Agenda packet — Paradise City Council, February 14, 2023 (part 1 of 3)

Town of Paradise
Town Council Meeting Agenda
6:00 PM – February 14, 2023
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/Elections Official, 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, Patrick Purvis
Chief of Police, Eric Reinbold
Recovery & Economic Development Director, Colette Curtis Human Resources & Risk Management Director, Crystal Peters Information Systems Director, Luis Marquez
Mayor, Greg Bolin
Vice Mayor, Rose Tryon
Council Member, Steve Crowder
Council Member, Steve “Woody” Culleton
Council Member, Ron Lassonde
1 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. Proclamation recognizing Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Alex Padilla and Congressman Doug LaMalfa for their assistance in securing funding for the Roe Road Project.
1f. Proclamation recognizing Alliance For Workforce Development. 1g. Special recognition is awarded to sworn and non-sworn police personnel and volunteers for their exemplary contributions to the department.

Police Officer of the Year: Officer Derek Archuleta
Civilian Employee of the Year: Support Services Supervisor Jeannette Huggins
VIP of the Year: Frank Dodini
PASH Volunteer of the Year: Richard Abbott
1h. Camp Fire Recovery Updates - Written reports are included in the agenda packet.
p6 Colette Curtis, Recovery and Economic Development Director - Recovery Projects, Advocacy, Economic Recovery and Development, Communications and Emergency Operations.
p9 Marc Mattox, Public Works Director/Town Engineer - Infrastructure and sewer Update
p11 Tony Lindsey, CDD-Building and Code Enforcement - Code Enforcement Update
p17 Kate Anderson, Business and Housing Manager - Business and Housing 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. p19 Approve the Regular, January 10, 2023 and Special, January 17, 2023 meeting minutes of the Paradise Town Council.
2b. p26 Approve January 2023 Cash Disbursements in the amount of $3,196,412.63
2c. p34 Declaring the attached itemized list of equipment from the Fire Department as surplus property; and, adopt Resolution No. 2023-04, “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Declaring Certain Property to be Surplus and Authorizing Disposal Thereof”. 2d. p38 Adopt Resolution No. 2023-05, "A Resolution of the Town Council of Town of Paradise accepting the work performed under the On-System 2 3
Culvert Repair Project (Contract No. 7301.CON) Performed by Escheman Construction Company.”
2e. p41 Adopt Resolution No. 2023-06, "A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Amending and Re-Adopting Conflict of Interest Code for the Agencies and Departments of the Town of Paradise Which Incorporate by Reference the Fair Political Practices Commission's Standard Model Conflict of Interest."
2f. p48 Adopt Resolution No. 2023-07, "A Resolution of the Town Council of Town of Paradise Accepting the Work Performed Under the Off-System Culvert Repair Project (Contract No. 8408.CON) Performed by Allen Gill Construction, Inc."
2g. p51 Review and file the 2nd Quarter Investment Report for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2023.

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.

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None

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. p73 Review the updated Federal Advocacy Platform and provide comments to staff.
6b. p90 1. Consider concurring with the recommendation of the interview panel; and, 2. Appoint applicant Charles Homan to fill the existing vacancy on the Planning Commission (effective immediately with term to expire June 30, 2024; or, 3. Consider an alternative direction. (ROLL CALL VOTE) 6c. p92 1. Consider approving the formation of a public services sub-committee to consider input and requests for public services funding; and, 2. Appoint two Council members to the public services sub-committee. (ROLL CALL VOTE)
6d. p94 1. Consider reviewing and approving the proposed Inter-Municipal Agreement and authorize the Town Manager to execute following review and approval by the Town Attorney, City of Chico City Council and City Attorney; and 2. Authorize the Town Manager to approve minor adjustments to the Inter-Municipal Agreement as requested by the City of Chico during its review and consideration process; and 3. Direct staff to continue the next steps in the Paradise Sewer Project including supporting the City of Chico 3 in an application to the Butte Local Agency Formation Commission for the extension of wastewater treatment services to the Town of Paradise; or, 4.

Provide alternative action. (ROLL CALL VOTE)
6e. p366 Upon conclusion of public discussion of this agenda item: 1. Consider establishing a standing committee of the Town Council entitled “Legislative Committee” and appoint two members of the Council to the serve on the committee, including setting policies and priorities of the committee; or, 2.

Provide an alternative directive to Town staff.
6f. p368 1. Consider reviewing and filing the financial information provided by staff concerning the FY 2022-23 operating and capital budgets; and

2. Approve position control from 1.0 to 0.9 FTE for the Senior Accountant position; and

3. Approve position control from 0.6 to 0.9 FTE for the Administrative Assistant (Public Works) position; and

4. Approve the job classification of Engineering Intern and add this new position to the salary pay plan and position control; and

5. Approve the job classification of Accounting Analyst and add this new position to the salary pay plan and position control; and

6. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-__, "A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise, California adopting the amended Salary Pay Plan for Town of Paradise Employees for the Fiscal Year 2022-2023; and

7. Approve staff recommended budget adjustments. (ROLL CALL VOTE) 6g. p458 1. Consider reviewing and approving the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with local non-profits for lot acquisition for affordable homeownership; and, 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-___ “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Directing the Method of Purchase of Lots for the Construction of Affordable Housing and Making Findings Related Thereto.” (ROLL CALL VOTE)
6h. p464 Provide direction regarding future spending of transient occupancy tax revenues.

7. COUNCIL INITIATED ITEMS AND REPORTS
7a. Council initiated agenda items
7a1. Discuss enforcement of professional landscapers blowing and leaving the leaves in the street. (BOLIN)
7b. Council reports on committee representation
7c. Future Agenda Items

8. STAFF COMMUNICATION
8a. Town Manager Report
 Community Development Director
4 5

9. CLOSED SESSION - None

10. ADJOURNMENT

5 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 1(h)
ORIGINATED BY: Colette Curtis, Recovery and Economic
Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Monthly Recovery Update

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

Yes
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. None
Background:

This report continues the Monthly Updates provided to keep the Town Council apprised of important developments related to the recovery of the Town of Paradise from the Camp Fire.

Included in this update are items related to recovery projects, advocacy economic recovery and development, communications and emergency operations.

Analysis:

ECONOMC DEVELOPMENT
Business Assistance Programs
 Business Investment Grant (BIG) Program
o 112 applications received during the application period. o 15 applicants were selected through a lottery process. Application numbers were chosen at random by a number generator.
o Checks are being sent out as selected businesses return their required paperwork.  Commercial Sign Removal Program
o Application period opened January 16th 2023.
o 2 applications have been received to date.

Business Retention and Attraction
 Big Lots opened in the old Rite Aid Building on Dec. 1st.  A national clothing retailer is planning to occupy the other side of the old Kmart building, next to Tractor Supply. Staff has been working with the development staff for the retailer.  Paradise Brew Werks, a local microbrewery, is moving forward with plans to establish themselves in Town. They have acquired property on Skyway (old Big 5 Property).

CDBG-DR Economic Development
 The Butte County allocation for CDBG DR Economic Development has been announced at $18.7 million.
6  The Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) is expected to be released in March 2023, and we will have more information on what projects will be eligible.  In preparation, the Town is working with our regional workforce partners on potential projects.

RECOVERY
Category 4 Tree Removal Program
 We opened the program to applicants on July 25th and received 577 applicants. This represents 1,014 acres of private property across the Town.  The assessment Phase has been completed. Nearly 11,000 standing dead trees have been identified, tagged and catalogued for review by FEMA/CalOES  Phase 2 continues to be in Federal Environmental Review. The draft Environmental Assessment is now complete and in final review with FEMA.  Tree cutting process would commence after full phase 2 approval of submitted tree inventory.
 We are finalizing the plan for tree removal and anticipate bringing that to council in March.

Early Warning System
 The Early Warning System was fully approved in April 2022 and a contract was awarded in July 2022.
 Our contractor has ordered long lead-time materials and is working on coordinating utilities for each of the 21 sites.
 We are working with PPRD and PUSD on formal agreements for the towers which are on their property.
 We are working to survey tower sites in public right-of-ways to confirm locations.  We are finalizing the power access in partnership with PG&E. Materials will begin arriving in early March and we anticipate construction beginning soon after.

Residential Ignition Resistant Retrofit Program
 Undergoing Federal Environmental Review. The draft Environmental Assessment is now complete and in final review with FEMA.
 All other Town required action items are complete
 We are in the middle of the procurement process for a lead management contractor to assist in finishing the phase 1 criteria and opening applications to the public by the end of March.

Hazardous Fuels Reduction Program
 Undergoing Federal Environmental Review. The draft Environmental Assessment is now complete and in final review with FEMA.
 All other Town required action items are complete.

Defensible Space Code Enforcement
 Undergoing Federal Environmental Review. The draft Environmental Assessment is now complete and in final review with FEMA.
 All other Town required action items are complete.
7 Abatement Update
 We continue to move forward with the ~100 properties that are not compliant with the hazardous tree ordinance utilizing a complaint driven legal abatement process.

COMMUNICATIONS
 TOP POP Events
o In order to build community in Paradise during the 5th anniversary year after the Camp Fire, the Town is hosting 12 months of pop-up events around town. o These events are a way to help acknowledge the progress and rebuilding over the last 5 years.
o Each month, different pop-up events will take place around town, with a local partner organization hosting the event.
o In January, the Paradise Equilibrium Center hosted the first TOP POP event, inviting residents to share their New Year’s resolutions for the Town.  Community Relations Committee (CRC)
o The CRC continues to meet monthly and has recently added new members representing the Gold Nugget Museum and Paradise Art Center.  Upcoming Recovery Events
o Staff is planning a media event for the installation of the Early Warning System towers in January or February 2023.

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
 A full scale EOC exercise is in the initial planning stages for Spring or early Summer 2023 o The exercise will involve the community and cooperator agencies o A months long information and education campaign will precede the exercise o The Early Warning System will be utilized as part of the exercise Financial Impact:

None.
8 1

TOWN OF PARADISE
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda No. 1(h)
ORIGINATED BY: Marc Mattox, Public Works Director / Town Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager

SUBJECT: Camp Fire Recovery Updates - Infrastructure
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. None, written monthly update only.

Background:

This report continues the Monthly Disaster Recovery Updates provided to keep the Town Council apprised of important developments related to the recovery of the Town of Paradise from the Camp Fire.

Analysis:

Road Rehabilitation
As previously covered in related Agenda Summaries and Updates, the Town of Paradise has secured funding from both FEMA and Federal Highways Administration for the purposes of road rehabilitation associated with Camp Fire damages from the fire itself, debris removal and tree removal operations. These projects cover all Town of Paradise publicly owned and maintained roadways.

A revised paving plan has been published here:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1w-PjuvtL5rmmOj_EM-4IFaj7sVYVRs&ll=39.763511840651375%2C-121.61120815000001&z=13 This paving plan informs residents of which roads are expected to be paved in which calendar year. The plan will be updated frequently as actual field conditions change.

The first project in this series, Skyway between Crossroads and Westchester Way is nearing full closeout, anticipated to be considered by Council in March 2023.

Further, the Town has awarded a contract for about half of 2023’s paving schedule, with the remaining half of work pending FEMA’s review of the Town’s Improved Project request.

Paradise Sewer Project
Efforts for Past Month:
 Previous Updates:
• The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) hosts meetings of the Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee (SRPAC). The SRPAC last met on March 21, 2022 at the City of Chico council chambers and 9 2
finalized the first draft of the Principles of Agreement (POA). The POA served as a starting point for drafting an inter-municipal agreement (IMA) between Paradise and Chico to address treatment of Paradise wastewater at the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant. Information about SRPAC meetings, including agendas and meeting minutes, are at www.paradisesewer.com.
 The 30-day appeal period for the Final EIR closed on December 8, 2022. No appeals were filed.
 Continued to update the project’s public website (www.paradisesewer.com).  Continued working with City of Chico staff to finalize the draft IMA.  Continued funding application efforts with the State and CDBG-DR.

Efforts for Next Month:
 Present the IMA to the Paradise Town Council on February 14 and Chico City Council on February 21 during regular Council meetings for their respective consideration.  Continue funding application efforts and funding due diligence. 10

Page 1 of 2 ends

Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14th, 2023
Agenda Item: 1(h)
ORIGINATED BY: Tony Lindsey, Community Development
Director, Building & Code Enforcement
REVIEWED BY: Kevin Philips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Camp Fire Recovery Updates – Code Enforcement

LONG-TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

No
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Code Enforcement Update
Background:

The mission of the Code Enforcement Division is to promote and maintain a safe and desirable living and working environment. We help maintain and improve the quality of our community by administering a fair and unbiased enforcement program to correct violations of municipal codes and land use requirements. We work with residents, neighborhood associations, public service agencies, and other Town departments to:
 Facilitate voluntary compliance with Town codes.
 Empower community self-help programs.
 Develop public outreach programs.
 Establish community priorities for enforcement programs.

Analysis:

Code Enforcement receives complaints of violations from staff and general community members.

Each complaint is investigated and verified by our Officers.

Temporary Use Permits (TUPs) issued under Urgency Ordinance 612 as of 1/31/2023 = 256 (Exhibit A):
 37 – Parcels with RV Storage only
 219 – Parcels permitted to occupy an RV (125 currently occupied)  20 – Accessory structures (Sheds, Shops, Non-habitable)  3-Months before Ordinance 612 expiration, informational notifications were distributed by certified and first-class mail to the current owners and emailed to all applicants.

Information was also delivered to each site, either hand-delivered or posted. Notice attached. (Exhibit C)
RV Code Enforcement activity for the reporting period (Dec 22nd – Feb 2nd) (Exhibit B) :
11

Page 2 of 2 ends

 Occupied sites without TUPs – 36
 Occupied sites with TUP Violations – 1
 Compliance gained/RV cases closed – 11
o 6 RVs removed
o 5 Violations resolved (3 building permit issued)
 Civil Abatement Cases have been forwarded to Town Attorney – 43. Twenty-five cases have been resolved, and 18 remain eligible for action.

The Community Enhancement Outreach Team, consisting of Fire Prevention, Police, Housing, Disaster Case Managers (DCMs), and Code Enforcement staff, visited 25 RV sites. The team contacted 21 community members in January:
o 7 were tenants and did not own property
o 14 owner-occupied
o 0 purchased the property post-Camp Fire
o 9 supplied contact information to DCM staff
Other Code Enforcement Items:
 Abandoned Vehicle Authority abatements – 11
o Nine vehicles voluntarily abated
o Two vehicles Towed
 Complaints regarding waste and refuse, zoning, building without a permit, camping, fire hazards, vehicles, vending, no garbage service, grading, etc.

Fire Prevention is built upon the philosophy of three main objectives: Education, Engineering, and Enforcement. Fire Prevention is vital in the community and our continued economic development. Our defensible space and hazardous fuel management ordinance require property owners to keep their parcels fire-safe, whether they live in Town or not. The Fire Prevention staff performs weed abatement inspections on 11,100 parcels within our community.

Beginning April 1st, 2022, the Town started requiring property title transfers to obtain a Certificate of Compliance with our Defensible Space regulations. During January:
 Clearance requests received – 67
 First inspection compliance rate – 64%
 Certificates issued – 54
 Land Surveyor’s Certifications on file – 17
The following is the number of town-wide Defensible Space Program inspections completed as of 2/22/2023:
 Compliant – 7,733 (approx. 70%)
 Non-compliant – 3,119 (not including active code enforcement cases)  Code Enforcement Referrals for citation – 237 Active Code Cases o 17 – Commercial parcels, 220 – Residential parcels
12 TUPs under ORD 612 5/31/22
RV TUP STORAGE ONLY RV TUP OCCUPIED 7/27/2022
12/21/2022 13
TUPs under ORD 612

RV TUP STORAGE ONLY RV TUP OCCUPIED
TUP Violations 5/31/22
Violations w/ TUP RV no TUP
12/21/2022 7/27/2022
14 Town of Paradise
Community Development Department
6295 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
(530) 872-6291 x411
Working together to rebuild a thriving community.

January 31, 2023

MAILING LABEL
*IMPORTANT INFORMATION – 2
nd NOTICE*
RV Temporary Use Permit – Town of Paradise Urgency Ordinance No. 612 We are contacting you again because a temporary recreational vehicle (RV) permit was issued for the property referenced above following the 2018 Camp Fire. With the expiration of the Urgency Ordinance scheduled for April 30, 2023, we wanted to make sure each permit holder was aware of the following important dates:
• August 10, 2021 – Paradise Town Council extended the deadline for the Urgency Ordinance, and the RV permits, until April 30, 2023.
• January 1, 2023 – The new 2022 California Building Codes became effective statewide. Rebuild submittals will need to comply with the new 2022 building codes. • April 30, 2023 – The Urgency Ordinance and temporary RV permits will expire. A rebuild permit for a permanent dwelling must be issued to continue to keep an RV on the property beyond this date.

On the back of this notice are rebuilding resources if you need assistance. If you would like to speak to someone in person, our Business & Housing Division staff at Town Hall (5555 Skyway) are available MondayThursday to help explain different rebuilding programs that you may be eligible for. In addition, the State’s ReCoverCA rebuilds grant program has representatives available at the Building Resiliency Center (6295 Skyway) on the 1st and 3rd Wednesday of every month, from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., to meet with residents interested in their grant program.

We want to hear from you!
• If you are under contract with a builder, plans designer, or other rebuild professionals, please get in touch with us through the phone number or email below so that our records can be updated, showing your progress towards rebuilding.
• Please let us know if you have property title issues to overcome. • Please let us know if you have not received your determination notice from PG&E or the first payment.

We understand recovery after the fire is complex, and we are here to assist in any way we can in connecting you with the tools and resources you need to transition to permanent housing. If you have any questions about this notice, please get in touch with our Planning Division staff at (530) 872-6291 ext. 411 or [email protected]
15 Town of Paradise
Community Development Department
6295 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
(530) 872-6291 x411
Working together to rebuild a thriving community.

Rebuilding Resources
Help Central
http://helpcentral.org/ or call 211 or text your zip
code to 898211
• Get connected with area resources
• If you are a Camp Fire survivor, connect
with a Disaster Case Manager
USDA Section 502 Direct Loan
https://eligibility.sc.egov.usda.gov/ (530) 534-0112
• Income-limits apply
• Value-limits apply
• Available to former renters or homeowners
CalVet
https://www.calvet.ca.gov/HomeLoans
or 866-653-2510
• Available to veterans
• No minimum credit scores
• No income limits
• Available to former renters or homeowners
Town of Paradise First-Time Home Buyer
Program
https://www.townofparadise.com/housing/page/firs
t-time-home-buyer-program
• Down payment assistance to purchase a
standing home in Paradise
• Income-limits apply
• Value-limits apply
• Available to former renters or homeowners
ReCoverCA
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants-andfunding/recoverca
• Federal grants for rebuild
• Available to former homeowners
• Income-limits apply
Town of Paradise Owner-Occupied
Rehabilitation Loan
https://www.townofparadise.com/housing/page/ow
ner-occupied-housing-rehabilitation-andreconstruction
• Up to $150,000, deferred loan, for
rebuilding or repairing a home in Paradise
• Income-limits apply
• Value-limits apply
• Available to homeowners (must have been
on the title at the time of the fire)
Rebuild Paradise Foundation
https://www.rebuildparadise.org/
• Grants to reimburse costs for a survey,
architecture/engineering fees, water
expenses
• Grants up to $7,500 to repair or replace
septic
• Income-limits apply
• Available to homeowners and former
renters in Paradise
• Pre-approved building plans
Community Housing Improvement Program
(CHIP)
• https://chiphousing.org/ or call (530)891-
6931
• Self-help rebuild program and the waiting
list for Paradise Community Village
apartments
Habitat For Humanity
https://www.buttehabitat.org/
(530) 332-0821 or [email protected]
• Self-help build program, available to former
homeowners and people who were renting
16 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 1(h)
ORIGINATED BY: Kate Anderson, Housing Program Manager
REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Housing Recovery Update

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

No
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. None
Background:

This report provide the Town Council with an update of Housing activities. A summary of the programs, with overall interest and change from the last month, follows.

Analysis:

We have 29.3% (+0.2) of our pre-disaster housing stock to-date (1,377 surviving units + 2,143 new CofOs to-date [+35 from last month] = 3,320 habitable dwellings / 12,015 housing units before the Camp Fire). An additional 800 (+11) permits have been issued but have not received their CofO yet.

Town of Paradise Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation/Reconstruction Program ($21 million)  This program helps homeowners rehabilitate or reconstruct their home.  To-date 28 (+1) homes rebuilt, 22 (-1) under construction and 36 (-3) in the application process.

State of California/ReCoverCA: Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation/Reconstruction Program ($47 million across state)
 Grants of up to $500,000 for property owners.
 To-date 5 (+0) home rebuilt, 9 (+0) permits issued, 2 (+0) have been submitted for plan review, 1,232 (+0) surveys received.

Town of Paradise First-Time Homebuyer Program ($2 million)  Helping to make home ownership more affordable by providing assistance toward the purchase price and closing costs of an owner-occupied, affordable housing unit.  Working with Habitat and CHIP to accept land for self-help affordable homeownership.  To-date 12 (+4) homes purchased and 32 (-7) applications in process. Lots of interest from local lenders and realtors.

Town of Paradise Septic Grant Program ($570,000)
 Grants up to $17,000 to assist Camp Fire survivors to repair or replace septic systems damaged or destroyed during the Camp Fire or subsequent clean-up efforts.  To-date 29 (+2), applications in process, 7 (+1) applications approved, 13 (+0) completed. 17 CDBG-DR Multifamily Rental Housing Program ($55 million)  Goal is to create affordable rental housing
 Large projects (8+ units): 8 project received totaling 368 units and $64,377,157 requested (oversubscribed); 7 projects will be funded.

HOME Infill New Construction ($700,000)
 Create affordable housing for first-time homebuyers.
 Working with North Valley Housing Trust to accept land for program.  HCD has let us know that we received the award but this program is still suspended.

CDBG (2022 Annual Allocation: $107,537 + Prior unspent awards: $548,325.35 + Program Income:
$126,956.67)
 Timeliness issue continues; a minimum of $621,513.52 must be spent by May 1, 2023. o Skyway sidewalk project = $600,000 to be completed by March o Property acquisition for affordable homeownership = $135,771 to be purchased by April o Public services (B&GC, Meal on Wheels and PRPD) = $12,098.25 by April o Program administration = $16,130.25 by April
 CV funds (separate from above) ear-marked for Economic Development = $208,244 awarded, of which $166,595.20 must be spent.

Financial Impact:

None.
18 TOWN COUNCIL
Meeting Minutes
6:00 PM – January 10, 2023

1. OPENING
The Regular meeting of the Paradise Town Council was called to order by Mayor Bolin at 6:00 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 Culleton.

COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Crowder, Steve “Woody” Culleton, Rose Tryon and Greg Bolin, Mayor
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Ron Lassonde
STAFF PRESENT: Town Manager Kevin Phillips, Town Attorney Scott E. Huber, Town Clerk/Elections Official Dina Volenski, Finance Director/Town Treasurer Ross Gilb, Information Systems Director Luis Marquez, Public Works Director/Town Engineer Marc Mattox, Community Development Director Tony Lindsey, Recovery and Economic Development Director Colette Curtis, Business and Housing Manager Kate Anderson, Recovery and Economic Development Project Manager Brian Solecki, Police Chief Eric Reinbold, and Fire Chief Patrick Purvis.

Mayor Bolin stated that in order for the Council to discuss and make the recommendation of declaring a Local Emergency within the Town of Paradise, as a result of the recent winter storms, the item must be formally added to the agenda. It takes two thirds vote to add the item to the agenda, or if less than two thirds are present a unanimous vote of those present.

As such, Council is requested to take the following actions:

Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(b)(2) the Town Council finds that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need came to the attention of the Town after the posting of the agenda concerning the following item:
1(a)1. 1. Consider declaring the existence of a Local Emergency within the Town of Paradise as a result of the recent storms; and, 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-03, “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Proclaiming the Existence of a Local Emergency.”
Motion by Tryon, seconded by Crowder, the Town Council finds that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need came to the attention of the Town after the posting of the agenda and added Agenda Item 1(a)1 to the agenda. Roll call vote was unanimous with Lassonde absent and not voting.
19 Motion by Tryon, seconded by Culleton, 1. Declared the existence of a Local Emergency within the Town of Paradise as a result of the recent storms; and, 2. Adopted Resolution No. 2023-03, “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Proclaiming the Existence of a Local Emergency.” Roll call vote was unanimous with Lassonde absent and not voting. (420-50-054)
1a. Mayor Bolin presented the 2022 Recognitions for Employee Service to the Town of Paradise. (630-20-022)
15 Years
Kate Anderson - Business and Housing Services
Shirley Kamm - Animal Control – (Not present)
Eric Reinbold - Police Department
5 Years
Hunter Carmassi - Engineering Department - (Not present) 1b. Camp Fire Recovery Updates - Written reports are included in the agenda packet. (110-60-061)
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 - Code Enforcement Update
Kate Anderson, Business and Housing Manager - Business and Housing Update

2. CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION by Crowder, seconded by Culleton, approved consent calendar items 2a through 2b. Roll call vote was unanimous with Lassonde absent and not voting. 2a. Approved the Special and Regular minutes of the December 13, 2022, Town Council meeting.
2b. Approved December 2022 Cash Disbursements in the amount of $3,684,830.18. (310-10-034)

3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR - None

4. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION

1. Ward Habriel commented on recipients of the weed abatement letters and Fire Station 83.
20 2. Jon Remalia commented on Public Works’ diligence and good work throughout the storms. He also commented on the Devil Mountain Brigade’s exclusion from the Gold Nugget Day Parade.

3. Carrie Max commented on the end of the RV Urgency Ordinance.

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None

6. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
6a. Police Chief Reinbold provided an overview of the proposed MOU with Paradise Unified School District to implement and support a School Resource Officer position.

1. Mimi Brown, a counselor for PUSD, spoke in favor of this item.

2. Melissa Brown, a Paradise High School alumni, shared an experience of being attacked in the bathroom while she was attending Paradise High School and spoke in favor of this item.

MOTION by Culleton, seconded by Crowder Adopted Resolution No. 2023-01, “A Resolution of The Town Council of The Town of Paradise Making Findings Concerning Executing an MOU with the Paradise Unified School District to Implement and Support a School Resource Officer Position." Roll call vote was unanimous with Lassonde absent and not voting. (480-60-014, 510-20-369)
6b. Town Manager Phillips and Town Attorney Scott Huber presented on the Town owned property located at 5560 Berry Creek Drive that was purchased in 2000 with DCBG funding for community park usage. A plan was previously established to create Berry Creek Park, however, in 2002 Town Council approved renaming Berry Creek Park to Larry Estes Memorial Park and naming the playing field Ralph Dorville Field. Paradise Little League’s has inquired about the use of the property.

Council provided direction to staff to bring the dialogue to PRPD and Paradise Little League to determine if they were interested in collaborating on this property and consider discussing a lease for joint use. 6c. Public Works Director/Town Engineer Marc Mattox provided an overview of the On-System Roadway Rehabilitation – Pearson (Phase2) project.

1. Jon Remalia asked whether the Town could require the contractor to bore the pipe through rather than disturbing the surface.

MOTION by Culleton, seconded by Tryon 1. Adopted Resolution No. 2023-02, “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Awarding Contract No. 7303.2.CON, On-System Roadway Rehabilitation – Pearson (Phase 2) to Baldwin Contracting Company, Inc. dba Knife River Construction in the amount of their base bid; and, 2. Authorized 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 21 bid #1 relating to Contract No. 7303.2.CON and to approved contingency expenditures not exceeding 10%. Roll call vote was unanimous with Lassonde absent and not voting. (950-40-054, 510-20-368) 6d. Town Council discussed clarifying whether the appointed position for the Butte County and Vector Control District board should be a two or four-year appointment.

1. Melissa Schuster provided a report from the Butte County Mosquito and Vector Control District board where she is a Council appointed representative.

MOTION by Crowder, seconded by Culleton, approved the Butte County Mosquito and Vector Control District Board appointment as a four-year term. Roll call vote was unanimous with Lassonde absent and not voting. (120-10-010)
6e. Town Attorney Scott Huber presented on the proposed ordinance relating to abatement warrants, injunctions and Civil Penalties. Mr. Huber clarified that this ordinance would be used as an additional tool of last resort and that it is possible it will not apply to occupied dwellings.

1. Ward Habriel commented on this item.

MOTION by Culleton, seconded by Crowder, waived second reading of the entire Town Ordinance No. 623 and approved reading by title only; and, adopted Town Ordinance No. 623, "An Ordinance Amending Paradise Municipal Code Section 8.04.020.1 Relating to Abatement Warrants, Injunctions and Civil Penalties." Roll call vote was unanimous with Lassonde absent and not voting. (540-16-192)

7. COUNCIL INITIATED ITEMS AND REPORTS
7a1. Council Member Culleton presented a proposal to create an Art Committee to promote the Town of Paradise as an art community destination.

1. Melissa Schuster spoke in favor of this item.

2. Mimi Brown spoke in favor of this item.

3. Mark Thorp spoke in favor of this item.

4. Kathy Dysert spoke in favor of this item.

5. Melissa Brown spoke in favor of this item.

Council provided staff with direction to bring back an outline of parameters to establish an Art Committee.
7a2. Discuss enforcement of professional landscapers blowing and leaving the leaves in the street (BOLIN) – This item was tabled until more information is received regarding the issue.
22 7a3. Council Member Tryon introduced the creation of a Legislative Committee to work with State and Federal Advocates. Town Council provided direction to staff to bring back an outline of parameters for a Legislative Committee. 7b. Council reports on committee representation:

Vice Mayor Tryon attended the Solid Waste Management meeting and reported that the green waste yard will continue on Fridays and Saturdays.

Council Member Culleton attended the Solid Waste Management meeting and reported the Consortium of Care Committee meetings have been postponed.

Council Member Crowder attended the Board of Realtors meeting and the swearing-in of Animal Control Supervisor Mollie St John.

Mayor Bolin attended the swearing-in of Animal Control Supervisor Mollie St John and reported that LAFCo was cancelled this month. 7c. Future Agenda Items - None

8. STAFF COMMUNICATION
8a. Town Manager Phillips reported that the Town received rebuild applications from 7th Day Adventist Church, and the Calvary Baptist Church; Rental Guys has applied for building permits for upper Skyway; Three (3) affordable housing projects are in plan review; the EV Parking Stations are in plan check; IBHS will present as a guest speaker at the Building Stakeholders Meeting on February 1st and reported an increase in singlefamily homes and multi-family home applications for the month of December.

9. CLOSED SESSION - None

10. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Bolin adjourned the meeting at 8:02 p.m.

Date approved:

By: Attest:
________________________ _________________________
Greg Bolin, Mayor Dina Volenski, CMC, Town Clerk
23 MINUTES

PARADISE TOWN COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING – 3:00 PM – January 17, 2023

1. OPENING
The Special meeting of the Paradise Town Council was called to order by Mayor Bolin at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 5555 Skyway, Paradise, California who led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America.

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

COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Town Manager Kevin Phillips, Town Clerk/Elections Official Dina Volenski, Town Attorney Scott E. Huber (via Teams), Recovery & Economic Development Director Colette Curtis, Finance Director/Town Treasurer Ross Gilb, and Information Systems Director Luis Marquez.

Vice Mayor Tryon requested that agenda item 3a be moved to the top of the agenda. All Town Council concurred to move item 3a to the top of the agenda.

3. COUNCIL INITIATED
3a. Vice Mayor Tryon presented this item asking that all Town Council sign a letter showing support for Congressman LaMalfa and Thompson’s bill to exclude Fire Victim’s settlement funds from federal taxes.

MOTION by Culleton, seconded by Tryon, approved a letter of support from the Town Council supporting Congressman LaMalfa and Thompson’s bill to exclude Fire Victim’s settlements from federal taxes. Roll call vote was unanimous. (550-30-001, 180-30-100)

2. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
2a. Council Member Crowder provided an overview of the purpose of the Washington D.C. trip to advocate on the bill introduced by Congressman LaMalfa and Thompson to exclude Fire Victims settlement funds from Federal taxes. Town of Paradise federal lobbyist Kristi More answered questions about the necessity of visiting DC in both February and March and strategies regarding the best timing on advocating these issues to Congress.

1. Jon Remalia spoke in favor of this item.
24 MOTION by Tryon, seconded by Culleton, approved a trip to be taken by Council Member Steve Crowder to Washington DC to advocate for HR 176 (tax burden relief for wildfire claimants) and a budget adjustment, not to exceed $1,500, to fund the trip from the Town Council budget with input from Vice Mayor Tryon. (Receipts to be provided upon return for reimbursement) Roll call vote was unanimous. (340-40-016)

4. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Bolin adjourned the Council meeting at 3:48 p.m.

Date approved:

By: Attest:
________________________ _________________________
Greg Bolin, Mayor Dina Volenski, CMC, Town Clerk
25 TOWN OF PARADISE

CASH DISBURSEMENTS REPORT

FOR THE PERIOD OF
January 1, 2023 - January 31, 2023
26 CASH DISBURSEMENTS REPORT
January 1, 2023 - January 31, 2023
Check Date Pay Period End Description Amount Total
1/6/2023 1/1/2023 Net Payroll - Direct Deposits and Checks $ 203,418.88 1/20/2023 1/15/2023 Net Payroll - Direct Deposits and Checks 218,223.89 $ 421,642.77
Accounts Payable
Payroll Vendors: Taxes, PERS, Dues, Insurance, Etc. 390,654.58 Operations Vendors: Supplies, Contracts, Utilities, Etc. $ 2,384,115.28 TOTAL CASH DISBURSEMENTS ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 2,774,769.86
GRAND TOTAL CASH DISBURSEMENTS $ 3,196,412.63
APPROVED BY:

Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
APPROVED BY:

Ross Gilb, Finance Director / Town Treasurer
27 Number Date Status Void Reason
Reconciled/
Voided Date
Transaction
Amount
Reconciled
Amount Difference
82477 01/04/2023 Open $781.25
82478 01/04/2023 Open $1,073.32
82479 01/04/2023 Open $166.50
82480 01/11/2023 Open $2,952.08
82481 01/11/2023 Open $194.76
82482 01/12/2023 Open $53,325.00
82483 01/12/2023 Open $18.89
82484 01/12/2023 Open $345.00
82485 01/12/2023 Open $159,463.20
82486 01/12/2023 Open $197,437.90
82487 01/12/2023 Open $75.00
82488 01/12/2023 Open $396.75
82489 01/12/2023 Open $79.54
82490 01/12/2023 Open $176.55
82491 01/12/2023 Open $193.81
82492 01/12/2023 Open $100.00
82493 01/12/2023 Open $1,379.76
82494 01/12/2023 Open $4,345.56
82495 01/12/2023 Open $2,930.00
82496 01/12/2023 Open $344.00
82497 01/12/2023 Open $12,907.63
82498 01/12/2023 Open $950.00
82499 01/12/2023 Open $901.80
82500 01/12/2023 Open $3,061.58
82501 01/12/2023 Open $121.25
82502 01/12/2023 Open $401.40
82503 01/12/2023 Open $416.40
82504 01/12/2023 Open $416.40
82505 01/12/2023 Open $148.40
82506 01/12/2023 Open $81.32
82507 01/12/2023 Open $1,092.50
82508 01/12/2023 Open $345.00
82509 01/12/2023 Open $63,955.69
82510 01/12/2023 Open $101,394.58
82511 01/12/2023 Open $11,000.00
82512 01/12/2023 Open $100,000.00
82513 01/12/2023 Open $86.00
82514 01/12/2023 Open $1,129.02
82515 01/12/2023 Open $194.13
82516 01/12/2023 Open $92.00
82517 01/12/2023 Open $5,296.00
82518 01/12/2023 Open $1,450.00
82519 01/12/2023 Open $10,191.03
82520 01/12/2023 Open $1,060.87
82521 01/12/2023 Open $400.00
82522 01/12/2023 Open $323.92
82523 01/12/2023 Open $6,675.00
Accounts Payable Biometrics4ALL, Inc
Accounts Payable James or Lavenia Riotto
Accounts Payable JC NELSON SUPPLY COMPANY
Accounts Payable Jennifer Arbuckle
Accounts Payable Guardian Public Safety Background Investigations Accounts Payable I.M.P.A.C. PAYMENTS IMPAC GOV SVCS/US BANCORP Accounts Payable J.J.R. Enterprises Inc
Accounts Payable Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service, Inc.

Accounts Payable GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Accounts Payable GREEN RIDGE LANDSCAPING
Accounts Payable FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY - CHICO Accounts Payable Fisher, Joshua
Accounts Payable FRANKLIN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
Accounts Payable Elk Grove Auto / Winner Chevrolet
Accounts Payable Escheman Construction Company
Accounts Payable EXECUTIVE HOMES
Accounts Payable Creative Composition Inc
Accounts Payable DOBRICH & SONS SEPTIC
Accounts Payable Eidhammer, Trenton
Accounts Payable COMCAST CABLE
Accounts Payable COMCAST CABLE
Accounts Payable COMCAST CABLE
Accounts Payable CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION Accounts Payable Carmassi, Hunter, C
Accounts Payable COMCAST CABLE
Accounts Payable BUTTE COUNTY ELECTIONS DIVISION
Accounts Payable California Assoc of Sanitation Agencies Accounts Payable CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION Accounts Payable Blue Flamingo Marketing Advocates
Accounts Payable Bunch Electrical
Accounts Payable BUTTE CO RECORDER
Accounts Payable Batteries Plus Bulbs
Accounts Payable Big O Tires
Accounts Payable Archuleta, Derek, S
Accounts Payable AT&T MOBILITY
Accounts Payable AT&T MOBILITY
Allen Gill Construction, Inc.

Accounts Payable ANIMAL HOSPITAL/VETMOBILE
Accounts Payable Adams Ashby Group, Inc.

Accounts Payable ADVANCED DOCUMENT CONCEPTS
Accounts Payable Akin, David
Accounts Payable

TOWN OF PARADISE
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 1/1/2023 - To Payment Date: 1/31/2023 Source Payee Name
Accounts Payable SBA Monarch Towers III LLC
Accounts Payable ICMA 457 - MissionSquare
Accounts Payable STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT
AP - US Bank TOP AP Checking
Check
Accounts Payable De Lage Landen Public Finance LLC
Accounts Payable ENTERPRISE FM TRUST
Accounts Payable All-American Construction, Inc.
28 Number Date Status Void Reason
Reconciled/
Voided Date
Transaction
Amount
Reconciled
Amount Difference

TOWN OF PARADISE
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 1/1/2023 - To Payment Date: 1/31/2023 Source Payee Name
AP - US Bank TOP AP Checking
Check
82524 01/12/2023 Open $186.45
82525 01/12/2023 Open $3,667.05
82526 01/12/2023 Open $333,856.13
82527 01/12/2023 Open $98,274.69
82528 01/12/2023 Open $6,725.40
82529 01/12/2023 Open $463.22
82530 01/12/2023 Open $60.50
82531 01/12/2023 Open $457.06
82532 01/12/2023 Open $8,975.44
82533 01/12/2023 Open $7,713.00
82534 01/12/2023 Open $4,500.00
82535 01/12/2023 Open $388.32
82536 01/12/2023 Open $39.99
82537 01/12/2023 Open $63,211.75
82538 01/12/2023 Open $522.95
82539 01/12/2023 Open $946.86
82540 01/12/2023 Open $9,022.79
82541 01/12/2023 Open $11,566.13
82542 01/12/2023 Open $20,225.31
82543 01/12/2023 Open $6,082.31
82544 01/12/2023 Open $422.94
82545 01/12/2023 Open $1,029.44
82546 01/12/2023 Open $1,302.04
82547 01/12/2023 Open $825.45
82548 01/12/2023 Open $8.74
82549 01/12/2023 Open $75.00
82550 01/12/2023 Open $16,965.57
82551 01/12/2023 Open $3,070.73
82552 01/12/2023 Open $3,540.97
82553 01/12/2023 Open $24,920.52
82554 01/12/2023 Open $92,178.37
82555 01/12/2023 Open $54,552.14
82556 01/12/2023 Open $10,655.00
82557 01/12/2023 Open $15,030.00
82558 01/12/2023 Open $107.25
82559 01/12/2023 Open $283.41
82560 01/12/2023 Open $50.00
82561 01/12/2023 Open $635.79
82562 01/12/2023 Open $106,270.38
82563 01/12/2023 Open $73,611.71
82564 01/12/2023 Open $1,892.63
82565 01/12/2023 Open $492.12
82566 01/12/2023 Open $9,545.16
82567 01/12/2023 Open $548.50
82568 01/12/2023 Open $1,370.97
82569 01/12/2023 Open $59.00
82570 01/12/2023 Open $355.97
Accounts Payable T MOBILE USA, INC.

Accounts Payable Tahoe Pure Water Co.

Accounts Payable THOMAS ACE HARDWARE - ENG. DEPT.

Accounts Payable Stratti
Accounts Payable Stratton, Brock
Accounts Payable Specialized Pavement Marking, LLC
Accounts Payable Spherion Staffing
Accounts Payable STERICYCLE, INC.

Accounts Payable Sigler Pest Control
Accounts Payable SKYWAY TOOL CENTER
Accounts Payable SONSRAY MACHINERY LLC
Accounts Payable RE CONSTRUCTION
Accounts Payable RENTAL GUYS - CHICO
Accounts Payable Riebes Auto Parts- Motorpool
Accounts Payable Psomas
Accounts Payable Psomas
Accounts Payable R B SPENCER INC
Accounts Payable Psomas
Accounts Payable Psomas
Accounts Payable Psomas
Accounts Payable PETTY CASH, CHRISTINA SHOEMAKER
Accounts Payable PICKERING, ROBERT
Accounts Payable Psomas
Accounts Payable OFFICE DEPOT ACCT#36233169
Accounts Payable PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC
Accounts Payable PARADISE POST
Accounts Payable NV5, Inc.

Accounts Payable NV5, Inc.

Accounts Payable O'REILLY AUTO PARTS
Accounts Payable NORTHERN RECYCLING & WASTE SERVICES, INC.

Accounts Payable NORTHGATE PETROLEUM CO
Accounts Payable NV5, Inc.

Accounts Payable MUNIMETRIX SYSTEMS CORP
Accounts Payable NCCSIF TREASURER
Accounts Payable North State Tire Co. Inc.

Accounts Payable Mennonite Disaster Service
Accounts Payable Meyers Police K-9 Training, LLC
Accounts Payable Mt Shasta Spring Water Co., Inc
Accounts Payable LOCATE PLUS CORPORATION
Accounts Payable Look Ahead Veterinary Services
Accounts Payable Mark Thomas & Company Inc
Accounts Payable KNIFE RIVER CONSTRUCTION
Accounts Payable Lash's Glass
Accounts Payable LIFE ASSIST INC
Accounts Payable JOHNNY ON THE SPOT PORTABLES
Accounts Payable Kevin Sharrah Designs
Accounts Payable KNIFE RIVER CONSTRUCTION
29 Number Date Status Void Reason
Reconciled/
Voided Date
Transaction
Amount
Reconciled
Amount Difference

TOWN OF PARADISE
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 1/1/2023 - To Payment Date: 1/31/2023 Source Payee Name
AP - US Bank TOP AP Checking
Check
82571 01/12/2023 Open $58.31
82572 01/12/2023 Open $152.43
82573 01/12/2023 Open $28.78
82574 01/12/2023 Open $1,237.50
82575 01/12/2023 Open $74.00
82576 01/12/2023 Open $1,204.66
82577 01/12/2023 Open $59.00
82578 01/12/2023 Open $5,610.00
82579 01/12/2023 Open $203.50
82580 01/12/2023 Open $27.89
82581 01/12/2023 Open $396.75
82582 01/12/2023 Open $126.60
82583 01/12/2023 Open $57.98
82584 01/12/2023 Open $11,528.15
82585 01/12/2023 Open $1,003.00
82586 01/12/2023 Open $1,820.96
82587 01/12/2023 Open $6,927.63
82588 01/12/2023 Open $858.47
82589 01/12/2023 Open $80.00
82590 01/24/2023 Open $2,952.08
82591 01/24/2023 Open $194.76
82592 01/26/2023 Open $28,545.00
82593 01/26/2023 Open $263.64
82594 01/26/2023 Open $33,778.71
82595 01/26/2023 Open $452.80
82596 01/26/2023 Open $859.90
82597 01/26/2023 Open $110.79
82598 01/26/2023 Open $89.46
82599 01/26/2023 Open $2,248.13
82600 01/26/2023 Open $212.09
82601 01/26/2023 Open $19.61
82602 01/26/2023 Open $2,212.33
82603 01/26/2023 Open $24.12
82604 01/26/2023 Open $1,136.08
82605 01/26/2023 Open $158.52
82606 01/26/2023 Open $15.00
82607 01/26/2023 Open $2,900.00
82608 01/26/2023 Open $175.00
82609 01/26/2023 Open $175.00
82610 01/26/2023 Open $6,719.43
82611 01/26/2023 Open $155.00
82612 01/26/2023 Open $1,897.36
82613 01/26/2023 Open $76,500.00
82614 01/26/2023 Open $4,000.00
82615 01/26/2023 Open $41.00
82616 01/26/2023 Open $95,765.92
82617 01/26/2023 Open $25,446.66 Accounts Payable Butte County Construction Inc Accounts Payable Broad & Gusman
Accounts Payable Bug Smart
Accounts Payable BUTTE CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Accounts Payable Big O Tires
Accounts Payable Blue Flamingo Marketing Advocates
Accounts Payable Bob Walters Jr. Construction Inc.

Accounts Payable BIDWELL TITLE & ESCROW
Accounts Payable Bidwell Truck & Auto
Accounts Payable Baker, Heavenlea
Accounts Payable Bear Electrical Systems, Inc
Accounts Payable BIDWELL TITLE & ESCROW
Accounts Payable AT&T/CALNET3 - Summary
Accounts Payable AT&T/CALNET3 - TH/FDPD FIBER LINES
Accounts Payable AWARDS COMPANY
Accounts Payable AT&T/CALNET3 - REPEATER LINES
Accounts Payable AT&T/CALNET3 - COMMUNITY PARK
Accounts Payable AT&T/CALNET3 - Summary
Accounts Payable AT&T & CALNET3 - CIRCUIT LINES
Accounts Payable AT&T MOBILITY
Accounts Payable AT&T Wireless Services
Accounts Payable Allen Gill Construction, Inc.

Accounts Payable Asbury Environmental Services
Accounts Payable AT&T & CALNET3 - CIRCUIT LINES
Accounts Payable STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT
Accounts Payable 4LEAF, Inc
Accounts Payable ACCESS INFORMATION PROTECTED
Accounts Payable SUPERIOR VISION SVC NGLIC
Accounts Payable TOP CONFIDENTIAL MID MGMT ASSOCIATION
Accounts Payable ICMA 457 - MissionSquare
Accounts Payable OPERATING ENGINEERS
Accounts Payable PARADISE POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
Accounts Payable SUN LIFE INSURANCE
Accounts Payable Wood Rodgers, Inc.

Accounts Payable Aflac
Accounts Payable Met Life
Accounts Payable WILKEY, JOHN
Accounts Payable WITTMEIER AUTO CENTER
Accounts Payable Wood, Montana, S
Accounts Payable Walters, Perry
Accounts Payable White Glove Cleaning Svc Inc, Theresa Contreras Accounts Payable TRUEPOINT SOLUTIONS, LLC
Accounts Payable Tuck, Kevin
Accounts Payable VERIZON WIRELESS
Accounts Payable THOMAS ACE HARDWARE - FIRE DEPT.

Accounts Payable THOMAS ACE HARDWARE - MOTORPOOL
Accounts Payable THOMAS ACE HARDWARE - POLICE DEPT.
30 Number Date Status Void Reason
Reconciled/
Voided Date
Transaction
Amount
Reconciled
Amount Difference

TOWN OF PARADISE
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 1/1/2023 - To Payment Date: 1/31/2023 Source Payee Name
AP - US Bank TOP AP Checking
Check
82618 01/26/2023 Open $780.00
82619 01/26/2023 Open $100.00
82620 01/26/2023 Open $437.00
82621 01/26/2023 Open $401.40
82622 01/26/2023 Open $431.40
82623 01/26/2023 Open $4,000.00
82624 01/26/2023 Open $85.80
82625 01/26/2023 Open $1,100.00
82626 01/26/2023 Open $71.44
82627 01/26/2023 Open $68,937.49
82628 01/26/2023 Open $9,839.00
82629 01/26/2023 Open $160.94
82630 01/26/2023 Open $5,250.00
82631 01/26/2023 Open $800.00
82632 01/26/2023 Open $327.28
82633 01/26/2023 Open $258.70
82634 01/26/2023 Open $109.95
82635 01/26/2023 Open $17,579.38
82636 01/26/2023 Open $6,960.00
82637 01/26/2023 Open $604.37
82638 01/26/2023 Open $7,845.25
82639 01/26/2023 Open $400.00
82640 01/26/2023 Open $129.31
82641 01/26/2023 Open $750.00
82642 01/26/2023 Open $37,909.34
82643 01/26/2023 Open $23,949.64
82644 01/26/2023 Open $18.90
82645 01/26/2023 Open $15,000.00
82646 01/26/2023 Open $20,150.00
82647 01/26/2023 Open $4,124.53
82648 01/26/2023 Open $125.00
82649 01/26/2023 Open $971.65
82650 01/26/2023 Open $250.00
82651 01/26/2023 Open $1,000.00
82652 01/26/2023 Open $871.90
82653 01/26/2023 Open $482.84
82654 01/26/2023 Open $1,200.00
82655 01/26/2023 Open $508.50
82656 01/26/2023 Open $358.89
82657 01/26/2023 Open $147.79
82658 01/26/2023 Open $607.17
82659 01/26/2023 Open $3,433.20
82660 01/26/2023 Open $4,488.82
82661 01/26/2023 Open $150.00
82662 01/26/2023 Open $475.93
82663 01/26/2023 Open $1,500.00
82664 01/26/2023 Open $94.53

KOEFRAN INDUSTRIES
Accounts Payable
Mark Thomas & Company Inc
Mark Thomas & Company Inc
L.N. CURTIS & SONS
Accounts Payable LAUTZENHISER'S STATIONERY, INC.

Accounts Payable Lindsey, Anthony
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable I.M.P.A.C. PAYMENTS IMPAC GOV SVCS/US BANCORP Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable Hope Crisis Response Network, Inc
Accounts Payable Guardian Public Safety Background Investigations Accounts Payable HDR Engineering, Inc
Accounts Payable HDR Engineering, Inc

HLP, INC / CHAMELEON SOFTWARE PRODUCTS
Accounts Payable Hope Crisis Response Network, Inc

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MUNICIPAL CLERKS
Accounts Payable Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service, Inc.

Accounts Payable Granicher Appraisals, Inc
Accounts Payable GREAT AMERICA LEASING CORP.

Accounts Payable Escheman Construction Company
Accounts Payable Evans Consoles Incorporated
Accounts Payable EVERGREEN JANITORIAL SUPPLY, INC.

Accounts Payable ELLIS ART & ENGINEERING
Accounts Payable ENTENMANN-ROVIN COMPANY
Accounts Payable Entersect
Accounts Payable DURHAM PENTZ TRUCK CENTER
Accounts Payable Elegant Homes
Accounts Payable Elegant Homes
Accounts Payable DFM ASSOCIATES
Accounts Payable Dokken Engineering, Inc.

Accounts Payable Door Company Inc, The
Accounts Payable Computershare
Accounts Payable Creative Composition Inc
Accounts Payable Crossfire Tree & Vegetation Services
Accounts Payable CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Accounts Payable COMCAST CABLE
Accounts Payable COMCAST CABLE
Accounts Payable California Building Officials (CALBO)
Accounts Payable CALIFORNIA CRIMINAL JUSTICE WARRANT SERVS.

Accounts Payable INTERSTATE SALES
Meyers Police K-9 Training, LLC
Accounts Payable MOBILE MINI INC
Accounts Payable MORGAN TREE SERVICE
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable James or Lavenia Riotto
Accounts Payable JOURNYX, INC.

Accounts Payable KNIFE RIVER CONSTRUCTION
Mt Shasta Spring Water Co., Inc
Look Ahead Veterinary Services
Accounts Payable KNIFE RIVER CONSTRUCTION
Accounts Payable
31 Number Date Status Void Reason
Reconciled/
Voided Date
Transaction
Amount
Reconciled
Amount Difference

TOWN OF PARADISE
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 1/1/2023 - To Payment Date: 1/31/2023 Source Payee Name
AP - US Bank TOP AP Checking
Check
82665 01/26/2023 Open $7,312.55
82666 01/26/2023 Open $1,996.00
82667 01/26/2023 Open $38.35
82668 01/26/2023 Open $161.40
82669 01/26/2023 Open $18,096.81
82670 01/26/2023 Open $2,348.92
82671 01/26/2023 Open $142.38
82672 01/26/2023 Open $728.27
82673 01/26/2023 Open $266.00
82674 01/26/2023 Open $6,012.99
82675 01/26/2023 Open $250.00
82676 01/26/2023 Open $100.00
82677 01/26/2023 Open $21,486.66
82678 01/26/2023 Open $3,659.78
82679 01/26/2023 Open $5,056.53
82680 01/26/2023 Open $54.00
82681 01/26/2023 Open $116.05
82682 01/26/2023 Open $39.52
82683 01/26/2023 Open $69.81
82684 01/26/2023 Open $31.27
82685 01/26/2023 Open $966.40
82686 01/26/2023 Open $90.00
82687 01/26/2023 Open $113.62
82688 01/26/2023 Open $247.32
82689 01/26/2023 Open $342.09
82690 01/26/2023 Open $36.08
82691 01/26/2023 Open $47.87
82692 01/26/2023 Open $32,637.20
$2,412,685.15
1381 01/05/2023 Open $9,449.36
1382 01/05/2023 Open $34,019.03
1383 01/11/2023 Open $51,961.61
1384 01/11/2023 Open $8,475.76
1385 01/10/2023 Open $148,501.49
1386 01/19/2023 Open $10,772.10
1387 01/19/2023 Open $37,990.49
1388 01/24/2023 Open $52,289.11
1389 01/24/2023 Open $8,625.76
$362,084.71
Checks Status Count
Open 216
Reconciled 0
Voided 0
Stopped 0
Type Check Totals:

EFT
Type EFT Totals:

AP - US Bank TOP AP Checking Totals
Reconciled Amount
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Spherion Staffing
Accounts Payable SUTTER BUTTES COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Westlake Ace Hardware
Accounts Payable WITTMEIER AUTO CENTER

CALPERS - RETIREMENT
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable

ING LIFE INS & ANNUITY COMPANY
9 Transactions
ULINE
Accounts Payable

EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Accounts Payable CHUCK PATERSON TOYOTA
216 Transactions
Accounts Payable NORTHGATE PETROLEUM CO
Servpro of South Shasta County
Specialized Pavement Marking, LLC
Shasta Cascade Chapter ICC
Accounts Payable Shelby's Pest Control, Inc.

PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC

PARADISE POST

NORTHSTAR
Riebes Auto Parts- Motorpool
SACRAMENTO REGIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING CTR.

O'REILLY AUTO PARTS
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable PARADISE IRRIGATION DIST
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
OFFICE DEPOT ACCT#36233169
THOMAS ACE HARDWARE - ENG. DEPT.

Accounts Payable THOMAS ACE HARDWARE - FIRE DEPT.

ING LIFE INS & ANNUITY COMPANY
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Tahoe Pure Water Co.

Accounts Payable THOMAS ACE HARDWARE - MOTORPOOL
Accounts Payable

VERIZON WIRELESS
Accounts Payable VERIZON WIRELESS
Accounts Payable
THOMAS ACE HARDWARE - POLICE DEPT.

Accounts Payable Tri Flame Propane
Accounts Payable TUCKER PEST CONTROL INC
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable CALPERS - RETIREMENT
$2,412,685.15
$0.00
$0.00

CALPERS
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
Accounts Payable
$0.00
Transaction Amount

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
32 Number Date Status Void Reason
Reconciled/
Voided Date
Transaction
Amount
Reconciled
Amount Difference

TOWN OF PARADISE
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 1/1/2023 - To Payment Date: 1/31/2023 Source Payee Name
AP - US Bank TOP AP Checking
Check
Total 216
EFTs Status Count
Open 9
Reconciled 0
Voided 0
Total 9
All Status Count
Open 225
Reconciled 0
Voided 0
Stopped 0
Total 225 $2,774,769.86
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Reconciled Amount
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Reconciled Amount
$0.00
$0.00 $0.00
$0.00
$362,084.71
Transaction Amount
$2,774,769.86
$2,412,685.15
Transaction Amount
$362,084.71
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
33 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 2(c)
ORIGINATED BY: Rick Manson, Paradise Fire Department
Battalion Chief
REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Deceleration of Certain Town Equipment from the Fire Department to be Surplus

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

No.

COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Declare the attached itemized list of equipment from the Fire Department as surplus property; and,

2. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- , “A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Declaring Certain Property to be Surplus and Authorizing Disposal Thereof”.

Background:

The Paradise Fire Department has continued to replace equipment that has reached the end of its service life or has become outdated due to advances in technology. Practice has been that the Town retain replaced equipment to be used as a backup in the event of an equipment failure. The Fire Department is now in a position where the reserves are sufficient to support the Department’s mission and the surplus list is recommended for disposal.

Analysis:

The Fire Department is in possession of the items on the attached itemized list, Exhibit “A”, and request authorization for disposal.

Financial Impact:

Disposal of the declared items retain no value and will have no impact on the General Fund. 34 Exhibit “A”
Paradise Fire Department Surplus Items:
(1) Garmin Nuvi GPS Unit- No Serial or Town #
(2) Go Pro Camera w/accessories- No Serial or Town #
(7) Kenwood TK-272 Radios
B3900282 70600540 30500961
40201251 40201014 70600539
70600538
(1) Kenwood TK-272 Radio Charging Base
(1) Porta Count Plus Gas Calibrator 080202006
(1) Industrial Scientific Gas Calibrator 11032xy003
(1) Minolta Maxxum 5xi Camera 17207950
(1) Qualcomm Global Star SAT Phone N107M35LL
(2) Motorola Programmer for Minitor 5 Radio Pagers
(20) Motorola Minitor 5 Radio Pagers
136WJW6813 136WHN2573 136WGS1190 136WHN2556
136WKQ4713 136WJW6809 136WKQ4716 136WHJ7505
136WKQ4714 136WJG4249 136WHA6117 136WJW6814
136WHN2557 136WGS9192 136WHN2552 136WJY4366
136WJY4362 136WJY4361 136WJY4363 0091
(15) Motorola Minitor 5 Radio Batteries-NO SERIAL OR TOWN # (13) Motorola Minitor 5 Radio Charging Base
07862 06692 07861 00076 04808 06693 05680
01974 03565 09930 02927 00878 05675
(3) Relm BK Radio Battery Holder-NO SERIAL OR TOWN #
(2) Kenwood KBP-1 Radio Battery Case-NO SERIAL OR TOWN # (3) Kenwood TK-260 Radio Batteries- NO SERIAL OR TOWN # (3) MSA TIC (Thermal Imaging Camera)
(4) MSA Evolution TIC (Thermal Imaging Camera) Base
35

Page 1 of 2 ends

TOWN OF PARADISE
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04

A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PARADISE

DECLARING CERTAIN TOWN PROPERTY TO BE SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING

DISPOSAL THEREOF
WHEREAS, the Town of Paradise wishes to dispose of certain equipment from the Fire Department through public auction, internet sale, salvage or other legal method that is no longer functional or necessary to the Town’s operations.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PARADISE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Town hereby declares Fire Department property surplus as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference.

Section 2. Pursuant to Paradise Municipal Code Section 2.45.130, the Town Manager is hereby authorized to dispose of the property set forth in Section 1 through public auction, internet, sale, salvage, donation or other legal method.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Paradise on this 14th day of February, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

By: ________________________________
Greg Bolin, Mayor
ATTEST:

Dina Volenski, CMC, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Scott E. Huber, Town Attorney
36 TOWN OF PARADISE
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04

TOWN OF PARADISE
RESOLUTION 2023-04
EXHIBIT "A"
(1) Garmin Nuvi GPS Unit- No Serial or Town #
(2) Go Pro Camera w/accessories- No Serial or Town #
(7) Kenwood TK-272 Radios
B3900282 70600540 30500961
40201251 40201014 70600539
70600538
(1) Kenwood TK-272 Radio Charging Base
(1) Porta Count Plus Gas Calibrator 080202006
(1) Industrial Scientific Gas Calibrator 11032xy003
(1) Minolta Maxxum 5xi Camera 17207950
(1) Qualcomm Global Star SAT Phone N107M35LL
(2) Motorola Programmer for Minitor 5 Radio Pagers
(20) Motorola Minitor 5 Radio Pagers
136WJW6813 136WHN2573 136WGS1190 136WHN2556
136WKQ4713 136WJW6809 136WKQ4716 136WHJ7505
136WKQ4714 136WJG4249 136WHA6117 136WJW6814
136WHN2557 136WGS9192 136WHN2552 136WJY4366
136WJY4362 136WJY4361 136WJY4363 0091
(15) Motorola Minitor 5 Radio Batteries-NO SERIAL OR TOWN # (13) Motorola Minitor 5 Radio Charging Base
07862 06692 07861 00076 04808 06693 05680
01974 03565 09930 02927 00878 05675
(3) Relm BK Radio Battery Holder-NO SERIAL OR TOWN #
(2) Kenwood KBP-1 Radio Battery Case-NO SERIAL OR TOWN # (3) Kenwood TK-260 Radio Batteries- NO SERIAL OR TOWN # (3) MSA TIC (Thermal Imaging Camera)
(4) MSA Evolution TIC Base
37 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 2(d)
ORIGINATED BY: Jessica Erdahl, Sr. Capital Projects Manager REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: On-System Culvert Repair Project – Construction Contract Acceptance

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

Yes, Tier 1
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Consider adopting Resolution No. 2023- , A Resolution of the Town Council of Town of Paradise accepting the work performed under the On-System Culvert Repair Project (Contract No. 7301.CON) Performed by Escheman Construction Company.” (ROLL CALL VOTE)
Background:

As a result of the 2018 Camp Fire, numerous on-system HDPE culverts were damaged.

Immediately following the disaster, the Town identified fifteen (15) on-system culverts, initially, that needed emergency opening (EO) repairs. EO repairs were completed between December 2018 and June 2019. Subsequent assessments identified twenty-five (25) additional locations that were damaged and in need of permanent restoration.

The Town coordinated with Caltrans and Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) to secure Emergency Relief permanent restoration funding to repair the damaged infrastructure town wide.

Through the Emergency Relief Program, the Town of Paradise has been approved for $922,950 for the on-system culvert repair project. The approved project is located on Federal-Aid “OnSystem” roads – meaning the Town’s primary collectors and arterials such as Skyway, Clark, Pearson, Elliott, Bille, Wagstaff, Pentz, etc.

On December 11, 2018, Paradise Town Council awarded a contract to Mark Thomas to perform engineering services on disaster related projects. Subsequently, in July 2020, task orders were issued to perform civil design services on the culvert repair project.

On October 12, 2021 Paradise Town Council adopted a resolution approving the Plans & Specifications for the On-System culvert repair project. Council further directed staff to advertise for bids.

On January 11, 2022 Paradise Town Council awarded contract No 7301.CON On-System Culvert Repair Project to Escheman Construction Company in the amount of their base bid $595,398.51 and approved contingency expenditures not exceeding 10%.

Analysis:

Construction efforts began on March 14, 2022 and the project was substantially complete on 38 September 27, 2022.

Financial Impact:

The total estimated construction cost of the Project, including a 10% contingency, was $652,738.36. The actual total construction cost is $735,636.55. Actual construction expenditures exceeded the 10% contingency due to additional damage caused by the Camp Fire not previously included in the contract quantities, as well as unforeseen environmental requirements. Escheman Construction Company’s bid was below available construction funding; therefore, ER funds are available to cover these additional costs. Project expenditures and a funding summary is detailed below:

Contract
Items
Participating
Reimb. Ratio Total Cost ER Local Match
Construction Contract - Actuals 88.53% $ 735,636.55 $ 651,259.04 $ 84,377.51 Construction Management - Estimated 88.53% $ 110,000.00 $ 97,383.00 $ 12,617.00 Total $ 845,636.55 $ 748,642.04 $ 96,994.51
Available Funding CON/CE $ 847,900.00 $ 750,645.87 $ 97,254.13 Balance $ 2,263.45 $ 2,003.83 $ 259.62
Attachments:

A. Resolutions
39 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-05

RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF TOWN OF PARADISE

ACCEPTING THE WORK PERFORMED UNDER THE ON-SYSTEM
CULVERT REPAIR PROJECT (CONTRACT NO. 7301.CON)

PERFORMED BY ESCHEMAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
WHEREAS, the Town of Paradise has heretofore contracted with Escheman Construction Company for certain work performed under that certain project known as the On-System Culvert Repair Project, being Contract No. 7301.CON; and WHEREAS, said work of improvements, as called for by the contract between the Town of Paradise and Escheman Construction Company, referable to said project was completed on December 29, 2022 to the satisfaction of the Town; and WHEREAS, there has been posted a bond insuring the work of improvements from a maintenance standpoint for a period of one year from and after completion.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Town Council of the Town of Paradise that it hereby accepts the work performed on those certain improvements, the subject of a contract between the Town of Paradise and Escheman Construction Company, known and referred to as the On-System Culvert Repair Project.

THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION WAS DULY AND REGULARLY
INTRODUCED, PASSED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Paradise at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day of February 2023.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Greg Bolin, Mayor
ATTEST:

Dina Volenski, CMC, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Scott E. Huber, Town Attorney
40 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 2(e)
ORIGINATED BY: Dina Volenski, Town Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Amendment to positions listed in the Town of Paradise Conflict of Interest Code

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

No
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-__, A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Paradise Amending and Re-Adopting Conflict of Interest Code for the Agencies and Departments of the Town of Paradise Which Incorporate by Reference the Fair Political Practices Commission's Standard Model Conflict of Interest.

Background:

Government Code Section 87300, et seq., requires every local government agency to adopt and promulgate a Conflict of Interest Code that sets forth Town officials/employees who make decisions that might benefit them financially and, as such, must publicly disclose certain financial interests. The proposed resolution incorporates by reference the Fair Political Practices Commission adopted regulation (2 Cal. Code of Reg., Section 18730) which contains the terms of a standard model Conflict of Interest Code.

Analysis:

Upon review, it was determined that Appendix B to the Town Conflict of Interest Code needs to be revised to amend and update several positions/titles due to the Reclassification and addition of new positions over the last two years and also update the appropriate disclosure categories.

Financial Impact:

None
41 TOWN OF PARADISE
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-06
“AMENDS RESOLUTION 22-66”

TOWN OF PARADISE
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PARADISE AMENDING AND READOPTING CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR THE AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS OF

THE TOWN OF PARADISE WHICH INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE FAIR POLITICAL

PRACTICES COMMISSION'S STANDARD MODEL CONFLICT OF INTEREST WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act, Government Code Section 87300, et seq., requires every local government agency to adopt and promulgate a Conflict of Interest Code; and WHEREAS, the Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation, 2 Cal. Code of Reg., Section 18730, which contains the terms of a standard model Conflict of Interest Code, which can be incorporated by reference, and which will be amended to conform to amendments in the Political Reform Act; and
WHEREAS, this Town Council has determined that the attached Appendices A, B and C accurately set forth those positions which should be designated and the categories of financial interests which should be made reportable;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PARADISE AS FOLLOWS:

1. The provisions of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations Section 18730 and any amendment to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission along with the attached Appendices in which Town officials and employees are designated and disclosure categories are set forth, are hereby amended and re-adopted and incorporated by reference and constitute the Conflict of Interest Codes of the Town of Paradise.

2. Persons holding designated positions shall file statements of economic interest pursuant to Section 18730. All designated employees shall file their statement with the Paradise Town Clerk to whom the Town Council hereby delegates the authority to carry out the duties of filing officer.

3. Statements of economic interest for members of the Town Council, Planning Commission, Town Manager, Town Attorney, Finance Director/Town Treasurer shall be filed with the Town Clerk who shall make and retain a copy and forward the original of these statements to the Fair Political Practices Commission.
42 TOWN OF PARADISE
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-06
“AMENDS RESOLUTION 22-66”

TOWN OF PARADISE
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-

A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PARADISE AMENDING AND RE-ADOPTING

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR THE AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS OF THE TOWN OF PARADISE WHICH

INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION'S STANDARD MODEL

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Paradise this 14th day of February, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

NOT VOTING:
__________________________
Greg Bolin, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Dina Volenski, CMC, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
Scott E. Huber, Town Attorney
43 APPENDIX A
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-__

GENERAL PROVISIONS
When a designated employee is required to disclose investments and sources of incomes, he/she need only disclose investments in business entities and sources of income which do business in the Town of Paradise, plan to do business in the Town of Paradise or have done business in the Town of Paradise within the past two years. In addition to other activities, a business entity is doing business within the Town of Paradise if it owns real property within the Town limits. When a designated employee is required to disclose interests in real property, he need only disclose real property which is located in whole or in part within, or no more than two miles outside, the boundaries of the Town of Paradise or within two miles of any land owned or used by the Town of Paradise.

Designated employees shall disclose their financial interest pursuant to the appropriate disclosure category as indicated in Appendix B.

DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
Category 1: Designated Employees Whose Duties are Broad and Indefinable All sources of income, interests in real property, and investments and business positions in business entities.

Category 2: Designated Employees Whose Duties Involve Contracting or Purchasing Contracts or makes purchases for entire agency: Investments and business positions in business entities and sources of income which provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment of the type utilized by the agency.

Contracts or makes purchases for specific department within the agency: Investments and business positions in business entities and sources of income which provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment of the type utilized by the designated employee's department or division.

Category 3: Designated Employees Whose Duties Involve Regulatory, Permit, or Licensing Powers All investments and business positions in business entities and sources of income which are subject to the regulatory permit or licensing authority of the Town.

Category 4: Designated Employees Whose Decisions May Affect Real Property Interests Investments and business positions in business entities and sources of income which engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property, and all interests in real property.
44 APPENDIX B
RESOLUTION 2023-__
Town Council 1
Successor Agency to Paradise Redevelopment Agency Directors 1 Planning Commissioners 1
Measure V Oversight Committee 1
Town Manager/Successor Agency Manager 1
Assistant Town Manager 1
Assistant to the Town Manager 1
Town Attorney/Successor Agency Counsel 1
Finance Director/Town Treasurer /Successor Agency Finance Director 1 Town Clerk/Elections Official/Successor Agency Clerk Secretary 1 Human Resources/Risk Management Director 1
Recovery and Economic Development Director 1
Recovery and Economic Development Project Manager 1
Housing Program Supervisor Manager 4
Housing Program Analyst Technician 4
Information Systems Director 2
Fleet Services Supervisor 2
Senior Mechanic 2
Chief of Police 1
Police Lieutenant 2
Fire Chief 1
Fire Battalion Chief 2
Building Official/ Fire Marshall 3
Community Development Director (CDD) -Onsite 1
Community Development Director (CDD) -Building 1
Community Development Manager 2
Assistant/Associate Planner 1
Senior Planner 1
Senior Supervising Code Enforcement Officer 3
Code Enforcement Officer I/II 3
CDD Permit Coordinator 3
Fire Inspectors I/II 3
Construction Inspector I/II 3
Building/Onsite Inspector I/II 3
Assistant Onsite Sanitary Official 3
Senior Building/Onsite Inspector 3
45 Senior Accountant 3
Accounting Manager 3
Accountant 3
Public Works Director/Town Engineer 1
Assistant/Associate Engineer 3
Senior Planner 1
Principal Engineer 3
Engineering Division Manager 3
Capital Projects Manager 1
Senior Capital Project Manager 1
Infrastructure Program Manager 3
Public Works Manager 2
46 APPENDIX C
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-
Consultant/Contract Employee Disclosure Category
Consultants/contract employees shall be included in the list of designated employees and shall disclose pursuant to the broadest disclosure category in the code subject to the following limitation:

The Town Attorney may determine in writing that a particular consultant, although a "designated position," is hired to perform a range of duties that is limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements described in this section. Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant's/contractor's duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. The Town Attorney's determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this Conflict of Interest Code.
47 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 2(f)
ORIGINATED BY: Jessica Erdahl, Sr. Capital Projects Manager REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Off-System Culvert Repair Project – Construction Contract Acceptance

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

Yes, Tier 1
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Consider adopting Resolution No.2023- , A Resolution of the Town Council of Town of Paradise Accepting the Work Performed Under the Off-System Culvert Repair Project (Contract No. 8408.CON) Performed by Allen Gill Construction, Inc. (ROLL

CALL VOTE)
Background:

As a result of the 2018 Camp Fire, numerous off-system HDPE culverts were damaged.

Immediately following the disaster, the Town identified two (2) off-system culverts, initially, that needed emergency opening (EO) repairs. EO repairs were completed in January 2019.

Subsequent assessments identified twenty-five (25) additional locations that were damaged and in need of permanent restoration.

On November 10, 2020, Paradise Town Council awarded master on-call contracts to Mark Thomas, Dokken Engineering, GHD, Inc., Wood Rodgers, Inc. and Dewberry Drake Haglan to perform on-call professional civil engineering services for a variety of local, state, and federallyfunded projects. Subsequently, in February 2021, a task order was issued to Dokken Engineering, to perform civil design services on the Off-System Culvert Replacement Project.

The overall scope of work for the Project can be summarized as follows:
 Repair Camp Fire damaged off-system culverts to achieve a pre-fire condition.

On June 14, 2022 Paradise Town Council adopted a resolution approving the Plans & Specifications for the Off-System Culvert Repair Project. Council further directed staff to advertise for bids.

On July 12, 2022 Paradise Town Council awarded contract No 8408.CON On-System Culvert Repair Project to Allen Gill Construction, Inc. in the amount of their base bid $478,901.00 and approved contingency expenditures not exceeding 10%.

Analysis:

Construction efforts began on October 18, 2022 and the project was substantially complete on January 20, 2023.
48 Financial Impact:

The total estimated construction cost of the Project, including a 10% contingency, was $526,791.10. The actual total construction cost is $494,096.09. Project expenditures and a funding summary is detailed below:

Staff Report Actuals- Construction and CM
Contract
Items
Participating
Reimb. Ratio Total Cost FEMA Local Match
Construction Contract - Actuals 93.75% $ 494,096.09 $ 463,215.08 $ 30,881.01 Construction Management - Estimated 93.75% $ 100,000.00 $ 93,750.00 $ 6,250.00 Total $ 594,096.09 $ 556,965.08 $ 37,131.01
Available Funding CON/CE $ 607,790.00 $ 569,803.13 $ 37,986.88 Balance $ 13,693.91 $ 12,838.04 $ 855.87
Attachments:

A. Resolutions
49 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-07

RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF TOWN OF PARADISE

ACCEPTING THE WORK PERFORMED UNDER THE OFF-SYSTEM
CULVERT REPAIR PROJECT (CONTRACT NO. 8408.CON)
PERFORMED BY ALLEN GILL CONSTRUCTION, INC.

WHEREAS, the Town of Paradise has heretofore contracted with Allen Gill Construction, Inc. for certain work performed under that certain project known as the OffSystem Culvert Repair Project, being Contract No. 8408.CON; and WHEREAS, said work of improvements, as called for by the contract between the Town of Paradise and Allen Gill Construction, Inc., referable to said project was completed on January 20, 2022 to the satisfaction of the Town; and WHEREAS, there has been posted a bond insuring the work of improvements from a maintenance standpoint for a period of one year from and after completion.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Town Council of the Town of Paradise that it hereby accepts the work performed on those certain improvements, the subject of a contract between the Town of Paradise and Allen Gill Construction, Inc., known and referred to as the Off-System Culvert Repair Project.

THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION WAS DULY AND REGULARLY
INTRODUCED, PASSED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Paradise at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day of February 2023.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Greg Bolin, Mayor
ATTEST:

Dina Volenski, CMC, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Scott E. Huber, Town Attorney
50 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 2(g)
ORIGINATED BY: Ross Gilb, Finance Director/Town Treasurer REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

Review and file the 2nd Quarter Investment Report for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2023.

Background:

Attached is the report on the Town’s cash and investments for the quarter ended December 31, 2022.

A US Bank checking account is currently being used for payroll, accounts payable and other operating purposes. Most accounts payable disbursements are drawn through checks, and most payroll disbursements are processed through direct deposit. Deposits are fully collateralized. With COVID-19 and the impacts to the economy, the credit rate is currently less than 0.01%.

The Town received a $5 million cash advance from CalOES in December 2018 for projects and restoration that will be funded through FEMA’s public assistance grant program. As FEMA eligible expenses and/or projects are completed, funds are transferred to the Town operating checking account to fund those activities. The remaining advance funds are required to be held in a noninterest-bearing account. A US Bank non-interest-bearing checking account was established to track the funds. As of December 31, 2022, the remaining funds yet to be drawn upon was $1,672,356. Additional funds are expected to be received into this account during the current and following fiscal years as the Town secures additional reimbursement for ongoing FEMA public assistance grants.

The Town has historically primarily utilized the State of California managed Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) for investment of General Fund cash in excess of immediately needed operating capital. LAIF provides for same day liquidity as funds can be transferred electronically through computer authorization between LAIF and the Town checking account. LAIF has also provided historically competitive yields, with an average return of 2.07% for the quarter ended December 31, 2022. LAIF has been a great investment option for the Town’s General Fund short term reserves.

To provide additional opportunity for asset diversification, during the quarter ended September 30, 2022, the Town began utilizing the California Cooperative Liquid Assets Securities System 51 (California CLASS) in conjunction with the aforementioned investment accounts to hold shortterm reserves. California CLASS is a joint exercise of powers entity authorized under Section 6509.7, California Government Code. California CLASS is a pooled investment option that was created via a joint exercise of powers agreement (JPA Agreement) by and among California public agencies. California CLASS provides the Town with a convenient method for investing in highquality, short- to medium-term securities carefully selected to optimize interest earnings while maximizing safety and liquidity. The California CLASS Prime fund has provided the Town with an opportunity to strengthen and diversify its cash management programs in accordance with the safety, liquidity, and yield hierarchy that governs the investment of public funds. During the second quarter of the fiscal year, CLASS has provided a very competitive yield, with an average return of

3.69% for the quarter ended December 31, 2022.

In July 2020, the Town received a net settlement from PG&E related to the 2018 Camp Fire in the amount of $219,187,262. Since that time, the Town continues to utilize two investment vehicles to manage these funds. Securities purchases are held in a custodial account with US Bank. The Town has contracted with Meeder Investments to assist with management of these funds. Excess funds that are not invested in specific securities are held in the State of California managed Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). These funds are held separate from the Town’s General Fund LAIF account. Future use of these funds continues to be evaluated through a longterm fiscal sustainability model. Based on current rebuild rates and revenue growth trends, at this time it is expected that at least 80% of the total fund balance will be required to be utilized for long-term revenue backfill to ensure continued fiscal sustainability.

During the second quarter of the 2022-23 fiscal year, the Town transferred a total of $8,400,000 from the combined LAIF and CLASS accounts to the Town’s US Bank operating account in order to fund operations for the quarter.

In June of 2011, the Town established an irrevocable trust to begin funding the future obligations associated with retiree health as required by GASB 45. The funds are being managed by SelfInsured Schools of California (SISC) and can only be used for the payment of retiree health benefits.

Financial Impact:

Total investment earnings for the quarter ended December 31, 2022 was $505,702. Total investment earnings for the 2022-23 fiscal year to date was $841,726, which trends in line with total budgeted investment earnings for the 2022-23 fiscal year in the amount of $1,100,000. 52 TOWN OF PARADISE

QUARTERLY SUMMARY OF INVESTMENTS
For Quarter Ended December 31, 2022
Investment Type Yield Book Value Market Value Interest Earnings Yield Book Value Market Value Net Change US Bank Checking 0.00% 2,377,091.20 2,377,091.20 - 0.00% 2,945,582.69 2,945,582.69 (568,491.49) US Bank - Cal OES Advance Checking 0.00% 1,672,356.86 1,672,356.86 - 0.00% 1,672,356.86 1,672,356.86 - Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) (General Fund) Savings 2.07% 3,294,671.13 3,233,354.86 * 17,211.25 1.35% 3,283,498.59 3,220,327.24 13,027.62 Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) (PG&E Settlement Fund) Savings 2.07% 38,525.65 37,808.66 * 8,595.44 1.35% 5,404,571.20 5,300,592.45 (5,262,783.79) California CLASS Prime Fund Savings 3.69% 6,091,237.19 6,090,935.67 ** 69,816.34 2.14% 7,021,420.85 7,020,309.64 (929,373.97) US Bank Custodial Investment Account Various**** 1.20% 198,230,559.54 183,713,261.86 *** 410,079.59 1.02% 199,845,464.82 184,132,633.48 (419,371.62) SISC GASB 45 Trust B Various 0.00% 254,534.13 254,534.13 - 0.00% 254,534.13 254,534.13 - Fiscal Agents & Petty Cash Other 0.00% 1,350.00 1,350.00 - 0.00% 1,350.00 1,350.00 - Totals 211,960,325.70 197,380,693.24 505,702.62 220,428,779.14 204,547,686.49 (7,166,993.25) Total Quarterly Earnings on Accrual Basis 505,702.62
Year-to-Date Earnings (July 1st - June 30th) 841,726.82 * Market Value determined by LAIF
** Market Value determined by California CLASS Prime Fund *** Market Value determined by US Bank
**** Detail investment type listing attached
For Quarter Ended December 31, 2022 For Quarter Ended September 30, 2022 In compliance with the California Code Section 53646; the Treasurer of the Town of Paradise herby certifies that sufficient investment liquidity and anticipated revenues are available to meet the Town's budgeted expenditure requirements for the next six months.

Investments in the report meet the requirements of the Town of Paradise's adopted investment policy.

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Ross Gilb Finance Director/Town Treasurer
53 Investment Type Total
LAIF (General) 3,233,354.86 $
LAIF (PGE Settlement Funds) 37,808.66
California CLASS Prime Fund 6,090,935.67
US Bank Bank Operations 2,377,091.20
US Bank Custodial Investment Fund 183,713,261.86
Cal OES Advance 1,672,356.86
GASB 45 Trust 254,534.13
Petty Cash 1,350.00
Grand Total 197,380,693.24 $

TOWN OF PARADISE

INVESTMENT BALANCES AT A GLANCE
For Quarter Ended December 31, 2022
54 $-
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250 Dec-17 Mar-18 Jun-18 Sep-18 Dec-18 Mar-19 Jun-19 Sep-19 Dec-19 Mar-20 Jun-20 Sep-20 Dec-20 Mar-21 Jun-21 Sep-21 Dec-21 Mar-22 Jun-22 Sep-22 Dec-22 Dec-17 Mar-18 Jun-18 Sep-18 Dec-18 Mar-19 Jun-19 Sep-19 Dec-19 Mar-20 Jun-20 Jun-21 Sep-21 Dec-21 Mar-22 Jun-22 Sep-22 Dec-22 Series1 3.66 4.80 5.19 1.91 8.42 12.89 22.67 20.13 20.67 22.86 22.64 231.93 227.87 223.35 213.75 211.30 204.58 197.38

TOWN OF PARADISE
Timeline of Investment Market Value Balances (in millions) From Fiscal Year 2017/18 to Fiscal Year 2022/23
55 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 2 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account PORTFOLIO SUMMARY As of December 31, 2022 56 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 10 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 57 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 11 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 58 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 12 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 59 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 13 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 60 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 14 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 61 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 15 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 62 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 16 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 63 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 17 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 64 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 18 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 65 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 19 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account POSITION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 66 Total 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 20 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account TRANSACTION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 67 2,500,000.00 550,000.00 3,000,000.00 2,200,000.00 1,000,000.00 705,000.00 1,987,016.67 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 21 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account TRANSACTION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 68 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 22 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account TRANSACTION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 69 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 23 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account TRANSACTION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 70 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 24 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account TRANSACTION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 71 6125 Memorial Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017 | 866-633-3371 | www.meederpublicfunds.com Page 25 of 26 Town of Paradise Operating Account TRANSACTION STATEMENT As of December 31, 2022 72 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 6(a)
ORIGINATED BY: Colette Curtis, Recovery and Economic
Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Federal Advocacy Platform Update

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

Yes
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Review the updated Federal Advocacy Platform and provide comments to staff.

Background:

On December 8, 2020, Town Council approved a Federal Advocacy Platform which documented recovery successes, immediate needs, as well as long term needs and policy considerations.

This document has been utilized by Council and staff in our legislative advocacy for funding and other policy needs during recovery from the 2018 Camp Fire.

Analysis:

The Federal Advocacy Platform should be updated regularly to ensure the platform remains current for use by Council and Staff. Two years after the first platform was approved, it is time to update the document with our successes to date as well as current short- and long-term needs.

The attached platform includes the achievements in recovery over the last two years, as well as the existing needs to address the barriers our community faces.

Financial Impact:

This item has no impact to the general fund. The platform was drafted by Town staff and by the Ferguson Group through the Town’s existing contract.

Attachments: Updated Federal Advocacy Platform
73 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA
2 0 2 3 F E D E R A L P L A T F O R M A N D P R I O R I T I E S 74 On November 8, 2018, the Camp Fire left the Town of Paradise largely destroyed, forever changing the future of the community. The Town is focused on rebuilding the community into a safer, stronger, and more resilient Town. The federal government has been crucial to the Town’s recovery thus far and will continue to play a key role as Paradise rebuilds for the future. The Town’s 2023 Federal Platform and Priorities highlights the successes of the Town’s partnership with the federal government and outlines how this partnership can be used to address the critical recovery needs that remain.
75 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 3

T H E TO W N
 Incorporated on November
27, 1979
 Located in Butte County,
CA
 Home of the longest
running harvest festival in
California

T H E P E O P L E
 9,000 residents (2022)
 26,218 residents (preCamp Fire)
 4,600 Daytime Population

T H E C O M M U N I T Y
 35% growth since the
Camp Fire
 350+ businesses
 Changing from retirement
community to young
families

T O W N O F P A R A D I S E
Greg Bolin
Mayor
Rose Tryon
Vice Mayor
Steve Crowder
Councilmember
Steve “Woody” Culleton
Councilmember
Ron Lassonde
Councilmember
****
Kevin Phillips
Town Manager
Paradise Town Hall
5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
(530) 872-6291
www.townofparadise.com
76 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 4

I N F R A S T R U C T U R E N E E D S

S E W E R S Y S T E M
Secure funding to support the construction of the Paradise Sewer Project, unlocking the missing piece of the Town’s affordable housing and economic recoveries.

For a number of years, the Town has pursued a municipal solution for wastewater treatment to address failed septic systems that have degraded local groundwater quality and constrained affordable housing, essential community services, and related economic growth. Reliance on septic systems has resulted in two areas of concern: environmental impacts and economic impediment. Failed septic systems release untreated wastewater into groundwater or at the ground surface, resulting in environmental degradation and public health risk due to water contamination or exposure to untreated wastewater. Economically, the lack of a sewer system has suppressed the development of a sustainable business community by limiting the size and types of businesses that can affordably operate in the community. Development of affordable housing and workforce housing also has been hindered as larger housing facilities require more sewer treatment capacity than a traditional septic system can provide within the available parcel sizes. As a result of these concerns, the Town worked diligently for more than 50 years, even prior to its incorporation in 1979, to identify a feasible wastewater treatment solution for the community, with a priority to provide service to those commercial and densely populated residential areas with failed and failing septic systems.

Prior to the 2018 Camp Fire, the Town struggled to support a thriving economy, in part due to the lack of sewer availability. Conditions since the 2018 Camp Fire are amplified with even fewer businesses able to open or reopen due to septic failures or required upgrades that are cost prohibitive. Commercial parcels in Town are generally small in size and concentrated in a core commercial area that provides limited space for septic tanks and leach fields. These restrictions are compounded by siting restrictions such as high groundwater and poor drainage due to the local soil composition. As a result, existing Town businesses have been severely constrained due to their septic system discharge exceeding the available capacity of the land itself, while new businesses are often forced to open elsewhere due to the limitations placed on them to operate with an on-site septic system. Three primary objectives and associated goals drove the development of the Proposed Project:
 Provide long-term, efficient, reliable treatment of wastewater in a cost-effective, environmentally beneficial manner to current and returning Town residents, in a manner acceptable to the RWQCB and other permitting agencies:
o Accommodate regrowth while reducing further environmental degradation of groundwater and surface water from failing septic systems o Reduce the public health risk associated with failing septic systems.  Generate economic recovery by eliminating septic-related capacity limitations, as well as the general burden of on-site wastewater management for businesses:
o Promote the return or arrival of essential community services and businesses by removing restrictions caused by on-site septic systems.  Provide for the ability to construct and maintain affordable housing, specifically multifamily housing:
77 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 5
o Support centralizing affordable higher-density housing to Paradise’s urban core, along major evacuation routes.

The Town of Paradise has a certified Final Programmatic Environmental Impact report to construct both the core collection system and export pipeline to the City of Chico’s existing Water Pollution Control Plant, about 18 miles east of Paradise. Utilizing a regional approach is the most cost effective and feasible solution for the project.

The Town anticipates a funding shortfall of about $48M after other funding programs have been secured.

E V A C U A T I O N I N F R A S T R U C T U R E
Seek additional funding opportunities for the improved resiliency of critical evacuation routes within Paradise as well as those arterial roads that provide access to and from the Town.

The Town of Paradise is situated along a ridge, constrained by two canyons, presenting limited circulation and evacuation routes. Accordingly, the 2018 Camp Fire demonstrated this constraint with long delays due to local and regional constraints. In the Town’s recovery, the Town of Paradise utilized an Economic Development Administration grant to complete the 2022 Transportation Master Plan. This plan, guided by the Town’s original 2019 Long Term Recovery Plan, aimed to organize public input, identify critical projects and position the Town to secure additional funding for implementation.

As a result, 48 unique evacuation route projects were identified with an unmet funding need over $625M. These projects would increase capacity on existing roadways, connect new roadways for improved circulation, address dead-end roads and create an interconnected multi-use path system which can double as emergency evacuation assets. With these projects fully vetted and studied in the Transportation Master Plan, the Town’s overall unmet needs were submitted for consideration in the 2018 California Wildfires (DR-4407) Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) Infrastructure Program. These overall 78 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 6
funds are appropriated by Congress to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and administered by California Housing & Community Development (HCD).

Recognizing unmet infrastructure recovery needs, HCD allocated $317,428,488 of the CDBG-DR funding to the Disaster Recovery Infrastructure Program (DR-Infrastructure). DR-Infrastructure projects are funded to assist with meeting the unmet infrastructure needs of local communities.

Of this total allocation, the Town of Paradise has been awarded $199.5M towards eligible infrastructure projects, including unfunded disaster recovery match requirements such as FEMA Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Projects.

While the CDBG-DR allocation will be instrumental in making progress towards a safer community, over $320M in critical evacuation infrastructure projects remain unfunded.

Concurrently, the Town of Paradise plans to submit our Roe Road Extension Phase 2 Project to the United States Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) 2023 Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) competitive grant program. This project is vital to our recovery and serves an Area of Persistent Poverty or Historically Disadvantaged Communities pursuant to the program guidelines.

The Town is requesting $8 million in RAISE funding for the Project Approval and Environmental Document, as well as for Plans, Specifications, and Estimates for the Project. The Project will construct a new 1-mile three-lane roadway extending from South Libby Road to Clark Road/State Route 191, and will include a Class I multi-use pathway that also serves as emergency vehicle access, Americans with Disabilities Act curb ramps, and storm drainage infrastructure. This Project is part of a larger effort to construct a new east-west roadway between Skyway and Pentz Road to improve circulation and connectivity throughout the Town, provide alternative ingress/egress routes for residential neighborhoods, and provide additional evacuation capacity during disaster events. Doing so will improve safety, environmental sustainability, quality of life, and mobility in the Town, as well as increase the area’s resiliency toward future emergencies and climate induced events.

S T O R M W A T E R A N D D R A I N A G E S Y S T E M
Secure funding opportunities to upgrade and redevelop the current stormwater and drainage system in Paradise.

As the community of Paradise continues to rebuild, providing for adequate stormwater and drainage will be critical to the redevelopment processes. Sustainable stormwater and drainage investments would decrease the quantity of runoff and improve the quality of water. A study has been completed to assess the condition of the Town’s storm drain system as well as critical needs and priorities. The 2022 Storm Drain Master Plan identifies over $25M in unfunded projects necessary to support a multi-hazard hardened community recovery. 79 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 7

E C O N O M I C R E C O V E R Y

N E E D S

E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T S T R A T E G Y
Pursue funding through the Economic Development Agency (EDA) for an Economic Development Strategy Document to jump start economic recovery.

The Town of Paradise experienced severe economic damage and financial instability as a result of the Camp Fire and seeks to develop an economic strategy for recovery. A regional and commercial market study have been completed, and now Paradise needs a strategy document to analyze this data and make recommendations for action to rebuild a sustainable economy. The goals of this strategy document will be to support the current construction economy, prioritize steps to recruit and attract businesses, and identify funding and incentives to jump start economic recovery.

W O R K F O R C E D E V E L O P M E N T
Secure funding through CDBG DR Workforce Development and other sources for a Workforce Training Center and other programs.

The Camp Fire resulted in a loss of jobs and businesses for many in Paradise, while at the same time creating the need for a strong construction-related workforce to rebuild the community. CDBG DR Workforce Development funding has been allocated to Butte County in the amount of $18.7 Million. The Town of Paradise is working on a project that will include a construction trades training center, including a training program for 3D printing technology to print homes using concrete. This innovative center will focus on training the 80 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 8
next generation of workforce utilizing traditional and cutting-edge technology for a resilient future. The Town intends to submit an Notice of Intent for this project once the application period for the CDBG DR Workforce Development funding opens. It is anticipated additional funding will be needed for this and other related workforce development projects within the community.

D I R E C T B U S I N E S S A S S I S T A N C E A N D

I N C E N T I V E S
Secure funding for businesses affected by the disaster to re-open in the community as well as incentives to new businesses investing in Paradise.

Paradise businesses were devastated by the Camp Fire, first through the physical loss of structures, and then through the loss of their customers as the population of Paradise went from over 26,000 to just over 4,000 overnight. Those businesses that were able to reopen in the four years since the fire have struggled to remain solvent with the smaller population, in addition to complications
caused by the COVID 19 Pandemic. Many
businesses closed by the fire have been
unable to reopen as their owners deal with
the personal and financial ramifications of
the fire, as well as complicated and
protracted insurance issues. In addition,
businesses that may have otherwise been
interested in opening in Paradise have
been dissuaded by the drop in population
and some of the infrastructure barriers
that are part of a fire-impacted
community.

The Town of Paradise is looking for funding to provide to businesses, that were affected by the fire to help them remain open, to help those who have been unable reopen do so, and to incentivize new businesses to invest in Paradise.
81 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 9

H O U S I N G A N D T R A N S I T

N E E D S

H O U S I N G D E V E L O P M E N T
Support funding for the rebuilding of all types of housing in the Town.

The majority of housing that existed in Paradise
pre-fire was older, single-family homes,
duplexes and mobile homes, both in parks and
on private land. The fire destroyed 90% of the
Town’s housing stock and replacement costs
are currently so high that homeowners and
landlords are unable to rebuild their units.

Paradise needs more housing of all types,
including affordable multifamily housing. The
lack of a sewer system has been a major barrier
to this type of housing in the past, however
with the current sewer project underway,
affordable multifamily housing is achievable.

Currently, CDBG-DR funds are being utilized to rebuild single-family and multifamily housing, however the need is greater than the current funding available. Funding for workforce housing (80%-120% AMI) is also greatly needed, for reconstruction and first-time homebuyer. In addition, more funding toward local Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs), housing trusts and land trusts would assist considerably with our ability to create programs (such as first-time homebuilders, contractor loan programs, etc.) to rebuild all types of housing lost to in the disaster.

P U B L I C T R A N S P O R T A T I O N
Support funding for Butte County Association of Governments to explore and expand additional transit needs in Paradise.

The Town of Paradise is working with the Butte County Association of Governments to plan for the future of public transportation in Paradise to include:
 Continue exploring unmet transit needs in Paradise along corridors that service and provide increased access to employment, housing, and education.  Expanding paratransit services to meet the needs of our population accessing medical and essential community services within the boundaries of Butte County and together with transportation options to adjoining communities.
82 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 10

C O M M U N I T Y N E E D S

H E A L T H C A R E
Support the return of a full range of health care, including emergency services and hospital.

The Camp Fire severely impacted health care services in Paradise, and since November 2018, the Town has been without a hospital or Emergency Room. Prior to the fire, the hospital was the largest employer in Paradise, and served not only the Paradise population, but also the surrounding unincorporated communities as well as being a destination location for cancer and birthing services. The lack of a full hospital and emergency room is a barrier to recovery, and the Town is focused on working with any provider who is interested in investing in the Paradise community into the future.

R E S I D E N T F I R E M I T I G A T I O N E D U C A T I O N Pursue federal funding opportunities for the center including DOI’s Joint Fire Science Program, USDA’s State and Private Forestry: Cohesive Fire Strategy Program, and FEMA’s Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program.

Paradise should be a location for the study of fire safety, fire hazard area ecology, disaster recovery best practices, hardening research, vocational training, building in harmony with nature, etc. The Town of Paradise would like to pursue partnerships with educational institutions that could lead to programs and a potential space downtown. Chico State has expressed interest in creating a healing recovery and resiliency center and Paradise should partner with Chico State to do this. With Chico State as the lead for this project, Paradise should seek subsequent funding to support their development of the center.

W I L D F I R E R I S K R E D U C T I O N B U F F E R
Support Paradise Recreation and Parks District in their efforts to secure funding for the acquisition and maintenance of land supporting the creation of significant wildfire buffer areas.

Fire breaks are a key element of community-wide fire safety and serve as an instrumental mitigation measure with long-term impact. Implement and maintain a buffer zone between development and the wildlands to reduce fire risk, especially on the east side of town. As fuels are reduced, these areas can also double as an opportunity for hiking trails. The soon to be released IBHS Wildfire Prepared Community Standards are expected to include buffer zones as a fundamental mitigation measure.

It is anticipated that the creation of a fire break that fully surrounds the Town of Paradise would help reduce insurance costs by up to 40%. As well, initial cost benefit analysis research shows a 4:1 return on investment from damage reduction over 30 years with a fire break just on the eastern edge of Town. In addition to insurance reductions, a fire break could serve several functions beyond a protective barrier and passive green space. Other uses include: active park spaces, extended trail networks, and potential business opportunities that take responsible care of the town’s boundary.
83 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 11

P O L I C Y R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S

T A X E X E M P T I O N F O R S E T T L E M E N T

P A Y M E N T S
Support H.R. 176 to exempt federal taxation on settlement payments for Camp Fire Survivors.

Having experienced the most devastating fire in California history, survivors of the Camp Fire are doing their best to recover. With Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) being found responsible for the fire, many survivors entered into a lawsuit to help them recover financially when insurance and other resources fell far short of what would be needed to rebuild. These survivors are still waiting, 4 years later, for these funds to be fully distributed. Once received, without H.R. 176, those funds would be taxed as income.

The State of California has already determined that to ask survivors of this tragedy to pay tax on these funds would be unjust and has passed A.B. 1249 exempting these funds from state taxes.

Camp Fire survivors are doing their best to move on with their lives, rebuild, and thrive. Resources to rebuild are scarce, and as prices rise due to inflation and supply chain issues, the cost of rebuilding is higher each day that goes by. Exempting PG&E settlement funds from federal taxes through H.R. 176 would help these survivors rebuild and make sure the funds they have available can all go towards that goal.

P R I V A T E R O A D D E S I G N A T I O N B Y F E M A Explore potential options which would allow the Town to facilitate Camp Fire repairs to privately owned roadways.

Within the incorporated Town of Paradise exists about 550 unique private roadways totaling over 65 roadway miles. These roadways have been similarly impacted by the 2018 Camp Fire as public roads. Private roads were subject to damage caused by the fire itself, comprehensive debris removal operations, hazard tree removal operations and recovery/reconstruction activities. While public roadways have been determined eligible to receive public assistance through FEMA and Federal Highways Administration, private roadway owners have no recourse for damage restoration costs.

D I S A S T E R Z O N E D E S I G N A T I O N
Advocate for the establishment of a Disaster Zone designation for communities with significant destruction in the aftermath of a major natural disaster.

The Town of Paradise was devastated by the amount of destruction from the Camp Fire and faces a long road ahead for full economic recovery as the residential and business communities are rebuilt and reestablished.

Building upon the Opportunity Zone program, the establishment of a Disaster Zone would help communities face rebuilding with support from federal agencies as well as private industry to spur the long-term investment needed for a full recovery. Assistance provided to communities under a Disaster Zone designation should also include direct federal assistance for grant administration as well as an expedited 84 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 12
disbursement of federal aid from programs such as CDBG-Disaster Recovery and FEMA Hazardous Mitigation Grant Program.

P O S T - D I S A S T E R R E C O V E R Y E F F I C I E N C I E S Advocate for the implementation of efficient processes and procedures that allow local, state, and federal agencies to respond quickly after a disaster and enable them to accelerate planning for and implementation of projects and programs that are vital to a community’s immediate and long-term recovery efforts.

Post-disaster recovery efforts after the Camp Fire required close coordination between the Town, state agencies, and federal agencies, not to mention the Town’s citizens, employees, contractors, and partners.

The Town found that, at times, laborious and tedious processes to access federal and state resources often slowed down the implementation timeline for much needed recovery projects and programs. For instance, implementation of the Government Hazard Tree Removal Program was delayed several times in 2020 due to protests on the tree-felling bidding process. The delays resulted in the hazardous trees remaining a threat to the people and property in Paradise, delaying reconstruction in some cases, and resulting in trees falling and damaging standing homes and rebuilds.

C E N T R A L I Z E D F E D E R A L F U N D I N G

A P P L I C A T I O N
Advocate for the establishment of a centralized disaster aid application process that provides simple and efficient access to federal resources for public agencies, business, and citizens in the aftermath of a major natural disaster.

In the days, weeks, and months that followed the Camp Fire, the Town, its residents, and its businesses applied for federal assistance from a variety of sources, including from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Small Business Administration, and other federal agencies. Each agency and each program required a different application process and documentation which created a laborious process for not only the Town, but also for Paradise citizens. Establishing one centralized portal that gathers information and documentation once from applicants would create a more efficient flow of information, services, and assistance.

F E D E R A L R O L E I N P E R M A N E N T H O U S I N G A I D

F O R D I S A S T E R S U R V I V O RS
Advocate for Congressional evaluation of how and when federal agencies should assist disaster survivors in attaining permanent housing.

Section 408 of the Stafford Act (42 USC 5174) provides FEMA with the authority to provide financial or direct assistance for permanent housing construction in “insular areas outside the continental United States and in other remote locations in cases in which—(A) no alternative housing resources are not available; and (B) the types of temporary housing assistance…are unavailable, infeasible, or not cost-effective.” If temporary housing assistance is not available, feasible, or cost-effective, FEMA should be able to assist with providing permanent housing solutions or at a minimum helping survivors attain permanent housing in the continental 85 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 13
U.S. as well. In addition, a 2019 CRS report titled “Disaster Housing Assistance: Homeland Security Issues in the 116th Congress,” (IN11054) states that “FEMA provides temporary housing assistance to meet shortterm and interim disaster housing needs; however, clearly defining the use of these programs and identifying a process to assist some disaster survivors with attaining permanent housing may be needed to comprehensively address disaster housing needs throughout all phases of recovery.” 86 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 14

S U C C E S S E S

C O N G R E S S I O N A L P R I O R I T Y P R O J E C T S Paradise was supported by our Senators Feinstein and Padilla, and Congressman LaMalfa in their Congressional Priority Projects. $1.8 Million was allocated to the Town for the Roe Road Extension Phase 1 Project, which will improve evacuation by connecting multiple long dead-end streets in Town. The Town of Paradise also received $615,000 to replace Police Radios lost in the fire, improving public safety for our residents.

W A L K A B L E A N D W O R K A B L E D O W N T O W N
Paradise was awarded funding for sidewalks, lighting, landscaping, and drainage facilities in the central business district. The Town utilized this investment to help revitalize the central business district of Paradise by increasing the downtown area’s walkability and workability, through public transportation and recreational opportunities.

P U B L I C S A F E T Y A N D L A W E N F O R C E M E N T The Town’s public safety and law enforcement agencies were critical during the response to the Camp Fire event and remain a critical element of our recovery efforts. Since the disaster, the Town has rebuilt critical public safety buildings and restored damaged fleets, and continues to invest in upgrades to aging and damaged technologies for the Town’s police and fire departments.

E M E R G E N C Y N O T I F I C A T I O N S Y S T E M
As part of the Town’s Long-Term Community Recovery Plan, the Town prioritized the installation of an early warning system that would improve the existing voluntary notification system, implement a mass notification system, and create an audible/alarm notification system. The system will allow the Town to communicate specific messages for emergency events, including the presence of a fire, as well as provide redundant and timeline alerts in addition to existing notification tools. The Town secured a Hazard Mitigation Grant to develop a Design & Scoping Plan for the project and has been authorized to start construction activities. It is anticipated a complete system, comprised of 21 individual towers will be ready for use in summer 2023.

R O A D W A Y D A M A G E R E S T O R A T I O N
Combined support between FEMA Public Assistance and Federal Highways Administration’s Emergency Relief Program, the Town of Paradise has secured and commenced delivery of $93M in roadway rehabilitation projects.

These projects are critical to the Town’s recovery and will provide basic infrastructure restoration to pre-fire conditions.

E D A T R A N S P O R T A T I O N M A S T E R P L A N
As noted elsewhere in this document, the Town of Paradise was awarded a critical Economic Development Administration planning grant to prepare the 2022 Transportation Master Plan. This $1.8M grant allowed the Town to perform invaluable public outreach, complete detailed studies and scope projects the Town depends on for a full recovery. It cannot be understated the value of this “gap” funding project has served, now having leveraged nearly $250M in returns between multiple State and federal grant programs. 87 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 15

C D B G - D R A L L O C A T I O N S F O R M U L T I - F A M I L Y

H O U S I N G A N D I N F R A S T R U C T U R E
To date, over $250 Million has been allocated to the Town of Paradise for Multi-Family Housing and Infrastructure projects. $55 Million in multi-family housing projects are working their way through the permitting process, and we anticipate over 290 new affordable housing units through these efforts. $199 Million in infrastructure funding is being allocated to priority evacuation projects to increase evacuation capacity and safety for residents.

W A T E R S Y S T E M I N F R A S T R U C T U R E
The Town of Paradise supported the Paradise Irrigation District (PID) in its mission to restore potable water to the area. In order to repair the water system, PID sampled all service laterals and mains in the distribution system for volatile organic compounds, replaced contaminated service laterals, and restored potable water service to the system.

F E M A C O S T S H A R E I N C R E A S E F O R

C A T E G O R I E S A & B
Camp Fire emergency response and debris removal needs are extraordinary. While final costs of these activities are still unknown, they are estimated to be millions of dollars. This does not include the expense of staff and employee time, which is non-reimbursable under Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) Public Assistance Program. The Town’s share of the local match required for Categories A (debris removal) and B (emergency response) continues to climb, with required local matches far exceeding local resources. Understanding the exceptional nature of the damages produced by the Camp Fire, Congress approved an increase in the federal share of assistance for Category A & B damages under FEMA’s Public Assistance Program from 75% to 90% in Section 309 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019.

F E M A C O S T S H A R E F O R C A T E G O R I E S C – G The current reimbursement rate for FEMA Public Assistance Categories C-G is 75%. The Town anticipates one of its largest expenditures in recovery efforts to be the repair and replacement of damaged roads. Public roadways fall under FEMA’s jurisdiction under Category C (roads). Early estimates predict total road repairs to be in the tens of millions of dollars, putting the Town’s share at a level that could exceed its annual operating budget for normal road maintenance. The final cost of needed road repairs will not be known until further in the recovery effort as truck and freight movement in and out of the Town for debris removal, tree removal, and reconstruction continue. An increase in the federal cost share of FEMA Public Assistance funding would significantly reduce the Town’s unmet funding needs.

R U R A L C O M M U N I T Y D E S I G N A T I O N
After the Camp Fire, the Town of Paradise’s population fell from 26,800 to approximately 2,034. Paradise’s original population exceeded thresholds for grant and loan programs offered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

However, the post Camp Fire population met USDA population requirements. In order to help bridge the gap between the official population counts for the Town, Congress approved legislative language in Section 108 the FY 2019 Additional Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Act (P.L. 116-20) that allowed the Governor to designate the Town as rural in nature until a revised population count was conducted as part of the 2020 Census. The designation qualified the Town to apply for immediate assistance under the USDA Rural Development programs.

R E M O V A L O F S T A N D I N G B U R N T T R E E S
The removal of standing burnt trees was critical to the overall recovery of the Town as tens of thousands of trees needed to be removed. Historically, FEMA has not funded the removal of standing burnt trees on private property that were threatening the public right-of-way. The Town worked with FEMA to explain how critical the removal of these trees is to the safety and recovery of the Town. In 2019, FEMA approved the use of Public Assistance Program funding for the removal of standing burnt trees located on private property that are threatening a public right-of-way. 88 TOWN OF PARADISE, CA – 2023 FEDERAL PLATFORM | 16

U S D A G R A N T F O R B U I L D I N G R E S I L I E N C Y

C E N T E R
After the Camp Fire, the Town needed a place that could be used as a one-stop-shop for residents who are rebuilding or considering rebuilding in the Town of Paradise. USDA awarded the Town a $148,300 grant to renovate a building donated by the Bank of America for use as the Town’s “Building Resiliency Center” (BRC). The BRC was one of the first major community projects completed since the Camp Fire. The Town’s building department is located inside the BRC, where residents can ask questions, apply for permits, and get all the information they need to rebuild their home. The BRC also offers housing counseling services to help residents understand grants and other resources available for their housing needs. Further, USDA supported the procurement of the following equipment:

Fire Engine
Police Department Community Services Officer Vehicle
Animal Control Truck
Street Sweeper
Two Code Enforcement Vehicles
Brush Chipper
Skid Steer
Four Public Works Trucks
Vacuum Excavator
These items replaced equipment lost in the fire as well as equipment to manage the new post-fire landscape. 89 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 6(b)
ORIGINATED BY: Dina Volenski, Town Clerk/Elections Official REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Town Council Appointment to fill one vacancy on the Paradise Planning Commission

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

No
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Council Members Crowder and Lassonde, the Planning Commission Interview Panel, recommend the following:

Consider concurring with the recommendation of the interview panel; and,

1. Appoint applicant Charles Homan to fill the existing vacancy on the Planning Commission (effective immediately with term to expire June 30, 2024; or,

2. Consider an alternative direction.

Background:

On December 13, 2022, the Town Council approved the Notice of Vacancy and application and authorized staff to advertise the existing vacancy on the Planning Commission due to the Election of Ron Lassonde to the Paradise Town Council.

Advertising for the position included posting on the Town’s website, Facebook page, a public notice and the Weekly Recovery update. An application deadline of January 12, 2023 at 5:00 p.m. was set; Council Members Crowder and Lassonde were appointed to serve as the interview committee; staff was directed to provide suggested questions and a scoring matrix for the candidates; interviews were scheduled for January 25, 2023; and appointment to the vacancy at the February 14, 2023 Regular Town Council meeting.

Nine applications were received, but one individual withdrew their name from the interview process due to a potential conflict of interest. Interviews were conducted on January 25, 2023 with the following applicants:
 Raymond Gary Hendra
 Lee Brown
 Josh Fisher
 Speri Machuga
 Dee Riley
 Charles Holman
 Linda Reynolds
 Clariece Tally
90 Analysis:

The interview committee unanimously recommends appointing Charles Holman to the Planning Commission, effective immediately. Additionally, the following applicants are recommended to be alternates for potential future vacancies.  Josh Fisher
 Dee Riley
 Clariece Tally
Financial Impact:

None
91 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 6(c)
ORIGINATED BY: Kate Anderson, Housing Program Manager
REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Community Development Block Grant Program
(CDBG) 2023-2024 Subrecipient Committee
Appointment

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

No.

COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Approve the formation of a public services sub-committee to consider input and requests for public services funding; and

2. Appoint two Council members to the public services subcommittee.

Background:

The Town of Paradise has been a U.S. Department of Housing and Development (HUD) entitlement city since 1994. HUD awards grants to entitlement community grantees to carry out a wide range of community development activities directed toward revitalizing neighborhoods, economic development, and providing improved community facilities and services.

Entitlement communities develop their own programs and funding priorities. However, grantees must give maximum feasible priority to activities which benefit low- and moderate-income persons. A grantee may also carry out activities which aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight. Additionally, grantees may fund activities when the grantee certifies that the activities meet other community development needs having a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community where other financial resources are not available to meet such needs. CDBG funds may not be used for activities which do not meet these broad national objectives.

HUD determines the amount of each entitlement grant by a statutory dual formula which uses several objective measures of community needs, including the extent of poverty, population, housing overcrowding, age of housing and population growth lag in relationship to other metropolitan areas.

Public Services Funding Process: As part of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Annual Plan process, the Town Council may elect, but is not required, to allocate up to 15% of its Program Year funding for public services agencies. The agencies must be legal, non-profit organizations that provide services to low- and moderate-income residents. 92 In the past, the Town Council directed staff to establish a sub-committee consisting of two council representatives and two staff members to hold preliminary interviews with interested subrecipients. The purpose of the subcommittee was to meet with the subrecipients and make a formal recommendation to the Council for final approval.

Analysis:

Although the Town has some discretion on how the funds are used, there are many restrictions, conditions, and objectives that must be met. Community Development Block Grant funds for public services must be a new service; or be a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service; may not replace local or state monies to fund an essential service; may not fund payments made to individuals for basic needs; and may not fund a political activity. The activity funded must also:

1. Benefit low- and moderate-income persons,

2. Aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or,

3. Meet community development needs having a particular urgency.

Financial Impact:

The impact of this agenda item and subsequent actions related to the CDBG Program is positive.

It will result in the award of approximately $107,537.00 in federal funds as we estimate the Town may receive approximately the same amount of funding as last year, of which, $16,130 can be granted to subrecipients.
93 Town of Paradise
Council Agenda Summary
Date: February 14, 2023
Agenda Item: 6(d)
ORIGINATED BY: Marc Mattox, Public Works Director &Town Engineer Ashley Stanley, Engineering Division Manager
REVIEWED BY: Kevin Phillips, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Paradise Sewer Project – Inter-Municipal Agreement

LONG TERM
RECOVERY PLAN:

Yes, Tier 1 “Sewer”
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
a) Review and approve the proposed Inter-Municipal Agreement and authorize the Town Manager to execute following review and approval by the Town Attorney, City of Chico City Council and City Attorney; and
b) Authorize the Town Manager to approve minor adjustments to the Inter-Municipal Agreement as requested by the City of Chico during its review and consideration process; and
c) Direct staff to continue the next steps in the Paradise Sewer Project including supporting the City of Chico in an application to the Butte Local Agency Formation Commission for the extension of wastewater treatment services to the Town of Paradise; or
d) Provide alternative action (ROLL CALL VOTE)
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 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 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 Paradise Sewer Project consists of three primary components: Core Collection System, Export Pipeline System, and Extended Collection System. The Core Collection System would support the centralized businesses and housing in Town, including approximately 1,500 parcels along the Skyway, Clark Road, and Pearson Road corridors. The proposed Export Pipeline System would start at the southern end of the Core Collection System as a gravity sewer line and would continue southwest approximately 18 miles to the City of Chico for connection to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant. Other than the Town of Paradise flow, no other connections will be 94 allowed to the export pipeline. The Extended Collection System would be an extension of the Core Collection System that would allow collection of sewage from parcels outside the Core Collection System, but within the Town limits.

Concurrent to the preparation of the Programmatic Environmental Impact Report, a Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee (SRPAC) was formed. The role of the Advisory Committee is to develop principles of agreement for the City to provide the Town with wastewater treatment services. The Advisory Committee will also monitor overall progress of the project including the EIR process and associated public comment periods as well as provide updates and recommendations back to the two Councils.

The SRPAC met numerous times between April 2021 and March 2022, soliciting public and stakeholder feedback along the way. The SRPAC methodically addressed the draft Principles of Agreement during these open meetings.

The Principles of Agreement prepared with the SRPAC outlined key parameters of a potential agreement such as ensuring that ratepayers for Chico are not financially responsible for any aspect of Paradise’s treatment needs, in addition to a potential connection payment from the Town of Paradise to the City of Chico, agreed at $14.9 million, to support the existing plant and capacity related needs.

The Principles of Agreement also set forth a requirement that the Paradise Sewer Project only serves properties within the Town of Paradise Town Limits.

The Principles of Agreement created by the SRPAC were approved as Draft, without comments by both Paradise Town Council (April 2022) and Chico City Council (May 2022) and received no public comments in the 30-day public noticing period. The Principles were finalized in June 2022 by respective Town and City Councils with direction for staff to start preparing the formal InterMunicipal Agreement (IMA) for execution between the Town of Paradise and City of Chico following the certification of the Project’s Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR).

The Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (Final PEIR) assessed the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project on the physical, human, and natural environment.

A wide variety of resource areas were studied 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 were identified and evaluated in the Draft PEIR.

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, 5pm, to August 29, 2022) and held three public meetings (August 8 (6:00pm), August 10 (12:30 and 6:00 pm), 2022).

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 (FPEIR). A Public Hearing for the FPEIR was held on November 7, 2023 and was approved by the Paradise Town Council. A Notice of Determination was filed with the Butte County Recorder’s Office with final certification complete on December 8, 2022.
95 Analysis:

Following extensive reviews by both City of Chico and Town of Paradise staff and legal departments, a proposed Inter-Municipal Agreement has been completed and requires consideration by respective City and Town Council’s for execution.

A copy of the IMA is included in this Agenda Summary. The IMA is consistent with the Principles of Agreement initially approved by the SRPAC and respective Councils.

It is anticipated that the City of Chico City Council will formally consider review and approval of the IMA at their regularly scheduled February 21, 2023 Council meeting.

Staff is recommending Town Council approve the presented IMA with authorization given to the Town Manager to approve any minor changes proposed by the City of Chico during their consideration process.

Financial Impact:

There are no new financial impacts associated with this specific action requested. Project funding is addressed separately through various Council Actions and funding sources.

To date, all project costs within the prior three years have been secured through various grants with $30 million secured for anticipated design and right of way phases. Further the Town of Paradise has pledged an additional $15 million of Disaster Recovery Infrastructure funding to the construction phase of the project. Staff continues to seek additional grant funding opportunities, including significant funding through the Water Board Division of Financial Assistance under the 2022 State Budget Act’s approved Septic to Sewer funding program.

Attachments:

1. Inter-Municipal Agreement between the Town of Paradise and City of Chico 96 INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT

CITY OF CHICO WASTEWATER TREATMENT SERVICES TO THE

TOWN OF PARADISE
FEBRUARY 21, 2023
97 CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 1
THIS INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into on ___________________ by and between the TOWN OF PARADISE, a municipal corporation (Town) and the CITY OF CHICO, a municipal corporation (City). Each may be referred to as a Party and together as the Parties.

RECITALS

1. The Town of Paradise experiences public health and safety risks as a result of its failed or failing sewer system and has sought a solution for some time, as detailed in the Program EIR for the Paradise Sewer Project.

2. Through its work on the Paradise Sewer Project (Project), the Town of Paradise (Town) identified a connection to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) as its preferred alternative for wastewater treatment and disposal and approached the City of Chico (City) to explore the feasibility of such a connection.

3. The Project improves groundwater quality and facilitates a regional wastewater approach.

4. The WPCP is part of the Chico sanitary sewer system.

5. The City of Chico Municipal Code Section 15.40.285, “Regulation of Waste Received from Other Jurisdictions,” requires that any project with another municipality which would utilize the Chico sanitary sewer system requires an intermunicipal agreement (IMA) and sets out the requirements for such agreement.

6. To initially draft such an IMA, the Councils of the Town of Paradise, and City of Chico formed a Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee (Committee) as a mechanism for exploring this proposal. The Committee was composed of two elected officials from each entity.

7. The Committee developed 17 Principles of Agreement (POA) that were posted for public review and comment between March 25 and April 25, 2022. No comments were received.

8. At a City Council meeting on June 7, 2022, and Town Council meeting on June 14, 2022, the two Councils approved the POA and directed counsel for each party to develop the IMA, based on the POA. A copy of the approved POA is attached and incorporated as Exhibit 1 to this Agreement.

9. On or about November 7, 2022, the Town Council certified the Program EIR for the Project; in addition, the Town filed a Notice of Determination for the Final Program EIR on December 8, 2022.

10. This IMA is intended to be a living and flexible document to guide the future relationship between the Parties in regarding the use of the Chico Sanitary Sewer System at the connection to the WPCP.
98 CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 2
Section 1. Recitals.

The Recitals set out above are true and correct.

Section 2. Definitions.

Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms defined in this Section 2 shall for all purposes of this Agreement have the meanings specified here:

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE: The Town of Paradise Town Manager or designee and the City of Chico City Manager or designee.

CHICO SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM: The sewer system within the City of Chico, separate from the Town sewer system.

CHICO WPCP or WPCP: The Chico Water Pollution Control Plant.

CITY: The City of Chico.

COMBINED FLOW: The total flow within the pipe
CORE COLLECTION SYSTEM: The sewer system within the Town of Paradise identified in the Sewer Service Area.

DISCHARGE: The introduction of pollutants or wastewater into the City’s sanitary sewer system by any means.

EXPORT PIPELINE SYSTEM: The portion of the Paradise Sewer Project beginning at the downstream point of the Town collection system and ending at the connection to the Chico WPCP.

INFILTRATION: Any inflow entering a collector, trunk, or interceptor sewer or service connections thereto from the ground through such means as, including but not limited to, defective pipes, pipe joints, connections, or manhole walls.

INFLOW: Any non-sewer discharge into the collector, trunk, or interceptor sewer or service connections thereto from such sources as, but not limited to, roof leaders, cellars, yard and area drains, foundation drains, cooling water discharges, drains from springs and swampy areas, manhole covers, crossconnections from storm sewers and combined sewers, catch basins, storm waters, surface runoff, street wash waters or drainage.

MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION COSTS: The reasonable and necessary costs of maintaining and operating a wastewater collection system calculated on sound accounting principles, including but not limited to the reasonable expenses of management, operation, repair and other expenses necessary to maintain and preserve the system in good repair and working order, and reasonable amounts for administration overhead, insurance, taxes (if any) and other similar costs.

MGD: Million gallons per day.
99 CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 3
PRETREATMENT: The reduction of the amount of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nature of pollutant properties in wastewater prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise introducing such pollutants into the Town or City’s sanitary sewer system. The reduction or alteration can be obtained by physical, chemical or biological processes; by process changes; or by other means, except by diluting the concentration of the pollutant unless allowed by an applicable pretreatment standard.

PRETREATMENT PROGRAM: The City of Chico Municipal Code pretreatment requirements for wastewater pursuant to Chico Municipal Code Chapter 15 Article 3 commencing with Section 15.40.027.

PROJECT: The entire wastewater project that the Town of Paradise will construct to collect and convey wastewater to the Chico WPCP, also called the Paradise Sewer Project.

SANITARY SEWAGE: All liquid and water-carried waste from residences, business buildings, institutions, or other similar establishments, excluding storm waters, combined flow, and industrial waste.

SEWER SERVICE AREA: The area within the Town of Paradise where wastewater is collected consisting of the Core Collection Area (approximately 1,400 parcels within the Town’s downtown and evacuations corridors). At no time shall the Sewer Service Area extend beyond the Town limits.

TOWN: The Town of Paradise.

TOWN CORE COLLECTION AREA/SYSTEM: The Wastewater Collection system within the Town of Paradise Sewer Service Area.

TOWN WASTEWATER FACILITIES: The combination of the Core Collection System and Export Pipeline System.

WASTEWATER: The liquid and water-carried industrial or domestic wastes from dwellings, commercial buildings, industrial facilities, and institutions, whether treated or untreated, which is contributed into or permitted to enter the Chico WPCP. This includes infiltration, inflow, and combined flow.

WASTEWATER COLLECTION: The combined sewer system, including pipelines conveying sewer.

WASTERWATER TREATMENT SERVICES: The services provided by the City of Chico to the Town of Paradise pursuant to this Agreement.

Section 3. General Terms and Conditions.

A. Purpose of Agreement:

It is intended that this Agreement meet the requirements of the applicable provisions of Chico Municipal Code Section 15.40.285 for an inter-municipal agreement for connection of the Town’s Sewer Service Area to the Chico WPCP as well as provide for the roles and responsibilities for the provision of wastewater discharge for the Paradise Sewer Project. 100

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 4
It further is intended that this Agreement serve as an inter-municipal agreement to be submitted to the Butte County Local Agency Formation Commission.

B. Term and Termination:

This Agreement shall become effective as of the date of approval of both Parties and thereafter an Extension of Services approval by the Butte County Local Agency Formation Commission; thereafter, it shall continue in full force and effect until terminated by written agreement of all the parties hereto, as provided in Section 17, or by operation of law.

C. Scope of Authority and Services:

1. City’s Financial Responsibility: The City shall finance, construct, reconstruct, operate, repair and maintain all facilities for the treatment and disposal of sanitary sewage and industrial waste delivered to the WPCP originating from the Town’s Sewer Service Area in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations and the terms of this Agreement. Except as otherwise provided herein, the City shall not be financially responsible for any costs of Town’s Wastewater Facilities.

2. Town’s Financial Responsibility: Except as otherwise provided herein, the Town shall be financially responsible for any and all costs of Town’s Wastewater Facilities and shall finance, construct, reconstruct, operate, repair and maintain all collector and trunk sewers for wastewater originating within its Sewer Service Area in compliance with this Agreement and all applicable laws and regulations, including but not limited to those of the City of Chico and specifically Chico Municipal Code Sections 15.40.024 and 15.40.027, and the terms of this Agreement.

D. Project Committee:

Upon execution of this Agreement by both Parties, each Party shall appoint an Authorized Representative to represent it in dealing with ongoing operations and provide written notice and contact information for its Authorized Representative to the other Party.

During the construction of the Project, the Parties shall work together through a project coordination team (PCT). The PCT will include each Party’s Authorized Representative and such other staff or consultants as each Party desires. The PCT will meet periodically as agreed by its members, but at least monthly, to review progress and cooperate in fulfilling each Party’s responsibilities under this Agreement.

Upon completion of the Project and connection to the WPCP, the Authorized Representatives shall continue to represent each Party and the PCT will continue to assist the Parties.

Each Party shall bear its own expenses for the PCT unless otherwise agreed in writing.

E. Good Faith Cooperation:

The Parties will act in good faith and cooperate with each other in operating the Paradise Sewer Project and the WPCP. The Parties will provide the necessary services of their Authorized 101

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 5
Representatives to perform their duties under this Agreement and provide any necessary institutional and financial support to meet their obligations under this Agreement.

F. Disclosure of Financial Information, Operating Data, and Other Information:

Each Party agrees to furnish such financial, operating, and other data pertaining to the Paradise Sewer Project and WPCP respectively as may be requested by the other Party or the State Water Resources Control Board.

G. Operating Agreement:

The City and Town will enter into a more detailed Operating Agreement which may become part of this Agreement. That Operating Agreement shall deal with the engineering and technical details of the connection to the WPCP and system operations and maintenance thereafter. The Operating Agreement also may allocate operational responsibilities and costs. The execution of the Operating Agreement is a condition precedent to the Town discharging any wastewater to the WPCP.

Section 4. City Provision of Wastewater Capacity to the Town.

A. The City guarantees that in consideration of the Town’s initial treatment connection payment (described in Section 12), commencing as of __________________, the Town of Paradise is allocated, guaranteed and entitled to discharge up to, but no more than, 0.464 million gallons per day (mgd) average dry weather flow (ADWF) to the WPCP. ADWF will be calculated using criteria specified by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board in the Chico National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit as revised from time to time.

B. If the Town exceeds this allocated amount of discharge, Town shall pay to City normal fees plus a flat 20% penalty fee.

C. When the Town’s discharge reaches 90% (0.4176 mgd) of the agreed upon 0.464 mgd capacity allocation, the following shall occur:

1. Town will prepare and submit to the City an Allocation Assessment Report. The report shall include a review of options, including maintaining the 0.464 mgd flow limit, or commence efforts to negotiate additional capacity to be discharged to the WPCP, including required environmental review and approvals.

2. The Town will review proposed or new connections and continue to approve new connections only in a manner that does not exceed the 0.464 mgd allocation.

3. If the Town reaches the 0.464 mgd flow limit, the Town shall not allow additional connections to its sewer system until discharges are reduced to the flow limit.

Alternatively, the City and Town, in an Amendment pursuant to Section 19.E Modifications of Agreement, may agree on an increase in the allowable discharge to the WPCP, including required environmental review and approvals. 102

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 6
D. The boundaries of the area served under this Agreement cannot exceed the boundaries of the Town.

E. All other applicable requirements for the connection of the Core Collection and Extended Collection Systems must be met, including but not limited to capacity at the Chico WPCP.

F. The Town and the City shall prohibit connections to the Export Pipeline System from that portion of the pipeline that sits outside of the Town limits.

Section 5. Town Adoption of City Sewer Use Ordinance.

A. The Town will adopt a sewer use ordinance at least as stringent as that set out in City Municipal Code Section 15.40 Article II (attached and incorporated as Exhibit “2”) which ordinance is acceptable to the City. Town thereafter will update the ordinance so that it remains consistent with the City’s ordinance (the “Sewer Use Ordinance”). Such ordinance shall be in effect no later than the time of the completion of construction of the Export Pipeline System and before connection to the WPCP.

B. The Sewer Use Ordinance shall apply to all Wastewater discharges from the Town.

C. The Sewer Use Ordinance shall address and the Town shall develop and administer a Sewer Application process. The Sewer Application process shall consist of two parts: a Town-reviewed portion for the connection to the Core Collection or Extended Collection System and a City-reviewed portion for treatment for industrial uses which meet the discharge thresholds set out in Section

15.40.285 (the Pretreatment Program, attached and incorporated as Exhibit “3”).

D. The Town generally will not be required to pretreat its discharges. However, all Town wastewater discharges are subject to the Pretreatment requirements of the City’s Pretreatment Program as set out in this Agreement and in the City Code.

E. The City review of Town wastewater discharges for Pretreatment requirements will be the same as the existing program within the City. When the proposed Discharge exceeds the thresholds established in the Pretreatment Program, the discharger will be required by the City to treat its Discharge to a sufficient degree to meet the City’s Pretreatment Program requirements. The Town does not have a role in enforcing such requirements.

Section 6. Information Provided by the Town to the City:

A. Quarterly Report:

Commencing as of the first date of the discharge into the Export Pipeline System, the Town shall submit a quarterly report of all entities discharging into its Core Collection System, classified by residential and commercial dischargers. The report shall be in a format determined by the City. This quarterly report also shall contain an estimate of the number of new connections estimated to 103

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 7
occur over the next 12-month period, broken down by the same classifications, and expected changes in volume and character of wastewater discharge within that time period.

B. Annual Inventory:

The annual inventory shall be based upon the quarterly inventory and shall reflect data from July 1 through June 30 of each fiscal year, and will be submitted by August 1 of each year, commencing with the first year of operation of the Core Collection System.

The annual and quarterly reports and inventory process also shall apply to the Extended Collection System and any other connections within the Sewer Service Area.

The Town also shall provide information requested by the City Director of Public Works (“Director”), including but not limited to a description of the quality and volume of wastewater discharged to the City’s sanitary sewer system by the Town and such other information as the Director shall deem necessary.

Section 7. Access to Town Facilities.

A. The Town hereby grants to the City access to the Town Wastewater Facilities, including but not limited to those within the Town’s boundaries for purposes of inspection, sampling, and other duties deemed necessary by the City. The City will give the Town sufficient notice to allow the Town to arrange safe access to the facilities. The Town and City will agree upon efficient ways to jointly conduct inspections to minimize impacts to both entities’ staff.

Section 8. Wastewater Monitoring.

A. As part of the Project, the Town will construct the Flow Control and Metering Structure which will contain flow control and monitoring equipment. The Flow Control and Metering Structure will be located at or near the WPCP. The Flow Control and Metering Structure shall contain Wastewater monitoring equipment (e.g., flow meter, composite sampler). Because the City has staff familiar with this type of equipment, and because it has its own Wastewater laboratory for testing Wastewater samples, the flow metering and monitoring equipment may be operated and maintained by City staff or their designees, and samples may be processed in the City lab or designated lab. The costs for these services shall be incorporated within the agreed-upon monthly fee structure for Wastewater Treatment Services provided by the City to the Town.

B. Consideration will also be given by the Parties to having some level of monitoring equipment at the upper end of the Export Pipeline System with access granted by the Town to the City.

Section 9: Pretreatment: Administration and Compliance with Requirements.

A. It is anticipated that a majority of the Wastewater discharges into the Paradise collection system will be of typical residential and commercial quality. However, all potential Town discharges will be subject to the Pretreatment requirements of this Agreement. 104

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 8
B. The Town shall follow the City’s Pretreatment Program, including future changes required by law or by the City. The Town will not develop a pretreatment program of its own. This includes but is not limited to the City’s Fats, Oils & Grease (FOG) program. Dischargers will follow the City’s Pretreatment Program application process, which includes setting monthly fees to be paid to the City. Pretreatment program fees will be collected by the Town and conveyed to the City, similar to the process outlined in Chapter 15 Article 3 commencing with 15.40.027 of the Chico Municipal Code.

C. Application for sewer service first shall be made to the Town. Thereafter, all such applications will be provided to the City for review for Pretreatment requirements. The City has a Pretreatment Program to identify and monitor industrial or commercial dischargers who exceed certain thresholds. The review for Pretreatment requirements will be the same process as currently used by the City. If the proposed discharge exceeds the thresholds established in the Pretreatment Program, the discharger will have to treat its discharge to a sufficient degree to meet the City’s Pretreatment Program requirements. The Town will reimburse the City for the costs of handling Pretreatment applications upon receipt of an invoice from the City showing the number of applications and per application cost.

D. The Town shall provide the City with all information it obtains relative to meeting the City’s Pretreatment Program requirements.

Section 10. Town Operation and Maintenance of Facilities.

A. Subject to any exceptions and limitations set forth in this Agreement, the Town shall own and have the sole responsibility to finance, construct, reconstruct, operate, repair, replace and maintain all collector and trunk sewers for Wastewater originating within the Sewer Service Area, and all components of the Export Pipeline System that conveys Wastewater from the Sewer Service Area to the Chico WPCP, including but not limited to the Flow Control and Metering Structure at or near the Chico WPCP.

B. Inflow and Infiltration: Town will complete such corrective measures to eliminate excessive inflow and infiltration as are reasonably demonstrated to be cost effective by studies conducted and funded by the Town
C. Nothing in this Agreement prohibits the Town from contracting with the City to carry out the Town’s responsibilities as to the Export Pipeline subject to one or more separate agreements.

Section 11. City Operation of WPCP.

A. Subject to the exceptions and limitations set forth in this Agreement, City has the sole responsibility to finance, construct, reconstruct, operate, and maintain the WPCP in compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements, as those may be modified from time to time. 105

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 9
Section 12. Allocation of Costs, Establishment of Service Rates and Procedures for the Collection of Sewer Rates and Delinquent Charges.

A. Initial Treatment Connection Payment:

In consideration of the provision of the capacity in the WPCP set out in this Agreement, the Town shall pay to City approximately $14.9 million, payable in full at the time initial Wastewater flows begin from the Core Collection Area. This amount may be recalculated approximately six months before that date pursuant to the “Regionalization Planning Report for the Paradise Sewer Project (March 2022),” attached and incorporated as Exhibit “4.” This payment shall be used by the City only for capital costs associated with projects implemented at the WPCP. No flows shall be accepted by City until this payment has been made. The Town at its sole discretion may provide for the recovery of all or a portion of this payment in its sewer rates or sewer connection and capacity charges.

B. Subsequent Treatment Connection Fees:

In the event a new project or modification by the City is required solely for the purpose of sustaining the Town’s connection, the City shall formally notify the Town of anticipated improvements, costs and schedules for an evaluation of alternatives including the Town modifying its monthly sewer rates. The Town shall pay to the City the Town’s proportionate share of costs for improvements or modifications to the WPCP required by any regulatory agency only as a result of the Town connection and excluding any such costs for City connections or services.

C. Town Capacity and Connection Charges:

The Town will develop both capacity and connection charges as well as sewer impact fees applicable to new connections to the sewer system in the amounts and in the manner allowed by law.

D. Town Monthly Sewer Rates:

The Town shall develop sewer rates to be billed on a monthly basis, which will include the Town’s and City’s costs. Such rates shall be in the amounts allowed by law and shall be approved as required by Proposition 218 and other applicable laws. The City’s monthly costs associated with wastewater treatment and disposal at the WPCP shall be included in such rates along with any additional pretreatment fee charged to special dischargers, according to the same metric as the City ratepayers.

E. Town Collection of Sewer Rates:

The Town shall periodically levy, bill, and use reasonable efforts to collect from each of its residential and commercial system users such sewer user charge. 106

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 10
F. Town Sewer Rate and Payment Records:

Adequate records shall be maintained by the Town to permit ready, separate identification of City Services and of local service charges, amounts received, and payments made to the City.

G. Pretreatment Costs:

In addition to City Wastewater treatment and disposal charges, a Town discharger subject to pretreatment requirements shall be responsible for payment of the City’s charges for participating in the Pretreatment Program. Pursuant to Section 6, City shall collect all information from the Town needed to compute such charges and administer the approval process, provide such costs to the Town for such charges and adjust such charges as allowed by law. The Town shall be responsible for including such cost in its monthly sewer billings. The City shall be responsible for compliance with applicable law in setting such charges.

Section 13. Town Payment of Sewer Charges to City.

A. Not later than 45 calendar days following the date of each regular periodic billing for sewer charges, the Town shall pay to the City a sum that equals the total of all charges for City that were charged to Town for that billing period, regardless of the amount collected by Town from its users. Payments shall be accompanied by a summary identification by billing categories. A periodic (semi-annually) report shall be submitted to the City reconciling billings with payments.

Section 14. Monthly Treatment User Fees.

A. In addition to any other user and Pretreatment fees, the City shall establish a WPCP treatment fee as part of its overall City fee structure. Similarly, the Town of Paradise users will be charged WPCP treatment fees in accordance with residential, commercial, and industrial uses, and such fees shall not be higher than the proportional fees collected from the City’s rate payers for WPCP treatment.

The Town will pay the treatment fee established in the City’s fee schedule, including any future increases made to those fees. For any fee increases to City users, the City shall undertake the Prop 218 process. For any fee increases to Town users, whether initiated by Town or passed through to Town by City, Town shall undertake the Prop 218 process as required by law.

The Town will collect the treatment monthly user fee from its users. The Town will submit the total treatment monthly user fee amount to the City as set out in Section 13 above. 107

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 11
Section 15. Additional Provisions.

A. No Joint and Several Liability:

Neither party to this Agreement nor any officer or employee thereof shall be responsible for any liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by the other party to this Agreement under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to said other party under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement does not create a joint powers agency and, pursuant to California Government Code Section 895.4, each party to this Agreement shall fully indemnify and hold each other party to this Agreement harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined by California Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by said indemnifying party under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to said party under this Agreement. There shall be no joint and several liability as a result of this Agreement.

B. Auditing Records:

The City shall have the authority to appoint such auditors as it deems necessary for the examination of financial records of the Town to determine compliance with this Agreement. The Town shall make available to such auditors all requested records and will assist and cooperate with the auditors in their efforts. Examples of required documentation may include reasonable efforts to collect delinquent charges; details of uncollectable charges; and account billing information by parcel.

Section 16. Resolution of Disputes.

A. “Dispute” means disputes, claims or other matters in question regarding the discharge of wastewater from the Town Wastewater Facilities to the Chico WPCP, which may or may not be a breach of this Agreement. Either party may initiate the dispute resolution process. No matter will be considered if it is a claim barred by an applicable statute of limitations or the provisions of local, state or federal law.

1. Initial Informal Resolution:

Either Party’s Authorized Representative may provide the other Party’s Authorized Representative a written letter or memo setting out the dispute in writing in sufficient detail to allow its resolution (with relevant back up materials), the remedy sought and the timing for resolution. The receiving party may request additional information. Once each side has the information necessary, the Authorized Representatives shall meet (in person or virtually) within a reasonable period of time (not to exceed one month) to try to resolve the dispute. Any resolution shall be in writing, attached to all materials provided, and retained for future reference.

2. If the Authorized Representatives cannot resolve the dispute, the process will be repeated with the senior executives of each party (i.e., public works director or city manager).
108

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 12

3. If the matter involves a technical operational matter, and the Parties themselves cannot resolve it, they may designate an independent expert to analyze the issue and provide recommendations for resolution. The Parties will evenly divide the costs of such an independent expert.

4. If the dispute is not otherwise resolved, the Parties will engage in non-binding mediation or arbitration.

5. Mediation:

If the Dispute is not resolved, then prior to any litigation of the Dispute commenced by either or both Parties, the Parties must jointly attempt to resolve the Dispute through mediation with a mutually acceptable mediator. If the Parties are unable to agree on a mediator within ten days of the request for mediation, then the Party requesting the mediation will request that JAMS or the American Arbitration Association to appoint a mediator from its personnel/panel experienced in similar disputes.

With the prior written approval of the Parties, the mediator may engage an expert consultant to provide independent analysis to the mediator on technical matters, which analysis the mediator may share with the Parties in mediator's discretion. The Parties and mediator will schedule a mediation session at a mutually acceptable time. Representatives from each Party who have authority to resolve the Dispute will attend the mediation. The mediator will have no authority to make binding decisions; any resolution of the Dispute during mediation requires the written agreement of both Parties. The Parties will bear the cost of mediation equally.

If mediation is not successful, the Parties may pursue any other remedy allowed by law and not prohibited by this Agreement, including but not limited to, binding arbitration or court action.

6. Continuation of Work:

Each Party must continue to perform its obligations under this Agreement, including but not limited to making all undisputed payments, regardless of the existence of a Dispute or the pendency of dispute resolution proceedings between the Parties. In no case shall the treatment of wastewater delivered from Paradise to the Chico WPCP cease.
109

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 13
Section 17. Default.

A. Failure of Chico to Properly Treat Wastewater:

It is understood and agreed that City, in granting to the Town the rights herein specified to discharge Wastewater into the WPCP and to have such Wastewater treated and disposed of in said system, is agreeing that the WPCP will be able to satisfactorily treat such Wastewater when delivered pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. In the event the Chico WPCP should for any reason be incapable of satisfactorily conveying, treating, or disposing of Wastewater discharged from the Town, the Town shall in no way be liable to the City for any damages arising or resulting from or suffered because of that failure; provided, however, that the Town shall not knowingly permit to be discharged into Chico WPCP any Wastewater from any source at rates of flow, strength or other characteristics inconsistent with this Agreement or those for which the WPCP is designed to handle or has been shown capable of handling by prior experience. The Parties agree that the City’s obligations are unique and that the City’s failure to meet its obligations under this Agreement would result in Town being unable to supply wastewater treatment in compliance with regulatory requirements, or in providing continuing sewer services, thereby harming the public welfare.

Therefore, without limiting any other of the Town’s rights or remedies if the City fails to cure a material default which results in Town being unable to use the WPCP facilities, City agrees that the Town may bring an action for specific performance of this Agreement by the City, without waiving (1) any defense to such action; (2) its right to contest whether the City is in breach of a contractual obligation or (3) Town’s obligation under Civil Code Section 3386 (or any successor statutory provision) to assure Town’s performance of this Agreement.

B. Failure of Paradise to Properly Convey Wastewater:

Except as provided in Section 17.C, below, City agrees that its only remedy for a material default by the Town is a claim for monetary damages to the extent allowed under this Agreement. Except as provided in Section 17.C, below, in no event may the City suspend, slow down or cease to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement to operate the Chico WPCP and accept Paradise wastewater without the written consent of the Town. Except as specifically provided otherwise in this Agreement, before the City may seek a remedy for a material default by the Town, the City must provide written notice of such default to the Town. The notice must describe the nature of the default and identify a reasonable period for cure which must be at least 30 thirty calendar days after the notice of default and which will be extended as reasonably necessary for the cure of that default, so long as the Town commences and pursues the cure with reasonable diligence during the identified time period. If the Town fails to cure the default within that time period, then the City may proceed with dispute resolution set out in Section 16.

C. Termination:

Parties agree to fully exhaust all measures outlined in Section 16 of this Agreement prior to consideration of termination of this Agreement. Parties further agree that if termination of this Agreement needs to be explored, terms shall be incorporated within a formal Amendment to this Agreement pursuant to Section 19.E Modifications of Agreement. 110

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 14
Section 18. Insurance and Indemnification.

A. Insurance:

Insurance requirements for both the City and Town are listed in Exhibit “5” of this Agreement.

B. Town’s Duty of Indemnification and Defense:

To the fullest extent permitted by law, Town will defend, indemnify and hold City and its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all claims, losses, damages, liabilities, fines, penalties, administrative proceedings, legal actions and expenses (including reasonable legal, expert witness and consulting fees and costs) to the extent arising out of, or resulting from the active negligence or willful misconduct of Town in connection with the Paradise Sewer Project or arising out of this Agreement.

If Town fails diligently to defend any such claim or proceeding, City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to do so at the Town’s expense. The duty to defend will apply, and Town will be required to furnish a defense, notwithstanding that there has not yet been an adjudication or finding of liability on the part of either Party, or as to whether an exception to provide a defense or indemnity may apply.

Notwithstanding the above, Town will not be required to defend, indemnify and hold harmless City or its officers, employees or agents (“City”) when such claims, losses, damages, liabilities and expenses arise from the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of City or those for whom City is responsible, which include fines imposed by administrative agencies, specifically including but not limited to fines from the Regional Water Board arising from City’s operation of the WCPC.

C. City’s Duty of Indemnification and Defense:

To the fullest extent permitted by law, City will defend, indemnify and hold Town and its officers, employees and agents affiliates harmless from any and all claims, losses, damages, liabilities, fines, penalties, administrative proceedings, legal actions, and expenses (including reasonable legal, expert witness and consulting fees and costs) including but not limited to those for costs for fines imposed by the Regional Water Board or other agencies arising from City’s operation of the WCPC, to the extent arising out of or resulting from the active negligence or willful misconduct of City in providing or failing to provide services at the WPCP under this Agreement, and including but not limited to any challenges arising under City’s rate setting process. Notwithstanding, the City will not be required to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Town or its officers, employees or agents for their sole active negligence, or willful misconduct.

The City’s obligations include providing the Town with copies of pleadings or other documents and the status of all such proceedings; coordinate any settlement of such claims and obtain full releases.

If City fails diligently to defend any such claim or proceeding, Town shall have the right, but not the obligation, to do so at the City’s expense. The duty to defend will apply, and City will be required to furnish a defense, notwithstanding that there has not yet been an adjudication or finding of liability 111

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 15
on the part of either Party, or as to whether an exception to provide a defense or indemnity may apply.

Section 19. Miscellaneous.

A. Force Majeure/State of Emergency:

Force Majeure Event means a natural disaster, terrorist action or act of war, epidemic, pandemic, grave natural disaster, negligence on the part of the state, the United States, or any department or agency thereof, an act of governmental agency an intentional ace of a third party, the effects of which could not have been prevented or avoided by the exercise of due care or foresight, any other circumstance or event that causes a discharge despite the exercise of every reasonable precaution to prevent or mitigate the discharge or other emergencies, whether or not declared a State of Emergency beyond the control of the Parties that that impacts performance under this Agreement.

1. In anticipation of or upon occurrence of any Force Majeure Event, each Party will notify the other’s Authorized Representative. The Parties will notify and follow the guidance of the State Water Resources Control Board and Central Valley Water Resources Control Board.

2. During the period of any Force Majeure Event the performance of this Agreement is abated and/or excused to the extent such performance was rendered impossible or extremely difficult.

3. If a Force Majeure Event caused damage to the Chico Sanitary Sewer System, City shall use reasonable efforts to restore or mitigate the damage. City shall perform such restoration or mitigation in a reasonable time under the circumstances and at the sole cost and expense of City.

4. If a Force Majeure Event caused damage to the Town Wastewater Facilities, Town shall use reasonable efforts to restore or mitigate the damage. Town shall perform such restoration or mitigation in a reasonable time under the circumstances and at the sole cost and expense of Town.

B. Emergency Notification:

Each Party will promptly notify the other of material problems in the operation of the Paradise Sewer Project or Chico WPCP that affect the other Party, including, but not limited to:

1. Contamination from Paradise into the Export Pipeline.

2. Break in the Export Pipeline.

3. Reduced capacity at the WPCP.

4. Discharge violations at the WPCP.

C. Notice:

Notices required or permitted under this Agreement shall be sufficiently given to a party if in writing and if either served by email, facsimile, personally upon or mailed by registered or certified mail to the clerk of its governing body.
112

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 16
D. Time of the Essence:

Time is of the essence in this Agreement.

E. Modification of Agreement:

No term, provision, or condition of this Agreement shall be altered, amended, or departed from or be held or construed to have been waived except by the unanimous agreement and consent of the parties to this Agreement as evidenced by resolutions adopted by their respective governing bodies specifically authorizing the amendment. No waiver of any term or condition of this Agreement shall be a continuing waiver thereof.

This Agreement shall be reviewed 3 years from initial execution and every 5 years thereafter by the Parties and updated or revised as necessary.

Any modifications to the Agreement shall include a formal notification to the Water Board prior to execution.

F. Severability:

If any paragraph, subparagraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Agreement, or the application thereof, to any party, or to any other person or circumstance is for any reason held invalid, it shall be deemed severable and the validity of the remainder of the Agreement or the application of such provision to the other parties, or to any other persons or circumstance, shall not be affected thereby. Each party hereby declares that it would have entered into this Agreement and each paragraph, subparagraph, sentence, clause, phrase, and word thereof irrespective of the fact that one or more paragraphs, subparagraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases, or words, or the application thereof to any party or any other person or circumstance, be held invalid.

G. Further Assurances:

Each Party will adopt, make, execute and deliver any and all such further resolutions, instruments and assurances as may be reasonably necessary or proper to carry out the purposes and intent of this Agreement.

H. Jurisdiction and Venue:

This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. The Parties agree that the exclusive venue for any legal proceeding brought under this Agreement will be in the County of Butte, State of California.

I. Successors and Assigns:

It is mutually agreed by all the parties hereto that the agreements, covenants, conditions, limitations, restrictions, and undertakings herein contained shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the respective parties hereto as if they were in all cases named. 113

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 17
J. Section Headings:

The Section Headings contained in this Agreement are for reference purposes only and will not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

K. Entire Agreement:

This Agreement constitutes the entire integrated agreement between the Parties and supersedes all prior oral and written negotiations, representations, or agreements by the Parties with respect to this subject matter.

L. Counterparts:

For convenience the Parties may execute and acknowledge this Agreement in counterparts and when the separate signature pages containing original signatures are attached to the original Agreement or a copy of the Agreement, such document shall constitute one and the same complete original Agreement.
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
114

CITY OF CHICO-TOWN OF PARADISE
INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT 18

CITY OF CHICO
____________________________________________ Date: ___________________________ NAME, City Manager
Approved as to form:
____________________________________________ Date: ___________________________ NAME, City Attorney
ATTEST:
____________________________________________ Date: ___________________________ NAME, City Clerk

TOWN OF PARADISE
____________________________________________ Date: ___________________________ NAME, Town Manager
Approved as to form:
____________________________________________ Date: ___________________________ NAME, Town Attorney
ATTEST:
____________________________________________ Date: ___________________________ NAME, Town Clerk
115

Page 1 of 8 ends

Final Principles of Agreement
(version 7, 21-March-2022)
Introduction and Background
Through its work on the Paradise Sewer Project (Project), the Town of Paradise (Town) has identified a connection to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) as its preferred alternative for wastewater treatment and disposal, and has approached the City of Chico (City) to explore the feasibility of such a connection. The Councils of the Town of Paradise and City of Chico have formed a Sewer Regionalization Project Advisory Committee (Committee) as a mechanism for exploring this proposal. The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) has agreed to facilitate the activities of the Committee.

Membership on the Committee is limited to elected officials from the Town and City, as those two parties are signatories to the Cooperative Funding Agreement (CFA) and will be signatories to a future inter-municipal agreement (IMA). The Town and City have both designated their Mayors and Vice Mayors as their Committee members.

The Committee will develop an agreed-upon list of basic principles for an IMA, which will be captured in this document, the Principles of Agreement (POA). It is anticipated that a draft POA will be developed by the Committee, which will then be brought to the Town Council and City Council for review and approval. The final POA would then be turned over to legal counsel from the Town and City to draft into an IMA for consideration by the Town Council and City Council.

City of Chico Municipal Code
The City of Chico has a provision in its municipal code Section 15.40.285—Regulation of Waste Received from Other Jurisdictions that specifically addresses handling wastewater from outside the city’s sanitary sewer system. That code section is presented in its entirety at the end of this document.

Principles of Agreement
The Principles of Agreement are divided into 17 subject areas, as listed below. (Other subject areas may be added over time.) The first eight items reflect the eight items specified in Section 15.40.285.

Over the course of its work, the Committee will develop specific agreed-upon statements (principles of agreement) for each of these items.

1. Sewer Use Ordinance: The Town will need to adopt a sewer use ordinance that parallels the City’s sewer use ordinance. The POA could contain a commitment from the Town to have an ordinance completed by a certain milestone.
o AGREED: The Town will adopt a sewer use ordinance that parallels the City’s ordinance. The Town’s ordinance shall be adopted and in place 30 days prior to the commencement of discharge into the Project.

2. User Inventory: The Town will need to submit an annual inventory of entities discharging into the sewer system. The POA could contain a statement to that effect. o AGREED: The Town will submit a quarterly inventory of entities discharging into its sewer system, classified by residential and commercial dischargers. This quarterly report will also contain an estimate of new connections estimated to occur over the upcoming 12 months, broken down by the same classifications.

Exhibit 1 - Principles of Agreement
116

Page 2 of 8 ends

This inventory will reflect data from July 1 through June 30 of each year, and will be submitted by August 1 of each year.
o AGREED: The Town will develop and administer a Sewer Application process, with two parts—a Town-reviewed portion for the collection system and a Cityreviewed portion for treatment. The treatment portion will follow the existing City sewer application. If the proposed discharge exceeds the thresholds established in the pretreatment program (see below), it will have to treat its discharge to a sufficient degree to meet the City’s pretreatment program requirements.

Businesses would face the same pretreatment requirements, whether they are in Paradise or Chico.
o AGREED: The Town and the City agree to prohibit future connections to the export pipeline in the portion of the pipeline that sits outside of the Town limits or City limits.

3. Pretreatment: The City has an existing pretreatment program to monitor industrial/ commercial dischargers, which Town dischargers will need to meet. (The City has two employees conducting annual inspections of commercial/industrial dischargers.) The POA could contain a statement to that effect. In addition, the Town will need to decide whether to create and administer its own pretreatment program, or simply comply with the City’s pretreatment program. Ultimately, the Town and City will need to determine who implements the various pretreatment activities for Paradise dischargers. The POA could contain the basic definition of these divisions of responsibility.
o AGREED: The Town will follow the City’s pretreatment program, including future changes; the Town will not develop a pretreatment program of its own. This includes the City’s Fats, Oils & Grease (FOG) program. Dischargers would follow the City’s pretreatment program application process, which includes setting monthly fees. Pretreatment program fees will be collected by the Town and conveyed to the City, similar to the process outlined in Item 10.

4. Pretreatment Data Access: The Town will need to provide the City with all information it obtains related to the pretreatment activities. The POA could contain a statement to that effect.
o AGREED: The Town will provide the City with all information it obtains relative to meeting the City’s pretreatment program requirements. o AGREED: Paradise will contract with the City or hire and use qualified professionals (Industrial Waste Inspectors, testing, labs, etc.) to conduct its pretreatment activities. [Staff Input: This statement may no longer apply, given the decision made on Item 3—Pretreatment. Delete.]

5. Wastewater Limits: The agreement will need to define limits on the volume and quality of Paradise wastewater discharged to the Chico Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). This will likely be addressed by the City’s CFA efforts; the Committee would then review those Exhibit 1 - Principles of Agreement
117

Page 3 of 8 ends

results and draft POA language. Town and City staff are currently awaiting results from the City’s engineering consultant in order to draft suggested language for this item. o AGREED: Associated with the treatment connection payment (described below), the Town of Paradise wastewater flow to the Chico WPCP will be limited to 0.464 million gallons per day (mgd) average dry weather flow (ADWF). ADWF will be calculated using criteria specified by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board in the Chico permit. It is anticipated that a majority of the wastewater discharges into the Paradise collection system will be of typical residential and commercial quality. However, all potential Town discharges will be subject to the Pretreatment requirements of this agreement, as specified in Section 3.

6. Wastewater Monitoring: The agreement will need to define how the volume and quality of Paradise wastewater will be monitored.
o AGREED: The Termination Structure, to be constructed as part of the Paradise Sewer Project, will contain wastewater monitoring equipment (e.g., flow meter, composite sampler). Because the City has staff familiar with this type of equipment, and because it has its own wastewater laboratory for testing wastewater samples, the flow metering and monitoring equipment will be operated and maintained by City staff, and samples will be processed in the City lab. Consideration will also be given to having some level of monitoring equipment at the upper end of the export pipeline. A payment will be negotiated at the start of the contract and paid annually by the Town to the City to cover the costs associated with these efforts.

7. Access to Facilities: The City will need to be granted access to the Town’s wastewater facilities, including those within the Town’s boundaries. The POA could contain a statement to that effect.
o AGREED: The Town will grant the City access to the Town’s wastewater facilities, including those within the Town’s boundaries for purposes of inspection, sampling, and other duties deemed necessary by the City. The City will give the Town sufficient notice to allow the Town to arrange safe access to the facilities. The Town and City will look for efficient ways to jointly conduct inspections to minimize impacts to both entities’ staff.

8. Remedies for Breach of Agreement: Like all legal agreements, the IMA will need to address how the parties would handle any breach of the agreement. This item might need input from Town and City attorneys, in order to draft appropriate POA language. These remedies will vary by the various required items in this POA. o AGREED: If disagreements exist between the Town and City attorneys regarding agreement language, those disagreements will be brought back to the Committee to attempt to resolve.

Exhibit 1 - Principles of Agreement
118

Page 4 of 8 ends

9. Treatment Connection Payment. A number of items need to be addressed related to the treatment connection payment to be paid by the Town for connecting to the Chico WPCP.

These will likely be addressed by the City’s CFA efforts; the Committee would then review those results and draft POA language. Items include:
o How much should the initial connection payment be (e.g., for the initial Paradise flow or the ultimate flow)?
o If ongoing connection fees are to be collected for future connections, how much should they be (e.g., linked to the City of Chico’s current connection fee schedule)?
o How should they be collected and paid to the City of Chico (e.g., collected by the Town of Paradise on an ongoing basis and paid to the City of Chico quarterly)? o AGREED: The goal is to obtain funding for the treatment connection payment in a similar manner to the remainder of the Paradise Sewer Project. The payment is currently estimated at $14.9 million (estimated as December 2026 dollars; as documented in “Regionalization Planning Report for the Paradise Sewer Project,” Carollo Engineers, March 2022), which the Town of Paradise would pay to the City of Chico to cover treatment capital costs associated with a wastewater flow from the Town of 0.464 mgd ADWF (see ADWF definition above). From six to 12 months before the date of connection, the estimated treatment connection payment will be recalculated using the methodology established in the Carollo study. This payment is assumed to be made at the time that initial Paradise flows are sent to the Chico WPCP, currently estimated to start on or about December 2026.

10. Monthly User Fees. A number of items need to be addressed related to the monthly fees to be paid by the Town for discharging to the Chico WPCP. (Note: The City does not currently break its monthly fees into treatment and collection system components.) Items include:
o How much should the monthly user fees charged to the Town be (e.g., linked to the treatment portion of the City of Chico’s current monthly user fees)?  AGREED: Assuming that the City establishes a treatment portion of its monthly user fee, the Town users will pay that treatment monthly user fee to the City. Town users will also pay a collection system monthly user fee to the Town associated with the Town’s collection system and export pipeline O&M costs.
o How should they be collected and paid to the City of Chico?  AGREED: The Town will collect the treatment monthly user fee from its users. The Town will submit the total treatment monthly user fee amount to the City on a [monthly/quarterly] basis. The Town will be responsible for collecting unpaid treatment monthly user fees from its users.

Exhibit 1 - Principles of Agreement
119

Page 5 of 8 ends

o How should future rate updates be handled?
 AGREED: As discussed above, the Town users will pay the treatment monthly user fee established in the City’s fee schedule, including any future increases made to those fees. The assumption is that the City and Town users will pay the same monthly treatment fee based on the established fee schedule. Future increases will follow the Prop 218 process, including public noticing.
o [There is potential for power generation as the wastewater moves from Paradise down off the Ridge to Chico. Need to address potential for sharing any electrical generation revenue.]
 AGREED: It is generally not practical to generate electricity from raw wastewater flows, especially intermittent flows that we will see in the export pipeline. Therefore, this item will not be addressed in the POA. [leave this item in the POA, to allow others to see the discussion/conclusion]
o [There is potential for Chico to treat its wastewater for recycling. Need to address the potential for revenue sharing.]
 AGREED: Because the City’s wastewater system operates as an “enterprise” fund, any income or cost resulting from water recycling will be incorporated into the City’s connection fees and monthly user fees. This item can be stated in the POA as an item not included. [leave this item in the POA, to allow others to see the discussion/conclusion] o [Include a requirement for producing an annual financial report.]  AGREED: In general, wastewater costs and revenues will be captured in the annual budgets of both the Town and City. Also, the City will be provided the ability to audit the Town’s financial records related to the collection of monthly treatment fees. Therefore, no separate annual financial report is needed.

11. O&M of Facilities. The Town will construct the export pipeline and a termination structure at or near the Chico WPCP. The Town would own the export pipeline. The POA would need to address who is responsible for O&M and future repairs/replacements of the export pipeline and termination structure at the Chico WPCP.
o AGREED: It is anticipated that the Town will own the entire export pipeline and will provide all operation and maintenance associated with it, with the exception of wastewater monitoring efforts, which are described in item 6 above. o [It may work best to develop a separate “O&M Agreement” to cover all of the various items related to operating costs.]
Exhibit 1 - Principles of Agreement
120

Page 6 of 8 ends

 AGREED: The City and Town intend to develop an inter-municipal agreement based on these Principals of Agreement. In the future, if O&M items arise and warrant it, the two parties may wish to develop an O&M Agreement. For example, one item that might arise is that the Town might wish to contract with the City to provide some O&M services on the export pipeline, given that the City has on-staff expertise in this area.

12. Term and Termination of the Agreement. [Need to develop the term and termination of the agreement. The term of the agreement should match any financing requirements and/or the lifespan of the infrastructure. Also need to address how to handle disaster scenarios.

This item might need input from Town and City attorneys, in order to draft appropriate POA language.]

13. “Revisit” Clause. [Need to develop a statement that allows for an evolution of the roles and responsibilities established in this document. For example, in the future, if the Town grows to a size that it makes sense for it to create and run its own pretreatment program, the document should allow for that to happen. This item will need input from Town and City attorneys.]
[ADDITIONAL ITEMS 14, 15, and 16 came from “Crafting Interlocal Water and Wastewater Agreements,” UNC Environmental Finance Center, 2019. Text in quotes is taken from that document]

14. Service Area Boundary. “When two or more service providers agree to buy or sell water services to one another, it is extremely important to remove as much ambiguity as possible about current and future service areas.” Identify the service area boundary as the Town of Paradise town limits. The Sphere of Influence and Town/City limits may change… o AGREED: This item relates to the potential for the two entities to have adjacent or overlapping service area boundaries. The Town of Paradise and the City of Chico will not overlap with respect to providing wastewater services. In the future, spheres of influence could overlap (although this is extremely unlikely). If that situation arises, it should be addressed at that time. [Ask the attorneys for their input, including if language should be included on this subject in the intermunicipal agreement.]

15. Notice Requirements for Fee Changes. “The contract should also include language to cover notice requirements or any other processes related to when and how rates will be changed. If there will be a process for modifying rates in the future, the parties should contemplate what shall constitute reasons to justify modification.” o AGREED: In California, formal notification to citizens regarding fee increases is covered by Prop 218. If the City is considering a fee update, City staff will inform the Town Council of an upcoming fee adjustment process.

Exhibit 1 - Principles of Agreement
121

Page 7 of 8 ends

16. Excessive Inflow and Infiltration. “Inflow and infiltration (I&I) can be a big problem for wastewater interlocal agreements. If possible, partners should consider how to contract in language that will address how I&I should be handled.”
o AGREED: Because the Town’s collection system and export pipeline will be entirely new, the initial amount of I&I should be very low. Over time, it is possible I&I will increase. The Town of Paradise will monitor its wet weather flows each year and assess the level of I&I it is experiencing. If excessive I&I is seen, the Town will complete such corrective measures to eliminate excessive I&I as are reasonably demonstrated to be cost effective by studies conducted and funded by the Town. [Perhaps move this item up to Section 11--O&M of Facilities]

17. Resolving Conflicts or Disagreements. [“Regardless of how carefully an interlocal agreement may be contracted, there can still be conflict or disagreement, particularly when unanticipated needs or challenges arise. Parties to an agreement should anticipate the need to potentially negotiate at some point during the life of the agreement, and should build in language that lays out what process should be used.” This item will need input from Town and City attorneys.]
o [Note from Staff: The City of Folsom/SRCSD contract has extensive sample language for this item, which the attorneys can use if they wish to.] Exhibit 1 - Principles of Agreement
122

Page 8 of 8 ends

City of Chico, Code Section 15.40.285
The City of Chico has a provision in its municipal code, Section 15.40.285—Regulation of Waste Received from Other Jurisdictions, that specifically addresses handling wastewater from outside the city’s sanitary sewer system. Here is the code section in its entirety:

15.40.285 Regulation of Waste Received from Other Jurisdictions If another municipality or user located within another municipality contributes wastewater to the city’s sanitary sewer system, the director shall enter into an inter-municipal agreement with the contributing municipality. Prior to entering into an agreement, the director shall request the following information from the contributing municipality:

1. A description of the quality and volume of wastewater discharged to the city’s sanitary sewer system by the contributing municipality;

2. An inventory of all users located within the contributing municipality that are discharging to the city’s sanitary sewer system; and

3. Such other information as the director may deem necessary.

An inter-municipal agreement shall contain the following conditions:

1. A requirement for the contributing municipality to adopt a sewer use ordinance which is at least as stringent as this ordinance and local limits, including required baseline monitoring reports which are at least as stringent as those set out in section 15.40.024. The requirement shall specify that such ordinance and limits must be revised as necessary to reflect changes made to the city’s ordinance or local limits;

2. A requirement for the contributing municipality to submit a revised user inventory on at least an annual basis;

3. A provision specifying which pretreatment implementation activities, including wastewater discharge permit issuance, inspection and sampling, enforcement, will be conducted by the contributing municipality; which of these activities will be conducted by the director; and which of these activities will be conducted jointly by the contributing municipality and the director;

4. A requirement for the contributing municipality to provide the director with access to all information that the contributing municipality obtains as part of its pretreatment activities;

5. Limits on the nature, quality, and volume of the contributing municipality’s wastewater at the point where it discharges to the city’s sanitary sewer system;

6. Requirements for monitoring the contributing municipality’s discharge;

7. A provision ensuring the director access to the facilities of the users located within the contributing municipality’s jurisdictional boundaries for the purpose of inspection, sampling, and other duties deemed necessary by the director; and

8. A provision specifying the remedies available for breach of the terms of the inter-municipal agreement.

Exhibit 1 - Principles of Agreement
123
ARTICLE II. DISCHARGE RESTRICTIONS

15.40.020 General prohibitions.

No user shall introduce or cause to be introduced into the city’s sanitary sewer system any pollutant or wastewater which causes pass through or interference. These general prohibitions apply to all users of the city’s sanitary sewer system whether or not they are subject to categorical pretreatment standards or any other federal, state, or local pretreatment standards or requirements.
(Ord. 2481 §1 (part))

15.40.021 Specific prohibitions.

No user shall introduce or cause to be introduced into the city’s sanitary sewer system any of the following pollutants, substances, or wastewater:

1. Pollutants which create a fire or explosive hazard in the city’s sanitary sewer system with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140° degrees Fahrenheit (60 degrees centigrade) using the test methods specified in 40 CFR Part 261.21.

Prohibited materials include, but are not limited to, gasoline, kerosene, naphtha, benzene, toluene, xylene, ethers, alcohols, ketones, aldehydes, peroxides, chlorates, perchlorates, bromates, carbides, hydrides, or sulfides. Closed cup flashpoint values may be found in the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards;

2. Wastewater having a pH lower than 5.0 or more than 11.5, or otherwise capable of causing damage or hazard to the city’s sanitary sewer system;

3. Solids or viscous substances, including, but not limited to, fats, oils, or grease, garbage with particles greater than one-half inch in any dimension, animal guts or tissues, paunch manure, bones, hair, hides or fleshings, entrails, whole blood, feathers, ashes, cinders, sand, spent lime, stone or marble dust, metal, glass, straw, shavings, grass clippings, rags, spent grains, spent hops, wastepaper, wood, plastics, gas, tar, asphalt residues, residues from refining or processing of fuel or lubricating oil, mud, or glass grinding or polishing wastes, which may cause obstruction of flow in the sewer or other inference with the operation of the city’s sanitary sewer system;

4. Pollutants including oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD, COD, etc.) released in a discharge at a flow rate and/or pollutant concentration which, either singly or by interaction with other pollutants, will cause interference to the city’s sanitary sewer system;

5. Wastewater having a temperature greater than 140 degrees Fahrenheit (60 degrees centigrade), or which will inhibit biological activity in the water pollution control plant resulting in interference, but, in no case, wastewater which causes the temperature, at the introduction into the water pollution control plant which to exceeds 140 degrees Fahrenheit (60 degrees centigrade);

6. Petroleum oil, nonbiodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral oil origin that will cause interference or pass through;

7. Pollutants which result in the presence of toxic gases, vapors or fumes within the city’s sanitary sewer system in a quantity that may cause acute worker health and safety issues;

8. Trucked or hauled wastes, except at discharge points designated by the director;

9. Noxious or malodorous liquids, gases, or solids, which either singly or by interaction with other wastes, are sufficient to create a public nuisance or hazard to life, or are sufficient to prevent entry into the city’s sanitary sewer system for maintenance and repair;

10. Wastewater that may cause a detrimental environmental impact or nuisance in the waters of the state or United States that is unacceptable to any public agency having regulatory jurisdiction over the city;

11. Wastewater which imparts color which cannot removed in the treatment process, such as, but not limited to, dye wastes and vegetable tanning solutions;

12. Wastewater causing two readings on an explosion hazard meter at the point of discharge into the city’s sanitary sewer system (or at any point in the city’s sanitary sewer system) of more than five (5) percent nor any single reading over ten (10) percent of the lower explosive limit (LEL) of the meter. Prohibited materials include, but are not limited to, gasoline, kerosene, naphtha, benzene, toluene, xylene, ethers, alcohols, ketones, aldehydes, peroxides, chlorates, perchlorates, bromates, carbides, hydrides, sulfides, and any other substances in any quantity or concentration that the city, state, or USEPA has notified the user are a fire hazard or a hazard to the city’s sanitary sewer system;

13. Wastewater containing algaecides, fungicides, antibiotics, insecticides, strong oxidizing agents or strong reducing agents in such quantity or strength as to cause or contribute to violations of the city’s NPDES permit discharge restrictions, interference with or upset of the city’s sanitary sewer system, or personnel safety hazards;

14. Medical waste, except as specifically authorized by the director, in a wastewater discharge permit;

15. Wastewater requiring an excessive quantity of chlorine or other chemical compound used for disinfection purposes; Exhibit 2 - City of Chico Sewer Use Ordinance
124

16. Wastewater containing radioactive wastes or isotopes of such half-life or concentration as may exceed limits established by the director in compliance with any applicable state or federal regulations;

17. Wastewater that causes a hazard to human life or creates a public nuisance;

18. Wastewater containing toxic pollutants, gases, vapors, or fumes in sufficient quantity, which either singly or by interaction with other pollutants, may injure or interfere with any wastewater treatment process, cause acute worker health and safety problems, constitute a hazard to humans or animals, create a toxic effect in the receiving waters of the city’s sanitary sewer system, result in exceedances of biosolids disposal restrictions, or exceed the limitation set forth in a pretreatment standard or requirement. A toxic pollutant shall include, but not be limited to, any pollutant identified pursuant to section 307(a) of the Act;

19. Stormwater, rainwater, groundwater, street drainage, subsurface drainage, yard drainage, and cooling water, including evaporative type air cooler discharge water and noncontact cooling water;

20. Wastewater containing sulfides in sufficient quantity or strength as to cause or contribute to corrosion in the city’s sanitary sewer system or violations of the city’s NPDES permit; or

21. Discharges which, if otherwise disposed of, would be a hazardous waste under 40 CFR Part 261.

Pollutants, substances, or wastewater prohibited by section 15.40.021 of this chapter shall not be processed or stored in such a manner that they could be discharged into the city’s sanitary sewer system. (Ord. 2481 §1 (part))

15.40.022 National categorical pretreatment standards.

Users must comply with the categorical pretreatment standards found in 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N, sections 405- 471, as amended.

Upon the promulgation of categorical pretreatment standards for a particular industrial subcategory, the categorical pretreatment standards, if more stringent than limitations imposed under this chapter for sources in that subcategory, shall immediately supersede the limitations imposed under this chapter. The director shall attempt to notify all known affected users of the applicable reporting requirements under 40 CFR Part 403.12, or other applicable pretreatment requirements.

Provided, however, that in no case shall the failure of the director to notify a user constitute a defense to noncompliance with any such requirement, statute or regulations, or to noncompliance with the provisions of this chapter.

Modifications to the categorical pretreatment standards may occur under the following situations:

1. Where the city’s sanitary sewer system achieves consistent removal of pollutants limited by pretreatment standards, the director may apply to the Administrator for modification of specific limits in the pretreatment standards. Upon approval from the Administrator, the director may modify pollutant discharge limits in the pretreatment standards if the requirements contained in 40 CFR Part 403.7 are fulfilled.

2. When the limits in a categorical pretreatment standard are expressed only in terms of either the mass or the concentration of a pollutant in wastewater, the director may impose equivalent concentration or mass limits in accordance with 40 CFR Part 403.6(c).

3. When wastewater subject to a categorical pretreatment standard is mixed with wastewater not regulated by the same standard, the director shall impose an alternate limit, using the combined wastestream formula in 40 CFR Part 403.6(e).

4. A user otherwise classified as a CIU may obtain a variance from a categorical pretreatment standard if the user can prove, pursuant to the procedural and substantive provisions in 40 CFR Part 403.13, that factors relating to its discharge are fundamentally different from the factors considered by USEPA when developing the categorical pretreatment standard.

5. A CIU may obtain a net gross adjustment to a categorical pretreatment standard in accordance with 40 CFR Part 403.15.
(Ord. 2481 §1 (part))

15.40.023 State pretreatment standards.

Users must comply with all applicable state pretreatment standards. (Ord. 2481 §1 (part))

15.40.024 Local limits.

The director is authorized to establish local limits pursuant to 40 CFR Part 403.5(c). Local limits are established to protect against pass through and interference. No wastewater discharge shall exceed the local limits as determined by the director pursuant to section 15R.40.010 of this code.

The local limits apply at the point where wastewater is discharged into the city’s sanitary sewer system. The director may impose mass limitations in addition to or in lieu of the concentration-based limitations above.

The director may develop BMPs, by ordinance, or in wastewater discharge permits, to implement the local limits and Exhibit 2 - City of Chico Sewer Use Ordinance
125
requirements of sections 15.40.020 and 15.40.021.
(Ord. 2481 §1 (part))

15.40.025 City’s right of revision.

The city reserves the right to establish, by ordinance or wastewater discharge permit, more stringent standards or requirements on discharges to the city’s sanitary sewer system, if deemed necessary to comply with the objectives of this chapter or the Act.
(Ord. 2481 §1 (part))

15.40.026 Excessive discharge/dilution.

No user shall increase the use of process water or in any way attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with the discharge limitations contained in the pretreatment standards or requirement.

The director may impose mass limitations on users who are using dilution to meet applicable pretreatment standards or requirements, or in other cases when the imposition of mass limitations is appropriate. (Ord. 2481 §1 (part))
Exhibit 2 - City of Chico Sewer Use Ordinance
126
ARTICLE III. PRETREATMENT OF WASTEWATER

15.40.027 Pretreatment facilities.

Users who are CIUs, SIUs, or who are required by the director to obtain an industrial wastewater discharge permit shall provide wastewater pretreatment as necessary to comply with this chapter and shall achieve compliance with all categorical pretreatment standards and pretreatment requirement, local limits, and the prohibitions of this chapter within the time limitations specified by USEPA, the state, or the director, whichever is more stringent. Any facilities necessary for compliance shall be provided, operated, and maintained at the user’s expense. Detailed plans describing such facilities and operating procedures shall be submitted to the director for review, and shall be acceptable to the director before such facilities are constructed. The review of such plans and operating procedures shall in no way relieve the user from the responsibility of modifying such facilities as necessary to produce a discharge acceptable to the city under the provisions of this chapter. Subsequent changes in the pretreatment facilities or method of operation shall be reported to and acceptable to the director prior to the user’s initiation of the changes. (Ord. 2481 §1 (part))

15.40.030 Interceptors.

1. An interceptor shall be installed in a user’s building sewer when in the opinion of the director it is necessary for the proper handling of wastewater containing grease or oil in excessive amounts, sand, grit or other harmful substances; except that such interceptors shall not be required for buildings used solely for residential purposes. Provided, however, that interceptors shall be constructed in any place or building having a capacity to serve group meals and in commercial and industrial cleaning facilities.

Where the director requires the installation of an interceptor by a user who is neither an SIU nor a CIU, the user shall also be required to obtain a pollution prevention permit. Typical users required to install an interceptor and obtain a pollution prevention permit include, but are not limited to, restaurants, cafes, lunch counters, cafeterias, bars and clubs; hotels, hospitals, sanitariums, factory or school kitchens, equipment repair shops, service stations, and other establishments where grease, oils, sand, or grit may be introduced into the city’s sanitary sewer system in quantities that can obstruct the sewer or hinder wastewater treatment or private wastewater disposal.

2. All interceptors shall be of a type and capacity approved by the director and shall be so located as to be readily and easily accessible for cleaning and inspection. Interceptors shall be constructed of impervious materials capable of withstanding abrupt and extreme changes in temperature. They shall be of substantial construction, water-tight and equipped with easily removable covers which, when bolted in place, are gas- and water-tight. All interceptors shall be maintained by the user, at the user’s expense, in continuously efficient operation at all times.

3. Each user shall regularly inspect, clean, and repair interceptors. Records of inspections, cleaning and repairs, and the costs associated with these actions shall be kept for a minimum of three (3) years and be made available for inspection by city personnel upon request. Debris from interceptors shall be disposed of through a licensed waste hauler. Waste disposal records, including receipts, shall be kept for a minimum of three (3) years and be made available for inspection by city personnel upon request.

4. All interceptors shall comply with the following standards:
a. Plans shall be submitted to and approval obtained from the director prior to the installation of any interceptor. b. All drains from kitchen areas including pre-wash shall be connected to an interceptor. Toilets, lavatories and other sanitary fixtures shall not be connected to any interceptor. c. All fixtures discharging into an interceptor shall be individually trapped and vented in a manner approved by the director.
d. Each interceptor shall be so installed and connected that it shall be at all times easily accessible for inspection, cleaning, and removal of the intercepted material.
e. Interceptors shall be maintained in efficient operating condition by periodic removal of the accumulated materials. No such collected material shall be introduced into any drainage piping, public or private, or discharged to the city’s sanitary sewer system.
f. Each interceptor shall be constructed of durable materials satisfactory to the director and shall have a full-size gastight cover which can easily and readily be removed. g. Interceptors required by this chapter shall not be installed until the type and/or model has been subjected to, and has fully complied with, tests acceptable to the director. Where existing conditions are found acceptable as determined by the director, such facilities as presently exist will be allowed to remain in use. Whenever it shall come to the attention of the director that any interceptor is no longer acceptable or does not comply with the provisions of this section, the director shall suspend or revoke such approval and require corrective measures. (Ord. 2481 §1 (part))

15.40.120 Accidental spill and slug discharge control plans.

Exhibit 3 - City of Chico Pretreatment of Wastewater Ordinance 127

1. The director shall evaluate whether each SIU needs an accidental spill and slug control plan or other action to control slug discharges. The director may require any user develop, submit for approval, and implement such a plan or take other such action that may be necessary to control slug discharges. Alternatively, the director may develop such a plan for any such user. An accidental discharge/slug discharge control plan shall address, at a minimum, the following:
a. Description of discharge practices, including non-routine batch discharges; b. Description of stored chemicals;
c. Procedures for immediately notifying the director of any accidental or slug discharge, as required by section

15.40.350; and
d. Procedures to prevent adverse impact from any accidental or slug discharge. Such procedures include, but are not limited to, inspection and maintenance of storage areas, handling and transfer of materials, loading and unloading operations, control of plant site runoff, worker training, building of containment structures and equipment, measures for containing toxic organic pollutants, including solvents, and/or measures and equipment for emergency response.

2. Each user required to have an accidental spill and slug discharge control plan shall provide protection from spills or accidental discharges of prohibited materials or other substances regulated by this chapter. Facilities to prevent accidental discharge of prohibited materials shall be provided and maintained at the user’s own cost and expense. Detailed plans showing facilities and operating procedures to provide this protection shall be submitted to the director for review, and shall be approved by the director before construction of the facility.

3. Each user required to have an accidental spill and slug discharge control plan shall permanently post a notice on a bulletin board or other prominent place within the user’s place of business advising employees whom to call in the event of spill, slug discharge or an accidental discharge. Users shall ensure that all employees who may cause or suffer such spills or slug discharges to occur are advised of the emergency notification procedures. (Ord. 2481 §1 (part))

15.40.140 Maintenance of side sewers.

All users shall keep that portion of their side sewer in good repair, at their own expense, and shall be liable for any damages which may result from their failure to do so.
(Ord. 2481 §1 (part))
Exhibit 3 - City of Chico Pretreatment of Wastewater Ordinance 128
Regionalization Planning Report for
the Paradise Sewer Project
Prepared under the Cooperative Funding
Agreement between the City of Chico and the
Town of Paradise
FINAL | May 2022
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
129
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
130
City of Chico
Regionalization Planning Report for the
Paradise Sewer Project
Prepared under the Cooperative Funding Agreement between the City of Chico and the Town of Paradise
FINAL | May 2022
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
131
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
132
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | i
pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Chico/11082A00/Deliverables/Updated for Paradise Connection/WPCPStrategicPlanningRpt Contents
Chapter 1 - Executive Summary 1-1

1.1 Introduction 1-1

1.2 Background 1-1

1.2.1 Previous Planning Effort 1-1

1.2.2 Facility Improvement Categories 1-2

1.3 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs 1-2

1.4 Summary of Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs 1-3

1.5 Summary of Condition-Driven Facility Needs 1-4

1.6 Summary of Findings – Capital Needs 1-4

1.7 Connection Payment Calculation 1-6
Chapter 2 - Flows and Loads Analysis 2-1

2.1 Basis of Evaluation 2-1

2.2 Background 2-1

2.2.1 Previous WPC P Facility Planning 2-1

2.2.2 WPCP Servic e Area 2-2

2.3 Historical Population, Flows, and Loads 2-7

2.3.1 Historical Population 2-7

2.3.2 Historical Flows 2-11

2.3.3 Historical Wastewater Loads 2-15

2.4 Projected Population, Flows, and Loads 2-20

2.4.1 Projected Population 2-20

2.4.2 Projected Flows 2-25

2.4.3 Projected Loads 2-31

2.5 Summary of Projections 2-31
Chapter 3 - Plant Capacity Evaluation 3-1

3.1 Basis of Evaluation 3-1

3.1.1 Flow & Load Basis 3-1

3.1.2 Unit Process Availability Criteria 3-2

3.2 Background 3-2

3.2.1 Previous WPCP Facility Planning 3-2
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
133
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWERPROJECT ii | MAY 2022 | FINAL

3.2.2 WPCP Description 3-2

3.3 Peak Hydraulic Capacity Evaluation 3-15

3.3.1 Headworks 3-15

3.3.2 Primary Treatment 3-15

3.3.3 Primary Effluent Pumping 3-15

3.3.4 Secondary Treatment and Disinfection 3-16

3.3.5 Peak Hydraulic Capacity Analysis Summary 3-16

3.4 Treatment Process Capacity Evaluation 3-17

3.4.1 Primary Treatment Facilities 3-17

3.4.2 Secondary Treatment Facilities 3-18

3.4.3 Disinfection 3-21

3.4.4 Solids Handling 3-22

3.5 Summary of WPCP Capacity Limitations 3-24
Chapter 4 - Capacity-Driven Facility Needs 4-1

4.1 Approach 4-1

4.2 Headworks 4-1

4.3 Primary Clarification 4-1

4.4 Primary Effluent Pumping 4-5

4.5 Secondary Treatment Facilities 4-5

4.5.1 Near-Term Improvements 4-6

4.5.2 Options for Secondary Treatment Expansion 4-9

4.6 Disinfection and Dechlorination 4-22

4.6.1 Solids Handling 4-25

4.7 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs 4-25
Chapter 5 - Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs 5-1

5.1 Existing Discharge Requirements 5-1

5.1.1 Status of NPDES Permit Order 5-3

5.2 Previous Projection of Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs at the WPCP 5-3

5.3 Revised Schedule and Sizing Criteria 5-5

5.4 Updated Projection of Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs at the WPCP 5-6

5.4.1 Required Improvements for Land Discharge 5-6

5.4.2 Tertiary Treatment 5-13
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
134
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | iii

5.4.3 Requirements for DEHP, Lead, and Zinc Compliance 5-19

5.4.4 Alternative Disinfection 5-19
Chapter 6 - Condition-Driven Facility Needs 6-1

6.1 Summary of Near-Term Condition Driven Needs 6-1

6.2 Summary of Long-Term Condition Driven Needs 6-3

6.3 Options for Reduced or Deferred Capital Expenditure 6-4

6.4 Development of Condition-Driven Project Packages 6-4

6.5 Summary of Condition-Driven Project Costs 6-4
Chapter 7 - Facility Improvement Recommendations 7-1

7.1 Summary of Capacity-Driven Projects 7-1

7.1.1 Limitations of Capacity Analysis 7-2

7.2 Summary of Regulatory-Driven Projects 7-3

7.2.1 Limitations of Regulatory Analysis 7-4

7.3 Summary of Condition-Driven Projects 7-4

7.3.1 Limitations of Condition Analysis 7-7

7.4 Capital Improvement Project Summary 7-7
Appendices
Appendix A Cost Estimates
Appendix B Daily Data
Tables
Table 1.1 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs 1-2 Table 1.2 Summary of Recommended Project and Project Costs 1-4 Table 1.3 Summary of Recommended Project and Project Costs 1-4 Table 1.4 Summary of Recommended Project and Project Costs 1-5 Table 2.1 Historical Population Estimates 2-7
Table 2.2 Historical College Student Total and Connected Population Estimates 2-9 Table 2.3 Estimated Connected Population vs College Breaks 2-13 Table 2.4 Summary of Annual Growth Rate Projections 2-21 Table 2.5 Connected Population Growth Projections 2-22
Table 2.6 Connected Chico and Paradise Residents 2-24
Table 2.7 Summary of Historical and Projected Population, Flows, and Loads 2-35 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
135
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWERPROJECT iv | MAY 2022 | FINAL
Table 3.1 Projected WPCP Flows & Loads 3-2
Table 3.2 Historical WPCP Capacity Ratings and Flow Split 3-3 Table 3.3 Hydraulic Capacity Summary for WPCP Major Processes 3-16 Table 3.4 Modeling Scenarios 3-17
Table 3.5 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs 3-25 Table 4.1 Secondary Treatment Facility Improvements 4-6 Table 4.2 Option 1 Component Costs 4-13
Table 4.3 Option 2 Component Costs 4-17
Table 4.4 Option 3 Component Costs 4-21
Table 4.5 Disinfection System Improvement Costs 4-25
Table 4.6 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs 4-26 Table 5.1 Current Effluent Limitations for Effluent Discharge to the Sacramento River 5-2
Table 5.2 Future Effluent Limitations for Land Discharge 5-3 Table 5.3 Summary of Probable Future Effluent Limitations 5-4 Table 5.4 Cloth Disk Filter Design Criteria 5-15
Table 5.5 UV Facility Design Criteria 5-21
Table 6.1 Summary of Near-Term Plant 2 Condition-Driven Needs 6-2 Table 6.2 Summary of Long-Term Plant 2 Condition Needs 6-3 Table 7.1 Secondary Treatment Facility Expansion Options 7-1 Table 7.2 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs 7-2 Table 7.3 Summary of Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs 7-3 Table 7.4 Summary of Near-Term Condition-Driven Facility Needs 7-5 Table 7.5 Summary of Long-Term Condition-Driven Facility Needs 7-6 Table 7.6 Summary of Recommended Project and Project Cost 7-8 Figures
Figure 2.1 City of Chico Sphere of Influence & Planning Area 2-3 Figure 2.2 Town of Paradise Sewer Service Area and Proposed Export Pipeline 2-4 Figure 2.3 WPCP Service Area Population Details 2-5
Figure 2.4 Historical ADWF and ADWF Per Capita Range 2-12 Figure 2.5 Historical ADWF vs. College Breaks and Estimated ADWF per Capita 2-13 Figure 2.6 Historical Flow Parameters and Peaking Factors 2-14 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
136
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | v
Figure 2.7 Historical Sierra Nevada Brewery Loads 2-16
Figure 2.8 Historical TSS Loads 2-17
Figure 2.9 Historical BOD Loads 2-17
Figure 2.10 Historical NH3 Loads 2-18
Figure 2.11 Historical Max Month Loads 2-19
Figure 2.12 Historical Max Month Load Peaking Factors 2-20 Figure 2.13 Historical Population Growth 2-21
Figure 2.14 Projected Flows 2-27
Figure 2.15 Projected ADWF 2-29
Figure 2.16 Projected Loads 2-33
Figure 3.1 WPCP Site Map with Facility Pond Locations 3-5 Figure 3.2 Existing WPCP Treatment Works and Facility Buildings 3-7 Figure 3.3 Existing WPCP Hydraulic Profile 3-9
Figure 3.4 Existing Liquids Flow Schematic for WPCP 3-11 Figure 3.5 Existing Solids Flow Schematic for WPCP-This Page Intentionally Left Blank 3-13
Figure 4.1 Primary Clarifier #4 4-3
Figure 4.2 Fourth Secondary Clarifier 4-7
Figure 4.3 Secondary Expansion (Option 1) 4-11
Figure 4.4 Secondary Expansion (Option 2) 4-15
Figure 4.5 Secondary Expansion (Option 3) 4-19
Figure 4.6 Chlorine Contact Basin 4-23
Figure 5.1 Emergency Effluent Bypass, Storage, and Return Improvements 5-7 Figure 5.2 Process Conversion from Nitrifying Activated Sludge to Modified Ludzack-Ettinger 5-11
Figure 5.3 Configuration of Basic Disk Filter 5-14
Figure 5.4 Potential Layout for Disk Filter Facilities at WPCP 5-17 Figure 5.5 Potential Layout for UV Disinfection Facilities at the WPCP 5-23 Figure 7.1 Projected Capital Investment by Spending Category 7-10 Figure 7.2 Total Annual Capital Spending through Planning Horizon 7-11 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
137
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
138
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | vii
Abbreviations
AA average annual
AAF Average Annual Flow
AAFPF AAF Peaking Factor
ADWF average dry weather flow
BOD biochemical oxygen demand
BOD5 biochemical oxygen demand
CCBs chlorine contact basins
City City of Chico
CSU California State University
CT chlorine contact
DAFT dissolved air flotation thickener
DBP disinfection byproducts
DEHP Di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
gpcd gallons per capita day
gpd/ft2 gallons per day per square foot
gph gallons per hour
gpm gallons per minute
hp horsepower
HRT hydraulic residence time
lb/day pounds per day
MG million gallons
mg/L milligrams per liter
mgd million gallons per day
mL milliliter
ML mixed liquor
MLE Modified-Ludzack Ettinger
MLR mixed liquor recycle
MM maximum monthly
MMF maximum month flow
MMFPF maximum month flow peaking factor
MPN most probable number
NH3 ammonia
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Paradise Town of Paradise
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
139
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWERPROJECT viii | MAY 2022 | FINAL
PF peak flow
PFPF peak flow peaking factor
psig pounds per square inch gauge
PSRP Process to Significantly Reduce Pathogens
RAS return activated sludge
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SBS sodium bisulfite solution
SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition
scfm standard cubic feet per minute
SHS sodium hypochlorite solution
SIU significant industrial user
SNB Sierra Nevada Brewery
SOI sphere of influence
SRPAC Sewer Regional Project Advisory Committee
SVI sludge volume index
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TSS total suspended solids
UV ultraviolet
UVT ultraviolet transmittance
WAS waste activated sludge
WDR waste discharge requirement
WPC Water Pollution Control Plant
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
140
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 1-1
Chapter 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Introduction
The Town of Paradise (Paradise) has studied options for treatment and disposal of the wastewater produced within the Town’s service boundary for many years, limited by high groundwater, lack of available land, and poor soils. The absence of a viable wastewater solution has restricted residential and commercial growth within the Town’s sewer service area and has threatened underlying groundwater supplies due to imminent failure of aging septic systems.

The City of Chico (City) provides wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal service for residents within the City’s service area. The City population grew by almost 20 percent in 2019 due to Camp Fire1 victim relocations, but the City did not see a proportional revenue growth for increased wastewater flows due to limited housing supplies (more people were living in shared houses).

The Paradise Sewer Project is a wastewater regionalization project that creates a solution for Paradise’s wastewater issues, in turn relieving some of the pressure that the City has remained under since the Camp Fire. The purpose of this report is to quantify the impact that the Paradise sewer connection would have on the City’s WPCP, define the facility needs for increased treatment associated with the Paradise connection and the City’s continued growth, and create a basis for negotiation of a connection payment between the City and Paradise.

1.2 Background

1.2.1 Previous Planning Effort
The City initiated a WPCP planning effort in 2018 to evaluate facility needs related to condition, capacity, and regulatory requirements (near- and longer-term) as a basis for adjustments to the City’s sewer service rates. During completion of this effort, the City experienced several planning changes, including significant impacts related to the 2018 Camp Fire and the 2019 Coronavirus Pandemic. Planning efforts were eventually summarized in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 2 in February 2021 as a means for jump starting the sewer service rate adjustments currently underway, but the findings of that report had limited use for this effort for several reasons:
• The baseline population used for planning was no longer accurate. • The population growth projection assumption was inadequate based on recent observations by the City and an increase in planned development within the City’s sphere of influence (SOI).
1 The Camp Fire was the deadliest and most destructive wildfire in California’s history, and the most expensive natural disaster in the world in terms of losses. 2 (Carollo Engineers, Inc. 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
141
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 1-2 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
• Future sewer flows from the Town of Paradise had not been accounted for. • Increased flows now expected from California State University, Chico which had not been accounted for.
• The planning period for the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 3 effort only extended to 2040, while the planning period for the Paradise Sewer Project ended in 2057.

This report provides updated planning results that incorporate these changes, providing an updated basis for planning for the City and Paradise.

1.2.2 Facility Improvement Categories
There are three main categories related to facility improvements referenced within this planning document, each with differing project triggers and associated timelines. These project categories include:
• Capacity-Driven Facility Needs: Projects in this category include improvements required to extend both treatment capacity and hydraulic capacity to account for the total City and Paradise influent loading (discussed in Chapter 4). • Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs: Projects in this category are predicated on potential water quality regulation requirements anticipated in future NPDES permit renewals (discussed in Chapter 5).
• Condition-Driven Facility Needs: Condition-driven facility needs were determined through completion of a detailed multidiscipline condition assessment conducted April 25 to 26, 2018 (summarized in Chapter 6).

The previous planning effort also included a detailed “strategic planning” effort based on the City’s goals for sustainability and long-term resilience. Those findings are not adjusted in this report but should be revisited as the City gets closer to implementation of a chosen alternative.

1.3 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs
Table 1.1 includes a summary of recommended projects based on anticipated capacity-driven facility needs through 2057, along with predicted timelines for implementation of each and planning level construction and project cost estimates (presented in December 2021 dollars).

Table 1.1 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs
Projected
Timeline for
Implementation
Project Description Estimated
Construction Cost(1)(2)
Estimated
Project Cost(1)(3)
2028 Secondary Clarifier #6(4)
(fourth clarifier in Plant 2) $8,000,000 $10,700,000
2032 Supplemental Carbon Project $300,000 $400,000
2033 Chlorine Contact Basin $4,100,000 $5,100,000
2033
Chemical Storage and Feed
Facility Improvements
(SHS and SBS)
$1,300,000 $1,600,000
3 (Carollo Engineers, Inc. 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
142
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 1-3
Projected
Timeline for
Implementation
Project Description Estimated
Construction Cost(1)(2)
Estimated
Project Cost(1)(3)
2036 Southern Pond Improvements for
Secondary Expansion $700,000 $900,000
2036 Secondary Clarifier #7(5)
(fifth clarifier in Plant 2) $10,000,000 $13,400,000
2036 RAS/WAS Pump Station and
Electrical Building(6) $1,300,000 $1,600,000
2038 Parallel Force Main Improvements $800,000 $1,100,000 2039 Secondary Clarifier #8(5)
(sixth clarifier in Plant 2) $10,000,000 $13,400,000
2044 Aeration Tank #5(7) $11,700,000 $15,600,000
2044 Blower and Electrical Building(6) $5,000,000 $6,300,000 2044 Standby Generator $1,200,000 $1,500,000
2045 Primary Clarifier #4 $3,700,000 $5,000,000
2053 Aeration Tank #6(7) $11,700,000 $15,600,000
2054 Primary Effluent Lift Station
Improvements $1,700,000 $2,100,000
2054 Bar Screen #3 $500,000 $600,000
Total Required Capital Investment $72,000,000 $94,900,000 Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (2) Includes estimating contingency of 40% applied to total direct cost, general conditions and contractor overhead and profit contingencies at 18% of total direct cost (each), and local sales tax of 7.25% applied to half of the total direct cost. (3) Includes project cost factor of 35% for legal, administration, permitting, design, and engineering services during construction.
(4) 100-foot diameter secondary clarifier.
(5) 125-foot diameter secondary clarifier.
(6) Based on Secondary Treatment Expansion Option 3 layout (Chapter 4). (7) With denitrification improvements (MLE).

1.4 Summary of Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs
Table 1.2 includes a summary of recommended projects based on reasonably anticipated regulatory-driven facility needs through 2057, along with predicted timelines for implementation of each, and planning level project cost estimates (presented in December 2021 dollars).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
143
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 1-4 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Table 1.2 Summary of Recommended Project and Project Costs Projected
Timeline for
Implementation
Project Description
Estimated
Construction
Cost(1)2)
Estimated
Project Cost(1)(3)
2027 Emergency Effluent Bypass, Storage, and
Return Improvements (NE Pond)(4) $7,050,000 $8,460,000
2032 Modified MLE process upgrades(5) $3,620,000 $4,350,000 2042 Tertiary Filtration Upgrades(6) $16,830,000 $22,710,000 2047 Alternate Disinfection(7) $30,200,000 $40,800,000
Total Required Capital Investment $57,700,000 $76,320,000 Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (2) Includes estimating contingency of 40% applied to total direct cost, general conditions and contractor overhead and profit contingencies at 18% of total direct cost (each), and local sales tax of 7.25% applied to half of the total direct cost. (3) Includes project cost factor of 35% for legal, administration, permitting, design, and engineering services during construction.
(4) Includes pipeline between outfall box and Northeast Pond, a pump station for pump back to Headworks, and civil improvements to deepen the pond for 25 MG of storage.
(5) In-basin improvements to existing aeration tanks in Plant 2. (6) Assumes cloth disk filtration, sized for peak flow at 39.6 mgd. (7) Assume UV disinfection, sized for peak flow of 39.6 mgd.

1.5 Summary of Condition-Driven Facility Needs
Table 1.3 includes a summary of total costs for near-term and long-term projects based on observed condition-driven needs at the facility through 2040 (presented in December 2021 dollars). Refer to Chapter 6 for additional details.

Table 1.3 Summary of Recommended Project and Project Costs Projected Timeline
for Implementation Project Description(1) Total Estimated Project Cost(2) <5 years Near-term condition-driven projects $10,580,000 2025-2039 Long-term condition-driven projects $34,060,000 Total Required Capital Investment $44,640,000
Notes:
(1) Refer to Chapter 6 for additional detail.
(2) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

1.6 Summary of Findings – Capital Needs
An assessment of the hydraulic and treatment capacity of existing facilities at the WPCP indicates that significant improvements will be required to accommodate projected increases in wastewater flow and loading over the planning horizon. Table 1.4 includes a summary of recommended projects to address capacity short-comings, along with condition-driven and regulatory-driven facility needs identified for the WPCP.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
144
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY ͮͬͮͮ | ͭ‐ͱ
Table ͭ.Ͱ Summary of Recommended Project and Project Costs Projected
Timeline for
Implementation
Capacity Improvements   Project Driver
Estimated Project
Cost(ͭ)
ͮͬͮͭ Aeration and Primary Treatment
Upgrades Recommended by ͮͬͮͯ(ͮ) Condition ͈ͭ,ʹͳͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͮͮ
Disinfection, Chemical Building, Solids
Thickening and Dewatering, Plant Power
Systems, and Other Plant Systems
Upgrades Recommended by ͮͬͮͯ(ͮ)
Condition ͈ͮ,Ͳͳͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͮͯ Solids Digestion Upgrades
Recommended by ͮͬͮͯ(ͮ) Condition ͈ͮ,ͯͳͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͮͱ Primary Treatment Upgrades
Recommended by ͮͬͮͱ(ͮ) Condition ͈ͯ,Ͳʹͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͮͱ Recycled Water Feasibility Study Strategic ͈ͱͯͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͮͳ Emergency Effluent Bypass, Storage, and
Return Improvements   Regulatory ͈ʹ,ͰͲͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͮͳ Condition Driven Upgrades
Recommended in ͮͬͮͳ(ͮ) Condition ͈ͳ,ͲͰͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͮʹ Secondary Clarifier #Ͳ(ͯ)
(fourth clarifier in Plant ͮ) Capacity   ͈ͭͬ,ͳͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͮʹ Condition Driven Upgrades
Recommended in ͮͬͮʹ(ͮ) Condition ͈ͯ,ͮͰͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͮ͵ Condition Driven Upgrades
Recommended in ͮͬͮ͵(ͮ) Condition ͈ͱ,ͯ͵ͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͯͮ Modified MLE process upgrades Regulatory ͈Ͱ,ͯͱͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͯͯ Condition Driven Upgrades
Recommended in ͮͬͯͯ(ͮ) Condition ͈ͯ,ͱͮͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͯͮ Supplemental Carbon Project   Capacity   ͈Ͱͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͯͯ Chlorine Contact Basin Capacity   ͈ͱ,ͭͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͯͯ Chemical Storage and Feed Facility
Improvements (SHS and SBS) Capacity   ͈ͭ,Ͳͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͯͲ Southern Pond Improvements for
Secondary Expansion   Capacity   ͈͵ͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͯͲ Secondary Clarifier #ͳ(Ͱ)

(fifth clarifier in Plant ͮ) Capacity   ͈ͭͯ,Ͱͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͯͲ RAS/WAS Pump Station and Electrical
Building(ͱ) Capacity   ͈ͭ,Ͳͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͯʹ Parallel Primary Effluent Force Main
Improvements Capacity   ͈ͭ,ͭͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͯ͵ Secondary Clarifier #ʹ(Ͱ)

(sixth clarifier in Plant ͮ) Capacity ͈ͭͯ,Ͱͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
145
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT ͭ‐Ͳ | MAY ͮͬͮͮ | FINAL
Projected
Timeline for
Implementation
Capacity Improvements
Project Driver
Estimated Project
Cost(ͭ)
ͮͬͯ͵ Condition Driven Upgrades
Recommended in ͮͬͯ͵(ͮ) Condition ͈ͭͬ,ͰͲͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͰͬ Anaerobic Digester ͯ(ͮ) Condition ͈ͯ,ʹͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͰͮ Tertiary filtration(Ͳ) Regulatory ͈ͮͮ,ͳͭͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͰͰ Aeration Tank #ͱ(ͳ) Capacity ͈ͭͱ,Ͳͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͰͰ Blower and Electrical Building(ͱ) Capacity ͈Ͳ,ͯͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͰͰ Standby Generator Capacity ͈ͭ,ͱͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͰͱ Primary Clarifier #Ͱ Capacity ͈ͱ,ͬͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͰͳ Alternate Disinfection(Ͳ) Regulatory ͈Ͱͬ,ʹͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͱͯ Aeration Tank #Ͳ(ͳ) Capacity ͈ͭͱ,Ͳͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͱͰ Primary Effluent Lift Station
Improvements Capacity ͈ͮ,ͭͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
ͮͬͱͰ Bar Screen #ͯ Capacity ͈Ͳͬͬ,ͬͬͬ
Total Required Capital Investment ͈ͮͭͲ,ͯͲͬ,ͬͬͬ
Notes:
(ͭ) Costs are in December ͮͬͮͭ dollars based on ENR‐CCI CCI of ͭͮͰʹͮ. (ͮ) Refer to Chapter Ͳ for condition‐driven project specific details. (ͯ) ͭͬͬ‐foot diameter secondary clarifier.
(Ͱ) ͭͮͱ‐foot diameter secondary clarifier.
(ͱ) Based on Secondary Treatment Expansion Option ͯ layout (Chapter Ͱ). (Ͳ) Sized for peak flow of ͯ͵ mgd.
(ͳ) With denitrification improvements (MLE).

1.7 Connection Payment Calculation
Various options for the calculation of a connection payment between Paradise and the City were evaluated by a working group that included team members from both agencies. The following three connection payment calculation options were presented for SRPAC consideration in January ͮͬͮͮ:
ͭ. Option ͭ: The ratio of total projected Paradise sewer flow (ͬ.ͰͲͰ mgd) to the build‐ out flow projected for the WPCP (ͭͱ.ʹ mgd) applied to each of the following (additive for total connection payment):
a. The calculated capacity‐driven project cost.
b. The calculated condition driven project cost.
c. The estimated value of the existing WPCP Plant ͮ facilities4. ͮ. Option ͮ: The calculated capacity‐driven costs at the ratio of total projected Paradise sewer flow (ͬ.ͰͲͰ mgal) to the added flow to build‐out (ͳ.Ͱ mgd), plus the calculated condition‐driven project costs at the ratio of the total projected Paradise sewer flow (ͬ.ͰͲͰ mgd) to the current WPCP capacity (ʹ.Ͱ mgd). 4 Escalated from published Plant ͮ valuation estimate in the Asset Valuation and Revenue Sufficiency Analysis (NHA Advisors, May ͮͬͭͲ) using published historical average interest rates (ͮͬͭͳ‐ͮͬͮͭ) and a projected average annual interest rate of Ͱ.ͱ% through December ͮͬͮͲ.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
146
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 1-7

3. Option 3: The calculated capacity-driven costs applied to the ratio of total projected Paradise sewer flow (0.464 mgd) to the added flow to build-out (7.4 mgd), plus the estimated value of the existing WPCP Plant 2 facilities applied to the ratio of the total projected Paradise sewer flow (0.464 mgd) to the current WPCP capacity (8.4 mgd).

In each case, the calculated costs were escalated from the December 2021 estimates to December 2026 projections, matching the planned timeline for sewer connection.

The third option was presented to the SRPAC in March 2022 as the recommended calculation methodology for the connection payment from Paradise to the City, with a draft total payment estimated at $14.9 million (in December 2026 dollars). This methodology (and estimated connection payment value) was recorded in the draft Principles of Agreement, which is currently in final negotiation between Paradise and the City.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
147
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 1-8 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 148
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT| CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-1
Chapter 2

FLOWS AND LOADSANALYSIS
This Chapter presents an evaluation of historical wastewater flow and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), and ammonia loads entering the City of Chico’s WPCP, and projections of future flow and load demands for the facility. Historical flow and loads are used to establish a baseline for flow and load projections used for planning of future facility needs.

2.1 Basis of Evaluation
The flow and load projections developed herein are based on an analysis of historical data reported during the period from May 2009 through May 2021. Historical flow and load data were compiled from WPCP operational observations and laboratory measurements (Appendix B).

Other sources of data and information are cited throughout this Chapter.

These data were analyzed to develop baseline per-capita values for the average dry weather flow (ADWF) as well as the average annual (AA) load. Flow and load peaking factors were also developed from the analysis of the historical data. These per-capita values for ADWF and AA load were then used to develop projections through the end of the planning period, by applying the per-capita values to the projected population that would be contributing flow to the facility.

Other flow and load parameters presented herein (e.g., maximum month) were projected by applying observed historical peaking factors to the projected ADWF and AA loads.

2.2 Background

2.2.1 Previous WPCP Facility Planning
Planning for WPCP facility needs has been accomplished in varying degrees since construction of the original facilities. The flow and load projections from the 2005 WPCP Facility Plan1 are included herein for comparison to the updated projections developed for this effort. In the 2005 Facility Plan historical data between 1996 and 2001 was analyzed and the following flow projections were made:
• AA flows of 9 mgd in 2009.
• AA flows of 12 mgd in 2015.
• AA flows of 15 mgd at buildout.

These projections were made with the context of strong population growth assumptions (Table 2.4), significant industrial loading from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company (Section 2.3.3.1), and 100 percent connection of approximately 7,800 residences identified in the Nitrate Action Plan2.
1 (Carollo Engineers, Inc. 2005)
2 (Butte County and City of Chico 1994)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
149
CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-2 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
An updated facility planning effort was initiated in 2018 to evaluate long-term facility needs related to condition, capacity, and regulatory requirements (near- and longer-term) as a basis for adjustments to the City’s sewer service rates. During completion of this effort, the City experienced several planning changes, including significant impacts related to the Camp Fire in late 2018 and the COVID-19 pandemic beginning in late 2019.

That planning effort was eventually summarized in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 3 in February 2021 as a means for jump starting the ongoing sewer service rate adjustments.

The updated analysis presented herein reflects the City’s effort to correct the previously unknown limitations reflected in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 4, which includes:
• An increase in the baseline population within the City’s service area. • Increased anticipated population growth rates.
• Increased flows due to planned development at the California State University, Chico. • Increased sewer flows due to a possible future connection of the Town of Paradise sewer.

Updated WPCP needs presented herein are based on these updates, assume that the proposed connection of the Town of Paradise sewer to theCity’s WPCP will occur, and include planning through the year 2057 (to match the Town of Paradise planning period).

2.2.2 WPCP Service Area
As described in the Chico General Plan5, the City’s planning efforts should address all land within the incorporated City limits, land within the City’s designated sphere of influence (SOI), and other unincorporated land within Butte County (Figure 2.1). As discussed in Chapter 1, the Town of Paradise’s new collection system is expected to be connected directly to the influent box at the WPCP by December 2026, at which point it will begin contributing to the WPCP’s influent flow (Figure 2.2).

The WPCP is located approximately four miles southwest of downtown Chico and provides wastewater treatment and disposal services for most of the residences within the incorporated City of Chico and other residences in unincorporated areas of Butte County (Figure 2.3). 3 (Carollo Engineers, Inc. 2021) 4 (Carollo Engineers, Inc. 2021) 5 (City of Chico; PMC 2017)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
150
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-3
Figure 2.1 City of Chico Sphere of Influence & Planning Area Image from City of Chico 2030 General Plan (City of Chico, 2021) Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
151
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-4 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
Figure2.2 Town of Paradise Sewer Service Area and Proposed Export Pipeline Image from Town of Paradise Sewer Project EIR Public Summary Report (Town of Paradise, 2021) Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
152
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-5
Figure 2.3 WPCP Service Area Population Details
Image received from the City of Chico (2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
153
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-6 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 154
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT| CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-7

2.3 Historical Population, Flows, and Loads
Historical population, flow and load data are analyzed herein to develop ADWF and AA load per-capita values, as well as flow and load peaking factors.

2.3.1 Historical Population
Estimation of current per-capita wastewater flows (i.e., thevolume of flow per person contributing to the total flow to the WPCP) is important because it provides a benchmark for future flow projections. It can also be compared to typical per capita flows to identify any collection system issues that may exist (e.g., flow due to infiltration and inflow).

To avoid over (or under) sizing future WPCP facilities, accurate per-capita values are needed. For true per-capita estimation, only the population connected to the WPCP collection system should be counted. Because the City population and the connected population are not equivalent, the connected population was estimated as follows:
2020 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑒𝑒 = 110,364 − 17,204 = 93,160 The estimated 2020 connected population represents about 84 percent of the estimated 2020 City population. This percentage was applied to historical City population estimates to develop historical connected population estimates (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1 Historical Population Estimates
Year Estimated City Population(1) Estimated Connected Population 2000 60,516 51,073
2001 64,810 54,697
2002 66,481 56,107
2003 67,862 57,273
2004 70,322 59,349
2005 72,459 61,152
2006 77,348 65,279
2007 82,784 69,866
2008 85,034 71,765
2009 85,739 72,360
2010 86,136 72,695
2011 86,707 73,177
2012 87,523 73,866
2013 88,127 74,376
2014 88,785 74,931
2015 89,615 75,631
2016 90,007 75,962
2017 91,166 76,940
2018 92,040 77,678
2019 110,126 92,942
2020 110,364 93,160
Notes:
(1) (State of California Department of Finance 2021).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
155
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-8 | MAY 2022 | FINAL

2.3.1.1 Estimation of Full-Time Residents
The estimation of full-time residents is another key factor in the per-capita analysis for the City, due to the significant number of connected population that are college students (some of which are not full-time residents). Most of the students that live within the City’s SOI are enrolled at the Chico campuses of California State University (CSU) (also known as CSU Chico or Chico State) or Butte College. The following enrollment data is available for these colleges:
• CSU Chico:
- Total number of students.
- Number of students that list Butte County as their residence. • Butte College:
- Total number of students.
- Percentage of students that list the City of Chico as their residence.

The connected population when school is in session (which represents the maximum population during the calendar year) was estimated using thefollowing assumptions:
• CSU Chico:
- 100 percent of the students that listed Butte County as their residence remain in the service area during school breaks.
- 100 percent of students that did not list Butte County as their residence leave the service area during school breaks.
• Butte College:
- 100 percent of the students that listed the City of Chico as their residence remain in the service area during school breaks.
- 100 percent of students that did not list the City of Chico as their residence leave the service area during school breaks.

In the case of Butte College, more enrolled students live in Chico than attend classes at the Chico campus (i.e., the connected population does not decrease when school is in-session). A slight decrease in flow may occurwhen these students are attending classes; however, most of their contribution to the collection system (from clothes washing, showers, dishwashers, etc.) is unaffected. A decrease in flow was not discernable from the data; therefore, the effect of Butte College breaks was presumed to be insignificant.

Accordingly, the connected population when school is on-break (which represents the minimum population during the calendar year) was estimated as follows:

𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑂𝑂 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝐵𝐵 = 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑇𝑇 𝐶𝐶 − 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶ℎ𝑖𝑖 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 The resulting Historical College Student Total and Connected Population Estimates are summarized in Table 2.2.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
156
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-9
Table 2.2 Historical College Student Total and Connected Population Estimates Year CSU Chico Student Population(1) Butte College Student Population Estimated Connected Population
Total (Fall) County County % non-County Total (Fall)(2) City Residents(3) Chico Campus (Fall) On-Break (Min)(4) In-Session(5) 2000 15,912 4,418 27.8% 11,494 11,542 4,848 3,195 39,579 51,073 2001 16,704 4,573 27.4% 12,131 12,669 5,321 3,507 42,566 54,697 2002 16,246 4,534 27.9% 11,712 13,296 5,584 3,680 44,395 56,107 2003 15,516 4,371 28.2% 11,145 12,244 5,142 3,389 46,128 57,273 2004 15,734 4,343 27.6% 11,391 12,745 5,353 3,528 47,958 59,349 2005 15,919 4,161 26.1% 11,758 13,453 5,650 3,724 49,394 61,152 2006 16,250 4,016 24.7% 12,234 12,284 5,159 3,400 53,045 65,279 2007 17,034 3,933 23.1% 13,101 12,228 5,136 3,385 56,765 69,866 2008 17,132 3,811 22.2% 13,321 12,458 5,232 3,448 58,444 71,765 2009 16,934 3,729 22.0% 13,205 13,147 5,522 3,806 59,155 72,360 2010 15,989 3,419 21.4% 12,570 13,293 5,583 3,591 60,125 72,695 2011 15,920 3,381 21.2% 12,539 12,923 5,428 3,587 60,638 73,177 2012 16,470 3,326 20.2% 13,144 12,290 5,162 3,365 60,722 73,866 2013 16,356 3,202 19.6% 13,154 12,163 5,108 3,320 61,222 74,376 2014 17,287 3,226 18.7% 14,061 12,161 5,108 3,366 60,870 74,931 2015 17,220 3,080 17.9% 14,140 11,669 4,901 3,230 61,491 75,631 2016 17,557 3,081 17.5% 14,476 11,300 4,746 3,128 61,486 75,962 2017 17,875 3,001 16.8% 14,874 11,386 4,782 3,152 62,066 76,940 2018(6) 18,179 3,052 16.8% 15,127 11,580 4,863 3,205 62,551 77,678 2019(6) 18,488 3,104 16.8% 15,384 11,776 4,946 3,260 77,558 92,942 2020(6) 18,802 3,157 16.8% 15,646 11,977 5,030 3,315 77,514 93,160 Notes:
(1) (The California State University 2018).
(2) (National Center for Education Statistics 2018).
(3) (Butte College 2016).
(4) Calculated using equation described in Section 2.3.1.1. (5) From Table 2.1.
(6) Estimation based on student population growth assumption of 1.7 percent to match population growth values used elsewhere. Does not reflect numbers reported by the university.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
157
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-10 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 158
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-11

2.3.2 Historical Flows
Flow is defined as the volumetric rate at which raw influent wastewater enters the WPCP from the collection system, usually expressed in terms of millions of gallons per day (mgd). The WPCP influent flow measurement occurs downstream of screening and grit removal and prior to the introduction of plant recycle streams, tracked as a combination of flow measurements that occur in parallel Parshall flumes downstream of the grit removal facilities.

Daily minimum, maximum, and average flow data were compiled from monthly operational reports from January 2012 through December 2020 (thelatest 9 full calendar years of data available) and analyzed to develop the flow parameters for each year as defined below:
• Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF):
- The ADWF is the average of daily average flows for the three-month dry weather period (July through September) each year.
- ADWF per capita is the ADWF divided by the connected population, expressed in units of gallons per capita day (gpcd).
• Average Annual Flow (AAF):
- The AAF is the average of average daily flows for the entire calendar year. - The AAF Peaking Factor (AAFPF) is AAF divided by the ADWF. • Maximum Month Flow (MMF):
- The MMF is the maximum 30-day running average of average daily flow data. - The MMF Peaking Factor (MMFPF) for each year is MMF divided by the ADWF. • Peak Flow (PF):
- The PF for each year is the maximum instantaneous flow measured by supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA).6.
- The PF Peaking Factor(PFPF) for each year is PF divided by the ADWF.

Prior to developing these flow parameters, known erroneous data points and other statistical outliers (e.g., a PF on a dry summer day) were identified and removed (Appendix B).

2.3.2.1 Historical ADWF and ADWF per Capita
ADWF was calculated as described above, and an ADWF per capita range was calculated using the maximum and minimum connected population estimates from Table 2.2 (Figure 2.4). 6 Maximum influent flow reported on the monthly operational data sheets represents the maximum instantaneous flow, whose interval is subject to the PLC/SCADA programming. Hourly data prior to 2016 is not available due to a SCADA upgrade. Previous planning efforts expressed wet weather flow criteria in terms of peak hour wet weather flow (PHWWF).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
159
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-12 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Figure 2.4 Historical ADWF and ADWF Per Capita Range
The upper bound of the ADWF per capita value represents the minimum year-round connected population estimate (assuming 100 percent of the non-local college students remain in the service area during school breaks, as described in Section 2.2). The lower bound ADWF per capita value represents the maximum year-round connected population estimate (assuming 100 percent of the non-local college students leave the service area during school breaks).

To better estimate the ADWF per capita value, flow data were compared with respect to the four major college breaks: spring break, summer break, Thanksgiving break, and winter break.

Assuming students and non-students produce the same volume of wastewater when they are living in the service area, the ADWF per capita can be estimated algebraically:
𝒏𝒏𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃
𝒏𝒏𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒕𝒕
∙ 𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃 ∙ 𝐴𝐴𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑐𝑐 +
𝒏𝒏𝒊𝒊 −
𝒏𝒏𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒕𝒕
∙ (𝑷𝑷 𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷 𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒕𝒕)
∙ 𝐴𝐴 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑐𝑐 = 𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒕𝒕
Where n is the number of days (either during a break or in-session) for the ADWF period each year; for 2012:
𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓
𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟖
∙ 𝟓𝟓.𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟖 𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎 ∙ 𝐴𝐴 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑐𝑐 +
𝟑𝟑 𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟖 ∙ (𝟕𝟕 , 𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟖) ∙ 𝐴𝐴 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑐𝑐 = . 𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎
𝐴𝐴 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑐𝑐 = 87 𝑔𝑔 𝑔𝑔
This calculation was applied to each year, with results summarized in Figure 2.5.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
160
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-13
Figure 2.5 Historical ADWF vs. College Breaks and Estimated ADWF per Capita From this ADWF per capita estimate, the population of students that leave during break can be more accurately estimated as follows:
(𝑷𝑷 𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷 𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒕𝒕 − 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑠 𝑡𝑡ℎ 𝑙𝑙 ) ∙ 𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨 𝒄𝒄 = 𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃𝒃 From this, the connected populations summarized in Table 2.2 were updated (Table 2.3).

Table 2.3 Estimated Connected Population vs College Breaks Year Connected Population,
On-Break (Minimum)(1)
Connected Population,
On-Break (Estimated)
Connected Population,
In-Session (Maximum)(1)
2009 59,155 65,363 72,360
2010 60,125 67,682 72,695
2011 60,638 66,406 73,177
2012 60,722 67,265 73,866
2013 61,222 67,010 74,376
2014 60,870 70,571 74,931
2015 61,491 70,131 75,631
2016 61,486 68,881 75,962
2017 62,066 69,216 76,940
2018 62,551(2) 69,061 77,678
2019 77,558(2) 85,760 92,942
2020 77,514(2) 88,830 93,160
Notes:
(1) Copied from Table 2.2.
(2) Estimation based on student population growth assumption of 1.7 percent to match population growth values used elsewhere. Does not reflect numbers reported by the university.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
161
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-14 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
For the period prior to 2018, approximately 54 percent of the non-resident students (non-City Butte College and non-County CSU Chico) left the service area over breaks (on average).

2.3.2.2 Other Historical Flows and Peaking Factors
Historical flow parameters are important for various planning, design, and operational purposes, a few of which are listed below7
:
• AA flows: Used for estimation of pumping and chemical costs; can be used as a benchmark for comparison to similar plants for staffing purposes. • Maximum monthly (MM) flows: Used to identify the required number and/or size of unit processes with large hydraulic retention; prevents overly conservative design. • Peaking factors: Used for hydraulic design and sizing of more critical unit processes.

For each flow parameter, a historical flow peaking factor was developed that represents the ratio of that flow to the ADWF.

The WPCP historical flow parameters and associated peaking factors for 2012-2020 are presented in Figure 2.6.

Figure 2.6 Historical Flow Parameters and Peaking Factors 7 (Tchobanoglous 2014)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
162
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-15
The flow peaking factors are applied to the ADWF projections in the development of projections for the other flow parameters used for facility design (MMF and PF).

Because the historical PFs for this data set represent peak instantaneous flows, the PF peaking factors exceed the previously published peaking factor for the WPCP8,9 of 2.5. This past value reflects peak hour flow, which reflects a more realistic basis for capacity-related planning; the hydraulic design of the WPCP allows for some dampening of instantaneous flow impacts.

Therefore, a flow peaking factor of 2.5 (matching historical practices) was chosen for this planning effort.

2.3.3 Historical Wastewater Loads
Wastewater loads are defined as the quantities of pollutants carried by the wastewater as it enters a treatment facility, usually expressed in terms of pounds per day (lb/day). Important loading criteria (related to facility design) include:
• Daily loads: Daily loads calculated using the measured average daily flow and the measured daily concentration for each pollutant.
• Annual average loads: Average daily loads treated at a facility for the calendar year, based on measured loading values.

Loading values were calculated for the WPCP based on historical data discussed herein. No historical loading values were available for Paradise so it was assumed that wastewater from Paradise would have the same characteristics as the flow from Chico. Once calculated, statistical outliers were removed from each pollutant’sdataset to account for possibly erroneous concentration measurements10.

2.3.3.1 Sierra Nevada Brewery Loads
The largest significant industrial user (SIU) in the WPCP’s service area is the Sierra Nevada Brewery (SNB). Untreated brewery wastewater is typically high-strength, which can be a significant burden for wastewater treatment. The preparation of 2005 WPCP Facility Plan11 was preceded by a significant uptick in the flow and loads discharged by SNB to the City’s collection system (and ultimately treated by the WPCP). This directly impacted the load projections made during that facility planning effort.

Since the 2005 facility planning effort, SNB has installed pre-treatment systems for its brewery wastewater prior to its discharge to the City’s collection system, which has significantly reduced SNB’s load on the WPCP as indicated in Figure 2.7.
8 (Carollo Engineers, Inc. 2005)
9 (Carollo Engineers, Inc. 2013)
10 Outliers were removed from calculated loads rather than frommeasured concentrations. This is because a low concentration may appear to be a statistical outlier withoutflow context (i.e., rainfall can dilute a pollutant’s concentration), but when taken in context with the associated high flow, the load is not a statistical outlier.
11 (Carollo Engineers, Inc. 2005)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
163
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-16 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
Figure 2.7 Historical Sierra Nevada Brewery Loads
Given the significant upgrades of SNB’s pretreatment systems and the measured downward trend of their loading on the WPCP, sampling frequency by SNB was reasonably decreased (the brewery’s effluent wastewater [load to the WPCP] has improved in quality over the time period analyzed).

To develop accurate per capita load values for the WPCP, the load associated with the brewery is differentiated from the rest of the total load measured at the plant (non-Sierra Nevada loads) in this evaluation. Since SNB data was not available after 2017,it was assumed for this analysis that 2018, 2019, and 2020 were identical to 2017.

2.3.3.2 Non-Sierra Nevada Loads and per Capita Values
Using the same methodology to capture college break and in-session population differences with a single per-capita value used for ADWF, AA load per capita values were calculated for TSS, BOD, and ammonia (NH3) (Figure 2.8, Figure 2.9, and Figure 2.10).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
164
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-17
Figure 2.8 Historical TSS Loads
Figure 2.9 Historical BOD Loads
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
165
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-18 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Figure 2.10 Historical NH3 Loads
The per-capita ammonia load values reported in Figure 2.10 reflect the non-Sierra Nevada ammonia loading; Sierra Nevada’s ammonia loading is shown only for comparison purposes. The average annual and per capita loads for NH3 have trended upwards in recent years. However, the WPCP NH3 data collected prior to 2018 was based on grab samples and all data since are based on 24-hour composite samples (depicting a more realistic daily concentration for the influent flow). For this reason, NH3 data prior to 2018 was not used for future projections and is only presented herein for reference. Additionally, WPCP NH3 data was not available for 2019 and 2020 so the 2018 loads were used in their place.

Historical maximum month values were calculated for non-Sierra Nevada loads (Figure 2.11) and peaking factors were calculated by dividing these loads by the average annual loads (Figure

2.12).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
166
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-19
Figure 2.11 Historical Max Month Loads
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
167
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-20 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
Figure 2.12 Historical Max Month Load Peaking Factors

2.4 Projected Population, Flows, and Loads
Population projections were created using historical trends and input from City staff. ADWF and AA load were projected by applying the developed per-capita values to the projected population.

Other flow and load parameters were projected by applying the peaking factors to the projected ADWF or AA load.

2.4.1 Projected Population
Much of theCity’s population growth before 2009 was due to annexations related to the Nitrate Action Plan and other efforts undertaken by the City to consolidate its incorporated limits. As depicted in Figure 2.13, the Great Recession of 2008/2009 slowed this growth significantly with no notable increase until 2019. In 2019,the City saw a substantial increase in population growth following the Camp Fire, as Chico received an influx of displaced residents from the Town of Paradise.

There are currently several development efforts underway (and planned) within the City’s SOI that will result in continued growth in the near-term.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
168
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-21
Figure 2.13 Historical Population Growth
Other historical planning efforts have assumed population growth rates that are higher than recently observed (Table 2.4).

Table 2.4 Summary of Annual Growth Rate Projections
Source Year(s) City County
Facilities Plan 1996 2.9% -
General Plan Update 1998 2.9% 2.5%
Facilities Plan Update 2005 2.5% -
BCAG 2014 1.2-1.6% 1.2-1.6%
CA DOF 2015 - 0.53%
General Plan Update 2017 1.7% 1.6%
Observed Historical 2009-2018 0.83% 0.44%
WPCP Strategic
Planning Report 1.2 - 1.4% -
The original WPCP Strategic Planning Report 12 assumed a growth rate of 1.2 percent, with an alternate growth rate assumption of 1.4 percent presented for comparison purposes, as requested by the City (Table 2.5).

For theupdated analysis presented herein, a growth rate of 1.7 percent is used as directed by City staff. This growth rate matches the growth rate used for the 2017 General Plan Update and is intended to reflect expected and ongoing development activitywithin the City’s SOI. 12 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
169
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-22 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
Table 2.5 Connected Population Growth Projections
Year
As Presented in WPCP Strategic Planning Report(1) Current(2)

1.2% Annual Growth 1.4% Annual Growth 1.7% Annual Growth On-Break(3) In-Session On-Break(3) In-Session On-Break(3) In-Session 2018 70,826 77,938 70,812 77,938 - -
2019 71,676 78,873 71,803 79,029 - -
2020 72,536 79,820 72,808 80,136 88,830 93,160(4)
2021 73,494 80,778 73,930 81,257 88,235 95,474
2022 74,376 81,747 74,965 82,395 91,060 98,422
2023 75,357 82,728 76,119 83,549 93,936 101,423
2024 76,261 83,721 77,185 84,718 96,874 104,488
2025 77,266 84,725 78,371 85,904 99,874 107,618
2026 78,193 85,742 79,468 87,107 102,939 110,814
2027 79,222 86,771 80,687 88,326 107,496 115,505
2028 80,172 87,812 81,817 89,563 110,764 118,909
2029 81,226 88,866 83,071 90,817 114,105 122,389
2030 82,201 89,932 84,234 92,088 117,519 125,943
2031 83,280 91,011 85,523 93,378 120,426 128,993
2032 84,279 92,104 86,720 94,685 123,409 132,122
2033 85,385 93,209 88,046 96,010 126,460 135,322
2034 86,409 94,327 89,279 97,355 129,582 138,594
2035 87,541 95,459 90,642 98,718 132,776 141,941
2036 88,592 96,605 91,911 100,100 136,042 145,363
2037 89,751 97,764 93,312 101,501 139,384 148,863
2038 90,828 98,937 94,618 102,922 142,802 152,443
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
170
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-23
Year
As Presented in WPCP Strategic Planning Report(1) Current(2)

1.2% Annual Growth 1.4% Annual Growth 1.7% Annual Growth On-Break(3) In-Session On-Break(3) In-Session On-Break(3) In-Session 2039 92,015 100,124 96,059 104,363 146,299 156,104
2040 93,125 101,326 97,423 105,824 149,877 159,848
2041 - - - - 152,513 162,654
2042 - - - - 155,199 165,512
2043 - - - - 157,935 168,424
2044 - - - - 160,723 171,390
2045 - - - - 163,563 174,411
2046 - - - - 166,457 177,489
2047 - - - - 169,406 180,625
2048 - - - - 172,410 183,821
2049 - - - - 175,472 187,077
2050 - - - - 178,593 190,395
2051 - - - - 181,774 193,776
2052 - - - - 185,016 197,222
2053 - - - - 188,320 200,734
2054 - - - - 191,689 204,314
2055 - - - - 195,123 207,963
2056 - - - - 198,625 211,683
2057 - - - - 202,195 215,475
Notes:
(1) Does not include Paradise residents.
(2) Includes connected population from the Town of Paradise, as projected in Technical Memorandum #2 for the Paradise Sewer Project (Design Criteria for Local Wastewater Treatment Plant, HDR, November 2020).
(3) Projected from Table 2.3 assuming college enrollment grows at the same rate as the non-student connected population. (4) Carried down from Table 2.1.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
171
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-24 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
The remainder of this report, beginning with Table 2.6, assumes a singular growth rate assumption of 1.7 percent.

With use of the updated projection of 1.7 percent annual growth rate and the updated baseline population values for 2020 presented herein (which represent a 20 percent increase from the 2018 population estimate), the resulting connected population projection in the year 2057 is 215,475 residents. This represents a population increase of 131 percent from the 2020 baseline population, as anticipated growth within the Chico and Paradise service areas combined.

Annexations of unincorporated areas of Butte County (unincorporated islands within the City limits and developments outside of City limits) are included in this projection because these annexations have been captured in the historical data and because the rate of annexations is not expected to significantly change.

The updated population projections also include connected Paradise residents starting in 2027 (estimated connection to the WPCP is December 2026), and total 6,163 people by 2057 (Table

2.6). For the remainder of the discussion in this report, only the combined connected population is considered.

Table 2.6 Connected Chico and Paradise Residents
Year Chico Paradise(1) Total Connected(2,3)
2020 93,160 1,200 93,160
2021 95,474 1,230 95,474
2022 98,422 1,260 98,422
2023 101,423 1,292 101,423
2024 104,488 1,324 104,488
2025 107,618 1,357 107,618
2026 110,814 1,391 110,814
2027 114,079 1,426 115,505
2028 117,412 1,497 118,909
2029 120,817 1,572 122,389
2030 124,293 1,651 125,943
2031 127,260 1,733 128,993
2032 130,302 1,820 132,122
2033 133,411 1,911 135,322
2034 136,588 2,006 138,594
2035 139,834 2,107 141,941
2036 143,151 2,212 145,363
2037 146,541 2,323 148,863
2038 150,004 2,439 152,443
2039 153,543 2,561 156,104
2040 157,159 2,689 159,848
2041 159,831 2,823 162,654
2042 162,548 2,964 165,512
2043 165,311 3,113 168,424
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
172
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-25
Year Chico Paradise(1) Total Connected(2,3)
2044 168,121 3,268 171,390
2045 170,979 3,432 174,411
2046 173,886 3,603 177,489
2047 176,842 3,783 180,625
2048 179,848 3,973 183,821
2049 182,906 4,171 187,077
2050 186,015 4,380 190,395
2051 189,177 4,599 193,776
2052 192,393 4,829 197,222
2053 195,664 5,070 200,734
2054 198,990 5,324 204,314
2055 202,373 5,590 207,963
2056 205,814 5,869 211,683
2057 209,312 6,163 215,475
Notes:
(1) Connected Paradise residents were calculated using Paradise wastewater flows and per capita usage provided by HDR. (2) From Table 2.5.
(3) Connected residents total does not include Paradise residents until the connection is online in 2027.

The total connected population projection of 215,475 represents a 131 percent increase from the 2020 connected population estimate.

2.4.1.1 Population Growth due to Connection of Unconnected City Residents The number of currently unconnected City residents is a more significant portion of the overall population than the county annexations, and the historical rate of adding unconnected City residents is expected to be higher in the future as the implementation of the Nitrate Compliance Plan continues.

For this planning effort, it was assumed that 100 percent of the estimated 17,204 unconnected City residents will be connected by 2040; the number of residents connected annually is assumed to increase at the same rate as that of the currently connected population.

2.4.2 Projected Flows
In the dry weather months from which the ADWF per-capital value was derived, approximately 60 percent of the days are on-break days and 40 percent are in-session days. ADWF was projected by applying the average ADWF per-capita value (76.3 gpcd) proportionally to the break and in-session population projections as follows:

𝐴𝐴 = 60% ∙ 𝐴𝐴 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑐𝑐 ∙ 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 −𝑏𝑏 + 40% ∙ 𝐴𝐴 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑐𝑐 ∙ 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 −𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠
Other flow parameters were projected by applying the flow peaking factors to the projected ADWF (Figure 2.14). As with Table 2.6, the ADWF flow projections for the total connected population can also be split between the Chico service area and the Paradise residents (Figure

2.15).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
173
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-26 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 174
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-27
Figure 2.14 Projected Flows
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
175
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-28 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 176
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-29
Figure 2.15 Projected ADWF
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
177
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-30 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 178
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-31

2.4.3 Projected Loads
Average annual loads were projected by applying the average annual per-capita values to the projected population. Because of the small and decreasing portion of Sierra Nevada’s load to the overall influent load, the average loads for the time period analyzed were held constant for projected loads (Figure 2.16).

2.5 Summary of Projections
Table 2.7 contains a summary of historical and projected population, flow, and load values.

Findings related to this data include the following:
• The population connected to theWPCP collection system is projected to increase 131 percent by 2057 (from 93,160 to 215,475).
• The ADWF for the WPCP is projected to increase 126 percent by 2057 (from 7.0 mgd to

15.8 mgd).
• Projected flows and loads are higher than previous projections:
- Projected AA and MM flows are 14 percent and 12 percent higher than the previous facility plan’s projections, respectively.
- Projected AA and MM TSS loads are 17 percent and 31 percent higher than the previous facility plan’s projections, respectively.
- Projected AA and MM BOD loads are 30 percent and 45 percent higher than the previous facility plan’s projections, respectively.

These flow and load projections provide context for the capacity-driven facility needs discussion in Chapter 4 and the regulatory-driven facility needs discussion in Chapter 5.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
179
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-32 |MAY 2022 |FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 180
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-33
Figure 2.16 Projected Loads
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
181
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-34 | MAY 2021 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 182
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 2-35
Table 2.7 Summary of Historical and Projected Population, Flows, and Loads Planning Parameter
Previously Projected Updated Projection Historical Projections4 2018 Baseline1 2018 Peaking 2040 Projected 2040 Projection 2021 Baseline2 2021 Peaking 2040 & 2057 2040 Projection 2057 Projection 2005 Facility Plan 2013 SSMPU Factor PF (2018 BL) (2018 BL) Factor Projected PF
(2021 BL) (2021 BL) (2021 BL) Projection Projection
Connected Population3
Annual Maximum 77,938 - - 116,986 93,160 - - 159,848 215,475 - - Annual Minimum 70,842 - - 108,798 88,830 149,877 202,195 - - Average Dry Weather (ADW)
Flow, mgd 5.91 - - 9.39 5.72 11.74 15.83 - 13.91
Diurnal Peak Flow, mgd 8.22 1.39 1.39 13.05 7.95 1.39 1.39 16.30 21.98 20.30 - AWDF per capita, gpcd 84 - - 84 76 76 76 - -
Annual Average (AA)
Flow, mgd 6.35 1.09 1.09 10.23 6.18 1.08 1.08 12.68 17.10 15.00 - TSS, ppd 12,443 - - 19,379 13,062 26,064 35,028 30,000
TSS per capita, ppcd 0.17 - - 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 -
BOD, ppd 11,051 - - 17,861 11,586 24,050 32,379 25,000
BOD per capita, ppcd 0.16 - - 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 -
NH3, ppd 1,214 - - 1,972 1,705 3,019 4,069 -
NH3 per capita, ppcd 0.02 - - 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 -
Maximum Month (MM)
Flow, mgd 8.52 1.47 1.47 13.76 7.86 1.37 1.37 16.12 21.74 19.50 TSS, ppd 14,672 1.21 1.21 23,499 15,618 1.22 1.22 31,687 42,585 32,500 BOD, ppd 14,224 1.30 1.30 23,294 15,478 1.34 1.34 32,217 43,376 30,000 NH3, ppd 1,512 1.27 1.27 2,501 1,873 1.10 1.10 3,323 4,479 - Peak
Flow, mgd 15.86 2.74 2.50 23.48 16.36 2.86 2.50 29.34 39.58 37.50 35.30 Notes:
(1) For the connected population, the baseline represents the estimated connected population at the beginning of 2018; for ADW, the baseline represents the historical average of the years 2009-2017; for all other parameters, the baseline represents the historical average of the years 2010-2017. (2) For the connected population, the baseline represents the estimated connected population at the beginning of 2021; for all other parameters, the baseline represents the historical average of the years 2012-2020. (3) The connected population is presented as a range for informational purposes only to reflect the biannual population swings due to college students; the flow and load projections use a blend of both population totals presented as described in this Chapter. (4) Historical projections were based on complete buildout of the City's Planning Area. The other projections in this table only extend to the end of the stated planning period (2040 or 2057).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
183
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 2-36 |MAY 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 184
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL| MAY 2022 | 3-1
Chapter 3

PLANT CAPACITY EVALUATION
This chapter evaluates the capacity of the City’sWPCP to provide adequate treatment for the projected flows and loads within the planning period ending in 2057 (Chapter 2) in a tightening regulatory environment (Chapter 5).

Within this updated plant capacity evaluation there are several new capacity-driven upgrades identified that were not included in therecent WPCP Strategic Planning Report 1. The capacitydriven upgrades that had not been previously discussed are primarily the result of the three following circumstances:
• An increased population assumption compared to that used in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 2.
- The updated 2021 baseline population is approximately 20 percent higher than the previous 2018 baseline population.
• An increased growth rate assumption due to current development planning activity (1.7 percent compared to 1.2 percent used in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 3). • An increase in planning period length (from ending in 2040 to ending in 2057) resulting a 35 percent increase in anticipated flows and loads since the previous planning effort.

3.1 Basis of Evaluation
Two parameters that were used to evaluate the WPCP’s capacity are defined below:
• Peak hydraulic capacity: The maximum flow that can be physically passed through the treatment plant without over-topping structures or submerging effluent weirs.

Evaluated with Carollo’s Hydraulix® modeling software.
• Treatment process capacity: The maximum flow for the WPCP at which treatment objectives are accomplished for each process unit. Evaluated with BioWinTM wastewater process modeling software.

3.1.1 Flow & Load Basis
Annual average (AA) and maximum month (MM) flow and load projections form the basis for treatment process capacity evaluations. Peak flow projections provide the basis for peak hydraulic capacity evaluation. The flow and load projections for these analyses were developed in Chapter 2 and are summarized in Table 3.1.
1 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
2 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
185
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-2 |MAY 2022 |FINAL
Table 3.1 Projected WPCP Flows & Loads
Condition Projected Flow(1), mgd Projected Load(1)
, ppd
(TSS / BOD / NH3)
Peak 39.6 -
MM 21.7 42,600 / 43,400 / 4,500
AA 17.1 35,100 / 32,400 / 4,100
Average Dry Weather(ADW) 15.8 -
Notes:
(1) Projection is based on the planning period which extends through 2057.

3.1.2 Unit Process Availability Criteria
Both capacity parameters (peak hydraulic capacity and treatment process capacity) were evaluated for each unit process based on a unit process availability criterion defined below:
• Firm capacity/availability:All units are in service (available) except the largest unit. • Total capacity/availability:All units are in service (available).

These unit process criteria are used to evaluate individual unit process capacities as described herein. For all capacity ratings in this chapter, it is assumed that the flow distribution to each process is optimized and that individual units are receiving equal amounts of flow.

3.2 Background

3.2.1 Previous WPCP Facility Planning
The City’s 2005WPCP Facility Plan4 described two projects to expand the firm AA treatment process capacity of the plant to 12-and 15- mgd, respectively. Each project was developed to provide 2.5 times the AA flows in peak hydraulic capacity.

The 12 mgd upgrade project was constructed in 2007 and was comprised of hydraulic and process-related capacity improvements to several unit processes, however, the 15 mgd expansion project has not been implemented. As described in Chapter 2, AA flow is projected to surpass the WPCP’s current design capacity of 12 mgd within the planning period.

3.2.2 WPCP Description

3.2.2.1 Split Flow Configuration
Influent wastewater flows through the Headworks and the primary treatment process at the WPCP by gravity. After primary treatment, primary effluent was historically split between two parallel trains (Plant 1 and Plant 2) that each consist of secondary treatment and disinfection processes.

Plants 1 and 2 were originally designed to receive approximately 30 percent and 70 percent of the total flow, respectively. However, as noted elsewhere in this report, the City is unable to consistently rely on aging Plant 1 facilities and is treating all flows with Plant 2 only. Plant 1 facilities are not discussed further in this report.

A summary of historical WPCP flow splits and capacity ratings is presented in Table 3.2. 4 (Carollo Engineers, Inc. 2005)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
186
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL| MAY 2022 | 3-3
Table 3.2 Historical WPCP Capacity Ratings and Flow Split Project (Year)
Shared -
Primary,
mgd
Plant 1 -
Secondary &
Disinfection,
mgd (% of
Total)
Plant 2 -
Secondary &
Disinfection,
mgd (% of
Total)
Total Design
Capacity
(AA), mgd
Total Peak
Flow
Capacity,
mgd
12 mgd Expansion
Project (2007) 12 3.6 (30%)(1) 8.4 (70%) 12 30
1997 Expansion
Project (1997) 9 3.6 (40%)(2) 5.4 (60%) 9 22.5
1990 Expansion
Project 6 6 (100%) - 6 15
Notes:
(1) Plant 1 is currently not in use other than Aeration Tank #2, which is being used for centrate storage/return. Efforts would be needed to bring Plant 1 capacity back online.
(2) Plant 1 was de-rated to 3.6 mgd in 1997 due to new nitrification requirements.

The locations of the major plant hydraulic components described in this chapter are depicted in the facility layouts included as Figures 3.1 and 3.2. The WPCP’s existing hydraulic profile is Figure

3.3, and Figures 3.4 and 3.5 are the WPCP’s existing liquids and solids flow schematics, respectively.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
187
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-4 |MAY 2022 |FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 188
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL| MAY 2022 | 3-5
Figure 3.1 WPCP Site Map with Facility Pond Locations
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
189
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-6 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 190
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 3-7
Figure 3.2 Existing WPCP Treatment Works and Facility Buildings Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
191
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-8 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 192
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWERE PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL| MAY ͮͬͮͮ | ͯ‐͵
Figure ͯ.ͯ Existing WPCP Hydraulic Profile55 Water surface elevations are based on AA design flows of ͭͮ mgd and design peak flows of ͯͬ mgd.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
193
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-10 | MAY 2022 |FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 194
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 3-11
Figure 3.4 Existing Liquids Flow Schematic for WPCP
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
195
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-12 | MAY 2022 FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 196
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 3-13
Figure 3.5 Existing Solids Flow Schematic for WPCP-This Page Intentionally Left Blank Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
197
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-14 | MAY 2022 FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 198
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 3-15

3.3 Peak Hydraulic Capacity Evaluation
A detailed hydraulic model was prepared to develop the hydraulic capacity for individual unit processes, which was then evaluated against the projected peak flow of 39.6 mgd using the following unit process criteria:
• Pumping processes are evaluated based on their capacity for handling the peak flow condition with the largest unit out of service (firm capacity). • Hydraulic structures are evaluated based on their capacity for handling the peak flow condition without over-topping the walls or submerging the effluent weirs.

The hydraulic capacity was evaluated assuming that only the Plant 2 secondary and disinfection facilities will be in operation during projected peak flows (per current operation).

3.3.1 Headworks
Untreated wastewater from the City’s collection system enters the WPCP via 66-inch and 33-inch sewer pipes that connect to a junction box where flow is combined before flowing into the Headworks facility.

Upon entering the Headworks, the water flows through two of three bar screen channels and two mechanically induced vortex grit chambers. De-gritted influent flow is conveyed to the Parshall flume located to the southwest of the Headworks through two 4-foot-wide channels.

The Headworks facility was designed for 15 mgd buildout condition (which had an associated peak flow of 37.5 mgd when the facility was constructed); with two mechanical bar screens designed for a peak flow of 19 mgd each and two grit chambers designed for a peak flow of 20 mgd each.

To meet the projected peak flows, a third mechanical barscreen will be needed (replacing the manual bar rack that is currently installed in the third screen channel) by 2054.

3.3.2 Primary Treatment
From the Parshall flume, water flows through a 5-foot-wide rectangular concrete box channel that reduces to a 4-foot-wide rectangular channel before Primary Clarifier No. 1. The channel then reduces to a 3-foot-wide rectangular channel before Primary Clarifier No. 2, with channel width remaining at 3-feet for the rest of the influent channel.

Transition concrete channels split the flow from the influent channel to the three primary clarifiers. The effluent from the primary clarifiers is routed to the Primary Effluent Lift Station via a 4-foot-wide concrete channel. From this location, the flow is pumped to the Plant 2 secondary treatment train.

3.3.3 Primary Effluent Pumping
The Primary Effluent Lift Station contains four vertical turbine pumps, with three pumps rated at 6,600 gallons per minute (gpm) at 30 feet of head and the fourth pump rated at 6,800 gpm at 50 feet of head. This station has a current total capacity of 34.5 mgd and a firm capacity of

28.5 mgd for the pumps. The force main between the Primary Effluent Lift Station and the aeration tanks has a capacity of 24.0 mgd. The capacity of this station can be extended with the installation of a parallel force main between the Primary Effluent Lift Station and the aeration Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
199
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-16 | MAY 2022 FIN AL
tanks and with modifications to the existing Primary Effluent Lift Station to allow the installation of another pump.

With a firm capacity of 19,800 gpm (28.5mgd) for the pumps and 24.0 mgd for the force main, the Primary Effluent Lift station has sufficient hydraulic capacity for the projected AAF flow of

17.1 mgd, but not enough capacity for the projected peak hour wet weather flow of 39.6 mgd.

To meet peak flow projections summarized herein, the parallel force main will be needed by 2038 and an additional pump will be needed at the Primary Effluent Pump Station by 2054.

3.3.4 Secondary Treatment and Disinfection
The Primary Effluent Lift Station pumps primary effluent to the influent channel of Aeration Tank Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6. Return activated sludge (RAS) can be mixed with the primary effluent at this point or added directly to each aeration tank. Mixed liquor exiting from the four aeration tanks enters the Mixed Liquor Splitter Box where the flow is currently split into three streams.

The flows are transported to Secondary Clarifier Nos. 3, 4, and 5 through three 36-inch pipes.

Effluent from the three secondary clarifiers is combined in two 36-inch pipes that combine into a 48-inch pipe before it enters Chlorine Contact Basin Nos. 3 and 4. After passing through the flash mixer, the flow is split between the two chlorine contact basins. Effluent from both chlorine contact basins is combined and flows to the Outfall Box through a 48-inch pipe. At the Outfall Box, effluent is dechlorinated, and then flows toward the river through parallel 48-inch and 33- inch pipelines.

3.3.5 Peak Hydraulic Capacity Analysis Summary
The existing system provides hydraulic control points at each of the major processes, including the primary clarifiers, aeration tanks, secondary clarifiers, and the chlorine contact basins. The control points, in the form of rectangular or v-notch weirs, provide hydraulic breaks between the processes. These hydraulic breaks are needed so that flows are split evenly between process units where required, and so that the processes are operated within design parameters in a manner such that process performance can be maintained.

The submerged flow condition for each of the WPCP main hydraulic breaks is summarized in Table 3.3 along with theresults of their associated adequacy evaluation. Since the weirs are at a lower elevation than the top of the structure, the submerged weir condition is the criteria used for peak flow capacity.

Table 3.3 Hydraulic Capacity Summary for WPCP Major Processes Unit Process Submerged Effluent Weir Flow Condition (mgd) Adequate Peak
Hydraulic
Capacity?(1)
Primary Clarifiers 29 No
Aeration Tanks 33 No
Secondary Clarifiers 33 No
Chlorine Contact Basins 25 No
Notes:
(1) Compared against peak flow projection of 39.6 mgd.

Facility improvements necessary to meet hydraulic capacity needs within the planning period are discussed in Section 3.4 in context of process needs for the same facilities.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
200
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 3-17

3.4 Treatment Process Capacity Evaluation
Existing plant treatment processes were modeled using BioWinTM, with projected flow and load conditions and more stringent effluent limitations outlined in Chapter 5. The model was calibrated using AA flow and load data from 2020.

The process capacity was evaluated assuming that only Plant 2 secondary and disinfection facilities will be in operation during projected peak flow and loading conditions (per current operation).

Process capacity scenarios modeled for this evaluation are summarized in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4 Modeling Scenarios
Treatment Objective(1) Process Current Flows and
Loads
Projected Flows and
Loads
Current Operation
Nitrifying Activated
Sludgewith Partial
Denitrification
Modeled Modeled
Reduction of effluent
nitrate(2)
MLE
(Modified-Ludzack
Ettinger)
Not Modeled Modeled
Reduction of effluent
TSS/BOD(3) MLE + Filtration Not Modeled Modeled
Reduction of
inorganics and
disinfection
byproducts(4)
MLE + Filtration +
Advanced Disinfection Not Modeled Modeled
Notes:
(1) Based on projected regulatory requirements summarized in Chapter 5. (2) Less than 10 mg/L NO3 + NO2.
(3) 10/15/30 mg/L (average monthly, average weekly, and maximum daily). (4) Values currently undefined but would predicate non-chlorine disinfection.

3.4.1 Primary Treatment Facilities
Primary treatment facilities at the plant remove the portion of the influent suspended solids that can be separated from the flow by gravity. These facilities also remove grease, scum, and floatables from the influent. The principal components at the WPCP for the primary treatment process are the primary clarifiers and the primary sludge and scum pumping systems.

3.4.1.1 Primary Clarifiers
Three primary clarifiers are currently in use at the Chico WPCP. All are rectangular in shape and measure 98 feet by 38 feet, with a sidewater depth of 10.3 feet. To maintain acceptable overflow rates through 2057, a fourth primary clarifier would need to be constructed by 2044.The design overflow rate for all clarifiers in service with this additional unit would be 1,150 gallons per day per square foot (gpd/ft2) for projected AA flow and 2,660 gpd/ft2 for peak flow. The firm overflow rates for AA and peak flows are 1,530 gpd/ft2 and 3,540 gpd/ft2, respectively. These overflow rates fall within commonly accepted design criteria.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
201
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-18 | MAY 2022 FINAL

3.4.1.2 Primary Sludge and Scum Pumping
Primary sludge is thickened in Primary Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2 and pumped by three primary sludge double disc pumps to the digesters, each with a capacity of 200 gpm. Two primary sludge progressive cavity pumps are dedicated to Primary Clarifier No. 3, each with a capacity of 70 gpm at 60 feet of head.

These systems continue to provide sufficient capacity for current loads and treatment objectives as well as projected loads and advanced treatment.

3.4.1.3 Summary of Primary Treatment System Needs
The Headworks facility will need a third mechanical barscreen by 2054.

The primary treatment facilities will require an additional primary clarifier by 2044 and a capacity expansion for the Primary Effluent Lift Station which includes a parallel force main by 2038 and an additional primary effluent pump (with related wet well improvements) by 2054.

3.4.2 Secondary Treatment Facilities
The capacity evaluation presented herein discusses operation of the secondary treatment unit processes in nitrification mode. Nitrification describes the biochemical process whereby NH3 present in municipal wastewater is oxidized into nitrate. Currently, the WPCP nitrifies the wastewater through a single stage nitrification step, where the nitrification process occurs simultaneously with carbonaceous treatment. Carbonaceous treatment is the oxidation of soluble and particulate organic compounds present in the primary effluent by biochemical processes, which is the primary focus of secondary treatment. Since the front of the aeration tanks is unaerated, partial denitrification is achieved from the nitrate in the RAS returned to these unaerated zones.

3.4.2.1 Aeration Tanks and Secondary Clarifiers
Aeration Tank Nos. 3 through 6 are rectangular and each have a total volume of approximately

4.36 million gallons (MG).

Secondary Clarifier Nos. 3, 4 and 5 are all 100-foot diameter circular tanks with a sidewater depth of 14 feet. Each clarifier has a center pier-mounted rotating sludge collector mechanism driven by a 1 horsepower (hp) motor.

3.4.2.2 Existing Nitrifying Activated Sludge Process
With all 4 existing aeration tanks and all three existing secondary clarifiers in service, the WPCP does not have adequate capacity to treat the projected max month BOD, TSS, and NH3 loads at the projected peak flows.

Using the projected influent TSS loads developed in Chapter 2 and assuming a sludge volume index (SVI) of 120 mL/g, theexisting Aeration Tank #6 may need to be in service by 2023, assuming MM loads occur concurrent to peak flows. The operation of this fourth aeration tank will dilute the mixed liquor concentration to ensure that the three existing secondary clarifiers can provide adequate treatment.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
202
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 3-19
Impact of Sludge Retention Time on Facility Needs
The City currently sees significant energy savings by operating the aeration tanks under suboxic conditions (i.e. dissolved oxygen ranging from 0.5 to 1 mg/L). The process has been optimized to operate under these conditions at an 11-day solids retention time (SRT) with the SRT and DON Master, which control aeration and wasting for the secondary process.

With all four existing aeration tanks and all three existing secondary clarifiers in service, assuming no change to the current SRT of 11 days in the near-term, the need for a new (fourth) secondary clarifier is projected by 2028. Reducing the SRT to 9 days shifts this need for a new fourth secondary clarifier back 2 years to 2030.

While a 9-day SRT is sufficient for meeting effluent ammonia targets, it’s not certain if the same level of nutrient reduction can be achieved as with an 11-day SRT. Since maintaining an 11-day SRT will require more aeration tanks and secondary clarifiers at buildout (2057) than a 9-day SRT would require for the same level of treatment, the City is open to operation with a 9-day SRT in the future. Thus, alternatives evaluated for improving the secondary treatment process longterm use an SRT of 9 days, while near-term needs are evaluated based on the current SRT of 11 days. Options for secondary system upgrades to meet the projected flows and loads at an SRT of 9 day are discussed in more detail in Chapter 4. In short, the WPCP will need 2-4 new secondary clarifiers and 2-3 new aeration tanks, depending on selected configuration. Refer to Table 3.5 for the estimated timeline that each structure will be needed.

Impact of Sludge Volume Index on Facility Needs
The timeline for required upgrades may shift if there is a significant increase in the plant’s SVI, which could occur after transitioning to the Modified Ludzack-Ettinger (MLE) process by 2032 (discussed herein and in Chapter 5). Although the WPCP has consistently produced sludge with SVIs below 120 mL/g, transitioning an activated sludge process to theMLE process can sometimes result in poorer settling and higher SVIs. Observations conducted subsequent to that transition to MLE will better define the timing for more clarifier upgrades needed within the planning period.

Under projected peak flows, the secondary clarifiers would collectively have a total surface overflow rate between 720 gpd/ft2 (assuming 7 total secondary clarifiers) and 1,110 gpd/ft2 (assuming 5 total secondary clarifiers), depending on the configuration at buildout as discussed in Chapter 4. These surface overflow rates fall within commonly accepted design criteria6. The solids loading for both configurations was also confirmed to be within acceptable operating ranges using a state point analysis.

3.4.2.3 Regulatory-Driven Capacity Impacts
To meet the future anticipated total nitrogen (combined nitrate and nitrite) effluent limit of <10 mg/L, it is recommended that the aeration tanks be reconfigured for the MLE process. MLE is a very common nitrogen removal process. With this process, removal of NH3 occurs with similar operation as that currently used at the WPCP (long [7+ day] SRT and additional aeration to facilitate nitrification in the aerobic portions of the aeration tanks), but includes an anoxic zone to induce denitrification.
6 Maximum recommended surface overflow rate at peak flow is 1,200 gpd/ft2 (Ten-States Standards).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
203
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-20 | MAY 2022 FIN AL
As mentioned previously, some nitrate removal is already being achieved through introduction of theRAS in the unaerated zones at the front of the aeration basins. To facilitate more nitrate removal, mixed liquorrecycle (MLR) pumps will be added to increase the amount of nitrate returned to the unaerated zones at the front of the aeration tanks. With the current 2-pass wrap -around configuration, MLR pumping could be added in the common wall at the east end of the tanks, providing a relatively low-cost nutrient removal upgrade.

At a MLR ratio of 300 percent (3 times theinfluent flow to each tank is recycled back to the anoxic zones), upgraded Aeration Tank Nos. 3 through 6 can produce effluent with approximately 15 mg/L combined nitrate and nitrite at current demands. MLR rates above 300 percent provide diminishing returns in terms of nitrate removal.

Based on the process model (calibrated using the last full year of operational data from 2020) there is not enough soluble BOD (the carbon source for the bacteria) in the primary effluent to support denitrification to treatment levels below 10 mg/L. To increase the soluble BOD and improve thedenitrification capacity, a range of options are available:
• Increasing the MLR rate improves nitrate removal but very minimally. • Increasing the anoxic volume to 50 percent of the total tanks volume, which can be accomplished with the addition of baffle walls, can achieve the required reduction but comes at the expense of reduced aerobic volume (necessary for BOD and NH3 removal) which decreases the ability of the system to adequately treat any significant short-term change of influent characteristics.
• Adding chemical “food” addition (e.g., methanol or acetate) directly to the process. This approach is typically a last resort (due to high capital and operational costs), but it is the best option in this case since it will minimize the number of aeration tanks that will be needed in the future.

A detailed wastewater characterization and refined plant process model (using dynamic analysis) is recommended during design of the secondary treatment expansion processes to confirm sizing for the required methanol feed facility.

3.4.2.4 Aeration Capacity
Three high-speed turbo blowers currently supply the aeration system air at the WPCP. One blower has a nameplate capacity of 4,500 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm) at a pressure of

9.1 pounds per square inch gauge (psig), and the other two blowers are dual core and each have a nameplate capacity of 7,800 scfm (3,900 scfm per core) at 9.5 psig. Air requirements in nitrifying activated sludge mode (current operation) at projected AA and MM loads are estimated to range from 13,700 to 14,600 scfm, and 18,300 to 19,500 scfm, respectively, depending on the treatment plant configuration and operation at buildout.

The existing system has a firm capacity of 15,600 scfm, with a blower nameplate capacity of 20,100 scfm, and is sufficient for projected AA loads but not for MM loads. Additionally, actual performance of the dual core blowers has not yet been established relative to the rated capacity and the remaining blower did not match the rated capacity.

Additional aeration capacity will be needed for the modified build-out condition.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
204
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 3-21

3.4.2.5 Plant 2 RAS and WAS Pumping
RAS Pump Station No. 2 consists of four horizontal mixed-flow centrifugal pumps, each with a capacity of 2,100 gpm at 24 feet of head. A RAS pump is dedicated to each of the three secondary clarifiers, and a fourth pump is configured for standby use by any of the clarifiers. A total of 9 mgd firm RAS pumping capacity is provided by RAS Pump Station No. 2.

The waste activated sludge (WAS) pumps are also located at the RAS Pump StationNo. 2. The WAS pumps consist of two progressive cavity pumps, each with a capacity of 150 gpm at 35 feet of head.

These systems will not provide sufficient firm capacity for projected loads and treatment objectives. At least 4 additional RAS pumps and 1 additional WAS pump will be required to provide firm capacity for projected RAS and WAS flows at the projected MM flows and loads; however, it is most likely that 1 additional RAS pump will be provided for each new secondary clarifier that is built and that 1 additional WAS pump will be provided for every 2 new secondary clarifiers that are built, which would also provide sufficient capacity.

3.4.2.6 Summary of Secondary Treatment System Needs
The secondary treatment facilities will require significant improvements to adequately treat the projected flows and loads through 2057. This includes a new secondary clarifier by 2028, and up to three more secondary clarifiers and three more aeration tanks by 2057. Additional blowers and RAS/WAS pumps will also be needed to support the new aeration tanks and clarifiers, plus ancillary facilities.

To address regulatory requirements, MLE upgrades and a supplemental carbon facility will be needed by 2032.

3.4.3 Disinfection
The existing plant effluent disinfection system uses liquid sodium hypochlorite solution (SHS) to disinfect the secondary effluent, and liquid sodium bisulfite solution (SBS) to dechlorinate the disinfected effluent prior to discharge.

3.4.3.1 Sodium Hypochlorite Feed System
SHS is stored in two 9,500-gallon storage tanks located at the Chemical Building. The Chemical Building contains four metering pumps for distribution of SHS throughout the plant; two that are rated at 150 gallons per hour (gph) and two that are rated at 60 gph. The 150 gph pumps delivers SHS for chlorination of the effluent at Chlorine Contact Basin Nos. 3 and 4, and the 60 gph pumps deliver SHS to the other dosing points within the plant (with duty/standby configuration for both pumping systems).

The SHS feed system does not has enough storage and pumping capacity to meet the plant demands at projected AA and peak flows and it is recommended additional SHS pumps and storage be installed at the same time the new CCB described below is constructed.

3.4.3.2 Disinfection Contact Facilities
Chlorine Contact Basin Nos. 3 and 4 each have a volume of 257,000 gallons. In normal operation, the basins are operated in parallel. Each of the basins can be taken out of service for cleaning and other maintenance purposes.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
205
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-22 | MAY 2022 FINAL
The existing facilities are not sufficient to provide a 30-minutehydraulic residence time (HRT) at the projected peak flow of 39.6 mgd nor are they sufficient to provide a 60-minute chlorine contact (CT) time at the projected AA flow of 17.1 mgd. An additional CCB, equal in size to the two existing CCBs will be required by 2033 to provide a sufficient HRT and a sufficient CTtime for the projected flows.

3.4.3.3 Dechlorination Facilities
The SBS feed system consists of two 6,500-gallon liquid SBS storage tanks, two 80 gph metering pumps, two chlorine residual analyzers, and ancillary equipment.

The Outfall Box gates are hydraulically actuated and are connected to the plant SCADA system to allow flow to the river to be interrupted upon detection of a positive chlorine residual. The gate controlling pond discharge is also integrated within the hydraulic controls, allowing for automated diversion. Modification of the Outfall Box will be needed to meet the projected peak flow condition.

The SBS feed system does not has enough storage and pumping capacity to meet the plant demands at projected AA and peak flows and it is recommended additional SBS pumps and storage be installed at the same time the new CCB described above is constructed.

3.4.3.4 Summary of Disinfection and Dechlorination Facility Needs The existing chlorine contact basins are not adequately sized for projected AA and peak flows, and the existing chlorination and dechlorination chemical storage and delivery facilities are also not adequately sized for the projected flows.

To provide adequate disinfection and dechlorination for peak flows through 2057, an expansion of the disinfection and dechlorination facilities will likely be needed by 2033. These include one additional chlorine contact basin, increased SHS and SBS storage and pumping capacity, and modification of the Outfall Box.

As discussed in Chapter 5, it is anticipated that the City will be required to implement alternate disinfection (non-chlorination) by 2047.The City may consider expedited implementation of the alternate disinfection facilities to avoid sunk costs associated with construction of the needed disinfection system upgrade in 2033.

3.4.4 Solids Handling
Existing on-site solids handling systems at the plant are evaluated in the following subsections.

3.4.4.1 Primary Solids Thickening
Solids removed from the primary clarifiers were previously thickened in a single 55-foot diameter gravity thickener converted from a primary clarifier. The generous sizing was because this tank was initially used as a primary clarifier and then used as a thickener for both primary and secondary sludge. This practice was discontinued when the first dissolved air flotation thickener (DAFT) was constructed to separately thicken WAS.

The recent conversion of the Primary Clarifier No. 1 and 2 sludge pumps to positive displacement, double disc diaphragm pumps has allowed WPCP staff to experiment with sludge thickening directly in all of the primary clarifiers. Previously this capability was only possible in Primary Clarifier No. 3. To date the WPCP has had positive results with this change and the gravity thickener process is currently not in use.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
206
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 3-23

3.4.4.2 WAS Thickening
WAS is presently thickened separately from primary sludge prior to stabilization in the anaerobic digesters. Dual 25-foot diameter dissolved air flotation thickeners (DAFTs) are provided for this purpose. Operation of the two existing DAFTs provides sufficient capacity to thicken WAS at the projected MM flows of 21.7 mgd. In the event that one DAFT is out of service, the remaining unit could be operated at a level exceeding its design capacity.

WAS pumping can be interrupted for short term periods since it is not critical to waste secondary solids continuously so long as the appropriate waste volume is maintained over time. The presence of a second unit provides additional reliability for the WAS thickening process. One unit may be out of service for maintenance reasons without adversely affecting the process and can accommodate longer shutdown periods, if required.

The existing system provides adequate capacity for the projected AA and MM loads.

3.4.4.3 Anaerobic Digestion
Solids generated from the primary sedimentation and secondary treatment processes are stabilized in three 70-foot diameter anaerobic digesters (Anaerobic Digester Nos. 1, 2, and 4) having a combined volume of 277,500 cubic feet (2,077,500 gallons). The sludge is heated for Anaerobic Digester Nos. 1, 2, with pumped circulation of the digester contents through external heat exchangers. Externally mounted pumps provide mixing within the digesters.

The floating cover digester was converted to Anaerobic Digester No. 3 and serves primarily as a sludge storage/holding tank for the solids dewatering process. This tank is a 60-foot diameter tank with a total effective storage of 32,500 cubic feet (243,000 gallons). This volume provides approximately 1.5 days sludge storage at a plant influent flow rate of 17.1 mgd. Anaerobic Digester No. 3 could also be heated and used as a primary digester if Digester No. 1, 2, or 4 is out of service. Anaerobic Digester No. 3 has a gas mixing system and recirculation pump discharge nozzles to keep the contents of the digester mixed before the dewatering process.

At the projected sludge generation rate, Anaerobic Digester Nos. 1, 2, and 4 are capable of providing a theoretical detention time of about 15.4 days under MM loading conditions.A minimum detention time of 15 days at MM loadings is required for the solids to meet federal EPA requirements as a Process to Significantly Reduce Pathogens (PSRP). Compliance with the PSRP requirements is essential to provide the City with the stabilization needed for the biosolids to be classified as Class B, as required for land application.

The existing system provides adequate capacity for the projected AA and MM loads.

3.4.4.4 Solids Dewatering
Two separate methods of solids dewatering are available at the WPCP. Digested sludge from Anaerobic Digester No. 3 can be fed to the centrifuge for solids dewatering. The centrifuge mechanically dewaters the digested sludge through high-speed rotation, concentrating the solids into a “cake.” The centrifuge utilizes polymer to flocculate the solids prior to dewatering.

Following centrifuge dewatering, the solids can either be directly off-hauled, or stored on site for future disposal. The WPCP currently dewaters all solids via centrifuge and has them off-hauled directly through a contract with Synagro.

Alternatively, digested sludge may be directly transferred to the drying beds located to the north of the WPCP unit processes. These drying beds may be also used for further drying of the cake Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
207
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-24 | MAY 2022 FIN AL
solids from the centrifuge, or digested sludge can be transferred to the beds directly from the digesters. After completion of solar drying, the solids can be stockpiled in two designated areas to await off haul.

The existing centrifuges were designed to dewater digested sludge from the sludge storage tank (Anaerobic Digester No. 3) for 45 hours per week at 18 mgd MM design conditions. However, even at an MM flow of 21.7 mgd, the centrifuge firm capacity will likely be sufficient to keep the centrifuge run time below 31 hours per week. Under this operational strategy and at a projected MM flow of 21.7 mgd in 2057, the solids dewatering process has adequate capacity.

3.4.4.5 Digester Gas
Digester gas is a usable byproduct produced continually by the anaerobic digesters. Digester gas is utilized in two areas: the boilers of the integrated-type sludge heaters and the cogeneration system. The demand for gas by the boilers and cogeneration system is intermittent and variable.

There are presently no facilities at the plant intended for the storage of gas produced by the anaerobic digestion process. A very limited amount of storage is available in the space between the digester domes on the fixed-roof digesters and the surface of the digester contents. Once this space is filled and the gas demand is satisfied, excess gas is flared in the waste gas burner.

The cogeneration feasibility study determined that digester gas storage did not provide an economic benefit to operate in a peak shaving mode. This analysis is not repeated herein.

3.4.4.6 Summary of Solids Handling Facility Needs
The solids handling facilities have adequate capacity to support project flows and loads discussed herein.

3.5 Summary of WPCP Capacity Limitations
The WPCP does not have the capacity for adequate treatment of the currently projected flows and loads through the planning period ending in 2057.

A summary of capacity-driven facility needs is included in Table 3.5, including the estimated timeline for implementation of each improvement.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
208
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 3-25
Table 3.5 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs
Improvement Required Timeline(1)
Fourth Secondary Clarifier 2028(2)
Supplemental Carbon Project(3) 2032
Chlorine Contact Basin(4) 2033(5)
Fifth Secondary Clarifier(6) 2036(7)
Primary Effluent Parallel Force Main 2038
Sixth Secondary Clarifier(6) 2039(7)
Fifth Aeration Tank(8) 2044(7)
Primary Clarifier#4 2044
Sixth Aeration Tank(8) 2053(7)
Primary Effluent Pump Station Improvements 2054
Mechanical Barscreen 2054
Notes:
(1) Based on projected flows and loads summarized in Chapter 2 and existing process limitations discussed in this chapter. (2) Assumes current 11-day SRT is maintained.
(3) Associated with the regulatory-driven MLE project.
(4) Plus ancillary facilities (SBS and SHS storage and pumping, Outfall Box modifications, and associated structural/civil/electrical/ instrumentation improvements). (5) City may consider implementation of alternate disinfection in lieu of additional chlorine contact facility construction. (6) Plus ancillary facilities (RAS/WAS pumping and associated structural/civil/electrical/instrumenta tion improvements) and southern pond improvements necessary for secondary expansion in that area. (7) Assumes SRT of 9-days and a planned facility layout that includes 1 new (100-ft diameter) secondary clarifier, 2 new (125- ft diameter) secondary clarifiers, and 2 new aeration tanks. Additional expansion options are presented in Chapter 4. (8) Plus ancillary facilities (blower and electrical building and associated upgrades, ancillary structural/civil/electrical/ instrumentation improvements, and a standby generator).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
209
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 3-26 | MAY 2022 FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 210
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-1
Chapter 4

CAPACITY-DRIVEN FACILITY NEEDS
Expansion alternatives for the WPCP are evaluated herein to achieve interim and final capacity needed for the facility given updated flow and load projections presented in Chapter 2 and identified capacity limitations identified in Chapter 3.

4.1 Approach
Processes and areas that will require capacity expansion and/or upgrade were identified in Chapter 3. Recommended improvements are discussed by WPCP area herein, with a summary of probable implementation schedule and conceptual level project cost estimates for each improvement.

4.2 Headworks
A third mechanical barscreen will be required by 2054 to adequately handle the projected peak flows. The following improvements are needed as part of the barscreen project:
• Demolition of existing manual bar rack.
• Installation of new mechanical barscreen.
• Extension of existing screenings conveyor1.
• Ancillary structural, electrical, and instrumentation improvements.

The estimated costs for the new bar screen are $500,000 (construction cost) and $600,0002 (project cost), both in December 2021 dollars. This cost is carried through in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables with forecasted implementation by 2054.

4.3 Primary Clarification
A fourth primary clarifier will need to be constructed by 2044 to maintain acceptable overflow rates in the primary clarifiers (Figure 4.1).

The existing primary sludge and scum pumping systems provide sufficient capacity for the projected loads and advanced treatment but will need to be reconfigured for use with the new primary clarifier.
1 Assumes that screenings conveyor is still in appropriate condition for extension. May require conveyor replacement.
2 Project cost factor reduced to 15% due to project simplicity.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
211
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-2 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 212
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-3
Figure 4.1 Primary Clarifier #4
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
213
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-4 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 214
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-5
The following improvements are needed as part of the primary clarifier project:
• Primary clarifier.
• Reconfiguration of existing sludge and scum pumping systems3 .
• Ancillary civil, structural, electrical, and instrumentation improvements.

The estimated costs for theprimary clarifier project are $3.7 million (construction cost) and $5.0 million (project cost), both in December 2021 dollars. This cost is carried through in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables with forecasted implementation by 2044.

4.4 Primary Effluent Pumping
Primary Effluent Lift Stations improvements will be required by 2038 to increase the hydraulic capacity of the system for anticipated peak flows. The following improvements are needed to upgrade thePrimary Effluent Lift Station project for the build-out flows:
• Parallel force main between the primary effluent lift station and the Plant 2 aeration tanks (by 2038).
• Primary Effluent Lift Station improvements (by 2054):
- Wet well expansion.
- Additional primary effluent pump.
- Ancillary mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation improvements.

The estimated construction costs for the improvements associated with the Primary Effluent Parallel Force Main and Lift Station Improvement Projects are $800K and $1.7 million, respectively, with estimated project costs totaling $1.1 million and $2.1 million, respectively.

All costs (all in December 2021 dollars) are carried through in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables with forecasted need as discussed above.

4.5 Secondary Treatment Facilities
The secondary treatment facilities will require significant improvements to provide adequate treatment through 2057. Near- and long-term improvement recommendations are summarized in Table 4.1 and individual secondary treatment process components are discussed herein. 3 Existing pumping systems will likely have been replaced before the project is needed. The City should consider the future primary clarifier when/if pumping system adjustments are made.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
215
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-6 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
Table 4.1 Secondary Treatment Facility Improvements
Existing WPCP (2022) Near-Term Improvements
(<2030)
Long-Term Improvements
(<2057)
MLE Upgrades
Supplemental Carbon
4 Total Aeration Tanks 2 New Aeration Tanks
(6 total)
3 Total Secondary Clarifiers 1 New Secondary Clarifier
(4 total)
3 New Secondary Clarifiers
(6 total)(1)
Blower Upgrades
RAS/WAS Pumping Upgrades RAS/WAS Pumping Upgrades
Notes:
(1) Based on Secondary Treatment Expansion Option 3 presented herein. Includes one secondary clarifier matching existing unit sizing (100-ft diameter) and two larger (125-ft diameter) clarifiers.

4.5.1 Near-Term Improvements
An additional secondary clarifier will be needed by 2028 at the current WPCP operation with 11- day SRT. The addition of a fourth secondary clarifier will increase the total volume of secondary clarifiers from 2.47 MG to 3.30 MG (Figure 4.2).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
216
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-7
Figure 4.2 Fourth Secondary Clarifier
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
217
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-8 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 218
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-9
The following improvements are needed as part of the Secondary Clarifier project:
• 100-foot diameter Secondary Clarifier with 14-ft side water depth. • Dedicated RAS and WAS pumps (installed at existing RAS/WAS pump station). • Ancillary civil, structural, electrical, and instrumentation improvements.

The estimated costs for the improvements associated with the 2028 Secondary Treatment improvements is $8.0 million (construction cost) and $10.7 million (project cost),both in December 2021 dollars. This cost is carried through in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables with a forecasted need for a fourth secondary clarifier by 2028.

4.5.2 Options for Secondary Treatment Expansion
To provide adequate secondary treatment capacity through 2057,new aeration tanks and secondary clarifiers will be needed, with quantities of each contingent on SRT operation (Chapter 3) and City preference for facility layout. Following discussion with City staff, a 9-day SRT was selected for long-term planning and three options were identified:
• Option 1: Two new aeration tanks (6 total) and 4 new secondary clarifiers (7 total). • Option 2: Three new aeration tanks (7 total) and 2 new secondary clarifiers (5 total). • Option 3: Two new aeration tanks (6 total) and 3 new secondary clarifiers (of differing sizes).

For all options, the aeration tanks (new and existing) will need to be modified with MLE and supplemental carbon upgrades (discussed in Chapters 3 and 5).

4.5.2.1 Option 1
A potential layout for Option 1 is included below as Figure 4.3.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
219
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-10 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 220
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-11
Figure 4.3 Secondary Expansion (Option 1)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
221
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-12 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 222
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-13
Based on a long-term plan to adjust facility operation to meet a 9-day SRT, the following improvements will be needed for the Option 1 secondary expansion alternative:
• 2 new aeration tanks (rectangular, 2.2 MG each with MLE improvements). • 3 additional secondary clarifiers (100 ft circular, 14 ft SWD). • RAS/WAS pumping facilities (4 RAS and 2 WAS pumps).
• RAS/WAS electrical building.
• New Blower and electrical room (3 blowers).
• Standby generator.
• Ancillary civil, structural, electrical, and instrumentation improvements.

Project costs estimates were prepared for this option based on component costs developed to correspond with staged construction (i.e. as facilities are needed).

Refer to Table 4.2 for a summary of component costs associated with Option 1.

Table 4.2 Option 1 Component Costs
Treatment Unit # Required Component Project
Cost
Total System Project
Cost
Secondary Clarifier(1) 3(2) $10.7 M $32.1 M
Aeration Tank(3) 2 $14.5 M $29.0 M
MLE Upgrades(4) 2 $1.1 M $2.2 M
RAS/WAS Pump
Station and Electrical
Building(5)
1 $1.8 M $1.8 M
Blower and Electrical
Room(6) 1 $6.3 M $6.3 M
Standby Generator 1 $1.5 M $1.5M
Southern Pond
Improvements for
Secondary Expansion
1 $0.9M $0.9M
Estimated Project Cost(7) $73.8 M(8)
Notes:
(1) 100-ft diameter with 14-ft side water depth.
(2) Cost for 3 secondary clarifiers included here, with cost for the fourth clarifier discussed separately (as near-term improvement in Section 4.5.1.
(3) 2.2 MG capacity matching layout of existing aeration tanks. (4) Cost presented as a ratio of the costs presented in Chapter 5 for existing basin retrofit. (5) Includes four (4) RAS pump and three (3) WAS pumps, with similar layout as existing RAS/WAS pump station facilities. (6) Includes three (3) blowers, with similar layout as existing blower building facilities. (7) In December 2021 dollars (ENR CCI 12482).
(8) Actual project cost may differ if constructed as one project.

This option is expensive due to the number of structures required.

4.5.2.2 Option 2
A potential layout for Option 2 is included below as Figure 4.4.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
223
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-14 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 224
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-15
Figure 4.4 Secondary Expansion (Option 2)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
225
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-16 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 226
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-17
Based on a long-term plan to adjust facility operation to meet a 9-day SRT, the following improvements will be needed for the Option 2 secondary expansion alternative:
• 3 new aeration tanks (rectangular, 2.2 MG each with MLE improvements). • 1 additional secondary clarifier (100 ft circular, 14 ft SWD). • RAS/WAS pumping facilities (2 RAS and 2 WAS pumps).
• RAS/WAS electrical building.
• New Blower and electrical room (4 blowers).
• Standby generator.
• Ancillary civil, structural, electrical, and instrumentation improvements.

Project costs estimates were prepared for this option based on component costs developed to correspond with staged construction (i.e. as facilities are needed).

Refer to Table 4.3 for a summary of component costs associated with Option 2.

Table 4.3 Option 2 Component Costs
Treatment Unit # Required Component Project
Cost
Total System Project
Cost
Secondary Clarifier(1) 1(2) $10.7 M $10.7 M
Aeration Tank(3) 3 $14.5 M $43.5 M
MLE Upgrades(4) 3 $1.1 M $3.3 M
RAS/WAS Pump
Station and Electrical
Building(5)
1 $1.4 M $1.4 M
Blower and Electrical
Room(6) 1 $7.2 M $7.2 M
Standby Generator 1 $1.5 M $1.5 M
Southern Pond
Improvements for
Secondary Expansion
1 $0.9M $0.9M
Estimated Project Cost(7) $68.5 M(8)
Notes:
(1) 100-ft diameter with 14-ft side water depth.
(2) Cost for 1 secondary clarifier included here, with cost for the fourth clarifier discussed separately (as near-term improvement in Section 4.5.1.
(3) 2.2 MG capacity with MLE upgrades incorporated at time of construction. (4) Cost presented as a ratio of the costs presented in Chapter 5 for existing basin retrofit. (5) Includes two (2) RAS pump and two (2) WAS pumps, with similar layout as existing RAS/WAS pump station facilities. (6) Includes four (4) blowers, with similar layout as existing blower building facilities. (7) In December 2021 dollars (ENR CCI 12482).
(8) Actual project cost may differ if constructed as one project.

This option also presents a flow-split challenge that will be difficult to overcome and has high operational (and life cycle) costs compared to Option 1.

4.5.2.3 Option 3
A potential layout for Option 3 is included below as Figure 4.5.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
227
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-18 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 228
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-19
Figure 4.5 Secondary Expansion (Option 3)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
229
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-20 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 230
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-21
Based on a long-term plan to adjust facility operation to meet a 9-day SRT, the following improvements will be needed for the Option 3 secondary expansion alternative:
• 2 new aeration tanks (rectangular, 2.2 MG each with MLE improvements). • 2 additional secondary clarifiers (125 ft circular, 14 ft SWD). • RAS/WAS pumping facilities (3 RAS and 2 WAS pumps).
• RAS/WAS electrical building.
• New Blower and electrical room (3 blowers).
• Standby generator.
• Ancillary civil, structural, electrical, and instrumentation improvements.

Project costs estimates were prepared for this option based on component costs developed to correspond with staged construction (i.e. as facilities are needed).

Refer to Table 4.4 for a summary of component costs associated with Option 3.

Table 4.4 Option 3 Component Costs
Treatment Unit # Required Component Project
Cost
Total System Project
Cost
Secondary Clarifier(1) 2(2) $13.4 M $26.8 M
Aeration Tank(3) 2 $14.5 M $29.0 M
MLE Upgrades(4) 2 $1.1 M $2.2 M
RAS/WAS Pump
Station and Electrical
Building(5)
1 $1.6 M $1.6 M
Blower and Electrical
Room(6) 1 $6.3 M $6.3 M
Standby Generator 1 $1.5 M $1.5M
Southern Pond
Improvements for
Secondary Expansion
1 $0.9M $0.9M
Estimated Project Cost(7) $68.3 M(8)
Notes:
(1) 125-ft diameter each with 14-ft side water depth.
(2) Cost for 2 secondary clarifiers included here, with cost for the fourth clarifier discussed separately (as near-term improvement in Section 4.5.1).
(3) 2.2 MG capacity with MLE upgrades incorporated at time of construction. (4) Cost presented as a ratio of the costs presented in Chapter 5 for existing basin retrofit. (5) Includes two (2) RAS pump and two (2) WAS pumps, with similar layout as existing RAS/WAS pump station facilities. (6) Includes three (3) blowers, with similar layout as existing blower building facilities. (7) In December 2021 dollars (ENR CCI 12482).
(8) Actual project cost may differ if constructed as one project.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
231
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-22 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
This option has an approximate capital cost estimate equal to Option 2 (both significantly less than Option 1) and low operational costs compared to Option 2. Additionally, this layout can be configured to operate in parallel with the existing facility (operating as “Plant 3”), thus enhancing flow split.

Option 3 provides the most benefit to the City at the least cost.

The projected timeline for implementation and project costs for the various facilities that make up Option 3 are summarized in Table 4.4 (Section 4.7) and carried through in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables.

4.6 Disinfection and Dechlorination
As discussed in Chapter 3, additional disinfection and dechlorination facilities are required by 2033 to adequately treat the projected flows. The location/layout for a new chlorine contact basin, which will be required by 2033 to treat peak flow conditions, is included below as Figure

4.6. Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
232
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-23
Figure 4.6 Chlorine Contact Basin
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
233
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-24 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 234
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 4-25
The following improvements are needed as part of the Disinfection Facilities project:
• 1 new chlorine contact basin (CCB).
• CCB inlet basin modifications.
• Additional sodium hypochlorite (SHS) storage and feed pumps. • Additional sodium bisulfite (SBS) storage and feed pumps. • Outfall box improvements.
• Ancillary civil, structural, electrical, and instrumentation improvements.

A summary of estimated project component costs is included below as Table 4.5.

Table 4.5 Disinfection System Improvement Costs
Treatment Unit Estimated Construction
Cost(1)(2) Estimated Project Cost (1)(3)
Chlorine Contact Basin(4) $4.1 M $5.1 M
SHS and SBS Storage and Feed
Facility Improvements(5) $1.3 M $1.6 M
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (2) Includes estimating contingency of 40% applied to total direct cost, general conditions and contractor overhead and profit contingencies at 18% of total direct cost (each), and local sales tax of 7.25% applied to half of the total direct cost. (3) Includes project cost factor of 35% for legal, administration, permitting, design, and engineering services during construction.
(4) Includes cost for CCB inlet basin modifications.
(5) Includes cost for outfall box modifications.

These costs are carried through in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables with forecasted implementation by 2033.

4.6.1 Solids Handling
As discussed in chapter 3, the WPCP solids handling facilities have adequate capacity to support projected flows and loads discussed herein. No project costs are carried through for these facilities.

4.7 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs
Table 4.6 includes a summary of recommended projects based on anticipated capacity-driven facility needs through 2057, along with predicted timelines for implementation of each and planning level construction and project cost estimates (presented in December 2021 dollars).

The total capacity-driven project cost estimate of $94.9 M is escalated to December 2026 dollars ($118.3 M) for the connection payment calculation option presented in Chapter 1 with use of a projected average annual interest rate of 4.5 percent.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
235
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 4-26 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
Table 4.6 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs
Projected Timeline for
Implementation Project Description Estimated Construction Cost(1)(2) Estimated Project Cost(1)(3) 2028 Secondary Clarifier #6(4)
(fourth clarifier in Plant 2) $8,000,000 $10,700,000
2032 Supplemental Carbon Project $300,000 $400,000
2033 Chlorine Contact Basin $4,100,000 $5,100,000
2033 Chemical Storage and Feed Facility
Improvements (SHS and SBS) $1,300,000 $1,600,000
2036 Southern Pond Improvements for
Secondary Expansion $700,000 $900,000
2036 Secondary Clarifier #7(5)
(fifth clarifier in Plant 2) $10,000,000 $13,400,000
2036 RAS/WAS Pump Station and
Electrical Building(6) $1,300,000 $1,600,0000
2038 Parallel Force Main Improvements $800,000 $1,100,000 2039 Secondary Clarifier #8
(sixth clarifier in Plant 2) $10,000,000 $13,400,000
2044 Aeration Tank #5(7) $11,700,000 $15,600,000
2044 Blower and Electrical Building(6) $5,000,000 $6,300,000 2045 Primary Clarifier #4 $3,700,000 $5,000,000
2053 Aeration Tank #6(7) $11,700,000 $15,600,000
2054 Primary Effluent Lift Station
Improvements $1,700,000 $2,100,000
2054 Bar Screen #3 $500,000 $600,000
Total Required Capital Investment $72,000,000 $94,900,000 Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (2) Includes estimating contingency of 40% applied to total direct cost, general conditions and contractor overhead and profit contingencies at 18% of total direct cost (each), and local sales tax of

7.25% applied to half of the total direct cost.
(3) Includes project cost factor of 35% for legal, administration, permitting, design, and engineering services during construction. (4) 100-foot diameter secondary clarifier.
(5) 125-foot diameter secondary clarifier.
(6) Based on Secondary Treatment Expansion Option 3 layout (Chapter 4). (7) With denitrification improvements (MLE).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
236
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-1
Chapter 5

REGULATORY-DRIVEN FACILITY NEEDS
Waste discharge requirements (WDRs) issued for the WPCP reflect both state and federal laws, regulations, and policies related to water quality pollution. As these laws, regulations, and policies become more stringent over time, the need for more advanced wastewater treatment at the WPCP will increase. This chapter includes a summary of facility needs that could be required to comply with these changing regulations, referred to herein as “regulatory-driven facility needs”.

5.1 Existing Discharge Requirements
The effluent discharge requirements for the WPCP are issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Central Valley Region in California. The RWQCB is the regional authority of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). In addition to the state laws and regulations, the effluent discharge requirements also incorporate federal laws and regulations.

This is because the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delegated the authority for issuing federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits to the SWRCB.

The current WDRs for the WPCP are established in Order No. R5-2016-0023 (NPDES No. CA0079081). The Order includes two permitted discharge locations:
• D-001: Discharge to the Sacramento River (surface water discharge). • D-002: Discharge to the underlying groundwater (land discharge).

Current effluent limitations for discharge to the Sacramento River are summarized in Table 5.1.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
237
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-2 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Table 5.1 Current Effluent Limitations for Effluent Discharge to the Sacramento River Parameter Units Average
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Maximum
Daily
Instantaneous
Minimum
Instantaneous
Maximum
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD₅)
(5-day @ 20 degrees Celsius)
mg/L 30 45 90 - -
lbs/day(1) 3,002 4,504 9,007 - -
TSS mg/L 30 45 90 - -
lbs/day(1) 3,002 4,504 9,007 - -
pH standard units - - - 6.0 8.5
Ammonia Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 8.2 17.6 - - -
lbs/day(1) 821 1,761 - - -
Copper, Total Recoverable µg/L 15 - 20 - -
Chlorodibromomethane µg/L 17.2 - 34 - -
Dichlorobromomethane µg/L 25.2 - 43 - -
Nitrate Plus Nitrite (as N) mg/L 60 104 - - -
Notes:
(1) Based on design dry weather flow of 12 mgd.
(2) Abbreviations – mg/L = milligrams per liter.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
238
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-3
Order No. R5-2016-0023 also includes the following effluent discharge requirements for discharges to the Sacramento River:
• BOD and TSS: average monthly percent removal shall be no less than 85 percent for each. • Toxicity: survival of aquatic organisms in 96-hour acute whole effluent toxicity bioassays shall be no less than 70 percent (minimum for any one bioassay) and 90 percent (median for any three consecutive bioassays). The Order also includes a numeric toxicity monitoring trigger for chronic whole effluent toxicity of > 10 TUc (where TUc = 100/NOEC [no observed effect concentration]).
• Total residual chlorine: shall not exceed 0.011 mg/L (4-day average) and 0.019 mg/L (1-hour average).
• Total coliform organisms: shall not exceed 23 most probable number (MPN) per 100 milliliter (mL) (7-day median) and 240 MPN/100 mL (more than once in any 30-day period).
• Combined chlorpyrifos and diazinon concentration: The Order specifies that the combined concentration for chlorpyrifos and diazinon shall not exceed 1.0 µg/L as a weekly or monthly average concentration in the discharged effluent.

Future limitations for effluent discharge to the facility’s ponds (Land Discharge Specifications) are summarized in Table 5.2. These effluent limitations were scheduled to take effect on May 30, 2021.

Table 5.2 Future Effluent Limitations for Land Discharge Parameter Units Average
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Daily
Maximum
BOD5
(5-day @ 20 deg. Celsius)
mg/L 30 45 -
lbs/day(1) 626 939 -
TSS mg/L 30 45 -
lbs/day(1) 626 938 -
Total Coliform Organisms MPN/100 mL - 23(2) 240(3)
Notes:
(1) Based upon an average monthly flow of 2.5 mgd.
(2) Based upon a 7-day median concentration.
(3) Shall not be exceeded more than once in any 30-day period.

5.1.1 Status of NPDES Permit Order
Order No. R5-2016-0023 expired on May 31, 2021but has been administratively extended by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as they draft a renewed Order for the WPCP in parallel with the development of this report.

5.2 Previous Projection of Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs at the WPCP The WPCP Strategic Planning Report 1 included a detailed summary of existing WDRs for the WPCP; a listing of state and federal requirements applicable to the WPCP with analysis of how these requirements may change over time based on historical and ongoing activities; and an analysis of probable future effluent limits. Probable future effluent limitations outlined in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 2 are repeated here as Table 5.3 for reference. 1 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
2 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
239
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-4 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Table5.3 Summary of Probable Future Effluent Limitations Parameter Unit Probable Effluent Limit Averaging Period(1) Proposed Treatment BOD₅ (5-day @ 20°C) mg/L 10/15/30 Monthly/Weekly/Daily Tertiary Filtration TSS mg/L 10/15/30 Monthly/Weekly/Daily Tertiary Filtration pH standard units 6.0/8.5 Instantaneous Minimum/ Maximum N/A Ammonia Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 8.2/17.6(2) Monthly/Weekly N/A Copper, Total Recoverable µg/L 15/20 Monthly/Daily Potentially Filtration(3) Chlorodibromo-methane µg/L 17.2/34.0 Monthly/Daily Alternative Disinfection(3) Dichlorobromo-methane µg/L 25.2/43.0 Monthly/Daily Alternative Disinfection(3) Nitrate Plus Nitrite (as N) mg/L 10(5) Monthly Denitrification Upgrades Bis
(Di-2-ethylhexyl)-phthalate (DEHP) µg/L 1.8/3.6(5) Monthly/Daily Potentially Filtration Lead µg/L 1.3/2.8(5) Monthly/Daily Potentially Filtration Zinc µg/L 300(5) Average Annually Potentially Filtration Notes:
(1) Monthly and weekly values are average effluent concentration limitations. Daily value is maximum effluent concentration limitation. (2) Ammonia limits may be reduced with implementation of 2013 Criteria. (3) Would be required if current limits are reduced during future permit renewals due to mixing zone limitations (or other). (4) Current permit limitations are 60/104 mg/L (average monthly/average weekly). (5) Assumes no dilution credit assignment, which is currently considered conservative.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
240
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-5
The WPCP Strategic Planning Report 3 also included a summary of probable regulatory-driven facility needs based on the prediction of near-term and longer-term regulatory drivers and the planning horizon in question at the time of analysis (through 2040). Based on the analysis completed for the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 4, the following regulatory-driven needs were projected for the WPCP:
• Required improvements for land discharge of treated effluent:
If City preferred to continue discharging treated effluent to the ponds, denitrification upgrades would be needed by 2024.
It City preferred to continue discharging partially treated effluent to the ponds during facility upset conditions, a project would be needed by 2026 to install a lining over a portion (or all) of the WPCP Southeast and/or Northeast ponds. • Addition of tertiary treatment facilities at the WPCP (assumed required in 2021 permit, with full implementation by 2031).
• Required improvements forreduction of Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), lead, and zinc concentrations in the treated effluent, with implementation by 20315:
All possibly reduced with implementation of MLE and tertiary filtration improvements, assuming optimized chemical addition.
• Required improvements forreduction of disinfection byproduct (DBP) concentrations in the treated effluent, with implementation by 20361:
Treatment with alternative disinfection facilities.

The WPCP Strategic Planning Report 6 included an evaluation of project alternatives for each of these capital requirements, with potential layout options, operational and capital cost estimates, qualitative comparisons based on related project experience, and the presentation of recommendations for City planning and future implementation. The evaluation of project alternatives for the regulatory-driven needs at the WPCP is not recreated herein, but updated facility sizing, project costs, and projected timeline for implementation of the previously selected project alternatives is.

5.3 Revised Schedule and Sizing Criteria
With ongoing participation from the both the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the RWQCB in the Sewer Regional Project Advisory Committee (SRPAC) associated with the potential connection of the Paradise sewer to the WPCP, the City has had the opportunity to discuss the projected regulatory needs for the facility with both agencies, obtaining productive feedback related to timelines for implementation of the regulatory-driven facility needs previously identified.

The projections made in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 7 for regulatory-driven facility needs are modified herein based on the following discussions:
3 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
4 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
5 If existing mixing zone/dilution credit allowances were to become more stringent, with newly identified reasonable potential, or with failure of other non-treatment options evaluated in parallel. 6 (Carollo Engineers, 2021) 7 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
241
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-6 |MAY 2022 |FINAL
• Meeting with theCity, RWQCB, and Carollo on December 10, 2021:
- Pond lining will not be required for an emergency bypass pond. The City will be protected against non-compliance (during facility upset conditions) if they pursue a project to store bypassed effluent into a pond area that can be drained back to the influent side of the WPCP. This should occur in the near-term. - The permit order currently being drafted by the RWQCB will not require the implementation of denitrification upgrades at the WPCP. The City should plan for this requirement to be included within the next permit cycle (likely adoption in 2027) with implementation required prior to permit expiration (assumed 2032). • Meeting with the City, RWQCB, SWRCB, Paradise, Carollo, and HDR on December 22, 2021:
- Tertiary filtration will not be required within the next two permit cycles. The City should plan for this requirement to be included in the following permit cycle (likely adoption in 2032) with a 10-year compliance order for implementation (assumed 2042).
- Alternate disinfection (if required) will not be included within the next three permit cycles. The City could plan for this requirement to be included in the permit cycle following the one that requires tertiary filtration (likely adoption in 2037) and can also anticipate that the City would be allowed a 10-year compliance order for implementation (assumed 2047).

Regulatory-driven needs at the WPCP are also updated herein based on modified flow and load projections completed as part of this planning effort (Chapter 2). Related facility sizing and project cost adjustments are discussed in the following sections.

5.4 Updated Projection of Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs at the WPCP

5.4.1 Required Improvements for Land Discharge
Adjustments to the recommended facility improvement projects for land discharge originally included in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 8 are discussed in the following sections.

5.4.1.1 Emergency Effluent Bypass, Storage, and Return Improvements If the City decides to continue to use the existing WPCP ponds for emergency storage of treated effluent that does not comply with land-discharge requirements (i.e., bypassed flows during facility upset conditions), then an improvement project of some sort will be needed to protect the City from non-compliance with land-discharge specifications. Project alternatives previously presented for this were all costly due to the assumed need for a pond liner. The RWQCB agreed during a meeting on December 10, 2021 that a pond liner would not actually be required if the City can return flow to the front of the WPCP for treatment within a reasonable time following bypass. A modified alternative project for effluent bypass, storage, and return to the front of the WPCP for treatment is presented in Figure 5.1.
8 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
242
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-7
Figure 5.1 Emergency Effluent Bypass, Storage, and Return Improvements Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
243
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-8 |MAY 2022 |FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 244
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-9
The following improvements are needed for this effluent bypass, storage, and return project:
• Removal of approximately 10 feet of soil across pond area to increase storage capacity to 25 million gallons.
• Installation of diversion piping between the existing outfall box and the Northeast pond. • Installation of 3 MGD pump station to assist with return pumping of the bypassed effluent to the headworks facility (in conjunction with existing drain pump station to achieve maximum drainage time of 4 days).
• Ancillary stripping and grading efforts.
• Ancillary electrical and instrumentation upgrades.

The estimated costs for the emergency effluent bypass, storage, and return improvements presented herein are $7.1 million (construction cost) and $8.5 million (project cost), both in December 2021 dollars. This cost is carried through in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables with forecasted implementation by 2027.

As facility flow increases throughout the new planning period (2057), the need for additional bypass storage capacity at the WPCP will need to be revisited.

5.4.1.2 Denitrification Upgrades
The secondary treatment process currently nitrifies (removes ammonia) but only includes partial denitrification (conversion of nitrates and nitrites into nitrogen gas for release into the atmosphere). It is anticipated that effluent limitations for nitrate will become more stringent over time with a likely requirement to implement denitrification at theWPCP by 2032.The Pond/Facility Improvement Options TM9 included a recommendation to implement a Modified Ludzack-Ettinger (MLE) process within the existing Plant 2 aeration tanks for this purpose.

The MLE process requires an anoxic zone upstream of the aerobic zone to facilitate the biological denitrification reaction. For incorporation of this process into the existing aeration tanks (as depicted in Figure 5.2), the anaerobic zone for each tank will be converted to an anoxic zone by pumping mixed liquor (ML) from the effluent end of the tank to the anoxic zones at the influent end of the tank. This requires the installation of mixed liquor recycle pumps as depicted in Figure 5.2.
9 (Carollo Engineers, 2019)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
245
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-10 |MAY 2022 |FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 246
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-11
Figure 5.2 Process Conversion from Nitrifying Activated Sludge to Modified Ludzack-Ettinger Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
247
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-12 |MAY 2022 |FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 248
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-13
The following improvements are needed to upgrade the existing secondary process to MLE:
• Addition of four 7.5 mgd MLE pumps:
- One pump per tank, with shelf-spare on hand.
• Addition of fourteen 6-horsepower submersible mixers. • Piping, electrical, instrumentation, and ancillary items.

The estimated project cost for these upgrades was originally presented in the Pond/Facility Improvement Options TM (Carollo Engineers, 2019). The updated project cost for these upgrades is approximately $4,400,000 (in December 2021 dollars). This cost is carried through the in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables with forecasted implementation by 2032.

5.4.2 Tertiary Treatment
Tertiary treatment is likely to be required within thenext few NPDES permit cycles with reduced BOD/TSS limits (and likely turbidity limit of 2 Nephelometric turbidity units [NTU]). This level of treatment is typically accomplished with filtration, which is a process that removes suspended solids that remain in treated flow after the secondary clarification process.

The following industry leading filtration methods were evaluated as alternatives in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 10:
• Dual media filtration.
• Cloth disk filters.
• Membrane filtration.

Following a detailed comparison involving project costs, annual O&M costs and labor requirements, relative footprint needs/limitations, and ability to meet future water quality goals (near- and long-term), cloth disk filters were selected as the chosen alternative for planning purposes. Design criteria, facility sizing and layout, and related project costs are updated herein for this filter technology only.

5.4.2.1 Filter Design Flow and Flow Equalization
The requirement to filter the effluent flow could be based on the AAF or PF, depending on the final permit requirements. The more conservative assumption is that the permit will require that the peak facility flow be filtered. In this case, flow equalization could be considered to reduce filter size and capital costs. Providing flow equalization for thePF may be possible, but it is not considered within this evaluation as there are many other key considerations (and because flow equalization may not actually save the City money). Instead, filters are sized to provide filtration for the PF without redundancy, with a normal redundancy requirement included for treatment of the MMF.

5.4.2.2 Filter Loading Rate
Title 22 regulations for recycled water require a maximum loading rate of 6 to 7 gpm/sf, depending on the cloth type used. Higher loading rates (up to 22 gpm/sf) are possible if specific design and monitoring conditions are met.
10 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
249
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-14 |MAY 2022 |FIN AL
The filters for the WPCP will not be required to meet Title 22 standards unless the City wishes to implement a water recycling program in the future. For planning purposes, non-Title 22 conforming loading rates are used herein for facility sizing and related project cost estimates.

5.4.2.3 Cloth Disk Filters
Cloth disk filters are vertical disks located within concrete or steel tanks. For the vendors considered within this study, water flows by gravity from the outside of the disks, through the vertical disk media, to an effluent collection pipe, and into an effluent chamber. Figure 5.3 illustrates the configuration of a basic disk filter.

Figure5.3 Configuration of Basic Disk Filter
Courtesy of Aqua Aerobics (Left) and Disk Filters at Turlock Regional Water Quality Control Facility (Right) Backwashes are conducted through a suction foot that vacuums each disk using filtrate water.

Unlike some other conventional filters, cloth filters can be backwashed while still producing effluent. As such, the downtime for disk filters is minimized. Additionally, since backwashing uses the filtrate directly on the other side of the media, there is no need for a backwash supply tank (reducing overall footprint and cost).

Disk filters were very popular in the early 2000s for their reduced footprint requirement, low head loss, and continuous flow production throughout backwashing. They also have a reduced energy requirement compared to other filter technologies because they operate with gravity flow. However, where dual media filters are robust, cloth media disk filters require a relatively high-quality influent (consistent turbidity less than 5 NTU and TSS lower than 15 mg/L)to produce a high-quality effluent. Flows with turbidity values above 5 NTU can cause downstream compliance issues if upstream coagulant addition is not used to optimize treatment. Coagulant addition must be carefully handled because too much coagulant can easily clog cloth filters. With the proper influent or upstream chemistry, disk filters are a good solution downstream of a nitrified secondary treatment process.

Though not monitored regularly, available data indicates that the WPCP has low effluent turbidity as flow exits the secondary clarifiers. Thus, regular chemical addition may not be required. Upgrading the secondary treatment process to include denitrification is not expected to adversely affect the effluent water quality if sufficient clarification capacity is available. The City should monitor effluent turbidity values after the MLE process is implemented, so that adequate information will be available for filtration system design.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
250
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-15
Projected design criteria for disk filters for the WPCP is summarized in Table 5.4.

Table 5.4 Cloth Disk Filter Design Criteria
Design Criteria Value Units
Design Average Flow(1) 21.8 mgd
Peak Hour Flow(2) 39.6 mgd
Tertiary Lift Station(3) 120 hp
Number of Filters (Duty+Standby) 4 (3+1) No.

Filter Cell Length (each) 25 ft
Filter Cell Width (each) 13 ft
Number of Disks per Unit 15 No.

Filtration Area Provided (N-0) 6,456 sf
Filtration Area Provided (N-1) 4,842 sf
Filter Loading Rate at Peak Flow (N-1) 5.7 gpm/sf
Filter Loading Rate at Design Flow(N-1) 3.1 gpm/sf
Backwash Pumps (Duty+Standby) 4 (3+1) No.

Backwash Pump Motor Power (each) 20 hp
Backwash Waste Pumped Direct to Headworks
Overall Footprint(4) 60’ x 60’ ft
Notes:
(1) Projected WPCP maximum month flow through end of planning cycle (2057). (2) Projected WPCP peak hour flow through end of planning cycle (2057). (3) Assumes three duty 30-hp pumps and one standby 30-hp pump. (4) Filter includes pumping room and disk filters.

A potential layout for the disk filters at the WPCP is included as Figure 5.4. Effluent from the secondary clarifiers will be routed through the disk filters and then to the influent side of the existing chlorine contact basins (as shown).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
251
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-16 |MAY 2022 |FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 252
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-17
Figure5.4 Potential Layout for Disk Filter Facilities at WPCP Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
253
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-18 |MAY 2022 |FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 254
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-19
The following improvements are needed to implement disk filtration at the WPCP:
• Construction of four disk filter cells with area and disk details summarized in Table 5.3. • Addition of a tertiary lift station to pump effluent from the secondary clarifiers into the disk filter facility.
- Three duty pumps at build-out flows, one standby.
• Addition of piping between the tertiary lift station and the influent side of the disk filter facility.
• Addition of piping between the effluent side of the disk filter facility and the influent side of the existing chlorine contact basin.
• Addition of backwash pump station.
• Demolition of existing shop building.
• Ancillary civil, mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation items.

The estimated costs for the cloth disk filters are $16.8 million (construction cost) and $22.7 million (project cost), both in December 2021 dollars. This cost is carried through in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables with forecasted implementation by 2042.

Cost estimate details are included herein as Appendix A.

5.4.3 Requirements for DEHP, Lead, and Zinc Compliance
Recommended strategies for long-term DEHP, lead and zinc compliance were discussed in detail in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report, with study cost estimates included for CIP planning.

These discussion and related costs are not repeated herein for simplicity, because the planning period is long and detailed compliance requirements will continue to evolve throughout the planning period, and because this type of work will more likely be covered under the City’s operational budget (which is adjusted annually to account for these variable needs at the WPCP).

The City should review related needs with each NPDES permit renewal cycle.

5.4.4 Alternative Disinfection
The Chico WPCP currently uses sodium hypochlorite for free chlorine disinfection. The current disinfection regulations includea monthly average total coliform limit of 23 MPN per 100 mL, which the WPCP can consistently meet with current chlorine dosing practices. However, two major regulatory requirements will require a recurring re-examination of the disinfection system:
• Possible reduction of effluent water quality limitation to 2.2 MPN per 100 mL. • Possible future stringent regulation of DBPs.

While existing DBP effluent limitations (for chlorodibromomethane and dichlorobromomethane) have not been exceeded, an increased level of disinfection (to meet 2.2 MPN per 100 mL) may require higher chlorine doses or contact time(potentially leading to increased DBP formation).

Additionally, the WPCP’s ability to comply with DBP limits relies heavily on continued allowance of dilution credits by the RWQCB as included in the current permit Order. If dilution credits for these DBPs (or others that may be identified in future reasonable potential analyses) are reduced or eliminated, then an alternate disinfection process may be required.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
255
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-20 |MAY 2022 |FINAL
The following disinfection alternatives were analyzed with respect to their DBP formation potential and their ability to comply with the more stringent total coliform limit projected in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 11:
• Ozone disinfection.
• Ultraviolet disinfection (UV) constructed within existing chlorine contact basin (CCB) channels.
• UV disinfection in a standalone structure.
• Testing and adjustment of existing chlorination practices.

Following a detailed comparison summarized in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 12 involving project and operational costs, reliability of treatment process, relative footprint needs/limitations, and ability to meet future water quality goals (near- and long-term), UV disinfection in a standalone structure was selected as the chosen alternative for planning purposes. Design criteria, facility sizing and layout, and related project costs are updated herein for this option only.

5.4.4.1 UV Disinfection
UV disinfection is popular due to its efficiency, lack of toxicity, and lack of DBP formation. UV has a high efficiency for bacterial, virus, and protozoa disinfection, and it does not need to be quenched before discharge.

UV Design Assumptions
Ultraviolet transmittance (UVT) is a key design criteria for UV system design, alongside UV dose and wastewater flow. For the WPCP UV design, a process capacity of the peak hour flow (39.6 mgd) was assumed, along with a UVT of 55 percent (which is a typical low value for wastewater effluent). It is probable that after filtration, the UVT of the filtered flow will increase, potentially requiring a reduced number of UV lamps. For planning purposes, the conservative value of 55 percent UVT is used in this evaluation.

Other projected design criteria for the UV system for the WPCP is summarized in Table 5.5. 11 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
12 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
256
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-21
Table 5.5 UV Facility Design Criteria
Parameter Value
Peak Hour Flow Rate (mgd) 39.6
Maximum Month Flow Rate (mgd) 21.7
Average Annual Flow Rate (mgd) 17.1
Design UV Transmittance (%) 55.0
Minimum MS2 RED (mJ/cm2), per NWRI 2012 105.0
Total Suspended Solids
Average Monthly (mg/L) 10
Average Weekly (mg/L) 15
Maximum Daily (mg/L) 20
Redundancy
Meet Design Dose at
Maximum Day Flow with
one channel out of service
Permit Limit, shall not exceed:

Total Coliform, 7-day median 2.2 MPN/100 mL
Total Coliform, more than once in any 30-day
period 23 MPN/100 mL
Total Coliform, at any time 240 MPN/100 mL
Abbreviation:

ED = reduction equivalent dose
A potential layout for the new UV facility at the WPCP is included as Figure 5.5. Effluent from the new disk filter facility will be routed to the influent end of the UV facility, through the new UV equipment, and disinfected effluent will then flow to the to the existing outfall box for discharge to the Sacramento River.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
257
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-22 |MAY 2022 |FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 258
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-23
Figure5.5 Potential Layout for UV Disinfection Facilities at the WPCP Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
259
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-24 |MAY 2022 |FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 260
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 5-25
The following improvements are needed to implement UV disinfection at the WPCP:
• Construction of UV facility.
• Addition of piping between the effluent side of the disk filter facility and the influent side of the UV facility.
• Addition of piping between the effluent side of the UV facility and the existing outfall box.
• Construction of UV Electrical Building.
• Ancillary civil, mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation items.

The estimated costs for the proposed UV facilities is $30.2 million (construction cost) and $40.8 million (project cost), both in December 2021 dollars. This cost is carried through in Chapter 1 and 7 summary tables with forecasted implementation by 2047.

Cost estimate details are included herein as Appendix A.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
261
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 5-26 |MAY 2022 |FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 262
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 6-1
Chapter 6

CONDITION-DRIVEN FACILITY NEEDS
Condition-driven needs for the WPCP were evaluated as part of detailed visual assessment of facility assets in 2018 by a multi-disciplinary condition assessment team. Methodology and findings of this assessment are summarized in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 1. This analysis, including extension of the planning period from 2040 to 2057 as described in Chapter 1, was not updated as part of this planning exercise. The condition-driven improvement recommendations from this original assessment are repeated herein for Plant 2 to allow for a complete picture of facility needs through 2040, with simple updates provided for related project costs.

6.1 Summary of Near-Term Condition Driven Needs
Although the Plant 2 facilities have been well maintained, some elements are nearing the end of their useful lives and will require attention. Table 6.1 includes a summary of near-term improvements that would be required to maintain Plant 2 operational reliability. 1 (Carollo Engineers, 2021).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
263
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 6-2 |MAY 2022 |FINAL
Table 6.1 Summary of Near-Term Plant 2 Condition-Driven Needs Process Area Required Improvement Timeline for
Implementation(1)
Estimated
Project Cost(2)
Primary Treatment Basin rehabilitation(3)
Equipment replacement(4) < 5 years $3,680,000
Aeration Equipment replacement(5) < 5 years $880,000
Secondary
Treatment Equipment replacement(6) < 5 years $980,000
Disinfection Equipment replacement(7) < 5 years $840,000 Chemical Building Equipment replacement(8) < 5 years $190,000 Solids Thickening Equipment replacement(9) < 5 years $350,000 Solids Digestion Equipment replacement(10) < 5 years $2,370,000 Solids Dewatering Equipment replacement(11) < 5 years $540,000 Plant Power Systems Equipment replacement(12) < 5 years $10,000 Other Plant Systems Equipment replacement(13) < 5 years $740,000 Total Near-Term Required Capital Investment $10,580,000 Notes:
(1) These recommendations were originally made (as listed) in 2018. (2) Costs are escalated from those presented in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report based on December 2021 dollars using an ENR-CCI 20 Cities Index of 12482. Original cost estimating assumptions and limitations are discussed therein. (3) Includes concrete repair and rehabilitation, replacement of gates and actuators, all process instrumentation, and spot repair/rehabilitation of process piping.
(4) Includes replacement of sludge collector motor and chains for Primary Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2, pit pumps for Primary Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2, primary effluent pump motors (pumps No. 2 and 3), replacement of PLC-H, and ancillary items. (5) Includes replacement of Blower No. 7, air diffuser and air flow meters in Aeration Basin Nos. 3 and 4, PLC-B, and ancillary items.
(6) Includes replacement of sludge collectors for Secondary Clarifier Nos. 3 and 4, replacement of MCC-EP-1, MCC-P1, and PLC-R, and ancillary items.
(7) Includes replacement of flash mixers for Chlorine Contact Basin Nos. 3 and 4, gates and actuators, flow meters, sampling pumps, PLC-C, and ancillary items.
(8) Includes replacement of CSS Pump Nos. 1 and 2, SBH Recirculation Pump No. 1, SHS Pump No. 1, PLC-C, and ancillary items.
(9) Includes replacement of Recycle Pressurization Pump Nos. 1-4, air compressors for DAFT Nos. 1 and 2, polymer feed system, MCC-EP5, PLC-B-I/02, and miscellaneous items.
(10) Includes improvements to Boiler Building No. 2 and replacement of Sludge Heater Nos. 1-3, digester gas flow meters, PLC-D, and ancillary items.
(11) Includes replacement of Screw Conveyor No. 1, solids grinder, miscellaneous exhaust/supply fans, flow meters, and unit heaters, PLC-B2-I/02, and ancillary items.
(12) Includes replacement of LCP-PCP-47.
(13) Includes replacement of Deep Well Pump Nos. 1 and 2, MCC-PC/EP-2, and ancillary items.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
264
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 6-3

6.2 Summary of Long-Term Condition Driven Needs
Table 6.2 includes a summary of long-term condition-driven project costs for Plant 2 facilities.

Table 6.2 Summary of Long-Term Plant 2 Condition Needs
Process Area Required Improvement Timeline for
Implementation(1)
Estimated
Project Cost(2)
Headworks Equipment
rehabilitation/replacement(3) 2029 - 2039 $3,180,000
Primary Treatment Equipment replacement(4) 2025 - 2039 $4,160,000 Aeration Equipment replacement(5) 2027 - 2039 $1,900,000 Secondary Treatment Equipment replacement(6) 2027 - 2039 $2,390,000 Disinfection Equipment replacement(7) 2027 - 2039 $1,080,000 Chemical Building Equipment replacement(8) 2029 - 2038 $510,000 Solids Thickening Equipment replacement(9) 2027 - 2039 $1,210,000 Solids Digestion Equipment replacement(10) 2027 - 2040 $6,210,000 Solids Dewatering Equipment replacement(11) 2027 - 2039 $5,790,000 Plant Power Systems Equipment replacement(12) 2027 - 2039 $7,210,000 Other Plant Systems Equipment replacement(13) 2027 - 2039 $420,000 Total Long-Term Required Capital Investment $34,060,000 Notes:
(1) These recommendations were originally made (as listed) in 2018. (2) Costs are escalated from those presented in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report based on December 2021 dollars using an ENR-CCI 20 Cities Index of 11699. Original cost estimating assumptions and limitations are discussed therein. (3) Includes replacement of major mechanical equipment items (shaftless screw conveyor, mechanical bar screens, screenings washer/compactors, vortex grit chamber drives, grit cyclone separators, ferric facility pumps biofilter fans, grit basement exhaust and supply fans, flow meters/transmitters, sump pumps, analyzers, samplers, etc.) (in 2029); and replacement of grit pumps, channel gates, and MCC-P14 (in 2039). (4) Includes rehabilitation of Primary Clarifier No. 3 (motor and chains, sludge collector drives, chains, etc), replacement of Primary Effluent Pumps Nos. 1-3 (with new VFDs), and ancillary items (in 2027); replacement of MCC-EP7 and PLC-X (in 2029); miscellaneous items (2030 - 2036); and replacement of Primary Effluent Pump No. 4 and MCC-P13 (in 2039). (5) Includes replacement of tank inlet/outlet gates and MCC-P8 (in 2027); DO meters (in 2028); air diffusers and flow meters for Aeration Basin Nos. 5 and 6, exhaust and supply fans for Blower Building No. 2, and PLC-BB (in 2029); air inlet and blow off valves (in 2032); miscellaneous items (2034-2036); and Blower No. 8, and inlet and outlet gates for Aeration Basin Nos. 5 and 6 (in 2039).
(6) Includes replacement of sludge collector drive for Secondary Clarifier No. 3, RAS Pump Nos. 4-7, MCC-P11A, and SWGP-1 (in 2027); MCC-P11 and PLC-RR (in 2029); miscellaneous flow meters and heat pumps (in 2036); and the sludge collector drive for Secondary Clarifier No. 5, RAS Pump No. 9, and Secondary Scum Pump No. 5 (in 2039). (7) Includes replacement of sluice gates (in 2027), miscellaneous flow meters, analyzers, and sample pumps (2028-2035), and the hydraulic power unit and sluice gates (in 2039).
(8) Includes replacement of MCC-P12, SBS recirculation Pump No. 2, and miscellaneous heat pumps, unit heaters, exhaust fans, and instrumentation (in 2029); and replacement of SBS Pump Nos. 1 and 2 and SHS Pumps 2-4 (in 2038). (9) Includes replacement of DAFT No. 2 collector drive, TWAS Pump Nos. 1-4, Thickened Sludge Grinder Nos. 1 and 2, instrumentation for DAFT Nos. 1 and 2, and MCC-P13 (in 2029); DAFT No. 1 collector drive (in 2032); and Thickened Sludge Pump Nos. 1 and 2 (in 2039).
(10) Includes replacement of Digester No. 3, most digester transfer/recirculation pumps and Sludge Mixing Pump Nos. 1-3 (in 2027); MCC-P15, MCC-P9, PLC-X, and miscellaneous items (in 2029); miscellaneous flow meters, inlet valves (2030-2036); and Digester Transfer Pump No. 2, Sludge Mixing Pump No. 4, Digester Recirculation Pump No. 3, and Hot Water Loop Pump Nos. 1-3 (in 2039).
(11) Includes replacement of Centrifuge No. 1 and miscellaneous control and starter panels (in 2027); Screw Conveyor Nos. 2 and 3, Polymer Mixing Pump Nos. 1-2, Polymer Blending Pump Nos. 1-2, and MCC-P10 (in 2029); miscellaneous items (2030-2037); and Centrifuge No. 2, Centrifuge Feed Pump Nos. 1-2, and ancillary items (in 2039). (12) Includes replacement of solar power system, Switchboard-P2, Transformer No. 1, and Standby Generator No. 2 Control Panel (in 2027); Substation No. 1, Panel-P9A, and miscellaneous electrical items (in 2029); the cogeneration unit (in 2034); Standby Generator No. 2 and the synchronizer panel for Generator Nos. 1-2 (in 2037); and the cogeneration hot water loop and control panels for Standby Generator No. 3 and 4 (in 2039). (13) Includes replacement of 3W Pump Nos. 1-4 and main hot water pumps (in 2027); miscellaneous items (2029-2032), and 3W Pump No. 5 (in 2039).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
265
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 6-4 |MAY 2022 |FINAL

6.3 Options for Reduced or Deferred Capital Expenditure The WPCP Strategic Planning Report 2 identified four projects as unnecessary following related discussions with the City staff after completion of the on-site condition assessment:
• Rehabilitation/replacement of gravity thickener and thickened sludge pump equipment:
- These facilities were not in use at the time of the analysis, following completion of facility upgrades that have allowed WPCP staff to thicken sludge in the primary clarifiers.
• Rehabilitation/replacement of ferric chloride facilities:
- These facilities had not been used since their construction, and plant staff indicated that they did not plan to use them in the foreseeable future. • Rehabilitation/replacement of Aeration Blowers No. 7 and 8:
- The City had completed related improvements during the final efforts associated with the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 3
.
• Rehabilitation/replacement of the photovoltaic (solar) system:
- The City had requested that costs associated with replacement/repair of these facilities be excluded from the analysis at the time of its completion.

The costs for these project components were presented in theWPCP Strategic Planning Report 4 (for reference only) but were not factored into the Condition-Driven Project Packages developed as part of that effort (discussed in Section 6.4). The need for these improvements should be reevaluated as facility uses continue to change.

6.4 Development of Condition-Driven Project Packages
The final analysis presented in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 5 included a list of conditiondriven project packages based on the coupling of the near- and long-term condition-driven needs presented in Tables 6.1 and 6.2 for ease of delivery. This analysis is not updated herein for reasons of simplicity. The timing and scope of condition-driven project packages will need to be reevaluated as the City implements these improvements over time.

6.5 Summary of Condition-Driven Project Costs
The total estimated project cost for all near- and long term 2 condition-driven needs identified for Plant 2 is $44.6 M (in December 2021 dollars). This estimated project cost is escalated to December 2026 dollars ($55.6 M) for the connection payment calculation option presented in Chapter 1 with use of a projected average annual interest rate of 4.5 percent 2 (Carollo Engineers, 2021).
3 (Carollo Engineers, 2021).
4 (Carollo Engineers, 2021).
5 (Carollo Engineers, 2021).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
266
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 7-1
Chapter 7

FACILITY IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility planning recommendations are summarized herein based on identified needs at the WPCP as related to projected capacity limitations, changing regulatory drivers, and observed condition deficiencies.

7.1 Summary of Capacity-Driven Projects
Several facility improvements are needed to increase the hydraulic and treatment capacity of the WPCP through the end of the planning period (2057).

The secondary treatment facilities will require significant improvement extending into the existing pond area south of the main WPCP treatment works area. Three options for expansion were evaluated (Table 7.1), with Option 3 costs carried through for planning purposes.

Table 7.1 Secondary Treatment Facility Expansion Options Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
2 New Aeration Tanks
(6 total)
3 New Aeration Tanks
(7 total)
2 New Aeration Tanks
(6 total)
4 New Secondary Clarifiers
(7 total)(1)
2 New Secondary Clarifiers
(5 total)(2)
3 New Secondary Clarifiers
(7 total)(3)
Blower Upgrades Blower Upgrades Blower Upgrades
RAS/WAS Pumping Upgrades RAS/WAS Pumping Upgrades RAS/WAS Pumping Upgrades Ancillary Upgrades Ancillary Upgrades Ancillary Upgrades Notes:
(1) One (1) 100-ft diameter clarifier (near-term) and three (3) 100-ft diameter secondary clarifiers longer-term. (2) One (1) 100-ft diameter clarifier (near-term) and one (1) 100-ft diameter secondary clarifier longer-term. (3) One (1) 100-ft diameter clarifier (near-term) and two (2) 125-foot diameter secondary clarifiers longer-term.

Table 7.2 includes a summary of recommended projects based on anticipated capacity-driven facility needs through 2057, along with predicted timelines for implementation of each and planning level construction and project cost estimates (presented in December 2021 dollars).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
267
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 7-2 | MAY 2 022 | FINAL
Table 7.2 Summary of Capacity-Driven Facility Needs
Projected
Timeline for
Implementation
Project Description Estimated
Construction Cost(1)(2)
Estimated
Project Cost(1)(3)
2028 Secondary Clarifier #6(4) (fourth
clarifier in Plant 2) $8,000,000 $10,700,000
2032 Supplemental Carbon Project $300,000 $400,000
2033 Chlorine Contact Basin $4,100,000 $5,100,000
2033
Chemical Storage and Feed
Facility Improvements
(SHS and SBS)
$1,300,000 $1,600,000
2036 Southern Pond Improvements for
Secondary Expansion $700,000 $900,000
2036 Secondary Clarifier #7(5)
(fifth clarifier in Plant 2) $10,000,000 $13,400,000
2036 RAS/WAS Pump Station and
Electrical Building(6) $1,300,000 $1,600,000
2038 Parallel PE Force Main
Improvements $800,000 $1,100,000
2039 Secondary Clarifier #8(5)
(sixth clarifier in Plant 2) $10,000,000 $13,400,000
2044 Aeration Tank #5(7) $11,700,000 $15,600,000
2044 Blower and Electrical Building(6) $5,000,000 $6,300,000 2044 Standby Generator $1,200,000 $1,500,000
2045 Primary Clarifier #4 $3,700,000 $5,000,000
2053 Aeration Tank #6(7) $11,700,000 $15,600,000
2054 Primary Effluent Lift Station
Improvements $1,700,000 $2,100,000
2054 Bar Screen #3 $500,000 $600,000
Total Required Capital Investment $72,000,000 $94,900,000(8) Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (2) Includes estimating contingency of 40% applied to total direct cost, general conditions and contractor overhead and profit contingencies at 18% of total direct cost (each), and local sales tax of 7.25% applied to half of the total direct cost. (3) Includes project cost factor of 35% for legal, administration, permitting, design, and engineering services during construction.
(4) 100-foot diameter secondary clarifier.
(5) 125-foot diameter secondary clarifier.
(6) Based on Secondary Treatment Expansion Option 3 layout (Chapter 4). (7) With denitrification improvements (MLE).
(8) Escalated to December 2026 dollars ($118.3M) in Chapter 4 with use of a projected annual average interest rate of 4.5%.

7.1.1 Limitations of Capacity Analysis
The capacity of the existing WPCP facilities was evaluated against expected flows and loads projected over the planning horizon (through 2057), as calculated with an expected growth rate of 1.7 percent per year (Chapter 2). This growth rate value is consistent with the 2030 General Plan, but may prove inaccurate long-term due to the following:

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
268
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 7-3
• With a long planning period it is less likely that an assumed population growth rate of

1.7 percent will accurately represent the final population at build-out. The projection results in a population that is more than double the existing population in 35 years. • Population and wastewater data collected in the baseline year of 2020 may be less representative than other years due to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Additionally, there is some uncertainty with how the Paradise connection will impact projected flows and loads. Since a wastewater characterization of Paradise flows was unavailable, it was assumed that Paradise would produce flows with similar quality as Chico.

It is recommended that the City revisit the findings of this evaluation within the next 3 to 5 years to best prepare for future facility needs related to hydraulic and process capacity.

Last, the capacity analysis includes facility needs identified based on identified hydraulic and/or treatment limitations, without consideration of cost for facilities that may age out during the 35- year planning period. Additional cost may be incurred long-term for facilities deemed herein as having adequate capacity based on asset condition not addressed herein.

7.2 Summary of Regulatory-Driven Projects
Regulatory drivers for future facility upgrade needs were evaluated in detail in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 1 with updated timing, facility sizing, and project costs presented herein (Chapter 5).

Table 7.3 includes a summary of recommended projects based on reasonably anticipated regulatory-driven facility needs through 2057, along with predicted timelines for implementation of each, and planning level project cost estimates (presented in December 2021 dollars).

Table 7.3 Summary of Regulatory-Driven Facility Needs
Projected
Timeline for
Implementation
Project Description
Estimated
Construction
Cost(1)2)
Estimated
Project Cost(1)(3)
2027 Emergency Effluent Bypass, Storage, and
Return Improvements (NE Pond)(4) $7,050,000 $8,460,000
2032 Modified MLE process upgrades(5) $3,620,000 $4,350,000 2042 Tertiary Filtration Upgrades(6) $16,830,000 $22,710,000 2047 Alternate Disinfection(7) $30,200,000 $40,800,000
Total Required Capital Investment $57,700,000 $76,320,000 Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (2) Includes estimating contingency of 40% applied to total direct cost, general conditions and contractor overhead and profit contingencies at 18% of total direct cost (each), and local sales tax of 7.25% applied to half of the total direct cost. (3) Includes project cost factor of 35% for legal, administration, permitting, design, and engineering services during construction.
(4) Includes pipeline between outfall box and Northeast Pond, a pump station for pump back to Headworks, and civil improvements to deepen the pond for 25 MG of storage.
(5) In-basin improvements to existing aeration tanks in Plant 2. (6) Assumes cloth disk filtration, sized for peak flow at 39.6 mgd. (7) Assume UV disinfection, sized for peak flow of 39.6 mgd. 1 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
269
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 7-4 | MAY 2022 | FINAL

7.2.1 Limitations of Regulatory Analysis
Facility upgrade recommendations made herein are based on ongoing (and recent) coordination with the RWQCB and SWRCB, experience at similar facilities, and site-specific effluent and receiving water quality observations.

The regulatory climate is highly volatile, especially in California. This creates difficulty in fully predicting facility needs based on impending regulatory requirements over a long-term (35 year) planning horizon. For this reason, it is recommended that the City revisit the findings of this evaluation within the next 5 to 10 years to best prepare for future facility needs.

7.3 Summary of Condition-Driven Projects
Condition-driven needs at the WPCP were identified through an on-site, multi-discipline visual condition assessment of all facilities, including detailed mechanical, structural, and electrical/instrumentation and control inspections of each asset. The methods and findings of this effort are summarized in detail in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report 2.

Chapter 6 includes a high-level summary of condition-driven projects that resulted from this effort, escalated to December 2021 dollars. The originally projected project timing for the identified near-term and long-term condition-driven projects is summarized in Tables 7.4 and

7.5, respectively. Project costs have been escalated in both tables based on simple escalation between February 2021 and December 2021.

Near-and long term condition-driven project costs are further escalated to December 2026 dollars ($55.6 M) with use of a projected average annual interest rate of 4.5 percent. 2 (Carollo Engineers, 2021)
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
270
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 7-5
Table 7.4 Summary of Near-Term Condition-Driven Facility Needs Process Area Required Improvement Timeline for
Implementation(1)
Estimated
Project Cost(2)
Primary Treatment Basin rehabilitation(3)
Equipment replacement(4) < 5 years $3,680,000
Aeration Equipment replacement(5) < 5 years $880,000
Secondary
Treatment Equipment replacement(6) < 5 years $980,000
Disinfection Equipment replacement(7) < 5 years $840,000 Chemical Building Equipment replacement(8) < 5 years $190,000 Solids Thickening Equipment replacement(9) < 5 years $350,000 Solids Digestion Equipment replacement(10) < 5 years $2,370,000 Solids Dewatering Equipment replacement(11) < 5 years $540,000 Plant Power
Systems Equipment replacement(12) < 5 years $10,000
Other Plant Systems Equipment replacement(13) < 5 years $740,000 Total Near-Term Required Capital Investment $10,580,000 Notes:
(1) These recommendations were originally made (as listed) in 2018. (2) Costs are escalated from those presented in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report based on December 2021 dollars using an ENR-CCI 20 Cities Index of 12482. Original cost estimating assumptions and limitations are discussed therein. (3) Includes concrete repair and rehabilitation, replacement of gates and actuators, all process instrumentation, and spot repair/rehabilitation of process piping.
(4) Includes replacement of sludge collector motor and chains for Primary Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2, pit pumps for Primary Clarifier Nos. 1 and 2, primary effluent pump motors (pumps No. 2 and 3), replacement of PLC-H, and ancillary items. (5) Includes replacement of Blower No. 7, air diffuser and air flow meters in Aeration Basin Nos. 3 and 4, PLC-B, and ancillary items.
(6) Includes replacement of sludge collectors for Secondary Clarifier Nos. 3 and 4, replacement of MCC-EP-1, MCC-P1, and PLC-R, and ancillary items.
(7) Includes replacement of flash mixers for Chlorine Contact Basin Nos. 3 and 4, gates and actuators, flow meters, sampling pumps, PLC-C, and ancillary items.
(8) Includes replacement of CSS Pump Nos. 1 and 2, SBH Recirculation Pump No. 1, SHS Pump No. 1, PLC-C, and ancillary items.
(9) Includes replacement of Recycle Pressurization Pump Nos. 1-4, air compressors for DAFT Nos. 1 and 2, polymer feed system, MCC-EP5, PLC-B-I/02, and miscellaneous items.
(10) Includes improvements to Boiler Building No. 2 and replacement of Sludge Heater Nos. 1-3, digester gas flow meters, PLC-D, and ancillary items.
(11) Includes replacement of Screw Conveyor No. 1, solids grinder, miscellaneous exhaust/supply fans, flow meters, and unit heaters, PLC-B2-I/02, and ancillary items.
(12) Includes replacement of LCP-PCP-47.
(13) Includes replacement of Deep Well Pump Nos. 1 and 2, MCC-PC/EP-2, and ancillary items.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
271
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 7-6 | MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Table 7.5 Summary of Long-Term Condition-Driven FacilityNeeds Process Area Required Improvement Timeline for
Implementation(1)
Estimated
Project Cost(2)
Headworks Equipment
rehabilitation/replacement(3) 2029 - 2039 $3,180,000
Primary Treatment Equipment replacement(4) 2025 - 2039 $4,160,000 Aeration Equipment replacement(5) 2027 - 2039 $1,900,000 Secondary Treatment Equipment replacement(6) 2027 - 2039 $2,390,000 Disinfection Equipment replacement(7) 2027 - 2039 $1,080,000 Chemical Building Equipment replacement(8) 2029 - 2038 $510,000 Solids Thickening Equipment replacement(9) 2027 - 2039 $1,210,000 Solids Digestion Equipment replacement(10) 2027 - 2040 $6,210,000 Solids Dewatering Equipment replacement(11) 2027 - 2039 $5,790,000 Plant Power Systems Equipment replacement(12) 2027 - 2039 $7,210,000 Other Plant Systems Equipment replacement(13) 2027 - 2039 $420,000 Total Long-Term Required Capital Investment $34,060,000 Notes:
(1) These recommendations were originally made (as listed) in 2018. (2) Costs are escalated from those presented in the WPCP Strategic Planning Report based on December 2021 dollars using an ENR-CCI 20 Cities Index of 12482. Original cost estimating assumptions and limitations are discussed therein. (3) Includes replacement of major mechanical equipment items (shaftless screw conveyor, mechanical bar screens, screenings washer/compactors, vortex grit chamber drives, grit cyclone separators, ferric facility pumps biofilter fans, grit basement exhaust and supply fans, flow meters/transmitters, sump pumps, analyzers, samplers, etc.) (in 2029); and replacement of grit pumps, channel gates, and MCC-P14 (in 2039). (4) Includes rehabilitation of Primary Clarifier No. 3 (motor and chains, sludge collector drives, chains, etc), replacement of Primary Effluent Pumps Nos. 1-3 (with new VFDs), and ancillary items (in 2027); replacement of MCC-EP7 and PLC-X (in 2029); miscellaneous items (2030 - 2036); and replacement of Primary Effluent Pump No. 4 and MCC-P13 (in 2039). (5) Includes replacement of tank inlet/outlet gates and MCC-P8 (in 2027); DO meters (in 2028); air diffusers and flow meters for Aeration Basin Nos. 5 and 6, exhaust and supply fans for Blower Building No. 2, and PLC-BB (in 2029); air inlet and blow off valves (in 2032); miscellaneous items (2034-2036); and Blower No. 8, and inlet and outlet gates for Aeration Basin Nos. 5 and 6 (in 2039).
(6) Includes replacement of sludge collector drive for Secondary Clarifier No. 3, RAS Pump Nos. 4-7, MCC-P11A, and SWGP-1 (in 2027); MCC-P11 and PLC-RR (in 2029); miscellaneous flow meters and heat pumps (in 2036); and the sludge collector drive for Secondary Clarifier No. 5, RAS Pump No. 9, and Secondary Scum Pump No. 5 (in 2039). (7) Includes replacement of sluice gates (in 2027), miscellaneous flow meters, analyzers, and sample pumps (2028-2035), and the hydraulic power unit and sluice gates (in 2039).
(8) Includes replacement of MCC-P12, SBS recirculation Pump No. 2, and miscellaneous heat pumps, unit heaters, exhaust fans, and instrumentation (in 2029); and replacement of SBS Pump Nos. 1 and 2 and SHS Pumps 2-4 (in 2038). (9) Includes replacement of DAFT No. 2 collector drive, TWAS Pump Nos. 1-4, Thickened Sludge Grinder Nos. 1 and 2, instrumentation for DAFT Nos. 1 and 2, and MCC-P13 (in 2029); DAFT No. 1 collector drive (in 2032); and Thickened Sludge Pump Nos. 1 and 2 (in 2039).
(10) Includes replacement of Digester No. 3, most digester transfer/recirculation pumps and Sludge Mixing Pump Nos. 1-3 (in 2027); MCC-P15, MCC-P9, PLC-X, and miscellaneous items (in 2029); miscellaneous flow meters, inlet valves (2030-2036); and Digester Transfer Pump No. 2, Sludge Mixing Pump No. 4, Digester Recirculation Pump No. 3, and Hot Water Loop Pump Nos. 1-3 (in 2039).
(11) Includes replacement of Centrifuge No. 1 and miscellaneous control and starter panels (in 2027); Screw Conveyor Nos. 2 and 3, Polymer Mixing Pump Nos. 1-2, Polymer Blending Pump Nos. 1-2, and MCC-P10 (in 2029); miscellaneous items (2030-2037); and Centrifuge No. 2, Centrifuge Feed Pump Nos. 1-2, and ancillary items (in 2039). (12) Includes replacement of solar power system, Switchboard-P2, Transformer No. 1, and Standby Generator No. 2 Control Panel (in 2027); Substation No. 1, Panel-P9A, and miscellaneous electrical items (in 2029); the cogeneration unit (in 2034); Standby Generator No. 2 and the synchronizer panel for Generator Nos. 1-2 (in 2037); and the cogeneration hot water loop and control panels for Standby Generator No. 3 and 4 (in 2039). (13) Includes replacement of 3W Pump Nos. 1-4 and main hot water pumps (in 2027); miscellaneous items (2029-2032), and 3W Pump No. 5 (in 2039).

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
272
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 7-7

7.3.1 Limitations of Condition Analysis
The assessment of condition-driven facility needs is based on observations from 2018, with initial project scheduled for implementation starting in 2021, though 2040 (the previous planning period). Project costs were escalated for this planning effort, but projected timelines were not adjusted. Additionally, the City will encounter additional rehabilitation and/or replacement needs within the new planning period (that extends through 2057) that have not been identified herein. It is recommended that the City conduct an updated analysis to determine long-term facility needs as near-term condition-driven projects are completed.

7.4 Capital Improvement Project Summary
Capital need projections are included herein to supplement the City’s sewer rate study, providing sustainable budgets for current and projected WPCP needs through updated sewer fees. All recommended projects are summarized in Table 7.6.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
273
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 7-8 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
Table 7.6 Summary of Recommended Project and Project Cost Projected Timeline for
Implementation Capacity Improvements Project Driver Estimated Project Cost(1) 2021 Aeration and Primary Treatment Upgrades Recommended by 2023(2) Condition $1,870,000
2022
Disinfection, Chemical Building, Solids Thickening and
Dewatering, Plant Power Systems, and Other Plant Systems Upgrades Recommended by 2023(2)
Condition $2,670,000
2023 Solids Digestion Upgrades Recommended by 2023(2) Condition $2,370,000 2025 Primary Treatment Upgrades Recommended by 2025(2) Condition $3,680,000 2025 Recycled Water Feasibility Study Strategic $530,000 2027 Emergency Effluent Bypass, Storage, and Return Improvements Regulatory $8,460,000 2027 Condition Driven Upgrades Recommended in 2027(2) Condition $7,640,000 2028 Secondary Clarifier #6(3)
(fourth clarifier in Plant 2) Capacity $10,700,000
2028 Condition Driven Upgrades Recommended in 2028(2) Condition $3,240,000 2029 Condition Driven Upgrades Recommended in 2029(2) Condition $5,390,000 2032 Modified MLE process upgrades Regulatory $4,350,000 2033 Condition Driven Upgrades Recommended in 2033(2) Condition $3,520,000 2032 Supplemental Carbon Project Capacity $400,000
2033 Chlorine Contact Basin Capacity $5,100,000
2033 Chemical Storage and Feed Facility Improvements (SHS and SBS) Capacity $1,600,000
2036 Southern Pond Improvements for Secondary Expansion Capacity $900,000 2036 Secondary Clarifier #7(4)
(fifth clarifier in Plant 2) Capacity $13,400,000
2036 RAS/WAS Pump Station and Electrical Building(5) Capacity $1,600,000 2038 Parallel Primary Effluent Force Main Improvements Capacity $1,100,000 2039 Secondary Clarifier #8(4)
(sixth clarifier in Plant 2) Capacity $13,400,000
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
274
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWERE PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY ͮͬͮͮ | ͳ‐͵
Projected Timeline for
Implementation Capacity Improvements Project Driver Estimated Project Cost(ͭ) ͮͬͯ͵ Condition Driven Upgrades Recommended in ͮͬͯ͵(ͮ) Condition ͈ͭͬ,ͰͲͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͰͬ Anaerobic Digester ͯ(ͮ) Condition ͈ͯ,ʹͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͰͮ Tertiary filtration(Ͳ) Regulatory ͈ͮͮ,ͳͭͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͰͰ Aeration Tank #ͱ(ͳ) Capacity ͈ͭͱ,Ͳͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͰͰ Blower and Electrical Building(ͱ) Capacity ͈Ͳ,ͯͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͰͰ Standby Generator Capacity ͈ͭ,ͱͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͰͱ Primary Clarifier #Ͱ Capacity ͈ͱ,ͬͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͰͳ Alternate Disinfection(Ͳ) Regulatory ͈Ͱͬ,ʹͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͱͯ Aeration Tank #Ͳ(ͳ) Capacity ͈ͭͱ,Ͳͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͱͰ Primary Effluent Lift Station Improvements Capacity ͈ͮ,ͭͬͬ,ͬͬͬ ͮͬͱͰ Bar Screen #ͯ Capacity ͈Ͳͬͬ,ͬͬͬ Total Required Capital Investment ͈ͮͭͲ,ͯͲͬ,ͬͬͬ
Notes:(ͭ) Costs are in December ͮͬͮͭ dollars based on ENR‐CCI CCI of ͭͮͰʹͮ. (ͮ) Refer to Chapter Ͳ for condition‐driven project specific details. (ͯ) ͭͬͬ‐foot diameter secondary clarifier.(Ͱ) ͭͮͱ‐foot diameter secondary clarifier.(ͱ) Based on Secondary Treatment Expansion Option ͯ layout (Chapter Ͱ). (Ͳ) Sized for peak flow of ͯ͵.Ͳ mgd.
(ͳ) With denitrification improvements (MLE).

Figures ͳ.ͭ and ͳ.ͮ depict the capital investment needs per category (condition, capacity, and regulatory‐driven facility needs) and total projected annual spending needs over the planning horizon (through ͮͬͱͳ), respectively.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
275
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 7-10 | MAY 2 022 | FINAL
Figure 7.1 Projected Capital Investment by Spending Category Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
276
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022 | 7-11
Figure 7.2 Total Annual Capital Spending through Planning Horizon Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
277
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT 7-12 | MAY 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 278
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022
Appendix A

COST ESTIMATES
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
279
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT MAY 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 280
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022

BASIS OF COST ESTIMATES
Construction costs included in this report were estimated using unit costs developed from previous construction contracts, estimating guides, unit prices, and construction costs of similar facilities and process configuration at other locations. Using these sources, adjusted capital costs were developed.

Construction costs have historically escalated with time. This trend is expected to continue in the future. To record these trends in rising costs, several indices have been established for various fields of construction. The most commonly used standard barometer of construction cost changes is the Engineering News Report's Construction Cost Index (ENR-CCI). Capital costs for the alternative analysis are based on the December 2021 20-Cities ENR-CCI of 12482, and the R.S. Means Location Factor for Redding, CA, of 1.185 (an index which represents the relative geographic difference in materials pricing and cost of labor between individual cities as compared to a standard factor). Redding currently represents the closest and most appropriate location factor for estimating construction costs in Chico.

Costs within this section were developed following the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97 for a Class 5 estimate level. According to AACE International, a "Class 5 Estimate" is defined as an estimate used for screening or feasibility studies during 0 to 2 percent project completion with an expected accuracy of +50 percent to -30 percent in relation to the actual completed project cost.

Table 1 includes a summary of cost estimating factors and contingencies used in the preparation of each cost estimate.

Table A.1 Cost Estimating Factors and Contingencies
Item Value
Estimating Contingency 40%
Contractor Overhead and Profit 18%
General Conditions 18%
Sales Tax 7.250%
Project Cost Factor 35%
ENR-CCI(1) 12482
Location Factor(2) 1.185
Notes:
(1) December 2021 ENR-CCI 20Cities.
(2) Location Factor for Redding, CA.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
281
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT MAY 2022 | FIN AL

CAPACITY-DRIVEN PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Table A.2 Headworks Bar Screen Project Cost Estimate
Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Equipment(1) 1 LS $225,000 $225,000
Installation 25 % $56,250 $56,000
EI&C 20 % $45,000 $45,000
Total Direct Costs $326,000
Contingency 40% $49,000
Subtotal $375,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $68,000
General Conditions 18% $68,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $14,000
Total Construction Cost $500,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $79,000
Total Project Cost(2) $600,000
Notes:
(1) Fine screen with 18 MGD capacity, matching existing screens. (2) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Table A.3 PrimaryClarifier Project Cost Estimate
Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Primary Clarifier(1) 38,000 ft3 $38 $1,459,000
Site Work 1 LS $95,000 $95,000
Valving/Mechanical 1 LS $58,000 $58,000
Yard Piping 1 LS $117,000 $117,000
EI&C 1 LS $168,000 $168,000
Total Direct Costs $1,897,000
Contingency 40% $759,000
Subtotal $2,656,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $478,000
General Conditions 18% $478,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $96,000
Total Construction Cost $3,700,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $1,298,000
Total Project Cost(2) $5,000,000
Notes:
(1) Estimated from cost curve from construction bid tabs for primary clarifiers. (2) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
282
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022
Table A.4 Aeration Tank Project Cost Estimate
Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Aeration Tank(1) 176,600 ft3 $24 $4,238,000
Site Work 1 LS $275,000 $275,000
Valving/Mechanical 1 LS $170,000 $170,000
Yard Piping 1 LS $424,000 $424,000
EI&C 1 LS $572,000 $572,000
Total Direct Costs $5,509,000
Contingency 40% $2,204,000
Subtotal $7,713,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $1,388,000
General Conditions 18% $1,388,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $280,000
Total Construction Cost $10,800,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $3,769,000
Total Project Cost(2) $14,500,000
Notes:
(1) Estimated from cost curve from construction bid tabs for aeration tanks. (2) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Table A.5 Supplemental Carbon Project Cost Estimate
Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Carbon Storage Tote/Rack 1 LS $85,000 $80,000
Pumping Equipment $25,000 $25,000
Installation 25 % $27,500 $28,000
EI&C 20 % $22,000 $22,000
Total Direct Costs $160,000
Contingency 40% $64,000
Subtotal $223,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $40,000
General Conditions 18% $40,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $8,000
Total Construction Cost $300,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $78,000
Total Project Cost(1) $400,000
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
283
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Table A.6 Secondary Clarifier Project Cost Estimate
Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Secondary Clarifier(1) 110,000 ft3 $28 $3,132,000
Site Work 1 LS $204,000 $204,000
Yard Piping $313,000 $313,000
EI&C 1 LS $423,000 $423,000
Total Direct Costs $4,072,000
Contingency 40% $1,629,000
Subtotal $5,700,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $1,026,000
General Conditions 18% $1,026,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $207,000
Total Construction Cost $8,000,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $2,786,000
Total Project Cost(3) $10,700,000(3)
Notes:
(1) Estimated from cost curve from construction bid tabs for secondary clarifiers. (2) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (3) Estimated Project Cost is for 100-ft diameter secondary clarifier. The estimated project cost for a 125-ft diameter secondary clarifier (Option 3) is $13.4M.

Table A.7 RAS/WAS Pump Station and Electrical Building Project Cost Estimate(1) Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
RAS Pumps 3 EA $45,000 $135,000
WAS Pumps 2 EA $20,000 $40,000
Piping/Valving 25 % $43,750 $44,000
Electrical Building 1 LS $200,000 $200,000
Installation 25 % $104,700 $105,000
EI&C 20 % $83,750 $84,000
Total Direct Costs $607,000
Contingency 40% $243,000
Subtotal $850,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $183,000
General Conditions 18% $183,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $37,000
Total Construction Cost $1,300,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $313,000
Total Project Cost(2) $1,600,000(3)
Notes:
(1) Based on Option 3 Secondary Treatment Expansion Layout. (2) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (3) Estimated Project Cost for Option 1 and Option 2 Secondary Treatment Expansion Layout is $1.8 and $1.4 million, respectively.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
284
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022
TableA.8 Blower and Electrical Building Project Cost Estimate(1) Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Blower Building 1 EA $350,000 $350,000
Blowers 3 EA $300,000 $900,000
Air Header Piping 150 LF $250 $38,000
Valving/Mechanical 15 % $193,100 $193,000
Electrical Gear 1 LS $300,000 $300,000
Installation 25 % $445,200 $445,000
EI&C 20 % $356,100 $356,000
Total Direct Costs $2,582,000
Contingency 40% $1,033,000
Subtotal $3,615,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $651,000
General Conditions 18% $651,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $131,000
Total Construction Cost $5,000,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $1,262,000
Total Project Cost(2) $6,300,000(3)
Notes:
(1) Based on Option 3 Secondary Treatment Expansion Layout. (2) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (3) Estimated Project Cost for Option 1 and Option 2 Secondary Treatment Expansion Layout is $6.3 (same as Option 3) and $7.2 million, respectively.

Table A.9 Southern Pond Improvements for Secondary Expansion Project Cost Estimate Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Effluent Line to Southwest Pond 500 FT $250,000 $125,000 Pond Inlet Structures 2 EA $60,000 $120,000
Installation 25 % $68,750 $61,000
EI&C 20 % $55,000 $49,000
Total Direct Costs $355,000
Contingency 40% $142,000
Subtotal $497,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $90,000
General Conditions 18% $90,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $18,000
Total Construction Cost $700,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $174,000
Total Project Cost(1) $900,000
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
285
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Table A.10 Standby Generator Project Cost Estimate
Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Standby Generator 1 EA $250,000 $250,000
Structural 1 EA $75,000 $75,000
Fuel Storage 1 EA $50,000 $50,000
Valving/Mechanical 15 % $56,300 $56,000
Installation 25 % $107,800 $108,000
EI&C 20 % $86,300 $86,000
Total Direct Costs $625,000
Contingency 40% $250,000
Subtotal $875,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $158,000
General Conditions 18% $158,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $32,000
Total Construction Cost $1,200,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $306,000
Total Project Cost(1) $1,500,000
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Table A.11 Chlorine Contact Basin Project Cost Estimate Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Chlorine Contact Basin 1 EA $950,000 $3,132,000
Inlet Basin Modifications 1 EA $100,000 $100,000
Chemical mixing/valves/mechanical 15 % $157,500 $158,000 Site Work 15 % $181,200 $181,000
Installation 25 % $347,200 $347,000
EI&C 20 % $241,500 $242,000
Bypass Pumping 1 LS $100,000 $100,000
Total Direct Costs $2,077,000
Contingency 40% $831,000
Subtotal $2,908,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $523,000
General Conditions 18% $523,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $105,000
Total Construction Cost $4,100,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $1,015,000
Total Project Cost(1) $5,100,000
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
286
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022
Table A.12 SHS/SBS Storage and Feed Facility and Outfall Box Modification Project Cost Estimate Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Chemical Building Modifications 1 EA $100,000 $100,000
Chemical Tanks 2 EA $75,000 $150,000
Chemical Pumps 2 EA $15,000 $30,000
Outfall Box Modifications 1 EA $100,000 $100,000
Piping/valving/mechanical 20 % $76,000 $76,000
Installation 25 % $114,000 $114,000
EI&C 20 % $91,200 $92,000
Total Direct Costs $661,000
Contingency 40% $264,000
Subtotal $926,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $167,000
General Conditions 18% $167,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $34,000
Total Construction Cost $1,300,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $323,000
Total Project Cost(1) $1,600,000
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Table A.13 Primary Effluent Lift Station Improvements Project Cost Estimate Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Structure Modifications 1 EA $250,000 $250,000
PE Pump 1 EA $150,000 $150,000
Valving/Mechanical 15 % $60,000 $60,000
Installation 25 % $115,000 $115,000
EI&C 20 % $92,000 $92,000
Bypass Pumping 1 LS $250,000 $250,000
Total Direct Costs $917,000
Contingency 40% $347,000
Subtotal $1,214,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $218,000
General Conditions 18% $218,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $44,000
Total Construction Cost $1,700,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $424,000
Total Project Cost(1) $2,100,000
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
287
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Table A.14 Primary Effluent Force Main Project Cost Estimate Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Force Main between PELS and ATs 600 FT $450 $270,000
Installation(1) 40 % $108,000 $108,000
EI&C 20 % $54,000 $54,000
Total Direct Costs $432,000
Contingency 40% $173,000
Subtotal $605,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $109,000
General Conditions 18% $109,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $22,000
Total Construction Cost $800,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $211,000
Total Project Cost(1) $1,100,000
Notes:
(1) Difficult installation.
(2) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
288
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022

REGULATORY-DRIVEN PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Table A.15 MLE Project Cost Estimate
Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
MLE Pump 6 EA $116,700 $700,000
Submersible Mixer 14 EA $59,400 $832,000
Valving/Mechanical 15 % $229,800 $230,000
Installation 15 % $264,200 $264,000
EI&C 15 % $264,200 $264,000
Total Direct Costs $2,290,000
Contingency 40% $916,000
Subtotal $3,206,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $158,000
General Conditions 18% $158,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $32,000
Total Construction Cost $3,600,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $888,000
Total Project Cost(1) $4,400,000(2)
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482. (2) Total project cost is for retrofit of existing Aeration Tanks 3-6. An “MLE Addition” cost of $1.1M is extended to each AT that is included in the various Secondary Treatment Expansion Options.

Table A.16 Emergency Bypass, Storage, and Return Improvements Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Site Work 1 LS $1,440,000 $1,440,000
Pump Station and Pipeline 1 LS $1,600,000 $1,600,000
Bypass Pumping 1 LS $425,000 $425,000
Total Direct Costs $3,456,000
Contingency 40% $1,386,000
Subtotal $4,851,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $873,000
General Conditions 18% $873,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $176,000
Total Construction Cost $6,800,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $1,693,000
Total Project Cost(1) $8,500,000
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
289
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT MAY 2022 | FIN AL
Table A.17 Cloth Disk Filter Project Cost Estimate
Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
Equipment(1) 1 LS $2,957,000 $2,957,000
Concrete 1 LS $690,000 $690,000
Piping 1 LS $1,331,000 $1,331,000
E&IC 1 LS $1,183,000 $1,183,000
Site Work 1 LS $616,000 $616,000
Yard Piping 1 LS $616,000 $616,000
Tertiary Lift Station 1 LS $1,200,000 $1,214,000
Total Direct Cost $8,607,000
Estimating Contingency 40% $3,443,000
Subtotal $12,050,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $2,169,000
General Conditions 18% $2,169,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7.25% $437,000
Total Construction Cost $16,825,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $5,889,000
Total Project Cost(2) $22,714,000
Notes:
(1) Equipment quote from vendor, with additional 20 percent added for installation. (2) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Table A.18 UV Capital Project Cost Estimate
Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total
UV Equipment 1 LS $6,207,000 $6,207,000
Site Work 1 LS $621,000 $621,000
Structural 1 LS $3,104,000 $3,104,000
Electrical, Instrumentation, and Controls 1 LS $3,725,000 $3,725,000 Electrical Building 1 LS $260,000 $260,000
Piping 1 LS $1,552,000 $1,552,000
Total Direct Costs $15,469,000
Contingency 40% $6,188,000
Subtotal $21,657,000
Contractor Overhead & Profit 18% $3,898,000
General Conditions 18% $3,898,000
Sales Tax on 50% 7% $785,000
Total Construction Cost $30,200,000
Project Cost Factor 35% $10,538,000
Total Project Cost $40,800,000
Notes:
(1) Costs are in December 2021 dollars based on ENR-CCI CCI of 12482.

Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
290
REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT | CITY OF CHICO FINAL | MAY 2022
Appendix B

DAILY DATA
Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
291
CITY OF CHICO | REGIONALIZATION PLANNING REPORT FOR THE PARADISE SEWER PROJECT MAY 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left BlankExhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report 292
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
5/1/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.77 9.96 7.78 48% 38% 78% 1.28 237.00 202.00 0.85 15,374 13,103 15,374 13,1035/2/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.01 11.03 8.15 49% 36% 74% 1.355/3/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.22 11.01 7.99 53% 38% 73% 1.385/4/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.75 10.05 8.00 47% 37% 80% 1.26 184.00 12,273 12,2735/5/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.26 9.99 7.90 54% 43% 79% 1.26 167.00 132.00 0.79 11,009 8,701 11,009 8,7015/6/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.03 10.00 7.70 52% 40% 77% 1.30 16.17 1,038 1,0385/7/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.84 9.66 7.52 51% 40% 78% 1.28 248.00 231.00 0.93 15,562 14,495 15,562 14,4955/8/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.77 9.45 7.35 51% 40% 78% 1.29 263.00 16,113 16,1135/9/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.32 9.65 6.93 48% 34% 72% 1.39 7.7 5/10/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.88 9.69 6.83 42% 30% 71% 1.42 7.55/11/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.48 9.18 7.11 49% 38% 77% 1.29 7.4 355.00 21,056 TSS 21,0565/12/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.64 9.20 7.24 50% 40% 79% 1.27 7.3 272.00 199.00 0.73 16,415 12,009 16,415 12,0095/13/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.56 9.33 7.24 49% 38% 78% 1.29 7.25/14/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.69 9.34 7.15 52% 40% 77% 1.31 7.2 318.00 221.00 0.69 18,957 13,175 18,957 13,1755/15/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.43 9.12 7.08 48% 38% 78% 1.29 7.1 194.00 20.84 11,462 1,231 11,462 1,2315/16/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.83 9.62 6.75 42% 29% 70% MinAvg 1.43 7.15/17/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.82 9.56 6.80 41% 29% 71% MinAvg 1.41 7.15/18/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.14 8.96 7.12 44% 35% 79% 1.26 7.2 220.00 13,060 13,0605/19/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.70 9.80 7.18 52% 38% 73% 1.36 7.2 251.00 184.00 0.73 15,030 11,018 14,745 10,9095/20/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.36 9.32 7.25 46% 36% 78% 1.29 7.25/21/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.42 9.16 7.23 47% 37% 79% 1.27 7.2 231.00 21.14 13,929 1,275 13,929 1,2755/22/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.48 9.33 7.23 48% 37% 77% 1.29 7.2 261.00 213.00 0.82 15,738 12,844 15,738 12,8445/23/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.30 9.60 6.94 48% 34% 72% 1.38 7.25/24/2009 FALSE TRUE 3.17 9.33 6.48 49% 34% 69% 1.44 7.15/25/2009 FALSE TRUE 2.64 9.63 6.63 40% 27% 69% MinAvg 1.45 7.15/26/2009 FALSE TRUE 3.19 8.60 6.85 47% 37% 80% 1.26 7.0 207.00 206.00 1.00 11,819 11,762 11,819 11,7625/27/2009 FALSE TRUE 3.37 8.61 6.82 49% 39% 79% 1.26 7.05/28/2009 FALSE TRUE 3.51 8.61 6.82 51% 41% 79% 1.26 6.9 209.00 19.88 11,895 1,131 11,895 1,1315/29/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.41 8.50 6.68 51% 40% 79% 1.27 6.8 312.00 17,382 17,3825/30/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.99 8.89 6.39 47% 34% 72% 1.39 6.7 14,401 12,138 1,169 14,382 12,125 1,1695/31/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.70 8.81 6.40 42% 31% 73% 1.38 7.2 6.6 14,401 12,138 1,169 14,382 12,125 1,169 6/1/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.06 8.61 6.66 46% 36% 77% 1.29 7.2 6.7 272.00 15,108 14,383 12,001 1,169 15,108 14,364 11,985 1,169 6/2/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.36 8.54 6.69 50% 39% 78% 1.28 7.1 6.7 250.00 13,957 14,357 12,001 1,169 13,957 14,339 11,985 1,1696/3/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.35 8.27 6.80 49% 41% 82% 1.22 7.1 6.7 14,357 12,001 1,169 14,339 11,985 1,1696/4/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.67 8.88 6.90 53% 41% 78% 1.29 7.0 6.7 322.00 18,530 14,748 12,001 1,169 18,530 14,730 11,985 1,1696/5/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.60 8.70 6.82 53% 41% 78% 1.28 7.0 6.7 20.40 1,160 14,997 12,550 1,167 1,160 14,978 12,532 1,1676/6/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.60 8.80 6.41 56% 41% 73% 1.37 6.9 6.6 14,997 12,550 1,199 14,978 12,532 1,1996/7/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.87 8.85 6.21 46% 32% 70% 1.43 6.9 6.6 14,957 12,161 1,199 14,936 12,140 1,1996/8/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.07 8.71 6.52 47% 35% 75% 1.34 6.9 6.6 248.00 13,481 14,769 12,161 1,199 13,481 14,748 12,140 1,1996/9/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.39 8.29 6.55 52% 41% 79% 1.27 6.8 6.6 227.00 12,397 14,611 12,161 1,199 12,397 14,592 12,140 1,199 6/10/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.36 8.38 6.62 51% 40% 79% 1.27 6.8 6.6 14,611 12,161 1,199 14,592 12,140 1,1996/11/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.40 8.29 6.55 52% 41% 79% 1.26 6.8 6.6 250.00 195.00 0.78 13,665 10,659 14,551 11,911 1,199 13,665 10,659 14,534 11,893 1,1996/12/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.29 8.50 6.35 52% 39% 75% 1.34 6.8 6.5 274.00 19.98 14,506 1,058 14,432 11,891 1,171 14,506 1,058 14,414 11,869 1,1716/13/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.87 8.43 6.11 47% 34% 73% 1.38 6.7 6.4 14,432 11,891 1,171 14,414 11,869 1,1716/14/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.50 8.50 6.04 41% 29% 71% MinAvg 1.41 6.7 6.4 14,131 11,571 1,171 14,112 11,543 1,1716/15/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.92 8.42 6.45 45% 35% 77% 1.31 6.7 6.4 237.00 12,741 14,216 11,571 1,156 12,741 14,197 11,543 1,1566/16/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.00 8.40 6.51 46% 36% 78% 1.29 6.7 6.4 204.00 11,076 14,216 11,472 1,156 10,671 14,197 11,369 1,1566/17/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.00 8.40 6.51 46% 36% 78% 1.29 6.7 6.4 260.00 14,116 14,210 11,472 1,156 14,116 14,192 11,369 1,1566/18/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.30 8.20 6.40 52% 40% 78% 1.28 6.7 6.4 256.00 186.00 0.73 19.48 13,664 9,928 1,040 14,247 11,214 1,133 13,664 9,928 1,040 14,230 11,129 1,1336/19/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.30 8.31 6.40 52% 40% 77% 1.30 6.6 6.4 235.00 12,543 14,092 11,254 1,133 12,543 14,092 11,173 1,1336/20/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.77 8.46 6.10 45% 33% 72% 1.39 6.6 6.4 14,092 11,254 1,133 14,092 11,173 1,1336/21/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.46 8.20 5.95 41% 30% 73% MinAvg 1.38 6.6 6.4 14,103 11,254 1,097 14,103 11,173 1,0976/22/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.06 8.43 6.43 48% 36% 76% 1.31 6.5 6.4 231.00 12,380 13,879 10,856 1,097 12,380 13,879 10,755 1,0976/23/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.49 8.07 6.40 55% 43% 79% 1.26 6.5 6.4 167.00 161.00 0.96 8,917 8,596 13,569 10,404 1,097 8,917 8,596 13,569 10,323 1,0976/24/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.49 8.03 6.34 55% 43% 79% 1.27 6.5 6.4 13,569 10,404 1,097 13,569 10,323 1,0976/25/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.51 7.97 6.41 55% 44% 80% 1.24 6.5 6.4 21.37 1,143 13,569 10,404 1,106 1,143 13,569 10,323 1,1066/26/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.20 8.30 6.29 51% 39% 76% 1.32 6.5 6.3 310.00 16,262 13,847 10,065 1,106 16,262 13,847 9,964 1,1066/27/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.70 8.10 5.94 45% 33% 73% 1.36 6.5 6.3 13,847 10,065 1,106 13,847 9,964 1,1066/28/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.54 8.06 5.90 43% 32% 73% 1.37 6.4 6.2 13,977 10,065 1,100 13,977 9,964 1,1006/29/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.20 8.46 6.44 50% 38% 76% 1.31 6.4 6.3 242.00 22.99 12,998 1,235 13,684 10,065 1,127 12,998 1,235 13,684 9,964 1,1276/30/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.37 8.12 6.45 52% 42% 79% 1.26 6.4 6.3 250.00 145.00 0.58 13,457 7,805 13,670 9,613 1,127 13,457 7,805 13,670 9,532 1,127 7/1/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.38 8.20 6.43 53% 41% 78% 1.27 6.4 6.3 13,670 9,613 1,127 13,670 9,532 1,1277/2/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.35 8.05 6.33 53% 42% 79% 1.27 6.4 6.3 274.00 197.00 0.72 14,474 10,407 13,631 9,745 1,127 14,474 10,407 13,631 9,678 1,127 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 1 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
293
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
7/3/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.91 8.06 5.93 49% 36% 74% 1.36 6.4 6.2 13,609 9,745 1,127 13,609 9,678 1,1277/4/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.67 7.66 5.43 49% 35% 71% 1.41 6.3 6.1 13,609 9,745 1,127 13,609 9,678 1,1277/5/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.37 7.73 5.78 41% 31% 75% MinAvg 1.34 6.3 6.1 13,257 9,745 1,127 13,257 9,678 1,1277/6/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.01 8.26 6.37 47% 36% 77% 1.30 6.3 6.2 239.00 12,693 13,220 9,745 1,119 12,693 13,220 9,678 1,1197/7/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.41 8.11 6.33 54% 42% 78% 1.28 6.3 6.2 213.00 167.00 0.78 11,252 8,822 13,097 9,613 1,119 11,252 8,822 13,097 9,555 1,1197/8/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.32 8.00 6.30 53% 42% 79% 1.27 6.3 6.2 13,097 9,613 1,119 13,097 9,555 1,1197/9/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.51 7.97 6.22 56% 44% 78% 1.28 6.3 6.1 20.70 1,074 13,071 9,613 1,110 1,074 13,071 9,555 1,110 7/10/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.34 8.30 6.29 53% 40% 76% 1.32 6.3 6.1 333.00 224.00 0.67 17,463 11,747 13,409 9,880 1,110 17,463 11,747 13,409 9,829 1,1107/11/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.68 8.12 5.94 45% 33% 73% 1.37 6.3 6.1 13,409 9,880 1,110 13,409 9,829 1,1107/12/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.51 8.01 5.91 42% 31% 74% 1.36 6.2 6.2 13,390 9,769 1,110 13,390 9,711 1,1107/13/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.83 8.28 6.27 45% 34% 76% 1.32 6.2 6.2 215.00 11,236 13,157 9,769 1,123 11,236 13,157 9,711 1,1237/14/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.21 7.94 6.43 50% 40% 81% 1.23 6.3 6.2 200.00 174.00 0.87 10,732 9,337 12,995 9,715 1,123 10,732 9,337 12,995 9,664 1,1237/15/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.18 8.09 6.41 50% 39% 79% 1.26 6.3 6.2 12,995 9,715 1,123 12,995 9,664 1,1237/16/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.18 7.94 6.50 49% 40% 82% 1.22 6.3 6.2 262.00 20.77 14,194 1,125 13,092 9,715 1,123 14,194 1,125 13,092 9,664 1,1237/17/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.20 8.10 6.21 52% 40% 77% 1.30 6.3 6.2 231.00 176.00 0.76 11,964 9,115 13,022 9,470 1,123 11,964 9,115 13,022 9,470 1,1237/18/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.80 8.10 5.89 48% 35% 73% 1.38 6.2 6.2 12,949 9,470 1,123 12,949 9,470 1,1237/19/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.49 7.95 5.82 43% 31% 73% 1.37 6.2 6.2 12,897 9,404 1,144 12,897 9,404 1,1447/20/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.96 8.57 6.42 46% 35% 75% 1.33 6.2 6.2 232.00 12,426 12,889 9,404 1,144 12,426 12,889 9,404 1,1447/21/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.23 8.17 6.43 50% 40% 79% 1.27 6.2 6.3 92.00 4,934 12,359 9,404 1,144 4,934 12,359 9,404 1,1447/22/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.19 8.25 6.40 50% 39% 78% 1.29 6.2 6.3 12,359 9,404 1,144 12,359 9,404 1,1447/23/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.86 8.13 6.35 45% 35% 78% 1.28 6.2 6.3 12,357 9,404 1,144 12,357 9,404 1,1447/24/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.39 8.38 6.29 54% 40% 75% 1.33 6.2 6.2 207.00 186.00 0.90 10,866 9,764 12,496 9,571 1,144 10,866 9,764 12,496 9,571 1,1447/25/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.82 7.97 6.01 47% 35% 75% 1.33 6.2 6.2 12,496 9,571 1,144 12,496 9,571 1,1447/26/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.40 8.01 5.92 41% 30% 74% MinAvg 1.35 6.2 6.2 12,496 9,571 1,145 12,496 9,571 1,1457/27/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.80 8.30 6.32 44% 34% 76% 1.31 6.2 6.3 179.00 9,435 12,009 9,571 1,145 9,435 12,009 9,571 1,1457/28/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.60 8.30 6.42 40% 31% 77% MinAvg 1.29 6.2 6.3 212.00 113.00 0.53 11,351 6,050 11,965 9,131 1,145 11,351 6,050 11,965 9,131 1,1457/29/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.30 8.20 6.47 51% 40% 79% 1.27 6.2 6.3 185.00 9,983 11,841 9,131 1,145 9,983 11,841 9,131 1,1457/30/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.40 8.20 6.70 51% 41% 82% 1.22 6.2 6.4 19.18 1,072 11,764 9,131 1,090 1,072 11,764 9,131 1,0907/31/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.27 8.17 6.19 53% 40% 76% 1.32 6.2 6.3 179.00 9,238 11,643 9,310 1,090 9,238 11,643 9,310 1,090 8/1/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.71 8.17 5.90 46% 33% 72% 1.38 6.2 6.3 11,643 9,310 1,090 11,643 9,310 1,0908/2/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.73 8.18 6.12 45% 33% 75% 1.34 6.2 6.3 11,425 9,153 1,090 11,425 9,153 1,0908/3/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.18 8.43 6.51 49% 38% 77% 1.30 6.2 6.3 11,425 9,153 1,090 11,425 9,153 1,0908/4/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.41 8.43 6.52 52% 40% 77% 1.29 6.3 6.3 206.00 154.00 0.75 11,208 8,379 11,410 9,056 1,090 11,208 8,379 11,410 9,056 1,0908/5/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.44 8.63 6.48 53% 40% 75% 1.33 6.3 6.4 11,410 9,056 1,090 11,410 9,056 1,0908/6/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.48 8.13 6.53 53% 43% 80% 1.25 6.3 6.4 269.00 183.00 0.68 14,645 9,963 11,549 9,157 1,090 14,645 9,963 11,549 9,157 1,0908/7/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.40 8.60 6.48 52% 40% 75% 1.33 6.3 6.3 11,572 9,199 1,090 11,572 9,199 1,0908/8/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.00 8.40 6.23 48% 36% 74% 1.35 6.3 6.3 11,572 9,199 1,090 11,572 9,199 1,0908/9/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.53 8.33 6.13 41% 30% 74% MinAvg 1.36 6.3 6.4 11,572 9,199 1,098 11,572 9,199 1,098 8/10/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.13 8.50 6.52 48% 37% 77% 1.30 6.3 6.5 172.00 9,359 10,949 8,835 1,098 9,359 10,949 8,835 1,0988/11/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.53 8.53 6.74 52% 41% 79% 1.27 6.3 6.5 209.00 127.00 0.61 11,745 7,137 11,005 8,623 1,098 11,745 7,137 11,005 8,623 1,0988/12/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.42 8.68 6.58 52% 39% 76% 1.32 6.3 6.5 11,005 8,623 1,098 11,005 8,623 1,0988/13/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.44 8.37 6.60 52% 41% 79% 1.27 6.4 6.5 237.00 165.00 0.70 20.97 13,045 9,082 1,154 11,135 8,674 1,117 13,045 9,082 1,154 11,135 8,674 1,1178/14/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.29 8.24 6.39 52% 40% 78% 1.29 6.4 6.5 240.00 12,782 11,281 8,591 1,117 12,782 11,281 8,591 1,1178/15/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.73 8.60 6.27 44% 32% 73% 1.37 6.4 6.5 11,281 8,591 1,117 11,281 8,591 1,1178/16/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.53 8.73 6.37 40% 29% 73% MinAvg 1.37 6.3 6.5 11,057 8,591 1,113 11,057 8,591 1,1138/17/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.18 8.67 6.78 47% 37% 78% 1.28 6.4 6.6 172.00 9,723 10,885 8,516 1,113 9,723 10,885 8,516 1,1138/18/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.42 8.82 6.84 50% 39% 78% 1.29 6.4 6.6 218.00 135.00 0.62 12,429 7,697 10,995 8,414 1,113 12,429 7,697 10,995 8,414 1,1138/19/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.43 9.11 6.78 51% 38% 74% 1.34 6.4 6.6 10,995 8,414 1,113 10,995 8,414 1,1138/20/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.62 8.85 6.91 52% 41% 78% 1.28 6.5 6.7 198.00 19.22 11,416 1,108 10,923 8,414 1,111 11,416 1,108 10,923 8,414 1,1118/21/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.03 8.69 6.94 44% 35% 80% 1.25 6.5 6.7 203.00 11,743 11,409 8,414 1,111 11,743 11,409 8,414 1,1118/22/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.02 9.49 6.79 44% 32% 72% 1.40 6.5 6.8 11,409 8,414 1,111 11,409 8,414 1,1118/23/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.76 9.62 6.90 40% 29% 72% MinAvg 1.39 6.5 6.8 11,409 8,414 1,111 11,409 8,414 1,1118/24/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.20 9.30 7.11 45% 34% 76% 1.31 6.5 6.9 216.00 12,815 11,548 8,221 1,111 12,815 11,548 8,221 1,1118/25/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.52 9.38 7.10 50% 38% 76% 1.32 6.6 6.9 210.00 147.00 0.70 12,438 8,707 11,608 8,282 1,111 12,438 8,707 11,608 8,282 1,1118/26/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.46 9.11 7.11 49% 38% 78% 1.28 6.6 7.0 11,608 8,282 1,111 11,608 8,282 1,1118/27/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.55 9.22 7.12 50% 39% 77% 1.29 6.6 7.0 212.00 20.32 12,589 1,207 11,818 8,282 1,135 12,589 1,207 11,818 8,282 1,1358/28/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.52 9.08 7.13 49% 39% 79% 1.27 6.6 7.0 221.00 13,138 11,937 8,600 1,135 13,138 11,937 8,600 1,1358/29/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.76 9.47 6.74 41% 29% 71% MinAvg 1.41 6.6 7.1 12,077 8,600 1,135 12,077 8,600 1,1358/30/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.68 9.44 6.79 39% 28% 72% MinAvg 1.39 6.6 7.1 12,077 8,600 1,156 12,077 8,600 1,1568/31/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.01 9.19 7.70 39% 33% 84% MinAvg 1.19 6.7 7.1 215.00 13,810 12,192 8,494 1,156 13,810 12,192 8,494 1,156 9/1/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.61 9.25 6.54 55% 39% 71% 1.41 6.7 7.0 203.00 164.00 0.81 11,079 8,951 12,123 8,559 1,156 11,079 8,951 12,123 8,559 1,1569/2/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.47 9.23 7.13 49% 38% 77% 1.29 6.7 7.0 12,123 8,559 1,156 12,123 8,559 1,1569/3/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.24 9.22 7.20 45% 35% 78% 1.28 6.8 7.0 221.00 32.64 13,274 1,961 12,191 8,559 1,357 13,274 1,961 12,191 8,559 1,357 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 2 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
294
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
9/4/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.41 9.01 7.10 48% 38% 79% 1.27 6.8 7.0 203.00 178.00 0.88 12,024 10,543 12,238 8,868 1,357 12,024 10,543 12,238 8,868 1,3579/5/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.08 9.77 6.86 45% 32% 70% 1.42 6.8 7.0 12,238 8,868 1,357 12,238 8,868 1,3579/6/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.72 9.61 6.58 41% 28% 68% MinAvg 1.46 6.8 7.0 12,088 8,686 1,357 12,088 8,686 1,3579/7/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.60 9.70 6.90 38% 27% 71% MinAvg 1.41 6.8 7.0 12,088 8,686 1,357 12,088 8,686 1,3579/8/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.20 9.10 7.12 45% 35% 78% 1.28 6.9 7.0 207.00 161.00 0.78 12,292 9,560 12,100 8,811 1,357 12,292 9,560 12,100 8,811 1,3579/9/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.50 8.99 7.14 49% 39% 79% 1.26 6.9 7.1 12,100 8,811 1,357 12,100 8,811 1,357 9/10/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.50 9.10 7.10 49% 38% 78% 1.28 6.9 7.1 228.00 21.52 13,501 1,274 12,344 8,811 1,341 13,501 1,274 12,344 8,811 1,3419/11/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.50 9.10 7.00 50% 38% 77% 1.30 6.9 7.1 216.00 12,610 12,395 9,090 1,341 12,610 12,395 9,090 1,3419/12/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.30 9.45 6.77 49% 35% 72% 1.40 6.9 7.0 12,395 9,090 1,341 12,395 9,090 1,3419/13/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.20 9.90 7.05 45% 32% 71% 1.40 6.9 7.0 12,354 9,092 1,387 12,354 9,092 1,3879/14/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.49 9.31 7.54 46% 37% 81% 1.23 7.0 7.1 12,325 9,092 1,387 12,325 9,092 1,3879/15/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.72 9.34 7.40 50% 40% 79% 1.26 7.0 7.1 237.00 201.00 0.85 19.28 14,619 12,398 1,189 12,469 9,643 1,348 14,619 12,398 1,189 12,469 9,643 1,3489/16/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.90 9.50 7.30 53% 41% 77% 1.30 7.0 7.2 12,469 9,643 1,348 12,469 9,643 1,3489/17/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.00 9.00 7.30 41% 33% 81% MinAvg 1.23 7.0 7.2 12,652 9,643 1,348 12,652 9,643 1,3489/18/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.00 9.00 7.30 41% 33% 81% MinAvg 1.23 7.1 7.2 242.00 14,733 12,805 10,032 1,348 14,733 12,805 10,032 1,3489/19/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.00 9.00 7.30 41% 33% 81% MinAvg 1.23 7.1 7.2 12,805 10,032 1,348 12,805 10,032 1,3489/20/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.00 9.00 6.78 44% 33% 75% 1.33 7.1 7.2 12,905 10,032 1,408 12,905 10,032 1,4089/21/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.04 9.23 7.23 42% 33% 78% MinAvg 1.28 7.1 7.3 215.00 12,971 12,992 10,032 1,408 12,971 12,992 10,032 1,4089/22/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.35 9.37 7.03 48% 36% 75% 1.33 7.1 7.1 220.00 181.00 0.82 12,891 10,606 12,986 10,128 1,408 12,891 10,606 12,986 10,128 1,4089/23/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.42 9.42 7.01 49% 36% 74% 1.34 7.1 7.0 12,986 10,128 1,408 12,986 10,128 1,4089/24/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.41 9.22 7.09 48% 37% 77% 1.30 7.1 7.0 21.73 1,285 12,998 10,128 1,383 1,285 12,998 10,128 1,3839/25/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.46 9.35 6.83 51% 37% 73% 1.37 7.1 6.9 188.00 10,712 13,041 10,462 1,383 10,712 13,041 10,462 1,3839/26/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.94 9.33 6.67 44% 32% 72% 1.40 7.0 6.9 13,041 10,462 1,383 13,041 10,462 1,3839/27/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.51 9.31 6.72 37% 27% 72% MinAvg 1.39 7.0 6.9 13,079 10,462 1,427 13,079 10,462 1,4279/28/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.25 9.23 7.16 45% 35% 78% 1.29 7.0 7.0 195.00 11,641 12,954 10,462 1,427 11,641 12,954 10,462 1,4279/29/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.31 9.19 7.15 46% 36% 78% 1.29 7.0 7.0 165.00 126.00 0.76 9,834 7,509 12,714 10,040 1,427 9,834 7,509 12,714 10,040 1,4279/30/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.32 9.16 7.26 46% 36% 79% 1.26 7.1 7.0 12,714 10,040 1,427 12,714 10,040 1,42710/1/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.21 8.83 7.09 45% 36% 80% 1.25 7.1 7.0 288.00 24.32 17,025 1,438 12,961 10,040 1,429 17,025 1,438 12,961 10,040 1,42910/2/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.40 8.79 7.19 47% 39% 82% 1.22 7.1 7.0 208.00 170.00 0.82 12,466 10,188 13,068 10,217 1,429 12,466 10,188 13,068 10,217 1,42910/3/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.09 9.41 6.57 47% 33% 70% 1.43 7.1 7.0 13,068 10,217 1,429 13,068 10,217 1,42910/4/2009 FALSE FALSE 1.44 7.78 6.82 21% 19% 88%MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 1.14 7.1 7.1 13,051 10,217 1,296 13,051 10,217 1,29610/5/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.82 9.37 6.98 40% 30% 75% MinAvg 1.34 7.1 7.1 217.00 12,636 13,102 10,162 1,296 12,636 13,102 10,162 1,29610/6/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.09 9.03 7.17 43% 34% 79% 1.26 7.1 7.1 212.00 131.00 0.62 12,681 7,836 13,069 9,830 1,296 12,681 7,836 13,069 9,830 1,29610/7/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.14 9.04 7.12 44% 35% 79% 1.27 7.1 7.1 19.71 1,170 13,069 9,830 1,271 1,170 13,069 9,830 1,27110/8/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.29 9.37 7.19 46% 35% 77% 1.30 7.1 7.1 215.00 12,896 13,057 9,830 1,271 12,896 13,057 9,830 1,27110/9/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.25 9.19 7.02 46% 35% 76% 1.31 7.1 7.0 199.00 11,647 13,011 9,875 1,271 11,647 13,011 9,875 1,271 10/10/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.26 9.76 6.80 48% 33% 70% 1.43 7.1 7.0 13,011 9,875 1,271 13,011 9,875 1,27110/11/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.68 9.30 6.84 39% 29% 74% MinAvg 1.36 7.1 7.1 12,973 9,875 1,270 12,973 9,875 1,27010/12/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.96 9.57 7.38 40% 31% 77% MinAvg 1.30 7.1 7.1 343.00 21,123 TSS 13,003 9,875 1,270 21,123 13,003 9,875 1,27010/13/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.39 9.96 8.26 41% 34% 83% MinAvg 1.21 7.1 7.1 228.00 175.00 0.77 15,714 12,061 13,212 10,187 1,270 15,714 12,061 13,212 10,187 1,27010/14/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.23 9.80 8.33 51% 43% 85% 1.18 7.1 7.3 13,212 10,187 1,270 13,212 10,187 1,27010/15/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.05 9.60 7.56 54% 42% 79% 1.27 7.1 7.4 213.00 18.64 13,423 1,175 13,227 10,187 1,251 13,423 1,175 13,227 10,187 1,25110/16/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.72 8.92 7.37 50% 42% 83% 1.21 7.1 7.4 183.00 183.00 1.00 11,251 11,251 12,986 10,023 1,267 11,251 11,251 12,986 10,023 1,26710/17/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.50 9.37 7.08 49% 37% 76% 1.32 7.1 7.4 12,986 10,023 1,267 12,986 10,023 1,26710/18/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.30 10.02 7.43 44% 33% 74% 1.35 7.1 7.6 12,986 10,023 1,267 12,986 10,023 1,26710/19/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.29 9.58 6.80 48% 34% 71% 1.41 7.1 7.4 190.00 10,775 12,704 10,023 1,267 10,775 12,704 10,023 1,26710/20/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.52 9.40 6.22 57% 37% 66% 1.51 7.1 7.3 221.00 188.00 0.85 11,464 9,752 12,621 9,990 1,267 11,464 9,752 12,621 9,990 1,26710/21/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.31 9.57 7.01 47% 35% 73% 1.37 7.1 7.2 19.49 1,139 12,621 9,990 1,241 1,139 12,621 9,990 1,24110/22/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.37 9.54 7.04 48% 35% 74% 1.36 7.1 7.1 12,596 9,990 1,241 12,596 9,990 1,24110/23/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.42 9.26 6.96 49% 37% 75% 1.33 7.1 7.0 279.00 241.00 0.86 16,200 13,993 12,832 10,413 1,241 16,200 13,993 12,832 10,413 1,24110/24/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.19 9.19 6.92 46% 35% 75% 1.33 7.1 6.9 12,832 10,413 1,241 12,832 10,413 1,24110/25/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.97 9.44 6.87 43% 31% 73% 1.37 7.1 6.9 12,832 10,413 1,230 12,832 10,413 1,23010/26/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.21 9.45 7.23 44% 34% 76% 1.31 7.1 6.9 260.00 15,673 13,022 10,370 1,230 15,673 13,022 10,370 1,23010/27/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.49 9.69 7.62 46% 36% 79% 1.27 7.1 7.0 201.00 12,767 13,006 10,370 1,230 12,767 13,006 10,370 1,23010/28/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.79 9.27 5.94 64% 41% 64% 1.56 7.1 6.9 13,006 10,370 1,230 13,006 10,370 1,23010/29/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.56 9.42 7.07 50% 38% 75% 1.33 7.1 7.0 19.78 1,166 13,097 10,370 1,218 1,166 13,097 10,370 1,21810/30/2009 FALSE FALSE 7.05 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.1 6.9 300.00 218.00 0.73 17,639 12,818 13,617 11,129 1,218 17,639 12,818 13,617 11,129 1,21810/31/2009 FALSE FALSE 7.50 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.1 6.9 13,617 11,129 1,218 13,617 11,129 1,218 11/1/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.81 9.46 6.80 41% 30% 72% MinAvg 1.39 7.1 6.9 13,374 11,129 1,163 13,374 11,129 1,16311/2/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.85 9.14 7.12 40% 31% 78% MinAvg 1.28 7.1 7.0 225.00 13,368 13,438 11,285 1,163 13,368 13,438 11,285 1,16311/3/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.20 9.06 7.07 45% 35% 78% 1.28 7.1 6.9 228.00 177.00 0.78 13,444 10,437 13,439 11,164 1,163 13,444 10,437 13,439 11,164 1,16311/4/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.12 9.23 7.18 43% 34% 78% 1.29 7.1 6.8 13,439 11,164 1,163 13,439 11,164 1,16311/5/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.11 9.03 7.03 44% 34% 78% 1.28 7.1 7.1 24.46 1,435 13,496 11,164 1,217 1,435 13,496 11,164 1,217 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 3 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
295
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
11/6/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.21 8.90 6.97 46% 36% 78% 1.28 7.1 7.1 241.00 205.00 0.85 14,009 11,917 13,591 11,747 1,217 14,009 11,917 13,591 11,747 1,21711/7/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.79 9.43 6.91 40% 30% 73% MinAvg 1.36 7.1 7.1 13,591 11,747 1,229 13,591 11,747 1,22911/8/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.71 9.27 6.84 40% 29% 74% MinAvg 1.35 7.1 7.1 13,644 11,747 1,229 13,644 11,747 1,22911/9/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.81 8.76 7.19 39% 32% 82% MinAvg 1.22 7.1 7.1 205.00 12,289 13,694 11,747 1,229 12,289 13,694 11,747 1,229 11/10/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.81 9.38 6.89 41% 30% 73% MinAvg 1.36 7.1 7.1 279.00 192.00 0.69 22.10 16,039 11,038 1,270 13,861 11,658 1,237 16,039 11,038 1,270 13,861 11,658 1,23711/11/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.33 9.65 7.28 46% 35% 75% 1.33 7.1 7.1 13,861 11,658 1,237 13,861 11,658 1,23711/12/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.37 10.39 6.35 53% 32% 61% 1.64 7.1 6.9 13,861 11,658 1,237 13,861 11,658 1,23711/13/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.38 8.84 6.64 51% 38% 75% 1.33 7.0 6.8 13,719 11,601 1,237 13,719 11,601 1,23711/14/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.78 9.58 6.83 41% 29% 71% MinAvg 1.40 7.0 6.8 13,719 11,601 1,237 13,719 11,601 1,23711/15/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.64 9.30 6.85 39% 28% 74% MinAvg 1.36 7.0 6.8 13,743 11,601 1,253 13,743 11,601 1,25311/16/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.96 8.93 7.10 42% 33% 79% MinAvg 1.26 6.9 6.8 277.00 229.00 0.83 16,398 13,556 14,172 11,930 1,253 16,398 13,556 14,172 11,930 1,25311/17/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.04 9.25 7.25 42% 33% 78% MinAvg 1.28 6.9 6.8 14,172 11,930 1,253 14,172 11,930 1,25311/18/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.32 9.18 7.43 45% 36% 81% 1.24 6.9 6.9 14,172 11,930 1,253 14,172 11,930 1,25311/19/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.19 8.90 7.20 44% 36% 81% 1.24 6.9 6.9 294.00 21.13 17,659 1,269 14,746 11,930 1,256 17,659 1,269 14,746 11,930 1,25611/20/2009 FALSE TRUE 3.33 9.43 7.25 46% 35% 77% 1.30 7.0 7.1 220.00 13,304 14,899 12,293 1,256 13,304 14,899 12,293 1,25611/21/2009 FALSE TRUE 3.38 9.48 6.94 49% 36% 73% 1.37 7.0 7.2 14,899 12,293 1,285 14,899 12,293 1,28511/22/2009 FALSE TRUE 3.19 8.94 6.74 47% 36% 75% 1.33 7.0 7.1 14,899 12,293 1,285 14,899 12,293 1,28511/23/2009 FALSE TRUE 2.94 8.61 6.88 43% 34% 80% 1.25 7.0 7.1 216.00 12,394 14,582 11,953 1,285 12,394 14,582 11,953 1,28511/24/2009 FALSE TRUE 3.14 8.26 6.56 48% 38% 79% 1.26 7.0 7.0 235.00 203.00 0.86 19.19 12,855 11,105 1,050 14,449 11,812 1,238 12,855 11,105 1,050 14,449 11,812 1,23811/25/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.19 8.61 6.64 48% 37% 77% 1.30 6.9 7.0 14,449 11,812 1,238 14,449 11,812 1,23811/26/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.89 8.77 5.74 50% 33% 65% 1.53 6.9 6.7 14,347 11,812 1,238 14,347 11,812 1,23811/27/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.21 8.33 6.18 52% 39% 74% 1.35 6.8 6.6 14,491 11,812 1,238 14,491 11,812 1,23811/28/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.83 9.03 5.91 48% 31% 65% 1.53 6.8 6.4 14,491 11,812 1,238 14,491 11,812 1,23811/29/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.80 9.11 7.07 40% 31% 78% MinAvg 1.29 6.8 6.4 14,491 11,812 1,256 14,491 11,812 1,25611/30/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.80 9.01 7.07 40% 31% 78% MinAvg 1.27 6.8 6.3 14,176 11,610 1,256 14,176 11,610 1,256 12/1/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.16 9.06 7.04 45% 35% 78% 1.29 6.8 6.3 228.00 205.00 0.90 13,387 12,036 14,104 11,681 1,256 13,387 12,036 14,104 11,681 1,25612/2/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.10 9.60 7.50 41% 32% 78% MinAvg 1.28 6.8 6.3 21.93 1,372 14,104 11,681 1,279 1,372 14,104 11,681 1,27912/3/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.10 9.60 6.89 45% 32% 72% 1.39 6.8 6.4 228.00 13,100 14,080 11,681 1,279 13,100 14,080 11,681 1,27912/4/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.11 8.92 6.85 45% 35% 77% 1.30 6.8 6.6 242.00 219.00 0.90 13,825 12,511 14,114 12,027 1,279 13,825 12,511 14,114 12,027 1,27912/5/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.17 9.67 6.79 47% 33% 70% 1.42 6.8 6.7 14,114 12,027 1,279 14,114 12,027 1,27912/6/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.10 10.13 6.80 46% 31% 67% 1.49 6.8 6.9 14,114 12,027 1,240 14,114 12,027 1,24012/7/2009 FALSE FALSE 2.98 8.92 7.19 41% 33% 81% MinAvg 1.24 6.7 6.9 220.00 13,196 14,040 12,049 1,240 13,196 14,040 12,049 1,24012/8/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.18 8.51 6.99 46% 37% 82% 1.22 6.8 6.9 205.00 195.00 0.95 11,944 11,361 13,866 11,935 1,240 11,944 11,361 13,866 11,935 1,24012/9/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.33 8.72 7.15 47% 38% 82% 1.22 6.8 6.9 13,866 11,935 1,240 13,866 11,935 1,240 12/10/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.37 8.62 7.10 47% 39% 82% 1.21 6.8 6.9 254.00 22.23 15,036 1,316 14,095 11,935 1,255 15,036 1,316 14,095 11,935 1,25512/11/2009 FALSE FALSE 3.40 8.70 7.74 44% 39% 89% AvgMax 1.12 6.8 6.9 241.00 15,553 14,054 12,114 1,252 15,553 14,054 12,114 1,25212/12/2009 FALSE FALSE 6.49 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.8 7.0 14,054 12,114 1,252 14,054 12,114 1,25212/13/2009 FALSE FALSE 7.57 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.8 7.0 14,054 12,114 1,252 14,054 12,114 1,25212/14/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.26 9.88 8.32 51% 43% 84% 1.19 6.9 7.4 160.00 11,102 13,827 12,114 1,252 11,102 13,827 12,114 1,25212/15/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.28 9.53 7.70 56% 45% 81% 1.24 6.9 7.5 261.00 181.00 0.69 16,763 11,625 14,037 12,032 1,252 16,763 11,625 14,037 12,032 1,25212/16/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.51 10.11 8.35 54% 45% 83% 1.21 7.0 7.7 14,037 12,032 1,252 14,037 12,032 1,25212/17/2009 FALSE FALSE 4.24 9.89 8.08 53% 43% 82% 1.22 7.0 7.9 227.00 17.59 15,289 1,185 13,958 11,728 1,238 15,289 1,185 13,958 11,728 1,23812/18/2009 TRUE TRUE 4.13 9.30 7.46 55% 44% 80% 1.25 7.0 8.0 193.00 190.00 0.98 12,000 11,813 13,827 11,742 1,238 12,000 11,813 13,827 11,742 1,23812/19/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.58 9.48 6.92 52% 38% 73% 1.37 7.0 7.8 13,827 11,742 1,238 13,827 11,742 1,23812/20/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.41 9.06 6.74 51% 38% 74% 1.34 7.0 7.7 260.00 14,615 13,624 11,742 1,231 14,615 13,624 11,742 1,23112/21/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.54 9.21 7.28 49% 38% 79% 1.26 7.0 7.6 13,647 11,742 1,231 13,647 11,742 1,23112/22/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.65 9.02 7.05 52% 40% 78% 1.28 7.0 7.4 238.00 18.62 13,986 1,094 13,670 11,742 1,203 13,986 1,094 13,670 11,742 1,20312/23/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.47 8.65 7.13 49% 40% 82% 1.21 7.0 7.4 244.00 193.00 0.79 14,509 11,477 13,722 11,704 1,203 14,509 11,477 13,722 11,704 1,20312/24/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.30 9.96 5.87 56% 33% 59% 1.70 7.0 7.1 13,811 11,704 1,203 13,811 11,704 1,20312/25/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.53 8.50 5.40 47% 30% 64% 1.57 6.9 6.7 13,879 11,804 1,242 13,879 11,804 1,24212/26/2009 TRUE TRUE 2.83 10.10 5.72 50% 28% 57% AvgMax 1.77 6.9 6.6 13,879 11,804 1,242 13,879 11,804 1,24212/27/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.01 8.05 6.47 47% 37% 80% 1.24 7.0 6.6 13,879 11,804 1,242 13,879 11,804 1,24212/28/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.12 8.11 6.59 47% 38% 81% 1.23 7.0 6.5 13,879 11,804 1,242 13,879 11,804 1,24212/29/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.40 7.80 6.74 50% 44% 86% AvgMax 1.16 7.0 6.4 193.00 10,849 13,879 11,667 1,242 10,849 13,879 11,667 1,24212/30/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.60 8.30 6.65 54% 43% 80% 1.25 7.0 6.4 221.00 12,257 13,771 11,667 1,242 12,257 13,771 11,667 1,24212/31/2009 TRUE TRUE 3.52 9.95 6.78 52% 35% 68% 1.47 7.0 6.3 234.00 18.30 13,226 1,034 13,737 11,667 1,200 13,226 1,034 13,737 11,667 1,200 1/1/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.59 8.27 6.30 57% 43% 76% 1.31 7.0 6.4 13,760 11,606 1,200 13,760 11,606 1,2001/2/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.39 8.90 6.46 52% 38% 73% 1.38 7.0 6.5 13,760 11,606 1,157 13,760 11,606 1,1571/3/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.16 8.54 6.71 47% 37% 79% 1.27 7.0 6.6 13,807 11,606 1,157 13,807 11,606 1,1571/4/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.10 8.24 6.68 46% 38% 81% 1.23 6.9 6.6 234.00 13,027 13,750 11,425 1,157 13,027 13,750 11,425 1,1571/5/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.35 8.09 6.70 50% 41% 83% 1.21 6.9 6.6 232.00 204.00 0.88 12,964 11,399 13,698 11,421 1,157 12,964 11,399 13,698 11,421 1,1571/6/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.25 8.01 6.64 49% 41% 83% 1.21 6.9 6.6 13,698 11,421 1,157 13,698 11,421 1,1571/7/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.52 7.99 6.69 53% 44% 84% 1.19 6.9 6.6 272.00 20.23 15,172 1,128 13,829 11,421 1,152 15,172 1,128 13,829 11,421 1,152 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 4 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
296
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
1/8/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.61 7.79 6.35 57% 46% 81% 1.23 6.9 6.6 243.00 207.00 0.85 12,861 10,956 13,891 11,353 1,152 12,861 10,956 13,891 11,353 1,1521/9/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.08 7.95 6.41 48% 39% 81% 1.24 6.9 6.6 13,891 11,353 1,152 13,891 11,353 1,152 1/10/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.10 8.70 6.57 47% 36% 76% 1.32 6.9 6.6 13,809 11,353 1,110 13,809 11,353 1,1101/11/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.20 8.80 7.01 60% 48% 80% 1.26 6.9 6.6 189.00 20.44 11,050 1,195 13,487 11,353 1,127 11,050 1,195 13,487 11,353 1,1271/12/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.19 8.66 7.82 54% 48% 90% AvgMax 1.11 6.9 6.6 198.00 177.00 0.89 12,908 11,539 13,449 11,380 1,127 12,908 11,539 13,449 11,380 1,1271/13/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 5.30 9.32 7.74 68% 57% 83% MinMax 1.20 6.9 6.6 13,449 11,380 1,127 13,449 11,380 1,1271/14/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.42 9.08 7.55 59% 49% 83% 1.20 6.8 6.8 167.00 173.00 1.04 10,510 10,888 13,409 11,318 1,127 10,510 10,888 13,409 11,318 1,1271/15/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.98 8.66 7.33 54% 46% 85% 1.18 6.8 6.9 228.00 13,936 13,221 11,274 1,127 13,936 13,221 11,274 1,1271/16/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.82 9.34 6.93 55% 41% 74% 1.35 6.8 7.0 13,221 11,274 1,127 13,221 11,274 1,1271/17/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.05 11.05 8.35 49% 37% 76% 1.32 6.8 7.3 13,073 11,274 1,113 13,073 11,274 1,1131/18/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 6.38 13.96 11.14 57% 46% 80% 1.25 6.9 8.0 13,155 11,184 1,113 13,155 11,184 1,1131/19/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 7.18 13.65 11.93 60% 53% 87% AvgMax 1.14 6.9 8.3 258.00 25,670 TSS 13,155 11,184 1,113 24,870 13,155 11,184 1,1131/20/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 8.53 14.56 12.44 69% 59% 85% MinMax 1.17 6.9 8.3 123.00 12,757 13,012 11,184 1,113 12,757 13,012 11,184 1,1131/21/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 8.46 13.27 11.88 71% 64% 90%MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 1.12 6.9 8.3 114.00 10.71 11,297 1,061 12,890 11,184 1,103 11,297 1,061 12,890 11,184 1,1031/22/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 7.70 13.30 10.82 71% 58% 81% MinAvgMinMax 1.23 6.9 8.4 155.00 138.00 0.89 13,987 12,453 12,890 11,366 1,105 13,987 12,453 12,890 11,366 1,1051/23/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.50 12.20 9.05 50% 37% 74% 1.35 7.0 8.9 12,765 11,347 1,105 12,765 11,347 1,1051/24/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 5.47 12.00 9.22 59% 46% 77% 1.30 7.1 9.4 12,765 11,347 1,105 12,765 11,347 1,1051/25/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 5.80 14.61 12.12 48% 40% 83% 1.21 7.4 10.4 190.00 19,197 13,225 11,347 1,105 19,197 13,225 11,347 1,1051/26/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 8.73 13.69 11.45 76% 64% 84% MinAvgMinMax 1.20 7.4 10.1 171.00 135.00 0.79 16,331 12,893 13,432 11,568 1,105 16,331 12,893 13,432 11,568 1,1051/27/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 6.33 11.63 9.06 70% 54% 78% MinAvg 1.28 7.5 10.1 13,432 11,568 1,105 13,432 11,568 1,1051/28/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.98 11.70 9.88 61% 51% 84% 1.18 7.6 10.1 11.06 911 13,432 11,568 1,066 911 13,432 11,568 1,0661/29/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.81 10.82 9.48 61% 54% 88% AvgMax 1.14 7.6 10.1 223.00 176.00 0.79 17,622 13,908 13,694 12,005 1,066 17,622 13,908 13,694 12,005 1,0661/30/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.81 11.70 9.38 62% 50% 80% 1.25 7.7 9.9 13,790 12,005 1,066 13,790 12,005 1,0661/31/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.14 11.38 9.19 56% 45% 81% 1.24 7.8 10.0 13,830 12,005 1,074 13,830 12,005 1,074 2/1/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.22 10.71 9.06 58% 49% 85% 1.18 8.0 9.9 257.00 19,425 14,203 12,005 1,074 19,425 14,203 12,005 1,0742/2/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.14 10.67 8.57 60% 48% 80% 1.25 8.1 9.2 165.00 178.00 1.08 11,786 12,715 14,052 12,094 1,074 11,786 12,715 14,052 12,094 1,0742/3/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 7.43 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 8.1 9.2 14,052 12,094 1,074 14,052 12,094 1,0742/4/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.53 11.07 9.19 49% 41% 83% 1.20 8.3 9.2 197.00 15.04 15,101 1,153 14,181 12,094 1,090 15,101 1,153 14,181 12,094 1,0902/5/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 6.89 14.60 10.29 67% 47% 71% 1.42 8.4 9.3 225.00 187.00 0.83 19,317 16,054 14,579 12,676 1,090 19,317 16,054 14,579 12,676 1,0902/6/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 7.08 13.53 11.04 64% 52% 82% 1.23 8.6 9.5 14,579 12,676 1,090 14,579 12,676 1,0902/7/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 6.78 12.09 10.01 68% 56% 83% MinMax 1.21 8.7 9.6 14,539 12,676 1,080 14,539 12,676 1,0802/8/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.86 11.30 10.00 59% 52% 88% AvgMax 1.13 8.9 9.6 159.00 13,261 14,566 12,921 1,080 13,261 14,566 12,921 1,0802/9/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.87 13.98 9.30 52% 35% 67% 1.50 9.0 9.7 154.00 132.00 0.86 11,945 10,238 14,402 12,586 1,080 11,945 10,238 14,402 12,586 1,080 2/10/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 6.31 12.20 9.20 69% 52% 75% 1.33 9.1 9.8 8.56 657 14,402 12,586 995 657 14,402 12,586 9952/11/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.68 12.04 9.10 51% 39% 76% 1.32 9.3 9.7 275.00 196.00 0.71 20,871 14,875 TSS 14,625 12,840 946 20,871 14,875 14,625 12,840 9462/12/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 6.65 9.99 8.29 80% 67% 83% MinAvgMinMax 1.20 9.3 9.8 209.00 14,457 14,729 13,003 946 14,457 14,729 13,003 9462/13/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 6.09 9.18 9.74 63% 66% 106% MinMaxAvgMax 0.94 9.3 9.7 14,729 13,003 946 14,729 13,003 9462/14/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.39 9.15 7.55 71% 59% 83% MinAvgMinMax 1.21 9.4 9.2 15,030 13,305 946 15,030 13,305 9462/15/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.64 10.07 6.83 68% 46% 68% 1.47 9.3 8.6 15,114 13,305 946 15,114 13,305 9462/16/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.18 9.86 8.24 63% 53% 84% 1.20 9.4 8.5 193.00 13,270 14,982 13,305 946 13,270 14,982 13,305 9462/17/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.86 9.48 7.01 69% 51% 74% 1.35 9.3 8.1 14,982 13,305 946 14,982 13,305 9462/18/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.82 11.28 7.72 62% 43% 68% 1.46 9.1 7.8 308.00 14.33 19,841 923 15,306 13,305 941 19,841 923 15,306 13,305 9412/19/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 2.71 8.45 7.70 35% 32% 91% MinAvgAvgMax 1.10 9.1 7.5 253.00 213.00 0.84 16,243 13,675 15,365 13,351 941 16,243 13,675 15,365 13,351 9412/20/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.99 10.61 7.36 54% 38% 69% 1.44 9.0 7.4 15,539 13,351 941 15,539 13,351 9412/21/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.67 9.77 7.65 48% 38% 78% 1.28 9.0 7.5 15,842 13,351 911 15,842 13,351 9112/22/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.79 9.29 7.82 48% 41% 84% 1.19 8.9 7.5 194.00 12,649 15,746 13,480 911 12,649 15,746 13,480 9112/23/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.66 9.13 8.62 42% 40% 94% AvgMax 1.06 8.9 7.6 199.00 184.00 0.92 14,313 13,234 15,650 13,449 911 14,313 13,234 15,650 13,449 9112/24/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 7.03 12.00 9.00 78% 59% 75% MinAvgMinMax 1.33 8.9 7.5 15,650 13,449 911 15,650 13,449 9112/25/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 6.53 11.81 8.26 79% 55% 70% MinAvgMinMax 1.43 8.7 7.6 178.00 12.74 12,268 878 15,188 13,449 904 12,268 878 15,188 13,449 9042/26/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.60 10.20 8.96 63% 55% 88% MinMaxAvgMax 1.14 8.7 7.6 157.00 148.00 0.94 11,732 11,060 14,882 13,220 904 11,479 10,991 14,865 13,211 9042/27/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 6.00 9.60 8.62 70% 63% 90%MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 1.11 8.7 7.6 14,882 13,220 904 14,865 13,211 9042/28/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 6.20 10.60 7.60 82% 58% 72% MinAvgMinMax 1.39 8.6 7.7 14,882 13,220 903 14,865 13,211 903 3/1/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 6.30 10.20 8.16 77% 62% 80% MinAvgMinMax 1.25 8.6 7.8 208.00 14,148 14,650 13,122 903 14,148 14,633 13,112 9033/2/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 6.70 10.90 8.01 84% 61% 74% MinAvgMinMax 1.36 8.6 #DIV/0! 186.00 143.00 0.77 12,432 9,558 14,512 12,676 903 12,432 9,558 14,496 12,668 9033/3/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 6.70 11.20 8.39 80% 60% 75% MinAvgMinMax 1.33 8.6 #DIV/0! 13.00 910 14,512 12,676 904 910 14,496 12,668 9043/4/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.38 9.67 7.37 73% 56% 76% MinAvgMinMax 1.31 8.5 #DIV/0! 194.00 11,921 14,043 12,676 904 11,921 14,027 12,668 9043/5/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.16 11.14 8.04 64% 46% 72% 1.38 8.5 8.0 187.00 12,545 14,090 12,671 904 12,545 14,074 12,661 9043/6/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.83 11.17 7.89 61% 43% 71% 1.42 8.4 8.0 14,090 12,671 904 14,074 12,661 9043/7/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.52 8.61 7.65 59% 52% 89% AvgMax 1.13 8.4 8.0 14,023 12,671 842 14,006 12,661 8423/8/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.38 9.29 8.76 50% 47% 94% AvgMax 1.06 8.2 8.0 172.00 12,566 13,573 12,107 842 12,566 13,556 12,095 8423/9/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.59 9.65 7.30 63% 48% 76% 1.32 8.0 7.7 174.00 147.00 0.84 10,593 8,950 13,386 11,656 842 10,593 8,950 13,371 11,646 842 3/10/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.10 9.28 9.24 44% 44% 100% AvgMax 1.00 8.0 7.7 13,386 11,656 842 13,371 11,646 8423/11/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 2.39 8.87 7.88 30% 27% 89% MinAvgAvgMax 1.13 8.0 7.7 219.00 14.70 14,393 966 13,457 11,656 867 14,393 966 13,441 11,646 867 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 5 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
297
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
3/12/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 2.85 8.86 7.60 38% 32% 86% MinAvgAvgMax 1.17 7.8 7.7 205.00 186.00 0.91 12,994 11,789 13,523 11,877 867 12,994 11,789 13,507 11,867 8673/13/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 2.41 8.37 6.98 35% 29% 83% MinAvg 1.20 7.7 7.6 13,523 11,877 919 13,507 11,867 9193/14/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.72 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.6 7.3 13,523 11,378 919 13,507 11,366 9193/15/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.78 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.6 7.3 214.00 12,101 13,376 11,378 919 12,101 13,360 11,366 9193/16/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.65 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.6 7.3 181.00 154.00 0.85 10,038 8,541 13,179 10,972 919 10,038 8,541 13,164 10,963 9193/17/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 7.22 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.6 #DIV/0! 13,179 10,972 919 13,164 10,963 9193/18/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.83 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.7 #DIV/0! 109.00 6,209 12,792 10,972 919 6,209 12,778 10,963 9193/19/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 2.67 7.97 6.07 44% 34% 76% 1.31 7.4 6.1 210.00 15.78 10,635 799 12,646 10,972 895 10,635 799 12,632 10,963 8953/20/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.19 9.17 6.70 48% 35% 73% 1.37 7.4 6.4 12,646 10,972 895 12,632 10,963 8953/21/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.15 8.90 6.82 46% 35% 77% 1.31 7.3 6.5 12,222 10,972 888 12,207 10,963 8883/22/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.31 8.94 7.46 44% 37% 83% 1.20 7.3 6.8 265.00 16,483 12,236 10,522 888 16,483 12,222 10,511 8883/23/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 9.00 6.79 50% 37% 75% 1.32 7.3 6.8 242.00 229.00 0.95 13,710 12,974 12,318 10,872 888 13,710 12,974 12,304 10,862 8883/24/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 7.59 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.2 6.8 12,318 10,872 888 12,304 10,862 8883/25/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 7.53 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.1 6.8 247.00 20.33 15,512 1,277 12,477 10,872 966 15,512 1,277 12,463 10,862 9663/26/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.46 8.99 6.52 53% 38% 73% 1.38 7.1 6.7 212.00 11,524 12,322 10,478 966 11,524 12,308 10,467 9663/27/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.05 9.38 6.95 44% 33% 74% 1.35 7.1 6.9 12,322 10,478 966 12,308 10,467 9663/28/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.12 10.07 7.12 44% 31% 71% 1.41 7.1 6.9 12,326 10,478 988 12,311 10,467 9883/29/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.28 9.41 7.16 46% 35% 76% 1.31 7.1 7.0 12,363 10,362 988 12,363 10,362 9883/30/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.35 9.35 7.23 46% 36% 77% 1.29 7.1 7.0 356.00 239.00 0.67 21,451 14,401 TSS 12,363 11,035 988 21,451 14,401 12,363 11,035 9883/31/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.32 9.38 7.10 47% 35% 76% 1.32 7.1 7.0 12,363 11,035 988 12,363 11,035 988 4/1/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.65 9.22 6.96 52% 40% 75% 1.33 7.1 7.0 221.00 21.12 12,821 1,225 12,280 11,035 1,035 12,821 1,225 12,280 11,035 1,0354/2/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.44 10.37 7.17 48% 33% 69% 1.45 7.1 7.0 185.00 203.00 1.10 11,061 12,137 12,194 11,465 1,035 11,061 12,137 12,194 11,465 1,0354/3/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.32 9.15 6.86 48% 36% 75% 1.33 7.1 7.1 12,194 11,465 1,067 12,194 11,465 1,0674/4/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.00 11.50 7.23 69% 43% 63% 1.59 7.1 7.1 12,212 11,465 1,067 12,212 11,465 1,0674/5/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.84 9.68 7.95 48% 40% 82% 1.22 7.1 7.2 237.00 15,712 12,423 11,465 1,067 15,712 12,423 11,465 1,0674/6/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.68 9.37 7.71 48% 39% 82% 1.22 7.1 7.3 224.00 211.00 0.94 14,398 13,562 12,547 11,765 1,067 14,398 13,562 12,547 11,765 1,0674/7/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.59 9.32 7.26 49% 39% 78% 1.28 7.1 7.3 12,547 11,765 1,067 12,547 11,765 1,0674/8/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.65 8.97 7.55 48% 41% 84% 1.19 7.1 7.3 212.00 21.53 13,342 1,355 12,595 11,765 1,124 13,342 1,355 12,595 11,765 1,1244/9/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.60 9.00 7.42 49% 40% 82% 1.21 7.1 7.4 203.00 203.00 1.00 12,562 12,562 12,718 12,281 1,124 12,562 12,562 12,718 12,281 1,124 4/10/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 9.20 7.10 52% 40% 77% 1.30 7.1 7.4 12,718 12,281 1,124 12,718 12,281 1,1244/11/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.39 10.35 8.47 40% 33% 82% MinAvg 1.22 7.1 7.5 12,607 12,281 1,164 12,607 12,281 1,1644/12/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.60 11.83 10.00 56% 47% 85% 1.18 7.2 7.9 239.00 19,933 13,069 12,363 1,164 19,933 13,069 12,363 1,1644/13/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.96 11.67 9.65 62% 51% 83% 1.21 7.3 8.1 218.00 159.00 0.73 17,543 12,795 13,349 12,425 1,164 17,543 12,795 13,349 12,425 1,1644/14/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.04 11.50 9.17 55% 44% 80% 1.25 7.4 8.3 13,349 12,425 1,164 13,349 12,425 1,1644/15/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.80 10.11 8.37 57% 47% 83% 1.21 7.5 8.5 206.00 14.37 14,383 1,003 13,492 12,425 1,132 14,383 1,003 13,492 12,425 1,1324/16/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.44 9.87 7.92 56% 45% 80% 1.25 7.5 8.5 243.00 176.00 0.72 16,059 11,631 13,868 12,866 1,132 16,059 11,631 13,868 12,866 1,1324/17/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.82 10.14 7.61 50% 38% 75% 1.33 7.5 8.5 13,868 12,866 1,132 13,868 12,866 1,1324/18/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.90 10.10 8.30 47% 39% 82% 1.22 7.5 8.7 14,378 12,866 1,132 14,378 12,866 1,1324/19/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.30 10.00 7.16 60% 43% 72% 1.40 7.5 8.5 190.00 17.91 11,346 1,069 14,426 12,866 1,186 11,346 1,069 14,426 12,866 1,1864/20/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.40 10.20 9.40 47% 43% 92% AvgMax 1.09 7.6 8.3 201.00 15,758 14,509 12,866 1,186 15,758 14,509 12,866 1,1864/21/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.20 10.60 8.98 47% 40% 85% 1.18 7.7 8.2 220.00 162.00 0.74 16,477 12,133 14,625 12,774 1,186 16,477 12,133 14,625 12,774 1,1864/22/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.80 10.10 8.82 54% 48% 87% AvgMax 1.15 7.7 8.1 14,509 12,774 1,186 14,509 12,774 1,1864/23/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.45 9.89 7.79 57% 45% 79% 1.27 7.7 8.0 14,562 12,746 1,186 14,562 12,746 1,1864/24/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.90 9.98 7.50 52% 39% 75% 1.33 7.7 7.9 14,562 12,746 1,186 14,562 12,746 1,1864/25/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.49 9.55 7.29 48% 37% 76% 1.31 7.7 7.8 14,494 12,746 1,163 14,494 12,746 1,1634/26/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.72 9.34 7.72 48% 40% 83% 1.21 7.7 7.7 319.00 20,549 TSS 14,723 12,746 1,163 20,549 14,723 12,746 1,1634/27/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.12 9.39 7.74 53% 44% 82% 1.21 7.7 7.8 221.00 166.00 0.75 14,262 10,713 14,690 12,492 1,163 14,262 10,713 14,690 12,492 1,1634/28/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.06 9.65 7.97 51% 42% 83% 1.21 7.8 7.9 14,690 12,492 1,163 14,690 12,492 1,1634/29/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 7.36 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 7.8 7.7 34.58 2,121 NH3 14,690 12,492 1,163 2,121 14,690 12,492 1,1634/30/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.64 8.92 7.33 63% 52% 82% 1.22 7.8 7.6 181.00 11,059 14,448 12,219 1,163 11,059 14,448 12,219 1,163 5/1/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.48 9.02 6.59 53% 39% 73% 1.37 7.8 7.4 14,448 12,219 1,163 14,448 12,219 1,1635/2/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.18 8.16 6.47 49% 39% 79% 1.26 7.8 7.3 14,564 12,219 1,143 14,564 12,219 1,1435/3/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 2.80 7.90 6.35 44% 35% 80% 1.24 7.7 7.2 173.00 9,162 14,428 12,233 1,143 9,162 14,428 12,233 1,1435/4/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 2.53 9.07 6.40 40% 28% 71% MinAvg 1.42 7.8 7.1 14,428 12,233 1,143 14,428 12,233 1,1435/5/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 2.20 8.50 6.40 34% 26% 75% MinAvg 1.33 7.8 6.9 195.00 10,408 14,160 12,233 1,143 10,408 14,160 12,233 1,1435/6/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 2.10 9.70 6.40 33% 22% 66% MinAvgMinMax 1.52 7.8 6.7 223.00 20.54 11,903 1,096 13,906 12,233 1,131 11,903 1,096 13,906 12,233 1,1315/7/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.39 6.87 6.52 52% 49% 95% AvgMax 1.05 7.8 6.7 235.00 196.00 0.83 12,779 10,658 13,798 11,749 1,131 12,779 10,658 13,798 11,749 1,1315/8/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.43 7.83 6.30 54% 44% 80% 1.24 7.8 6.4 13,798 11,749 1,131 13,798 11,749 1,1315/9/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.8 6.4 13,831 11,749 1,056 13,831 11,749 1,056 5/10/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.8 6.3 203.00 23.08 13,929 11,586 1,056 13,929 11,586 1,0565/11/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.8 6.3 123.00 160.00 1.30 13,929 11,586 1,056 13,929 11,586 1,0565/12/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.8 6.3 13,929 11,586 1,056 13,929 11,586 1,0565/13/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.7 6.3 234.00 13,428 11,586 1,056 13,428 11,586 1,056 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 6 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
298
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
5/14/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.6 6.3 184.00 13,054 11,284 1,056 13,054 11,284 1,0565/15/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.5 6.3 13,054 11,284 1,056 13,054 11,284 1,0565/16/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.4 12,921 11,284 1,083 12,921 11,284 1,0835/17/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.4 108.00 22.90 12,573 11,168 1,083 12,573 11,168 1,0835/18/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.4 221.00 190.00 0.86 12,573 11,168 1,083 12,573 11,168 1,0835/19/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.3 12,573 11,168 1,083 12,573 11,168 1,0835/20/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.3 190.00 12,726 11,168 1,096 12,726 11,168 1,0965/21/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.3 218.00 12,293 11,168 1,096 12,293 11,168 1,0965/22/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.2 11,595 10,685 1,096 11,595 10,685 1,0965/23/2010 FALSE TRUE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.2 11,595 10,685 1,096 11,595 10,685 1,0965/24/2010 FALSE TRUE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.1 195.00 11,595 10,685 1,096 11,595 10,685 1,0965/25/2010 FALSE TRUE TRUE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.1 182.00 203.00 1.12 11,595 10,685 1,096 11,595 10,685 1,0965/26/2010 FALSE TRUE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.1 11,595 10,685 1,096 11,595 10,685 1,0965/27/2010 FALSE TRUE TRUE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 7.0 220.00 20.92 11,595 10,685 1,096 11,595 10,685 1,0965/28/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 6.45 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.8 #DIV/0! 270.00 261.00 0.97 14,524 14,040 11,639 12,349 1,096 14,524 14,040 11,639 12,349 1,0965/29/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.16 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.6 #DIV/0! 11,639 12,349 1,096 11,639 12,349 1,0965/30/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 5.85 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.6 #DIV/0! 11,639 12,349 1,096 11,639 12,349 1,0965/31/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.21 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.4 #DIV/0! 11,755 12,349 1,096 11,755 12,349 1,096 6/1/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.15 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.4 #DIV/0! 184.00 183.00 0.99 9,438 9,386 11,369 11,361 1,096 9,438 9,386 11,369 11,361 1,0966/2/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.33 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.3 #DIV/0! 11,369 11,361 1,096 11,369 11,361 1,0966/3/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.27 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.3 #DIV/0! 188.00 20.00 9,831 1,046 11,480 11,361 1,071 9,831 1,046 11,480 11,361 1,0716/4/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 6.17 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.3 #DIV/0! 205.00 212.00 1.03 10,549 10,909 11,347 11,248 1,071 10,549 10,909 11,347 11,248 1,0716/5/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 5.72 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.3 #DIV/0! 11,504 11,248 1,071 11,504 11,248 1,0716/6/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 5.98 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.3 #DIV/0! 11,424 11,248 1,046 11,424 11,248 1,0466/7/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.32 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.3 #DIV/0! 163.00 20.42 8,592 1,076 10,587 11,445 1,061 8,592 1,076 10,587 11,445 1,0616/8/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.29 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 188.00 9,862 10,466 11,445 1,061 9,862 10,466 11,445 1,0616/9/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.35 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 10,466 11,445 1,061 10,466 11,445 1,061 6/10/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.24 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 233.00 12,126 10,703 11,445 1,061 12,126 10,703 11,445 1,0616/11/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.13 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 229.00 11,707 10,829 11,445 1,061 11,707 10,829 11,445 1,0616/12/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 5.88 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 10,829 11,445 1,061 10,829 11,445 1,0616/13/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.41 7.95 5.88 58% 43% 74% 1.35 5.9 5.9 10,829 11,445 1,061 10,829 11,445 1,0616/14/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.45 7.93 6.15 56% 44% 78% 1.29 6.0 6.0 180.00 9,232 10,651 11,445 1,061 9,232 10,651 11,445 1,0616/15/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.46 7.98 6.22 56% 43% 78% 1.28 6.1 6.1 215.00 183.00 0.85 11,153 9,493 10,701 10,957 1,061 11,153 9,493 10,701 10,957 1,0616/16/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.51 8.03 6.27 56% 44% 78% 1.28 6.1 6.1 10,701 10,957 1,061 10,701 10,957 1,0616/17/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.48 8.80 6.19 56% 40% 70% 1.42 6.1 6.1 20.51 1,059 10,701 10,957 1,060 1,059 10,701 10,957 1,0606/18/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.48 9.11 5.42 64% 38% 59% 1.68 6.0 6.0 190.00 161.00 0.85 8,589 7,278 10,509 10,221 1,060 8,589 7,278 10,509 10,221 1,0606/19/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 6.0 6.0 10,509 10,221 1,060 10,509 10,221 1,0606/20/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 6.0 6.0 10,509 10,221 1,060 10,509 10,221 1,0606/21/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 6.0 6.1 186.00 10,509 10,221 1,060 10,509 10,221 1,0606/22/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 6.0 6.0 199.00 16.71 10,509 10,221 1,060 10,509 10,221 1,0606/23/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 5.88 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.0 6.0 10,509 10,221 1,060 10,509 10,221 1,0606/24/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 5.93 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.0 5.8 10,509 10,221 1,060 10,509 10,221 1,0606/25/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.37 9.06 5.90 57% 37% 65% 1.54 6.0 5.7 212.00 185.00 0.87 10,432 9,103 10,503 10,035 1,060 10,432 9,103 10,503 10,035 1,0606/26/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 5.74 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.0 5.9 10,503 10,035 1,060 10,503 10,035 1,0606/27/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 5.93 5.86 57% 56% 99% MinMaxAvgMax 1.01 6.0 5.9 10,503 10,035 1,060 10,503 10,035 1,0606/28/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 6.20 6.24 54% 54% 101% AvgMax 0.99 6.0 5.9 204.00 10,616 10,177 9,234 1,060 10,616 10,177 9,234 1,0606/29/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.46 6.13 6.20 56% 56% 101% MinMaxAvgMax 0.99 6.0 5.9 86.00 104.00 1.21 4,447 5,378 TSS 10,177 8,591 1,060 4,447 5,378 10,177 8,591 1,0606/30/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 6.26 6.19 55% 54% 99% AvgMax 1.01 6.0 5.9 10,177 8,591 1,060 10,177 8,591 1,060 7/1/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.36 6.32 6.12 55% 53% 97% AvgMax 1.03 6.0 5.9 172.00 20.12 8,779 1,027 10,070 8,591 1,052 8,779 1,027 10,070 8,591 1,0527/2/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.39 9.40 6.02 56% 36% 64% 1.56 6.0 6.0 261.00 166.00 0.64 13,104 8,334 10,352 8,416 1,052 13,104 8,334 10,352 8,416 1,0527/3/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.31 8.85 5.54 60% 37% 63% 1.60 6.0 5.8 10,352 8,416 1,052 10,352 8,416 1,0527/4/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.16 8.08 5.20 61% 39% 64% 1.55 5.9 5.6 10,395 8,416 1,054 10,395 8,416 1,0547/5/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.39 9.02 5.89 58% 38% 65% 1.53 5.9 5.7 10,381 7,917 1,054 10,381 7,917 1,0547/6/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 8.99 6.06 55% 37% 67% 1.48 5.9 5.7 249.00 178.00 0.71 12,585 8,996 10,565 8,097 1,054 12,585 8,996 10,565 8,097 1,0547/7/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.39 8.83 6.04 56% 38% 68% 1.46 5.9 5.8 10,565 8,097 1,054 10,565 8,097 1,0547/8/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.42 8.79 6.18 55% 39% 70% 1.42 5.9 5.8 273.00 21.59 14,071 1,113 11,021 8,097 1,066 14,071 1,113 11,021 8,097 1,0667/9/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.91 8.19 6.00 65% 48% 73% 1.37 5.9 5.9 245.00 201.00 0.82 12,260 10,058 11,221 8,377 1,066 12,260 10,058 11,221 8,377 1,066 7/10/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.47 9.28 5.75 60% 37% 62% 1.61 5.9 5.8 11,221 8,377 1,066 11,221 8,377 1,0667/11/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 8.70 5.70 60% 39% 66% 1.53 5.9 5.9 11,139 8,377 1,066 11,139 8,377 1,0667/12/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 8.80 6.06 56% 39% 69% 1.45 5.9 6.0 192.00 9,704 10,957 8,377 1,066 9,704 10,957 8,377 1,0667/13/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 8.90 6.08 56% 38% 68% 1.46 5.9 6.0 127.00 113.00 0.89 6,440 5,730 10,580 8,046 1,066 6,440 5,730 10,580 8,046 1,0667/14/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 8.90 6.04 56% 38% 68% 1.47 5.9 6.0 10,580 8,046 1,066 10,580 8,046 1,0667/15/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 8.70 6.05 56% 39% 70% 1.44 5.9 6.0 255.00 22.29 12,867 1,125 10,883 8,046 1,081 12,867 1,125 10,883 8,046 1,081 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 7 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
299
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
7/16/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.39 9.01 5.78 59% 38% 64% 1.56 5.9 5.9 273.00 184.00 0.67 13,160 8,870 11,050 7,968 1,081 13,160 8,870 11,050 7,968 1,0817/17/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.50 8.30 5.62 62% 42% 68% 1.48 5.9 5.9 11,050 7,968 1,081 11,050 7,968 1,0817/18/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.10 8.50 5.60 55% 36% 66% 1.52 5.8 5.9 11,050 7,968 1,088 11,050 7,968 1,0887/19/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.41 7.83 6.03 57% 44% 77% 1.30 5.9 5.9 153.00 7,694 10,976 8,067 1,088 7,694 10,976 8,067 1,0887/20/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.57 7.58 6.03 59% 47% 80% 1.26 5.9 5.9 199.00 199.00 1.00 10,008 10,008 10,901 8,310 1,088 10,008 10,008 10,901 8,310 1,0887/21/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.50 8.55 6.10 57% 41% 71% 1.40 5.9 5.9 10,901 8,310 1,088 10,901 8,310 1,0887/22/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.48 7.11 5.96 58% 49% 84% 1.19 5.9 5.9 210.00 325.00 1.55 10,438 16,155 10,868 9,181 1,088 10,438 16,155 10,868 9,181 1,0887/23/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.50 7.40 5.92 59% 47% 80% 1.25 5.9 5.9 219.00 20.71 10,813 1,023 10,865 9,181 1,072 10,785 1,023 10,863 9,181 1,0727/24/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 7.80 5.75 63% 46% 74% 1.36 5.9 5.9 10,865 9,181 1,072 10,863 9,181 1,0727/25/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 7.59 5.63 60% 44% 74% 1.35 5.9 5.9 10,865 9,181 1,072 10,863 9,181 1,0727/26/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.39 8.09 6.07 56% 42% 75% 1.33 5.9 5.9 197.00 9,973 10,834 9,191 1,072 9,973 10,832 9,191 1,0727/27/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.45 8.12 6.06 57% 42% 75% 1.34 5.9 5.9 201.00 21.90 10,159 1,107 10,792 9,191 1,079 10,159 1,107 10,790 9,191 1,0797/28/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.41 8.51 6.02 57% 40% 71% 1.41 5.9 5.9 234.00 11,748 10,848 9,191 1,079 11,748 10,847 9,191 1,0797/29/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.47 7.74 6.03 58% 45% 78% 1.28 5.9 5.9 233.00 11,718 10,913 9,191 1,079 11,718 10,911 9,191 1,0797/30/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.45 6.32 6.01 57% 55% 95% AvgMax 1.05 5.9 5.9 207.00 259.00 1.25 10,376 12,982 10,883 10,142 1,079 10,376 12,982 10,882 10,142 1,0797/31/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.45 6.21 5.73 60% 56% 92% MinMaxAvgMax 1.08 5.9 5.9 10,883 10,142 1,079 10,882 10,142 1,079 8/1/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.30 8.39 5.71 58% 39% 68% 1.47 5.9 5.9 11,007 10,142 1,092 11,005 10,142 1,0928/2/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.38 8.79 6.03 56% 38% 69% 1.46 5.9 6.0 188.00 9,455 10,792 10,400 1,092 9,455 10,791 10,400 1,0928/3/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.51 8.09 6.07 58% 43% 75% 1.33 5.9 6.0 235.00 228.00 0.97 11,897 11,542 10,853 10,543 1,092 11,897 11,542 10,852 10,543 1,0928/4/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.43 8.65 6.07 57% 40% 70% 1.43 5.9 6.0 10,853 10,543 1,092 10,852 10,543 1,0928/5/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 8.64 6.04 56% 39% 70% 1.43 5.9 6.0 248.00 280.00 1.13 12,493 14,105 10,940 10,938 1,092 12,493 14,105 10,938 10,938 1,0928/6/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.42 7.74 6.02 57% 44% 78% 1.29 5.9 6.0 21.08 1,058 10,848 11,181 1,085 1,058 10,847 11,181 1,0858/7/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.09 8.04 5.82 70% 51% 72% MinAvg 1.38 5.9 6.0 10,848 11,181 1,085 10,847 11,181 1,0858/8/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.38 9.52 5.86 58% 36% 62% 1.62 5.9 6.0 218.00 10,654 10,659 11,181 1,078 10,654 10,657 11,181 1,0788/9/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.30 8.70 6.21 53% 38% 71% 1.40 5.9 6.0 147.00 7,613 10,400 11,342 1,078 7,613 10,399 11,342 1,078 8/10/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.43 6.65 6.27 55% 52% 94% AvgMax 1.06 5.9 6.0 128.00 181.00 1.41 6,693 9,465 10,205 11,107 1,078 6,693 9,465 10,204 11,107 1,0788/11/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.33 6.65 6.30 53% 50% 95% AvgMax 1.06 6.0 6.0 10,205 11,107 1,078 10,204 11,107 1,0788/12/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.33 6.67 6.32 53% 50% 95% AvgMax 1.06 6.0 6.0 136.00 20.15 7,168 1,062 10,072 11,107 1,075 7,168 1,062 10,070 11,107 1,0758/13/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 8.20 6.03 56% 41% 74% 1.36 5.9 6.0 692.00 403.00 0.58 34,801 20,267 TSS 10,274 12,924 1,075 34,801 20,267 10,272 12,924 1,0758/14/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.30 8.60 5.93 56% 38% 69% 1.45 5.9 6.0 10,274 12,924 1,075 10,272 12,924 1,0758/15/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.26 8.59 6.09 54% 38% 71% 1.41 5.9 6.0 10,121 12,924 1,062 10,120 12,924 1,0628/16/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.45 7.28 6.34 54% 47% 87% AvgMax 1.15 6.0 6.1 168.00 8,883 9,870 13,503 1,062 8,883 9,868 13,503 1,0628/17/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.33 8.62 6.34 53% 39% 74% 1.36 6.0 6.1 404.00 200.00 0.50 21,362 10,575 TSS 9,870 13,137 1,062 21,362 10,575 9,868 13,137 1,0628/18/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.46 6.77 6.38 54% 51% 94% AvgMax 1.06 6.0 6.1 9,870 13,137 1,062 9,868 13,137 1,0628/19/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.41 8.18 6.40 53% 42% 78% 1.28 6.0 6.2 188.00 20.22 10,035 1,079 10,007 13,137 1,066 10,035 1,079 10,006 13,137 1,0668/20/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.42 9.28 6.42 53% 37% 69% 1.45 6.0 6.2 223.00 124.00 0.56 11,940 6,639 10,121 12,716 1,066 11,940 6,639 10,119 12,716 1,0668/21/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.41 10.19 6.31 54% 33% 62% 1.61 6.0 6.2 10,121 12,716 1,066 10,119 12,716 1,0668/22/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.41 9.02 6.35 54% 38% 70% 1.42 6.1 6.3 10,101 12,225 1,066 10,099 12,225 1,0668/23/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 6.94 6.45 52% 48% 93% AvgMax 1.08 6.1 6.4 154.00 8,284 9,943 12,225 1,077 8,284 9,943 12,225 1,0778/24/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.43 9.72 6.45 53% 35% 66% 1.51 6.1 6.4 171.00 9,199 9,899 12,225 1,077 9,199 9,899 12,225 1,0778/25/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.32 9.84 6.56 51% 34% 67% 1.50 6.1 6.4 9,899 12,225 1,077 9,899 12,225 1,0778/26/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.32 9.79 6.53 51% 34% 67% 1.50 6.2 6.4 184.00 21.18 10,021 1,153 9,902 12,225 1,092 10,021 1,153 9,902 12,225 1,0928/27/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.52 6.73 5.08 69% 52% 75% 1.32 6.1 6.2 259.00 10,973 9,950 12,225 1,088 10,973 9,950 12,225 1,0888/28/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.48 MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 0.00 6.1 6.2 9,838 12,225 1,088 9,838 12,225 1,0888/29/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.01 6.30 4.44 68% 48% 70% 1.42 6.0 5.9 9,712 12,225 1,088 9,712 12,225 1,0888/30/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.26 9.85 6.57 50% 33% 67% 1.50 6.1 5.9 160.00 8,767 9,605 12,099 1,088 8,767 9,605 12,099 1,0888/31/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.36 8.06 6.53 51% 42% 81% 1.23 6.1 6.0 182.00 9,912 9,624 12,099 1,088 9,844 9,620 12,099 1,088 9/1/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.26 7.68 6.50 50% 42% 85% 1.18 6.1 6.0 190.00 10,300 9,664 12,099 1,088 10,300 9,660 12,099 1,0889/2/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 6.39 6.68 50% 53% 105% AvgMax 0.96 6.1 5.9 202.00 20.19 11,254 1,125 9,770 12,099 1,096 11,254 1,125 9,766 12,099 1,0969/3/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.42 9.82 6.53 52% 35% 66% 1.50 6.1 5.9 221.00 12,036 9,778 12,210 1,096 12,036 9,774 12,210 1,0969/4/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.38 10.09 6.28 54% 33% 62% 1.61 6.2 6.1 9,778 12,210 1,096 9,774 12,210 1,0969/5/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.30 9.57 5.96 55% 34% 62% 1.61 6.2 6.1 9,608 11,737 1,096 9,604 11,737 1,0969/6/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.16 9.46 7.93 40% 33% 84% MinAvg 1.19 6.2 6.4 9,608 11,737 1,105 9,604 11,737 1,1059/7/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.36 6.77 4.71 71% 50% 70% MinAvg 1.44 6.2 6.4 9,608 11,737 1,105 9,604 11,737 1,1059/8/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.29 9.35 7.19 46% 35% 77% 1.30 6.2 6.5 271.00 16,250 9,958 11,737 1,105 16,250 9,954 11,737 1,1059/9/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.34 9.39 6.89 48% 36% 73% 1.36 6.3 6.6 243.00 20.29 13,963 1,166 10,355 11,737 1,117 13,963 1,166 10,351 11,737 1,117 9/10/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.38 10.01 6.76 50% 34% 68% 1.48 6.3 6.6 217.00 197.00 0.91 12,234 11,107 10,701 12,147 1,117 12,234 11,107 10,697 12,147 1,1179/11/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.33 9.89 6.36 52% 34% 64% 1.56 6.3 6.6 10,701 12,147 1,117 10,697 12,147 1,1179/12/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.25 10.31 6.34 51% 32% 61% 1.63 6.3 6.6 10,937 12,147 1,131 10,932 12,147 1,1319/13/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.35 9.96 6.63 51% 34% 67% 1.50 6.3 6.7 186.00 10,285 10,896 9,440 1,131 10,285 10,892 9,440 1,1319/14/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.28 10.14 6.61 50% 32% 65% 1.53 6.3 6.7 10,896 9,440 1,131 10,892 9,440 1,1319/15/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 9.68 6.58 51% 35% 68% 1.47 6.4 6.7 269.00 14,762 11,123 9,440 1,131 14,762 11,119 9,440 1,1319/16/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.34 9.42 6.58 51% 35% 70% 1.43 6.4 6.6 22.74 1,248 11,263 9,440 1,154 1,248 11,259 9,440 1,154 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 8 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
300
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
9/17/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 2.23 10.24 6.57 34% 22% 64% MinAvgMinMax 1.56 6.4 6.6 224.00 256.00 1.14 12,274 14,027 11,323 10,591 1,154 12,274 14,027 11,319 10,591 1,1549/18/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 2.15 10.03 6.32 34% 21% 63% MinAvgMinMax 1.59 6.4 6.5 11,323 10,591 1,154 11,319 10,591 1,1549/19/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.37 9.80 6.44 52% 34% 66% 1.52 6.4 6.5 11,403 10,591 1,173 11,399 10,591 1,1739/20/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.31 9.72 6.66 50% 34% 69% 1.46 6.4 6.6 144.00 7,998 11,157 12,567 1,173 7,998 11,153 12,567 1,1739/21/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.38 9.45 6.65 51% 36% 70% 1.42 6.4 6.6 215.00 185.00 0.86 11,924 10,260 11,202 11,798 1,173 11,924 10,260 11,198 11,798 1,1739/22/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.36 9.38 6.62 51% 36% 71% 1.42 6.4 6.6 11,202 11,798 1,173 11,198 11,798 1,1739/23/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.33 9.41 6.54 51% 35% 70% 1.44 6.4 6.6 214.00 20.22 11,672 1,103 11,401 11,798 1,159 11,672 1,103 11,397 11,798 1,1599/24/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.20 6.50 52% 37% 71% 1.42 6.4 6.6 162.00 229.00 1.41 8,782 12,414 11,377 11,952 1,159 8,782 12,414 11,373 11,952 1,1599/25/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.30 6.22 55% 37% 67% 1.50 6.4 6.5 11,377 11,952 1,159 11,373 11,952 1,1599/26/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.31 8.79 6.21 53% 38% 71% 1.42 6.4 6.5 11,462 11,952 1,160 11,457 11,952 1,1609/27/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.20 6.54 52% 37% 71% 1.41 6.4 6.5 192.00 10,472 11,430 11,952 1,160 10,339 11,418 11,952 1,1609/28/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.38 9.57 6.54 52% 35% 68% 1.46 6.4 6.5 236.00 194.00 0.82 12,872 10,581 11,515 11,678 1,160 12,872 10,581 11,503 11,678 1,1609/29/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.41 9.52 6.53 52% 36% 69% 1.46 6.5 6.5 11,515 11,678 1,160 11,503 11,678 1,1609/30/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.35 9.73 6.69 50% 34% 69% 1.45 6.5 6.5 23.91 1,334 11,687 11,678 1,195 1,334 11,674 11,678 1,19510/1/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.41 9.74 6.44 53% 35% 66% 1.51 6.5 6.5 263.00 14,126 11,950 11,678 1,195 14,126 11,942 11,678 1,19510/2/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.31 9.77 6.24 53% 34% 64% 1.57 6.5 6.4 12,060 11,678 1,195 12,051 11,678 1,19510/3/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.30 9.80 6.36 52% 34% 65% 1.54 6.5 6.4 12,118 11,678 1,213 12,108 11,678 1,21310/4/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.30 9.40 6.78 49% 35% 72% 1.39 6.5 6.5 181.00 10,235 11,989 11,678 1,213 10,235 11,980 11,678 1,21310/5/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.40 7.71 44% 36% 82% 1.22 6.6 6.7 225.00 14,468 12,155 11,678 1,213 14,468 12,146 11,678 1,21310/6/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.30 9.30 6.81 48% 35% 73% 1.37 6.6 6.7 12,155 11,678 1,213 12,146 11,678 1,21310/7/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.40 6.72 51% 36% 71% 1.40 6.6 6.7 212.00 17.69 11,881 991 12,137 11,678 1,168 11,881 991 12,129 11,678 1,16810/8/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.30 9.30 6.65 50% 35% 72% 1.40 6.6 6.7 216.00 211.00 0.98 11,980 11,702 12,128 11,682 1,168 11,980 11,702 12,120 11,682 1,16810/9/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.39 9.48 6.40 53% 36% 68% 1.48 6.6 6.7 11,871 11,682 1,168 11,862 11,682 1,168 10/10/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.48 9.37 5.94 59% 37% 63% 1.58 6.6 6.7 11,731 11,682 1,169 11,722 11,682 1,16910/11/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.41 9.36 6.70 51% 36% 72% 1.40 6.6 6.7 191.00 25.65 10,673 1,433 11,627 11,797 1,222 10,673 1,433 11,618 11,797 1,22210/12/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.44 9.28 6.69 51% 37% 72% 1.39 6.6 6.7 198.00 232.00 1.17 11,047 12,944 11,591 11,988 1,222 11,047 12,944 11,582 11,988 1,22210/13/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.43 9.29 6.70 51% 37% 72% 1.39 6.6 6.6 11,591 11,988 1,222 11,582 11,988 1,22210/14/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.48 9.40 6.74 52% 37% 72% 1.39 6.6 6.6 230.00 12,929 11,756 11,988 1,222 12,929 11,748 11,988 1,22210/15/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.41 9.40 6.66 51% 36% 71% 1.41 6.6 6.6 256.00 14,219 11,901 11,988 1,222 14,219 11,893 11,988 1,22210/16/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.34 9.97 6.43 52% 34% 64% 1.55 6.6 6.5 11,722 11,988 1,222 11,714 11,988 1,22210/17/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.39 10.56 6.66 51% 32% 63% 1.59 6.6 6.6 11,722 11,988 1,215 11,714 11,988 1,21510/18/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.86 6.85 50% 34% 69% 1.44 6.6 6.7 219.00 12,511 11,737 11,580 1,215 12,511 11,729 11,580 1,21510/19/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.35 10.37 6.76 50% 32% 65% 1.53 6.6 6.7 246.00 230.00 0.93 13,869 12,967 11,862 11,812 1,215 13,869 12,967 11,854 11,812 1,21510/20/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 9.83 6.74 50% 34% 69% 1.46 6.6 6.7 11,862 11,812 1,215 11,854 11,812 1,21510/21/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.39 9.98 7.30 46% 34% 73% 1.37 6.6 6.8 261.00 23.63 15,890 1,439 12,327 11,812 1,260 15,890 1,439 12,319 11,812 1,26010/22/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.41 9.97 6.64 51% 34% 67% 1.50 6.6 6.8 245.00 225.00 0.92 13,568 12,460 12,423 12,178 1,260 13,568 12,460 12,415 12,178 1,26010/23/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.50 11.07 6.91 51% 32% 62% 1.60 6.6 6.8 12,423 12,178 1,260 12,415 12,178 1,26010/24/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.51 12.87 8.39 42% 27% 65% MinAvg 1.53 6.6 6.8 12,470 12,178 1,299 12,462 12,178 1,29910/25/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.66 11.32 7.71 47% 32% 68% 1.47 6.7 7.0 12,716 12,131 1,299 12,707 12,131 1,29910/26/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.54 10.45 7.26 49% 34% 69% 1.44 6.7 7.0 199.00 201.00 1.01 12,049 12,170 12,674 12,138 1,299 12,049 12,170 12,666 12,138 1,29910/27/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.44 10.69 7.41 46% 32% 69% 1.44 6.8 7.1 12,674 12,138 1,299 12,666 12,138 1,29910/28/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.44 10.23 7.01 49% 34% 69% 1.46 6.8 7.2 242.00 26.57 14,148 1,553 12,904 12,138 1,350 14,148 1,553 12,904 12,138 1,35010/29/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.58 10.23 7.21 50% 35% 70% 1.42 6.8 7.2 177.00 10,643 12,765 12,449 1,350 10,643 12,765 12,449 1,35010/30/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.64 10.33 7.22 50% 35% 70% 1.43 6.8 7.2 12,765 12,449 1,350 12,765 12,449 1,35010/31/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.43 10.97 6.84 50% 31% 62% 1.60 6.8 7.2 12,765 12,449 1,354 12,765 12,449 1,354 11/1/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.99 6.90 49% 34% 69% 1.45 6.8 7.2 138.00 7,941 12,378 12,449 1,354 7,941 12,378 12,449 1,35411/2/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.38 9.95 6.85 49% 34% 69% 1.45 6.9 7.1 238.00 200.00 0.84 13,597 11,426 12,450 12,278 1,354 13,597 11,426 12,450 12,278 1,35411/3/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.44 9.81 6.80 51% 35% 69% 1.44 6.9 7.0 12,450 12,278 1,354 12,450 12,278 1,35411/4/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.42 10.08 6.77 51% 34% 67% 1.49 6.9 7.0 224.00 25.23 12,647 1,425 12,592 12,278 1,368 12,647 1,425 12,592 12,278 1,36811/5/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.80 6.67 51% 35% 68% 1.47 6.8 6.9 236.00 208.00 0.88 13,128 11,571 12,513 12,177 1,368 13,128 11,571 12,513 12,177 1,36811/6/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.80 7.73 44% 35% 79% 1.27 6.9 7.0 12,513 12,177 1,368 12,513 12,177 1,36811/7/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.58 10.83 7.54 47% 33% 70% 1.44 6.9 7.0 12,552 12,177 1,462 12,552 12,177 1,46211/8/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.49 11.37 7.41 47% 31% 65% 1.53 6.9 7.1 209.00 20.30 12,916 1,255 12,611 12,256 1,421 12,916 1,255 12,611 12,256 1,42111/9/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.49 11.03 7.18 49% 32% 65% 1.54 6.9 7.1 213.00 177.00 0.83 12,755 10,599 12,619 12,020 1,421 12,755 10,599 12,619 12,020 1,421 11/10/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.43 10.44 6.80 50% 33% 65% 1.54 7.0 7.1 12,619 12,020 1,421 12,619 12,020 1,42111/11/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.31 10.10 6.81 49% 33% 67% 1.48 7.0 7.1 12,741 12,020 1,418 12,741 12,020 1,41811/12/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.41 6.39 6.57 52% 53% 103% AvgMax 0.97 7.0 7.2 224.00 12,274 12,818 11,865 1,418 12,274 12,818 11,865 1,41811/13/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.47 10.34 6.37 54% 34% 62% 1.62 7.0 7.1 12,818 11,865 1,418 12,818 11,865 1,41811/14/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.31 10.38 6.46 51% 32% 62% 1.61 7.0 6.9 12,810 11,865 1,418 12,810 11,865 1,41811/15/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 10.16 6.49 52% 33% 64% 1.57 7.0 6.8 201.00 10,879 12,588 11,865 1,418 10,879 12,588 11,865 1,41811/16/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.40 6.48 52% 36% 69% 1.45 7.0 6.7 12,588 11,865 1,418 12,588 11,865 1,41811/17/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.40 6.56 52% 36% 70% 1.43 7.0 6.6 239.00 221.00 0.92 13,076 12,091 12,618 11,898 1,418 13,076 12,091 12,618 11,898 1,41811/18/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.70 6.60 52% 35% 68% 1.47 6.9 6.5 234.00 12,880 12,641 11,898 1,418 11,615 12,562 11,898 1,418 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 9 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
301
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
11/19/2010 FALSE TRUE TRUE 3.42 10.12 6.52 52% 34% 64% 1.55 6.9 6.5 212.00 11,528 12,495 11,719 1,418 11,528 12,416 11,719 1,41811/20/2010 FALSE TRUE TRUE 3.33 11.03 7.22 46% 30% 65% 1.53 7.0 6.6 12,495 11,719 1,418 12,416 11,719 1,41811/21/2010 FALSE TRUE FALSE 3.65 10.92 7.00 52% 33% 64% 1.56 6.9 6.7 12,269 11,719 1,411 12,184 11,719 1,41111/22/2010 FALSE TRUE FALSE 3.67 10.06 6.74 54% 36% 67% 1.49 6.9 6.7 197.00 19.16 11,074 1,077 12,102 11,571 1,327 11,074 1,077 12,018 11,571 1,32711/23/2010 FALSE TRUE FALSE 3.39 9.77 6.57 52% 35% 67% 1.49 6.9 6.7 198.00 10,849 12,024 11,571 1,327 10,849 11,945 11,571 1,32711/24/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.45 9.79 6.46 53% 35% 66% 1.52 6.9 6.7 200.00 211.00 1.06 10,775 11,368 11,951 11,537 1,327 10,775 11,368 11,876 11,537 1,32711/25/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.34 9.95 5.68 59% 34% 57% AvgMax 1.75 6.9 6.7 11,951 11,537 1,327 11,876 11,537 1,32711/26/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.34 9.13 5.87 57% 37% 64% 1.56 6.8 6.6 11,944 11,411 1,327 11,865 11,411 1,32711/27/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.53 10.60 6.65 53% 33% 63% 1.59 6.8 6.6 11,944 11,411 1,327 11,865 11,411 1,32711/28/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.43 10.50 6.75 51% 33% 64% 1.56 6.8 6.6 11,798 11,411 1,252 11,713 11,411 1,25211/29/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.44 9.83 6.85 50% 35% 70% 1.44 6.8 6.6 160.00 143.00 0.89 9,141 8,169 11,697 10,871 1,252 9,141 8,169 11,613 10,871 1,25211/30/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.53 10.24 6.89 51% 34% 67% 1.49 6.8 6.6 240.00 195.00 0.81 13,791 11,205 11,828 10,918 1,252 13,791 11,205 11,749 10,918 1,252 12/1/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.39 9.90 6.75 50% 34% 68% 1.47 6.8 6.6 11,828 10,918 1,252 11,749 10,918 1,25212/2/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.42 9.80 6.89 50% 35% 70% 1.42 6.8 6.7 267.00 26.30 15,343 1,511 12,291 10,918 1,317 15,343 1,511 12,212 10,918 1,31712/3/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.47 10.61 7.35 47% 33% 69% 1.44 6.8 6.8 264.00 200.00 0.76 16,183 12,260 12,452 11,038 1,317 16,183 12,260 12,373 11,038 1,31712/4/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.60 10.98 7.17 50% 33% 65% 1.53 6.8 6.9 12,452 11,038 1,317 12,373 11,038 1,31712/5/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.75 12.64 8.84 42% 30% 70% 1.43 6.9 7.2 12,439 11,038 1,281 12,355 11,038 1,28112/6/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 2.76 13.13 9.34 30% 21% 71% MinAvgMinMax 1.41 6.9 7.2 12,390 10,949 1,281 12,300 10,949 1,28112/7/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.12 11.76 7.90 52% 35% 67% 1.49 6.9 7.4 191.00 170.00 0.89 21.53 12,584 11,201 1,419 12,403 10,985 1,315 12,584 11,201 1,419 12,319 10,985 1,31512/8/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.04 11.60 8.27 49% 35% 71% 1.40 6.9 7.6 12,403 10,985 1,315 12,319 10,985 1,31512/9/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.97 11.84 8.10 49% 34% 68% 1.46 6.9 7.8 198.00 13,376 12,434 10,985 1,336 13,376 12,349 10,985 1,336 12/10/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.79 11.13 7.73 49% 34% 69% 1.44 7.0 7.9 164.00 196.00 1.20 10,573 12,636 12,288 11,276 1,336 10,573 12,636 12,204 11,276 1,33612/11/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 11.49 7.34 50% 32% 64% 1.57 7.0 7.9 12,288 11,276 1,336 12,204 11,276 1,33612/12/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.55 11.13 7.19 49% 32% 65% 1.55 7.0 7.9 12,288 11,276 1,336 12,204 11,276 1,33612/13/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.59 10.34 7.19 50% 35% 70% 1.44 7.0 7.7 139.00 8,335 12,026 11,276 1,336 8,335 11,941 11,276 1,33612/14/2010 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.71 10.68 7.54 49% 35% 71% 1.42 7.0 7.7 186.00 206.00 1.11 11,696 12,954 12,005 11,485 1,336 11,696 12,954 11,926 11,485 1,33612/15/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.58 10.68 7.40 48% 34% 69% 1.44 7.1 7.6 12,005 11,485 1,336 11,926 11,485 1,33612/16/2010 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.54 10.34 7.23 49% 34% 70% 1.43 7.1 7.5 24.16 1,457 12,080 11,485 1,366 1,457 11,996 11,485 1,36612/17/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.51 10.50 7.49 47% 33% 71% 1.40 7.1 7.4 211.00 13,180 12,149 11,485 1,366 13,180 12,070 11,485 1,36612/18/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.92 12.33 7.92 49% 32% 64% 1.56 7.2 7.4 12,087 11,399 1,366 12,003 11,399 1,36612/19/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.05 13.04 8.33 49% 31% 64% 1.57 7.2 7.5 12,031 11,399 1,366 12,031 11,399 1,36612/20/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 6.39 10.70 8.30 77% 60% 78% MinAvgMinMax 1.29 7.3 7.6 150.00 10,383 11,949 11,399 1,366 10,383 11,949 11,399 1,36612/21/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 6.30 11.65 8.95 70% 54% 77% MinAvg 1.30 7.3 7.7 151.00 9.85 11,271 735 11,904 11,399 1,240 11,271 735 11,904 11,399 1,24012/22/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 6.39 14.34 9.90 65% 45% 69% 1.45 7.4 8.0 145.00 143.00 0.99 11,972 11,807 11,908 11,450 1,240 11,972 11,807 11,908 11,450 1,24012/23/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 5.87 13.90 8.49 69% 42% 61% 1.64 7.4 8.2 11,964 11,450 1,280 11,964 11,450 1,28012/24/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.96 8.59 7.62 52% 46% 89% AvgMax 1.13 7.5 8.4 12,043 11,450 1,280 12,043 11,450 1,28012/25/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.75 8.74 8.33 45% 43% 95% AvgMax 1.05 7.5 8.7 12,141 11,462 1,280 12,141 11,462 1,28012/26/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.40 12.50 8.80 50% 35% 70% 1.42 7.6 8.9 12,141 11,462 1,280 12,141 11,462 1,28012/27/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.90 8.80 8.46 58% 56% 96% MinMaxAvgMax 1.04 7.6 9.1 139.00 9,807 11,974 11,462 1,280 9,383 11,944 11,462 1,28012/28/2010 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.90 15.30 9.69 40% 25% 63% MinAvg 1.58 7.7 9.1 152.00 12,284 11,995 11,462 1,280 12,284 11,966 11,462 1,28012/29/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 6.70 14.10 10.07 67% 48% 71% 1.40 7.8 9.3 154.00 143.00 0.93 12,934 12,010 12,053 11,530 1,280 12,934 12,010 12,027 11,530 1,28012/30/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.90 12.50 8.78 56% 39% 70% 1.42 7.9 9.0 150.00 10.68 10,984 782 12,168 12,010 1,181 10,984 782 12,142 12,010 1,18112/31/2010 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.91 12.58 7.82 63% 39% 62% 1.61 7.9 8.9 12,060 12,144 1,181 12,032 12,144 1,181 1/1/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.41 12.15 7.98 55% 36% 66% 1.52 8.0 8.7 12,060 12,144 1,181 12,032 12,144 1,1811/2/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.40 13.00 8.87 50% 34% 68% 1.47 8.1 8.7 11,826 12,144 1,098 11,796 12,144 1,0981/3/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.49 11.68 8.47 53% 38% 73% 1.38 8.1 8.7 168.00 11,867 11,518 12,121 1,098 11,867 11,487 12,121 1,0981/4/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.45 10.91 8.04 55% 41% 74% 1.36 8.2 8.6 175.00 17.18 11,734 1,152 11,532 12,121 1,109 11,734 1,152 11,504 12,121 1,1091/5/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.65 10.98 7.64 48% 33% 70% 1.44 8.1 8.5 185.00 11,788 11,548 12,121 1,109 11,788 11,522 12,121 1,1091/6/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.92 10.86 7.56 52% 36% 70% 1.44 8.1 8.1 174.00 200.00 1.15 10,971 12,610 11,514 12,203 1,109 10,971 12,610 11,489 12,203 1,1091/7/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.80 10.70 7.30 52% 36% 68% 1.47 8.1 8.0 162.00 9,863 11,354 12,403 1,032 9,863 11,329 12,403 1,0321/8/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.70 11.40 7.10 52% 32% 62% 1.61 8.0 7.9 11,354 12,403 1,032 11,329 12,403 1,0321/9/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.51 10.92 7.07 50% 32% 65% 1.54 8.0 7.8 11,228 12,403 1,032 11,201 12,403 1,032 1/10/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.55 10.21 7.07 50% 35% 69% 1.44 7.9 7.5 225.00 13,267 11,396 12,345 1,032 13,267 11,370 12,345 1,0321/11/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.65 10.23 7.02 52% 36% 69% 1.46 7.9 7.4 11,396 12,345 1,032 11,370 12,345 1,0321/12/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.90 10.10 6.99 56% 39% 69% 1.44 7.9 7.2 213.00 12,417 11,456 12,345 1,032 12,417 11,431 12,345 1,0321/13/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.87 10.97 7.60 51% 35% 69% 1.44 7.9 7.2 209.00 268.00 1.28 13,247 16,987 11,745 13,274 1,032 13,247 16,987 11,720 13,274 1,0321/14/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.96 10.34 7.27 54% 38% 70% 1.42 7.9 7.2 202.00 14.87 12,248 902 11,778 13,353 1,006 12,248 902 11,753 13,353 1,0061/15/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.67 11.25 7.08 52% 33% 63% 1.59 7.9 7.2 11,778 13,353 1,006 11,753 13,353 1,0061/16/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.58 10.69 6.86 52% 33% 64% 1.56 7.9 7.1 11,778 13,353 893 11,753 13,353 8931/17/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.57 11.19 7.28 49% 32% 65% 1.54 7.9 7.1 11,690 13,353 893 11,663 13,353 8931/18/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.54 10.16 7.15 50% 35% 70% 1.42 7.9 7.2 207.00 277.00 1.34 12,344 16,518 11,728 13,986 893 12,344 16,518 11,703 13,986 8931/19/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.63 10.08 6.95 52% 36% 69% 1.45 7.8 7.1 11,728 13,986 893 11,703 13,986 8931/20/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.61 10.00 6.91 52% 36% 69% 1.45 7.8 7.1 198.00 18.15 11,411 1,046 11,789 13,986 923 11,411 1,046 11,764 13,986 923 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 10 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
302
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
1/21/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.56 10.23 7.01 51% 35% 69% 1.46 7.7 7.1 210.00 257.00 1.22 12,277 15,025 11,848 14,159 970 12,277 15,025 11,823 14,159 9701/22/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.56 10.76 6.94 51% 33% 64% 1.55 7.6 7.0 11,840 14,630 970 11,814 14,630 9701/23/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.62 10.97 7.05 51% 33% 64% 1.56 7.6 7.0 11,840 14,630 970 11,814 14,630 9701/24/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.44 10.77 7.10 48% 32% 66% 1.52 7.6 7.0 206.00 12,198 11,861 14,630 970 12,198 11,836 14,630 9701/25/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.58 10.95 7.01 51% 33% 64% 1.56 7.5 7.0 185.00 228.00 1.23 10,816 13,330 11,803 14,413 970 10,816 13,330 11,780 14,413 9701/26/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.57 10.71 7.05 51% 33% 66% 1.52 7.5 7.0 11,803 14,413 970 11,780 14,413 9701/27/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.46 10.50 6.94 50% 33% 66% 1.51 7.5 7.0 24.15 1,398 11,921 14,413 1,056 1,398 11,921 14,413 1,0561/28/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.50 10.55 6.97 50% 33% 66% 1.51 7.5 7.0 238.00 283.00 1.19 13,835 16,451 12,012 14,704 1,056 13,835 16,451 12,012 14,704 1,0561/29/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.50 10.73 6.97 50% 33% 65% 1.54 7.4 7.0 11,954 15,153 1,056 11,954 15,153 1,0561/30/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.50 10.60 7.06 50% 33% 67% 1.50 7.3 7.0 12,019 15,153 1,124 12,019 15,153 1,1241/31/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.60 11.20 7.11 51% 32% 63% 1.58 7.3 7.0 176.00 10,436 11,920 15,153 1,124 10,436 11,920 15,153 1,124 2/1/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.60 11.00 7.03 51% 33% 64% 1.56 7.2 7.0 200.00 286.00 1.43 11,726 16,768 11,909 15,384 1,124 11,726 16,768 11,909 15,384 1,1242/2/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.50 7.50 6.96 50% 47% 93% AvgMax 1.08 7.2 7.0 11,909 15,384 1,124 11,909 15,384 1,1242/3/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 10.60 7.12 52% 35% 67% 1.49 7.1 7.0 255.00 17.30 15,142 1,027 12,101 15,384 1,105 15,142 1,027 12,101 15,384 1,1052/4/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.60 11.85 6.75 53% 30% 57% AvgMax 1.76 7.1 7.0 297.00 344.00 1.16 16,720 19,365 12,394 15,882 1,093 16,720 19,365 12,394 15,882 1,0932/5/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.44 10.72 6.63 52% 32% 62% 1.62 7.1 7.0 12,432 15,882 1,093 12,432 15,882 1,0932/6/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.34 7.56 6.49 51% 44% 86% AvgMax 1.16 7.1 7.0 12,530 16,349 1,093 12,530 16,349 1,0932/7/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.34 6.63 6.63 50% 50% 100% AvgMax 1.00 7.0 7.0 227.00 12,552 12,709 16,349 1,093 12,552 12,709 16,349 1,0932/8/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.38 6.92 6.67 51% 49% 96% AvgMax 1.04 7.0 6.9 200.00 11,126 12,610 16,349 1,093 11,126 12,610 16,349 1,0932/9/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.33 6.67 6.54 51% 50% 98% AvgMax 1.02 7.0 6.9 220.00 276.00 1.25 12,000 15,054 12,574 16,187 1,093 12,000 15,054 12,574 16,187 1,093 2/10/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.35 6.44 6.37 53% 52% 99% AvgMax 1.01 7.0 6.9 21.73 1,154 12,531 16,187 1,105 1,154 12,531 16,187 1,1052/11/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.46 9.88 6.42 54% 35% 65% 1.54 7.0 6.5 209.00 255.00 1.22 11,190 13,653 12,452 15,906 1,105 11,190 13,653 12,452 15,906 1,1052/12/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.55 9.39 6.38 56% 38% 68% 1.47 7.0 6.5 12,454 15,906 1,105 12,454 15,906 1,1052/13/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.31 9.72 6.41 52% 34% 66% 1.52 6.9 6.4 12,401 15,771 1,105 12,401 15,771 1,1052/14/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.52 9.58 6.97 51% 37% 73% 1.37 6.9 6.5 222.00 12,905 12,445 15,771 1,156 12,905 12,445 15,771 1,1562/15/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.49 11.06 7.52 46% 32% 68% 1.47 7.0 6.7 217.00 285.00 1.31 13,610 17,874 12,518 16,004 1,156 13,610 17,874 12,518 16,004 1,1562/16/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.88 11.71 8.41 46% 33% 72% 1.39 7.0 7.0 12,518 16,004 1,156 12,518 16,004 1,1562/17/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.24 13.82 10.04 42% 31% 73% 1.38 7.1 7.5 209.00 16.75 17,500 1,403 12,811 16,004 1,206 17,500 1,403 12,811 16,004 1,2062/18/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.21 9.76 9.50 55% 53% 97% AvgMax 1.03 7.1 7.5 234.00 237.00 1.01 18,540 18,778 13,175 16,255 1,206 18,540 18,778 13,175 16,255 1,2062/19/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.71 11.53 9.59 49% 41% 83% 1.20 7.2 7.9 13,175 16,255 1,206 13,175 16,255 1,2062/20/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.43 9.76 8.46 52% 45% 87% AvgMax 1.15 7.3 8.2 13,286 16,255 1,246 13,286 16,255 1,2462/21/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.34 12.56 8.55 62% 43% 68% 1.47 7.3 8.5 13,353 16,409 1,246 13,353 16,409 1,2462/22/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.65 10.23 8.05 58% 45% 79% 1.27 7.4 8.7 181.00 224.00 1.24 12,152 15,039 13,278 16,257 1,246 12,152 15,039 13,278 16,257 1,2462/23/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.47 10.24 7.82 57% 44% 76% 1.31 7.4 8.7 13,278 16,257 1,246 13,278 16,257 1,2462/24/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.47 9.86 7.76 58% 45% 79% 1.27 7.4 8.6 190.00 17.07 12,296 1,105 13,284 16,257 1,217 12,296 1,105 13,284 16,257 1,2172/25/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.95 13.42 9.38 42% 29% 70% MinAvg 1.43 7.5 8.4 114.00 154.00 1.35 8,918 12,047 13,165 16,114 1,217 8,918 12,047 13,165 16,114 1,2172/26/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.19 12.26 8.45 50% 34% 69% 1.45 7.5 8.4 13,165 16,114 1,217 13,165 16,114 1,2172/27/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.36 11.36 8.09 66% 47% 71% 1.40 7.6 8.1 13,165 16,114 1,172 13,165 16,114 1,1722/28/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.82 8.49 7.88 48% 45% 93% AvgMax 1.08 7.6 8.1 171.00 11,238 13,003 16,072 1,172 11,238 13,003 16,072 1,172 3/1/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.56 11.26 7.83 45% 32% 70% 1.44 7.7 8.0 174.00 249.00 1.43 11,363 16,260 12,907 16,093 1,172 11,363 16,260 12,907 16,093 1,1723/2/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.80 12.05 8.70 44% 32% 72% 1.39 7.7 8.1 12,907 16,093 1,172 12,907 16,093 1,1723/3/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.16 11.49 8.44 49% 36% 73% 1.36 7.8 8.2 210.00 14,782 13,162 16,093 1,172 14,782 13,162 16,093 1,1723/4/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.12 10.84 8.17 50% 38% 75% 1.33 7.9 8.3 180.00 259.00 1.44 22.79 12,265 17,648 1,553 13,194 16,191 1,248 12,265 17,648 1,553 13,194 16,191 1,2483/5/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.04 11.57 7.85 51% 35% 68% 1.47 7.9 8.2 13,194 16,191 1,248 13,194 16,191 1,2483/6/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.30 12.83 8.87 48% 34% 69% 1.45 8.0 8.3 13,072 16,191 1,304 13,072 16,191 1,3043/7/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.74 12.40 8.87 53% 38% 72% 1.40 8.0 8.4 114.00 8,433 12,554 15,794 1,304 8,433 12,554 15,794 1,3043/8/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.25 11.65 8.21 52% 36% 70% 1.42 8.1 8.4 177.00 254.00 1.44 12,119 17,392 12,529 15,972 1,304 12,119 17,392 12,529 15,972 1,3043/9/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.99 11.46 7.92 50% 35% 69% 1.45 8.1 8.4 12,529 15,972 1,304 12,529 15,972 1,304 3/10/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.87 11.68 8.00 48% 33% 68% 1.46 8.1 8.3 233.00 16.69 15,546 1,114 12,705 15,972 1,266 15,546 1,114 12,705 15,972 1,2663/11/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.97 10.96 7.78 51% 36% 71% 1.41 8.0 8.2 199.00 285.00 1.43 12,912 18,492 12,810 16,224 1,266 12,912 18,492 12,810 16,224 1,2663/12/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.86 10.87 7.15 54% 36% 66% 1.52 8.0 8.1 12,861 16,354 1,266 12,861 16,354 1,2663/13/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.90 10.90 7.00 56% 36% 64% 1.56 8.0 8.0 12,861 16,354 1,293 12,861 16,354 1,2933/14/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.10 11.00 7.21 57% 37% 66% 1.53 8.0 7.8 162.00 9,741 12,770 16,691 1,293 9,741 12,770 16,691 1,2933/15/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.40 7.90 7.66 57% 56% 97% MinMaxAvgMax 1.03 8.1 7.6 237.00 15,141 12,909 16,691 1,293 15,141 12,909 16,691 1,2933/16/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.10 8.50 7.95 52% 48% 94% AvgMax 1.07 8.1 7.5 228.00 316.00 1.39 15,117 20,952 BOD 13,032 16,691 1,293 15,117 20,952 13,032 16,691 1,2933/17/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.00 9.00 7.55 53% 44% 84% 1.19 8.2 7.4 217.00 14.21 13,664 895 13,074 16,691 1,214 13,664 895 13,074 16,691 1,2143/18/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 4.13 12.86 9.08 45% 32% 71% 1.42 8.2 7.6 198.00 230.00 1.16 14,994 17,417 13,151 16,634 1,214 14,994 17,417 13,151 16,634 1,2143/19/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 4.78 12.74 9.88 48% 38% 78% 1.29 8.3 8.0 13,151 16,634 1,214 13,151 16,634 1,2143/20/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 6.94 11.37 10.49 66% 61% 92% MinMaxAvgMax 1.08 8.2 8.1 12,895 16,634 1,166 12,895 16,634 1,1663/21/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 5.69 10.12 9.91 57% 56% 98% MinMaxAvgMax 1.02 8.2 8.4 170.00 14,050 12,631 16,328 1,166 14,050 12,631 16,328 1,1663/22/2011 TRUE FALSE TRUE 5.42 9.60 9.49 57% 56% 99% MinMaxAvgMax 1.01 8.1 8.8 159.00 193.00 1.21 12,584 15,275 12,629 16,196 1,166 12,584 15,275 12,629 16,196 1,1663/23/2011 TRUE FALSE TRUE 5.84 10.56 10.02 58% 55% 95% MinMaxAvgMax 1.05 8.1 8.8 12,629 16,196 1,166 12,629 16,196 1,1663/24/2011 TRUE FALSE TRUE 5.66 12.07 11.21 50% 47% 93% AvgMax 1.08 8.1 8.8 100.00 11.17 9,349 1,044 12,456 16,196 1,142 9,349 1,044 12,456 16,196 1,142 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 11 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
303
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
3/25/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 6.71 13.16 10.36 65% 51% 79% 1.27 8.2 9.8 152.00 177.00 1.16 13,133 15,293 12,508 16,228 1,142 13,133 15,293 12,508 16,228 1,1423/26/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 6.70 15.37 11.51 58% 44% 75% 1.34 8.4 10.6 12,508 16,228 1,142 12,508 16,228 1,1423/27/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 5.57 14.27 10.27 54% 39% 72% 1.39 8.5 10.7 12,519 16,228 1,151 12,519 16,228 1,1513/28/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 5.61 14.10 9.67 58% 40% 69% 1.46 8.6 10.5 161.00 12,984 12,745 16,825 1,151 12,984 12,745 16,825 1,1513/29/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.98 12.31 9.13 55% 40% 74% 1.35 8.6 10.2 167.00 12,716 12,744 16,825 1,151 12,716 12,744 16,825 1,1513/30/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.74 12.13 8.98 53% 39% 74% 1.35 8.6 10.0 12,744 16,825 1,151 12,744 16,825 1,1513/31/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.60 11.40 8.78 52% 40% 77% 1.30 8.6 9.8 182.00 12.85 13,327 941 12,854 16,825 1,109 13,327 941 12,854 16,825 1,109 4/1/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.66 8.91 8.43 55% 52% 95% AvgMax 1.06 8.7 9.8 186.00 229.00 1.23 13,077 16,100 12,944 16,803 1,109 13,077 16,100 12,944 16,803 1,1094/2/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.34 9.40 8.07 54% 46% 86% AvgMax 1.16 8.7 9.7 12,944 16,803 1,109 12,944 16,803 1,1094/3/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.17 9.52 7.93 53% 44% 83% 1.20 8.6 9.1 12,842 16,803 1,109 12,842 16,803 1,1094/4/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.10 10.32 7.86 52% 40% 76% 1.31 8.6 8.7 174.00 11,406 12,794 16,662 998 11,406 12,794 16,662 9984/5/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.47 9.99 7.72 58% 45% 77% 1.29 8.6 8.4 168.00 190.00 1.13 14.63 10,817 12,233 942 12,690 16,029 987 10,817 12,233 942 12,690 16,029 9874/6/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.44 9.93 7.69 58% 45% 77% 1.29 8.6 8.2 12,690 16,029 987 12,690 16,029 9874/7/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.33 9.83 7.62 57% 44% 78% 1.29 8.5 7.9 12,927 16,029 987 12,927 16,029 9874/8/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.21 10.53 7.48 43% 30% 71% 1.41 8.5 7.7 189.00 198.00 1.05 11,790 12,352 12,908 15,309 987 11,790 12,352 12,908 15,309 9874/9/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.59 11.04 7.26 49% 33% 66% 1.52 8.5 7.7 12,908 15,309 987 12,908 15,309 987 4/10/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.00 9.50 7.19 56% 42% 76% 1.32 8.4 7.6 12,753 15,309 955 12,753 15,309 9554/11/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.10 9.26 7.26 56% 44% 78% 1.28 8.4 7.5 154.00 9,324 12,542 14,778 955 9,324 12,542 14,778 9554/12/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.20 9.26 7.26 58% 45% 78% 1.28 8.4 7.4 206.00 210.00 1.02 12,473 12,715 12,538 14,484 955 12,473 12,715 12,538 14,484 9554/13/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.30 9.12 7.20 60% 47% 79% 1.27 8.4 7.4 12,538 14,484 955 12,538 14,484 9554/14/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.45 8.75 7.16 62% 51% 82% 1.22 8.4 7.3 20.61 1,231 12,703 14,484 1,011 1,231 12,703 14,484 1,0114/15/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.80 9.40 7.00 54% 40% 74% 1.34 8.3 7.2 220.00 204.00 0.93 12,844 11,910 12,568 14,162 1,011 12,844 11,910 12,568 14,162 1,0114/16/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.80 9.60 6.76 56% 40% 70% 1.42 8.3 7.1 12,408 14,162 1,011 12,408 14,162 1,0114/17/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.88 8.93 6.92 56% 43% 77% 1.29 8.2 7.1 12,325 14,162 1,039 12,325 14,162 1,0394/18/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.88 9.57 7.19 54% 41% 75% 1.33 8.2 7.1 226.00 13,552 12,229 13,697 1,039 13,552 12,229 13,697 1,0394/19/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.79 9.07 6.99 54% 42% 77% 1.30 8.0 7.1 213.00 219.00 1.03 12,417 12,767 12,240 13,581 1,039 12,417 12,767 12,240 13,581 1,0394/20/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.90 9.10 7.04 55% 43% 77% 1.29 8.0 7.0 12,240 13,581 1,039 12,240 13,581 1,0394/21/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.90 9.20 6.92 56% 42% 75% 1.33 8.0 7.0 22.32 1,288 12,120 13,581 1,089 1,288 12,120 13,581 1,0894/22/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.15 8.66 6.91 60% 48% 80% 1.25 7.9 7.0 238.00 259.00 1.09 13,716 14,926 12,195 13,537 1,089 13,716 14,926 12,195 13,537 1,0894/23/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.99 9.29 6.61 60% 43% 71% 1.41 7.9 6.9 12,195 13,537 1,089 12,195 13,537 1,0894/24/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 8.80 6.02 68% MinAvgMinMax 1.46 7.9 6.9 12,398 13,537 1,100 12,398 13,537 1,1004/25/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.80 8.80 7.15 53% 43% 81% 1.23 7.8 7.0 245.00 14,610 12,504 13,286 1,100 14,610 12,504 13,286 1,1004/26/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.80 9.00 6.81 56% 42% 76% 1.32 7.6 6.9 270.00 233.00 0.86 15,335 13,233 12,693 13,280 1,100 15,335 13,233 12,693 13,280 1,1004/27/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.90 9.50 6.77 58% 41% 71% 1.40 7.5 6.9 12,693 13,280 1,100 12,693 13,280 1,1004/28/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.90 9.50 6.72 58% 41% 71% 1.41 7.4 6.8 313.00 33.84 17,542 1,897 12,996 13,280 1,260 17,542 1,897 12,996 13,280 1,2604/29/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.67 13.92 6.79 54% 26% 49% AvgMax 2.05 7.3 6.8 300.00 313.00 1.04 16,989 17,725 13,281 13,773 1,260 16,989 17,725 13,281 13,773 1,2604/30/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.99 6.52 52% 34% 65% 1.53 7.2 6.8 13,281 13,773 1,260 13,281 13,773 1,260 5/1/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.66 11.41 6.50 56% 32% 57% AvgMax 1.76 7.2 6.8 13,278 13,773 1,339 13,278 13,773 1,3395/2/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.52 9.98 6.70 53% 35% 67% 1.49 7.1 6.8 225.00 12,573 13,242 13,483 1,339 12,573 13,242 13,483 1,3395/3/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.52 10.06 6.61 53% 35% 66% 1.52 7.1 6.7 226.00 225.00 1.00 12,459 12,404 13,190 13,363 1,339 12,459 12,404 13,190 13,363 1,3395/4/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.53 9.85 6.66 53% 36% 68% 1.48 7.1 6.7 13,190 13,363 1,339 13,190 13,363 1,3395/5/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.57 9.97 6.59 54% 36% 66% 1.51 7.0 6.6 237.00 22.45 13,026 1,234 13,298 13,363 1,318 13,026 1,234 13,298 13,363 1,3185/6/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.90 9.60 6.61 59% 41% 69% 1.45 7.0 6.6 231.00 221.00 0.96 12,734 12,183 13,426 13,357 1,412 12,734 12,183 13,426 13,357 1,4125/7/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.80 8.80 6.45 59% 43% 73% 1.36 6.9 6.6 13,426 13,357 1,412 13,426 13,357 1,4125/8/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.41 10.37 6.49 53% 33% 63% 1.60 6.9 6.6 13,426 13,357 1,412 13,426 13,357 1,4125/9/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.41 10.72 6.91 49% 32% 64% 1.55 6.9 6.6 275.00 15,848 13,696 13,483 1,412 15,848 13,696 13,483 1,412 5/10/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.45 11.01 6.72 51% 31% 61% 1.64 6.9 6.6 257.00 266.00 1.04 14,404 14,908 13,740 13,641 1,412 14,404 14,908 13,740 13,641 1,4125/11/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.57 9.72 6.71 53% 37% 69% 1.45 6.8 6.6 26.64 1,491 13,740 13,641 1,428 1,491 13,740 13,641 1,4285/12/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.61 9.82 6.68 54% 37% 68% 1.47 6.8 6.6 270.00 15,042 14,098 13,641 1,428 15,042 14,098 13,641 1,4285/13/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.66 10.55 6.61 55% 35% 63% 1.60 6.8 6.6 337.00 305.00 0.91 18,578 16,814 14,479 14,097 1,428 18,578 16,814 14,479 14,097 1,4285/14/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.57 9.67 6.49 55% 37% 67% 1.49 6.8 6.6 14,479 14,097 1,428 14,479 14,097 1,4285/15/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.88 9.57 6.75 57% 41% 71% 1.42 6.8 6.7 14,479 14,097 1,477 14,479 14,097 1,4775/16/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.68 9.01 7.14 52% 41% 79% 1.26 6.8 6.8 242.00 14,411 14,577 14,370 1,477 14,411 14,577 14,370 1,4775/17/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.15 9.92 7.67 54% 42% 77% 1.29 6.8 6.8 223.00 208.00 0.93 14,265 13,305 14,559 14,252 1,477 14,265 13,305 14,559 14,252 1,4775/18/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.95 9.63 7.35 54% 41% 76% 1.31 6.8 6.9 18.01 1,104 14,559 14,252 1,403 1,104 14,559 14,252 1,4035/19/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.93 9.30 7.12 55% 42% 77% 1.31 6.8 7.0 222.00 13,183 14,537 14,252 1,403 13,183 14,537 14,252 1,4035/20/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.78 9.01 6.90 55% 42% 77% 1.31 6.8 7.0 220.00 241.00 1.10 12,660 13,869 14,551 14,374 1,403 12,660 13,869 14,551 14,374 1,4035/21/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.78 9.57 6.71 56% 39% 70% 1.43 6.8 7.0 14,551 14,374 1,403 14,551 14,374 1,4035/22/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 3.69 9.34 6.66 55% 40% 71% 1.40 6.8 7.0 14,551 14,374 1,431 14,551 14,374 1,4315/23/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 3.92 8.41 6.89 57% 47% 82% 1.22 6.8 7.1 179.00 18.61 10,286 1,069 14,350 14,305 1,359 10,286 1,069 14,350 14,305 1,3595/24/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 3.76 8.77 6.88 55% 43% 78% 1.27 6.8 7.0 261.00 14,976 14,384 14,305 1,359 14,976 14,384 14,305 1,3595/25/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 4.31 10.89 8.47 51% 40% 78% 1.29 6.9 7.1 14,384 14,305 1,359 14,384 14,305 1,3595/26/2011 FALSE TRUE FALSE 6.20 8.19 7.78 80% 76% 95%MinAvgMinMaxAvgMax 1.05 6.8 7.1 169.00 159.00 0.94 10,966 10,317 14,182 13,862 1,359 10,966 10,317 14,182 13,862 1,359 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 12 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
304
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
5/27/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.12 8.84 7.03 59% 47% 80% 1.26 6.9 7.1 195.00 11,433 13,965 13,940 1,359 10,564 13,917 13,940 1,3595/28/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.97 9.17 6.77 59% 43% 74% 1.35 6.9 7.1 13,965 13,940 1,359 13,917 13,940 1,3595/29/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.91 8.89 6.44 61% 44% 72% 1.38 6.8 7.0 13,755 13,940 1,225 13,704 13,940 1,2255/30/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.73 9.54 6.56 57% 39% 69% 1.45 6.8 7.0 13,553 13,400 1,225 13,498 13,400 1,2255/31/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.61 8.59 6.69 54% 42% 78% 1.28 6.8 7.0 222.00 12,386 13,484 13,400 1,225 12,386 13,433 13,400 1,225 6/1/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.71 8.45 6.65 56% 44% 79% 1.27 6.8 6.9 197.00 190.00 0.96 10,926 10,538 13,342 13,042 1,225 10,926 10,538 13,294 13,042 1,2256/2/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.70 8.40 6.47 57% 44% 77% 1.30 6.8 6.7 249.00 13,436 13,390 13,042 1,225 13,436 13,342 13,042 1,2256/3/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.88 7.39 6.34 61% 53% 86% AvgMax 1.17 6.8 6.7 280.00 18.21 14,805 963 13,520 13,133 1,172 14,805 963 13,472 13,133 1,1726/4/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.63 8.50 6.37 57% 43% 75% 1.33 6.8 6.6 13,520 13,133 1,172 13,472 13,133 1,1726/5/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.70 8.60 6.36 58% 43% 74% 1.35 6.8 6.5 13,549 13,133 1,157 13,498 13,133 1,1576/6/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.80 8.40 6.61 57% 45% 79% 1.27 6.8 6.5 189.00 10,419 13,413 13,292 1,157 10,419 13,362 13,292 1,1576/7/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.70 8.50 6.59 56% 44% 78% 1.29 6.8 6.5 282.00 203.00 0.72 15,499 11,157 13,529 12,987 1,157 15,499 11,157 13,481 12,987 1,1576/8/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.00 8.10 6.51 61% 49% 80% 1.24 6.8 6.5 249.00 13,519 13,528 12,987 1,157 13,519 13,483 12,987 1,1576/9/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.90 8.00 6.38 61% 49% 80% 1.25 6.8 6.5 245.00 19.10 13,036 1,016 13,380 12,987 1,129 13,036 1,016 13,335 12,987 1,129 6/10/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.86 8.21 6.26 62% 47% 76% 1.31 6.8 6.4 204.00 243.00 1.19 10,651 12,687 13,183 12,669 1,129 10,651 12,687 13,137 12,669 1,1296/11/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.76 8.34 6.08 62% 45% 73% 1.37 6.8 6.4 13,183 12,669 1,038 13,137 12,669 1,0386/12/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.75 8.42 6.09 62% 45% 72% 1.38 6.7 6.4 13,080 12,669 1,038 13,031 12,669 1,0386/13/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.75 8.05 6.34 59% 47% 79% 1.27 6.7 6.4 235.00 12,426 12,738 11,979 1,038 12,426 12,690 11,979 1,0386/14/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.92 7.90 6.28 62% 50% 79% 1.26 6.7 6.3 234.00 218.00 0.93 12,256 11,418 12,712 11,899 1,038 12,256 11,418 12,667 11,899 1,0386/15/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.74 8.25 6.22 60% 45% 75% 1.33 6.7 6.3 12,712 11,899 1,038 12,667 11,899 1,0386/16/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.76 7.86 6.22 60% 48% 79% 1.26 6.7 6.2 272.00 21.93 14,110 1,138 12,697 11,899 1,058 14,110 1,138 12,651 11,899 1,0586/17/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.90 7.86 6.15 63% 50% 78% 1.28 6.6 6.2 239.00 218.00 0.91 12,259 11,181 12,591 11,595 1,058 12,259 11,181 12,545 11,595 1,0586/18/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.83 7.68 5.88 65% 50% 77% 1.31 6.6 6.2 12,591 11,595 1,047 12,545 11,595 1,0476/19/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.62 7.88 5.89 61% 46% 75% 1.34 6.5 6.1 12,558 11,595 1,047 12,510 11,595 1,0476/20/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.79 7.99 6.20 61% 47% 78% 1.29 6.5 6.1 291.00 21.83 15,047 1,129 12,691 11,216 1,063 15,047 1,129 12,643 11,216 1,0636/21/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.57 7.64 6.00 60% 47% 79% 1.27 6.5 6.1 242.00 230.00 0.95 12,110 11,509 12,660 11,258 1,063 12,110 11,509 12,614 11,258 1,0636/22/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.56 7.71 6.01 59% 46% 78% 1.28 6.5 6.1 12,660 11,258 1,063 12,614 11,258 1,0636/23/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.62 7.34 5.99 60% 49% 82% 1.23 6.4 6.0 252.00 12,589 12,781 11,258 1,061 12,589 12,736 11,258 1,0616/24/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.46 7.83 5.90 59% 44% 75% 1.33 6.4 6.0 244.00 12,006 12,625 11,258 1,061 11,066 12,530 11,258 1,0616/25/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.51 7.85 5.71 61% 45% 73% 1.37 6.3 5.9 12,625 11,258 1,061 12,530 11,258 1,0616/26/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.54 7.33 5.68 62% 48% 77% 1.29 6.3 5.9 12,717 11,415 1,061 12,617 11,415 1,0616/27/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.55 7.40 6.01 59% 48% 81% 1.23 6.2 5.9 238.00 11,929 12,745 11,415 1,061 11,929 12,693 11,415 1,0616/28/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.50 9.36 6.94 50% 37% 74% 1.35 6.2 6.0 308.00 216.00 0.70 17,827 12,502 13,012 11,570 1,061 17,827 12,502 12,963 11,570 1,0616/29/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.97 7.56 6.79 58% 53% 90% AvgMax 1.11 6.2 6.0 13,012 11,570 1,061 12,963 11,570 1,0616/30/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.96 7.53 6.39 62% 53% 85% 1.18 6.2 6.1 268.00 224.00 0.84 14,282 11,938 13,076 11,616 1,061 14,282 11,938 13,029 11,616 1,061 7/1/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.67 7.90 6.07 60% 46% 77% 1.30 6.2 6.1 217.00 18.68 10,985 946 13,006 11,616 1,038 10,985 946 12,959 11,616 1,0387/2/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.55 7.83 5.73 62% 45% 73% 1.37 6.2 6.1 13,115 11,770 1,038 13,066 11,770 1,0387/3/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.53 7.54 5.50 64% 47% 73% 1.37 6.2 6.0 13,098 11,770 1,038 13,045 11,770 1,0387/4/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.70 6.40 5.52 67% 58% 86% MinMaxAvgMax 1.16 6.2 6.1 12,997 11,770 1,057 12,942 11,770 1,0577/5/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.51 7.64 6.06 58% 46% 79% 1.26 6.1 6.1 243.00 163.00 0.67 12,281 8,238 12,957 11,329 1,057 12,281 8,238 12,905 11,329 1,0577/6/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.70 7.40 6.15 60% 50% 83% 1.20 6.1 6.0 12,957 11,329 1,057 12,905 11,329 1,0577/7/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.63 7.89 6.05 60% 46% 77% 1.30 6.1 6.0 250.00 17.36 12,614 876 13,079 11,329 1,021 12,614 876 13,027 11,329 1,0217/8/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.70 7.60 5.92 63% 49% 78% 1.28 6.1 5.9 214.00 191.00 0.89 10,566 9,430 12,805 11,113 1,021 10,566 9,430 12,753 11,113 1,0217/9/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 7.60 5.76 63% 47% 76% 1.32 6.1 5.9 12,763 11,113 1,021 12,708 11,113 1,021 7/10/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.45 7.91 5.83 59% 44% 74% 1.36 6.0 5.9 12,746 11,113 1,022 12,687 11,113 1,0227/11/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.47 8.73 6.12 57% 40% 70% 1.43 6.0 6.0 12,886 10,888 1,022 12,823 10,888 1,0227/12/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 8.77 6.14 55% 38% 70% 1.43 6.0 6.0 311.00 208.00 0.67 15,926 10,651 13,076 10,858 1,022 15,926 10,651 13,017 10,858 1,0227/13/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.32 8.92 6.11 54% 37% 68% 1.46 6.0 6.0 13,076 10,858 1,022 13,017 10,858 1,0227/14/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.38 8.91 6.07 56% 38% 68% 1.47 6.0 6.0 245.00 20.15 12,403 1,020 13,074 10,858 1,022 12,403 1,020 13,016 10,858 1,0227/15/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.83 7.48 5.97 64% 51% 80% 1.25 6.0 6.0 238.00 150.00 0.63 11,850 7,468 13,049 10,365 1,022 11,850 7,468 12,990 10,365 1,0227/16/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 7.71 5.76 63% 47% 75% 1.34 6.0 6.0 13,049 10,365 1,022 12,990 10,365 1,0227/17/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.50 7.40 5.75 61% 47% 78% 1.29 6.0 6.0 12,978 10,365 993 12,916 10,365 9937/18/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.45 7.30 6.06 57% 47% 83% 1.20 6.0 6.0 246.00 12,433 12,990 10,248 993 12,433 12,927 10,248 9937/19/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 7.60 6.06 59% 47% 80% 1.25 6.0 6.0 275.00 222.00 0.81 13,899 11,220 13,047 10,370 993 13,899 11,220 12,988 10,370 9937/20/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 7.40 5.98 60% 49% 81% 1.24 6.0 6.0 13,047 10,370 993 12,988 10,370 9937/21/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.50 7.60 6.01 58% 46% 79% 1.26 6.0 6.0 231.00 20.39 11,579 1,022 12,830 10,370 966 11,579 1,022 12,771 10,370 9667/22/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.33 8.89 5.93 56% 37% 67% 1.50 6.0 5.9 254.00 224.00 0.88 12,562 11,078 12,858 10,316 966 12,562 11,078 12,799 10,316 9667/23/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.30 8.80 5.70 58% 38% 65% 1.54 6.0 5.9 12,858 10,316 966 12,799 10,316 9667/24/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.50 7.60 5.70 61% 46% 75% 1.33 6.0 5.9 12,876 10,316 966 12,813 10,316 9667/25/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.31 8.64 6.00 55% 38% 69% 1.44 6.0 5.9 211.00 10,558 12,780 10,316 966 10,558 12,780 10,316 9667/26/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.30 8.30 5.96 55% 40% 72% 1.39 6.0 5.9 253.00 146.00 0.58 12,576 7,257 12,767 9,976 966 12,576 7,257 12,767 9,976 9667/27/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.58 7.38 6.00 60% 49% 81% 1.23 6.0 5.9 243.00 12,160 12,731 9,976 966 12,160 12,731 9,976 9667/28/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.55 7.30 5.99 59% 49% 82% 1.22 6.0 5.9 18.14 906 12,781 9,976 954 906 12,781 9,976 954 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 13 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
305
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
7/29/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 7.70 5.95 61% 47% 77% 1.29 6.0 5.9 272.00 204.00 0.75 13,497 10,123 12,511 9,712 954 13,497 10,123 12,511 9,712 9547/30/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.70 7.70 5.76 64% 48% 75% 1.34 5.9 5.9 12,511 9,712 954 12,511 9,712 9547/31/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.29 8.86 5.77 57% 37% 65% 1.54 5.9 5.9 12,393 9,433 954 12,393 9,433 954 8/1/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.36 9.04 6.02 56% 37% 67% 1.50 5.9 5.9 12,493 9,433 956 12,493 9,433 9568/2/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.33 8.70 6.04 55% 38% 69% 1.44 5.9 5.9 244.00 189.00 0.77 12,291 9,521 12,480 9,443 956 12,291 9,521 12,480 9,443 9568/3/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.37 8.61 6.01 56% 39% 70% 1.43 6.0 5.9 12,480 9,443 956 12,480 9,443 9568/4/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.38 8.86 6.07 56% 38% 69% 1.46 6.0 6.0 202.00 20.17 10,226 1,021 12,339 9,443 969 10,226 1,021 12,339 9,443 9698/5/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.61 7.58 5.98 60% 48% 79% 1.27 6.0 6.0 298.00 14,862 12,500 9,594 969 14,862 12,500 9,594 9698/6/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.70 7.83 5.86 63% 47% 75% 1.34 5.9 5.9 12,500 9,594 969 12,500 9,594 9698/7/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.70 7.60 5.81 64% 49% 76% 1.31 5.9 5.9 12,492 9,594 992 12,492 9,594 9928/8/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 7.50 6.09 59% 48% 81% 1.23 5.9 6.0 12,630 9,617 992 12,630 9,617 9928/9/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 8.90 6.23 58% 40% 70% 1.43 6.0 6.0 232.00 12,054 12,592 9,617 992 12,054 12,592 9,617 992 8/10/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 7.80 6.10 59% 46% 78% 1.28 6.0 6.0 300.00 15,262 12,759 9,617 992 15,262 12,759 9,617 9928/11/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 7.70 6.11 56% 44% 79% 1.26 6.0 6.0 221.00 19.09 11,262 973 12,671 9,617 988 11,262 973 12,671 9,617 9888/12/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 8.96 6.03 56% 37% 67% 1.49 6.0 6.0 303.00 206.00 0.68 15,238 10,360 12,630 9,575 988 15,238 10,360 12,630 9,575 9888/13/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.39 9.30 5.95 57% 36% 64% 1.56 6.0 6.0 12,630 9,575 988 12,630 9,575 9888/14/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.70 9.20 6.12 60% 40% 67% 1.50 6.0 6.1 12,644 9,575 981 12,644 9,575 9818/15/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.30 9.20 6.29 52% 36% 68% 1.46 6.0 6.1 12,697 9,926 981 12,697 9,926 9818/16/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 9.22 6.49 52% 37% 70% 1.42 6.0 6.2 309.00 16,725 12,949 9,926 981 16,725 12,949 9,926 9818/17/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 5.30 7.95 6.53 81% 67% 82% MinAvgMinMax 1.22 6.0 6.2 199.00 10,838 12,825 9,926 981 10,838 12,825 9,926 9818/18/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 4.01 7.88 6.64 60% 51% 84% 1.19 6.0 6.2 200.00 18.79 11,076 1,041 12,745 9,926 993 11,076 1,041 12,745 9,926 9938/19/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.80 8.40 6.68 57% 45% 80% 1.26 6.0 6.3 184.00 170.00 0.92 10,251 9,471 12,530 9,635 993 10,251 9,471 12,530 9,635 9938/20/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.70 8.60 6.51 57% 43% 76% 1.32 6.1 6.4 12,530 9,635 993 12,530 9,635 9938/21/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.38 10.58 6.68 51% 32% 63% 1.58 6.1 6.5 12,590 9,635 985 12,590 9,635 9858/22/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 10.50 6.78 50% 32% 65% 1.55 6.1 6.6 210.00 11,874 12,547 9,346 985 11,874 12,547 9,346 9858/23/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.42 10.35 6.68 51% 33% 65% 1.55 6.1 6.6 247.00 180.00 0.73 13,761 10,028 12,618 9,460 985 13,761 10,028 12,618 9,460 9858/24/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.36 10.55 6.74 50% 32% 64% 1.57 6.2 6.7 12,618 9,460 985 12,618 9,460 9858/25/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.46 10.31 6.72 51% 34% 65% 1.53 6.2 6.7 262.00 18.16 14,684 1,018 12,861 9,460 992 14,684 1,018 12,861 9,460 9928/26/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.94 9.03 6.76 58% 44% 75% 1.34 6.2 6.7 232.00 203.00 0.88 13,080 11,445 12,891 10,158 992 13,080 11,445 12,891 10,158 9928/27/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.00 8.57 6.58 61% 47% 77% 1.30 6.2 6.7 12,936 10,158 992 12,936 10,158 9928/28/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.80 8.60 6.60 58% 44% 77% 1.30 6.3 6.7 12,936 10,158 1,013 12,936 10,158 1,0138/29/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.80 8.50 6.69 57% 45% 79% 1.27 6.3 6.7 236.00 13,168 12,916 10,165 1,013 13,168 12,916 10,165 1,0138/30/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 8.90 6.72 55% 42% 76% 1.32 6.3 6.7 241.00 169.00 0.70 13,507 9,472 12,950 10,049 1,013 13,507 9,472 12,950 10,049 1,0138/31/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.80 8.90 6.74 56% 43% 76% 1.32 6.4 6.7 12,950 10,049 1,013 12,950 10,049 1,013 9/1/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.80 8.90 6.76 56% 43% 76% 1.32 6.4 6.7 213.00 20.60 12,009 1,161 12,898 10,049 1,043 12,009 1,161 12,898 10,049 1,0439/2/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.60 6.65 51% 35% 69% 1.44 6.4 6.7 234.00 193.00 0.82 12,978 10,704 12,936 10,247 1,043 12,978 10,704 12,936 10,247 1,0439/3/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.85 6.40 53% 35% 65% 1.54 6.4 6.6 12,936 10,247 1,043 12,936 10,247 1,0439/4/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.43 6.29 54% 36% 67% 1.50 6.4 6.6 13,096 10,247 1,048 13,096 10,247 1,0489/5/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.62 9.01 6.65 54% 40% 74% 1.35 6.4 6.6 12,985 10,247 1,048 12,985 10,247 1,0489/6/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.62 9.04 6.72 54% 40% 74% 1.35 6.5 6.6 213.00 179.00 0.84 11,938 10,032 12,924 10,216 1,048 11,938 10,032 12,924 10,216 1,0489/7/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.66 8.98 6.74 54% 41% 75% 1.33 6.5 6.6 188.00 10,568 12,793 10,216 1,048 10,568 12,793 10,216 1,0489/8/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.67 8.91 6.72 55% 41% 75% 1.33 6.5 6.6 12,793 10,216 1,048 12,793 10,216 1,0489/9/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 8.90 6.73 55% 42% 76% 1.32 6.5 6.6 219.00 21.03 12,292 1,180 12,806 10,216 1,075 12,292 1,180 12,806 10,216 1,075 9/10/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.73 8.62 6.46 58% 43% 75% 1.33 6.6 6.6 12,661 10,216 1,075 12,661 10,216 1,0759/11/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.36 10.01 6.61 51% 34% 66% 1.51 6.6 6.6 12,749 10,216 1,100 12,749 10,216 1,1009/12/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.68 7.03 48% 35% 73% 1.38 6.6 6.7 204.00 11,961 12,544 10,192 1,100 11,961 12,544 10,192 1,1009/13/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 9.00 6.44 57% 41% 72% 1.40 6.6 6.7 238.00 180.00 0.76 12,783 9,668 12,558 10,117 1,100 12,783 9,668 12,558 10,117 1,1009/14/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 9.30 6.82 54% 40% 73% 1.36 6.6 6.7 12,558 10,117 1,100 12,558 10,117 1,1009/15/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.36 9.90 6.75 50% 34% 68% 1.47 6.7 6.7 19.75 1,112 12,558 10,117 1,102 1,112 12,558 10,117 1,1029/16/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.75 8.93 6.79 55% 42% 76% 1.32 6.7 6.7 198.00 181.00 0.91 11,212 10,250 12,234 10,134 1,102 11,212 10,250 12,234 10,134 1,1029/17/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.71 8.59 6.42 58% 43% 75% 1.34 6.7 6.7 12,321 10,134 1,102 12,321 10,134 1,1029/18/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.54 8.74 6.54 54% 41% 75% 1.34 6.7 6.7 12,404 10,134 1,118 12,404 10,134 1,1189/19/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.69 8.95 6.73 55% 41% 75% 1.33 6.7 6.7 192.00 10,777 12,439 10,228 1,118 10,777 12,439 10,228 1,1189/20/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.71 9.05 6.69 55% 41% 74% 1.35 6.7 6.6 202.00 170.00 0.84 11,271 9,485 12,366 10,135 1,118 11,271 9,485 12,366 10,135 1,1189/21/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 9.00 6.70 55% 41% 74% 1.34 6.7 6.7 12,366 10,135 1,118 12,366 10,135 1,1189/22/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.50 8.90 6.74 52% 39% 76% 1.32 6.7 6.7 248.00 20.42 13,940 1,148 12,495 10,135 1,124 13,940 1,148 12,495 10,135 1,1249/23/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 9.57 6.57 51% 35% 69% 1.46 6.7 6.6 12,411 10,151 1,124 12,411 10,151 1,1249/24/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.35 9.38 6.39 52% 36% 68% 1.47 6.7 6.6 12,411 10,151 1,124 12,411 10,151 1,1249/25/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.80 8.60 6.54 58% 44% 76% 1.31 6.6 6.6 12,249 10,151 1,150 12,249 10,151 1,1509/26/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.75 8.48 6.72 56% 44% 79% 1.26 6.6 6.6 236.00 13,227 12,259 9,935 1,150 13,227 12,259 9,935 1,1509/27/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.84 8.62 6.75 57% 45% 78% 1.28 6.6 6.6 198.00 170.00 0.86 11,146 9,570 12,185 9,883 1,150 11,146 9,570 12,185 9,883 1,1509/28/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.89 8.33 6.72 58% 47% 81% 1.24 6.7 6.6 12,185 9,883 1,150 12,185 9,883 1,1509/29/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.90 8.30 6.83 57% 47% 82% 1.22 6.7 6.7 227.00 21.57 12,930 1,229 12,169 9,883 1,166 12,930 1,229 12,169 9,883 1,166 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 14 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
306
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
9/30/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.80 8.40 6.71 57% 45% 80% 1.25 6.7 6.7 183.00 184.00 1.01 10,241 10,297 11,951 10,001 1,166 10,241 10,297 11,951 10,001 1,16610/1/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.50 8.30 6.48 54% 42% 78% 1.28 6.6 6.6 11,951 10,001 1,166 11,951 10,001 1,16610/2/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 9.98 6.59 51% 34% 66% 1.51 6.6 6.7 11,947 10,001 1,167 11,947 10,001 1,16710/3/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.35 9.77 6.82 49% 34% 70% 1.43 6.6 6.7 215.00 12,229 11,894 9,884 1,167 12,229 11,894 9,884 1,16710/4/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.43 10.15 7.20 48% 34% 71% 1.41 6.7 6.8 218.00 177.00 0.81 13,090 10,628 11,974 9,990 1,167 13,090 10,628 11,974 9,990 1,16710/5/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.69 11.67 7.92 47% 32% 68% 1.47 6.7 6.9 11,974 9,990 1,167 11,974 9,990 1,16710/6/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.79 11.48 8.11 47% 33% 71% 1.42 6.8 7.1 223.00 12.44 15,083 841 12,168 9,990 1,102 15,083 841 12,168 9,990 1,10210/7/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.14 10.03 7.42 56% 41% 74% 1.35 6.8 7.2 200.00 168.00 0.84 12,377 10,396 12,195 10,042 1,102 12,377 10,396 12,195 10,042 1,10210/8/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.04 9.07 6.95 58% 45% 77% 1.31 6.8 7.2 12,304 10,042 1,102 12,304 10,042 1,10210/9/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.60 9.40 6.96 52% 38% 74% 1.35 6.8 7.2 12,304 10,042 1,102 12,304 10,042 1,102 10/10/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.94 9.74 7.87 50% 40% 81% 1.24 6.8 7.4 189.00 180.00 0.95 12,405 11,814 12,311 10,264 1,082 12,405 11,814 12,311 10,264 1,08210/11/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.80 9.50 7.65 50% 40% 81% 1.24 6.9 7.5 218.00 19.41 13,909 1,238 12,411 10,264 1,114 13,909 1,238 12,411 10,264 1,11410/12/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.90 9.90 7.28 54% 39% 74% 1.36 6.9 7.5 12,411 10,264 1,114 12,411 10,264 1,11410/13/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.58 8.77 7.14 64% 52% 81% 1.23 6.9 7.4 195.00 11,612 12,389 10,264 1,114 11,612 12,389 10,264 1,11410/14/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.47 10.15 6.92 50% 34% 68% 1.47 6.9 7.3 217.00 207.00 0.95 12,524 11,947 12,373 10,548 1,114 12,524 11,947 12,373 10,548 1,11410/15/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.43 10.00 6.70 51% 34% 67% 1.49 6.9 7.2 12,373 10,548 1,114 12,373 10,548 1,11410/16/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.59 9.09 6.72 53% 39% 74% 1.35 6.9 7.2 12,373 10,548 1,114 12,373 10,548 1,11410/17/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.64 9.22 6.88 53% 39% 75% 1.34 6.9 7.1 191.00 10,959 12,357 10,591 1,114 10,959 12,357 10,591 1,11410/18/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 9.06 6.85 54% 41% 76% 1.32 6.9 7.0 204.00 178.00 0.87 11,654 10,169 12,316 10,538 1,114 11,654 10,169 12,316 10,538 1,11410/19/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 9.04 6.76 55% 41% 75% 1.34 6.9 6.9 12,316 10,538 1,114 12,316 10,538 1,11410/20/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.72 9.13 6.77 55% 41% 74% 1.35 6.9 6.8 22.16 1,251 12,412 10,538 1,141 1,251 12,412 10,538 1,14110/21/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.60 8.30 6.74 53% 43% 81% 1.23 6.9 6.8 229.00 12,872 12,512 10,689 1,141 12,872 12,512 10,689 1,14110/22/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.70 8.90 6.52 57% 42% 73% 1.37 6.9 6.7 12,512 10,689 1,141 12,512 10,689 1,14110/23/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.33 9.71 6.61 50% 34% 68% 1.47 6.9 6.7 12,417 10,689 1,140 12,417 10,689 1,14010/24/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.34 10.32 7.02 48% 32% 68% 1.47 7.0 6.8 269.00 15,749 12,625 10,689 1,140 15,749 12,625 10,689 1,14010/25/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.41 10.03 6.80 50% 34% 68% 1.48 7.0 6.8 234.00 174.00 0.74 13,271 9,868 12,663 10,586 1,140 13,271 9,868 12,663 10,586 1,14010/26/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.29 10.34 6.76 49% 32% 65% 1.53 7.0 6.7 12,663 10,586 1,140 12,663 10,586 1,14010/27/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.33 9.82 6.75 49% 34% 69% 1.45 7.0 6.7 505.00 22.20 28,429 1,250 TSS 12,628 10,586 1,162 28,429 1,250 12,628 10,586 1,16210/28/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.65 8.93 6.79 54% 41% 76% 1.32 7.0 6.7 235.00 224.00 0.95 13,308 12,685 12,763 10,976 1,162 13,308 12,685 12,763 10,976 1,16210/29/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.67 9.38 6.71 55% 39% 72% 1.40 7.0 6.7 12,763 10,976 1,162 12,763 10,976 1,16210/30/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.56 8.95 6.60 54% 40% 74% 1.36 7.0 6.8 12,752 10,976 1,145 12,752 10,976 1,14510/31/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.72 8.41 6.54 57% 44% 78% 1.29 7.0 6.7 209.00 11,400 12,829 11,072 1,145 11,400 12,829 11,072 1,145 11/1/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.54 8.62 6.59 54% 41% 76% 1.31 7.0 6.7 271.00 238.00 0.88 14,894 13,081 12,958 11,324 1,145 14,894 13,081 12,958 11,324 1,14511/2/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.79 8.84 6.77 56% 43% 77% 1.31 7.0 6.7 12,958 11,324 1,145 12,958 11,324 1,14511/3/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.69 8.99 6.78 54% 41% 75% 1.33 7.0 6.7 20.52 1,160 13,007 11,324 1,148 1,160 13,007 11,324 1,14811/4/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 9.79 6.68 50% 34% 68% 1.47 7.0 6.7 264.00 212.00 0.80 14,708 11,811 13,115 11,471 1,148 14,708 11,811 13,115 11,471 1,14811/5/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.39 10.03 6.82 50% 34% 68% 1.47 6.9 6.7 13,115 11,471 1,148 13,115 11,471 1,14811/6/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.81 9.27 6.82 56% 41% 74% 1.36 6.9 6.7 12,974 11,471 1,225 12,974 11,471 1,22511/7/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.93 8.92 6.79 58% 44% 76% 1.31 6.9 6.7 308.00 17,442 13,336 11,625 1,225 17,442 13,336 11,625 1,22511/8/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.29 10.21 6.71 49% 32% 66% 1.52 6.8 6.7 202.00 11,304 13,201 11,625 1,225 11,304 13,201 11,625 1,22511/9/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.39 10.43 6.70 51% 33% 64% 1.56 6.8 6.8 186.00 180.00 0.97 10,393 10,058 13,025 11,429 1,225 10,393 10,058 13,025 11,429 1,225 11/10/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.32 9.63 6.62 50% 34% 69% 1.45 6.8 6.7 228.00 21.32 12,588 1,177 13,037 11,374 1,215 12,588 1,177 13,037 11,374 1,21511/11/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.59 9.33 6.74 53% 38% 72% 1.38 6.8 6.7 12,979 11,374 1,210 12,979 11,374 1,21011/12/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.61 8.94 6.43 56% 40% 72% 1.39 6.7 6.7 12,979 11,374 1,210 12,979 11,374 1,21011/13/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 10.10 6.61 51% 33% 65% 1.53 6.7 6.7 13,076 11,374 1,210 13,076 11,374 1,21011/14/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.39 9.80 6.68 51% 35% 68% 1.47 6.7 6.7 235.00 13,092 13,117 11,279 1,210 13,092 13,117 11,279 1,21011/15/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.37 9.92 6.66 51% 34% 67% 1.49 6.7 6.6 218.00 188.00 0.86 12,109 10,442 13,050 11,159 1,210 12,109 10,442 13,050 11,159 1,21011/16/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.36 9.89 6.72 50% 34% 68% 1.47 6.7 6.6 13,050 11,159 1,210 13,050 11,159 1,21011/17/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.35 9.54 6.72 50% 35% 70% 1.42 6.7 6.6 210.00 20.85 11,769 1,169 13,104 11,159 1,201 11,769 1,169 13,104 11,159 1,20111/18/2011 FALSE TRUE FALSE 3.44 6.49 6.49 53% 53% 100% AvgMax 1.00 6.7 6.7 221.00 220.00 1.00 11,962 11,908 13,124 11,407 1,201 11,962 11,908 13,124 11,407 1,20111/19/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 3.43 9.70 6.39 54% 35% 66% 1.52 6.7 6.6 13,124 11,407 1,201 13,124 11,407 1,20111/20/2011 FALSE TRUE TRUE 3.40 9.60 6.52 52% 35% 68% 1.47 6.7 6.6 13,124 11,407 1,189 13,124 11,407 1,18911/21/2011 FALSE TRUE FALSE 3.40 9.60 6.69 51% 35% 70% 1.43 6.7 6.6 167.00 18.42 9,318 1,028 12,887 11,407 1,157 9,318 1,028 12,887 11,407 1,15711/22/2011 FALSE TRUE FALSE 3.90 8.80 6.63 59% 44% 75% 1.33 6.7 6.6 12,887 11,407 1,157 12,887 11,407 1,15711/23/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.00 8.70 6.60 61% 46% 76% 1.32 6.7 6.6 219.00 196.00 0.89 12,055 10,789 12,835 11,330 1,157 12,055 10,789 12,835 11,330 1,15711/24/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 4.10 9.30 6.10 67% 44% 66% 1.52 6.7 6.5 12,641 11,330 1,157 12,641 11,330 1,15711/25/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.44 8.94 6.07 57% 38% 68% 1.47 6.6 6.4 12,596 11,539 1,157 12,596 11,539 1,15711/26/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.44 9.60 6.14 56% 36% 64% 1.56 6.6 6.4 12,596 11,539 1,157 12,596 11,539 1,15711/27/2011 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.61 8.59 6.51 55% 42% 76% 1.32 6.6 6.4 12,596 11,539 1,133 12,596 11,539 1,13311/28/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.59 8.55 6.72 53% 42% 79% 1.27 6.6 6.4 194.00 10,873 12,422 11,348 1,133 10,873 12,422 11,348 1,13311/29/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.75 8.68 6.66 56% 43% 77% 1.30 6.6 6.4 235.00 216.00 0.92 13,053 11,998 12,464 11,441 1,133 13,053 11,998 12,464 11,441 1,13311/30/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.55 8.94 6.79 52% 40% 76% 1.32 6.6 6.4 12,464 11,441 1,133 12,464 11,441 1,133 12/1/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.41 9.59 6.68 51% 36% 70% 1.44 6.6 6.5 195.00 25.57 10,864 1,425 12,428 11,441 1,192 10,864 1,425 12,428 11,441 1,192 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 15 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
307
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

BOD/TSS
Ratio
Influent
NH3-N
Conc.,
mg/L
Avg Inf
TSS Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
BOD Load,
ppd
Avg Inf
NH3 Load,
ppd
Load
Outlier
Type
30-d Avg
of TSS
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of BOD
Load, ppd
30-d Avg
of NH3-N
Load, ppd
non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
non-SN
NH3 Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
TSS Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
BOD Load,
ppd
30-d Avg
of non-SN
NH3-N
Load, ppd
12/2/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.78 8.52 6.63 57% 44% 78% 1.29 6.6 6.5 231.00 209.00 0.90 12,773 11,556 12,287 11,223 1,192 12,773 11,556 12,287 11,223 1,19212/3/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.67 9.10 6.60 56% 40% 73% 1.38 6.6 6.6 12,287 11,223 1,192 12,287 11,223 1,19212/4/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.34 10.10 6.65 50% 33% 66% 1.52 6.6 6.7 12,287 11,223 1,199 12,287 11,223 1,19912/5/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.31 9.29 6.71 49% 36% 72% 1.38 6.6 6.7 240.00 13,431 12,202 11,125 1,199 13,431 12,202 11,125 1,19912/6/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.40 9.88 6.67 51% 34% 68% 1.48 6.6 6.7 209.00 189.00 0.90 11,626 10,514 12,166 11,038 1,199 11,626 10,514 12,166 11,038 1,19912/7/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.33 9.41 6.73 49% 35% 72% 1.40 6.6 6.7 12,166 11,038 1,199 12,166 11,038 1,19912/8/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.33 9.77 6.73 49% 34% 69% 1.45 6.6 6.7 202.00 24.19 11,338 1,358 11,784 11,038 1,231 11,338 1,358 11,784 11,038 1,23112/9/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.03 8.39 7.41 54% 48% 88% AvgMax 1.13 6.6 6.7 11,816 11,038 1,231 11,816 11,038 1,231 12/10/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.79 8.89 5.97 63% 43% 67% 1.49 6.6 6.6 11,918 11,201 1,231 11,918 11,201 1,23112/11/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.52 9.38 6.67 53% 38% 71% 1.41 6.6 6.6 11,866 11,201 1,245 11,866 11,201 1,24512/12/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.66 8.58 6.73 54% 43% 78% 1.27 6.6 6.6 202.00 11,338 11,829 11,201 1,245 11,338 11,829 11,201 1,24512/13/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.68 8.61 6.76 54% 43% 79% 1.27 6.6 6.6 197.00 217.00 1.10 11,107 12,234 11,780 11,349 1,245 11,107 12,234 11,780 11,349 1,24512/14/2011 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.59 8.76 6.77 53% 41% 77% 1.29 6.6 6.6 11,780 11,349 1,245 11,780 11,349 1,24512/15/2011 FALSE FALSE TRUE 3.68 8.58 6.68 55% 43% 78% 1.28 6.6 6.6 21.29 1,186 11,687 11,349 1,233 1,186 11,687 11,349 1,23312/16/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.32 9.63 6.59 50% 34% 68% 1.46 6.6 6.6 230.00 245.00 1.07 12,641 13,465 11,725 11,781 1,233 12,417 13,364 11,709 11,766 1,23312/17/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.33 9.89 6.39 52% 34% 65% 1.55 6.6 6.6 11,725 11,781 1,233 11,709 11,766 1,23312/18/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.76 8.25 6.18 61% 46% 75% 1.33 6.6 6.6 11,721 11,781 1,249 11,704 11,766 1,24912/19/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.74 8.14 6.33 59% 46% 78% 1.29 6.5 6.6 179.00 9,450 11,528 11,759 1,249 9,450 11,511 11,742 1,24912/20/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.75 8.02 6.21 60% 47% 77% 1.29 6.5 6.5 11,528 11,759 1,249 11,511 11,742 1,24912/21/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 8.48 5.98 56% 40% 71% 1.42 6.5 6.4 207.00 22.14 10,324 1,104 11,442 11,759 1,220 10,324 1,104 11,426 11,742 1,22012/22/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.28 8.73 5.97 55% 38% 68% 1.46 6.5 6.3 233.00 239.00 1.03 11,601 11,900 11,605 11,779 1,268 11,601 11,900 11,589 11,765 1,26812/23/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 8.45 6.16 58% 43% 73% 1.37 6.5 6.2 11,605 11,779 1,268 11,589 11,765 1,26812/24/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.58 8.34 5.77 62% 43% 69% 1.45 6.5 6.1 11,571 11,944 1,268 11,553 11,928 1,26812/25/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 6.60 5.19 66% 52% 79% 1.27 6.4 6.0 11,571 11,944 1,268 11,553 11,928 1,26812/26/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.29 9.17 5.94 55% 36% 65% 1.54 6.4 5.9 11,571 11,944 1,268 11,553 11,928 1,26812/27/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 8.99 6.08 55% 37% 68% 1.48 6.4 5.9 281.00 246.00 0.88 14,249 12,474 11,762 12,020 1,268 14,249 12,474 11,746 12,006 1,26812/28/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.35 9.02 6.08 55% 37% 67% 1.48 6.4 5.9 11,762 12,020 1,268 11,746 12,006 1,26812/29/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.40 10.29 6.14 55% 33% 60% 1.68 6.4 5.9 224.00 19.28 11,471 987 11,805 12,020 1,212 11,471 987 11,789 12,006 1,21212/30/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.95 8.10 6.15 64% 49% 76% 1.32 6.4 5.9 270.00 13,849 11,861 12,024 1,212 13,849 11,845 12,007 1,21212/31/2011 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.68 7.97 6.12 60% 46% 77% 1.30 6.3 5.9 11,861 12,024 1,212 11,845 12,007 1,212 1/1/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.87 7.83 5.83 66% 49% 74% 1.34 6.3 5.9 11,938 12,024 1,159 11,921 12,007 1,1591/2/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.90 7.70 6.26 62% 51% 81% 1.23 6.3 6.1 11,869 12,117 1,159 11,850 12,097 1,1591/3/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 8.00 6.19 58% 45% 77% 1.29 6.3 6.1 236.00 12,183 11,893 12,117 1,159 12,183 11,876 12,097 1,1591/4/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 8.00 6.25 58% 45% 78% 1.28 6.3 6.1 11,893 12,117 1,159 11,876 12,097 1,1591/5/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.60 8.00 6.23 58% 45% 78% 1.28 6.3 6.1 261.00 21.03 13,561 1,093 11,903 12,117 1,146 13,561 1,093 11,886 12,097 1,1461/6/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.33 8.83 6.15 54% 38% 70% 1.44 6.2 6.1 235.00 213.00 0.91 12,053 10,925 11,936 12,200 1,146 12,053 10,925 11,918 12,179 1,1461/7/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.29 9.72 6.19 53% 34% 64% 1.57 6.2 6.2 11,936 12,200 1,146 11,918 12,179 1,1461/8/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.41 8.36 6.20 55% 41% 74% 1.35 6.2 6.2 11,985 12,200 1,093 11,967 12,179 1,0931/9/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.18 8.73 6.18 51% 36% 71% 1.41 6.2 6.2 227.00 11,700 11,963 12,200 1,093 11,700 11,946 12,179 1,093 1/10/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.38 11.17 6.14 55% 30% 55% AvgMax 1.82 6.2 6.2 260.00 271.00 1.04 13,314 13,877 12,060 12,479 1,093 13,314 13,877 12,044 12,462 1,0931/11/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.31 12.67 5.99 55% 26% 47% AvgMax 2.12 6.2 6.2 12,060 12,479 1,093 12,044 12,462 1,0931/12/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.31 8.71 5.96 56% 38% 68% 1.46 6.2 6.2 21.62 1,075 12,116 12,479 1,089 1,075 12,098 12,462 1,0891/13/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.41 7.36 5.83 58% 46% 79% 1.26 6.1 6.1 276.00 13,420 12,293 12,528 1,089 13,420 12,276 12,508 1,0891/14/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.38 8.21 5.84 58% 41% 71% 1.41 6.1 6.0 12,293 12,528 1,089 12,276 12,508 1,0891/15/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.45 8.02 5.74 60% 43% 72% 1.40 6.1 6.0 12,293 12,528 1,065 12,276 12,508 1,0651/16/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.44 8.57 6.21 55% 40% 72% 1.38 6.1 6.0 12,264 12,294 1,065 12,264 12,294 1,0651/17/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.21 9.01 6.14 52% 36% 68% 1.47 6.1 6.0 23.37 1,197 12,264 12,294 1,091 1,197 12,264 12,294 1,0911/18/2012 TRUE TRUE FALSE 3.32 8.97 6.18 54% 37% 69% 1.45 6.1 6.0 12,264 12,294 1,091 12,264 12,294 1,0911/19/2012 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.27 9.38 6.62 49% 35% 71% 1.42 6.1 6.1 261.00 14,410 12,678 12,294 1,091 14,293 12,668 12,294 1,0911/20/2012 TRUE TRUE TRUE 3.94 12.60 9.19 43% 31% 73% 1.37 6.2 6.5 246.00 227.00 0.92 18,855 17,398 13,153 13,315 1,091 18,855 17,398 13,144 13,315 1,0911/21/2012 TRUE TRUE TRUE 6.06 11.39 8.47 72% 53% 74% MinAvg 1.34 6.2 6.6 13,389 13,315 1,088 13,379 13,315 1,0881/22/2012 TRUE TRUE 4.45 11.95 9.65 46% 37% 81% 1.24 6.3 7.1 13,551 13,669 1,088 13,541 13,669 1,0881/23/2012 TRUE TRUE TRUE 5.87 14.92 11.45 51% 39% 77% 1.30 6.5 7.9 188.00 17,953 13,918 13,669 1,088 17,953 13,908 13,669 1,0881/24/2012 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.77 11.08 8.69 55% 43% 78% 1.28 6.6 8.3 147.00 119.00 0.81 10,654 8,624 13,667 12,660 1,088 10,654 8,624 13,658 12,660 1,0881/25/2012 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.46 10.16 7.96 56% 44% 78% 1.28 6.7 8.5 13,667 12,660 1,088 13,658 12,660 1,0881/26/2012 FALSE FALSE TRUE 4.52 9.60 7.74 58% 47% 81% 1.24 6.8 8.8 14.20 917 13,667 12,660 1,054 917 13,658 12,660 1,0541/27/2012 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.16 9.43 7.42 56% 44% 79% 1.27 6.8 8.9 188.00 177.00 0.94 11,634 10,953 13,466 12,356 1,054 11,634 10,953 13,457 12,356 1,0541/28/2012 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.91 9.91 7.22 54% 39% 73% 1.37 6.8 8.6 13,466 12,356 1,054 13,457 12,356 1,0541/29/2012 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.32 9.31 7.08 61% 46% 76% 1.31 6.9 8.4 13,632 12,356 1,070 13,622 12,356 1,0701/30/2012 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.99 8.70 7.03 57% 46% 81% 1.24 6.9 8.1 166.00 9,733 13,289 12,356 1,070 9,733 13,279 12,356 1,0701/31/2012 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.99 8.64 6.91 58% 46% 80% 1.25 6.9 7.5 209.00 183.00 0.88 12,045 10,546 13,193 12,054 1,070 12,045 10,546 13,184 12,054 1,070 2/1/2012 FALSE FALSE FALSE 3.97 8.73 6.76 59% 45% 77% 1.29 7.0 7.3 13,193 12,054 1,070 13,184 12,054 1,0702/2/2012 FALSE FALSE FALSE 4.40 8.10 6.79 65% 54% 84% 1.19 7.0 7.1 31.57 1,788 13,193 12,054 1,214 1,788 13,184 12,054 1,214 City of Chico - Strategic Planning and Sewer Rate Review Support Project Flow and Loads Analysis - Appendix B - Daily Data (2) 16 of 71 Exhibit 4 - Regionalization Planning Report
308
Date Butte Break? CSU Break? Precip?
Min
Influent
Flow, mgd
Max
Influent
Flow, mgd
Avg
Influent
Flow, mgd
Min % of
Avg
Min % of
Max
Avg % of
Max
Flow
Outlier
Type
Diurnal
Peak
Factor
(DPF)
30-d Avg
of Avg
Flow, mgd
7-d Avg of
Avg Flow,
mgd
Influent
TSS Conc.,
mg/L
Influent
BOD
Conc.,
mg/L

Paradise City CouncilFebruary 14, 2023

Paradise City Council
February 14, 2023