Paradise City Council
November 7, 2022

Town of Paradise and Quad Consultants. 2008. Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan. Prepared for Town of Paradise Community Development Department. Amended January 2008. https://www.townofparadise.com/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/3251/townofp aradise-generalplan_1994.pdf.

USACE. 2016. National Levee Database. Accessed May 19, 2022. https://levees.sec.usace.army.mil/#/. Accessed May 19, 2022. 854
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Appendix A: NOP Scoping Report
855
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Appendix B: Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan Resolution and Amendments
856
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Appendix C: Regulatory Framework
857
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Appendix D: Emissions Modeling
858
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Appendix E: Vegetation Community Descriptions and Special-Status Species Accounts
859
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Attachment 1: Aquatic Resources and Vegetation Communities Mapbook 860
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Attachment 2: Database Queries
861
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Attachment 3: Sensitive Biological Resources Table
862
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Appendix F: Swainson’s Hawk Survey and Elderberry Shrub Mapping Report
863
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Appendix G: Tribal Consultation
864
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Appendix H:

Pump Station Energy Consumption Calculation

865
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendices
hdrinc.com
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Appendix I:

Public Comments and Responses on Draft PEIR
866

Paradise Sewer Project

EXHIBIT B
CEQA Findings Regarding
Significant Environmental Impacts
Paradise, CA
November 7, 2022
867
Page Intentionally Blank
868
Exhibit B
CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Environmental Impacts The Town of Paradise, California (Town), is the lead agency for the Paradise Sewer Project (the “Project” or “Proposed Project”) under the California Environmental Quality Act, (“CEQA”). The City of Chico (“City”), Butte Local Agency Formation Commission (“Butte LAFCo”) , Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (“RWQCB”), Butte County (“County”), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”) are considered Responsible Agencies under CEQA based on their discretionary approval over aspects of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would be located in Paradise, Chico and unincorporated areas in Butte County, California.

As more fully explained in the PEIR, since its incorporation in 1979, the Town has sought a formal wastewater treatment solution for the community, with service for commercial and densely populated residential areas being a priority. Failed and failing septic systems have created public health and environmental issues and concerns and have limited economic growth. Prior to the Camp Fire, which almost completely destroyed the Town in 2018, Paradise was the largest unsewered community in California. The Town has prepared numerous studies to address its need for a centralized wastewater treatment solution, and in its most recent study, the Town identified a proposed sewer service area. The proposed sewer service area includes the Town’s commercial corridors, and as described in the 2017 feasibility study, it represented the area that had the most septic systems that had failed or were projected to fail by 2022.

The Town now the proposes the Paradise Sewer Project, consisting of the design, right of way acquisition and construction for the core collection system, extended collection system, export pipeline and connection to the City of Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (“Proposed Project” or “Project”).

The Proposed Project would allow for the replacement of individual septic systems within the Town’s sewer service area that are currently are managed, owned, and maintained by individual property owners. The abandonment of such individual septic systems is not within the scope of this Project or the PEIR. This Proposed Project further includes a regional approach through the provision of wastewater treatment services from the City of Chico to the Town, to be approved by Butte LAFCo.

The Proposed Project would consist of three primary components. The first two components are analyzed at a project level in the PEIR because sufficient information is available regarding the characteristics, timing, and locations of these proposed facilities. The third component is analyzed at a programmatic level. The three components include the following:
 Core Collection System: The Core Collection System would consist of pipelines and 28 small pump stations (also referred to as lift stations) to serve approximately 1,500 individual parcels within the Town’s core sewer service area.
 Export Pipeline System: The 18-mile Export Pipeline System is proposed to convey wastewater from the Core Collection System to the Chico WPCP.
 Extended Collection System: The Extended Collection System would be an extension of the Core Collection System that would allow parcels within the Town limits to connect to the sewer system up to the capacity of the system infrastructure and the Town's allocation within the Chico WPCP capacity.
869
In order to approve these activities for the construction and operation of the Proposed Project, the Town has completed a PEIR in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This environmental review process focuses on the potential impacts caused by the Proposed Project on local resources.

The Town developed and implemented an extensive public outreach and education program for the public and other public agencies. The Town published the required documents for availability, distribution, and comments on the Draft PEIR, including a 45-day public review and comment period (July 14 through 5pm on August 29, 2022) and held three public meetings (August 8 (6:00 pm), August 10 (12:30 and 6:00 pm), 2022). All notices, materials and comments received at those meetings are included within the administrative records. Responsible and trustee agencies, involved federal agencies, interest groups, and members of the public were invited to provide input on the Draft PEIR. Comments were submitted in person, at Town Hall and through www.paradisesewer.com. All input received was documented and addressed in the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report.

As used here, “impacts” refers to one or more significant environmental effects of the project that have been identified in the PEIR process.

Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and specifically Section1 15091(a)(1) for each possible impact identified, the Town makes a finding of the changes or alternations required or incorporated into the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect or impact.

In adopting these Findings, the Town also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pursuant to California Public Resources Code, Section 21081.6, and CEQA Guidelines, Section 15097.

This program is designed to ensure that the project complies with the feasible mitigation measures identified below during implementation of the project. The program is set forth in the Paradise Sewer Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is adopted by the Town concurrently with these Findings as Exhibit C.

Findings:

1. For the reasons set out in the PEIR, as specifically reviewed by the Town Council, the Town Council finds that adoption of a regional approach to the provision of sewer services to the Town of Paradise as detailed in the EIR as the approach which meets the Objectives and Goals for the Project.

2. The Town Council further finds that there are revisions in only three mitigation measures, as shown below in the Findings (Haz Mat 4-5).

3. The Town Council further findings that the significant environmental effects (also called “impacts”) of the Project include conditions changes and alterations, as set out below and in the MMRP and PEIR, that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects where feasible and as identified in the PEIR; as a result, there are no significant impacts from implementation of the Project that were not mitigable by proposed Mitigation Measures (listed in the MMRP and PEIR).
870
3 Mitigation of Biological Resources Impacts

1. Facts. According to the EIR, the Project construction could create a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on the state or federally protected wetlands, riparian habitat, or other communities and any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS: Special-Status Plant Species.

However, this impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level when the project applicant implements the mitigation measures explained below:
i. During site preparation for any segment of the Core Collection System, Export Pipeline System, or Extended Collection System, ground disturbance and vegetation clearing footprints, including along construction access routes or at temporary work areas, will be reduced to the smallest area feasible. In addition, prior to any ground disturbance, a qualified biologist hired by the Town will identify areas to be avoided during construction activities; these areas will be fenced and/or flagged as close to construction limits as feasible. This mitigation measure applies to all biological resources.
ii. Before initiating the proposed ground disturbance or vegetation clearing, a qualified botanist will perform focused surveys to determine the presence or absence of special-status plant species with the potential to occur within a one-hundred feet radius of the proposed disturbance areas, as prescribed by CDFW. These surveys will be conducted per CDFW Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (CDFW 2018a), requiring rare plant surveys to be conducted during the proper time of the year when rare or endangered species are evident and identifiable. Surveys will be scheduled to coincide during known flowering periods and/or appropriate developmental periods necessary to identify the plant species of concern. iii. If any special-status plant species are found within one-hundred feet of ground disturbance or vegetation clearing areas, including construction access routes or temporary work areas, the following will be implemented:
a. Suppose the area is not proposed to be disturbed or does not need to be cleared for construction. In that case, any special-status plant species will be protected by flagging, signage, orange plastic fence, and/or silt fence, as appropriate, based on site conditions. This will limit the effects of activities and material stockpiles on special-status plant species. 871
4 b. If activities could result in the loss of greater than ten percent of a population identified during surveys or occupied habitat for a specialstatus plant species, a qualified biologist will develop and implement a mitigation plan for the Town. The plan will include a program to transplant, salvage, cultivate, and reestablish the species at suitable sites (if feasible); means and methods to propagate affected special-status plants through vegetative or reproductive means as appropriate for the species; and transplant at suitable receiving sites as close to the existing population as possible. CDFW and any other agencies with jurisdiction will approve the plan over the species found prior to implementation of the plan and before the initiation of any construction-related activities.

Propagation and transplantation will occur prior to the initiation of the activity. The receiving location will be evaluated and chosen based on similar conditions at the transplant source location. Site conditions to consider when choosing a receiving site will include aspect, substrate, hydrology, associated species, and canopy cover. A qualified biologist for the Town will monitor the transplanted plants for at least one year following transplantation. As part of the mitigation plan, a monitoring plan will be developed and approved by CDFW with propagation goals tailored to the species being transplanted. If propagation goals are not met after one year following transplantation, then adaptive management strategies will be developed in coordination with CDFW to achieve those goals.
c. The actual level of mitigation may vary depending on the sensitivity of the species, its prevalence in the area, the location of the occurrence, and the current state of knowledge about overall population trends and threats to its survival. However, at a minimum, the species and habitat will be replaced at a 1:1 ratio (individuals or acreage of occupied habitat). Ratios will be developed in coordination with and approved by CDFW.
iv. A qualified biologist will monitor construction activities that could potentially cause significant impacts on sensitive biological resources. The Town’s qualified biologist will determine the amount and duration of monitoring depending on the activity. Monitoring will be required at any location where special status species have been identified within 100 feet of the vegetation clearing area. In addition, the Town will retain a qualified biologist to conduct mandatory awareness training for construction personnel regarding the identified location's sensitive biological resources, identifying species (visual and auditory) most likely to be present, the need to avoid impacts on biological resources (e.g., plants, wildlife, and jurisdictional waters), and the penalties for non-compliance with the mitigation requirements. If new construction 872
5 personnel are added to the Project, the contractor will ensure they receive the mandatory training before starting work. This mandatory training will be included in all contractor construction specs and required by the contract. This measure will apply to any biological resources for which complete avoidance cannot be attained through or resource-specific measures. v. Following the construction of the Core Collection System, Export Pipeline System, or Extended Collection System, all exposed and/or disturbed areas resulting from ground-disturbing activities, including construction access routes or temporary work areas, will be returned to their original contour and grade, and restored using locally native grass and forb seeds, plugs, or a mix of the two. Areas will be seeded with species appropriate to their topographical and hydrological character and covered with broadcast straw and/or jute netted, as appropriate for specific habitat types. Several invasive and noxious weed species are known to occur in the study area, and 27 plant species classified by the California Invasive Plant Council as invasive were identified in the study area during field studies. To avoid the spread of invasive plant species in the study area, native species will be used for reseeding, and the Proposed Project will not allow any use of species listed as noxious weeds. Further, precautions will be taken to avoid the spread of invasive plant species. These include inspecting and cleaning construction equipment and implementing CDFWapproved eradication strategies should an invasion occur. This measure is focused on habitat but applies to all biological resources. vi. No net loss of aquatic resources would be achieved through impact avoidance and minimization, covered under Section 1 through Section 4, and/or compensatory mitigation. The mitigation for permanent impacts on aquatic resources will be provided at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Mitigation will be achieved through onsite restoration, in-lieu fee payment, or purchase of mitigation credits at a USACE-, USFWS-, and/or CDFW-approved mitigation bank at the Town's expense. Mitigation will be applied to satisfy this measure as required in regulatory permits issued through CDFW, USACE, USFWS, and/or the RWQCB.
vii. If sensitive communities occur within 100 feet (250 feet for vernal pools as mandated by USFWS) of proposed ground disturbing activities, including construction access routes and temporary work areas, with no pre-existing barrier between them and the proposed ground disturbance, protective fencing, such as silt fencing, will be installed between habitats that are to be avoided and the construction limits to prevent accidental disturbance and to protect water quality during construction.
873
6 viii. Ground disturbing activities within 100 feet (250 feet for vernal pools) of aquatic resources will coincide with the driest time of year and will avoid occurring within 72 hours (before or after) a rain event, if feasible. ix. If the proposed project impacts, including along construction access routes and temporary work areas, are to take place within 165 feet of a riparian corridor where elderberry shrubs are known to be present, then a full inventory of elderberry shrubs within 165 feet of the proposed disturbance, including an assessment of whether valley elderberry longhorn beetle exit holes are present, will be conducted under the Framework for Assessing Impacts to the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle. Based on the inventory findings, the Town and USFWS will coordinate to determine whether formal consultation is required for the Project. If formal consultation is deemed required, the Town will submit inventory results in a Biological Assessment to USFWS. USFWS will review the proposed findings and mitigation, and respond in a Biological Opinion, which will finalize the elderberry mitigation required of the Town for the Proposed Project.
x. Elderberry shrubs that the Proposed Project would directly impact will be transplanted to a new suitable location. In addition, two credits would be purchased at a USFWS-approved bank for each shrub (2:1 ratio). Mitigation, as required in regulatory permits issued through USFWS, may be applied to satisfy this measure.
xi. Elderberry shrubs would be transplanted outside the flight season of the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (March to July) and follow the most current version of the American National Standards Institute A300 (Part 6) guidelines for transplanting (http://www.tcia.org/). Exit-hole surveys would be completed immediately before transplanting. The number of exit holes found, the GPS location of the plant to be relocated, and the GPS location of where the plant is transplanted would be reported to USFWS. A qualified biologist hired by the Town will be on site for the duration of transplanting activities to ensure compliance with avoidance and minimization measures and other conservation measures. In addition, the qualified biologist will monitor the transplanted shrubs during one growth season following the transplant to confirm shrub survival. No further monitoring or action would be necessary if the shrub(s) are deemed alive. If the shrub(s) are deemed dead, The Town will purchase an additional one credit per shrub from a USFWS-approved bank for the valley elderberry longhorn beetle.
xii. Activities that may indirectly damage or kill an elderberry shrub (trenching, paving, etc.) will require an avoidance area of at least 20 feet from a shrub’s drip line, depending on the type of activity. All activities that could occur 874
7 within 165 feet of an elderberry shrub will also be conducted outside of the flight season of the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (March to July). xiii. Herbicides will not be used within the drip line of the shrub. Insecticides will not be used within 98 feet (30 meters, as required by USFWS) of an elderberry shrub. If deemed necessary, all chemicals will be applied using a backpack sprayer or a similar direct application method.
xiv. Mechanical weed removal within the shrub's drip line would be limited to the season when adult-valley elderberry longhorn beetles are not active (August to February) and will be completed so as to not damage an elderberry shrub. xv. Before construction, and as part of the specifications for the project included within the contractor agreement, the Town will require that its contractor prepare an Inadvertent Release Plan to address the inadvertent loss of inert drilling fluids in the event of a frac-out during HDD for each waterbody crossing. This plan will include Best Management Practices, monitoring, and contingency procedures. It will be developed, approved by a qualified biologist hired by the Town, and implemented by the contractor during construction to avoid or counteract potential impacts on water quality, fish, or other aquatic wildlife resulting from turbidity changes from the fluids. xvi. A qualified biologist would conduct a preconstruction survey for western pond turtles within 24 hours before the onset of any ground-disturbing activities that would occur within 350 feet of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of a creek or stream. If juvenile or adult turtles are found within the survey area, they would be moved by a qualified and CDFW-permitted biologist hired by the Town at least 500 feet away from the proposed disturbance area to a location with similar habitat. If a turtle nest is found within the survey area, construction activities will not occur within 100 feet of the nest until the turtles have hatched or the eggs have been moved to an appropriate location. Any egg relocation would be conducted by a qualified and CDFW-permitted biologist in coordination with CDFW.
xvii. Within 3-5 days before working within 300 feet radius of the OHWM of a creek or stream within the foothill yellow-legged frog range, per CDFW guidelines, a qualified and CDFW-permitted biologist will survey the Proposed Project site for foothill yellow-legged frogs (adults, subadults, tadpoles or egg masses), including construction access routes and at least 500 feet upstream and downstream (CDFW 2018b). Although unlikely, if the Project activities are expected to result in effects extending beyond 500 feet downstream (e.g., heavy sedimentation that could bury egg masses or tadpole rearing sites), the survey area will be expanded to encompass the expected affected area. 875
8 Suppose surface water is present during the work period. In that case, a qualified biologist hired by the Town will inspect the site daily for foothill yellow-legged frogs before work begins and during construction. xviii. Within 3-5 days before working within 300 feet of the OHWM of a creek or within 300 feet of fresh emergent wetland habitat, a qualified and CDFWpermitted biologist will conduct a visual encounter survey of the Proposed Project site for California red-legged frogs (adults, subadults, tadpoles or egg masses).
xix. During biological monitoring (Section 4 above), the biologist will identify any suitable aquatic or upland habitat that may be used by giant garter snakes within or adjacent to areas where ground-disturbing and vegetation-clearing activities would occur. Construction activities within 200 feet of suitable giant garter snake aquatic (generally defined as sloughs, irrigation ditches, creeks, or slow-moving streams) or upland habitat (defined as grasslands or disturbed areas within 200 feet of an aquatic feature suitable for a giant garter snake) will be conducted during the snake’s active period (May 1 through October 1). This minimizes the risk that the snakes will be underground and more susceptible to injury or death from ground-disturbing activities.
xx. Staging areas will be located more than 200 feet from any suitable giant garter snake aquatic or upland habitat as identified during monitoring by the biologist, or the area will be fenced with exclusion fencing before the start of construction. Vegetation clearing within 200 feet of the banks of suitable giant garter snake aquatic habitat will be limited to the minimum area necessary. The movement of heavy equipment within 200 feet of the banks of suitable giant garter snake aquatic habitat will be confined to designated haul routes to minimize habitat disturbance.
xxi. To the extent feasible, tree and vegetation clearing will be conducted outside the migratory bird nesting season (March 1 through August 31) in areas where the Town’s biologist identifies potential nesting trees. However, if clearing and/or construction activities need to occur during the migratory bird nesting season in these locations, then preconstruction surveys to identify active migratory bird and/or raptor nests would be conducted by a qualified biologist within 14 calendar days before construction initiation. A qualified biologist must perform focused surveys to determine the presence or absence of active nest sites within the proposed impact area, including construction access routes with a 500-foot buffer, where feasible.
xxii. In the year that construction of the Proposed Project is planned to be initiated, a qualified biologist will conduct protocol surveys for Swainson’s hawk in and 876
9 within 0.5-mile of all suitable habitats for the species in the Proposed Project footprint. These surveys will follow the protocol outlined in the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee’s Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley (CDFW 2000). Suppose any active Swainson’s hawk nests are found.

In that case, the biologist will determine an appropriately sized buffer around the nest in which construction activities will not be allowed to commence until the biologist has determined the nest to have reached the end of its cycle (fledged or failed). The size of the buffer will initially be 0.25-mile per CDFW standard requirements. However, it may be reduced in certain circumstances based on the opinion of the biologist regarding the observed sensitivity of the hawks to disturbance, visual screens between the nest and disturbance, and other factors.
xxiii. If active nests of any MBTA- and FGC-protected bird species are identified within the survey areas, a no-disturbance buffer would be established for all active nest sites before the commencement of any Proposed Project construction activities to avoid construction or access-related disturbances to migratory bird nesting activities. A no-disturbance buffer is a zone in which Proposed Project-related activities (vegetation removal, earth moving, noise generation, and construction) cannot occur. A qualified biologist would determine the size of the no-disturbance buffers based on the species, activities proposed near the nest, and topographic and other visual barriers. xxiv. Before implementing Proposed Project-related activities in undisturbed portions of the Proposed Project site and in and around buildings or other human-made structures with recesses where bats could roost, a qualified biologist will conduct a daytime site reconnaissance of the area. The biologist, focusing on buildings and other human-made structures or trees with cavities or exfoliating bark, would look for bats and bat signs, including existing roost sites, bat guano deposits, and will listen for roosting bats. If the daytime survey does not identify the presence of potential bat roosts, no further mitigation is required. If potential roost sites are identified, a nighttime exit survey will be conducted to determine species of roosting bats, relative bat activity and to estimate the number of individual bats. This nighttime survey may be an active or passive acoustic monitoring survey. If occupied bat roost sites are identified, appropriate spatial and temporal buffers, as defined by the Town’s biologist based on experience with bat species, would be implemented to minimize the impact on roosting bats during the construction of the Project. xxv. Within 14 days before the implementation of Project-related activities in or adjacent to the American badger habitat (annual grassland, mixed chaparral, and blue oak-foothill pine), a qualified biologist will determine if American 877
10 badger dens are present within 500 feet of the proposed impact area, including construction access routes. If badger den(s) are observed, the following buffer distances, according to what type of den(s) the biologist determines it (them) to be, will be established before construction activities:
a. Potential den = 30 feet
b. Active (adults present) den = 250 feet
c. Natal (young present) den = 500 feet
Activities permitted within and the size of the no-disturbance buffers may be adjusted based on an evaluation by the qualified biologist. The buffer would be imposed until a qualified biologist determines the den is inactive. xxvi. Compensatory mitigation for temporary and permanent impacts on state and/or federally protected wetlands that cannot be avoided through other mitigation measures will be purchased by the Town at a minimum 1:1 ratio, as defined by USACE through the Section 404 permit. Mitigation might include onsite restoration approved by the USACE, in-lieu fee payment, or purchasing mitigation credits at a USACE-approved mitigation bank. Mitigation may be applied to satisfy this measure as required in regulatory permits issued through the USACE and/or CDFW.

2. Findings. The Town Council finds that:
i. As outlined above, the measures recommended in the EIR to mitigate the creation of a substantial effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species from construction activities have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
ii. These measures will mitigate and reduce the impact on the candidate, sensitive, or special-status species created by construction and operation to a less than significant level during site preparation, before, during, and post-construction.

Mitigation of Cultural Resources Impacts

1. Facts. According to the EIR, project construction could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of archaeological resources under Section 15064.5.

However, this impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level if the project 878
11 applicant implements targeted archaeological monitoring and follow inadvertent discovery procedures. The mitigation measures are the following:
i. The archaeological survey did not include the proposed Export Pipeline System between Midway Road and Skyway due to a lack of landowner consent to access. Although not fully relocated, previous monitoring work along Skyway recorded a series of sparse lithic scatters demonstrating an elevation sensitivity for near-surface archaeological sites. Therefore, based on the lack of previous survey coverage and the number of previously documented archaeological sites in the vicinity, the Project alignment between Midway Road (on the west) and the intersection of Skyway and Neal Road (on the east) will be subject to a qualified professional archaeologist monitoring during the initial ground disturbance. The archaeologist will monitor the initial trenching of previously undisturbed deposits. However, the monitoring may vary based on the excavation rate, the materials excavated, and the absence/presence of artifacts and/or cultural features.
ii. Suppose unrecorded cultural resources are encountered during Project-related ground-disturbing activities, even without an onsite archaeological monitor. In that case, a qualified cultural resources specialist will be contacted to assess the potential significance of the finding. If an inadvertent discovery of cultural materials (e.g., unusual amounts of shell, animal bone, bottle glass, ceramics, structure remains) is made during Project-related construction activities, ground disturbances in the area of the find will be halted, and a qualified professional archaeologist will be notified of the discovery. The archaeologist will determine whether the resource is potentially significant per the CRHR and develop appropriate mitigation, such as avoidance or data recovery.

2. Findings. The Town Council finds that:
i. As outlined above, the measures recommended in the EIR to mitigate the creation of a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource under Section 15064.5 from construction activities have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
ii. These measures will mitigate and reduce the impact on the identified location’s archaeological resource created by construction and operation to a less than significant level at the initial and during the ground disturbance.

Mitigation of Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources 879
12 1. Facts. According to the EIR, the project construction may cause potential substantial adverse effects including risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, liquefaction, on or off-site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence or collapse, and directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource, site or unique geologic feature.

However, this impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level when the Town obtains the services of a qualified, licensed geotechnical engineer to prepare a design-level geotechnical report. The Town will review the geotechnical report with the geotechnical engineer to develop viable measures and require contractors to incorporate these measures into all construction plans and specifications.

To minimize Geologic Hazards, the Town will obtain the services of a qualified, licensed geotechnical engineer before construction to prepare a design-level geotechnical report with specific recommendations to address geologic hazards, seismic safety, and soil conditions during construction. The Town will review the geotechnical report with the geotechnical engineer to develop viable measures that will avoid or minimize risks associated with ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, unstable soils, and expansive soils during construction. The Town will require contractors to incorporate these measures into all construction plans and specifications.

If paleontological resources are inadvertently discovered during earth-moving activities, the construction crew will immediately cease work within a 50-foot radius of the find and notify the Town’s Project Manager. Construction work will be halted until the collection of fossil specimens has been completed. The collection and treatment actions will occur after recovery of specimens and once scientific value can be confirmed and documented. If fossils are found, treatment actions will include sampling for microfossils, conducting paleomagnetic analysis, identifying and preparing fossils, arranging for a repository, and preparing a final report.

2. Findings. The Town Council finds that:
i. As state above, the measures recommended in the EIR to mitigate the potential adverse effects of potential risk of loss, injury, or death involving geological hazards and potential destruction of a unique paleontological resource from construction activities have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
880
13 ii. These measures will mitigate and reduce the impact on the identified location’s geological, soil, and paleontological resources to a less than significant level before the construction and during earth-moving activities.

Mitigation of Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts

1. Facts. According to the EIR, the project construction could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and be located on a site under Government Code § 65962.5. In addition, the project construction may impair implementation or physically interfere with the emergency response or evacuation plan and expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. However, the Town can mitigate this impact to a less than significant level when the Town implements and requires contractors to incorporate the following measures (underlined and bolded text are updates made to the Final PEIR in response to agency comments):
i. The Town will require and enforce, through encroachment permit conditions and construction documents, that all vehicle traffic associated with Proposed Project-related activities will be confined to established roads, staging areas, and parking areas during construction. Additionally, maintenance or refueling of vehicles or equipment must occur in designated areas and/or secondary containment away from waterbodies.
ii. Before any work is to occur within 500 feet of the Cypress Lane Site, a parcelspecific contaminated soil management plan shall be prepared to address the known contamination at the site for submission to and approval by DTSC.

The plan shall include specific hazards and provisions for managing soils and groundwater at the Cypress Lane Site. The plan shall provide requirements for soil testing and characterization, soil disposal protocols, protocols governing the discovery of unknown contaminants, and soil management. The plan shall also include health and safety provisions, including training requirements for site workers who may be handling contaminated material, including the transport and disposal of contaminated material; chemical exposure hazards in soil, groundwater, or soil vapor that are known to be present at the property; and mitigation and monitoring measures that are protective of the site worker and public health and safety. These health and safety provisions shall be prepared to meet OSHA requirements, Title 29 of the CFR 1910.120 and CCR Title 8, Section 5192, and all applicable federal, state, and local regulations and agency ordinances related to the proposed management, transport, and disposal of contaminated media during the implementation of work and field 881
14 activities. The plan shall be signed and sealed by a Certified Industrial Hygienist licensed by the American Board of Industrial Hygiene. The DTSC or another applicable regulator, included as a requirement of construction/in construction documents, shall enforce the plan.
iii. The Proposed Project will require a Butte County encroachment permit to mitigate the adverse effect on emergency services. The standard Butte County encroachment permit requires that “at least one lane of any public road…shall be kept open for travel by the general public at all times.” Skyway consists of four lanes of traffic, two in each direction. Therefore, the Proposed Project will require a Town of Paradise encroachment permit for work within the Town limits. In addition, the Proposed Project will be held accountable to the Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update and policies included in the Butte County General Plan and the Town’s draft Safety Element (1994) and Hazardous Waste Management Element (1994).

Further, to minimize the potential for impeding emergency response vehicles at any time during construction, the Proposed Project will only close one lane of traffic at any given time. A two-lane closure might be required only for short instances for the relocation of large equipment, which will be a requirement stated in the construction documents issued by the Town.

Therefore, the three lanes of Skyway will always remain open. iv. To implement a rapid demobilization plan, the Proposed Project will be held accountable to the Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update and policies included in the Butte County General Plan and the Town’s draft Safety Element (1994) and Hazardous Waste Management Element (1994). Further, the contractor will be required to prepare a rapid demobilization plan covering the one Skyway Lane it occupies in the construction documents issued by the Town. Demobilization would require the contractor to cover any open trench with metal plates sufficiently strong to carry vehicle traffic, patch cut pavement, remove traffic barrier rails (if used), and move construction equipment completely clear of the road. During fire season, the contractor will be required to have sufficient metal plating on-site to immediately cover any open trench. Conversely, the length of open trenching will be limited to the amount of metal plating on-site. The contractor will also need sufficient cold-mix asphalt on site to temporarily patch any cut road surface. The plan will be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director and enforced by the Town.
v. The Proposed Project will be held accountable to the Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update and policies included in the Butte County General Plan and the Town’s draft Safety Element (1994) and Hazardous Waste Management Element (1994). Further, to minimize the potential for 882
15 impeding emergency response vehicles and at the direction of the Town during an evacuation, the contractor will be required to demobilize off of Skyway (Hazard Mitigation, Section (iv)), leaving all four lanes clear for the public traffic and emergency crews within four hours if no traffic barrier rails are being used and within eight hours if traffic barrier rails are being used.

Again, other than short instances where a two-lane closure might be required to relocate large equipment, three of the four lanes of Skyway will be continuously open during construction.
vi. During the final design, the Town will require that the engineering designer prepare a Traffic Management Plan that complies with Section 110.7 Traffic Control Plans of the Highway Design Manual (Caltrans 2020), which will be included in the construction documents and implemented by the construction contractor. The designer will submit the plan to the Town of Paradise, Butte County, and the City of Chico’s transportation and engineering departments for review and approval before it is included in the construction documents.

The plan will be prepared following professional engineering standards and will consist of, but not be limited to, the following requirements:
a) Schedule truck trips outside of peak traffic hours when feasible. b) Store all equipment and materials in designated staging areas. c) Use signage to guide vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians through and/or around the construction areas.
d) Install traffic control devices where traffic conditions warrant. e) Provide safe detours to reroute vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.
f) Encourage construction crews to park at staging areas to limit lane closures in the public right-of-way.
g) Consult with Butte Regional Transit before construction to coordinate bus stop relocations (as necessary).
h) Coordinate all construction activities with the emergency service providers in the area.
i) Stop all construction work during any period declared as a Red Flag Warning. The National Weather Service issues a Red Flag Warning for weather events that may produce an increased risk of fire danger.
j) Post notices and/or appropriate signage to notify the public of upcoming construction activities, including exact location, schedule, and duration. This will include alternative access routes 883
16 if a short-term full-lane closure will be required to transport equipment.
k) The Town of Paradise will enforce the Traffic Management Plan. vii. The project should incorporate fire prevention measures that require construction crews and equipment to avoid circumstances that could cause wildfire and that crews and staff have access to fire-prevention equipment onsite. Specific fire prevention measures include: fire extinguishers or other approved fire suppressants be available at all times, proper storage of flammable materials, safe cutting and welding practices, proper installation of temporary electrical equipment, and use of dust-collecting apparatus on power equipment.
viii. The Town and construction contractor must ensure that the public will receive adequate warning of construction activities and any dangerous conditions that might result from the use of fences, barriers, lights, flagging, guards, and signs. This will be incorporated into the Traffic Management Plan. ix. The construction Contractor will be advised before construction activities that the Town of Paradise is in a Wildland Fire Area and that fire hazard is EXTREME during the summer months.

2. Findings. The Town Council finds that:
i. The measures recommended in the EIR as outlined above to mitigate the potential adverse effects of the construction to the public or the environment through hazardous materials, interference with the emergency response or evacuation plan, and exposure of people or structures to wildland fires have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
ii. These measures will mitigate the impact of the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, interference with an emergency response or evacuation plan, and exposure to wildland fires to less than significant level through the implementation of mitigation plans set out above before and during construction activities and in the event of an emergency requiring evacuation.

Mitigation of Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts
884
17 1. Facts.. According to the EIR, the project construction could violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. The project could also substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces. The alteration would result in a substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site, create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. In flood hazard, tsunami or seiche zones risk the release of pollutants due to the project inundation. The project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

However, this impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level if the project contractor prepares and implements flood protection, stormwater management and treatment plan. These mitigation measures include:
i. The Town will require and enforce, through encroachment permit conditions and construction documents, that all vehicle traffic associated with Proposed Project-related activities will be confined to established roads, staging areas, and parking areas during construction. Additionally, maintenance or refueling of vehicles or equipment must occur in designated areas and/or secondary containment away from waterbodies.
ii. The Town will require in the construction agreement that the contractor prepare and implement a Proposed Project-specific Stormwater Management and Treatment Plan that addresses construction-related activities. The plan will include all the SWPPP and Small MS4 permits, as well as the Construction Best Management Practices (explained below). iii. Prior to initiation of ground- disturbing activities within 250 feet of vernal pools or 100 feet of other aquatic resources, construction Best Management Practices (“BMPs”) will be employed on-site to prevent degradation to on-site and off-site aquatic resources. Methods will include the use of appropriate measures to intercept and capture sediment prior to entering aquatic resources, as well as erosion control measures along the perimeter of all work areas to prevent the displacement of fill material. All BMPs will be in place prior to initiation of any construction activities and will remain until construction activities are completed. All erosion control methods will be maintained until all on-site soils are stabilized.
iv. Before construction, and as part of the specifications for the project included within the contractor agreement, the Town will require that its contractor prepare an Inadvertent Release Plan to address the inadvertent loss of inert 885
18 drilling fluids in the event of a frac-out during HDD for each waterbody crossing. This plan will include Best Management Practices, monitoring, and contingency procedures. It will be developed, approved by a qualified biologist hired by the Town, and implemented by the contractor during construction to avoid or counteract potential impacts on water quality, fish, or other aquatic wildlife resulting from turbidity changes from the fluids. v. Before construction, the Town will require the contractor to prepare and implement a Flood Protection Plan for the Proposed Project. The Flood Protection Plan must include evacuation routes in the event of a flood and will consist of the implementation of temporary flood barriers, such as sandbags, berms, or portable fence systems, to be set up around the perimeter of the construction work area in high flood hazard areas, as discussed in Section

3.10.1.5, Tsunami, Seiche and Flood Hazards.

2. Findings. The Town Council finds that:
i. The measures recommended in the EIR as outlined above to mitigate the potential alteration of drainage patterns, violation of any water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality which could result in a substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan. ii. These measures will mitigate the impact of construction activities that could alter existing drainage patterns, including the alteration of the course of a stream or river, risk of floods, and conflict with water quality control plans to less than significant levels through the implementation of Flood Protection, Stormwater Management, and Treatment Plans set out above before construction activities.

Mitigation of Noise Impacts

1. Facts. According to the EIR, the project construction could generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project above the standards established in the local general plan, noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies, and an excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels. However, these impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level if the Town and contractor minimize construction noise.

Before construction, the Town will incorporate the following measures into all construction plans and agreements to reduce noise levels during construction:
886
19 a) Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
b) Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from noise-sensitive receptors.
c) Use quiet air compressors and other stationary noise-generating equipment where appropriate technology exists and is feasible. d) Maintain and tune all equipment following the manufacturer's recommendations to minimize noise emission.
e) Install temporary construction-site sound barriers near noise sources.
f) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. g) Limit the use of public address systems.
h) Post construction dates and times, as well as the designated representative's name and phone number to be contacted for noiserelated concerns at the perimeter of the construction site. i) Comply with county, city and/or town noise policies applicable to the location's jurisdiction.

2. Findings. The Town Council finds that:
i. The mitigation measures recommended in the EIR outlined above to mitigate the noise levels from construction activities have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
ii. These measures will mitigate the impact of a substantial increase in the Project vicinity’s noise levels and potential excessive ground-borne vibrations to a less than significant level.

Mitigation of Public Services Impacts

1. Facts. According to the EIR, project construction could 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 Fire and Police protection, schools, and other public facilities. 887
20 However, these impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant when the Town implements and requires contractors to incorporate the Traffic Management Plan explained below:

During the final design, the Town will require that the engineering designer prepare a Traffic Management Plan that complies with Section 110.7 Traffic Control Plans of the Highway Design Manual (Caltrans 2020), which will be included in the construction documents and implemented by the construction contractor. The designer will submit the plan to the Town of Paradise, Butte County, and the City of Chico’s transportation and engineering departments for review and approval before it is included in the construction documents. The plan will be prepared following professional engineering standards and will consist of, but not be limited to, the following requirements:
a) Schedule truck trips outside of peak traffic hours when feasible.

Store all equipment and materials in designated staging areas. b) Use signage to guide vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians through and/or around the construction areas.
c) Install traffic control devices where traffic conditions warrant. d) Provide safe detours to reroute vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.
e) Encourage construction crews to park at staging areas to limit lane closures in the public right-of-way.
f) Consult with Butte Regional Transit before construction to coordinate bus stop relocations (as necessary).
g) Coordinate all construction activities with the emergency service providers in the area.
h) Stop all construction work during any period declared as a Red Flag Warning. The National Weather Service issues a Red Flag Warning for weather events that may produce an increased risk of fire danger.
i) Post notices and/or appropriate signage to notify the public of upcoming construction activities, including exact location, schedule, and duration. This will include alternative access routes if a short-term full-lane closure will be required to transport equipment.
j) The Town of Paradise will enforce the Traffic Management Plan. 888
21 2. Findings. The Town Council Finds that:
i. The mitigation measures recommended in the EIR stated above to mitigate the potential adverse effects on public or government facilities and performance have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
ii. These measures will mitigate the impact of construction-related activities to a less than significant level through the implementation of the Traffic Management Plan enforced by the Town.

Mitigation of Transportation Impacts

1. Facts. According to the EIR, the project construction could result in a conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. In addition, the project may result in inadequate emergency access. However, these impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant when the Town implements and requires contractors to incorporate the Traffic Management Plan explained below:

During the final design, the Town will require that the engineering designer prepare a Traffic Management Plan that complies with Section 110.7 Traffic Control Plans of the Highway Design Manual (Caltrans 2020), which will be included in the construction documents and implemented by the construction contractor. The designer will submit the plan to the Town of Paradise, Butte County, and the City of Chico’s transportation and engineering departments for review and approval before it is included in the construction documents. The plan will be prepared following professional engineering standards and will consist of, but not be limited to, the following requirements:
a) Schedule truck trips outside of peak traffic hours when feasible.

Store all equipment and materials in designated staging areas. b) Use signage to guide vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians through and/or around the construction areas.
c) Install traffic control devices where traffic conditions warrant. d) Provide safe detours to reroute vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.
e) Encourage construction crews to park at staging areas to limit lane closures in the public right-of-way.
889
22 f) Consult with Butte Regional Transit before construction to coordinate bus stop relocations (as necessary).
g) Coordinate all construction activities with the emergency service providers in the area.
h) Stop all construction work during any period declared as a Red Flag Warning. The National Weather Service issues a Red Flag Warning for weather events that may produce an increased risk of fire danger.
i) Post notices and/or appropriate signage to notify the public of upcoming construction activities, including exact location, schedule, and duration. This will include alternative access routes if a short-term full-lane closure will be required to transport equipment.
j) The Town of Paradise will enforce the Traffic Management Plan.

2. Findings. The Town Council Finds that:
i. The mitigation measures recommended in the EIR stated above to mitigate the potential conflict with program, ordinance, or policy addressing transit systems and adverse effects on emergency access have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
ii. These measures will mitigate the impact of construction-related activities to a less than significant level through the implementation of the Traffic Management Plan enforced by the Town.

Mitigation of Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts

1. Facts According to the EIR, the project construction could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of tribal cultural resources, defined in PRC Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape geographically defined in size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k); or
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant according to the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1. In 890
23 applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1, the lead agency will consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

However, these impacts can be mitigated to less than significant level when the Town coordinates efforts with the Konkow Valley Band of Maidu, and Mechoopda Indian Tribe explained below:
i. During the final design, the Town will continue to consult and coordinate with the Konkow Valley Band of Maidu and Mechoopda Indian Tribe to identify sensitive areas to be protected during construction work and appropriate methods to protect those areas.
ii. Before construction, the Town will coordinate with the Konkow Valley Band of Maidu and Mechoopda Indian Tribe in identifying a Tribal Cultural Monitor, as deemed necessary by either/both Tribes, to be present during ground disturbance work within areas designated as sensitive for tribal cultural resources.

2. Findings. The Town Council Finds that:
i. The mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, as outlined above, to mitigate the potential adverse effect on the significance of trial cultural resources have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan. ii. These measures will mitigate the impact of construction-related activities to a less than significant level through the Town’s coordination with Konkow Valley Band of Maidu and Mechoopda Indian Tribe during the final design of the project, before and during construction activities.

Mitigation of Utilities and Service Systems Impacts

1. Facts. According to the EIR, the project construction could require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities which could result in significant environmental effects. However, these impacts can be mitigated to less than significant when the Town prepares and implement a Utility conflict and coordination plan.

During the final design, to minimize disruptions to utility services, the Town will prepare a Utility Conflict and Coordination Plan that identifies outages that could affect residents and businesses, including fiber-optic/communications, water, power, and gas. As part of that plan, the public and stakeholders will be notified 891
24 by signage and on the Town’s website of any potential service interruptions at least two weeks before construction work.

2. Findings. The Town Council Finds that:
i. As stated above, the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR to mitigate the potential adverse effect on the environment through the relocation or construction of utilities and service systems have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
ii. These measures will mitigate the impact of construction-related activities to a less than significant level through the Town’s preparation and implementation of a utility coordination plan during the final project’s final design.

Mitigation of Wildfire Impacts

1. Facts. According to the EIR, the project construction could substantially impair an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan and exacerbate wildfire risks due to slopes, prevailing winds, and other factors, thereby exposing project occupants to pollutant concentrations from or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. In addition, the project may require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts on the environment. This could also expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides resulting from runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

As explained in the MMRP, mitigation measures include:
i. The Proposed Project will require a Butte County encroachment permit to mitigate the adverse effect on emergency services. The standard Butte County encroachment permit requires that “at least one lane of any public road…shall be kept open for travel by the general public at all times.” Skyway consists of four lanes of traffic, two in each direction. Therefore, the Proposed Project will require a Town of Paradise encroachment permit for work within the Town limits. In addition, the Proposed Project will be held accountable to the Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update and policies included in the Butte County General Plan and the Town’s draft Safety Element (1994) and Hazardous Waste Management Element (1994). Further, to minimize the potential for impeding emergency response vehicles at any time during construction, the Proposed Project will only close one lane of traffic at any given time. A two-lane closure might 892
25 be required only for short instances for the relocation of large equipment, which will be a requirement stated in the construction documents issued by the Town. Therefore, the three lanes of Skyway will always remain open. ii. To implement a rapid demobilization plan, the Proposed Project will be held accountable to the Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update and policies included in the Butte County General Plan and the Town’s draft Safety Element (1994) and Hazardous Waste Management Element (1994). Further, the contractor will be required to prepare a rapid demobilization plan covering the one Skyway Lane it occupies in the construction documents issued by the Town. Demobilization would require the contractor to cover any open trench with metal plates sufficiently strong to carry vehicle traffic, patch cut pavement, remove traffic barrier rails (if used), and move construction equipment completely clear of the road.

During fire season, the contractor will be required to have sufficient metal plating on-site to immediately cover any open trench. Conversely, the length of open trenching will be limited to the amount of metal plating onsite. The contractor will also need sufficient cold-mix asphalt on site to temporarily patch any cut road surface. The plan will be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director and enforced by the Town. iii. The Proposed Project will be held accountable to the Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update and policies included in the Butte County General Plan and the Town’s draft Safety Element (1994) and Hazardous Waste Management Element (1994). Further, to minimize the potential for impeding emergency response vehicles and at the direction of the Town during an evacuation, the contractor will be required to demobilize off Skyway (Hazard Mitigation, Section (iv)), leaving all four lanes clear for the public traffic and emergency crews within four hours if no traffic barrier rails are being used and within eight hours if traffic barrier rails are being used. Again, other than short instances where a two-lane closure might be required to relocate large equipment, three of the four lanes of Skyway will be continuously open during construction.
iv. During the final design, the Town will require that the engineering designer prepare a Traffic Management Plan that complies with Section 110.7 Traffic Control Plans of the Highway Design Manual (Caltrans 2020), which will be included in the construction documents and implemented by the construction contractor. The designer will submit the plan to the Town of Paradise, Butte County, and the City of Chico’s transportation and engineering departments for review and approval before it is included in the construction documents. The plan will be prepared following professional engineering standards and will consist of, but not be limited to, the following requirements:
893
26 l) Schedule truck trips outside of peak traffic hours when feasible. m) Store all equipment and materials in designated staging areas. n) Use signage to guide vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians through and/or around the construction areas.
o) Install traffic control devices where traffic conditions warrant. p) Provide safe detours to reroute vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.
q) Encourage construction crews to park at staging areas to limit lane closures in the public right-of-way.
r) Consult with Butte Regional Transit before construction to coordinate bus stop relocations (as necessary).
s) Coordinate all construction activities with the emergency service providers in the area.
t) Stop all construction work during any period declared as a Red Flag Warning. The National Weather Service issues a Red Flag Warning for weather events that may produce an increased risk of fire danger.
u) Post notices and/or appropriate signage to notify the public of upcoming construction activities, including exact location, schedule, and duration. This will include alternative access routes if a short-term full-lane closure will be required to transport equipment.
v) The Town of Paradise will enforce the Traffic Management Plan. v. The Town will require and enforce, through encroachment permit conditions and construction documents, that all vehicle traffic associated with Proposed Project-related activities will be confined to established roads, staging areas, and parking areas during construction. Additionally, maintenance or refueling of vehicles or equipment must occur in designated areas and/or secondary containment away from waterbodies. vi. The project should incorporate fire prevention measures that require construction crews and equipment to avoid circumstances that could cause wildfire and that crews and staff have access to fire-prevention equipment onsite. Specific fire prevention measures include: fire extinguishers or other approved fire suppressants be available at all times, proper storage of flammable materials, safe cutting and welding practices, proper installation of temporary electrical equipment, and use of dust-collecting apparatus on power equipment.
894
27 vii. The Town and construction contractor must ensure that the public will receive adequate warning of construction activities and any dangerous conditions that might result from the use of fences, barriers, lights, flagging, guards, and signs. This will be incorporated into the Traffic Management Plan.
viii. The construction Contractor will be advised before construction activities that the Town of Paradise is in a Wildland Fire Area and that fire hazard is EXTREME during the summer months.
ix. The Town will require in the construction agreement that the contractor prepare and implement a Proposed Project-specific Stormwater Management and Treatment Plan that addresses construction-related activities. The plan will include all the SWPPP and Small MS4 permits, as well as the Construction Best Management Practices (explained below).

Prior to initiation of ground- disturbing activities within 250 feet of vernal pools or 100 feet of other aquatic resources, construction Best Management Practices (“BMPs”) will be employed on-site to prevent degradation to onsite and off-site aquatic resources. Methods will include the use of appropriate measures to intercept and capture sediment prior to entering aquatic resources, as well as erosion control measures along the perimeter of all work areas to prevent the displacement of fill material. All BMPs will be in place prior to initiation of any construction activities and will remain until construction activities are completed. All erosion control methods will be maintained until all on-site soils are stabilized.
x. Before construction, the Town will require the contractor to prepare and implement a Flood Protection Plan for the Proposed Project. The Flood Protection Plan must include evacuation routes in the event of a flood and will consist of the implementation of temporary flood barriers, such as sandbags, berms, or portable fence systems, to be set up around the perimeter of the construction work area in high flood hazard areas, as discussed in Section 3.10.1.5, Tsunami, Seiche and Flood Hazards. xi. To minimize Geologic Hazards, the Town will obtain the services of a qualified, licensed geotechnical engineer before construction to prepare a design-level geotechnical report with specific recommendations to address geologic hazards, seismic safety, and soil conditions during construction.

The Town will review the geotechnical report with the geotechnical engineer to develop viable measures that will avoid or minimize risks associated with ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, unstable soils, and expansive soils during construction. The Town will require contractors to incorporate these measures into all construction plans and specifications. 895
28 2. Findings. The Town Council Finds that:
i. As outlined above, the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR to mitigate the potential adverse effect of the Project Construction on an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan and the risks associated with wildfires through the installation or maintenance of associate structures have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution, project development guidelines, and the Monitoring and Reporting Plan. ii. These measures will mitigate the impact of construction-related activities on emergency response plans and wildfire risks to a less than significant level.
896

Paradise Sewer Project
Mitigation, Monitoring and
Reporting Program
Paradise, CA
November 4, 2022
897
Page Intentionally Blank
898
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The Town of Paradise, California (Town), is the lead agency for the Paradise Sewer Project under CEQA.

The City of Chico (City), Butte Local Agency Formation Commission (Butte LAFCo), Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Butte County (County), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) are considered Responsible Agencies under CEQA based on their discretionary approval over aspects of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would be located in Paradise, Chico and unincorporated areas in Butte County, California.

The Town is proposing to construct, operate, and maintain a new sewer collection system within the Town limits, with an export pipeline from the Town to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). The Proposed Project would allow for the replacement of individual septic systems within the Town’s sewer service area that are managed, owned, and maintained by individual property owners. The abandonment of such individual septic systems is not within the scope of this Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR).

This Proposed Project further includes the provision of wastewater treatment services from the City to the Town, to be approved by Butte LAFCo.

Specifically, the Proposed Project would consist of three primary components. The first two components are analyzed at a project level in the PEIR because sufficient information is available regarding the characteristics, timing, and locations of these proposed facilities. The third component is analyzed at a programmatic level. The three components include the following:
• Core Collection System: The Core Collection System would consist of pipelines and 28 small pump stations (also referred to as lift stations) to serve approximately 1,500 individual parcels within the Town’s core sewer service area.
• Export Pipeline System: The 18-mile Export Pipeline System is proposed to convey wastewater from the Core Collection System to the Chico WPCP.
• Extended Collection System: The Extended Collection System would be an extension of the Core Collection System that would allow parcels within the Town limits to connect to the sewer system up to the capacity of the system infrastructure and the Town's allocation within the Chico WPCP capacity.

In order to approve these activities for the construction and operation of the Proposed Project, the Town has completed a PEIR in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This environmental review process focuses on the potential impacts caused by the Proposed Project on local resources.

In accordance with Section 21083, Public Resources Code (CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 [a]), “a public agency shall adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it has required and the measures it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects. A public agency may delegate reporting or monitoring responsibilities to another public agency or to a private entity which accepts the delegation; however, until mitigation measures have been completed, the lead agency remains responsible for ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures occurs in accordance with the program” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 (a)).

This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) addresses the requirement. Unless noted otherwise, the Town would be the enforcing entity for all mitigation requirements, including but not limited to contractors, are responsible for implementation. Measures identified as the responsibility of contractors would be included as requirements in Town contracting agreements and construction specs. 899
Page Intentionally Blank
900
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: 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 CDFW or USFWS:

Special-Status Plant Species
MM-BIO-1: Minimize Disturbance Footprint. During site preparation for any segment of the Core Collection System, Export Pipeline System, or Extended Collection System, ground disturbance and vegetation clearing footprints, including along construction access routes or at temporary work areas, will be reduced to the smallest area feasible. Prior to any ground disturbance, a qualified biologist hired by the Town will identify areas to be avoided during construction activities; these areas will be fenced and/or flagged as close to construction limits as feasible. This mitigation measure is coordinated with MM-BIO-2 but applies to all biological resources.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
A qualified biologist will identify areas to be
avoided during construction activities.

During site preparation, prior to
construction.

MM-BIO-2: Special-status Plant Surveys. Prior to initiating proposed ground disturbance or vegetation clearing, including along construction access routes or at temporary work areas, a qualified botanist will perform focused surveys to determine the presence or absence of special-status plant species with potential to occur in and adjacent to (within a radius of 100 feet, as prescribed by CDFW) proposed disturbance areas. These surveys will be conducted in accordance with CDFW Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (CDFW 2018a), which requires rare plant surveys be conducted at the proper time of year when rare or endangered species are both evident and identifiable. Surveys will be scheduled to coincide with known flowering periods, and/or during appropriate developmental periods that are necessary to identify the plant species of concern. If special-status plants are identified during surveys, then MM-BIO-3 will be implemented.

A qualified botanist will perform focused
surveys to determine the presence or absence
of special-status plant species with potential to
occur in and adjacent to proposed disturbance
areas. These surveys will be conducted in
accordance with CDFW Protocols for Surveying
and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status
Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural
Communities/Town, CDFW
Prior to ground disturbance or
vegetation clearing.

MM-BIO-3: Special-status Plant Avoidance. If any special-status plant species are found within 100 feet of ground disturbance or vegetation clearing areas, including construction access routes or temporary work areas, during MM-BIO-2, the following will be implemented:
• Any special-status plant species that are identified within 100 feet of proposed ground disturbance or vegetation clearing areas, including construction access routes or temporary work areas, but are not proposed to be disturbed (that is, the area doesn’t need to be cleared for construction), will be protected by flagging, signage, orange plastic fence, and/or silt fence, as appropriate based on site conditions, to limit the effects of activities and material stockpiles on special-status plant species. • If activities could result in the loss of greater than 10 percent of a population identified during surveys or occupied habitat for a special-status plant species, a mitigation plan will be developed and implemented by a qualified biologist for the Town that will include a program to transplant, salvage, cultivate, and reestablish the species at suitable sites (if feasible); means and methods to propagate affected specialstatus plants through vegetative or reproductive means (for example, harvesting of seed or seed bank through topsoil collection, salvaging and transplanting or collecting of cuttings), as appropriate for the species, and transplant at suitable receiving sites as close to the existing population as possible. The plan will be approved by CDFW and any other agencies with jurisdiction over the species found to be present prior to implementation of the plan and before initiation of any construction related activities. Propagation and transplantation will occur prior to initiation of the activity. The receiving location will be evaluated and chosen based on similarity to conditions at the transplant source location. Site conditions to consider when choosing a receiving site will include aspect, substrate, hydrology, associated species, and canopy cover.

The transplanted plants will be monitored by a qualified biologist for the Town for at least 1 year following transplantation. As part of the mitigation plan, a monitoring plan will be developed and approved by CDFW with propagation goals tailored to the species that are being transplanted. If propagation goals are not met after 1 year following transplantation, then adaptive management strategies will be developed in coordination with CDFW to achieve those goals.
• The actual level of mitigation may vary depending on the sensitivity of the species, its prevalence in the area, the location of the occurrence, and the current state of knowledge about overall population trends and threats to its survival; however, at a minimum, the species and habitat will be replaced at a 1:1 ratio (individuals or acreage of occupied habitat). Ratios will be developed in coordination with and approved by CDFW.

A mitigation plan will be developed and
implemented by a qualified biologist for the
Town or designated Contractor. The plan will
be approved by CDFW and any other agencies
with jurisdiction over the species found to be
present prior to implementation of the plan and
before initiation of any construction related
activities. As part of the mitigation plan, a
monitoring plan will be developed and approved
by CDFW. If propagation goals are not met
after 1 year following transplantation, then
adaptive management strategies will be
developed in coordination with CDFW to
achieve those goals/CDFW and other
jurisdictional agencies./Town, CDFW
Prior to ground disturbance or
vegetation clearing; during
construction activities; and after 1
year of initiation of a mitigation
plan.
901
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
MM-BIO-4: Biological Monitoring and Worker Environmental Awareness Training. A qualified biologist will monitor construction activities that could potentially cause significant impacts on sensitive biological resources.

The amount and duration of monitoring will depend on the activity and will be determined by a qualified biologist for the Town. Monitoring will be required at any location where special status species have been identified within 100 feet of vegetation clearing area. In addition, a qualified biologist will be retained by the Town to conduct mandatory contractor/worker awareness training for construction personnel to brief them on the identified location of sensitive biological resources, including how to identify species (visual and auditory) most likely to be present, the need to avoid impacts on biological resources (e.g., plants, wildlife, and jurisdictional waters), and on the penalties for not complying with biological mitigation requirements. If new construction personnel are added to the Project, the contractor will ensure that they receive the mandatory training before starting work. This mandatory training will be included in all contractor construction specs and required by contract. This measure will apply to any biological resources for which complete avoidance cannot be attained through MM-BIO-1 or resourcespecific measures.

A qualified biologist will monitor construction
activities that could potentially cause significant
impacts on sensitive biological resources.

A qualified biologist will conduct mandatory
contractor/worker awareness training for
construction personnel. If new construction
personnel are added to the Project, the
Contractor will ensure that they receive the
mandatory training before starting work.

During construction activities.

MM-BIO-5: Restoration of Temporarily Disturbed Areas and Invasive Weed Control. Following construction of the Core Collection System, Export Pipeline System, or Extended Collection System, all exposed and/or disturbed areas resulting from ground disturbing activities, including construction access routes or temporary work areas, will be returned to their original contour and grade, and restored using locally native grass and forb seeds, plugs, or a mix of the two. Areas will be seeded with species appropriate to their topographical and hydrological character and covered with broadcast straw and/or jute netted, as appropriate for specific habitat type. For example, temporarily disturbed wetlands will be seeded with native hydrophytic species typical to the region, whereas upland areas will be seeded with an upland grass and forb mix. Several invasive and noxious weed species are known to occur in the study area, and 27 plant species classified by the California Invasive Plant Council as invasive were identified in the study area during field studies (Appendix G). In order to avoid the spread of invasive plant species in the study area, native species will be used for reseeding, and the Proposed Project will not allow any use of species listed as noxious weeds. Further, precautions will be taken to avoid the spread of invasive plant species. These include the inspection and cleaning of construction equipment and implementation of CDFW-approved eradication strategies should an invasion occur. This measure is focused on habitat, but applies to all biological resources (e.g., special status species dependent on specific habitat).

The construction contractor will be responsible
for implementation.

Post-construction.

Impact BIO-1: 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 CDFW
or USFWS: Vernal Pool Crustaceans
MM-BIO-1: Minimize Disturbance Footprint. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-6: No Net Loss of Aquatic Resources. No net loss of aquatic resources would be achieved through impact avoidance, minimization, which are both covered under MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-4, and/or compensatory mitigation. Mitigation for permanent impacts on aquatic resources will be provided at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Mitigation will be achieved through onsite restoration, in-lieu fee payment, or purchase of mitigation credits at a USACE-, USFWS-, and/or CDFW-approved mitigation bank at the expense of the Town. Mitigation, as required in regulatory permits issued through CDFW, USACE, USFWS, and/or the RWQCB will be applied to satisfy this measure.

Mitigation will be achieved through onsite
restoration, in-lieu fee payment, or purchase of
mitigation credits at a USACE-, USFWS-,
and/or CDFW-approved mitigation bank at the
expense of the Town. Mitigation, as required in
regulatory permits issued through CDFW,
USACE, USFWS, and/or the RWQCB will be
applied to satisfy this measure./Town, CDFW,

USACE, USFWS, RWQCB
During construction activities and
post-construction.

MM-BIO-7: Sensitive Community Fencing. If sensitive communities occur within 100 feet (250 feet for vernal pools as mandated by USFWS) of proposed ground disturbing activities, including construction access routes and temporary work areas, with no pre-existing barrier between them and the proposed ground disturbance, protective fencing, such as silt fencing, will be installed between habitats that are to be avoided and the construction limits to prevent accidental disturbance and to protect water quality during construction.

The construction contractor will be responsible
for implementation of this mitigation in
accordance with USFWS standards.

Prior to construction activities.

MM-BIO-8: Dry Work Areas. Ground disturbing activities within 100 feet (250 feet for vernal pools) of aquatic resources will coincide with the driest time of year and will avoid occurring within 72 hours (before or after) a rain event, if feasible.

The construction contractor will be responsible
for implementation of this mitigation.

At the driest time of year and will
avoid occurring within 72 hours
(before or after) a rain event, if
feasible.
902
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Impact BIO-1: 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 CDFW
or USFWS: Valley Elderberry Longhorn
Beetle
MM-BIO-1. Minimize Disturbance Footprint. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-9: Mapping of Elderberry Shrubs and USFWS Section 7 Consultation. If Proposed Project impacts, including along construction access routes and temporary work areas, are to take place within 165 feet of a riparian corridor where elderberry shrubs are known to be present, then a full inventory of elderberry shrubs within 165 feet of the proposed disturbance, including an assessment of whether valley elderberry longhorn beetle exit holes are present, will be conducted pursuant to the Framework for Assessing Impacts to the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle. Based on the inventory findings, the Town and USFWS will coordinate to determine whether formal consultation is required for the Project. If formal consultation is deemed required, results of the inventory will be submitted by the Town in a Biological Assessment to USFWS. USFWS will review proposed findings and mitigation, and respond in a Biological Opinion, which will finalize elderberry mitigation that will be required of the Town for the Proposed Project.

An inventory of elderberry shrubs will be
conducted by a qualified biologist. The Town
and USFWS will coordinate to determine
whether formal consultation is required for the
Project. If formal consultation is deemed
required, results of the inventory will be
submitted by the Town in a Biological
Assessment to USFWS. USFWS will review
proposed findings and mitigation, and respond
in a Biological Opinion, which will finalize
elderberry mitigation that will be required of the
Town for the Proposed Project./Town, USFWS
Prior to ground disturbance and
vegetation clearing.

MM-BIO-10: No Net Loss of Elderberry Shrubs. Elderberry shrubs that would be directly impacted by the Proposed Project will be transplanted to a new suitable location. In addition, two credits would be purchased at a USFWS-approved bank for each shrub ( 2:1 ratio). Mitigation as required in regulatory permits issued through USFWS may be applied to satisfy this measure.

A qualified will be on site for the duration of
transplanting activities The Town will obtain
regulatory permits issued through
USFWS./Town, USFWS
Prior to ground disturbance and
vegetation clearing.

MM-BIO-11: Elderberry Transplanting. Elderberry shrubs would be transplanted outside the flight season of the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (March to July) and follow the most current version of the American National Standards Institute A300 (Part 6) guidelines for transplanting (http://www.tcia.org/). Exit-hole surveys would be completed immediately before transplanting. The number of exit holes found, GPS location of the plant to be relocated, and the GPS location of where the plant is transplanted would be reported to USFWS. A qualified biologist hired by the Town will be on site for the duration of transplanting activities to ensure compliance with avoidance and minimization measures and other conservation measures. The transplanted shrubs will be monitored by a qualified biologist during one growth season following transplant to confirm shrub survival. If the shrub(s) are deemed alive, no further monitoring or action would be necessary. If the shrub(s) are deemed dead, an additional one credit per shrub would be purchased by the Town from a USFWS-approved bank for valley elderberry longhorn beetle.

A qualified biologist will be on site for the
duration of transplanting activities to ensure
compliance with avoidance and minimization
measures and other conservation measures.

The transplanted shrubs will be monitored by a
qualified biologist during one growth season
following transplant to confirm shrub
survival./Town, USFWS
Elderberry shrubs would be
transplanted outside the flight
season of the valley elderberry
longhorn beetle (March to July).

MM-BIO-12: MM-BIO-12: Avoidance Areas. Activities that may indirectly damage or kill an elderberry shrub (trenching, paving, etc.) will require an avoidance area of at least 20 feet from a shrub’s drip line, as appropriate, depending on the type of activity. All activities that could occur within 165 feet of an elderberry shrub will also be conducted outside of the flight season of the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (March to July).

The construction contractor will be responsible
for implementation of this mitigation.

All activities that could occur
within 165 feet of an elderberry
shrub will also be conducted
outside of the flight season of the
valley elderberry longhorn beetle
(March to July).

MM-BIO-13: Chemical Use. Herbicides will not be used within the drip line of the shrub. Insecticides will not be used within 98 feet (30 meters, as required by USFWS) of an elderberry shrub. If deemed necessary, all chemicals will be applied using a backpack sprayer or similar direct application method.

The construction contractor will be responsible
for implementation of this mitigation.

Prior to and during construction.

MM-BIO-14: Mowing. Mechanical weed removal within the drip line of the shrub would be limited to the season when adult- valley elderberry longhorn beetles are not active (August to February) and will be completed so as to not damage an elderberry shrub.

The construction contractor will be responsible
for the implementation of this mitigation.

Implementation of this mitigation
will be limited to the season when
adult- valley elderberry longhorn
beetles are not active (August to
February).

Impact BIO-1: 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 CDFW
or USFWS: Special-Status Fishes
MM-BIO-15: Frac-Out-Plan. Prior to construction, and as part of the specifications for the project included within the contractor agreement, the Town will require that its contractor prepare an Inadvertent Release Plan to address inadvertent loss of inert drilling fluids in the event of a frac-out during HDD for each waterbody crossing.

This plan will include Best Management Practices, monitoring, and contingency procedures, and will be developed, approved by a qualified biologist hired by the Town, and implemented by the contractor during construction to avoid or counteract potential impacts on water quality, fish, or other aquatic wildlife resulting from turbidity changes from the fluids.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
The Town will require that its contractor prepare
an Inadvertent Release Plan to address
inadvertent loss of inert drilling fluids in the
event of a frac-out during HDD for each
waterbody crossing./Town, RWQCB, CDFW,
USFWS
Prior to construction.
903
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Impact BIO-1: 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 CDFW
or USFWS: Special-status Amphibians
and Reptiles
MM-BIO-1: Minimize Disturbance Footprint. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-6: No Net Loss of Aquatic Resources. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-7: Sensitive Community Fencing. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-8: Dry Work Areas. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-16: Western Pond Turtle Visual Encounter Surveys. A preconstruction survey for western pond turtle would be conducted by a qualified biologist within 24 hours prior to the onset of any ground disturbing activities that would occur within 350 feet of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of a creek or stream. If juvenile or adult turtles are found within the survey area, they would be moved by a qualified and CDFW-permitted biologist hired by the Town at least 500 feet away from the proposed disturbance area to a location with similar habitat. If a turtle nest is found within the survey area, construction activities would not take place within 100 feet of the nest until the turtles have hatched or the eggs have been moved to an appropriate location. Any egg relocation would be conducted by a qualified and CDFW-permitted biologist in coordination with CDFW.

A preconstruction survey for western pond
turtle would be conducted by a qualified
biologist./Town, CDFW
Within 24 hours prior to the onset
of any ground disturbing activities
that would occur within 350 feet of
the Ordinary High Water Mark
(OHWM) of a creek or stream.

MM-BIO-17: Foothill Yellow-legged Frog Surveys. Within 3-5 days prior to working within 300 feet radius of the OHWM of a creek or stream within the foothill yellow-legged frog range, per CDFW guidelines, a qualified and CDFW-permitted biologist will survey the Proposed Project site for foothill yellow-legged frogs (adults, subadults, tadpoles or egg masses), including construction access routes and at least 500 feet upstream and downstream (CDFW 2018b). Although unlikely, if the Project activities are expected to result in effects extending beyond 500 feet downstream (e.g., heavy sedimentation that could bury egg masses or tadpole rearing sites), the survey area will be expanded to encompass the expected affected area. If surface water is present during the work period, a qualified biologist hired by the Town will inspect the work area daily for foothill yellow-legged frogs before work begins and during construction.

A qualified and CDFW-permitted biologist will
survey the Proposed Project site for foothill
yellow-legged frogs. If surface water is present
during the work period, a qualified biologist
hired by the Town will inspect the work area
daily for foothill yellow-legged frogs before work
begins and during construction./Town, CDFW
Within 3-5 days prior to working
within 300 feet radius of the
OHWM of a creek or stream within
the foothill yellow-legged frog
range.

If surface water is present during
the work period, a qualified
biologist hired by the Town will
inspect the work area daily for
foothill yellow-legged frogs before
work begins and during
construction.

MM-BIO-18: California Red-legged Frog Surveys. Within 3-5 days prior to working within 300 feet of the OHWM of a creek or within 300 feet of fresh emergent wetland habitat, a qualified and CDFW-permitted biologist will conduct a visual encounter survey of the Proposed Project site for California red-legged frogs (adults, subadults, tadpoles or egg masses).

A qualified and CDFW-permitted biologist will
conduct a visual encounter survey of the
Proposed Project site for California red-legged
frogs./Town, CDFW
Within 3-5 days prior to working
within 300 feet of the OHWM of a
creek or within 300 feet of fresh
emergent wetland habitat.

MM-BIO-19: Conduct Construction Activities during the Active Period for Giant Garter Snakes. During biological monitoring (MM-BIO-4), the biologist will identify any suitable aquatic or upland habitat that may be used by giant garter snake within or adjacent to areas where ground disturbing and vegetation clearing activities would occur. All construction activity within 200 feet of suitable giant garter snake aquatic (generally defined as sloughs, irrigation ditches, creeks or slow-moving streams) or upland habitat (defined as grasslands or disturbed areas within 200 feet of an aquatic feature suitable for a giant garter snake) will be conducted during the snake’s active period (May 1 through October 1) in order to minimize the risk that the snakes will be underground and more susceptible to injury or death from ground disturbing activities.

A qualified biologist will be responsible for
identifying any suitable aquatic or upland
habitat that may be used by giant garter
snake./Town, CDFW
During biological monitoring, prior
to ground disturbance and
vegetation clearing.

All construction activity within 200
feet of suitable giant garter snake
aquatic will be conducted during
the snake’s active period (May 1
through October 1)
MM-BIO-20: Minimize Potential Effects on Giant Garter Snake Habitat. Staging areas will be located more than 200 feet from any suitable giant garter snake aquatic or upland habitat as identified during monitoring by the biologist, or the area will be fenced with exclusion fencing prior to the start of construction. Vegetation clearing within 200 feet of the banks of suitable giant garter snake aquatic habitat will be limited to the minimum area necessary. The movement of heavy equipment within 200 feet of the banks of suitable giant garter snake aquatic habitat will be confined to designated haul routes to minimize habitat disturbance.

Monitoring will be performed by a qualified
biologist. The construction contractor will be
responsible for implementation of the
mitigation.

Prior to construction, during
biological monitoring.
904
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Impact BIO-1: 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 CDFW
or USFWS: MBTA and FGC-Protected
Birds and Raptors
MM-BIO-1: Minimize Disturbance Footprint. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-21: MBTA- and FGC-Protected Bird and Raptor Surveys. To the extent feasible, tree and vegetation clearing will be conducted outside the migratory bird nesting season (March 1 through August 31) in areas where the Town’s biologist identifies potential nesting trees. However, if clearing and/or construction activities need to occur during the migratory bird nesting season in these locations, then preconstruction surveys to identify active migratory bird and/or raptor nests would be conducted by a qualified biologist within 14 calendar days prior to construction initiation. Focused surveys must be performed by a qualified biologist for the purposes of determining presence or absence of active nest sites within the proposed impact area, including construction access routes with a 500-foot buffer, where feasible.

The Town’s biologist would be responsible for
surveys and identifying potential nesting
trees./Town, CDFW
To the extent feasible, tree and
vegetation clearing will be
conducted outside the migratory
bird nesting season (March 1
through August 31). However, if
clearing and/or construction
activities need to occur during the
migratory bird nesting season in
these locations, then
preconstruction surveys to identify
active migratory bird and/or raptor
nests would be conducted by a
qualified biologist within 14
calendar days prior to construction
initiation.

MM-BIO-22: Protocol Swainson’s Hawk Surveys. In the year that construction of the Proposed Project is planned to be initiated, a qualified biologist will conduct protocol surveys for Swainson’s hawk in and within 0.5- mile of all suitable habitat for the species in the Proposed Project footprint. These surveys will follow the protocol outlined in the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee’s Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley (CDFW 2000). If any active Swainson’s hawk nests are found, the biologist will determine an appropriately sized buffer around the nest in which construction activities will not be allowed to commence until which time the nest has been determined by the biologist to have reached the end of its cycle (fledged or failed). The size of the buffer will initially be 0.25-mile per CDFW standard requirements but may be reduced in certain circumstances based on the opinion of the biologist regarding observed sensitivity of the hawks to disturbance, visual screens between the nest and disturbance, and other factors.

A qualified biologist will conduct protocol
surveys for Swainson’s hawk./Town, CDFW
In the year that construction of the
Proposed Project is planned to be
initiated.

MM-BIO-23: Nest Avoidance. If active nests of any MBTA- and FGC-protected bird species are identified within the survey areas, a no-disturbance buffer would be established for all active nest sites prior to commencement of any Proposed Project construction activities to avoid construction or access-related disturbances to migratory bird nesting activities. A no disturbance buffer is a zone in which Proposed Project-related activities (that is, vegetation removal, earth moving, noise generation, and construction) cannot occur. The size of the no disturbance buffers would be determined by a qualified biologist based on the species, activities proposed near the nest, and topographic and other visual barriers.

The construction contractor will be responsible
for implementation of the mitigation. The size of
the no disturbance buffers would be determined
by a qualified biologist./Town, CDFW
Prior to construction activities.
905
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Impact BIO-1: 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 CDFW
or USFWS: Special-Status Bats
MM-BIO-1. Minimize Disturbance Footprint. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-24: Bat Surveys. Prior to implementation of Proposed Project-related activities in undisturbed portions of the Proposed Project site and in and around buildings or other human-made structures with recesses where bats could potentially roost, a qualified biologist will conduct a daytime site reconnaissance of the area. The biologist, focusing on buildings and other human-made structures or trees with cavities or exfoliating bark, would look for bats and bat signs including existing roost sites, bat guano deposits, and will listen for roosting bats. If the daytime survey does not identify the presence of potential bat roosts, no further mitigation is required. If potential roost sites are identified, an exit nighttime survey will be conducted to determine species of roosting bats, relative bat activity, and to estimate the number of individual bats. This nighttime survey may be an active or passive acoustic monitoring survey. If occupied bat roost sites are identified, appropriate spatial and temporal buffers, as defined by the Town’s biologist based on experience with bat species, would be implemented to minimize impact on roosting bats during construction of the Project.

A qualified biologist will conduct a daytime site
reconnaissance of the area./Town, CDFW
Prior to construction activities.

Impact BIO-1: 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 CDFW
or USFWS: American Badger
MM-BIO-1. Minimize Disturbance Footprint. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-25: American Badger Detection Surveys. Within 14 days prior to implementation of Proposed Projectrelated activities in or adjacent to American badger habitat (annual grassland, mixed chaparral, and blue oakfoothill pine), a qualified biologist will determine if American badger dens are present within 500 feet of the proposed impact area, including construction access routes. If badger den(s) are observed, the following buffer distances, according to what type of den(s) the biologist determines it (them) to be, will be established prior to construction activities:
• potential den = 30 feet
• active (adults present) den = 250 feet
• natal (young present) den = 500 feet
Activities permitted within and the size of the no disturbance buffers may be adjusted based on an evaluation by the qualified biologist. The buffer would be imposed until a qualified biologist determines the den is inactive.

A qualified biologist will determine if American
badger dens are present within 500 feet of the
proposed impact area./Town, CDFW
Within 14 days prior to
implementation of Proposed
Project-related activities in or
adjacent to American badger
habitat.

Impact BIO-2: Have a substantial adverse
effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in
local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS
MM-BIO-1: Minimize Disturbance Footprint. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-5: Restoration of Temporarily Disturbed Areas and Invasive Weed Control. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-6: No Net Loss of Aquatic Resources. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-7: Sensitive Community Fencing. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-8: Dry Work Areas. See description above. See description above. See description above.

Impact BIO-3: Have a substantial adverse
effect on state or federally protected
wetlands
MM-BIO-1: Minimize Disturbance Footprint. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-5: Restoration of Temporarily Disturbed Areas and Invasive Weed Control. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-6: No Net Loss of Aquatic Resources. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-7: Sensitive Community Fencing. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-8: Dry Work Areas. See description above. See description above. See description above.

MM-BIO-26: State or Federally Protected Wetlands Mitigation. Compensatory mitigation for temporary and permanent impacts on state and/or federally protected wetlands that cannot be avoided through other mitigation measures will be purchased by the Town at a minimum 1:1 ratio, as defined by USACE through the Section 404 permit. Mitigation might include onsite restoration approved by the USACE, in-lieu fee payment, or purchase of mitigation credits at a USACE approved mitigation bank. Mitigation as required in regulatory permits issued through the USACE and/or CDFW may be applied to satisfy this measure.

Compensatory mitigation for temporary and
permanent impacts on state and/or federally
protected wetlands that cannot be avoided
through other mitigation measures will be
purchased by the Town, in accordance with
USACE 404 permitting./Town, USACE, CDFW
During and post-construction
activities.
906
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-2: Cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to
section 15064.5
MM-CUL-1: Targeted Archaeological Monitoring. As described above, the archaeological survey did not include the proposed Export Pipeline System between Midway Road and Skyway due to lack of landowner consent to access. Additionally, although not fully relocated, previous monitoring work along Skyway recorded a series of sparse lithic scatters demonstrating an elevation sensitivity for near-surface archaeological sites.

Therefore, based on the lack of previous survey coverage and the number of previously documented archaeological sites in the vicinity, the Project alignment between Midway Road (on the west) and the intersection of Skyway and Neal Road (on the east) will be subject to monitoring during initial ground disturbance by a qualified professional archaeologist. The archaeologist will monitor initial trenching of previously undisturbed deposits, but the monitoring may vary based on the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and the absence/presence of artifacts and/or cultural features. In the event of an inadvertent discovery during monitoring, the procedures noted in MM-CUL-2 will be implemented.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
Monitoring will be performed by a qualified
archeologist.

During initial ground disturbance.

MM-CUL-2: Follow Inadvertent Discovery Procedures. If unrecorded cultural resources are encountered during Project-related ground-disturbing activities, even in the absence of an onsite archaeological monitor, a qualified cultural resources specialist will be contacted to assess the potential significance of the find. If an inadvertent discovery of cultural materials (e.g., unusual amounts of shell, animal bone, bottle glass, ceramics, structure/building remains) is made during Project-related construction activities, ground disturbances in the area of the find will be halted, and a qualified professional archaeologist will be notified regarding the discovery. The archaeologist will determine whether the resource is potentially significant per the CRHR and develop appropriate mitigation, such as avoidance or data recovery.

A qualified cultural resources specialist will be
contacted to assess the potential significance
of unrecorded cultural resources.

A qualified archaeologist will be notified
regarding any inadvertent discovery of cultural
resources.

During project-related grounddisturbing activities.

Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources
Impact GEO-1(b): Directly or indirectly
cause potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving: Strong seismic
ground shaking
MM-GEO-1: Minimize Geologic Hazards. Prior to construction, the Town will obtain the services of a qualified, licensed geotechnical engineer to prepare a design-level geotechnical report with specific recommendations to address geologic hazards, seismic safety, and soil conditions during construction. The Town will review the geotechnical report with the geotechnical engineer to develop viable measures that will avoid or minimize risks associated with ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, unstable soils, and expansive soils during construction.

The Town will require contractors to incorporate these measures into all construction plans and specifications.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
The Town will obtain the services of a qualified,
licensed geotechnical engineer to prepare a
design-level geotechnical report. The Town will
review the geotechnical report with the
geotechnical engineer to develop viable
measures. The Town will require contractors to
incorporate these measures into all
construction plans and specifications.

Prior to construction activities.

Impact GEO-1(c): Directly or indirectly
cause potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving: Seismic-related
ground failure, including liquefaction
MM-GEO-1: Minimize Geologic Hazards. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

Impact GEO-1(d): Directly or indirectly
cause potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving: Landslides
MM-GEO-1: Minimize Geologic Hazards. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

Impact GEO-3: 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
MM-GEO-1: Minimize Geologic Hazards. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

Impact GEO-4: Be located on expansive
soil, as defined in Table 18-1B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial direct or indirect risk to life or
property
MM-GEO-1: Minimize Geologic Hazards. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.
907
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Impact GEO-6: Directly or indirectly
destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic
feature
MM-GEO-2: Inadvertent Discovery Protocol. If paleontological resources are discovered during earth-moving activities, the construction crew will immediately cease work within a 50-foot radius of the find and notify the Town’s Project Manager. Construction work will be halted until the collection of fossil specimens has been completed. The collection and treatment actions will occur after recovery of specimens and once scientific value can be confirmed and documented. If fossils are found, treatment actions will include sampling for microfossils, conducting paleomagnetic analysis, identifying and preparing fossils, arranging for a repository, and preparing a final report.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
If paleontological resources are discovered
during earth-moving activities, the construction
crew will immediately cease work and notify the
Town’s Project Manager.

During earth-moving activities.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-1: Create a significant hazard
to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials
MM-HAZ-1: Vehicle Equipment Access and Fueling: During construction, the Town will require and enforce through encroachment permit conditions and construction documents that all vehicle traffic associated with Proposed Project-related activities will be confined to established roads, staging areas, and parking areas.

Additionally, maintenance or refueling of vehicles or equipment must occur in designated areas and/or secondary containment away from waterbodies.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
The Town will be responsible for mitigation
enforcement through encroachment permit
conditions.

During construction activities.

Impact HAZ-4: 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
MM-HAZ-2: Cypress Lane Site Specific Contaminated Soil Management Plan. Prior to any work set to occur within 500 feet of the Cypress Lane Site, a parcel-specific contaminated soil management plan shall be prepared to address the known contamination at the site for submittal to and approval by DTSC. The plan shall include specific hazards and provisions for how soils and groundwater will be managed at the Cypress Lane Site. The plan shall provide requirements for soil testing and characterization, soil disposal protocols, protocols governing the discovery of unknown contaminants, and soil management. The plan shall also include health and safety provisions including training requirements for site workers who may be handling contaminated material, including the transport and disposal of contaminated material; chemical exposure hazards in soil, groundwater, or soil vapor that are known to be present at the property; and mitigation and monitoring measures that are protective of the site worker and public health and safety. These health and safety provisions shall be prepared to meet OSHA requirements, Title 29 of the CFR 1910.120 and CCR Title 8, Section 5192, and all applicable federal, state, and local regulations and agency ordinances related to the proposed management, transport, and disposal of contaminated media during implementation of work and field activities. The plan shall be signed and sealed by a Certified Industrial Hygienist, who is licensed by the American Board of Industrial Hygiene. The plan shall be enforced by DTSC or another applicable regulator and included as a requirement of construction/in construction documents.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
The construction contractor will be responsible
for implementation of a soil management plan,
which will be submitted and approved by
DTSC. The plan shall be signed and sealed by
a Certified Industrial Hygienist who is licensed
by the American Board of Industrial Hygiene.

The plan shall be enforced by DTSC or another
applicable regulator and included as a
requirement of construction/in construction
documents./Town, DTSC or other regulator
Prior to any work set to occur
within 500 feet of the Cypress
Lane Site.
908
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Impact HAZ-6: Impair implementation of
or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan
MM-HAZ-3: Road Closure Restrictions. The Proposed Project will require a Butte County encroachment permit. The standard Butte County encroachment permit requires that “at least one lane of any public road…shall be kept open for travel by the general public at all times.” Skyway consists of four lanes of traffic, two in each direction. The Proposed Project will require a Town of Paradise encroachment permit for work within the Town limits. The Proposed Project will be held accountable to the Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update and policies included in the Butte County General Plan and the Town’s draft Safety Element (1994) and Hazardous Waste Management Element (1994). Further, during construction, to minimize the potential for impeding emergency response vehicles at any time, the Proposed Project will only close one lane of traffic at any given time, other than short instances where a two-lane closure might be required for relocation of large equipment; this will be a requirement stated in the construction documents issued by the Town. Therefore, three lanes of Skyway will always remain open.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
The Town will be responsible for obtaining a
Butte County construction encroachment
permit. Butte County will have authority to
enforce this mitigation./Town, Butte County
MM-HAZ-4: Rapid Demobilization Plan. The Proposed Project will be held accountable to the Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update and policies included in the Butte County General Plan and the Town’s draft Safety Element (1994) and Hazardous Waste Management Element (1994). Further, in the construction documents issued by the Town, the contractor will be required to prepare a rapid demobilization plan covering the one Skyway lane it occupies. Demobilization would require the contractor cover any open trench with metal plates sufficiently strong to carry vehicle traffic, patching cut pavement, removing traffic barrier rails (if used), and moving construction equipment completely clear of the road. During fire season, the contractor will be required to have sufficient metal plating on-site to immediately cover any open trench, and conversely the length of open trenching will be limited to the amount of metal plating on-site. The contractor will also be required to have sufficient cold-mix asphalt on site to temporarily patch any cut road surface. The plan will be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director and enforced by the Town.

The contractor will be required to prepare a
rapid demobilization plan and obtain necessary
materials. The plan will be reviewed and
approved by the Public Works Director and
enforced by the Town.

The rapid demobilization plan will
be prepared prior to construction.

MM-HAZ-5: Evacuation Warning Procedures. The Proposed Project will be held accountable to the Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update and policies included in the Butte County General Plan and the Town’s draft Safety Element (1994) and Hazardous Waste Management Element (1994). Further, to minimize the potential for impeding emergency response vehicles and at the direction of the Town during an evacuation, the contractor will be required to demobilize off of Skyway (MM-HAZ-4), leaving all four lanes clear for public traffic and emergency crews, within four hours if no traffic barrier rails are being used and within eight hours if traffic barrier rails are being used. Again, other than short instances where a two-lane closure might be required for relocation of large equipment, during construction, three of the four lanes of Skyway will be continuously open.

At the direction of the Town, the contractor will
cease all construction operations and
implement the rapid demobilization plan. As
part of the rapid demobilization plan approved
by the Public Works Director and enforced by
the Town, the contractor will be required to
demobilize off of Skyway.

In the event of an emergency
requiring evacuation.

MM-HAZ-6: Traffic Management Plan. During final design, the Town will require that the engineering designer prepare a Traffic Management Plan that complies with Section 110.7 Traffic Control Plans of the Highway Design Manual (Caltrans 2020), that will be included in the construction documents and implemented by the construction contractor. The designer will submit the plan to the Town of Paradise, Butte County, and City of Chico’s transportation and engineering departments for review and approval before it is included in the construction documents. The plan will be prepared in accordance with professional engineering standards and will include, but not be limited to, the following requirements:
• Schedule truck trips outside of the peak traffic hours, when feasible. • Store all equipment and materials in designated staging areas. • Use of signage to guide vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians through and/or around the construction areas. • Install traffic control devices where traffic conditions warrant. • Provide safe detours to reroute vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic. • Encourage construction crews to park at staging areas to limit lane closures in the public right-of-way. • Consult with Butte Regional Transit prior to construction to coordinate bus stop relocations (as necessary). • Coordinate all construction activities with the emergency service providers in the area. • Stop all construction work during any period of time declared as a Red Flag Warning. A Red Flag Warning is issued by the National Weather Service for weather events that may produce an increased risk of fire danger.
• Post notices and/or appropriate signage to notify the public of upcoming construction activities, including exact location, schedule, and duration. This will include alternative access routes if a short-term full-lane The Town will require that the engineering
designer prepare a Traffic Management Plan,
that will be included in the construction
documents and implemented by the
construction contractor. The designer will
submit the plan to the Town of Paradise, Butte
County, and City of Chico’s transportation and
engineering departments for review and
approval before it is included in the construction
documents./Town, County, City
During final design, the Town will
require that the engineering
designer prepare a Traffic
Management Plan.
909
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
closure will be required to transport equipment.
• The Traffic Management Plan will be enforced by the Town of Paradise.

Impact HAZ-7: Expose people or
structures, either directly or indirectly, to
a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires
MM-HAZ-1: Vehicle Equipment Access and Fueling .See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-HAZ-7: Incorporate Fire Prevention Measures. Require that construction crews and equipment avoid circumstances that could cause wildfire and that crews and staff have access to fire-prevention equipment onsite.

Specific fire prevention measures include: fire extinguishers or other approved fire suppressants are to be available at all times, proper storage of flammable materials, safe cutting and welding practices, proper installation of temporary electrical equipment, and use of dust-collecting apparatus on power equipment.

The construction contractor will be responsible
for implementation of this mitigation.

Prior to and during construction
activities.

MM-HAZ-8: Incorporate Public Safety Measures. Requires that the public will receive adequate warning of construction activities and any dangerous condition that might result from the use of fences, barriers, lights, flagging, guards, and signs. This will be incorporated into the Traffic Management Plan.

The Town and construction contractor will be
responsible for implementation of this
mitigation.

Prior to construction activities.

MM-HAZ-9: Wildland Fire Area. The Contractor will be advised that the Town of Paradise is in a Wildland Fire Area and during the summer months the fire hazard is EXTREME.

The construction contractor is responsible for
implementation of this mitigation.

Prior to construction activities.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact HYD-1: Violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality
MM-HAZ-1: Vehicle and Equipment Access and Fueling. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HYD-1: Stormwater Management and Treatment Plan. The Town will require in the construction agreement that the contractor prepare and implement a Proposed Project-specific Stormwater Management and Treatment Plan that addresses construction-related activities. The plan will include all of the SWPPP and Small MS4 permits, as well as the Construction BMPs included in MM-HYD-2.

Town will require in the construction agreement
that the contractor prepare and implement a
Proposed Project-specific Stormwater
Management and Treatment Plan./Town,
RWQCB
Prior to construction activities.

MM-HYD-2: Construction Best Management Practices: Prior to initiation of ground- disturbing activities within 250 feet of vernal pools or 100 feet of other aquatic resources, construction BMPs will be employed on-site to prevent degradation to on-site and off-site aquatic resources. Methods will include the use of appropriate measures to intercept and capture sediment prior to entering aquatic resources, as well as erosion control measures along the perimeter of all work areas to prevent the displacement of fill material. All BMPs will be in place prior to initiation of any construction activities and will remain until construction activities are completed. All erosion control methods will be maintained until all on-site soils are stabilized.

The construction contractor would be
responsible for the implementation of this
mitigation.

Prior to initiation of ground
disturbing activities.

MM-BIO-15: Frac-Out-Plan. See description under Biological Resources, above. See description under Biological Resources, above.

See description under Biological
Resources, above.

Impact HYD-3(a): Substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through
the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would: Result in
substantial erosion or siltation on or offsite
MM-HYD-1: Stormwater Management and Treatment Plan. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

Impact HYD-3(b): Substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through
the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would: Substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site
MM-HYD-1: Stormwater Management and Treatment Plan. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

MM-HYD-3: Flood Protection Plan. Prior to construction, the Town will require that the contractor prepare and implement a Flood Protection Plan for the Proposed Project. The Flood Protection Plan must include evacuation routes in the event of a flood, and will include the implementation of temporary flood barriers, such as sandbags, berms or portable fence systems, to be set up around the perimeter of the construction work area in high flood hazard areas, as discussed in Section 3.10.1.5, Tsunami, Seiche and Flood Hazards.

The Town will require that the contractor
prepare and implement a Flood Protection Plan
for the Proposed Project./Town, RWQCB
Prior to construction activities.
910
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Impact HYD-3(c): Substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through
the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would: Create or contribute
runoff water that would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm
water drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff
MM-HYD-1: Stormwater Management and Treatment Plan. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thansignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above
MM-HYD-3: Flood Protection Plan. See description above. See description above. See description above Impact HYD-4: In flood hazard, tsunami,
or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants
due to Project inundation
MM-HYD-3: Flood Protection Plan. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above
Impact HYD-5: Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality control
plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan
MM-HYD-1: Stormwater Management and Treatment Plan. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

Noise
Impact NSE-1: Generate a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
Project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or in applicable
standards of other agencies
MM-NSE-1: Minimize Construction Noise. Prior to construction, the Town will incorporate the following measures into all construction plans and agreements to reduce noise levels during construction:
• Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
• Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from noise-sensitive receptors. • Use quiet air compressors and other stationary noise-generating equipment where appropriate technology exists and is feasible.
• Maintain and tune all equipment in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations to minimize noise emission.
• Install temporary construction-site sound barriers near noise sources. • Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. • Limit use of public address systems.
• Post the days and hours of construction as well as the name and phone number of a designated representative to be contacted for noise-related concerns at the perimeter of the construction site. • Comply with county, city and/or town noise policies applicable to the location’s jurisdiction.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
The Town and construction contractor will be
responsible for implementation of this
mitigation.

Prior to construction.

Impact NSE-2: Generate excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels
MM-NSE-1: Minimize Construction Noise. See description above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description above. See description above.

Public Services
Impact PS-1(a): 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
following public services: Fire Protection
MM-HAZ-6: Traffic Management Plan. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

Impact PS-1(b): Result in substantial MM-HAZ-6: Traffic Management Plan. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. Significant Less-than- See description under Hazards and Hazardous See description under Hazards 911
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
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
following public services: Police
Protection
Impact Significant
Impact
Materials, above. and Hazardous Materials, above.

Impact PS-1(c): 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
following public services: Schools
MM-HAZ-6: Traffic Management Plan. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

Impact PS-1(d): 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
following public services: Other Public
Facilities
MM-HAZ-6: Traffic Management Plan. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

Transportation
Impact TRA-1: Conflict with a program
plan, ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities
MM-HAZ-6: Traffic Management Plan. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

Impact TRA-4: Result in inadequate
emergency access
MM-HAZ-6: Traffic Management Plan. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.
912
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact TCR-1: Cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource, defined in PRC
Section 21074 as either a site, feature,
place, or 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
PRC Section 5020.1(k), or
• 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 PRC
Section 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
PRC Section 5024.1, the lead agency
will consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe
MM-TCR-1: Coordination with Konkow Valley Band of Maidu and Mechoopda Indian Tribe. During final design, the Town will continue to consult and coordinate with the Konkow Valley Band of Maidu and Mechoopda Indian Tribe to identify sensitive areas to be protected during construction work and appropriate methods to protect those areas.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
The Town will be responsible for coordination
efforts with the Konkow Valley Band of Maidu
and Mechoopda Indian Tribe.

During final design.

MM-TRC-2: Tribal Cultural Monitoring. Prior to construction, the Town will coordinate with the Konkow Valley Band of Maidu and Mechoopda Indian Tribe to identify a Tribal Cultural Monitor, as deemed necessary by either/both Tribes, to be present during ground disturbance work within areas designated as sensitive for tribal cultural resources.

The Town will coordinate with the Konkow
Valley Band of Maidu and Mechoopda Indian
Tribe to identify a Tribal Cultural Monitor.

Prior to and during construction
activities.

Utilities and Service Systems
Impact UTIL-1: Require or result in the
relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment,
storm water drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications
facilities, the construction or relocation of
which could cause significant
environmental effects
MM-UTIL-1: Minimize Utility and Service System Disruptions. During final design, to minimize disruptions to utility services, the Town will prepare a Utility Conflict and Coordination Plan that identifies outages that could affect residents and businesses, including fiber-optic/communications, water, power, and gas. As part of that plan, the public and stakeholders will be notified by signage and on Town’s website of any potential service interruptions at least 2 weeks prior to construction work.

The Town will prepare a Utility conflict and
Coordination Plan and will be responsible for its
implementation.

During final design.

Wildfire
Impact FIRE-1: Substantially impair an
adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan
MM-HAZ-3: Road Closure Restrictions. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. Significant Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HAZ-4: Rapid Demobilization Plan. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HAZ-5: Evacuation Warning Procedures. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HAZ-6: Traffic Management Plan. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.
913
CEQA Mitigation Designation Mitigation and/or Monitoring Reporting Description Impact Level
Prior to
Mitigation
Impact Level
with Mitigation Responsibilities/Enforcement Timeframe
Impact FIRE-2: Exacerbate wildfire risks
due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread
of a wildfire
MM-HAZ-1: Vehicle Equipment Access and Fueling. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HAZ-7: Incorporate Fire Prevention Measures. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HAZ-8: Incorporate Public Safety Measures. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HAZ-9. Wildland Fire Area. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

Impact FIRE-3: Require the installation or
maintenance of associated infrastructure
(such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines, or other
utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or
that may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment
MM-HAZ-1: Vehicle Equipment Access and Fueling. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HAZ-7: Incorporate Fire Prevention Measures. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HAZ-8: Incorporate Public Safety Measures. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

See description under Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

MM-HAZ-9. Wildland Fire Area. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above. See description under Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

See description under Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, above.

Impact FIRE-4: Expose people or
structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire
slope instability, or drainage changes
MM-HYD-1: Stormwater Management and Treatment Plan. See description under Hydrology and Water Quality, above.

Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
See description under Hydrology and Water
Quality above.

See description under Hydrology
and Water Quality, above.

MM-HYD-3: Flood Protection Plan. See description under Hydrology and Water Quality, above. See description under Hydrology and Water Quality, above.

See description under Hydrology
and Water Quality, above.

MM-GEO-1: Minimize Geologic Hazards. See description under Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources, above.

See description under Geology, Soils, and
Paleontological Resources, above.

See description under Geology,
Soils, and Paleontological
Resources, above.
914
A
NOP Scoping Report
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 1 of 116
915
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 2 of 116
916
Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................3 Overview........................................................................................................................................................................3 Project Purpose ......................................................................................................................................................3 Project Benefits ......................................................................................................................................................4 Notice of Preparation ....................................................................................................................................................4 Public Notification and Outreach...................................................................................................................................4 Public Notice Advertisements.................................................................................................................................4 Media Relations......................................................................................................................................................4 Website ..................................................................................................................................................................5 E‐Blasts...................................................................................................................................................................5 Social Media ...........................................................................................................................................................5 Public and Stakeholder Engagement............................................................................................................................. 6 Virtual Public Meetings...........................................................................................................................................6 Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee ..............................................................................................6 Comment Submittal.......................................................................................................................................................6 Virtual Public Meeting Comments.................................................................................................................................6 Comment Documentation and Review.......................................................................................................................... 7 Comment Themes .........................................................................................................................................................7 Next Steps......................................................................................................................................................................8 Attachments
A Notice of Preparation
B Public Notice Advertisement
C Press Release
D Project Website
E E‐Blasts
F Social Media
G Virtual Public Meeting Presentation
H Comment Matrix
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 3 of 116
917
Introduction
The Town of Paradise, California, (Town) is proposing a new wastewater management system for the residents of Paradise. Currently, all wastewater within the Town is treated by individual, on‐site septic systems. The Paradise Sewer Project would bring long‐term and reliable wastewater management to Paradise that would be both economically and socially beneficial. Specifically, local businesses would have better opportunities to expand and thrive, which would provide more economic stability for Paradise as well as more job opportunities for residents.

Residents and visitors would also have the potential for an overall better quality of life because there would be fewer potential health risks from the existing septic systems. With the new wastewater system, residential parcels could be developed more densely, including multi‐family housing, which would allow for more low‐income housing opportunities.

Overview
Project Purpose
The proposed project involves two major components: a wastewater collection system that would provide service connections to individual parcels within the designated sewer service area, and an 18‐mile‐long export pipeline to carry wastewater to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP), as shown in Figure 1. The project would provide long‐term wastewater management to the residents of Paradise.

Figure 1. Study Area Map
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 4 of 116
918
Project Benefits
The Paradise Sewer Project would bring many benefits to Paradise and the region, including:
 providing wastewater disposal surety to help businesses and jobs return to Paradise and spur economic recovery;
 improving Paradise groundwater quality by decreasing septic tank discharges;  allowing for more densely populated residential development in Paradise to increase affordable/multi‐ family housing;
 creating a wastewater solution supported by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and partner agencies to help create opportunities for additional funding.

Notice of Preparation
On May 3, 2021, the Town, acting as the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Lead Agency, launched the environmental process for the proposed Paradise Sewer Project with a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and virtual public scoping meetings. The first step in the EIR process was to solicit public input regarding the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR. The NOP was posted at the State Clearinghouse (SCH# 2021050008) and circulated to public agencies and other interested parties in compliance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15082(a). The NOP notified the public that the EIR is being prepared and provided information on how the public could provide comments on the scope of the EIR.

Issuance of the NOP started the 30‐day public comment period, which was open from May 3 to June 3, 2021.

The NOP provided information about the public comment period, project location, project background, project description, and the probable environmental effects of the proposed project. The NOP was posted on the project website at www.paradisesewer.com. The NOP package can be found in Attachment A of this document and includes the NOP, the distribution list, and the Notice of Completion and Environmental Document Transmittal.

Public Notification and Outreach
Several methods were used to build awareness about the Paradise Sewer Project, the NOP, and the subsequent public comment period and scoping meetings. Using the established project website (www.paradisesewer.com) and the Town’s social media accounts (Facebook and YouTube), the project team posted key information online to direct viewers to the project website and to promote the initial project activities and environmental milestones.

Additionally, the project team submitted notices in local Paradise and Chico media publications, and conducted public and Town Council engagement meetings.

Public Notice Advertisements
Public notices for the public comment period were published in the Paradise Post on May 1, 2021, and in the Enterprise‐Record on May 3, 2021. Copies of the public notice advertisements are included in Attachment B.

Media Relations
One press release was sent on May 3, 2021, to n the surrounding project area. A copy of the media release is included in Attachment C.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 5 of 116
919
Website
The project website (www.paradisesewer.com), which was revamped on April 9th, 2021 continued to act as the main information hub for the public to learn about the project and get updated information at milestones throughout the environmental phase. The website includes the following pages and sections:

Page Sections
Project Overview ‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
Project Components
Project Area Map (static map)
Project Costs
Find My Property (interactive map)
Project Benefits
Project Schedule
Public Engagement ‐
‐
‐
News
Events
Key Activities
Environmental  ‐
‐
‐
Environmental Review
CEQA Process
Environmental Key Activities
Advisory Committee  ‐
‐
‐
Overview
Advisory Committee Members
Advisory Committee Meetings
Project Materials ‐
‐
‐
‐
Frequently Asked Questions
Project Documents
Technical Documents
Related Links
Contact  ‐  Mailing information and Phone Number
Comment Submittal Form
The website is updated regularly to provide timely information on outreach and engagement activities. All comments received via the website were documented and recorded for the scoping process. Screenshots of the project website can be found in Attachment D.

E‐Blasts
Four e‐blasts were distributed during the 30‐day public comment period. The e‐blasts provided reminders of the virtual public meetings and public comment period and included the project website address. Copies of the e‐ blasts are included in Attachment E.

Social Media
Throughout the public comment period, social media was used to educate and inform the public about the Paradise Sewer Project. The project team used both the Town’s Facebook and YouTube pages. The Town’s Facebook page provided the public with information about community meetings, reminders of the virtual public scoping meetings, and directions on how to submit comments. The YouTube page provided the public with council meeting recordings. Copies of social media posts are provided in Attachment F.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 6 of 116
920
Public and Stakeholder Engagement
Virtual Public Meetings
For public convenience and to allow participation in a safe environment, two virtual public meetings were held via Webex during the public comment period. The meetings provided a brief overview of the proposed project and the EIR process and encouraged the public to provide comments about the scope of the EIR effort. The first virtual public meeting took place on May 13, 2021, and had 40 attendees—11 project team members and 29 public attendees. The second virtual public meeting took place on May 25, 2021, and had 26 attendees—12 project team members and 14 public attendees. Those who needed additional accessibility preferences were directed to post a message on the project website (www.paradisesewer.com/contact). Any persons who are deaf, hard of hearing or speech impaired (TDD) were also encouraged to contact the California Relay Service TTY and/or Voice Line at 1‐ 800‐735‐2929, or 711. The PowerPoint presentations from the virtual public meetings are provided in Attachment G.

Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee
In addition to the virtual public meetings, the project team participated in monthly Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee meetings starting in April 2021. The purpose of the committee meetings is to develop an agreement between the Town of Paradise and the City of Chico regarding potential future discharge of the Town’s wastewater to the Chico WPCP, and to monitor the progress of the Paradise Sewer Project EIR. Information about the committee, including meeting minutes, can be found on the project website (www.paradisesewer.com/advisory‐committee).

Comment Submittal
To encourage public comments, a number of submittal methods were provided. Comments could be submitted by direct mail, email, on the project website (www.paradisesewer.com/contact), during the two virtual public meetings, and by phone. Overall, 75 comments were submitted by 27 individual commenters during the project scoping period. A few commenters made multiple comment submittals during the public comment period. A comment matrix including all comments received during the public comment period can be found in Attachment H.

The following summarizes the number of comments received by each submittal method:
 6 letters (from the Native American Heritage Commission, Butte Local Agency Formation Commission, Paradise Irrigation District, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Central Valley Flood Protection Board, and Butte County Department of Development Services)  1 email
 9 virtual public meeting comment submittals
 14 website comment submittals
Virtual Public Meeting Comments
As mentioned previously, two virtual public meetings were held via Webex during the public comment period.

Attendees of the public meetings were encouraged to ask questions and provide input on the project and process.

Nine comments were provided during the public meetings. Commonly asked questions were about any potential project costs to property owners and if the project would be able to handle future growth in Paradise. Additionally, several commenters requested more project information about current funding sources for the project, the export Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 7 of 116
921
pipeline route, and recommendations for property owners considering constructing septic tank systems before construction of the new sewer system.

Comment Documentation and Review
The final step during the public comment period is the collection, categorization, and review of all comments received. Comments submitted during the 30‐day public comment period were documented and organized by category to allow for easy review by the project team and the respective technical disciplines. Afterwards, the process will be to consider the comments as the project team continues its environmental analysis.

Comment Themes
There were 27 individual commenters who submitted a total of 75 comments. Of the 75 comments submitted during the public comment period, the following themes were identified (some of the comments were outside the scope of the Paradise Sewer Project). The sub‐bullets below each theme were specific items addressed by the public:
 Administrative (jurisdiction, rights, and oversight)
o Provide post‐construction recommendations to property owners after project completion o Consider addition of properties to the proposed sewer service area o Provide a subcontractor bidding schedule
 Aesthetics
o Coordinate project construction with road rebuilding efforts o Provide a physical description of the export pipeline  Agency Coordination
o Coordinate efforts with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) o Coordinate efforts with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) o Coordinate efforts with the Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB) if Title 23 standards are not followed
o Coordinate efforts with Paradise Irrigation District (PID)  Biological Resources
o Assess biological resources
o Analyze direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to biological resources o Include appropriate and adequate mitigation measures for project impacts to biological resources  Concepts/Alternatives
o Consider smaller and de‐centralized alternatives
o Consider a separate Town of Paradise wastewater system o Confirm the export pipeline route
o Confirm the project boundary
o Provide better plans/designs/maps depicting the project  Funding/Costs
o Inform project funding sources
o Inform potential costs to residents and rate payers in the City of Chico o Inform potential costs to Paradise residents and property owners not within the sewer service area
 Health/Safety
o Consider risks to public safety when developing the project Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 8 of 116
922
 Land Use
o Clarify export pipeline alignment outside of right‐of‐way o Assess potential crossing of prime agricultural land
 Outreach/Communications
o Consult with respective stakeholders
 Tribal/Cultural Resources
o Consult with Native American tribes
o Assess cultural resources
 Urban Growth
o Address the increase of population in the Town of Paradise, City of Chico, and surrounding region  Outreach/Communications
o Consult with respective stakeholders
 Water Quality
o Assess potential water quality impacts of all respective water bodies  Wildfire
o Consider the potential fire hazard associated with pipe materials o Consider the potential for increased exposure to fire risks Next Steps
The Town will review and, as appropriate, incorporate input received during the public comment period into the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR will contain the results of the alternatives analysis, an assessment of environmental impacts, and identification of mitigation measures. The next key project milestone will be the release of the Draft EIR for public review in early 2022.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 9 of 116
923
Attachment A
Notice of Preparation
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 10 of 116
924
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
April 30, 2021
Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact
Report and Public Scoping Meeting Notice
RE: Paradise Sewer Project
To Interested Agencies and Persons:

The Town of Paradise (Town) as the Lead Agency for the Paradise Sewer Project (Proposed Project) has issued this Notice of Preparation (NOP) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to notify responsible and trustee agencies and other interested parties that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be prepared to evaluate potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Project. The Town is soliciting public input regarding the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR.

The NOP provides information about the public review and comment period, project location, project description, and the probable environmental effects of the Proposed Project, and is posted on the Town’s website at www.paradisesewer.com.

Agency and Public Review and Comment
The Town is interested in receiving input from agencies, stakeholders, and the public regarding the Proposed Project. Your agency may need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the Proposed Project, if any is required. Please respond with written comments regarding the proposed scope and the intended content of the EIR as it relates to your agency’s area of statutory responsibility or your areas of concern or expertise. We are requesting that all comments be provided in writing to enable us to address the comments as intended in the EIR.

Written comments are also requested from organizations and other interested parties regarding the scope and evaluation of potential environmental issues associated with the Proposed Project.

Written responses are due within 30 days of the receipt of this NOP, as provided by state law. As such, a 30-day public review and scoping period is established from May 3 to June 3, 2021. Comments may be submitted by mail or email, or by attending the public scoping meeting (see details below) and submitting a written comment. All comments should indicate a contact person for the agency or organization.

Two virtual public scoping meetings regarding the Proposed Project and EIR will be held. You, members of your agency or organization, and the public are invited to attend to provide written comments on the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR. These meetings will include a brief overview of the Proposed Project and EIR process, and will allow time for questions about the project and process.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 11 of 116
925
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
The Town will hold these public scoping meetings on May 13 with an approximately 30-minute presentation starting at 6:00 p.m. and on May 25 with an approximately 30-minute presentation starting at 12:00 p.m. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, the meetings will be held virtually for remote public participation. The meeting links and call-in number for the presentation are provided below.

Thursday, May 13, at 6:00 p.m. Tuesday, May 25, at 12:00 p.m.

WebEx Link: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg1
WebEx Password: Paradise
Dial In #: 408-418-9388
Code: 123 202 6837
WebEx Link: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2
WebEx Password: Paradise
Dial In #: 408-418-9388
Code: 123 877 2748
For additional accessibility preferences, please post a message on the project website at paradisesewer.com/contact (from subject dropdown menu, select “Submit a comment on Environmental Impact Report”). Persons who are deaf, hard of hearing, or speech impaired (TDD) may contact the California Relay Service TTY and/or Voice Line at 1-800-735-2929, or 711.

We value your input and look forward to hearing from you. For your convenience, we have a number of ways for you to provide comments at any time during the 30-day comment period ending at 5:00 p.m. on June 3, 2021. Comments can be submitted the following ways:
 Direct Mail:

Colette Curtis, Public Information Officer
Town of Paradise
5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
 Website and Virtual Meeting comment submittal: paradisesewer.com/contact (from subject dropdown menu, select “Submit a comment on Environmental Impact Report”).  Telephone: 530-872-6291, ext. 112
If you are an authorized representative of a Responsible Agency or a Trustee Agency, the Town needs to know the views of your agency regarding the scope and content of the environmental information that is relevant to your agency’s statutory responsibilities in connection with the Proposed Project. Your agency will need to use the EIR when considering whether to permit or otherwise approve the Proposed Project. Comments received from State of California agencies should address (1) whether the agency will be a Responsible Agency or a Trustee Agency for the Proposed Project, and (2) if the agency is a Responsible Agency, the significant environmental issues and reasonable alternatives and mitigation measures that the Responsible Agency will need to have explored in the analysis. We will also need the name, address, telephone number, and email address of the contact person for your agency.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 12 of 116
926
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
Project Location
Paradise is in eastern Butte County, in the western foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The topography of Paradise is characterized by intervening ridges and valleys sloping to the southwest, with elevations ranging from 1,080 to 2,320 feet. Paradise is bordered on the east by the west branch of the Feather River and on the west by Little Butte Creek. Paradise is approximately 12 miles east of the City of Chico, California; 20 miles northwest of the City of Oroville, California; and 90 miles north of the City of Sacramento California. The primary entrances to Paradise are Skyway and Highway 191 (Clark Road). Paradise is connected to Chico via Skyway and to Oroville via Highway 191, which is known as Clark Road upon entering Paradise.

Chico, also in Butte County, sits on the Sacramento Valley floor close to the foothills of the Sierra Nevada range to the east. Chico’s terrain is generally flat, with increasingly hilly terrain beginning at the eastern city limits. The city is traversed by two creeks, Big Chico Creek and Little Chico Creek, and the Lindo channel, all of which feed into the Sacramento River. Highways 32 and 99 comprise Chico’s regional transportation network. Highway 32 connects Chico residents to Glenn and Plumas Counties to the west and east, respectively. Highway 99 connects residents to Tehama and Sutter Counties to the north and south, respectively (see Figure 1, map inset).

Project Background
Since its incorporation in 1979, the Town has sought a formal wastewater treatment solution for the community, with service for commercial and densely populated residential areas being a priority. Failed and failing septic systems create the potential for public health and environmental concerns and have limited economic growth. Prior to the Camp Fire, which almost completely destroyed the town in 2018, Paradise was the largest unsewered community in California.

The Town has supported numerous studies to address its need for a centralized wastewater treatment solution, and in its most recent study,1 the Town identified a proposed sewer service area. The proposed sewer service area includes the Town’s commercial corridors, and as described in the 2017 study, it represented the area that had the most septic systems that had failed or were projected to fail by 2022.

Existing Facilities
Wastewater treatment facilities in Paradise consist of individual, privately owned septic tanks and soil absorption disposal systems known as leach fields, together with several engineered subsurface disposal systems serving commercial and institutional facilities. Businesses and residences near the future sewer system continue to rely on septic tanks and leach field systems for wastewater treatment and disposal.
1 Bennett Engineering, 2017, Town of Paradise Sewer Project Alternatives Analysis and Feasibility Report: Determining a Preferred Option for Implementation, June 21.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 13 of 116
927
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 14 of 116
928
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
The Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) is approximately 5 miles southwest of Chico on 120 acres of land owned by the City of Chico. The City of Chico owns and operates the Chico WPCP, which provides wastewater treatment and disposal for the greater Chico area. The Chico WPCP service area comprises the incorporated area of Chico and small parcels of unincorporated Butte County.

The Chico WPCP treatment system consists of screening for removal of large solids, grit removal, primary clarification, activated sludge treatment with secondary clarification, and chlorination/dechlorination. Sludge is treated by anaerobic digestion followed by mechanical dewatering. Biosolids are hauled directly from the centrifuge building for land application in unincorporated Sacramento County, California. The treated wastewater from the Chico WPCP is discharged to the Sacramento River through a submerged outfall diffuser and is regulated in accordance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CA0079081 (Order No. R5-2016-0023). This order permits an average dry weather flow effluent flow of 12 million gallons per day (gpd).

Project Description
The Proposed Project consists of three constructed components—a wastewater collection system in Paradise, an 18-mile export pipeline to convey wastewater to the Chico WPCP, and connection to the WPCP—and operation of the new sewer system. The export pipeline would begin at the southwest edge of Paradise and run for approximately 8 miles along Skyway until reaching south Chico, at which point the pipeline would leave Skyway and continue west, crossing Butte Creek, Highway 99, and the Union Pacific Railroad, and terminating at the Chico WPCP in Chico. The Proposed Project would not change the service area of the Chico WPCP other than the addition of the Paradise connection and treatment. Moreover, there would be no additional fees for Chico residents and rate payers as a result of the Proposed Project.

Sewer Service Area
The sewer service area (SSA) would serve approximately 1,500 parcels (out of the 11,000 total parcels in Paradise) along the Skyway, Clark Road, and Pearson Road corridors (see Figure 2). The SSA also would serve most businesses in Paradise and would enable future construction of affordable multifamily housing, which is limited because of multiple septic system constraints such as high groundwater, poor soils, and limited parcel sizes.

At the time of initial operation, an estimated 360 occupied parcels within the SSA would be generating an average wastewater flow of 109,000 gpd. It is estimated that it could take 30 years for the entire SSA to be occupied, at which time the average wastewater flow would be 448,000 gpd. The Town is considering this level of development and wastewater flow in planning its wastewater treatment solutions.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 15 of 116
929
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 16 of 116
930
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
Collection System
The collection system would serve all parcels within the SSA, and would consist of a system of gravity sewers, small pump stations, and force mains. This collection system would enable properties within the SSA to have existing septic tanks and leach line systems abandoned altogether and would remove future onsite wastewater treatment and dispersal requirements. Because of the varied topography within the SSA, a number of pump stations and pressurized force mains would be required to pump flows out of valleys and swales, and back up to an adjacent gravity sewer. The collection system would consist of approximately 157,000 feet of 2- to 4-inch-diameter force mains, 29,000 feet of 8-inchdiameter gravity trunk lines, and 28 pump stations, all within public right-of-way. The gravity sewers would come together at the southwest edge of town, on Skyway, where they would transition to the export pipeline to the Chico WPCP.

Export Pipeline
The proposed export pipeline would start along Skyway at the south end of the Paradise collection system and would continue southwest along Skyway. Near Chico, at the bend where Skyway turns north, the pipeline would continue west, heading cross-country with crossings of Butte Creek and Highway 99 until reaching Midway, and would proceed into Chico and end at the Chico WPCP. The connection to the Chico WPCP is not associated with other ongoing facility upgrades. Figure 1 shows the proposed export pipeline route and connection to the Chico WPCP.

Operation and Maintenance
Operation and maintenance activities would occur with the facilities that comprise the Proposed Project.

This would include various inspections, servicing, and replacement of pertinent Proposed Project facility elements at designated intervals.

Probable Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project
After completing a preliminary review of the Proposed Project, as described in Section 15060(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, the Town has determined that an EIR should be prepared to assess the potentially significant environmental impacts of the Proposed Project.

The EIR will address environmental impacts of the Proposed Project’s construction and operation activities and will propose mitigation measures to address significant impacts that are identified. The following describes the anticipated environmental issues that may be addressed in the EIR:
 Aesthetics. Potential impacts on aesthetics during construction and operation of the Proposed Project will be considered. Although temporary impacts may occur during construction, no permanent change in the visual landscape or viewshed is expected.  Agriculture and Forestry Resources. Given the rural conditions, impacts on agriculture and forestry resources will be considered. However, it is anticipated that the Proposed Project would not result in impacts on prime agriculture and forestry resources that cannot be avoided.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 17 of 116
931
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Criteria air pollutants generated during construction and operation of the Proposed Project would be estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Potential impacts on air quality will be assessed by comparing the Proposed Project’s criteria air pollutant emissions with the thresholds of significance for criteria air pollutants in the Butte County Air Quality Management District’s (BCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook.

Construction would be the main source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. GHG emissions during construction of the Proposed Project would be estimated using CalEEMod. Impacts associated with GHG emissions would be determined by comparing project GHG emissions during construction to BCAQMD’s recommended thresholds for GHG emissions contained in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
 Biological Resources. The Town is completing field surveys to catalogue protected species and habitat conditions including wetlands and vernal pools. The EIR will consider impacts of proposed trenching and trenchless construction methods on biological resources.  Cultural Resources. Potential impacts on cultural resources that could occur during grounddisturbing construction activities will be evaluated. An initial historic records search was completed, and intensive pedestrian surveys are being completed as part of this planning process. The findings from these studies will be used to analyze the potential physical impacts on historic, pre-historic, archaeological, and cultural resources that could result from proposed construction activities.
 Energy. A temporary increase in the consumption of energy would be required during construction, and a long-term increase in the use of energy would be required for operation of the Proposed Project. The impact analysis will assess if the Proposed Project would result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction or operation, or would conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.  Geology and Soils. Construction of the Proposed Project could result in site-specific impacts on or from local geology and soils conditions. Potential impacts related to geologic, seismic, and soils constraints will be assessed. Potential impacts on paleontological resources and mineral resources will also be considered.
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials will be evaluated, including the potential hazardous materials associated with transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction and potential hazardous emissions or hazardous materials used during construction and operation of the Proposed Project.
 Hydrology and Water Quality. Potential impacts on hydrology and water quality will be described based on qualitative assessment of Project construction activities. No permanent changes to hydrology are expected to result from the Proposed Project.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 18 of 116
932
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
 Land Use and Planning. Although the Proposed Project is not expected to change existing land use, the EIR will evaluate zoning within the sewer service area in relation to current and future development.
 Noise. Potential construction-period noise and vibration impacts on sensitive receptors (residences) near the Proposed Project will be assessed. Operational noise will also be analyzed in the EIR.
 Population and Housing. While the Proposed Project is not a response to the recovery effort from population and housing loss associated with the 2018 Camp Fire, the Proposed Project could lead to new opportunities for population and housing in the sewer service area. It is not anticipated that siting of the Proposed Project would lead to housing displacement. The balance of current and planned housing in the sewer service area would be considered against the Chico WPCP capacity.
 Public Services. Impacts on fire protection services, law enforcement services, schools, and other public services will be evaluated based on available information.  Recreation. Potential impacts on existing recreational resources will be evaluated. It is not anticipated that the Proposed Project would affect existing recreational facilities or activities.  Transportation. Because much of the proposed collection and export pipeline would be constructed in or adjacent to existing roadways, impacts on transportation are expected.

Construction-related vehicle trips will be estimated, and temporary construction-related traffic will be evaluated to identify any hazardous conditions on roadways or inadequacies in emergency access that may result during construction of the Proposed Project.  Tribal Cultural Resources. The Town is coordinating with interested tribes in accordance with Assembly Bill 52. Impacts on tribal cultural resources will be evaluated based on discussions with tribes regarding the relationship of the Proposed Project to the ongoing practice of traditional life ways.
 Utilities and Service Systems. The Proposed Project would introduce a new utility and service system, which will be analyzed. Construction and operation of the Proposed Project would raise demands on water supply and power utilities.
 Wildfire. The Proposed Project is in a state responsibility area, traversing moderate and high fire hazard severity zones. Therefore, this evaluation will focus on the potential for construction activities to impair an emergency response or evacuation plan, exacerbate wildfire risks, and expose people to risks due to post-fire effects, consistent with standards in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. The focus will be on elements of construction that could exacerbate fire hazard risks; however, once construction is completed, the underground pipeline would not create conditions that would affect wildland fire risks.  Other Sections. The EIR will include additional topics as required by the CEQA Guidelines, including significant irreversible environmental changes, growth inducement, cumulative Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 19 of 116
933
Paradise Sewer Project | Notice of Preparation
impacts, and alternatives. The EIR will describe and evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives to the Proposed Project that would feasibly attain most or all of the Proposed Project’s basic objectives while avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the Proposed Project. These alternatives may include alternative pipeline routes. For each alternative, the EIR will assess the degree to which it might reduce one or more identified significant project impacts, whether it could result in other new or increased impacts, its feasibility, and the degree to which it is consistent with the Proposed Project objectives. The “No Project” alternative will also be evaluated as required by CEQA.

Further Information
For environmental review information or questions about the Proposed Project, please contact us at through our project website at paradisesewer.com/contact (from subject dropdown menu, select “Submit a comment on Environmental Impact Report”) or by calling us at 530-872-6291, ext. 112 Sincerely,
4/23/2021
Marc Mattox
Town of Paradise Director of Public Works
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 20 of 116
934
Attachment B
Public Notice Advertisement
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 21 of 116
935

PUBLIC NOTICE

NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

AND PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING NOTICE
The Town of Paradise (Town) as the Lead Agency for the Paradise Sewer Project (Proposed Project) has issued this Notice of Preparation (NOP) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to notify responsible and trustee agencies and other interested parties that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be prepared to evaluate potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Project. The Town is soliciting public input regarding the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR. The NOP provides information about the public review and comment period, project location, project description, and the probable environmental effects of the Proposed Project, and is posted on the Town’s website at paradisesewer.com.

PUBLIC REVIEW & COMMENT PERIOD: May 3 to June 3, 2021
Since its incorporation in 1979, the Town has sought a formal wastewater treatment solution for the community, with service for commercial and densely populated residential areas being a priority. Failed and failing septic systems create the potential for public health and environmental concerns and have limited economic growth. Prior to the Camp Fire, which almost completely destroyed the town in 2018, Paradise was the largest unsewered community in California. The Town has supported numerous studies to address its need for a centralized wastewater treatment solution, and in its most recent study, the Town identified a proposed sewer service area. The proposed sewer service area includes the Town’s commercial corridors, and as described in the 2017 study, it represented the area that had the most septic systems that had failed or were projected to fail by 2022.

The Proposed Project consists of three constructed components—a wastewater collection system in Paradise, an 18-mile export pipeline to convey wastewater to the Chico WPCP, and connection to the WPCP—and operation of the new sewer system. The export pipeline would begin at the southwest edge of Paradise and run for approximately 8 miles along Skyway until reaching south Chico, at which point the pipeline would leave Skyway and continue west, crossing Butte Creek, Highway 99, and the Union Pacific Railroad, and terminating at the Chico WPCP in Chico. The Proposed Project would not change the service area of the Chico WPCP other than the addition of the Paradise connection and treatment. Moreover, there would be no additional fees for Chico residents and rate payers as a result of the Proposed Project.

The EIR process will assess the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project on the physical, human, and natural environment. A wide variety of resource areas will be studied during the environmental review to identify potential impacts, including aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utilities and service systems, wildfire, and additional topics as required by the CEQA Guidelines including significant irreversible environmental changes, growth inducement, cumulative impacts, and alternatives. Measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate any potential adverse impacts will be identified and evaluated in the EIR.

VIRTUAL PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGS
A 30-day public scoping process is being initiated with this notice. Responsible and Trustee Agencies, involved federal agencies, interest groups, and members of the public are invited to participate and provide valuable input into the scope of the EIR. For your convenience, and to allow participation in a safe environment while social distancing, two virtual public scoping meetings will be held during the project’s 30-day scoping period. Please join us at one of the following meetings to learn about the project, interact with project team members, ask questions, and submit formal comments.

THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2021 | 6 P.M.

Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg1
Webex Password: Paradise
Dial-in #: 408-418-9388 | Code: 123 202 6837
TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 | 12 P.M.

Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2
Webex Password: Paradise
Dial-in #: 408-418-9388 | Code: 123 877 2748
Submission of comments on the environmental scope of the Project are invited from all interested parties from May 3, 2021 until 5 p.m. PST on June 3, 2021. Comments can be submitted via the website at paradisesewer.com/contact (from subject dropdown menu, select “Submit a comment on Environmental Impact Report”) or via the following options:

Telephone: 530-872-6291, ext. 112 Mail: Colette Curtis, Public Information Officer Town of Paradise
5555 Skyway, Paradise, CA 95969
For additional accessibility preferences, please submit a message on the project website at paradisesewer.com/contact (from subject dropdown menu, select “Submit a comment on Environmental Impact Report”). Persons who are deaf, hard of hearing, or speech impaired (TDD) may contact the California Relay Service TTY and/or Voice Line at 1-800-735-2929, or 711.

SUBMITTING COMMENTS

SPECIAL MEETING ACCOMMODATIONS

PROJECT OVERVIEW

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 22 of 116
936
Attachment C
Press Release
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 23 of 116
937
May 3, 2021

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Media Contact: Colette Curtis
Public information Officer
Town of Paradise
[email protected]
530-872-6291 ext. 112
Town of Paradise Launches Environmental Review
for Paradise Sewer Project
Public input solicited on environmental scope and content of EIR Paradise, CA – On Monday, May 3, the Town of Paradise (Town), and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Lead Agency, officially launched the environmental review process for the Paradise Sewer Project with a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Virtual Public Scoping Meetings. The Town is soliciting public input regarding the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR.

PROJECT OVERVIEW
Since its incorporation in 1979, the Town has sought a formal wastewater treatment solution for the community, with service for commercial and densely populated residential areas being a priority. Failed and failing septic systems create the potential for public health and environmental concerns and have limited economic growth. Prior to the Camp Fire, which almost completely destroyed the town in 2018, Paradise was the largest unsewered community in California. Numerous studies have supported the need for a centralized wastewater treatment solution, and in its most recent study, the Town identified a proposed sewer service area. The proposed sewer service area includes the Town’s commercial corridors, and as described in the 2017 study, it represented the area that had the most septic systems that had failed or were projected to fail by 2022. A map of the proposed sewer service area can be found on the project website here.

The Proposed Project consists of three constructed components—a wastewater collection system in Paradise, an 18-mile export pipeline to convey wastewater to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP), and connection to the WPCP — and operation of the new sewer system. The export pipeline would begin at the southwest edge of Paradise and run for approximately 8 miles along Skyway until reaching south Chico, at which point the pipeline would leave Skyway and continue west, crossing Butte Creek, Highway 99, and the Union Pacific Railroad, and terminating at the Chico WPCP in Chico. The Proposed Project would not change the service area of the Chico WPCP other than the addition of the Paradise connection and treatment. Moreover, there would be no additional fees for Chico residents and existing Chico WPCP rate payers as a result of the Proposed Project. This long-term wastewater solution will allow for sustainable housing and business activity in Town, supporting the community’s economic recovery and vitality.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 24 of 116
938

LEARN MORE AT UPCOMING VIRTUAL PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGS
As an initial step within the CEQA process, project scoping allows the Town to seek public and stakeholder input on the environmental scope of the project. To provide convenient participation in a safe environment while social distancing, the Town is hosting two virtual public scoping meetings during the project’s 30-day public comment period to allow attendees to learn about the project, interact with project team members, ask questions and submit formal comments.

THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2021 | 6 P.M. TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 | 12 P.M.

ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg1
 Webex Password: Paradise
BY PHONE:
 Dial-in #: 408-418-9388
 Code: 123 202 6837
ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2
 Webex Password: Paradise
BY PHONE:
 Dial-in #: 408-418-9388
 Code: 123 877 2748
For additional accessibility preferences, please submit a message on the project website at paradisesewer.com/contact (from subject dropdown menu, select “Submit a comment on Environmental Impact Report”). Persons who are deaf, hard of hearing, or speech impaired (TDD) may contact the California Relay Service TTY and/or Voice Line at 1-800-735-2929, or 711.

SUBMITTING COMMENTS
Suggestions and comments on the scope and content of the EIR are invited from all interested parties for a period of 30 days (May 3 through June 3, 2021 by 5 p.m. PDT).

Written or verbal comments concerning the Proposed Project’s environmental scope should be submitted via the following options.

Website: paradisesewer.com/contact
(from subject dropdown menu,
select “Submit a comment on
Environmental Impact Report”)
Telephone: 530-872-6291, ext. 112
Mail: Colette Curtis
Public Information Officer
Town of Paradise
5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT:

To learn more about the proposed project or to stay updated, visit paradisesewer.com. # # #
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 25 of 116
939
Attachment D
Project Website
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 26 of 116
940
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 27 of 116
941
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 28 of 116
942
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 29 of 116
943
Attachment E
E‐Blasts
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 30 of 116
944
Send on Monday, May 3, 2021
Subject: Paradise Sewer Project Environmental Scoping & Virtual Public Meetings

ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING INFORMATION & VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETINGS The Town of Paradise (Town), the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Lead Agency, officially launched the environmental review process for the Paradise Sewer Project with this Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Virtual Public Scoping Meetings.

The Town is soliciting public input regarding the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR.

LEARN MORE AT UPCOMING VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETINGS
For your convenience, and to allow participation in a safe environment while social distancing, two virtual public meetings will be held during the project's 30-day scoping period to allow attendees to learn about the project, interact with project team members, ask questions and submit formal comments.

THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2021 | 6 P.M. TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 | 12 P.M.

ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg1
 Webex Password: Paradise
BY PHONE:
 Dial-in #: 408-418-9388
 Code: 123 202 6837
ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2
 Webex Password: Paradise
BY PHONE:
 Dial-in #: 408-418-9388
 Code: 123 877 2748

SUBMITTING COMMENTS
Suggestions and comments on the scope and content of the EIR are invited from all interested parties for a period of 30 days (May 3 through June 3, 2021 by 5 p.m. PDT). Written or verbal comments concerning the proposed project’s environmental scope should be submitted via the following options.

Website: paradisesewer.com/contact
(from subject dropdown menu,
select “Submit a comment on
Environmental Impact Report”)
Telephone: 530-872-6291, ext. 112
Mail: Colette Curtis
Public Information Officer
Town of Paradise
5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT
To learn more about the proposed project or to stay updated, visit paradisesewer.com.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 31 of 116
945
Send on Tuesday, May 11, 2021
Subject: Paradise Sewer Project – First Virtual Public Meeting This Week REMINDER: FIRST VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETING HAPPENING THIS WEEK Don’t forget, our first virtual public meeting for the Paradise Sewer Project is this Thursday. Join us to learn more about the project, interact with team members, ask questions and submit formal comments.

JOIN ONLINE OR BY PHONE
You can participate in the meetings online or by phone to remain safe while social distancing. Your participation matters!
THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2021 | 6 P.M. TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 | 12 P.M.

ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg1
 Webex Password: Paradise
BY PHONE:
 Dial-in #: 408-418-9388
 Code: 123 202 6837
ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2
 Webex Password: Paradise
BY PHONE:
 Dial-in #: 408-418-9388
 Code: 123 877 2748

SUBMITTING COMMENTS
Even if you can’t make the meetings, suggestions/comments on the scope and content of the EIR are invited from all interested parties anytime until 5 p.m. on June 3, 2021. Written or verbal comments concerning the proposed project’s environmental scope can be submitted via the following options.

Website: paradisesewer.com/contact
(from subject dropdown
menu, select “Submit a
comment on Environmental
Impact Report”)
Telephone: 530-872-6291, ext. 112
Mail: Colette Curtis
Public Information Officer
Town of Paradise
5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT
To learn more about the proposed project or to stay updated, visit paradisesewer.com.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 32 of 116
946
Send week of May 17, 2021
Subject: Paradise Sewer Project – Second Virtual Public Meeting Next Week DID YOU MISS LAST WEEK’S VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETING?
In case you missed our first virtual public meeting last week for the Paradise Sewer Project, we’re hosting a second meeting next Tuesday, May 25 at Noon. Your participation and input matters so don’t miss the discussion on this important proposed project.

JOIN ONLINE OR BY PHONE
You can participate in the meeting online or by phone. Join us to learn more about the project, interact with team members, ask questions and submit formal comments. We look forward to connecting with you!
TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 | 12 P.M.

ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2
 Webex Password: Paradise
BY PHONE:
 Dial-in #: 408-418-9388
 Code: 123 877 2748
SUBMIT COMMENTS ANYTIME UNTIL JUNE 3
Suggestions and comments on the scope and content of the EIR are invited from all interested parties anytime until 5 p.m. on June 3, 2021. Written or verbal comments concerning the proposed project’s environmental scope can be submitted via the following options.

Website: paradisesewer.com/contact
(from subject dropdown
menu, select “Submit a
comment on Environmental
Impact Report”)
Telephone: 530-872-6291, ext. 112
Mail: Colette Curtis
Public Information Officer
Town of Paradise
5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969

STAY INVOLVED
To learn more about the proposed project or to stay updated, visit paradisesewer.com.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 33 of 116
947
Send on Thursday, May 27, 2021
Subject: Thank You for Attending our Paradise Sewer Project Virtual Public Meetings THANK YOU FOR ENGAGING WITH US!
Thank you for joining us this month for our two virtual public scoping meetings for the Paradise Sewer Project. The Town of Paradise appreciates your input during the meetings and ongoing participation in this project.

THERE’S STILL TIME TO SUBMIT COMMENTS
If you didn’t get a chance to attend our meetings, please visit our Public Engagement page to view the meeting recordings and PowerPoint. We still welcome your input regarding the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the Environmental Impact Report. You can submit a comment or letter of support through a number of ways during our public comment period that ends at 5 p.m. PDT on June 3, 2021.

Website: paradisesewer.com/contact
(from subject dropdown menu,
select “Submit a comment on
Environmental Impact Report”)
Telephone: 530-872-6291, ext. 112
Mail: Colette Curtis
Public Information Officer
Town of Paradise
5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969

STAY UPDATED
We thank you for your continued interest in the vital proposed project and encourage you to stay updated throughout the various project milestones by visiting paradisesewer.com! Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 34 of 116
948
Attachment F
Social Media
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 35 of 116
949
@ Town of Paradise
May3, 2021
Paradise Sewer Project - Environmental Review Update
We have kicked o ff the environment al review of the Paradise Sewer Project and want your input. This vital proposed Project will provide a long-term solution for wastewater collection, transport and treatment from properties identified in the proposed sewer service area, which is encompassed mostly by Clark Road, Skyway and Pearson Road. This long-term wastewater solution will allow for sustainable housing and business activity in Town, supporting the community's economic recovery and vitality.

Visit paradisesewer.com to learn more about the environmental review process and this initial public comment period that will end at 5 p.m.

PDT on June 3.

TOWN OF PARADISE

SEWER PROJECT
3 Comments 14 Shares
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 36 of 116
950
@ Town of Parad ise
May 3, 2021
Paradise Sewer Project Public Scoping Meetings
Don't forget, we're hosting our first of two virtual public meetings this Thursday for the Paradise Sewer Project. Your participation and input matters so join us online or by phone to learn more about this vital proposed project and talk directly with the project team.

Visit www.paradisesewer.com for meeting details or to submit comments during the project's 30-day scoping period, which will end at 5 p.m. PDT on June 3.

SEWER
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 37 of 116
951
Town of Paradise
May 2021
If you missed our first virtual public meeting last week for the Paradise Sewer Project don't worry, we're hosting a second meeting next Tuesday, May 25 at Noon. Don't miss the discussion on this important proposed project. We look forward to connecting with you! Visit www.paradisesewer.com for meeting details or to submit comments during the project's 30-day scoping period, which ends June 3 at 5 p.m. PDT.

TOWN OF PARADISE

SEWER PROJECT
0 0 9 4 Comments 6 Shares
@
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 38 of 116
952
Town of Paradise
May 27, 2021
Thank you for joining us this month for our two virtual public scoping meeting s for the Paradise Sewer Project. If you didn't get a chance to attend our meetings. we still welcome your input regarding the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the Environmental Impact Report.

You can submit a comment or a letter of support through a number of ways during our public comment period that ends at 5 p.m. PDT on June 3, 2021. Send us an email. leave a voicemail, write a letter. or connect with the project team via our website contact page.

We appreciate your ongoing interest in this vital proposed project and encourage you to stay updated throughout the various project milestones by visiting www.paradisesewer.com.
@
== ==
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 39 of 116
953
Attachment G
Virtual Public Meeting Presentation
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 40 of 116
954
Public Scoping Meeting for
the Environmental Impact ReportThursday, May 13, 2021 | 6 p.m.Tuesday, May 25, 2021 | Noon Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 41 of 116
955
Agenda
Purpose & Introductions
Meeting LogisticsProject Overview
CEQA Overview
Public Comment
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 42 of 116
956
Meeting Logistics
• Meeting is being recorded for documentation • Until the Q&A session begins, attendees will be muted for best audio quality • Opportunity to comment/ask questions during facilitated Q&A session. • Instructions will be displayed onscreen:
• Type questions/comments into Q&A box (chat box will be disabled) • Raise hand then wait to be called upon and unmuted
• Time Limit: 2 minutes per person• If unable to answer questions or run out of time, will follow-up with all Q&A in writing • For more information, visit paradisesewer.com TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 43 of 116
957
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Project Overview
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 44 of 116
958
Project Components
COLLECTIONA series of gravity sewers, small pump stations, and pressure lines will collect wastewater from the Sewer Service Area and convey it to the southwest edge of Paradise.

TRANSPORTA single pipeline will convey Paradise wastewater down Skyway and across south Chico to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP).

TREATMENTAt the Chico WPCP, Paradise wastewater will blend with Chico wastewater. The combined flow will receive high-level treatment before discharging to the Sacramento River.

TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 45 of 116
959
Project Area Map
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 46 of 116
960
Sewer Service Area
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 47 of 116
961
Export Pipeline – South Chico Area
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 48 of 116
962
Project Costs
Proposed project currently estimated to cost approximately$184 million $2M
EIR
(fully funded)
$30M
Design and
Right-of-way
$152M
Construction
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 49 of 116
963
Project Schedule

WE ARE HERE
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 50 of 116
964
Project Benefits
Paradise Sewer Project will bring many benefits to the region:

Provide wastewater
disposal surety to help
businesses and jobs
return to Paradise and
spur economic recovery
Improve Paradise
groundwater quality by
decreasing septic tank
discharges
Allow for more denselypopulated residential
development in the Town
to increase
affordable/multi-family
housing
Create a wastewater
solution supported by the
Central Valley Regional
Water Quality Control
Board and partner
agencies to help create
opportunities for
additional funding
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 51 of 116
965
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
CEQA Overview
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 52 of 116
966
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
PROJECTA discretionary action by a public agency that has the potential to result in a physical change in the environment, either directly or indirectly TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 53 of 116
967
CEQA (continued)
Inform agency decision-makers and the public of significant project environmental effectsIdentify feasible ways to avoid or reduce significant impacts, including mitigation measures and alternativesProvide an opportunity for the public and agencies to comment on the environmental analyses Purpose of CEQA
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 54 of 116
968
CEQA (continued)
SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENTA substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in physical conditions within the project area TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 55 of 116
969
CEQA (continued)
TECHNICAL RESOURCES BEING CONSIDERED:

Land Use Agriculture RecreationAesthetics & Visual Resources Air QualityGreenhouse Gas Emissions NoiseEnergyGeology and Soils Hydrology & Water Quality Biological Resources Cultural ResourcesTribal Cultural Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services & Utilities Population & Housing TransportationWildfire Other CEQA Topics:
• Growth Inducement • Cumulative Impacts • Alternatives • Impacts Not Significant • Summary of Impacts Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 56 of 116
970
Key Decision Makers

CEQA LEAD AGENCY RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Other Responsible or Trustee Agencies may be identified through planning process.

The Town has initiated tribal notifications in accordance with Assembly Bill 52.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 57 of 116
971
CEQA Process
Notice of Preparation (NOP) of EIRLAUNCHED | MAY 3, 2021 Scoping & Minimum 30-Day Public Comment Period — Public Scoping MeetingPUBLIC REVIEW & COMMENT PERIOD | MAY 3 – JUNE 3, 2021 Draft EIR DevelopmentMAY / JUNE 2021Draft EIR Minimum 45-Day Circulation for Public/Agency Review & Comment — Public MeetingPUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITY | WINTER 2022Final EIR, Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting ProgramSUMMER 2022Decision/Notice of Determination — Public Hearing PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITY | SUMMER 2022 TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 58 of 116
972
Proactive Public Engagement
Public engagement program designed to:
• Provide convenient
and timely information
• Educate and inform
about the project
• Seek public
participation throughout environmental planning process TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Provide Presentations to Local GroupsDistribute Educational MaterialsFacilitate Public Input on EIRHost Public MeetingsForm Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory CommitteeCoordinate with Media Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 59 of 116
973
Project Schedule

WE ARE HERE
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 60 of 116
974
How to Provide Comments
Provide comments during today’s meetingparadisesewer.com(from subject dropdown menu, select “Submit a comment on Environmental Impact Report”)(530) 872-6291, ext. 112Colette CurtisPublic Information Officer Town of Paradise5555 SkywayParadise, CA 95969 We invite your comments on:
• Environmental issues that should
be studied
• Nature and extent of potential
environmental impacts
• Methods of analysis
• Measures that could reduce
environmental impacts
• Alternatives that could avoid
or reduce impacts
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Suggestions & comments accepted
until 5 p.m. PDT on June 3, 2021
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 61 of 116
975
Q&A Session: How to Participate
RAISE YOUR HAND• Select raise hand
• Internet Browser: , then• Webex Software: , then• Mobile App: , then • Wait to be called upon and unmuted• Lower hand after speaking

DIALED-IN BY PHONE
• Press *3 to “Raise/Lower Hand”
TIME LIMIT: 2 minutes per person

SUBMIT QUESTIONS
• Select appropriate icon
• Internet Browser:• Webex Software: “ Q&A” • Mobile App: , then • Type question/comment into Q&A box
• Moderator will read question/comment
aloud for panelists’ response
• Chat box will be disabled during meeting
If unable to answer questions or run out of time, we’ll follow-up with all Q&A in writing TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 62 of 116
976
Stay Informed
paradisesewer.com
(530) 872-6291, ext. 112
Town of Paradise5555 Skyway, Paradise, CA 95969
TOWN OF PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | www.paradisesewer.com
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL townofparadise Town of Paradise
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 63 of 116
977
Attachment H
Comment Matrix
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 64 of 116
978
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION 4/8/2111:06 a.m.

Myron Coleman
Coleman Pipelines6300 Stiffer RdMagalia, CA 95954530‐413‐3490 [email protected]
Website Good morning my name is Myron Coleman owner of Coleman Pipelines. I was wondering when will the bids be coming for subcontractors. Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
4/20/218:26 a.m.

Matt Rogers1115 E Ewald Ct, Suite A
Paradise, CA [email protected]
Website Good morning.

Are there any estimates of how much it will cost individual properties to hook up to the proposed sewer line?
4/28/2110:21 a.m.

Jacquelyn6777 Moore RdParadise, CA 95969
[email protected]
Website My home is being rebuilt at 6777 Moore rd. It looks like I am aligned to get the sewer but have concerns. I am downslope from skyway and worry about hydrologic pressure andneeding it to flow uphill. My homes septic is downslope from my house too I worry about what the monthly charge as I am a senior on a fixed income 5/3/2112:02 p.m.

Sasha Poe
1043 Central park Dr
Paradise, CA [email protected]
Website I have asked numerous times for our Community Commercial to be included in Sewer Plans. No one has responded. My lot 1043 Central Park should be included in sewer district addresses as it is community commercial!! Please call me 530‐327‐4949 5/3/21 Nancy Gonzalez‐Lopez
Cultural Resources Analyst
Native American Heritage Commission
1550 Harbor Boulevard, Suite 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
(916) 373‐3710
Nancy.Gonzalez‐[email protected]
Letter May 3, 2021
Colette CurtisTown of Paradise5555 SkywayParadise, CA 95969Re: 2021050008, Paradise Sewer Project, Butte CountyDear Ms. Curtis:The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) has received the Notice of Preparation(NOP), Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) or Early Consultation for the project referenced above. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code §21000 et seq.), specifically Public Resources Code §21084.1, states that a project thatmay cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. (Pub. Resources Code § 21084.1; Cal. Code Regs., tit.14, §15064.5 (b) (CEQA Guidelines §15064.5 (b)). If there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before a lead agency, that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) shall be prepared. (Pub. Resources Code §21080 (d); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 5064 subd.(a)(1)(CEQA Guidelines §15064 (a)(1)). In order to determine whether a project will cause asubstantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, a lead agency will Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 65 of 116
979
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION need to determine whether there are historical resources within the area of potentialeffect (APE).

CEQA was amended significantly in 2014. Assembly Bill 52 (Gatto, Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014) (AB 52) amended CEQA to create a separate category of cultural resources, “tribalcultural resources” (Pub. Resources Code §21074) and provides that a project with aneffect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. (Pub.

Resources Code §21084.2). Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects toany tribal cultural resource. (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)). AB 52 applies to anyproject for which a notice of preparation, a notice of negative declaration, or a mitigatednegative declaration is filed on or after July 1, 2015. If your project involves the adoption of or amendment to a general plan or a specific plan, or the designation or proposed designation of open space, on or after March 1, 2005, it may also be subject to Senate Bill 18 (Burton, Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004) (SB 18). Both SB 18 and AB 52 have tribal consultation requirements. If your project is also subject to the federal NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.) (NEPA), the tribal consultationrequirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (154 U.S.C. 300101, 36 C.F.R. §800 et seq.) may also apply.

The NAHC recommends consultation with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of your proposed project asearly as possible in order to avoid inadvertent discoveries of Native American human remains and best protect tribal cultural resources. Below is a brief summary of portions ofAB 52 and SB 18 as well as the NAHC’s recommendations for conducting cultural resourcesassessments.

Consult your legal counsel about compliance with AB 52 and SB 18 as well as compliance with any other applicable laws.

AB 52
AB 52 has added to CEQA the additional requirements listed below, along with many otherrequirements:1. Fourteen Day Period to Provide Notice of Completion of an Application/Decision toUndertake a Project: Within fourteen (14) days of determining that an application for aproject is complete or of a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, a lead agency shall provide formal notification to a designated contact of, or tribal representativeof, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, to be accomplished by at least one written notice that includes:
a. A brief description of the project.b. The lead agency contact information.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 66 of 116
980
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION c. Notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to requestconsultation. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1 (d)).d. A “California Native American tribe” is defined as a Native American tribe located inCalifornia that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC for the purposes of Chapter 905 of Statutes of 2004 (SB 18). (Pub. Resources Code §21073).

2. Begin Consultation Within 30 Days of Receiving a Tribe’s Request for Consultation andBefore Releasing a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, orEnvironmental Impact Report: A lead agency shall begin the consultation process within30 days of receiving a request for consultation from a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1, subds. (d) and (e)) and prior to the release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration or Environmental Impact Report. (Pub.Resources Code §21080.3.1(b)).a. For purposes of AB 52, “consultation shall have the same meaning as provided in Gov.

Code §65352.4 (SB 18). (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1 (b)).

3. Mandatory Topics of Consultation If Requested by a Tribe: The following topics ofconsultation, if a tribe requests to discuss them, are mandatory topics of consultation:
a. Alternatives to the project.b. Recommended mitigation measures.c. Significant effects. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (a)).

4. Discretionary Topics of Consultation: The following topics are discretionary topics ofconsultation:
a. Type of environmental review necessary.b. Significance of the tribal cultural resources.c. Significance of the project’s impacts on tribal cultural resources. d. If necessary, project alternatives or appropriate measures for preservation or mitigationthat the tribe may recommend to the lead agency. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (a)).5. Confidentiality of Information Submitted by a Tribe During the Environmental ReviewProcess: With some exceptions, any information, including but not limited to, the location,description, and use of tribal cultural resources submitted by a California Native American tribe during the environmental review process shall not be included in the environmentaldocument or otherwise disclosed by the lead agency or any other public agency to the public, consistent with Government Code §6254 (r) and §6254.10. Any informationsubmitted by a California Native American tribe during the consultation or environmental review process shall be published in a confidential appendix to the environmentaldocument unless the tribe that provided the information consents, in writing, to the disclosure of some or all of the information to the public. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3(c)(1)).

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 67 of 116
981
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION

6. Discussion of Impactsto Tribal Cultural Resources in the Environmental Document: If aproject may have a significant impact on a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency’s environmental document shall discuss both of the following:a. Whether the proposed project has a significant impact on an identified tribal cultural resource.b. Whether feasible alternatives or mitigation measures, including those measures thatmay be agreed to pursuant to Public Resources Code §21082.3, subdivision (a), avoid or substantially lessen the impact on the identified tribal cultural resource. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (b)).

7. Conclusion of Consultation: Consultation with a tribe shall be considered concludedwhen either of the following occurs:a. The parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect, if a significanteffect exists, on a tribal cultural resource; orb. A party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutualagreement cannot be reached. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (b)).8. Recommending Mitigation Measures Agreed Upon in Consultation in the EnvironmentalDocument: Any mitigation measures agreed upon in the consultation conducted pursuantto Public Resources Code §21080.3.2 shall be recommended for inclusion in theenvironmental document and in an adopted mitigation monitoring and reporting program,if determined to avoid or lessen the impact pursuant to Public Resources Code §21082.3,subdivision (b), paragraph 2, and shall be fully enforceable. (Pub. Resources Code§21082.3 (a)).9. Required Consideration of Feasible Mitigation: If mitigation measures recommended bythe staff of the lead agency as a result of the consultation process are not included in theenvironmental document or if there are no agreed upon mitigation measures at the conclusion of consultation, or if consultation does not occur, and if substantial evidencedemonstrates that a project will cause a significant effect to a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency shall consider feasible mitigation pursuant to Public Resources Code §21084.3 (b). (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (e)).

10. Examples of Mitigation Measures That, If Feasible, May Be Considered to Avoid orMinimize Significant Adverse Impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources:
a. Avoidance and preservation of the resources in place, including, but not limited to:
i. Planning and construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural andnatural context.ii. Planning greenspace, parks, or other open space, to incorporate the resources with culturally appropriate protection and management criteria.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 68 of 116
982
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION b. Treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity, taking into account the tribal cultural values and meaning of the resource, including, but not limited to, thefollowing:
i. Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource. ii. Protecting the traditional use of the resource.
iii. Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
c. Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property, with culturally appropriate management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizingthe resources or places.d. Protecting the resource. (Pub. Resource Code §21084.3 (b)).e. Please note that a federally recognized California Native American tribe or a non‐ federally recognized California Native American tribe that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC to protect a California prehistoric, archaeological, cultural,spiritual, or ceremonial place may acquire and hold conservation easements if the conservation easement is voluntarily conveyed. (Civ. Code §815.3 (c)). f. Please note that it is the policy of the state that Native American remains and associated grave artifacts shall be repatriated. (Pub. Resources Code §5097.991).

11. Prerequisites for Certifying an Environmental Impact Report or Adopting a MitigatedNegative Declaration or Negative Declaration with a Significant Impact on an IdentifiedTribal Cultural Resource: An Environmental Impact Report may not be certified, nor may amitigated negative declaration or a negative declaration be adopted unless one of the following occurs:a. The consultation process between the tribes and the lead agency has occurred asprovided in Public Resources Code §21080.3.1 and §21080.3.2 and concluded pursuant toPublic Resources Code §21080.3.2.b. The tribe that requested consultation failed to provide comments to the lead agency or otherwise failed to engage in the consultation process.c. The lead agency provided notice of the project to the tribe in compliance with Public Resources Code §21080.3.1 (d) and the tribe failed to request consultation within 30 days. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (d)).

The NAHC’s PowerPoint presentation titled, “Tribal Consultation Under AB 52:

Requirements and Best Practices” may be found online at: http://nahc.ca.gov/wp‐ content/uploads/2015/10/AB52TribalConsultation_CalEPAPDF.pdf SB 18
SB 18 applies to local governments and requires local governments to contact, providenotice to, refer plans to, and consult with tribes prior to the adoption or amendment of a general plan or a specific plan, or the designation of open space. (Gov. Code §65352.3).Local governments should consult the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research’s “Tribal Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 69 of 116
983
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION Consultation Guidelines,” which can be found online at:https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/09_14_05_Updated_Guidelines_922.pdf.

Some of SB 18’s provisions include:1. Tribal Consultation: If a local government considers a proposal to adopt or amend ageneral plan or a specific plan, or to designate open space it is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the NAHC by requesting a “Tribal Consultation List.” If a tribe, once contacted, requests consultation the local government must consult with thetribe on the plan proposal. A tribe has 90 days from the date of receipt of notification torequest consultation unless a shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe. (Gov.

Code §65352.3 (a)(2)).2. No Statutory Time Limit on SB 18 Tribal Consultation. There is no statutory time limit on SB 18 tribal consultation.3. Confidentiality: Consistent with the guidelines developed and adopted by the Office ofPlanning and Research pursuant to Gov. Code §65040.2, the city or county shall protect the confidentiality of the information concerning the specific identity, location, character, and use of places, features and objects described in Public Resources Code §5097.9 and§5097.993 that are within the city’s or county’s jurisdiction. (Gov. Code §65352.3 (b)).4. Conclusion of SB 18 Tribal Consultation: Consultation should be concluded at the point in which:a. The parties to the consultation come to a mutual agreement concerning theappropriate measures for preservation or mitigation; or b. Either the local government or the tribe, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached concerning the appropriate measures of preservation or mitigation. (Tribal Consultation Guidelines, Governor’s Officeof Planning and Research (2005) at p. 18).

Agencies should be aware that neither AB 52 nor SB 18 precludes agencies from initiating tribal consultation with tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with their jurisdictions before the timeframes provided in AB 52 and SB 18. For that reason, we urgeyou to continue to request Native American Tribal Contact Lists and “Sacred Lands File”searches from the NAHC. The request forms can be found online at:
http://nahc.ca.gov/resources/forms/.NAHC Recommendations for Cultural Resources Assessments To adequately assess the existence and significance of tribal cultural resources and plan for avoidance, preservation in place, or barring both, mitigation of project‐related impacts to tribal cultural resources, the NAHC recommends the following actions:

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 70 of 116
984
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION

1. Contact the appropriate regional California Historical Research Information System (CHRIS) Center (http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=1068) for an archaeological records search. The records search will determine:
a. If part or all of the APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources.b. If any known cultural resources have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE.c. If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE.d. If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded culturalresources are present.

2. If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and recommendations of the records search andfield survey. a. The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measuresshould be submitted immediately to the planning department. All informationregarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum and not be made available for public disclosure.b. The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has beencompleted to the appropriate regional CHRIS center.

3. Contact the NAHC for:
a. A Sacred Lands File search. Remember that tribes do not always record their sacred sites in the Sacred Lands File, nor are they required to do so. A Sacred Lands File search is not a substitute for consultation with tribes that are traditionally andculturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project’s APE.b. A Native American Tribal Consultation List of appropriate tribes for consultation concerning the project site and to assist in planning for avoidance, preservation inplace, or, failing both, mitigation measures.

4. Remember that the lack of surface evidence of archaeological resources (including tribal cultural resources) does not preclude their subsurface existence. a. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of inadvertently discoveredarchaeological resources per Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §15064.5(f) (CEQA Guidelines§15064.5(f)). In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native American with knowledge of cultural resources should monitor all ground‐disturbing activities.b. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting programplans provisions for the disposition of recovered cultural items that are not burialassociated in consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 71 of 116
985
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION c. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plans provisions for the treatment and disposition of inadvertently discovered Native American human remains. Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097.98, and Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §15064.5, subdivisions (d) and (e) (CEQA Guidelines §15064.5, subds. (d) and (e)) address the processes to be followed in the event of an inadvertent discovery of any Native American human remains and associated grave goods in a location other than a dedicated cemetery.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: Nancy.Gonzalez‐[email protected].

Sincerely,
Nancy Gonzalez‐LopezCultural Resources Analyst
cc: State Clearinghouse
2021050008_NAHC
Comment.pdf
5/11/21 Sandra Peltola
Box 501
Fort Bragg, CA 95437
[email protected]
Website What will be the cost be to each property owner? How will it be charged to the property owners? A tax bond? Do Owners get to vote on whether they want sewers in Paradise? What if they want to opt out, if it goes through? After all the community has been through, I think it should be shelved until at least 10 years has passed since the horrific and life changing fire. Bring it up after people have either been paid by PGE lawsuit, rebuilt, or sold their properties. It would be heartless to expect owners to pay for this measure, and possibly never see the project finished, or be able to use it as they have not re‐built. I vote NO on Paradise Sewer Project!
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 72 of 116
986
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION 5/13/21
4:04 p.m.

Richard HarrimanGeneral Counsel
Northern California Environmental Defense
Center1078 Via Verona DriveChico, CA 95973‐1031
[email protected]
Website 1. The most important issues regarding this proposed project are the Project Description and the Alternatives Analysis.

2. The stated purpose of the project is to redevelop the Town of Paradise and restorehousing opportunities for the TOP, which will also cause accelerated growth and potentially significant indirect and secondary unplanned adverse environmental effects in the unincorporated areas of the County. However, project consultants have stated inopen public meetings that this project will notbe completed for between 5‐10 years.

3. This fact raises significant questions regarding the true purpose and intent of theproposed project, which are to accelerate and increase urban growth and developmentin the City of Chico. This will require a comprehensive update of the City of Chico'sGeneral Plan and the certification of a new EIR for the General Plan update. This will require substantially more time to complete the proposed project and will significantly increase the cost of the project, which is currently estimated at approximately $180million dollars.4. The project, as proposed, cannot, and will not, achieve the purpose of expediting the redevelopment of the TOP, and will greatly increase unplanned growth in the City ofChico and in the County's jurisdiction surrounding the City of Chico. The project as described is inconsistent with the purpose, goal, and objective of the project.5. Therefore, the Project Description needs to be re‐defined and re‐stated to be stable, finite, and ACCURATE.6. Further, other alternatives for smaller de‐centralized specially designed and engineered treatment facilities must be re‐analyzed and re‐considered and included inthe Project Alternatives analysis.7. Finally, given the fact that the City of Chico's Capital Improvement Program has not publicly disclosed what the cost of the project will be to the residents and rate payers ofthe City of Chico and how the new infrastructure necessary to provide an increased supply of potable and re‐cycled water and transportation infrastructure and Operation & Maintenance expenses will be paid by the residents and rate payers of the City of Chico.Please include these comments in the record of proceedings for the Scoping Meeting forthe proposed project.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.Very truly yours. 5/13/216:59 p.m.

Darrell Hilton117 Summerbreeze LnGrangeville, Idaho [email protected] Website My property is on Oak Way off of Billie. According to the service map the service area runs along Skyway and along Clark. But nothing in between skyway & Clark. It would be very helpful to property owners, like myself to be able to see how far off of skyway & off of Clark the service area runs. Listing street names in the general service area between Clark and skyway would be helpful
5/14/21 (3:39 p.m.): M. Norris responded via email:

Good morning Darrell,
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 73 of 116
987
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION Thank you for your message. If you follow the link tohttp://paradisesewer.com/, you can scroll down toour interactive map under “Find My Property”. Thisinteractive map will allow you to enter your street address or the Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) todetermine if your property is located within theproposed service area. The map allows you to zoom in and explore the limits of the current, proposedboundary area.

Please let us know if you have any other questions.
5/13/2111:26 a.m.

Marion Weer2277 Crest DriveFortuna, CA [email protected] Website Can you provide a physical description of the sewer transmission pipeline. What will it look like. What will be its size? Will it be above or below ground. How will it blend with the environment?
5/13/21 Chris Rehmann
[email protected]
Virtual Public
Meeting #1
Will there be any cost to property owners who are NOT in the sewage collection area? 5/13/21 Eric Salerno
[email protected]
Virtual Public
Meeting #1
What is your current project funding priority and how can Cal OES be supportive? 5/13/21 John Stonebraker
[email protected]
Virtual Public
Meeting #1
Ok, if there's time: the slide showed the Skyway route. is that confirmed? or is the Neal Road route still being considered?
5/13/21 Karen Heckman
[email protected]
Virtual Public
Meeting #1
What is the cost to the property owners?
What other future costs to property owners for things like maintenance?How will those properties not in the initial inclusive to public sewer connections be added? And when?Am I understanding correctly, those town of Paradise properties not in the blue area will not ever be included?The town consider the cost of building our own system instead of sending the sewer allthe way to Chico?Thank you for holding these meetings. 5/13/21 Kathy Roessler
[email protected]
Virtual Public
Meeting #1
Will the line installed be big enough to handle future growth? We think it's short sighted to not anticipate future growth.What if the hospital come back? 5/13/21 Mevanisko
[email protected]
Virtual Public
Meeting #1
Will parcels within the proposed service area be required to connect to the proposed sewer system?How will the construction of the proposed sewer system be coordinated with the road rebuilding efforts to minimize impact to the Town?
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 74 of 116
988
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION 5/14/213:11 p.m.

Kathy Roessler5802 Acorn Ridge DrParadise, CA [email protected] Website We think that the sewer project should consider future growth and put in a bigger pipe line going down to Chico than what the current needs call for. 5/20/211:52 p.m.

Stephen LucasExecutive OfficerButte Local Agency Formation Commission 1453 Downer Street, Suite COroville, CA 95965530‐[email protected] Email Hello Ms. Curtis,
Please find attached comments from the Butte LAFCo concerning the Town of ParadiseSewer Service Project EIR Notice of Preparation.

Cheers, Steve
Submitted Via Website: [email protected]
Collette Curtis, Public Information OfficerTown of Paradise5555 SkywayParadise, CA 95969Re: Town of Paradise Sewer Project – Notice of Preparation of Environmental Impact Report
Dear Ms. Curtis:The Butte Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) appreciates the opportunity to provide input for the Town of Paradise Sewer Project – Notice of Preparation of Environmental Impact Report that will support the proposed sewer line extension fromthe City of Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) to the Town of Paradise. This will also require the approval of an extension of services application by LAFCo as the service extension is proposed to be outside of the City’s jurisdictional and Sphere of Influence boundaries.The primary concern of LAFCo as a responsible agency with permitting authority is to ensure that the Commission is regularly consulted by affected agencies to avoid the matter being presented to the Commission for action after important decisions and milestones have been locked in. It is our understanding that coordination with LAFCo is identified as a Phase 2 implementation issue under the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) covering the selected alternative.

LAFCO’s RoleGovernment Code Section 56133(a)(b)(c) mandates that A city or district may provide newor extended services by contract or agreement outside its jurisdictional boundary only if it Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 75 of 116
989
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION first requests and receives written approval from the commission. The commission may authorize a city or district to provide new or extended services outside its jurisdictional boundary outside its jurisdictional boundary and outside its sphere of influence to respondto an existing or impending threat to the health or safety of the public or the residents of the affected territory, if the entity applying for approval has provided the commission with documentation of a threat to the health and safety of the public or the affected residents.

The proposal for the City to extend its sewage collection and/or wastewater treatment facilities to the Town falls under the purview of Section 56133 and therefore, LAFCo.Should the sewer service extension be approved by LAFCo for the proposed sewer service area boundary identified by the Town, any future adjustments to that boundary or additional sewer connections will require the consent the City as the contracted provider and LAFCo as the approving authority for the service extension request.

Provisions for extension of service requests are found in Government Code §56133 and inSection 4.5 of the Commission Policies and Procedures. Service extensions outside of anagency's Sphere of Influence may only be approved by LAFCo if there is "an existing or impending threat to the health or safety of the public or the residents of the affectedterritory. (§56133(c)) Support DocumentsThe City/Town will need to provide documentation/justification of the existing or impending public health and safety threat the extension of services would address. This is a critical prerequisite to the project as it is the only legally permissible justification available to the LAFCo to approve a service extension request outside of an agency's (Chico) Sphere of Influence.

Additionally, the City will have to demonstrate how such an arrangement will not impactits current residents or its responsibility to serve the existing parcels within its jurisdictional boundaries/service area who are not currently sewered and utilize on‐site septic systems. This would include the remaining approximately 3,000 parcels that are not currently connected to the City’s sewer infrastructure but fall under are under the Chico Urban Area Nitrate Compliance Plan which calls for the termination of on‐site septic systems as a contributor to ground water nitrate contamination. It is fundamentally critical that the City ensure that it retains adequate WCPP capacity for future servicedemands from it residents.

Along with a determination of capacity, LAFCo will also have to review the fiscal viability of the proposed extension, particularly the projected cost to Paradise residents of such service and the assurances that City residents do not in any way subsidize the proposed service.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 76 of 116
990
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION EIR‐NOP Observations/Comments:

1. Project Description ‐ The proposed project for the purposes of the EIR, should be adequately described to include not only the sewer infrastructure analysis, but the necessary Extension of Services Application that is expected to be initiated by the City of Chico and considered for approval by LAFCo. It is vitally important to recognize that limiting the “project description” to only the sewer infrastructure project will make associated regulatory agency approvals such as LAFCo’s morecomplicated. This raises the important question of just what type of governance isanticipated now by the Town and what type of governance oversight may be useful in the future such a special district or subsidiary district? For the EIR to be of the greatest value, it should consider all alternatives that may be desired now or in the future.

2. Proposed Sewer Service Area – The proposal describes the intended Sewer Service Area, which is limited primarily to the commercial and industrial land uses along Skyway, Pearson and Clark Roads. How would future sewer connection requests within the Town Sewer Service Area (not along the pipe to Chico) be addressed?There are small lot residential neighborhoods immediately adjacent to theproposed Town Sewer Service area, It seems reasonable based on early public comments to anticipate that landowners contiguous to the Town's Sewer ServiceArea/collection system with a developed use and failing septic system would desireto connect rather than repair an existing system. This is a different scenario fromnew development. Butte County Environmental Health Division regulationsrequire a landowner with a failed septic system to connect to a public sewer if theaccess is within 250 feet of the affected parcel. How will additional requests for access to sewer services be addressed?

3. Post Treatment (Recycled) Water – The Town will be sending significant quantities of effluent to the City’s WPCP, which will be treated, and under current conditions, discharged to the Sacramento River. Given the extreme focus on drought planning, the reuse of treated effluent is an ever more important source of scarce watersupplies. At some point, the City of Chico may determine that moving to tertiary treatment and reusing this valuable resource is a priority. The question is: Who will retain the rights to treated water discharged from the ChicoWPCP? Will the Town receive credit/compensation for its share of the treated effluent?

4. WPCP Concerns – How will the City and Town address future WPCP issues such as plant expansions, conversion to tertiary treatment and violations at the WPCP be addressed.

5. Administration ‐ Who will provide overall administration of the proposed sewer extension to the Town? How will customer relations such as billing, maintenance, and new connections be accomplished?

6. Governance Alternatives – Should the sewer service extension be found unworkable, or if LAFCo cannot determine a legally supportable exemption from the requirements found in GC56133, what other alternatives would be considered(such as the creation of a separate subsidiary district to provide sewer service to Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 77 of 116
991
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION both cities)? Such a reorganization would make 56133 no longer applicable, as thenew district will have its own sphere.

7. Growth Inducement ‐ Depending on the design capacity of the pipeline, its location, and its potential users, it is likely that additional development within the Town could become possible. Current on‐site wastewater treatment systemsgreatly limit development potential. Once sewer becomes available, those growth limitations no longer apply. This analysis may be difficult to accurately assess giventhe age of the Town General Plan adopted in 1994. Ideally, the 1994 General Planwould be updated based on current conditions prior to estimating future sewerage flows. Additionally, other landowners outside the City boundaries in proximity to such a sewer line may request or expect that the development of those lands bepermitted to utilize the new sewer line. The potential environmental impacts ofsuch development needs to be analyzed in the EIR unless a firm prohibition on such connections is included in the project, if not, LAFCo may consider conditions of approval that would restrict access to the sewer line to parcels only within the Town’s defined sewer service area.

8. Chico Urban Area Nitrate Compliance Plan – The Nitrate Compliance Plan was adopted in 2000 as a result of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Prohibition Orders No. 90‐126 and 905‐024 which addressed the nitrate contamination in the groundwater linked to on‐site septic systems in the ChicoUrban Area. The orders called for existing septic systems be discontinued and connections to the City sewer system be required. Much effort and resources were spent on this program and the City has installed significant new sewage collectioninfrastructure over the past decade to allow all affected parcels to connect. Howwill the City ensure that the WPCP maintains/reserves the capacity to accommodate these remaining approximately 3,000 uses on septic systems?

9. Increased Exposure to Severe Fire Hazard. Development of the project is intended to encourage the growth and redevelopment of the Town of Paradise. While this has many desirable benefits, the EIR cannot ignore the serious adverse fire riskimpact of the project. As the fire demonstrated, Paradise is clearly located in a severe fire zone with limited access for evacuation. Encouraging redevelopment and growth in that area will inevitably result in increased exposure of the new structures and residents to the severe fire risk. This impact is likely to be significant over the long run. It must be analyzed and mitigation measures explored to mitigate the risk. For example, is an additional evacuation route feasible? LAFCo is eager to be cooperative partner in the effort to bring sewer service to the Town as the project is likely to greatly assist the Town to address a serious long‐term problem and augment the Town’s ability to rebuild a sustainable and viable commercial district.

However, we are all bound to comply with the law, even where it may hinder achievement of a desirable objective. We look forward to working with the City and Town and its partners in development of this proposal in order to determine if a legally permissible Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 78 of 116
992
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION path forward can be found for LAFCo to approve the extension of services. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions
Sincerely,Steve Lucas
Executive Officer
cc: LAFCO
Paradise Sewer
NOP Comments 5-20
5/21/215:30 p.m.

Pam Galloway
6083 Maxwood DrParadise, CA 95969
[email protected]
Website This project is a waste of time, effort and money for the town and citizens of Paradise. I think the project should be put to stopped as there are better uses of the towns money.

Just a concerned citizens comment.
5/24/214 p.m.

Janet Peterson
1080 Buschman Rd
Paradise, CA 95969
[email protected]
Website I own the property at 1080 Buschman Rd adjacent to the proposed boundary at Clark Rd. I had twenty‐four 1 bedroom units which were destroyed in 2018. I tried to rebuild but the costs, slope, ADA requirements made it impossible. The flat land on my parcel is where the septic field is. Being able to have sewer would allow me to build affordable. Can I request to be considered for hookup? Much thanks, Janet Peterson 5/24/21 Melissa Murphy
Senior Environmental
ScientistState of California Department of Fish
and Wildlife
1701 Nimbus Road, Suite A
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
(916) 597‐[email protected]
Letter May 24, 2021
Colette CurtisTown of Paradise
5555 SkywayParadise, CA 95969
[email protected]: Paradise Sewer Project – Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report SCH# 2021050008Dear Ms. Curtis:The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received and reviewed the Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) from the Town of Paradise for the Paradise Sewer Project (Project) in Butte County pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statute and guidelines.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats. Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 79 of 116
993
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may need to exercise its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code (Fish & G. Code).CDFW ROLECDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd.(a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a).). CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management offish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Id., § 1802.). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW provides, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specificallyon projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.CDFW may also act as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381.) CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFW’s lake and streambed alteration regulatory authority. (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.) Likewise, to the extent implementation of the Project as proposed may result in “take” as defined by State law of any species protected under the California EndangeredSpecies Act (CESA) (Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), the Project proponent may seek related take authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
The Project site is located within the Town of Paradise, the City of Chico, and the sections of unincorporated Butte County that connect Paradise and Chico.The Project consists of three constructed components—a wastewater collection system inParadise, an 18‐mile export pipeline to convey wastewater to the Chico Water PollutionControl Plant (WPCP), and connection to the WPCP—and operation of the new sewer system. The export pipeline would begin at the southwest edge of Paradise and run forapproximately 8 miles along Skyway until reaching south Chico, at which point the pipelinewould leave Skyway and continue west, crossing Butte Creek, Highway 99, and the Union Pacific Railroad, and terminating at the Chico WPCP in Chico.

The Project description should include the whole action as defined in the CEQA Guidelines § 15378 and should include appropriate detailed exhibits disclosing the Project area including temporary impacted areas such as equipment stage area, spoils areas, adjacent infrastructure development, staging areas and access and haul roads if applicable.

As required by § 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR should include an appropriate range of reasonable and feasible alternatives that would attain most of the basic Project objectives and avoid or minimize significant impacts to resources under CDFW's jurisdiction.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 80 of 116
994
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CDFW offers the comments and recommendations presented below to assist the Town of Paradise in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project’s significant, or potentiallysignificant, impacts on biological resources. The comments and recommendations are alsooffered to enable CDFW to adequately review and comment on the proposed Project with respect to impacts on biological resources. CDFW recommends that the forthcoming EIR address the following:Assessment of Biological ResourcesSection 15125(c) of the CEQA Guidelines states that knowledge of the regional setting of aproject is critical to the assessment of environmental impacts and that special emphasisshould be placed on environmental resources that are rare or unique to the region. To enable CDFW staff to adequately review and comment on the Project, the EIR shouldinclude a complete assessment of the flora and fauna within and adjacent to the Project footprint, with emphasis on identifying rare, threatened, endangered, and other sensitive species and their associated habitats. CDFW recommends the EIR specifically include:

1. An assessment of all habitat types located within the Project footprint, and a map that identifies the location of each habitat type. CDFW recommends that floristic, alliance‐ and/or association‐based mapping and assessment be completedfollowing, The Manual of California Vegetation, second edition (Sawyer 2009).

Adjoining habitat areas should also be included in this assessment where site activities could lead to direct or indirect impacts offsite. Habitat mapping at thealliance level will help establish baseline vegetation conditions.

2. A general biological inventory of the fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, and mammal species that are present or have the potential to be present within each habitat type onsite and within adjacent areas that could be affected by the Project. CDFW recommends that the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), as well as previous studies performed in the area, be consulted to assess the potentialpresence of sensitive species and habitats. A nine United States Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5‐minute quadrangle search is recommended to determine what may occur in the region, larger if the Project area extends past one quad (see Data UseGuidelines on the Department webpage www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps‐ and‐Data). Please review the webpage for information on how to access thedatabase to obtain current information on any previously reported sensitive species and habitat, including Significant Natural Areas identified under Chapter 12 of the Fish and Game Code, in the vicinity of the Project. CDFW recommends that CNDDB Field Survey Forms be completed and submitted to CNDDB to document surveyresults. Online forms can be obtained and submitted at:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting‐Data.

Please note that CDFW’s CNDDB is not exhaustive in terms of the data it houses, nor is it an absence database. CDFW recommends that it be used as a starting point in Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 81 of 116
995
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION gathering information about the potential presence of species within the general area of the Project site. Other sources for identification of species and habitats near or adjacent to the Project area should include, but may not be limited to, State andfederal resource agency lists, California Wildlife Habitat Relationship (CWHR) System, California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory, agency contacts, environmental documents for other projects in the vicinity, academics, and professional or scientific organizations.

3. A complete and recent inventory of rare, threatened, endangered, and other sensitive species located within the Project footprint and within offsite areas with the potential to be affected, including California Species of Special Concern and California Fully Protected Species (Fish & G. Code § 3511). Species to be addressed should include all those which meet the CEQA definition (CEQA Guidelines § 15380).

The inventory should address seasonal variations in use of the Project area andshould not be limited to resident species. The EIR should include the results of focused species‐specific surveys, completed by a qualified biologist and conducted at the appropriate time of year and time of day when the sensitive species are active or otherwise identifiable. Species‐specific surveys should be conducted inorder to ascertain the presence of species with the potential to be directly, indirectly, on or within a reasonable distance of the Project activities. CDFW recommends the lead agency rely on survey and monitoring protocols and guidelines available at: www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey‐Protocols.

Alternative survey protocols may be warranted; justification should be provided to substantiate why an alternative protocol is necessary. Acceptable species‐specific survey procedures should be developed in consultation with CDFW and the U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service, where necessary. Some aspects of the Project may warrant periodic updated surveys for certain sensitive taxa, particularly if the Project isproposed to occur over a protracted time frame, or in phases, or if surveys are completed during periods of drought or deluge.

4. A thorough, recent (within the last two years), floristic‐based assessment of special‐ status plants and natural communities, following CDFW's Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities (see www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Plants).

5. Information on the regional setting that is critical to an assessment of environmental impacts, with special emphasis on resources that are rare or uniqueto the region (CEQA Guidelines § 15125[c]).

Analysis of Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Impacts to Biological Resources The EIR should provide a thorough discussion of the Project’s potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on biological resources. To ensure that Project impacts on biological resources are fully analyzed, the following information should be included in the EIR:

1. The EIR should define the threshold of significance for each impact and describe the criteria used to determine whether the impacts are significant (CEQA Guidelines, § Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 82 of 116
996
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION 15064, subd. (f)). The EIR must demonstrate that the significant environmental impacts of the Project were adequately investigated and discussed, and it must permit the significant effects of the Project to be considered in the fullenvironmental context.

2. A discussion of potential impacts from lighting, noise, human activity, and wildlife‐ human interactions created by Project activities especially those adjacent to natural areas, exotic and/or invasive species occurrences, and drainages. The EIR shouldaddress Project‐related changes to drainage patterns and water quality within,upstream, and downstream of the Project site, including: volume, velocity, and frequency of existing and post‐Project surface flows; polluted runoff; soil erosion and/or sedimentation in streams and water bodies; and post‐Project fate of runoff from the Project site.

3. A discussion of potential indirect Project impacts on biological resources, including resources in areas adjacent to the Project footprint, such as nearby public lands (e.g. National Forests, State Parks, etc.), open space, adjacent natural habitats, riparian ecosystems, wildlife corridors, and any designated and/or proposed reserve or mitigation lands (e.g., preserved lands associated with a Conservation orRecovery Plan, or other conserved lands).

4. A cumulative effects analysis developed as described under CEQA Guidelines section 15130. The EIR should discuss the Project's cumulative impacts to natural resourcesand determine if that contribution would result in a significant impact. The EIR should include a list of present, past, and probable future projects producing relatedimpacts to biological resources or shall include a summary of the projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, that consider conditionscontributing to a cumulative effect. The cumulative analysis shall include impact analysis of vegetation and habitat reductions within the area and their potential cumulative effects. Please include all potential direct and indirect Project‐related impacts to riparian areas, wetlands, wildlife corridors or wildlife movement areas, aquatic habitats, sensitive species and/or special‐status species, open space, andadjacent natural habitats in the cumulative effects analysis.

Mitigation Measures for Project Impacts to Biological Resources The EIR should include appropriate and adequate avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures for all direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts that are expected to occur as a result of the construction and long‐term operation and maintenance of the Project. CDFW also recommends the environmental documentation provide scientificallysupported discussion regarding adequate avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigationmeasures to address the Project's significant impacts upon fish and wildlife and their habitat. For individual projects, mitigation must be roughly proportional to the level of impacts, including cumulative impacts, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA (Guidelines § § 15126.4(a)(4)(B), 15064, 15065, and 16355). In order for mitigation measures to be effective, they must be specific, enforceable, and feasible actions that willimprove environmental conditions. When proposing measures to avoid, minimize, or Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 83 of 116
997
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION mitigate impacts, CDFW recommends consideration of the following:

1. Fully Protected Species: Several Fully Protected Species (Fish & G. Code § 3511) have the potential to occur within or adjacent to the Project area, including, but notlimited to: white‐tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), American peregrine falcon (Falcoperegrinus anatum), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and California blackrail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus). Fully protected species may not be taken orpossessed at any time. Project activities described in the EIR should be designed to completely avoid any fully protected species that have the potential to be presentwithin or adjacent to the Project area. CDFW also recommends the EIR fully analyze potential adverse impacts to fully protected species due to habitat modification,loss of foraging habitat, and/or interruption of migratory and breeding behaviors.

CDFW recommends that the Town of Paradise include in the analysis how appropriate avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures will reduce indirectimpacts to fully protected species.

2. Sensitive Plant Communities: CDFW considers sensitive plant communities to be imperiled habitats having both local and regional significance. Plant communities,alliances, and associations with a statewide ranking of S‐1, S‐2, S‐3, and S‐4 should be considered sensitive and declining at the local and regional level. These ranks can be obtained by querying the CNDDB and are included in The Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer 2009). The EIR should include measures to fully avoid and otherwise protect sensitive plant communities from Project‐related direct and indirect impacts.

3. Mitigation: CDFW considers adverse Project‐related impacts to sensitive species and habitats to be significant to both local and regional ecosystems, and the EIR should include mitigation measures for adverse Project‐related impacts to theseresources. Mitigation measures should emphasize avoidance and reduction ofProject impacts. For unavoidable impacts, onsite habitat restoration, enhancement, or permanent protection should be evaluated and discussed in detail. If onsite mitigation is not feasible or would not be biologically viable and therefore not adequately mitigate the loss of biological functions and values, offsite mitigationthrough habitat creation and/or acquisition and preservation in perpetuity shouldbe addressed.The EIR should include measures to perpetually protect the targeted habitat values within mitigation areas from direct and indirect adverse impacts in order to meet mitigation objectives to offset Project‐induced qualitative and quantitative losses of biological values. Specific issues that should be addressed include restrictions onaccess, proposed land dedications, long‐term monitoring and management programs, control of illegal dumping, water pollution, increased human intrusion, etc.

4. Habitat Revegetation/Restoration Plans: Plans for restoration and revegetation should be prepared by persons with expertise in the regional ecosystems and nativeplant restoration techniques. Plans should identify the assumptions used to develop Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 84 of 116
998
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION the proposed restoration strategy. Each plan should include, at a minimum: (a) the location of restoration sites and assessment of appropriate reference sites; (b) the plant species to be used, sources of local propagules, container sizes, and seedingrates; (c) a schematic depicting the mitigation area; (d) a local seed and cuttings and planting schedule; (e) a description of the irrigation methodology; (f) measures to control exotic vegetation on site; (g) specific success criteria; (h) a detailedmonitoring program; (i) contingency measures should the success criteria not be met; and (j) identification of the party responsible for meeting the success criteriaand providing for conservation of the mitigation site in perpetuity. Monitoring of restoration areas should extend across a sufficient time frame to ensure that thenew habitat is established, self‐sustaining, and capable of surviving drought.

CDFW recommends that local onsite propagules from the Project area and nearby vicinity be collected and used for restoration purposes. Onsite seed collection should be appropriately timed to ensure the viability of the seeds when planted.Onsite vegetation mapping at the alliance and/or association level should be usedto develop appropriate restoration goals and local plant palettes. Reference areas should be identified to help guide restoration efforts. Specific restoration plans should be developed for various Project components as appropriate. Restoration objectives should include protecting special habitat elements or re‐creating them inareas affected by the Project. Examples may include retention of woody material, logs, snags, rocks, and brush piles. Fish and Game Code sections 1002, 1002.5 and1003 authorize CDFW to issue permits for the take or possession of plants andwildlife for scientific, educational, and propagation purposes. Please see our website for more information on Scientific Collecting Permits atwww.wildlife.ca.gov/Licensing/Scientific‐Collecting#53949678‐regulations‐.

5. Nesting Birds: Please note that it is the Project proponent’s responsibility to comply with all applicable laws related to nesting birds and birds of prey. Migratory non‐ game native bird species are protected by international treaty under the federalMigratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918, as amended (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.).CDFW implemented the MBTA by adopting the Fish and Game Code section 3513.

Fish and Game Code sections 3503, 3503.5 and 3800 provide additional protection to nongame birds, birds of prey, their nests and eggs. Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the Fish and Game Code afford protective measures as follows: section 3503 states that it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by the Fish and Game Code or anyregulation made pursuant thereto; section 3503.5 states that is it unlawful to take,possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds‐of‐ prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except asotherwise provided by the Fish and Game Code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto; and section 3513 states that it is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 85 of 116
999
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION Interior under provisions of the MBTA.

Potential habitat for nesting birds and birds of prey is present within the Project area. The Project should disclose all potential activities that may incur a direct orindirect take to nongame nesting birds within the Project footprint and its vicinity.

Appropriate avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures to avoid takemust be included in the EIR.

CDFW recommends the EIR include specific avoidance and minimization measures to ensure that impacts to nesting birds or their nests do not occur. Project‐specific avoidance and minimization measures may include, but not be limited to: Projectphasing and timing, monitoring of Project‐related noise (where applicable), sound walls, and buffers, where appropriate. The EIR should also include specificavoidance and minimization measures that will be implemented should a nest belocated within the Project site. In addition to larger, protocol level survey efforts(e.g. Swainson’s hawk surveys) and scientific assessments, CDFW recommends afinal preconstruction survey be required no more than three (3) days prior to vegetation clearing or ground disturbance activities, as instances of nesting could be missed if surveys are conducted earlier.

6. Moving out of Harm’s Way: The Project is anticipated to result in the clearing of natural habitats that support native species. To avoid direct mortality, the Town of Paradise should state in the EIR to require that a qualified biologist with the properhandling permits, will be retained to be onsite prior to and during all ground‐ and habitat‐disturbing activities. Furthermore, the EIR should describe that the qualifiedbiologist with the proper permits may move out of harm’s way special‐status species or other wildlife of low or limited mobility that would otherwise be injuredor killed from Project‐related activities, as needed. The EIR should also describequalified biologist qualifications and authorities to stop work to prevent direct mortality of special‐status species. CDFW recommends fish and wildlife species beallowed to move out of harm’s way on their own volition, if possible, and to assisttheir relocation as a last resort. It should be noted that the temporary relocation ofonsite wildlife does not constitute effective mitigation for habitat loss.

7. Translocation of Species: CDFW generally does not support the use of relocation, salvage, and/or transplantation as the sole mitigation for impacts to rare,threatened, or endangered species as these efforts are generally experimental in nature and largely unsuccessful. Therefore, the EIR should describe additional mitigation measures utilizing habitat restoration, conservation, and/or preservation, in addition to avoidance and minimization measures, if it is determined that theremay be impacts to rare, threatened, or endangered species.

The EIR should incorporate mitigation performance standards that would ensure thatimpacts are reduced to a less‐than‐significant level. Mitigation measures proposed in theEIR should be made a condition of approval of the Project. Please note that obtaining a Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 86 of 116
1000
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION permit from CDFW by itself with no other mitigation proposal may constitute mitigationdeferral. CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4, subdivision (a)(1)(B) states that formulation ofmitigation measures should not be deferred until some future time. To avoid deferringmitigation in this way, the EIR should describe avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures that would be implemented should the impact occur.

California Endangered Species ActCDFW is responsible for ensuring appropriate conservation of fish and wildlife resources including threatened, endangered, and/or candidate plant and animal species, pursuant tothe California Endangered Species Act (CESA). CDFW recommends that a CESA IncidentalTake Permit (ITP) be obtained if the Project has the potential to result in “take” (Fish & G.

Code § 86 defines “take” as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt,pursue, catch, capture, or kill”) of state‐listed CESA species, either through construction orover the life of the Project.

State‐listed species with the potential to occur in the area include, but are not limited to:foothill yellow‐legged frog (Rana boylii), cascades frog (Rana cascadae), Sierra Nevada yellow‐legged frog (Rana sierrae), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swansonii), giant garter snake(Thamnophis gigas), least bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), western yellow‐billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis), willow flycatcher(Empidonax traillii), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), California black rail (Laterallusjamaicensis coturniculus), bank swallow (Riparia riparia), spring‐run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Butte County meadowfoam (Limnanthes floccosa ssp.californica), and slender Orcutt grass (Orcuttia tenuis).

The EIR should disclose the potential of the Project to take State‐listed species and how the impacts will be avoided, minimized, and mitigated. Please note that mitigation measures that are adequate to reduce impacts to a less‐than significant level to meet CEQA requirements may not be enough for the issuance of an ITP. To facilitate the issuance of an ITP, if applicable, CDFW recommends the EIR include measures to minimize and fullymitigate the impacts to any state‐listed species the Project has potential to take. CDFW encourages early consultation with staff to determine appropriate measures to facilitate future permitting processes and to engage with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/orNational Marine Fisheries Service to coordinate specific measures if both State and federally listed species may be present within the Project vicinity.

Native Plant Protection ActThe Native Plant Protection Act (Fish & G. Code §1900 et seq.) prohibits the take or possession of state‐listed rare and endangered plants, including any part or productthereof, unless authorized by CDFW or in certain limited circumstances. Take of state‐ listed rare and/or endangered plants due to Project activities may only be permitted through anITP or other authorization issued by CDFW pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title14, section 786.9 subdivision (b).

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 87 of 116
1001
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION Lake and Streambed Alteration Program
The EIR should identify all perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral rivers, streams, lakes, other hydrologically connected aquatic features, and any associated biologicalresources/habitats present within the entire Project footprint (including utilities, access and staging areas). The environmental document should analyze all potential temporary, permanent, direct, indirect and/or cumulative impacts to the above‐mentioned features and associated biological resources/habitats that may occur because of the Project. If it isdetermined the Project will result in significant impacts to these resources the EIR shall propose appropriate avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less‐than‐significant level.Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code requires an entity to notify CDFW prior to commencing any activity that may do one or more of the following: substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream or lake; substantially change or use anymaterial from the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake; or deposit debris, waste or other materials that could pass into any river, stream or lake. Please note that "any river, stream or lake" includes those that are episodic (i.e., those that are dry forperiods of time) as well as those that are perennial (i.e., those that flow year‐round). This includes ephemeral streams and watercourses with a subsurface flow. It may also apply to work undertaken within the flood plain of a body of water.

If CDFW determines that the Project activities may substantially adversely affect an existing fish or wildlife resource, a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement will be issued which will include reasonable measures necessary to protect the resource. CDFW’sissuance of an LSA Agreement is a “project” subject to CEQA (see Pub. Resources Code21065). To facilitate issuance of an LSA Agreement, if one is necessary, the EIR should fullyidentify the potential impacts to the lake, stream, or riparian resources, and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, and monitoring and reporting commitments. Early consultation with CDFW is recommended, since modification of the Project may avoid or reduce impacts to fish and wildlife resources. To obtain an LSA notification package, pleasego to https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA/Forms.

Please note that other agencies may use specific methods and definitions to determineimpacts to areas subject to their authorities. These methods and definitions often do notinclude all needed information for CDFW to determine the extent of fish and wildlife resources affected by activities subject to Notification under Fish and Game Codesection1602. Therefore, CDFW does not recommend relying solely on methods developed specifically for delineating areas subject to other agencies’ jurisdiction (such as United States Army Corps of Engineers) when mapping lakes, streams, wetlands, floodplains,riparian areas, etc. in preparation for submitting a Notification of an LSA.CDFW relies on the lead agency environmental document analysis when acting as a Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 88 of 116
1002
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION responsible agency issuing an LSA Agreement. CDFW recommends lead agencies coordinate with us as early as possible, since potential modification of the proposed Project may avoid or reduce impacts to fish and wildlife resources and expedite the Project approval process.The following information will be required for the processing of an LSA Notification and CDFW recommends incorporating this information into any forthcoming CEQA document(s) to avoid subsequent documentation and Project delays:

1. Mapping and quantification of lakes, streams, and associated fish and wildlife habitat (e.g., riparian habitat, freshwater wetlands, etc.) that will be temporarilyand/or permanently impacted by the Project, including impacts from access and staging areas. Please include an estimate of impact to each habitat type.

2. Discussion of specific avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to reduce Project impacts to fish and wildlife resources to a less‐than‐significant level. Pleaserefer to section 15370 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Based on review of Project materials, aerial photography and observation of the site from public roadways, the Project site supports Butte Creek, Comanche Creek, and Little ChicoCreek, unnamed tributaries to these creeks, and their associated riparian habitats. CDFWrecommends the EIR fully identify the Project’s potential impacts to these streams and/or their associated vegetation and wetlands.ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negativedeclarations be incorporated into a database, which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations (Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e)).Accordingly, please report any special‐status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The CNNDB field survey form can be found at the following link:https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting‐Data. The completed form can be submitted online or mailed electronically to CNDDB at the following email address:

[email protected].

FILING FEESThe Project, as proposed, would have an effect on fish and wildlife, and assessment of filingfees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment ofthe fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final. (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & G. Code § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089.)CONCLUSIONPursuant to Public Resources Code sections 21092 and 21092.2, CDFW requests written Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 89 of 116
1003
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION notification of proposed actions and pending decisions regarding the Project. Writtennotifications shall be directed to: California Department of Fish and Wildlife North Central Region, 1701 Nimbus Road, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670.

CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the NOP of the EIR for the Paradise Sewer Project and recommends that the Town of Paradise address CDFW’s comments and concerns in the forthcoming EIR. CDFW personnel are available for consultation regardingbiological resources and strategies to minimize impacts.

If you have any questions regarding the comments provided in this letter or wish toschedule a meeting and/or site visit, please contact Melissa Murphy, Senior Environmental Scientist (Specialist) at (916) 597‐6417 or [email protected].

Sincerely,Kelley BarkerEnvironmental Program Managerec: Juan Torres, Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisory)Melissa Murphy, Senior Environmental Scientist (Specialist)]Department of Fish and WildlifeOffice of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, SacramentoLiterature CitedSawyer, J. O., T. Keeler‐Wolf, and J. M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd ed. California Native Plant Society Press, Sacramento, California. http://vegetation.cnps.org/
5/25/21 Anonymous (Caller) Virtual Public
Meeting #2
Hi, thank you for taking my call and I apologize if this was covered. I missed a portion of your presentation. If the location that we currently have is within the proposed service area, but it's currently under septic, what advice are you providing to the property owners or what websites or information areas do you recommend in order to understand what would be the proper steps in evaluating whether or not we are required to connect with the sewer system versus having the existing septic system function? That's the biggestquestion I guess for a lot of people that I know is what are our requirements versus what what's nice to have versus what's required to do.
5/25/21 Anonymous (Caller) Virtual Public
Meeting #2
I'm actually calling from Lane County, emergency management over here in Oregon and so if it's a better conversation to have offline, I'm happy to do that, but really you guys are so much farther ahead than we are with fire recovery. I was just looking to get a better understanding of pitfalls and hurdles that we might be looking out for in the future as we move towards getting a little bit closer to where you guys are, because you guys havebeen inspirational in your recovery process.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 90 of 116
1004
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION 5/25/21 Mike Garcia‐Forterra Pipe & Precast Virtual Public Meeting #2
Have the pipe material options been listed, and if so, are you eliminating thermoplasticpipes due to issues of flammable concerns. 5/25/2112:10 p.m.

Dennis [email protected]
cc: Gwen [email protected]
Email Mark ‐ Sorry that I couldn’t join you today. I wan unable to load your meeting software on my Mac ‐ probably a Boomer thing!
I submitted a question to the consultants regarding connection fees and payment. Todate, I’ve not heard back. I’m asking on behalf of Paradise Lutheran Church on Luther Drive, next to Terry Ashe Park. I assume it is still too early to know the dollar amount of the connection fee, but can you tell me how they will be determined and the anticipated payment policy for the connection fees. Your answer will be helpful to the church as they move forward in their recovery process.

Thank you for your time and assistance.
5/25/21 (1:33 p.m.): M. Mattox responded via email:

Good afternoon Dennis!Great question – we actually received one just like it during the webinar… In short, we do not have the
answer…yet. What I mean is that as we are in the EIR
phase, we do not have certainty the project will
indeed move forward. However, if it does,
administration of items like this are key in project
success. Our goal would be to provide a heavilyincentivized opportunity to connect at the initialstartup construction. Absent of that, we would be tough to find another approach other than requiringconnections at a time when the system fails… Meaning if you install a system in 2021 and it doesn’tfail until 2041, a connection may not be required until 2041. From the lens of recovery and planning today, it
may be most prudent to assume no project and moveforward – although, I have heard of property ownersinstalling a stubbed lateral which could be intertied in the future, this may be attractive for the church.

Hope this helps! Best of luck!
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 91 of 116
1005
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION 5/27/21 Paula M. Daneluk
DirectorButte County Department of Development
Services7 County Center Drive
Oroville, California 95965
T: 530‐552‐3700
F: 530‐538‐7785
buttecounty.net/ddsT: 530‐552‐3656
[email protected]
Letter May 27, 2021
Colette Curtis
Public Information OfficerTown of Paradise
5555 Skyway Rd.Paradise, CA 95969
Subject: Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Paradise Sewer ProjectDear Ms. Curtis,We have reviewed the above‐referenced Notice of Preparation (NOP), dated April 30, 2021. The following statements and comments have been prepared pursuant to ButteCounty’s authority as a Responsible Agency with jurisdiction over land affected by the project. The Paradise Sewer Project comprises three components: a wastewater collection system in Paradise, an 18‐mile export pipeline to convey wastewater to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP), and a connection to the WPCP facility. Theexport pipeline would be located between the Town of Paradise and the City of Chico, themajority of this development area falling under Butte County’s jurisdiction. The following are issues that should be included and analyzed in the EIR for the Paradise Sewer Project:1. The project description for the “Export Pipeline” component of the project within theabove‐ referenced NOP is lacking critical information required for a full and thorough analysis. Technical details regarding the export pipeline should be provided within theEIR. Specific information such as the pipeline’s dimensions (including length and diameter of the pipe), the number of proposed lift or pump stations, as well as the alignment of the pipeline need to be identified to adequately describe the project for analysis.

2. Due to a lack of spatial information, the extent to which the export pipeline will be contained within the County right‐of‐way (ROW) as opposed to crossing private land isunclear. There is concern about the potential necessity of cross‐country alignments outside of the ROW. Will the pipeline cross agricultural lands or the Agricultural “GreenLine”, which could result in potentially significant impacts to prime agricultural land? Clarification is needed to clearly site this component in relation to the ROW and agricultural resources.3. Clearly describe in detail any and all proposed undergrounding of the export pipeline.

Analysis should include potential impacts to aesthetics if not undergrounded andgeological impacts if undergrounded.4. The environmental analysis should address water quality and the proposed export Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 92 of 116
1006
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION pipeline’s impacts to Butte Creek, vernal pools, and multiple water basins across theproject alignment, as well as analysis of leak potential and resulting impacts. The biological resources analysis should include a wetland delineation and analysis of impacts to the area and any associated riparian habitats.

5. Noise analysis should identify lift stations and associated generator noise impacts to biological resources as well as sensitive receptors along the route.

6. Specify in the project description any easements proposed across areas with existingrecreational or trail systems.7. Analyze the impacts of possible contamination from leaks or spills due to long‐term operation of the export pipeline and short‐term construction.

8. The Butte County Department of Public Works will require either a franchise agreement or encroachment maintenance agreement. Additionally, the County willrequire pavement restoration to bring the impacted roadways to an as‐equal or bettercondition. Please include details within the project description analyzing these impacts.We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the NOP. Questions regarding this letter should be directed to Paula M. Daneluk, AICP at 530.552.3656 [email protected],Paula M. Daneluk, AICP Director, Butte County Department of Development Services 5/27/215:33 p.m.

Sasha Poe1043 Central Park Dr
Paradise, CA 95969530‐326‐4949
[email protected]
Website I have emailed 5 times asking for my commercial property to be added to the sewer plan. 6/2/21 (1:15 p.m.): M. Mattox responded via email:

Hi Sasha:I apologize for the delayed response. We have
received your request for the project to include your
property. At this moment, we are unable to
administratively add this to the area – however, we
will keep your request in the public comment file and
be sure to explore it further.

Thanks for reaching out!
5/28/21 Andrea Buckley
Environmental Services and Land
Management Branch ChiefCentral Valley Flood Protection Board 3310 El Camino Ave., Ste. 170
Sacramento, CA 95821
916‐574‐0609
Letter May 28, 2021
Mr. Marc MattoxTown of Paradise5555 SkywayParadise, CA 95969 Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 93 of 116
1007
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION James Herota
916‐574‐0651
[email protected]
Subject: Comments on the Paradise Sewer Project, Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2021050008)
Dear Mr. Mattox,The Central Valley Flood Protection Board (Board) appreciates the opportunity tocomment on the Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for theproposed Paradise Sewer Project. The EIR will be prepared to disclose and addresspotential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The proposed project is located in Butte County and involves construction of a sewer pipeline crossing the Butte Creek and Little Chico Creek.

Responsibility of the Central Valley Flood Protection Board The Board is the State’s regulatory agency responsible for ensuring appropriate standardsare met for the construction, maintenance, and operation of the flood control system thatprotects life, property, and habitat in California’s Central Valley. The Board serves as the State coordinator between local flood management agencies and the federal government,with the goal of providing the highest level of flood protection possible to California’s Central Valley. The Board operates under authorities as described in California Water Code (Water Code), which requires the Board to oversee future modifications or additions tofacilities of the State Plan of Flood Control (SPFC). In addition, pursuant to assurancesprovided to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) by the Board on behalf ofthe State, the USACE Operation and Maintenance Manuals, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 33, § 208.10, and United States Code, Title 33, § 408, the Board is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the SPFC facilities. The USACE requires the Board to serve as the lead non‐Federal sponsor for projects to improve or alter facilities of the SPFC pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations, Title 33, § 408. The State's objectives include fulfilling the USACE's expectations pursuant to the assurances provided to the USACE.Encroachment PermitPer California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Waters, Division 1 (Title 23), Section 6, approvalby the Board is required for all proposed work or uses, including the alteration oflevees within any area for which there is an Adopted Plan of Flood Control within the Board’s jurisdiction. In addition, Board approval is required for all proposed encroachments within afloodway, on adjacent levees, and within any Regulated Stream identified in Title 23, Table

8.1. Specifically, Board jurisdiction includes the levee section, the waterward area betweenproject levees, a minimum 10‐foot‐wide strip adjacent to thelandward levee toe, the area within 30 feet from the top of bank(s) of Regulated Streams, and inside Board’s DesignatedFloodways. Activities outside of these limits which could adversely affect Federal‐State flood control facilities, as determined by Board staff, are also under the Board’s jurisdiction.

Permits may also be required for existing unpermitted encroachments or where it isnecessary to establish the conditions normally imposed by permitting, including whereresponsibility for the encroachment has not been clearly established or ownership or uses have been changed. This proposed project islocated within the Board’s permitting authority, thereby requiring an encroachment permit.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 94 of 116
1008
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION Federal permits, including USACE Section 404 and Section 10 regulatory permits and Section 408 Permission, in conjunction with a Board permit, may be required for the proposed project. In addition to federal permits, state and local agency permits,certification, or approvals may also be required. State approvals may include, but are not limited to, California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Lake and Streamed Alteration Agreement and Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Section 401 Water Quality Certification. The Applicant must obtain all authorizations that the proposed project mayrequire.

Flood Impacts AnalysisPursuant to Section 15 of Title 23, the Board may deny an encroachment permit if theproposed project could:
 Jeopardize directly or indirectly the physical integrity of levees or other works;  Obstruct, divert, redirect, or raise the surface level of design floods or flows, or the lesser flows for which protection is provided;
 Cause significant adverse changes in water velocity or flow regimen;  Impair the inspection of floodways or project works; Interfere with the maintenance of floodways or project works;  Interfere with the ability to engage in flood fighting, patrolling, or other flood emergency activities;
 Increase the damaging effects of flood flows;
 Be injurious to, or interfere with, the successful execution, functioning, or operation of any adopted plan of flood control; or
 Adversely affect the State Plan of Flood Control, as defined in the California Water Code.

As a responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Boardwill need to have adequate information in order to evaluate whether to issue a permit at a future date. Accordingly, please be prepared to provide specific analyses to determine ifthe proposed project could result in any potential impacts listed above. This includesdirect impacts to facilities under construction, as well as indirect impacts from the project to surrounding facilities. This encompasses any proposed work that contemplatesmodifications to a SPFC Facility, Lower San Joaquin Levee District Facility, or operation ofany adopted plan of flood control or the hydrology of the water ways including increasesor decreases in water surface elevation due to construction activities and encroachments; any work including dewatering and vibrations from both pile driving and heavy machinery that may destabilize the SPFC levees; and potential levee damage resulting from heavy machinery construction activities and associated haul routes. It is therefore recommended that the environmental document include a specific flood facility impacts analysis section.

Document Specific Comments
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 95 of 116
1009
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION According to page 4, Figure 1 Paradise Export Pipeline, shows that the proposed pipeline is within Butte Creek and Little Chico Creek.

Title 23 provides standards that govern the design and construction of projects that affect the flood control works and floodways. Board staff recommends that you review Title 23 Standards, including but not limited to Sections 115 (Dredged, Spoil, and Waste Material),120 (Levees), and 130 (Patrol Roads and Access Ramps), 123 (Pipelines, Conduits, and Utility Lines). Any deviation (or variation) from these standards will require approval from the Board.

ClosingThe potential risks to public safety, including increased flood risks, need to be considered when developing proposed projects that seek to modify flood control works or the hydrology of the water ways. Board staff is available to discuss any questions you have regarding the above comments. Please contact James Herota at (916) 574‐0651, or viaemail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,Andrea BuckleyEnvironmental Services and Land Management Branch Chief cc: Office of Planning and Research | [email protected] 6/3/212:59 p.m.

Nick Avdis455 Capitol Mall, Suite 801
Sacramento, CA [email protected]
Website This firm represents Tuscan Ridge Associates LLC and their interests in the development projects known as "Tuscan Ridge" located at 3100 Skyway in unincorporated Butte County.

The Tuscan Ridge project to has submitted an initial planning application with Butte County. The EIR for the Town of Paradise to City of Chico sewer project should include analysis of providing sewer service to the Tuscan Ridge project. Please put me on the notification list for any upcoming meetings or otherwise. Thank you. 6/4/21 Tom Lando
District Manager, Paradise Irrigation DistrictParadise Irrigation District6332 Clark Rd Paradise, CA 95969530‐877‐4971
Letter June 4, 2021
Colette Curtis, Public Information OfficerTown of Paradise5555 SkywayParadise, CA 95969RE: Request for comments regarding the scope of the EIR for a proposed sewer systemParadise Irrigation District (“PID”) is informed that the Town of Paradise is seeking aformal wastewater treatment solution and has identified a proposed sewer service area.

The proposed sewer service area includes geographic areas within PID’s current water distribution service area. As an irrigation district, PID has latent authority to own, operate and maintain a sewer system. Additionally, PID has the equipment and infrastructure tomanage the proposed project as well as the personnel, expertise and administrative Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 96 of 116
1010
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Comments Matrix

DATE CONTACT INFO SOURCE COMMENTS/QUESTIONS RESPONSE/ACTION framework to manage billing and customer service. PID respectfully asks that its participation in the Project be considered as part of the scope of EIR and that any environmental effects of potentially having PID operate and maintain the Project be assessed.

Sincerely,Tom Lando
District Manager, Paradise Irrigation District
sewerCommentsPID
.pdf
6/24/215:31 p.m.

APN is 053‐101‐001‐000 Phone Call C. Curtis spoke with a resident today who is interested in adding her property to the Sewer Service Area. Her APN is 053‐101‐001‐000 – it is located off Clark Rd and is adjacent to properties that are part of the SSA. Additionally her property is zoned for multi‐family and if it is in the SSA she plans to develop multi‐family housing there in the future. Please let me know if you need any additional information.
6/25/218:58 a.m.

Rhonda Berndt6221 Clark RoadParadise, CA 95969
[email protected]
Website Why does the sewer plan avoid access to sewer for the Multifamily parcels on James Drive and Camino? It seems like that would benefit the community in the long run and is located inside the sewer area already.
6/28/21 (9:37 a.m.): M. Mattox responded via email:

Good morning Rhonda:

Thank you for your inquiry relating to the SSA
excluding James Drive and Camino Lane. We will
consider the impacts of this request along with others
to increase the size of the sewer service area within
the Town of Paradise.

Thank you!
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 97 of 116
1011
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
2/8/21 Media Article

CHICO, PARADISE SEWER PROJECT UNANIMOUSLY REACHES SECOND PHASEParadise Sewer Project moves on to an 18‐month Environmental Impact Review and will be grant‐funded.

Posted: Feb 8, 2021 7:43 PM | Brandon DownsPARADISE, Calif. ‐ Chico City Council unanimously voted to analyze and study the currentand future needs for the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) to develop a regional sewer connection to Paradise, according to the Town of Paradise.

The connection will be from a specified area in Paradise, called the Sewer Service Area, and will include many parcels along Skyway, Pearson, and Clark Road.Chico City Council appointed their Mayor and Vice Mayor to a Sewer RegionalizationProject Advisory Committee. This includes the Mayor and Vice Mayor of Paradise andwill be facilitated by the Regional Water Quality Control board over the course of the planned 18‐month Environmental Impact Review (EIR).
“We look forward to seeing what develops during this 18‐month EIR process andcertainly support efforts to improve our regional economy and the wastewater infrastructure in Chico,” said Chico Mayor Andrew Coolidge.

The Town of Paradise said the Paradise Sewer Project has been studied for over 50 years and is a Tier 1 Town‐Led Priority Project in the Long‐Term Community Recovery Plan.

The EIR will be phase II of the project and is fully funded by a grant. This will not cost the City of Chico or Town of Paradise. A copy of the Phase I report can be found here. “Now, with the Phase II Environmental Impact Review process of a regional sewer connection between Paradise and Chico, we are just beginning the true vetting processwith a Cooperative Work Agreement with the Town and a grant‐funded opportunity tostudy the impacts and opportunities for Chico’s Water Pollution Control Plant,” saidMayor Coolidge.

Paradise has been in need of wastewater solutions for years due to high groundwater,limited land available and poor soils. This restricts multi‐family housing and commercialoperations that rely on water usage, like restaurants.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 98 of 116
1012
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
“The Paradise Sewer Project is vitally important for the recovery of Paradise after theCamp Fire,” said Paradise Mayor Steve Crowder. “There are also substantial benefits for the City of Chico to regionalize their Water Pollution Control Plant.”The Paradise Sewer Project is one of the largest infrastructure projects in California. It isthe largest in the Central Valley Region and the largest, by far, in the North State.

For more information and regular updates on the Paradise Sewer Project, including committee meeting dates and times, visit www.paradisesewer.com. https://www.actionnewsnow.com/content/news/Chico‐Paradise‐sewer‐project‐ unanimously‐reaches‐second‐phase‐573755081.html 3/7/21 Media Article
Study the sewer, PIDpipesthen decidewhat’snextBy EDITORIAL BOARD | March 7, 2021 at 3:16 a.m.When the Camp Fire roared through Butte County in 2018, destroying 90 percent of the structures within its path and burning more than 153,000 acres, the Paradise Irrigation District lost all of its customer base.The Town of Paradise and Paradise Unified School District each got backfill funding from the state for three years to stay afloat.

Additionally, the town got $250 million in damagesfrom PG&E.

The PID, which has yet to receive any settlement funding from PG&E, received its backfillfunding contingent upon a plan to create new revenue to make up for the lost customerbase.At a minimum, the PID needed to show the state it was working towards a solution to the problem. One solution that was proposed was an intertie from Paradise to Chico.It is an idea that the PID wanted to study, along with Butte County. In 2019, in order to getthe study started, the county needed a 4/5ths vote from the Butte County Board of Supervisors because it was a budget adjustment. It was an adjustment that at first supervisor Debra Lucero supported, but changed her mind after saying the Board ofSupervisors was not given vital documents prior to the initial vote. That vote, along with Tami Ritter’s “no” vote, sank the study.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 99 of 116
1013
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
Since then a Sacramento State University study has begun on the issue and is a mandatedrequirement to ensure that PID can obtain funding for its drinking water systemimprovementsfrom the California State Legislature.It’simportant to note that nothing is going to be built, whether it be a sewer or a PID pipe,unless the studies prove that they can work.

From there the local entities, the town of Paradise, PID, City of Chico and LAFCO have toagree — and much of that depends on public support.Not only has PID been working towards a pipe to Chico but so has the town of Paradise.

The Paradise sewer pipe would be connected to Chico’s wastewater plant west of Chico.

The other option that was in front of the town council was building a wastewater plant within the town limits. But the Chico option has always been favored by town and city staffbecause it is a cheaper option.

The sewer pipe has the support of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality ControlBoard, which isin fact leading a board made up of councilorsfrom both cities — and thatmeets for the first time this coming week.Studying the pipesto Chico is worth doing and in fact, Chico appearsto agree.

The town of Paradise has been struggling to develop a viable business community, particularly those surrounding restaurants, for decades — long before the Camp Fire. Itsrebuild might well rest on both a sewer and PID pipe.

But it’s only by studying both optionsthat can we learn if they are beneficial financially orenvironmentally for the county as a whole. And in the end it isthe science that comes out of the environmental impact reports and Sacramento State University study that shouldguide our next moves. https://www.chicoer.com/2021/03/07/study‐the‐sewer‐pid‐pipes‐then‐decide‐whats‐ next/ Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 100 of 116
1014
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
5/1/21 Public Notice Advertisement
(Paradise Post)
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 101 of 116
1015
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
5/3/21 State Clearinghouse 2021050008 SCH Number: 2021050008 Lead Agency: Town of Paradise
Document Title: Paradise Sewer ProjectDocument Type: NOP ‐ Notice of Preparation Received: 5/3/2021
Present Land Use: Agricultural, Industrial, Public, Residential, Conservation AreaDocument Description: The Proposed Project consists of three constructed components—a wastewater collection system in Paradise, an 18‐mile export pipeline to convey wastewater to the Chico WPCP, and connection to the WPCP— and operation of the new sewer system. The export pipeline would begin at the southwest edge of Paradise and run for approximately 8 miles along Skyway until reaching south Chico, at which point the pipeline would leave Skyway and continue west, crossing Butte Creek, Highway 99, and the Union Pacific Railroad, and terminating at the Chico WPCP in Chico. The Proposed Project would not change the service area of the Chico WPCP other than the addition of the Paradise connection and treatment. Moreover, there would be no additional feesfor Chico residents and rate payers as a result of the Proposed Project.

Contact Information
Marc Mattox
Town of Paradise
Lead/Public Agency
5555 SkywayParadise, CA 95969Phone : (530) 872‐6291 ext. [email protected] Cities: Chico, ParadiseCounties: Butte
Regions: Citywide Countywide
Cross Streets: Highway 99, Midway, Dayton Road, Pearson Road State Highways: Highways 32 and 99Railways: Union Pacific Railroad Airports: Ranchaero AirportSchools: Chapman Elementary School, Little Chico Creek Elementary School Waterways: Feather River, Little Butte Creek, Big Chico Creek, Little Chico Creek, Sacramento River
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 102 of 116
1016
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
Review Period Start: 5/3/2021Review Period End: 6/3/2021 Paradise Draft SCDD_Bizhub21042 SCDD_Bizhub21042
NOP_20210423_OCR 815340_OCR.pdf 815341_OCR.pdf
5/3/21 Press Release Town of Paradise Launches Environmental Review for Paradise Sewer Project
Public input solicited on environmental scope and content of EIR Paradise, CA – On Monday, May 3, the Town of Paradise (Town), and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Lead Agency, officially launched the environmental review process for the Paradise Sewer Project with a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Virtual Public Scoping Meetings. The Town is soliciting public input regarding the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR.

PROJECT OVERVIEWSince its incorporation in 1979, the Town has sought a formal wastewater treatment solution for the community, with service for commercial and densely populated residential areas being a priority. Failed and failing septic systems create the potential for public health and environmental concerns and have limited economic growth. Prior to the Camp Fire, which almost completely destroyed the town in 2018, Paradise was the largest unsewered community in California. Numerous studies have supported the need for a centralized wastewater treatment solution, and in its most recent study, the Town identified a proposed sewer service area. The proposed sewer service area includes the Town’s commercial corridors, and as described in the 2017 study, it represented the area that had the most septic systems that had failed or were projected to fail by 2022. A map of the proposed sewer service area can be found on the project website here.

The Proposed Project consists of three constructed components—a wastewater collection system in Paradise, an 18‐mile export pipeline to convey wastewater to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP), and connection to the WPCP — and operation of the new sewer system. The export pipeline would begin at the southwest edge of Paradise and run for approximately 8 miles along Skyway until reaching south Chico, at which point the pipeline would leave Skyway and continue west, crossing Butte Creek, Highway 99, and the Union Pacific Railroad, and terminating at the Chico WPCP in Chico. The Proposed Project would not change the service area of the Chico WPCP other than the addition of the Paradise connection and treatment. Moreover, there would be no additional fees for Chico residents and existing Chico WPCP rate payers as a result of the Proposed Project. This long‐term wastewater solution will allow for sustainable Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 103 of 116
1017
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
housing and business activity in Town, supporting the community’s economic recovery and vitality.

LEARN MORE AT UPCOMING VIRTUAL PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGSAs an initial step within the CEQA process, project scoping allows the Town to seek public and stakeholder input on the environmental scope of the project. To provideconvenient participation in a safe environment while social distancing, the Town ishosting two virtual public scoping meetings during the project’s 30‐day public comment period to allow attendees to learn about the project, interact with project teammembers, ask questions and submit formal comments.

THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2021 | 6 P.M. TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 | 12 P.M.

ONLINE: ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg1  Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2 Webex Password: Paradise  Webex Password: Paradise BY PHONE: BY PHONE:
 Dial‐in #: 408‐418‐9388  Dial‐in #: 408‐418‐9388
 Code: 123 202 6837  Code: 123 877 2748
For additional accessibility preferences, please submit a message on the project websiteat paradisesewer.com/contact (from subject dropdown menu, select “Submit a commenton Environmental Impact Report”). Persons who are deaf, hard of hearing, or speechimpaired (TDD) may contact the California Relay Service TTY and/or Voice Line at 1‐800‐ 735‐2929, or 711.SUBMITTING COMMENTSSuggestions and comments on the scope and content of the EIR are invited from allinterested parties for a period of 30 days (May 3 through June 3, 2021 by 5 p.m. PDT).Written or verbal comments concerning the Proposed Project’s environmental scopeshould be submitted via the following options.

Website: paradisesewer.com/contact Mail: Colette Curtis (from subject dropdown menu, Public Information Officerselect “Submit a comment on Town of Paradise Environmental Impact Report”) 5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
Telephone: 530‐872‐6291, ext. 112
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT:To learn more about the proposed project or to stay updated, visit paradisesewer.com. # # #
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 104 of 116
1018
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
5/3/21 E‐blast
ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING INFORMATION & VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETINGSThe Town of Paradise (Town), the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Lead Agency, officially launched the environmental review process for the Paradise Sewer Project with this Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Virtual Public Scoping Meetings. The Town is soliciting public input regarding thescope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR.

LEARN MORE AT UPCOMING VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETINGSFor your convenience, and to allow participation in a safe environment while social distancing, two virtual public meetings will be held during the project's 30‐day scoping period to allow attendees to learn about the project, interact with project team members, ask questions and submit formal comments.

THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2021 | 6 P.M. TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 | 12 P.M.

ONLINE: ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg1  Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2 Webex Password: Paradise  Webex Password: Paradise BY PHONE: BY PHONE:
 Dial‐in #: 408‐418‐9388  Dial‐in #: 408‐418‐9388
 Code: 123 202 6837  Code: 123 877 2748
SUBMITTING COMMENTSSuggestions and comments on the scope and content of the EIR are invited from allinterested parties for a period of 30 days (May 3 through June 3, 2021 by 5 p.m. PDT).Written or verbal comments concerning the proposed project’s environmental scopeshould be submitted via the following options.

Website: paradisesewer.com/contact Mail: Colette Curtis (from subject dropdown menu, Public Information Officerselect “Submit a comment on Town of Paradise Environmental Impact Report”) 5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
Telephone: 530‐872‐6291, ext. 112
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECTTo learn more about the proposed project or to stay updated, visit paradisesewer.com.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 105 of 116
1019
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
5/3/21 Public Notice Advertisement
(Enterprise‐Record)
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 106 of 116
1020
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
5/3/21 Social Media Post We have kicked off the environmental review of the Paradise Sewer Project and want your input. This vital proposed Project will provide a long‐term solution for wastewatercollection, transport and treatment from properties identified in the proposed sewer service area, which is encompassed mostly by Clark Road, Skyway and Pearson Road.

This long‐term wastewater solution will allow for sustainable housing and businessactivity in Town, supporting the community’s economic recovery and vitality.

Visit paradisesewer.com to learn more about the environmental review process and thisinitial public comment period that will end at 5 p.m. PDT on June 3. 5/11/21 E‐blast
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 107 of 116
1021
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
REMINDER: FIRST VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETING HAPPENING THIS WEEKDon’t forget, our first virtual public meeting for the Paradise Sewer Project is this Thursday. Join us to learn more about the project, interact with team members, askquestions and submit formal comments.

JOIN ONLINE OR BY PHONEYou can participate in the meetings online or by phone to remain safe while socialdistancing. Your participation matters! THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2021 | 6 P.M. TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 | 12 P.M.

ONLINE: ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg1  Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2 Webex Password: Paradise  Webex Password: Paradise BY PHONE: BY PHONE:
 Dial‐in #: 408‐418‐9388  Dial‐in #: 408‐418‐9388
 Code: 123 202 6837  Code: 123 877 2748
SUBMITTING COMMENTSEven if you can’t make the meetings, suggestions/comments on the scope and content of the EIR are invited from all interested parties anytime until 5 p.m. on June 3, 2021.Written or verbal comments concerning the proposed project’s environmental scope can be submitted via the following options.

Website: paradisesewer.com/contact Mail: Colette Curtis (from subject dropdown menu, Public Information Officerselect “Submit a comment on Town of Paradise Environmental Impact Report”) 5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
Telephone: 530‐872‐6291, ext. 112
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECTTo learn more about the proposed project or to stay updated, visit paradisesewer.com. 5/12/21 Social Media Post Don’t forget, we’re hosting our first of two virtual public meetings this Thursday for the Paradise Sewer Project. Your participation and input matters so join us online or by phone to learn more about this vital proposed project and talk directly with the projectteam.Visit paradisesewer.com for meeting details or to submit comments during the project’s30‐day scoping period, which will end at 5 p.m. PDT on June 3.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 108 of 116
1022
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
5/13/21 Virtual Public Meeting #1 40 Total
29 Attendees
(4 callers)
11 Panelists
Thursday, May 13, 2021 | 6 p.m.

Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg1
Webex Password: ParadiseDial‐in #: 408‐418‐9388Code: 123 202 6837 Questions/comments:
 What is the cost to Paradise property owners within the SSA? Outside of the SSA but within the Town limits?
 What other future costs to property owners for things like maintenance?  Will properties outside of the SSA but within the Town limits ever be served in the future?
 Will there be any cost to property owners who are NOT in the sewage collection area?
 Am I understanding correctly that those town of Paradise properties not in the blue area will not ever be included?
 Is the Skyway route confirmed or is the Neal Road route still being considered?  Will parcels within the proposed service area be required to connect to the proposed sewer system?
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 109 of 116
1023
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
 Will the line installed be big enough to handle future growth? [Need to look at existing FAQs and see if one can be expanded to address this.]  How will the construction of the proposed sewer system be coordinated with road rebuilding efforts to minimize impact to the Town?  We think it's short sighted to not anticipate future growth. What if the hospital comes back?
 Has the Town consider the cost of building our own system instead of sending the sewer all the way to Chico?
 What is your current project funding priority and how can Cal OES be supportive? 5/17/21 E‐blast
DID YOU MISS LAST WEEK’S VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETING?In case you missed our first virtual public meeting last week for the Paradise Sewer Project, we’re hosting a second meeting next Tuesday, May 25 at Noon. Your participation and input matters so don’t miss the discussion on this important proposedproject.JOIN ONLINE OR BY PHONEYou can participate in the meeting online or by phone. Join us to learn more about the project, interact with team members, ask questions and submit formal comments. Welook forward to connecting with you! TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2021 | 12 P.M.

ONLINE:
 Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2
 Webex Password: Paradise
BY PHONE:
 Dial‐in #: 408‐418‐9388
 Code: 123 877 2748
SUBMIT COMMENTS ANYTIME UNTIL JUNE 3Suggestions and comments on the scope and content of the EIR are invited from all interested parties anytime until 5 p.m. on June 3, 2021. Written or verbal comments concerning the proposed project’s environmental scope can be submitted via thefollowing options.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 110 of 116
1024
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
Website: paradisesewer.com/contact
(from subject dropdown menu,select “Submit a comment onEnvironmental Impact Report”) Telephone: 530‐872‐6291, ext. 112
Mail: Colette Curtis
Public Information Officer
Town of Paradise5555 SkywayParadise, CA 95969
STAY INVOLVEDTo learn more about the proposed project or to stay updated, visit paradisesewer.com. 5/20/21 Social Media Post If you missed our first virtual public meeting last week for the Paradise Sewer Project, don’t worry, we’re hosting a second meeting next Tuesday, May 25 at Noon. Don’t miss the discussion on this important proposed project. We look forward to connecting with you!Visit paradisesewer.com for meeting details or to submit comments during the project’s 30‐day scoping period, which ends June 3 at 5 p.m. PDT.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 111 of 116
1025
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
5/25/21 Virtual Public Meeting #2 31 Total
14 Attendees
(5 callers)
12 Panelists
Tuesday, May 25, 2021 | Noon
Webex: bit.ly/Paradise_Sewer_Mtg2
Webex Password: ParadiseDial‐in #: 408‐418‐9388Code: 123 877 2748  Hi, thank you for taking my call and I apologize if this was covered. I missed a portion of your presentation. If the location that we currently have is within the proposed service area, but it's currently under septic, what advice are you providing to the property owners or what websites or information areas do you recommend in order to understand what would be the proper steps in evaluating whether or not we are required to connect with the sewer system versus having the existing septic system function? That's the biggest question I guess for a lot ofpeople that I know is what are our requirements versus what what's nice to haveversus what's required to do.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 112 of 116
1026
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
 I'm actually calling from Lane County, emergency management over here in Oregon and so if it's a better conversation to have offline, I'm happy to do that, but really you guys are so much farther ahead than we are with fire recovery. Iwas just looking to get a better understanding of pitfalls and hurdles that wemight be looking out for in the future as we move towards getting a little bitcloser to where you guys are, because you guys have been inspirational in yourrecovery process.  Have the pipe material options been listed, and if so, are you eliminating thermoplastic pipes due to issues of flammable concerns. 5/27/21 E‐blast
THANK YOU FOR ENGAGING WITH US!Thank you for joining us this month for our two virtual public scoping meetings for theParadise Sewer Project. The Town of Paradise appreciates your input during the meetings and ongoing participation in this project.THERE’S STILL TIME TO SUBMIT COMMENTS If you didn’t get a chance to attend our meetings, please visit our Public Engagementpage to view the meeting recordings and PowerPoint. We still welcome your inputregarding the scope and content of environmental information to be included in theEnvironmental Impact Report. You can submit a comment or letter of support through a number of ways during our public comment period that ends at 5 p.m. PDT on June 3,2021.

Website: paradisesewer.com/contact Mail: Colette Curtis (from subject dropdown menu, Public Information Officerselect “Submit a comment on Town of ParadiseEnvironmental Impact Report”) 5555 Skyway Paradise, CA 95969
Telephone: 530‐872‐6291, ext. 112
STAY UPDATEDWe thank you for your continued interest in the vital proposed project and encourageyou to stay updated throughout the various project milestones by visitingparadisesewer.com! 5/27/21 Social Media Post Thank you for joining us this month for our two virtual public scoping meetings for the Paradise Sewer Project. If you didn’t get a chance to attend our meetings, we still Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 113 of 116
1027
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
welcome your input regarding the scope and content of environmental information tobe included in the Environmental Impact Report.You can submit a comment or a letter of support through a number of ways during our public comment period that ends at 5 p.m. PDT on June 3, 2021. Send us an email, leavea voicemail, write a letter, or connect with the project team via our website contact page.We appreciate your ongoing interest in this vital proposed project and encourage you to stay updated throughout the various project milestones by visiting paradisesewer.com! 6/7/21 E‐blast
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 114 of 116
1028
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT DURING PROJECT SCOPING!The Town of Paradise would like to extend a big THANK YOU to our community for your interest in the proposed Paradise Sewer Project. We appreciate your participation and input during the formal 30‐day project scoping period from May 3 to June 3, 2021.

WHAT’S NEXT?Based on all the valuable feedback received during the public comment period, the Town of Paradise is now preparing the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that willhighlight results of the alternatives analysis, environmental impacts and identification ofmitigation measures. The next key project milestone will be the release of the Draft EIR for public review in early 2022.Although the project’s scoping period has ended, we welcome public input throughoutthe environmental process in addition to the formal public comment periods. We willcontinue to keep you informed throughout each project milestone.STAY UPDATEDVisit paradisesewer.com to stay in the know about this long‐term wastewater solution that will allow for sustainable housing and business activity in Paradise, supporting the community’s economic recovery and vitality.
6/7/21 Social Media Post We would like to extend a big THANK YOU to our community for your interest in the proposed Paradise Sewer Project. We appreciate your participation and input during the formal 30‐day project scoping period from May 3 to June 3, 2021. Based on all the valuable feedback received, the project team is now preparing the Draft Environmental Impact Report, which will be released for public review in early 2022.

Visit paradisesewer.com to stay in the know about this long‐term wastewater solutionthat will allow for sustainable housing and business activity in Paradise, supporting the community’s economic recovery and vitality.

Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 115 of 116
1029
Town of Paradise Sewer Project
Outreach/Media Log
DATE OUTREACH TYPE # OF CONTACTS MEETING INFO NOTES
Paradise Sewer Project | Final Program Environmental Impact Report Appendix A - NOP Scoping Report Page 116 of 116
1030
B
Town of Paradise 1994
General Plan Resolution and
Amendments
1031
INDEX

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
1 J:\TownClerk\Indices\GeneralPlanAmendments

RESOLUTION
NUMBER
DATE

ADOPTED

TYPE OF AMENDMENT APPLICANT AMENDMENT

NUMBERS
RES. 82-22 04-07-82 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE

GENERAL PLAN

TOWN OF PARADISE N/A
RES. 82-40 08-18-82 LAND USE MAP TOWN OF PARADISE UNKNOWN RES. 83-16 04-05-83 LAND USE MAP TOWN OF PARADISE GPA-03-82(b), GPA-01-83, GPA-03-83, GPA-04-83
RES. 83-55 12-06-83 LAND USE MAP ANDY MITAL AND OTHERS GPA-12-83 RES. 84-38 08-21-84 LAND USE MAP TOWN OF PARADISE GPA-04-84 RES. 85-02 01-02-85 LAND USE MAP TOWN OF PARADISE GPA-05-84 RES. 85-56 12-10-85 LAND USE MAP TOWN OF PARADISE GPA-01-85, GPA-02-85, GPA-03-85A, GPA-03-85B,
GPA-03-85C,GPA-03-85D,
GPA-04-85, GPA-05-85
RES. 87-20 05-19-87 LAND USE MAP TOWN OF PARADISE GPA-01-87, GPA-02-87, GPA-03-87, GPA-04-87
RES. 90-23 06-16-90 LAND USE MAP CLIFFORD LARSEN GPA/RZ-09-89 RES. 91-09 05-21-91 LAND USE MAP JOHANN KLEMPA

KAROLY KASZA
GPA/RZ-04-90
GPA/RZ-03-90
RES. 92-07 04-07-92 LAND USE MAP TEN SEVENTY CORP. GPA/RZ-01-91 RES. 94-42 10-04-94 ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN TOWN OF PARADISE N/A RES. 95-28 11-21-95 LAND USE MAP OUR SAVIOR LUTHERAN
CHURCH and OTHERS
GA-95-001
RES. 96-05 05-07-96 LAND USE MAP YOUNGBLOOD ET. AL.

JUBILEE ON THE RIDGE
ET. AL.

RICK SOUZA ET AL
GA-96-001
GA-96-002
GA-96-002
1032
INDEX

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
2 J:\TownClerk\Indices\GeneralPlanAmendments

RESOLUTION
NUMBER
DATE

ADOPTED

TYPE OF AMENDMENT APPLICANT AMENDMENT

NUMBERS
RES. 97-07 03-04-97 LAND USE MAP DWIGHT and BONNIE
MILLER
GA-96-003
RES. 97-24 10-07-97 LAND USE MAP ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP
OF CA
GA-97-001 and GR-96-001
RES. 98-25 09-15-98 HOUSING ELEMENT TOWN OF PARADISE GA-98-0001 RES. 99-10 04-06-99 LAND USE MAP LARRY KNIFONG GR-99-001 RES. 00-15 05-23-00 LAND USE MAP and SAFETY

ELEMENTS
TOWN OF PARADISE GA-00-001
RES. 01-07 02-27-01 LAND USE MAP DREW SYPHERD GR-00-002 and GR-00-005 RES. 01-11 04-10-01 LAND USE MAP FRANK FILER GR-00-004
RES. 01-31 09-25-01 LAND USE MAP ROBERTWOODWORTH GR-01-001 RES. 01-37 11-27-01 LAND USE MAP TOWN OF PARADISE GR-01-04 RES. 02-22 05-14-02 LAND USE MAP LARRY KNIFONG GR-01-05 RES. 02-66 12-10-02 LAND USE MAP PARADISE CEMETERY

DISTRICT
GR-02-01
RES. 03-28 06-10-03 LAND USE MAP PATRICK CORRIGAN GR-02-03 RES. 04-07 02-10-04 LAND USE MAP MORRIS, ANDERS, SELKO/

TOWN OF PARADISE
GR-03-05
RES. 04-23 06-03-04 LAND USE MAP FHK COMPANIES GR-01-02 RES. 05-03 01-11-05 LAND USE MAP CREW GR-04-03 and GR-04 RES. 05-20 06-28-05 LAND USE MAP FEATHER RIVER HOSPITAL

SWANLUND
GR-05-02
GR-05-04
RES. 05-34 09-27-05 LAND USE MAP BRANDI
WYMAN
GR-04-05 and GR-05-01
RES. 05-35 09-27-05 HOUSING ELEMENT TOWN OF PARADISE GA-03-04 1033
INDEX

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
3 J:\TownClerk\Indices\GeneralPlanAmendments

RESOLUTION
NUMBER
DATE

ADOPTED

TYPE OF AMENDMENT APPLICANT AMENDMENT

NUMBERS
RES. 05-50 12-13-05 CIRCULATION DIAGRAM OF THE

CIRCULATION ELEMENT
TOWN OF PARADISE GA-05-01
RES. 06-08 03-28-06 LAND USE MAP GALLI / DEROMEDI
TURMAN
GR-05-05
GR-05-06
RES. 06-52 10-24-06 AMENDMENT TO LUP-47 OF THE

LAND USE ELEMENT
TOWN OF PARADISE GA-06-01
RES. 07-06 02-13-07 HOUSING ELEMENT TOWN OF PARADISE GA-06-02 RES. 07-12 05-08-07 LAND USE MAP and LAND USE

ELEMENT

BARKLEY

TOWN OF PARADISE
GA-06-01
GA-07-03
RES. 07-22 07-10-07 LAND USE MAP TOWN OF PARADISE GR-04-02 RES. 07-43 10-23-07 LAND USE MAP FRATERNAL ORDER OF
EAGLES GR-07-001
RES. 08-04 01-08-08 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE
OCEI-3 OF THE OPEN SPACE /

CONSERVATION ELEMENT
TOWN OF PARADISE GA-07-04
RES. 08-20 05-13-08 LAND USE MAP SONNTAG GR-08-01
RES. 08-23 05-13-08 LAND USE MAP NIBLETT GR-07-02
RES. 08-46 08-12-08 LAND USE MAP RICKARDS-ANDERSON GR-07-05 RES. 08-58 10-28-08 LAND USE MAP MCGREGOR GR-08-02
RES. 09-05 01-27-09 LAND USE MAP SONNTAG

TOWN OF PARADISE
GR-08-06
GR-08-07
RES. 09-67 12-08-09 HOUSING ELEMENT TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE RHNP and

CURRENT STATE LAW

TOWN OF PARADISE N/A
RES. 10-27 08-10-10 AMENDMENT TO LUO-22(a) OF

THE LAND USE ELEMENT

TOWN OF PARADISE N/A
1034
INDEX

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
4 J:\TownClerk\Indices\GeneralPlanAmendments

RESOLUTION
NUMBER
DATE

ADOPTED

TYPE OF AMENDMENT APPLICANT AMENDMENT

NUMBERS
RES. 10-34 09-14-10 LAND USE MAP FEATHER RIVER HOSPITAL

AND RINEHART
PL10-00260-FRH
PL10-00194 Rinehart
RES. 12-29 08-07-12 LAND USE MAP GRAND SIERRA LODGE PL12-00075 RES. 13-58 12-10-13 LAND USE MAP GILKEY PL12-00020
RES. 14-22 06-10-14 HOUSING ELEMENT 2014 TOWN OF PARADISE N/A RES. 18-23 07-10-18 LAND USE MAP BALASEK PL18-00063
RES. 18-38 09-11-18 LAND USE MAP SONNTAG PL18-00151
RES. 19-43 12-20-19 LAND USE MAP MCAFEE PL19-00227
RES. 20-45 12-08-20 LAND USE MAP PUSD PL20-00261
1035

MEMORANDUM
AGENDA NO: 6(a)
FROM: Craig Baker, Community Development Director
TO: Lauren Gill, Interim Town Manager
Dwight Moore, Town Attorney
DATE: August 12, 2013
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution Document Finding that the 1994 Paradise General Plan Substantially Complies With the Statutory Mandates of Government Code Section 65302
COMMISSION ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution No. 13-04, “A Resolution of the Town of Paradise Planning Commission Finding the 1994 Paradise General Plan Substantially Complies with the Statutory Mandates Under Government Code Section 65302.” BACKGROUND: The general plan is at the top of a city or county’s land use regulation hierarchy.

Each California city and county is required to have a comprehensive, long-term general plan that includes specific mandatory elements which set forth the objectives, policies, principals, standards and plan proposals for the physical development of the city or county. Pursuant to Government Code section 65302, each general plan must include the following elements:
• Land Use
• Circulation
• Housing
• Conservation
• Open Space
• Noise
• Safety
The 1994 Paradise General Plan was adopted by the Paradise Town Council on October 4, 1994.

The process of developing the new, revised plan took approximately four years of work by the Town’s hired consultant, five separate citizen subcommittees, the Planning Commission, the Town Council and Town staff. The document is the third general plan adopted by the Town since its incorporation in 1979 and is organized into three separate volumes: Volume I – Policy Document, Volume II - Environmental Impact Report and Volume III – Environmental Setting.

Volume I, the Policy Document, contains a comprehensive assemblage of all mandatory general plan elements and an additional, non-mandatory Education and Social Services element. The 1994 plan was intended to chart and direct future land use decision making for the Town of Paradise over a fifteen year period to October, 2009.

With the exception of the Housing Element, no comprehensive updates have been completed since the plan’s adoption in 1994, although the Town has adopted ten focused text amendments and twenty-six individual General Plan Land Use Map amendments since then. Pursuant to 1036
Planning Commission
Agenda No. 6(a)
Government Code section 65588(b) the Housing Element is required to be updated every five years. The 1994 Paradise General Plan Housing Element was last revised in 2009 and is not due for another revision until June 30, 2014. Town staff is currently developing a request for proposals (RFP) for the purpose of selecting a consultant to assist in that work effort.

Government Code section 65400 requires every local planning agency to annually review and provide a report to the local legislative body (Town Council) concerning progress achieved toward the implementation of its general plan and a separate review and report specifically concerning progress toward the implementation of its general Housing Element. Town staff has developed these reports on an annual basis for review by the Planning Commission, acceptance by the Town Council and submittal to the California Department of Housing and Community Development as required by section 65400. In addition, Government Code section 65103(a) requires the Town Planning Commission to periodically review and revise the general plan, as necessary.

ANALYSIS
Government Code statutes associated with the requirements for a legally adequate general plan do not provide a mandatory minimum timeframe for revision of elements, except for the housing element. In order to be found to be legally adequate, a general plan must first be complete. As discussed previously, the 1994 Paradise General Plan is comprised of all seven required general plan elements and is therefore complete from that perspective.

Secondly, general plans must be internally consistent. That is, all elements must be integrated and compatible. The generation of annual implementation status reports not only satisfies a State requirement for tracking implementation, but also provides the Town with a periodic opportunity to examine the document for inconsistencies or conflicts. The latest annual reports for 2013 not only failed to identify any notable inconsistencies or conflicting policy directives, objectives or implementation measures, Town staff was also able to conclude that, despite periodic and at times chronic funding and staffing shortages, the 1994 Paradise General Plan continues to be increasingly implemented.

Although the Town does collect a 12% surcharge on most building, planning and wastewater permits to be used for updating the general plan, the fund balance is not currently sufficient at this time. However, there is sufficient funding from this source to complete the required housing element update.

Included within the various findings necessary to be made by a planning agency when approving a development project is a finding that the project is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the agency’s general plan.

A planning agency’s general plan should be a reflection of the character of the community for which it was prepared and adopted. The Town of Paradise still bears substantial similarity to the community that existed here in 1994, and perhaps before. There have been no significant annexations since the general plan was adopted. The Town boundary is essentially the same as 1037
Planning Commission
Agenda No. 6(a)
in 1994 and, in fact, bears a remarkable resemblance to the 1994 boundary of the Paradise Irrigation District. Based upon U.S. Census data, the Town’s population increased by only 3% between 1990 and 2010 (Interestingly, the 1994 Paradise General Plan predicted that the Town’s population would increase by approximately 20% by the year 2008). There is still no large-scale wastewater disposal system serving the community. Since 1989, traffic counts have remained fairly static in most areas but show a general decline from 2003 to 2010 over the last ten years (Butte County Association of Governments). These observations lend support to the notion that the Paradise community has not changed to any great degree in terms of its character, environmental setting and function since 1994 and that the Town’s current general plan can still be found to be adequate as a document to guide the future development of the community.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
It is the position of the Town Planning Director and the Town Attorney that based upon the circumstances outline within the preceding discussion, the 1994 General Plan is not outdated or legally inadequate. In consideration of this finding, the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 13.04 has been prepared for your consideration and recommended adoption. Planning Commission adoption of the resolution document is intended to formally affirm the relevance and adequacy of the 1994 Paradise General Plan. Please be prepared to discuss this matter with staff and other Planning Commission members. Town Attorney Dwight Moore will be in attendance at the meeting to provide guidance and assistance and to answer questions that may arise during the discussion.
1038

TOWN COUNCIL
Meeting Minutes
6:00 PM – April 12, 2022

1. OPENING
The Regular meeting of the Paradise Town Council was called to order by Mayor Crowder at 6:06 p.m. in the Town Council Chamber located at 5555 Skyway, Paradise, California who led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America.

An invocation was offered by Council Member Steve “Woody” Culleton.

COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Greg Bolin, Steve “Woody” Culleton, Jody Jones, Rose Tryon and Steve Crowder, Mayor.

COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Town Manager Kevin Phillips, Town Attorney Scott E. Huber, Town Clerk Dina Volenski, Town Engineer/Public Works Director Marc Mattox, Finance Director/Town Treasurer Ross Gilb, Community Development Director Susan Hartman, Community Development Director Tony Lindsey, Information Systems Director Luis Marquez, Business and Housing Manager Kate Anderson, Recovery and Economic Development Director Colette Curtis, Police Chief Eric Reinbold, Police Lieutenant Cameron Kovacs and Police Lieutenant Anthony Borgman.
1e. Mayor Crowder read the proclamation recognizing Congressman Doug LaMalfa, Senator Dianne Feinstein and Senator Alex Padilla for their assistance in securing funding to benefit the Paradise Police Department. (180-40-027)
Congressman LaMalfa accepted the Proclamation in person. 1f. Mayor Crowder read the Proclamation recognizing Jake Early for creating the new seal representing the Town of Paradise. (180-40-027) 1g. Camp Fire Recovery Updates - Written reports are included in the agenda packet.
 Colette Curtis, Recovery and Economic Development Director - Recovery projects, Advocacy, Economic Recovery and
Development, Communications and Emergency Operations.
 Marc Mattox, Public Works Director/Town Engineer - Infrastructure and Sewer Update.
 Tony Lindsey, CDD-Building and Code Enforcement Update.

2. CONSENT CALENDAR
1039
MOTION by Bolin, seconded by Culleton, approved consent calendar items 2a through 2j with the addition to item 2j to include compensation of $1,000 for each easement. Roll call vote was unanimous.
2a. Approved minutes of the March 8, 2022 Special and Regular Town Council meetings.
2b. Approved March 2022 Cash Disbursements in the amount of $3,262,687.15. (310-10-034)
2c. Waived second reading of the entire Town Ordinance No. 615 and approved reading by title only; and, Adopted Town Ordinance No. 615, “An Ordinance Adding Section 9.70 to the Paradise Municipal Code Relating to Military Equipment Use.” (540-16-184)
 2d. 1. Concurred with staff’s recommendation of Northstar and Rolls Anderson Rolls to perform On Call Surveying Services for the Town’s survey needs to support Public Works and Development services; and,

2. Approved the Professional Services Agreement with Northstar Engineering and Rolls Anderson Rolls and authorized the Town Manager to execute a two-year contract, with three one-year optional extensions. (510-20-339 & 510-20-340)
2e. Approved Program Supplement Agreements for Emergency Relief projects to Administering Agency-State Agreement for Federal-Aid Projects, Agreement No. 03-5425F15:
 PSA No. F028 for Project ER-38Y0(014) Emergency Opening Guardrail Repair (950-40-065)
 PSA No. F029 for Project ER-38Y0(015) Emergency Opening Culvert Repair; and, (950-40-066)
Adopted Resolution No. 2022-17, A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise authorizing the Town Manager, or designee, to sign the above listed Program Supplement Agreement to Administering AgencyState Agreement for Federal-Aid Projects, Agreement No. 03-5425F15. 2f. Authorized the Town Manager to enter into a three-year agreement for financial audit services with Richardson & Company, LLP. (510-20-341) 2g. Adopted Town of Paradise Resolution No. 2022-18, “Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise requesting extension of the Vehicle Abatement Program and associated fees and authorizing continued participation in a Service Authority for Abandoned Vehicle Abatement pursuant to California Vehicle Code section 9250.7 and 22710.” (540-15-012) 2h. Adopted Resolution No.22-19, A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise approving the plans and specifications for the Off1040 System Culvert Replacement Project and authorizing advertisement for bids on the project. (950-40-060 & 910-30-004)
2i. Adopted Resolution No. 2022-20, A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise accepting Contract No. 9380.CON, Ponderosa Elementary Safe Routes to School Project, performed by All-American Construction, Inc., Live Oak, CA. (950-40-032 & 510-20-299) 2j. Adopted Resolution No. 2022-21, A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise authorizing a permanent easement at 6225 and 6295 Skyway to Pacific Gas and Electric Company with compensation of $1,000 for each easement. (950-90-004, 850-20-011)

3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR - None

4. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION

1. Ed Schilling would like to see the Bike Path beautified and thinks the Town should have its own sewer plant, doesn’t think the connection to Chico makes sense.

2. Jon Remalia would like to see the Planning Commissioners page on the Town Website updated.

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
5a. Business and Housing Manager Kate Anderson provided the Town Council with an overview of the Draft 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan and requested Council to conduct the second public hearing to solicit comments and/or suggestions regarding the Draft 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan; and, Adopt the Draft 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan as submitted; or, Revise the Draft 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan as submitted; and, Authorize staff to submit the adopted 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development should no public comment be received.

Mayor Crowder opened the public hearing at 6:43 p.m.

There were no public comments.

Mayor Crowder closed the public hearing at 6:44 p.m.

MOTION by Jones, seconded by Bolin, adopted the Draft 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan as submitted and authorized staff to submit the adopted 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development since there were no public comments. Roll call vote was unanimous. (710-10-100)
1041
5b. Community Development Director Susan Hartman provided the Town Council with an overview of the Updated Design Standards for the Downtown and Clark Road/Community Commercial Development Areas and Rescinding the Greater RDA Project Area Design District Standards that no long exist due to the dissolution of the RDA in 2012 and requested the Town Council to conduct the duly noticed and scheduled public hearing regarding the Updated Design Standards.

Mayor Crowder opened the public hearing at 7:01 p.m.

1. Jon Remalia thinks there’s an issue if someone has a zero setback lot and they have to provide landscaping from the side they lose a lot of property.

Mayor Crowder closed the public hearing at 7:02 p.m.

MOTION by Bolin, seconded by Jones, concurred with the project “CEQA determination” finding presented and considered by the Planning Commission on March 15, 2022, and embodied within Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-01; and, concurred with the project recommended adoption and zoning ordinance amendment adopted by the Planning Commission on March 15, 2022, and embodied within Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-01; and, Adopted Town of Paradise Resolution No. 2022-22, “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Adopting Updated Design Standards for the Downtown and Clark Road/Community Commercial Development Areas of the 2010 Design Standards and Rescinding the Greater RDA Project Area Design District Standards”, and, waived the first reading of Town Ordinance No.616 and read by title only; and, Introduced Town of Paradise Ordinance No.616, “An Ordinance Amending Text Regulations with Paradise Municipal Code Chapter 17.41 [Design Standards and Design Review] Relative to Updated Adoption Dates”. Roll call vote was unanimous. (710-80-012 & 540-16-185)

6. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
6a. Chief Reinbold introduced Lieutenant Kovacs who provided Council with an overview of the proposed purchase of Body Worn Cameras, Vehicle Cameras and Data Management Products and Services for Bodyworn by Utility Associates. Lt. Kovacs introduced David Burns from Bodyworn by Utility Associates, Inc. who provided additional information to the Council about the products.

MOTION by Crowder, seconded by Culleton, adopted Resolution No. 2022-23, a Resolution of The Town Council of The Town of Paradise Making Findings Concerning Sole Vendor For The Purchase of Body Worn Cameras, Vehicle Cameras, and Data Management Products and Services from Bodyworn, by Utility Associates, Inc. Body Worn Cameras, Vehicle Cameras, and Data Management Products and Services from 1042
Bodyworn, by Utility Associates, Inc. Pursuant To Paradise Municipal Code Sections 2.45.070B, 245.070C, and 245.070G. Roll call vote was unanimous. (480-35-002)
6b. MOTION by Jones, seconded by Culleton, authorized the Town Manager to enter into a contract with CDX Wireless for Project Management of the Town’s two-way radio system restoration. Roll call vote was unanimous. (480-35-002)
6c. MOTION by Culleton, seconded by Jones, authorized the Police Department to purchase three (3) 2022 or 2023 Chevrolet Tahoe PPV vehicles under California State Contract pricing through Elk Grove Auto / Winner Chevrolet; and, authorized the Police Department to purchase required upfit and emergency equipment from Lehr, under the existing, publicly bid, Placer County contract with Lehr Auto, to upfit the Tahoes into two (2) Patrol vehicles and one (1) K9 Patrol vehicle. Roll call vote was unanimous. (480-35-002)
6d. MOTION by Jones, seconded by Crowder, adopted Town of Paradise Resolution No. 2022-24, “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Adopting CEQA Findings, Adopting the Town of Paradise’s Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Thereafter Approving Its Vehicle Miles Traveled Policies.” Roll call vote was unanimous. (720-10-002, 770-40-009)
6e. MOTION by Bolin, seconded by Crowder concurred with staff recommendation to award communication services contract to Blue Flamingo Marketing; and, authorized the Town Manager to execute a 3- year contract with Blue Flamingo Marketing. Roll call vote was unanimous. (510-20-234)
6f. Community Development Director Tony Lindsey provided the Town Council with and overview of the proposed Ordinance amending Section

8.58.080 of the Paradise Municipal Code relating to Defensible Space and Hazardous Fuel Management that would allow an issued Certificate of Compliance to remain valid for 90 days from the inspection date.

MOTION by Bolin, seconded by Culleton, waived the first reading of Town Ordinance No. 617 and read by title only; and, Introduced Town Ordinance No. 617. “An Ordinance Amending Paradise Municipal Code Section 8.58.060 Relating to Defensible Space and Hazardous Fuel Management”. Roll call vote was unanimous. (480-35-002) 6g. At 8:24 p.m. Vice Mayor Greg Bolin recused himself from the dais regarding this agenda item due to a potential conflict of interest.

Public Works Director/Town Engineer Marc Mattox provided the Town Council with an overview of the Draft Principals of Agreement between the 1043
Town of Paradise and the City of Chico that the Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee has been working on.

Council discussed the Draft Principals Agreement between the Town of Paradise and City of Chico developed by the Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee and provide no additional comments.

Vice Mayor Bolin returned to the dais at 8:48 p.m.

7. COUNCIL INITIATED ITEMS AND REPORTS
7a. Council initiated agenda items
7a1. Consider discussing road construction projects in Town and requesting identifying plaques for the contractors and putting construction maps on social media so citizens can see where road construction is in Town. (CULLETON)
Council Member Culleton talked with PG&E and they stated there are other contractors working on the roadways in Paradise; PG&E now provides a map of where construction is going on in Town so the public can be informed of what the best routes are for driving in town. The Town is also working on identifying where other contractors are working in Town.

Marc Mattox stated that Paradise is one of the largest construction sites in the country and temporary construction sites are difficult to manage because job sites change on a daily basis, but the Town is working on providing more information to the public.
7a2. Discuss changes to Ordinance 612 regarding citations issued to property owners instead of violators living on the property. (CULLETON) Council Member Culleton was concerned with the Ordinance only citing the property Owner and not the actual violator on the property, but had a discussion with staff and learned that the Ordinance allows staff the ability and tools to cite the property owner and violator.
7b. Council reports on committee representation
Council Member Jones attended Sewer Regional Project Advisory Committee (SRPAC), Butte County Association of Governments and Butte County Air Quality Management District meetings.

Council Member Culleton attended Solid Waste Committee and CDBG Partnership program to award money to Service organizations
Council Member Tryon attended meetings with Broad and Guzman, CDBG Partnership Program, Waste Management; and announced that potentially the green waste yard, buy back center and Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) center could be available in the near future.
1044
Mayor Crowder attended SRPAC, Congressman LaMalfa press conference, labor negotiations with Generals and POA and Chamber Business walk. 7c. Future Agenda Items - None

8. STAFF COMMUNICATION
8a. Town Manager Report
Town Manager Phillips reported on meeting with PASH; ICS 300 training with Jim Broshears; Counselors of Real Estate meeting; discussion to enhance Yellowstone Kelly trail with mountain biking amenities; announced the Town will be hosting HUD for a Roundtable meeting/discussion and will be hosting the Sacramento Valley City Mangers meeting.

Town Manger Phillips announced the City Clerks Association of California 2022 Clerk of the Year award was presented to Town Clerk Dina Volenski in San Francisco.

Community Development Director (CDD) Update
CDD Director Tony Lindsey informed the Town Council that the department has been hosting Stakeholders meetings on the first Monday of each month; Community Enhancement Outreach Team has contacted 40 community members last month and generated 85 clients for the Business and Housing Department; exploring opportunities for residents to receive affordable insurance through IBHS which focus on Wildfire preparedness and is supported by National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); and, introduced an interactive Wildfire Ready app to assist residents.

9. CLOSED SESSION - None

10. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Crowder adjourned the meeting at 9:27 p.m.

Date approved: May 10, 2022
By: Attest:
_________________________ _________________________
Steve Crowder, Mayor Dina Volenski, CMC, Town Clerk
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1 Town of Paradise
Planning Commission
Special Meeting Agenda
6:00 PM – May 24, 2022
Town of Paradise Council Chamber – 5555 Skyway, Paradise, CA Planning Commission Staff:

Susan Hartman, Community Development Director
Planning Commission Members:

Carissa Garrard, Chair
Ron Lassonde, Vice Chair
Lynn Costa, Commissioner
Kim Morris, Commissioner
Zeb Reynolds, Commissioner
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need a special accommodation to participate, please contact Community Development Director Hartman, at 872-6291 ext. 417 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting. Hearing assistance devices for the hearing impaired are available from the Presiding Clerk. Members of the public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. If you wish to address thePlanning Commission on any matter on the Agenda, it is requested that you complete a "Request to Address Council/Commission" card and give it to the Presiding Clerk prior to the beginning of the Meeting. All writingsor documents which are related to any item on an open session agenda and which are distributed to a majorityof the Planning Commission within 72 hours of a Regular Meeting will be available for public inspection at theTown Hall in the Town Clerk or Community Development Services Department located at 5555 Skyway, at thetime the subject writing or document is distributed to a majority of the subject body. Regular business hoursare Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

ROLL CALL

1. PUBLIC HEARING
* * * PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE * * *
A. Staff comments C. Close hearing to the public
B. Open the hearing to the public D. Commission discussion

1.Project applicant E. Motion

2.Parties for the project F. Vote

3.Parties against the project

4.Rebuttals
NOTE: Pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution No. 96-001, any person may speak before the Commission regarding the matter under consideration for a maximum of five minutes unless granted additional time by the Chair. "In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need a special accommodation to participate, please contact the Community Development Dept., at 872-6291 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting."
1a. 1. Conduct the duly noticed and scheduled public hearing regarding the proposed Town of Paradise Housing Element 2022 update; and, 1 1056
2 2. Consider adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022- 02, thereby recommending that the Town Council take the following actions: a) Certify and adopt the proposed Initial Study and Negative Declaration document as it relates to the proposed Town of Paradise Housing Element 2022 Update, and b) Adopt the
amendments to the Housing (2022-2030 Housing Element) of the 1994 Paradise General Plan known as the Town of Paradise Housing Element 2022 Update in order to make the Paradise Housing Element consistent with the RHNA and current State housing element law. (ROLL CALL VOTE)

2. ADJOURNMENT
2 1057
Town of Paradise
Planning Commission Agenda Summary
Date: May 24, 2022
Agenda Item: 1(a)
ORIGINATED BY: Susan Hartman, Community Development
Director – Planning & Wastewater
REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Review the Final Revised 2022-2030 Housing Element Update and Consider Adoption of a Resolution
Recommending Town Council Adoption of a Town of
Paradise 2022-2030 Housing Element Update and
Certification of its Associated Negative Declaration
Environmental Document
COMMISSION ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Conduct the duly noticed and scheduled public hearing regarding the proposed Town of Paradise Housing Element 2022 update; and, 2.

Consider adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-02, thereby recommending that the Town Council take the following actions: a) Certify and adopt the proposed Initial Study and Negative Declaration document as it relates to the proposed Town of Paradise Housing Element 2022 Update, and b) Adopt the amendments to the Housing (2022-2030 Housing Element) of the 1994 Paradise General Plan known as the Town of Paradise Housing Element 2022 Update in order to make the Paradise Housing Element consistent with the RHNA and current State housing element law. (ROLL CALL VOTE) Background:

The Housing Element is one of seven mandatory elements that comprise a local agency's General Plan according to Section 65302(c) of the California Government Code. The Housing Element is considered to be the primary policy document for a community to guide the development, rehabilitation and preservation of its housing for all economic segments of the local population.

In February 2021, Urban Planning Partners, Inc. (UPP) was selected as the Town’s consultant and began the process of reviewing the 2014-2022 Housing Element, collecting, and analyzing housing data such as population, housing and employment characteristics, the regional allocation of housing units, the characteristics of the housing market, and the housing needs of special populations to begin the preparation of the 2022-2030 Housing Element.

On December 3, 2021, the Public Draft Housing Element was made available for public review and comment with written comments being accepted through 5:00 p.m., January 4, 2022. Only grammatical corrections/typos were received from the public during that timeframe.

On January 18, 2022, the Draft Housing Element was forwarded to the State Dept of Housing & Community Development (HCD) for their initial 90-day review. A virtual meeting was conducted 3 1058
with HCD staff regarding their preliminary review worksheet on March 18, 2022. As a result of that conversation, additional information was provided to HCD for their housing element review.

Their final draft comments were received by staff on April 18, 2022. Two subsequent virtual meetings were held with HCD to review the comments in detail before beginning on the additional data analysis required in order to secure final certification of the Housing Element from HCD.

On April 15, 2022, the 30-day review period began for the Initial Study and Negative Declaration which was noticed in the newspaper and uploaded to the State Clearinghouse. The Initial Study & Negative Declaration covered both the Housing Element & the Safety Element Updates (still in initial review with Cal Fire). Comments were accepted until 12:00 p.m. on Monday May 16, 2022.

There were no comments received from the public.

Analysis:

The draft housing element letter from HCD staff, received on April 18, 2022, indicated that the draft 2022-2030 Housing Element update would meet the statutory requirements of State Housing Element law with the additional analysis and program timeframe updates requested. Therefore, a final version of the Housing Element update is being presented to the Planning Commission, incorporating those items, for consideration and a recommendation to the Town Council for its adoption. Upon adoption, the Final Housing Element will be submitted toHCD for final certification.

Attached with the staff report for your review and consideration are copies of 1) the proposed final Town of Paradise 2022-2030 Housing Element Update and 2) its related proposed Initial Study and Negative Declaration document dated April 2022. In addition, a Planning Commission Resolution and several other documents are attached for your review and consideration.

Financial Impact:

There is no financial impact to the Town’s General Fund to adopt a Resolution recommending Town Council adoption of the 2022-2030 Housing Element Update and associated Negative Declaration environmental document. If ultimately adopted by the Town Council, the cost associated with filing the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk for the Negative Declaration will be paid for out of the General Plan Update fund.

Attachments:
 Notice of the Planning Commission meeting of May 24, 2022.  Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration/Initial Study for the Housing & Safety Elements.
 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-02.
 Initial Study and Negative Declaration environmental document.  Final Adoption Draft of the Town of Paradise Updated 2022-2030 Housing Element. 4 1059

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

PARADISE PLANNING COMMISSION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN BY THE Paradise Planning Commission that a public hearing will be held on May 24, 2022 at 6:00 p.m. in the Paradise Town Council Chambers at Paradise Town Hall located at 5555 Skyway, Paradise, CA regarding the matter described below:
a. Item for which a Negative Declaration is proposed to be adopted Town of Paradise Housing Element Update – The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing regarding the proposed Final Town of Paradise General Plan Housing Element update. The updated Housing Element is intended to address the housing needs of the Town of Paradise from 2022 to 2030. The State of California requires periodic updates of Housing Elements to address the necessary conditions for developing and preserving an adequate supply of housing for all income categories. The proposed Final Housing Element update analyzed the post-fire housing needs of the Town and aimed to develop goals, policies, and programs which create a more wildfire resilient housing inventory. It is the intent of Town staff to seek Town Council adoption of the updated Housing Element by June 15, 2022, and subsequently submit the adopted 2022- 2030 Housing Element Update to the California State Department of Housing and Community Development for final certification.

The draft Housing Element and associated environmental document can be found online at https://www.townofparadise.com/planning/page/housing-element-2022 or a public view copy is available at the Building Resiliency Center located at 6295 Skyway. If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Paradise Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. For further information please contact the Planning Division at (530) 872-6291, extension 424.

Susan Hartman
Community Development Director
5 1060

TOWN OF PARADISE
Date: April 13, 2022
Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration/Initial Study for the Paradise Housing Element & Safety Element Update Projects
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN by the Planning Director that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 24, 2022 at 6:00 p.m. in the Town Hall Council Chambers, 5555 Skyway, Paradise, California, regarding the following project:

Lead Agency: Town of Paradise
5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
Project Title: Town of Paradise Housing Element Update
Project Location: The Town of Paradise is located in north central Butte County where the western slopes of the Cascade and Sierra Nevada ranges meet. The topography in the area is composed of mostly steeper canyons from the major drainages. The Town is situated at an elevation of between 1,500 and 2,200 feet.

Project Description: The Town of Paradise Housing Element update would revise the Town’s Housing Element consistent with the requirements of state law.

Findings/Determination: The Town has reviewed and considered the proposed project and has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, with substantial supporting evidence provided in the Initial Study. The Town hereby prepares and proposes to adopt a Negative Declaration for this project.

Public Review Period: A 30-day public review period for the Negative Declaration/ Initial Study, which covers both the Housing Element & Safety Element updates, commenced on April 15, 2022 and will end on May 15, 2022 for interested individuals and public agencies to submit written comments on the document. Written comments on the Initial Study/ Negative Declaration should be sent to the attention of Susan Hartman, Community Development Director and must be received at 5555 Skyway, Paradise, CA 95969 by 12:00 PM on May 16, 2022. Copies of the Negative Declaration/Initial Study and the draft Town of Paradise Housing Element Update are available for review at the Town of Paradise Building Resiliency Center at 6295 Skyway, Paradise, CA 95969 or online at www.townofparadise.com/planning/page/housing-element-2022. 6 1061

PARADISE PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-02

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF PARADISE

RECOMMENDING TOWN COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT (2022-2030 HOUSING ELEMENT) OF THE 1994 PARADISE GENERAL PLAN (Town of Paradise Housing Element 2022 Update)
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2020, the Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG) adopted the Butte County Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP): December 31, 2021 – June 15, 2030, establishing a housing allocation for the Town of Paradise that needs to be incorporated and appropriately addressed within the Housing Element of the 1994 Paradise General Plan, and; WHEREAS, existing State housing element law requires the Town of Paradise to amend the Housing Element of its 1994 Paradise General Plan not only to make it consistent with the RHNP but also to become consistent with changes to State housing element law adopted from 2014 to 2022; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the Paradise citizenry that the 1994 Paradise General Plan include a Housing Element that is updated to be consistent with the RHNP and that has been determined by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to be in compliance with State housing element law; and WHEREAS, town staff with the assistance of a planning consultant hired by the Town of Paradise has generated a proposed 1994 Paradise General Plan amendment document (Housing Element 2022 Update) that proposes adoption of the 2022-2030 Housing Element as a text amendment to the 2014-2022 Housing Element in order to make it consistent with the RHNP and in compliance with current State housing element law; and WHEREAS, the proposed 2022-2030 Housing Element has been circulated for review by the public and HCD consistent with the requirements of State housing element law; and WHEREAS, the Town of Paradise determined that the Housing Element Update was subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and circulated a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for the Housing Element and an Initial Study for public review; and WHEREAS, the Paradise Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing, pursuant to California planning and zoning law concerning a proposed amendment to the 2014-2022 Housing Element text of the 1994 Paradise General Plan; and WHEREAS, such public hearing also included review of potential environmental impacts associated with said amendment to the Paradise General Plan, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
7 1062

TOWN OF PARADISE

PARADISE PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-02
WHEREAS, California Government Code Sections 65353 and 65354 require the Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing and notify the Town Council in writing of its recommendation; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the analysis and recommendations of town staff; has considered the 2022-2030 Housing Element, as revised in response to recent comments received from the State Department of Housing and Community Development; and has considered comments made at a public hearing conducted by the Planning Commission; and on the basis thereof has determined pursuant to Government Code Section 65358 that a certain amendment to the 1994 Paradise General Plan that would replace the 2014-2022 Housing Element with the 2022-2030 Housing Element in order to attain compliance consistency with the RHNP as well as with current State housing element law is not only in the public interest but also would be internally consistent with the remainder of the Paradise General Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PARADISE PLANNING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Town Council certify and adopt the proposed Initial Study and Negative Declaration document as it relates to the proposed Town of Paradise Housing Element 2022 Update; and SECTION 2. The Planning Commission further recommends that the Town Council adopt the amendment to the Housing Element (2022-2030 Housing Element) of the 1994 Paradise General Plan known as Town of Paradise Housing Element 2022 Update in order to make the Paradise Housing Element consistent with the RHNP and current State housing element law, which amendment is set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the Town of Paradise this 24th day of May, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Carissa Garrard, Chair
ATTEST:

By:______________________________
Dina Volenski, Town Clerk
8 1063
Town of Paradise
Town Council Meeting Agenda
6:00 PM – June 14, 2022
Town of Paradise Council Chamber – 5555 Skyway, Paradise, CA

Meeting Procedures
I. The Mayor is the Presiding Chair and is responsible for maintaining an orderly meeting. The Mayor calls the meeting to order and introduces each item on the agenda.

II. The Town staff then provides a report to Council and answers questions from the Council.

III. Citizens are encouraged to participate in the meeting process and are provided several opportunities to address Council. Any speaker addressing the Council is limited to three minutes per speaker - fifteen minutes per agenda item A. If you wish to address the Council regarding a specific agenda item, please complete a “Request to Address Council” card and give it to the Town Clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. This process is voluntary and allows for citizens to be called to the speaker podium in alphabetical order.

Comments and questions from the public must be directed to the Presiding Chair and Town Council Members (please do not address staff.) Town staff is available to address citizen concerns Monday through Thursday at Town Hall between the hours of 8am and 5pm.

B. If you wish to address Council regarding an item not on the agenda, you may do so under Item 4, “Public Communication.” Again, please fill out a card and give it to the Town Clerk before the meeting. State Law prohibits Council action on items not listed on a public agenda.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Compliance, persons who need special accommodations to participate in the Town Council meeting may contact the Town Clerk at least three business days prior to the date of the meeting to provide time for any such accommodation.

Town Manager, Kevin Phillips
Town Attorney, Scott E. Huber
Town Clerk, Dina Volenski
CDD, Planning & Onsite, Susan Hartman
CDD, Building & Code Enforcement, Tony Lindsey
Finance Director/Town Treasurer – Ross Gilb
Public Works Director/Town Engineer, Marc Mattox
Division Chief, CAL FIRE/Paradise Fire, Garrett Sjolund Chief of Police, Eric Reinbold
Recovery & Economic Development Director, Colette Curtis Human Resources & Risk Management Director, Crystal Peters Information Systems Director, Luis Marquez
Mayor, Steve Crowder
Vice Mayor, Greg Bolin
Council Member, Steve “Woody” Culleton
Council Member, Jody Jones
Council Member, Rose Tryon
1064

1. OPENING
1a. Call to Order
1b. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America 1c. Invocation
1d. Roll Call
1e. Presentation by CalFire/Paradise Fire Chief - Patrick Purvis 1f. Camp Fire recovery updates - Written reports are included in the agenda packet:

P5 Colette Curtis, Recovery and Economic Development Director - Recovery projects, Advocacy, Economic Recovery and Development, Communications and Emergency Operations.

P8 Marc Mattox, Public Works Director/Town Engineer - Infrastructure and Sewer Update
p10Tony Lindsey, CDD-Building and Code Enforcement - Code Enforcement Update

2. CONSENT CALENDAR
One roll call vote is taken for all items. Consent items are considered to be routine business that does not call for discussion.
2a. p14 Approve minutes from the May 10, 2022, Special and Regular meetings and the May 31, 2022 Special meeting.
2b. p25 Approve May 2022 Cash Disbursements in the amount of $3,398,869.57.
2c. p33 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-____, “A Resolution of Intention of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise to Set a Public Hearing to Consider Naming an Existing Private Access Easement off Pentz Road, Located in the Town of Paradise. Petitioner: Travis Thomsen, et al”; or, 2. Adopt a motion to continue the matter to a date certain and direct staff to provide any additional desired information pertaining to the requested road name; or, 3. Adopt a motion to deny adoption of Town Resolution No. 2022-____. 2d. p37Waive second reading of Town Ordinance No. 618 and approve reading by title only; and, Adopt Town Ordinance No. 618, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 8.58.060 to the Paradise Municipal Code Relating to Defensible Space and Hazardous Fuel Management".
2e. Approve an amended and restated professional services agreement with Kevin Phillips for Town Manager services with an expiration date of June 30, 2025 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement.

3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR

4. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION
For matters that are not on the Council business agenda, speakers are allowed three (3) minutes to address the Council. The Town Council is prohibited from taking action on matters that are not listed on the public agenda. The Council may briefly respond for clarification and may refer the matter to the Town staff. 1065
3 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
For items that require a published legal notice and/or a mailed notice.

Public Hearing Procedure:

A. Staff Report
B. Mayor opens the hearing for public comment in the following order:
i. Project proponents (in favor of proposal)
ii. Project opponents (against proposal)
iii. Rebuttals – if requested
C. Mayor closes the hearing
D. Council discussion and vote
5a. p46 1. Conduct the duly noticed and scheduled public hearing and concur with the recommended actions adopted by the Planning Commission of May 24, 2022, and embodied within Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022- 02; and, 2. Certify and adopt the proposed Initial Study and Negative Declaration document as it relates to the proposed 2022-2030 Town of Paradise Housing Element Update; and, 3. Adopt Town of Paradise Resolution No. 2022-______, “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Adopting an Amendment to the Housing Element (2022- 2030 Housing Element) of the 1994 Paradise General Plan”; or, 4. Provide alternative direction to town staff. (ROLL CALL VOTE)

6. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Action items are presented by staff and the vote of each Council Member must be announced. A roll call vote is taken for each item on the action calendar. Citizens are allowed three (3) minutes to comment on agenda items.
6a. p. 424 After discussion consider waiving the first reading of Town Ordinance No. ____ and read by title only [roll call vote]; and, 1. Introduce Town Ordinance No. ____, “An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Amending Text Regulations within Paradise Municipal Code Chapter 8.08 [Solid Waste] and Adding Article 1 Regarding Mandatory Municipal MSW, Recyclable Material, and Organic Waste Disposal Reduction Consistent with New State Law Requirements”; or 2. Provide alternative direction to town staff. (ROLL CALL VOTE)
6b. p474 Discuss and consider concurring with staff’s recommendation to select P31 Enterprises of Oroville, CA to perform arborist services for the Category 4 Tree Removal Program; and, approve the attached Professional Services Agreement with P31 Enterprises and authorize the Town Manager and Town Mayor to execute the agreement. (ROLL CALL VOTE)
6c. p491 Discuss and consider approving the Principals of Agreement between the Town of Paradise and City of Chico developed by the Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee. The Inter-Municipal Agreement between the Town and City will utilize the approved Principals of Agreement. (ROLL CALL VOTE)
6d. p503 Consider approving the 2022 Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP) prepared by Wood Rodgers, including deliverables of the Town-wide Master Drainage Study, field evaluation and monitoring of storm drain systems and drainageways, Flood Risk Modeling, field condition 1066
assessment, data computation, project prioritization criteria, updating and expanding flood risk modeling for 10 and 100-year storm events (Special Permit Zones), the evaluation of drainage system condition and capacity deficiencies, and a prioritized project list and costs. (ROLL CALL VOTE) The Storm Drain Master Plan is too large to include in the agenda packet.

Below is a link to review the document online. A public view copy is available at the Town Clerk's window at Town Hall, 5555 Skyway, Paradise, CA 95969, for review. Link to the SDMP: https://bit.ly/3trfPEB 6e. p509 Consider adopting the attached Resolution No. 2022- ___, “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Declaring An Emergency And Authorizing Repair or Replacement of The Stearns Road 72” Culvert Without Observance Of Public Bidding Requirements”; and Authorize the Town Manager to execute agreements for a contractor and/or materials for the subject project. (ROLL CALL VOTE)
6f. p516 Consider adopting Resolution No. 2022-__, “A resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Awarding Contract No. 7303.21.CON, OnSystem Roadway Rehabilitation –Skyway (Phase 1) to Baldwin Contracting Company, Inc. dba Knife River Construction in the amount of their base bid plus additive bid #1; and, Authorize the Town Manager to execute an agreement with Baldwin Contracting Company, Inc. dba Knife River Construction in the amount of their base bid plus additive bid #1 relating to Contract No. 7303.1.CON and to approve contingency expenditures not exceeding 10%. (ROLL CALL VOTE)

7. COUNCIL INITIATED ITEMS AND REPORTS
7a. Council initiated agenda items
7a1. Discuss changing the Town of Paradise Ordinance No. 618 prohibiting the use of power tools, potentially defined as metal bladed power tools that could cause combustion during a red flag warning issued by the Weather Service. (CROWDER)
7b. Council reports on committee representation
7c. Future Agenda Items

8. STAFF COMMUNICATION
8a. Town Manager Report
8b. Community Development Director

9. CLOSED SESSION - None

10. ADJOURNMENT

1067
1068
1069
C
Regulatory Framework
1070
C Regulatory Framework
C.1 Introduction
This regulatory framework presents the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to each environmental resource topic analyzed in the Paradise Sewer Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Chapter 3, Environmental Impact Analysis. This regulatory framework is applicable to construction, operation, and maintenance of the Proposed Project. This regulatory framework is needed provide regulatory context and background for each resource area in order to determine if the Proposed Project would be consistent with federal state and local regulations and to assess environmental impacts.

C.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
This section summarizes the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of agriculture and forestry resources in the EIR, Section 3.2.

C.2.1 Federal
Farmland Protection Policy Act
Congress enacted the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) as part of the Agriculture and Food Act of 1981. The US Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service is responsible for implementation of the FPPA. The FPPA is intended to minimize the impact federal programs have on the unnecessary and irreversible conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses.

The FPPA assures that federal programs are administered in a manner that is compatible with state, local, and private programs designed to protect farmland. Federal agencies are required to develop and review their policies and procedures to implement the FPPA every two years. The FPPA does not authorize the federal government to regulate the use of private or non-federal land or, in any way, affect the property rights of owners.

For the purposes of the FPPA, farmland includes prime farmland, unique farmland, and land of statewide or local importance. Farmland subject to the FPPA requirements does not have to be currently used for cropland. It can be forest land, pastureland, cropland, or other land, but not water or urban built-up land.

Projects are subject to FPPA requirements if they may irreversibly convert farmland (directly or indirectly) to nonagricultural use and are completed by a federal agency or with assistance from a federal agency. Activities that may be subject to FPPA include:
• State highway construction projects (through the Federal Highway Administration) • Airport expansions
• Electric cooperative construction projects
• Railroad construction projects
1071
• Telephone company construction projects
• Reservoir and hydroelectric projects
• Federal agency projects that convert farmland
• Other projects completed with federal assistance
C.2.2 State
California Department of Conservation
The California Department of Conservation (DOC) provides services and information that promote environmental health, economic vitality, informed land-use decisions, and sound management of the state's natural resources. The DOC administers and supports a number of programs, including the Williamson Act, the California Farmland Conservancy Program, the Williamson Act Easement Exchange Program, and the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP). These programs are designed to preserve agricultural land and provide data on conversion of agricultural land to urban use.

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
The FMMP produces maps and statistical data used for analyzing impacts on California’s agricultural resources. The maps are updated every 2 years using a computer mapping system, aerial imagery, public review, and field reconnaissance. Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and irrigation status. The following categories are mapped by the DOC (DOC 2021b):

The FMMP categories mapped by the DOC include the following (DOC 2021a):
• Prime Farmland: This farmland has the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long-term agricultural production. Prime Farmland has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agriculture production at some time during the 4 years prior to the mapping date.
• Farmland of Statewide Importance: This farmland is similar to Prime Farmland, but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the 4 years prior to the mapping date.
• Unique Farmland: Farmland of lesser quality soils used for the production of the state's leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated but may include non-irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have been cropped at some time during the 4 years prior to the mapping date. • Farmland of Local Importance: Land of importance to the local agricultural economy as determined by each county’s board of supervisors and a local advisory committee. • Grazing Land: Land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock. 1072
• Urban and Built-up Land: Land occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10-acre parcel. This land is used for residential, industrial, commercial, construction, institutional, public administration, railroad and other transportation yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, water control structures, and other developed purposes. • Other Land: Land not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments; brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry or aquaculture facilities; strip mines, borrow pits; and waterbodies smaller than forty acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as Other Land.

Williamson Act
The California Land Conservation Act of 1965, commonly referred to as the Williamson Act, is a nonmandated state program, administered by counties and cities to preserve agricultural land and discourage the premature conversion of agricultural land to urban uses. The act authorizes local governments and property owners to (voluntarily) enter into contracts to commit agricultural land to specified uses for 10 or more years. Once restricted, the land is valued for taxation based on its agricultural income rather than unrestricted market value, resulting in a lower tax rate for owners. In return, the owners guarantee that these properties remain under agricultural production for an initial 10-year period. The contract is renewed automatically unless the owner files a notice of nonrenewal, thereby maintaining a constant 10-year contract.

Z’berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act
The Z’berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 established a set of rules known as the Forest Practice Rules to be applied to forest management-related activities (e.g., timber harvests, timberland conversions, fire hazard removal) on privately owned timberlands in California. They are intended to ensure that timber harvesting is conducted in a manner that will preserve and protect fish, wildlife, forests, and streams. Under the Forest Practice Act, a Timber Harvesting Plan is submitted to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection by the landowner outlining what timber is proposed to be harvested, the harvesting method, and the steps that will be taken to prevent damage to the environment.

C.2.3 Regional and Local
Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
The Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan includes the following agriculture-related policies:
• Policy OCEP-31: Retention of agricultural lands within the town limits should be encouraged while recognizing that changing circumstances may necessitate a change in use for some lands.
• Policy OCEP-32: Significantly important agricultural and timber production lands, particularly those located in the secondary and tertiary planning areas, shall be identified and protected from incompatible development.
1073
Butte County General Plan 2030
The Butte County General Plan 2030 includes the following policies related to agriculture and forestry resources:
• Policy LU-P13.1: Maintain the Chico Area Greenline, which shall be located as shown on Figure LU-7.
• Policy LU-P13.3: Recognize the Chico Area Greenline as the boundary between the “Urban Side of the Chico Area Greenline” and the “Agricultural Side of the Chico Area Greenline.” • Policy LU-P13.7: Conserve and protect for agricultural use the lands in the Chico area that are situated on the Agricultural Side of the Chico Area Greenline. • Policy COS-P11.3: Urban development shall not limit the financial sustainability of timber operations.
• Policy COS-P11.6: Public facilities shall generally not be located in the Timber Production Zone if the facility would have a significant adverse effect on the production of timber unless alternative sites for an essential public use cannot be located elsewhere.

Chico 2030 General Plan
The Chico 2030 General Plan includes the following policies related to agriculture:
• Policy OS-5.1, Urban/Rural Boundary: Protect agriculture by maintaining the Greenline between urban and rural uses.
• Policy OS-5.2, Agricultural Resources: Minimize conflicts between urban and agricultural uses by requiring buffers or use restrictions.
o Action OS-5.2.1, Agricultural Buffers: Require buffers for development adjacent to active agricultural operations along the Greenline to reduce incompatibilities and explore opportunities for public uses within buffers.

C.3 Air Quality
This section summarizes the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of air quality in the EIR, Section 3.3.

C.3.1 Federal
Federal Clean Air Act and National Ambient Air Quality Standards The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA; 42 USC Section 7401), as amended, is the primary federal law governing air quality. The FCAA is regulated by the USEPA, which sets standards for the concentration of pollutants in the air. At the federal level, these standards are called National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). NAAQS standards have been established for six criteria air pollutants that have been linked to potential health concerns: CO, NO2, O3, SO2, PM10, PM2.5. In addition, national standards exist for Pb. The NAAQS standards are set at levels that protect public 1074
health with a margin of safety and are subject to periodic review and revision. The federal regulatory schemes also cover TACs.

The FCAA requires USEPA to designate areas as attainment, nonattainment, or maintenance (an area that was previously nonattainment and is currently attainment) for each criteria pollutant based on whether the NAAQS have been achieved. The federal standards are summarized in Table C.3-1.

The FCAA requires each state to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as the State Implementation Plan (SIP). USEPA is responsible for implementing the programs established under the FCAA, programs such as establishing and reviewing the federal ambient air quality standards and judging the adequacy of SIPs. If a state contains areas that violate the national standards, the FCAA requires the State to revise its SIP to incorporate additional control measures to reduce air pollution. USEPA has authorized States such as California with air programs that meet or exceed federal standards to implement many of the federal programs while retaining an oversight role.

Table C.3-1. State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Attainment Status for Butte County Pollutant Averaging Time State Standard1 Federal Standard2 SVAB Attainment Status
O3
3 1 hour
8 hours

0.09 ppm

0.070 ppm
---

0.070 ppm
(4thhighest in 3 years)
Federal:

Nonattainment (8-hour)
State:

Nonattainment (1-hour
and 8-hour)
CO 1 hour
8 hours
8 hours
(Lake Tahoe)
20 ppm

9.0 ppm
6 ppm
35 ppm
9 ppm
---
Federal:

Attainment
State:

Attainment
PM10 4 24 hours
Annual
50 µg/m3
20 µg/m3
150 µg/m3
---
Federal:

Attainment (24-hour)
No Standard (Annual)
State:

Nonattainment (24-hour)
Attainment (Annual)
PM2.5 4 24 hours
Annual
Secondary
Standard (annual)
---
12 µg/m3
---
35 µg/m3

12.0 µg/m3
15 µg/m3
(98th percentile over 3
years)
Federal:

Attainment (24-hour and
Annual)
State:

No standard (24-hour)
Nonattainment (Annual)
NO2
5 1 hour
Annual

0.18 ppm

0.030 ppm
100 ppb
(98th percentile over 3
years)

0.053 ppm
Federal:

Attainment
State:

Attainment
SO2
6 1 hour
3 hours
24 hours
Annual Arithmetic

0.25 ppm
----

0.04 ppm
----
75 ppb
(99th percentile over 3
years)

0.5 ppm

0.14 ppm 6
Federal:

Attainment
State:

Attainment
1075
Pollutant Averaging Time State Standard1 Federal Standard2 SVAB Attainment Status
Mean 0.03 ppm 6
Pb 7,8 Monthly
Calendar Quarter
Rolling 3-month
average

1.5 µg/m3
----
----
----

1.5 µg/m3 7

0.15 µg/m3
Federal:

Attainment
State:

Attainment
Sulfate 24 hours 25 µg/m3 No federal standards Federal:

N/A
State:

Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm No federal standards Federal:

N/A
State:

Unclassified
Vinyl Chloride7 24 hours 0.01 ppm No federal standards Federal:

N/A
State:

No designation
Visibility Reducing
Particles9
8 hours See footnote 9 No federal standards Federal:

N/A
State:

Unclassified
Sources: ARB 2016, ARB 2021, BCAQMD 2018.
1 California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (except 8-hour Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1 and 24 hour), nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5, and visibility reducing particles), are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. California ambient air quality standards are listed in the Table of Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations.
2 National standards (other than ozone, particulate matter, and those based on annual arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The ozone standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration measured at each site in a year, averaged over 3 years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24-hour standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 µg/m3is equal to or less than one. For PM2.5, the 24-hour standard is attained when 98 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less than the standard. Contact the USEPA for further clarification and current national policies.
3 On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour ozone primary and secondary standards were lowered from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm. 4 On December 14, 2012, the national annual PM2.5 primary standard was lowered from 15 μg/m3 to 12.0 μg/m3. The existing national 24-
hour PM2.5 standards (primary and secondary) were retained at 35 μg/m3, as was the annual secondary standard of 15 μg/m3. The existing 24-hour PM10 standards (primary and secondary) of 150 μg/m3 also were retained. The form of the annual primary and secondary standards is the annual mean, averaged over 3 years.
5 To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 100 ppb. Note that the national 1-hour standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units of parts per million (ppm). To directly compare the national 1-hour standard to the California standards the units can be converted from ppb to ppm. In this case, the national standard of 100 ppb is identical to 0.100 ppm. 6 On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established, and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were revoked. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 75 ppb. The 1971 SO2 national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1971 standards, the 1971 standards remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are approved. Note that the 1-hour national standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units of parts per million (ppm). To directly compare the 1-hour national standard to the California standard the units can be converted to ppm. In this case, the national standard of 75 ppb is identical to 0.075 ppm. 1076
7 The ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as 'toxic air contaminants' with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These actions allow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants.
8 The national standard for lead was revised on October 15, 2008, to a rolling 3-month average. The 1978 lead standard (1.5 μg/m3 as a quarterly average) remains in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2008 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1978 standard, the 1978 standard remains in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2008 standard are approved.
9 In 1989, the ARB converted both the general statewide 10-mile visibility standard and the Lake Tahoe 30-mile visibility standard to instrumental equivalents, which are "extinction of 0.23 per kilometer" and "extinction of 0.07 per kilometer" for the statewide and Lake Tahoe Air Basin standards, respectively.

NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards; DPM = diesel particulate matter; CO = carbon monoxide; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; O3 = ozone; Pb = lead; PM2.5 = particles of 2.5 micrometers and smaller; PM10 = particles of 10 micrometers and smaller; SO2 = sulfur dioxide; SOX = sulfur oxides; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; ppb = parts per billion; ppm = parts per million; SVAB = Sacramento Valley Air Basin; SIP = state implementation plan; TACs = toxic air contaminants, N/A = not applicable Non-Road Diesel New Engine and Fuel Standards
The USEPA has adopted multiple tiers of emission standards for non-road (or off-road) diesel engines. The non-road standards cover mobile non-road diesel engines of all sizes used in a wide range of construction, agricultural and industrial equipment. The first federal standards, Tier 1, were adopted in 1994. Tier 2 standards were adopted in 2001, Tier 3 in 2006, and final Tier 4 standards in 2014. The federal emission standards for non-road diesel engines are established in advancing tiers that progressively become more stringent (i.e., the higher the tier, the lower the emissions).

Currently, the most stringent is Tier 4. The Tier 4 emissions standards have more stringent NOX, particulate matter, and hydrocarbon limits than the lower tiers. The CO emission limits for Tier 4 standards remain unchanged from the Tier 2 and Tier 3 standards.

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants are stationary source standards for hazardous air pollutants (40 CFR 63). Hazardous air pollutants are those pollutants that are known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious health effects, such as reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse environmental effects (USEPA 2021d).

C.3.2 State
California Clean Air Act and California Ambient Air Quality Standards In California, the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) is administered by the ARB at the state level and by the air quality management districts and air pollution control districts at the regional and local levels (air districts). ARB is responsible for meeting the state requirements of the FCAA, administering the CCAA, establishing the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), and establishing motor vehicle emissions standards. The CCAA requires all air districts in the state to endeavor to achieve and maintain the CAAQS.

CAAQS are generally more stringent than the corresponding federal standards and incorporate additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility-reducing particles.

ARB is responsible for setting emission standards for vehicles sold in California and for other emission sources, such as consumer products and certain off-road equipment. ARB also establishes passenger vehicle fuel specifications. ARB oversees the functions of air districts, which in turn 1077
administer air quality activities at the regional and county levels. The state standards are summarized in Table C.5-1.

The CCAA requires ARB to designate areas in California as either attainment or nonattainment for each criteria pollutant based on whether the CAAQS have been achieved. Under the CCAA, areas are designated as nonattainment for a pollutant if air quality data show that a state standard for the pollutant was violated at least once during the previous 3 calendar years. Exceedances that are affected by highly irregular or infrequent events are not considered violations of a state standard and are not used as a basis for designating areas as nonattainment.

California State Implementation Plan
The 1990 amendments to the FCAA set new deadlines for attainment based on the severity of the pollution problem and launched a comprehensive planning process for attaining the NAAQS. The promulgation of the national 8-hour ozone standard and the fine particulate matter standards in 1997 resulted in additional statewide air quality planning efforts. In response to new federal regulations, SIPs began to address ways to improve visibility in national parks and wilderness areas. SIPs are not single documents, but rather a compilation of new and previously submitted plans, programs, district rules, state regulations, and federal controls.

Many of California’s SIPs rely on the same core set of control strategies, including emission standards for cars and heavy trucks, fuel regulations, and limits on emissions from consumer products. State law makes ARB the lead agency for all purposes related to the SIPs. Local air districts and other agencies prepare SIP elements and submit them to ARB for review and approval.

ARB then forwards SIP revisions to EPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register. CFR Title 40, Chapter I, Part 52, Subpart F, Section 52.220 lists all of the items that are included in the California SIP.

Health Impacts of Regional Criteria Air Pollutants
In December 2018, the California Supreme Court released a decision in Sierra Club v. County of Fresno, 6 Cal. 5th 502, also known as the Friant Ranch Case, finding that CEQA requires that a connection be drawn between project emissions and human health impacts.

As explained in the amicus curiae brief submitted by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District for the Friant Ranch case, air district significance thresholds were set at emissions levels tied to the region’s attainment status; they are emissions levels at which stationary pollution sources permitted by air districts must offset their emissions and CEQA projects must use feasible mitigation measures, and they are not intended to indicate any localized human health impact that a project may have. Therefore, a project’s exceedance of the air district’s mass regional emission thresholds does not necessarily indicate that the project would cause or contribute to the exposure of sensitive receptors to ground-level concentrations of ozone greater than health-protective levels.

As suggested in the amicus curiae brief submitted for the Friant Ranch case, given the complexity of ozone formation and the current state of environmental science modeling, it is infeasible to determine whether, or the extent to which, a single project’s emissions of precursors (NOX and ROG) would result in the formation of secondary ground-level ozone, and to identify the geographic and temporal distribution of such secondary formed emissions. Furthermore, available models today are designed to determine regional, population-wide health impacts, and cannot accurately quantify 1078
ozone-related health impacts caused by project-related NOX or ROG emissions on the local (project) level. Therefore, it is infeasible to connect ozone precursor emissions at a project level to ozone-related health impacts.

Mobile Source Toxics and Toxic Air Contaminants
California regulates TACs primarily through Assembly Bill (AB) 1807, Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act (Tanner Act) and AB 2588, Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (Hot Spots Act). The Tanner Act sets forth a formal procedure for ARB to designate substances as toxic air contaminants (TAC). Once a TAC is identified, ARB adopts an “airborne toxics control measure” for sources that emit designated TACs. If there is a safe threshold for a substance (a point below which there is no toxic effect), the control measure must reduce exposure to below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate best available toxics control technology to minimize emissions.

Under the Hot Spots Act, TAC emissions from individual facilities are quantified and prioritized by the air quality management district or air pollution control district. High-priority facilities are required to perform a health risk assessment and, if specific thresholds are exceeded, are required to communicate the results to the public in the form of notices and public meetings.

The ARB adopted a comprehensive Diesel Risk Reduction Plan in September 2000 to reduce emissions from both new and existing diesel-fueled engines and vehicles. The ARB has also adopted regulations to reduce emissions from both on-road and off-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles (for example, equipment used in construction). These regulations, known as airborne toxic control measures, reduce the idling of school buses and other commercial vehicles, control DPM, and limit the emissions of ocean-going vessels in California waters. The regulations also include measures to control emissions of air toxics from stationary sources.

C.3.3 Regional and Local
Butte County Air Quality Management District
BCAQMD is the air quality regulating authority in Butte County, which adopts and enforces controls on stationary sources of air pollutants through its permit and inspection programs. BCAQMD is responsible for ensuring that NAAQS and CAAQS are not violated within Butte County.

Responsibilities of BCAQMD include monitoring air quality, preparing clean air plans, and responding to citizen complaints concerning air quality.

Air Quality Attainment Plan. The Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area 2018 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan (2018 Air Quality Attainment Plan) (Sacramento Valley Air Quality Engineering and Enforcement Professionals [SVAQEEP] 2018) is the most recent air quality attainment plan applicable to Butte County. The air districts for the counties located in the northern portion of the Sacramento Valley together establish the Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area.

The Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area air districts were designated as nonattainment for the ozone CAAQS and agreed to jointly prepare the 2018 Air Quality Attainment Plan. The plan assesses the progress made in implementing the previous triennial update and proposes modifications to the strategies necessary to attain the CAAQS by the earliest practicable date. The 2018 Air Quality Attainment Plan includes an assessment of progress towards achieving the control 1079
measure commitments in the previous triennial plan, a summary of the last 3 years of ozone data, a comparison of the expected versus actual emission reductions for each measure committed to in the previous triennial plan, updated control measure commitments, and updated growth rates of population, industry, and vehicle related emissions.

Regulations and Rules. The BCAQMD develops regulations to improve air quality and protect the health and welfare of Butte County residents and their environment. BCAQMD rules and regulations (BCAQMD 2014) applicable to the Proposed Project include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Regulation II, Rule 200, Nuisance: No person shall discharge from any non-vehicular source such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public or which cause or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property. • Regulation II, Rule 201, Visible Emissions: A person shall not discharge into the atmosphere from any single source of emission whatsoever, any air contaminant for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any one hour which is:
o As dark or darker in shade as that designated as No. 2 on the Ringelmann Chart, as published by the U.S. Bureau of Mines, or
o Of such opacity as to obscure an observer’s view to a degree equal to or greater than does smoke described above.
• Regulation II, Rule 202, Particulate Matter Concentration: A person shall not discharge into the atmosphere from any source particulate matter in excess of 0.3 grains per cubic foot of gas at standard conditions.
• Regulation II, Rule 205, Fugitive Dust Emissions: No person shall cause or allow the emissions of fugitive dust from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area such that:
• Regulation IV, Rule 400, Permit Requirements: Requires any person constructing, altering, or operating a source that emits or may emit air contaminants to obtain an Authority to Construct or Permit to Operate from the Air Pollution Control Officer and to provide an orderly procedure for application, review, and authorization of new sources and of the modification and operation of existing sources of air pollution. • Regulation IV, Rule 430, State New Source Rule: Establishes pre-construction review requirements for new and modified stationary sources of air pollution for use of Best Available Control Technology (BACT), offsets, and analysis of air quality impacts, and to ensure that the operation of such sources does not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of ambient air quality standards and complies with all other applicable BCAQMD Rules and Regulations.

CEQA Guidelines. The CEQA Air Quality Handbook (BCAQMD 2014) includes analysis requirements for construction and operational emissions. Table C.3-2 summarizes BCAQMD’s thresholds for criteria air pollutants and TACs. Thresholds for criteria air pollutants are based upon 1080
BCAQMD’s Rule 430, State New Source Review, which incorporates stationary permitting significance thresholds for ambient air quality standards as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 40918. BCAQMD has only established thresholds of significance for criteria air pollutants; while it provides guidance with regards to impacts related to TACs.

Table C.3-2. BCAQMD Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant Construction-related Operational-Related
ROG 137 lb/day, not to exceed 4.5 tons/year 25 lb/day
NOX 137 lb/day, not to exceed 4.5 tons/year 25 lb/day
PM10 80 lb/day 80 lb/day
New Source TAC
Risk and Hazards –
Individual Project
Same as Recommended Operational
Thresholds
No Adopted Threshold. Recommended Thresholds:

Increased Cancer Risk > 10 in one million
Increased Non-Cancer Risk of > 1.0 Hazard Index
(Chronic or Acute)
Ambient Diesel PM2.5 > 0.3 µg/m3 annual average
Zone of Influence: 1,000-foot radius from parcel(s)
of source or receptor
New Source TAC
Risk and Hazards –
Cumulative Impacts
Same as Recommended Operational
Thresholds
No Adopted Threshold. Recommended Thresholds:

Cancer Risk > 10 in a million from all local sources
Non-Cancer Risk > 1.0 Hazard Index (from all local
sources – chronic)
Diesel PM2.5 > 0.8 µg/m3 annual average
Zone of Influence: 1,000-foot radius from parcel(s)
of sources or receptors
Source: BCAQMD 2014
Notes: ROG = reactive organic gases, NOX = nitrogen oxides, PM10 = particles of 10 micrometers and smaller, PM2.5 = particles of 2.5 micrometers and smaller, TAC = toxic air contaminant, lb = pounds, µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter Odors. Offensive or strong odors may come from a wide variety of temporary and more or less permanent sources: exhaust from heavy equipment, garbage dumpsters, restaurants, animal boarding facilities, feed lots and general agricultural operations, food processing, compost/green waste and wastewater treatment facilities, rendering plants, various industrial processes, landfills, painting/coating operations, and others.

Pollutants associated with odors such as sulfur compounds and methane can be a nuisance to healthy people and can trigger asthmatic conditions in people with sensitive airways. Given the somewhat subjective nature of human response to odors, BCAQMD does not provide quantitative or formulaic methods to evaluate the presence of an impact. While most odors are highly dispersive, the significance of an odor impact is generally related to its intensity with distance from the source.

Table C.3-3 presents BCAQMD’s screening distances for various odors sources.

Table C.3-3. BCAQMD Screening Levels for Potential Odor Sources Type of Facility Screening Distance (miles)
Wastewater Treatment Plant 2
Wastewater Pumping Facilities 1
Sanitary Landfill 1
Transfer Station 1
1081
Type of Facility Screening Distance (miles)
Composting Facility 2
Petroleum Refinery 2
Asphalt Batch Plant 2
Chemical Manufacturing 1
Fiberglass Manufacturing 1
Painting/Coating Operations 1
Rendering Plant 4
Coffee Roaster 1
Food Processing Facility 1
Feed Lot/Dairy 1
Green Waste and Recycling Operations 2
Metal Smelting Plants 1
Source: BCAQMD 2014
Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
The Open Space/Conservation/Energy Element of the Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan includes the following goals and objective pertaining to air quality:
• Goal CG-5: Maintain and improve local and regional air quality. • Objective OCEO-8: Comply with the standards, provisions, and objectives of the Butte County Air Quality Attainment Plan.

Butte County General Plan 2030
The Butte County General Plan 2030 includes the following policies related to air quality:
• Policy COS-P5.2: Developers shall implement best available mitigation measures to reduce air pollutant emissions associated with the construction and operation of development projects.
• Policy COS-P5.6: New sources of toxic air pollutants shall comply with the permitting requirements of the BCAQMD and Section 44300 et. Seq. of the California Health and Safety Code.

Chico 2030 General Plan
The Chico 2030 General Plan includes the following policy and actions related to air quality:
• Policy OS-4.1, Air Quality Standards: Work to comply with state and federal ambient air quality standards and to meet mandated annual air quality reduction targets. o Action OS-4.1.1, Air Quality Impact Mitigation: During project and environmental review, evaluate air quality impacts and incorporate applicable mitigations, including payment of air quality impact fees, to reduce impacts consistent with the BCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
1082
C.4 Biological Resources
This section identifies the federal, state, nongovernmental agency, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of biological resources in the EIR, Section 3.4.

C.4.1 Federal
Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) provides protective measures for federally listed threatened and endangered species, including their habitats, from unlawful take (16 United States Code [USC] §§ 1531–1544). The ESA defines take to mean “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” Title 50, § 222, of the CFR (50 CFR § 222) further defined harm to include an act that kills or injures fish or wildlife via significant habitat modification or degradation.

ESA Section 7(a)(1) requires federal agencies to use their authority to further the conservation of listed species. ESA Section 7(a)(2) requires consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) if a federal agency undertakes, funds, permits, or authorizes any action that may impact endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitat. For projects that may result in the incidental take of threatened or endangered species, or critical habitat, and that lack a federal nexus, a Section 10(a)(1)(b) incidental take permit may be obtained from USFWS and/or NMFS.

Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948 was the first major United States law to address water pollution. Upon sweeping amendments made in 1972, the law became commonly known as the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1251). The CWA established the structure for regulating discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters.

Clean Water Act Section 404
CWA Section 404 (33 USC § 1344) enables regulation of the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. The basic premise of the program is that no discharge of dredged or fill material may be permitted if: (1) a practicable alternative exists that is less damaging to the aquatic environment or (2) the nation’s waters would be significantly degraded.

To comply with these objectives, a permittee must document the measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts on waters of the United States and provide compensatory mitigation for any unavoidable impacts.

Clean Water Act Section 401
Under CWA Section 401 (33 USC § 1341), federal agencies are not authorized to issue a permit or license for any activity that may result in discharges to waters of the United States, unless a state or tribe where the discharge originates either grants, waives or denies CWA Section 401 certification.

Granting certification, with or without conditions, allows the federal permit or license to be issued and 1083
remain consistent with any conditions set forth in the CWA Section 401 certification. Decisions made by states or tribes are based on the proposed project’s compliance with USEPA water quality standards as well as applicable effluent limitations guidelines, new source performance standards, toxic pollutant restrictions, and any other appropriate requirements of state or tribal law. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board is the primary regulatory authority for CWA Section 401 requirements (additional details are provided in the following subsections).

Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899, Section 408 Under Section 408 (33 USC § 408), any use or alteration of a Civil Works project is subject to the approval of USACE. This requirement was established in Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Section 408 provides that USACE may grant permission for another party to alter a Civil Works project upon a determination that the alteration proposed will not be injurious to the public interest and will not impair the usefulness of the Civil Works project.

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Magnuson-Stevens Act of 1976 (revised in 1996 and reauthorized 2007) is the primary law governing marine fisheries management in US federal waters. The primary objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act are to prevent overfishing, rebuild overfished stocks, increase long-term economic and social benefits, and ensure a safe and sustainable supply of seafood. To this end, the federal government is responsible for considering direct and indirect habitat losses, or other impacts that may result in a diminished capacity to support existing populations and stocks.

Among other items, the Sustainable Fisheries Act revision in 1996 specifically outlined the responsibility of the United States to conserve and facilitate long-term protection of EFH, defined as “those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity.” (16 U.S.C. 1801). The 1996 revision also designated HAPCs, which are subsets of EFH for more focused consideration.

Under the act, federal agencies that fund, permit, or carry out activities that may adversely impact EFH or HAPCs are required to consult with NMFS regarding the potential adverse effects of Project activities, as well as respond in writing to NMFS Project-specific recommendations.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918
Migratory birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) (16 USC §§ 703– 711). The MBTA makes it unlawful to take, possess, buy, sell, purchase, or barter any migratory bird listed in 50 CFR § 10, including feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, or products, except as allowed by implementing regulations (50 CFR § 21). Solicitor’s Opinion M 37050 was released on December 22, 2017, stating the MBTA does not prohibit incidentally killing birds. Thus, the statute’s prohibitions on pursuing, hunting, capturing, taking, killing, or attempting to do any of the aforementioned, apply only to affirmative actions that have as their purpose the taking or killing of migratory birds, their nests, or their eggs.

Executive Order 13112 – Invasive Species
Executive Order 13112 directs all federal agencies to refrain from authorizing, funding, or carrying out actions or projects that may spread invasive species. The order further directs federal agencies 1084
to prevent the introduction of invasive species, control and monitor existing invasive species populations, restore native species to invaded ecosystems, research and develop prevention and control methods for invasive species, and promote public education on invasive species. As part of the proposed action, USFWS and USACE would issue permits and, therefore, would be responsible for ensuring that the proposed action complies with Executive Order 13112 and does not contribute to the spread of invasive species.

Executive Order 11990 – Protection of Wetlands
Executive Order 11990 (42 Federal Register [FR] 26961) requires federal agencies to provide leadership and take action to minimize destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural qualities of these lands. Federal agencies are required to avoid undertaking or providing support for new construction located in wetlands unless 1) no practicable alternative exists and 2) all practical measures have been taken to minimize harm to wetlands.

C.4.2 State
California Endangered Species Act
Under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is responsible for maintaining a list of endangered and threatened species (Fish and Game Code [FGC] § 2070). CDFW also maintains a list of candidate species, which are species under formal review for potential addition to the list of endangered or threatened species. And CDFW maintains a list of species of special concern, which are species that may be added to the list of candidate species.

Pursuant to the requirements of the CESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any state-listed endangered or threatened species may be present and determine whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact on such species. In addition, CDFW encourages informal consultation on any proposed project that may impact a candidate species.

Proposed project-related impacts on species on the CESA endangered or threatened list would be considered significant. State-listed species are fully protected under the mandates of the CESA.

Take of protected species incidental to otherwise lawful management activities may be authorized under FGC Section 206.591. Authorization from CDFW would be in the form of an incidental take permit.

California Fish and Game Code – Native Plant Protection Act The Native Plant Protection Act (FGC §§ 1900–1913) prohibits the taking, possession, or sale within the state of any plants with a state designation of rare, threatened, or endangered as defined by CDFW. An exception in the act allows landowners, under specified circumstances, to take listed plant species, if they first notify CDFW and give that state agency at least 10 days to retrieve the plants before they are plowed under or otherwise destroyed (FGC § 1913). Project impacts on these species are not considered significant unless the species are known to have a high potential to occur within the area of disturbance associated with construction of the proposed project. 1085
California Fish and Game Code §§ 3503 and 3503.5
Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the FGC provide regulatory protection to resident and migratory birds and all birds of prey within the state of California, including the prohibition of the taking of nests and eggs, unless otherwise provided for by the FGC. Specifically, these sections of the FGC make it unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nests or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code.

California Fish and Game Code – Fully Protected Species California statutes afford fully protected status to several specifically identified birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. These species cannot be taken, even with an incidental take permit. FGC § 3505 makes it unlawful to take “any aigrette or egret, osprey, bird of paradise, goura, numidi, or any part of such a bird”. FGC § 3511 protects from take the following fully protected birds: 1) American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum); 2) brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis); 3) California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus); 4) California clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus); 5) California condor (Gymnogyps californianus); 6) California least tern (Sterna albifrons browni); 7) golden eagle; (Aquila chrysaetos); 8) greater sandhill crane (Grus canadensis tabida); 9) light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes); 10) southern bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus leucocephalus); 11) trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator); 12) white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus); and 13) Yuma clapper rail (Rallus longirostris yumanensis).

FGC § 4700 identifies the following fully protected mammals that cannot be taken: 1) Morro Bay kangaroo rat (Dipodomys heermanni morroensis); 2) bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis), except Nelson bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni); 3) Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi); 4) ring-tailed cat (Bassariscus sp.); 4) Pacific right whale (Eubalaena sieboldi); 6) salt-marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris); 7) southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis); and 8) wolverine (Gulo gulo).

FGC § 5050 protects from take the following fully protected reptiles and amphibians: 1) blunt-nosed leopard lizard (Crotaphytus wislizenii silus); 2) San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia); 3) Santa Cruz long-toed salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylum croceum); 4) limestone salamander (Hydromantes brunus); and 5) black toad (Bufo boreas exsul).

FGC § 5515 identifies certain fully protected fish that cannot lawfully be taken, even with an incidental take permit. The following species are protected in this fashion: 1) Colorado River squawfish (Ptychocheilus lucius); 2) thicktail chub (Gila crassicauda); 3) Mohave chub (Gila mohavensis); 4) Lost River sucker (Catostomus luxatus); 5) Modoc sucker (Catostomus microps); 6) shortnose sucker (Chasmistes brevirostris); 7) humpback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus); 8) Owens River pupfish (Cyprinoden radiosus); 9) unarmored threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni); and 10) rough sculpin (Cottus asperrimus).

California Wetlands and Other Policies
The California Natural Resources Agency and its various departments, which includes CDFW and the Department of Water Resources, do not authorize or approve projects that fill or otherwise harm or destroy coastal, estuarine, or inland wetlands. Exceptions may be granted if all the following conditions are met:
1086

1. The project is water dependent.

2. No other feasible alternative is available.

3. The public trust is not adversely affected.

4. Adequate compensation is proposed as part of the project.

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne) of 1966 (California Water Code Section 13000 et seq.; CCR Title 23, Chapter 3, Subchapter 15) is the primary state regulation that addresses water quality. The requirements of the act are implemented by the State Water Resources Control Board at the state level and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) within the nine regions designated. The RWQCB carries out planning, permitting, and enforcement activities related to water quality in California. The RWQCB is responsible for controlling discharges to surface waters of the state by issuing waste discharge requirements or conditional waivers to waste discharge requirements. Waste discharge requirements are required by the RWQCB for activities that may affect water quality.

Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification A CWA Section 401 water quality certification is required for activities that require CWA Section 404 permits issued by USACE. As mentioned above, the State Water Resources Control Board has primary regulatory authority for CWA Section 401 requirements for protecting water resources.

Enforcement of these requirements is also handled by the nine RWQCBs depending upon location of the potential impacts. The Central Valley RWQCB will be responsible for CWA Section 401 for this project.

State Definition of Covered Waters
Under California state law, waters of the state means “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (California Water Code Section 13050). Therefore, water quality laws apply to both surface water and groundwater. After the United States Supreme Court decision in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001), the Office of Chief Counsel of the State Water Resources Control Board released a legal memorandum confirming the state’s jurisdiction over isolated wetlands. The memorandum stated that under the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (PorterCologne), discharges to wetlands and other waters of the state are subject to state regulation, and this includes isolated wetlands. In general, the State Water Resources Control Board regulates discharges to isolated waters in much the same way as they do for waters of the United States, but the regulation is via Porter-Cologne rather than the CWA.

C.4.3 Nongovernmental Agencies
California Native Plant Society
The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) is a nongovernmental agency that classifies native plant species according to current population distribution and threat level concerning extinction. These data are used by the CNPS to create and maintain a list of native California plants that have low 1087
numbers, limited distribution, or are otherwise threatened with extinction. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2021).

Potential impacts on populations of CNPS-listed plants receive consideration under CEQA review.

The following identifies the definitions of the CNPS listings:
• List 1A: Plants believed to be extinct
• List 1B: Plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere • List 2: Plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but are more numerous elsewhere.

All of the plant species on Lists 1 and 2 meet the requirements of the Native Plant Protection Act Section 1901, Chapter 10, or FGC Section 2062 and Section 2067, and are eligible for state listing.

Plants appearing on Lists 1 or 2 are considered to meet the criteria of CEQA Section 15380, and effects on these species are considered significant. Classifications for plants on List 3 (plants about which we need more information) and/or List 4 (plants of limited distribution), as defined by the CNPS, are not currently protected under state or federal law. Therefore, no detailed descriptions or impact analysis was performed on species with these classifications.

C.4.4 Regional and Local
Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
The Open Space/Conservation/Energy Element of the Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan includes the following goals and policies pertaining to biological resources:
• Goal OCEG-6: Preserve and protect naturally sensitive areas, and significant natural features in Paradise such as trees, views, stream courses, wildlife habitat, and clean air. • Policy OCEP-15: Existing, significantly important natural habitat areas having high value for birds and other wildlife should be preserved for future generations through careful land use planning and public participation.
• Policy OCEP-16: Area fisheries shall be protected, and the cooperation of responsible agencies shall be sought to assure minimum stream flow and restore fisheries.

Town of Paradise Tree Preservation Ordinance
The Town of Paradise Tree Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 8.12 of the Town’s municipal code) intends to limit the indiscriminate destruction of healthy trees, preserve natural beauty, maintain healthy forests, and promote proper tree management through education. This section of code prohibits felling of any qualifying trees without a permit. Certain activities are exempt from the tree felling permit program including the reparation, maintenance, or installation of service lines and the establishment of a town-funded capital improvement project. Tree felling permits may be issued to accommodate certain activities including the repair or installation of a town-authorized wastewater treatment and disposal system.
1088
Butte County General Plan 2030
The Conservation and Open Space Element of the Butte County General Plan 2030 includes the following goals and policies related to biological resources:
• Goal COS-7: Conserve and enhance habitat for protected species and sensitive biological communities.
• Policy COS-P7.3: Creeks shall be maintained in their natural state whenever possible, and creeks and floodways shall be allowed to function as natural flood protection features during storms.
• Policy COS-P7.4: New development projects shall mitigate their impacts in habitat areas for protected species through on- or off-site habitat restoration, clustering of development, and/or project design and through the provisions of the Butte Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) within the HCP/NCCP Planning Area, upon the future adoption of the HCP/NCCP. • Policy COS-P7.5: No new development projects shall occur in wetlands or within significant riparian habitats, except within the Butte Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) Planning Area where such development is consistent with the conditions of the HCP/NCCP, upon the future adoption of the HCP/NCCP.
• Policy COS-P7.6: New development projects shall include setbacks and buffers along riparian corridors and adjacent to habitat for protected species, except where permitted in the Butte Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) Planning Area and where such development is consistent with the conditions of the HCP/NCCP, upon the future adoption of the HCP/NCCP.
• Policy COS-P7.7: Construction barrier fencing shall be installed around sensitive resources on or adjacent to construction sites. Fencing shall be installed prior to construction activities and maintained throughout the construction period.
• Policy COS-P7.8: Where sensitive on-site biological resources have been identified, construction employees operating equipment or engaged in any development-associated activities involving vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities in sensitive resource areas shall be trained by a qualified biologist and/or botanist who will provide information on the on-site biological resources (sensitive natural communities, special-status plant and wildlife habitats, nests of special-status birds, etc.), avoidance of invasive plant introduction and spread, and the penalties for not complying with biological mitigation requirements and other State and federal regulations.
• Policy COS-P7.9: A biologist shall be retained to conduct construction monitoring in and adjacent to all habitats for protected species when construction is taking place near such habitat areas.
• Goal COS-8: Maintain and promote native vegetation.
1089
• Policy COS-P8.1: Native plant species shall be protected and planting and regeneration of native plant species shall be encouraged, wherever possible, in undisturbed portions of development sites.
• Policy COS-P8.4: Introduction or spread of invasive plant species during construction of development projects shall be avoided by minimizing surface disturbance; seeding and mulching disturbed areas with certified weed-free native mixes; and using native, noninvasive species in erosion control plantings.
• Goal COS-9: Protect identified special-status plant and animal species. • Policy COS-P9.1: A biological resources assessment shall be required for any proposed development project where special-status species or critical habitat may be present.

Assessments shall be carried out under the direction of Butte County. Additional focused surveys shall be conducted during the appropriate season if necessary. Upon adoption of the Butte Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), assessment requirements of the HCP/NCCP shall be implemented for development projects within the HCP/NCCP area.
• Policy COS-P9.2: If special-status plant or animal species are found to be located within a development site, proponents of the project shall engage in consultation with the appropriate federal, State and regional agencies and mitigate project impacts in accordance with State and federal law. Upon adoption of the Butte Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), mitigation requirements of the HCP/NCCP shall be implemented for development projects within the HCP/NCCP area. Examples of mitigation may include:
o Design the proposed project to avoid and minimize impacts. o Restrict construction to specific seasons based on project-specific special-status species issues (e.g., minimizing impacts to special-status nesting birds by constructing outside of the nesting season).
o Confine construction disturbance to the minimum area necessary to complete the work.
o Mitigate for the loss of special-status species by purchasing credits at an approved conservation bank (if a bank exists for the species in question), funding restoration or habitat improvement projects at existing preserves in Butte County, or purchasing or donating mitigation lands of substantially similar habitat. o Maintain a minimum 100-foot buffer on each side of all riparian corridors, creeks and streams for special-status and common wildlife.
o Establish setbacks from the outer edge of special-status species habitat areas. o Construct barriers to prevent compaction damage by foot or vehicular traffic.

Chico 2030 General Plan
1090
The Open Space and Environment Element of the Chico 2030 General Plan includes the following goals and policies related to biological resources:
• Goal OS-1: Protect and conserve native species and habitats. • Policy OS-1.1, Native Habitats and Species: Preserve native species and habitat through land use planning, cooperation, and collaboration.
• Policy OS-1.2, Regulatory Compliance: Protect special-status plant and animal species, including their habitats, in compliance with all applicable state, federal and other laws and regulations.
• Policy OS-2.5, Creeks and Riparian Corridors: Preserve and enhance Chico’s creeks and riparian corridors as open space for their aesthetic, drainage, habitat, flood control, and water quality values.
• Policy OS-2.6, Oak Woodlands: Protect oak woodlands as open space for sensitive species and habitat.

City of Chico Tree Preservation Regulations
Chapter 16.66 Tree Preservation Regulations of Chico’s municipal code requires that a tree removal permit be obtained from the director of the public works department before removing any trees within the city. A permit is not required for removal of a tree that presents an immediate hazard to life or property, as determined by the city manager, director, police chief, fire chief, public works director, community development director, urban forest manager, code enforcement officer, public utility companies, or their designees. This chapter of the code requires preparation of a tree protection plan that complies with the city’s “Best Practices Technical Manual: Tree Preservation Measures” prior to the issuance of demolition permits, grading permits, building permits, use permits, planned development permits, or parcel or tentative subdivision maps.

C.5 Cultural Resources
This section identifies the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of cultural resources in the EIR, Section 3.5.

Section 3.5 includes references to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and terminology such as “historic resource” and “archaeological resource,” which include in their definition “unique archaeological resources.” As such, the following regulations, plans, and/or policies provide relevant definitions and regulatory context for the impact discussion in Section 3.5.

C.5.1 Federal
National Historic Preservation Act
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires federal undertakings to consider the effects of the action on historic properties. Historic properties are defined by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 800) and consist of any prehistoric or historical archaeological site, building, structure, 1091
historic district, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. This term includes artifacts, records, and remains that are related to and located within such properties. The term includes properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization that meet the National Register criteria (36 CFR Part 800.16[l]).

To determine whether an undertaking could affect NRHP-eligible properties, cultural resources (including archaeological, historical, and architectural properties) must be inventoried and evaluated for listing in the NRHP.

For projects involving a lead federal agency, cultural resource significance is evaluated in terms of eligibility for listing in the NRHP. For a property to be considered for inclusion in the NRHP, it must be at least 50 years old and meet the criteria for evaluation set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.4.

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture must be present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. They must also meet one or more of the four criteria for inclusion on the NRHP:
• Criterion A, Association with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history;
• Criterion B, Association with the lives of persons significant in the past; • Criterion C, Embodiment of distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, the work of a master, high artistic values, or a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or • Criterion D, History of yielding, or the potential to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

If a cultural resources professional meeting the Secretary of Interior’s Qualification Standards determines a particular resource meets one of these criteria, it is considered as an eligible historic property for listing in the NRHP. Among other criteria considerations, a property that has achieved significance within the last 50 years is not considered eligible for inclusion in the NRHP unless certain exceptional conditions are met.

Antiquities Act
The Antiquities Act of 1906 (54 USC 320301–320303) provides for fines or imprisonment of any person convicted of appropriating, excavating, injuring, or destroying any historic or prehistoric ruin or monument or other object of antiquity that falls under the jurisdiction of the federal government.

Archaeological Resources Protection Act
1092
The Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 USC 470aa et seq.) amended the Antiquities Act, set a broad policy stating that archaeological resources are important to the nation and should be protected, and required special permits before the excavation or removal of archaeological resources from public or Indian lands.

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (25 USC 3001 et seq.) was intended to ensure the protection and rightful disposition of Native American cultural items and burials located on federal or tribal trust lands, and in the possession or control of the federal government. The act requires that an inventory of Native American human remains, and funerary objects must be compiled by federal funded agencies and all museums and educational institutions receiving federal funds. Additionally, this act makes it illegal to traffic Native American remains and cultural items without the right of possession, whether or not they derive from federal or Native American lands.

Also, all Indian tribes and representatives identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) must be consulted whenever archaeological investigations encounter, or are expected to encounter, Native American cultural items or when such items are unexpectedly discovered on federal or tribal lands. Excavation or removal of any such items also must be done under procedures required by the Archaeological Resources Protection Act.

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation
These standards, effective as of 1983, provide technical advice for archaeological and historic preservation practices. Their purposes are (1) to organize the information gathered about preservation activities; (2) to describe results to be achieved by federal agencies, states, and others when planning for the identification, evaluation, registration, and treatment of historic properties; and (3) to integrate the diverse efforts of many entities performing historic preservation into a systemic effort to preserve the nation’s culture heritage (48 Federal Register 44716).

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation These standards were established by the Secretary of the Interior in 1986 as a way to homogenize rehabilitation efforts of nationally significant historic properties and buildings. These standards pertain to actions involved in returning a property to a state of utility through repair or alteration. This allows for the preservation of historic and cultural values of the property, while giving it an efficient contemporary use (36 CFR 67).

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings The Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties are a compilation of 34 guidelines to promote the responsible preservation of U.S. historic cultural resources. The standards specifically address preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction of historic materials. The standards are not intended to be the sole basis for decision-making in regard to whether a historic property should be saved, but rather are intended to provide consistency in conservation and restoration practice (36 CFR 68).
1093
C.5.2 State
CEQA Statute and Guidelines
CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines include procedures for identifying, analyzing, and disclosing potential adverse impacts to cultural resources. For archaeological sites, the CEQA Guidelines [Section 15064.5(c)(1)] require that the lead agency first determine whether the site is a “historical resource” as defined in Section 15064.5(a) (see below definition). If the site qualifies as a historical resource, potential adverse impacts must be considered in the same manner as a historical resource, as described below [CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c)(2)]. If the archaeological site does not qualify as a historical resource but does qualify as a “unique archaeological resource,” then the archaeological site is treated in accordance with CEQA Public Resources Code Section 21083.2, which places certain limits on permissible mitigation measures [CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c)(3)]. In practice, most archaeological sites that meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource will also meet the definition of a historical resource.

The CEQA Guidelines [Section 15064.5(a)] define a “historical resource” as including the following:
• A resource listed in, or eligible for listing in, the CRHR; • A resource listed in a local register of historical resources (as defined at PRC Section 5020.1(k)];
• A resource identified as significant in a historical resources survey meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(g); or
• Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California (Generally, a resource is considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing in the CRHR).

A project that causes a “substantial adverse change” in the significance of a historical resource may have a significant effect on the environment [CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)]. The CEQA Guidelines [Section 15064.5(b)(1)] define “substantial adverse change” as “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired.” Generally, the significance of a historical resource is “materially impaired” when a project demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in or eligibility for the CRHR, or its inclusion in a local register of historical resources [CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(2)].

Mitigation measures are discussed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4. Generally, by following the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, impacts can be considered as mitigated to a less-thansignificant level [CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)]. For archaeological resources, the CEQA Guidelines [Section 15126.4(b)(3)] provide that a public agency should, whenever feasible, seek to avoid damaging effects on any historical resource of an archaeological nature. The CEQA 1094
Guidelines also require consideration of preservation in place as the preferred manner of mitigation.

Mitigation by data recovery is recommended only if preservation is not feasible.

California Register of Historical Resources: Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 The CRHR includes resources that are listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, as well as some designated California State Landmarks and Points of Historical Interest.

Properties of local significance that have been designated under a local preservation ordinance (local landmarks or landmark districts) or that have been identified in a local historical resources inventory may be eligible for listing in the CRHR.

California Native American Heritage Commission: Public Resources Code Sections 5097.91 through 5097.98
The California NAHC identifies and catalogs places of special religious or social significance to Native Americans and known graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on private lands. Section 5097 was amended in 1987 (5097.9) to require consultation with the California NAHC whenever Native American graves are found. When the NAHC is notified of human remains, it shall immediately notify those persons it believes to be the most likely descendants. Section 5097.98 1(b) states:

Upon the discovery of the Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located, is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred, as prescribed in this section, with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment.

It also states possible preferences the most likely descendants may have for said treatment, including preservation in place, nondestructive removal and analysis, relinquishment to the most likely descendants, or other appropriate treatment. Conferral or discussion between the most likely descendant and landowner is described in Section 5097.98 2(c) as “meaningful and timely discussion and careful consideration of the views of each party, in a manner that is cognizant of all parties’ cultural values, and where feasible, seeking agreement.” Unique Archeological Resources
The Public Resources Code Section 21083.2[a] also requires the Lead Agency to determine whether or not a project would have a significant effect on unique archaeological resources.

The Public Resources Code defines a unique archaeological resource as follows. • An archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:
o Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; 1095
o Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or
o Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person (PRC § 21083.2).

In most situations, resources that meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource also meet the definition of a historical resource. As a result, it is current professional practice to evaluate cultural resources for significance based on their eligibility for listing in the CRHR.

Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5: Removal of Human Remains Regarding the discovery of human remains on non-federal lands, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code (CHSC) states the following:
a) Every person who knowingly mutilates or disinters, wantonly disturbs, or willfully removes any human remains in or from any location other than a dedicated cemetery without authority of law is guilty of a misdemeanor, except as provided in Section 5097.99 of the [PRC]. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to any person carrying out an agreement developed pursuant to subdivision (l) of Section 5097.94 of the [PRC] or to any person authorized to implement Section 5097.98 of the [PRC].
b) In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined, in accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the California Government Code [CGC], that the remains are not subject to the provisions of Section 27491 of the CGC or any other related provisions of law concerning investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the PRC. The coroner shall make his or her determination within 2 working days from the time the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, notifies the coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains.
c) If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) (CHSC Section 7050.5).

Of particular note to cultural resources is subsection c). After notification, NAHC would follow the procedures outlined in PRC § 5097.98, which include notification of most likely descendants, if possible, and recommendations for treatment of the remains. The most likely descendants would have 24 hours after notification by the NAHC to make their recommendation (PRC § 5097.98). In addition, knowing or willful possession of Native American human remains or artifacts taken from a grave or cairn is a felony under State law (PRC § 5097.99). 1096
California Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
Section 8010 and 8011 of the Health and Safety Code also address the protection of Native American human remains and cultural items and state:
• Section 8010. This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 2001. • Section 8011. It is the intent of the Legislature to do all of the following:
(a) Provide a seamless and consistent state policy to ensure that all California Indian human remains and cultural items be treated with dignity and respect. (b) Apply the state’s repatriation policy consistently with the provisions of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. Sec. 3001 et seq.), which was enacted in 1990.
(c) Facilitate the implementation of the provisions of Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act with respect to publicly funded agencies and museums in California. (d) Encourage voluntary disclosure and return of remains and cultural items by an agency or museum.
(e) the Provide a mechanism whereby lineal descendants and culturally affiliated California Indian tribes that file repatriation claims for human remains and cultural items under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. Sec. 3001 et seq.) or under this chapter with California state agencies and museums may request assistance from the commission in ensuring that state agencies and museums are responding to those claims in a timely manner and in facilitating the resolution of disputes regarding those claims.
(f) Provide a mechanism whereby California tribes that are not federally recognized may file claims with agencies and museums for repatriation of human remains and cultural items.

C.5.3 Regional and Local
Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
Section 3.15 (Scenic and Cultural Resources) of the Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan details the Town’s procedures for complying with the state and federal policies outlined above. The General Plan includes the following goals, policies, and implementation measures related to cultural resources:
• Goal OCEG-9: Identify, record, preserve, and protect historical and archeological resources. • Policy OCEP-36: The Land Use Constraints Diagram identifies areas of potential archaeological sensitivity. Proposed development or public works projects within this area shall be required to undertake an archaeological survey prior to project approval. Proposed projects outside this area, in locations that have not been significantly disturbed, shall be referred to the California Archaeological Inventory, Northeast Information Center, California 1097
State University, Chico to undertake an archaeological survey prior to project approval upon recommendation by the Center.
• Implementation Measure OCEI-18: Require compliance of all development projects with Appendix K (archeological impacts) of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act.
• Implementation Measure OCEI-19: When an archaeological survey is required by the Town or recommended by the California Archaeological Inventory, Northeast Information Center, the survey shall be undertaken by a qualified professional archaeologist who is certified by the Society of Professional Archaeologists or has equivalent qualifications. • Implementation Measure OCEI-20: Should any historic or pre-historic artifacts be discovered during construction, all work shall cease until a qualified professional archaeologist views the site, provides recommendations and gives clearance to continue.

Chico 2030 General Plan
The Chapter 11 (Cultural Resources and Historic Preservation) element of the Chico 2030 General Plan identifies important local cultural, archaeological, and historic resources and establishes goals, policies, and actions for the protection and preservation of those resources. Importantly, the element supports a Memorandum of Understanding adopted in June 2008 between the City of Chico and the Mechoopda Indian Tribe of the Chico Rancheria. The element also establishes the policy guidance for the City of Chico’s comprehensive Historic Preservation Program. To this end, the City of Chico adopted three goals specific to cultural resources in the General Plan:
• Goal CRHP-1: Protect and preserve archaeological, historical, and other cultural resources to serve as significant reminders of the City’s heritage and values. • Goal CRHP-2: Reinvest in the archaeological, historical, and other cultural resources that frame Chico’s character and identity.
• Goal CRHP-3: Engage in and facilitate preservation efforts with local preservation and cultural entities.

The General Plan includes the following policies related to cultural resources:
• Policy CRHP-1.1, Historic Preservation Program: Maintain a comprehensive Historic Preservation Program that includes policies and regulations which protect and preserve the archeological, historical, and cultural resources of Chico. • Policy CRHP-2.1, Infill and Historic Preservation: Integrate the values of historic preservation with infill development and adaptive reuse. • Policy CRHP-2.2, Adaptive Reuse: Encourage the adaptive reuse of historic buildings when the original use of the structure is no longer feasible. • Policy CRHP-2.3, Demolition as Last Resort: Limit the demolition of historic resources to an act of last resort, to be permitted only if: 1) rehabilitation of the resource is not feasible; 2) 1098
demolition is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of its residents; or 3) the public benefits outweigh the loss of the historic resource. • Policy CRHP-2.4, Public Awareness of Heritage Resources: Encourage public awareness of the heritage resources that helped shape the history of Chico. • Policy CRHP-2.5, Purchase of Historically Significant Buildings: Explore grant funding, partnerships, and other opportunities to purchase historically significant buildings or sites that are eligible for State or National Registers as they become available. • Policy CRHP-3.1, Partnerships to Preserve Heritage Resources: Foster partnerships with interested parties to preserve heritage resources.

These policies detail the City of Chico’s protocols to, among others, identify, avoid, and mitigate impacts to archaeological, tribal, and built environment resources; integrate historic preservation into infill development; encourage public awareness of heritage resources; and establish partnerships with interested parties.

City of Chico Historic Preservation Ordinance
The historic preservation ordinance of the City of Chico’s Municipal Code (Chapter 19.37) specifically affords protection for properties listed on the City of Chico’s Historic Resources Inventory and provides a mechanism to add historic properties to the Inventory through Landmark Overlay zoning districts. The ordinance also provides development incentives to owners of designated historic property and establishes a number of exempt activities such as ordinary maintenance and repair. Proposals to significantly alter or demolish structures listed on the City of Chico’s Historic Resources Inventory are reviewed by the City of Chico’s five-member Architectural Review and Historic Preservation Board. The Board also reviews nominations to the City of Chico’s Inventory and forwards recommendations to the City Council for a final determination of listing.

Butte County General Plan 2030
Chapter 9 of the Butte County General Plan 2030 details Butte County’s protocols aligning Butte County’s efforts to identify, protect, and preserve important prehistoric and historic resources with state and federal regulations and specifies the mandated steps to identify, avoid, and mitigate (if necessary) cultural resources. To this end, the Butte County adopted three goals specific to cultural resources in the General Plan:
• Goal COS-14: Preserve important cultural resources
• Goal COS-15: Ensure that new development does not adversely impact cultural resources. • Goal COS-16: Respect Native American culture and planning concerns In support of these policies, the General Plan includes the following policies:
• Policy COS-P14.1: Historic and cultural resources management shall be coordinated with nearby jurisdictions, including the five incorporated municipalities, the Lassen and Plumas National Forests, other planning and regulatory agencies, and local tribes. 1099
• Policy COS-P14.2: As part of CEQA and NEPA projects, evaluations of surface and subsurface cultural resources in the county shall be conducted. Such evaluations should involve consultation with the Northeast Information Center. • Policy COS-P14.3: The Northeast Information Center and appropriate historic and preservation professionals shall be consulted when considering reuse of historic sites. • Policy COS-P15.1: Areas found during construction to contain significant historic or prehistoric archaeological artifacts shall be examined by a qualified consulting archaeologist or historian for appropriate protection and preservation. Historic or prehistoric artifacts found during construction shall be examined by a qualified consulting archaeologist or historian to determine their significance and develop appropriate protection and preservation measures. • Policy COS-P15.2: Any archaeological or paleontological resources on a development project site shall be either preserved in their sites or adequately documented as a condition of removal. When a development project has sufficient flexibility, avoidance and preservation of the resource shall be the primary mitigation measure. • Policy COS-P15.3: Demolition permit application on potentially important historic sites shall be subject to discretionary review.
• Policy COS-P16.2: Impacts to the traditional Native American landscape shall be considered during California Environmental Quality Act or National Environmental Protection Act review of development proposals.
• Policy COS-P16.3: Human remains discovered during implementation of public and private development projects shall be treated with dignity and respect. Such treatment shall fully comply with the federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and other appropriate laws.
• Policy COS-P16.4: If human remains are located during any ground disturbing activity, work shall stop until the County Coroner has been contacted, and, if the human remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the NAHC and most likely descendant have been consulted.
• Policy COS-P16.5: Consistent with State local and tribal intergovernmental consultation requirements such as SB 18, the County shall consult with Native American tribes that may be interested in proposed new development projects and land use policy changes.

C.6 Energy
This section summarizes the applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of energy in the EIR, Section 3.6.

C.6.1 Federal
Corporate Average Fuel Economy
1100
The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards were first introduced by Congress in 1975 to help reduce the country’s dependence on foreign oil. CAFE standards are regulated by Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA).

NHTSA sets and enforces the CAFE standards, while the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) calculates average fuel economy levels for manufacturers, and also sets related GHG standards. The regulations have become more stringent over time. The regulations at first applied only to passenger cars in 1978, then included light duty trucks up to 6,000 pounds in 1980, and finally increased to all vehicles up to 8,500 pounds the next year. Regulations varied during the 1980s for both cars and trucks before reaching a steady target for cars in 1990 through 2010, with trucks moderately increasing during the period from 20 to 21 miles per gallon (mpg) through 2005, then reaching 23.5 mpg by 2010.

On April 1, 2010, under the Obama Administration, the USEPA and the NHTSA announced a joint final rule establishing a national program that would reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel economy for new cars and trucks sold in the United States. The first phase of the national program applied to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles for model years 2012 through 2016. This phase required these vehicles to meet a fuel economy standard of 35.5 mpg. The second phase applied to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles for model years 2017 through 2025. This phase required these vehicles to meet an estimated fuel economy standard of 54.5 mpg.

On September 15, 2011, the USEPA and NHTSA issued a final rule for the first national standards to improve fuel efficiency of medium- and heavy-duty trucks and buses, model years 2014 through 2018 by up to 20 percent.

On October 25, 2016, the USEPA and NHTSA issued Phase 2 of the national standards to improve fuel efficiency standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks and buses for model years 2021 through 2027 to achieve vehicle fuel savings as high as 25 percent, depending on the vehicle category.

On March 31, 2020, under the Trump administration, the USEPA and NHTSA, issued the Safer Affordable Fuel Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule. The SAFE Vehicles Rule set new CAFE targets and tailpipe carbon dioxide emissions standards for passenger cars and lights trucks that increase 1.5 percent in stringency each year from model years 2021 through 2026.

The current Biden administration intends to set new fuel efficiency standards. In August 2021, NHTSA released its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking offering new standards for the 2024–2026 model years. The new standards would increase fuel efficiency 8 percent annually for model years 2024-2026 and increase the estimated fleetwide average by 12 mpg for model year 2026, relative to model year 2021. President Biden issued Executive Order (EO) 14037 on August 5, 2021, which requires NHTSA to develop fuel economy standards for passenger cars and light duty trucks for model years 2027-2030. In addition, NHTSA will develop medium and heavy-duty fuel efficiency standards beginning as early as model year 2027. At the time of EIR preparation, new CAFE standards have not been adopted.

National Energy Policy Act of 2005
1101
The National Energy Policy Act of 2005 set equipment energy efficiency standards. The law seeks to reduce reliance on non-renewable energy resources and provide incentives to reduce current demand on these resources. For example, under the National Energy Policy Act, consumers and businesses can obtain federal tax credits for purchasing fuel-efficient appliances and products, including hybrid vehicles; constructing energy-efficient buildings; and improving the energy efficiency of commercial buildings. Tax credits are also available for installing qualified fuel cells, stationary microturbine power plants, and solar power equipment.

Executive Order 13423 (Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management), signed by President George W. Bush in 2007, strengthened the federal government’s key energy management goals and set more challenging goals than the National Energy Policy Act of 2005. The energy reduction and environmental performance requirements of Executive Order 13423 were expanded upon in Executive Order 13514 (Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance), signed by President Barack Obama in 2009.

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program was created under the National Energy Policy Act of 2005 and established the first renewable fuel volume mandate in the United States. The program regulations were developed in collaboration with refiners, renewable fuel producers, and many other stakeholders. This RFS program under this act, commonly referred to as “RFS1”, required 4.0 billion gallons of renewable fuel to be blended into gasoline by 2006, ascending to 7.5 billion gallons by 2012.

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is designed to achieve energy security in the United States by increasing renewable fuel production, improving energy efficiency and performance, protecting consumers, improving vehicle fuel economy, and promoting research on GHG capture and storage. Under this act, RFS program was expanded in several ways that lay the foundation for achieving significant reductions in GHG emissions from the use of renewable fuels, reducing imported petroleum, and encouraging the development and expansion of the renewable fuels sector in the United States. The updated program is referred to as “RFS2” and includes the following:
• Expanded the RFS program to include diesel, in addition to gasoline • Increased the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended into transportation fuel from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons by 2022
• Established new categories of renewable fuel and set separate volume requirements for each
• Required the USEPA to apply lifecycle GHG performance threshold standards to ensure that each category of renewable fuel emits fewer GHGs than the petroleum fuel it replaces C.6.2 State
California Energy Commission
1102
The Warren-Alquist Act of 1974 established the California Energy Commission (CEC), which is California’s primary energy policy and energy planning agency. CEC’s core responsibilities include advancing the state’s energy policy, achieving energy efficiency, investing in energy innovation, developing renewable energy, transforming transportation, overseeing energy infrastructure, and preparing for energy emergencies.

Energy Action Plan
The California Public Utilities Commission approved the State’s first Energy Action Plan in 2003 followed by the Energy Action Plan II in 2005. The current plan, Energy Action Plan II, is California’s principal energy planning and policy document. The plan examines the state’s ongoing actions in the context of global climate change, describes a coordinated implementation plan for state energy policies, and identifies specific actions to ensure that California’s energy resources are adequate, reliable, and reasonably-priced. The plan identifies policies, strategies, and actions that are costeffective and environmentally-sound for California's consumers and taxpayers.

Greenhouse Gas Regulations
In 2006, the Legislature enacted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which required California to reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In 2016, the Legislature enacted SB 32, which extended the horizon year of the state’s codified GHG reduction planning targets from 2020 to 2030, requiring California to reduce its GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. In accordance with AB 32 and SB 32, ARB prepares scoping plans to guide the development of statewide policies and regulations for the reduction of GHG emissions. Many of the policy and regulatory concepts identified in the scoping plans focused on increasing energy efficiencies and the use of renewable resources and reducing the consumption of petroleum-based fuels (such as gasoline and diesel). As such, the state’s GHG emissions reduction planning framework creates co-benefits for energy-related resources. Additional information on Climate Change Scoping Plans is provided in Section C.8.2.

Renewable Energy Regulations
SB 1078 (2002) established the California Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program and required that a retail seller of electricity purchase a specified minimum percentage of electricity generated by eligible renewable energy resources as defined in any given year, culminating in a 20 percent standard by December 31, 2017. These retail sellers include electrical corporations, community choice aggregators, and electric service providers.

SB 107 (2006) accelerated the RPS established by SB 1078 by requiring that 20 percent of electricity retail sales be served by renewable energy resources by 2010 (not 2017).

SB X1-2 (2011) required all California utilities to generate 33 percent of their electricity from eligible renewable energy resources by 2020. Specifically, SB X1-2 set a three-stage compliance period: 20 percent electricity from renewables by December 31, 2013; 25 percent from renewables by December 31, 2016; and 33 percent from renewables by December 31, 2020.

SB 350 (2015) accelerated the RPS by requiring retail seller and publicly owned utilities to procure 50 percent of their electricity from eligible renewable energy resources by 2030, with interim goals of 40 percent by 2024 and 45 percent by 2027.
1103
SB 100 (2018) accelerated and expanded the standards set forth in SB 350 by establishing that 44 percent of the total electricity sold to retail customers in California per year by December 31, 2024, 52 percent by December 31, 2027, and 60 percent by December 31, 2030, be secured from qualifying renewable energy sources. SB 100 also states that it is the policy of the state that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent of the retail sales of electricity to California. This bill requires that the achievement of 100 percent zero-carbon electricity resources does not increase the carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid and that the achievement not be achieved through resource shuffling.

EO B-55-18 (2018) established a new statewide goal to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter. The EO requires the ARB to work with relevant State agencies to develop a framework for implementation and accounting that tracks the progress toward this goal. ARB will also be required to work with relevant State agencies to ensure future Scoping Plans identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal.

Assembly Bill 1007
AB 1007 (2005) required CEC to prepare a statewide plan to increase the use of alternative fuels in California. CEC prepared the State Alternative Fuels Plan in partnership with ARB and in consultation with other State, federal, and local agencies. The plan presents strategies and actions California must take to increase the use of nonpetroleum fuels in a manner that minimizes the costs to California and maximizes the economic benefits of in-state production. The plan assessed various alternative fuels and developed fuel portfolios to meet California’s goals to reduce petroleum consumption, increase alternative fuel use, reduce GHG emissions, and increase in-state production of biofuels without causing a significant degradation to public health and environmental quality.

Assembly Bill 1493
AB 1493 (2002) required ARB to set GHG emission standards for passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, and other vehicles whose primary use is non-commercial personal transportation in the state.

AB 1493 required that ARB set GHG emission standards for motor vehicles manufactured in 2009 and all subsequent model years.

Advanced Clean Cars
In 2012, ARB approved a new emissions-control program for model years 2017 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog, soot, and global warming gases and requirements for greater numbers of zero-emission vehicles into a single package of standards called Advanced Clean Cars.

In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation
All self-propelled off-road diesel vehicles 25 horsepower or greater used in California (such as bulldozers, loaders, backhoes, forklifts, etc.) and most two-engine vehicles (except on-road twoengine sweepers) are subject to the Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets (Off-Road Diesel Regulation). Adopted by the ARB on July 26, 2007, this regulation aims to reduce NOX and particulate matter from off-road diesel vehicles operating within California by retiring, replacing, or 1104
repowering older engines, or installing diesel exhaust retrofits. The compliance schedule requires full implementation by 2023 in all vehicles for large and medium fleets and by 2028 for small fleets.

Vehicles or engines subject to this regulation must limit their idling to five minutes. The idling limit does not apply to vehicles that need to idle to accomplish the work it was designed for (such as operating a crane), vehicles that need to idle for safe operation, vehicles being serviced or tested, or vehicles in a queue waiting for work. While the goal of this regulation is primarily to reduce emissions from diesel vehicles, compliance with the regulation also results in energy savings in the form of reduced fuel consumption from unnecessary idling.

Sustainable Communities Strategy
The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, or SB 375, coordinates land use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities to help California meet its GHG emissions reduction mandates. As codified in California Government Code, Section 65080, SB 375 requires metropolitan planning organizations (such as the Butte County Association of Governments) to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy in its regional transportation plan. The main focus of the Sustainable Communities Strategy is to plan for growth in a fashion that will ultimately reduce GHG emissions, but the strategy is also a part of a bigger effort to address other development issues within the general vicinity, including transit and VMT, which influence the consumption of petroleum-based fuels.

C.6.3 Regional and Local
Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
The Open Space/Conservation/Energy Element of the Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan includes the following goals related to energy:
• Goal OCEG-10: Maximize Paradise’s energy efficiency.
• Goal OCEG-11: Become a regional leader in the approach to energy conservation.

The general plan contains the following objective related to energy – OCEO-14: Significantly reduce town-wide energy consumption.

Butte County General Plan 2030
The Butte County General Plan 2030 includes the following policies related to energy:
• Policy H-P6.1: Continue to implement state energy efficiency standards. • Policy COS-P3.4: Solar-oriented and renewable design and grid-neutral development shall be encouraged.

Chico 2030 General Plan
The Chico 2030 General Plan includes the following policies related to energy:
1105
• Policy SUS-3.2, Municipal Energy Use: Reduce energy and water use in municipal operations.
• Policy SUS-3.4, Sustainable Fleet: Support sustainable City vehicles and equipment. • Policy SUS-4.1, Green Public Facilities: Incorporate green building techniques in the site design, construction, and renovation of public projects. • Policy SUS-5.2, Energy Efficient Design: Support the inclusion of energy efficient design and renewable energy technologies in public and private projects.

Butte County 2021 Climate Action Plan
The Butte County 2021 Climate Action Plan was adopted on December 14, 2021. Strategies in the climate action plan not only result in a reduction of GHG emissions countywide, but they increase overall sustainability and quality of life in the county by facilitating increased access to transportation and services, upgrades to infrastructure that build resiliency for the entire community, energy independence and affordability, and supporting broader economic development initiatives. Additional information on the climate action plan is provided in Section C.8.3.

City of Chico Climate Action Plan Update
The City of Chico Climate Action Plan Update (Rincon Consultants 2021) was adopted on October 19, 2021. Measures in the climate action plan that would result in a reduction of GHG emissions are related to energy efficiency, renewable energy, sustainable transportation, development patterns, solid waste, water, urban trees and greenspace, and community engagement. Additional information on the climate action plan is provided in Section C.8.3.

C.7 Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources
This section summarizes the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of geology, soils, and paleontological resources in the EIR, Section

3.7. C.7.1 Federal
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act
In October 1977, the United States Congress passed the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act to reduce the risks to life and property from future earthquakes in the United States. The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act established the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program. The purpose of this program is to reduce the risks to life and property in the United States from earthquakes through the establishment and maintenance of an effective national earthquake risk reduction program. Member agencies in the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program are the US Geological Survey, the National Science Foundation, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. 1106
In November 1990, the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Reauthorization Program Act amended the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 significantly by refining the description of agency responsibilities, program goals, and objectives.

The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act’s aims include improved understanding, characterization, and prediction of hazards and vulnerabilities; improved building codes and land use practices; reduced earthquake risks through post-earthquake investigations and education; development and improvement of design and construction techniques; improved mitigation capacity; and accelerated application of research results (US Geological Survey 2015).

Paleontological Resources Preservation Act
The Paleontological Resources Preservation Act was passed on March 30, 2009. The Paleontological Resources Preservation Act is intended to preserve, manage, and protect paleontological resources on lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, the National Parks Service, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The Paleontological Resources Preservation Act addresses the management, collection, and curation of paleontological resources from federal lands and authorizes civil and criminal penalties for illegally collecting, damaging, defacing, or selling paleontological resources.

C.7.2 State
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Alquist-Priolo Act) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] §§ 2621–2630) was enacted in 1972 to reduce the hazard of surface faulting to structures designed for human occupancy. The main purpose of the law is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The law addresses only the hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards. The Alquist-Priolo Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones known as Earthquake Fault Zones around the surface traces of active faults and issue appropriate maps, which are distributed to all affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning efforts. Before a project can be permitted in a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, the permitting agency must require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that buildings intended for human habitation would not be constructed on active faults.

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (PRC, Chapter 7.8, Sections 2690 to 2699.6) directs the DOC, CGS to identify and map areas prone to earthquake liquefaction hazards, earthquake-induced landslides, and amplified ground shaking. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act is intended to reduce the threat to public safety and to minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating these seismic hazards. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones (Zones of Required Investigation) and to issue appropriate maps (Seismic Hazard Zone maps). These maps are distributed to all affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling construction and development. 1107
General Permit for Construction Activities
The State of California adopted the Construction General Permit, Order No. 2012 0006 DWQ, amending Order No. 2009 0009 DWQ, effective July 17, 2012. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Water Quality Order 2012 0006 DWQ (Construction General Permit) regulates construction site stormwater management. Dischargers whose projects disturb 1 or more acres of soil, or whose projects disturb less than 1 acre but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs 1 or more acres, are required to obtain coverage under the general permit for discharges of stormwater associated with construction activity. This requirement includes linear projects that disturb 1 or more acres. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground, such as stockpiling or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility.

Permit applicants are required to submit a Notice of Intent to SWRCB and to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP identifies best management practices (BMPs) that must be implemented to reduce construction effects on receiving water quality based on pollutants.

The BMPs identified are directed at implementing both sediment and erosion control measures and other measures to control chemical contaminants. The SWPPP must also include descriptions of the BMPs to reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges after all construction phases have been completed at the site (post construction BMPs). The SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program, a chemical monitoring program for “nonvisible” pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of BMPs, and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a waterbody listed on the CWA 303(d) list for sediment.

Paleontological Resources
CEQA includes in its definition of historical resources “…any object [or] site …that has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory…” (14 CCR § 15064.5[a][3]), which is typically interpreted as including fossils and other paleontological resources. More specifically, destruction of a “…unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature…” constitutes a significant impact under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines in Appendix G. Treatment of paleontological resources under CEQA is generally similar to treatment of cultural resources, requiring evaluation of resources in the project; assessment of potential impacts on significant or unique resources; and development of mitigation measures for potentially significant impacts, which may include monitoring, data recovery excavation, and/or avoidance.

Public Resources Code Section 5097.5
PRC § 5097.5 states that no person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure, or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological, or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor. As used in this section, "public lands" means lands owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the state, or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof.
1108
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology has guidance for assessing and mitigating paleontological resources that could potentially be impacted from land development. This guidance is included in the Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 2010). As part of the assessment process for paleontological resources, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s guidance groups rock units into a high, undetermined, low, or no potential category for containing significant paleontological resources. These categories then determine the level of mitigation required, or further assessment prior to construction, for adequate protection or salvage of paleontological resources within a project area.

C.7.3 Regional and Local
Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
The Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan includes the following policies related to geology and soils:
• Policy SP-15: Development projects should be designed to minimize soil erosion and shall be required to comply with all Town of Paradise-adopted soil erosion standards maintained by the Paradise Community Development Department.
• Policy SP-16: The town should require all development proposals on sites that contain slopes exceeding 20 percent, and/or which border or include significant and sensitive stream courses or natural drainageways, to include programs for replanting and slope stabilization, erosion control plans, and to incorporate designs which minimize grading and cut-and-fill. • Policy SP-17: Building on slopes in excess of 30 percent should not be permitted.

Butte County General Plan 2030
The Butte County General Plan 2030 includes the following policies related to geology, soils, and paleontological resources:
• Policy HS-P6.1: Appropriate detailed seismic investigations shall be completed for all public and private development projects in accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act.
• Policy HS-P7.1: Site-specific geotechnical investigations shall be required to assess landslide potential for private development and public facilities projects in areas rated “Moderate to High” and “High” in Figure HS-4 or the most current available mapping • Policy HS-P8.1: Site-specific geotechnical investigations shall be required to assess erosion potential for private development projects and public facilities in areas rated “Very High” in Figure HS-7 or the most current available mapping.
• Policy HS-P9.1: Site-specific geotechnical investigations shall be required to assess risks from expansive soils for private development projects and public facilities in areas rated “High” in Figure HS-8 or the most current available mapping. 1109
• Policy COS-P14.2: As part of CEQA and NEPA projects, evaluations of surface and subsurface cultural resources in the county shall be conducted. Such evaluations should involve consultation with the Northeast Information Center. • Policy COS-P15.2: Any archaeological or paleontological resources on a development project site shall be either preserved in their sites or adequately documented as a condition of removal. When a development project has sufficient flexibility, avoidance and preservation of the resource shall be the primary mitigation measure.

Chico 2030 General Plan
The Chico 2030 General Plan includes the following policies and actions related to seismic and geologic hazards:
• Policy S-3.1, Potential Structural Damage: Prevent damage to new structures caused by seismic, geologic, or soil conditions.
o Action S-3.1.2, Potential Soil Hazards: In areas with highly expansive soils, require appropriate studies and structural precautions through project review.

Grading Ordinances
Chapter 15.02, 2019 California Building Standards Code, of the Town’s municipal code requires that a grading permit be obtained from the Town Engineer before any grading, clearing, or grubbing activities. Application for a grading permit requires submittal of a grading plan. The grading plan, and accompanying site map, shall show the following: existing and proposed contours, proposed limits of cuts and fills and other earthwork, existing off-site structures and other off-site improvements, public and private easements of record, typical sections of areas to be graded, all proposed uses for the site, and any other special features.

Chapter 13, Grading and Mining, of the Butte County’s municipal code states that the application for a grading permit shall include the following: location map, plot plan, description of the work to be done and materials to be used, location of all drainage to and from the site, location of culverts and natural watercourses, details of proposed drainage structures, description of the methods to be used for erosion and sediment control, and locations of anticipated stockpile areas.

Chapter 16.28, Grading Regulations – Permits, of the Chico Municipal Code states that application for a grading permit requires submittal of a grading plan. The grading plan shall include detailed plans, dimensions, and grading specifications. If required by the building official, a soils engineering report and/or engineering geology report must be prepared, and any recommendations included in these reports shall be a part of the grading plan submittal.

C.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This section summarizes the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of GHG emissions in the EIR, Section 3.8. 1110
C.8.1 Federal
United States Environmental Protection Agency
On April 2, 2007, in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497, the U.S.

Supreme Court found that GHGs are air pollutants covered by the Federal Clean Air Act. The court held that USEPA must determine whether GHG emissions from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make a reasoned decision. The Supreme Court’s decision resulted from a petition for rulemaking under section 202(a) filed by more than a dozen environmental, renewable energy, and other organizations.

C.8.2 State
Executive Order S-3-05
In June 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, which established the following GHG emissions reduction targets: 1) reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels by 2010, 2) reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and 3) reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

Assembly Bill 32 (Global Warming Solutions Act)
In September 2006, the California State Legislature enacted the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, also known as AB 32. AB 32 required that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. California met its 2020 reduction goal in 2018.

Executive Order B-30-15
On April 20, 2015, Governor Brown signed EO B-30-15 to establish a California GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. California’s emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 will make it possible to reach the ultimate goal of reducing emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. This is in line with the scientifically established levels needed in the United States to limit global warming below 2 degrees Celsius, the warming threshold at which there will likely be major climate disruptions such as super droughts and rising sea levels.

Senate Bill 32
Senate Bill (SB) 32 was signed into law on September 8, 2016, and expands upon AB 32 to reduce GHG emissions. SB 32 sets into law the mandated GHG emissions target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 written into EO B-30-15.

Climate Change Scoping Plan
In December 2008, the ARB adopted the Climate Change Scoping Plan (2008 Scoping Plan) to achieve the goals outlined in AB 32. The 2008 Scoping Plan, developed by ARB in coordination with the Climate Action Team, proposed a comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall GHG emissions in California, improve the environment, reduce dependence on oil, diversify the state’s energy sources, save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health. According to the 2008 Scoping Plan, California will implement strategies to achieve a reduction of approximately 118 1111
million metric tons (MT) of CO2e, or approximately 22 percent from the State’s projected 2020 emission level of 545 million MT of CO2e under a business‐as‐usual scenario. This is a reduction of 47 million MT CO2e, or almost 10 percent, from 2008 emissions (ARB 2008). The ARB’s original 2020 projection was 596 million MT CO2e, but this revised 2020 projection considered the economic downturn that occurred in 2008.

The First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan (2014 Scoping Plan) was approved by the ARB in May 2014 and built upon the 2008 Scoping Plan with new strategies and recommendations.

The 2014 Scoping Plan contained the main strategies California will implement to achieve a reduction of 80 million MT of CO2e emissions, or approximately 16 percent, from the state’s projected 2020 emission level of 507 million MT of CO2e under the business‐as‐usual scenario defined in the 2014 Scoping Plan (ARB 2014). The 2014 Scoping Plan also included a breakdown of the amount of GHG reductions ARB recommended for each emissions sector of the state’s GHG inventory. Several strategies to reduce GHG emissions were included: Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Pavley Rule, Advanced Clean Cars program, Renewable Portfolio Standard, and Sustainable Communities Strategy.

In 2016, the Legislature passed SB 32, which codified a 2030 GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels. With the passage of SB 32, the Legislature passed companion legislation AB 197, which provided additional direction for developing the Scoping Plan. The ARB adopted California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (2017 Scoping Plan) in November 2017. The 2017 Scoping Plan represents a second update to the scoping plan to reflect the 2030 target as codified by SB 32. According to the 2017 Scoping Plan, the 2030 target of 260 million MT of CO2e requires the reduction of 129 million MT of CO2e, or approximately 33.2 percent, from the state’s projected 2030 business‐as‐usual scenario emissions level of 389 million MT of CO2e (ARB 2017).

Assembly Bill 1493 (Pavley Clean Car Standards)
AB 1493 (Pavley Bill) (Chapter 200, Statutes of 2002) requires ARB to develop and adopt regulations that achieve “the maximum feasible reduction of GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty truck and other vehicles determined by ARB to be vehicles whose primary use is noncommercial personal transportation in the state.” In September 2004, pursuant to this directive, the ARB approved regulations to reduce GHG emissions from new motor vehicles beginning with the 2009 model year. These regulations created the Pavley standards. In September 2009, the ARB adopted amendments to the Pavley standards to reduce GHG emissions from new motor vehicles through the 2016 model year. These regulations created the Pavley II standards.

Advanced Clean Cars Program
In January 2012, the ARB approved a new emissions control program for model years 2017 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog, soot, and global warming gases and requirements for greater numbers of zero emission vehicles into a single packet of standards called Advanced Clean Cars. The Advanced Clean Cars Program includes the Zero Emission Vehicle Program, which is designed to achieve California’s long-term emission reduction goals by requiring manufacturers to offer for sale specific numbers of zero-emission vehicles, which include battery electric, fuel cell, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.
1112
C.8.3 Regional and Local
Butte County Air Quality Management District
BCAQMD is the air quality regulating authority in Butte County. The CEQA Air Quality Handbook (BCAQMD 2014) includes analysis requirements for construction and operational emissions.

BCAQMD has not adopted thresholds of significance for GHG emissions. For construction and operational GHG emissions, BCAQMD’s recommended threshold includes compliance with a qualified GHG reduction strategy, compliance with the Lead Agency’s threshold, or consistency with the goals of AB 32.

Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
The Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan does not contain any objectives or policies that specifically address GHG emissions. The Town has not adopted a climate action plan or any other plan to quantify existing GHG inventories or provide goals and measures to reduce GHG emissions in the town.

Butte County General Plan 2030
The Butte County General Plan 2030 includes the following policies related to GHG emissions:
• Policy COS-P1.1: Greenhouse gas emission impacts from proposed development projects shall be evaluated as required by the CEQA.
• Policy COS-P1.2: New development projects shall mitigate greenhouse gas emissions onsite or as close to the site as possible.

Chico 2030 General Plan
The Chico 2030 General Plan includes the following policies related to GHG emissions:
• Policy SUS-6.1, Greenhouse Gas Reduction Efforts: Support local, regional, and statewide efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases linked to climate change. • Policy SUS-6.2, Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Climate Action Plan: Maintain a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and implement the Climate Action Plan to make progress toward meeting the City’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal. • Policy SUS-6.3, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and CEQA: Analyze and mitigate potentially significant increases in greenhouse gas emissions during project review, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
• Policy SUS-6.4, Community Trees: Continue to support the planting and maintenance of trees in the community to increase carbon sequestration.

Butte County 2021 Climate Action Plan
The Butte County 2021 Climate Action Plan (Placeworks 2021), adopted on December 14, 2021, is Butte County’s strategic plan to reduce GHG emissions in the unincorporated county. This climate 1113
action plan updates the previously adopted climate action plan in Butte County, providing updated information, an expanded set of GHG reduction strategies, and a planning horizon out to 2050. Butte County is committed to reducing GHG emissions to 6.0 MT CO2e per person by 2030 and 2.0 MT CO2e per person by 2050, consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan guidance. Butte County is also setting forth an interim target of 4.0 MT CO2e per person by 2040. The following is a list of climate action plan strategies:
• Strategy 1: Continue efforts to promote energy conservation and efficiency opportunities for all residents, building/property owners, and renters in the unincorporated county, including support and promotion of programs for lower- income and disadvantaged populations. • Strategy 2: Continue efforts to promote energy conservation and efficiency opportunities for all nonresidential uses in the unincorporated county, including County facilities, office space, commercial space, and industrial space.
• Strategy 3: Work with property owners and property management groups to increase overall building electrification and adoption of modern, efficient appliances in residential rental properties.
• Strategy 4: Support efforts to increase renewable and carbon-free energy generation, including wind, solar, and biomass, and to ensure customer access to such renewable energy
• Strategy 5: Continue efforts to promote water conservation for all residents, building/property owners, and businesses in the unincorporated county, including support and promotion of programs for lower-income and disadvantaged populations, and large water users.
• Strategy 6: Pursue Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, implemented through local land use decisions and through partnerships with local employers, that reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) countywide.
• Strategy 7: Prioritize bicycling and walking as safe, practical, and attractive travel options countywide.
• Strategy 8: Reduce carbon emissions from transportation by facilitating a transition to efficient or clean-fuel vehicles.
• Strategy 9: Encourage hybrid and clean-fuel construction and landscaping equipment countywide.
• Strategy 10: Reduce the amount of solid waste sent to local landfills through innovative programs and partnerships.
• Strategy 11: Reduce emissions from disposal and decomposition of organic waste. • Strategy 12: Work to reduce GHG emissions associated with agricultural equipment, in partnership with regional partners, agencies, and members of the agricultural community. 1114
• Strategy 13: Track trends in agricultural operations and encourage existing and new farming techniques that reduce GHG emissions from crop cultivation. • Strategy 14: Work with farmers and local and regional agencies to explore techniques to maximize carbon sequestration of the county’s natural and working lands. • Strategy 15: Implement projects and programs to reduce GHG emissions associated with Butte County operations.

City of Chico Climate Action Plan Update
The City of Chico Climate Action Plan Update (Rincon Consultants 2021) was adopted on October 19, 2021. The City of Chico is committed to a GHG emissions reduction target of 2.71 MT of CO2e per person (or 292,437 MT of CO2e in total emissions) by 2030. This corresponds to an 80 percent reduction in per capita emissions (or a 46 percent reduction in total emissions) below 1990 levels by 2030, exceeding the SB 32 target of 40 percent reduction in total emissions by 2030. To achieve the GHG emissions reduction target, the climate action plan includes 13 measures related to energy efficiency, renewable energy, sustainable transportation, development patterns, solid waste, water, urban trees and greenspace, and community engagement.

C.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
This section identifies the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of hazards and hazardous materials in the EIR, Section 3.9.

C.9.1 Federal
Hazardous Waste Management
The Federal Toxic Substances Control Act (1976) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) established a program administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the regulation of the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act (HSWA), which affirmed and extended the “cradle to grave” system of regulating hazardous wastes. The use of certain techniques for the disposal of some hazardous wastes was specifically prohibited by HSWA. The statute also addresses program administration; implementation and delegation to the states; enforcement provisions and responsibilities; and research, training, and grant funding.

EPA Asbestos National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) The asbestos NESHAP regulations specify work practices for asbestos to be followed during demolition and renovation of all structures, installations, and buildings (excluding residential buildings that have four or fewer dwelling units). 40 CFR Part 61 states that the owner or operator of a demolition or renovation activity and prior to the commencement of the demolition or renovation will thoroughly inspect the affected facility or part of the facility where the demolition or renovation operation will occur for the presence of asbestos. The regulations require the owner of the building or the operator to notify the appropriate state agency before any demolition, or before any renovations of buildings that could contain a certain threshold amount of asbestos or asbestoscontaining material. In addition, particular manufacturing and fabricating operations either cannot 1115
emit visible emissions into the outside air or must follow air cleaning procedures, as well as follow certain requirements when removing asbestos-containing waste. 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart M establishes the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and names asbestos-containing material as one of these materials. Asbestos-containing material use, removal, and disposal are regulated by U.S. EPA under this law. Work practice standards under the EPA for air toxics regulations would include removing all asbestos1containing materials, adequately wetting all regulated asbestos-containing materials, sealing the material in leak tight containers and disposing of the asbestos-containing waste material as expediently as practicable. In addition, notification of friable asbestos-containing material removal prior to a proposed demolition project is required by this law.

Universal Waste Management
40 CFR Part 273 governs the collection and management of widely generated waste, including batteries, pesticides, mercury-containing equipment, and bulbs. This regulation streamlines the hazardous waste management standards and ensures that such waste is diverted to the appropriate treatment or recycling facility.

U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration 29 CFR Part 1910, Occupational Safety and Health Standards, requires facilities that use, store, manufacture, handle, process, or move hazardous materials to conduct employee safety training; inventory safety equipment relevant to potential hazards; have knowledge on safety equipment use; prepare an illness prevention program; provide hazardous substance exposure warnings; prepare an emergency response plan, and prepare a fire prevention plan. 29 CFR Part 1926 establishes safety and health regulations for construction. These standards require employee training; personal protective equipment; safety equipment; and written procedures, programs, and plans for ensuring worker safety when working with hazardous materials or in hazardous work environments during construction activities, including renovations and demolition projects and the handling, storage, and use of explosives. These standards also provide rules for the removal and disposal of asbestos, lead, lead based paint, and other lead materials.

U.S. Department of Transportation
Transportation of hazardous materials is regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Office of Hazardous Materials Safety. The office formulates, issues, and revises hazardous materials regulations under the Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law. The hazardous materials regulations cover hazardous materials definitions and classifications, hazard communications, shipper and carrier operations, training and security requirements, and packaging and container specifications. Vehicles transporting hazardous materials must be properly placarded. In addition, the carrier is responsible for the safe unloading of hazardous materials at the site, and operators must follow specific procedures during unloading to minimize the potential for an accidental release of hazardous materials. The hazardous materials transportation regulations are codified in 49 CFR Parts 100–185.

C.9.2 State
California Hazardous Waste Control Law
1116
The California Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL) is administered by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to regulate hazardous wastes. While the HWCL is generally more stringent than RCRA, until the U.S. EPA approves the California program, both the state and federal laws apply in California. The HWCL lists 791 chemicals and about 300 common materials that may be hazardous; establishes criteria for identifying, packaging, and labeling hazardous wastes; prescribes management controls; establishes permit requirements for treatment, storage, disposal and transportation; and identifies some wastes that cannot be disposed of in landfills.

The California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 22, Chapter 11, Article 2, Section 66261, defines hazardous waste as: a waste that exhibits the characteristics that may: (1) cause, or significantly contribute to, an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible, illness; or (2) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or environment when improperly treated, stored, transported or disposed or otherwise managed.

According to 22 CCR, substances having a characteristic of toxicity, ignitability, corrosivity, or reactivity are considered hazardous waste. Hazardous wastes are hazardous substances that no longer have a practical use, such as material that has been abandoned, discarded, spilled, or contaminated, or that is being stored prior to proper disposal.

California Occupational Safety and Health Administration The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) is the primary agency responsible for worker safety in the handling and use of chemicals in the workplace. Cal/OSHA standards are generally more stringent than federal regulations. The employer is required to monitor worker exposure to listed hazardous substances and notify workers of exposure (8 CCR 337–340).

The regulations specify requirements for employee training, availability of safety equipment, accident prevention programs, and hazardous substance exposure warnings.

Cal/OSHA is the agency responsible for enforcement of the construction safety orders of 8 CCR 1529 related to asbestos removal and cleanup. Section 1529 regulates construction-related asbestos exposure involving demolition of structures, removal of asbestos containing materials, asbestos clean-up, or excavation activities which may involve exposure to asbestos. Work practice standards for Cal/OSHA are similar to the EPA, but also include the presence of an asbestos competent person for monitoring during all demolition activities, HEPA filter dust collection systems, and ventilation of enclosed or isolated areas. Section 1532.1 addresses specific measures for construction workers to take if exposed to sources that contain lead, including lead-based paint.

Lead-Based Paint
The California Department of Public Health enforces lead laws and regulations related to the prevention of lead poisoning in children, prevention of lead poisoning in occupational workers, accreditation and training for construction-related activities, lead exposure screening and reporting, disclosures, and limitations on the amount of lead found in products. Accredited lead specialists are required to find and abate lead hazards in a construction project and to perform lead-related construction work in an effective and safe manner. Specific regulations include:

California Health & Safety Code Section
1117
105250 Establishes a program to accredit lead-related construction training providers and certify individuals to conduct lead-related construction activities.

California Civil Code Sections 1102 to 1102.16
Requires the disclosure of known lead-based paint hazards upon sale of a property.

California Labor Code Sections 6716 to 6717
Provides for the establishment of standards that protect the health and safety of employees who engage in lead-related construction work, including construction, demolition, renovation, and repair.

California Health & Safety Code Sections 105185 to 105197 Establishes an occupational lead poisoning prevention program to register and monitor laboratory reports of adult lead toxicity cases, monitor reported cases of occupational lead poisoning to ascertain lead poisoning sources, conduct investigations of take-home exposure cases, train employees and health professionals regarding occupational lead poisoning prevention, and recommended means for lead poisoning prevention.

State Water Resources Control Board
The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) protects water quality in California by setting statewide policy. The SWRCB supports the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards, which, within their areas of jurisdiction, protect surface and groundwater from pollutants discharged or threatened to be discharged to the waters of the state. For the City of Chico, the Central Valley RWQCB (CVRWQCB) maintains jurisdiction within the subject basin. This protection is carried out through the issuance and enforcement of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, called Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs), regulation of leaking underground storage tanks and contaminated properties through the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) and Spills, Leaks, Investigation, and Cleanup (SLIC) programs, respectively. USTs are regulated under Chapter 6.7 of the California Health and Safety Code and 23 CCR Chapter 16.

California Health and Safety Code – Handling and Storage of Hazardous Waste In California, the handling and storage of hazardous materials is regulated by Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code. Under Sections 25500–25543.3, facilities handling hazardous materials are required to prepare a Hazardous Materials Business Plan. The plan provides information to the local emergency response agency regarding the types and quantities of hazardous materials stored at a facility and provides detailed emergency planning and response procedures in the event of a hazardous materials release. In the event that a facility stores quantities of specific acutely hazardous materials above the thresholds set forth by the California code, facilities are also required to prepare a Risk Management Plan and California Accidental Release Plan, which provides information on the potential impact zone of a worst-case release, and requires plans and programs designed to minimize the probability of a release and mitigate potential impacts.

California Health and Safety Code – Transportation of Hazardous Waste In California, transportation of hazardous waste is regulated under Chapter 6.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. Under Section 21560, hazardous waste generators must complete a 1118
manifest for the waste before it is transported or offered for transportation. A manifest is a shipping document that is signed by the hazardous waste generator and contains the necessary information to be in compliance with all state and federal regulations. The purpose of the manifest is to allow for the waste to be tracked from point of origin through point of disposal and for the generator or regulatory agency to verify that the waste is properly delivered without incurring any loss along the way. The enforcement agencies for the transportation of hazardous materials regulations are the California Highway Patrol and Caltrans.

Emergency Response/Evacuation Plans
The state of California passed legislation authorizing the Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) to prepare a Standard Emergency Management System program, which sets forth measures by which a jurisdiction should handle emergency disasters. Non-compliance with the program could result in the state withholding disaster relief from the non-complying jurisdiction in the event of an emergency disaster.

California Disaster and Civil Defense Master Mutual Aid Agreement The California Disaster and Civil Defense Master Mutual Aid Agreement states that all resources and facilities of the state, including all political subdivisions, shall voluntarily aid and assist each other in the event of a disaster by the interchange of services, including rescue, relief, evacuation, rehabilitation, and reconstruction (CalOES 1950).

C.9.3 Regional and Local
Butte County Emergency Response
The Butte County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) was prepared to reduce risks for hazards by helping decision makers direct mitigation activities and resources. The LHMP documents the hazard mitigation planning process and identifies relevant hazards and vulnerabilities facing the county. The LHMP also includes the strategies the County will use to increase resiliency in the face of hazardous situations. This multi-jurisdictional plan includes Butte County, the cities of Biggs, Chico, Gridley, Oroville, and the Town of Paradise, as well as a number of public utilities and services agencies serving the area. According to the LHMP’s Hazard Identification Assessment, the most significant hazards in the county are dam failure, 100, 200, and 500-year floods, levee failure, and wildfire (Butte County 2019). Butte County has adopted a multi-jurisdictional Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), which assigns functions and tasks consistent with California’s Standardized Emergency Management System and the National Incident Management System. The intent of the EOP is to provide direction on how to mobilize and respond to an emergency from onset to recovery (Butte County 2011).

The Butte Emergency Command Center is the mutual aid coordination center for Butte County. They have the responsibility for coordinating all mutual aid requests in Butte County and have the authority to directly obtain resources from neighboring counties including Yuba, Sutter, Plumas, Glenn, Colusa, Tehama, and Lassen (Butte County 2018c). Butte County is also part of the California Disaster and Civil Defense Master Mutual Aid Agreement and is able to share or receive resources and/or services with other jurisdictions within California in the event of a disaster or emergency situation.
1119
Hazardous Materials Joint Powers Agreement
The Hazardous Materials Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) was initiated in December 1990 by Butte County and its five cities: Biggs, Chico, Gridley, Oroville, and the Town of Paradise. The JPA is governed by the fire chiefs of the six signatory agencies (including Butte County). The Chico Fire Department (CFD) provides 11 of the 40 authorized state certified specialist positions on the team.

The nearest specialists are dispatched to any hazardous materials emergency, regardless of jurisdiction (Butte LAFCO 2018).

City of Chico 2030 General Plan
The City’s 2030 General Plan includes a number of goals, policies and actions that address the use, handling, storage, and transport of hazardous materials and emergency response in the event of a fire or other city-wide emergency. Relevant goals, policies and actions are as follows.

Safety Element
The General Plan provides several policies and actions related to emergency preparedness, fire hazards, public safety, and emergency response planning.

Goal S-1-: Minimize the loss of life and property resulting from natural and human-caused hazards.

Policy S-1.1 (Emergency Preparedness) – Promote public safety from hazards that may cause death, injury, or property damage through emergency preparedness and awareness.

Action S-1.1.1 (Emergency Plan Maintenance) – Maintain, and update as needed, the City’s Emergency Plan to guide emergency management in the City.

Action S-1.1.2 (Emergency Response Awareness) – Promote community preparedness for hazards and awareness of emergency notification methods.

Action S-1.1.3 (Incident Training) – Continue to participate in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s National Incident Management System program, which provides a standardized approach to emergency incidents.

Goal S-4: Continue to provide effective and efficient fire protection and prevention services to Chico area residents.

Policy S-4.1 (Fire Safety Staffing) – Maintain adequate fire suppression and prevention staffing levels.

Policy S-4.2 (Interagency Coordination) – Continue to maintain interagency relationships to maximize fire protection services and support programs that reduce fire hazards.

Policy S-4.3 (Fire Safety Standards and Programs) – Support the development and implementation of standards and programs to reduce fire hazards and review development and building applications for opportunities to ensure compliance with relevant codes.

Goal S-8: Reduce the potential for public exposure to hazardous materials or the accidental releases of toxic or hazardous substances.
1120
Policy S-8.1 (Hazardous Materials Safety Coordination) – Support efforts to reduce the potential for accidental releases of toxic and hazardous substances.

Action S-8.1.1 (Planning for Hazardous Materials Safety) – Consult with the State Office of Emergency Services, the State Department of Toxic Substances Control, the California Highway Patrol, Butte County, and other relevant agencies regarding hazardous materials routing and incident response programs.

Policy S-8.2 (Reduce Toxic Materials Use) – Reduce the use of hazardous and toxic materials in City operations.

City of Chico Emergency Response
As part of the Butte County LHMP, a Hazard Identification Assessment was conducted for the City of Chico, indicating that drought and water shortage, earthquake and liquefaction, 100-, 200-, and 500- year floods, heavy rain and storms, and wildfire are the hazards with the most widespread potential impact. The City has established a number of agreements and procedures regarding response to emergency situations. This includes standard emergency response procedures in line with the CalOES Standard Emergency Management System program, which sets forth measures by which a jurisdiction should handle emergency disasters and mutual aid agreements for emergency assistance. These emergency response measures are included in the Butte County EOP, such established roles for command/management, communication protocols, and establishment of priorities for resource allocation (Butte County 2011). The City maintains numerous mutual aid agreements, including those with Butte County, CSU, Chico’s University Police Department, and all other jurisdictions of the state during emergency situations (in accordance with the California Disaster and Civil Defense Master Mutual Aid Agreement) for fire, police, evacuation, and rescue, among other shared services. The General Plan identifies Highway 99 and State Route 32 as emergency routes for evacuation within the city.

Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
The Town’s 1994 General Plan includes a number of goals, objectives, and policies that address the use, handling, storage, and transport of hazardous materials and emergency response in the event of a fire or other town-wide emergency. Relevant goals, policies and actions are as follows.

Safety Element
The General Plan provides several goals, objectives, and policies related to emergency preparedness, fire hazards, public safety, and emergency response planning.

Goal SG-1: Assure that law enforcement and fire protection services are enhanced sufficiently to meet the demands of new and existing land use development Goal SG-2: Provide adequate access, including emergency vehicle access and evacuation, to all new parcels and existing parcels where feasible.

Goal SG-3: Strive to protect the Paradise community from injury, loss of life and property damage resulting from catastrophes and hazardous conditions.
1121
Goal SG-6: Improve the communication systems used during townwide emergencies, such as wildland fires, earthquakes or volcanic occurrences.

Objective SO-2: Maintain an overall fire insurance (ISO) rating of three or better, and an emergency fire response within five minutes for 90% of all emergency incidents within town limits.

Objective SO-3: Maintain the Paradise Multihazard Disaster Plan and conduct practice exercises throughout the life of the General Plan.

Policy SP-1 - New and unmitigated land use development shall not cause the police and fire protection services emergency response times to full below the service levels established by this plan.

Policy SP-2 - Through the development review process, adequate roads shall be required to be constructed and/or improved for emergency vehicle access, particularly in high wildland fire hazard areas.

Policy SP-3 - Future development should be designed and constructed to take maximum advantage of known fire and crime prevention siting, orientation and building techniques.

Policy SP-5 - The town should promote fire prevention by continuing to require brush removal and fuel load clearing as ongoing conditions of development approval and property maintenance.

Policy SP-8 - The town shall encourage Butte County to enforce standards conforming to the fire safety standards established by the state Board of Forestry for state responsibility areas within the Paradise secondary and tertiary planting areas, including:
• Road standards for fire equipment access
• Standards for signs identifying streets, roads and buildings • Minimum private water supply reserves for emergency fire use • Fuel breaks and greenbelts
• Land use policies and safety standards that take into account the recurrent nature of wildland fires
• Design standards establishing minimum road widths and clearances around structures • Emergency preparedness protocol and procedures
• Maximum length of cul-de-sac roadways
Policy SP-13 - The town shall attempt to require all new development to comply with the airport height restriction policy, airport safety area(s) policies and land use guidelines for safety compatibility of the Paradise Skypark Airpon Land Use Plan.

Policy SP-14 - Detrimental and toxic discharge into natural waterways shall not be permitted.

Hazardous Waste Management Element
1122
The General Plan provides several goals, objectives, and policies related to the use, handling, storage, and transport of hazardous materials.

Goal SG-7: Provide for the safe disposal and handling of toxic and hazardous waste.

Goal SG-8: Direct and promote hazardous waste management practices and technologies that will, in order of priority:
• reduce the use of hazardous substances and the generation of hazardous wastes at their source;
• recover and recycle the remaining waste for reuse to the extent feasible; • treat those wastes not amenable to source reduction or recycling so that the environment and community health are not harmed by their ultimate release or disposal; • ensure the safe transportation and disposal of treated hazardous waste residuals in repositories made secure from liquids that might create a toxic leachate and contaminate groundwater.

Goal SG-9: Reduce the need for additional hazardous waste disposal sites.

Objective SO-7 - Minimize the generation of hazardous wastes by seeking waste reduction alternatives which are safe, economically viable, and which represent the best technology available to the generator.

Policy SP-24 - The county, and each city, shall require that all local land use decisions on siting specified hazardous waste management facilities are consistent with the goals and policies and the siting criteria contained in the Hazardous Waste Management Plan.

C.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
This section identifies the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of hydrology and water quality in the EIR, Section 3.10.

C.10.1 Federal
Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948 was the first major United States law to address water pollution. Upon sweeping amendments made in 1972, the law became commonly known as the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1251). The CWA established the structure for regulating discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters.

Clean Water Act Section 404
CWA Section 404 (33 USC § 1344) enables regulation of the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. The basic premise of the program is that no discharge of dredged or fill material may be permitted if: (1) a practicable alternative exists that is 1123
less damaging to the aquatic environment or (2) the nation’s waters would be significantly degraded.

To comply with these objectives, a permittee must document the measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts on waters of the United States and provide compensatory mitigation for any unavoidable impacts.

Clean Water Act Section 401
Under CWA Section 401 (33 USC § 1341), federal agencies are not authorized to issue a permit or license for any activity that may result in discharges to waters of the United States, unless a state or tribe where the discharge originates either grants, waives or denies CWA Section 401 certification.

Granting certification, with or without conditions, allows the federal permit or license to be issued and remain consistent with any conditions set forth in the CWA Section 401 certification. Decisions made by states or tribes are based on the proposed project’s compliance with USEPA water quality standards as well as applicable effluent limitations guidelines, new source performance standards, toxic pollutant restrictions, and any other appropriate requirements of state or tribal law. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board is the primary regulatory authority for CWA Section 401 requirements (additional details are provided in the following subsections).

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The NPDES permit was established in the CWA to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the US. The ultimate objective of the CWA is zero pollutant discharge, but it recognizes the need for a system to regulate non-zero pollutant discharges until the zero-pollutant objective is feasible. CWA Section 402 established NPDES for this purpose. The NPDES regulates all pollutant discharges, particularly point source discharges, to the waters of the US.

Construction General Permit
The Construction General Permit (CGP; NPDES No. CAS000002, SWRCB Order No. 2009-0009- DWQ, adopted on November 16, 2010) became effective on February 14, 2011, and was amended by Order No. 2010-0014-DWQ and Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ. The CGP authorizes the discharge of stormwater (and certain unauthorized non-stormwater discharges) from construction sites that disturb 1 acre or more of land, and from smaller sites that are part of a larger, common plan of development. For all projects subject to the CGP, the applicant is required to hire a qualified developer to develop and implement an effective Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).

All project registration documents, including the SWPPP, are required to be uploaded into the State Water Resources Control Board’s online Stormwater Multiple Application and Report Tracking System at least 30 days prior to construction.

Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899 – Section 408 Under Section 408 (33 USC § 408), any use or alteration of a Civil Works project is subject to the approval of United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).  This requirement was established in Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Section 408 provides that USACE may grant permission for another party to alter a Civil Works project upon a determination that the alteration proposed will not be injurious to the public interest and will not impair the usefulness of the Civil Works project.
1124
C.10.2 State
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne) of 1966 (California Water Code Section 13000 et seq.; CCR Title 23, Chapter 3, Subchapter 15) is the primary state regulation that addresses water quality. The requirements of the act are implemented by the State Water Resources Control Board at the state level and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) within the nine regions designated. The RWQCB carries out planning, permitting, and enforcement activities related to water quality in California. The RWQCB is responsible for controlling discharges to surface waters of the state by issuing waste discharge requirements or conditional waivers to waste discharge requirements. Waste discharge requirements are required by the RWQCB for activities that may affect water quality.

Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification A CWA Section 401 water quality certification is required for activities that require CWA Section 404 permits issued by USACE. As mentioned above, the State Water Resources Control Board has primary regulatory authority for CWA Section 401 requirements for protecting water resources.

Enforcement of these requirements is also handled by the nine RWQCBs depending upon location of the potential impacts. The Central Valley RWQCB will be responsible for CWA Section 401 for this project.

Delegated Permit Authority
California has been delegated permit authority for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, including storm water permits for all areas except tribal lands.

Issuance of CWA Section 404 permits remains the responsibility of USACE; however, the state actively uses its CWA Section 401 certification authority to safeguard that CWA Section 404 permits will comply with state water quality standards.

State Definition of Covered Waters
Under California state law, waters of the state refer to “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (California Water Code Section 13050). Therefore, water quality laws apply to both surface water and groundwater. After the United States Supreme Court decision in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001), the Office of Chief Counsel of the State Water Resources Control Board released a legal memorandum confirming the state’s jurisdiction over isolated wetlands. The memorandum stated that under the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (PorterCologne), discharges to wetlands and other waters of the state are subject to state regulation, and this includes isolated wetlands. In general, the State Water Resources Control Board regulates discharges to isolated waters in much the same way as they do for waters of the United States, but the regulation is via Porter-Cologne rather than the CWA.

Central Valley Flood Protection Board (California Code Regs. Title 23, Division 1) The CVFPB exercises regulatory authority within its jurisdiction to maintain the integrity of the existing flood control system and designated floodways by issuing permits for encroachments. The 1125
CVFPB has mapped designated floodways along more than 60 streams and rivers in the Central Valley. In addition, in the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 23, Table 8.1 shows several hundred stream reaches and waterways that are regulated streams. Projects that encroach in a designated floodway or regulated stream, or within 10 feet of the toe of a state-federal flood control structure (levee), require an encroachment permit and the submission of an associated application, including an environmental assessment questionnaire. A project must demonstrate that it will not reduce the channel flow capacity and that it will comply with channel and levee safety requirements.

In cooperation with USACE, the CVFPB enforces standards for the construction, maintenance, and protection of adopted flood control plans that will protect public lands from floods. The jurisdiction of the CVFPB includes the Central Valley, including all tributaries and distributaries of the Sacramento River, the San Joaquin River, and designated floodways (23 CCR § 2). The CVFPB has all the responsibilities and authorities necessary to oversee future modifications as approved by USACE pursuant to assurance agreements with USACE and the USACE Operation and Maintenance Manuals under 33 CFR 208.10 and 33 USC 408.

State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards The SWRCB adjudicates water rights, sets water pollution control policy, issues water board orders on matters of statewide application, and oversees water quality functions throughout the state by approving Basin Plans, TMDLs, and NPDES permits. RWCQBs are responsible for protecting beneficial uses of water resources within their regional jurisdiction using planning, permitting, and enforcement authorities to meet this responsibility.

C.10.3 Regional and Local
Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan
The proposed Project is under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley RWQCB. The Central Valley RWQCB implements the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (May 2018) to regulate surface and groundwater quality in the region. The Basin Plan covers the entire Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. The Basin Plan lists beneficial uses and water quality objectives to protect those uses. The proposed Project is in the Sacramento River Basin and will follow the requirements laid out in that portion of the Basin Plan.

Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
CWA Section 402(p) requires the issuance of NPDES permits for five categories of stormwater dischargers, including MS4s. EPA defines an MS4 as “any conveyance or system of conveyances (roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, human-made channels, and storm drains) owned or operated by a state, city, town, county, or other public body having jurisdiction over storm water, that are designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater.” Pursuant to CWA Section 402, NPDES permits are required and issued for discharges from an MS4 serving a population of 100,000 or more for the Phase I MS4 Municipal Program and serving a population of 10,000 or more for the Phase II Small MS4 Program. As discussed, Butte County operates under Small MS4 stormwater permit.
1126
Butte County Groundwater Conservation Ordinance (Chapter 33) In November 1996, the voters in Butte County approved an ordinance to protect the groundwater resources in Butte County. One of the stated purposes of the ordinance was that the groundwater underlying Butte County is a significant water resource which must be reasonably and beneficially used and conserved for the benefit of the overlying land by avoiding extractions which harm the Butte Basin aquifer, causing exceedance of the safe yield or a condition of overdraft. The ordinance is now codified as Chapter 33 of the Butte County Code relating to groundwater conservation. The Proposed Project would not extract or use groundwater resources during construction and operations and would not conflict with the Butte County Groundwater Conservation Ordinance.

Butte County Integrated Water Resources Plan (IWRP)
The purpose of the IWRP is to document the stakeholder-centered process used by Butte County to develop water resources policy recommendations for consideration by the Butte County Board of Supervisors. The IWRP is part of the Butte County’s proactive Integrated Water Resources Program.

Four-County Memorandum of Understanding
The counties of Butte, Colusa, Glenn, and Tehama share common surface water and groundwater resources. The purpose of the four county MOU is to establish the mutual understandings of the four counties with respect to their voluntary joint efforts toward regional coordination, collaboration and communication. Treated wastewater from the Proposed Project would be discharged into the Sacramento River in accordance with NPDES permitting requirements. The Proposed Project would also include a Frac-out Plan, which would outline all standard BMPs, monitoring, and contingency procedures in the event of frac-out during ground disturbing activities to protect groundwater resources. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with the Four-County MOU.

Butte County General Plan 2030 Water Resources Element
The Water Resources Element of the Butte County General Plan 2030 describes the water resources within Butte County and contains goals and policies related to groundwater and surface water conservation and protection. It also provides additional guidance to Butte County related to decisions about water resources. The following goals and policies in the Butte County General Plan 2030 are relevant to the hydrology and water quality analysis:
• Goal W-1: Maintain and enhance water quality.
• Goal W-2: Ensure an abundant and sustainable water supply to support all uses in Butte County.
• Goal W-3: Effectively manage groundwater resources to ensure a long-term water supply for Butte County.
• Goal W-4: Promote water conservation as an important part of a long-term and sustainable water supply.
• Goal W-5: Protect water quality through effective stormwater management. 1127
• Policy W-P1.4: Where appropriate, new development shall be Low Impact Development (LID) that minimizes impervious area, minimizes runoff and pollution and incorporates best management practices.
• Policy W-P1.8: The County supports conversion from septic systems to public sewer service, where feasible.
• Policy W-P2.1: The County supports solutions to ensure the sustainability of community water supplies.
• Policy W-P2.2: The County may continue the Four-County Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Colusa, Glenn, Tehama and Sutter Counties, and may support the development of the Northern Sacramento Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. • Policy W-P2.6: The County supports water development projects that are needed to supply local demands.
• Policy W-P2.7: The Butte County Water Commission and the Department of Water Resource Conservation shall continue to be utilized as important partners in the water resource planning process.
• Policy W-P3.3: The County shall protect groundwater recharge and groundwater quality when considering new development projects.
• Policy W-P4.4: Opportunities to recover and utilize wastewater for beneficial purposes shall be promoted and encouraged.
• Policy W-P4.6: New development projects shall adopt best management practices for water use efficiency and demonstrate specific water conservation measures. • Policy W-P4.7: County facilities shall adopt water conservation measures and when appropriate retrofit existing facilities to improve water conservation. • Policy W-P5.2: New development projects shall identify and adequately mitigate their water quality impacts from stormwater runoff.
• Policy W-P5.4: Temporary facilities shall be installed as necessary during construction activities in order to adequately treat stormwater runoff from construction sites.

Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
Chapter 6.6 of the Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan, Open Space/Conservation/Energy Element addresses the goals, objectives, policies, and implementation measures related to water resources in the Town. It addressed open space for preservation of natural resources, including rivers, streams and watersheds; and open space for public health and safety, including floodplains, watersheds, and the protection of water quality and reservoirs. The following policies in the Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan are relevant to the hydrology and water quality analysis:
1128
• Policy SP-17: Development projects shall be designed to minimize soil erosion and shall be required to comply with all Town of Paradise adopted soil erosion standards maintained by the Town Engineering Office.
• Policy OCEP-22: Surface and groundwater quality shall be improved and preserved, and the Paradise area watershed shall be protected.
• Policy OCEP-23: Stream courses identified and designated as significantly important shall be carefully protected from the impacts of land use development, both within and outside the Town limits.
• Policy OCEP-25: Natural riparian vegetation along creeks shall be protected.

Town of Paradise Stormwater Ordinance
The Town of Paradise adopted an ordinance relating to Stormwater Quality Management for the purpose of protecting and promoting the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the Town. The purpose of the ordinance is also to protect and enhance the water quality, beneficial uses, habitats and ecosystems in receiving waters by reducing pollution and pollutant loads discharged in urban runoff from areas within the town's jurisdiction, and by prohibiting nonstormwater discharges to municipal storm drain systems.

Chico 2030 General Plan Open Space and Environment Element The Chico 2030 General Plan Open Space and Environment Element provides context and sets goals and policies for the protection of water resources. The following goals and policies in the Chico 2030 General Plan are relevant to the hydrology and water quality analysis:
• Goal OS-3: Conserve water resources and improve water quality. • Policy OS-3.1, Surface Water Resources: Protect and improve the quality of surface water. • Policy OS-3.2, Protect Groundwater: Protect groundwater and aquifer recharge areas to maintain groundwater supply and quality.
• Policy OS-3.3, Water Conservation and Reclamation: Encourage water conservation and the reuse of water.

Chico Urban Area Nitrate Compliance Plan
The Chico Urban Area Nitrate Compliance Plan (Butte County 2000) was prepared in response to the contamination of groundwater in the Chico Urban Area by nitrate, a form of nitrogen, and the subsequent issuance of Prohibition Order No. 90-126 adopted by the Central Valley RWQCB on April 27, 1990. The discharge from individual septic systems was the primary source of groundwater nitrate contamination that exceeded drinking water standards set by the USEPA and the SWRCB.

Nitrate levels that exceed the standards pose a threat to the public health and are subject to regulation. The Chico Urban Area Nitrate Compliance Plan supersedes the Nitrate Action Plan, which was adopted by the Butte County Board of Supervisors and Chico City Council in 1985. 1129
C.11 Land Use and Planning
This section identifies the applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of land use and planning in the EIR, Section 3.11.

C.11.1 Federal
No identified federal laws, regulations, orders, policies, or plans regarding land use and planning are relevant to the Proposed Project.

C.11.2 State
California State Planning and Zoning Law (California Government Code § 65000 to 66037) The California State Planning and Zoning Law delegates most of the state’s local land use and development decisions to the respective city or county, and describes the laws that pertain to the land use regulations set by the local government’s general plan requirements, specific plans, and zoning.

C.11.3 Regional and Local
Town of Paradise “Dig Once” Policy
The Town of Paradise adopted the “Dig Once” Policy in 2019 to rebuild the Town’s infrastructure after the 2018 Camp Fire. Per this policy, the Town strives to place all utility lines underground and direct utility agencies and companies to coordinate with each other when constructing and maintaining their infrastructure. This coordination would lessen the impact on the Town’s roadways.

Full relocation of utilities is estimated to take 5 years to complete, and work has already begun in Paradise. The Policy includes the following pertinent objectives related to land use and planning:
• Minimize disruption of the town’s public infrastructure, such as paved roads and sidewalks. • Ensure efficient, non-duplicative placement of infrastructure in the town’s right-of-way (ROW).
• Protect and control access to public ROW and ensure that use of public ROW aligns with the vision for a resilient and modern Town of Paradise.

Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan
The Town of Paradise 1994 General Plan, adopted in 1994 and amended through 2008, provides direction on land use decision-making for the next 15 years. The General Plan process offers the Town the opportunity to plan proactively rather than reactively for future development. The General Plan includes the following pertinent goals and policies related to land use and planning:
• Implementation Measure LUI-7: Continue to implement the Master Storm Drain Study and Facilities Plan
• Policy ESP-6: School sites should have on a timely basis access to all utilities and services, including sewer, water, gas, electricity, and drainage. 1130
• Objective LUO-10: Consider the construction and installation of a formal sewer system to service the commercial and industrial areas in the town within the fifteen-year planning period.
• Policy LUP-16: The Town shall attempt to implement all feasible steps to assure that sewer service is made available to the commercial area of the Town as expeditiously as possible • Goal LUG-2: Accommodate a rate of growth consistent with the physical and infrastructural limitations in Paradise.
• Objective LUO-2: Stimulate and accommodate commercial/industrial growth while maintaining the current quality of life.
• Objective LUO-4: Carefully manage and control population growth, while stimulating local economic growth.
• Goal LUG-32: Assure that all land uses in the town conform to the goals and policies of the General Plan.

Butte County General Plan 2030
The Butte County General Plan 2030, adopted in 2010 and updated in 2012, provides Butte County direction on how it will fulfill its community vision and manage its future growth. The General Plan addresses all aspects of Butte County’s development, including land use, circulation, public facilities, and public safety. The General Plan includes the following pertinent goals and policies related to land use and planning:
• Goal LU-1: Continue to uphold and respect the planning principles on which the County’s land use map is based.
• Goal LU-3: Create communities where there is a sense of well-being where families and neighbors can socialize, interact, and play.
• Goal LU-5: Provide adequate land for and promote the development of attractive commercial and industrial areas and uses that provide goods, services, and jobs. • Goal LU-9: Coordinate land development with provision of new services and infrastructure.

Chico 2030 General Plan
The Chico 2030 General Plan, adopted in 2011 and amended in 2017, provides the City of Chico a comprehensive, long-range, and internally consistent policy framework for the growth and preservation of Chico. The General Plan consists of guiding principles, goals, policies, and actions to guide the physical development of Chico. The General Plan includes the following pertinent goals and policies related to land use and planning:
• Goal LU-1: Reinforce the City’s compact urban form, establish urban growth limits, and manage where and how growth and conservation will occur. 1131
• Goal LU-2: Maintain a land use plan that provides a mix and distribution of uses that meet the identified needs of the community.

C.12 Noise and Groundborne Vibration
This section summarizes the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, orders, policies, and plans that are relevant to the analysis of noise and groundborne vibration in the EIR, Section 3.12.