shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist for the area within Implementation District "L." The archaeologist will identify and record all visible cultural resources, and will develop appropriate management measures for them. 3. Prior -to issuance of grading permits, data recovery excavations shall be performed for archaeological sites CA-ORA-270 and CA-ORA-1082 by a qualified archaeologist. Alternatively, treatment plans ensuring long term preservation of the sites shall be developed and implemented by a qualified archaeologist. 4. Prior to issuance of grading permits, data recovery excavations shall be performed for archaeological sites CA-ORA-269, CA-ORA-273, CA-ORA-1080, CA-ORA-1093, and CA-ORA-1094 by a qualified archaeologist to determine whether or not each site is eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The archaeologist completing the excavations shall develop appropriate plans for the future management of the sites. 5. All archaeological excavation completed on -site shall utilize a research design that is compatible with, and supplements, the research designs developed for the Newport • Coast Archaeological Project and the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Archaeological Project. The project archaeologist shall consult with representatives of local state -recognized tribes (Gabrielino-Tongva and Juaneno-Acjachemen Nations) prior to the commencement of data recovery excavations. With implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures from the PA 27 FEIR, construction impacts related to NTS Site 42 were mitigated to below a level of significance with the exception of air quality. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted and determined adequate for this significant unavoidable impact. IRWD has evaluated the information, findings and statement of overriding considerations adopted for PA 27 FEIR and is in agreement with the findings and statement of overriding considerations as they relate to the construction impacts of NTS Site 42. 2.3 The Northern Sphere Area General Plan Amendment and Zone Change Final EIR (Northern Sphere FEIR), which includes NTS Sites 16 (Trabuco Retarding Basin), 18 (Marshburn Retarding Basin), 70A-70C (Ague Chinon [multiple basins]), and 71 (Marshburn Channel), was certified by the Irvine City Council on June 4, 2002. Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations were also adopted for the Northern Sphere project. Findings from the Northern Sphere FEIR that are applicable to the proposed NTS Facilities at Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C, and 71 include the following: Agricultural Resources, Air Quality, • Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hydrology/Water Quality, Land Use/Planning, and Noise. The findings and associated mitigation measures for the environmental issues of Aesthetics, Geology/Soils, Hazards/Hazardous Materials, Population/Housing, Public Services, R.1PmjectsMRWDU2no41EIRAppendimS0001 Appends M-010504AOC 17 Appendix Son Dlego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Dreg EIR Recreation, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities/Service Systems were found to not be applicable to construction of NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C, and 71, Mitigation measures from the Norther Sphere FEIR that are relevant to NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C and 71 are listed below. 2.3.1 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES The Northern Sphere FEIR identified that the Northern Sphere project would convert approximately 3,100 acres of prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, and unique farmland to non-agricultural and residential uses. The FEIR found that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which would lessen the significant environmental effects of the project related to agricultural resources. These changes or alterations, however, would not reduce this impact to below a level of significance. The City found that there was no other feasible mitigation measures that would mitigate the impact to below a level of significance, and that specific economic, social, technological or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the FEIR. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted in which the City determined that this impact was acceptable because of specific overriding considerations Site 16 (Trabuco Retarding Basin) and Site 18 (Marshbum Retarding Basin) are existing retarding basins and are within the development area of the Northern Sphere project. Sites 70A-70C and 71 are not existing facilities. The City of Irvine General Plan land use designation for Site 16 and the area surrounding it is Agriculture. Therefore, any land use changes, such as installation of the basin, were considered a conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural land uses. However, the proposed NTS Facility at the Trabuco Retarding Basin is considered a new use; however, construction of the NTS Facility was environmentally . analyzed and documented in the Northern Sphere FEIR. The agricultural resources impact identified in the Northern Sphere FEIR is, therefore applicable to the proposed Site 16 at the Trabuco Retarding Basin. For Sites 18, 70A-70C and 71, the General plan land use designations are not agricultural and are not considered as conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural land. 2.3.2 AIR QUALITY Construction. The Northern Sphere FOR identified that development of the Northern Sphere Area (Phase I and If developments) would result in significant construction -related air quality impacts due to emissions that would exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds. Emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen dioxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx) and particulate matter greater than 10 microns in size (PM1o) were projected to exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds during Phase I construction. Emissions of NOx and PM10 would exceed SCAQMD thresholds during Phase II construction. The Northern Sphere FEIR found that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that would lessen the significant environmental effects of the project related to air quality impacts. These changes or alterations, however, would not reduce this impact to below a level of significance. The City found that there were no other feasible mitigation measures that would mitigate the impact to below a level of significance, and that specific economic, social, technological or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the FEIR. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted in which the City determined that this impact was acceptable because of specific Is considerations r:wry.a.vawoUxIw�EIR#Mondlws oolaq,erXk"1osw.00c 18 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment -System Revised Draft EIR Mitigation measures from the Northern Sphere FOR that are applicable to Sites 16, 18, 70A- 70C, and 71 are as follows: Northern Sphere FOR Air Quality Mitigation Measures 3.1 and 3.2: 3.1 The proposed project shall include suppression measures for fugitive dust and those associated with construction equipment in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD") Rule 403 and other SCAQMD requirements. Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall obtain the appropriate permits from the SCAQMD and submit them to the City. (Note: The SCAQMD has adopted standard "rules" to minimize the air quality impacts associated, with development activities to the extent feasible. SCAQMD Rule 403 is one such rule. Rule 403 prohibits the creation of fugitive dust from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area where dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line. Under Rule 403, the Project is required to employ best available control measures to minimize fugitive dust emissions, including frequent watering, use of dust suppressants, installation of temporary enclosures, and/or planting of a vegetative ground cover after active operations have ceased. Other SCAQMD requirements that minimize short-term construction impacts include Rule 401 and Rule 402. The mitigation measures ensure compliance with SCAQMD .rules and emissions reduction requirements.) 3.2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall include a note on all grading plans, which requires the construction contractor to implement following measures during grading. These measures shall also be discussed at the pregrade conference. a. Use low emission mobile construction equipment. b. Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them tuned. C. Use low sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment. d. Utilize existing power sources (i.e., power poles) when feasible. e. Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference to a minimum. f. Minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes. When feasible, construction should be planned so that lane closures on existing streets are kept hours. g. Schedule construction operations affecting traffic for off-peak hours. h. Develop a traffic plan to minimize traffic flow for interference from construction activities (the plan may include advance public notice of routing, use of public transportation and satellite parking areas with shuttle service). 2.3.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Habitat/SDecies. The Northern Sphere FEIR identified that the Northern Sphere project would have direct and indirect impacts on CSS, federal and state listed species and NCCP/HCP . covered and conditional covered species as follows: CSS —175.9 acres; California gnatcatcher — 19 locations;, Cactus wren — eight locations; least Bell's vireo — one pair; and Intermediate/ Foothill Mariposa Lily — two colonies (28 individuals). The FEIR found that changes or R1ProlWe11RWDWan04T1RAppendi=5U001 Appendix M-010504.DOC 19 AppendixM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to below a level of significance. Biological resources mitigation measures that would apply to NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C, and 71 are: 1.2 Lighting for public recreational facilities within the project shall be in conformance with the City of Irvine Community Services Lighting Standards for Public Facilities. To the extent practical, installed lighting shall be shielded so that light is directed away from preserved open space, thereby minimizing light impacts on preserved open space. (Note: The City of Irvine Community Services Lighting Standards for Public Facilities limits the maximum footcandle level on the property line of park facilities to 1.5 footcandles, and requires a numerical lighting model showing compliance with that standard to be submitted and approved with the lighting plans for recreational athletic fields. A footcandle is a unit of Illuminance produced by one candle on a surface that is uniformly one foot from the light source. Ambient light at a property line that is 1.4 footcandles or less is not considered significantly adverse.). 4.1 Prior to the issuance of permits for any grading activity including but hot limited to clearing, grubbing, mowing, discing, trenching, grading, fuel modification, agricultural planting activity and/or other related construction activity, the [landowner or subsequent project] the applicant shall obtain written authorization from the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies that said activity complies with the regulations enforced by those agencies. Additionally, any mitigation requirements set forth by such agencies shall be incorporated into the project's final design plans. This written authorization, along with plans and mitigation measures, shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development for review and shall have been approved prior to any grading • activity. (Standard Condition 2.6.) [This standard condition only applies to the removal of non -covered habitats. Covered habitats are subject to the provisions of the NCCP/HCP as set forth in Mitigation Measure 4.7.] (Note: Federally, the United States Fish and & Wildlife Service regulates the removal of listed native plant communities through the Federal Endangered Species Act ("FESA") and the requirement for an incidental take permit (or take authorization). in essence, the FESA prohibits activities resulting in take of listed species that (1) are not minimized or mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, and/or (2) jeopardize the continued existence of listed species. The Army Corps of Engineers regulates activities impacting wetlands and other waters of the United States through the Clean Water Act and the requirement for a Section 404 dredge and fill permit, generally with a requirement of "no net loss" of wetlands and their habitat values.) 4.3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit covering jurisdictional areas, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall 1) provide evidence to the City of Irvine Community Development Director that (a) all necessary permits or authorizations have been obtained from the CDFG (pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of the Fish and Game Code) and the ACOE (pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act), or (b) that no such permits or authorizations are required, and 2) provide evidence to the City of Irvine Community Development Director that the project and the riparian mitigation and restoration program has been coordinated with the SAMP/MSAA for the San Diego Creek Watershed. 4.4 if a Section 404 Permit or other authorization Is required from the ACOE, the landowner • or subsequent project applicant shall provide, to the Community Development Director of x%rmnd:uawou«w+Vae W1"1 amn widx o,o5o4DOC 20 AppendixM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR the City of Irvine, evidence of a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the • California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 4.5 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any area containing resources subject to the jurisdiction of CDFG and ACOE other than occupied or potential least Bell's vireo habitat, a detailed riparian mitigation and restoration program shall be developed which has been coordinated with the SAMP/MSAA, and shall address the following items: a. Responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan. The responsibilities of the landowner, specialists and maintenance personnel that will supervise and implement the plan will be specified. b. Site selection. The site for mitigation within or adjacent to the Northern Sphere Area will be determined in coordination with the project applicant, CDFG and ACOE. The site will either be located within the Northern Sphere Area in a dedicated open space area, or land will be purchased or preserved adjacent to, but off site within the San Diego Creek watershed. Potential sites include: Agua Chinon south of the sedimentation basin; upland areas adjacent to the 3.15 acres willow woodland north of Portola Parkway; and upland areas adjacent to the three patches of riparian woodland which was occupied by vireos (if vireos remain and the area is preserved). C. Restoration and Creation of Habitat: The plan shall require the creation of riparian habitat in the amount and of the type required by CDFG and ACOE, provided, however, that, in order to assure no net loss of jurisdictional resources on an acre -for- acre basis, all impacted Corps and CDFG jurisdictional habitat • shall be compensated by restoration, enhancement or creation at a minimum of 1.25:1 ratio. d. Site preparation and planting implementation. The site preparation will include: 1) protection of existing native species, 2) trash and weed removal, 3) native species salvage and reuse (i.e., duff), 4) soil treatments (i.e., imprinting, decompacting), 5) temporary irrigation installation, 6) erosion control measures (i.e., rice or willow wattles), 7) seed mix application, and 8) container species. e. Schedule. A schedule will be developed which includes planting to occur in late fall and early winter, between October and January 31. f. Maintenance plan/guidelines. The maintenance plan will include: 1) weed control, 2) herbivory control, 3) trash removal, 4) irrigation system maintenance, 5) maintenance training, and 6) replacement planting. g. Monitoring plan. The monitoring plan will include: 1) qualitative monitoring (i.e., photographs and general observation), 2) quantitative monitoring (i.e., randomly placed- transects), 3) performance criteria as approved by the resource agencies, 4) monitoring reports for three to five years, 5) site monitoring as required by the resource agencies to ensure successful establishment of riparian habitat within the restored and created area. Successful establishment is defined per the performance criteria agreed to by the ACOE, CDFG and the landowner or subsequent project applicant. ® h. Long-term preservation. Long-term preservation of the site will also be outlined in the conceptual mitigation plan to ensure the mitigation site is not impacted by R.WmjectsVRWDWen041EIRAppeneimsU001 Appendix M-010504ADC 21 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR future development. The plan shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development for review and approval. • Mexican elderberry woodland and mulefat. The riparian mitigation and restoration program will address impacts to Mexican elderberry woodland and mulefat. 4.6 Prior to the approval of a tentative tract map within Planning Area 6, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall assure avoidance (or minimization in consultation with USFWS and CDFG) of impacts to occupied least Bell's vireo habitat. Accordingly, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall undertake annual surveys (commencing with the next breeding season following certification of this FIR) to determine presence or absence of least Bell's vireo (LBV) within Identified occupied and potential LBV habitat In the Northern Sphere Area development areas. Such surveys shall be submitted to CDFG and USFWS, and landowner or subsequent project applicant shall review the surveys with those agencies if any significant changes occur In LBV presence or absence as documented by the surveys. Prior to approval of a tentative tract map for any project that would Impact identified occupied or potential LBV habitat, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall consult with CDFG and USFWS regarding any potential impacts to LBV of the project proposed by the tentative tract map in accordance with the provisions governing conditional coverage of the LBV set forth in the Implementation Agreement for the County of Orange Central and Coastal NCCP Pursuant to such review, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall, In accordance with the NCCP/HCP, obtain from USFWS and CDFG a determination regarding any long-term conservation value of LBV habitat and appropriate avoidance measures. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall: 1) provide evidence to the City of Irvine Community • Development Director that (a) all necessary permits or authorizations for impacts to LBV have been obtained from the State Department of Fish and Game USFWS under the NCCP/HCP; or (b) that no such permits or authorizations are required, and 2) provide evidence to the City of Irvine Community Development Director that the project and the LBV avoidance measures have been coordinated with USFWS and CDFG. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any area containing occupied LBV habitat, detailed avoidance measures shall be developed in coordination with USFWS and CDFG and in accordance with the NCCP, and such measures shall, at a minimum, address the following items: a. Fencing. When construction activity occurs in the vicinity of LBV habitat to be preserved, such habitat shall be fenced prior to commencement of construction, and all construction personnel shall strictly limit their activities and vehicles to assure that the fenced areas are not disturbed. Staging and storage areas shall be at least 150 feet away from all such fenced habitat. A contractor education program shall be prepared and Implemented to apprise all construction personnel working in the vicinity of protected habitat of the occurrence of sensitive species in the area, the sensitivity of the species to human activities, the legal protection afforded to these species, and the penalties for violations of these legal protections, and the roles and authority of monitoring biologists. b. Biological Monitor. A biological monitor shall be on -site, to monitor construction activities adjacent to LBV habitat and buffer areas to be preserved to assure that the habitat is preserved, and all minimization measures are followed. The biological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt activities that are 1C1Protat1&VRWDVm011EIR Appodims"t AppendxM-01e54.000 22 AppendkM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR disturbing the listed species and to implement minimization measures specified • in the avoidance program. C. Construction Noise. Removal of occupied LBV habitat shall occur outside of the breeding season (March 15 to September 15). If construction will occur adjacent to occupied vireo habitat during the breeding season, surveys shall be conducted prior to construction activity occurring within 500 feet of occupied LBV habitat to determine the location of any nesting LBV. During construction, no activity will occur within 500 feet of active nesting territories of LBV, unless measures are implemented to minimize noise and other disturbance to those adjacent birds. These measures shall include sound walls and/or other measures that assure that sound levels reaching vireo in areas do not exceed 60 dBA, taking into account, however, the noise levels preceding construction activity at the nesting location which may be high due to proximity of nesting sites to Portola. d. Shield Lighting. To reduce the potential of indirect impacts to conserved LBV habitat, public lighting installed in conjunction with proposed development in proximity to the conserved habitat shall be shielded so that the light is directed' away from the conserved habitat. e. Discourage Human Entry. Post -construction signage, fencing, vegetative barriers or other effective measures shall be taken to discourage human entry associated with project development into conserved LBV habitat areas located adjacent to habitat areas in parks, or community areas where human activity is planned. • f. Cowbird Control. If significant areas of turf are to be installed as a part of proposed development in proximity to the conserved LBV habitat, post - construction cowbird control measures shall be implemented for at least five years. These measures can be coordinated with the cowbird control program operated by the Nature Reserve of Orange County. After the five year monitoring period, a biologist shall evaluate the potential for long-term threat and determine if continued post -construction monitoring is necessary. g. Resident/Recreational User Education. A post -construction education program shall be developed to advise residents living in proximity to conserved LBV habitat of the potential impacts to listed species from human activities and the potential penalties for taking such species. The program, shall include, but not be limited to, information pamphlets and education displays at village or recreation centers and the community park. Pamphlets shall be distributed to all residences in areas adjacent to conserved LBV habitat. At a minimum, the program shall include the following topics: occurrence of the listed and sensitive species in the area, their general ecology, sensitivity of the species to human activities, impacts from free -roaming pets (particularly domestic and feral cats), legal protection afforded these species, penalties for violation of the Federal and State laws, report requirements, and project features designed to reduce impacts to these species. 4.7 Prior to the issuance of the first preliminary grading permit for areas adjacent to NCCP Reserve, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall provide letters from a IsUSFWS/CDFG approved biologist. The letters shall state that these individuals have been retained by the landowner or subsequent project applicant, and that the consultant(s) will monitor all grading and other significant ground disturbing activities in R.wroJeasuRwouaao41EiaAppendimWD)lAppendix M-010504.Doc 23 Appendix San Diego CteekWatershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftEIR or adjacent to areas of coastal sage scrub or NCCP Reserve areas. The consultant(s) shall monitor these activities to ensure that the landowner or subsequent project . applicant complies with the NCCP/HCP Implementing Agreement (IA) which specifies measures that must be taken to minimize construction impacts to CSS during construction including: a. To the maximum extent practicable, no grading of CSS habitat that is occupied by nesting gnatcatchers will occur during the breeding season (February 15 through July 15). It is expressly understood that this provision and the remaining provisions of these "construction -related minimization measures," are subject to public health and safety considerations. These considerations include unexpected slope stabilization, erosion control measure and emergency facility repairs. In the event of such public health and safety circumstances, landowners or public agencies/utilities will provided USFWS/CDFG with the maximum practicable notice (or such notice as is specified In the NCCP/HCP) to allow for capture of gnatcatchers, cactus wrens, and any other CSS Identified Species that are not otherwise flushed and will carry out the following measures only to the extent as practicable in the context of the public health and safety considerations. b. Prior to the commencement of grading operations or other activities involving significant soil disturbance, all areas of CSS habitat to be avoided under the provisions of the NCCP/HCP, shall be identified with temporary fencing or other markers clearly visible to construction personnel. Additionally, prior to the commencement of grading operations or other activities involving disturbance of CSS, a survey will be Conducted to locate gnatcatchers and cactus wrens within 100 feet of the outer extent of projected soil disturbance activities and the locations of any such species shall be clearly marked and identified on the construction/grading plans. C. A monitoring biologist, acceptable to USFWS/CDFG will be onsite during any clearing of CSS. The landowner or relevant public agency/utility will advise USFWS/CDFG at least seven calendar days (and preferably 14 calendar days) prior to the clearing of any habitat occupied by Identified Species to allow USFWS/CDFG to work with the monitoring biologist in connection with bird flushing capture activities. The monitoring biologist will flush Identified Species (avian or other mobile Identified Species) from occupied habitat areas immediately prior to brush -clearing and earth -moving activities. If birds cannot be flushed, they will be captured in mist nets, If feasible, and relocated to areas of the site to be protected or to the NCCP/HCP reserve system. it will be the responsibility of the monitoring biologist to assure that identified bird species will not be directly impacted by brush- clearing and earth -moving equipment in a manner that also allows for construction activities on a timely basis. d. Following the completion of initial grading/earth movement activities, all areas of CSS habitat to be avoided by construction equipment and personnel will be marked by the monitoring biologist with temporary fencing or other appropriate markers clearly visible to construction personnel. No construction access, parking, or storage of equipment will be permitted within such marked areas. e. In areas bordering the NCCP reserve system or Special Linkage/Special Management areas containing significant CSS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection, vehicle transportation routes between cut -and -fill locations will be restricted to a minimum number during construction consistent with project nwrq.duawwr040aAPPuaC44UWIAPPVdXM41osa.o0c 24 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR construction requirements. Waste dirt or rubble will not be deposited on adjacent • CSS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection. Pre -construction meetings involving the monitoring biologist,. construction supervisors and equipment operators will be conducted and documented to ensure maximum practicable adherence to these measures. f. CSS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection and located within the likely dust drift radius of construction areas shall be periodically sprayed with water to reduce accumulated dust on the leaves as recommended by the monitoring biologist. 4.8 Prior to issuance of building permits within Planning Area 6, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall submit, and the Director of Community Development shall have approved, a wildland interface brochure (to be obtained from The Nature Reserve of Orange County) to educate homeowners of the responsibilities associated with living at the wildland interface. The approved wildland interface brochure, along with its attachments, shall be included as part of the rental/lease agreements and as part of the sales literature for the project. The brochure shall• address relevant issues, including the role of natural predators in the wildlands and how to minimize impacts of humans and domestic pets on native communities and their inhabitants. 4.9 Prior to the issue of the first building permit for Planning Area 6, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall submit the plant palette for the fuel modification zone or landscape areas within 100 feet of the NCCP Reserve. Invasive exotic plant species, listed on the California EPA list of exotic pest plants, shall be excluded from the described landscape zone to reduce the risk that these species will become established • in the Reserve. The fuel modification zone shall include plants approved by the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). 4.10 Prior to the issuance of permits for any grading activity that will impact jurisdictional riparian habitat or raptor nests during the period from March 15 to September 15 (the nesting season), including but not limited to clearing, grubbing, mowing, discing, trenching, grading, fuel modification, agriculture planting activity and/or other related construction activity, a qualified biologist with appropriate resource agency permits shall survey the riparian habitat to be impacted for the presence of occupied nests and/or burrows. During the nesting season, the survey will be conducted 72 hours prior to clearing riparian vegetation. The survey results shall be submitted by the landowner or subsequent project applicant to the Director of Community Development. Any occupied nests/burrows found during survey efforts shall be mapped on the construction plans and protected by a buffer until nesting activity has ended. Nesting activity for raptors in the region of the project site normally occurs from February 1 to June 30. To protect any nest/burrow site, the following restrictions on construction activities are required during the nesting season (or until nest/burrows are no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist): 1) a buffer will be established a minimum of 200 feet in any direction from any occupied nest/burrow; 2) the buffer shall remain in place until the nest is no longer active or the young have fleges, 3) if the monitoring biologist determines that the nesting activities are being substantially disrupted by adjacent construction activity, USFWS/CDFG shall be notified and measures to avoid or minimize such impacts shall be developed in consultation with those agencies. The biologist will then remove the nest site or excavate the burrow site with hand tools or fill with soil so owls cannot return • to burrow site. RVmjecI6RWDUari041EIR AppendimAJ001 Appenciz M-010504 DOC 25 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR 4.11 If improvements are proposed within Caltrans Right of Way, the landowner or subsequent applicant shall have the appropriate plant and wildlife surveys completed by • a qualified biologist. Official lists and databases shall be consulted for sensitive species such as the California Natural Diversity Database and lists provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. Any Impacts that affect waterways and drainages and/or open space during construction, or that occur indirectly as a result of the project, must be coordinated with the appropriate resource agencies. 4.12 To the extent practical, prior to issuance of grading permits within PA 6, mature coastal sage scrub and cactus scrub will be salvaged and translocated to potential restoration areas in adjacent preserved areas. Salvage and translocation activities will be coordinated with USFWS, CDFG, and The Nature Reserve of Orange County. 4,13 Prior to issuance of grading permits within PA 6, focused surveys for western spadefoot toads will be conducted in any potential breeding pools within the PA 6 development area, if toads are found within the development areas of PA 6, a spadefoot toad mitigation plan will be developed in coordination with USFWS and CDFG. The plan will quantify impacts to spadefoot toads and include provisions for the creation of spadefoot breeding pools in nearby Reserve lands as mitigation for impacts to toads in the development area. The nature and location of the proposed pools will be approved by the USFWS and CDFG prior to creation of pools. 4.14 Prior to issuance of grading permits within PA 6, focused surveys for Riverside fairy shrimp and San Diego fairy shrimp will be conducted within the PA 6 development area including, to the extent necessary, in any man-made seasonal wetlands. If either shrimp is found within the development areas of PA 6, a fairy shrimp mitigatibn plan will be • developed in coordination with USFWS and CDFG. The plan will be consistent with the requirements of the NCCP/HCP Implementation Agreement and will include provisions for the creation of fairy shrimp breeding pools in nearby Reserve lands as mitigation for impacts to Riverside or San Diego fairy shrimp in the PA 6 development area. The nature and location of the proposed pools will be approved by the USFWS and CDFG prior to creation of the pools. Riparian/Wetlands. The Northern Sphere FEIR identified that the Northern Sphere project would result in unavoidable impacts to areas of fragmented and/or isolated stands of riparian habitat including mulefat scrub and southern willow scrub. A total of 8.8 acres of riparian habitat would be potentially Impacted by grading, some of which is jurisdictional and some of which is not. Of this habitat, some is high quality and could support least Bell's vireo, although most is not. The Northern Sphere project would impact 0.96 acre of Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional wetlands, 2.75 acres of ephemeral drainage channels also within ACOE jurisdiction, and 2.80 acres of ephemeral drainages within CDFG jurisdiction including ephemeral drainages without riparian habitat. Biological resources mitigation measures that would apply to NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-700 and 71 are Mitigation Measures 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.10, and 4.11. These measures were previously identified above. Eucalyptus Windrows. The Northern Sphere FEIR identified that the Northern Sphere project would result in removal of eucalyptus windrows, which are considered significant under the City's Urban Forestry Ordinance. The FEIR found that changes or alterations have been • required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially less the significant environmental effect to below a level of significance. KWrgMVRWDU&040RAPP&W1 =i APW4XM-011504 DOC 26 AppendixM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment EIR Biological resources Mitigation Measure 4.2 would apply: 4.2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for any Planning Area potentially affecting eucalyptus windrows, an application to remove the trees shall be submitted by the landowner or subsequent project applicant and a permit must be received from the City of Irvine's Community Development Department, Building and Safety Division, in accordance with the City of Irvine's Urban Forestry Ordinance. 2.3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES Historical Resources. The Northern Sphere FEIR identified that the Northern Sphere project may impact cultural resource sites that have been recorded in Planning Area 6, which may be historical resources or unique archaeological resources. The FEIR found that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to below a level of significance. Cultural resources mitigation measures that would apply to NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C, and 71 are: 5.2 Prior to issuance of the first preliminary or precise grading permit, and for any subsequent permit involving excavation to increased depth, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall provide evidence that an archaeologist and/or paleontologist have been retained by the landowner or subsequent project applicant, and that the consultant(s) will be present during all grading and other significant ground disturbing activities. These consultants shall be selected from the roll of qualified archaeologists and paleontologists maintained by the County of Orange. Should any • cultural/paleontological resources be discovered, the monitor is authorized to stop all grading in the immediate area of the discovery, and shall make recommendations to the Director of Community Development on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. If the resources are determined to be "historic resources" at that term is defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Director of Community Development. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in greenspace, parks or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Director of Community Development approves the measures to protect these resources. Any paleontological or archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be donated to a qualified scientific institution approved by the Director of Community Development where they would be afforded long term preservation to allow future scientific study. 5.3 The EIR concludes that there are or may be significant archaeological resources within areas where ground disturbing activity is proposed by the project. Therefore, prior to issuance of the first preliminary or precise grading permit for development within Planning Areas 5B, 6 and 9, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall provide evidence that an archaeologist and/or paleontologist have been retained by the landowner or subsequent project applicant, and has conducted a site survey of the planning area at such time as all ground surfaces are visible after current uses are • removed. If any sites are discovered, the archaeologist shall conduct surveys and/or test level investigations. Testing and evaluation may consist of surface collection and mapping, limited subsurface excavations, and the appropriate analyses and research R.Truject3MVIDWen0M1EIRAppend]M WDol Append% M-010504 DOC 27 Appendix M Son Diego creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revisod Draft EIR necessary to characterize the artifacts and deposit from which they originated. Upon completion of the test level investigations, for sites are determined to be unique . archaeological sites or historical resources as set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, the following measures shall be undertaken: the archaeologist shall submit recommendations to the landowner or subsequent project applicant and the Director of Community Development on the measures that shall be Implemented to protect the sites. Appropriate measures for unique archaeological resources or historical resources could include preservation In place through planning construction to avoid archaeological sites; incorporation of sites within parks, greenspace, or other open space; covering the archaeological sites with a layer of chemically stable soil before building tennis courts, parking lots, or similar facilities on the site or deeding the site Into a permanent conservation easement. When data recovery through excavation is the only feasible mitigation, a data recovery plan, which makes provision for adequately recovering the scientifically consequential information from and about the historical resource, shall be prepared and adopted prior to any excavation being undertaken. Such studies shall be deposited with the California Historical Resources Regional Information Center. Archaeological sites known to contain human remains shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of Section 7050.5 Health and Safety Code. To the extent these sites are not preserved in place, the archaeologist shall conduct a data recovery program, which shall include: (1) Preparation of a research design for those sites determined to be "historical resources" or "unique archaeological resources" that cannot be avoided that describes the recommended field Investigations and makes provisions for adequately recovering the scientifically consequential information from and about the "historical resource." • (2) Conducting site excavations in accordance with the research design with an emphasis on obtaining an adequate sample for analysis within the limits of the research questions being addressed. Special studies such as pollen analyses, soil analyses, radiocarbon dating, and obsidian hydration dating should be conducted as appropriate. (3) Monitoring of all field excavations by a Native American representative. (4) Preparation of a final report of the Phase 3 data recovery work and submittal of the research design and final report to the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), and other agencies, as appropriate. (5) Any archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be donated to a qualified scientific institution approved by the Director of Community Development where they would be afforded long term preservation to allow future scientific study. 5.4 Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the following note shall be placed on the cover sheet, and discussed at the pre -grade meeting: Fossils found by the owners of the property, their agents, contractors, or subcontractors during the development of the property, shall be reported immediately to the qualified paleontologic monitor. If significant fossils (those having potential to increase scientific • knowledge, including all identifiable vertebrate remains) are encountered on the property during development, the following mitigation procedures shall be implemented: R.wrol.wvaWouVN0R AWWdW%=1 AM«,axMVosa ooc 28 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR a. The paleontologist retained for the project shall immediately evaluate the fossils • which have been discovered to determine if they are significant and, if so, to develop a plan to collect and study them for the purpose of mitigation. b. The paleontologic monitor must be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect excavation equipment if fossils are found to allow evaluation and removal of them, if necessary. The monitor should be equipped to speedily collect specimens if they are encountered. C. The monitor, with assistance if necessary, shall collect individual fossils and/or samples of fossil bearing sediments. If specimens of small animal species are encountered, the most time and cost efficient method of recovery is to remove a selected volume of fossil bearing earth from the grading area and screen wash it off -site. d. Fossils recovered during earthmoving or as a result of screen -washing of sediment samples shall be cleaned and prepared sufficiently to allow identification. This allows the fossils to be described in a report of findings and reduces the volume of matrix around specimens prior to storage, thus reducing storage costs. e. A report of findings shall be prepared and submitted to the public agency responsible for overseeing developments and mitigation of environmental impacts upon completion of mitigation. This report would minimally include a statement of the type of paleontologic resources found, the methods and procedures used to recover them, an inventory of the specimens recovered', and a statement of their scientific significance. f. The paleontological or archaeological specimens recovered as a result of mitigation shall be denoted to a qualified scientific institution approved by the Director of Community Development where they would be afforded long term preservation to allow future scientific study. 5.5 The EIR concludes that there are or may be significant archaeological resources within areas where ground disturbing activity is proposed by the Project. Therefore, prior to issuance of the first preliminary or precise grading permit for development in Planning Area 6, each prehistoric site identified in Table 4-23 in Section 4.5.1 (including but not limited to CR-ORA-244, know as the Tomato Spring site) and located within the project grading footprint must be tested and evaluated, following clearing and scraping activities. Testing and evaluation may consist of surface collection and mapping, limited subsurface excavations, and the appropriate analyses and research necessary to characterize the artifacts and deposit from which they originated. Upon completion of the test level investigations, for sites determined to be unique archaeological sites or historical resources as set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, the following measures shall be undertaken: the archaeologist shall submit recommendations to the landowner or subsequent project applicant and the Director of Community Development on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the sites. Appropriate measures for unique archaeological resources or historical resources could include preservation in place through planning construction to avoid archaeological sites; incorporation of sites within parks, greenspace, or other open space; covering the archaeological sites with a • layer of chemically stable soil before building tennis courts, parking lots, or similar facilities on the site or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. When data recovery through excavation is the only feasible mitigation, a data recovery plan, R:1ProjWsYRWDUan041EIRAppendkosU001 Appendm M-010504AOC 29 Appendix Son Diego Creek Watershedbletural Tmetmenf System Revised Draft EIR which makes provision for adequately recovering the scientifically consequential information from and about the historical resource, shall be prepared and adopted prior . to any excavation being undertaken. Such studies shall be deposited with the California Historical Resources Regional Information Center. Archaeological sites known to contain human remains shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of Section 7050.5 Health and Safety Code. (1) Preparation of a research design for those sites determined to be "historical resources" or "unique archaeological resources" that cannot be avoided that describes the recommended field investigations, and makes provision for adequately recovering the scientifically consequential information from and about the "historical resource." (2) Conducting site excavations in accordance with the research design with an emphasis on obtaining an adequate sample for analysis within the limits of the research questions being addressed. Special studies such as pollen analyses, soil analyses, radiocarbon dating, and obsidian hydration dating should be conducted as appropriate. (3) Monitoring of all field excavations by a Native American representative. (4) Preparation of a final report of the Phase 3 work and submittal of the research design and final report to the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), and other agencies, as appropriate. (5) Any archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be donated to a qualified scientific institution approved by the Director of Community Development where they would be afforded long term preservation to allow future scientific study. These recommendations shall have been reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of the grading permit and prior to any surface disturbance on the project site. 5.6 Prior to issuance of the first preliminary or precise grading permit for development in Planning Area 6, each historic site listed in Table 4-24 of Section 4.5.1 must be evaluated to determine if the site is a "historical resource" as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Evaluations may include, but are not limited to, archival research, mapping and surface collection as warranted, photo -documentation, and subsurface excavation. If upon completion of the test level investigations, the sites are determined to be "historical resources," the archaeologist shall submit its recommendations to the landowner or subsequent project applicant and the Director of Community Development on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the sites. Appropriate mitigation measures for "historical resources" could include preservation of the site through avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in greenspace, parks or open space, data recovery excavations of the finds, or compliance with the Secretary of the interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995). To the extent these sites are not preserved in place, the archaeologist shall conduct a data recovery program which includes-, (1) Preparation of a research design for those sites determined to be "historical • resources" that cannot be avoided that describes the recommended field RV'roNdSVRWDUr44%EIRAPWdk*&0001 APPKX1XM4tO$O4 DCC 30 AppendkM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR investigations, and makes provisions for adequately recovering the scientifically • consequential information from and about the "historical resource." (2) Conducting site excavations in accordance with the research design with an emphasis on obtaining an adequate sample for analysis within the limits of the research questions being addressed. Special studies such as pollen analyses, soil analyses, radiocarbon dating, and obsidian hydration dating should be conducted as appropriate. (3) Monitoring of all field excavations by a Native American representative. (4) Preparation of a final report of the Phase 3 work and submittal of the research design and final report to the South Central Coast Information Center (SCCIC), and other agencies, as appropriate. (5) Any archaeological or historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be donated to a qualified scientific institution approved by the Director of Community Development where.they would be afforded long term preservation to allow future scientific study. These recommendations shall have been reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of the grading permit and prior to any surface disturbance on the project site. Paleontological Resources. The Northern Sphere FEIR identified that the Northern Sphere project would have the potential to result in indirect or direct destruction of paleontological • resources in Planning Area 6. The FEIR found that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to below a level of significance. Paleontological resources mitigation measures that would apply to NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C, and 71 are Mitigation Measures 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4. These measures were previously identified above. Pre-Histotic. The Northern Sphere FOR identified that the although no human remains have been discovered to date on the Northern Sphere project area, development of the Northern Sphere project would have the potential to result in the discovery of prehistoric (or historic) human remains. The FEIR found that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to below a level of significance. Pre -historic resources mitigation measures that would apply to NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C, and 71 are: 5.7 In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the following steps shall be taken: a. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the Orange County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are prehistoric and that • no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, then the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, and the Native American R-TrofeasVRWDUanNEIR Appendiwsl=l Appendw M-0105e4.OeC 31 Appendix San DkW Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftElR Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American. The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or b. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: The Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a most like descendent or the most likely descendant failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; 2. The descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or 3. The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. 2.3.5 HYDROLOGYMATER QUALITY Storm Water Quality. The Northern Sphere FEIR determined that no significant project -level or • cumulative impacts related to storm water quality had been identified. Mitigation measures and project design features identified in the FEIR were approved and will be implemented by the developer in consultation with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the City and will further reduce the less than significant impact of the project related to storm water quality. Storm water quality mitigation measures from the FEIR apply to the proposed NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C and 71 are: 8.1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall submit for approval to the State Water Resources Control Board, a Notice of Intent to be covered under the Storm Water Permit. Additionally, the project proponent shall prepare a SWPPP which will: 1) require Implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) so as to prevent a net increase in sediment load in storm water discharges relative to preconstruction levels; 2) prohibit during the construction period discharges of storm water or non -storm water at levels which would cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable water quality standards in the Basin Plan; 3) discuss in detail the BMPs planned for the project related to control of sediment and erosion, non - sediment pollutants, and potential pollutants in non -storm water discharges; 4) describe post -construction BMPs for the project; 5) explain the maintenance program for the projects BMPs; 6) during construction, require reporting of violations to the Regional Board; and 7) list the parties responsible for SWPPP implementation and BMP maintenance during and after grading. The project proponent shall implement the SWPPP and will modify the SWPPP as directed by the Storm Water Permit. (Existing • Regulations and Standard Conditions) FLWMJW1URWDUW&OR AppmW1028UMi APPKn K M410WDOC 32 AppendixM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft OR 8.2 Prior to issuance of precise grading permits, the landowner or subsequent project . applicant shall develop a WQMP in accordance with the requirements of the MSW Permit and the DAMP and shall submit the WQMP for review to the City. The City shall approve the WQMP prior to the granting of the precise grading permit for the proposed development. In accordance with the DAMP, the WQMP shall: 1) describe the routine and special post -construction BMPs to be used at the proposed development site (including both structural and non-structural measures); 2) describe responsibility for the initial implementation and long-term maintenance of the BMPs; 3) provide narrative with the graphic materials as necessary to specify the locations of the structural BMPs; and 4) certify that the project proponent will seek to have the WQMP carried out by all future successors or assigns to the property. Detailed information about process for identifying BMPs is included in the Water Quality Assessment Technical Appendix. (Existing Regulations and Standard Conditions) 8.4 Prior to the release of the final map by the City, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall construct, or enter into an agreement and post security, in a form and amount acceptable to the City Engineer, guaranteeing the construction of the following public and/or private improvements in conformance with applicable City standards and the City's Capital Improvement Policy: Storm drain facilities, including detention basins, in accordance with the approved Drainage Concept Plan. (Standard Condition 1.1) (Existing Regulations and Standard Conditions) 8.9 Prior to the issuance of precise grading permits, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall submit, and the Director of Community Development shall have • approved, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The WQMP shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on the site to control predictable pollutant runoff. (Standard 'Condition 2.10) (Existing Regulations and Standard Conditions) 8.11 ...Construction of the following improvements to the existing Trabuco Retarding Basin shall commence prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit for any residence (except a model home) in Planning Area 9. The existing Trabuco Retarding Basin shall be modified to provide a water quality pool of approximately 76 acre-feet, which will at a minimum treat over a 24-hour period the volume of runoff produced by a 24-hour, 85ht percentile storm event (runoff from a 0.75 inch storm) from approximately 1523 acres (1277 acres in Planning Area'9 and 246 acres in Planning Area 5B), which constitutes approximately 40 percent of the development area; and to treat low flows, the Trabuco Retarding Basin shall also include a natural water quality treatment BMP. 8.13 The project is expected to have a less -than significant impact on surface water quality, as discussed above, and accordingly no water quality mitigation measures are required under CEQA. The proposed project nonetheless proposed to include as part of the project a PDF to improve the quality of storm water runoff from developed areas of the site. Accordingly, as a monitoring device to ensure the PDF is implemented, the following identification of the PDF will be included in the Mitigation Monitoring Report for this project: ■ ...Prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit for any residence (except a model • home) for Planning Area 9, commence construction of a water quality pool of approximately 76 acre-feet in the Trabuco Retarding Basin... R'1ProJectsMRW0Van041EIR AppendimsW001 Appendu M-010504.000 33 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft OR 8,16 Any runoff draining into Caltrans Right of Way from construction operations or from the resulting project must fully conform to the current discharge requirements of the . Regional Water Quality Control Board to avoid impacting water quality. Measures must be incorporated to contain all vehicle loads and avoid any tracking of materials, which may fall or blow onto Caltrans roadways or facilities. Storm Water Quality During Construction. The Northern Sphere FEIR determined that no significant impacts related to construction storm water quality have been identified. Mitigation measures and project design features identified In the FEIR were approved and will be Implemented by the developer in consultation with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the City and would further reduce the less than significant impact of the project related to storm water quality. Storm water quality during construction mitigation measures from the FEIR that relate to the proposed NTS Site 16 are the same as those previously Identified above (Mitigation Measures 8.1, 8.2, 8A, 8.9, 8.11, 8.13, and 8.16). In addition, Mitigation Measure 8.8 applies to the proposed NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C and 71: 8.8 Prior to the issuance of preliminary or precise grading permits, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall provide the City Engineer with evidence that a Notice of Intent (NO[) has been filed with the State Water Resources Control Board. Such evidence shall consist of a copy of the NOI stamped by the State Water Resources Control Board or the Regional Water Quality Control Board, or a letter from either agency stating that the NO1 has been filed. (Standard Condition 2.5) (Existing Regulations and Standard Conditions) Dry Weather Flows. The Northern Sphere FEIR identified no significant impacts related to • incidental, dry weather non -storm waters. Mitigation measures and project design features Identified in the FEIR were approved and will be implemented by the developer in consultation with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the City and would further reduce the less than significant impact of the project related to water quality from dry weather flows. Mitigation measures for dry weather flows from the FEIR that relate to the proposed NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C and 71 are the same as those previously identified above (Mitigation Measures 8.1, 8.2, 8.4, 8.9, 8.11, 8.13, and 8.16). Erosion and Siltation. The Northern Sphere FEIR identified that development of the Northern Sphere Area (Phase I and II development) would result in an increase in runoff flow velocity and potentially erosion and siltation because of the increase In Impervious surfaces and the installation of drainage facilities that more efficiently convey runoff from the site to local water bodies. no significant impacts related to erosion and siltation. Mitigation measures and project design features identified in the FEIR were approved and will be implemented by the developer in consultation with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the City and would further reduce the less than significant impact of the project related to erosion and siltation. Mitigation measures for dry weather flows from the FEIR that relate to the proposed NTS Sites 16 are the same as those previously identified above (Mitigation Measures 8.1, 8.2, 8.4, 8.8, 8.9, 8.11, 8.13, and 8.16). In addition, Mitigation Measure 8,15 applies to the proposed NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C and 71, 8.15 The landowner or subsequent project applicant shall participate on a fair -share basis in • the construction of the improvements necessary, as determined by the City, to address a%0m*11VRNWU&1G4TJRAppwWUe601Appm4xM-01M.00c 34 AppendizM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR deficiencies in the downstream drainage system, in conjunction with the approval of the • first final map for the project. (Additional Mitigation Measures) 2.3.6 LAND USE/PLANNING City's General Plan. The Northern Sphere FEIR identified that the Northern Sphere Area (Phase I and II development) represents a significant change in on -site land uses. However, implementation of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would maintain consistency with the City's General Plan and Zoning Code. The FEIR found that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Northern Sphere project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to below a level of significance. Land use/planning mitigation measures from the FEIR that apply to the proposed NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C and 71 are: 9.1 The proposed project shall be designed in accordance with all relevant development standards and regulations set forth by the adopted Zone Change. (Existing Regulations and Standard Conditions) Other Plans. The Northern Sphere FOR identified that the Northern Sphere Area (Phase I and II development) represents a significant change in on -site land uses that could lead to land uses that are consistent with those in the County of Orange General Plan and other regional plans. The FEIR found that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to below a level of significance. • Mitigation measures for land use/planning from the FEIR that relate to the proposed NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C and 71 are the same as those previously identified above (Mitigation Measure 9.1). 2.3.7 NOISE Construction Noise. The Northern Sphere FEIR identified that the Northern Sphere Area (Phase I and II development) would have direct temporary or periodic noise impacts from construction. Temporary or short-term noise impacts from project construction will be generated by construction equipment, including trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers and portable generators. Peak noise levels from construction equipment could reach 70-95 dBA (A -weighted decibels, or "dBA") at a distance of 50 feet. Noise impacts to residential uses have the greatest potential for being significant. The FEIR found that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to below a level of significance. Noise mitigation measures from the FEIR that are applicable to the proposed NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C and 71 are: 10.2 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall incorporate the requirements of the Noise Ordinance as a note on the grading plan cover sheet, for review and approval by the Director of Community Development. Section 6-8- 205 limits construction related activities to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday, and prohibits work . on Sundays and holidays, unless prior approval is received from the City of Irvine. In addition, the Noise Ordinance requirements shall be discussed at the pre -grade meeting, and implemented during construction. R.TMJedSURWD0en091E1R AppendiWS0001 Appendm"10504 DOC 35 Appendix Sah Dlepo Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Reylsed Draft EIR 10.3 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the landowner or subsequent project applicant shall incorporate the following measures as a note on the grading plan cover sheet to ensure that the greatest distance between noise sources and sensitive receptors during construction activities has been achieved. This language shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. a. Construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be maintained in proper operating condition with approved noise mufflers. b. Construction staging areas shall be located away from off -site receptors and occupied buildings on site during the later phases of project development. C. Stationary equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directly away from residential areas to the greatest extent feasible. d. Construction access routes shall be selected to minimize truck traffic near existing residential uses where reasonably feasible. With implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures from the Northern Sphere FEIR, construction impacts related to the proposed NTS Sites 16, 18, 70A-70C, and 71 were mitigated to below a level of significance. 2.4 The Orange County Great Park (Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Zoning and Related • Actions) Final Environmental Impact Report (Great park FEIR), which includes Sites 22, 50, 51 and 52, was certified by the Irvine City Council on May 27, 2003. Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations were also adopted for the Great Park FEIR. Findings from the Great Park FEIR that are applicable to the proposed Sites 22, 50, 51 and 52 include the following: Agricultural Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hydrology/Water Quality, and Paleontological Resources. The findings for the environmental Issues of Land Use, Noise, Traffic/Circulation, Public Health and Safety, Geology and Seismicity, Aesthetics, Public Services and Facilities and Utilities were found to not be applicable to construction of Sties 22, 50, 51 and 52. Mitigation measures from the Great Park FEIR that are applicable to Sites 22, 50, 51 and 52 are listed below. 2.4.1 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES The Great Park FEIR identified that the Great Park project (Base Plan) will convert 574 acres of Prime Farmland, 63 acres of Unique Farmland, and 46 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use. The Overlay Plan for the Great Park project will convert 651 acres of Prime Farmland, 63 acres of Unique Farmland and 88 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural uses. Additionally, the Great Park project will involve changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of existing farmland to non-agricultural use. However, the Great Park FEIR found that even with implementation of Mitigation Measures Ag 1 through Ag 3 (listed below), the impact of the conversion of agricultural resources would remain a significant unavoidable adverse Impact. Agricultural resources mitigation measures from the Great Park FEIR that apply to Sites 22, 50, • 51, and 52 are: awMg8d8VM0U M0R"ndk"UWrapWdrrwroea.00c 36 AppendixM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR Ag 1. In order to encourage agriculture as an interim land use pending development on the project site by warning future residents that they are buying or renting a house adjacent to existing agricultural operations, City Of Irvine Standard Discretionary Case Condition B.4 and City Of Irvine Standard Subdivision Condition 3.4 regarding disclosure statements shall be amended to include the following for subdivisions proposed adjacent to existing agricultural operations: Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit, and the Director of Community Development shall have approved, a completed occupancy disclosure form for the project. The approved disclosure form, along with its attachments, shall be included as part of the rental/lease agreement and as part of the sales literature for the project. The disclosure statement shall include the following information: • Continuation of agricultural operations adjacent to the site and their potential effects (spraying of pesticides, noise, dust, odor, etc.) on future residents or tenants. Ag 2. Heritage and community service/educational farming operations shall be encouraged within utility easements and other lands. Heritage farming is defined as small-scale specialty farming operations that can be accommodated in an urban environment. An example would be the Edible Landscape project located adjacent to Harvard Avenue within the Edison right-of-way. Ag 3. Future landowners and the City shall work cooperatively with farmers to minimize conflicts between agricultural operation and adjacent urban uses. 2.4.2 AIR QUALITY • Construction Emissions Mitigation. The Great Park FEIR indicated that a major source of construction emissions are fugitive dust emissions resulting from the demolition of existing structures, land preparation and excavation for the construction of proposed structures. Construction related emissions are expected to result im significant unavoidable short-term impacts from ROG and NOx. Even with implementation of mitigation measures AQ1 and AQ2 (listed below), the impact associated with construction -related air quality would remain a significant unavoidable adverse impact. Air quality mitigation measures from the Great Park FOR that apply to Sites 22, 50, 51, 52 are: A01 Prior to the start of demolition and construction within the project area, adjacent sensitive receptors shall be informed of the planned demolition and construction activities. Measures to avoid significantly impacting these receptors shall be developed and implemented by the project proponent in coordination with these uses. Other applicable mitigation measures such as erection of fences around construction areas; staggered use of equipment near sensitive receptors; diversion of truck trips away from receptors; etc.; shall be employed as necessary. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Director of Community Development. AQ2 Prior to the commencement of construction activities required to demolish and/or remove existing DON infrastructure, including runways, the Director of Community Development shall receive and approve a construction emissions mitigation plan from the chosen demolition contractor. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant of any • future development project shall submit, and the Director of Community Development shall approve a construction emissions mitigation plan. The plans shall identify implementation procedures for each of the following emissions reduction measures and R9projedsURWDWan091EIRAppentlrcsaW001 Appendix M-010504MOC 37 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Netdrst Treatment System Revlsed Draft EIR all feasible mitigation measures shall be implemented. If certain measures are determined infeasible, an explanation thereof shall be provided. • Evaluate the availability and use, If available, of low -emission (i.e., methanol- or natural gas powered) construction equipment instead of diesel for each construction phase. • Water exposed soils.at least twice daily and maintain equipment and vehicle engines In good condition and in proper tune. • Wash off trucks leaving the site. • Replace ground cover on construction sites when it Is determined that the site will be undisturbed for lengthy periods. • Reduce speeds on unpaved roads to less than 15 miles per hour. • Halt all grading and excavation operations when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour. • Suspend all emission generating activities during smog alerts. • Use propane- or butane -powered on -site mobile equipment instead of diesel/ gasoline, whenever feasible. • Properly maintain diesel -powered on -site mobile equipment. • Sweep streets at the and of the day if substantial visible soil material is carried over to the adjacent streets. • Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary on -site diesel- or gasoline - powered generators, whenever feasible. • Use of low-VOC asphalt. • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose material to and from the site. • Provide temporary traffic controls (e.g., flag persons) during all phases of construction to ensure minimum disruption of traffic. • Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow on adjoining streets to off-peak hours to the extent possible. • Reroute construction trucks away from congested streets, whenever feasible. • Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on - and off -site, whenever feasible. 2.4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Sensitive Species, The Great Park FEIR identified that the southern tarplant, a federal species of concern, may be affected by development of the site. This is considered a significant impact; however, with implementation of mitigation measure Bio 1 (listed below), this Impact would be reduced to a level less than significant. Bio 1. Prior to approval of a subdivision map for each project area, a focused survey for the southern tarplant, mountain plover, and burrowing owl, shall be donducted. Prior to approval of a subdivision map for development within, or in proximity to Serrano Creek a focused survey shall be conducted for the least Bell's Vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher. Should the focused survey identify a significant population of southern tarplant or mountain plover, or the presence of burrowing owl, least Bell's vireo, or southwestern willow flycatcher, of this species in an area proposed for development, impacts shall be avoided through incorporation of the species into an open space easement, or if impacts cannot be avoided, then mitigation shall be negotiated through consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California • u Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 0 R.WmJfct$URWDUr,W1EIRAppeMlmsUNI Appwdx M-0105W Doe 36 Appendix San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR Sensitive Habitat. There is a limited amount of highly disturbed wetland habitat on the project • site. The project may result in an impact to this habitat. However, with implementation of mitigation measures Bio 2 and Bio 3 (listed below), this impact would be reduced to a level less than significant. Bio 2. Prior to approval of a subdivision map for each project area, a wetland delineation shall be performed for all areas within the master plan subarea that contain the potential for wetland habitat and/or jurisdictional waters. The loss of impacted wetlands shall be mitigated through the implementation of a wetland mitigation plan prepared and accepted by the appropriate agency (i.e., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U:S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game). Wetlands impacted on -site shall be mitigated through on -site or off -site replacement, re-creation (i.e., within the proposed wildlife corridor), and/or revegetation as deemed acceptable by the appropriate jurisdictional agencies. Bio 3. The City shall continue to work with State and federal agencies during the implementation of the proposed project to implement the Revegetation/restoration plan for the wildlife corridor. Measures such as sight and sound barriers, including artificial sound walls and natural diversions (e.g., hedges and tree lines) shall be incorporated into corridor design to ensure the viability of the corridor. The City shall implement the corridor consistent with the design criteria and viability analysis established in the EIR. Tree Ordinance. PAS 51 and 30 contain a large number of trees, many of them mature, representing a wide range of species. Implementation of the proposed project may result in damage and destruction to the trees. A significant impact related to conflicts with the City of Irvine's Urban Forestry Ordinance may occur. However, with implementation of mitigation • measure Bio 4 (listed below), this impact would be reduced to a level less than significant. Bio 4. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for each project area, a complete inventory of all trees of trunk diameter at breast height (DBH) greater than six inches and any significant (as determined by a certified arborist selected by the City) plants on the project site, excluding those within the habitat preserve shall be prepared. This inventory shall be prepared by an arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture and shall include (but not be limited to) data for each tree such as species, variety, DBH, condition (excellent, good, fair, poor, dead), and any recommendations. All trees in this inventory shall be considered "Significant Trees" under the City of Irvine's Urban Forestry Ordinance (UFO) (Section 5-7-401 et al) and the UFO shall apply to all trees included in this inventory. 2.4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES Archaeological Resources. The Great Park FEIR identified that grading activities associated with future development of the Great Park project area may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource. With implementation of mitigation measures Cult1 through Cult 3 (listed below), this impact would be reduced'to a level less than significant. Cultural resources mitigation measures from the Great Park FEIR that apply to Sites 22, 50, 51, and 52 are as follows: Cultl. Prior to subdivision for development, a detailed archaeological report(s) shall be prepared within PAS 51 and 30. This report(s) shall specifically address the potential for encountering archaeological resources at the time specific development is proposed. The report(s) shall provide recommendations to prevent degradation of archaeological R.1ProjectORWDUmOCEIR Appendima0001 Appendix M-010504,00C 39 Appendix San DI#W creak Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR resources such as site avoidance and data recovery. Recommendations contained in the report shall be implemented. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Community Development Department. Cult2. Monitoring of excavation and grading activities associated with future development In PAS 51 and 30 shall be conducted by a certified archaeologist In accordance with the report required in Mitigation Measure Cult1. If resources are encountered in the course of ground disturbance, the archaeological monitor shall be empowered to halt grading and to initiate an archaeological testing program. The testing shall include recordation of artifacts, controlled removal of the materials, and an assessment of their importance under CEQA and the City's local guidelines. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Community Development Department. Cult3. Prior to the issuance of grading permits and/or building permits for any future development in PAS 51 and 30, a detailed mitigation program shall be submitted by the applicant to the City of Irvine to address archaeological resources discovered during grading. Provisions of the program shall Include an immediate evaluation of the find by a qualified archaeologist. If the find is determined to be a unique archaeological resource, contingency funding and a time allotment sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures or appropriate mitigation shall be available. Work may continue on other parts of the construction site while archaeological resource mitigation takes place. The City of Irvine has standard conditions applied prior to the issuance of grading permits when a project site includes potentially significant archaeological sites. These Include retaining a qualified archaeologist, establishing procedures for cultural and scientific resource surveillance, and protection of any resources discovered during the grading process. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Community Development Department. Human Remains. The Great Park FOR identified that grading activities could uncover previously unknown human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. With Implementation of Mitigation Measure Cuit4 (listed below), this impact would be reduced to a level less than significant. Cultural resources mitigation measures from the Great Park FOR that apply to Sites 22, 50, 51, and 52 are as follows: Cult4. Prior to the issuance of any grading and/or building permits, a mitigation program shall be submitted by the developer to the City of Irvine to address the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains. The program shall include the following: There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until: • The county coroner must be contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American: • The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. • The Native American Heritage Commission shall Identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American. RWroJMxVRWDUanO4ORAgpxxVm&=J AppMUx M41OW4.bOC 40 AppendiXM San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR • The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriated dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or • Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance. ■ The Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely, descendent failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission. ■ The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation; or ■ The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Community Development Department. 2.4.5 HYDROLOGYMATER QUALITY Erosion. The Great Park FEIR identified that grading and excavation activities required for future development on the Great Park site could result in the exposure of bare soils that could result in both wind and water -related erosion, and a potentially significant water quality impact. Throughout buildout of the Great Park project, wind and water related erosion has the potential • to violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. With implementation of mitigation measures H/WQ 01 and H/WQ 02 (listed below), the impact associated with the potential to violate water quality standards and waste discharge requirements would be reduced to a level less than significant. Erosion mitigation measures from the Great Park FEIR that apply to Sites 22d, 50, 51, and 52 are as follows: H/WQ 01 Future development of the project area shall comply with City of Irvine adopted policies to ensure that the potential for soil erosion is minimized on a project -by - project basis. Specifically, the NPDES discharge permitting requirements to which the City is obligated will ensure that construction activities reduce, to the maximum extent feasible, the water quality impacts of construction activities. The NPDES permit guidance states that "industrial/commercial construction operations that result in a disturbance of one acre or more of total land area and residential construction sites that result in the disturbance of five acres or more shall be required to develop and implement BMPs to control erosion and siltation and contaminated runoff from the construction sites." The City's standard conditions of approval indicate that a Storm Water Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared prior to the approval of grading permits for any project site in order to reduce sedimentation and erosion. The SWPPP shall include the adoption of erosion and sediment control practices such as desilting basins and construction site chemical control management measures. • Additionally, prior to the issuance of precise grading permits, project applicants must submit, and the Director of Community Development must have approved, R.1Pro]WsURWDUanO41EIRAppend¢es0001 Appendix M010504.000 41 Appendix San Dlepo Creek Watershed Natural TreatMent System Revised Draft EIR a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The WQMP must identify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on the site to control predictable pollutant runoff. Ongoing operations after construction would be subject to the countywide Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permit, for which the City is a Co- Permittee. This WQMP shall identify, at a minimum, the routine, structural and non-structural measures specified in the Countywide NPDES DAMP Appendix which details implementation of BMPs whenever they are applicable to a project, the assignment of long-term maintenance responsibilities (specifying the developer, parcel owner, maintenance association, lessee, etc.); and shall reference the location(s) of structural BMPs. Also in accordance with standard City project permitting and approval procedures, Notices of Intent (NOls) for coverage of projects under the General Construction Activity Storm Water Runoff Permit will be submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board prior to issuance of grading permits in the project area. This requirement will be met to the satisfaction of the City Engineer for any disturbance of one acre or more of soil in the project area. Also in force during the period of construction would be the General Dewatering NPDES Permit of the Santa Ana RWQCB, as well as the provisions of the Countywide Permit. The Mitigation Measures will be implemented in accordance With local and State regulatory requirements. As future projects are planned and designed in the project area, specific BMPs and other water quality control methods will be utilized to reduce water quality degradation in the Newport Bay watershed. Future projects in the proposed project area will acknowledge and implement those additional requirements that may be Imposed by RWQCB in the future. • Compliance with these measures shall be verified by the Community Development Department. HMQ 02 All stormwater runoff and dewatering discharges from the project area shall be managed to the maximum extent practicable or treated as appropriate to comply with water quality standards identified in the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan, including Total Maximum Daily Load (TDML) allocations adopted for this watershed. Water Quallty. The Great Park FEIR identified that at the program level of planning, the potential to degrade surface water quality is considered a significant impact. With implementation of mitigation measure HNVQ 01, previously listed above, the impact of future development on surface water quality would be reduced to a -level less than significant. 2.4.6 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES The Great Park FEIR identified that earthmoving operations such as grading and trenching have the potential to Impact buried paleontological resources in the moderately to highly sensitive areas in the coastal plain and washes, northeast, northwest and southern portions of PA 51. With implementation of Mitigation Measure P1 (listed below), this impact would be reduced to level less than significant. Paleontological resources mitigation measures from the Great Park FEIR that apply to Sites 22, 50, 51 and 52 are as follows: • Rwrq.a.vawour104ERµpendimU I APW4 cMusosal000 42 Appendix M San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft E1R P1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any portion of the project area, a qualified • paleontologist shall be retained by the City or designee to carry out an appropriate paleontology investigation of the area proposed for grading. (A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with an M.S. or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.) The City of Irvine has standard conditions applied prior to the issuance of grading permits when a project site includes potentially significant paleontological sites, and paleontological monitoring conditions have not been attached to the previous map approval. These standard conditions include retaining a qualified paleontologist, establishing procedures for cultural and scientific resource surveillance, and protection of any resources discovered during the grading process. When fossils are discovered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most cases, this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossils specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for the recovery of small fossil remains, such as isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary in certain instances to set up a screen -washing operation on -site. Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Community Development Department. With implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures from the Great Park FEIR, construction impacts related to the proposed NTS Sites 22, 50, 51 and 52 have been mitigated to below a level of significance. 2.5 CITY OF IRVINE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 16 FEIR The General Plan Amendment 16 Final Environmental Impact Report (GPA 16 FEIR) was certified by the City of Irvine City Council on October 24, 1989. The GPA 16 "project" consisted of several amendments to the General Plan, along with a several detailed implementation actions and programs that would achieve the objectives of the proposed Land Use and Conservation and Open Space Plan Element amendments. Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations were also adopted for the GPA 16 project. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the following significant adverse impact: local air quality, agricultural, energy resources, local traffic and circulation within the Irvine Business Complex; however, only agricultural conversion impacts apply to the proposed NTS Plan, specifically NTS Sites 9, 10, 11, 12A-12G and 61, all within Irvine Planning Area 1. 2.5.1 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES The GPA 16 FEIR identified that the GPA 16 project would result in the conversion of approximately 832 acres of prime farmland to non-agricultural land uses. Of the 832 acres, 340 acres of land within the City's corporate boundaries would be redesignated to other General Plan land use categories and uses (i.e., Research and Industrial, General Commercial, Preservation, and Recreation). The remaining 483 acres within the City's adopted Sphere of Influence would be redesignated to other similar General Plan land use categories. The • conversion of the 832 acres was considered a significant impact in the GPA 16 FEIR and adopted Findings of Fact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted in which the R1Pr*ctsMRWDUen041EIR AppeMiMSUD01 Apperda M-010504 DOC 43 Appendix San Diego creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Dmt[ EIR City Council determined that this Impact was acceptable because of the specific overriding considerations. 0 IRWD has evaluated the findings of fact and statement of overriding considerations for the GPA 16 FEIR In light of the agricultural resources Impacts and in agreement with them as they related to agricultural resources impacts associated with NTS Sites 9, 11, 10, 12A-12G and 61. SECTION 3.0 CONCLUSION Based on the information provided above, impacts associated with 17 NTS sites (Sites 9,11, 10, 12A-12G, 31, 32, 49, 42, 16, 18, 70A-70C, 71, 22, 50, 51, 52, and 61) were previously addressed in prior certified CEQA documents. For NTS Sites 9, 11, 10, 12A-12G and 61, significant adverse agricultural resources impacts were previously evaluated in the GPA 16 EIR and therefore, these NTS sites would not result in any new Impacts to the conversion of agricultural resources than those that were previously evaluated. 0 LJ R%PM"VRNVUffMVRAppw41CgVW1 APPKV1x M41MMOC 44 AppendbcM • • Appendix N Remediation Procedures Report E San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR APPENDIX N - REMEDIATION PROCEDURES REPORT The following remediation procedures report is summarized from the Northern Sphere Area General Plan Amendment and Zone Change Final EIR (SCH'No. 2001051010) prepared by the City of Irvine, certified by the City of Irvine on June 4, 2002. The remediation procedures report was prepared Advanced Environmental Concepts, Inc. Provided below are "remediation procedures" identified to facilitate mitigation of environmental concerns relating to USTs/ASTs, asbestos and septic tanks, if encountered during construction pertaining to future development of the Natural Treatment System (NTS) project sites. These environmental concerns were identified as conditions that are potentially present within the (NTS) project areas. UST/AST REMOVAL PROCEDURES The removal of Underground Storage Tanks (LISTS) will require compliance with the following procedures: 1) Apply for removal permits with Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA). Submit four copies of site plan and location plan. 2) Upon receiving approval from Plan Check at OCHCA, pick up remaining sets of approved plans from OCHCA and submit OCHCA- approved plans to Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) for their concurrence. • 3) Schedule both OCFA,and OCHCA to be onsite for tank removal(s). 4) Uncover top and sides of tank. Screen soil using a calibrated PID meter in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 1166 (Not applicable if tank contents were diesel or waste oil). Remove all plumbing from tank top. 5) If gasoline UST„de-gas tank in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 1149 (diesel, waste oil, and USTs having capacities of 500 gallons, or less, do not require de gassing). Triple -rinse tank interior with high-pressure washer. Remove all rinseate with a vacuum truck. Transport and dispose of rinseate at approved recycling facilities such as DeMenno, Kerdoom, or Crosby and Overton. 6) Monitor LELJ02 using calibrated meter. Upon approval of Fire Inspector insert 15 pounds of dry ice per every 1,000-gallons of tank capacity. Upon acceptable LEU02 readings remove tank from emplacement using a crane. Load tank onto flatbed, strap tank down, transport to metal recycler (American Metal Recycling AMR is typical) for disposal. 7) Using a backhoe, the geologist will collect soil samples from beneath each end of former tank invert, beneath product line run, dispenser, and from spoils pile. OCHCA Specialist will usually direct sampling locations. 8) Send soil samples to California approved laboratory for OCHCA requested analyses. • 9) Backfill and compact tank excavation to minimum 90% relative compaction. R:WroedsMRWDUen041EIR Appendices0001 Appendix N•010904 DOC N-1 Appendix N— Remediation Procedures Report San Diego creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft E/R 10) Prepare Tank Closure Report for submittal to County. 11) If samples test "clean" expect Closure Letter from OCHCA with concurrence of Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). If samples exhibit elevated hydrocarbon concentrations a letter will be sent to Responsible Party (RP) requesting additional investigation to determine the lateral and vertical extent. Any Phase 11 Investigations will be conducted under OCHCA supervision (lead agency) with support review provided by the RWQCB. This same process will primarily apply for closure of aboveground storage tanks (ASTs). OCHCA will remain as the lead agency to oversee AST removal and soil sampling, and will consult with the RWQCB to obtain closure. ASBESTOS MITIGATION PROTOCOL FOR TRANSITS PIPE The NTS project areas may contain unspecified volumes of "transits pipe." Transite pipe has been historically used for a minimum of fifty (50) years as a means of subsurface irrigation water distribution on agricultural properties consisting primarily of permanent plantings such as citrus and stone fruit orchards and vineyards. The transits pipe is constructed of cement mixed with asbestos fibers thus creating greater strength and durability. The pipe is manufactured in varying sizes generally ranging between 4-inch diameters to 36-inch diameter. The transite pipe does not need to be analyzed by a laboratory to confirm asbestos content, visual recognition is generally adequate since transite pipe has a unique cross -hatching construction pattern. Asbestos containing materials (ACMs) have been classified Into "friable" and "non -friable" . categories and transite pipe Is regarded as non -friable. Generally, non -friable asbestos requires care in handling, yet is not considered "hazardous" because of the limited ability of the asbestos fibers to break away from the source and become ingested through inhalation. However, non - friable asbestos may become hazardous if it is drilled, cut, pulverized, or otherwise handled in a way that fibers become airborne. The presence of transits pipe is not a cause for concern if the pipe is being used for its specified use such as irrigation water diversion. Under those conditions, It does not require mitigation. if the pipe has been removed from the subsurface it may be stored onsite, however, it should be covered with plastic sheeting pending final disposition. Since transite pipe use was prominent on agricultural properties throughout Orange County, it is likely to be present throughout the NTS project sites. Therefore, the following mitigation measures to assure proper handling and disposal of the transite pipe as it is discovered are recommended: If buried transite pipe is discovered during a grading operation, the grading should cease within the immediate area of the discovery so that the transite pipe can be managed by appropriate environmental contractors in accordance with these procedures. SCAQMD shall be notified of the pending removal. The overburden soil shall be removed from the top arid sides of the transite pipe. Care should be exercised during the uncovering pipe to ensure that the pipe is not broken. Excavator operator and helper should wear dust masks and gloves as a precaution and both should be HAZWOPER 40-hour trained in accordance with OSHA Rule 29, CFR Part 1910.20. • R%Pr**URwoum %E1RO ,andia ootOp AxN.01Mooc N•2 AppendixN—Remedialion ProcedureaWeport San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised DraftE1R Once the pipe has been uncovered it should be brought to the surface. The transite pipe should • be placed into 10 ton bins, or if the bins are not readily available, transported to a stockpiling location using a loader fitted with forks on the front bucket. The stockpiled transite pipe that is aboveground should be wrapped with minimum 6 mu plastic sheeting pending approval to transport and dispose at an approvedlandfill. Precautions necessary for safe handling include removal and moving the removed pipe from the discovery area to the stockpile area. Effort should be taken to not cause any portion of the pipe to become friable, i.e. that the pipe is not broken, or damaged. Arrangements shall be made with a waste transporter to transport the pipe to an approved landfill. As Orange County landfills will not accept any asbestos waste, the closest approved disposal site for the 10 ton capacity bins is the Azusa Landfill, 1201 West Gladstone, Azusa, California 91702; (818) 334-0719. Although there are ether approved locations, they are of greater distance from Irvine. The Azusa landfill is the closest, approved landfill for disposal of asbestos -containing transite pipe. MITIGATION OF SEPTIC SYSTEMS/LEACH FIELDS According to the OCHCA, there are no written regulations governing the removal of any septic systems and associated leach fields that may be discovered during demolition and grading operations, however, based upon procedures described by OCHCA, the following procedures shall be implemented: • Obtain a removal permit from the County of Orange or other proper jurisdiction (City in which the system or leach field is located). Plan Check and Inspection fees will apply. Submit four copies of drawings of site to scale with estimated location of septic tank and leach field. Once the plans have been approved by the County of Orange or other proper jurisdiction, schedule the removal date with the County or City inspector and notify the inspector 48 hours prior to backfill. Excavate and remove assumed concrete constructed septic tank. Excavate and remove slotted leach field pipe. Dispose of the concrete at recycler, and dispose of leach pipe at a Class III landfill. Import "clean" backfill to replace void created by septic tank and leach pipe removal. Upon approval from Inspector, replace backfill to minimum 90% compaction. If contamination is identified; (contamination is defined as soil and/or groundwater exhibiting one, or all of the following: visual hydrocarbon staining, hydrocarbon odor, PID readings that exceed 100 ppm), the OCHCA, Industrial Section, shall be notified. The OCHCA inspector will visit the site and provide direction for closure. The site will be assigned a Case Number, and a work plan describing proposed investigation must be prepared. If necessary, perform remediation that may include soil removal to a Class II Landfill or an approved recycling facility, or leaving impacted soil in place if it is demonstrated that it will not adversely affect human health or the environment. If soil removal is required, controls will be implemented to prevent fugitive dust emanating from • the loading, and/or transport of the impacted soil. These controls include wetting soil during the RTrgeclsMRWDVan041EIR Appendiws=l Appeneu N-010904 CCC N-3 Appendix N— Remediation Procedures Report San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Revised Draft EIR removal and loading process, and covering the loaded soil with a tarpaulin during transport to the disposal facility. 0 RlpfopWSURWOUanU11EIRAPW4] $0001AppendXNA109MDOC N-4 AppendlxN—RemediahonProcedures Report