Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2017-07-25 - Board of Directors Meeting Agenda Packet
Yorba Linda Water District AGENDA YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, July 25, 2017, 6:30 PM 1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL J. Wayne Miller, President Al Nederhood, Vice President Andrew J. Hall, Director Phil Hawkins, Director Brooke Jones, Director 4. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA 5. INTRODUCTIONS AND PRESENTATIONS 5.1. Elected Official Liaison Reports 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS Any individual wishing to address the Board is requested to identify themselves and state the matter on which they wish to comment. If the matter is on the agenda, the Board will recognize the individual for their comment when the item is considered. No action will be taken on matters not listed on the agenda. Comments are limited to matters of public interest and matters within the jurisdiction of the Water District. Comments are limited to three minutes. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR All items listed on the consent calendar are considered to be routine matters, status reports, or documents covering previous Board instructions. The items listed on the consent calendar may be enacted by one motion. There will be no discussion on the items unless a member of the Board, staff, or public requests further consideration. 7.1. Minutes of Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. 7.2. Minutes of Board of Directors Workshop Meeting Held May 23, 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. 7.3. Minutes of Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. 7.4. Payments of Bills, Refunds, and Wire Transfers Recommendation: That the Board of Directors ratify and authorize disbursements in the amount of$4,472,758.00. 7.5. Claim for Damages Filed by Joseph Goudlock for Kennedy Wilson Properties, Ltd. Recommendation: That the Board of Directors reject and deny the claim filed by Joseph Goudlock for Kennedy Wilson Properties, Ltd. in the amount of$1,585.00. 8. ACTION CALENDAR This portion of the agenda is for items where staff presentations and Board discussions are needed prior to formal Board action. 8.1. Sewer Charges Collected on Tax Roll for Fiscal Year 2018 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors adopt Resolution No. 17-26 Electing to Have Certain Sewer Maintenance Charges Collected on the Fiscal Year 2018 Tax Roll and Superseding Resolution No.16-13. 8.2. Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Well 22 Project Recommendation: That the Board of Directors: (1) adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and make a finding on the basis of the whole record (including the Initial Study and comments received) that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the Board of Directors'independent judgment and analysis; (2) approve the proposed project, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and authorize staff to file a Notice of Determination for the Project; and (3) determine that the Board Secretary is the custodian of the documents and materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Board's decision is based and such documents and materials will be at the District's headquarters. 8.3. Administrative Penalty Conservation Credit (Nederhood) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors consider the one-time application of a Conservation Credit to active customer connections for water service and authorize $147,700.00 to be retained from the Conservation Reserve for the purposes of: (1) completing the preliminary analysis work towards investigating a Budget Based Rate Structure for the Yorba Linda Water District, and (2) processing a refund to the PYLUSD for an appeal that was granted on the basis of"health and safety". 8.4. Potential Customer Credit Resulting from District's Net Position as of June 30, 2017 (Nederhood) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors postpone a decision regarding this matter as the District's final net position for the period ending June 30, 2017 is not available at this time. 8.5. California Special Districts Association (CSDA) 2017 Board Elections Recommendation: That the Board of Directors consider voting for one candidate in the CSDA 2017 Board Election for Seat C in the Southern Network. 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS This portion of the agenda is for matters that cannot reasonably be expected to be concluded by action of the Board of Directors at the meeting, such as technical presentations, drafts of proposed policies, or similar items for which staff is seeking the advice and counsel of the Board of Directors. Time permitting, it is generally in the District's interest to discuss these more complex matters at one meeting and consider formal action at another meeting. This portion of the agenda may also include items for information only. 9.1. Budget to Actual Statements for the Month Ending June 30, 2017 9.2. Cash and Investment Report for Period Ending June 30, 2017 9.3. District Unfunded Long-term Projects 9.4. Request for Proposals for Contractual Services (Nederhood/Miller) 10. REPORTS, INFORMATION ITEMS, AND COMMENTS 10.1. Directors' Reports 10.2. General Manager's Report 10.3. General Counsel's Report 10.4. Future Agenda Items and Staff Tasks 11. COMMITTEE REPORTS 11.1. Interagency Committee with MWDOC and OCWD (Miller/Nederhood) • Next meeting scheduled July 27, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. 11.2. Joint Agency Committee with City of Yorba Linda (Miller/Hawkins) • Minutes of the meeting held June 12, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. will be provided when available. • Next meeting scheduled September 18, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. at YL City Hall. 11.3. Joint Agency Committee with City of Placentia (Miller/Nederhood) • Next meeting yet to be scheduled. 12. INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS 12.1. LAFCO - July 12, 2017 (Nederhood - As Needed) 12.2. YL City Council - July 18, 2017 (Miller) 12.3. MWDOC Board - July 19, 2017 (Nederhood) 12.4. OCWD - July 19, 2017 (Jones) 13. BOARD OF DIRECTORS ACTIVITY CALENDAR 13.1. Meetings from July 26 - September 30, 2017 14. CONFERENCES, SEMINARS, AND SPECIAL EVENTS This section of the agenda is for the Board of Directors to authorize Director attendance at the listed events. 14.1. ACWA Region 8 Water Reliability Program - August 24, 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve Director attendance at this event if desired. 15. ADJOURNMENT 15.1. The next Regular Board of Directors Meeting will be held Tuesday, August 8, 2017. Closed Session (if necessary) will begin at 5:30 p.m. and regular business at 6:30 p.m. Items Distributed to the Board Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting Pursuant to Government Code section 54957.5, non-exempt public records that relate to open session agenda items and are distributed to a majority of the Board less than seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting will be available for public inspection in the lobby of the District’s business office located at 1717 E. Miraloma Avenue, Placentia, CA 92870, during regular business hours. When practical, these public records will also be made available on the District’s internet website accessible at http://www.ylwd.com/. Accommodations for the Disabled Any person may make a request for a disability-related modification or accommodation needed for that person to be able to participate in the public meeting by telephoning the Executive Secretary at 714-701-3020, or writing to Yorba Linda Water District, P.O. Box 309, Yorba Linda, CA 92885-0309. Requests must specify the nature of the disability and the type of accommodation requested. A telephone number or other contact information should be included so the District staff may discuss appropriate arrangements. Persons requesting a disability-related accommodation should make the request with adequate time before the meeting for the District to provide the requested accommodation. ITEM NO. 7.1 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Subject:Minutes of Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: 2017-05-09_-_BOD_-_Minutes.doc Minutes Minutes Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 1 2017-XXX MINUTES OF THE YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, May 9, 2017, 6:30 p.m. 1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL DIRECTORS PRESENT STAFF PRESENT J. Wayne Miller, President Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Al Nederhood, Vice President Steve Conklin, Engineering Manager Andrew J. Hall, Director John DeCriscio, Operations Manager Phil Hawkins, Director Gina Knight, HR/Risk and Safety Manager Brooke Jones, Director Art Vega, Information Technology Manager Annie Alexander, Executive Assistant Cindy Botts, Management Analyst Kelly McCann, Senior Accountant Malissa Muttaraid, Public Affairs Representative ALSO PRESENT Andrew Gagen, Partner, Kidman Law LLP Brett Barbre, Director, MWDSC and MWDOC Tom Lindsey, Councilmember, City of Yorba Linda Daphne Munoz, Audit Partner, White Nelson Diehl Evans 4. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA Mr. Marc Marcantonio indicated that additional backup material related to Item No. 9.2. had been distributed. 5. INTRODUCTIONS AND PRESENTATIONS 5.1. Elected Official Liaison Reports Director Brett Barbre reported on State Water Project allocations, Metropolitan’s water storage efforts, status of the Oroville Dam, and the need for construction of additional water storage facilities. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 2 Councilmember Tom Lindsey reported on the status of the City’s median renovation project, upcoming Proposition 218 hearings for Landscaping Zones L1B and L5A, and the Esperanza Hills development project. 5.2. Overview of Services Provided by White Nelson Diehl Evans (WNDE) Mr. Kelly McCann introduced Ms. Daphne Munoz from W NDE. He explained that Ms. Munoz would be acting as the District’s engagement partner for the upcoming audit and provided an overview of her professional work experience. Ms. Munoz then summarized the auditors’ responsibilities and overall audit the process. 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ms. Pat Nelson (resident) commented on topics discussed during Ad Hoc Citizens Advisory Committee (AHCAC) meetings, staff’s time spent supporting committee efforts, and the cost of the meeting facilitator. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR Director Hawkins made a motion, seconded by Director Hall, to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. 7.1. Minutes of the Board of Directors Workshop Meeting Held January 31, 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. 7.2. Minutes of the Board of Directors Special Meeting Held February 13, 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. 7.3. Minutes of the Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held February 13, 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. 7.4. Payments of Bills, Refunds, and Wire Transfers Recommendation: That the Board of Directors ratify and authorize disbursements in the amount of $516,429.31. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 3 7.5. Declaration of Restrictive Covenants with Eric and Eileen Change, 18721 Windy Knoll Drive, Yorba Linda Recommendation: That the Board of Directors authorize the President and Secretary to execute the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants with Eric and Eileen Change. 7.6. Terms and Conditions for Sewer Service with Kurt Metcalf, 5041 Eureka Avenue, Yorba Linda Recommendation That the Board of Directors approve the Terms and Conditions for Sewer Service with Kurt Metcalf, 5041 Eureka Avenue, Job No. 201714S. 8. ACTION CALENDAR 8.1. District Investments Held with Safe Keeper/Custodial Agent Pershing LLC Mr. McCann explained that the custodial agreement for District investments held at Pershing was between First Empire Securities and Pershing and not directly between YLWD and Pershing. As a result, a significant deficiency in internal control was brought to the Board’s attention during the previous audit. The Board can choose to keep the current arrangement, however, the deficiency would remain. An alternative option would be to transfer these investments to Bank of the West through which the custodial agreement can be made directly. This would prevent any further comments regarding this matter in future audits while maintaining the safekeeping and third party relationship prescribed in the District’s investment policy. The Board and staff discussed the potential benefit of transferring the investments after they matured, the reasons for recommending Bank of the West, and exploring services provided by other local and national banking institutions including the County’s investment pool. Director Barbre commented on the investment services provided by the County. Following discussion, the Board requested staff expand their research of potential custodial agents and present this information in matrix form at a future meeting. 8.2. Rules and Regulations for Sewer Service Mr. Steve Conklin explained that staff had recently reviewed the rules and regulations for sewer service and identified some needed revisions related to connecting to the public sewer system. He noted that approximately Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 4 700 homeowners in the District’s service area were still reliant on septic tanks. The Board and staff then discussed the benefits of connecting to the public sewer system, assisting homeowners with obtaining funding for sewer connection fees, the potential for illegal connections to the sewer system, and sewer rules and regulations of comparative agencies. Mr. Dennis Anderson (resident) suggested forming small assessment districts in order to assist homeowners with obtaining funding for sewer connection fees. The Board voted 5-0 on a Roll Call to approve Resolution No. 17-14 adopting Rules and Regulations for Sewer Service, and rescinding Resolution No. 16-16. 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS 9.1. Ad Hoc Citizens Advisory Committee Recommendations to the Board of Directors Mr. Terry Harris (AHCAC Chair) provided a brief overview of the committee’s purpose and intentions. He then reviewed each of the committee’s recommendations including: exploring a budget-based rate structure with a suggested timeline for implementation; conducting an annual cost of service review; not making any immediate changes to the existing rate structure; reviewing and reconciling rate revenue with cost of service annually; issuing a refund and public statement associated with reconciliation of the FY16 budget; establishing a water efficiency education program; amending the administrative penalty ordinance; enhancing reports of expenditures and progress on capital and repair/replacement (R&R) projects; updating the Asset Management Plan; enhancing reporting of balances and expenditures in reserve categories; not increasing overall reserve balances; improving accessibility of financial reports on District’s website; providing additional monthly financial reports; updating the strategic plan; exploring low/fixed-income rates; developing benchmarks and metrics; reviewing the District’s staffing needs and organizational structure; and exploring options for reducing costs for professional services. Mr. Harris thanked the committee members for their efforts related to this endeavor. He also thanked staff for their support and the Board for establishing the committee. The Board thanked the committee members for their time and thoroughness. Dr. Jeff Decker (AHCAC member) commented on the committee’s recommendation to issue a refund and various aspects of the District’s finances. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 5 Mr. Dennis Anderson (AHCAC member) noted that the committee had unanimously approved the recommendations provided to the Board. Mr. Kent Ebinger (AHCAC member) commented on the District’s reserves and recent bond offering, and the committee’s recommendations related to issuance of a refund and public engagement. Mr. Ben Parker (AHCAC member) commented on public involvement in the committee’s meetings, budget-based rate structures, the committee’s recommendation to issue a refund, and using metrics to perform analysis of District operations. Ms. Pat Nelson (resident) commented on the committee’s purpose and recommendations, including the proposed refund and budget-based rate structures. Ms. Susan Decker (resident) commented on budget-based rate structures, rebate programs for installation of drought tolerant landscaping, and the proposed refund. Mr. Rick Nelson (resident) commented on budget-based rate structures. Mr. Ron Ricks (resident) commented on the committee’s efforts and various types of rate structures, including the District’s current structure. Ms. Cristy Parker (AHCAC member) commented on the District’s current rate structure and the committee’s recommendations. Mr. Harris commented on the public’s participation in committee meetings, the reasons for the committee’s recommendation regarding implementation of a budget-based rate structure, and the budget process and handling of net income at the end of the fiscal year. He then responded to questions from the Board regarding the types of rate structures considered by the committee. Dr. Decker commented on a presentation provided to the committee regarding Irvine Ranch Water District’s (IRWD) rate structure. Mr. Harris continued responding to questions from the Board regarding budget-based rate structures, the state’s long-term framework for water conservation, the process for reviewing variance requests for increased water allocations, and the time and resources required to implement a budget-based rate structure. Mr. Anderson commented on resources available, including grants, to assist with the process of converting to a budget-based rate structure. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 6 Discussion continued regarding various aspects of IRWD’s rate structure, the state’s provisional conservation standard for indoor residential water use, the committee’s recommendations related to reserves and refunds, establishment and funding of a rate stabilization reserve, and development of a public education program as part of the process of transitioning to a budget-based rate structure. Mr. Ebinger suggested improvements to the District’s website. Mr. Harris, Dr. Decker and Mr. Parker then provided additional feedback regarding the committee’s recommendations related to reserves. Ms. Pat Nelson (resident) commented on the purpose of reserves, the District’s reserve levels, and the importance of R&R. Mr. Harris then responded to questions from the Board regarding the committee’s recommendations related to metrics and benchmarks. Further discussion regarding the time and resources associated with the committee’s recommendations followed. The Board thanked the committee members once again for their service. Mr. Harris stated that the committee recognized the challenges facing the Board and that its members were willing to provide continued assistance. 9.2. Current Water Conservation Legislation Mr. Marcantonio explained that this item had been placed on the agenda at the request of Vice President Nederhood. Vice President Nederhood provided an overview of Trailer Bill Language 810 and key water conservation legislation being put forth by Assembly Members Friedman and Rubio. In short, the bills being sponsored by Friedman would unnecessarily place local water management decisions in the State’s hands, whereas the bills being sponsored by Rubio would improve urban water use efficiency in cooperation with local water agencies. Mr. Marcantonio noted that this legislation had been discussed in detail during MWDOC’s Elected Officials’ Forum and a recent event hosted by ACWA. He also reported that the District had signed on to multiple coalition letters in addition to submitting its own in support of Rubio’s bills, and that Townsend Public Affairs (TPA) would be testifying on YLWD’s behalf at future Senate committee meetings. Other agencies and associations, including the League of California Cities, have expressed their support of Rubio’s bills as well. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 7 The Board and staff then discussed the impacts to the District should Friedman’s bills pass. Director Hawkins asked if TPA could provide a report to the Board. Mr. Marcantonio indicated that a representative from TPA would do so at the next regular meeting. Mr. Kent Ebinger (resident) suggested that an e-mail be sent to District customers notifying them of the impact of these competing bills and encouraging them to contact their state legislators. The Board briefly discussed this suggestion following which Mr. Andrew Gagen indicated he would check into any associated legalities. Director Hall commented on the different philosophies between the northern and southern areas of the state in regards to water storage. Ms. Pat Nelson (resident) inquired as to how this legislation would impact sanitation districts and the Senate’s timeline for consideration. Mr. Ebinger also suggested that staff encourage other local water districts to send out a similar notification to their customers. Mr. Terry Harris (resident) stated that a budget-based rate structure could accommodate both Friedman and Rubio’s sponsored legislation. 10. REPORTS, INFORMATION ITEMS, AND COMMENTS 10.1. Directors' Reports Director Hawkins reported that he’d discussed water related issues with Assembly Member Chen during a dinner meeting in Sacramento the previous week. 10.2. General Manager's Report Mr. Marcantonio reported the bond issuance process was near completion and that a press release would be disseminated following closing. He then asked each of the managers (or their designee) to report on activities within their respective departments. Mr. Conklin reported that the Esperanza Hills development project had been approved by the OC Board of Supervisors. Mr. John DeCriscio reported that Well No. 15 was back in service and Well No. 1 was out of service due to a shaft break. Staff will be performing maintenance on fire hydrants located in wildland-urban Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 8 interface areas in preparation for the summer season. Thanks to Production staff’s efforts, the District achieved 70% groundwater production over the previous 10 months. Mr. Kelly McCann reported that staff was working on the previous months financial and investment reports which will be presented at the next regular meeting. Staff is also preparing documentation for the management audit scheduled at the end of the month. The Board and staff discussed historical financial reporting for capital and R&R projects. Mr. Conklin noted that $100K had been included in the draft FY18 budget to update the District’s Asset Management Plan. Mr. Art Vega reported on staff’s efforts related to upgrading the District’s accounting and billing software. Ms. Gina Knight reviewed the capabilities of NEOGOV’s human resources software and the District’s recent implementation of the performance evaluation and onboarding components. She also reported on the status of staff’s efforts to explore outsourcing payroll and summarized the District’s previous experience using ADP. 10.3. General Counsel’s Report None. 10.4. Future Agenda Items and Staff Tasks None. 11. COMMITTEE REPORTS 11.1. Interagency Committee with MWDOC and OCWD (Miller/Nederhood) Next meeting is scheduled May 25, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. 11.2. Joint Agency Committee with City of Yorba Linda (Miller/Hawkins) Minutes of the meeting held March 13, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. will be provided when available. Next meeting is scheduled June 12, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. at YL City Hall. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 9 11.3. Interagency Committee with City of Placentia and Golden State Water Company (Miller/Nederhood) Next meeting is yet to be scheduled. 11.4. Ad Hoc Citizens Advisory Committee Minutes of the meetings held April 20 and April 27, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. were provided in the agenda packet. Minutes of the meeting held May 4, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. will be provided when available. 12. INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS The Directors reported on their attendance at the following meetings. 12.1 MWDOC Elected Officials’ Forum – April 26, 2017 (Miller/Nederhood) 12.2 OCSD Board – April 26, 2017 (Hawkins) 12.3. Meet ACWA’s President Event – April 27, 2017 (Nederhood) 12.4. YL City Council – May 2, 2017 (Hawkins) 12.5. MWDOC Board – May 3, 2017 (Nederhood) 12.6. OCSD Operations Committee – May 3, 2017 (Hawkins) 12.7. OCWD – May 3, 2017 (Jones) 12.8. WACO – May 5, 2017 (Miller/Nederhood) 13. BOARD OF DIRECTORS ACTIVITY CALENDAR 13.1. Meetings from May 10, 2017 – July 31, 2017 The Board reviewed the activity calendar. President Miller and Director Hawkins noted they both had conflicts with attendance at a future YL City Council meeting. 14. CONFERENCES, SEMINARS, AND SPECIAL EVENTS 14.1. OC Water Summit – June 16, 2017 Director Hall made a motion, seconded by Director Hawkins, to approve Director attendance at this event if desired. Motion carried 5-0. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 9, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 10 15. ADJOURNMENT 15.1. The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. Annie Alexander Assistant Board Secretary ITEM NO. 7.2 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Subject:Minutes of Board of Directors Workshop Meeting Held May 23, 2017 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: 2017-05-23_-_Minutes_-_BOD_(A).doc Minutes Minutes Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Workshop Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. 1 2017-XXX MINUTES OF THE YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS WORKSHOP MEETING Tuesday, May 23, 2017, 4:00 p.m. 1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870 1. CALL TO ORDER President Miller called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL DIRECTORS PRESENT STAFF PRESENT J. Wayne Miller, President Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Al Nederhood, Vice President Steve Conklin, Engineering Manager Phil Hawkins, Director John DeCriscio, Operations Manager Brooke Jones, Director Gina Knight, HR/Risk and Safety Manager Delia Lugo, Finance Manager DIRECTORS ABSENT Art Vega, Information Technology Manager Andrew J. Hall Director Annie Alexander, Executive Assistant Cindy Botts, Management Analyst Kelly McCann, Senior Accountant Malissa Muttaraid, Public Affairs Representative ALSO PRESENT Andrew Gagen, Partner, Kidman Law LLP 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. 4. DISCUSSION ITEMS 4.1. Budget for 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan, Supplies and Services, and Salaries and Benefits for Fiscal Year 2018 Ms. Cindy Botts noted that a few of the slides included in the agenda packet had been revised. Mr. Steve Conklin explained that the District’s capital related expenses fell into three categories: capital improvement projects (CIP), replacement and refurbishment projects (R&R), and capital outlay. Staff is not Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Workshop Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. 2 proposing additional funding for CIP in FY18 although funds have been included in draft budget for Supplies and Services to update the District’s Asset Management Plan (AMP). Mr. Conklin then provided an overview of historical and projected capital related expenditures. He noted that as of May 2017, the District had approximately $13.8M available in water capital reserves as of May 2017. He then reviewed the detailed budget for water capital projects and R&R, including staff’s proposed adjustments for FY18. Discussion followed regarding the Susana, Bryant & John Bixby Pipeline Replacement Project and related public outreach efforts, cost estimates and timing of the listed R&R projects, and utilization of in-house staff versus consultants for project design. Mr. Conklin stated that funding for R&R would be depleted by FY21 and updating the AMP would provide the District with a roadmap for future projects. He also indicated that available water capital reserves were estimated to total $11.8M at the end of FY17 and $9.2M at the end of FY18. Ms. Botts clarified that funds from the 2017A revenue bonds could only be used for the Fairmont Booster Pump Station Upgrade Project (FBPS). Ms. Lugo briefly explained the process for funding reserves and stated that the Board would have the opportunity to discuss the reserves policy at a future workshop. She also suggested the District begin drawing funds from the 2017A revenue bonds in order to utilize the full amount for the FBPS project and avoid potential penalties. Ms. Botts noted that the projected available water capital reserve balances did not include possible annual reserve transfers from the Operating Fund. The Board did not request any modifications to the proposed budget for capital related expenses. Ms. Lugo explained that staff would be utilizing this information to update the District’s financial model. Ms. Botts provided an overview of the draft Supplies and Services budget and noted that the total increase from the FY17 forecast to the draft FY18 budget was approximately $485K or 11%. She then provided additional detail for specific categories with increases or decreases greater than 5%. The Board and staff discussed estimated costs for: updating the District’s website; newsletter publications; on-hold music/messaging services; customer water usage analytics; water quality testing for schools; liability and property insurance coverage; notebooks for field personnel access to CMMS; updating the AMP; conducting an employee compensation survey; labor counsel services; public affairs and CMMS consultant services; employee professional development and conference attendance; and uncollectible accounts. Ms. Botts then compared the Supplies and Services budgets for FY14 to FY18, including variances in specific categories over $50K. Staff explained the reasons for transferring SCADA/IT communications costs to the utilities category. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Workshop Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. 3 Ms. Knight provided an overview of forecasted and budgeted personnel related costs for FY17 and FY18. Ms. Botts noted that this information had been revised to account for unfilled positions. The Board and staff then discussed forecasted and budgeted costs for: overtime; cost-of-living adjustments; merit increases; retiree benefits; and unemployment insurance. Ms. Knight reviewed costs associated with new positions included in the FY18 budget and those that were unfilled during a portion or all of FY17. She also reviewed budgeted and forecasted overtime costs during FY17 and the portion being covered by administrative penalties. Ms. Knight then explained the rates for standby pay. Ms. Botts noted that while the total number of budgeted overtime hours for FY18 was 15 more than FY17, staff was projecting a reduction in total overtime costs for FY18 due to improved staffing levels. The Board and staff discussed customers’ heightened awareness of water waste due to the drought and its impact on staff’s workload and separating overtime costs for administrative work from emergency/afterhours call-outs. 5. ADJOURNMENT 5.1. The meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Annie Alexander Assistant Board Secretary ITEM NO. 7.3 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Subject:Minutes of Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: 2017-05-23_-_Minutes_-_BOD_(B).doc Minutes Minutes Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 1 2017-XXX MINUTES OF THE YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, May 23, 2017, 6:30 p.m. 1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:46 p.m. President Miller apologized for the late start due to the workshop meeting held immediately prior to this meeting. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL DIRECTORS PRESENT STAFF PRESENT J. Wayne Miller, President Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Al Nederhood, Vice President Steve Conklin, Engineering Manager Phil Hawkins, Director John DeCriscio, Operations Manager Brooke Jones, Director Gina Knight, HR/Risk and Safety Manager Art Vega, Information Technology Manager DIRECTORS ABSENT Annie Alexander, Executive Assistant Andrew J. Hall, Director Cindy Botts, Management Analyst Bryan Hong, Water Quality Engineer Kelly McCann, Senior Accountant Malissa Muttaraid, Public Affairs Representative ALSO PRESENT Andrew Gagen, Partner, Kidman Law LLP Beth Haney, Councilmember, City of Yorba Linda 4. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA None. 5. INTRODUCTIONS AND PRESENTATIONS 5.1. Elected Official Liaison Reports None. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 2 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Ben Parker (resident) commented on a report issued by the OC Grand Jury referencing the District’s reserves and requested a copy if available. Mr. Marcantonio indicated this report was accessible on the internet. Ms. Pat Nelson (resident) commented on information published in the newspaper and social media related to the Ad Hoc Citizens Advisory Committee’s (AHCAC) recommendations. She also spoke against budget based rate structures and the issuance of a refund. President Miller noted that slides from a special briefing regarding implementation of Executive Order B-37-16 had been added to the digital version of the agenda packet (see Item No. 10.1.). 7. CONSENT CALENDAR Vice President Nederhood stated he had a question regarding a payment to Kidman Law listed on Item No. 7.3. Director Hawkins suggested this item be considered separately from the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Director Hawkins made a motion, seconded by Director Jones, to approve Item Nos. 7.1., 7.2., and 7.4. on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0-0-1 with Director Hall being absent. 7.1. Minutes of Board of Directors Special Meeting Held February 23, 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. 7.2. Minutes of Board of Directors Special Meeting Held March 1, 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented. 7.4. Directors and General Manager Fees and Expenses Report for Third Quarter FY 2017 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the Directors and General Manager Fees and Expenses Report for Third Quarter FY 2017. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 3 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION 7.3. Payments of Bills, Refunds, and Wire Transfers Vice President Nederhood requested additional information regarding the amount listed for payment to Kidman Law. Mr. Kelly McCann and Mr. Marc Marcantonio explained that the District was incurring additional costs related to pending litigation. Pursuant to a fee sharing agreement for special counsel, these costs are being submitted to Kidman Law which are in turn billed to the District. A portion of the payment being made to Kidman Law represents multiple months of back billing for these services. Director Nederhood made a motion, seconded by Director Hawkins to ratify and authorize disbursements in the amount of $1,771,792.93. Motion carried 4-0-0-1 with Director Hall being absent. 8. ACTION CALENDAR 8.1. Proposed Budgeted Positions for Fiscal Year 2018 Ms. Gina Knight explained that the Board considers and approves funding for proposed positions as part of the annual budget process. The draft budget for FY18 includes funding for 80 regular, full time positions. This next year’s list includes the addition of two new positions (Assistant General Manager (AGM) and Accountant) and the removal of four others (Water Conservation Supervisor, Water Conservation Representative (2), and Office Clerk). The position of Communications Manager would be unfunded. The Board and staff discussed the need for the new Accountant position and the duties to be performed. Discussion continued regarding the salary range for the AGM position, funding of the Communications Manager position, and the District’s public relations needs. Ms. Pat Nelson (resident) commented on the proposed budgeted positions and the District’s communications efforts and future needs. The Board voted 3-0-1-1 on a Roll Call with Director Hawkins voting No and Director Hall being absent to adopt Resolution No. 17-15 approving the budgeted positions for Fiscal Year 2018 and rescinding Resolution No. 16-20. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 4 8.2. District Investments Held with Safe Keeper/Custodial Agent Pershing LLC Mr. McCann explained that YLWD’s non-trustee US Government sponsored agency securities and certificates of deposit were currently being held by Pershing LLC in the District’s name. However, the safe keeper/custodial agreement is between First Empire Solutions and Pershing. While the District can choose to continue with this arrangement, a significant deficiency of internal control will be reported in future audits. Another option is to transfer the investments held at Pershing to another safe keeper/custodial agent. The Board and staff reviewed a list of potential safe keepers, the associated cost for service, and their level of compliance with auditing requirements. They also discussed the current rate of return, the disposition of CD’s near maturation, and the ideal time for transferring investments to another safe keeper. The Board determined not to take action on this matter at this time. 8.3. Draft 2017 Water Quality Report Mr. Steve Conklin introduced Mr. Bryan Hong. Mr. Hong explained that state and federal regulations require the District to prepare an annual water quality report and make it available to its customers by July 1st of each year. This report covers water quality monitoring, testing and analysis conducted from the previous calendar year. Since 2013, water utility agencies have been allowed to deliver this report electronically resulting in cost savings. As such, the report will be published on the District’s website and hard copies will be provided upon request. Staff will also include a notice on customer bills regarding availability of the report during June and July’s billing cycles. Over 23,000 analyses were conducted in 2016 to ensure that the water provided by the District met all state and federal drinking standards. The District has never violated these standards and in some cases, went beyond what is legally required by providing additional monitoring for unregulated contaminants of concern. The Board and staff discussed various sections of the report, the District’s water quality testing and analysis processes, and shared costs for design. Director Hawkins made a motion, seconded by Director Jones, to approve the 2017 Water Quality Report and authorize staff to make it available on the District’s website pursuant to State and Federal law regarding electronic delivery. Motion carried 4-0-0-1 with Director Hall being absent. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 5 8.4. Change Order No. 4 for Richfield Road Water Main Project Mr. Conklin stated that this project was nearing completion. He explained that the contractor had requested an increase of $59,729.98 and 25 calendar day extension due to differing site conditions and unknown utilities. This includes the discovery of very fine sand which caused issues with shoring and an existing abandoned water pipeline and reinforced concrete encasement that needed to be removed. Director Hawkins made a motion, seconded by Director Nederhood, to approve Change Order No. 4 for $59,792.98 and 25 additional calendar days to TBU Construction Inc. for construction of the Richfield Road Water Main Project, Job No. 2014-23. Motion carried 4-0-0-1 with Director Hall being absent. 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS 9.1. Unaudited Financial Statements for Third Quarter FY 2017 Mr. McCann provided and overview of the statements including assets and liabilities, operating and non-operating revenues and expenses, and change in net position. The Board and staff discussed recent water consumption trends and water supply strategies for tying in the new water main. Ms. Pat Nelson (resident) commented on methods for notifying the public regarding the potential need for reduced consumption during the process of tying in the new water main. 9.2. Budget to Actual Statements for Month Ending April 30, 2017 Mr. McCann stated that the District’s auditors had requested staff postpone modifying the format of these statements until they can confirm compliance with GAAP and GASB requirements. He noted that the format of the comprehensive annual financial reports would not change. Mr. McCann then reviewed the consolidated statement touching on revenues, expenses, and net position. 9.3. Cash and Investment Report for Period Ending April 30, 2017 The Board and staff discussed the impact of decreased water consumption on the District’s water distribution system and the state’s long-term framework for water conservation. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 6 Mr. McCann provided an overview of information contained in the reports related to yields, expenditures, reserve levels, fair value measurement, and capital reserves and expenses. Mr. McCann confirmed that the Board wanted to begin drawing funds from the 2017A revenue bonds as mentioned in the previous workshop meeting. 9.4. Online Accessibility and Format of Periodic Financial Reports Ms. Malissa Muttaraid reviewed various methods being utilized to engage and inform District customers, including YLWD’s website and Constant Contact’s e-marketing services. She also described improvements planned for the website and staff’s efforts to notify customers of published financial reports. The Board and staff discussed efforts to obtain customers’ e-mail addresses and features provided by the DropCountr mobile application. Vice President Nederhood commended Ms. Muttaraid for her work with the AHCAC. The Board and staff discussed presenting the District’s financials in a pro forma format and the auditor’s concerns. 10. REPORTS, INFORMATION ITEMS, AND COMMENTS 10.1. Directors' Reports The Directors reported on their attendance at the following event: Special Briefing: Making Conservation a Way of Life – May 22, 2017 (Jones/Miller/Nederhood) Director Jones requested that a discussion item be placed on the agenda for the next regular meeting to discuss Item 7 of the AHCAC’s recommendations to the Board. The Board and staff discussed the state’s long-term framework for water conservation and potential variances the District may qualify for. 10.2. General Manager's Report Mr. Marcantonio reported that staff was working on responding to multiple public records requests. He also reported on his progress to obtain proposals from public relations firms, a recent meeting he had with representatives from ProcureAmerica to discuss potential cost efficiencies, Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 7 and a $200K grant awarded to MWDOC for leak detection equipment which will be shared amongst member agencies. He then asked each of the managers (or their designee) to report on activities within their respective departments. Mr. Conklin reported that the water audit was complete and would be conducted on an annual basis in the future. He also reported on the status of the Richfield Pipeline Replacement Project and Fairmont Booster Pump Station Upgrade Project. He noted that a meeting was scheduled with developers of the Esperanza Hills project. Mr. John DeCriscio reported on the status of repairs to Well No. 1, a recent water main break, and staff’s fire prevention efforts at various District facilities following an inspection performed by OCFA. Mr. McCann reported that staff was preparing for the interim audit scheduled to begin the following week. Mr. Marcantonio noted the auditors may wish to interview one or more of the Directors. Mr. Art Vega reported on staff’s efforts related to upgrading the District’s accounting and billing software and protecting the agency’s computer systems against malware. Ms. Knight reported on the number of public records requests received since January. Ms. Botts noted that representatives from Raftelis would be present at the budget workshop meeting scheduled June 19, 2017 to demonstrate the District’s financial model. 10.3. General Counsel’s Report None. 10.4. Future Agenda Items and Staff Tasks None other than Director Jones’ earlier request. 11. COMMITTEE REPORTS 11.1. Interagency Committee with MWDOC and OCWD (Miller/Nederhood) Next meeting is scheduled May 25, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 8 11.2. Joint Agency Committee with City of Yorba Linda (Miller/Hawkins) Minutes of the meeting held March 13, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. were included in the agenda packet. Next meeting is scheduled June 12, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. at YL City Hall. 11.3. Interagency Committee with City of Placentia (Miller/Nederhood) Next meeting is yet to be scheduled. 12. INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS The Directors reported on their attendance at the following meetings. 12.1 LAFCO – May 10, 2017 (Nederhood – As Needed) Vice President Nederhood commented on his efforts to examine a previous increase of the District’s annual dues. 12.2 YL Planning Commission – May 10, 2017 (Hawkins – As Needed) Director Hawkins did not attend this meeting. 12.3. YL City Council – May 16, 2017 (Hall) Director Hall was not present to provide a report. 12.4. MWDOC – May 17, 2017 (Nederhood) 13. BOARD OF DIRECTORS ACTIVITY CALENDAR 13.1. Meetings from May 24, 2017 – July 31, 2017 The Board reviewed the activity calendar and made no changes. 14. CONFERENCES, SEMINARS, AND SPECIAL EVENTS 14.1. Special Briefing: Making Conservation a Way of Life – May 22, 2017 CSDA Special District Leadership Academy Conference – July 9-12, 2017 UWI Annual Conference – August 16-18, 2017 Minutes of the YLWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting Held May 23, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. 9 Director Hawkins and President Miller discussed switching their attendance at future YL City Council meetings. The Board voted 4-0-0-1 with Director Hall being absent to approve and/or ratify Director attendance at these events if desired. 15. ADJOURNMENT 15.1. The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 p.m. Annie Alexander Assistant Board Secretary ITEM NO. 7.4 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Budgeted:Yes To:Board of Directors Cost Estimate:$4,472,758.00 Funding Source:All Funds From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Presented By:Delia Lugo, Finance Manager Dept:Finance Reviewed by Legal:N/A Prepared By:Richard Cabadas, Accounting Assistant I CEQA Compliance:N/A Subject:Payments of Bills, Refunds, and Wire Transfers SUMMARY: Section 31302 of the California Water Code says the District shall pay demands made against it when they have been approved by the Board of Directors. Pursuant to law, staff is hereby submitting the list of disbursements for Board of Directors’ approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors ratify and authorize disbursements in the amount of $4,472,758.00. DISCUSSION: The items on this disbursement list includes: A wire of $30,254.46 to So. California Gas Co. for June 2017 gas charges at multiple locations; a wire of $378.40 to So. California Edison for June 2017 electricity charges at multiple locations; a wire of $507,442.16 to MWDOC for May 2017 water purchases; a wire of $62,892.04 to So. California Edison Co. for June 2017 electricity charges at multiple locations; a check of $112,756.26 to ACWA/JPIA for August 2017 medical & dental premium; a check of $319,813.00 to CALPERS for annual prepayment on the unfunded accrued liability (UAL); a check of $41,159.20 to California United Bank for retentions on progress payments #6 & #7 at Fairmont booster pump station; a check of $2,271,898.98 to OCWD – Pump tax for replenishment assessment for January 2017 – June 2017; a check of $289,628.40 to Pacific Hydrotech Corporation for Fairmont booster pump station progress payment #7; a check of $296,357.60 to MWDOC for annual retail service connections for FY 17/18. The balance of $302,755.91 is routine invoices. The Accounts Payable check register total is $4,235,336.41; Payroll No. 14 total is $237,421.59; and the total of all listed disbursements for this agenda report is $4,472,758.00. A summary of the disbursements is attached. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S): The Board of Directors approves bills, refunds and wire transfers semi-monthly. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: 17-CS_0725.pdf Cap Sheet Backup Material CkReg072517.pdf Check Register Backup Material 17_CC_0725.pdf Credit Card Summary Backup Material Summary of Disbursements July 25, 2017 CHECK NUMBERS & WIRES: Computer Checks 70030—70128 $ 3,634,369.35 ____________ $ 3,634,369.35 WIRES: W071217 So. Cal Gas Co. $ 30,254.46 W071217A So. Cal Edison $ 378.40 W071417 MWDOC $ 507,442.16 W072017 So. Cal Edison $ 62,892.04 _____________ $ 600,967.06 TOTAL OF CHECKS & WIRES $4,235,336.41 PAYROLL NO. 14: Direct Deposits $ 173,894.62 Third Party Checks 6729—6736 $ 13,950.01 Payroll Taxes $ 49,576.96 $ 237,421.59 TOTAL OF PAYROLL $237,421.59 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DISBURSEMENT TOTAL: $4,472,758.00 ================================================================== APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MINUTE ORDER AT BOARD MEETING OF JULY 25, 2017 ==================================================================. Check No.Date Vendor Name Amount Description 70039 07/25/2017 ACWA/JPIA 112,756.26 MEDICAL & DENTAL PREMIUM - AUGUST 2017 70128 07/25/2017 ACWA/JPIA 35,117.18 2017 WORKER COMPENSATION - 4/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 70042 07/25/2017 Air Resources Board 570.00 PERMIT RENEWAL - UNIT #E162 70040 07/25/2017 Al Nederhood 94.70 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUNE 2017 70038 07/25/2017 ANNA KAME 173.33 CUSTOMER REFUND 70041 07/25/2017 Aramark 382.50 UNIFORM SERVICE 70058 07/25/2017 ARC 20.00 MONTHL FEE - PW DOC/BID MGTM 70043 07/25/2017 AT & T - Calnet3 849.69 ATT CALNET3 70044 07/25/2017 Autoscribe Corporation 799.50 PAYMENT VISION GATEWAY 70047 07/25/2017 B & M Lawn and Garden Inc 94.28 TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 70045 07/25/2017 Backflow Apparatus & Valve Co., Inc 1,605.48 BACKFLOW DEVICE REPAIRS 70046 07/25/2017 Best Drilling and Pump, Inc.1,200.00 WELL #1 - DOWN VIDEO LOG SURVEY 70048 07/25/2017 BrightView Tree Care Services Inc.7,601.17 SANTIAGO RESERVOIR - WEED CLEARANCE & MONTHLY LANDSCAPE SC7004907/25/2017 Brooke Jones 94.48 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUNE 2017 70032 07/25/2017 BYCOR GENERAL CONTRACTORS 1,056.27 CUSTOMER REFUND 70051 07/25/2017 CalCard US Bank 2,343.08 CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS FOR JUNE & JULY 2017 70052 07/25/2017 California United Bank 41,159.20 J10-11B - RETENTION - FAIRMONT PUMP STATION UPGRADE 70050 07/25/2017 CalPERS 319,813.00 ANNUAL UNFUNDED ACCRUED LIABILITY 70053 07/25/2017 CDM Smith 7,615.28 J09-22#22 - PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES - WELL22 70054 07/25/2017 CDW Government, Inc 24,233.24 J16-15 - VOIP PHONE SYSTEM 70055 07/25/2017 City Of Anaheim 37,765.58 LAKEVIEW & RICHFIELD - ELECTRIC CHARGES - 06/2017 - 07/2017 70056 07/25/2017 City Of Placentia 3,970.04 SEWER FEES - JUNE 2017 & ENCROACHMENT PERMITS 70057 07/25/2017 Clinical Lab. Of San Bern.1,415.00 WATER QUALITY - LAB SAMPLES 70059 07/25/2017 Culligan of Santa Ana 2,099.01 EQUIPMENT PE SOFTENER 70061 07/25/2017 Dean Criske Trucking 1,093.14 ROAD MATERIAL - SAND & BASE 70060 07/25/2017 Dell Marketing L.P.4,570.10 VLA OFFICE - STANDARD LICENSE 70062 07/25/2017 Department of Toxic Substance Control 175.00 EPA ID FEE 70036 07/25/2017 DIRT WORKS ENGINEERING 900.00 CUSTOMER REFUND 70063 07/25/2017 Eisel Enterprises, Inc.1,012.86 J14-08 - 438 MTR BOX, LID & COVERS 70064 07/25/2017 Employee Relations, Inc.89.60 PRE EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND CHECK 70065 07/25/2017 Enthalpy Analytical, Inc.2,080.60 WATER QUALITY - LAB SAMPLES 70067 07/25/2017 EyeMed 1,354.57 EYE MED - JULY 2017 70066 07/25/2017 Fairway Ford Sales, Inc.13.58 VEHICLE MAITNENANCE - UNIT #184 70068 07/25/2017 Fieldman Rolapp & Associates 540.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - RESERVE POLICY 70069 07/25/2017 Flex Advantage 112.50 FLEX ADVANTAGE - JUNE 2017 (25) 70070 07/25/2017 Fry's Electronics 83.93 IT HARDWARE 70071 07/25/2017 George Baltierra 90.00 CERTIFICATE REIMBURSEMENT - D3 70072 07/25/2017 Government Finance Officers 160.00 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL LUGO, D - 8/2017-8/2018 70073 07/25/2017 Graybar Electric Co 374.45 SURGE SUPRESSOR 70074 07/25/2017 Haaker Equipment Co.1,538.29 CCTV REPAIRS 70075 07/25/2017 Hach Company 550.25 POCKET CLRMTR II MONOCHL 70076 07/25/2017 Harrington Industrial 76.32 CL2 REPLACEMENT PARTS 70077 07/25/2017 Infosend Inc.12,421.57 POSTAGE BILLING & MONTHLY MAINTENANCE - JUNE 2017 70078 07/25/2017 Inland Overhead Door Company 539.00 SERVICE CALL - GATE 70079 07/25/2017 Innovyze 5,750.00 INFOWATER/SCADA WATCH - FLOATING LICENSES 70080 07/25/2017 Jackson's Auto Supply - Napa 168.94 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE - UNIT #170 70081 07/25/2017 John R Brundahl III 260.00 CERTIFICATE REIMBURSEMENT - D4 & T4 70082 07/25/2017 Kidman Law 16,336.50 LEGAL SERVICES - JUNE 2017 70083 07/25/2017 Kimball Midwest 585.14 HARDWARE SUPPLIES 70084 07/25/2017 Lancab, Inc.1,656.77 INSTALLATION OF CAT5E & CAT6 CABLE AT YLWD 70085 07/25/2017 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 791.00 LEGAL SERVICES - JUNE 2017 70037 07/25/2017 LIN ZHAO 154.43 CUSTOMER REFUND 70034 07/25/2017 LINDA PUTNAM 177.86 CUSTOMER REFUND 70030 07/25/2017 LISA WEAVER 1.19 CUSTOMER REFUND 70086 07/25/2017 Littlejohn-Reuland Corporation 2,743.71 A/C REPLACEMENT PARTS 70087 07/25/2017 Marc Marcantonio 74.58 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUNE 2017 70031 07/25/2017 MARY JO VINCENTE 320.59 CUSTOMER REFUND 70088 07/25/2017 Mc Fadden-Dale Hardware 78.85 HARDWARE SUPPLIES 70089 07/25/2017 Mc Master-Carr Supply Co.34.40 HARDWARE SUPPLIES 70102 07/25/2017 Measurement Specialties, Inc.888.02 PRODUCTION METERS & SENSORS 70033 07/25/2017 MICHIEL LOGAN 185.63 CUSTOMER REFUND 70090 07/25/2017 Minuteman Press 980.22 DOOR HANGERS NOTIFICATIONS 70091 07/25/2017 MSKW Company 355.55 MECHANIC SHOP SUPPLIES 70127 07/25/2017 Municipal Water District 296,357.60 ANNUAL RETAIL SERVICE CONNECTION CHARGES W071417 07/14/2017 Municipal Water District 507,442.16 WATER DELIVERIES FOR MAY 2017 70092 07/25/2017 Muzak LLC 89.56 CUSTOMER MESSAGE/PHONE SERVICE - JULY2017 70093 07/25/2017 NatPay Online Business Solutions 34.80 DOCULIVERY - MAY 2017 & JUNE 2017 Yorba Linda Water District Check Register For Checks Dated: 06/28/2017 thru 07/11/2017 70094 07/25/2017 Nickey Kard Lock Inc 4,227.38 FUEL - 06/15 - 06/30/17 70095 07/25/2017 Office Solutions 2,261.52 OFFICE SUPPLIES 70096 07/25/2017 Omni Enterprise Inc.2,990.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES - JUNE 2017 70097 07/25/2017 Orange County - Tax Collector 26,418.60 LAFCO COST - FY 2017/2018 70098 07/25/2017 Orange County Water District 2,271,898.98 REPLENISHMENT ASSESMENT FOR GROUND WATER - JAN. - JUNE 2017 70104 07/25/2017 P.T.I. Sand & Gravel, Inc.1,729.70 MATERIAL - COLD MIX ASPHALT & +30 FILL SAND 70099 07/25/2017 Pacific Hydrotech Corporation 289,628.40 J10-11B - PROGRESS PAYMENT #07 - FAIRMONT PUMP STATION UPGRADE 70100 07/25/2017 Phil Hawkins 75.97 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUNE 2017 70101 07/25/2017 Praxair Distribution 6,267.55 FUME EXTRACTOR 70103 07/25/2017 Process Solutions, Inc.862.50 ON SITE SERVICE - PLC SYSTEM 70105 07/25/2017 PULSCO INC.353.38 PUMP STATION REPAIR PARTS 70114 07/25/2017 Rachel Padilla/Petty Cash 344.89 PETTY CASH - O062117 & Y071017 70106 07/25/2017 Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc.4,194.33 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - JUNE 2017 70107 07/25/2017 Rick Walkemeyer 510.54 MILEAGE & TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT - RECOVERY SITE 70108 07/25/2017 RKI Engineering, LLC 5,800.00 SCADA SUPPORT - MAY 2017 70112 07/25/2017 S&J Supply Co.9,529.91 WAREHOUSE STOCK & VALVE REPAIR PARTS 70109 07/25/2017 Sanders Paving, Inc.2,840.00 CONCRETE REPAIR & ASPHALT PAVING 70110 07/25/2017 Selman Chevrolet Company 455.90 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE - UNIT #164 & #170 70111 07/25/2017 Sixth Man Promotions Inc.1,735.01 YLWD - DISTRICT UNIFORMS 70113 07/25/2017 Solarwinds Inc.395.00 SERV-U FTP SERVER LICENSE W071217A 07/12/2017 Southern Calif Edison Co.378.40 JUNE 2017 - ELECTRICITY CHARGES AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS W072017 07/20/2017 Southern Calif Edison Co.62,892.04 JUNE 2017 - ELECTRICITY CHARGES AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS W071217 07/12/2017 Southern Calif Gas Co.30,254.46 JUNE 2017 - GAS CHARGES AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS 70118 07/25/2017 St.Jude Hospital Yorba Linda 70.00 DMV PHYSICAL EXAM 70116 07/25/2017 Stantec Consulting Services In 32,085.96 J10-11B - FAIRMONT PS UPGRADE 70115 07/25/2017 Stater Bros. Markets 54.40 MEETING SUPPLIES 70117 07/25/2017 Step Saver Inc 548.57 COARSE SALT 70119 07/25/2017 Switch Ltd 554.87 DATA HOSTING - COLOCATION 70120 07/25/2017 The Shredders 22.00 SHRED ONSITE SERVICE 70121 07/25/2017 Time Warner Cable 175.14 MIRALOMA BASIC CABLE SERVICE 70122 07/25/2017 TMobile 0.16 T-MOBILE - 5/21-6/20/17 70123 07/25/2017 Townsend Public Affairs, Inc.5,000.00 CONSULTING SERVICE - JUNE 2017 70124 07/25/2017 Underground Service Alert 330.00 DIGALERT - JUNE 2017 70126 07/25/2017 United Water Works, Inc.2,671.12 WAREHOUSE STOCK 70125 07/25/2017 USA Blue Book 681.15 PRODUCTION REPAIR PARTS 70035 07/25/2017 YORBA LINDA 9, LLC 1,027.05 CUSTOMER REFUND 4,235,336.41 07-13-2017 PAYROLL #14 - EMPLOYEE DIRECT DEPOSIT 173,894.62 07-13-2017 PAYROLL #14 - PAYROLL TAX PAYMENT 49,576.96 6729 07-13-2017 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT 128.3 6730 07-13-2017 FLEX ADVANTAGE 1672.41 6731 07-13-2017 LINCOLN FINANCIAL GROUP 2659.69 6732 07-13-2017 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS 8147.7 6733 07-13-2017 KATHERINE VARGAS-LIMON 231 6734 07-13-2017 CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 366.92 6735 07-13-2017 CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 339.69 6736 07-13-2017 CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 404.3 237,421.59 Payroll Checks #14 Vendor Name Amount Description Harrington Industrial 53.70 CL2 replacement parts Brown & Caldwell 400.00 Job posting - Accountant & Management Analyst position Home Depot 36.04 Mechanic shop supplies Grainger 279.81 Pump sensors - Well 12 Coleman Hanna 145.82 Timer with assembly Praxair Distribution 47.71 Welding supplies Industrial Hearing & Pulmonary Mgmt 740.00 On site audiometrict testing CWEA SARBS 425.00 2017 Summer Collections Seminar - (7) attendees BHI Management Consulting 105.00 Books for Board, GM & AGM FTPToday.com 110.00 ylwd.ftptoday.com - storage 2,343.08 Cal Card Credit Card U S Bank ITEM NO. 7.5 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 To:Board of Directors From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Presented By:Gina Knight, HR/Risk and Safety Manager Dept:Human Resources/Risk Management Reviewed by Legal:No Prepared By:Amelia Cloonan, Human Resources Analyst Subject:Claim for Damages Filed by Joseph Goudlock for Kennedy Wilson Properties, Ltd. SUMMARY: A claim was filed with the District on June 29, 2017 for the cost of plumbing services incurred to repair a landscaping leak in a commercial parking lot located at Imperial Highway and Rose Drive, 1111 E. Imperial Highway, Placentia, CA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors reject and deny the claim filed by Joseph Goudlock for Kennedy Wilson Properties, Ltd. in the amount of $1,585.00. DISCUSSION: In the claim submitted to the District, claimant states that water was coming up through the ground in the parking lot at 1111 E. Imperial Highway, Placentia, CA on Friday, June 2, 2017. Claimant contacted YLWD's emergency response line at approximately 9:12 a.m. and requested someone be dispatched to determine whether the water was coming from YLWD pipes or the property's pipes. Claimant says he waited two hours. He then called the property management company's general contractor who arrived on the site at 11:20 a.m. After an additional hour, the general contractor began work. The District's employees, who had been working on another job on Rose Drive, arrived at the site at 12:30 p.m. and told the general contractor's employees to stop digging. The District employees determined that the backflow had already been turned off by the general contractor's employees. According to the District's Sr. Maintenance Worker in charge of leaks, when the leak did not stop after turning off the backflow, it should have been an indication to the contractor that the leak was not their leak. The meter in question is for irrigation only. There was no disruption to the water service for any of the businesses at any time. The area where water had leaked covered approximately five or six parking spots and was located just in from the edge of the parking lot near Imperial Highway. In his claim form, claimant, who did not visit the property during the event, referred to it as a flood. The pictures sent to the District by claimant do not support this. There did not appear to be any cars parked in the area. Prior to their departure, general contractor's employees put up yellow tape as a warning barrier. An investigation was conducted, and District staff repaired the leak by Monday, June 5, 2017. The claimant provided the District with pictures of the area. These pictures showed that the general contractor was working in the District's line, that the general contractor dug proximate to the District's line, and that a yellow tape barrier was erected. The Yorba Linda Water District's Rules and Regulations with Regard to the Rendition of Water Service, Section 5.9, Consumer's Responsibility, provides that: "The District shall in no way whatsoever be responsible for any damage to person or property because of any leakage, breakage or seepage from, or accident or damage to any meter or pipe situated within any private premises, and said District shall not be responsible for any leakage, breakage, or seepage from any pipe situated between any meter properly installed at the curb and the private premises served thereunder, nor shall said District be responsible for or on any account of any damage, injury or loss occasioned directly or indirectly by the existence of any meter or pipe situated upon private property." Thus, whatever occurs on the property owner's side is the property owner's responsibility, and the property owner must be responsible for the cost of any repairs. Section 9.1, Protection from Damage, of the District's Water Rules and Regulations for Water Service, August 2016, states: "No unauthorized person shall maliciously, willfully, or negligently remove, change, disturb, break, damage, destroy, uncover, deface or in any way tamper, or interfere, with any facility, apparatus, appliance, property, structure, appurtenance, or equipment which is used or maintained as a part of the water works. Any person violating this provision shall be subject to immediate arrest under charge of disorderly conduct. ..." This section provides that no one shall conduct repairs on District lines except the District. There is no charge to property owners for repairs the District performs on the District lines. The invoice presented to Kennedy Wilson and forwarded to the District states in part that the contractor's employees "... found valve box marked as property of Yorba Linda Water District; waited on-site until decision was made to perform repairs; once approval was given, demolished section of asphalt and began excavation of soil to uncover leak when Yorba Linda Water District arrived and requested stop work pending their investigation as to source of leak ...". In the Claim Form presented to the District, Mr. Goudlock states that the District employee demanded the contractor stop work. He called Dig Alert to set up a service call to have it investigated. California Government Code 4216.2 (b), Before Excavation, states that "Except in an emergency, an excavator planning to conduct an excavation shall notify the appropriate regional notification center of the excavator's intent to excavate at least two working days, and not more than 14 calendar days, before beginning that excavation." Claimant ordered a private general contractor to perform unnecessary work and to interfere with the District's line. The District is in no way responsible for the charges claimant incurred. The claim form and supporting documents are on file and available for review in the office of the General Manager. ITEM NO. 8.1 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Budgeted:Yes To:Board of Directors From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Presented By:Delia Lugo, Finance Manager Dept:Finance Prepared By:Delia Lugo, Finance Manager Subject:Sewer Charges Collected on Tax Roll for Fiscal Year 2018 SUMMARY: This time of the year, the Board of Directors considers collecting certain annual maintenance sewer charges on the County's property tax rolls. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors adopt Resolution No. 17-26 Electing to Have Certain Sewer Maintenance Charges Collected on the Fiscal Year 2018 Tax Roll and Superseding Resolution No.16-13. DISCUSSION: The District collects the Sewer Maintenance Charge by adding it to the monthly water bill of customers where the District provides water service and the customer also has a connection to the sewer system. For customers connected to the District's sewer system that receive water service from another purveyor or those customers that do not receive a monthly water bill from the District, the Sewer Maintenance Charge is collected through the property tax rolls prepared by the County of Orange Tax Assessors Office ("County"). This process is legally authorized and established by Resolution of the Board. Customer connections of the Locke Ranch area do not receive water service from the District, therefore their Sewer Maintenance Charges are collected through the County property tax rolls. The Sewer Maintenance Charges are subject to the substantive and procedural requirements of Proposition 218 (California Constitution Article XIII D) barring an increase in the rates and/or discretionary CPI increase of more than 5%, except with proper notifications to the property owners affected allowing adequate opportunity to protest any such increases. To collect the current sewer maintenance charges on the property tax rolls for FY 18, the County requires a certified Resolution by the Board of Directors directing their staff to add the charges to the property tax rolls for the properties assessed. The County has established a deadline of August 1, 2017 to receive this information. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: Resolution_No._17-26_-_Sewer_Maintenance_Charges.docx Resolution Resolution 2018_Exhibit_A-_Tax_Roll_Support.docx Exhibit Exhibit 2018_Attachment_C_-_County_Document.pdf Backup Material Backup Material Resolution No. 17-26 Electing to Have Certain Sewer Maintenance Charges Collected on the FY18 Tax Roll 1 RESOLUTION NO. 17-26 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT ELECTING TO HAVE CERTAIN SEWER MAINTENANCE CHARGES COLLECTED ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2018 TAX ROLL AND SUPERCEDING RESOLUTION 16-13 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 17-26 set out sewer rates for the Yorba Linda Water District (“District”) in compliance with substantive and procedural requirements of Proposition 218 (California Constitution Art. XIII D); and WHEREAS, under the authority of the California Water Code Sections 31100 the District may provide sewer service to property located outside the District boundaries and the District’s Regulations for Rendition of Sanitary Sewer Service include a provision that a sewer maintenance charge is adopted by Resolution; and WHEREAS, under authority of California Water Code Sections 31101 and 31102 the District may prescribe and collect charges for sewer services and facilities and may collect sewer charges in any lawful manner; and WHEREAS, under California Health and Safety Code Sections 5471 and 5473 the District may elect to have the County of Orange Auditor/Controller collect sewer charges on the Orange County Property Tax Roll. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Yorba Linda Water District to adopt Sewer Maintenance Charge as follows: Section 1. The Board of Directors elects to have the County of Orange Auditor/Controller collect the charges fixed herein on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time and together with and not separately from County of Orange taxes. Resolution No. 17-26 Electing to Have Certain Sewer Maintenance Charges Collected on the FY18 Tax Roll 2 Section 2. The General Manager or his designee is authorized and directed to file with the County of Orange Auditor/Controller a copy of this Resolution together with the listing of parcel numbers and amounts of charges shown in Exhibit “A” and such other documentation as the County Auditor/Controller may require in order to accomplish the purposes of this Resolution. Section 3. Resolution No. 16-13 is superseded effective immediately by the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of July 2017 by the following called vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: J. Wayne Miller, Ph.D., President Yorba Linda Water District ATTEST: Marc Marcantonio, Board Secretary Yorba Linda Water District Reviewed as to form by General Counsel: Andrew B. Gagen, Esq. Kidman Law LLP Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34901101 83.28 812 B9 34901102 83.28 812 B9 34901103 83.28 812 B9 34901104 83.28 812 B9 34901105 83.28 812 B9 34901106 83.28 812 B9 34901107 83.28 812 B9 34901108 83.28 812 B9 34901109 83.28 812 B9 34901110 83.28 812 B9 34901111 83.28 812 B9 34901201 83.28 812 B9 34901202 83.28 812 B9 34901203 83.28 812 B9 34901204 83.28 812 B9 34901205 83.28 812 B9 34901206 83.28 812 B9 34901207 83.28 812 B9 34901208 83.28 812 B9 34901209 83.28 812 B9 34901210 83.28 812 B9 34901301 83.28 812 B9 34901302 83.28 812 B9 34901303 83.28 812 B9 34901304 83.28 812 B9 34901305 83.28 812 B9 34901306 83.28 812 B9 34901307 83.28 812 B9 34902101 83.28 812 B9 34902102 83.28 812 B9 34902103 83.28 812 B9 34902104 83.28 812 B9 34902105 83.28 812 B9 34902106 83.28 812 B9 34902107 83.28 812 B9 34902108 83.28 812 B9 34902201 83.28 812 B9 34902202 83.28 812 B9 34902203 83.28 812 B9 34902204 83.28 812 B9 34902205 83.28 812 B9 34902206 83.28 812 B9 34902207 83.28 812 B9 34902208 83.28 812 B9 34902209 83.28 812 B9 34902210 83.28 812 B9 34902301 83.28 812 B9 34902302 83.28 812 B9 34902303 83.28 812 B9 34902304 83.28 812 B9 34902305 83.28 812 B9 34902401 83.28 812 B9 34902402 83.28 812 B9 34902403 83.28 812 B9 34902404 83.28 812 B9 34902405 83.28 812 B9 34902406 83.28 812 B9 34902407 83.28 812 B9 34902408 83.28 812 B9 34902409 83.28 812 B9 34903101 83.28 812 B9 34903102 83.28 812 B9 34903103 83.28 812 B9 34903104 83.28 812 B9 34903105 83.28 812 B9 34903106 83.28 812 B9 34903107 83.28 812 B9 34903108 83.28 812 B9 34903109 83.28 812 B9 34903110 83.28 812 B9 34903111 83.28 812 B9 34903112 83.28 812 B9 34903113 83.28 812 B9 34903114 83.28 812 B9 34903116 83.28 812 B9 34903117 83.28 812 B9 34903118 83.28 812 B9 34903214 83.28 812 B9 34903216 83.28 812 B9 34903217 83.28 812 B9 34903218 83.28 812 B9 34903219 83.28 812 B9 34903233 83.28 812 B9 34903234 83.28 812 B9 34903235 83.28 812 B9 34903236 83.28 812 B9 34903237 83.28 812 B9 34903238 83.28 812 B9 34903239 83.28 812 B9 34903240 83.28 812 B9 34903241 83.28 812 B9 34903242 83.28 812 B9 34903243 83.28 812 B9 34903244 83.28 812 B9 34903247 83.28 812 B9 34903248 83.28 812 B9 34903249 83.28 812 B9 34903250 83.28 812 B9 34903251 83.28 812 B9 34903252 83.28 812 B9 34903253 83.28 812 B9 34903254 83.28 812 B9 34903258 83.28 812 B9 34904101 83.28 812 B9 34904102 83.28 812 B9 34904103 83.28 812 B9 34904104 83.28 812 B9 34904105 83.28 812 B9 34904106 83.28 812 B9 34904107 83.28 812 B9 34904108 83.28 812 B9 34904109 83.28 812 B9 34904110 83.28 812 B9 34904111 83.28 812 B9 34904112 83.28 812 B9 34904113 83.28 812 B9 34904114 83.28 812 B9 34904115 83.28 812 B9 34904116 83.28 812 B9 34904117 83.28 812 B9 34904118 83.28 812 B9 34904119 83.28 812 B9 34904120 83.28 812 B9 34904121 83.28 812 B9 34904122 83.28 812 B9 34904123 83.28 812 B9 34904124 83.28 812 B9 34904125 83.28 812 B9 34904126 83.28 812 B9 34904127 83.28 812 B9 34904128 83.28 812 B9 34904129 83.28 812 B9 34904130 83.28 812 B9 34904201 83.28 812 B9 34904202 83.28 812 B9 34904203 83.28 812 B9 34904204 83.28 812 B9 34904205 83.28 812 B9 34904206 83.28 812 B9 34904301 83.28 812 B9 34904302 83.28 812 B9 34904303 83.28 812 B9 34905101 83.28 812 B9 34905102 83.28 812 B9 34905103 83.28 812 B9 34905104 83.28 812 B9 34905105 83.28 812 B9 34905106 83.28 812 B9 34905107 83.28 812 B9 34905108 83.28 812 B9 34905109 83.28 812 B9 34905110 83.28 812 B9 34905111 83.28 812 B9 34905112 83.28 812 B9 34905113 83.28 812 B9 34905114 83.28 812 B9 34905115 83.28 812 B9 34905116 83.28 812 B9 34905117 83.28 812 B9 34905118 83.28 812 B9 34905119 83.28 812 B9 34905120 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34905121 83.28 812 B9 34905122 83.28 812 B9 34905123 83.28 812 B9 34905124 83.28 812 B9 34905125 83.28 812 B9 34905126 83.28 812 B9 34905127 83.28 812 B9 34905128 83.28 812 B9 34905201 83.28 812 B9 34905204 83.28 812 B9 34905205 83.28 812 B9 34905206 83.28 812 B9 34905207 83.28 812 B9 34905208 83.28 812 B9 34905209 83.28 812 B9 34905210 83.28 812 B9 34905211 83.28 812 B9 34905212 83.28 812 B9 34905213 83.28 812 B9 34905214 83.28 812 B9 34905215 83.28 812 B9 34905216 83.28 812 B9 34905217 83.28 812 B9 34905220 333.12 812 B9 34905222 249.84 812 B9 34905223 83.28 812 B9 34906101 83.28 812 B9 34906102 83.28 812 B9 34906103 83.28 812 B9 34906104 83.28 812 B9 34906105 83.28 812 B9 34906106 83.28 812 B9 34906107 83.28 812 B9 34906108 83.28 812 B9 34906109 83.28 812 B9 34906110 83.28 812 B9 34906111 83.28 812 B9 34906112 83.28 812 B9 34906113 83.28 812 B9 34906114 83.28 812 B9 34906115 83.28 812 B9 34906116 83.28 812 B9 34906117 83.28 812 B9 34906118 83.28 812 B9 34906119 83.28 812 B9 34906120 83.28 812 B9 34906121 83.28 812 B9 34906122 83.28 812 B9 34906123 83.28 812 B9 34906124 83.28 812 B9 34906125 83.28 812 B9 34906126 83.28 812 B9 34906127 83.28 812 B9 34906128 83.28 812 B9 34906201 83.28 812 B9 34906202 83.28 812 B9 34906203 83.28 812 B9 34906204 83.28 812 B9 34906205 83.28 812 B9 34906206 83.28 812 B9 34906207 83.28 812 B9 34906208 83.28 812 B9 34906209 83.28 812 B9 34907117 1165.92 812 B9 34907118 83.28 812 B9 34907124 83.28 812 B9 34907126 83.28 812 B9 34909163 243.19 812 B9 34909167 425.55 812 B9 34912101 83.28 812 B9 34912102 83.28 812 B9 34912103 83.28 812 B9 34912104 83.28 812 B9 34912105 83.28 812 B9 34912106 83.28 812 B9 34912107 83.28 812 B9 34912108 83.28 812 B9 34912109 83.28 812 B9 34912110 83.28 812 B9 34912111 83.28 812 B9 34912112 83.28 812 B9 34912113 83.28 812 B9 34912114 83.28 812 B9 34912115 83.28 812 B9 34912116 83.28 812 B9 34912117 83.28 812 B9 34912118 83.28 812 B9 34912119 83.28 812 B9 34912120 83.28 812 B9 34912121 83.28 812 B9 34912122 83.28 812 B9 34912123 83.28 812 B9 34912124 83.28 812 B9 34912125 83.28 812 B9 34912126 83.28 812 B9 34912127 83.28 812 B9 34912128 83.28 812 B9 34912201 83.28 812 B9 34912202 83.28 812 B9 34912203 83.28 812 B9 34912301 83.28 812 B9 34912302 83.28 812 B9 34912303 83.28 812 B9 34912304 83.28 812 B9 34912305 83.28 812 B9 34912306 83.28 812 B9 34912307 83.28 812 B9 34912308 83.28 812 B9 34912309 83.28 812 B9 34912310 83.28 812 B9 34912311 83.28 812 B9 34912312 83.28 812 B9 34912313 83.28 812 B9 34912316 83.28 812 B9 34912317 83.28 812 B9 34912318 83.28 812 B9 34912319 83.28 812 B9 34912320 83.28 812 B9 34912321 83.28 812 B9 34912322 83.28 812 B9 34912323 83.28 812 B9 34912328 416.40 812 B9 34912330 333.12 812 B9 34912331 83.28 812 B9 34912332 582.96 812 B9 34913101 83.28 812 B9 34913102 83.28 812 B9 34913103 83.28 812 B9 34913104 83.28 812 B9 34913105 83.28 812 B9 34913106 83.28 812 B9 34913107 83.28 812 B9 34913108 83.28 812 B9 34913109 83.28 812 B9 34913110 83.28 812 B9 34913111 83.28 812 B9 34913112 83.28 812 B9 34913113 83.28 812 B9 34913201 83.28 812 B9 34913202 83.28 812 B9 34913203 83.28 812 B9 34913204 83.28 812 B9 34913205 83.28 812 B9 34913206 83.28 812 B9 34913207 83.28 812 B9 34913208 83.28 812 B9 34913209 83.28 812 B9 34913210 83.28 812 B9 34913211 83.28 812 B9 34913212 83.28 812 B9 34913213 83.28 812 B9 34913214 83.28 812 B9 34913215 83.28 812 B9 34913216 83.28 812 B9 34913217 83.28 812 B9 34913218 83.28 812 B9 34913219 83.28 812 B9 34913220 83.28 812 B9 34913221 83.28 812 B9 34913222 83.28 812 B9 34913223 83.28 812 B9 34913224 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34913225 83.28 812 B9 34913226 83.28 812 B9 34913301 83.28 812 B9 34913302 83.28 812 B9 34913303 83.28 812 B9 34913304 83.28 812 B9 34913305 83.28 812 B9 34913306 83.28 812 B9 34913307 83.28 812 B9 34913308 83.28 812 B9 34913309 83.28 812 B9 34913310 83.28 812 B9 34913311 83.28 812 B9 34913401 83.28 812 B9 34913402 83.28 812 B9 34914102 83.28 812 B9 34914103 83.28 812 B9 34914104 83.28 812 B9 34914105 83.28 812 B9 34914106 83.28 812 B9 34914107 83.28 812 B9 34914108 83.28 812 B9 34914109 83.28 812 B9 34914110 83.28 812 B9 34914111 83.28 812 B9 34914112 83.28 812 B9 34914113 83.28 812 B9 34914114 83.28 812 B9 34914115 83.28 812 B9 34914116 83.28 812 B9 34914117 83.28 812 B9 34914118 83.28 812 B9 34914119 83.28 812 B9 34914120 83.28 812 B9 34914121 83.28 812 B9 34914122 83.28 812 B9 34914123 83.28 812 B9 34914124 83.28 812 B9 34914125 83.28 812 B9 34914126 83.28 812 B9 34914127 83.28 812 B9 34914128 83.28 812 B9 34914129 83.28 812 B9 34914130 83.28 812 B9 34914131 83.28 812 B9 34914132 83.28 812 B9 34914133 83.28 812 B9 34914134 83.28 812 B9 34914135 83.28 812 B9 34914136 83.28 812 B9 34914137 83.28 812 B9 34914138 83.28 812 B9 34914139 83.28 812 B9 34914140 83.28 812 B9 34914141 83.28 812 B9 34914142 83.28 812 B9 34914143 83.28 812 B9 34914144 83.28 812 B9 34914145 83.28 812 B9 34914146 83.28 812 B9 34914147 83.28 812 B9 34914148 83.28 812 B9 34914149 83.28 812 B9 34914150 83.28 812 B9 34914151 83.28 812 B9 34914152 83.28 812 B9 34914153 83.28 812 B9 34914154 83.28 812 B9 34914155 83.28 812 B9 34914156 83.28 812 B9 34914157 83.28 812 B9 34914158 83.28 812 B9 34914159 83.28 812 B9 34914160 83.28 812 B9 34914161 83.28 812 B9 34914162 83.28 812 B9 34914165 83.28 812 B9 34914166 83.28 812 B9 34914201 83.28 812 B9 34914202 83.28 812 B9 34914203 83.28 812 B9 34914204 83.28 812 B9 34914301 83.28 812 B9 34914302 83.28 812 B9 34915201 83.28 812 B9 34915202 83.28 812 B9 34915203 83.28 812 B9 34915204 83.28 812 B9 34915205 83.28 812 B9 34915206 83.28 812 B9 34915207 83.28 812 B9 34915208 83.28 812 B9 34915209 83.28 812 B9 34915210 83.28 812 B9 34915211 83.28 812 B9 34915212 83.28 812 B9 34915213 83.28 812 B9 34915214 83.28 812 B9 34915215 83.28 812 B9 34915216 83.28 812 B9 34915301 83.28 812 B9 34915302 83.28 812 B9 34915303 83.28 812 B9 34915304 83.28 812 B9 34915305 83.28 812 B9 34915306 83.28 812 B9 34915307 83.28 812 B9 34915308 83.28 812 B9 34915309 83.28 812 B9 34915311 83.28 812 B9 34915312 83.28 812 B9 34915313 83.28 812 B9 34915314 83.28 812 B9 34915315 83.28 812 B9 34915316 83.28 812 B9 34915317 83.28 812 B9 34915318 83.28 812 B9 34915401 83.28 812 B9 34915402 83.28 812 B9 34915403 83.28 812 B9 34915404 83.28 812 B9 34915405 83.28 812 B9 34915406 83.28 812 B9 34915407 83.28 812 B9 34915408 83.28 812 B9 34915409 83.28 812 B9 34915410 83.28 812 B9 34915501 83.28 812 B9 34915502 83.28 812 B9 34915503 83.28 812 B9 34915504 83.28 812 B9 34915505 83.28 812 B9 34915506 83.28 812 B9 34915507 83.28 812 B9 34915508 83.28 812 B9 34915509 83.28 812 B9 34915511 83.28 812 B9 34915512 83.28 812 B9 34915513 83.28 812 B9 34915514 83.28 812 B9 34915515 83.28 812 B9 34915516 83.28 812 B9 34915517 83.28 812 B9 34915518 83.28 812 B9 34915519 83.28 812 B9 34919101 83.28 812 B9 34919102 83.28 812 B9 34919103 83.28 812 B9 34919104 83.28 812 B9 34919105 83.28 812 B9 34919106 83.28 812 B9 34919107 83.28 812 B9 34919108 83.28 812 B9 34919109 83.28 812 B9 34919110 83.28 812 B9 34919201 83.28 812 B9 34919202 83.28 812 B9 34919203 83.28 812 B9 34919204 83.28 812 B9 34919205 83.28 812 B9 34919206 83.28 812 B9 34919207 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34919208 83.28 812 B9 34919209 83.28 812 B9 34919210 83.28 812 B9 34919211 83.28 812 B9 34919212 83.28 812 B9 34919213 83.28 812 B9 34919214 83.28 812 B9 34919215 83.28 812 B9 34919216 83.28 812 B9 34919217 83.28 812 B9 34919218 83.28 812 B9 34919219 83.28 812 B9 34919220 83.28 812 B9 34919221 83.28 812 B9 34919222 83.28 812 B9 34919223 83.28 812 B9 34919224 83.28 812 B9 34919225 83.28 812 B9 34919226 83.28 812 B9 34919227 83.28 812 B9 34919228 83.28 812 B9 34919229 83.28 812 B9 34919230 83.28 812 B9 34919231 83.28 812 B9 34919232 83.28 812 B9 34919233 83.28 812 B9 34919234 83.28 812 B9 34919235 83.28 812 B9 34919236 83.28 812 B9 34919237 83.28 812 B9 34919238 83.28 812 B9 34919239 83.28 812 B9 34919240 83.28 812 B9 34919241 83.28 812 B9 34919242 83.28 812 B9 34919243 83.28 812 B9 34919244 83.28 812 B9 34919245 83.28 812 B9 34919246 83.28 812 B9 34919247 83.28 812 B9 34919248 83.28 812 B9 34919249 83.28 812 B9 34925106 83.28 812 B9 34925107 83.28 812 B9 34925108 83.28 812 B9 34925109 83.28 812 B9 34925110 83.28 812 B9 34925116 83.28 812 B9 34925117 83.28 812 B9 34925118 83.28 812 B9 34925119 83.28 812 B9 34925120 83.28 812 B9 34925201 83.28 812 B9 34925202 83.28 812 B9 34925203 83.28 812 B9 34925204 83.28 812 B9 34925205 83.28 812 B9 34925206 83.28 812 B9 34925207 83.28 812 B9 34925208 83.28 812 B9 34925209 83.28 812 B9 34925210 83.28 812 B9 34925211 83.28 812 B9 34925212 83.28 812 B9 34925213 83.28 812 B9 34925214 83.28 812 B9 34925215 83.28 812 B9 34925216 83.28 812 B9 34925217 83.28 812 B9 34925218 83.28 812 B9 34925301 83.28 812 B9 34925302 83.28 812 B9 34925303 83.28 812 B9 34925304 83.28 812 B9 34925305 83.28 812 B9 34925306 83.28 812 B9 34925307 83.28 812 B9 34925308 83.28 812 B9 34925309 83.28 812 B9 34925310 83.28 812 B9 34925311 83.28 812 B9 34925312 83.28 812 B9 34925313 83.28 812 B9 34925314 83.28 812 B9 34925315 83.28 812 B9 34925316 83.28 812 B9 34925317 83.28 812 B9 34925318 83.28 812 B9 34925319 83.28 812 B9 34925320 83.28 812 B9 34925321 83.28 812 B9 34925322 83.28 812 B9 34925323 83.28 812 B9 34925324 83.28 812 B9 34925325 83.28 812 B9 34925326 83.28 812 B9 34925327 83.28 812 B9 34925328 83.28 812 B9 34925329 83.28 812 B9 34925330 83.28 812 B9 34925331 83.28 812 B9 34928102 166.56 812 B9 34928103 83.28 812 B9 34928104 416.40 812 B9 34928105 83.28 812 B9 34928106 166.56 812 B9 34928107 416.40 812 B9 34928108 83.28 812 B9 34928109 249.84 812 B9 34929101 83.28 812 B9 34929102 83.28 812 B9 34929103 83.28 812 B9 34929104 83.28 812 B9 34929105 83.28 812 B9 34929106 83.28 812 B9 34929107 83.28 812 B9 34929108 83.28 812 B9 34929109 83.28 812 B9 34929110 83.28 812 B9 34929111 83.28 812 B9 34929112 83.28 812 B9 34929113 83.28 812 B9 34929114 83.28 812 B9 34929115 83.28 812 B9 34929116 83.28 812 B9 34929117 83.28 812 B9 34929118 83.28 812 B9 34929119 83.28 812 B9 34929120 83.28 812 B9 34929121 83.28 812 B9 34929122 83.28 812 B9 34929123 83.28 812 B9 34929124 83.28 812 B9 34929125 83.28 812 B9 34929126 83.28 812 B9 34929127 83.28 812 B9 34929128 83.28 812 B9 34929129 83.28 812 B9 34929130 83.28 812 B9 34929131 83.28 812 B9 34929132 83.28 812 B9 34929133 83.28 812 B9 34929134 83.28 812 B9 34929135 83.28 812 B9 34929136 83.28 812 B9 34929137 83.28 812 B9 34929138 83.28 812 B9 34929139 83.28 812 B9 34929140 83.28 812 B9 34929141 83.28 812 B9 34929142 83.28 812 B9 34929143 83.28 812 B9 34929144 83.28 812 B9 34929145 83.28 812 B9 34929146 83.28 812 B9 34929147 83.28 812 B9 34929148 83.28 812 B9 34929149 83.28 812 B9 34929150 83.28 812 B9 34929151 83.28 812 B9 34929152 83.28 812 B9 34929153 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34929155 83.28 812 B9 34929156 83.28 812 B9 34929157 83.28 812 B9 34929158 83.28 812 B9 34929159 83.28 812 B9 34929160 83.28 812 B9 34929161 83.28 812 B9 34929162 83.28 812 B9 34929163 83.28 812 B9 34929164 83.28 812 B9 34929165 83.28 812 B9 34929166 83.28 812 B9 34929167 83.28 812 B9 34929168 83.28 812 B9 34929169 83.28 812 B9 34929170 83.28 812 B9 34929171 83.28 812 B9 34929172 83.28 812 B9 34929173 83.28 812 B9 34929174 83.28 812 B9 34929175 83.28 812 B9 34929176 83.28 812 B9 34929177 83.28 812 B9 34929178 83.28 812 B9 34929179 83.28 812 B9 34929180 83.28 812 B9 34929181 83.28 812 B9 34929182 83.28 812 B9 34929183 83.28 812 B9 34929184 83.28 812 B9 34929185 83.28 812 B9 34929186 83.28 812 B9 34929187 83.28 812 B9 34929188 83.28 812 B9 34929189 83.28 812 B9 34929190 83.28 812 B9 34929191 83.28 812 B9 34929192 83.28 812 B9 34930101 83.28 812 B9 34930102 83.28 812 B9 34930103 83.28 812 B9 34930104 83.28 812 B9 34930105 83.28 812 B9 34930106 83.28 812 B9 34930107 83.28 812 B9 34930108 83.28 812 B9 34930109 83.28 812 B9 34930110 83.28 812 B9 34930201 83.28 812 B9 34930202 83.28 812 B9 34930203 83.28 812 B9 34930204 83.28 812 B9 34930205 83.28 812 B9 34930206 83.28 812 B9 34930207 83.28 812 B9 34930208 83.28 812 B9 34930209 83.28 812 B9 34930210 83.28 812 B9 34930211 83.28 812 B9 34930212 83.28 812 B9 34930213 83.28 812 B9 34930214 83.28 812 B9 34930215 83.28 812 B9 34930216 83.28 812 B9 34930217 83.28 812 B9 34930218 83.28 812 B9 34930219 83.28 812 B9 34930220 83.28 812 B9 34930221 83.28 812 B9 34930222 83.28 812 B9 34930223 83.28 812 B9 34930224 83.28 812 B9 34930225 83.28 812 B9 34930226 83.28 812 B9 34930227 83.28 812 B9 34930228 83.28 812 B9 34930229 83.28 812 B9 34930230 83.28 812 B9 34930301 83.28 812 B9 34930302 83.28 812 B9 34930303 83.28 812 B9 34930304 83.28 812 B9 34930305 83.28 812 B9 34930306 83.28 812 B9 34930307 83.28 812 B9 34930308 83.28 812 B9 34930309 83.28 812 B9 34930310 83.28 812 B9 34930311 83.28 812 B9 34930312 83.28 812 B9 34930313 83.28 812 B9 34930314 83.28 812 B9 34930315 83.28 812 B9 34930316 83.28 812 B9 34930317 83.28 812 B9 34930318 83.28 812 B9 34930319 83.28 812 B9 34930320 83.28 812 B9 34930321 83.28 812 B9 34930322 83.28 812 B9 34930323 83.28 812 B9 34930324 83.28 812 B9 34930325 83.28 812 B9 34930326 83.28 812 B9 34930327 83.28 812 B9 34930328 83.28 812 B9 34930329 83.28 812 B9 34930330 83.28 812 B9 34930331 83.28 812 B9 34930332 83.28 812 B9 34930333 83.28 812 B9 34931101 83.28 812 B9 34931102 83.28 812 B9 34931103 83.28 812 B9 34931104 83.28 812 B9 34931105 83.28 812 B9 34931106 83.28 812 B9 34931107 83.28 812 B9 34931108 83.28 812 B9 34931109 83.28 812 B9 34931110 83.28 812 B9 34931111 83.28 812 B9 34931112 83.28 812 B9 34931113 83.28 812 B9 34931114 83.28 812 B9 34931115 83.28 812 B9 34931116 83.28 812 B9 34931117 83.28 812 B9 34931118 83.28 812 B9 34931119 83.28 812 B9 34931120 83.28 812 B9 34931121 83.28 812 B9 34931122 83.28 812 B9 34931123 83.28 812 B9 34931124 83.28 812 B9 34931125 83.28 812 B9 34931126 83.28 812 B9 34931127 83.28 812 B9 34931128 83.28 812 B9 34931129 83.28 812 B9 34931130 83.28 812 B9 34931131 83.28 812 B9 34931132 83.28 812 B9 34931133 83.28 812 B9 34931134 83.28 812 B9 34931135 83.28 812 B9 34931201 83.28 812 B9 34931202 83.28 812 B9 34931203 83.28 812 B9 34931204 83.28 812 B9 34931205 83.28 812 B9 34931206 83.28 812 B9 34931301 83.28 812 B9 34931302 83.28 812 B9 34931303 83.28 812 B9 34931304 83.28 812 B9 34931306 83.28 812 B9 34931307 83.28 812 B9 34931308 83.28 812 B9 34931309 83.28 812 B9 34931311 83.28 812 B9 34931312 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34931313 83.28 812 B9 34931314 83.28 812 B9 34931315 83.28 812 B9 34931316 83.28 812 B9 34931317 83.28 812 B9 34931401 83.28 812 B9 34931402 83.28 812 B9 34931403 83.28 812 B9 34931404 83.28 812 B9 34931405 83.28 812 B9 34931406 83.28 812 B9 34931407 83.28 812 B9 34931409 83.28 812 B9 34931410 83.28 812 B9 34931411 83.28 812 B9 34931412 83.28 812 B9 34931413 83.28 812 B9 34931414 83.28 812 B9 34931415 83.28 812 B9 34932101 83.28 812 B9 34932102 83.28 812 B9 34932103 83.28 812 B9 34932104 83.28 812 B9 34932105 83.28 812 B9 34932106 83.28 812 B9 34932107 83.28 812 B9 34932108 83.28 812 B9 34932109 83.28 812 B9 34932110 83.28 812 B9 34932111 83.28 812 B9 34932112 83.28 812 B9 34932113 83.28 812 B9 34932114 83.28 812 B9 34932115 83.28 812 B9 34932116 83.28 812 B9 34932117 83.28 812 B9 34932118 83.28 812 B9 34932119 83.28 812 B9 34932120 83.28 812 B9 34932121 83.28 812 B9 34932122 83.28 812 B9 34932123 83.28 812 B9 34932202 83.28 812 B9 34932203 83.28 812 B9 34932204 83.28 812 B9 34932205 83.28 812 B9 34932206 83.28 812 B9 34932207 83.28 812 B9 34932208 83.28 812 B9 34932209 83.28 812 B9 34932210 83.28 812 B9 34932211 83.28 812 B9 34932212 83.28 812 B9 34932213 83.28 812 B9 34932301 83.28 812 B9 34932302 83.28 812 B9 34932303 83.28 812 B9 34932304 83.28 812 B9 34932305 83.28 812 B9 34932306 83.28 812 B9 34932307 83.28 812 B9 34932308 83.28 812 B9 34932309 83.28 812 B9 34932310 83.28 812 B9 34932311 83.28 812 B9 34932312 83.28 812 B9 34932313 83.28 812 B9 34932314 83.28 812 B9 34932315 83.28 812 B9 34932316 83.28 812 B9 34932317 83.28 812 B9 34932318 83.28 812 B9 34932319 83.28 812 B9 34932320 83.28 812 B9 34935101 83.28 812 B9 34935102 83.28 812 B9 34935103 83.28 812 B9 34935104 83.28 812 B9 34935105 83.28 812 B9 34935106 83.28 812 B9 34935107 83.28 812 B9 34935108 83.28 812 B9 34935109 83.28 812 B9 34935110 83.28 812 B9 34935111 83.28 812 B9 34935112 83.28 812 B9 34935113 83.28 812 B9 34935201 83.28 812 B9 34935202 83.28 812 B9 34935203 83.28 812 B9 34935204 83.28 812 B9 34935301 83.28 812 B9 34935302 83.28 812 B9 34935303 83.28 812 B9 34935305 83.28 812 B9 34935306 83.28 812 B9 34935307 83.28 812 B9 34935308 83.28 812 B9 34935309 83.28 812 B9 34935310 83.28 812 B9 34935311 83.28 812 B9 34935312 83.28 812 B9 34935313 83.28 812 B9 34935314 83.28 812 B9 34935315 83.28 812 B9 34935316 83.28 812 B9 34935317 83.28 812 B9 34935318 83.28 812 B9 34935319 83.28 812 B9 34935320 83.28 812 B9 34935321 83.28 812 B9 34935322 83.28 812 B9 34935323 83.28 812 B9 34935324 83.28 812 B9 34935325 83.28 812 B9 34935326 83.28 812 B9 34935327 83.28 812 B9 34935328 83.28 812 B9 34935329 83.28 812 B9 34935330 83.28 812 B9 34935331 83.28 812 B9 34935332 83.28 812 B9 34935333 83.28 812 B9 34935334 83.28 812 B9 34935335 83.28 812 B9 34935336 83.28 812 B9 34935337 83.28 812 B9 34935338 83.28 812 B9 34935401 83.28 812 B9 34935402 83.28 812 B9 34935403 83.28 812 B9 34935404 83.28 812 B9 34935405 83.28 812 B9 34935406 83.28 812 B9 34935407 83.28 812 B9 34935408 83.28 812 B9 34935409 83.28 812 B9 34935410 83.28 812 B9 34936101 83.28 812 B9 34936102 83.28 812 B9 34936104 83.28 812 B9 34936105 83.28 812 B9 34936106 83.28 812 B9 34936107 83.28 812 B9 34936108 83.28 812 B9 34936109 83.28 812 B9 34936110 83.28 812 B9 34936111 83.28 812 B9 34936201 83.28 812 B9 34936202 83.28 812 B9 34936203 83.28 812 B9 34936204 83.28 812 B9 34936205 83.28 812 B9 34936206 83.28 812 B9 34936207 83.28 812 B9 34936208 83.28 812 B9 34936209 83.28 812 B9 34936210 83.28 812 B9 34937101 83.28 812 B9 34937102 83.28 812 B9 34937103 83.28 812 B9 34937104 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34937105 83.28 812 B9 34937106 83.28 812 B9 34937107 83.28 812 B9 34937108 83.28 812 B9 34937109 83.28 812 B9 34937110 83.28 812 B9 34937111 83.28 812 B9 34937112 83.28 812 B9 34937113 83.28 812 B9 34937114 83.28 812 B9 34937115 83.28 812 B9 34937116 83.28 812 B9 34937117 83.28 812 B9 34937118 83.28 812 B9 34937119 83.28 812 B9 34937120 83.28 812 B9 34937121 83.28 812 B9 34937122 83.28 812 B9 34937123 83.28 812 B9 34937124 83.28 812 B9 34937125 83.28 812 B9 34937126 83.28 812 B9 34937127 83.28 812 B9 34937128 83.28 812 B9 34937129 83.28 812 B9 34937130 83.28 812 B9 34937131 83.28 812 B9 34937132 83.28 812 B9 34937133 83.28 812 B9 34937134 83.28 812 B9 34937135 83.28 812 B9 34937136 83.28 812 B9 34937137 83.28 812 B9 34937138 83.28 812 B9 34937139 83.28 812 B9 34937140 83.28 812 B9 34937201 83.28 812 B9 34937202 83.28 812 B9 34937203 83.28 812 B9 34937204 83.28 812 B9 34937205 83.28 812 B9 34937206 83.28 812 B9 34937207 83.28 812 B9 34937208 83.28 812 B9 34937209 83.28 812 B9 34937210 83.28 812 B9 34937211 83.28 812 B9 34937212 83.28 812 B9 34937301 83.28 812 B9 34937302 83.28 812 B9 34937303 83.28 812 B9 34937401 83.28 812 B9 34937402 83.28 812 B9 34937403 83.28 812 B9 34937404 83.28 812 B9 34939101 83.28 812 B9 34939102 83.28 812 B9 34939103 83.28 812 B9 34939104 83.28 812 B9 34939105 83.28 812 B9 34939106 83.28 812 B9 34939107 83.28 812 B9 34939108 83.28 812 B9 34939109 83.28 812 B9 34939110 83.28 812 B9 34939111 83.28 812 B9 34939112 83.28 812 B9 34939113 83.28 812 B9 34939114 83.28 812 B9 34939115 83.28 812 B9 34939116 83.28 812 B9 34939117 83.28 812 B9 34939118 83.28 812 B9 34939119 83.28 812 B9 34939120 83.28 812 B9 34939121 83.28 812 B9 34939122 83.28 812 B9 34939123 83.28 812 B9 34939124 83.28 812 B9 34939125 83.28 812 B9 34939126 83.28 812 B9 34939127 83.28 812 B9 34944101 83.28 812 B9 34944102 83.28 812 B9 34944103 83.28 812 B9 34944104 83.28 812 B9 34944105 83.28 812 B9 34944106 83.28 812 B9 34944107 83.28 812 B9 34944108 83.28 812 B9 34944109 83.28 812 B9 34944110 83.28 812 B9 34944111 83.28 812 B9 34944112 83.28 812 B9 34944113 83.28 812 B9 34944114 83.28 812 B9 34944115 83.28 812 B9 34944116 83.28 812 B9 34944117 83.28 812 B9 34944118 83.28 812 B9 34944119 83.28 812 B9 34944120 83.28 812 B9 34944121 83.28 812 B9 34944122 83.28 812 B9 34944123 83.28 812 B9 34944124 83.28 812 B9 34944125 83.28 812 B9 34944126 83.28 812 B9 34944127 83.28 812 B9 34944128 83.28 812 B9 34944129 83.28 812 B9 34944130 83.28 812 B9 34944131 83.28 812 B9 34944132 83.28 812 B9 34944133 83.28 812 B9 34944134 83.28 812 B9 34944135 83.28 812 B9 34944136 83.28 812 B9 34944137 83.28 812 B9 34944138 83.28 812 B9 34944139 83.28 812 B9 34944140 83.28 812 B9 34944141 83.28 812 B9 34944142 83.28 812 B9 34944143 83.28 812 B9 34944144 83.28 812 B9 34944145 83.28 812 B9 34944146 83.28 812 B9 34944147 83.28 812 B9 34944148 83.28 812 B9 34944149 83.28 812 B9 34944150 83.28 812 B9 34944151 83.28 812 B9 34944152 83.28 812 B9 34944153 83.28 812 B9 34944154 83.28 812 B9 34944155 83.28 812 B9 34944156 83.28 812 B9 34944157 83.28 812 B9 34944158 83.28 812 B9 34944159 83.28 812 B9 34944160 83.28 812 B9 34944161 83.28 812 B9 34944162 83.28 812 B9 34944201 83.28 812 B9 34944202 83.28 812 B9 34944203 83.28 812 B9 34944204 83.28 812 B9 34944205 83.28 812 B9 34944206 83.28 812 B9 34944207 83.28 812 B9 34944208 83.28 812 B9 34944209 83.28 812 B9 34944210 83.28 812 B9 34944211 83.28 812 B9 34944212 83.28 812 B9 34944213 83.28 812 B9 34944214 83.28 812 B9 34944215 83.28 812 B9 34944216 83.28 812 B9 34944217 83.28 812 B9 34944218 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34944219 83.28 812 B9 34944220 83.28 812 B9 34944221 83.28 812 B9 34944222 83.28 812 B9 34944223 83.28 812 B9 34944224 83.28 812 B9 34944225 83.28 812 B9 34944226 83.28 812 B9 34944227 83.28 812 B9 34944228 83.28 812 B9 34944229 83.28 812 B9 34944230 83.28 812 B9 34944231 83.28 812 B9 34944232 83.28 812 B9 34944233 83.28 812 B9 34944234 83.28 812 B9 34944235 83.28 812 B9 34944236 83.28 812 B9 34944237 83.28 812 B9 34944238 83.28 812 B9 34944239 83.28 812 B9 34944240 83.28 812 B9 34944241 83.28 812 B9 34944242 83.28 812 B9 34944243 83.28 812 B9 34944244 83.28 812 B9 34944245 83.28 812 B9 34944246 83.28 812 B9 34944247 83.28 812 B9 34944248 83.28 812 B9 34944249 83.28 812 B9 34944250 83.28 812 B9 34944251 83.28 812 B9 34944252 83.28 812 B9 34944253 83.28 812 B9 34944254 83.28 812 B9 34944255 83.28 812 B9 34944256 83.28 812 B9 34944257 83.28 812 B9 34944258 83.28 812 B9 34944259 83.28 812 B9 34944260 83.28 812 B9 34944261 83.28 812 B9 34944262 83.28 812 B9 34944263 83.28 812 B9 34944264 83.28 812 B9 34944265 83.28 812 B9 34944266 83.28 812 B9 34944267 83.28 812 B9 34944301 83.28 812 B9 34944302 83.28 812 B9 34944303 83.28 812 B9 34944304 83.28 812 B9 34944305 83.28 812 B9 34944306 83.28 812 B9 34944307 83.28 812 B9 34944308 83.28 812 B9 34944309 83.28 812 B9 34944310 83.28 812 B9 34944311 83.28 812 B9 34944312 83.28 812 B9 34944313 83.28 812 B9 34944314 83.28 812 B9 34944315 83.28 812 B9 34944316 83.28 812 B9 34944317 83.28 812 B9 34944318 83.28 812 B9 34944319 83.28 812 B9 34944320 83.28 812 B9 34944321 83.28 812 B9 34944322 83.28 812 B9 34944323 83.28 812 B9 34944324 83.28 812 B9 34944325 83.28 812 B9 34944326 83.28 812 B9 34944327 83.28 812 B9 34944328 83.28 812 B9 34944329 83.28 812 B9 34944330 83.28 812 B9 34944331 83.28 812 B9 34944332 83.28 812 B9 34944333 83.28 812 B9 34944334 83.28 812 B9 34944335 83.28 812 B9 34944336 83.28 812 B9 34944337 83.28 812 B9 34944338 83.28 812 B9 34944339 83.28 812 B9 34944340 83.28 812 B9 34944344 83.28 812 B9 34944345 83.28 812 B9 34944346 83.28 812 B9 34944347 83.28 812 B9 34944348 83.28 812 B9 34944349 83.28 812 B9 34944350 83.28 812 B9 34944351 83.28 812 B9 34944352 83.28 812 B9 34944353 83.28 812 B9 34944354 83.28 812 B9 34944355 83.28 812 B9 34944356 83.28 812 B9 34944357 83.28 812 B9 34944358 83.28 812 B9 34944359 83.28 812 B9 34944360 83.28 812 B9 34944361 83.28 812 B9 34944362 83.28 812 B9 34944363 83.28 812 B9 34944364 83.28 812 B9 34944365 83.28 812 B9 34944366 83.28 812 B9 34944367 83.28 812 B9 34944368 83.28 812 B9 34944369 83.28 812 B9 34944370 83.28 812 B9 34944371 83.28 812 B9 34944372 83.28 812 B9 34969202 83.28 812 B9 34969203 83.28 812 B9 34969204 83.28 812 B9 34969205 83.28 812 B9 34969206 83.28 812 B9 34969207 83.28 812 B9 34969208 83.28 812 B9 34969209 83.28 812 B9 34969210 83.28 812 B9 34969211 83.28 812 B9 34969212 83.28 812 B9 34969213 83.28 812 B9 34969214 83.28 812 B9 34969215 83.28 812 B9 34969216 83.28 812 B9 34969217 83.28 812 B9 34969218 83.28 812 B9 34969219 83.28 812 B9 34969220 83.28 812 B9 34969221 83.28 812 B9 34969222 83.28 812 B9 34969223 83.28 812 B9 34969224 83.28 812 B9 34969225 83.28 812 B9 34969226 83.28 812 B9 34969227 83.28 812 B9 34969228 83.28 812 B9 34969229 83.28 812 B9 34969230 83.28 812 B9 34969302 83.28 812 B9 34969304 83.28 812 B9 34969306 83.28 812 B9 34969308 83.28 812 B9 34969310 83.28 812 B9 34969312 83.28 812 B9 34969314 83.28 812 B9 34969317 83.28 812 B9 34969318 83.28 812 B9 34969319 83.28 812 B9 34969321 83.28 812 B9 34969322 83.28 812 B9 34969323 83.28 812 B9 34969326 83.28 812 B9 34969327 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34969328 83.28 812 B9 34969329 83.28 812 B9 34969330 83.28 812 B9 34969331 83.28 812 B9 34969332 83.28 812 B9 34969333 83.28 812 B9 34969334 83.28 812 B9 34969342 83.28 812 B9 34969345 83.28 812 B9 34969347 83.28 812 B9 34989201 83.28 812 B9 34989202 83.28 812 B9 34989203 83.28 812 B9 34989204 83.28 812 B9 34989205 83.28 812 B9 34989206 83.28 812 B9 34989207 83.28 812 B9 34989208 83.28 812 B9 34989209 83.28 812 B9 34989210 83.28 812 B9 34989211 83.28 812 B9 34989212 83.28 812 B9 34989213 83.28 812 B9 34989214 83.28 812 B9 34989215 83.28 812 B9 34989216 83.28 812 B9 34989217 83.28 812 B9 34989218 83.28 812 B9 34989219 83.28 812 B9 34989220 83.28 812 B9 34989221 83.28 812 B9 34989222 83.28 812 B9 34989223 83.28 812 B9 34989224 83.28 812 B9 34989225 83.28 812 B9 34989226 83.28 812 B9 34989227 83.28 812 B9 34989228 83.28 812 B9 34989229 83.28 812 B9 34989230 83.28 812 B9 34989231 83.28 812 B9 34989232 83.28 812 B9 34989233 83.28 812 B9 34989234 83.28 812 B9 34989235 83.28 812 B9 34989236 83.28 812 B9 34989237 83.28 812 B9 34989238 83.28 812 B9 34989239 83.28 812 B9 34989240 83.28 812 B9 34989241 83.28 812 B9 34989242 83.28 812 B9 34989243 83.28 812 B9 34989244 83.28 812 B9 34989245 83.28 812 B9 34989246 83.28 812 B9 34989247 83.28 812 B9 34989248 83.28 812 B9 34989301 83.28 812 B9 34989302 83.28 812 B9 34989303 83.28 812 B9 34989304 83.28 812 B9 34989305 83.28 812 B9 34989306 83.28 812 B9 34989307 83.28 812 B9 34989308 83.28 812 B9 34989309 83.28 812 B9 34989310 83.28 812 B9 34989311 83.28 812 B9 34989312 83.28 812 B9 34989313 83.28 812 B9 34989314 83.28 812 B9 34989315 83.28 812 B9 34989316 83.28 812 B9 34989317 83.28 812 B9 34989318 83.28 812 B9 34989319 83.28 812 B9 34989320 83.28 812 B9 34989321 83.28 812 B9 34989322 83.28 812 B9 34989323 83.28 812 B9 34989324 83.28 812 B9 34989325 83.28 812 B9 34989326 83.28 812 B9 34989327 83.28 812 B9 34989328 83.28 812 B9 34989329 83.28 812 B9 34989330 83.28 812 B9 34989331 83.28 812 B9 34989332 83.28 812 B9 34989333 83.28 812 B9 34989334 83.28 812 B9 34989335 83.28 812 B9 34989336 83.28 812 B9 34989337 83.28 812 B9 34989338 83.28 812 B9 34989339 83.28 812 B9 34989340 83.28 812 B9 34989341 83.28 812 B9 34989342 83.28 812 B9 34989343 83.28 812 B9 34989344 83.28 812 B9 34989345 83.28 812 B9 34989346 83.28 812 B9 34989347 83.28 812 B9 34989348 83.28 812 B9 34989349 83.28 812 B9 34989401 83.28 812 B9 34989402 83.28 812 B9 34989403 83.28 812 B9 34989404 83.28 812 B9 34989405 83.28 812 B9 34989406 83.28 812 B9 34989407 83.28 812 B9 34989408 83.28 812 B9 34989409 83.28 812 B9 34989410 83.28 812 B9 34989411 83.28 812 B9 34989412 83.28 812 B9 34989413 83.28 812 B9 34989414 83.28 812 B9 34989415 83.28 812 B9 34989416 83.28 812 B9 34989417 83.28 812 B9 34989418 83.28 812 B9 34989419 83.28 812 B9 34989420 83.28 812 B9 34989421 83.28 812 B9 34989422 83.28 812 B9 34989423 83.28 812 B9 34989424 83.28 812 B9 34989425 83.28 812 B9 34989426 83.28 812 B9 34989427 83.28 812 B9 34989428 83.28 812 B9 34989429 83.28 812 B9 34989430 83.28 812 B9 34989431 83.28 812 B9 34989432 83.28 812 B9 34989433 83.28 812 B9 34989434 83.28 812 B9 34989435 83.28 812 B9 34989436 83.28 812 B9 34989437 83.28 812 B9 34989438 83.28 812 B9 34989439 83.28 812 B9 34989440 83.28 812 B9 34989441 83.28 812 B9 34989442 83.28 812 B9 34989443 83.28 812 B9 34989444 83.28 812 B9 34989445 83.28 812 B9 34989446 83.28 812 B9 34989447 83.28 812 B9 34989448 83.28 812 B9 34989449 83.28 812 B9 34989450 83.28 812 B9 34989451 83.28 812 B9 34989452 83.28 812 B9 34989453 83.28 812 B9 34989454 83.28 812 B9 34989455 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 34989456 83.28 812 B9 34989457 83.28 812 B9 34989501 83.28 812 B9 34989502 83.28 812 B9 34989503 83.28 812 B9 34989504 83.28 812 B9 34989505 83.28 812 B9 34989506 83.28 812 B9 34989507 83.28 812 B9 34989508 83.28 812 B9 34989509 83.28 812 B9 34989510 83.28 812 B9 34989511 83.28 812 B9 34989512 83.28 812 B9 34989513 83.28 812 B9 34989514 83.28 812 B9 34989515 83.28 812 B9 34989516 83.28 812 B9 34989517 83.28 812 B9 34989518 83.28 812 B9 34989519 83.28 812 B9 34989520 83.28 812 B9 34989521 83.28 812 B9 34989522 83.28 812 B9 34989523 83.28 812 B9 34989524 83.28 812 B9 34989525 83.28 812 B9 34989526 83.28 812 B9 34989527 83.28 812 B9 34989528 83.28 812 B9 34989529 83.28 812 B9 34989530 83.28 812 B9 34989531 83.28 812 B9 34989532 83.28 812 B9 34989533 83.28 812 B9 34989534 83.28 812 B9 34989535 83.28 812 B9 34989536 83.28 812 B9 34989537 83.28 812 B9 34989538 83.28 812 B9 34989539 83.28 812 B9 34989540 83.28 812 B9 34989541 83.28 812 B9 34989542 83.28 812 B9 34989543 83.28 812 B9 34989544 83.28 812 B9 34989545 83.28 812 B9 34989546 83.28 812 B9 34994162 105.82 812 B9 35104149 2641.20 812 B9 35104601 415.33 812 B9 35116203 53.97 812 B9 35122101 569.09 812 B9 35122103 0.00 812 B9 35150203 172.54 812 B9 35150204 185.06 812 B9 35150205 128.51 812 B9 35150206 209.77 812 B9 35150207 219.59 812 B9 35150208 688.22 812 B9 35150209 115.04 812 B9 35150210 106.97 812 B9 35150211 116.79 812 B9 35152101 0.00 812 B9 35158181 59.51 812 B9 35175112 396.61 812 B9 35175113 120.11 812 B9 35211147 1225.27 812 B9 35211160 1307.89 812 B9 35211161 672.02 812 B9 35211162 1753.19 812 B9 35211203 113.30 812 B9 35211204 261.09 812 B9 35211302 196.78 812 B9 35211406 233.37 812 B9 35211407 188.07 812 B9 35211408 692.03 812 B9 35211409 599.24 812 B9 35211411 363.26 812 B9 35211412 291.18 812 B9 35211413 226.87 812 B9 35211501 528.78 812 B9 35211507 250.32 812 B9 35211508 225.13 812 B9 35211511 125.66 812 B9 35211513 131.68 812 B9 35211515 116.79 812 B9 35211516 146.41 812 B9 35211614 124.07 812 B9 35211623 193.29 812 B9 35211701 134.21 812 B9 35211703 232.22 812 B9 35211704 304.97 812 B9 35211705 304.49 812 B9 35211706 332.84 812 B9 35211707 127.31 812 B9 35211708 1198.12 812 B9 35211709 501.70 812 B9 35211711 124.07 812 B9 35211712 1610.77 812 B9 35212108 1432.21 812 B9 35213103 558.49 812 B9 35213105 37.99 812 B9 35213106 31.18 812 B9 35213109 131.20 812 B9 35213110 31.50 812 B9 35213111 29.60 812 B9 35213112 34.19 812 B9 35213113 48.61 812 B9 35213114 82.49 812 B9 35214101 140.07 812 B9 35214107 136.56 812 B9 35214115 311.78 812 B9 35214117 39.10 812 B9 35214118 78.41 812 B9 35214119 30.23 812 B9 35214120 42.75 812 B9 35214121 403.15 812 B9 35214122 36.25 812 B9 35214123 29.44 812 B9 35214124 113.89 812 B9 35214125 185.21 812 B9 35214126 100.72 812 B9 35214127 80.92 812 B9 35214128 118.17 812 B9 35214129 30.55 812 B9 35214130 28.02 812 B9 35215107 160.50 812 B9 35215109 66.49 812 B9 35215110 53.68 812 B9 35215111 40.37 812 B9 35215113 37.52 812 B9 35215121 30.71 812 B9 35215125 32.77 812 B9 35215129 1002.33 812 B9 35215130 32.77 812 B9 35215131 75.03 812 B9 35223101 167.95 812 B9 35223102 123.76 812 B9 35223103 97.26 812 B9 35223104 143.24 812 B9 35223105 74.61 812 B9 35223106 77.31 812 B9 35223107 427.27 812 B9 35223110 113.14 812 B9 35307109 357.60 812 B9 35307112 394.67 812 B9 35307114 71.29 812 B9 35307115 69.07 812 B9 35307116 100.43 812 B9 35307117 202.60 812 B9 35307118 51.46 812 B9 35307119 29.60 812 B9 35307120 30.55 812 B9 35307121 340.27 812 B9 35307122 384.55 812 B9 35307123 53.36 812 B9 35307124 61.12 812 B9 35307125 33.24 812 B9 35307126 67.14 812 B9 35307127 167.47 812 B9 35307128 215.94 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 35309104 125.50 812 B9 35309105 111.36 812 B9 35309106 1401.09 812 B9 35311115 8520.00 812 B9 35313108 176.34 812 B9 35313110 460.51 812 B9 35313111 7320.03 812 B9 35313112 161.61 812 B9 35316105 0.00 812 B9 35316155 0.00 812 B9 35334102 0.00 812 B9 93648212 83.28 812 B9 93648213 83.28 812 B9 93648214 83.28 812 B9 93648215 83.28 812 B9 93648216 83.28 812 B9 93648217 83.28 812 B9 93648218 83.28 812 B9 93648219 83.28 812 B9 93648220 83.28 812 B9 93648221 83.28 812 B9 93648222 83.28 812 B9 93648223 83.28 812 B9 93648224 83.28 812 B9 93648225 83.28 812 B9 93648226 83.28 812 B9 93648227 83.28 812 B9 93648228 83.28 812 B9 93648229 83.28 812 B9 93648230 83.28 812 B9 93648231 83.28 812 B9 93648232 83.28 812 B9 93648233 83.28 812 B9 93648234 83.28 812 B9 93648235 83.28 812 B9 93648236 83.28 812 B9 93648237 83.28 812 B9 93648238 83.28 812 B9 93648239 83.28 812 B9 93648240 83.28 812 B9 93648241 83.28 812 B9 93648242 83.28 812 B9 93648243 83.28 812 B9 93648244 83.28 812 B9 93648245 83.28 812 B9 93648246 83.28 812 B9 93648247 83.28 812 B9 93648248 83.28 812 B9 93648249 83.28 812 B9 93648250 83.28 812 B9 93648251 83.28 812 B9 93648252 83.28 812 B9 93648253 83.28 812 B9 93648254 83.28 812 B9 93648255 83.28 812 B9 93648256 83.28 812 B9 93648257 83.28 812 B9 93648258 83.28 812 B9 93648259 83.28 812 B9 93648260 83.28 812 B9 93648266 83.28 812 B9 93648267 83.28 812 B9 93648268 83.28 812 B9 93648269 83.28 812 B9 93648270 83.28 812 B9 93648271 83.28 812 B9 93648272 83.28 812 B9 93648273 83.28 812 B9 93648274 83.28 812 B9 93648275 83.28 812 B9 93648276 83.28 812 B9 93648277 83.28 812 B9 93648278 83.28 812 B9 93648279 83.28 812 B9 93648280 83.28 812 B9 93648281 83.28 812 B9 93648282 83.28 812 B9 93648283 83.28 812 B9 93648284 83.28 812 B9 93648285 83.28 812 B9 93648286 83.28 812 B9 93648287 83.28 812 B9 93648288 83.28 812 B9 93648289 83.28 812 B9 93648290 83.28 812 B9 93648291 83.28 812 B9 93648292 83.28 812 B9 93648293 83.28 812 B9 93648294 83.28 812 B9 93648295 83.28 812 B9 93648301 83.28 812 B9 93648302 83.28 812 B9 93648303 83.28 812 B9 93648304 83.28 812 B9 93648305 83.28 812 B9 93648306 83.28 812 B9 93648307 83.28 812 B9 93648308 83.28 812 B9 93648309 83.28 812 B9 93648310 83.28 812 B9 93648311 83.28 812 B9 93648312 83.28 812 B9 93648313 83.28 812 B9 93648314 83.28 812 B9 93648315 83.28 812 B9 93648316 83.28 812 B9 93648317 83.28 812 B9 93648318 83.28 812 B9 93648319 83.28 812 B9 93648320 83.28 812 B9 93648321 83.28 812 B9 93648322 83.28 812 B9 93648323 83.28 812 B9 93648324 83.28 812 B9 93648325 83.28 812 B9 93648326 83.28 812 B9 93648327 83.28 812 B9 93648328 83.28 812 B9 93648329 83.28 812 B9 93648330 83.28 812 B9 93648331 83.28 812 B9 93648332 83.28 812 B9 93648338 83.28 812 B9 93648339 83.28 812 B9 93648340 83.28 812 B9 93648341 83.28 812 B9 93648342 83.28 812 B9 93648343 83.28 812 B9 93648344 83.28 812 B9 93648345 83.28 812 B9 93648346 83.28 812 B9 93648347 83.28 812 B9 93648348 83.28 812 B9 93648349 83.28 812 B9 93648350 83.28 812 B9 93648351 83.28 812 B9 93648352 83.28 812 B9 93648353 83.28 812 B9 93648354 83.28 812 B9 93648355 83.28 812 B9 93648356 83.28 812 B9 93648357 83.28 812 B9 93648358 83.28 812 B9 93648359 83.28 812 B9 93648360 83.28 812 B9 93648361 83.28 812 B9 93648362 83.28 812 B9 93648363 83.28 812 B9 93648364 83.28 812 B9 93648365 83.28 812 B9 93648366 83.28 812 B9 93648367 83.28 812 B9 93648368 83.28 812 B9 93648369 83.28 812 B9 93648370 83.28 812 B9 93648371 83.28 812 B9 93648372 83.28 812 B9 93648373 83.28 812 B9 93648379 83.28 812 B9 93648380 83.28 812 B9 93648381 83.28 812 B9 93648382 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 93648383 83.28 812 B9 93648384 83.28 812 B9 93648385 83.28 812 B9 93648386 83.28 812 B9 93648387 83.28 812 B9 93648388 83.28 812 B9 93648389 83.28 812 B9 93648390 83.28 812 B9 93648391 83.28 812 B9 93648392 83.28 812 B9 93648393 83.28 812 B9 93648394 83.28 812 B9 93648395 83.28 812 B9 93648396 83.28 812 B9 93648397 83.28 812 B9 93648398 83.28 812 B9 93648399 83.28 812 B9 93648400 83.28 812 B9 93648401 83.28 812 B9 93648402 83.28 812 B9 93648403 83.28 812 B9 93648404 83.28 812 B9 93648405 83.28 812 B9 93648406 83.28 812 B9 93648407 83.28 812 B9 93648408 83.28 812 B9 93648409 83.28 812 B9 93648410 83.28 812 B9 93648411 83.28 812 B9 93648412 83.28 812 B9 93648413 83.28 812 B9 93648414 83.28 812 B9 93648420 83.28 812 B9 93648421 83.28 812 B9 93648422 83.28 812 B9 93648423 83.28 812 B9 93648424 83.28 812 B9 93648425 83.28 812 B9 93648426 83.28 812 B9 93648427 83.28 812 B9 93648428 83.28 812 B9 93648429 83.28 812 B9 93648430 83.28 812 B9 93648431 83.28 812 B9 93648432 83.28 812 B9 93648433 83.28 812 B9 93648434 83.28 812 B9 93648435 83.28 812 B9 93648436 83.28 812 B9 93648437 83.28 812 B9 93648438 83.28 812 B9 93648439 83.28 812 B9 93648440 83.28 812 B9 93648441 83.28 812 B9 93648442 83.28 812 B9 93648443 83.28 812 B9 93648444 83.28 812 B9 93648445 83.28 812 B9 93648446 83.28 812 B9 93648447 83.28 812 B9 93648448 83.28 812 B9 93648449 83.28 812 B9 93648450 83.28 812 B9 93648451 83.28 812 B9 93648452 83.28 812 B9 93648453 83.28 812 B9 93648454 83.28 812 B9 93648455 83.28 812 B9 93648456 83.28 812 B9 93648457 83.28 812 B9 93648458 83.28 812 B9 93648459 83.28 812 B9 93648464 83.28 812 B9 93648465 83.28 812 B9 93648466 83.28 812 B9 93648467 83.28 812 B9 93648468 83.28 812 B9 93648469 83.28 812 B9 93648470 83.28 812 B9 93648471 83.28 812 B9 93648472 83.28 812 B9 93648473 83.28 812 B9 93648474 83.28 812 B9 93648475 83.28 812 B9 93648476 83.28 812 B9 93648477 83.28 812 B9 93648478 83.28 812 B9 93648479 83.28 812 B9 93648480 83.28 812 B9 93648481 83.28 812 B9 93648482 83.28 812 B9 93648483 83.28 812 B9 93648484 83.28 812 B9 93648485 83.28 812 B9 93648486 83.28 812 B9 93648487 83.28 812 B9 93648488 83.28 812 B9 93648489 83.28 812 B9 93648490 83.28 812 B9 93648491 83.28 812 B9 93648492 83.28 812 B9 93648493 83.28 812 B9 93648494 83.28 812 B9 93648495 83.28 812 B9 93648496 83.28 812 B9 93648497 83.28 812 B9 93648498 83.28 812 B9 93648499 83.28 812 B9 93648504 83.28 812 B9 93648505 83.28 812 B9 93648506 83.28 812 B9 93648507 83.28 812 B9 93648508 83.28 812 B9 93648509 83.28 812 B9 93648510 83.28 812 B9 93648511 83.28 812 B9 93648512 83.28 812 B9 93648513 83.28 812 B9 93648514 83.28 812 B9 93648515 83.28 812 B9 93648516 83.28 812 B9 93648517 83.28 812 B9 93648518 83.28 812 B9 93648519 83.28 812 B9 93648520 83.28 812 B9 93648521 83.28 812 B9 93648522 83.28 812 B9 93648523 83.28 812 B9 93648524 83.28 812 B9 93648525 83.28 812 B9 93648526 83.28 812 B9 93648527 83.28 812 B9 93648528 83.28 812 B9 93648529 83.28 812 B9 93648530 83.28 812 B9 93648531 83.28 812 B9 93648532 83.28 812 B9 93648533 83.28 812 B9 93648534 83.28 812 B9 93648535 83.28 812 B9 93648536 83.28 812 B9 93648537 83.28 812 B9 93648538 83.28 812 B9 93648539 83.28 812 B9 93648540 83.28 812 B9 93648541 83.28 812 B9 93648546 83.28 812 B9 93648547 83.28 812 B9 93648548 83.28 812 B9 93648549 83.28 812 B9 93648550 83.28 812 B9 93648551 83.28 812 B9 93648552 83.28 812 B9 93648553 83.28 812 B9 93648554 83.28 812 B9 93648555 83.28 812 B9 93648556 83.28 812 B9 93648557 83.28 812 B9 93648558 83.28 812 B9 93648559 83.28 812 B9 93648560 83.28 812 B9 93648561 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 93648562 83.28 812 B9 93648563 83.28 812 B9 93648564 83.28 812 B9 93648565 83.28 812 B9 93648566 83.28 812 B9 93648567 83.28 812 B9 93648568 83.28 812 B9 93648569 83.28 812 B9 93648570 83.28 812 B9 93648571 83.28 812 B9 93648572 83.28 812 B9 93648573 83.28 812 B9 93648574 83.28 812 B9 93648575 83.28 812 B9 93648576 83.28 812 B9 93648577 83.28 812 B9 93648578 83.28 812 B9 93684101 121.31 812 B9 93684102 31.95 812 B9 93684103 95.97 812 B9 93684104 136.68 812 B9 93684105 132.40 812 B9 93684106 92.01 812 B9 93684107 32.61 812 B9 93684108 37.36 812 B9 93684109 50.19 812 B9 93684110 44.96 812 B9 93684111 148.40 812 B9 93684114 83.28 812 B9 93684115 83.28 812 B9 93684116 83.28 812 B9 93684117 83.28 812 B9 93684118 83.28 812 B9 93684119 83.28 812 B9 93684120 83.28 812 B9 93684121 83.28 812 B9 93684122 83.28 812 B9 93684123 83.28 812 B9 93684124 83.28 812 B9 93684125 83.28 812 B9 93684126 83.28 812 B9 93684176 83.28 812 B9 93684177 83.28 812 B9 93684178 83.28 812 B9 93684179 83.28 812 B9 93684180 83.28 812 B9 93684181 83.28 812 B9 93684182 83.28 812 B9 93684183 83.28 812 B9 93684184 83.28 812 B9 93684185 83.28 812 B9 93684186 83.28 812 B9 93684187 83.28 812 B9 93684188 83.28 812 B9 93684189 83.28 812 B9 93684190 83.28 812 B9 93684191 83.28 812 B9 93684192 83.28 812 B9 93684193 83.28 812 B9 93684194 83.28 812 B9 93684195 83.28 812 B9 93684196 83.28 812 B9 93684197 83.28 812 B9 93684198 83.28 812 B9 93684199 83.28 812 B9 93684200 83.28 812 B9 93684201 83.28 812 B9 93684202 83.28 812 B9 93684203 83.28 812 B9 93684204 83.28 812 B9 93684205 83.28 812 B9 93684206 83.28 812 B9 93684207 83.28 812 B9 93684208 83.28 812 B9 93684209 83.28 812 B9 93684210 83.28 812 B9 93684211 83.28 812 B9 93684212 83.28 812 B9 93684213 83.28 812 B9 93684214 83.28 812 B9 93684215 83.28 812 B9 93684216 83.28 812 B9 93684217 83.28 812 B9 93684218 83.28 812 B9 93684219 83.28 812 B9 93684220 83.28 812 B9 93684221 83.28 812 B9 93684222 83.28 812 B9 93684223 83.28 812 B9 93684224 83.28 812 B9 93684225 83.28 812 B9 93684226 83.28 812 B9 93684227 83.28 812 B9 93684228 83.28 812 B9 93684229 83.28 812 B9 93684230 83.28 812 B9 93684231 83.28 812 B9 93684232 83.28 812 B9 93684233 83.28 812 B9 93684234 83.28 812 B9 93684235 83.28 812 B9 93684236 83.28 812 B9 93684237 83.28 812 B9 93684238 83.28 812 B9 93684239 83.28 812 B9 93684240 83.28 812 B9 93684241 83.28 812 B9 93684242 83.28 812 B9 93684243 83.28 812 B9 93684244 83.28 812 B9 93684245 83.28 812 B9 93684246 83.28 812 B9 93684247 83.28 812 B9 93684248 83.28 812 B9 93684249 83.28 812 B9 93684250 83.28 812 B9 93684251 83.28 812 B9 93684252 83.28 812 B9 93684253 83.28 812 B9 93684254 83.28 812 B9 93684255 83.28 812 B9 93684256 83.28 812 B9 93684257 83.28 812 B9 93684258 83.28 812 B9 93684259 83.28 812 B9 93684260 83.28 812 B9 93684261 83.28 812 B9 93684262 83.28 812 B9 93684263 83.28 812 B9 93684264 83.28 812 B9 93684265 83.28 812 B9 93684266 83.28 812 B9 93684267 83.28 812 B9 93684268 83.28 812 B9 93684269 83.28 812 B9 93684270 83.28 812 B9 93684271 83.28 812 B9 93684272 83.28 812 B9 93684273 83.28 812 B9 93684274 83.28 812 B9 93684275 83.28 812 B9 93684276 83.28 812 B9 93684277 83.28 812 B9 93684278 83.28 812 B9 93684279 83.28 812 B9 93684280 83.28 812 B9 93684281 83.28 812 B9 93684282 83.28 812 B9 93684283 83.28 812 B9 93684284 83.28 812 B9 93684285 83.28 812 B9 93684286 83.28 812 B9 93684287 83.28 812 B9 93684288 83.28 812 B9 93684289 83.28 812 B9 93684290 83.28 812 B9 93684291 83.28 812 B9 93684292 83.28 812 B9 93684293 83.28 812 B9 93684294 83.28 812 B9 93684295 83.28 812 B9 93684296 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 93684297 83.28 812 B9 93684298 83.28 812 B9 93684299 83.28 812 B9 93684300 83.28 812 B9 93684301 83.28 812 B9 93684302 83.28 812 B9 93684303 83.28 812 B9 93684304 83.28 812 B9 93684305 83.28 812 B9 93684306 83.28 812 B9 93684307 83.28 812 B9 93684308 83.28 812 B9 93684309 83.28 812 B9 93684310 83.28 812 B9 93684311 83.28 812 B9 93684312 83.28 812 B9 93684313 83.28 812 B9 93684314 83.28 812 B9 93684315 83.28 812 B9 93684316 83.28 812 B9 93684317 83.28 812 B9 93684318 83.28 812 B9 93684319 83.28 812 B9 93684320 83.28 812 B9 93684321 83.28 812 B9 93684322 83.28 812 B9 93684323 83.28 812 B9 93684324 83.28 812 B9 93684325 83.28 812 B9 93684326 83.28 812 B9 93684327 83.28 812 B9 93684328 83.28 812 B9 93684329 83.28 812 B9 93684330 83.28 812 B9 93684331 83.28 812 B9 93684332 83.28 812 B9 93684333 83.28 812 B9 93684334 83.28 812 B9 93684335 83.28 812 B9 93684336 83.28 812 B9 93684337 83.28 812 B9 93684338 83.28 812 B9 93684339 83.28 812 B9 93684340 83.28 812 B9 93684341 83.28 812 B9 93684342 83.28 812 B9 93684343 83.28 812 B9 93684344 83.28 812 B9 93684345 83.28 812 B9 93684346 83.28 812 B9 93684347 83.28 812 B9 93684348 83.28 812 B9 93684349 83.28 812 B9 93684350 83.28 812 B9 93684351 83.28 812 B9 93684352 83.28 812 B9 93684353 83.28 812 B9 93684354 83.28 812 B9 93684355 83.28 812 B9 93684356 83.28 812 B9 93684357 83.28 812 B9 93684358 83.28 812 B9 93684359 83.28 812 B9 93684360 83.28 812 B9 93684361 83.28 812 B9 93684362 83.28 812 B9 93684363 83.28 812 B9 93684364 83.28 812 B9 93684365 83.28 812 B9 93684366 83.28 812 B9 93684367 83.28 812 B9 93684368 83.28 812 B9 93684369 83.28 812 B9 93684370 83.28 812 B9 93684371 83.28 812 B9 93684372 83.28 812 B9 93684373 83.28 812 B9 93684374 83.28 812 B9 93684375 83.28 812 B9 93684376 83.28 812 B9 93684377 83.28 812 B9 93684378 83.28 812 B9 93684379 83.28 812 B9 93684380 83.28 812 B9 93684381 83.28 812 B9 93684382 83.28 812 B9 93684383 83.28 812 B9 93684384 83.28 812 B9 93684385 83.28 812 B9 93684386 83.28 812 B9 93684387 83.28 812 B9 93684388 83.28 812 B9 93684389 83.28 812 B9 93684390 83.28 812 B9 93684391 83.28 812 B9 93684392 83.28 812 B9 93684393 83.28 812 B9 93684394 83.28 812 B9 93684395 83.28 812 B9 93684396 83.28 812 B9 93684397 83.28 812 B9 93684398 83.28 812 B9 93684399 83.28 812 B9 93684400 83.28 812 B9 93684401 83.28 812 B9 93684402 83.28 812 B9 93684403 83.28 812 B9 93684404 83.28 812 B9 93684405 83.28 812 B9 93684406 83.28 812 B9 93684407 83.28 812 B9 93684408 83.28 812 B9 93684409 83.28 812 B9 93684410 83.28 812 B9 93684411 83.28 812 B9 93684412 83.28 812 B9 93684413 83.28 812 B9 93684414 83.28 812 B9 93684415 83.28 812 B9 93684416 83.28 812 B9 93684417 83.28 812 B9 93684418 83.28 812 B9 93684419 83.28 812 B9 93684420 83.28 812 B9 93684421 83.28 812 B9 93684422 83.28 812 B9 93684423 83.28 812 B9 93684424 83.28 812 B9 93684425 83.28 812 B9 93684426 83.28 812 B9 93684427 83.28 812 B9 93684428 83.28 812 B9 93684429 83.28 812 B9 93684430 83.28 812 B9 93684431 83.28 812 B9 93684432 83.28 812 B9 93684433 83.28 812 B9 93684434 83.28 812 B9 93684435 83.28 812 B9 93684436 83.28 812 B9 93684437 83.28 812 B9 93684438 83.28 812 B9 93684439 83.28 812 B9 93684440 83.28 812 B9 93684441 83.28 812 B9 93684442 83.28 812 B9 93684443 83.28 812 B9 93684444 83.28 812 B9 93684445 83.28 812 B9 93684446 83.28 812 B9 93684447 83.28 812 B9 93684448 83.28 812 B9 93684449 83.28 812 B9 93684450 83.28 812 B9 93684451 83.28 812 B9 93684452 83.28 812 B9 93684453 83.28 812 B9 93684454 83.28 812 B9 93684455 83.28 812 B9 93684456 83.28 812 B9 93684457 83.28 812 B9 93684458 83.28 812 Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Maintenance Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018 Exhibit “A” B9 93684459 83.28 812 B9 93684460 83.28 812 B9 93684461 83.28 812 B9 93684462 83.28 812 B9 93684463 83.28 812 B9 93684464 83.28 812 B9 93684465 83.28 812 B9 93684466 83.28 812 B9 93684467 83.28 812 B9 93684468 83.28 812 B9 93684469 83.28 812 B9 93684470 83.28 812 B9 93684471 83.28 812 Attachment C DirectfCharges/Special Assessments 2017-18 Name of City/Special District: ` C List all assessments by name and tax type."r Assessment Name � r 4 G1 aye Contact Name Phone# 14-) 10 0 CU Assessment Name Tax Type Contact Name Phone# Assessment Name Tax Type Contact Name Phone# Assessment Name Tax Type Contact Name Phone# Assessment Name Tax Type Contact Name Phone# Assessment Name Tax Type Contact Name Phone# Assessment Name Tax Type Contact Name Phone# Assessment Name Tax Type Contact Name Phone# Assessment Name Tax Type Contact Name Phone# AUDITOR-CONTROLLER • 12 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA,ROOM 200 •SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA 92701 PHONE(714)834-2450 • FAX (714) 834-2569 • eric.woolery@ac.ocgov.com • ac.ocgov.com ITEM NO. 8.2 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Budgeted:Yes Total Budget:$2,500,000 To:Board of Directors Funding Source:All Water Funds From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Job No:J2009-22 #22 Presented By:Steve Conklin, Engineering Manager Dept:Engineering Reviewed by Legal:Yes Prepared By:Bryan Hong, Water Quality Engineer CEQA Compliance:MND Subject:Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Well 22 Project SUMMARY: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Initial Study (IS) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has been prepared for the Well 22 Project. The analysis concludes that the proposed project can be implemented without causing significant adverse environmental impacts with the incorporation of mitigation measures for specific issues. The impacts and mitigation measures are summarized in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), which is included in the attached Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: (1) adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and make a finding on the basis of the whole record (including the Initial Study and comments received) that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the Board of Directors' independent judgment and analysis; (2) approve the proposed project, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and authorize staff to file a Notice of Determination for the Project; and (3) determine that the Board Secretary is the custodian of the documents and materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Board's decision is based and such documents and materials will be at the District's headquarters. DISCUSSION: The MND/IS analysis for the Well 22 Project found that the proposed project will not impact any CEQA guideline categories when mitigation measures are included in the project. The impacts and mitigation measures are summarized in the attached MMRP. Mitigation measures include full compliance with local noise ordinances, protection of biological and hydrological resources, and monitoring for potential hazardous materials. The MND/IS was prepared by CDM Smith, Inc. in conformance with CEQA requirements. The project's contract documents and specifications will incorporate the identified mitigation measures. Pursuant to CEQA guidelines, copies of the MND/IS were distributed to various agencies for public review from May 31, 2017 to June 29, 2017. During the 30-day public review period, six correspondences were received. All comments were considered and addressed in the MND/IS. The comments do not impact or alter the original scope of work for the project. Section 6 of the attached MND/IS includes copies of the comment letters and corresponding responses. An electronic copy of the MND/IS is on file and available for review on the District's public website. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S): On December 22, 2016, the Board of Directors authorized execution of a Professional Services Agreement with CDM Smith, Inc. to provide Hydrogeologic and CEQA Services for Well 22 Drilling and Construction Support in the amount of $219,135. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: Final_MND_for_Well_22.pdf Backup Material Backup Material Prepared by: Smith 111 Academy Way, Suite 150 Irvine, California, 92617 Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study SCH No. 2017051083 Prepared for: Yorba Linda Water District 1717 East Miraloma Avenue Placentia, California 92870 July 25, 2017 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study The Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study (IS/MND) was circulated for public review between May 31, 2017 and June 29, 2017. During the public review period, six comment letters were received. In response to these comments, minor revisions have been made to the text of the IS/MND to clarify, amplify, or otherwise make insignificant modifications to the IS/MND. No new significant effects have been identified, nor are new measures or revisions required to reduce potential effects to less than significant. Therefore, no recirculation of the IS/MND is required pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15073.5. The revisions, which have been incorporated into the Final IS/MND and are shown in revision text (i.e., deletions are shown with strikethrough and additions are shown with underline), consist of the following: ▪ Text updates to the project description relative to lease and easement of the project site (see pages 8 and 9). ▪ Supplemental text addition to Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 to clarify that bicycle lane closures would be temporary or avoided as feasible (see pages 58 and 69). The Final IS/MND includes the revised IS/MND (as described above) and two new sections: Section 6 Comments and Responses, which includes copies of the Draft IS/MND comment letters and corresponding responses; and Section 7, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which provides a table to fulfill the project’s mitigation monitoring and reporting requirements under CEQA. Although Sections 6 and Section 7 are new to the Final IS/MND, those sections are not shown in revision text (i.e., Sections 6 and Section 7 are not presented in underlined text). YLWD Well 22 Initial Study This page intentionally left blank YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Table of Contents Section 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Scope of the IS/MND .................................................................................. 1 1.2 Document Format ....................................................................................... 2 Section 2 Proposed Project ......................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Existing Setting ........................................................................................... 5 2.2 Proposed Project ......................................................................................... 8 Section 3 Environmental Issues ................................................................................................ 11 Section 4 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................. 65 Section 5 References ............................................................................................................... 71 Section 6 Comments and Responses ...................................................................................... 73 Section 7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program .......................................................... 89 List of Tables Table 1: Mitigation Measures................................................................................................... 65 Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program ........................................ 90 List of Figure Figure 1 Location Map ............................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2 Preliminary Site Plan ................................................................................................... 7 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study This page intentionally left blank 1 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Section 1 Introduction The Yorba Linda Water District (YLWD or the District) is proposing to install a new municipal water supply well (Well No. 22) to increase groundwater production capabilities that would produce approximately 3,000 gallons per minute (gpm) with associated pipelines, and appurtenances (proposed project). The new well and pipelines would be located in the City of Anaheim within Orange County Water District’s (OCWD) recharge facilities (OCWD Basins), on the northerly side of Huckleberry Pond south of 1156 Fee Ana Street. This property is owned by the OCWD and is being leased to YLWD as a well site. This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) is a public document that assesses the environmental effects of proposed project, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The IS/MND contained herein have been prepared in accordance with CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 5000 et seq.). It serves as an environmental document to be used in the local planning and decision-making process. As the CEQA lead agency for the proposed project, the District will consider whether to adopt the MND and whether to approve the project. 1.1 Scope of the IS/MND This IS/MND “tiers” from the OCWD’s Final Program/Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Orange County Water District Annexation Request by the City of Anaheim, Irvine Ranch Water District, and Yorba Linda Water District (State Clearinghouse No. 2011071095) certified in September, 2013 (referred to herein as the 2013 EIR).1 As defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15152, “tiering refers to the analysis of general matters contained in a broader EIR with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower projects incorporating by reference the general discussion from the broader EIR; and concentrating the later EIR or negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project.” As stated in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(b), agencies are encouraged to tier environmental analyses for separate but related projects to reduce delays and excessive paperwork in the environmental review process. This is accomplished by eliminating repetitive analyses of issues that were adequately addressed in the 2013 EIR and incorporating those analyses by reference, and then concentrating the subsequent environmental review on project specific issues. The tiering of the environmental analysis for the proposed project allows this IS/MND to rely on the 2013 EIR, which is hereby incorporated by reference, for (1) a discussion of general background and setting information for environmental topic areas; (2) overall growth related issues; (3) issues that were previously evaluated in sufficient detail in the 2013 EIR and for which there is no significant new 1 The 2013 EIR is available at the YLWD located at 1717 E. Miraloma Avenue, Placentia, California or online at https://www.ocwd.com/media/1381/wic11bdraft-annexation-eir.pdf and https://www.ocwd.com/media/1395/05a10final-eir.pdf Section 1 • Introduction 2 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study information or changed circumstances that would require further analysis; (4) cumulative impacts, and (5) mitigation measures that are applicable to the proposed project. The 2013 EIR was prepared pursuant to CEQA to assess the potential environmental effects of annexation of lands within the YLWD, Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), and the City of Anaheim. The analysis included the evaluation of the anticipated redistribution of the annexing agencies’ production locations and patterns in order to serve demand in the proposed annexation areas. The 2013 EIR also analyzed the broad environmental issues associated with possible changes in the distribution of pumping within the basin, based on modeling efforts conducted by OCWD using the OCWD’s groundwater model. The 2013 EIR addressed the following specific to the District: ▪ Annexation of approximately 6,587 acres in the eastern portion of Yorba Linda, with an associated water demand of 6,518 acre feet year (afy). ▪ Development of three new wells for the annexation pumping, within an area generally bounded by Miraloma Avenue on the north, Tustin Avenue on the west, Lakeview Avenue on the east, and the Santa Ana River on the south. However, no specific well sites were identified within that area. Assuming a future basin production percentage (BPP) of 65 percent, YLWD estimates that future pumping to satisfy water demands in the proposed annexation area will be 4,237 afy. ▪ Construction of distribution lines planned to be located within the boundaries noted above that would connect the new distribution facilities to existing YLWD distribution facilities within this location; the existing facilities would then deliver groundwater to areas within the YLWD service boundary. The 2013 EIR anticipated that project-level environmental documentation for the wells proposed by YLWD would be prepared at the time specific groundwater facility proposals are developed, and as such, the 2013 EIR incorporated provisions to guide the project-level environmental documentation (such as this IS/MND), including the identification of mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts where feasible. Accordingly, this IS/MND adheres to all applicable mitigation measures identified in the 2013 EIR. The mitigation measures follow the same naming conventions as the 2013 EIR, such as MM AIR-1. One mitigation measure from the 2013 EIR, MM TRANS-1, has been augmented to add additional language clarifying that any bicycle lane closures would be temporary or avoided as feasible. Any mitigation measures that have been developed specifically for the proposed project are labeled as Well No. 22, such as MM NOI-1 (Well No. 22). 1.2 Document Format This IS is organized into four sections as follows: Section 1, Introduction: provides an overview of the CEQA environmental documentation process. Section 2, Proposed Project: provides a description of the project location and setting, project components, and proposed construction. Section 3, Environmental Issues: identifies the environmental factors potentially affected, presents the Checklist for all impact areas and mandatory findings of significance. Includes discussion and identifies applicable mitigation measures. Section 1 • Introduction 3 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Section 4, Mitigation Measures: provides the mitigation measures that would be implemented to ensure that potential adverse impacts of the proposed project would be reduced to a less than significant level. Section 5, References: provides the list of references used in preparation of this document. Section 6, Comments and Responses: this section has been added to the final IS/MND and includes all comments that were received during the public comment period (May 31 – June 29) and the District’s responses. Although Section 6 is new to the Final IS/MND, this section is not shown in revision text (i.e., Section 6 is not presented in underlined text). Section 7, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: this section has been added to the final IS/MND and presents the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which describes the procedures for the implementation of the mitigation measures to be adopted for the proposed project. Although Section 7 is new to the Final IS/MND, this section is not shown in revision text (i.e., Section 7 is not presented in underlined text). Section 1 • Introduction 4 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study This page intentionally left blank 5 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Section 2 Proposed Project 2.1 Existing Setting The District provides water and sewer service to an approximately 23 square-mile area that includes the City of Yorba Linda and portions of the Cities of Brea, Placentia, Anaheim, and unincorporated areas of Orange County. The service population was estimated at 75,773 in 2015 (YLWD, 2016). The District receives its water from two main sources – (1) Orange County Groundwater Basin (OC Basin) managed by OCWD; and (2) imported water from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) through the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). The District’s distribution system includes 11 wells, four imported water connections with MWD, 12 booster pumping stations, 14 water storage reservoirs, pressure reducing stations, and emergency interconnections with neighboring agencies. Approximately 70 percent of the District’s water is obtained from the 11 groundwater wells and the remainder is obtained from MWD (YLWD, 2016). Most of the wells are within or near the District’s Richfield Plant located at 913 Richfield Road, Placentia, California. Project Location and Setting As shown on Figure 1, the project site is in the City of Anaheim north of the Santa Ana River and State Route (SR)-91 and east of SR-57. It is an area north of the Santa Ana River that is developed with OCWD groundwater recharge basins located within the lower Santa Ana River watershed and protected by levees. The site is located at the southerly cul-de-sac of Fee Ana Street, south of La Palma Avenue, to the north of OCWD’s Huckleberry Pond and to the south of industrial development. The project site is located within a vacant dirt access road for the OCWD recharge basins/ponds. As shown on Figure 2, the well site would be located along the northern edge of the access road, immediately east of the Fee Ana cul-de-sac and south of an existing fence that separates the OCWD property from industrial facility uses. As shown on Figure 2, a waste discharge pipe would be constructed from the well site across the access way southeast leading to Huckleberry Pond. As shown on Figure 2, a discharge pipeline would be constructed under the cul-de-sac and along the northern edge of the Huckleberry Pond access road to Richfield Road. A second discharge pipeline would be constructed under Richfield Road to connect to the existing transmission pipeline. The project site is vacant, consisting of hard packed dirt with sparse weedy vegetation. Figure 1 Location Map Initial Study YLWD Well No. 22 Prepared by CDM Smith Figure 2 Preliminary Site Plan Initial Study YLWD Well No. 22 Prepared by YLWD 66'49'23'23'63'FEE ANA STREETPROPOSED YLWD CONSTRUCTION & MAINTAINANCE EASEMENT ~3,134SF PROPOSED YLWD WELL SITE EASEMENT W/ REMOVABLE FENCE ~2,340SF PROPOSED ANAHEIM ELECTRICAL EASEMENT PROPOSED 15 FT. YLWD PIPELINE EASEMENT ~600SF PROPOSED 15 FT. YLWD PIPELINE EASEMENT ~11,212SF LA PALMA AVENUE RICHFIELD ROADPROPOSED DISCHARGE PIPELINE PROPOSED PUMP LOCATION HUCKLEBERRY POND Section 2 • Proposed Project 8 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study 2.2 Proposed Project The proposed project consists of the installation and operation of a groundwater well, Well No. 22, and associated facilities within the District’s service area on property owned by the OCWD. In addition to well installation, the proposed project components include design and construction of the well pump system, mechanical and electrical work, addition of a pump to waste line leading from the well to Huckleberry Pond, and an approximately 900 linear-foot east-west water distribution pipeline and 170 linear-foot north-south pipeline to connect to the District’s water delivery system beneath Richfield Road. The anticipated capacity of Well No. 22 is approximately 3,000 gpm. Project Purpose The District currently pumps water from the principal aquifer of the OC Basin through its 11 active wells. The proposed project would help to fulfill plans by the District to maximize the full potential of its yearly allowable groundwater BPP for the benefit of its customers. The District’s BPP would remain the same, meaning that the total amount of groundwater that the District may extract from the OC Basin would not change under the proposed project. The District has obtained an easement a lease from the OCWD for 50 years to accommodate construction and maintenance of Well No. 22. The District also discussed the conceptual location with the State Water Resources Control Board – Division of Drinking Water (DDW). Project Components Well No. 22 Well 22 would be designed in accordance with the requirements of the California Water Well Standard, California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the DDW. The preliminary well design is described below. This preliminary design is based on water levels and water quality for existing wells in the vicinity of the proposed well provided by OCWD and the known hydrogeologic conditions at the site and the preferences of the District. Based upon this information, the well would be designed as follows: ▪ A maximum depth of 550 feet ▪ An estimated specific capacity of 30 gallons per minute per foot (gpm/ft) and targeted pumping rate of 3,000 gpm ▪ A blank casing at least 18 inches in diameter installed in the top 210 feet of the well to accommodate the anticipated pumping water levels ▪ A stainless steel casing and well screen installed at a minimum in the water bearing portion of the well ▪ Gravel pack materials inspected and approved by a geologist Well development and aquifer testing water would be discharged into the adjacent OCWD recharge basin (Huckleberry Pond, within the OCWD recharge basins). Only water that meets Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Order No. R8-2009-0003, NPDES No. CAG998001 requirements for discharges to surface waters that pose an insignificant (de Section 2 • Proposed Project 9 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study minimus) threat to water quality will be discharged into the pond. As described below, a temporary waste discharge pipe would be installed for well development and aquifer testing. A permanent waste pipeline would be installed following completion of the well. Electrical Services To power the proposed project, the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department would provide electrical service to Well No. 22 subject to an easement with OCWD. This would include, including installation of a new transformer, pull section and power meter. A new service connection would be made to an existing power pole near the northwest corner of the well site’s fenced boundary. The new transformer is proposed to be located in the northwest corner of the site. The transformer pad location would consist of a new 5-foot by 8.5-foot pad mount vault and base and a new 8-foot by 10-foot transformer pad within an 18-foot by 25-foot easement. The transformer pad would be surrounded by removable bollards. The electrical equipment for Well No. 22 would be configured with a programmable logic controller (PLC) that provides supervisory control and monitoring for the new well. The system would be integrated to the District's main supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system control. Discharge Pipeline The proposed project includes the installation of an approximately 900 linear-foot discharge pipeline that would carry untreated water pumped from Well No. 22 to the existing transmission pipeline. As shown in Figure 2, the 16-inch diameter pipeline would extend from Well No. 22 across the cul-de-sac and along the northern edge of the Huckleberry Pond access road to Richfield Road. The maximum depth would be approximately 4 feet to the top of the pipeline. The east-west discharge pipeline would intersect with an approximately 170 linear-foot north-south pipeline to be installed in Richfield Road. This 16-inch diameter pipeline would connect to the existing transmission pipeline in Richfield Road that leads to the District’s sodium hypochlorite generation system for chlorination at the District Headquarters facility at 913 Richfield Road in Placentia before entering the District’s potable water distribution system. Based on preliminary investigations, the existing chlorination system has adequate facilities to treat the Well No. 22 supply. The maximum depth would be approximately 7 feet to the top of the pipeline. Waste Line A temporary discharge pipe would be installed between the well site and Huckleberry Pond for well development and aquifer testing. The pipe would be buried or standard road crossings would be used. The pipe would be installed with a flow dissipater device or similar structure to prevent erosion of the basin walls. The temporary pipe would be removed following completion of well construction and testing. During well equipping activities, an approximately 80-linear foot, 10-inch diameter waste discharge pipeline would be installed underground at approximately the same location as the temporary pipe. The maximum depth would be approximately 4 feet to the top of the Section 2 • Proposed Project 10 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study pipeline. As with the temporary pipe described above, the pipe would be installed with a flow dissipater device or similar structure to prevent erosion of the basin walls. Construction Well No. 22 would be designed in accordance with the requirements of the California Water Well Standard, DWR and the DDW. The well would be drilled using the reverse circulation drilling method in which the borehole is drilled with water as the drilling fluid. This method generally does not cause clogging of the deposits adjacent to the boring; therefore, less development time is needed to complete the well. During drilling, mud tanks would be required. The proposed well would be constructed in the first phase of construction, which is expected to occur in late 2017. The equipping of the wellhead and construction of the discharge pipelines would occur in a second phase, anticipated to begin in 2019. Well Construction Well construction and mechanical development would take place on a 24-hour basis, seven days a week, and pumping development and aquifer testing would take place during the hours of 7:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday, with the exception of the constant discharge pumping test which would be conducted for a continuous 24 hours. The total well construction is estimated to require approximately 11 weeks, consisting of drilling the pilot hole, performing testing, well construction, and well development/testing. Equipment staging would be on-site to the degree feasible. If necessary, the District would work with OCWD for acquiring additional laydown area along the unpaved access road adjacent to the project site. Additionally, if necessary, the District would work with the City of Anaheim to use the southern end of the Fee Ana Street cul-de-sac for staging. Wellhead Equipping and Pipeline Construction Wellhead equipping and pipeline construction would occur over approximately 12 months. Installation of the pipeline would consist of trenching, pipelaying and backfill and compaction as described below. ▪ Trenching would involve extraction of soil and material from a trench, the trench dimensions would be a maximum of 9 feet deep by 3 feet wide ▪ Pipelaying would involve the actual installation of pipe within the trench ▪ Backfill and compaction of the trench after pipelaying Wellhead equipping would entail installing the well pump motor and electrical services at the project site. The staging for wellhead equipping would largely occur at the well site. The District would work with OCWD for acquiring additional laydown area along the unpaved access road adjacent to the project site for pipeline construction. If necessary, the District would work with the City of Anaheim to use the southern end of the Fee Ana Street cul-de-sac for staging. 11 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Section 3 Environmental Issues This section presents the Environmental Checklist, evaluates the potential impacts of the project relative to 18 environmental issue areas, and presents mandatory findings of significance required under CEQA. The analysis begins with a summary delineation of the environmental factors (issue areas) addressed in the checklist and whether any potentially significant impacts have been identified in the analysis, followed by an explanation of the environmental factors potentially affected, including an evaluation of, and significance findings for construction and operation of the proposed project. The proposed project is evaluated in the context of the existing regulatory and environmental setting. Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. A social or economic change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. A social or economic change related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant.” Impacts are separated into the following categories: ▪ No Impact. This category applies when a project would not create an impact in the specific environmental issue area. A “No Impact” finding does not require an explanation when the finding is adequately supported by the cited information sources (e.g., exposure to a tsunami is clearly not a risk for projects not near the coast). A finding of “No Impact” is explained where the finding is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). ▪ Less Than Significant Impact. This category is identified when the project would result in impacts below the threshold of significance, and would therefore be less than significant. ▪ Less Than Significant After Mitigation. This category applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures would reduce a “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The mitigation measures are described briefly along with a brief explanation of how they would reduce the effect to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures from the 2013 EIR are incorporated by reference as applicable. ▪ Potentially Significant Impact. This category is applicable if there is substantial evidence that a significant adverse effect might occur, and no feasible mitigation measures could be identified to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. There are no such impacts for the proposed project. Section 3•Environmental Issues Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The following environmental factors were considered as part of this analysis. Aesthetics Mineral Resources Agriculture Resources and Forestry Resources Noise Air Quality Population/Housing Biological Resources Public Services Cultural Resources Recreation Geology/Soils Tribal Cultural Resources Greenhouse Gases Transportation/Traffic Hazards&Hazardous Materials Utilities/Service Systems Hydrology/Water Quality Mandatory Findings of Significance Land Use/Planning The proposed project could potentially affect one or more of these factors,as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Determination: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the Proposed Action COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. I find that the Proposed Action MAY have a significant effect on the environment. X However, there are feasible alternatives and/or mitigation measures available that will substantially lessen any adverse impact. These alternatives are discussed in the attached written report I find that the Proposed Action MAY have a significant effect on the environment. There are no feasible alternatives and/or mitigation measures available that will substantially lessen an adverse impact. See Section 4 and 5 for a discussion of this determination. zo( ure Date Steve Conklin, P.E., Engineering Manager May 30, 2017 Printed Name/Title Date CDM 12 12 YLWD well 22 Initial Study Section 3 • Environmental Issues 13 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Environmental Factors (Issue Areas): Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? X d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X Discussion: a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The Green Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan identifies scenic resources within the City, including hills, canyons, and the Santa Ana River (City of Anaheim, 2004a). Goal 2.1 of the Green Element is to preserve scenic views of ridgelines, natural open space and other scenic vistas wherever possible. Other identified scenic resources include reservoirs and basins, such as the recharge basins south of the project site. Goal 4.1 seeks to maximize the recreational and scenic potential of the reservoirs, basins and waterways. Goal 4.1 is supported by Policy 2, which is to: “Work with the County of Orange and the Orange County Water District to maintain and improve the recreational and scenic resources of the Anaheim Lakes and Five Coves areas and other appropriate water resource areas, including retarding basins and reservoirs.” The proposed site is located at the end of cul-de-sac in a previously disturbed area located between industrial development and the recharge ponds. The site is located on a hardpacked dirt maintenance access road for the recharge basins that is enclosed by chain link fencing. Visual features in the area include the surrounding buildings, recharge ponds (separated from the cul-de-sac by the chain link fence), and distant views of hills to the south and north. The Santa Ana River is located approximately 0.24 mile from the site, but it is not visible. The distant hills and the recharge basins/ponds immediately to the south of the project provide some visual quality. However, given the existing urban setting, including chain link fencing, industrial buildings, and dirt access road, the visual setting is not high quality and is not considered scenic. The well and east-west pipeline would be located within the chain link fence along the access road. There is an existing one-story building located immediately north of the well site, several one and two- Section 3 • Environmental Issues 14 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study story industrial buildings located north of east-west pipeline, and on both sides of Richfield Road along the north-south pipeline. During construction of the well and eastern portion of the east-west pipeline, some equipment such as the drill rig would be visible from Fee Ana Street south of La Palma Avenue, and construction equipment would be visible on Richfield Road during construction of the north-south pipeline and western portion of the east-west pipeline. This would be temporary and views to the south of the hills and recharge basin would continue to be available. Further, as described above, given the industrial setting, the views at this location are not considered scenic and no significant impact on a scenic vista would occur. The well and pipeline would be located underground, although there would be some aboveground equipment such as a motor, piping, valves, and transformer. The tallest element is the motor, which could extend a maximum of 10-feet above ground. This would be visible from Fee Ana Street south of La Palma Avenue but views to south of the hills or the recharge basin would not be substantially reduced. Further, as described above, it is an industrial area and the view is not considered scenic. Should the motor be housed, the housing would visually blend with the near industrial building and would not eliminate views of the hills and basin. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Finding of Significance: The impact is less than significant and no mitigation is necessary. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The closest designated scenic highway is SR-91 between SR-55 and Weir Canyon Road located south of the project site (California Department of Transportation, 2017). This highway is described as having views of residential and commercial development with intermittent riparian and chaparral vegetation. The nearest segment of SR-91 to the project site is approximately 0.7 mile to the southeast. Given flat topography, distance from the project site, and the presence of sound walls along SR-91 from approximately Kellogg Street to SR-55, the project site is not visible from a scenic highway. The proposed project would not damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation is necessary. c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? As described under I. Aesthetics a) above, the project site is located in an urbanized area, at the edge of an industrial development, behind a chain link fence and on a dirt access road. While the recharge basins located to the south provide a more natural visual character, the overall setting is urban and utilitarian. Construction equipment would be visible at the site, but this would be temporary and would not substantially degrade the existing urban character of the project site. Once constructed, the well would occupy a small space adjacent behind the existing chain link fence adjacent to an industrial building with some equipment, such as the motor located above ground. The water pipeline would be underground and invisible. The well equipment would blend with the existing visual character of surrounding urban/industrial uses, including the adjacent building, and no visual degradation would occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Further, while the impacts would be less than Section 3 • Environmental Issues 15 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study significant, the following 2013 EIR Mitigation Measure MM AES-1would apply to the proposed project to further reduce impacts: MM AES-1 (a) The District shall design facilities to be consistent with local policies and programs to protect scenic values and to avoid visual intrusions. (b) Where possible, projects shall be sited in topographically screened locations, in locations screened by vegetation, or adjacent to existing facilities and surface disturbance to reduce visual contrast with adjacent undisturbed areas. (c) Design elements of the facility will incorporate surrounding architecture and topographical features and blend with the surrounding vegetation and colors. (d) Project facilities shall be painted inconspicuous colors that match the natural color scheme of the adjacent vegetation, rock formations, or exposed soils to reduce visual contrast. (e) Landscape buffers, such as trees and shrubs, and/or fencing shall be planted around the improvements at new or altered facilities to screen the facilities from view and blend the improvements into the natural environment. (f) Avoid scenic resources, such as mature trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings, if possible. Where unavoidable, the removal of these resources will be minimized to the extent practical. (g) Any proposed project facilities within the coastal zone will be subject to design requirements and mitigation measures that protect coastal views and aesthetics as outlined in the applicable LCP [Local Coastal Plan] and/or the requirements of the CCC [California Coastal Commission]. Finding of Significance: The impact is less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM AES-1. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The proposed project is located in an urbanized area at the end of cul-de-sac in a previously disturbed area adjacent to industrial development. There are no light sensitive uses in the vicinity. Existing light sources include street lights and exterior security lighting at the adjacent facilities. During construction, 24-hour construction would be required for the well which would include nighttime lighting. This lighting would be temporary, the minimum necessary to provide light to the construction area, and would occur in an urbanized area with existing nighttime light (i.e., street lighting). Thus, temporary construction lighting would not adversely affect nighttime views in the area. Further, there are no sensitive uses in the area that would be adversely affected. During operations, the proposed project would include one light standard at the well site that would be used to provide light only when needed (i.e., lighting for emergency maintenance work conducted during nighttime hours). Use of this light would be temporary and intermittent and would occur within an urbanized area that has existing lighting. Thus, it would not create a new source of substantial light that would adversely affect nighttime views. Minimal aboveground equipment would Section 3 • Environmental Issues 16 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study be installed at the well site. As described under I) Aesthetics a) above, this would be required to be consistent with local policies and programs to protect scenic values and to avoid visual intrusions, and to blend with the surrounding vegetation and colors. The aboveground equipment would not create a new source of glare that would adversely affect views in the area. Further, although impacts would be less than significant, 2013 EIR Mitigation Measure MM AES-2 would apply to the proposed project to further reduce impacts associated with light and glare: MM AES-2 (a) All outdoor fixtures shall use shielded, low pressure sodium fixtures with a maximum cutoff angle of 90 degrees. Mercury vapor lights shall be prohibited. (b) To reduce daytime glare, concrete or metal surfaces and structures will be constructed with materials that minimize reflection of light or sunshine. Finding of Significance: The impact is less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM AES-2. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? X Section 3 • Environmental Issues 17 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- forest use? X e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X Discussion: a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? The proposed project is located at a previously disturbed area between industrial development and water recharge ponds, and there is no farmland located at or near the project site. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program designates the area as Urban and Built-Up Lands and does not designate the site as having Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmlands, or Farmlands of Statewide Importance (California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, 2017). Therefore, construction and operation of the proposed project would not affect or convert any prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? See II. Agriculture and Forest Resources a) above. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? The proposed project is located at a previously disturbed area between industrial development and water recharge basins, and there is no forest land or timberland located at or near the project site. The project site is not zoned as forest land or timberland and would not result in any changes that would affect zoning for forest land or timberland, or otherwise result in the conversion of forest land or timberland to non-forest land/timberland use. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 18 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? See II. Agriculture and Forest Resources c) above. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? See II. Agriculture and Forest Resources a) and c) above. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? X c) 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 ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? X d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? X Discussion: a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plans? The project site is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB or Basin), a 6,600-square mile basin encompassing all of Orange County, most of Los Angeles and Riverside Counties, and the western portion of San Bernardino County, which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The basis for project air quality review in California is evaluating Section 3 • Environmental Issues 19 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study consistency with the SCAQMD regulations, which are designed to bring the Basin into attainment for all National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). SCAB is currently designated as a nonattainment area is for both national and state 1-hour ozone and particulate matter (PM) standards. SCAQMD is responsible for administering the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which is a comprehensive air pollution control program for attaining federal and state ambient air quality standards. To the extent that a proposed project is consistent with the growth assumptions in a General Plan for its jurisdiction, it is also considered consistent with the SCAQMD's AQMP. The proposed project would have short-term air emissions from vehicle/equipment exhaust and fugitive dust from ground disturbing activities during construction. During operations, the well would be equipped with an electric motor and would not result in an increase in operational air pollutant emissions. As described under II. Air Quality b) below, the proposed project would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Further, the proposed project would not increase population growth or otherwise conflict with the growth assumptions in the Anaheim General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP. Finding of Significance: The impact is less than significant and no mitigation is necessary. b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Under the SCAQMD, the SCAB is designed as a nonattainment area for ozone (O3) and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). In addition, the SCAB is designated as a maintenance area for carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen dioxide (NOx) and is in attainment for sulfur dioxide (SOx). In determining attainment and maintenance of air quality standards, the SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for these and other criteria pollutants. A significant impact would occur if project operation results in substantial emissions which would exceed the established thresholds. An analysis of construction emissions associated with well and pipeline construction was conducted for the 2013 EIR. As described in the 2013 EIR, construction emissions can vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of operation, and prevailing weather conditions. Construction emissions result from onsite and offsite activities. Onsite emissions principally consist of exhaust emissions (NOx, SOx, CO, volatile organic compounds [VOC], PM10, and PM2.5) from heavy-duty construction equipment, motor vehicle operation, and fugitive dust (mainly PM10) from disturbed soil. Paving operations would release negligible VOC emissions. Offsite emissions are caused by motor vehicle exhaust from delivery vehicles, worker traffic, and road dust (PM10 and PM2.5). The 2013 EIR used the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2011.1.1 to estimate construction-generated emissions associated with well and pipeline construction based on maximum daily rates for typical construction activity compiled from other well and pipeline installation projects. The 2013 EIR analysis assumed there would be concurrent activity for well construction and pipeline construction, which would generate more on-site emissions from equipment and activity. The pipeline construction was assumed to consist of a maximum of 200 feet of excavation, pipeline installation, and repaving per day. With an assumed trench width of 3 feet and an active area of 600 feet in length, the project would actively disturb less than 0.05 acre of area on any one day. The 2013 EIR further Section 3 • Environmental Issues 20 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study assumed that approximately 5,400 cubic feet of cut (or 2,052 cubic yards) would be excavated per day for the pipeline, and that one third of the cut (684 cubic yards) would be exported and two thirds of the cut (2,052 cubic yards) would be used onsite to backfill the trench. Assuming a haul truck capacity of 20 cubic yards, export would result in 68 trips per day. Based on the assumptions described above, the 2013 EIR determined that construction activities would be less than the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance for VOC, CO, SOx, PM10 and PM2.5 (see Table 4.3-6 on page 4.3-26 of the 2013 EIR). The 2013 EIR further determined that the assumed construction activities would exceed the SCAQMD’s threshold of significance for NOx. However, the 2013 EIR determined that if construction of the pipeline and well do not occur concurrently, the significant impact would be mitigated (Mitigation Measure MM AIR-1). The proposed project would involve well and pipeline construction that would use similar construction equipment, however, as discussed in Section 2.2 Construction, construction of the well and pipeline would not occur concurrently. Further, the size of the pipeline trench and the amount of pipeline construction that would occur over a one day period is anticipated to be less than assumed in the 2013 EIR. The proposed project would, thus, have fewer, peak day emissions than the construction identified in the 2013 EIR and the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance would not be exceeded. Nonetheless, Mitigation Measure MM AIR-1 provided in the 2013 EIR is applied to the proposed project to ensure that the proposed project would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation during construction. The 2013 EIR determined that unmitigated emissions during construction do not exceed the localized significance thresholds. During operations, the well would be equipped with an electric motor, which would not result in operational air emissions. The only vehicle trips associated with well operations would be associated with well maintenance. The trips would be irregular and infrequent and would not result in emissions that violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Therefore, operation of the proposed project annexation would not result in onsite or on- road operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance. While impacts would be less than significant, 2013 EIR Mitigation Measure MM AIR-1 would be applied to the project. Mitigation Measure MM AIR-1 addresses two options relative to construction emissions during well installation and/or pipeline construction. The proposed project would adhere to Option 1, which is listed below: MM AIR-1 If specific facility construction would generate the same or less horsepower hours per day as utilized in this analysis, and would not generate more on-road trips than analyzed, then, the following measures shall be implemented: Well and pipeline construction shall not occur on the same day - Tier 3 engines shall be used for all off road pipeline construction equipment greater than 100 horsepower. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM AIR-1. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 21 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emission which exceeds quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Regional emissions include those generated from all onsite and offsite activities. Regional significance thresholds have been established by the SCAQMD because emissions from projects in the air basin can potentially contribute to the existing emission burden and possibly affect the attainment and maintenance of ambient air quality standards. Projects within the SCAB with regional emissions in excess of any of the mass daily thresholds for construction or operation are considered to have a significant regional air quality impact. The well would be equipped with an electric motor and only involve infrequent vehicle trips associated with well maintenance. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in significant onsite or on-road operational emissions. As described in III. Air Quality b) above, the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD’s mass daily thresholds, and impacts would be further reduced with application of Mitigation Measure MM AIR-1. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM AIR-1. d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? As addressed under III. Air Quality b) the 2013 EIR determined that well and pipeline construction activity construction would not exceed the localized significance thresholds. CO hot spots are associated with areas of high traffic congestion. An electric motor would be installed at the new well and operation of the proposed project would not result in new on-site or substantial on-road operational emissions and would generate a less than significant impact for CO hotspot generation. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate a CO hot spot or expose sensitive receptors to substantial CO concentrations. Finding of Significance: Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Land uses typically considered associated with odors include wastewater treatment facilities, waste disposal facilities, or agricultural operations. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can cause agitation, annoyance, and concern to the general public. The proposed project would not establish any land uses associated with odors. Additionally, the project site is located in an industrial area away from sensitive receptors. Potential odors associated with the proposed project would include diesel exhaust and the application of any architectural coatings during construction and periodic maintenance. These odors, if perceptible, are common in the environment, would dissipate rapidly as they mix with the surrounding air and would be of very limited duration. Therefore, the project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 22 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? X c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? X e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? X Discussion: Section 3 • Environmental Issues 23 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study a) Would the project have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The project site is a previously disturbed area along a hard packed dirt access road and adjacent to industrial development. Some weeds and ornamental vegetation are located at the site, primarily along the northern edge of the well site and at the edge of Huckleberry Pond where the waste discharge pipeline would be located. This sparse and disturbed vegetation does not provide suitable cover or forage for special status species. As identified in the 2013 EIR, no special-status plant or wildlife species with a potential to occur within the proposed facility area are known to occur within disturbed habitat, urban/developed land or landscaped areas. Thus, no direct impact to any special- status plant or wildlife species, or associated habitats would occur during construction and operational activities. The 2013 EIR determined that a number of special-status avian species with a potential to occur within the basin boundaries and the YLWD proposed facility area utilize open water areas and riparian habitat for foraging and/or nesting. Special-status species including, but not limited to, white- tailed kite, least Bell’s vireo, and southwestern willow flycatcher, are known to forage over open water and nest in riparian habitats, respectively. Project construction and operational activities that occur in the immediate vicinity of the OCWD Basins, including Huckleberry Pond, may have a significant indirect adverse effect on riparian habitat associated special-status avian species if these areas are determined to be occupied by any of these species. The 2013 EIR further determined that trees, utility poles and lattice towers also provide suitable perch locations for raptor species foraging in the proposed facility area, specifically the OCWD Basins. While no trees or other potentially suitable habitat for nesting birds would be removed as a result of the project, if project construction occurs within the immediate vicinity of potentially suitable habitat (350-feet for passerines and 500-feet for raptors), there may be a significant indirect impact on nesting birds due to noise from construction activities, which could result in harassment and eventual ‘take’ of an active nest. As a result, the construction of well and pipeline facilities, including the proposed project could result in significant indirect impacts on nesting birds. Implementation of 2013 EIR Mitigation Measures MM BIO-1, MM BIO-2, and MM BIO-3 would reduce impacts to less than significant. Operation of the well and pipeline would occur underground and would not have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (formerly California Department of Fish and Game) or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. MM BIO-1 Once the construction locations are finalized, if any of the proposed well or pipeline facilities occur within the immediate vicinity of the four OCWD Basins (i.e., Little Warner, Warner, Conrock, and Huckleberry) and/or the adjacent native riparian restoration site, the presence of any riparian associated special-status species must be determined prior to project construction. A presence/absence survey must be conducted by a qualified and/or permitted biologist, to determine the current occupancy of the adjacent native riparian restoration site. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 24 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Presence/absence surveys must be conducted according to accepted protocol for the appropriate species. A permitted biologist will be required to survey for federal and state listed species such as southwestern willow flycatcher. If the existing native riparian habitat restoration site is determined to be occupied by any riparian habitat associated special-status species and facilities are proposed adjacent to this habitat, additional avoidance and minimization measures will be required such as those described in MM BIO-2. MM BIO-2 If it is determined that a special-status species is currently occupying any portion of the OCWD Basins or adjacent native riparian restoration site, a biological monitor must be onsite to assess the potential for the project to indirectly impact the special status species. If the monitor determines there is a potential for indirect impacts, additional avoidance measures will be required, such as construction activities may not encroach within the occupied territory at a minimum of 350-feet for passerines and 500-feet for raptors. Additionally, depending on the construction proximity and sensitivity of the special-status species, a noise monitor may be required to ensure that indirect noise impacts do not result in the harassment and potential take of the species. An average of 60db per hour at a known nest location for certain special status species, such as least Bell’s vireo, may result in potential nest failure and subsequent ‘take’ of the active nest. Construction related noise must be below 60db per hour during the nesting season to ensure indirect ‘take’ of the special-status species does not occur. MM BIO-3 Proposed project activities within the YLWD proposed facility area may occur within or immediately adjacent to suitable nesting habitat for a number of common and sensitive native, resident and migratory bird species protected under CDFG Code 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). If a proposed production well or facility site will be constructed within or immediately adjacent to suitable nesting habitat (i.e., trees, shrubs, lattice towers and/or utility poles), construction activities should avoid, if possible, the general nesting season of February through August. If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre-construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500-feet of the project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be on site to ensure that no project activities impact the active nest. The biological monitor will establish a suitable buffer around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged, and the nest is no longer active. Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM BIO-1, MM BIO-2 and MM BIO-3. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? See IV. Biological Resources a) above. The well site and pipeline would be located in a previously disturbed uplands area that does not have riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. As identified in the 2013 EIR, no facilities would be constructed within open water areas or stands of Section 3 • Environmental Issues 25 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study native vegetation, and therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. The project would not have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? See IV. Biological Resources b) above. The proposed project would be located within a disturbed area and no proposed project activities would occur within Huckleberry Pond or result in the removal of wetland habitat. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? See IV. Biological Resources a) above. The proposed project would be located within a disturbed area at the urban edge of the recharge basin that has no native habitat and does not support native fish or wildlife species. As identified in the 2013 EIR, the potential for wildlife movement corridors and/or wildlife nursery sites to occur within the proposed facility area is very minimal. The only potential wildlife nursery site occurs within the open water included in the OCWD Basins, which could be utilized as a stop over site for foraging for a number of migratory waterfowl known to occur throughout the District boundaries. Although no established or potential wildlife movement corridors occur within the proposed facility area, wildlife could use the area as part of a corridor. However, given the urban setting and lack of vegetation at the site, the use is expected to be minimal. Further, during well and pipeline operations, the dirt access road would remain accessible for wildlife movement. As discussed under III. Biological Resources a), trees located in vicinity of the project site may support nesting birds. Noise disturbance of nesting birds during construction activities would be a significant indirect impact. Impacts to migratory birds and active nests are prohibited under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), 50 C.F.R. Part 10. Additionally, Sections 3500 through 3705 of the California Fish and Game Code protect most migratory bird species and active nests from harm or destruction. Nearly all native North American bird species are on the MBTA list. The nesting season varies according to species, but is generally February 15th through August 15th for most birds and January 31st through September 1st for raptors. As required by Mitigation Measure MM BIO-3, if construction occurs during the nesting season, a pre-construction clearance survey would be Section 3 • Environmental Issues 26 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study performed to prevent disturbance of active nests, which would reduce potential impacts on migratory birds to less than significant. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM BIO-3. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Chapter 13.12 of the City of Anaheim Municipal Code requires permission for disturbance of street trees; however, there are no street trees in the vicinity of the project that would be disturbed. There are no other local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources that are applicable to the proposed project. Thus, the proposed project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of adopted habitat conservation plan, natural communities’ conservation plan, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed project site is not within the boundaries of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural communities’ conservation plan, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? X c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Section 3 • Environmental Issues 27 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Discussion: a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in significance of a historical resource as defined in State CEQA §15064.5? The 2013 EIR prepared for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (which includes the project site) determined that the area within the Specific Plan boundaries has been previously disturbed and lacks identified historical resources (City of Anaheim, 2015). This includes the project site, which is located on a maintenance access road and Richfield Road. There are no historical resources located at the project site. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to State CEQA §15064.5? The 2013 EIR prepared for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (that includes the project site) determined that the within the Specific Plan area the only major archaeological resource site (CA-Ora- 303) was first recorded in 1970 adjacent to SR-91, and there are no other known archaeological resources (City of Anaheim, 2015). Further, given that the area is fully built-out and has been previously disturbed, the potential for any subsurface cultural resources is negligible. As with other areas with the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan boundaries, the project site is in an urbanized area that is high disturbed. Given the lack of known archaeological resources in the project area and the high level of project disturbance, no significant impacts to archaeological resources would occur. Finding of Significance: No significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. c. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? The 2013 EIR prepared for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (that includes the project site) determined there are no known prehistoric/paleontological resources in the city limits (City of Anaheim, 2015). The Specific Plan area is fully built-out and has been previously disturbed, therefore, the potential for any subsurface resources is negligible. As with other areas with the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan boundaries, the project site is in an urbanized area that is high disturbed. Given the lack of known prehistoric/paleontological resources in the city limits and the high level of project disturbance, no significant impacts to archaeological resources would occur. Finding of Significance: No significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. d. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? The project site is in a highly-disturbed area and no known burial sites are located within or near the project site. Should human remains be encountered during construction, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that disturbance of the site must halt and remain halted until the coroner has conducted an investigation into the circumstances, manner, and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been Section 3 • Environmental Issues 28 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner would have 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC would identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent, who would then help determine the appropriate course of action. The proposed project would comply with existing law, and potential impacts to human remains would be less than significant. Finding of Significance: No significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. X ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? X e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? X Section 3 • Environmental Issues 29 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Discussion: a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: (i.) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the state geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. The City of Anaheim is located in an area considered to be seismically active, as is most of southern California. According to the 2013 EIR prepared for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (which includes the project site), the City of Anaheim is situated between two major, active fault zones: the Newport- Inglewood Fault Zone located to the southwest and the Whittier-Elsinore Fault Zone located to the northeast (City of Anaheim, 2015). Other potentially active faults in proximity to the Specific Plan area are the El Modeno, Peralta Hills, and Norwalk faults. There are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones within the City limits. Additionally, construction of the proposed project would comply with applicable grading code requirements, including Chapter 17.04 Grading, Excavations, Fills, and Watercourse of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and would not increase risk of human health or safety related to fault rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, liquefaction, or landslides compared to existing conditions. As such, the proposed project would result in no impact associated with fault rupture within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. (ii.) Strong seismic ground shaking? As described under VI. Geology and Soils(a)(i) above, while there are no active or potentially active faults in the project area, Anaheim is located in an area considered to be seismically active, as is most of Southern California. The proposed project would be built in conformance with both City requirements, as outlined in the General Plan Safety Element and Chapter 17.04 of the Municipal Code which sets performance standards for excavation, grading, and filling. The 2013 EIR determined that earthquakes could damage proposed facilities and/or affect reliable use of facilities. Primary earthquake hazards include damage from ground displacement along a fault zone, severe ground shaking, and induced secondary hazards such as liquefaction in areas that are underlain by loose to medium dense alluvial deposits, seismically induced differential settlement and lurching maintenance personal could be present, and could potentially be exposed to these risks. Therefore, impacts related to seismically induced ground shaking and associated secondary hazards could be potentially significant. Further, damage or rupture of pipelines during a seismic event could result in underground and surface spillage of water, which could result in localized flooding, erosion, liquefaction, differential settlement, and lateral spreading. This would be a potentially significant impact. With implementation of Mitigation Measures MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2, impacts associated with exposing people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving, as a result of seismic ground shaking, would be reduced to less than significant. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 30 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study MM GEO-1 (a) To reduce the hazards of seismic damage, project sites shall not be located in known active fault zones, if possible. A geotechnical engineering investigation consistent with California geologic and engineering standards shall be conducted for applicable facilities by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The geotechnical engineer shall prepare a report that summarizes the results of a field investigation, including site inspection and soil testing, potential geologic hazards (including fault rupture and severe secondary effects of earthquakes), along with design criteria and construction methods to effectively construct the proposed facilities with an acceptable level of risk with respect to earthquake, liquefaction, foundations, landscaping, dewatering, ground water, retaining walls (if applicable), pavement sections, and utilities. The report shall address all geologic and geotechnical factors related to the design and construction of the proposed project. The geotechnical engineering investigation shall delineate areas of active and potentially active faults. To the extent possible, it shall identify fault traces and locate them in the field so faults can be avoided. (b) Appropriate seismic design provisions shall be implemented with project design and construction in accordance with governing building codes. Unless superseded by other regulatory provisions or standards, seismic design criteria shall be developed on the basis of the requirements of the current CBC [California Building Code]. MM GEO-2 All practicable precautions shall be taken to design and construct project facilities to withstand the projected ground shaking associated with the characteristic earthquakes in the area. This includes secondary hazards induced by earthquakes (liquefaction, lurching, lateral spreading, and rapid differential settlement). Project structures shall be designed using project-specific criteria in accordance with the latest revision of the National Electrical Safety Code (American National Standards Institute [ANSI] C.2) and the CBC. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2. (iii.) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Soil liquefaction is a seismically induced form of ground failure commonly occurring in areas with loose soil and a shallow groundwater table. According to the Generalized Geologic Map (Figure S-2) in the Safety Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan, the project site is located in an area of alluvium within a designated liquefaction potential, as is most of lowland Anaheim (City of Anaheim, 2004b). The proposed project construction would comply with Chapter 17.04 Grading, Excavations, Fills, and Watercourse of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Additionally, 2013 EIR Mitigation Measures MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2 requiring geotechnical engineering investigation and implementation of seismic design provisions would apply to the project. With adherence to the City’s site preparation code and MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2, implementation of the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on risks to human health or safety related to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 31 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study (iv.) Landslides? According to the Generalized Geologic Map (Figure S-2) in the Safety Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan, the project area is not located in or near a landslide hazard area (City of Anaheim, 2004b). Additionally, the proposed project is located in a relatively flat area and would undergo requisite grading to compact soil according to engineering standard during construction. As such, the proposed project area is not susceptible to landslides. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? The project area is relatively flat with compacted soils. The proposed project would only result in ground disturbance for installation of pipeline and well drilling during the construction period. Additionally, the proposed project construction would comply with Chapter 17.04 Grading, Excavations, Fills, and Watercourse of the Anaheim Municipal Code, which would include best management practices to limit the potential for soil erosion. As a result, impacts involving soil erosion or loss of topsoil would be less than significant. Impacts would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM GEO-3 identified in the 2013 EIR: MM GEO-3 Prior to commencement of grading or dredging, appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be incorporated into project planning to reduce construction pollutants in runoff, consistent with goals and standards established under federal and state nonpoint source discharge NPDES regulations and basin Plan water quality objectives. To maximize effectiveness, the selected BMPs shall be based on finalized site-specific hydrologic conditions, with consideration for the types and locations of construction and development. Mechanisms to maintain the BMPs shall be identified in the Conditions of Approval. Construction BMPs could include, but are not limited to the following: ▪ Diversion of offsite run-off away from the construction area ▪ Prompt revegetation of proposed landscaped areas ▪ Perimeter straw wattles or silt fences and/or temporary basins to trap sediment before it leaves the site ▪ Regular sprinkling of exposed soils to control dust during construction during the dry season ▪ Installation of a minor retention basin(s) to alleviate discharge of increased flows ▪ Specifications for construction waste handling and disposal ▪ Erosion control measures maintained throughout the construction period ▪ Preparation of stabilized construction entrances to avoid trucks from imprinting debris on City of Anaheim roadways ▪ Contained wash out and vehicle maintenance areas Section 3 • Environmental Issues 32 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study ▪ Training of subcontractors on general construction area house keeping ▪ Construction scheduling to minimize soil disturbance during the wet weather season ▪ Regular maintenance and storm event monitoring Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation Mitigation Measure MM GEO-3. c) Is the project located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onsite or offsite landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? The proposed well and pipelines would extend below ground. These proposed facilities could be located within soils that could be susceptible to unstable geologic structures and expansive soils. These conditions could result in the damage or rupture of the proposed facilities. The proposed project construction would comply with Chapter 17.04 Grading, Excavations, Fills, and Watercourse of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Additionally, 2013 EIR Mitigation Measures MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2 requiring geotechnical engineering investigation and implementation of seismic design provisions would apply to the project. With adherence to the City’s site preparation code and MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2, implementation of the proposed project would have a less than significant impact relative to offsite landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2. d) Is the project located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? See VI. Geology and Soils a), b), and c) above. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2. e) Would the project have soils that are incapable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The proposed project does not entail the construction of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 33 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? X b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? X Discussion: a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? The proposed project involves construction and operation of a new groundwater well and pipelines. The proposed project would not induce an increase in population or traffic. Project construction would occur with minimal equipment over two phases. Project construction would result in short- term emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the project area. The 2013 EIR addressed GHG emissions associated with production well installation and pipeline installation based on typical construction activity compiled from other well and pipeline installation projects. As discussed under III. Air Quality a) above, construction of the proposed project is consistent with, and would not exceed, the well installation and pipeline installation construction parameters assessed in the 2013 EIR. The 2013 EIR determined that at a daily installation rate assumption of 200 feet of pipeline and an emissions rate of 8.4 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per day, 4 million feet of pipeline would have to be installed for the emissions associated with YLWD new well and pipeline installation to exceed the SCAQMD’s draft local industrial facility threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e per year. The 2013 EIR determined that the new well and pipeline installation associated with the YLWD annexation would not result in 4 million feet or more of pipeline installation; and therefore, new well and pipeline installation associated with the YLWD annexation would not exceed the SCAQMD’s draft local industrial facility threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e per year and no significant impact relative to GHG emissions would occur. The proposed project would implement a new well and pipelines associated with the YLWD annexation analyzed in the 2013 EIR, and is consistent with the assumptions therein. It involves the construction of approximately 1,600 feet of pipeline, and thus would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Long-term (operational) GHG emissions are expected to be primarily limited to indirect emissions as a result of energy consumption for running the water pump mechanism. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 34 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? As discussed in VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions above, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact on the environment due to the generation of GHG emissions during construction and operational activities. As a result, the proposed project would not conflict with plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? X c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? X d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? X e) For an action located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X f) For an action within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people X Section 3 • Environmental Issues 35 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? X Discussion: a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Construction activities associated with the proposed project would involve use of limited quantities of hazardous materials such as petroleum, hydrocarbons, and their derivatives (e.g., gasoline, diesel, oils, and lubricants) to operate the construction equipment. Construction activities would be short-term and would involve the limited transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. These materials would be used with construction equipment and stored in vessels engineered for safe storage. Similar to construction, operation of the proposed project could involve limited quantities of hazardous materials such as petroleum, hydrocarbons, and their derivatives (e.g., gasoline, diesel, oils, and lubricants) during periodic maintenance activities. Transport, use, or disposal of these hazardous substances would occur according to instructions provided by the product manufacturer and be subject to federal, state, and local health and safety regulations involving storage, transport, use, and disposal. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? As described under VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials a) above, construction and maintenance activities associated with the proposed project would involve relatively small quantities of hazardous substances associated with the operation of equipment and vehicles. Construction vehicles onsite may require refueling or maintenance that could result in minor releases of oil, diesel fuel, transmission fluid, or other materials. Additionally, the limited quantities of hazardous materials that would be Section 3 • Environmental Issues 36 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study associated with proposed construction and maintenance of well and pipeline facilities would not represent a significant hazard to the public or environment in the case of an accidental release. Similar to construction, operation of the proposed project could involve use of limited quantities of hazardous materials associated with repair and maintenance activities. This would not represent a significant hazard to the public or environment in the case of an accidental release such as petroleum, hydrocarbons, and their derivatives (e.g., gasoline, diesel, oils, and lubricants) during operations. Finally, mandatory compliance with all federal, state, and local regulations on the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials would further reduce the likelihood of an accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? The proposed project is surrounded by open space, water, and industrial uses. There are no schools located within 0.25 mile of the project site. As such, the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. d) Is the project located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? A Drinking Water Source Assessment and Protection (DWSAP) would be prepared as a part of this project. The DWSAP is a document required by the DDW as part of their permitting process for new water supply wells, and would document potentially contaminating activities (PCAs) near the well site that could potentially impose a risk to the groundwater supply. An Environmental Data Resources (EDR) report was prepared to provide information pertaining to PCAs in the vicinity of the project site. No PCAs were identified at the project site and there are no sites of concern located directly upgradient and in the immediate vicinity of the proposed well site. Based on distance and geographic/topographic orientation, this site would not constitute a recognized environmental concern to either project construction or operations. The proposed project is not located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and it would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) For an action located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? The nearest airport, the Fullerton Municipal Airport, is located approximately 10 miles west of the project site. Therefore, the project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and the proposed project would not expose people to a safety hazard associated with a public airport. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 37 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. f) For an action located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Heliports located in the vicinity include the Kaiser Permanente Orange County – Anaheim Medical Center located approximately 1.3 miles to the west of the project site. Based on the distance and the type of proposed facilities (i.e., well and pipeline), the proposed project would not result in an increased risk to the public relative to exposing people to a safety hazard associated with a private airstrip. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The proposed project is located adjacent to a cul-de-sac on Fee Ana Street. A segment of the water discharge pipeline would be constructed under the cul-de-sac, necessitating a temporary street closure. Further, the cul-de-sac could possibly be used for construction staging. The cul-de-sac is located at southern terminus of Fee Ana Street and temporary construction and construction staging at this location would not block access to other portions of the street or to driveways. A lane of Richfield Road would be temporarily closed during construction of the north-south pipeline (approximately four weeks). While this would reduce access, the road would remain open to through traffic, including emergency vehicles. In addition, the activities in both Richfield Road and Fee Ana Street would require an Encroachment Permit from the City of Anaheim. Compliance with the terms of the permit and City of Anaheim Fire Department codes and regulations, would ensure that proposed project construction would not interfere or impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Operations of the proposed pipelines would not impact emergency response or evacuation plans because the pipelines are located underground. While the proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, impacts would be further reduced with implementation of 2013 EIR Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-2: MM HAZ-2 Prior to construction, a Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared by YLWD for approval by the City of Anaheim. The plan shall include management practices to maintain access to businesses, residences, schools, park facilities, and other buildings when street lanes are closed during construction. The Traffic Control Plan shall identify requirements such as construction signage and traffic cone placement. Additionally, the Traffic Control Plan shall identify measures to accommodate bus, pedestrian, and bicycle use during construction. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-2. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 38 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study h) Would the project expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The project site is located in an urbanized area, adjacent to industrial uses and three large groundwater recharge basins/ponds. It is not adjacent to wildlands and would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? X b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? X c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? X d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? X e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? X Section 3 • Environmental Issues 39 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? X h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? X i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? X j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Discussion: a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Construction of the proposed project would involve earth-disturbing activities that could result in the discharge of sediment or other pollutants (e.g., petroleum products) to local drainages or Huckleberry Pond and ultimately the Pacific Ocean via runoff from the various construction sites. The proposed project would be required to implement water quality best management practices (BMPs) to prevent and control the introduction of pollutants to the stormdrain system and receiving waters in compliance with the County of Orange’s Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the City of Anaheim’s Local Implementation Plan (LIP), which has been adopted based upon the County’s DAMP. Such BMPs could include, but would not be limited to, use of silt basins or other mechanisms to trap sediment before it leaves the site and erosion control measures. In addition, implementation of the 2013 EIR Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2 would further reduce impacts on water quality. As a result, the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. MM HWQ-1 Project Conditions of Approval shall specify that, prior to issuance of a grading or dredging permit, appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) be incorporated into project planning to reduce construction pollutants in runoff, consistent with goals and standards established under federal and state nonpoint source discharge NPDES regulations and Basin Plan water quality objectives. To maximize effectiveness, the selected BMPs shall be based on finalized site-specific hydrologic conditions, with consideration for the types and locations of Section 3 • Environmental Issues 40 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study construction and development. Mechanisms to maintain the BMPs shall be identified in the Conditions of Approval. Construction BMPs could include, but are not limited to: ▪ Diversion of offsite run-off away from the construction area ▪ Prompt revegetation of proposed landscaped areas ▪ Perimeter straw wattles or silt fences and/or temporary Basins to trap sediment before it leaves the site ▪ Regular sprinkling of exposed soils to control dust during construction during the dry season ▪ Installation of a minor retention Basin(s) to alleviate discharge of increased flows ▪ Specifications for construction waste handling and disposal ▪ Erosion control measures maintained throughout the construction period ▪ Preparation of stabilized construction entrances to avoid trucks from imprinting debris on roadways ▪ Contained wash out and vehicle maintenance areas ▪ Training of subcontractors on general construction area house keeping ▪ Schedule construction to minimize soil disturbance during the wet weather season ▪ Regular maintenance and storm event monitoring MM HWQ-2 Project Conditions of Approval shall specify that appropriate post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) be incorporated into project design to reduce urban pollutants in runoff, consistent with goals and standards established under federal and state nonpoint source discharge NPDES regulations and Basin Plan water quality objectives. To maximize effectiveness, the selected BMPs shall be based on finalized site-specific hydrologic conditions, with consideration for the types and locations of development. Mechanisms to maintain the BMPs shall be identified in the Conditions of Approval. BMPs will be selected from the wide range of effective measures outlined in the CASA Handbook (California Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbook, 2003), the Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association Start at the Source-Design Guidance Manual, or similar documents that shall be identified prior to final design approval. BMPs shall also identify mechanisms for routine maintenance and repair of BMPs. These BMPs will be designed to comply with the DAMP and NPDES permit requirements for structural and nonstructural controls. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM HWQ-1 and MM HWQ-2. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 41 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Construction of the proposed project would result in surficial impacts to up to three to four feet below ground level for installation of the waste and discharge pipeline. The water table is at a depth of over 23 feet bgs. In addition, and per the issued permits, operation of Well No. 22 is a planned activity in accordance with the long range plan of the District. OCWD manages basin production through the use of economic incentives, such as the annual setting of the BPP, the replenishment assessment (RA), and the basin equity assessment (BEA). This is described in 2013 EIR as follows (page 4.9-21 of the Draft EIR): The BPP is defined as “the ratio that all water to be produced from groundwater supplies within the [Orange County Water] District bears to all water to be produced by persons and operators within the [Orange County Water] District from supplemental sources as well as from groundwater within the [Orange County Water] District.” The BEA is an additional fee that is set annually to make the cost of pumping above the BPP roughly equal to the cost of imported water supplies. As part of the setting of the BPP, the [Orange County Water] District reviews information regarding the Basin and determines what proportion of the total water demands within the [Orange County Water] District service area can be met by groundwater production from within the Basin in any given year. The BPP and BEA provide an economic incentive for groundwater producers (producers) to keep their groundwater production at or below the established threshold set by the [Orange County Water] District as a percentage of demand. Since 1975, the BPP has ranged from a low of 62 percent to a high of 80 percent. The annual setting of the BPP is based in part on OCWD’s groundwater modeling and monitoring program. The BPP has been shown to be an effective tool to manage the amount of groundwater pumping within the Basin. While the decision to pump above or below the BPP is an operational decision made by each individual groundwater producer, the District would continue to pump at or below the BPP and as such, the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies. Further, operation of new wells within the District was addressed in the 2013 EIR, which determined that pumping associated with new well locations would not cause any significant groundwater flow direction changes in the vicinity, and would not have significant change in groundwater gradient as compared to the baseline. The maximum water level decline or drawdown due to the pumping at the new well locations is very similar to the baseline and well within normal groundwater level fluctuations. Therefore, the 2013 EIR concluded that anticipated changes in groundwater levels associated with the YLWD pumping are well within the normal operational ranges observed in the principal aquifer. The proposed project would not alter or deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level such that the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a Section 3 • Environmental Issues 42 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on site or off site? No stream or river exists at the project site. The project site is hard packed dirt and stormwater runoff currently percolates into the ground surface, or, in the case of high rainfall events, stormwater at the project site flows into the Huckleberry Pond or into the storm drains on Fee Ana Street or Richfield Road. The proposed project would not result in an appreciable increase in impermeable surfaces and would maintain the existing rate and volume of stormwater runoff. Further, implementation of the 2013 EIR Mitigation Measures MM HWQ-1 and MM HWQ-2 would address surface runoff and maintain the runoff below the local drainage volume and flow requirements, which would also prevent downstream flooding. This would reduce potential stormwater runoff and drainage pattern alterations and no substantial erosion or siltation would occur onsite or offsite. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM HWQ-1 and MM HWQ-2. d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on site or off site? No stream or river exists at the project site. The project site is hard packed dirt and stormwater runoff currently percolates into the ground surface, or, in the case of high rainfall events, stormwater at the project site flows into the Huckleberry Pond or into the storm drains on Fee Ana Street or Richfield Road. The proposed project would not result in an appreciable increase in impermeable surfaces and would maintain the existing rate and volume of stormwater runoff. The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial flooding onsite or offsite. Additionally, 2013 EIR Mitigation Measure MM HWQ-3 would further reduce this impact. MM HWQ-3 Individual projects shall be designed to maintain pre-project stormwater runoff volume and flow for the 10- and 100-year flood events to prevent downstream and offsite flooding. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM HWQ-3. e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? The project site is hard packed dirt and stormwater runoff currently percolates into the ground surface, or, in the case of high rainfall events, stormwater at the project site flows into the Huckleberry Section 3 • Environmental Issues 43 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Pond or into the storm drains on Fee Ana Street or Richfield Road. No appreciable change in impervious surface area would occur under the proposed project. The proposed project would not result in an increase in volume and velocity of storm flows that could result in a substantial additional source of polluted runoff. Further, implementation of the 2013 EIR Mitigation Measures MM HWQ-1, MM HWQ-2, and MM HWQ-3 would include BMPs that would limit surface runoff and maintain local drainage volume and flow below requirements. The proposed project would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM HWQ-1, MM HWQ-2, and MM HWQ-3. f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? As described under IX. Hydrology and Water Quality a) above, the proposed project would be required to implement BMPs to prevent and control the introduction of pollutants to the storm drain system and receiving waters in compliance with the DAMP and LIP. The proposed project would not substantially degrade water quality. Further, implementation of 2013 EIR Mitigation Measures MM HWQ-1 and MM HWQ-2 would further reduce impacts on water quality. Finding of Significance: Impacts are less than significant and would be further reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM HWQ-1 and MM HWQ-2. g) Would the project place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary, Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? The proposed project is a groundwater extraction well and associated pipelines and does not include any residential uses. The proposed project would not place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary, Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. h) Would the project place within a 100-year floodplain structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? The project site is located on the edge of a FEMA 100-year flood zone. However, the proposed project would not involve an appreciable change in impervious surface area and existing drainage patterns would be maintained. The only aboveground features would be well equipment and housing associated with Well No. 22. The proposed project would not disrupt flood flows. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? See IX. Hydrology and Water Quality g) above. The proposed project would not disrupt flood flows, nor would it result in the construction of structures meant to house residents or employees, or reduce the amount of floodplain storage. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 44 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. j) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? The proposed project is not located in an area that is subject to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow, nor would it house residents or employees. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? X c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X Discussion: a) Would the project physically divide an established community? The project site is located between industrial development and groundwater recharge basins and is not within an established community. Further, the only above ground features would be well equipment and housing. It would not divide an established community. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Section 3 • Environmental Issues 45 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study The General Plan land use designation is Parks and the Zoning Designation is Development Area #6 (DA-6) Open Space/Water. The intent of the DA-6 zoning classification is to ensure that all existing water-related, open space areas are protected from incompatible uses and maintained in an orderly manner, and to protect the area for groundwater recharge activities (City of Anaheim, Anaheim Municipal Code. Section 18.120.030.060). Non-open space or water uses allowed within the area include minor utilities, which are defined as un-staffed facilities involving only minor structures, if any, that are used for the provision of electricity, communications (including pay phones), water, gas, wastewater, through wires, pipes, and other similar means. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the allowable uses. The proposed project is located in the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan area. Relative to the areas designated as Open Space/Water area, the Specific Plan states that it is important to increase public access to open space areas, it is also important to ensure that OCWD can continue to conduct groundwater recharge access in the project vicinity (i.e., planned bikeway along the recharge basin from Lakeview Avenue to Richfield Road identified on Figure 3-5 of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan) (City of Anaheim, 2016). The proposed project would continue to allow OCWD to conduct groundwater recharge and would not prevent possible future public access to the area. Therefore, the proposed project would be compatible with the City’s land use plan, policies, and regulations. The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the proposed project. Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities’ conservation plan? The proposed project is not located within the boundary of the any habitat conservation plan, including the Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) of Orange County. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XI. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X Section 3 • Environmental Issues 46 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Discussion: a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? The Green Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan shows the project site in area identified as Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ)-2 due to aggregate sand and gravel deposits. The project site is in a developed area that is expected to include alternating permeable (sands and gravels) and less permeable (silts and clays) based on Well 19, Well 20, and Well 21 well logs, and well logs and cross sections in the vicinity of the Richfield Wellfield. However, the project site is in a narrow area located between recharge basins and existing development and is not an available site for mineral extraction. Therefore, proposed project would not result in a loss a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? See XI. Mineral Resources a) above. While the site is in an area identified as MRZ-2 in the City’s General Plan, the project site is in a developed area that is not an available site for mineral extraction. The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XII. NOISE Would the project result in a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? X c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X Section 3 • Environmental Issues 47 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact e) For an action located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X f) For an action within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X Discussion: a) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? The proposed project is located near recharge ponds and industrial development. There are no sensitive uses in the vicinity. The nearest residential development is located south of the recharge basins/ponds, approximately 1,750 feet from the project site. Construction of the well and the associated water pipeline would generate various levels of noise in the City of Anaheim. According to Title 6, Chapter 6.70, Section 6.70.010 of the Anaheim Municipal Code construction or building repair noise is exempt from the City’s noise ordinance during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Additional work hours may be permitted if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works or Building Official. Thus, daytime construction (during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) would be exempt from the City’s noise standards. However, well construction would require the continuous operation of a drill rig for 24-hours, and thus construction activities would be required during the nighttime hours. The only structures located in the vicinity of the project site are industrial uses which are not expected to be in operation between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Further, additional work hours for nighttime construction would occur only as permitted by the Director of Public Works or Building Official per the Anaheim Municipal Code as described above. Thus, persons would not be exposed to generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local noise ordinance. The City of Anaheim has established a “normally acceptable” noise standard for single-family residential uses of 50 to 60 dB. This noise standard is not broken down by “daytime,” “evening,” and “nighttime” standards, and as such, is assumed to apply to all hours of the day. The 2013 EIR determined that the closest residential uses to potential well locations would be 800 feet. The 2013 EIR determined under this “worst-case” scenario of residential uses 800 feet from the well site, Section 3 • Environmental Issues 48 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study construction noise from operation of the drill rig would be approximately 53.6 dBA at the nearest residential uses. Thus, even with nighttime construction, well drilling would not exceed local noise standards at residential uses located 800 feet from the well site. As described above, the nearest residential uses to the project site are almost 1,000 feet further than the distance evaluated in the 2013 EIR (1,750 feet). Therefore, nighttime construction would not exceed the “normally acceptable” noise standard for residential uses. As a result, construction of the proposed project would occur in compliance with standards established in the local noise ordinance and would not exceed noise levels recognized as causing harm to sensitive receptors. Therefore, the construction noise impact would be less than significant. The nearest residential uses are approximately 1,750 feet from the project. Operational noise would not be audible at the this distance. Therefore, no impact on residential uses would occur. To determine the anticipated noise level generated by operation of the well, the 2013 EIR presents a comparative noise measurement that was taken approximately 50 feet from existing production well YLWD-10 (non-housed) and 150 feet from existing production well YLWD-12 (Table 4.12-4 of the 2013 EIR), on the south side of Miraloma Avenue in the City of Placentia. The 2013 EIR determined that these existing wells would be representative of the new production well. The noise measurement recorded a noise level generated by the operation of two existing production wells of 64.7 dBA Leq (at a distance of approximately 50 feet from YLWD-10 and 150 feet from YLWD-12). Based on the assumption that the noise level would be 64.7 dBA Leq at a location 50 feet from the well motor, the noise level would be 70 dBA at a location 15 feet from well. The City of Anaheim identifies a “normally acceptable” range for interior noise levels for offices, businesses, commercial, and industrial uses of 50 to 70 CNEL. Therefore, under the proposed project, if the motor is located 15 feet or closer to the adjacent building, a significant impact associated with exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies could occur. Implementation of the following Mitigation Measure MM NOI-1 (Well No. 22) would reduce impacts to less than significant: MM NOI-1(Well No. 22) Should the well pump be located within 15 feet of an existing building, a noise attenuation plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City, demonstrating operational noise levels shall not exceed seventy decibels CNEL at the property line for extended periods. Finding of Significance: Construction noise impacts would be less than significant. Operational noise impacts would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM NOI-1 (Well No. 22). b) Would the project expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise? Construction of the proposed project would potentially generate low levels of ground vibration. The significance of impacts associated with ground vibration is dependent on the type of construction equipment and activities occurring on the project site, as well as the proximity of construction equipment to nearby sensitive receptors and structures. Construction activities would be limited in duration and not require the activities or equipment known to generate substantial ground vibration, including activities such as blasting, pile driving, and equipment such as heavy demolition and Section 3 • Environmental Issues 49 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study jackhammers, impact hammers, and pile drivers. Further, structures nearest to the project site are industrial buildings, with no historic building, or sensitive uses such as residential, hospital, convalescent home, places of worship, or school uses located in the area. Operation of the well and pipeline would not generate vibration. Periodic maintenance would necessitate truck visits throughout the year, but maintenance truck trips are not associated with the generation of substantial ground vibration. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. Finding of Significance: Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? See XII. Noise a) above. The proposed project would result in construction noise during the two construction phases that would have noticeable impact. However, construction noise would be temporary and remain compliant the City’s Noise Ordinance. Additionally, there are no sensitive uses in the vicinity. During operations, if the well motor is located 15 feet or closer to the adjacent building, generation of noise levels in excess of standards could occur; thereby, resulting in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM NOI-1 (Well No. 22), impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Finding of Significance: Less than significant with implementation of mitigation measure MM NOI-1 (Well No. 22). d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? See XII. Noise a) and c) above. The proposed project would result in construction noise during the two construction phases that would have noticeable impact. However, construction noise would be temporary and remain compliant the City’s Noise Ordinance. Additionally, there are no sensitive uses in the vicinity. During operations, if the well motor is located 15 feet or closer to the adjacent building, generation of noise levels in excess of standards could occur; thereby, resulting in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM NOI-1 (Well No. 22), impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Finding of Significance: Construction noise impacts would be less than significant. Operational noise impacts would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM NOI-1 (Well No. 22). e) For an action located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Section 3 • Environmental Issues 50 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study The Fullerton Municipal Airport is the nearest airport, located approximately 10 miles west of the project site. Therefore, the project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and it would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. f) For an action located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Heliports located in the vicinity include the Kaiser Permanente Orange County – Anaheim Medical Center located approximately 1.3 miles to the west of the project site. Based on the distance to the and the type of proposed facilities (i.e., well and pipeline), the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X Discussion: a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The proposed project does not include new construction of residential development or other uses that would directly or indirectly induce population growth in an area. While the proposed project involves a new groundwater well, the overall amount of water pumped from the basin would not increase and thus the groundwater well would not indirectly induce population growth by increasing the available water supply. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 51 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study There would be a small number of construction jobs associated with the proposed project, but these jobs would be temporary. It is anticipated that the small work force involved in construction of the proposed project would be composed of people already living within the region. The proposed project would not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure). Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater well at a currently vacant site. There is no housing at or near the project site. The proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? See XIII. Population and Housing b) above. The proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? X ii) Police protection? X iii) Schools? X iv) Parks? X v) Other public facilities? X Discussion: a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental Section 3 • Environmental Issues 52 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i.) Fire Protection Fire protection services are currently provided to project site by the Anaheim Fire Department. The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater well and pipelines and would not increase the demand for fire protection/emergency services, nor require the construction of new or physically altered facilities to accommodate an increased demand or to maintain acceptable response times and fire flows. Finding of Significance: No impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. ii.) Police Protection Police protection services are currently provided to project site by the Anaheim Police Department. The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater well and pipelines and would not increase the demand for police protection nor require the construction of new or physically altered facilities to accommodate an increased demand or to maintain acceptable response times. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. iii) Schools The project site is within the Placentia – Yorba Linda Unified School District. The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater well and pipelines and would not affect the region’s population. It would not increase the demand for schools, nor require the construction of new or physically altered facilities to accommodate and maintain acceptable service ratios. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. iv) Parks The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater well and pipelines and would not affect the region’s population. It would not increase the demand for parks, nor require the construction of new or physically altered facilities to accommodate the region’s population. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. v) Other Public Facilities The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater well and pipelines and would not affect any of the region’s public facilities such as libraries and hospitals. It would not increase the demand, nor require the construction of new or physically altered public facilities to accommodate the region’s population. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 53 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Discussion: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater well at a currently vacant site. It does not involve any component, including indirect population growth, that would increase the use of parks or recreation facilities. The proposed project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater well at a currently vacant site. The project site is located on land designated as Open Space/Water area. However, it is an area owned by OCWD and used for water recharge. It is not open for public recreational uses. The Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan identifies a planned bikeway that would extend along the northern edge of Huckleberry Pond, adjacent to the project site. There are currently no plans underway to implement this bikeway; however, the proposed project would not preclude any future implementation of this bikeway. The proposed project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which would otherwise have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 54 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVI. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES: a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code §21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code §5020.1(k), or X ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code §5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code §5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? X Discussion: a)i) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code §21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code §5020.1(k)? There are no known tribal cultural resources, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 on the project site or immediate vicinity. The project site is in an urban area that is highly disturbed. The District initiated consultation with California Native American tribes with a traditional or cultural affiliation with the geographic area of the proposed project, as identified by the Native American Section 3 • Environmental Issues 55 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Heritage Commission (NAHC). Letters were sent to 20 Native American tribes identified by NAHC, including one that had specifically requested to be notified by the District of future projects pursuant to State Assembly Bill 52, providing formal notification of the District’s intent to undertake the proposed project and identifying the opportunity for consultation. No responses were received. The District also requested a Sacred Lands Search be performed by the NAHC, which did not identify any known tribal cultural resources within the vicinity. Based on existing information about tribal cultural resources and the results of the tribal consultation process, the District has determined that the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. a)ii) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code §21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code §5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code §5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. See XVI. Tribal Cultural Resources a) above. No known tribal cultural resources are located at the project site or vicinity and the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVII. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? X Section 3 • Environmental Issues 56 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? X c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? X d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? X e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? X Discussion: a) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Development of the proposed project would involve the addition of construction vehicles over the construction duration (two phases). This increase in construction vehicles would occur throughout the day and be minor in comparison to existing traffic on arterials in the vicinity of the project site. Even with the addition of construction vehicles during installation of the pipeline along Richfield Road, the volume to capacity ratio would be well within the current and buildout conditions for the roadway. Installation of the pipeline along the Fee Ana Street would require temporary closure of the cul-de-sac and the trenching for the pipeline installation along Richfield Road would require a lane closure. Both of these activities would require an Encroachment Permit from the City of Anaheim. The temporary closure on Fee Ana Street would only involve the cul-de-sac, and the access to all driveways along the street north of the cul-de-sac would remain open. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 57 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study The Richfield Road lane closure would be for small sections at a time. Closures of Fee Ana Street and Richfield Road would adhere to the required Encroachment Permits construction times (typically 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.) and traffic control requirements (via the current Work Area Traffic Control Handbook [W.A.T.C.H. Manual] and/or Manual on Traffic Control Devices [MUTCD]). Trenching and installation of the pipeline within Richfield Road is expected to be completed within approximately four weeks. Although, the construction vehicles and lane closure would cause a temporary increase in traffic and affect circulation, it would be localized and for a short-term duration and comply with the site-specific Encroachment Permits. Operation of the Project would utilize a SCADA remote surveillance system to monitor well production. Maintenance personnel would perform repairs on an as-needed basis. Traffic generated for this activity would involve one to two construction vehicles at a time. Therefore, based on the short-term construction schedule, Encroachment Permit requirements and minimal operation maintenance, the proposed project would not conflict with existing applicable plans, policies, and ordinances for circulation and would have a less than significant impact. Further, the following Mitigation Measures MM TRANS-1 and MM TRANS-2 identified in the 2013 EIR would further reduce impacts: MM TRANS-1 The following recommendations shall be considered and implemented as appropriate on a project-by-project basis: a. Prior to the start of the construction phase of proposed project facilities, the contractor shall submit a Traffic Control Plan to the appropriate local jurisdiction for review and approval. The plan shall be consistent with the Caltrans Traffic Manual, Chapter 5, and should include the following information: ▪ Signage posted in areas designated as temporary traffic control zones ▪ Speed limits to be observed within control zones b. Where appropriate for work on public roadways, the District will submit a set of proposed construction plans to agencies with jurisdiction over the roadways to allow them to comment on the proposed plans. During construction of water pipelines or other facilities that would be sited in or near roadways, the District shall implement traffic management measures, as deemed necessary and applicable by a properly licensed engineer: ▪ Temporary traffic lanes shall be marked, barricades and lights shall be provided at excavations and crossings ▪ Pipeline and facility construction activities shall affect the least number of travel lanes as possible, with both directions of traffic flow being maintained at all times, to the extent feasible ▪ Pipeline and facility construction shall avoid the morning and evening peak traffic periods to the extent feasible ▪ Construction within any major intersection shall be restricted to only one-half of an intersection at any one time in order to maintain one lane of traffic flow in each direction. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 58 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Pipeline and facility crossings of freeways, light rail, and railroad tracks shall be constructed using methods that provide minimal disruption to freeway, light rail, and railroad operations, to the extent feasible. ▪ Construction across on- and off-street bikeways shall be done in a manner that allows for safe bicycle access or bicycle traffic will be safely re-routed. Detours to bikeways can affect journey to work trips and utilitarian trips, as well as recreational trips. Therefore, closure of bikeways shall be temporary or avoided completely where feasible. ▪ Private driveways located within construction areas will remain open to maintain access to the maximum extent feasible. It is anticipated that if the trench will remain open in front of a private driveway for more than five days, metal plates would be used to provide 24-hour access, except for up to 3 hours of blockage as needed during construction. ▪ To minimize cumulative traffic impacts as a result of lane closures during construction, the District will require that the project construction contractor(s) coordinate with construction contractor(s) for any concurrent nearby projects that are planned for construction. The District shall notify the appropriate City or County Traffic Engineering Department of any such coordination among project contractors and the resulting recommendations. MM TRANS-2 Following construction or during construction, as necessary to maintain safe driving conditions, any damage to existing roadways caused by construction vehicles and equipment will be repaired as required in accordance with applicable city, county, or Caltrans standards. Finding of Significance: Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures MM TRANS-1 and MM TRANS-2 would further reduce impacts. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Anaheim is included in the County-wide Congestion Management Program (CMP) administered by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The CMP is a systematic program that provides for the management of the multimodal transportation system in Orange County with the intent of improving traffic congestion. The CMP only requires performance of a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) if a project would contribute 1,600 or more trips per day for development project that will directly access the CMP Highway System. The proposed project would result in a small crew of construction workers over the duration of two construction phases. Although the pipeline installation would temporary disrupt the flow of traffic along Richfield Road, it would be for a small road segment and for a short-term construction period of approximately four weeks. Operation maintenance personnel would perform repairs on an as-needed basis. Traffic-generated for this activity would involve one to two construction vehicles at a time. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. The impact would be less than significant impact. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 59 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The proposed project is installation of a new groundwater extraction well and pipelines and would not involve any changes in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks; therefore, project construction and operation would not impact air traffic patterns. Finding of Significance: No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are necessary. d) Would the project substantially increase hazards because of a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The proposed project is installation of a new groundwater extraction well and pipelines, which would be located underground with the exception of well equipment. The proposed project would not result in an increase in a hazard due to a design feature or incompatible use. No impact would occur. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Well No. 22 is accessed from Fee Ana Street. The pipeline is accessible from Fee Ana Street and Richfield Road. The proposed project would not disrupt the flow of traffic or emergency access along these streets or any of the nearby arterials, including La Palma Avenue, Tustin Avenue, or Lakeview Avenue. During construction, installation of the pipeline along the Fee Ana Street would require temporary closure of the cul-de-sac and the trenching for the pipeline installation along Richfield Road would require a lane closure. The closures would be temporary and would adhere to required traffic control requirements (via the current W.A.T.C.H. Manual and/or MUTCD), which would include provisions to ensure that emergency access would be available throughout the construction period. Further, the proposed project would implement the 2013 EIR Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-2, which would further reduce impacts. Finding of Significance: Less than significant impacts would occur, and Mitigation Measure MM HAZ- 2 would further reduce impacts. f) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? The proposed project is installation of a new groundwater extraction well and pipelines and would not result in changes to bus stops, bicycle racks, or other alternative transportation infrastructure. The Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan identifies a planned bikeway that would extend along the northern edge of Huckleberry Pond, adjacent to the project site. There are currently no plans underway to implement this bikeway; however, the proposed project would not preclude any future implementation of this bikeway. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 60 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? X b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? X e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? X f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? X g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X Discussion: a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? A portable toilet may be maintained by a service provider for use during the construction period. The proposed project would not otherwise tie into the local wastewater system. The proposed project would involve delivery of groundwater supplies to customers that would otherwise be served with Section 3 • Environmental Issues 61 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study imported water supplies or water extracted from other groundwater wells in the OC Basin. The populations to be served have already been factored into regional growth forecasts and would not add to the overall volume of wastewater flows. Further, the quality of groundwater supplies would meet the all applicable water quality standards. As a result, the proposed project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater extraction well and associated pipelines. It is not anticipated that new treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities would be required. Therefore, the proposed project would not require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The project site is hard packed dirt and stormwater runoff currently percolates into the ground surface, or, in the case of high rainfall events, stormwater at the project site flows into the Huckleberry Pond or into the storm drains on Fee Ana Street or Richfield Road. The proposed project would not result in an appreciable increase in impermeable surfaces and would maintain the existing site drainage patterns. No new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities would be necessary as a result of the proposed project development; therefore, no impact would occur. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater extraction well and associated pipelines, and would not result in an increased water demand. Water utilized for dust control purposes during construction would be trucked in to the project site. The proposed project would not result in a new tie-in to the existing water supply system for construction or operation. The proposed project would have no impact on the water supply system such that new or expanded entitlement would be necessary. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) Has the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Section 3 • Environmental Issues 62 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a new groundwater extraction well and associated pipelines, and would not tie into the existing sewer system. Wastewater from a portable sanitary toilet provided during construction would be handled by an established service provider and would not exceed treatment capacities. The proposed project would have no impact on wastewater treatment providers. Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? During construction, small amounts of solid waste materials may be generated (e.g., crew food scraps and construction packaging material) may be accumulated. These materials would be properly disposed of during construction of the project construction. Operation of the project would not generate solid waste. The proposed project would have a less than significant impacts on landfills. Finding of Significance: A less than significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? As described under XVIII. Utilities f) above, only a minimal amount of solid waste would be generated during project construction. Wastes that are generated would be disposed at County facilities with capacity remaining to accept those wastes, and in accordance with governing regulations in effect at that time. Finding of Significance: A less than significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: Would the project a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X Section 3 • Environmental Issues 63 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an action are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future actions)? X c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Discussion: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? As discussed in IV. Biological Resources, with implementation of the 2013 EIR Mitigation Measures MM BIO-1, MM BIO-2, and MM BIO-3, the proposed project would not degrade the quality of the environment or adversely affect biological resources directly or indirectly. As discussed in V. Cultural Resources, no examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory would be eliminated. Finding of Significance: Impacts would be less than significant impacts with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM BIO-1, MM BIO-2, and MM BIO-3. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an action are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future actions.) As discussed in Section 3 of this IS, with implementation of the identified mitigation measures, the proposed project would not have significant adverse effects on the environment. The short-term and long-term effects associated with proposed project would not be considered cumulatively considerable. Finding of Significance: Impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures identified in this IS. Section 3 • Environmental Issues 64 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study c) Does the project have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? As discussed throughout Section 3 of this IS, the proposed project would not have significant adverse effects on the environment, and thus, would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce short-term construction impacts and long-term operational impacts to a level of less than significant. Implementation of mitigation measures and compliance with existing federal, state and local regulations, along with standard design criteria, will ensure that the proposed project does not directly or indirectly cause a substantial adverse effect on human beings. Finding of Significance: Impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures identified in this IS. 65 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Section 4 Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures form the foundation of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) for the proposed project. CEQA requires public agencies to adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project that have been adopted to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). The program must be adopted by the public agency at the time findings are made regarding the project. The State CEQA Guidelines allow public agencies to choose whether its program will monitor mitigation, report on mitigation, or both (14 CCR Section 15097(c)). The mitigation measures described herein and shown in Table 1 are supplemental to those required as standard procedure for the District and its contractors. The District and its contractors are the parties responsible for: (1) the necessary implementing actions; (2) verifying that the necessary implementing actions are taken; and (3) the primary record documenting the necessary implementing actions. The mechanisms for verifying that mitigation measures have been implemented include design drawings, project plans and specifications, construction documents intended for use by construction contractors and construction managers, field inspections, field reports, and other periodic or special reports. All records pertaining to this mitigation program will be maintained and made available for inspection by the public in accordance with the District’s records management systems. Table 1: Mitigation Measures Resource Area Mitigation Measure Aesthetics MM AES-1 (a) The District shall design facilities to be consistent with local policies and programs to protect scenic values and to avoid visual intrusions. (b) Where possible, projects shall be sited in topographically screened locations, in locations screened by vegetation, or adjacent to existing facilities and surface disturbance to reduce visual contrast with adjacent undisturbed areas. (c) Design elements of the facility will incorporate surrounding architecture and topographical features and blend with the surrounding vegetation and colors. (d) Project facilities shall be painted inconspicuous colors that match the natural color scheme of the adjacent vegetation, rock formations, or exposed soils to reduce visual contrast. (e) Landscape buffers, such as trees and shrubs, and/or fencing shall be planted around the improvements at new or altered facilities to screen the facilities from view and blend the improvements into the natural environment. (f) Avoid scenic resources, such as mature trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings, if possible. Where unavoidable, the removal of these resources will be minimized to the extent practical. (g) Any proposed project facilities within the coastal zone will be subject to design requirements and mitigation measures that protect coastal views and aesthetics as Section 4 • Mitigation Measures 66 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study outlined in the applicable LCP [Local Coastal Plan] and/or the requirements of the CCC [California Coastal Commission]. MM AES-2 (a) All outdoor fixtures shall use shielded, low pressure sodium fixtures with a maximum cutoff angle of 90 degrees. Mercury vapor lights shall be prohibited. (b) To reduce daytime glare, concrete or metal surfaces and structures will be constructed with materials that minimize reflection of light or sunshine. Air Quality MM AIR-1 If specific facility construction would generate the same or less horsepower hours per day as utilized in this analysis, and would not generate more on-road trips than analyzed, then, the following measures shall be implemented: Well and pipeline construction shall not occur on the same day - Tier 3 engines shall be used for all off road pipeline construction equipment greater than 100 horsepower. Biological Resources MM BIO-1 Once the construction locations are finalized, if any of the proposed well or pipeline facilities occur within the immediate vicinity of the four OCWD Basins (i.e., Little Warner, Warner, Conrock, and Huckleberry) and/or the adjacent native riparian restoration site, the presence of any riparian associated special-status species must be determined prior to project construction. A presence/absence survey must be conducted by a qualified and/or permitted biologist, to determine the current occupancy of the adjacent native riparian restoration site. Presence/absence surveys must be conducted according to accepted protocol for the appropriate species. A permitted biologist will be required to survey for federal and state listed species such as southwestern willow flycatcher. If the existing native riparian habitat restoration site is determined to be occupied by any riparian habitat associated special -status species and facilities are proposed adjacent to this habitat, additional avoidance and minimization measures will be required such as those described in MM BIO-2. MM BIO-2 If it is determined that a special-status species is currently occupying any portion of the OCWD Basins or adjacent native riparian restoration site, a biological monitor must be onsite to assess the potential for the project to indirectly impact the special status species. If the monitor determines there is a potential for indirect impacts, additional avoidance measures will be required, such as construction activities may not encroach within the occupied territory at a minimum of 350-feet for passerines and 500-feet for raptors. Additionally, depending on the construction proximity and sensitivity of the special -status species, a noise monitor may be required to ensure that indirect noise impacts do not result in the harassment and potential take of the species. An average of 60db per hour at a known nest location for certain special status species, such as least Bell’s vireo, may result in potential nest failure and subsequent ‘take’ of the active nest. Construction related noise must be below 60db per hour during the nesting season to ensure indirect ‘take’ of the special -status species does not occur. MM BIO-3 Proposed project activities within the YLWD proposed facility area may occur within or immediately adjacent to suitable nesting habitat for a number of common and sensitive native, resident and migratory bird species protected under CDFG Code 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). If a proposed production well or facility site will be constructed within or immediately adjacent to suitable nesting habitat (i.e., trees, shrubs, lattice towers and/or utility poles), construction activities should avoid, if possible, the general nesting season of February through August. If construction cannot avoid the nesting Section 4 • Mitigation Measures 67 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study season, a pre-construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500-feet of the project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be on site to ensure that no project activities impact the active nest. The biological monitor will establish a suitable buffer around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged, and the nest is no longer active. Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor. Geology and Soils MM GEO-1 (a) To reduce the hazards of seismic damage, project sites shall not be located in known active fault zones, if possible. A geotechnical engineering investigation consistent with California geologic and engineering standards shall be conducted for applicable facilities by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The geotechnical engineer shall prepare a report that summarizes the results of a field investigation, including site inspection and soil testin g, potential geologic hazards (including fault rupture and severe secondary effects of earthquakes), along with design criteria and construction methods to effectively construct the proposed facilities with an acceptable level of risk with respect to earthquake, liquefaction, foundations, landscaping, dewatering, ground water, retaining walls (if applicable), pavement sections, and utilities. The report shall address all geologic and geotechnical factors related to the design and construction of the proposed project. The geotechnical engineering investigation shall delineate areas of active and potentially active faults. To the extent possible, it shall identify fault traces and locate them in the field so faults can be avoided. (b) Appropriate seismic design provisions shall be implemented with project design and construction in accordance with governing building codes. Unless superseded by other regulatory provisions or standards, seismic design criteria shall be developed on the basis of the requirements of the current CBC [California Building Code]. MM GEO-2 All practicable precautions shall be taken to design and construct project facilities to withstand the projected ground shaking associated with the characteristic earthquakes in the area. This includes secondary hazards induced by earthquakes (liquefaction, lurching, lateral spreading, and rapid differential settlement). Project structures shall be designed using project-specific criteria in accordance with the latest revision of the National El ectrical Safety Code (American National Standards Institute [ANSI] C.2) and the CBC. MM GEO-3 Prior to commencement of grading or dredging, appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be incorporated into project planning to reduce construction pollutants in runoff, consistent with goals and standards established under federal and state nonpoint source discharge NPDES regulations and basin Plan water quality objectives. To maximize effectiveness, the selected BMPs shall be based on finalized site-specific hydrologic conditions, with consideration for the types and locations of construction and development. Mechanisms to maintain the BMPs shall be identified in the Conditions of Approval. Construction BMPs could include, but are not limited to the following: ▪ Diversion of offsite run-off away from the construction area ▪ Prompt revegetation of proposed landscaped areas ▪ Perimeter straw wattles or silt fences and/or temporary basins to trap sediment before it leaves the site ▪ Regular sprinkling of exposed soils to control dust during construction during the dry season ▪ Installation of a minor retention basin(s) to alleviate discharge of increased flows ▪ Specifications for construction waste handling and disposal Section 4 • Mitigation Measures 68 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study ▪ Erosion control measures maintained throughout the construction period ▪ Preparation of stabilized construction entrances to avoid trucks from imprinting debris on City of Anaheim roadways ▪ Contained wash out and vehicle maintenance areas ▪ Training of subcontractors on general construction area house keeping ▪ Construction scheduling to minimize soil disturbance during the wet weather season ▪ Regular maintenance and storm event monitoring Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM HAZ-2 Prior to construction, a Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared by YLWD for approval by the City of Anaheim. The plan shall include management practices to maintain access to businesses, residences, schools, park facilities, and other buildings when street lanes are closed during construction. Th e Traffic Control Plan shall identify requirements such as construction signage and traffic cone placement. Additionally, the Traffic Control Plan shall identify measures to accommodate bus, pedestrian, and bicycle use during construction. Hydrology and Water Quality MM HWQ-1 Project Conditions of Approval shall specify that, prior to issuance of a grading or dredging permit, appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) be incorporated into project planning to reduce construction pollutants in runoff, consistent with goals and standards established under federal and state nonpoint source discharge NPDES regulations and Basin Plan water quality objectives. To maximize effectiveness, the selected BMPs shall be based on finalized site-specific hydrologic conditions, with consideration for the types and locations of construction and development. Mechanisms to maintain the BMPs shall be identified in the Conditions of Approval. Construction BMPs could include, but are not limited to: ▪ Diversion of offsite run-off away from the construction area ▪ Prompt revegetation of proposed landscaped areas ▪ Perimeter straw wattles or silt fences and/or temporary Basins to trap sediment before it leaves the site ▪ Regular sprinkling of exposed soils to control dust during construction during the dry season ▪ Installation of a minor retention Basin(s) to alleviate discharge of increased flows ▪ Specifications for construction waste handling and disposal ▪ Erosion control measures maintained throughout the construction period ▪ Preparation of stabilized construction entrances to avoid trucks from imprinting debris on roadways ▪ Contained wash out and vehicle maintenance areas ▪ Training of subcontractors on general construction area house keeping ▪ Schedule construction to minimize soil disturbance during the wet weather season ▪ Regular maintenance and storm event monitoring MM HWQ-2 Project Conditions of Approval shall specify that appropriate post -construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) be incorporated into project design to reduce urban pollutants in runoff, consistent with goals and standards established under federal and state nonpoint source discharge NPDES regulations and Basin Plan water quality objectives. To maximize effectiveness, the selected BMPs shall be based on finalized site-specific hydrologic conditions, with consideration for the types and locations of development. Mechanisms to maintain the BMPs shall be identified in the Conditions of Approval. Section 4 • Mitigation Measures 69 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study BMPs will be selected from the wide range of effective measures outlined in the CASA Handbook (California Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbook, 2003), the Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association Start at the Source-Design Guidance Manual, or similar documents that shall be identified prior to final design approval. BMPs shall also identify mechanisms for routine maintenance and repair of BMPs. These BMPs will be designed to comply with the DAMP and NPDES permit requirements for structural and nonstructural controls. MM HWQ-3 Individual projects shall be designed to maintain pre-project stormwater runoff volume and flow for the 10- and 100-year flood events to prevent downstream and offsite flooding Noise MM NOI-1(Well No. 22) Should the well pump be located within 15 feet of an existing building, a noise attenuation plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City, demonstrating operational noise levels shall not exceed seventy decibels CNEL at the property line for extended periods. Transportation/ Traffic MM TRANS-1 The following recommendations shall be considered and implemented as appropriate on a project-by-project basis: a. Prior to the start of the construction phase of proposed project facilities, the contractor shall submit a Traffic Control Plan to the appropriate local jurisdiction for review and approval. The plan shall be consistent with the Caltrans Traffic Manual, Chapter 5, and should include the following information: ▪ Signage posted in areas designated as temporary traffic control zones ▪ Speed limits to be observed within control zones b. Where appropriate for work on public roadways, the District will submit a set of proposed construction plans to agencies with jurisdiction over the roadways to allow them to comment on the proposed plans. During construction of water pipelines or other facilities that would be sited in or near roadways, the District shall implement traffic management measures, as deemed necessary and applicable by a properly licensed engineer: ▪ Temporary traffic lanes shall be marked, barricades and lights shall be provided at excavations and crossings ▪ Pipeline and facility construction activities shall affect the least number of travel lanes as possible, with both directions of traffic flow being maintained at all times, to the extent feasible ▪ Pipeline and facility construction shall avoid the morning and evening peak traffic periods to the extent feasible ▪ Construction within any major intersection shall be restricted to only one-half of an intersection at any one time in order to maintain one lane of traffic flow in each direction. Pipeline and facility crossings of freeways, light rail, and railroad tracks shall be constructed using methods that provide minimal disruption to freeway, light rail, and railroad operations, to the extent feasible. ▪ Construction across on- and off-street bikeways shall be done in a manner that allows for safe bicycle access or bicycle traffic will be safely re-routed. Detours to bikeways can affect journey to work trips and utilitarian trips, as well as recreational trips. Therefore, closure of bikeways shall be temporary or avoided completely where feasible. ▪ Private driveways located within construction areas will remain open to maintain access to the maximum extent feasible. It is anticipated that if the trench will remain open in front of a private driveway for more than five days, metal plates would be Section 4 • Mitigation Measures 70 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study used to provide 24-hour access, except for up to 3 hours of blockage as needed during construction. ▪ To minimize cumulative traffic impacts as a result of lane closures during construction, the District will require that the project construction contractor(s) coordinate with construction contractor(s) for any concurrent nearby projects that are planned for construction. The District shall notify the appropriate City or County Traffic Engineering Department of any such coordination among project contractors and the resulting recommendations. MM TRANS-2 Following construction or during construction, as necessary to maintain safe driving conditions, any damage to existing roadways caused by construction vehicles and equipment will be repaired as required in accordance with applicable city, county, or Caltrans standards. 71 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Section 5 References California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection. 2017. California Important Farmland Finder website. Available: http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ciff/ciff.html. Accessed April 2017. California Department of Transportation, 2011. Officially Designated State Scenic Highways and Historic Parkways website. Available: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/. Accessed April 2017. City of Anaheim. Anaheim Municipal Code Title 6, Chapter 6.70, Section 6.70.010, Sound Pressure Levels. City of Anaheim. Anaheim Municipal Code Title 13, Chapter 13.12, Street Trees. City of Anaheim. Anaheim Municipal Code Title 17, Chapter 17.04, Grading, Excavations, Fills, and Watercourse. City of Anaheim. Anaheim Municipal Code. Title 18, Chapter 18.120, Section 030.060, Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zoning and Development Standards, Intent of Individual Development Areas. City of Anaheim. 2016. Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan. January. City of Anaheim. 2015. Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Final EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2013101087. City of Anaheim. 2004(a). City of Anaheim General Plan Safety Element. May. City of Anaheim. 2004(b). City of Anaheim General Plan Green Element. May. FEMA. 2009. Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06059C0152J. Yorba Linda Water District. 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Prepared by Arcadis U.S., Inc., May. Section 5 • References 72 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study This page intentionally left blank 73 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Section 6 Comments and Responses The Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was circulated for public review from May 31, 2017 to June 29, 2017. The public review period, during which interested agencies, organizations, and members of the public were invited to submit written comments, was noticed and conducted in compliance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15105. During the public review period, six correspondences on the IS/MND and project were received by the District, which are identified as follows (in order correspondences were received): ▪ City of Yorba Linda, Jamie K. Smith, Assistant Planner (e-mail) ▪ Viejas Tribal Government, Ray Teran, Resource Management, Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians (letter) ▪ Orange County Water District, Michael Markus. P.E. , D.WRE, BCEE, F.ASCE, General Manager, (letter) ▪ Orange County Transportation Authority, Dan Phu, Manager Environmental Programs (letter) ▪ Orange County Public Works Service Area/OC Development Services, Laree Alonso, Manager Planning Division (letter) ▪ State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit, Scott Morgan, Director (letter) Following are the comments and responses to those comments. This section is organized in the following manner. Each comment is bracketed and numbered. Following each comment letter are the corresponding responses. Where responses to comments resulted in changes to the text of the IS/MND, these changes are noted in the responses. 1 Bryan Hong From:Jamie Smith <JSmith@yorba-linda.org> Sent:Friday, June 09, 2017 11:45 AM To:Bryan Hong Subject:MND for Yorba Linda Water District Well No. 22 Project Mr. Hong, The City of Yorba Linda has no comment with regard to the Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study prepared for the Yorba Linda Water District Well No. 22 project. Jamie K. Smith Assistant Planner City of Yorba Linda Phone: (714) 961-7130 Email: JSmith@yorba-linda.org #YorbaLinda50 Comment Letter 1 Section 6 • Comments and Responses 75 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Comment Letter 1 City of Yorba Linda Jamie K. Smith Assistant Planner 4845 Casa Loma Yorba Linda, CA 92886 Email dated June 9. 2017 Response 1-1 Comment noted. VIEJ AS PQ Box 908 Alpine, CA 91903 #1 Viejas Grade Road TRIBAL GOVERNMENT Alpine, CA 91901 Phone: 619.4453810 Fax: 619.4453337 June 13, 2017 viejas.com Bryan Hong Water Quality Engineer Yorba Linda Water District 1717 E. Miraloma Ave. Placentia, CA 92870 I[JN 1 9 2217 , Re: Well No. 22 Project Dear Mr. Hong, The Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians ("Viejas") has reviewed the proposed project and at this time we have determined that the project site is has little cultural significance or ties to Viejas. We further recommend that you contact the tribe(s) closest to the cultural resources. We, however, request to be informed of any new developments such as inadvertent discovery of cultural artifacts, cremation sites, or human remains in order for us to reevaluate our participation in the government-to-government consultation process. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have further questions. Please call Ernest Pingleton at 619-659-2314 or me at 619-659-2312, or email, epinglet.on@viejas-nsn.gov or rteran@viejas-nsn.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, RayTer^h, Resource Management VIEJAS BAND OF KUMEYAAY INDIANS Comment Letter 2 Section 6 • Comments and Responses 77 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Comment Letter 2 Viejas Tribal Government Ray Teran Resource Management Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians P.O. Box 908 Alpine, CA 91903 Letter dated June 13. 2017 Response 2-1 As described on pages 54 – 55 in Section 3, XVI(a)(ii) of the IS/MND, Letters were sent to 20 Native American tribes identified by Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), including one that had specifically requested to be notified by the District of future projects pursuant to State Assembly Bill 52, providing formal notification of the District’s intent to undertake the proposed project and identifying the opportunity for consultation. No responses were received. Notices regarding availability of the IS/MND for public review were also sent to the same 20 Native American Tribes, with the subject letter being the only reply received. Response 2-2 Comment noted. Viejas Tribal Government will be included on the list of interested parties for this project and will be notified should any inadvertent discovery of cultural artifacts, cremation sites, or human remains be unexpectedly encountered. I ComrtYeVtetter 3 OFFICERS PHILIP L.ANTHONY President DENIS R.BILODEAU,P.E. DENIS R.BILODEAU,P.E. SHAWN DEWANE • CATHY GREEN First Vice President DINA NGUYEN U PHILIP L.ANTHONY VICENTE SARMIENTO Second Vice President STEPHEN R.SHELDON SINCE 1933 SHAWN DEWANE JAMES VAN DERBILT BRUCE WHITAKER ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT General Manager ROGER C.YOH,P.E. MICHAEL R.MARKUS,P-E.,D.WRE ORANGE COUNTY'S GROUNDWATER AUTHORITY June 20, 2017 Bryan Hong, P.E. Water Quality Engineer Yorba Linda Water District 1717 East Miraloma Avenue Placentia, CA 92870 RE: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Yorba Linda Water District Well No. 22 Project Dear Mr. Hong, The Orange County Water District (OCWD) appreciates the opportunity to review the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Well No. 22 Project. Please make the following correction in the draft MND/IS dated May 31, 2017. PROJECT PURPOSE page 8, 2 nd paragraph: "The District has obtained an easement a lease from the OCWD for 50 years to accommodate construction and maintenance of Well No. 22." Please also note that installation of electrical equipment as described on page 9 will require an easement from OCWD. Such an easement with the City has yet to be negotiated. However, the OCWD Board of Directors has authorized the OCWD General Manager to negotiate and execute it. Thank you. Sincerely, Michael R. Markus, P.E., D.WRE, BCEE, F.ASCE General Manager PO BGX 8300 18700 00 Fountain Valley,CA ii Fountain Valley,CA 92708 (714)378-3373 fax Section 6 • Comments and Responses 79 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Comment Letter 3 Orange County Water District Michael Markus. P.E., D.WRE, BCEE, F.ASCE, General Manager 18700 Ward Street Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Letter dated June 20. 2017 Response 3-1 The requested text revision has been made. See page 8 of the Final IS/MND. Response 3-2 Comment noted. YLWD coordinate with the City of Anaheim and OCWD on the easement for electrical infrastructure to service Well 22. The project description of the IS/MND has been revised on page 9 to identify the need for an easement. Comment Letter 4 ra OCTA AFFILIATED AGENCIES June 29, 2017 Orange County Transit District Mr. Bryan Hong Local Transportation Water Quality Engineer Authority Yorba Linda Water District Service Authority for 1717 E. Miraloma Avenue Freeway Emergencies Placentia, CA 92870 Consolidated Transporation Service Agency Congestion Management Agency Subject: Yorba Linda Water District Well No. 22 Project Initial Service Authority for Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Abandoned Vehicles Dear Mr. Hong: Thank you for providing the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA)with the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Yorba Linda Water District Well No. 22 Project (Project). The following comments are provided for your consideration: • Page 58, Section XVII ('Transportation/Traffic'), Mitigation Measure Trans-1(b) indicates construction across on- and off-street bikeways shall be made in a manner that allows for safe bicycle access or bicycle traffic will be safely re-routed. OCTA appreciates the emphasis to reduce disruptions of the bicycle network during Project construction and would encourage the following language: o "Detours to bikeways can affect journey to work trips and utilitarian trips, as well as recreational trips. Therefore, we encourage closure of bikeways to be temporary or avoided completely where feasible." • Page 59 mentions the proposed bikeway along the northern edge of Huckleberry Pond within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan. The proposed bikeway is also shown on the recently approved City of Anaheim Bicycle Master Plan as project #3 (Basin Trail south of La Palma Avenue). We encourage the Yorba Linda Water District to consider coordination with the City of Anaheim (City) to construct the Class I off- street bikeway over the proposed 15-foot pipeline easement between Richfield Road and Fee Ana Street. This could reduce overall costs and provide a start to the City-planned off-street bikeway. Orange County Transportation Authority 550 South Main Street/P.O.Box 14184/Orange/California 92863-1584/(714)560-OCTA(6282) Comment Letter 4 Mr. Bryan Hong June 29, 2017 Page 2 Throughout the development of this project, we encourage communication with OCTA on any matters discussed herein. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at (714) 560-5907 or at dphu -octa.net. Sincerely, Dan Phu Manager, Environmental Programs Section 6 • Comments and Responses 82 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Comment Letter 4 Orange County Transportation Authority Dan Phu, Manager Environmental Programs 550 South Main Street Orange, California 92863-1584 Letter dated June 29. 2017 Response 4-1 The requested text addition to MM TRANS-1 to clarify that bicycle lane closures would be temporary or avoided as feasible has been made (see pages 58 and 69 of the Final IS/MND). Response 4-2 Participating the establishment of a bikeway within lease area for the approximately 900 linear-foot discharge pipeline is outside of the scope of the proposed project, and it is not included in the District’s lease agreement with OCWD (land owner). However, YLWD will cooperate with the City and OCWD should the City seek to establish a bicycle lane at this location in the future. Comment Letter 5 PubhcWorks Integrity, Accountability, Service, Trust Shane L.Siisby, Director • June 29, 2017 NCL-2017-037 Bryan Hong, P.E. Water Quality Engineer Yorba Linda Water District 1717 E. Miraloma Avenue Placentia, CA 92870 Subject: Notice of Intent to Adopt a MND for Yorba Linda Water District Well No. 22 Project Dear Mr. Hong: The County of Orange has reviewed the Notice of Intent to Adopt a MND for Yorba Linda Water District Well No. 22 Project and has no comments at this time. We would like to be advised of any further developments on the project. Please continue to keep us on the distribution list for future notifications related to the project. aorth nager, Planning Division Service Area/OC Development Services Street Santa Ana, California 92702-4048 Laree.alonso@ocpw.ocgov.com 300 N.Flower Street,Santa Ana,CA 92703 www.ocpublicworks.com P.O.Box 4048,Santa Ana,CA 92702-4048 714.667.8800 1 Info@OCPW.ocgov.com Section 6 • Comments and Responses 84 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Comment Letter 5 Orange County Public Works Service Area/OC Development Services Laree Alonso, Manager Planning Division 300 North Flower Street Santa Ana, California 92702-4048 Letter dated June 29. 2017 Response 5-1 Comment noted. Orange County Public Works Service Area/OC Development Services Planning Division will be included on the list of interested parties for this project. Comment Letter 6 -0-N Nc4Y EPL OF t 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA C m W H T Governor's Office of Planning and Research s 'FOR State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit �TA'F 0FCA11F�pa\p Edmund G.Brown Jr. hen Alex Governor Director June-29,2017 p Bryan Hong 0 3 2'r 7 Yorba Linda Water District 1717 E.Miraloma Ave. - -- Placentia,CA 92870 ; Subject: Yorba Linda Water District Well No..22 SCH#: 20170 1083 Dear Bryan Hong: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Mitigated Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on June 28,2017,and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. This letter acimowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents,pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearinghouse at(916)445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. If you have a question about the above-named project,please refer to the ten-digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. Sincerely, Sc6tt-Morgan Director, State Clearinghouse 1400 TENTH STREET P.O.BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95812-3044 TEL(916)445-0613 FAX(916)323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov Comment Letter 6 Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2017051083 Project Title Yorba Linda Water District Well No.22 Lead Agency Yorba Linda Water District Type MND Mitigated Negative Declaration Description Installation and operation of a groundwater well, Well no.22, and associated facilities within the Yorba Linda Water District's service area on property owned by the OCWD. In addition to well installation,the proposed project components include design and construction of the well pump system, mechanical and electrical work, a pump to waste line leading from the well to Huckleberry Pond, and an approx 900 If east-west water distribution pipeline and 170 If north-south pipeline to connect to the District's water delivery system beneath Richfield Rd.The anticipated capacity of Well No. 22 is approx 3,000 gallons per minute. Lead Agency Contact Name Bryan Hong Agency Yorba Linda Water District Phone (714) 701-3000 Fax email Address 1717 E. Miraloma Ave. City Placentia State CA Zip 92870 Project Location County Orange . City Anaheim Region Lat/Long 33°51'29" N/ 117'49'-23"W Cross Streets Between Richfield Rd and Fee Ana St, north of Huckleberry Pond Parcel No. 346-431-11, 346-431-13 Township 4S Range 9W Section 4 Base SB Proximity to: Highways 91 Airports Railways Metrolink Waterways Santa Ana River, OCWD Recharge Basins Schools various Land Use LU-vacant/access road Z-Development area#6 open space/water GP-parks Project Issues Aesthetic/Visual; Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic-Historic; Biological Resources; Coastal Zone; Cumulative Effects; Drainage/Absorption; Flood Plain/Flooding; Forest Land/Fire Hazard; Geologic/Seismic; Growth Inducing; Landuse; Minerals; Noise; Other Issues; Population/Housing Balance; Public Services; Recreation/Parks; Schools/Universities; Septic System; Sewer Capacity; Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading; Solid Waste;Toxic/Hazardous;Traffic/Circulation;Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply; Wetland/Riparian Reviewing Resources Agency; Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 5; Department of Parks and Recreation; Agencies Department of Water Resources; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 12; State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water; State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water, District 8; State Water Resources Control Board, Divison of Financial Assistance; State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Native American Heritage Commission; Public Utilities Commission Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base Date Received 05/30/2017 Start of Review 05/30/2017 End of Review 06/28/2017 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. Section 6 • Comments and Responses 88 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Comment Letter 6 State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research Scott Morgan, Director State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit 1400 10th Street Sacramento, California Letter dated June 29. 2017 Response 6-1 Comment noted. 89 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Section 7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 require public agencies to adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to a project that have been adopted to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). The program must be adopted by the public agency at the time findings are made regarding the project. The State CEQA Guidelines allow public agencies to choose whether its program will monitor mitigation, report on mitigation, or both (CEQA Guidelines Section 15097(c)). This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) contains the elements required by CEQA for the Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Project (proposed project). Although the Lead Agency (YLWD) may delegate monitoring responsibilities to other agencies or entities, the Lead Agency “…remains responsible for ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures occurs in accordance with the program.” The MMRP describes the procedures for the implementation of the mitigation measures to be adopted for the proposed project as identified in the IS/MND. Each mitigation measure is identified in the Table below and is categorized by environmental topic and corresponding number, with identification of: ▪ Timing for verification each measure’s implementation ▪ Methods for verification of each measure ▪ Agency/person who is responsible for verifying that the necessary implementing action is taken ▪ Primary record documenting that the necessary implementing action has occurred As described in Section 1.1, this IS/MND “tiers” from the OCWD’s Final Program/Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Orange County Water District Annexation Request by the City of Anaheim, Irvine Ranch Water District, and Yorba Linda Water District (State Clearinghouse No. 2011071095) certified in September 2013 (2013 EIR) and adheres to applicable mitigation measures in the 2013 EIR. Consequently, this MMRP for the proposed project also includes methods of verification, timing of verification, and parties responsible for verifying that the implementing action is taken identified in the adopted MMRP for the 2013 EIR. The mechanisms for verifying that mitigation measures have been implemented include design drawings, construction documents intended for use by construction contractors and construction managers, field inspections, field reports, and other periodic or special reports. All records pertaining to this mitigation program will be maintained and made available for inspection by the public in accordance with the District’s records management systems. Section 7 • MMRP 90 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials MM AES-1 (a) The District shall design facilities to be consistent with local policies and programs to protect scenic values and to avoid visual intrusions. (b) Where possible, projects shall be sited in topographically screened locations, in locations screened by vegetation, or adjacent to existing facilities and surface disturbance to reduce visual contrast with adjacent undisturbed areas. (c) Design elements of the facility will incorporate surrounding architecture and topographical features and blend with the surrounding vegetation and colors. (d) Project facilities shall be painted inconspicuous colors that match the natural color scheme of the adjacent vegetation, rock formations, or exposed soils to reduce visual contrast. (e) Landscape buffers, such as trees and shrubs, and/or fencing shall be planted around the improvements at new or altered facilities to screen the facilities from view and blend the improvements into the natural environment. (f) Avoid scenic resources, such as mature trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings, if possible. Where unavoidable, the removal of these resources will be minimized to the extent practical. (g) Any proposed project facilities within the coastal zone will be subject to design requirements and mitigation measures that protect coastal views and aesthetics as outlined in the applicable LCP [Local Coastal Plan] and/or the requirements o f the CCC [California Coastal Commission]. Prior to start of construction and during construction Submit plans for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources MM AES-2 (a) All outdoor fixtures shall use shielded, low pressure sodium fixtures with a maximum cutoff angle of 90 degrees. Mercury vapor lights shall be prohibited. (b) To reduce daytime glare, concrete or metal surfaces and structures will be constructed with materials that minimize reflection of light or sunshine. Prior to approval of the final design and at completion of construction Submit plans for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Section 7 • MMRP 91 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials completion of construction Natural Resources MM AIR-1 If specific facility construction would generate the same or less horsepower hours per day as utilized in this analysis, and would not generate more on-road trips than analyzed, then, the following measures shall be implemented: Well and pipeline construction shall not occur on the same day - Tier 3 engines shall be used for all off road pipeline construction equipment greater than 100 horsepower. Prior to construction, during construction, and at completion of construction Submit construction specifications for review and approval; routine inspections during construction; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources MM BIO-1 Once the construction locations are finalized, if any of the proposed well or pipeline facilities occur within the immediate vicinity of the four OCWD Basins (i.e., Little Warner, Warner, Conrock, and Huckleberry) and/or the adjacent native riparian restoration site, the presence of any riparian associated special-status species must be determined prior to project construction. A presence/absence survey must be conducted by a qualified and/or permitted biologist, to determine the current occupancy of the adjacent native riparian restoration site. Presence/absence surveys must be conducted according to accepted protocol for the appropriate species. A permitted biologist will be required to survey for federal and state listed species such as southwestern willow flycatcher. If the existing native riparian habitat restoration site is determined to be occupied by any riparian habitat associated special -status species and facilities are proposed adjacent to this habitat, additional avoidance and minimization measures will be required such as those described in MM BIO-2. Prior to start of construction and at completion of MM BIO-1 Submit evidence of presence/ absence survey by permitted/qualified biologist; provide notification and verification of survey to OCWD YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources MM BIO-2 If it is determined that a special-status species is currently occupying any portion of the OCWD Basins or adjacent native Prior to start of construction and Routine inspections during construction; YLWD Project Manager and Section 7 • MMRP 92 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials riparian restoration site, a biological monitor must be onsite to assess the potential for the project to indirectly impact the special status species. If the monitor determines there is a potential for indirect impacts, additional avoidance measures will be required, such as construction activities may not encroach within the occupied territory at a minimum of 350-feet for passerines and 500- feet for raptors. Additionally, depending on the construction proximity and sensitivity of the special-status species, a noise monitor may be required to ensure that indirect noise impacts do not result in the harassment and potential take of the species. An average of 60db per hour at a known nest location for certain special status species, such as least Bell’s vireo, may result in potential nest failure and subsequent ‘take’ of the active nest. Construction related noise must be below 60db per hou r during the nesting season to ensure indirect ‘take’ of the special-status species does not occur. at completion of construction notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources MM BIO-3 Proposed project activities within the YLWD proposed facility area may occur within or immediately adjacent to suitable nesting habitat for a number of common and sensitive native, resident and migratory bird species protected under CDFG Code 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). If a proposed production well or facility site will be constructed within or immediately adjacent to suitable nesting habitat (i.e., trees, shrubs, lattice towers and/or utility poles), construction activities should avoid, if possible, the general nesting season of February through August. If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre-construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500-feet of the project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be on site to ensure that no project activities impact the active nest. The biological monitor will establish a suitable buffer around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged, and the nest Prior to start of construction and at completion of construction Routine inspections during construction; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources Section 7 • MMRP 93 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials is no longer active. Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor. MM GEO-1 (a) To reduce the hazards of seismic damage, project sites shall not be located in known active fault zones, if possible. A geotechnical engineering investigation consistent with California geologic and engineering standards shall be conducted for applicable facilities by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The geotechnical engineer shall prepare a report that summar izes the results of a field investigation, including site inspection and soil testing, potential geologic hazards (including fault rupture and severe secondary effects of earthquakes), along with design criteria and construction methods to effectively construct the proposed facilities with an acceptable level of risk with respect to earthquake, liquefaction, foundations, landscaping, dewatering, ground water, retaining walls (if applicable), pavement sections, and utilities. The report shall address all geologic and geotechnical factors related to the design and construction of the proposed project. The geotechnical engineering investigation shall delineate areas of active and potentially active faults. To the extent possible, it shall identify fault traces and locate them in the field so faults can be avoided. (b) Appropriate seismic design provisions shall be implemented with project design and construction in accordance with governing building codes. Unless superseded by other regulatory provisions or standards, seismic design criteria shall be developed on the basis of the requirements of the current CBC [California Building Code]. Prior to approval of the final design and at completion of construction Submit documents for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources MM GEO-2 All practicable precautions shall be taken to design and construct project facilities to withstand the projected ground shaking associated with the characteristic earthquakes in the area. This includes secondary hazards induced by earthquakes (liquefaction, lurching, lateral spreading, and rapid differential settlement). Project structures shall be designed using project-specific criteria in accordance with the latest revision of the National Electrical Safety Prior to approval of the final design and at completion of construction Submit plans for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Section 7 • MMRP 94 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials Code (American National Standards Institute [ANSI] C.2) and the CBC. Natural Resources MM GEO-3 Prior to commencement of grading or dredging, appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be incorporated into project planning to reduce construction pollutants in runoff, consistent with goals and standards established under federal and state nonpoint source discharge NPDES regulations and basin Plan water quality objectives. To maximize effectiveness, the selected BMPs shall be based on finalized site-specific hydrologic conditions, with consideration for the types and locations of construction and development. Mechanisms to maintain the BMPs shall be identified in the Conditions of Approval. Construction BMPs could include, but are not limited to the following: ▪ Diversion of offsite run-off away from the construction area ▪ Prompt revegetation of proposed landscaped areas ▪ Perimeter straw wattles or silt fences and/or temporary basins to trap sediment before it leaves the site ▪ Regular sprinkling of exposed soils to control dust during construction during the dry season ▪ Installation of a minor retention basin(s) to alleviate discharge of increased flows ▪ Specifications for construction waste handling and disposal ▪ Erosion control measures maintained throughout the construction period ▪ Preparation of stabilized construction entrances to avoid trucks from imprinting debris on City of Anaheim roadways ▪ Contained wash out and vehicle maintenance areas ▪ Training of subcontractors on general construction area house keeping ▪ Construction scheduling to minimize soil disturbance during the wet weather season Prior to commencement of grading or dredging and at completion of construction Submit plans for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources Section 7 • MMRP 95 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials ▪ Regular maintenance and storm event monitoring MM HAZ-2 Prior to construction, a Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared by YLWD for approval by the City of Anaheim. The plan shall include management practices to maintain access to businesses, residences, schools, park facilities, and other buildings when street lanes are closed during construction. The Traffic Control Plan shall identify requirements such as construction signage and traffic cone placement. Additionally, the Traffic Control Plan shall identify measures to accommodate bus, pedestrian, and bicycle use during construction. Prior to construction and at completion of construction Submit plans to City of Anaheim for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources MM HWQ-1 Project Conditions of Approval shall specify that, prior to issuance of a grading or dredging permit, appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) be incorporated into project planning to reduce construction pollutants in runoff, consistent with goals and standards established under federal and state nonpoint source discharge NPDES regulations and Basin Plan water quality objectives. To maximize effectiveness, the selected BMPs shall be based on finalized site-specific hydrologic conditions, with consideration for the types and locations of construction and development. Mechanisms to maintain the BMPs shall be identified in the Conditions of Approval. Construction BMPs could include, but are not limited to: ▪ Diversion of offsite run-off away from the construction area ▪ Prompt revegetation of proposed landscaped areas ▪ Perimeter straw wattles or silt fences and/or temporary Basins to trap sediment before it leaves the site ▪ Regular sprinkling of exposed soils to control dust during construction during the dry season ▪ Installation of a minor retention Basin(s) to alleviate discharge of increased flows ▪ Specifications for construction waste handling and disposal Prior to issuance of a grading or dredging permit and at completion of construction Submit plans for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources Section 7 • MMRP 96 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials ▪ Erosion control measures maintained throughout the construction period ▪ Preparation of stabilized construction entrances to avoid trucks from imprinting debris on roadways ▪ Contained wash out and vehicle maintenance areas ▪ Training of subcontractors on general construction area house keeping ▪ Schedule construction to minimize soil disturbance during the wet weather season ▪ Regular maintenance and storm event monitoring MM HWQ-2 Project Conditions of Approval shall specify that appropriate post- construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) be incorporated into project design to reduce urban pollutants in runoff, consistent with goals and standards established under federal and state nonpoint source discharge NPDES regulations and Basin Plan water quality objectives. To maximize effectiveness, the selected BMPs shall be based on finalized site-specific hydrologic conditions, with consideration for the types and locations of development. Mechanisms to maintain the BMPs shall be identified in the Conditions of Approval. BMPs will be selected from the wide range of effective measures outlined in the CASA Handbook (California Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbook, 2003), the Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association Start at the Source-Design Guidance Manual, or similar documents that shall be identified prior to final design approval. BMPs shall also identify mechanisms for routine maintenance and repair of BMPs. These BMPs will be designed to comply with the DAMP and NPDES permit requirements for structural and nonstructural controls. Prior to approval of the final design and at completion of construction Submit plans for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources MM HWQ-3 Individual projects shall be designed to maintain pre-project stormwater runoff volume and flow for the 10 - and 100-year flood events to prevent downstream and offsite flooding Prior to approval of the final design Submit plans for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to YLWD Project Manager and Section 7 • MMRP 97 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials and at completion of construction construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources MM NOI-1 (Well No. 22) Should the well pump be located within 15 feet of an existing building, a noise attenuation plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City, demonstrating operational noise levels shall not exceed seventy decibels CNEL at the property line for extended periods. Prior to the start of the construction Provide verification that pump is not located within 15 feet of an existing building, or submit noise attenuation plan to the City of Anaheim for review and approval YLWD Project Manager MM TRANS-1 The following recommendations shall be considered and implemented as appropriate on a project-by-project basis: a. Prior to the start of the construction phase of proposed project facilities, the contractor shall submit a Traffic Control Plan to the appropriate local jurisdiction for review and approval. The plan shall be consistent with the Caltrans Traffic Manual, Chapter 5, and should include the following information: ▪ Signage posted in areas designated as temporary traffic control zones ▪ Speed limits to be observed within control zones b. Where appropriate for work on public roadways, the District will submit a set of proposed construction plans to agencies with jurisdiction over the roadways to allow them to comment on the proposed plans. During construction of water pipelines or other facilities that would be sited in or near roadways, the District shall implement traffic management measures, as deemed necessary and applicable by a properly licensed engineer: Prior to approval of the final design and at completion of construction Submit plans for review and approval; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources Section 7 • MMRP 98 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials ▪ Temporary traffic lanes shall be marked, barricades and lights shall be provided at excavations and crossings ▪ Pipeline and facility construction activities shall affect the least number of travel lanes as possible, with both directions of traffic flow being maintained at all times, to the extent feasible ▪ Pipeline and facility construction shall avoid the morning and evening peak traffic periods to the extent feasible ▪ Construction within any major intersection shall be restricted to only one-half of an intersection at any one time in order to maintain one lane of traffic flow in each direction. Pipeline and facility crossings of freeways, light rail, and railroad tracks shall be constructed using methods that provide minimal disruption to freeway, light rail, and railroad operations, to the extent feasible. ▪ Construction across on- and off-street bikeways shall be done in a manner that allows for safe bicycle access or bicycle traffic will be safely re-routed. Detours to bikeways can affect journey to work trips and utilitarian trips, as well as recreational trips. Therefore, closure of bikeways shall be temporary or avoided completely where feasible. ▪ Private driveways located within construction areas will remain open to maintain access to the maximum extent feasible. It is anticipated that if the trench will remain open in front of a private driveway for more than five days, metal plates would be used to provide 24-hour access, except for up to 3 hours of blockage as needed during construction. ▪ To minimize cumulative traffic impacts a s a result of lane closures during construction, the District will require that the project construction contractor(s) coordinate with Section 7 • MMRP 99 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study Yorba Linda Water District Well 22 Mitigation Monitoring Program No. Mitigation Measure Timing of Verification Method of Verification Responsible Agency/Person Completion Date/Initials construction contractor(s) for any concurrent nearby projects that are planned for construction. The District shall notify the appropriate City or County Traffic Engineering Department of any such coordination among project contractors and the resulting recommendations. MM TRANS-2 Following construction or during construction, as necessary to maintain safe driving conditions, any damage to existing roadways caused by construction vehicles and equipment will be repaired as required in accordance with applicable city, county, or Caltrans standards. During construction and at completion of construction Routine inspections during construction; final site inspection; notify OCWD prior to construction and provide notification and verification at completion of construction YLWD Project Manager and OCWD Executive Director of Planning and Natural Resources Section 7 • MMRP 100 YLWD Well 22 Initial Study This page intentionally left blank ITEM NO. 8.3 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Budgeted:No To:Board of Directors Funding Source:N/A From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Presented By:Delia Lugo, Finance Manager Dept:Finance Reviewed by Legal:Yes Prepared By:Cindy Botts, Water Conservation Supervisor CEQA Compliance:N/A Subject:Administrative Penalty Conservation Credit (Nederhood) SUMMARY: At their July 11, 2017 meeting, the Board of Directors requested Staff to bring forth an action item on the use of the District's Administrative Penalty reserve fund for a one-time Conservation Credit for all active water customer connections. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors consider the one-time application of a Conservation Credit to active customer connections for water service and authorize $147,700.00 to be retained from the Conservation Reserve for the purposes of: (1) completing the preliminary analysis work towards investigating a Budget Based Rate Structure for the Yorba Linda Water District; and (2) processing a refund to the PYLUSD for an appeal that was granted on the basis of "health and safety". DISCUSSION: Prior discussion from the Board regarding the use of the Conservation Reserve for the purposes of a "Conservation Credit" included a restriction to active water customer connections as of the date of Board approval, with the Incentive being an equal dollar amount to each connection, regardless of meter size or if any Administrative Penalties were collected. This Credit would be placed upon each active water customer connection, rather than preparing and issuing individual disbursements in order to decrease the District's costs related to the application of the Credit. Lastly, the Board discussed encouraging customers, via various public information channels, to utilize this Credit to decrease their future "water footprint" by installing water-saving devices or planting low-water use plants. Additionally, in anticipation of projected State Water Resources Control Board requirements from Executive Order B-37-16 "Making Conservation a California Way Life", staff is proposing to prepare preliminary investigative work towards a Budget Base Rate Structure. This is further supported by the Ad Hoc Citizen Advisory Committee recommendation numbers 1 and 4. Staff is bringing forth a plan that includes these elements and will result in an approximate Conservation Credit of $44.52 for each of the approximately 24,858 active customer connections. The completion of this process will liquidate the Conservation Reserve. Note the Conservation Credit amount is subject to change depending on the actual number of water active customer connections after the item is approved. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: FY_2017_4th_Qtr_Consolidated_Balance_Sheet_- _Acct_2025.xlsx Backup Material Backup Material ASSETS June 2017 June 2016 June 2015 CURRENT ASSETS: Cash and cash equivalents 1,253,252 1,580,760$ -$ Investment - - - Accounts receivable - water and sewer services - 305 240,050 Accounts receivable - property taxes - - - Accrued interest receivable 1,300 2,036 122 Prepaid expenses & other deposits - - - Inventory - - - TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 1,254,552 1,583,100 240,172 NONCURRENT ASSETS: Bond issuance costs - - - Other post-employment benefit (OPEB) asset - - - Deferred Pension Plans - - - Notes Receivable - - - Capital assets:- - Non-depreciable - - - Depreciable, net of accumulated depreciation - - - TOTAL NONCURRENT ASSETS - - - TOTAL ASSETS 1,254,552 1,583,100 240,172 LIABILITIES CURRENT LIABILITIES: YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT UNAUDITED COMBINING SCHEDULE OF NET ASSETS Administrative Penalty Account 2025 @ June 30, 2017 (With Year End Results from 2015 and 2016 for comparison only) CURRENT LIABILITIES: Accounts payable 47,700 8,394 50,858 Accrued expenses - 2,182 - Accrued interest payable - - - Certificates of Participation - current portion - - - Accrued OPEB - - - Refunding Revenue Bond - current portion - - - Compensated absences - - - Customer and construction deposits - - - Deferred revenue - - - TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 47,700 10,576 50,858 LONG-TERM LIABILITIES (LESS CURRENT PORTION): Deferred annexation revenue - - - Compensated absences - - - Net Pension Liability - - - Deferred Pension Plan - - - Refunding Revenue Bond - - - Certificate of Participation - - - TOTAL LONG TERM LIABILITIES (LESS CURRENT PORTION)- - - TOTAL LIABILITIES 47,700 10,576 50,858 NET ASSETS:1,206,852$ 1,572,524$ 189,314$ June 2017 June 2016 June 2015 OPERATING REVENUES: Water sales -$ -$ -$ Other operating revenues - 1,757,240 240,050 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES - 1,757,240 240,050 OPERATING EXPENSES Variable water costs - - - Personnel services 234,738 300,329 11,172 Supplies and services 71,281 79,360 39,686 Depreciation and amortization - - - TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 306,019 379,689 50,858 OPERATING INCOME/(LOSS)(306,019) 1,377,552 189,192 NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES): Property taxes - - - Investment income 11,367 5,659 122 Interest expense - - - Other nonoperating revenues - - - Other nonoperating expenses (71,020) - - TOTAL NONOPERATING REVENUES/EXPENSES (59,653) 5,659 122 YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT UNAUDITED COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN NET ASSETS For the period ended June 30, 2017 (With fiscal year ended June 2016 for comparison only) TOTAL NONOPERATING REVENUES/EXPENSES (59,653) 5,659 122 NET INCOME/(LOSS) BEFORE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS & EXTRAORDINARY ITEM(S) (365,672) 1,383,210 189,314 EXTRAORDINARY ITEM(S)- - - CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS - - - CHANGES IN NET ASSETS (365,672) 1,383,210 189,314 NET ASSETS - BEGINNING OF YEAR 1,572,524 189,314 - NET ASSETS - FOR PERIOD END JUNE 30, 2017 1,206,852$ 1,572,524$ 189,314$ ITEM NO. 8.4 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 To:Board of Directors From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Presented By:Delia Lugo, Finance Manager Dept:Finance Prepared By:Delia Lugo, Finance Manager Subject:Potential Customer Credit Resulting from District's Net Position as of June 30, 2017 (Nederhood) SUMMARY: Per Director Nederhood's request, staff is bringing this item before the Board of Directors for consideration. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors postpone a decision regarding this matter as the District's final net position for the period ending June 30, 2017 is not available at this time. DISCUSSION: Staff will not be prepared to present the analysis in support of this item until October 2017, when the final audited numbers, as presented in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, will be presented to the Board. Further discussions will be required with the District's legal counsel, financial advisers, bond counsel and auditors regarding any potential impacts on the District's future financial health. Further discussions by the Board of Directors will also be needed on current unfunded liabilities, reserve balances and debt service requirements prior to any discussion on this item in order to have a "complete picture" of the District's current position. ITEM NO. 8.5 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 To:Board of Directors From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Presented By:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Prepared By:Annie Alexander, Executive Assistant Subject:California Special Districts Association (CSDA) 2017 Board Elections STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors consider voting for one candidate in the CSDA 2017 Board Election for Seat C in the Southern Network. DISCUSSION: The attached ballot is for the District's use in voting to elect a representative to the CSDA Board of Directors in the Southern Network for Seat C. Each of CSDA's six networks has three seats on the Board. Each of the candidates is either a board member or management-level employee of a member district located within the Southern Network. Member districts in good standing are entitled to vote for one director to represent its network. Ballots must be received by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, August 4, 2017. Also attached is background information submitted by each candidate. The current incumbent in the expiring seat is Arlene Schafer from Costa Mesa Sanitary District. Ms. Schafer is running for re- election along with Kristin Bloomer from Desert Water Agency, John DeMonaco from Chino Valley Independent Fire District, Richard Hall from Mojave Water Agency, and Michael Mack from Rainbow Municipal Water District. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: CSDA_Election.pdf Backup Material Backup Material RECEIVED .Ji 1'� 5 2017 YORBA LINDA'AA TIER DISTRICT California Special BY Districts Association 19019121 Districts Stronger Together CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION 2017 BOARD ELECTIONS MAIL BALLOT INFORMATION Dear Member: A mail ballot has been enclosed for your district's use in voting to elect a representative to the CSDA Board of Directors in your Network for Seat C. Each of CSDA's six (6) networks has three seats on the Board. Each of the candidates is either a board member or management-level employee of a member district located in your network. Each Regular Member (district) in good standing shall be entitled to vote for one (1) person to represent its network. We have enclosed the candidate information for each candidate who submitted one. Please vote for only one candidate to represent your network in Seat C, unless otherwise noted on the actual ballot, and be sure to sign, date and fill in your member district information. If any part of the ballot is not complete, the ballot will not be valid and will not be counted. Please utilize the enclosed return envelope to return the completed ballot. Ballots must be received at the CSDA office at 1112 1 Street, Suite 200, Sacramento, CA 95814 by 5:00pm on Friday, August 4, 2017. If you do not use the enclosed envelope, please mail in your ballot to: California Special Districts Association Attn: 2017 Board Elections 1112 1 Street, Suite 200 Sacramento, CA 95814 Please contact Beth Hummel at 877.924.2732 or bethh )csda.net with any questions. CSDA BOARD OF DIRECTORS Aft OFFICIAL BALLOT 2017 .............................................................................................. ISSOUTHERN Arlene Schafer* NETWORK Costa Mesa Sanitary District NOW Kristin Bloomer ............................................................... Desert Water Agency SENT C ❑ John DeMonaco Chino valley Independent Fire District term ends 2020 Richard Hall .............................................................. Mo/ave WaterAgency Please vote for only one. ❑ Michael Mack Rainbow Municipal Water District SIGNATURE: DATE: MEMBER DISTRICT: Must be received by 5pm,August 4,2017.CSDA,1112 1 Street,Suite 200,Sacramento,CA 95814 California Special Districts Association IBOO13 Districts Stronger Together 2017 CSDA BOARD CANDIDATE INFORMATION SHEET The following information MUST accompany your nomination form and Resolution/minute order: Name: Arlene Schafer District/Company: Costa Mesa Sanitary District Title: Secretary Elected/Appointed/Staff: Elected Length of Service with District: 20 Years 1. Do you have current involvement with CSDA (such as committees, events, workshops, conferences, Governance Academy, etc.): Current member of the CSDA Board of Directors Legislative Committee Membership Commission Chair, Fiscal Committee and attendee of Legislative Days Annual Conference SDLA certificate holder. 2. Have you ever been associated with any other state-wide associations (CSAC, ACWA, League, etc.): Member of CSAC and was a member of the League when serving on the Citv Council 3. List local government involvement(such as LAFCo, Association of Governments, etc.): LAFCO member representing special districts former Chair and Vice Chair of the ISDOC and currently serving as an Executive Committee member, OCCOG Board member. 4. List civic organization involvement: President of Harbor-Mesa Lions (2 terms) Costa Mesa Republican Federation of Women OC Federation of Women, 31 Vice President Ways & Means Costa Mesa for Responsible Government member. RE-ELECT ARL,ENE SCHAFER CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION SOUTHERN NETWORK Arlene Schafer—Secretary Costa Mesa Sanitary District As the former Mayor of the City of Costa Mesa, it has been an honor to serve as your representative on the California Special Districts Asso- ciation (CSDA) for the past two years and now I humbly ask for your support to re-elect me to the Southern Network for another term. I believe my 28 years of experience as a local government leader that includes 20 years serving special districts in a variety of different capaci- ties makes me the best candidate. In March, the Little Hoover Com- mission will release its report on special districts and its very likely the report will focus on the role Local Agency Formation Commissions play in special district formation and reorganization. CSDA was an active participant in the public hearings where commissioners learned how special districts provide vital services in our communities and are 1. directly accountable to our voters and ratepayers. During my term as a member of the Board of Directors, CSDA successfully advocated for special districts by using the latest technology for outreaching such as CSDA's campaign website, "Districts Make the Difference" and the new online video, "Districts Empower our Communities." I believe it is extremely important for CSDA to keep its foot on the pedal on advo- cacy by letting legislators, media, business leaders, schools and the gen- eral public know how important we are in our communities. PREVIOUS CSDA EXPERIENCE ♦ Board President Currently, I am serving on the Board of Directors for the Costa Mesa ♦ Board Vice President Sanitary District (CMSD) where I have been a Board member for 20 years. I am proud to be part of an organization that has been a District ♦ Board Secretary of Distinction since 2009, earned the Transparency Certificate of ♦ Finance Corporation Excellence for four consecutive years and CMSD is one of few special ♦ Legislation Committee districts in California that received Gold Recognition in Special District Governance. ♦ Fiscal Committee ♦ CSDA Membership Committee If re-elected, I will continue to support CSDA's public outreach ♦ Recruitment&Planning Committee campaign about the essential services we provide and I will work collaboratively with CSDA Board of Directors and staff on providing essential training and professional development to help your agency succeed. Please vote for Arlene Schafer by August 4, 2017. California Special Districts Association ©©©� Districts Stronger Together 2017 CSDA BOARD CANDIDATE INFORMATION SHEET The following information MUST accompany your nomination form and Resolution/minute order: Name: Kristin Bloomer District/Company: Desert Water AgencV Title: Secretary-Treasurer Elected/Appointed/Staff: Elected Length of Service with District: 12/4/15 - Current 1. Do you have current involvement with CSDA(such as committees, events, workshops, conferences, Governance Academy, etc.): I recently attended the CSDA Legislative Days event. 2. Have you ever been associated with any other state-wide associations (CSAC, ACWA, League, etc.): I am a member of ACWA and attend their conferences. 3. List local government involvement (such as LAFCo, Association of Governments, etc.): City of Palm Springs Measure J Oversiqht Committee, Desert Water Agency Finance and Leaislative Committees 4. List civic organization involvement: Palm Springs SunUp Rotary Club, Palm Springs Woman's Club St Theresa School PTA President, Desert Roundtable "Candidate Statement—Although it is not required, each candidate is requested to submit a candidate statement of no more than 300 words in length. Any statements received in the CSDA office after May 31, 2017 will not be included with the ballot. Kristin Bloomer's Candidate Statement I was first elected to the Desert Water Agency Board in 2015 and currently serve as Secretary-Treasurer on the Board of Desert Water Agency. However,service to my community has always played an important role in my life. I am dedicated to improving the quality of life for my community. Throughout my life, influence in community affairs and local government has grown. I have focused on the priority of shaping local government to strengthen the local and regional economies and create solutions to local and regional challenges. Southern California is faced with many challenges and I believe that challenges present opportunities, and that the Southern Network cannot afford to miss capitalizing upon those opportunities. I am a longtime Palm Springs resident. My community service started early, when as a teenager, I volunteered with The Braille Institute and the National Charity League of Palm Springs. My dedication to community service includes: • Palm Springs Measure J Oversight Commission Vice-Chair • Palm Springs Sunup Rotary Club past-President and current Assistant District Governor • Founding President of the Desert Valley Women's Club • Member of the Palm Springs Woman's Club • St Theresa School Parent Teacher Group Board President • Volunteer Volleyball Coach at Palm Springs High School • Finance and Legislative Committee of Desert Water Agency California Special Districts Association IS©ID13 Districts Stronger Together 2017 CSDA BOARD CANDIDATE INFORMATION SHEET The following information MUST accompany your nomination form and Resolution/minute order: Name: John DeMonaco District/Company: Chino Valley Independent Fire District Title: Director Elected/Appointed/Staff: Elected Length of Service with District: 11 years 1. Do you have current involvement with CSDA(such as committees, events, workshops, conferences, Governance Academy, etc.): I am on the Legislative and Fiscal Committees I have also served on the Education and Membership Committees 2. Have you ever been associated with any other state-wide associations (CSAC, ACWA, League, etc.): I am on the Board of Directors for the Fire Districts Association of California 3. List local government involvement(such as LAFCo, Association of Governments, etc.): N/A 4. List civic organization involvement: I am a member and past Chairman of the Rotary Club of Chino. I am also a Board Member of the Chino Rotary Foundation. "Candidate Statement—Although it is not required, each candidate is requested to submit a candidate statement of no more than 300 words in length. Any statements received in the CSDA office after May 31, 2017 will not be included with the ballot. I am seeking election to a seat on the Board of Directors of the California Special Districts Association. I have served on the Board of Directors of the Chino Valley Independent Fire District for 11 years, elected in 2006. I am very proud to state that our Fire District is the first fire district to receive the District of Distinction Accreditation from the Special Districts Leadership Foundation (SDLF). We have been a District of Distinction since 2008. We also have obtained a District of Transparency Certificate of Excellence. I have completed the SDLF Recognition of Special District Governance. I serve on the CSDA Legislative and the Fiscal Committees. I have previously served on the CSDA Education and Membership committees. I am a retired Fire Chief with 33 years of Fire Service experience. I have been involved in city, county, JPAs and special districts in various capacities. I am currently on the Board of Directors of the Fire Districts Association of California and also serve on their Conference Committee. I am a Past President of the Chino Rotary Club and past Chairman of the Chino Rotary Foundation. I understand, and I am committed to legislative advocacy for special districts. Special Districts provide one of the most effective, efficient, and accountable forms of local service. It is vital that we continue to work together to influence and monitor policy decisions affecting California special districts. My commitment, extensive experience, and education in public service and as a special district board member and policy-maker, provides me with the ability to effectively serve as a CSDA Board Member representing all California Special Districts. I look forward to your support! Please contact me at(909) 816-8396 or email at jdemonacoLachofire.org. John DeMonaco RECEIVED JUN 6 2017 John DeMonaco, YORBA LINDA 1AIA7P DIS TRICIF jdemonacoCcDchofire.org BY (909) 816-8396 June 1, 2017 Dear CSDA Colleague, My name is John DeMonaco and I am requesting your VOTE in the upcoming 2017 election for a seat on the Board of Directors of the California Special Districts Association, Southern Network. The CSDA Southern Network is very large and includes approximately 180 Special Districts within the Counties of San Diego, Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles and Orange. I am a strong advocate of Special Districts. I believe that Special Districts are the strongest form of government that impacts our residents on a daily basis. Immediately after I was elected, I became involved with CSDA and volunteered to serve on numerous committees. I have previously served on the CSDA Education and Membership Committees and I now serve on the CSDA Legislative and the Fiscal Committees. I also serve on the CSDA Little Hoover Commission Working Group. Serving on these main CSDA committees has given me the insight and understanding into the "workings" of the association. I understand CSDA'S budget and finances, the educational programs, and what CSDA needs to offer its member districts. With this experience, I will be an effective board member from the "get-go." Serving on the Legislative Committee, I understand, and I am committed to legislative advocacy for special districts. I recognize the importance of working together to represent the common interest of all California Special Districts and the residents we serve. Special Districts provide one of the most effective, efficient, and accountable forms of local service. The California Special District Association monitors ALL legislation so that special districts can continue to deliver core services and can continue to be efficient. It is vital that the CSDA Legislative Staff with the direction of the Board of Directors continues to work to influence and monitor policy decisions affecting California special districts. I am on the Board of Directors of the Chino Valley Independent Fire District since 2006, serving my community for 11 years. I will be up for re-election in 2020. 1 am very proud to state that our Fire District is the first fire district to receive the District of Distinction Accreditation from the Special Districts Leadership Foundation (SDLF). We have been a District of Distinction since 2008. We also have obtained a District of Transparency Certificate of Excellence. I have completed the Special District Leadership Academy and have earned the SDLF Recognition of Special District Governance. Our District Board is in process of receiving the SDLF Gold Recognition of Special District Governance. I am a retired Fire Chief with 33 years of Fire Service experience. I have been involved in city, county, JPAs and special districts in various capacities. I am currently on the Board of Directors of the Fire Districts Association of California and also serve on the FDAC Conference Committee. I am a current board member and Past President of the Chino Rotary Club and past Chairman and member of the Chino Rotary Foundation. I believe in Special Districts and the service that we provide. Special Districts provide one of the most effective, efficient, and accountable forms of local service. I am committed to legislative advocacy for special districts. It is vital that we continue to work together to influence and monitor policy decisions affecting California special districts. My commitment and extensive experience, education in public service and as a special district board member & policy-maker, provides me with the ability to effectively serve as a CSDA Board Member representing all California Special Districts. If elected, I will work hard to support all Special Districts. Your District's VOTE will be greatly appreciated. I look forward to your support. If you would like to speak with me or I can be of any assistance, please contact me at (909) 816-8396 or email at jemonaco c ofire.or . Thank you. RespeoAjlly, John DeMonaco California Special Districts Association ©©0M Districts Stronger Together 2017 CSDA BOARD CANDfD:'E INFORMATIt N SHEET The following information MUST accompany your nomination form and Resolution/minute order: Name: District[Company: t Y i ewe Wakr ftje m,� Title: Vi �� L "4Y i 0ey/5i � Elected/Appointed/Staff: Length of Service with District: �-7 ye a✓S 1. Do you have current involvement with CSDA (such as committees, events, workshops, conferences, Governance Academy, etc.): `wenflu- ©4 f'�e rQ ssiyn� l ��Ue�o �vrPv� 2. Have you ever been associated with any other state-wide associations (CSAC, ACWA, League, etc.): LIE 6t1dkr89en0Y i S A Mwhes, 6(XO v 3. List local government involvement(such as LAFCo, Association of Governments, etc.): Yke ASSOCI'tbb 4 0 SAPI tsernal— iII D &Jrl 4. List civic organization involvement: McM�el 0 fhe F1(/-s ASSx1&-60ill, k.tttrag(S Z Sum Mi -�LUalie &Pel-iV at,'uae r s **Candidate Statement—Although it is not required, each candidate is requested to submit a candidate statement of no more than 300 words in length. Any statements received in the CSDA office after May 31, 2017 will not be included with the ballot. CANDIDATE STATEMENT My name is Richard Hall and I am currently a Director for the Mojave Water Agency and President of the Association of the San Bernardino County Special Districts and have served as an elected official for more than 35 years in two Special District organizations. I am interested in the CSDA Board of Directors position for Southern District Seat C—here is a list of my qualifications: • First-hand knowledge and experience to ensure that we have safe, quality drinking water. • Knowledge and experience in Recreation and Parks through 20 years on the Hesperia Recreation and Parks Special District board and served as president four times. • Knowledge and experience in Property Owners Association in Summit Valley, California where I helped to bring electricity and natural gas to the owners and served as president. • Knowledge and experience in Engineering and Management at General Dynamics Program Office working with the Federal and State government. • Reduced taxes through leadership as well as set policy to purchase quality water, build water discharge facilities, and given tax money back to residents who helped reduce water usage. • Continue to fight to bring 21"century technology to our Agency to study in order to better ensure management of our water resources by advanced computer systems,deep monitor wells, and other state of the art methods. • Worked closely with community leaders and residents for best policies and strategies including getting State and Federal funding for safe, drinkable water and other needed projects and programs.. • Support funding colleges and students for research and development for continued new resource solutions for present and future issues. I know that more needs to be done and have plans to meet these challenges. Let us protect our future and provide leadership with someone who knows how. Is California Special Districts Association I��OGI Districts Stranger Together 2017 CSDA BOARD CANDIDATE INFORMATION SHEET The following information MUST accompany your nomination form and Resolution/minute order: Name: M shoe.l (Y)6 C L District/Company:� YY �E- Title: ��}1y (:--'tom^. --C)\Vk 516* n �f Elected/Appointed/Staff: Length of Service with District: Jr'YY1CX1-N'l 1. Do you have current involvement with CSDA(such as committees, events, workshops, conferences, Governance Academy, etc.): '�r ice ei D i il if C I ►�►-- WQ yTZL1e be1,11fu.-k V-P, 2. Have you ever been associated with any other state-wide associations (CSAC,ACWA, League, etc.): 3. List local government involvement(such as LAFCo.Association of Governments, etc.): Uin( ,ed -C- -i, C 01- � �w t A �n- over d f A a clqc�5 n-(-1 ark-S �4e0dx()4-.s 4. List civic organization involvement: "Candidate Statement—Although it is not required, each candidate is requested to submit a candidate statement of no more than 300 words in length. Any statements received in the CSDA office after May 31,2017 will not be included with the ballot. ENDLESS POSSIBLITIES My name is Michael Mack and I am honored to be seeking e election to be on the Board of Directors of California Special Districts Association. I was elected to the Rainbow Municipal Water District Board of Directors in December 2016 and appointed to serve as the District's representative at both ACWA and CSDA. My background includes a degree in horticulture and worked for the City of San Marcos for over thirty years. As the Parks Department Supervisor, I had many responsibilities including reviewing plans and inspection of new park and street median installations. I was both a Certified Playground Inspector and Irrigation Auditor. One of my main responsibilities was ensuring efficient usage of water resources. I calculated, determined, and programmed water requirements for the plant material for all parks and street medians within the City. have learned the importance of CSDA is we are the support system to help ensure efficient and productive services to both small and large communities throughout California at the local level of city governments. As your CSDA Board Member, I see endless possibilities and promise to tackle and meet the challenges our districts face. We all must work together for present and future needs for our special districts and by doing so we can and will achieve our goals. We must be proactive with our legislators and with this energy and commitment we can make the different between success and failure. am very honored to have this chance to serve all of you and given this opportunity. I feel extensive service and experience in the public sector, I will work effortlessly to make those endless possibilities become reality. ITEM NO. 9.1 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 To:Board of Directors From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Presented By:Delia Lugo, Finance Manager Dept:Finance Prepared By:Kelly McCann, Senior Accountant Subject:Budget to Actual Statements for the Month Ending June 30, 2017 DISCUSSION: Cumulative Volumetric Water Revenue, as reported through the month ending June 30, 2017, reflects an average rebound of 12% as compared to prior year for the same reporting period. Landscape/Irrigation classified customer connections have experienced the largest rebound in monthly consumption for this reporting period. As seen the last few months, as the weather warms customer consumption increases. Total Variable Costs results reflect at 21% increase when compared to prior year for the same reporting period. The increase in costs is reflective of an increase in demand as well as a higher cost per acre foot. The cumulative demand recovery from July through June is 13.5% which is 1.5% above the projection. STRATEGIC PLAN: FR 1-F: Continue to Record and Report the Fairly Stated Financial Activities of the District in a Timely and Transparent Manner to the Board of Directors and Member Agencies ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: Consolidated_Budget_to_Actual_Statement_June_2017.xlsx Backup Material Backup Material Water_Budget_to_Actual_Statement_June_2017.xlsx Backup Material Backup Material Sewer_Budget_to_Actual_Statement_June_2017.xlsx Backup Material Backup Material Pro_Forma_June_30_2017.xlsx Backup Material Backup Material Monthly_Bounce_Back_Graph.pdf Backup Material Backup Material Monthly_Recovery_Graph.pdf Backup Material Backup Material Yorba Linda Water District Summary Financial Report Water & Sewer Funds For Period Ending June 30, 2017 - PRELIMINARY YTD June YTD YTD Actual Prior Year Prior Year YTD Actual YTD Actual Budget Actual Actual (Under) Over June Actual Actual (thru vs vs FY 2017 FY 2017 FY 2017 YTD Budget FY 2016 June 2016) PY Actual $ PY Actual % Revenue (Operating): Water Revenue (Residential) $13,907,406 $1,589,566 $13,510,717 (396,689) $1,369,520 $12,414,379 $1,096,338 8.83% Water Revenue (Commercial & Fire Det.) 1,874,818 185,403 1,802,131 (72,687) 170,587 1,711,104 91,027 5.32% Water Revenue (Landscape/Irrigation) 2,998,777 422,979 3,327,132 328,355 343,140 2,700,775 626,357 23.19% Water Revenue (Service Charge) 10,036,923 832,972 10,120,968 84,045 1,058,205 10,560,917 (439,949) -4.17% Sewer Charge Revenue 1,852,837 160,149 1,874,040 21,203 145,323 1,669,393 204,647 12.26% Locke Ranch Assessments 198,400 1 214,786 16,386 80 178,742 36,044 20.17% Other Operating Revenue 654,825 237,833 1,034,289 379,464 53,914 2,657,452 (1,623,163) -61.08% Total Operating Revenue: 31,523,986 3,428,903 31,884,063 360,077 3,140,769 31,892,762 (8,699) -0.03% Revenue (Non-Operating): Interest 115,000 29,571 339,145 224,145 23,717 257,592 81,553 31.66% Property Tax 1,450,000 26,967 1,668,870 218,870 33,023 1,602,827 66,043 4.12% Other Non-Operating Revenue 616,525 147,471 596,246 (20,279) 170,383 845,298 (249,052) -29.46% Total Non-Operating Revenue: 2,181,525 204,009 2,604,261 422,736 227,123 2,705,717 (101,456) -3.75% Total Revenue 33,705,511 3,632,912 34,488,324 782,813 3,367,892 34,598,479 (110,155) -0.32% Expenses (Operating): Variable Water Costs (G.W., Import & Power) 13,179,477 1,308,416 12,650,766 (528,711) 983,948 10,423,111 2,227,655 21.37% Salary Related Expenses 9,253,623 1,155,231 9,008,784 (244,839)867,174 8,495,220 513,565 6.05% Supplies & Services 4,969,229 429,314 4,470,156 (499,073) 493,271 4,321,274 148,882 3.45% Total Operating Expenses 27,402,329 2,892,961 26,129,706 (1,272,623) 2,344,393 23,239,605 2,890,102 12.44% Expenses (Non-Operating): Interest on Long Term Debt 1,721,884 231,508 1,563,104 (158,780) 154,410 1,693,461 (130,357) -7.70% Other Expense 23,000 97,951 54,335 31,335 (15,214) 21,681 32,654 150.61% Total Non-Operating Expenses: 1,744,884 329,459 1,617,439 (127,445) 139,196 1,715,142 (97,703) -5.70% Total Expenses 29,147,213 3,222,419 27,747,146 (1,400,067) 2,483,589 24,954,747 2,792,399 11.19% Net Position Before Capital Contributions 4,558,298 410,493 6,741,178 2,182,880 884,303 9,643,732 (2,902,554) -30.10% Capital Contributions (Non-Cash Transaction -- 23,155 2,285,131 2,285,131 441,009 860,406 1,424,725 165.59% GASB 34 Compliant) Net Position Before Depreciation 4,558,298 433,648 9,026,309 4,468,011 1,325,312 10,504,138 (1,477,829) -14.07% Depreciation & Amortization 7,561,272 597,897 7,143,310 (417,962) 627,291 7,566,109 (422,799) -5.59% Total Net Position ($3,002,974) ($164,249) $1,882,999 $4,885,973 $698,021 $2,938,029 ($1,055,030) -35.91% (26,979) (239,827) (28,337) (218,672) (21,155) 9.67% (With June 30, 2016 for comparison purposes) YTD June YTD YTD Actual Prior Year Prior YTD YTD Actual YTD - CUR Budget Actual Actual (Under)Over June Actual Actual (thru vs vs FY 2017 FY 2017 FY 2017 YTD Budget FY 2016 June 2016) PY Actual $PY Actual % Revenue (Operating): Water Revenue (Residential)$13,907,406 $1,589,566 $13,510,717 (396,689)$1,369,520 $12,414,379 $1,096,338 8.83% Water Revenue (Commercial & Fire Det.)1,874,818 185,403 1,802,132 (72,686)170,587 1,711,104 91,028 5.32% Water Revenue (Landscape/Irrigation)2,998,777 422,979 3,327,132 328,355 343,140 2,700,775 626,357 23.19% Water Revenue (Service Charge)10,036,923 832,972 10,120,967 84,044 1,058,205 10,560,917 (439,950) -4.17% Other Operating Revenue 617,654 160,686 862,607 244,953 51,015 2,575,954 (1,713,347) -66.51% Total Operating Revenue:29,435,578 3,191,606 29,623,555 187,977 2,992,467 29,963,129 (339,574) -1.13% Revenue (Non-Operating): Interest 100,000 27,241 304,346 204,346 21,997 237,638 $66,708 28.07% Property Tax 1,450,000 26,967 1,668,870 218,870 33,023 1,602,827 $66,043 4.12% Other Non-Operating Revenue 604,600 114,442 483,504 (121,096)149,373 752,776 (269,272) -35.77% Total Non-Operating Revenue:2,154,600 168,650 2,456,720 302,120 204,393 2,593,241 (136,521) -5.26% Total Revenue 31,590,178 3,360,256 32,080,275 490,097 3,196,860 32,556,370 (476,095) -1.46% Expenses (Operating): Variable Water Costs (G.W., Import & Power)13,179,477 1,308,416 12,650,766 (528,711)983,948 10,423,111 2,227,655 21.37% Salary Related Expenses 8,279,036 991,721 7,986,760 (292,276)769,906 7,605,934 380,826 5.01% Supplies & Services: Communications 242,840 16,361 156,811 (86,029)18,009 208,295 (51,484) -24.72% Contractual Services 479,560 54,627 411,608 (67,952)41,825 493,466 (81,858) -16.59% Data Processing 245,351 17,009 251,839 6,488 3,597 210,246 41,593 19.78% Dues & Memberships 88,878 438 85,761 (3,117)1,729 73,585 12,176 16.55% Fees & Permits 234,630 19,655 231,202 (3,428)20,431 192,641 38,561 20.02% Board Election 228,780 - 120,873 (107,907)- - 120,873 Insurance 266,296 19,754 238,798 (27,498) 20,095 238,391 407 0.17% Materials 724,812 56,539 853,393 128,581 77,316 774,084 79,309 10.25% District Activities, Emp Recognition 27,017 3,408 10,179 (16,838)383 7,888 2,291 29.04% Maintenance 393,245 30,062 386,539 (6,706)70,292 338,712 47,827 14.12% Non-Capital Equipment 158,364 4,892 149,804 (8,560)24,601 141,669 8,135 5.74% Office Expense 40,216 7,350 36,115 (4,101)5,715 38,199 (2,084) -5.46% Professional Services 562,720 100,549 580,940 18,220 76,354 627,452 (46,511) -7.41% Training 69,299 (4,836) 38,962 (30,337)2,468 23,863 15,099 63.27% Travel & Conferences 111,263 4,530 45,998 (65,265)5,044 45,802 196 0.43% Uncollectible Accounts 32,550 360 7,703 (24,847)7,430 61,639 (53,936) -87.50% Utilities 116,250 14,729 144,936 28,686 2,400 71,627 73,308 102.35% Vehicle Equipment 322,916 31,138 292,392 (30,524)34,904 312,615 (20,223) -6.47% Supplies & Services Sub-Total 4,344,986 376,565 4,043,853 (301,132)412,593 3,860,174 183,680 4.76% Total Operating Expenses 25,803,499 2,676,702 24,681,379 (1,122,119)2,166,447 21,889,219 2,792,160 12.76% Expenses (Non-Operating): Interest on Long Term Debt 1,721,884 231,508 1,563,104 (158,780)154,410 1,693,461 (130,357) -7.70% Other Expense 23,000 97,870 46,948 23,948 (20,907) 33,955 12,993 38.26% Total Non-Operating Expenses:1,744,884 329,378 1,610,052 (134,832) 133,503 1,727,416 (117,364) -6.79% Total Expenses 27,548,383 3,006,080 26,291,431 (1,256,952)2,299,950 23,616,636 2,674,796 11.33% Net Position Before Capital Contributions 4,041,795 354,176 5,788,844 1,747,049 896,910 8,939,735 (3,150,891)-35.25% Capital Contributions (Non-Cash Transaction -- - 1,325,532 1,325,532 249,510 419,756 905,776 215.79% GASB 34 Compliant) Net Position Before Depreciation 4,041,795 354,176 7,114,376 3,072,581 1,146,420 9,359,491 (2,245,115)-23.99% Depreciation & Amortization 6,198,432 485,997 5,806,858 (391,574)513,721 6,199,588 (392,730) -6.33% Total Net Position (2,156,637) (131,821) 1,307,518 3,464,155 632,699 3,159,903 (1,852,385) -58.62% Capital - Direct Labor (25,629)(223,176)(27,312) (195,783) (27,393) 13.99% (With June 30, 2016 for comparison purposes) Yorba Linda Water District Water Fund For Period Ending June 30, 2017 - PRELIMINARY YTD June YTD YTD Actual Prior Year Prior Year YTD Actual YTD - CUR Budget Actual Actual (Under)Over June Actual Actual (thru vs vs FY 2017 FY 2017 FY 2017 YTD Budget FY 2016 June 2016) PY Actual $ PY Actual % Revenue (Operating): Sewer Charge Revenue $1,852,837 $160,149 $1,874,041 $21,204 $145,323 $1,669,393 $204,648 12.26% Locke Ranch Assessments 198,400 1 214,785 16,385 80 178,742 36,043 20.17% Other Operating Revenue 37,171 77,146 171,683 134,512 2,898 81,498 90,185 110.66% Total Operating Revenue: 2,088,408 237,296 2,260,509 172,101 148,301 1,929,633 330,876 17.15% Revenue (Non-Operating): Interest 15,000 2,330 34,798 19,798 1,720 19,954 14,844 74.39% Other Non-Operating Revenue 11,925 33,029 112,743 100,818 21,010 92,522 20,221 21.85% Total Non-Operating Revenue: 26,925 35,359 147,540 120,615 22,730 112,476 35,064 31.17% Total Revenue 2,115,333 272,655 2,408,049 292,716 171,031 2,042,109 365,940 17.92% Expenses (Operating): Salary Related Expenses 974,587 163,509 1,022,023 47,436 97,269 889,286 132,738 14.93% Supplies & Services: Communications 16,085 1,231 9,339 (6,746) 1,356 13,533 (4,194) -30.99% Contractual Services 78,705 4,112 29,806 (48,899) 2,759 35,818 (6,012) -16.78% Data Processing 18,358 1,280 18,940 582 271 15,057 3,883 25.79% Dues & Memberships 6,907 33 6,627 (280) 130 5,716 911 15.93% Fees & Permits 16,795 1,331 15,010 (1,785)1,485 10,491 4,519 43.08% Board Election 17,220 - 9,098 (8,122) - - 9,098 - Insurance 20,044 1,487 17,694 (2,350)1,513 17,943 (249)-1.39% Materials 104,688 1,964 26,068 (78,620) 1,033 33,564 (7,496) -22.33% District Activities, Emp Recognition 2,034 257 766 (1,268) 29 591 175 29.61% Maintenance 171,585 26,979 152,729 (18,856) 59,920 188,884 (36,155) -19.14% Non-Capital Equipment 36,687 3,201 23,357 (13,330) 2,344 40,761 (17,404) -42.70% Office Expense 2,884 553 2,718 (166) 401 2,556 162 6.35% Professional Services 35,280 7,094 26,433 (8,847) 3,892 22,557 3,876 17.18% Training 7,786 (445) 5,196 (2,590) 186 3,898 1,298 33.31% Travel & Conferences 13,702 227 2,847 (10,855)239 2,982 (136)-4.55% Yorba Linda Water District Sewer Fund For Period Ending June 30, 2017 - PRELIMINARY (With June 30, 2016 for comparison purposes) Travel & Conferences 13,702 227 2,847 (10,855)239 2,982 (136)-4.55% Uncollectible Accounts 2,450 44 1,339 (1,112) 495 7,018 (5,680) -80.93% Utilities 9,550 1,170 11,470 1,921 235 5,309 6,161 116.05% Vehicle Equipment 63,484 2,230 66,866 3,382 4,390 54,419 12,447 22.87% Supplies & Services Sub-Total 624,243 52,748 426,303 (197,941) 80,678 461,098 (34,795) -7.55% Total Operating Expenses 1,598,830 216,257 1,448,326 (150,504) 177,947 1,350,384 97,943 7.25% Expenses (Non-Operating): Interest Expense - - - - - - - - Other Expense - 81 7,389 7,389 5,693 (12,275) 19,664 -160.20% Total Non-Operating Expenses: - 81 7,389 7,389 5,693 (12,275) 19,664 -160.20% Total Expenses 1,598,830 216,338 1,455,715 (143,115) 183,640 1,338,109 117,606 8.79% Net Position Before Capital Contributions 516,503 56,317 952,334 435,831 (12,609) 704,000 248,334 35.27% Capital Contributions (Non-Cash Transaction - - 23,155 959,599 959,599 191,499 440,650 518,949 117.77% GASB 34 Compliant) Net Position Before Depreciation 516,503 79,472 1,911,933 1,395,430 178,890 1,144,650 767,283 67.03% Depreciation & Amortization 1,362,840 111,900 1,336,452 (26,388) 113,570 1,366,521 (30,069) -2.20% Total Net Position (846,337) (32,428) 575,481 1,421,818 65,320 (221,871) 797,352 -359.38% Capital - Direct Labor (1,350) (16,651) (1,025) (22,889) 6,238 -27.26% FY17 Budget June Actuals FY18 Budget Water Revenue (Residential) 13,907,406$ 13,510,717$ 14,278,688$ Water Revenue (Commercial & Fire Det.) 1,874,818$ 1,802,132$ 2,071,031$ Water Revenue (Landscape/Irrigation) 2,998,777$ 3,327,132$ 3,079,054$ Service Charges 10,036,923$ 10,120,967$ 10,106,238$ Other Operating Revenue 617,654$ 862,607$ 769,106$ Total Operating Revenue 29,435,578$ 29,623,555$ 30,304,117$ Revenue (Non-Operating): Interest 100,000$ 304,346$ 275,000$ Property Taxes 1,450,000$ 1,668,870$ 1,710,000$ Other Non-Operating Revenue 604,600$ 483,504$ 604,646$ Total Non-Operating Revenue 2,154,600$ 2,456,720$ 2,589,646$ Total Revenue 31,590,178$ 32,080,275$ 32,893,763$ Expenses (Operating): Variable Water Costs (G.W., Import & Power) Water-Related Costs 10,575,305$ 10,383,268$ 11,240,088$ Fixed Costs 1,475,751$ 1,006,565$ 1,443,355$ Power-Related Costs 1,128,422$ 1,260,933$ 1,285,413$ Variable Water Costs Related Expenses Total 13,179,477$ 12,650,766$ 13,968,855$ Salary Related Expenses 8,108,690$ 7,771,072$ 8,859,867$ Salary Related Expenses - Limited-term Staff 355,346$ 215,688$ -$ Reduction for Capital Project Labor (185,000)$ -$ (215,000)$ Salary Related Expenses Total 8,279,036$ 7,986,760$ 8,644,867$ Supplies & Services Communications 242,840$ 156,811$ 233,275$ Yorba Linda Water District Water Enterprise FY17 ProForma June 2017 - PRELIMINARY Communications 242,840$ 156,811$ 233,275$ Contractual Services 479,560$ 411,608$ 566,153$ Data Processing 245,351$ 251,839$ 235,322$ Dues & Memberships 88,878$ 85,761$ 80,492$ Fees & Permits 234,630$ 231,202$ 264,641$ Board Election 228,780$ 120,873$ -$ Insurance 266,296$ 238,798$ 263,506$ Materials 724,812$ 853,393$ 797,347$ District Activities, Emp Recognition 27,017$ 10,179$ 22,506$ Maintenance 393,245$ 386,539$ 339,342$ Non-Capital Equipment 158,364$ 149,804$ 104,678$ Office Expense 40,216$ 36,115$ 39,662$ Professional Services 562,720$ 580,940$ 808,208$ Training 69,299$ 38,962$ 61,728$ Travel & Conferences 111,263$ 45,998$ 102,493$ Uncollectible Accounts 32,550$ 7,703$ 17,205$ Utilities 116,250$ 144,936$ 158,100$ Vehicle Expenses 322,916$ 292,392$ 286,812$ Supplies & Services Sub-Total 4,344,985$ 4,043,853$ 4,381,471$ Total Operating Expenses 25,803,499$ 24,681,379$ 26,995,193$ Expenses (Non-Operating) Other Expense 23,000$ 46,948$ 15,220$ Total Non-Operating Expenses 23,000$ 46,948$ 15,220$ Total Expenses 25,826,499$ 24,728,327$ 27,010,413$ Net Revenues 5,763,679$ 7,351,948$ 5,883,350$ Less: Debt Service (Principal & Interest) 2,716,884$ 2,716,884$ 2,729,799$ Less: Committed Capital Expenditures (PayGo)5,555,642$ 3,703,077$ 2,635,755$ Transfer to/(from) Reserves (2,508,847)$ 931,987$ 517,796$ Net -$ -$ -$ $2,716,884 $2,716,884 $2,729,799 212%271%216% Monthly Recovery % (based on average daily demand, FY 16/17 vs. FY 15/16) 40% 30% 28% 30% 28% 30% 26% 21% 22% 20% 17% 996 10% 0% -7% July August September October November D other Q March April May June -20%-30%40% % 6.9 MG -50% Actual Monthly Recovery (MG) (based on average daily demand) 25.00 "Bounce Back"from July 1,2016-June 30,2017: 13.5% 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 July August September October November December January February March April May lune Prior Year Current Year —rtlz%Bounce Back Target ITEM NO. 9.2 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 To:Board of Directors From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Presented By:Delia Lugo, Finance Manager Dept:Finance Prepared By:Kelly McCann, Senior Accountant Subject:Cash and Investment Report for Period Ending June 30, 2017 SUMMARY: Government Code Section 530607, et. seq., requires the person delegated to invest funds to make monthly report of investments to the legislative body. DISCUSSION: The Cash & Investment Portfolio Report presents the market value and percent yield for all District investments by institution. The Cash & Investment Summary Report includes budget and actual interest and average term portfolio information as well as market value broken out by reserve categories. The Fair Value Measurement Report categorizes investments with the fair value hierarchy established by generally accepted accounting principles. The total yield for the month ending June 30, 2017 is 1.05%. The overall decrease in the investment balance from the previous month is approximately $368,000. A large portion was due to the Water Capital Project Reserve decrease of $620,536 for Pay-As-You- Go payments related to capital improvements and other related capital purchases, a decrease in the restrictive 2017A Acquisition Fund of $410,374 to pay Fairmont Booster Pump Station capital project costs, and a decrease in the Conservation Reserve Fund by $70,026, due to conservation related costs. The Water Operating Fund increased by $623,378 and the Sewer Operating Fund increased by $54,824 due to a positive net effect between operating revenues and expenses through the reporting month of the fiscal year. STRATEGIC PLAN: FR 1-F: Continue to Record and Report the Fairly Stated Financial Activities of the District in a Timely and Transparent Manner to the Board of Directors and Member Agencies ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: Invst_Rpt_6-17.xlsx Cash and Investment Portfolio Report Backup Material Invst_Agenda_Backup_-_June_2017.xlsx Cash and Investment Summary Report Backup Material July_1__2017_Recommend_Beginning_Resv_Balances.xlsx Recommended Reserve Balances for July 1, 2017 Backup Material Fair_Value_Measurement_Report_6-17.xlsx Fair Value Measurement Report Backup Material Water_CIP___Captial_Outlay_Analysis_thru_June_2017.pdf Water CIP and Capital Outlay Analysis Backup Material Market %Date of Percent Value Par of Total Institution Maturity Yield Checking Account: 536,567$ 536,567$ Wells Fargo Bank 11,336 11,336 Pershing 547,902$ 547,902$ 1.37% Total 0.00% Money Market Accounts: 5,078,724$ 5,078,724 US Bank (Revenue Bonds) 0.38% 1,052,663 1,052,663 Bank of the West 0.08% 6,131,386$ 6,131,386$ 15.37% Total 0.33% Federal Agency Securities: 498,135$ 500,000 Federal Home Loan Bank 06/12/18 1.00% 499,305$ 500,000 Federal Home Loan Bank 06/13/18 1.10% 997,440$ 1,000,000$ 2.50% Total 1.05% Certificates of Deposits: 247,777$ 248,000$ CIT Bank, Salt Lake 05/22/18 1.20% 248,042$ 248,000 Discover 05/22/18 1.19% 247,777$ 248,000 Goldman Sachs Bank 05/22/18 1.20% 248,107$ 248,000 Beal Bank 05/23/18 0.99% 249,006$ 247,000 Barclays Bank 04/30/18 2.23% 248,258$ 248,000 State Bank of India 05/14/18 1.14% 248,213$ 249,000 Webster Bank 05/03/18 0.90% 248,084$ 248,000 American Express Centurion Bank 05/23/18 1.19% 247,546$ 248,000 GE Capital Bank 05/24/18 1.10% 248,410$ 249,000 Oriental Bank & Trust 05/29/18 1.05% 248,318$ 249,000 Silvergate Bank 05/30/18 1.00% 248,293$ 249,000 Enterprise Bank & TR Co Lowell 05/30/18 1.00% 248,308$ 249,000 Safra National Bank 05/31/18 1.00% 247,291$ 248,000 Townebank Portsmouth 05/31/18 1.00% 248,298$ 249,000 Mascoma Savings Bank 05/29/18 1.00% 100,065$ 100,000 Ally Bank Midvale Utah 12/11/17 1.54% 198,452$ 200,000 World's Foremost Bk Sydney 05/28/19 1.31% 246,849$ 248,000 Capital One Bk USA Natl Assn 05/13/19 1.20% 245,529$ 249,000 Comenity Cap Bk Salt Lake City 06/30/21 1.67% 244,047$ 248,000 EnerBank USA Salt Lake City 08/26/20 1.32% 245,384$ 248,000 EverBank Jacksonville Fla CTF 08/30/19 1.16% 181,663$ 180,000 HSBC BK USA, NA MC Clean CTF 08/31/21 1.23% 241,376$ 248,000 Wells Fargo Bank NA Sioux Falls D 08/31/21 1.64% 247,104$ 247,000 PrivateBank & Tr Chicago Ill CTF 03/30/22 2.19% 251,321$ 249,000 JP Morgan Chase Bk NA Columbus 03/31/22 2.42% 5,923,515$ 5,942,000$ 14.85% Total 1.31% Pooled Investment Accounts: 7,333,431$ 7,333,431$ Local Agency Investment Fund 0.98% 1,325,086 1,325,292 CalTRUST Short Term 1.10% 17,636,298 17,706,262 CalTRUST Medium Term 1.28% 26,294,816$ 26,364,985$ 65.91%1.19% 39,895,060$ 39,986,273$ 100% Total Investments 1.05% Per Government Code requirements, the Investment Report is in compliance with the Yorba Linda Water District's Investment Policy, and there are adequate funds available to meet budgeted and actual expenditures for the next six months. 6/30/17 Yorba Linda Water District Cash & Investment Portfolio Report June 30, 2017 ________________________________ Kelly D. McCann, Senior Accountant Below is a chart summarizing the yields as well as terms and maturities for the month of June 2017: Average # of Month Portfolio Days to of 2017 Yield Maturity June 1.05% 122 Below are charts comparing operating fund interest for current and prior fiscal years. Actual Interest 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Monthly - June 54,943$ 29,571$ Year-to-Date 288,818$ 339,145$ Budget 2015/2016 2016/2017 Interest Budget, June YTD 93,000$ 115,000$ Interest Budget, Annual 93,000$ 115,000$ Interest earned on investments is recorded in the fund that owns the investment. The distribution of investments in the portfolio both in dollars and as a percentage of the total portfolio by funds is as follows: Total of $39.8 million in cash and investments which is split between minimum reserve requirements and what is available to meet current year obligations (operating costs, debt service, capital costs). Reserve Cash and Requirements Investments May 2017 % Alloc June 2017 % Alloc "Conditional Available for Fund Description Balance 5/31/2017 Balance 6/30/2017 Use" CY Obligations Water Operating Reserve 8,326,960$ 24.51% 9,128,102$ 26.63% 4,132,257$ 4,995,845 Water Emergency Reserve 1,046,197 3.08% 1,047,426 3.06%1,042,888 4,538 Water Capital Project Reserve 15,461,136 45.52% 14,840,600 43.29% 1,820,000 13,020,600 Water Reserve for Debt Service 2,779,104 8.18%2,779,327 8.11%2,723,509 55,818 Cash & Investment Summary Report Cash & Investment Summary Comparison Between Current and Previous Month Water Reserve for Debt Service 2,779,104 8.18%2,779,327 8.11%2,723,509 55,818 Maintenance Reserve 201,674 0.59% 201,674 0.59% 200,000 1,674 Water Employee Liability Reserve 372,049 1.10% 372,067 1.09% 372,000 67 Un-Restricted Water Reserve Balance 28,187,120 28,369,195 10,290,654 18,078,541 Conservation Reserve 1,323,278 3.90% 1,253,252 3.66% - 1,253,252 Restricted Water Reserve Balance 1,323,278 1,253,252 Sewer Operating Reserve 412,012 1.21% 559,448 1.63% 239,825 319,622.75 Sewer Emergency Reserve 1,002,124 2.95% 1,002,483 2.92%1,000,000 2,483 Sewer Employee Liability Reserve 28,199 0.08% 28,199 0.08% 28,000 199 Sewer Capital Project Reserve 3,014,516 8.87% 3,067,192 8.95% 345,000 2,722,192 Un-Restricted Sewer Reserve Balance 4,456,850 4,657,322 1,612,825 3,044,497 Total Reserve Balances 33,967,248$ 100.00% 34,279,770$ 100.00% 11,903,479$ 22,376,291$ Water Operating 338,920 161,156 Sewer Operating 468,022 375,410 806,942 536,567 Revenue Bond 2017A-Acquisition Fund 5,489,098 5,078,724 Total Cash and Investments 40,263,288$ 39,895,060$ Year to Date Days in Cash Reserve Balances Operating Exp Calculation Un-Restricted Water Reserve Balance 28,369,195$ 24,681,379$ 420 Restricted Water Reserve Balance 1,253,252 Un-Restricted Sewer Reserve Balance 9,286,445$ 1,448,326$ 2340 Restricted Sewer Reserve Balance -$ Total Reserve Balances 38,908,893$ 26,129,705$ Fitch Ratings Metric Agency Rating AAA AA A Days in Cash 518 499 374 Ratio 5.8 4 3.7 Wells Fargo Bank Checking US Bank Held (Restricted) Recommended June 30, 2017 July 1, 2017 Fund Description Balance Balance Water Operating Reserve 9,128,102$ $14,118,341 Water Emergency Reserve 1,047,426 3,467,160 Water Capital Project Reserve 14,840,600 5,533,845 Water Reserve for Debt Service 2,779,327 - Maintenance Reserve 201,674 - Water Employee Liability Reserve 372,067 1,249,850 Rate Stabilizaiton Reserve - 4,000,000 Un-Restricted Water Reserve Balance 28,369,195 28,369,195 Conservation Reserve 1,253,252 1,253,252 Restricted Water Reserve Balance 1,253,252 1,253,252 Sewer Operating Reserve 559,448 743,496 Sewer Emergency Reserve 1,002,483 1,146,128 Sewer Employee Liability Reserve 28,199 500,000 Sewer Capital Project Reserve 3,067,192 2,267,699 Un-Restricted Sewer Reserve Balance 4,657,322 4,657,322 Total Reserve Balances 34,279,770$ 34,279,770$ Yorba Linda Water District Summary of Reserve Balances Yorba Linda Water District Fair Value Measurement Report June 30, 2017 Quoted Observable Unobservable Prices Inputs Inputs Investments Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total CalTRUST Investment Pool -$ 18,961,385$ -$ 18,961,385$ Local Agency Investment Fund - 7,333,431 - 7,333,431 U.S. Government Sponsored Agency Securities - 997,440 - 997,440 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit - 5,923,515 - 5,923,515 Total Investments -$ 33,215,771$ -$ 33,215,771$ $25.5M = As of June 30, 2016 - $7.0M = LOC Payment (Sept. 2016) -$1.0M = Fairmont Booster Pump Station - $944K = Richfield Road Replacement - $685K = Waterline Replacement (2015) - $360K = Well #21 - $36K = Well #22 - $13K = Pressure Reducing Station Rehab. - $657K = Vehicle and Capital Outlay $14.8M = Water Capital Reserve (FYE17) Fiscal Year 2017 Water CIP & Capital Outlay $6.0M = As of May 11, 2017 - $518K = May 2017 Payments - $410K = June 2017 Payments $5.07M = Restricted Acquisition Fund (FYE17) Restricted Acquisition Fund – Fairmont Booster Pump Station ITEM NO. 9.3 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 To:Board of Directors From:Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Presented By:Steve Conklin, Engineering Manager Prepared By:Steve Conklin, Engineering Manager Subject:District Unfunded Long-term Projects DISCUSSION: District staff, in meetings with the General Manager, has developed a list of over 50 projects that have been identified for review and evaluation, to improve the operations and efficiency of the District. This list is currently titled the YLWD Project List, and has also been called the "Ugly List." The Project List, as attached, was prepared in April 2017 and has not been updated to reflect the projects that may already have been approved and budgeted by the Board on June 27, 2017. The attached Project List is considered a "Living Document," that will be reviewed and updated on a regular basis. It is a compilation of projects identified from across all the District departments. The first four pages of the list include all 52 projects, each of which is identified by a Category and a Priority. These two identifiers were determined by staff and are provided as a means to rank the projects relative to each other. This subjective ranking is used on pages 6 thru 10 of the attachment, where the projects are in separate lists by category, ranked from high to low priority. Staff will review the Project List with the Board. It should be noted that the Project List is one of several elements that will need to be part of the discussion as the Board and staff develop the new long-term Strategic Plan for the District. Other elements in the discussion are the Finance Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, and Asset Management Plan. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: YLWD_Project_List.pdf Backup Material Backup Material YLWD Project List No. Category Priority Assigned To Estimated Budqet Design and construction of Well 22 and a discharge pipeline to 1 Well 22 the Richfield Road pipeline.This project is necessary to increase System Upgrade High ENG/OPS $ 2,500,000 the District's groundwater supply. Construction of the replacement pump station,including eight pumps discharging to three zones,disinfection system,and 2 Fairmont BPS Upgrade Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 7,830,005 backup power generation.This project will increase the District's capability to fully utilize either groundwater or import water. Repiping is needed to deliver flow to the reservoir and then to the 3 Lakeview BPS Piping Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 154,000 pump station to improve water quality. Replace the aging pump with a new natural gas engine-driven 4 Timber Ridge BPS Rehabilitation Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 900,000 pump in a pump house. 5 Pressure Regulating Stations(PRS) Replace the aging PRS that require frequent maintenance and do Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 726,000 Rehabilitation Phase 2 not meet current District standards. Replace the aging waterlines as identified in the District's Asset 6 FY 17/18 Waterline Replacement Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 1,000,000 Management Plan. Replace the aging waterlines as identified in the District's Asset 7 FY 18/19 Waterline Replacement Repair and Replacement Medium ENG/OPS $ 1,000,000 Management Plan. 8 Well 23 Construct future well offsite to replace aging wells on the District Repair and Replacement Low ENG/OPS $ 2,500,000 campus. Update the 2010 Asset Management Plan to include added 9 Update Asset Management Plan facilities,new cost projections,and a review of the replacement Program and Plan Update High ENG/OPS $ 100,000 schedules. After the District completed the 2011 Sewer Master Plan,the District assumed ownership of an additional 66 miles of sewer 10 Update Sewer Master Plan mains from the City of Yorba Linda.Update the 2011 Sewer Program and Plan Update High ENG/OPS $ 60,000 Master Plan to include these mains,as well as other areas added and planned. Page 1 of 14 YLWD Project List No. Assigned To Estimated Budqet Construct a future operations and maintenance building at the Fairmont pump station site with space for secondary SCADA and 11 Fairmont Site Improvements Phase 2 Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 3,000,000 computer facilities,and storage of District equipment and materials. Water System Control Valve at Construct a motor-operated control valve in the 36"pipeline to 12 Fairmont/eastanchury provide for remote adjustment of flow to balance flow for System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 250,000 improved system operation. The 12-inch diameter pipeline along Fairmont Blvd.between the Fairmont pump station and Forest Avenue was identified as 13 Fairmont Water Main deficient in the Northeast Area Planning Study.The study System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 1,500,000 recommends to replace with a 16-inch diameter pipeline or install a secondary parallel pipeline. Upgrade Emergency Backup Power Install additional backup generator and electrical improvements 14 to provide for continued operation of all staff functions at the Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 200,000 System for Campus Facilities District campus during an extended Edison power outage. 15 Well Field Backup System(Propane or Rehabilitate propane tanks or install diesel backup to ensure that Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 100,000 Diesel) the wells will be functional in the event of an emergency. The District has over 350 miles of water mains from 4"to 39"in Cathodic Protection and Corrosion- diameter. Of that total,approximately 20%is steel or iron with 16 protective coatings.An assessment needs to be performed, Program and Plan Update High ENG/OPS $ 50,000 Control Program particularly on the steel pipe,to determine its condition and to recommend protective measures. Seismic Retrofit to District Facilities(as The District has structures constructed in the 1970s and 1980s, 17 necessary) primarily pump stations,that should be evaluated for structural Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 100,000 integrity during a seismic event. Security Upgrades to District Facilities The District has many sites and facilities where the need for 18 security upgrades has to be evaluated and then implemented, Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 250,000 (as necessary) based on priority and level of risk. Equip all District vehicles with radios for communication during 19 District Vehicle Radios Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 25,000 the event of an emergency. Page 2 of 14 YLWD Project List No. Assigned To Estimated Budqet Perform bench-scale testing of granular activated carbon(GAC) 20 PFC Bench-scale Testing using the District's groundwater to determine its efficacy and to Regulatory High ENG/OPS $ 50,000 help refine the capital,operation and maintenance costs of this treatment system. Construct treatment systems to reduce the level of contaminants 21 Groundwater Treatment Plant found in the District's groundwater,i.e.PFCs,iron,manganese,or Regulatory Medium ENG/OPS $ 6,000,000 others. Chlorination Station at Camino De SWRCB-DDW requested that the District relocate the temporary 22 Regulatory High ENG/OPS $ 40,000 Bryant and Hidden Hills Reservoirs chlorination stations at these reservoirs to a permanent location. Future Waterline Replacement Replace the aging waterlines as identified in the District's Asset 23 Repair and Replacement Medium ENG/OPS $ 2,000,000 (Annual Recurring) Management Plan. 24 Reservoir Valve Replacement Replace the aging reservoir valves that require replacement. Repair and Replacement Medium ENG/OPS $ 120,000 25 Pressure Regulating Stations(PRS) Replace the aging PRS that require frequent maintenance and do Repair and Replacement Medium ENG/OPS $ 900,000 Rehabilitation Phase 3 not meet current District standards. Hidden Hills Booster Pump Station Replace pump(s)to increase the pumping capacity at the pump 26 System Upgrade Medium ENG/OPS $ 500,000 Upgrade station to accommodate future demands. Bryant Ranch Reservoir Site Construct v-ditches and erosion control devices to prevent storm 27 Improvements water runoff to flow onto the adjoining properties and repair the System Upgrade Medium ENG/OPS $ 40,000 existing fence. District-wide Advanced Metering 28 Upgrade the District's metering system to AMI technology. System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 6,000,000 Infrastructure(AMI) Increase the capacity of the reservoir to accommodate future 29 Little Canyon Reservoir Expansion System Upgrade Law ENG/OPS $ 500,000 demands. Sewer Line Non-Capital Repairs Sewer lines with small to medium sized cracks have been 30 (Annual Recurring) identified through the CCN evaluation.Slip line contractor to Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 100,000 perform section repairs on these sewer lines. Page 3 of 14 YLWD Project List No. Category Priority Assigned To Estimated Budqet Sewer Line Capital Repairs Sewer lines with medium to large sized cracks have been 31 (Annual Recurring) identified through the CCN evaluation.Slip line contractor to Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 150,000 perform complete relines on these sewer lines. The Valley View Reservoir and Booster Pump Station are open to 32 Valley View Security Fence the public which is susceptible to loitering,vandalism,and Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 100,000 potential contamination.Recommend fencing off the entire facility with 8-foot wrought iron fence. This area of the District has a single water supply which results in Single Water Supply Main at Savi the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. 33 Emergency Preparedness and Security Law ENG/OPS TBD Ranch Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and reduce impact when work is required. This area of the District has a single water supply which results in the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. 34 Single Water Supply Main at Blue Gum Emergency Preparedness and Security Law ENG/OPS TBD Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and reduce impact when work is required. This area of the District has a single water supply which results in Single Water Supply Main at Hidden the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. 35 Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS TBD Hills Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and reduce impact when work is required. This area of the District has a single water supply which results in Single Water Supply Main at Casino the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. 36 Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS TBD Ridge Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and reduce impact when work is required. This area of the District has a single water supply which results in Single Water Supply Main at the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. 37 Orangeview Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS TBD reduce impact when work is required. 7 District well to waste discharge lines are not currently equipped 38 District Well Waste Discharge Line with meters to accurately measure the flow.Meters need to be System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 100,000 Meters installed and tied in to SCADA in order to account for the water that is discharged to waste during well start up and shut down. Page 4 of 14 YLWD Project List No. Assigned To Estimated Budqet It is recommended to install permanent backup power supplies in Backup Power at Hidden Hills,Box order to operate these pump stations during an extended power 39 Canyon,Elk Mountain,and Yorba outage or emergency.Currently,the District has only one Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 400,000 Linda Booster Pump Stations portable generator that requires personnel to transport and set up. The chlorine generation system and associated equipment needs Well 20 On-Site Chlorine Generation an upgrade to accommondate current and future chlorination 40 System demands.The existing system is undersized and at its current System Upgrade High ENG/OPS $ 200,000 capacity,the life cycle of the system has been greatly reduced. Valve 50 on Deimer Rd.has been used to import water from the OC-51 connection during MET shutdowns and District shutdowns. 41 Automated Control Valve 50 During these conditions and potential emergency situations,the System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 50,000 use of an automated control valve would facilitate controlling the flow in order to maintain water levels in the system. 42 Well 15 Chemical Feed Pumps The chemical feed pumps at Well 15 are very old and need to be Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 10,000 replaced. A PRS is needed to drop water from Zone 6(1133)to Zone 5 Zone 6 to Zone 5 Pressure Reducing (908).It would provide an alternative to feeding the lower zone 43 area during scheduled or emergency repairs.The station will also System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 300,000 Station(PRS) assist in maintaining water quality and expanding the area that Hidden Hills Reservoir currently serves. A hydraulic study is needed to investigate the flow conditions from Zone 2 to Zone 3 when the pumps are in operation, 44 Zone 2 to 3 Hydraulic Study Program and Plan Update High ENG/OPS $ 20,000 including recommendations to better facilitate and control the flow to the upper reservoirs based on the needs of the system. The Production Staff has observed calcium formations floating in Water Quality Improvements at these reservoirs due to the characteristics of the water stored. 45 Lakeview,Valley View,Gardenia,and Although not a public health risk,the installation of a reservoir System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 400,000 Quarter Horse Reservoirs management system in each reservoir would circulate the water to minimize the calcium conditions. Page 5 of 14 YLWD Project List No. Assigned To Estimated Budqet Due to very low demands,the groundwater system requires 46 Chlorine Boosting Study additional chlorine boosting throughout the zones.This needs to Program and Plan Update Medium ENG/OPS $ 20,000 be studies to determine the best solution and what locations need bososting systems. The main chlorination system at Richfield is aging and in need of 47 Richfield Chlorination System Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 100,000 major upgrades. Furnish a chlorination trailer that can be mobilized to any location 48 Emergency Chlorination Trailer Emergency Preparedness and Security Medium ENG/OPS $ 30,000 where there is a need to boost the chlorine levels. 49 Security Key Control System A security key system needs to be developed to address access Emergency Preparedness and Security High ENG/OPS TBD control,lost and stolen keys,etc. Admin Building ADA Compliance Construct upgrades at building entrance to comply with current 50 Regulatory Low ENG/OPS $ 25,000 Improvements ADA requirements. Pressure Regulating Stations(PRS) Replace the aging PRS that require frequent maintenance and do 51 Rehabilitation Phase 4 not meet current District standards. Repair and Replacement Low ENG/OPS $ 750,000 Green Crest Sewer Lift Station Replace the manhole frame and cover at the Green Crest Sewer 52 Refurbishment Lift Station due to a safety issue. Repair and Replacement Low ENG/OPS $ 25,000 As of lune 30,2016 there are 3 Unfunded Liability items: 1.OPEB Actuarial Accrued Liability(UAAL) $1,394,265 Funding of District's Unfunded 2.Pension Unfunded Accrued Liability(UAL)$5,289,322 53 Accrued Liabilities 3.Compensated Absences Accrued Liability $1,442,344 Program and Plan Update High FIN $ 8,125,931 Need to implement a financial plan to set aside funds to pay down these reported liabilites. These items will updated adjusted every June 30th of the closing fiscal year. $ 49,300,936 Page 6 of 14 Repair and Replacement Projects No. Project Assigned To Estimated � Budget Construction of the replacement pump station,including eight pumps discharging to three zones,disinfection system,and 2 Fairmont BPS Upgrade Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 7,830,005 backup power generation.This project will increase the District's capability to fully utilize either groundwater or import water. Repiping is needed to deliver flow to the reservoir and then to the 3 Lakeview BPS Piping Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 154,000 pump station to improve water quality. Replace the aging pump with a new natural gas engine-driven 4 Timber Ridge BPS Rehabilitation Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 900,000 pump in a pump house. Pressure Regulating Stations(PRS) Replace the aging PRS that require frequent maintenance and do 5 Rehabilitation Phase 2 not meet current District standards. Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 726,000 Replace the aging waterlines as identified in the District's Asset 6 FY 17/18 Waterline Replacement Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 1,000,000 Management Plan. Sewer Line Non-Capital Repairs Sewer lines with small to medium sized cracks have been 30 (Annual Recurring) identified through the CCN evaluation.Slip line contractor to Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 100,000 perform section repairs on these sewer lines. Sewer Line Capital Repairs Sewer lines with medium to large sized cracks have been 31 (Annual Recurring) identified through the CCN evaluation.Slip line contractor to Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 150,000 perform complete relines on these sewer lines. The chemical feed pumps at Well 15 are very old and need to be 42 Well 15 Chemical Feed Pumps Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 10,000 replaced. The main chlorination system at Richfield is aging and in need of 47 Richfield Chlorination System Repair and Replacement High ENG/OPS $ 100,000 major upgrades. Replace the aging waterlines as identified in the District's Asset 7 FY 18/19 Waterline Replacement Repair and Replacement Medium ENG/OPS $ 1,000,000 Management Plan. Future Waterline Replacement Replace the aging waterlines as identified in the District's Asset 23 Repair and Replacement Medium ENG/OPS $ 2,000,000 (Annual Recurring) Management Plan. Page 7 of 14 Repair and Replacement Projects No. Prolect Assigned To Estimated Budqet 24 Reservoir Valve Replacement Replace the aging reservoir valves that require replacement. Repair and Replacement Medium ENG/OPS $ 120,000 Pressure Regulating Stations(PRS) Replace the aging PRS that require frequent maintenance and do 25 Repair and Replacement Medium ENG/OPS $ 900,000 Rehabilitation Phase 3 not meet current District standards. 8 Well 23 Construct future well offsite to replace aging wells on the District Repair and Replacement Low ENG/OPS $ 2,500,000 campus. Pressure Regulating Stations(PRS) Replace the aging PRS that require frequent maintenance and do 51 Rehabilitation Phase 4 not meet current District standards. Repair and Replacement Low ENG/OPS $ 750,000 Green Crest Sewer Lift Station Replace the manhole frame and cover at the Green Crest Sewer 52 Refurbishment Lift Station due to a safety issue. Repair and Replacement Low ENG/OPS $ 25,000 $ 18,265,005 Page 8 of 14 System Upgrade Projects No. Project Category Priority Assigned To Estimated Budqet Design and construction of Well 22 and a discharge pipeline to 1 Well 22 the Richfield Road pipeline.This project is necessary to increase System Upgrade High ENG/OPS $ 2,500,000 the District's groundwater supply. The chlorine generation system and associated equipment needs Well 20 On-Site Chlorine Generation an upgrade to accommondate current and future chlorination 40 System demands.The existing system is undersized and at its current System Upgrade High ENG/OPS $ 200,000 capacity,the life cycle of the system has been greatly reduced. Hidden Hills Booster Pump Station Replace pump(s)to increase the pumping capacity at the pump 26 Upgrade station to accommodate future demands. System Upgrade Medium ENG/OPS $ 500,000 Bryant Ranch Reservoir Site Construct v-ditches and erosion control devices to prevent storm 27 Improvements water runoff to flow onto the adjoining properties and repair the System Upgrade Medium ENG/OPS $ 40,000 existing fence. Water System Control Valve at Construct a motor-operated control valve in the 36"pipeline to 12 Fairmont/Bastanchury provide for remote adjustment of flow to balance flow for System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 250,000 improved system operation. The 12-inch diameter pipeline along Fairmont Blvd.between the Fairmont pump station and Forest Avenue was identified as 13 Fairmont Water Main deficient in the Northeast Area Planning Study.The study System Upgrade Law ENG/OPS $ 1,500,000 recommends to replace with a 16-inch diameter pipeline or install a secondary parallel pipeline. District-wide Advanced Metering 28 Infrastructure(AMI) Upgrade the District's metering system to AMI technology. System Upgrade Law ENG/OPS $ 6,000,000 Increase the capacity of the reservoir to accommodate future 29 Little Canyon Reservoir Expansion System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 500,000 demands. 7 District well to waste discharge lines are not currently equipped 38 District Well Waste Discharge Line with meters to accurately measure the flow.Meters need to be System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 100,000 Meters installed and tied in to SCADA in order to account for the water that is discharged to waste during well start up and shut down. Page 9 of 14 System Upgrade Projects No. Project Category Priority Assigned To Estimated Budqet Valve 50 on Deimer Rd.has been used to import water from the OC-51 connection during MET shutdowns and District shutdowns. 41 Automated Control Valve 50 During these conditions and potential emergency situations,the System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 50,000 use of an automated control valve would facilitate controlling the flow in order to maintain water levels in the system. A PRS is needed to drop water from Zone 6(1133)to Zone 5 Zone 6 to Zone 5 Pressure Reducing (908).It would provide an alternative to feeding the lower zone 43 area during scheduled or emergency repairs.The station will also System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 300,000 Station(PRS) assist in maintaining water quality and expanding the area that Hidden Hills Reservoir currently serves. The Production Staff has observed calcium formations floating in Water Quality Improvements at these reservoirs due to the characteristics of the water stored. 45 Lakeview,Valley View,Gardenia,and Although not a public health risk,the installation of a reservoir System Upgrade Low ENG/OPS $ 400,000 Quarter Horse Reservoirs management system in each reservoir would circulate the water to minimize the calcium conditions. $ 12,340,000 Page 10 of 14 Regulatory Projects No. Assigned To Estimated Budqet Perform bench-scale testing of granular activated carbon(GAC) 20 PFC Bench-scale Testing using the District's groundwater to determine its efficacy and to Regulatory High ENG/OPS $ 50,000 help refine the capital,operation and maintenance costs of this treatment system. Chlorination Station at Camino De SWRCB-DDW requested that the District relocate the temporary 22 Regulatory High ENG/OPS $ 40,000 Bryant and Hidden Hills Reservoirs chlorination stations at these reservoirs to a permanent location. Construct treatment systems to reduce the level of contaminants 21 Groundwater Treatment Plant found in the District's groundwater,i.e.PFCs,iron,manganese,or Regulatory Medium ENG/OPS $ 6,000,000 others. Admin Building ADA Compliance Construct upgrades at building entrance to comply with current 50 Regulatory Low ENG/OPS $ 25,000 Improvements ADA requirements. $ 6,115,000 Page 11 of 14 Emergency Preparedness and Security Projects No. Project Description Estimated Assigned To Budqet 49 Security Key Control System A security key system needs to be developed to address access Emergency Preparedness and Security High ENG/OPS TBD control,lost and stolen keys,etc. 48 Emergency Chlorination Trailer Furnish a chlorination trailer that can be mobilized to any location Emergency Preparedness and Security Medium ENG/OPS $ 30,000 where there is a need to boost the chlorine levels. Construct a future operations and maintenance building at the Fairmont pump station site with space for secondary SCADA and 11 Fairmont Site Improvements Phase 2 Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 3,000,000 computer facilities,and storage of District equipment and materials. Upgrade Emergency Backup Power Install additional backup generator and electrical improvements 14 to provide for continued operation of all staff functions at the Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 200,000 System for Campus Facilities District campus during an extended Edison power outage. 15 Well Field Backup System(Propane or Rehabilitate propane tanks or install diesel backup to ensure that Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 100,000 Diesel) the wells will be functional in the event of an emergency. Seismic Retrofit to District Facilities(as The District has structures constructed in the 1970s and 1980s, 17 necessary) primarily pump stations,that should be evaluated for structural Emergency Preparedness and Security Law ENG/OPS $ 100,000 integrity during a seismic event. Security Upgrades to District Facilities The District has many sites and facilities where the need for 18 security upgrades has to be evaluated and then implemented, Emergency Preparedness and Security Law ENG/OPS $ 250,000 (as necessary) based on priority and level of risk. Equip all District vehicles with radios for communication during 19 District Vehicle Radios Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 25,000 the event of an emergency. The Valley View Reservoir and Booster Pump Station are open to the public which is susceptible to loitering,vandalism,and 32 Valley View Security Fence potential contamination.Recommend fencing off the entire Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 100,000 facility with 8-foot wrought iron fence. This area of the District has a single water supply which results in Single Water Supply Main at Savi the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. 33 Ranch Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS TBD reduce impact when work is required. Page 12 of 14 Emergency Preparedness and Security Projects No. Project Descriofion Assigned To Estimated Budqet This area of the District has a single water supply which results in 34 Single Water Supply Main at Blue Gum the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS TBD Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and reduce impact when work is required. This area of the District has a single water supply which results in Single Water Supply Main at Hidden the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. 35 Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS TBD Hills Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and reduce impact when work is required. This area of the District has a single water supply which results in Single Water Supply Main at Casino the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. 36 Emergency Preparedness and Security Law ENG/OPS TBD Ridge Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and reduce impact when work is required. This area of the District has a single water supply which results in Single Water Supply Main at the shutdown of many services for maintenance or repairs. 37 Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS TBD Orangeview Providing a second supply source would increase reliability and reduce impact when work is required. It is recommended to install permanent backup power supplies in Backup Power at Hidden Hills,Box order to operate these pump stations during an extended power 39 Canyon,Elk Mountain,and Yorba outage or emergency.Currently,the District has only one Emergency Preparedness and Security Low ENG/OPS $ 400,000 Linda Booster Pump Stations portable generator that requires personnel to transport and set up. $ 4,205,000 Page 13 of 14 Program and Plan Update Projects No. Project Category Priority Assigned To Estimated � Budget Update the 2010 Asset Management Plan to include added 9 Update Asset Management Plan facilities,new cost projections,and a review of the replacement Program and Plan Update High ENG/OPS $ 100,000 schedules. After the District completed the 2011 Sewer Master Plan,the District assumed ownership of an additional 66 miles of sewer 10 Update Sewer Master Plan mains from the City of Yorba Linda.Update the 2011 Sewer Program and Plan Update High ENG/OPS $ 60,000 Master Plan to include these mains,as well as other areas added and planned. The District has over 350 miles of water mains from 4"to 39"in Cathodic Protection and Corrosion- diameter. Of that total,approximately 20%is steel or iron with 16 protective coatings.An assessment needs to be performed, Program and Plan Update High ENG/OPS $ 50,000 Control Program particularly on the steel pipe,to determine its condition and to recommend protective measures. A hydraulic study is needed to investigate the flow conditions from Zone 2 to Zone 3 when the pumps are in operation, 44 Zone 2 to 3 Hydraulic Study including recommendations to better facilitate and control the Program and Plan Update High ENG/OPS $ 20,000 flow to the upper reservoirs based on the needs of the system. Due to very low demands,the groundwater system requires 46 Chlorine Boosting Study additional chlorine boosting throughout the zones.This needs to Program and Plan Update Medium ENG/OPS $ 20,000 be studies to determine the best solution and what locations need bososting systems. As of lune 30,2016 there are 3 Unfunded Liability items: 1.OPEB Actuarial Accrued Liability(UAAL) $1,394,265 Funding of District's Unfunded 2.Pension Unfunded Accrued Liability(UAL)$5,289,322 53 Accrued Liabilities 3.Compensated Absences Accrued Liability $1,442,344 Program and Plan Update High FIN $ 8,125,931 Need to implement a financial plan to set aside funds to pay down these reported liabilites. These items will updated adjusted every June 30th of the closing fiscal year. $ 8,375,931 Page 14 of 14 ITEM NO. 13.1 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Subject:Meetings from July 26 - September 30, 2017 ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: BOD_-_Activities_Calendar.pdf Backup Material Backup Material Board of Directors Activity Calendar Event Date Time Attendance By July OCSD Wed, Jul 26 6:00 PM Hawkins/Jones Yorba Linda Planning Commission Wed, Jul 26 6:30 PM Hawkins (As Needed) Interagency Committee Meeting with MWDOC and OCWD Thu, Jul 27 4:00 PM Miller/Nederhood August Yorba Linda City Council Tue, Aug 1 6:30 PM Jones MWDOC Wed, Aug 2 8:30 AM Nederhood OCSD Operations Committee Wed, Aug 2 5:00 PM Hawkins OCWD Wed, Aug 2 5:30 PM Jones WACO Fri, Aug 4 7:30 AM Jones (All Directors PA) Board of Directors Regular Meeting Tue, Aug 8 6:30 PM LAFCO Wed, Aug 9 8:00 AM Nederhood (As Needed) Yorba Linda Planning Commission Wed, Aug 9 6:30 PM Hawkins (As Needed) YL City Council Tue, Aug 15 6:30 PM Miller MWDOC Wed, Aug 16 8:30 AM Nederhood UWI Annual Conference Wed, Aug 16 1:00 PM Jones/Nederhood OCWD Wed, Aug 16 5:30 PM Jones UWI Annual Conference Thu, Aug 17 8:00 AM Jones/Nederhood UWI Annual Conference Fri, Aug 18 8:00 AM Jones/Nederhood CASA Annual Conference Tue, Aug 22 8:00 AM Board of Directors Regular Meeting Tue, Aug 22 6:30 PM CASA Annual Conference Wed, Aug 23 8:00 AM OCSD Wed, Aug 23 6:00 PM Hawkins/Jones Yorba Linda Planning Commission Wed, Aug 23 6:30 PM Hawkins (As Needed) CASA Annual Conference Thu, Aug 24 8:00 AM ACWA Region 8 Water Reliability Program Thu, Aug 24 10:00 AM Nederhood MWDOC Water Policy Forum Wed, Aug 30 5:00 PM September WACO Fri, Sep 1 7:30 AM Jones (All Directors PA) District Offices Closed Mon, Sep 4 7:00 AM Yorba Linda City Council Tue, Sep 5 6:30 PM Nederhood MWDOC Wed, Sep 6 8:30 AM Nederhood OCSD Operations Committee Wed, Sep 6 5:00 PM Hawkins OCWD Wed, Sep 6 5:30 PM Jones Board of Directors Regular Meeting Tue, Sep 12 6:30 PM LAFCO Wed, Sep 13 8:00 AM Nederhood (As Needed) Yorba Linda Planning Commission Wed, Sep 13 6:30 PM Hawkins (As Needed) YL Mayor's Prayer Breakfast Thu, Sep 14 7:00 AM Joint Committee Meeting with City of Yorba Linda Mon, Sep 18 4:00 PM Miller/Hawkins YL City Council Tue, Sep 19 6:30 PM Hall MWDOC Wed, Sep 20 8:30 AM Nederhood OCWD Wed, Sep 20 5:30 PM Jones CSDA Annual Conference Mon, Sep 25 8:00 AM CSDA Annual Conference Tue, Sep 26 8:00 AM Board of Directors Regular Meeting Tue, Sep 26 6:30 PM CSDA Annual Conference Wed, Sep 27 8:00 AM OCSD Wed, Sep 27 6:00 PM Hawkins/Jones Yorba Linda Planning Commission Wed, Sep 27 6:30 PM Hawkins (As Needed) CSDA Annual Conference Thu, Sep 28 8:00 AM Interagency Committee Meeting with MWDOC and OCWD Thu, Sep 28 4:00 PM Miller/Nederhood PA = Preauthorized ITEM NO. 14.1 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Subject:ACWA Region 8 Water Reliability Program - August 24, 2017 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve Director attendance at this event if desired. ATTACHMENTS: Name:Description:Type: ACWA_Program.pdf Backup Material Backup Material REGISTRATION NOW OPEN! ACWA Region 8 Program Water Reliability: The Continued Value of Local Projects Date: Thursday, August 24, 2017 Time: 10:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. (Check-in begins at 9:30 a.m.) Location: Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 700 North Alameda Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012 ACWA Region 8 invites you to a one-day program that will highlight the importance of local project investments. The program will also discuss the Delta and aging infrastructure. REGISTRATION OPEN HERE Pre-Registration Fee: ACWA Member $50 | Non-member $75 Onsite Registration Fee: ACWA member $55 | Non-member $75 (Onsite registrations will be accommodated as space permits.) Registration Fee Includes: Continental breakfast, lunch, refreshments and materials Online Registration Deadline: August 17, 2017 or until space is full. Cancellations Deadline: August 17, 2017, 5 p.m. (PST) to receive reimbursement. Cancellation must be in writing. Substitutions can be made by requesting it in writing by August 17. After that date, substitutions can be handled onsite at the event. Event details are subject to change and registrants will be notified by e-mail if changes occur. ACWA Regions | ACWA Events | ACWA ACWA REGION 8 BOARD 2016‐2017 Chair Steve Cole, Newhall County Water District Vice Chair Gloria Gray, West Basin Municipal Water District Board Members Brian Bowcock, Three Valleys Municipal Water District Bill Cooper, Castaic Lake Water Agency Mike Holmes, Walnut Valley Water District Mel Matthews, Foothill Municipal Water District Steve Blois, Calleguas Municipal Water District QUESTIONS Contact Brandon Ida, Regional Affairs Representative Brandon Ida brandoni@acwa.com or (916) 441-4545