City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority / Public Financing Authority
December 13, 2022

The following policies from the Public Health and Safety Element are relevant to geology and soils with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):
 Policy PHS-3.1. Consider Geologic Hazards for New Development: The County shall consider the risk to human safety and property from seismic and geologic hazards in designating the location and intensity for new development and the conditions under which that development may occur.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-61  Policy PHS-3.4. Liquefaction Studies: The County shall require proposals for new development in areas determined by the County to have high liquefaction potential to include detailed site-specific liquefaction studies.  Policy PHS-3.5. Subsidence or Liquefaction: The County shall require that all proposed structures, utilities, or public facilities within County-recognized areas of near-surface subsidence or liquefaction be located and constructed in a manner that minimizes or eliminates potential damage.  Policy PHS-3.7. Erosion Control: The County shall encourage the planting of vegetation to decrease loss of soil by erosion.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The Safety Element of the City’s General Plan identifies hazards that are to be considered in the development of future land uses, including geologic hazards. The following policies from the Safety Element are relevant to geology and soils with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy SAFE-1.1: The City will ensure that approved development projects and public investments are consistent with the information provided in the Stanislaus County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.  Policy SAFE-1.2: The City will continue to enforce State of California Building Standards Commission uniform codes, such as the California Building Code and California Fire Code with adopted Fire District amendments.  Policy SAFE-1.11: Proposed developments located within river bluff areas and other areas prone to geologic and soil limitations require a detailed geotechnical study prepared by an independent qualified geologist approved by the City. Approved plans, projects, and subdivision requests shall incorporate measures to reduce risks identified in the geotechnical study, to the City’s satisfaction.

3.7.2 Environmental Setting

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The project area is underlain by Pleistocene to Holocene-age alluvium, lake, playa, and terrace deposits (CGS 2015).

Table 3.7-1 includes a summary of the soil types within the areas of ground disturbance and their characteristics.

Table 3.7-1 Soil Types in the Areas of Ground Disturbance Soil Type Description
Percent of
Disturbance
Area
Permeability
Surface
Runoff
Potential
Erosion
Hazard
Shrink-Swell
Potential
Columbia fine sandy loam,
channeled, partially drained,
0 to 2 percent slopes,
frequently flooded
Very deep, somewhat poorly drained,
nearly level soil on flood plains 3% Moderately
rapid Slow Moderate Low
Columbia fine sandy loam,
drained, 0 to 2 percent
slopes
Very deep, somewhat poorly drained,
nearly level soil on flood plains <1% Moderately
rapid Slow Slight Low
Delhi loamy sand, 0 to 2
percent slopes
Very deep, somewhat excessively
drained, nearly level soil on dunes 3% Rapid Slow Slight (water), Severe (wind) Low Grangeville fine sandy loam,
partially drained, 0 to 2
percent slopes
Very deep, somewhat poorly drained,
nearly level soil on flood plains 2% Moderately
rapid Slow Slight Low
Honcut sandy loam, 0 to 2
percent slopes
Very deep, well drained, nearly level soil
on alluvial fans 2% Moderately
rapid Slow
Slight (water),
Moderate
(wind)
Low
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-62 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Soil Type Description
Percent of
Disturbance
Area
Permeability
Surface
Runoff
Potential
Erosion
Hazard
Shrink-Swell
Potential
Merritt silty clay loam,
partially drained, 0 to 2
percent slopes
Very deep, poorly drained, nearly level
soil on flood plains <1% Moderately
slow Slow Slight Moderate
Pits, gravel
Open excavations from which soil and
underlying material have been removed
and other material that supports few or
no plants have been exposed
1% Varies Varies Varies Varies
Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 2
percent slopes
Very deep, somewhat excessively
drained, nearly level soil on flood plains
and elongated channel remnants
<1% Rapid Slow Slight (water),
Severe (wind) Low
Water Water 88% Not
applicable
Not
applicable
Not
applicable
Not
applicable
Source: NRCS 1988.

GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
The potential for geologic hazards to occur in the project area are summarized as follows:
 Seismic Ground Shaking: Faults are considered to be active if there has been evidence of seismic activity within the last 11,000 years. Although there are no active faults within San Joaquin County, there are several active faults in proximity to the county that have potential to result in seismic ground shaking in the project area. The closest active fault is the Marsh Creek-Greenville fault, approximately 37 miles west of the project area. Other nearby active faults include the Concord, Calaveras, Hayward, and San Andreas Faults (CGS 2021).  Surface Rupture: Surface rupture is the visible offset of the ground surface when an earthquake rupture along a fault affects the Earth’s surface. Based on mapping by the California Geological Survey (CGS), the project area is not within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zone (CGS 2021). Therefore, the potential for surface rupture at the project area is considered low.
 Liquefaction: Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength or stiffness due to a buildup of pore-water pressure during severe ground shaking. Liquefaction is associated primarily with loose (low density), saturated, fine- to mediumgrained, cohesionless soils. Effects of severe liquefaction can include sand boils, excessive settlement, bearing capacity failures, and lateral spreading. The project area has not been evaluated by CGS for liquefaction hazards (CGS 2021).
 Landslides: The project area has not been evaluated by CGS for seismic landslide hazards (CGS 2021). Because there are no steep slopes within or adjacent to the project area, the potential for landslides is considered low.  Settlement: Seismically induced settlement consists of dry dynamic settlement (above groundwater) and liquefaction-induced settlement (below groundwater). These settlements occur primarily within loose to moderately dense sandy soil due to reduction in volume during and shortly after an earthquake event. The project area has not been evaluated for the potential for settlement.  Lateral Spreading: Lateral spreading is the finite, lateral movement of gently to steeply sloping, saturated soil deposits caused by earthquake-induced liquefaction. The project area has not been evaluated for the potential for lateral spreading.
 Subsidence: Regional ground subsidence generally occurs due to rapid and intensive removal of subterranean fluids, such as water or oil. Due to historical groundwater use and excessive pumping, considerable land subsidence has been observed throughout the San Joaquin Valley (San Joaquin County 2017a). The project area has not been evaluated for the potential for subsidence.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-63  Expansive Soils: Expansive soils contain large amounts of clay particles that swell considerably when wetted and shrink with the loss of water. Foundations and structures constructed on these soils can be subject to uplifting forces caused by the swelling, potentially resulting in heaving and cracking of both building foundations and slabs-on-grade. As shown in Table 3.7-1, soil types in the areas of ground disturbance have a low to moderate shrink-swell potential.

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
According to the Environmental Impact Report for the San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan, most paleontological specimens from San Joaquin County have been found in rock formations in the foothills of the Diablo Mountain Range. However, remains of extinct animals such as mammoth, could be found anywhere in the county, especially along watercourses such as the San Joaquin River and its tributaries (San Joaquin County 2017a).

3.7.3 Discussion
24Ba) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
25Bi) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to California Geological Survey Special Publication 42.)
No Impact. As stated in Section 3.7.2, the project area is not within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zone (CGS 2021). Therefore, the project would have no impact related to earthquake fault rupture. 26Bii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less-than-significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.7.2, the project area is not within an active fault zone, but is in proximity to several active faults that may cause strong seismic ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. The project would include improvements to the WWTP and construction of recycled water storage and distribution facilities. These facilities would be designed and constructed in accordance with the CBC, which includes standards intended to protect structures from earthquake-related hazards and seismic activity. The construction and operation of the project would not exacerbate existing seismic conditions. Therefore, impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.
27Biii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less-than-significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.7.2, the project area is in a seismically-active region. Therefore, there is potential for seismic-related ground failure to occur within the project area. A site-specific geotechnical study meeting the requirements of the CBC would be required before project-related permits are issued. The geotechnical study would identify potential risks, including liquefaction potential, and recommendations to reduce seismic, geologic, and soils hazards. Because the project would comply with CBC requirements, impacts related to seismicrelated ground failure would be less than significant. 28Biv) Landslides?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.7.2, there are no steep slopes within or adjacent to the project area and the potential for landslides to occur on-site or off-site is considered low. Therefore, the project would have no impact related to landslides.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-64 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 29Bb) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less-than-significant impact. As shown in Table 3.14-1, the erosion potential for soils in the areas of ground disturbance range from slight to severe. Project construction would involve ground disturbing activities, including trenching and minor grading, which have potential to cause soil erosion and contaminate nearby surface water, in particular the Stanislaus River. Because construction activities would disturb approximately 78.88 acres of land, the City would be required to file a Notice of Intent with the Central Valley RWQCB to be covered under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit (Construction General Permit) (refer to Section 3.10.2 for additional information about the NPDES Program). As a requirement of the NPDES Construction General Permit, the City would prepare a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and implement associated BMPs that are specifically designed to reduce the amount of soil disturbance, erosion and sediment transport into receiving waters, and pollutants in site runoff during construction. Following construction, all areas of bare soil would be landscaped or paved to prevent soil erosion. Project operations would not involve ground disturbance. Therefore, project-related erosion impacts would be less than significant.
30Bc) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less-than-significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.7.2, there are no steep slopes within or adjacent to the project area and the potential for landslides to occur on-site or off-site is considered low. The project area has not been evaluated for the potential for other geologic hazards, including lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse; however, seismic ground shaking in the region could also contribute to instability of soils and geologic units, depending on soil and groundwater conditions within the project area. Additionally, subsidence has been observed in the San Joaquin Valley due to declining groundwater levels. Because dewatering may be required during excavation activities, subsurface soil compaction and subsequent sinking or settling of the ground surface have potential to occur within the project area. A site-specific geotechnical evaluation meeting the requirements of the CBC would be required before project-related permits are issued. The geotechnical study would identify potential risks, including potential for settlement, lateral spreading, and subsidence, and recommendations to reduce seismic, geologic, and soils hazards. Because the project would comply with CBC requirements, impacts related to unstable geologic units or soils would be less than significant.
31Bd) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less-than-significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.7.2, soil types in the disturbance area have a low to moderate shrink-swell potential. As described previously, a site-specific geotechnical study meeting the requirements of the CBC would be required before project-related permits are issued. The geotechnical study would identify potential risks and recommendations to reduce seismic, geologic, and soils hazards. Because the project would comply with CBC requirements, impacts related to expansive soils would be less than significant. 32Be) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
No Impact. The project would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Thus, the project would have no impact related to soil suitability for use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-65 3Bf) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The disturbance area encompasses 78.88 acres of land that has been previously disturbed by development of agricultural and public facility land uses and is predominately underlain by fill materials. Therefore, the project site is not anticipated to be underlain by unique geologic features.

Additionally, the project would require excavation to a maximum depth of 12 feet for trenching and installing pipelines. Based on this excavation depth and previous disturbance, paleontological resources are not expected to be encountered. However, intact paleontological resources may be present below the original layer of fill material. In the event that intact paleontological resources are inadvertently discovered during construction, ground-disturbing activities associated with construction of the project, such as grading during site preparation and excavation to install treatment facilities, have the potential to destroy a unique paleontological resource or site. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure 3.7-1: Retain Qualified Paleontologist to Conduct Project Design Review Prior to completion of project design and the beginning of construction, the City of Riverbank shall retain a qualified paleontologist to review the project plans and all geotechnical reports to determine whether construction activities would affect native sediments containing sensitive paleontological resources. The qualified paleontologist will provide these findings in writing and provide recommendations for paleontological monitoring during construction, if necessary. If the project would not disturb native soils, no further action would be necessary.

Mitigation Measure 3.7-2: Prepare Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Plan In the event that construction activities occur in native sediments identified as being sensitive for paleontological resources, the City of Riverbank shall retain a qualified paleontologist to prepare a Paleontological Mitigation Plan (PMP) consistent with the guidelines of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010). The PMP will be prepared prior to construction and will include requirements for paleontological resource monitoring to inspect exposed rock units during active excavations within geologically sensitive sediments.

Mitigation Measure 3.7-3: Conduct Paleontological Monitoring In the event that construction activities occur in native sediments identified as being sensitive for paleontological resources, the City of Riverbank shall retain a qualified paleontologist prior to construction to monitor grading and trenching activities during construction of the project. The paleontological monitor will have authority to temporarily divert ground-disturbing activities away from exposed fossils to professionally and efficiently recover the fossil specimens and collect associated data. If potentially significant paleontological resources are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, the contractor will stop all work within 60 feet of the discovery until the paleontological monitor can remove the fossils and retrieve associated data. If fossils are collected, they will be transported to a paleontological laboratory for processing where they will be prepared to the point of identification, identified by qualified experts, and listed in a database to facilitate analysis. If discovered, significant specimens will be deposited in a designated paleontological curation facility.

Significance after Mitigation
With the implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.7-1, 3.7-2, and 3.7-3, the City would avoid and minimize the potential to destroy a unique paleontological resource or site by implementing paleontological design review, preparing a PMP, conducting paleontological monitoring, and in the event paleontological resources are discovered, by providing data retrieval, fossil collection and processing, and curation as appropriate. Therefore, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on potentially significant paleontological resources, and the impact would be clearly reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-66 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.8 90BGREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?

3.8.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
In Massachusetts et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al., 549 US 497 (2007), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that carbon dioxide (CO2) is an air pollutant as defined under the CAA and that the EPA has the authority to regulate GHG emissions. In 2010, EPA started to address GHG emissions from stationary sources through its New Source Review permitting program, including operating permits for “major sources” issued under Title V of the CAA.

In October 2012, EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, on behalf of the US Department of Transportation (DOT), issued final rules to further reduce GHG emissions and improve corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for light-duty vehicles for model years 2017 and beyond (77 Federal Register [FR] 62624).

These rules would increase fuel economy to the equivalent of 54.5 miles per gallon, limiting vehicle emissions to 163 grams of CO2 per mile for the fleet of cars and light-duty trucks by model year 2025 (77 FR 62630).

However, on April 2, 2018, the EPA administrator announced a final determination that the current standards should be revised. On August 2, 2018, DOT and EPA proposed the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule (SAFE Rule), which would amend existing CAFE standards for passenger cars and light-duty trucks by increasing the stringency of the standards by 1.5 percent per year from models 2021 through 2026 (NHTSA 2020).

The CAA grants California the ability to enact and enforce more strict fuel economy standards through the acquisition of an EPA-issued waiver. Each time California adopts a new vehicle emission standard, the state applies to EPA for a preemption waiver for those standards. However, Part One of the SAFE Rule, which became effective on November 26, 2019, revokes California’s existing waiver to implement its own vehicle emission standard and also established a standard to be adopted and enforced nationwide (84 FR 51310). At the time of preparing this environmental document, the implications of the SAFE Rule on California’s future emissions are contingent upon a variety of unknown factors, including legal challenges by California and other states to the revocation of California’s waiver.

In June 2019, EPA, under the authority of CAA Section 111(d), issued the Affordable Clean Energy Rule, which provides guidance to states on establishing emissions performance standards for coal-fired electric generating units (EGUs).

Under this rule, states are required to submit plans to EPA that demonstrate the use of specifically listed retrofit technologies and operating practices to achieve CO2 emission reductions through heat rate improvement (HRI). HRI is a measurement of power plant efficiency that EPA determined as part of this rulemaking to be the best system of emission reductions for CO2 generated from coal-fired EGUs (EPA 2019).

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-67 STATE
Statewide GHG Emission Targets and Climate Change Scoping Plan Reducing GHG emissions in California has been the focus of the state government for approximately two decades.

GHG emission targets established by the state legislature include reducing statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (AB 32 of 2006) and reducing them to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (SB 32 of 2016). Executive Order S3-05 calls for statewide GHG emissions to be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Executive Order B-55- 18 calls for California to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 and achieve and maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter. These targets are in line with the scientifically established levels needed in the United States to limit the rise in global temperature to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (°C), the warming threshold at which major climate disruptions, such as super droughts and faster rising sea levels, are projected; these targets also pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 °C (United Nations 2015).

California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (2017 Scoping Plan), prepared by CARB, outlines the main strategies California will implement to achieve the legislated GHG emission target for 2030 and “substantially advance toward our 2050 climate goals” (CARB 2017). It identifies the reductions needed by each GHG emission sector (e.g., transportation, industry, electricity generation, agriculture, commercial and residential, pollutants with high GWP, and recycling and waste). The 2022 Draft Scoping Plan Update (2022 Scoping Plan Update) assesses progress toward the statutory 2030 target, while laying out a path to achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The proposed 2022 Scoping Plan Update focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the State’s longterm climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities (CARB 2022b). The Draft 2022 Scoping Plan Update and associated environmental documentation were released for public review on May 10, 2022. The comment period ended June 24, 2022.

Legislation Associated with Electricity Generation
The state has passed legislation requiring the increasing use of renewables to produce electricity for consumers.

California utilities are required to generate 33 percent of their electricity from renewables by 2020 (SB X1-2 of 2011), 52 percent by 2027 (SB 100 of 2018), 60 percent by 2030 (also SB 100 of 2018), and 100 percent by 2045 (also SB 100 of 2018).

LOCAL
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
SJVAPCD is the primary agency responsible for addressing air quality concerns in all of San Joaquin County. Its role is discussed further in Section 3.2, “Air Quality.” SJVAPCD also recommends methods for analyzing project-generated GHGs in CEQA analyses and offers multiple potential GHG reduction measures for land use development projects.

SJVAPCD developed thresholds of significance to provide a uniform scale to measure the significance of GHG emissions from land use and stationary source projects in compliance with CEQA and AB 32. SJVAPCD’s goals in developing GHG thresholds include ease of implementation, use of standard analysis tools, and emissions mitigation consistent with AB 32. However, since the passage of SB 32, which mandates a statewide emissions target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, SJVAPCD has not developed new thresholds in compliance with this target.

San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The following policies from the Public Health and Safety Element of the San Joaquin County General Plan are relevant to greenhouse gas emissions with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):
 Policy PHS-6.1 Municipal GHG Reduction Targets The County shall reduce GHG emissions from County facilities and activities by 15 percent below 2007 levels by 2020, and shall strive to reduce GHG emissions 40 percent and 80 percent below reduced 2020 levels by 2035 and 2050, respectively.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-68 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  Policy PHS-6.2 Community GHG Reduction Targets The County shall reduce community greenhouse gas emissions by 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, and shall strive to reduce GHG emissions by 40 percent and 80 percent below reduced 2020 levels by 2035 and 2050, respectively.  Policy PHS-6.3 GHG Reduction Strategies The County shall promote greenhouse gas emission reductions by encouraging efficient farming methods (e.g., no-till farming, crop rotation, cover cropping); supporting the installation of renewable energy technologies; and protecting grasslands, open space, oak woodlands, riparian forest and farmlands from conversion to urban uses.
 Policy PHS-6.4 Methane Digesters The County shall encourage large dairies to capture methane through use of manure digester systems to generate an alternative source of energy, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and serve as a source of profit for agricultural operations.  Policy PHS-6.5 Diversion, Recycling, and Reuse The County shall achieve a 75 percent diversion of landfilled waste based on 1990 levels by 2020, and shall achieve a diversion rate of 90 percent by 2035.  Policy PHS-6.6 Business-related GHG Reduction Strategies The County shall encourage all businesses to help reduce GHG emissions by: replacing high mileage fleet vehicles with more efficient and/or alternative fuel vehicles; increasing the energy efficiency of facilities; transitioning toward the use of renewable energy instead of non-renewable energy sources; adopting purchasing practices that promote emissions reductions and reusable materials; and increasing recycling.
 Policy PHS-6.7 New Development The County shall require new development to incorporate all feasible mitigation measures to reduce construction and operational GHG emissions.  Policy PHS-6.8 Agricultural Equipment and Emissions The County shall implement the following measures pertaining to agricultural equipment and emissions reductions:
 Support SJVAPCD programs to fund equipment upgrades, retrofits, and replacement through the Carl Moyer heavy-duty vehicle and equipment program or other funding mechanisms (e.g., Rule 9510).  Work with SJVAPCD and stakeholders to identify practical and feasible options for fuel-efficient agricultural equipment.
 Work with agricultural organizations and stakeholders to provide workshops and presentations and outreach materials focused on promoting fuel efficient farm equipment and operations and encourage participation in the Carl Moyer incentive program.
 Policy PHS-6.9 Public Awareness The County shall support public awareness about climate change and encourage County residents and businesses to become involved in activities and lifestyle changes that will aid in reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through alternative energy use, energy and water conservation, waste reduction and recycling, and other sustainable practices.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2005
The following policies from the Air Quality Element, Conservation and Open Space, and Public Services and Facilities Elements of the City’s General Plan are relevant to greenhouse gas emissions with respect to the project:
 Policy AIR-1.11: The City acknowledges the following facts: carbon dioxide is the most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas from future development in Riverbank; global increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration are due primarily to fossil fuel combustion and land use changes; anthropogenic increases in greenhouse gas concentrations cause climate change; and, the economic, social, and environmental consequences of climate change are catastrophic. The City will monitor and comply with relevant local, regional, statewide, and federal legislation and regulation designed to address climate change.  Policy CONS-6.6: The City will encourage the use of recycled water for appropriate use, including but not limited to outdoor irrigation, toilet flushing, fire hydrants, and commercial and industrial processes.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-69  Policy PUBLIC-3.1: The City will require that wastewater collection, conveyance, and treatment facilities meet or exceed local, State, and federal standards, as addressed in the City’s Sewer Collection System Master Plan.  Policy PUBLIC-3.2 The City will identify and utilize, as feasible, best environmental practices and technologies for wastewater collection, conveyance, and treatment.

3.8.2 Environmental Setting
Certain gases in the earth’s atmosphere, classified as GHGs, play a critical role in determining the earth’s surface temperature. GHGs are responsible for “trapping” solar radiation in the earth’s atmosphere, a phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect. Prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride.

Human-caused emissions of these GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for intensifying the greenhouse effect and leading to a trend of unnatural warming of the earth’s climate, known as global climate change or global warming. It is “extremely likely” that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in GHG concentrations and other anthropogenic factors together (IPCC 2014: 3, 5). By adoption of AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and SB 97, the State of California has acknowledged that the effects of GHG emissions cause adverse environmental impacts.

Emissions of GHGs have the potential to adversely affect the environment because such emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. Although the emissions of one single project, would not cause global climate change, GHG emissions from multiple projects throughout the world could result in a cumulative impact with respect to global climate change.

Guidance published by OPR does not include a quantitative threshold of significance to use for assessing a project’s GHG emissions under CEQA. Moreover, ARB has not established such a threshold or recommended a method for setting a threshold for project-level analysis. In the absence of a consistent statewide threshold, a threshold of significance for analyzing the project’s GHG emissions was developed. The issue of setting a GHG threshold is complex and dynamic, especially in light of the 2016 California Supreme Court decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (referred to as the Newhall Ranch decision hereafter). The California Supreme Court ruling also highlighted the need for the threshold to be tailored to the specific project type, its location, and the surrounding setting. Therefore, the threshold used to analyze the project is specific to the analysis herein and the SJVAPCD retains the ability to develop and/or use different thresholds of significance for other projects in its capacity as lead agency and recognizing the need for the individual threshold to be tailored and specific to individual projects.

State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064 and relevant portions of Appendix G recommend that a lead agency consider a project’s consistency with relevant, adopted plans and discuss any inconsistencies with applicable regional plans, including plans to reduce GHG emissions. SJVAPCD policy provides for a tiered approach in assessing significance of project-specific GHG emission increases, as shown below.  Projects complying with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or GHG mitigation program which avoids or substantially reduces GHG emissions within the geographic area in which the project is located would be determined to have a less-than-significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions. Such plans or programs must be specified in law or approved by the lead agency with jurisdiction over the affected resource and supported by a CEQA-compliant environmental review document adopted by the lead agency. Projects complying with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or GHG mitigation program would not be required to implement Best Performance Standards (BPS).
 Projects implementing BPS would not require quantification of project-specific GHG emissions. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines, such projects would be determined to have a less-than-significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-70 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  Projects not implementing BPS would require quantification of project-specific GHG emissions and demonstration that project-specific GHG emissions would be reduced or mitigated by at least 29 percent, and compared to business-as-usual (BAU), including GHG emission reductions achieved since the 2002-2004 baseline period, consistent with GHG emission reduction targets established in the 2017 Scoping Plan. Projects achieving at least a 29 percent GHG emission reduction compared to BAU would be determined to have a less-thansignificant individual and cumulative impact for GHGs.

3.8.3 Discussion
34Ba) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less-than-significant impact. Construction-related activities that would generate GHGs include worker commute trips, haul trucks carrying supplies and materials to and from the project site, and off-road construction equipment (e.g., dozers, graders, excavators). Project construction would include various phases over a 27-month construction timeline. Construction equipment and the number of truck trips would vary by phase, and are based on construction phasing and equipment inventory provided by the project applicant. A detailed description of construction modeling methodology is provided above in Section 3.3.3.

Total construction emissions for each year of construction are summarized in Table 3.8-1. Additional details on the modeling assumptions, inputs, and outputs are provided in Appendix B.

Table 3.8-1 Summary of Construction-Generated GHG Emissions Construction Year Emissions (MTCO2e)
2024 309
2025 363
2026 336
Total 1,008
Notes: MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent Refer to Appendix B for detailed s and modeling output files.

Source: Modeling conducted by Ascent Environmental in 2022.

As shown, construction activities would result in maximum annual emissions of 363 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year. SJVAPCD has not adopted a GHG emission threshold for construction-related emissions. However, this level of one-time GHG emissions is considered nominal relative to the 1,100-MTCO2e/year threshold recommended by many air districts in California for land use projects, including the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD).

For the most part, operational emission estimates are based on the same approach as described in Section 3.3.3.

However, the GHG analysis includes modeling for both the first year of operation (2027) and the future growth year (2050) to account for the anticipated increase in wastewater flows and associated increase in pump-related electricity consumption. Over time, the electric grid increasingly results in lower carbon output as the electrical utilities increase their renewable portfolio mix consistent with the state’s renewable portfolio standard and SB 100. This analysis accounts for the increase in renewable energy and associated decrease in carbon intensity in electricity delivered to power the pumps. Additionally, water consumption, wastewater generation, and solid waste generation are based on model defaults for 6,000 square feet of light industrial uses (which is equal to the size of the treatment and maintenance buildings).

Total estimated operational emissions for both 2027 and 2050 are summarized in Table 3.8-2. As shown, emissions in 2027 are primarily associated with pump electricity consumption, with smaller amounts associated with mobile (delivery and biosolids hauling) and stationary (backup generator testing). As shown, emissions in 2050 are expected Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-71 to drop substantially, as the electrical grid is expected to be carbon-free, and trucks associated with deliveries and hauling are expected to become even cleaner due to implementation of CARB rules related to truck fuel efficiency and electrification. As shown, emissions would be low in 2027, and would be much lower in 2045, demonstrating substantial progress toward carbon neutrality consistent with statewide planning efforts.

Table 3.8-2 Summary of Operational GHG Emissions
Emission Source Emissions (MTCO2e)
2027 2050
Area Sources <1 <1
Mobile Sources 12 10
Stationary Sources 11 11
Electricity 432 0
Water and Wastewater 3 2
Solid Waste 3 3
Total Operational Emissions 460 25
Notes: MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent Refer to Appendix B for detailed s and modeling output files.

Source: Modeling conducted by Ascent Environmental in 2022.

Overall, operation of the project is not expected to result in a significant impact on the environment. Emissions would be below the numerical thresholds that have been adopted (1,100 MTCO2e/year by BAAQMD and SMAQMD).

Moreover, while not quantified herein, the project would increase the use of recycled water for irrigation, which would reduce the need for depletion of groundwater sources.

Because project-related construction and operational GHGs would be less than adopted thresholds, and long-term operational GHG emissions would demonstrate substantial progress towards carbon neutrality, the project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment. This impact would be less than significant.
35Bb) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less-than-significant impact. The City has not developed a plan for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

However, both the City of Riverbank General Plan and San Joaquin County General Plan contain various policies and implementation strategies that aim to reduce emissions associated with both air quality and GHGs. For example, in the City’s General Plan, Policy CONS-6.6 states that the City will encourage the use of recycled water for appropriate use, including but not limited to outdoor irrigation, toilet flushing, fire hydrants, and commercial and industrial processes. Recycled water reduces energy required to convey, treat, and distribute water, thereby reducing electricity consumption and associated GHG emissions. The Natural and Cultural Resources (NCR) Element of the San Joaquin County General Plan includes numerous goals and policies related to water conservation and groundwater, stating specifically that groundwater recharge and prevention of overdraft are increasingly important strategies. Policies NCR-3.1 and NCR-3.2 direct the County to ensure that substantial groundwater recharge areas are maintained and that the development of groundwater recharge projects of all scales to increase groundwater supplies shall be encouraged. The project is consistent with these goals and policies because the project would contribute to greater water balance by replacing some of the groundwater that would otherwise be used for irrigation. Furthermore, production of recycled water would potentially reduce the use of on-site percolation basins, leading to potentially improved groundwater conditions underlying the project area (see more details in Section 3.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality”). The project would support the City’s and Country’s goals of preserving water resources. Additionally, the Local Action portion of the CARB Scoping Plan states that projects should develop a plan requiring water recycling, and greywater and rainwater reuse, and provide funding for incentives and other program delivery Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-72 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration mechanisms, where feasible. The project is consistent with these applicable policies and plans because it would produce and distribute high-quality recycled water for agricultural irrigation that helps to reduce energy consumption associated with irrigation water. Operational emission sources would be minimal, and the project would be consistent with the General Plan and statewide strategies in the Scoping Plan because the operational uses would support the City’s and County’s goals of incorporating water recycling and reducing groundwater depletion. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. This impact would be less than significant.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-73

3.9 91BHAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and/or accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?

3.9.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
EPA has primary responsibility for enforcing and implementing federal laws and regulations pertaining to hazardous materials. Applicable regulations are contained mainly in CFR Titles 29, 40, and 49. Hazardous materials, as defined in the CFR, are listed in 49 CFR 172.101. Management of hazardous materials is governed by the following laws:
 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) (42 USC 6901 et seq.) established a federal regulatory program for the generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous substances. Under RCRA, EPA regulates the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-74 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration disposal of hazardous substances. RCRA was amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, which banned the disposal of hazardous waste on land and strengthened EPA’s reporting requirements.  Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980: Also called the Superfund Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 USC 9601 et seq.) provided broad federal authority and created a trust fund for addressing releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances that could endanger public health or the environment. EPA is responsible for compiling the National Priorities List for known or threatened release sites of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (commonly referred to as “Superfund sites”). EPA provides oversight of, and supervision for, Superfund investigation/remediation projects, evaluates remediation technologies, and develops hazardous materials disposal restrictions and treatment standards.
 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986: Also called SARA Title III or the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986, the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (Public Law 99- 499; USC Title 42, Chapter 116) imposes hazardous materials planning requirements to help protect local communities in the event of accidental release.
 Clean Air Act: Regulations under the CCA (42 USC 7401 et seq., as amended) are designed to prevent accidental releases of hazardous materials. The regulations require facilities that store a threshold quantity or greater of regulated substances to develop a risk management plan that includes hazard assessments and response programs to prevent accidental releases of listed chemicals.

Transport of Hazardous Materials
DOT regulates the transport of hazardous materials between states and is responsible for protecting the public from dangers associated with such transport. The basic statute regulating transport of hazardous materials in the United States, addressed in 49 USC 5101 et seq. (formerly the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 USC 1801 et seq.), regulates intrastate and interstate transport by rail car, aircraft, motor vehicle, and vessel and includes requirements related to the appropriate packaging and labeling of the hazardous material for transit. There are registration requirements for individuals that offer and accept hazardous wastes, and hazardous materials must be properly classed, described, packaged, marked, and labeled. Hazardous materials transport regulations are enforced by the Federal Highway Administration, the US Coast Guard, the Federal Railroad Administration, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Occupational Safety and Health Administration Worker Safety Requirements The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible for ensuring worker safety. OSHA sets federal standards for implementation of workplace training, exposure limits, and safety procedures for handling hazardous substances and addressing other potential industrial hazards. OSHA also establishes criteria by which each state can implement its own health and safety program. The Hazard Communication Standard (CFR Title 29, Part 1910) requires that workers be informed of the hazards associated with the materials they handle. Workers must be trained in safe handling of hazardous materials, use of emergency response equipment, and building emergency response plans and procedures. Containers must be labeled appropriately, and material safety data sheets must be available in the workplace.

STATE
The Hazardous Waste Control Act
The Hazardous Waste Control Act (HSC Section 25100 et seq.) is the seminal hazardous waste control law in California. It establishes standards for regulating the generation, handling, processing, storage, transportation, and disposal of hazardous wastes. The hazardous waste control program is administered by California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and local Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPAs). Within the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), DTSC is primarily responsible for regulating the generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous substances under the authority of the Hazardous Waste Control Act; enforcement is delegated Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-75 to local jurisdictions. Regulations implementing the Hazardous Waste Control Act list hazardous chemicals and common substances that may be hazardous; establish criteria for identifying, packaging, and labeling hazardous substances; prescribe hazardous substances management; establish permit requirements for the treatment, storage, disposal, and transportation of hazardous substances; and identify hazardous substances prohibited from landfills.

These regulations apply to the protection of human health and the environment during construction.

Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program CalEPA has adopted regulations implementing the Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program (Unified Program). The six program elements of the Unified Program are hazardous waste generation and onsite treatment, underground storage tanks (USTs), aboveground storage tanks, hazardous material release response plans and inventories, risk management and prevention programs, and Uniform Fire Code hazardous materials management plans and inventories. The program is implemented at the local level by a local agency, referred to as the CUPA, which is responsible for consolidating the administration of the six program elements within its jurisdiction. Although the project proponent and owner is the City of Riverbank, which is located in Stanislaus County, since the project site is located in San Joaquin County, the San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department is the CUPA pursuant to HSC Section 25180; San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors Resolution R-95-760 and San Joaquin County Ordinance No. 4432.

Emergency Response to Hazardous Materials Incidents
California has developed an emergency response plan to coordinate emergency services provided by federal, state, and local governments and private agencies. Response to hazardous material incidents is one part of this plan. The plan is managed by the California Emergency Management Agency, which coordinates the responses of other agencies, including CalEPA, the California Highway Patrol, the CDFW, and regional water quality control boards (RWQCBs).

California Government Code Section 65962.5 (Cortese List) The provisions of California Government Code Section 65962.5 are commonly referred to as the “Cortese List” (after the legislator who authored the law). The Cortese List is a planning document used by state and local agencies to comply with CEQA requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. The list, or a site’s presence on the list, has bearing on the local permitting process. DTSC is responsible for a portion of the information contained in the Cortese List. Other state and local government agencies in California, such as the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), also must provide additional release information.

Government Code Section 65962.5 requires CalEPA to develop an updated Cortese List at least annually. However, because this statute was enacted more than 20 years ago, some of the provisions refer to agency activities that are no longer being implemented, and in some cases, the information to be included in the Cortese List does not exist.

Further, although Government Code Section 65962.5 makes reference to the preparation of a “list,” many changes have occurred related to web-based information access since 1992, and this information is now largely available on the internet sites of the responsible organizations. A centralized list is no longer compiled.

California Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law The California Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law requires preparation of hazardous materials Business Plans and disclosure of hazardous materials inventories. Such plans must include an inventory of hazardous materials handled, facility floor plans showing where hazardous materials are stored, and an emergency response plan, and they must establish emergency response procedures that include employee training (HSC, Division 20, Chapter 6.95, Article 1). The business plan program is administered by the California Emergency Management Agency.

California Accidental Release Prevention Program
The goal of the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CCR Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 4.5) is to reduce the likelihood and severity of consequences of any releases of extremely hazardous materials. Any business that handles regulated substances (chemicals that pose a major threat to public health and safety or the environment because they Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-76 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration are highly toxic, flammable, or explosive, including ammonia, chlorine gas, hydrogen, nitric acid, and propane) must prepare a risk management plan. The risk management plan is a detailed engineering analysis of the potential accident factors present at a business and the measures that can be implemented to reduce this accident potential. The plan must provide safety information, hazard data, operating procedures, and training and maintenance requirements. The list of regulated substances is found in Article 8, Section 2770.5 of the program regulations.

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
Through the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and the NPDES program, RWQCBs have the authority to require proper management of hazardous materials during project construction. For a detailed description of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the NPDES program, and the role of the RWQCBs, see Section 3.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality.”
SWRCB adopted the statewide NPDES Construction General Permit in August 1999. The state requires that projects disturbing more than 1 acre of land during construction file a notice of intent with the appropriate RWQCB to be covered under this permit. Construction activities subject to the General Permit include clearing, grading, stockpiling, and excavation. Dischargers are required to eliminate or reduce non-stormwater discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters. A SWPPP must be developed and implemented for each site covered by the permit. The plan must identify BMPs designed to prevent construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and keep products of erosion from moving off‐site into receiving waters throughout the construction and life of the project; the BMPs must address source control and, if necessary, pollutant control.

Waste Discharge Requirements
Pursuant to 27 CCR, Section 2005 et seq., SWRCB has established regulations addressing the treatment, storage, processing, and/or disposal of waste. For given sites, like the existing WWTP, the RWQCB approves site-specific requirements and monitoring responsibilities related to on-site operations that are intended to insure the maintenance of acceptable water quality within the region and prevent the potential release of hazardous materials via surface waters and groundwater. As noted in Chapter 2, “Project Description,” current discharge requirements for the WWTP are prescribed under WDR Order No. 94-100 and the associated Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP), which was adopted by the Central Valley RWQCB on April 22, 1994.

California Occupational Safety and Health Administration Worker Safety Requirements The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) assumes primary responsibility for developing and enforcing workplace safety regulations in California. Cal/OSHA regulations for the use of hazardous materials in the workplace (CCR Title 8) require safety training, available safety equipment, accident and illness prevention programs, hazardous substance exposure warnings, and preparation of emergency action and fire prevention plans. Cal/OSHA enforces regulations on hazard communication programs and mandates specific training and information requirements. These requirements include procedures for identifying and labeling hazardous substances, providing hazard information about hazardous substances and their handling, and preparing health and safety plans to protect workers and employees at hazardous waste sites. Employers must make material safety data sheets available to employees and document employee information and training programs.

California State Aeronautics Act
At the state level, Caltrans’ Division of Aeronautics administers FAA regulations (Stats. 1951, Ch. 764; Public Utilities Code Section 21001 et seq.). The division issues permits for public-use airports. In addition, the Division of Aeronautics administers noise regulation and land use planning laws, which regulate the operational activities and provides for the integration of aviation planning on a regional basis. There are no airports located near the project site therefore the project is located outside of any airports’ safety zones and any noise contours set forth in such airport land use compatibility plans.

California Building Code
The CBC (CCR Title 24 Part 2)) contains general building design and construction requirements relating to fire and life safety, structural safety, and access compliance. CBC provisions provide minimum standards to safeguard life or limb, Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-77 health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of all buildings and structures and certain equipment. The CBC is based on the International Building Code, but has been amended for California conditions. It is generally adopted on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis, subject to further modification based on local conditions. Commercial and residential buildings are plan-checked by local building officials for compliance with the CBC. Typical fire safety requirements of the CBC include the installation of sprinklers in all high-rise buildings; the establishment of fire resistance standards for fire doors, building materials, and particular types of construction; and the clearance of debris and vegetation within a prescribed distance from occupied structures in wildfire hazard areas.

California Fire Code
The California Fire Code (CFC) is contained within CCR Title 24. The CFC establishes requirements for development design to safeguard public health, safety and general welfare from the hazards of fire. This includes standards on building design, materials, fire flow, and other suppression provisions. The CFC also regulates the use, handling, and storage requirements for hazardous materials at fixed facilities. The CFC and the CBC use a hazard classification system to determine what protective measures are required to protect life and provide fire safety. These measures may include applying construction standards, requiring separation between structures and property lines, and using specialized equipment. To ensure that these safety measures are met, the CFC employs a permit system based on hazard classification. The CFC is updated every 3 years.

LOCAL
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The following policies from the Public Health and Safety Element of the San Joaquin County General Plan are relevant to hazards and hazardous materials with respect to the project:
 Policy PHS-1.3. Emergency Operations Plans: The County shall maintain and implement the following emergency and hazard mitigation plans to provide emergency planning, mitigation, response, and recovery activities to the community:
 Emergency Operations Plan,
 Mountain House Community Emergency Operations Plan,
 Multi-Hazard Functional Plan,
 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, and
 Flood Safety Plan and Contingency Mapping.
 Policy PHS-1.4. Emergency Preparedness Exercises: The County shall coordinate with local and regional agencies to conduct emergency and disaster preparedness exercises to test operational and emergency plans.  Policy PHS-1.8. Emergency Operations Center: The County shall continue to maintain the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) as the single point for centralized management and coordination of emergency response and recovery operations during a disaster or emergency.
 Policy PHS-1.10. Emergency Vehicles Access: The County shall require all new developments to provide, and existing developments to maintain, adequate primary and alternative access for emergency vehicles.  Policy PHS-4.1. Community Wildfire Protection Plan: The County shall maintain and implement the Community Wildfire Protection Plan as a mechanism for community input and identification of areas with high fire hazard risk.
 Policy PHS-4.2. Residential Densities in High Hazard Areas: The County shall restrict development to rural residential densities or lower and require on-site fire suppression measures in areas with high or extreme wildfire hazards.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-78 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  Policy PHS-4.3. Fire Prevention Measures: The County shall implement State recommendations for fire prevention in Fire Hazard Severity Zones and require new and/or existing development to provide clearance around structures, use fire-resistant ground cover, build with fire-resistant roofing materials, participate in fuel load reduction, and take other appropriate measures.
 Policy PHS-4.4. Clear Zones: The County shall require clear zones and regular weed abatement around residential structures in high fire hazard areas and assist property owners in identifying how clear zones should be maintained.
 Policy PHS-4.5. Vegetation and Fuel Management: The County shall require new development in high fire-hazard areas to have fire-resistant vegetation, cleared fire breaks separating communities or clusters of structures from native vegetation, or a long-term comprehensive vegetation and fuel management program consistent with State codes 4290 and 4291 for wildland fire interface and vegetation management.  Policy PHS-4.6. Fire Protection Coordination: The County shall encourage well-organized and efficient coordination among fire agencies, CalFire, and the County.  Policy PHS-7.1. Minimize Hazardous Materials and Wastes: The County shall discourage the use of hazardous materials and the creation of hazardous wastes.
 Policy PHS-7.2. Avoid Contamination of Resources: The County shall strive to ensure that hazardous materials and wastes do not contaminate air, water, or soil resources.  Policy PHS-7.3. Control Hazardous Materials: The County shall require the use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes to comply with local, State, and Federal safety standards.  Policy PHS-7.4. County Hazardous Waste Management Plan: The County shall maintain and implement the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
 Policy PHS-7.5. Locate Hazardous Materials Away from Populated Areas: To the extent feasible, the County shall require proposed activities and land uses that use, store, or dispose of hazardous materials or wastes to be located away from existing and planned populated areas.  Policy PHS-7.6. Require Hazardous Materials Management Plans: The County shall require businesses that use or store materials and wastes on-site to prepare Hazardous Materials Management Plans (Business Plans) that map and inventory all hazardous materials and contain contingency plans for accidents, designate an individual or individuals as emergency coordinator(s), and ensure that all employees understand the potential for accidents and the appropriate response. Plans must follow the requirements for Federal, State, and/or local defined special flood hazard areas.
 Policy PHS-7.7. County Hazardous Materials Area Plan: The County shall maintain and implement the County Hazardous Materials Area Plan for emergency response to a release or threatened release of hazardous material within the unincorporated County.
 Policy PHS-7.8. Consistency with Hazardous Waste Management Plan: The County shall require all new development to be consistent with the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (CHWMP). Any proposed hazardous waste facility, or expansion of an existing hazardous waste facility, shall be consistent with the CHWMP.
 Policy PHS-7.9. Require Disclosure of Hazardous Materials and Waste: The County shall require public disclosure of hazardous materials and wastes for existing and proposed businesses.  Policy PHS-7.11. Hazardous Materials Transportation Routes: The County shall continue to maintain route designations for hazardous materials transport within San Joaquin County.  Policy PHS-7.12. Hazardous Liquids Storage Tanks: The County shall maintain and implement hazardous material regulations for the storage of hazardous liquids in underground or aboveground storage tanks.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-79  Policy PHS-7.13. Hazardous Waste Disposal Facilities: The County shall provide areas for hazardous waste disposal facilities sufficient to meet the needs of county residents and businesses.  Policy PHS-7.14. Legislative Support: The County shall support legislation that would further reduce public risks associated with hazardous materials, reduce hazardous waste generation, aid in cleanup, or provide assistance for hazardous materials management.
 Policy PHS-7.15. Site Cleanup Support: The County shall support programs and funding for determination of sites contaminated with hazardous materials and for site cleanup.  Policy PHS-7.16. Hazardous Waste Property Designations: When known, the County shall refer contaminated sites to the appropriate lead agency with established authority/jurisdiction for the required assessment and cleanup activities.
 Policy PHS-8.1. Land Use Compatibility: The County shall prohibit land uses within unincorporated areas that interfere with the safe operation of aircraft or that would expose people to hazards from the operation of aircraft.

San Joaquin County Emergency Operations Plan
The San Joaquin County Office of Emergency Services (OES) is the single coordinating center for major emergency activities. The San Joaquin County OES prepared the San Joaquin County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), which establishes a systematic and synchronized process to facilitate emergency preparedness, promote hazard mitigation, and coordinate emergency response and disaster recovery activities and actions. The EOP identifies the primary responsibilities of San Joaquin County government before, during, and after emergencies and major disasters, while recognizing the significant roles of federal, tribal, state, and other local government agencies, as well as the private sector, and non-governmental organizations/private nonprofits. The primary objective of the EOP is to coordinate the personnel, facilities, and other resources of the County into an efficient organization capable of responding to any emergency, disaster, or planned event (San Joaquin County 2022).

The EOP accomplishes the following (San Joaquin County 2022):
 Establishes a County emergency management structure, which will coordinate and support on-scene responses, including maintenance of situational awareness, facilitation of effective communication between operations centers at various levels of government, maintain continuity of government, and interaction with public information sources.
 Establishes the overall operational concepts associated with the management of incidents, emergencies, crises, disasters, and catastrophes at the County and operational area levels.  Provides a flexible platform for planning and response to all hazards, incidents, events, and emergencies believed to be important to the operational area. It is applicable to a wide variety of anticipated incident events including floods, droughts, earthquakes, and public health issues.

San Joaquin County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan – Revised 2017 The local hazard mitigation plan (LHMP) is intended to provide strategies for the County and other local jurisdictions to identify and implement mitigation actions for reducing damages from various potential natural and technological disasters. The goals, actions, and strategies contained in the San Joaquin County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan document are only for the unincorporated areas of the County (San Joaquin County 2017b).

San Joaquin County Municipal Code
Title 4 Division 8 of the San Joaquin County Municipal Code outlines the handling of and regulations of hazardous materials in the County.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The following policies from the Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to hazards and hazardous materials with respect to the project:

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-80 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  Policy CIRC-4.1: The City will work with relevant public agencies and the railroad to appropriately regulate the movement of truck traffic and hazardous materials throughout the City.  Policy CIRC-4.4: The City will support the development and implementation of a quick-response emergency services program for railroad corridors and continue to support the County’s Hazardous Materials Team.

The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to hazards and hazardous materials with respect to the project:
 Policy PUBLIC-7.1: The City will ensure that adequate fire flow pressure is available in relation to structure size, design, requirements for construction, and/or built-in fire protection systems. Maintenance of adequate fire flows includes factors such as adequate storage, system gridding, hydrant spacing, and spacing and sizing of water mains, as specified in the City’s Water Master Plan.
 Policy PUBLIC-7.2: For new development, the City will require a minimum fire flow pressure of 1,500 GPM (sustainable for at least two hours) for residential use. For new development, the City will require a minimum fire flow pressure of approximately 3,600 GPM (sustainable for longer periods) for larger residences and for other building types, depending on the particular use and structure characteristics, and in coordination with the fire service provider.
 Policy PUBLIC-7.3: The City will require that fire stations be located to ensure the appropriate level of service (including adequate response time per Policy Public 7.5), community compatibility, and efficiency, including the location of such facilities relative existing and planned public parks, libraries, and other activity centers.  Policy PUBLIC-7.4: The City will coordinate with fire protection providers, including through reciprocity arrangements, to ensure equipment, staffing, and facilities for emergency medical services, urban search and rescue, hazardous materials emergency response, and other relevant needs, as appropriate. The City will ensure consistency with National Fire Protection Association and Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District response requirements.
 Policy PUBLIC-7.5: The City will coordinate with fire protection providers to [provide] an emergency response system capable of achieving the following standards in 95% of all cases: first fire emergency response unit within six minutes of dispatch; full alarm assignment within 10 minutes of dispatch; second alarm assignment within 15 minutes of dispatch; and an Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of Class 2 for areas within the City.  Policy PUBLIC-7.6: The City will work with property owners in existing developed portions of the City to achieve a minimum fire flow pressure of 1,500 GPM (sustainable for at least two hours) for residential use and approximately 3,600 GPM (sustainable for longer periods) for larger residences and for other building types, depending on the particular use and structure characteristics, and in coordination with the fire service provider.

The following policies from the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to hazards and hazardous materials with respect to the project:
 Policy SAFE-1.2: The City will continue to enforce State of California Building Standards Commission uniform codes, such as the California Building Code and California Fire Code with adopted Fire District amendments.  Policy SAFE-1.3: The City will encourage the retrofitting of older buildings to current safety standards, and require compliance to recommendations of the fire and law enforcement service providers and the State Building Standards Commission uniform codes in coordination with major remodeling or additions.  Policy SAFE-1.4: The City will require set backs, ignition resistant building materials, or other measures to reduce exposure to potential wildfires in areas designated for natural open space preservation, in coordination with California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection recommendations and Maintenance of Defensible Space Measures, as appropriate.
 Policy SAFE-1.5: Approved plans, projects, and subdivision requests will ensure adequate fire flow per City and Fire District standards. The installation of automatic fire sprinklers may, at the discretion of the City and the Fire Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-81 Chief, allow for a reduction in the required fire flow, while still complying with the California Fire Code requirements.
 Policy SAFE-1.8: The City will require that hazardous materials are used, stored, transported, and disposed in a safe manner and in compliance with local, State, and federal safety standards.  Policy SAFE-1.10: The City will review development requests and require that any airborne, waterborne, windborne, and other hazardous materials issues are fully disclosed, analyzed, and mitigated to ensure against any risk relative to any nearby planned or existing land uses and their users.  Policy SAFE-2.1: The City will require development and maintenance of a road system that provides adequate access for emergency equipment.
 Policy SAFE-2.2: The City will consult with fire protection service providers in reviewing development proposals.

Development proposals will include City conditions that respond to concerns of fire protection service providers.  Policy SAFE-2.3: The City will improve fire flow in existing developed areas of the City, as feasible, to meet standards presented in the Public Facilities and Services Element of the General Plan and relevant City Master Plans.
 Policy SAFE-2.4: The City will coordinate with the County Office of Emergency Services to identify evacuation routes and operational plans to be used in case of dam failure, flood disaster, and wildfire for any new growth areas in addition to any updates required to serve the existing developed City.

3.9.2 Environmental Setting
The project site consists mostly of disturbed land which currently, and historically, has been used for the existing WWTP. The WWTP treats and disposes the wastewater (sewage) collected from within the City of Riverbank. The WWTP is located north of Riverbank across the Stanislaus River and borders the north side of Jacob Myers Park.

The majority of the WWTP facilities were constructed before the 1990s, with upgrades to the aeration system in the late-2010’s (KSN and BC 2022). The existing facilities at the WWTP consist of a headworks system, two aerated treatment ponds, two polishing ponds, eight evaporation/percolation ponds, 13 groundwater monitoring wells, and associated piping and mechanical components.

DOCUMENTED SITES OF CONTAMINATION
The project site is not listed as a hazardous waste and substances site maintained by CalEPA pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (DTSC 2022). It is also not currently on the Cortese List of hazardous waste and substance sites or SWRCB’s list of open, active leaking UST sites, based on a review of the agency databases (SWRCB 2022). However, since the project site is a wastewater treatment facility , it is identified as a site subject to WDRs, as noted on the SWRCB’s GeoTracker website.

As discussed in Section 2.0, “Project Description,” the WWTP is in compliance with applicable WDRs, with the following exceptions:
 Nitrate and ammonia concentrations in groundwater sampled from several interior monitoring wells dominated by effluent exceed recommended groundwater limitations.  Dissolved oxygen in ponds T-1 and T-2 periodically fall below the 1.0 mg/L limit.  The City is currently implementing measures consistent with the WDRs and MRP, which were adopted for the site on April 22, 1994, to reduce nitrate and ammonia concentrations, and increase oxygen concentrations at the site to within the limits established by the WDRs.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-82 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

TRANSPORT OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Hazardous materials, hazardous wastes, and petroleum products are a subset of the goods routinely shipped along the transportation corridors in the project area. In California, unless specifically exempted, it is unlawful for any person to transport hazardous wastes unless the person holds a valid registration issued by DTSC. DTSC maintains a list of active registered hazardous waste transporters throughout California, and the California Department of Public Health regulates the haulers of hazardous waste.

Current operations at the WWTP include the transport, storage, and use of hazardous materials related to wastewater treatment. Hazardous chemicals are stored in designated hazardous materials storage or containment areas on-site, depending on the nature of the chemical., All chemicals used for wastewater treatment are stored according to local, state, and federal regulations.

SCHOOLS
Children are particularly susceptible to long-term effects from emissions of hazardous materials. Therefore, locations where children spend extended periods, such as schools, are sensitive to hazardous air emissions and accidental release associated with the handling of extremely hazardous materials, substances, or wastes. This risk is considered substantial where the potential release is within 0.25 mile of the school. No existing or proposed schools are within

0.25 mile of the project site. The nearest school is Cardozo Middle School located approximately 0.8 mile southeast of the project site.

AIRPORTS AND AIRSTRIPS
There are no active public airports or private airstrips within 2 miles of the project site. The nearest public airport to the project site is Oakdale Airport, located approximately 8 miles east of the project site.

3.9.3 Discussion
36Ba) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less-than-significant impact. Construction of the project could temporarily increase the transport of materials generally regarded as hazardous materials that are typically used in construction activities. It is anticipated that limited quantities of miscellaneous hazardous substances, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic fluids, and other similarly related materials would be brought onto the project site, and used and stored there during the construction period. The types and quantities of materials to be used for construction of the project could pose a significant risk to the public and/or the environment if not properly handled. Operation of the WWTP would continue to involve hazardous materials. The transport, storage, and use of hazardous materials could potentially expose and adversely affect workers, the public, or the environment as a result of improper handling or use, accident, environmentally unsound disposal methods, fire, explosion, or other emergencies, resulting in adverse health or environmental effects.

State agencies regulating hazardous materials are Cal/EPA and the Office of Emergency Services. The California Highway Patrol and Caltrans enforce regulations for hazardous materials transport. Within Cal/EPA, DTSC has primary regulatory authority to enforce hazardous materials regulations. State hazardous waste regulations are contained primarily in CCR Title 22. The Cal/OSHA has developed rules and regulations regarding worker safety around hazardous and toxic substances. Because the City and its contractors would implement and comply with these regulations during construction and operation of the project, the potential for significant hazards to the public through routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials would be minimal, and this impact would be less than significant.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-83 37Bb) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less-than-significant impact. As discussed above, there are no existing hazardous materials sites located within or near the project site. During project construction and operation, project-related activities may involve the transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. The City is required to comply with existing laws and regulations regarding the transportation, use, and disposal of hazardous materials in relation to construction and operation of the WWTP. These regulations are specifically designed to protect the public health and the environment, including through the prevention of accident conditions, and must be adhered to during project construction and operation.

Although the existing WWTP is currently in compliance with applicable WDRs (apart from the nitrate and ammonia concentrations in groundwater sampled from several interior monitoring wells dominated by effluent which exceed recommended groundwater limitations, and the dissolved oxygen in ponds T-1 and T-2 which periodically fall below the 1.0 mg/L limit), the continued compliance with the WDRs and MRP (discussed in Section 2.0, “Project Description”) would achieve the concentration limitations outlined in the regulations. Furthermore, as part of the project, WWTP operations would be subject to amended WDRs, including monitoring responsibilities and potential corrective actions, for the discharge of treated wastewater to land, as described in Section 2.9 of the Project Description, “Required Permits and Project Approvals.” Compliance with the amended WDRs and other applicable regulations would ensure that the potential for accident conditions would be minimized and addressed appropriately as part of regulatory compliance. As a result, this impact would be less than significant. 38Bc) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No impact. There are no existing schools within one-quarter mile radius of the project site. The nearest existing school to the project site is Cardozo Middle School, located approximately 0.8 miles southeast of the project site.

Therefore, the project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. No impact would occur. 39Bd) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Less-than-significant impact. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires that DTSC compile and maintain a list of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action, land designated as hazardous waste property, or hazardous waste disposals on public land. This list is known as the Cortese List, which can be accessed on CalEPA’s website. As described above, the project site and surrounding area are not located on a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites (DTSC 2022; SWRCB 2022). The project site is a wastewater treatment facility and is identified on the SWRCB’s GeoTracker website as a WDRs site and is not identified as a hazardous materials site. Thus, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment, and this impact would be less that significant. 40Be) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
No impact. The nearest public airport to the project site is Oakdale Airport, located approximately 8 miles east of the project site. The project site is not located within the airport land use plan for this airport, or any other airport, nor is it located in a restricted airport zone. Therefore, no impact would occur.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-84 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 41Bf) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less-than-significant impact. San Joaquin County has an EOP and a LHMP, which address emergencies and evacuation within the County. Access to the WWTP site (as discussed in Section 2.0, “Project Description”) is limited and a temporary access point and road would be required to support the transportation of construction materials and equipment during project construction. The proposed temporary access point would be located northwest of the project site off Burwood Road. The approximately 9,000-foot-long temporary access road would be constructed between the access point and the WWTP site on a combination of private farm roads and existing WWTP roads, both currently unimproved. Improvements would include fine grading followed by placement of aggregate base rock on the existing roads. The temporary construction access road would be maintained throughout the construction timeline. Watering of this road would be required to prevent fugitive dust caused by vehicular traffic as necessary.

Encroachment permits for the temporary access point would be acquired as required by San Joaquin County. As part of this encroachment permit application, the project applicant would be required to prepare and implement a traffic control plan, which would require temporary traffic controls during construction. Although affected roadway segments may be closed temporarily during pipeline installation activities, traffic control operations would be noticed at the location of the temporary traffic restrictions a week in advance of any road work that impedes the flow of traffic (i.e. closes the road, closes a traffic lane, or closes the road shoulder). All roadways would be repaved and returned to pre-project conditions upon completion of project construction. Once operational, the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. 42Bg) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
No impact. The project site is not located within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) nor is it on land classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone (CAL FIRE 2022). The project would involve improvements to the existing WWTP which includes increasing its existing capacity in order to accommodate the planned growth and expansion of the City through 2050, as envisioned in the City’s General Plan. Project development would be required by law to incorporate the CBC, the CFC with adopted Fire District amendments, and other applicable state and local fire safety requirements. In addition, the City of Riverbank and San Joaquin County General Plan policies listed in Section 3.9.1, “Regulatory Setting” would ensure people and structures would not be exposed to significant risk of loss of injury involving wildland fires. Furthermore, the project does not include any residential components. Therefore, implementation of the project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur. For additional information and analysis related to wildland fire hazards, refer to Section 3.20, “Wildfire.”
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-85

3.10 92BHYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
X. Hydrology and Water Quality.

Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial on- or offsite erosion or siltation; ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management
plan?

3.10.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
Clean Water Act
EPA is the lead federal agency responsible for water quality management. The Clean Water Act (CWA) is the primary federal law that governs and authorizes water quality control activities by EPA as well as the states. Various elements of the CWA address water quality. These are discussed below.

CWA Water Quality Criteria/Standards
Pursuant to federal law, EPA has published water quality regulations under Title 40 of the CFR. Section 303 of the CWA requires states to adopt water quality standards for all surface waters of the United States. As defined by the act, water quality standards consist of designated beneficial uses of the water body in question and criteria that Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-86 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration protect the designated uses. Section 304(a) requires EPA to publish advisory water quality criteria that accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge on the kind and extent of all effects on health and welfare that may be expected from the presence of pollutants in water. Where multiple uses exist, water quality standards must protect the most sensitive use. As described in the discussion of state regulations below, SWRCB and its nine RWQCBs have designated authority in California to identify beneficial uses and adopt applicable water quality objectives.

CWA Section 303(d) Impaired Waters List
Under Section 303(d) of the CWA, states are required to develop lists of water bodies that do not attain water quality objectives after implementation of required levels of treatment by point source dischargers (municipalities and industries). Section 303(d) requires that the state develop a total maximum daily load (TMDL) for each of the listed pollutants. The TMDL is the amount of the pollutant that the water body can receive and still comply with water quality objectives. The TMDL is also a plan to reduce loading of a specific pollutant from various sources to achieve compliance with water quality objectives. In California, implementation of TMDLs is achieved through water quality control plans, known as Basin Plans, of the RWQCBs.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The NPDES permit program was established in the CWA to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the United States. NPDES permit regulations have been established for broad categories of discharges including point source waste discharges and nonpoint source stormwater runoff. Each NPDES permit identifies limits on allowable concentrations and mass emissions of pollutants contained in the discharge. Sections 401 and 402 of the CWA contain general requirements regarding NPDES permits. “Nonpoint source” pollution originates over a wide area rather than from a definable point. Nonpoint source pollution often enters receiving water in the form of surface runoff and is not conveyed by way of pipelines or discrete conveyances. Two types of nonpoint source discharges are controlled by the NPDES program: discharges caused by general construction activities and the general quality of stormwater in municipal stormwater systems. The goal of the NPDES nonpoint source regulations is to improve the quality of stormwater discharged to receiving waters to the maximum extent practicable. The RWQCBs in California are responsible for implementing the NPDES permit system.

National Flood Insurance Act
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is tasked with responding to, planning for, recovering from and mitigating against disasters. The Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration within FEMA is responsible for administering the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and administering programs that aid with mitigating future damages from natural hazards.

FEMA prepares Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that delineate the regulatory floodplain to assist local governments with the land use planning and floodplain management decisions needed to meet the requirements of NFIP. Floodplains are divided into flood hazard areas, which are areas designated per their potential for flooding, as delineated on FIRMs. Special Flood Hazard Areas are the areas identified as having a one percent chance of flooding in each year (otherwise known as the 100-year flood). In general, the NFIP mandates that development is not to proceed within the regulatory 100-year floodplain, if the development is expected to increase flood elevation by 1 foot or more.

STATE
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1970 (Porter-Cologne Act) California’s primary statute governing water quality and water pollution issues with respect to both surface waters and groundwater is the Porter-Cologne Act. The Porter-Cologne Act grants SWRCB and each of the nine RWQCBs power to protect water quality, and is the primary vehicle for implementation of California’s responsibilities under the CWA. The applicable RWQCB for the project is the Central Valley RWQCB. Both the SWRCB and the Central Valley RWQCB have the authority and responsibility to adopt plans and policies, regulate discharges to surface and groundwater, regulate waste disposal Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-87 sites, and require cleanup of discharges of hazardous materials and other pollutants. The Porter-Cologne Act also establishes reporting requirements for unintended discharges of any hazardous substances, sewage, or oil or petroleum products.

Under the Porter-Cologne Act, each RWQCB must formulate and adopt a water quality control plan (known as a “Basin Plan”) for its region. The project area is within the Central Valley RWQCB’s jurisdiction and would be required to comply with the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins (Basin Plan). The Basin Plan includes a comprehensive list of waterbodies within the region and detailed language about the components of applicable Water Quality Objectives (WQOs). The Basin Plan recognizes natural water quality, existing and potential beneficial uses, and water quality problems associated with human activities throughout the region. Through the Basin Plan, the Central Valley RWQCB executes its regulatory authority to enforce the implementation of TMDLs, and to ensure compliance with surface WQOs. The Basin Plan includes both narrative, and numerical WQOs designed to provide protection for all designated and potential beneficial uses in all its principal streams and tributaries. The Central Valley RWQCB also administers the adoption of WDRs, manages groundwater quality, and adopts projects within its boundaries under the NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit).

Waste Discharge Requirements Order No. 94-100
Current discharge requirements for the WWTP are prescribed under WDR Order No. 94-100 and the associated MRP, which was adopted by the Central Valley RWQCB, on 22 April 1994. A summary of applicable WDRs is provided in Section 2.5, “Existing Water Pollution Control Requirements.” NPDES Construction General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity SWRCB adopted the statewide NPDES Construction General Permit in August 1999. The state requires that projects disturbing more than 1 acre of land during construction file a Notice of Intent with the applicable RWQCB to be covered under this permit. Construction activities subject to the NPDES Construction General Permit include clearing, grading, stockpiling, and excavation. Dischargers are required to eliminate or reduce non-stormwater discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters. A SWPPP must be developed and implemented for each site covered by the permit. The SWPPP must include BMPs designed to prevent construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and keep products of erosion from moving off‐site into receiving waters throughout the construction and life of the project; the BMPs must address source control and, if necessary, pollutant control.

Title 22 of California’s Code of Regulations
CCR Title 22 refers to state guidelines for how treated and recycled water is discharged and used. CCR Title 22 lists the specific uses allowed with the following types of recycled water: (1) disinfected tertiary recycled water (such as irrigating parks), (2) disinfected secondary recycled water (such as irrigating animal feed and other unprocessed crops), and (3) undisinfected secondary recycled water (such as industrial uses). Other allowed uses of the disinfected recycled water include irrigation of food crops and residential landscaping, supply of recreational impoundments for unrestricted body contact, air conditioning, commercial laundry, decorative fountains, and flushing toilets in commercial buildings. SWRCB governs the permitting of recycled water projects, develops uniform water recycling criteria and reviews and approves Title 22 engineering reports for recycled water use. Wastewater treatment standards are set and enforced by the state’s nine RWQCBs in consultation with the California Department of Public Health.

California Water Code
The California Water Code is enforced by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The mission of DWR is “to manage the water resources of California in cooperation with other agencies, to benefit the state’s people, and to protect, restore, and enhance the natural and human environments.” DWR is responsible for promoting California’s general welfare by ensuring beneficial water use and development statewide.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-88 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Groundwater Management
Groundwater management is outlined in the California Water Code, Division 6, Part 2.75, Chapters 1-5, Sections 10750 through 10755.4. The Groundwater Management Act was first introduced in 1992 as AB 3030, and has since been modified by SB 1938 in 2002, AB 359 in 2011, and the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SB 1168, SB 1319, and AB 1739) in 2014. The intent of these Acts is to encourage local agencies to work cooperatively to manage groundwater resources within their jurisdictions and to provide a methodology for developing a Groundwater Management Plan.

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 (SGMA) became law on January 1, 2015, and applies to all groundwater basins in the state (Water Code Section 10720.3). By enacting SGMA, the legislature intended to provide local agencies with the authority and the technical and financial assistance necessary to sustainably manage groundwater within their jurisdiction (Water Code Section 10720.1).

Pursuant to SGMA, any local agency that has water supply, water management, or land use responsibilities within a groundwater basin may elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency (GSA) for that basin (Water Code Section 10723). The project area is within the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin, which has been designated under SGMA as a high priority basin. The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority, which is the GSA for the subbasin, adopted the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin GSP in November 2019. The 2019 GSP was subsequently revised in June 2022 to address deficiencies identified by DWR.

Water Reclamation Requirements for Recycled Water Use
SWRCB adopted Water Reclamation Requirements for Recycled Water Use (Order WQ 2016-0068-DDW) (General Order) on June 7, 2016. The General Order establishes standard conditions for recycled water use and conditionally delegates authority to an Administrator to manage a Water Recycling Program and issue Water Recycling Permits to recycled water users. Only treated municipal wastewater for non-potable uses can be permitted, such as landscape irrigation, crop irrigation, dust control, industrial/commercial cooling, and decorative fountains. Potable reuse activities are not authorized under this General Order.

LOCAL
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The Natural and Cultural Resources Element of the County’s General Plan is intended to support the balanced management and conservation of the County’s natural resources, including water resources. The following policies from the Natural and Cultural Resources Element are relevant to hydrology and water quality with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):
 Policy NCR-3.1. Preserve Groundwater Recharge Areas: The County shall strive to ensure that substantial groundwater recharge areas are maintained as open space.  Policy NCR-3.2. Groundwater Recharge Projects: The County shall encourage the development of groundwater recharge projects of all scales within the County and cities to increase groundwater supplies.  Policy NCR-3.5. Low Impact Development: The County shall require new development to minimize or eliminate stormwater quality and hydro-modification impacts through site design, source controls, runoff reduction measures, best management practices (BMPs), and Low Impact Development (LID).  The Public Health and Safety Element of the County’s General Plan provides guidance for how to protect County residents, workers, visitors, and properties from unreasonable risks associated with natural and manmade hazards, including flood hazards. The following policies from the Public Health and Safety Element are relevant to hydrology and water quality with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):
 Policy PHS-2.1. Restrict Uses in Designated Floodways: The County shall restrict uses in designated floodways except those that do not adversely affect flood elevations or velocities, and are tolerant of occasional flooding in accordance with the County’s Floodplain Management Ordinance.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-89  Policy PHS-2.3. Evaluation of Flood Protection for New Development: The County shall require evaluation of potential flood hazards prior to approval of new development projects to determine whether the proposed development is reasonably safe from flooding, and shall approve such development consistent with applicable State and Federal laws.
 Policy PHS-2.7. Preservation of Floodway and Floodplains: The County shall preserve floodways and floodplains for non-urban uses in an effort to maintain existing flood carrying capacities, except that development may be allowed in floodplains with mitigation measures that are in conformance with the County’s floodplain management ordinance.

Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability To address the extensive salt and nitrate impairments in the Central Valley, the Central Valley RWQCB initiated a collaborative stakeholder initiative, known as Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CVSALTS), in 2006. The CV-SALTS initiative was tasked to develop a Central Valley-wide Salt and Nitrate Management Plan (SNMP). Stakeholder membership in CV-SALTS included representatives from the Central Valley RWQCB, SWRCB, agriculture, municipalities, industry, water supply, environmental justice, state and federal regulatory agencies, and the public. The final SNMP was accepted by the Central Valley RWQCB in 2017 and provided a regulatory and programmatic approach for the management of salts and nitrate in groundwater and surface water in the Central Valley. The SNMP goals are (1) to ensure a safe drinking water supply; (2) to achieve balanced salt and nitrate loadings; and (3) to implement long-term and managed aquifer restoration programs where reasonable, feasible, and practicable. The SNMP was used to develop a Central Valley-wide Salt and Nitrate Control Program, which established a prioritized Nitrate Control Program for discharges to groundwater and a phased Salt Control Program for discharges to surface water and groundwater.

The Central Valley-wide Salt and Nitrate Control Program was incorporated into proposed amendments for the Basin Plan to address salt and nitrate impairments in the Central Valley. On May 31, 2018, the Central Valley RWQCB adopted Resolution R5-2018-0034 amending the Basin Plan to include the Central Valley-wide Salt and Nitrate Control Program. The approved amendments contained new policies, new regulatory tools (or strategies), and recommended clarification to existing policies to facilitate the Central Valley RWQCB’s efforts to achieve the salt and nitrate management goals.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The Safety Element of the City’s General Plan identifies hazards that are to be considered in the development of future land uses, including hazards related to flood zones. The following policies from the Safety Element are relevant to hydrology and water quality with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy SAFE-1.6: The City will not allow the development of housing in the 100-year floodplain, as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The City may permit placement of non-residential improvements within the 100-year floodplain under a very limited set of circumstances. Any development project that includes structures or disturbances of natural features within the 100-year floodplain shall prove that the proposal does not:
 Create danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by excavation, fill, roads, or intended use.
 Create difficult emergency vehicle access in times of flood.  Create a safety hazard due to the unexpected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site.
 Create excessive costs in providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public facilities.
 Interfere with the existing waterflow capacity of the floodway.  Substantially increase erosion and/or sedimentation.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-90 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  Contribute to the deterioration of any watercourse or the quality of water in any body of water.  Policy SAFE-1.7: The City will require any public facilities in the 100-year flood zones to be flood-proofed to a point at or above the base flood level elevation from the Stanislaus River.

The Public Services and Facilities Element evaluates existing sewer, water, storm drainage, and other utility facilities.

The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element are relevant to hydrology and water quality with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy PUBLIC-4.5: New development shall be designed to control surface runoff discharges to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit and the receiving water limitations assigned by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
 Policy PUBLIC-4.6: The City will establish, and new development shall implement nonpoint source pollution control measures and programs designed to reduce and control the discharge of pollutants into the City's storm drains and river.
 Policy PUBLIC-4.7: The City will require minimization of the amount of new impervious surfaces and directly connected impervious surfaces in areas of new development and redevelopment and, where feasible, maximize onsite infiltration of stormwater runoff.
 Policy PUBLIC-4.8: The City will encourage pollution prevention methods, supplemented by pollutant source controls and treatment. Use small collection strategies located at, or as close to possible to the source (i.e., the point where water initially meets the ground) to minimize the transport or urban runoff and pollutants off-site.

The Conservation and Open Space Element addresses the management of natural resources, including water pollution and groundwater supplies. The following policies from the Conservation and Open Space Element are relevant to hydrology and water quality with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy CONS-4.2: Approved projects, plans, and subdivisions shall provide for collection, conveyance, treatment, detention, and other stormwater management measures in a way that does not decrease water quality or alter hydrology in the Stanislaus River or associated groundwater recharge areas.  Policy CONS-6.6: The City will encourage the use of recycled water for appropriate use, including but not limited to outdoor irrigation, toilet flushing, fire hydrants, and commercial and industrial processes.  Policy CONS-6.7: The City will require mitigation measures, in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, as a part of approved projects, plans, and subdivisions to address the quality and quantity of urban runoff, including that attributable to soil erosion.

3.10.2 Environmental Setting

SURFACE WATERS
The project area is in the San Joaquin River Basin, which encompasses 15,880 square miles and includes the entire area drained by the San Joaquin River. The San Joaquin River Basin is bordered by the Coast Range mountains to the west, the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east, the Sacramento River Basin to the north, and the Tulare Basin to the south. Major surface waters in this watershed are the San Joaquin River and its larger tributaries, which include Calaveras River, Mokelumne River, and Stanislaus River (Central Valley RWQCB 2019).

The project area is adjacent to the Stanislaus River. The Basin Plan does not list beneficial uses for the Stanislaus River.

The Stanislaus River, Lower segment is listed as a Category 5 waterbody segment on the 2018 303(d) list for the following pollutants: group A pesticides, mercury, water temperature, toxicity, chlorpyrifos, and diazinon (SWRCB 2021: Appendix A). Category 5 refers to water segments where water quality standards are not met and a TMDL is required, but not yet completed, for at least one of the listed pollutants.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-91

GROUNDWATER
Regional Groundwater Hydrology
The project area is in the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin. The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin is defined by the area of unconsolidated to semi consolidated sedimentary deposits that are bounded by the Mokelumne River on the north and northwest, the San Joaquin River on the west, the Stanislaus River on the south, and consolidated bedrock on the east. The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin is drained by the San Joaquin River and several of its major tributaries, including the Stanislaus, Calaveras, and Mokelumne rivers. The San Joaquin River flows northward into the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and ultimately discharges into the San Francisco Bay.

In addition to project construction occurring within the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin, the project would accommodate planned growth in the City of Riverbank which is located south of the Stanislaus River in the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin. Because the City’s water is supplied from groundwater wells, planned growth would result in increased groundwater withdrawals in the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin. However, effects of growth on the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin are addressed in the City of Riverbank General Plan EIR. Therefore, no further discussion of impacts on the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin is included in this section.

Groundwater Elevations and Depth
Groundwater elevations in the study area are between 60 to 80 feet above mean sea level. However, the groundwater elevation in the region has been observed to be declining at a rate of 0.4 feet per year (City of Riverbank 2022). The depth to groundwater at the project site is approximately 20 to 25 feet below the ground surface (bgs).

Groundwater Supplies
According to DWR, the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is subject to critical conditions of overdraft (DWR 2020).

Overdraft conditions occur when groundwater discharge exceeds recharge, resulting in a net reduction in groundwater stored in the aquifer. Groundwater level trends indicated a principal cone of depression in the area east of the City of Stockton, which is caused by excess water demand. This demand has led to an annual overdraft rate between 70,000 to 80,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) within the subbasin. Generally, wells located farther away from the main cone of depression near recharge sources, such as the Stanislaus River, are expected to show a less dramatic water level decline than other wells (City of Riverbank 2022).

To address declining groundwater levels and overdraft conditions in the subbasin, the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority, which is the GSA for the subbasin, adopted the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin GSP. The GSP identifies future projects and management actions intended to replace groundwater use (offset) or supplement groundwater supplies (recharge) to meet current and future demands. Planned projects identified in the GSA include direct and in-lieu recharge (i.e., the use of surface water or recycled water supplies for applications where groundwater is currently used), intra-basin water transfers, demand conservation, water recycling, and stormwater reuse. The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority anticipates that these projects will provide enough water to meet the estimated pumping offset and/or recharge need of 16,000 AFY (ESJGA 2022).

Groundwater Quality
The Basin Plan designated the beneficial uses of underlying groundwater as municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, and industrial supply. Groundwater quality in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is generally sufficient to meet beneficial uses; however, several constituents of concern are either currently impacting groundwater use or have the potential to impact groundwater use in the future. The primary naturally occurring water quality constituents of concern above maximum containment levels are salinity and arsenic, while primary water quality constituents related to human activity include nitrates, salinity, and various point-source contaminants (City of Riverbank 2022).

Stormwater runoff from the existing WWTP is stored for future use or discharged to on-site percolation ponds.

Treated wastewater from the WWTP is not discharged to surface water, but is allowed to percolate to groundwater or Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-92 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration evaporate to the atmosphere. Current discharge requirements for the WWTP are prescribed under WDR Order No. 94-100 and the associated MRP, which was adopted by the Central Valley RWQCB on April 22, 1994. Based on sampling of groundwater below the WWTP, the WWTP is in compliance with the WDRs, with exceptions related to groundwater and dissolved oxygen. Specifically, concentrations of nitrate and ammonia in several groundwater monitoring wells that are dominated by effluent were found to exceed recommended groundwater limitations.

However, these conditions were found to be either stable or improving with time. Additionally, the dissolved oxygen concentration in ponds T-1 and T-2 have been below the 1.0 mg/L limits specified in the WDRs.

INUNDATION
The project area is included on FEMA FIRM panels 06077C0690F, 06077C0695F, 06077C0830F, and 06077C0835F (FEMA 2009). As shown in Figure 3.10-1, the project area is mapped within the following zones:
 Special Flood Hazard Areas (Zone A): areas subject to inundation by the 1 percent annual chance flood with no base flood elevation determined.
 Other Flood Areas (Zone X): areas of 0.2 percent annual chance flood; areas of 1 percent annual chance flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from the 1 percent annual chance flood.
 Other Areas (Zone X): areas determined to be outside 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain.

The project area is not within a coastal region that is subject to tsunami or adjacent to an enclosed waterbody that could generate a seiche.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-93 Source: Data downloaded from FEMA in 2022; adapted by Ascent in 2022.

Figure 3.10-1 Flood Zones
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-95

3.10.3 Discussion
43Ba) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Less-than-significant impact. The potential for project construction and operation to violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality is described in the following sections.

Construction
Construction activities would require ground disturbance, which could result in potential erosion and sediment carried into receiving waters. In addition, accidental discharges of construction-related fuels, oils, hydraulic fluid, and other hazardous substances could contaminate stormwater flows, resulting in a reduction in water quality on-site or downstream of the project area. As discussed in Section 3.7.3(b), the City would be required to file a Notice of Intent with the Central Valley RWQCB to be covered under the NPDES Construction General Permit. As a requirement of the NPDES Construction General Permit, the City would prepare a SWPPP and implement associated BMPs that are specifically designed to reduce the amount of soil disturbance, erosion and sediment transport into receiving waters, and pollutants in site runoff during construction. Compliance with the NPDES Construction General Permit would ensure that project construction would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degrade water quality.

Operation
The project would include new wastewater treatment facilities and new electrical and shop maintenance buildings, which would result in a net increase of 0.7 acre of impervious surfaces. This minor increase in impervious surfaces would not substantially increase sources of polluted runoff in the project area. On-site drainage would be designed to store and discharge stormwater runoff to on-site percolation ponds.

The project would increase wastewater treatment capacity at the existing WWTP from 1.8 million gallons per day (mgd) to approximately 2.29 mgd to accommodate future planned growth in the City. Similar to existing conditions, the project does not propose discharges to surface waters. Treated wastewater would continue to be stored and/or disposed of on-site in percolation ponds or distributed to nearby agricultural users for irrigation of nut orchards. The existing discharge requirements prescribed under WDR Order No. 94-100/MRP would continue to be required for proposed activities at the WWTP, including disposal of treated wastewater by means of percolation ponds. The proposed treatment facilities would also likely be subject to the newly adopted CV-SALTS program regulations for effluent disposal, which is a program to manage nitrogen and salinity in Central Valley groundwater. Compliance with this program is anticipated to improve water quality conditions of treated wastewater from the WWTP. Additionally, the use of recycled water for irrigation would be permitted under Order WQ 2016-00680-DDW with a revision of the existing WDRs, and the City would be required to submit a Notice of Intent with the Central Valley RWQCB for coverage under this General Order. The City would also be required to comply with Title 22 requirements, including submittal of a Title 22 Engineering Report to the Central Valley RWQCB and California Department of Public Health, to allow the use of recycled water for irrigation. Compliance with these permits, programs, and regulatory requirements would ensure that project operation would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degrade water quality.

Summary
Compliance with applicable permits, programs, and regulations would ensure that project construction and operation would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-96 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4Bb) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less-than-significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.10.2, the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin has experienced declining groundwater levels and is subject to critical conditions of overdraft (DWR 2020). The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority, the GSA for the subbasin, adopted the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin GSP to address declining groundwater levels and overdraft conditions in the subbasin. The potential for project construction and operation to substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin is described in the following sections.

Construction
The project would require excavation to a maximum depth of 12 feet for trenching and installing pipelines. As discussed in Section 3.10.2, the depth to groundwater at the project site is approximately 20 to 25 bgs; therefore, groundwater dewatering is not anticipated to be required during pipeline installation. In the event that groundwater dewatering is required for on-site excavation, water would be disposed to nearby irrigation ditches, impoundments, or on-site percolation ponds to allow for groundwater recharge. Therefore, project construction would not interfere with groundwater recharge, exacerbate overdraft conditions, or interfere with implementation of the GSP for the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin.

Operation
As discussed in Section 3.10.3(a) above, the project would result in a net increase of 0.7 acre of impervious surfaces.

However, on-site drainage would be designed to store and discharge stormwater runoff to on-site percolation ponds to allow for groundwater recharge.

Additionally, the project would increase the City’s production of recycled water, which would create a source of highquality irrigation water that would be used to irrigate nearby agricultural land. Therefore, the project would contribute to greater water balance in the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin by replacing some of the groundwater that would otherwise be used for irrigation. Furthermore, production of recycled water at the Riverbank WWTP has the potential to reduce the use of on-site percolation basins, leading to potential improved conditions for the groundwater underlying the project area. Therefore, project operation would not interfere with groundwater recharge, exacerbate overdraft conditions, or interfere with implementation of the GSP for the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin.

Summary
Based on the above discussion, project construction and operation would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin. Impacts would be less than significant. 45Bc) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
46Bi) Result in substantial on- or offsite erosion or siltation; Less-than-significant impact. The potential for project construction and operation to result in substantial on- or offsite erosion or siltation is described in the following sections.

Construction
Project construction would involve ground disturbing activities, including trenching and minor grading, which would result in alterations to the existing drainage pattern of the project area. Ground-disturbing activities have the potential to cause soil erosion and contaminate nearby surface water, in particular the Stanislaus River. Because Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-97 construction activities would disturb approximately 78.88 acres of land, the City would be required to file a Notice of Intent with the Central Valley RWQCB to be covered under the NPDES Construction General Permit. As a requirement of the NPDES Construction General Permit, the City would prepare a SWPPP and implement associated BMPs that are specifically designed to reduce the amount of soil disturbance, erosion and sediment transport into receiving waters, and pollutants in site runoff during construction. Therefore, compliance with the NPDES Construction General Permit would ensure that construction activities would not result in substantial erosion or siltation.

Operation
Project operations would not involve ground disturbance. As discussed in Section 3.10.3(a) above, the project would result in a net increase of 0.7 acre of impervious surfaces, which would change existing drainage patterns in the project area. However, on-site drainage would be designed to store and discharge stormwater runoff to on-site percolation ponds. Other areas of bare soil would be landscaped or paved to prevent substantial soil erosion.

Therefore, the project design would ensure that substantial erosion or siltation would not occur during project operations.

Summary
Because the project would be designed and constructed to minimize erosion and siltation, impacts would be less than significant.
47Bii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
Less-than-significant impact. The potential for project construction and operation to result in flooding on- or off-site is described in the following sections.

Construction
As discussed in Section 3.10.3(c)(i) above, project construction would involve ground-disturbing activities, which would result in alterations to the existing drainage pattern of the project area. The City would be required to file a Notice of Intent with the Central Valley RWQCB to be covered under the NPDES Construction General Permit. As a requirement of the NPDES Construction General Permit, the City would prepare a SWPPP and implement associated BMPs that are specifically designed to minimize the potential for flooding.

Operation
As discussed in Section 3.10.3(a) above, the project would result in a net increase of 0.7 acre of impervious surfaces.

Therefore, the rate and amount of surface runoff from the project area is expected to marginally increase. The project area would be graded to divert water away from structures and from the tops of slopes into drainages and to prevent flooding. On-site drainage would be designed to store and discharge stormwater runoff to on-site percolation ponds.

Summary
Because project construction and operation would not increase the rate or amount of surface water in a manner that would result in on- or off-site flooding, impacts would be less than significant. 48Biii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
Less-than-significant impact. The potential for project construction and operation to create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff is described in the following sections.

Construction
As discussed in Section 3.10.3(c)(i) above, project construction would involve ground-disturbing activities, which would result in alterations to the existing drainage pattern of the project area. The City would be required to file a Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-98 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Notice of Intent with the Central Valley RWQCB to be covered under the NPDES Construction General Permit. As a requirement of the NPDES Construction General Permit, the City would prepare a SWPPP and implement associated BMPs that are specifically designed to reduce the amount of soil disturbance, erosion and sediment transport into receiving waters, and pollutants in site runoff during construction. Therefore, compliance with the NPDES Construction General Permit would ensure that construction activities would not result in excess runoff or additional sources of polluted runoff.

Operation
As discussed in Section 3.10.3(a) above, the project would result in a net increase of 0.7 acre of impervious surfaces.

Therefore, the rate and amount of surface runoff from the project area is expected to marginally increase. Runoff from the project area would not be discharged into the stormwater drainage system; rather, it would be stored and discharged to on-site percolation ponds. Therefore, the project design would ensure that project operations would not result in excess runoff or additional sources of polluted runoff.

Summary
Because project construction and operation would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff impacts would be less than significant.
49Biv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less-than-significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.10.2, project features mapped within the Special Flood Hazard Area (100-year flood zone) are limited to the agricultural lands that would receive recycled water following project implementation. The headworks facility, vactor truck receiving station, electrical and controls building, shop and maintenance building, tertiary treatment facilities, and seasonal storage basins would be located in areas of minimal flood hazard. Project features that would be located within the 500-year flood zone include a temporary staging area, secondary treatment facilities, improved access routes, and underground recycled water distribution pipelines.

Because all above-ground buildings and structures would be located outside of Special Flood Hazard Areas, impacts related to impeding or redirecting flood flows would be less than significant. 50Bd) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Less-than-significant impact. The project area is not within a coastal region that is subject to tsunami or adjacent to an enclosed waterbody that could generate a seiche. As discussed in Section 3.10.3(c)(iv) above, the project would not place above-ground structures in a Special Flood Hazard Area (100-year flood zone); however, a temporary staging area, secondary treatment facilities, improved access routes, and underground recycled water distribution pipelines would be located within the 500-year flood zone. Construction activities would comply with the NPDES Construction General Permit and a site-specific SWPPP, which would include BMPs to prevent the release of pollutants from the construction site, including the temporary staging area. The only permanent, above-ground structures that would be located within the 500-year flood zone include the secondary treatment facilities; however, these facilities would be elevated and encircled by berms to prevent the release of wastewater in the event of a flood.

Therefore, the project would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. For these reasons, impacts would be less than significant.
51Be) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less-than-significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.10.2, the applicable water quality control plan for the project area is the Basin Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins and the applicable sustainable groundwater management plan for the project area is the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin GSP. The potential for project construction and operation to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Basin Plan for the Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-99 Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins and the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin GSP is described in the following sections.

Construction
As described in Section 3.10.3(a), construction activities could result in potential erosion and sediment carried into receiving waters. In addition, accidental discharges of construction-related fuels, oils, hydraulic fluid, and other hazardous substances could impair water quality. The City would be required to file a Notice of Intent with the Central Valley RWQCB to be covered under the NPDES Construction General Permit. As a requirement of the NPDES Construction General Permit, the City would prepare a SWPPP and implement associated BMPs that are specifically designed to reduce the amount of soil disturbance, erosion and sediment transport into receiving waters, and pollutants in site runoff during construction. Compliance with the NPDES Construction General Permit would ensure that project construction would not conflict with the Basin Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins.

As described in Section 3.10.3(b), groundwater dewatering is not anticipated to be required during pipeline installation. However, in the event that groundwater dewatering is required for on-site excavation; water would be disposed to nearby irrigation ditches, impoundments, or on-site percolation ponds to allow for groundwater recharge. Therefore, project construction would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin GSP.

Operation
As described in Section 3.10.3(a), the City would obtain and comply with all applicable permits and regulations governing water quality, including WDR Order No. 94-100/MRP, CV SALTS program regulations, Order WQ 2016- 00680-DDW, and Title 22 requirements. Compliance with these permits, programs, and regulatory requirements would ensure that project operation would not conflict with the Basin Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins.

As described in Section 3.10.3(b), the project would increase the City’s production of recycled water, which would create a source of high-quality irrigation water that could contribute to greater water balance in the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin by replacing some of the groundwater that would otherwise be used for irrigation.

Furthermore, production of recycled water at the Riverbank WWTP has the potential to reduce the use of on-site percolation basins, leading to potential improved conditions for the groundwater underlying the project area.

Therefore, project operation would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin GSP.

Summary
Because project construction and operation would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Basin Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins and the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin GSP, impacts would be less than significant.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-100 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.11 93BLAND USE AND PLANNING

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XI. Land Use and Planning.

Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect?

3.11.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to land use are applicable to the project.

STATE
No state plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to land use are applicable to the project.

LOCAL
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The following policies from the Community Development Element of the San Joaquin County General Plan are relevant to land use with respect to the project:
 Policy LU-1.1. Compact Growth and Development: The County shall discourage urban sprawl and promote compact development patterns, mixed-use development, and higher development intensities that conserve agricultural land resources, protect habitat, support transit, reduce vehicle trips, improve air quality, make efficient use of existing infrastructure, encourage healthful, active living, conserve energy and water, and diversify San Joaquin County's housing stock.
 Policy LU-1.3. Building Intensity and Population Density: The County shall regulate the levels of building intensity and population density according to the standards and land use designations set out in the General Plan and the San Joaquin County Development Title. Within these designations, cumulative development from 2010 shall not exceed 35,500 new dwelling units and 31,700 new employees by 2035.  Policy LU-1.4. Encourage Infill Development: The County shall encourage infill development to occur in Urban and Rural Communities and City Fringe Areas within or adjacent to existing development in order to maximize the efficient use of land and use existing infrastructure with the capacity to serve new development. The County shall balance infill development within outward expansion of communities and new development in other unincorporated areas.
 Policy LU-1.5. Clear Boundaries: The County shall strive to preserve agricultural and open space areas that contribute to maintaining clear boundaries among cities and unincorporated communities.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-101  Policy LU-1.7. Farmland Preservation: The County shall consider information from the State Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program when designating future growth areas in order to preserve prime farmland and limit the premature conversion of agricultural lands.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The following policies from the Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to land use with respect to the project:
 Policy LAND-5.1: The City will maintain public services and facilities in the existing developed City and make improvements as necessary to maintain a consistent Citywide level of service.  Policy LAND-5.2: Infill development will be given priority to remaining capacity for water supply and delivery, wastewater treatment and conveyance, stormwater collection and conveyance, and other services and infrastructure currently in place. Development impact fees shall reflect the existing capacity to serve infill development areas. Any urban development of new growth areas shall plan and finance necessary infrastructure and service expansion to serve those areas.
 Policy LAND-5.6: Large-scale community facilities are appropriate in neighborhood centers and downtown.

Places for religious assembly are allowed in neighborhood centers and downtown, subject to appropriate development standards and review to ensure neighborhood compatibility. Certain civic uses are allowed in areas with other Land Use Designations, as described in the Land Use Classifications section of the Land Use Element.

3.11.2 Environmental Setting
The project site is located on the north side of the Stanislaus River in San Joaquin County at 23865 Santa Fe Road, adjacent to the City of Riverbank, California. The San Joaquin County General Plan identifies the project site as Public (P/F) and the project site is zoned P-F for Public Facility. The lands surrounding the WWTP are designated as General Agriculture (AG-40) (San Joaquin County 2019). The San Joaquin County General Plan provides the following guidance related to the P/F land use designation:
 Public (P/F): This designation provides for location of services and facilities that are necessary to the health and welfare of the community. The Public designation may be applicable to any area of the County where a public or quasi-public use is appropriate or where a public agency owns property. Building types vary based on use.

The City of Riverbank General Plan identifies the project site as Civic use (C) and provides the following guidance:
 Civic (C): This category includes civic and cultural land uses of various types. Examples include schools, places of worship, public facilities and infrastructure, community halls, and similar cultural and civic land uses. Where such land uses occur within an existing or planned neighborhood, they shall be designed to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. They shall be designed to be pedestrian friendly, include publicly accessible areas (where appropriate), and shall unify rather than divide neighborhoods. Certain land uses included in this category, such as day care centers, public facilities and services, places of religious worship, and other appropriate land uses will be allowed in other land use designations, as well, according to standards established in Riverbank’s zoning ordinance. The FAR for civic uses is highly variable, depending on the use. One of the school districts serving the Planning Area (Sylvan), for example, has a standardized approach to school construction that involves an FAR of less than 0.1. Churches, community centers, and other civic land uses would have a higher FAR. The General Plan does not, therefore, specify a maximum FAR for land uses developed in areas with this Land Use Designation. Civic land uses developed in areas with other Land Use Designations should, however, respect the relevant maximum FAR standard. This land use category would not include solid or liquid waste facilities, as those facilities are provided elsewhere for development within the City and establishment of such uses within the Planning Area is not anticipated during this General Plan time horizon.

Refer to the Public Services and Facilities Background Report and Element for more detail.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-102 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.11.3 Discussion
52Ba) Physically divide an established community?
No impact. Project construction and implementation would occur on the existing Riverbank WWTP property, which is separated from the nearby residential uses located to the south by over 500 feet and to the east by approximately 600 feet. As no land acquisition would occur, the project would not divide an established community. No impact would occur.
53Bb) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
No Impact. The project would include upgrades to the existing WWTP, including new secondary and tertiary treatment and disinfection facilities, construction of a recycled water storage tank, reconfiguration of existing percolation ponds to provide additional seasonal recycled water storage, and installation of a distribution system to initially serve nearby agricultural users. The proposed pipelines associated with the distribution system would be under existing private roadways, and the project would restore the roads to pre-project conditions. Thus, the project would not result in any land use changes.

As discussed in Section 2.0, “Project Description,” future growth within the city is managed under the policies of the City’s General Plan and under adopted zoning. Future city wastewater flows and loads to the WWTP are expected to increase as a result of infill development and new development within the City’s sphere of influence. Implementation of the project is necessary in order to meet the requirements for Title 22 unrestricted recycled water use and provide wastewater treatment and recycled water storage capacity adequate to treat wastewater flows and loads projected by the year 2050 and produce and distribute recycled water to the potential use areas. Therefore, project implementation is in line with the sustainability goals in place by the City and is intended to improve water quality in the area.

As stated in Section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” the project is located within the plan area of the SJMSCP (Section

3.7.1), and the City of Riverbank General Plan (Policy CONS-4.3) (City of Riverbank 2009) requires compliance with the SJMSCP for covered activities within San Joaquin County as applicable. Because the City would avoid or mitigate for potential impacts to covered species in a manner consistent with the SJMSCP and that meets the requirements of applicable regulatory and permitting agencies, the project would not conflict with the provisions of General Plan Policy CONS-4.3.

For these reasons, the project would not conflict with any adopted plans, policies, or regulations adopted for avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, and there would be no impact.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-103

3.12 94BMINERAL RESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XII. Mineral Resources.

Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

3.12.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to mineral resources are applicable to the project.

STATE
California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975
The California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) requires the State Geologist to classify land into Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs), according to the known or inferred mineral potential of that land. In compliance with SMARA, the California Geological Survey established the following MRZ classification system to denote the location and significance of key extractive resources:
 MRZ-1: Areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence  MRZ-2: Areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence  MRZ-3: Areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data  MRZ-4: Areas where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ LOCAL
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The Natural and Cultural Resources Element of the County’s General Plan is intended to support the balanced management and conservation of the County’s open space, wildlife, water, minerals, energy, scenic amenities, recreational resources, and cultural and historic heritage. The following policies from the Natural and Cultural Resources Element are relevant to mineral resources with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):
 Policy NCR-4.1. Mineral Resource Protection: The County shall require mineral deposits of significant quantity, value, or quality, as identified and updated by the State Division of Mines and Geology [now the California Geological Survey] reports as MRZ-2 Mineral Resource Zones, to remain in agricultural or open space uses until the extraction of the resources, unless the immediate area has been committed to other uses.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-104 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  Policy NCR-4.2. Discretionary Permit to Protect Mineral Resources: The County shall require all new development in areas of significant sand and gravel deposits, as identified by the State Division of Mines and Geology [now the California Geological Survey], to obtain a discretionary permit, conditioned to protect the resources.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan addresses the management of natural resources, including mineral deposits. The following policy from the Conservation and Open Space Element is relevant to mineral resources with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy CONS-9.1: The City will coordinate with the California Geologic Survey to incorporate, as necessary, on policies for conservation and possible future extraction of mineral resources of regional or statewide significance.

3.12.2 Environmental Setting
Peat, gold, and silver have been historically mined in San Joaquin County, but existing mining activities consist primarily of sand and gravel aggregate operations (San Joaquin County 2017a: 3.4-8). The State Mining and Geology Board classifies the project area as MRZ-3, which indicates the potential for mineral deposits (San Joaquin County 1992: Figure IV.B-2). However, the project area is designated for public and agricultural land uses and is currently developed with the City WWTP and walnut orchards. There are no active mining operations within the project area (DOC 2016).

3.12.3 Discussion
54Ba) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.12.2, the project area is classified by the State Mining and Geology Board as MRZ-3, which indicates the potential for mineral deposits. However, the project area is developed with the City WWTP and walnut orchards, which are incompatible with and preclude mining operations. Because the area with potential mineral deposits that would be affected by the project comprises an existing developed WWTP site and private roads within active walnut orchards that preclude mining operations, and the site is not currently sued for mineral resource extraction, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region and residents of the state. The project would have no impact related to mineral resources. 5Bb) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.12.2, the project area is designated for public and agricultural land uses in the County General Plan. The project area is developed with the City WWTP and walnut orchards; it is not currently used for mineral resource extraction and the County does not have plans to use the site for mineral resource extraction in the future. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site, and no impact would occur.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-105

3.13 95BNOISE

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XIII. Noise.

Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan, or a substantial temporary or permanent increase in noise
levels above existing ambient levels that could result in an adverse effect on humans?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?

3.13.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
Federal Interagency Committee on Noise
There are no state or federal regulations related to assessment of the project’s noise impacts, although federal guidelines provide direction regarding what constitutes a significant change in noise conditions. The Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) determined what increase in noise level (measured in terms of community noise equivalent level [CNEL]) is noticeable; and a noticeable change may indicate a significant impact. These findings, as shown in Table 3.13-1, Significance of Changes in Cumulative Noise Exposure, indicate that, at lower existing noise levels, a greater increase is needed to create a significant impact. The FICON findings were developed as part of an assessment related to aircraft operations, but these findings have commonly been applied to all types of community noises.

Table 3.13-1 FICON Significance of Change in Noise Exposure Ambient Noise Level Without Project Significant Impact Occurs if the Project Increases Ambient Noise Levels by:
< 60 dB +5 dB or more
<60-65 +3 dB or more
>65 +1.5 dB or more
Source: Table based on FICON 1992: ES-3.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-106 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Federal Transit Administration
To address the human response to ground-borne vibration, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has set forth guidelines for maximum-acceptable vibration criteria for different types of land uses. These guidelines are presented in Table 3.13-2. In addition, FTA has also established construction vibration damage criteria, shown below in Table 3.13-3.

Table 3.13-2 FTA Indoor Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria for General Vibration Assessment Land Use Category GBV Impact Levels (VdB re 1 micro-inch/sec) Frequent Events1 Occasional Events2 Infrequent Events3
Category 1: Buildings where vibration would interfere with interior operations. 65 VdB4 65 VdB4 65 VdB4 Category 2: Residences and buildings where people normally sleep. 72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB Category 3: Institutional land uses with primarily daytime use. 75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB Notes: GBV = ground-borne vibration; VdB re 1 micro-inch/sec= “smoothed” root mean square vibration velocity level in decibels, with a reference quantity of one micro-inch per second
1 Frequent events: More than 70 events per day
2 Occasional events: 30-70 events per day
3 Infrequent events: Fewer than 30 events per day
4 This criterion limit is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment such as optical microscopes. For equipment that is more sensitive, a Detailed Vibration Analysis must be performed.

Source: Table based on Volpe 2018: 126.

Table 3.13-3 FTA Construction Damage Vibration Criteria Land Use Category PPV, in/sec
Reinforced-concrete, steel or timber (no plaster) 0.5
Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3
Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2
Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 Notes: PPV= peak particle velocity; in/sec = inches per second Source: Table based on FTA 2018: 126.

STATE
California General Plan Guidelines
The State of California General Plan Guidelines 2017, published by OPR (OPR 2017), provides guidance for the compatibility of projects within areas of specific noise exposure. Acceptable and unacceptable community noise exposure limits for various land use categories have been determined to help guide new land use decisions in California communities. In many local jurisdictions, these guidelines are used to derive local noise standards and guidance. Citing EPA materials and the state Sound Transmissions Control Standards, the state’s general plan guidelines recommend interior and exterior CNEL of 45 and 60 A-weighted decibels (dBA; adjusted for the range perceptible by the human ear in which decibel values of sounds at low frequencies are reduced) for residential units, respectively (OPR 2017:378).

LOCAL
San Joaquin County General Plan
The San Joaquin County General Plan Noise Element (San Joaquin County 2017a) contains noise goals and policies (e.g., exterior noise-level performance standards for new projects affected by using the Noise Levels by Land Use [Table 3.13-4]). The following policies from the Noise Element are relevant to the project:

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-107  Policy N-1.1.1: The City shall not permit development of noise sensitive uses within an unacceptable noise range of a major noise generator.
 Policy N-1.1.2: Conduct an acoustical analysis to determine existing noise levels at the site of proposed development and use projected noise levels to determine impact on surrounding uses.  Policy N-1.1.3: The City shall not permit development of major noise generators within an unacceptable range of noise sensitive uses.
 Policy N-1.2.1: The City shall require that proposed development incorporate design elements to minimize adverse noise impacts on surrounding land uses.
 Policy N-1.2.2: The City shall ensure multi-family residences and hotels comply with state interior noise insulation standards in cases where they fall within the 60 dBA (CNEL or Ldn) noise exposure contours.  Policy N-1.3.1: The City shall enforce statewide vehicle noise regulations of illegal or faulty exhaust systems.  Policy N-1.3.2: The City shall determine the significance of noise impacts due to new roadway improvements in the City.

Table 3.13-4 County of San Joaquin Acceptable Noise Levels by Land Use Land Use Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Normally Acceptable Conditionally Acceptable Normally Unacceptable Clearly Unacceptable Residential- Low Density Single Family,
Duplex, Mobile Homes 50-60 55-70 70-75 Above 75
Residential – Multi Family 50-65 60-70 70-75 Above 75
Transient Lodging Motels, Hotels 50-65 60-70 70-80 Above 80 Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes 50-70 60-70 70-80 Above 80
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters — 50-70 — Above 65
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports — 50-75 — Above 70 Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 50-70 — 67.5-75 Above 72.5 Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries 50-75 — — Above 70
Office Buildings, Business Commercial
and Professional 50-70 67.5-77.5 Above 75 —
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture 50-75 70-80 Above 75 —
Notes: CNEL = community noise equivalent level; dBA = A-weighted decibel; Ldn = day-night average sound level Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.

Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development shall be undertaken only after a detailed noise analysis is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.

Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development is discouraged. If new construction does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.

Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.

Source: San Joaquin County 2017a.

San Joaquin County Municipal Code
Chapter 9-1025.9 of the San Joaquin County Municipal Code establishes guidelines citywide to regulate noise. The following sections from Chapter 9-1025.9 are relevant to the project.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-108 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Stationary Noise Sources. Excluding proposed noise sensitive land uses on infill lots, proposed noise sensitive land uses that will be impacted by stationary noise sources shall be required to mitigate the noise levels from these stationary noise sources so that the resulting noise levels on said proposed noise sensitive land uses do not exceed the standards specified in Table 9-1025.9, Part II (Table 3.13-5).

Proposed projects that will create new stationary noise sources or expand existing stationary noise sources shall be required to mitigate the noise levels from these stationary noise sources so as not to exceed the noise level standards specified in Table 9-1025.9, Part II (Table 3.13-5).

Exemptions. The following will be exempt from the provisions of this chapter:
 Noise sources associated with construction, provided such activities do not take place before 6:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. on any day;
Acoustical Study. The Review Authority shall require the preparation of an acoustical study in instances where it has determined that a project may expose existing or proposed noise sensitive land uses to noise levels exceeding the noise standards specified in Table 9-1025.9. This determination shall be based on the existing or future sixty-five (65) dBA Ldn noise contour in the General Plan, the proximity of new noise sensitive land uses to known noise sources, or the knowledge that a potential for adverse noise impacts exists. The study shall be paid for by the applicant and shall be prepared by a person or persons selected by the Director. The Director shall select the consultant from the County's consultant list. The acoustical study shall include the following information:
 A general description of the project, with appropriate maps, and the noise sources of concern;  A description of the methodology that will be used to assess noise impacts, including a listing of all assumptions and data used in any computer models.
 Computer models that will be used for noise predictions shall be standard versions approved by the FHWA, FAA, Caltrans, or other government agencies.
 For traffic noise studies, the computer models, SOUND32 or other proprietary models based on the 1978 "FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108)" shall be used. The FHWA's new "Traffic Noise Model" (TNM) shall be used after its phase in date. For aircraft noise studies, the latest version of the FAA's "Integrated Noise Model" (INM) shall be used.
 If standard government approved models do not exist (e.g., railroad and industrial noise sources), a description of the model shall be provided.
 A description of existing and future noise levels together with a comparison of these noise levels to the noise level standards specified in Table 9-1025.9 [Table 3.13-5].  A description of existing and future noise levels together with a comparison of these noise levels to the noise level standards specified in Table 9-1025.9 [Table 3.13-5].

Table 3.13-5 San Joaquin County Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure – Stationary Noise Source (Part II) Noise Sensitive Land Use (Use Types) Outdoor Activity Areas1 Daytime2
(7 a.m. to 10 p.m.)
Outdoor Activity Areas1 Daytime2
(10 p.m. to 7 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent Sound Level (Leq), dBA 50 45
Maximum Sound Level (Lmax), dBA 70 65
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel; Leq = equivalent continuous sound level; Lmax = maximum sound level. 1 Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown or is not applicable, the noise standard shall be applied at the property line of the receiving land use. When determining the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures, the standards shall be applied on the receiving side of noise barriers or other property line noise mitigation measures. 2 Each of the noise level standards specified shall be reduced by 5 dB for impulsive noise, single tone noise, or noise consisting primarily of speech or music.

Source: San Joaquin County Noise Ordinance 9-1025.9
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-109 City of Riverbank General Plan
The City of Riverbank General Plan Noise Element (City of Riverbank 2016) contains noise goals and policies (e.g., exterior and interior noise-level performance standards for new projects affected by transportation sources [Table

3.13-6] and non-transportation sources [Table 3.13-7]). The following policies from the Noise Element are relevant to the project:
 Policy NOISE-1.1: Large-scale commercial land uses requiring frequent large truck deliveries shall not be developed within new or existing neighborhoods.
 Policy NOISE-1.2: New growth areas shall avoid the use of large-volume, high-speed roadways within neighborhoods and instead disperse vehicular traffic onto a network of fully connected smaller roadways.  Policy NOISE-1.3: Industrial and other noise-generating land uses shall be located away from noise-sensitive land uses or shall enclose any substantial noise sources completely within buildings or structures.  Policy NOISE-1.4: Development of noise-sensitive land uses in areas exposed to existing or projected levels of noise from transportation, stationary sources, or agricultural operations exceeding, or estimated to exceed, levels specified in Table N-1 shall require transportation planning, traffic calming, site planning, buffering, sound insulation, or other methods to reduce noise exposure in outdoor activity areas and interior spaces to the levels specified in Table N-1 [Table 3.13-6 in this Initial Study].

Table 3.13-6 [City of Riverbank] Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure from Transportation Noise Sources at Noise-Sensitive Land Uses
Land Use Outdoor Activity Areas (dBA Ldn) Interior Spaces dBA Ldn dBA Leq
Residential 60 45 —
Transient Lodging 60 45 —
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 60 45 —
Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls — — 35
Churches, Meeting Halls 60 — 40
Office Buildings — — 45
Schools, Libraries, Museums 60 — 45
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 70 — —
Notes: [dBA = A-weighted decibel; Ldn = day-night average noise level, Leq = equivalent continuous sound level.] Noise-sensitive land uses include schools, hospitals, rest homes, long-term care, mental care facilities, residences, and other similar land uses.

Outdoor activity areas are considered to be the portion of a noise-sensitive property where outdoor activities would normally be expected (i.e., patios of residences and outdoor instructional areas of schools). Outdoor activity areas for the purposes of this element do not include gathering spaces alongside transportation corridors or associated public rights-of-way. Where development projects or roadway improvement projects could potentially create noise impacts, an acoustical analysis shall be required as part of the environmental review process so that noise mitigation may be included in the project design. Such analysis shall be the financial responsibility of the applicant and be prepared by a qualified person experienced in the fields of environmental noise assessment and architectural acoustics. Mitigation strategies shall include site planning and design over other types of mitigation.
[Source: City of Riverbank 2009.]
 Policy NOISE-1.5: Soundwalls are prohibited as a method for reducing noise exposure that could be addressed through other means
 Policy NOISE-2.1: Development projects and roadway improvement projects that increase traffic noise levels shall be mitigated to achieve acceptable levels specified in Table N-1 [Table 3.13-6] as measured at outdoor activity areas and interior spaces of existing and planned noise sensitive land uses. If existing noise levels exceed allowable levels in Table N-1 [Table 3.13-6] at noise sensitive land uses, then:

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-110 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  Where existing exterior noise levels are between 60 and 65 dBA Ldn at outdoor activity areas of noisesensitive uses, an increase of 3 dBA Ldn or greater is considered significant and requires mitigation to achieve allowable levels.
 Where existing exterior noise levels are greater than 65 dBA Ldn at outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, an increase of 1.5 dBA Ldn or greater is considered significant and requires mitigation to achieve allowable levels.
 Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dBA Ldn or less using practical application of the best available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 dBA Ldn may be allowed, provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with Table N-1 [Table 3.13-6].  Policy NOISE-2.2: Development projects that produce, or are affected by, non-transportation related noise shall be mitigated to achieve acceptable levels specified in Table N-2 [Table 3.13-7 in this Initial Study], as measured at outdoor activity areas of existing and planned noise-sensitive land uses. If existing noise levels exceed acceptable levels in Table N-2 [Table 3.13-7] as measured at outdoor activity areas of noise sensitive land uses:
 Where existing exterior noise levels are between 60 and 65 dBA at outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, an increase of 3 dBA or greater is considered significant and requires mitigation to achieve acceptable levels.
 Where existing exterior noise levels are greater than 65 dBA at outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, an increase of 1.5 dBA or greater is considered significant and requires mitigation to achieve acceptable levels.
 Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dBA or less using practical application of the best-available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 dBA may be allowed, provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented.

Table 3.13-7 [City of Riverbank] Performance Standards for New Projects Affected By, or Including, NonTransportation Noise Sources Noise Level Descriptor Outdoor Activity Areas (7 am – 10 pm) Interior Spaces (10 pm – 7 am) Hourly Leq 60 dB 45 dB
Lmax 75 dB 65 dB
Notes: [Leq = equivalent continuous sound level; Lmax = maximum sound level.] Each of the noise levels specified shall be lowered by five dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech, or music, or for recurring impulsive noises. These noise level standards do not apply to residential units established in conjunction with industrial or commercial uses (e.g., caretaker dwellings).
[Source: City of Riverbank 2009.]
 Policy NOISE-2.3: The City shall require all feasible noise mitigation to reduce construction and other short-term noise and vibration impacts as a condition of approval for development projects by applying the performance standards outlined in Table N-3 [Table 3.13-8 in this Initial Study]. The total noise level resulting from new sources and ambient noise shall not exceed the standards in Table N-3 [Table 3.13-8], as measured at outdoor activity areas of any affected noise sensitive land use except:
 If the ambient noise level exceeds the standard in Table N-3 [Table 3.13-8], the standard becomes the ambient level plus 5 dB(A).
 Reduce the applicable standards in Table N-3 [Table 3.13-8] by 5 decibels if they exceed the ambient level by 10 or more decibels.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-111 Table 3.13-8 [City of Riverbank] Noise Level Performance Standards for Non-Transportation Noise Sources Cumulative Duration of a Noise Event1
(Minutes)
Maximum Exterior Noise Level Standards2
Daytime3,5 Nighttime4,5
30-60 60 45
15-30 75 65
5-15 60 55
1-5 65 60
0-1 70 65
Notes:
1 Cumulative duration refers to time within any one-hour period. 2 Noise level standards measured in dB [A-weighted decibels (dBA)]. 3 Daytime = Hours between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
4 Nighttime = Hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
5 Each of the noise level standards specified may be reduced by 5 dBA for tonal noise (i.e., a signal which has a particular and unusual pitch) or for noises consisting primarily of speech of for recurring impulsive noises (i.e., sounds of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay such as the discharge of firearms). [Source: City of Riverbank 2009.]
City of Riverbank Municipal Code
Chapter 93 of the Riverbank Municipal Code establishes guidelines citywide to regulate noise. The following sections from Chapter 93 are relevant to the project.
§ 93.07 Noise Source Exemptions. Noise sources associated with construction provided such activities do not take place between 6:30 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. on weekdays or 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. on weekends and legal holidays.

3.13.2 Environmental Setting

EXISTING NOISE SETTING
The project plan proposes the expansion of the existing City of Riverbank WWTP located in San Joaquin County at 23865 Santa Fe Road. Land use surrounding the project site is mostly undeveloped except for the existing residential land uses located east and west of the project site boundary. The closest residential land use east of the project site is 23665 Santa Fe Road located in San Joaquin County, which is approximately 615 feet east of the WWTP. The other nearest residential land use is located at 2806 River Cove Drive which is approximately 615 feet south of the WWTP on the other side of the Stanislaus River in the City of Riverbank. Existing loud noise source emitters for both the project site and nearby sensitive receptors include the railroad track located 45 feet east of the project site, however, according to the DOT Federal Railroad Administration, the track has been closed from operation since 2020 and has not been opened since. Therefore, no noise would be emitted as the track is not in operation anymore. Additional loud noise sources that exist near the project site include County Highway J7 (Santa Fe Road) located approximately 900 feet east of the project site as well as State Route (SR) 108 (Atchison Street) located approximately 1,780 feet south of the project site. Using average daily traffic data from Caltrans (2020) which provides the average daily traffic (ADT) for major roads such as state highways, freeways, and interstates. The existing ambient noise/traffic noise levels near the sensitive receivers closest to the project site identified above were modeled using calculation methods consistent with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5 (FHWA 2004) and using ADT volumes provided in the Caltrans data for SR 108. Noise from the traffic volume on SR 108 was attenuated to the nearest project’s sensitive receptors to provide an estimated calculation of existing ambient noise levels as shown on Table 3.13-9. Calculations for existing ambient noise levels can be found in Appendix D.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-112 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Table 3.13-9 Existing Noise Levels at Nearby Sensitive Receptors Location dBA Leq dBA CNEL dBA Ldn
23665 Santa Fe Road 50.9 dBA 50.7 dBA 50.3 dBA
2806 River Cove Drive 52.7 dBA 52.5 dBA 52.1 dBA
Source: Calculations done by Ascent Environmental in 2022 and presented in Appendix D.

3.13.3 Discussion
56Ba) Result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan, or a substantial temporary or permanent increase in noise levels above existing ambient levels that could result in an adverse effect on humans?
Construction
Less-than-significant impact. Construction noise is generally considered a temporary source. Construction noise levels vary from hour to hour and day to day, depending on the equipment in use, the operations being performed, and the distance between the source and receptor. As shown in Figures 2-3 in Section 2.1 (Project Background and Overview) and Figure 2-4 in Section 2.6.5 (Project Features), construction would occur mostly on the eastern side of the WWTP site. Construction would begin on October 1, 2024, and is anticipated to be complete by November 30, 2026.

Development would occur in multiple phases with each requiring its own set of equipment. The list of equipment that would be used for construction in each corresponding phase can be found in Appendix A “Construction Assumptions”.

While construction of some phases of the project would occur independently, other phases would be constructed concurrently as summarized in Table 2-5 of Chapter 2, ”Project Description.:” To analyze construction impacts, construction phases that would require the highest number and loudest pieces of construction equipment and would be located closest to existing sensitive receptors were evaluated; thus, the construction noise analysis evaluates the potential worst-case noise levels and associated exposure to sensitive receptors.

Construction noise is difficult to quantify precisely because of the many variables involved, including the specific equipment types, size of equipment used, percentage of time each piece is in operation, condition of each piece of equipment, and number of pieces that would operate on the project site. The typical maximum noise levels for various pieces of construction equipment at a distance of 50 feet are presented in Table 3.13-10 (Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels). Note that the equipment noise levels presented in Table 3.13-10 are maximum noise levels. Typically, construction equipment operates in alternating cycles of full power and low power, producing average noise levels less than the maximum noise level. The average sound level of construction activity also depends on the amount of time that the equipment operates and the intensity of construction activities during that time.

The maximum noise levels at 50 feet for typical construction equipment would range up to 85 dBA for the type of equipment normally used for this type of project based on the anticipated construction equipment as shown in Table

3.13-10. Construction noise in a well-defined area typically attenuates at approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance.

To assess potential short-term (construction-related) noise impacts, sensitive receptors and their relative exposure were identified. Project-generated construction source noise levels were determined based on methodologies, reference emission levels, and usage factors from FTA’s Guide on Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment methodology (FTA 2018) and FHWA’s Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide (FHWA 2006). Reference levels for noise for specific equipment or activity types are well documented and the usage thereof includes common practices that are used in the field of acoustics.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-113 Table 3.13-10 Noise Emission Levels from Construction Equipment Equipment Type Typical Noise Level (Lmax dBA) @ 50 feet Backhoe 80
Concrete Mixer 85
Compactor 80
Crane/Lift 85
Compressor (Air) 80
Dozer 85
Dump Truck 84
Excavator 85
Flat Bed Truck 84
Front End Loader 80
Generator 70
Grader 85
Scraper 85
Roller 85
Pickup Trucks 54
Notes: Assumes all equipment is fitted with a properly maintained and operational noise control device, per manufacturer specifications. Noise levels listed are manufacture-specified noise levels for each piece of heavy construction equipment.

Source: FTA 2018: 176.

Using the FTA construction noise model and project-specific construction information details e.g., types and number of construction equipment by phase), estimated noise levels were calculated for the construction activity that would occur closest to each of the two nearest sensitive receptors and for the loudest and most intensive construction activity that would occur closest to each of the two nearest sensitive receptors. Construction activities that generate the loudest noise levels are generally associated with mass excavation. This type of activity would occur at the WWTP.

Construction at the WWTP would be the nearest construction activity to the residence located at 2806 River Cove Drive, which is approximately 615 feet to the south of the WWTP. However, construction of Pipeline B would occur within 65 feet of the residence at 23665 Santa Fe Road, and therefore would be the closest construction activity to this receptor. Therefore, project-related noise levels generated by construction activity associated with Pipeline B construction and WWTP mass excavation were modeled at 23665 Santa Fe Road. However, only the project-related noise level that would be generated by mass excavation activity at the WWTP site was modeled at 2806 River Cove Drive, because this activity would both be the loudest and the nearest to this receptor. Construction equipment used during the mass excavation phase would include two pickup trucks, two dump trucks, four 657 scrapers, two LGP D6 dozers, one water truck, and one 140 motor grader. For the 1B pipeline installation, construction equipment would include two pickup trucks, two 320 excavators, one water truck, one 950 wheel loader, one dump truck, and one allterrain forklift. The modeled noise levels re summarized below in Table 3.13-11 and model inputs/outputs are included in Appendix D.

Table 3.13-11 Estimated Temporary Noise Levels During Selected Construction Phase Noise-Sensitive
Receptor
Construction Phase and
Distance from Receptor
Estimated Leq at
50 feet, dBA
Estimated Leq at
Sensitive Location dBA
Estimated Lmax at
50 feet, dBA
Estimated Lmax at
Sensitive Location dBA
2806 River Cove Drive Mass Excavation (615’) 86.6 57.9 90.6 61.8 23665 Santa Fe Road Mass Excavation (645’)
Pipeline 1B Installation (65’)

86.6 84.0

54.8 81.0

90.6 88.0

58.8 85.0
Notes: dB= A-weighted decibels; Leq=hourly-average levels; Lmax=maximum instantaneous levels Source: Appendix D.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-114 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration As shown on Table 3.13-11, and based on modeling conducted, noise generated from mass excavation activities at the WWTP would generate the highest noise levels (86.6 dBA hourly equivalent sound level [Leq], 90.6 dBA maximum instantaneous levels [Lmax]). Considering noise from mass excavation activities at nearby receptors, Leq levels would attenuate from distance alone to 54.8 dBA Leq at 23665 Santa Fe Road and 57.9 dBA Leq at 2806 River Cove Drive, which would result in audible increases (i.e., approximately 3-dBA above existing levels). Regarding noise from pipeline construction affecting the residence at 23665 Santa Fe Road, noise would result in Leq noise levels of 81.0 dBA, which would be perceived as a doubling in existing noise levels at this location (i.e., over 10 dBA increase over existing modeled levels).

However, construction would only occur during the hours of Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. in the fall, winter, and spring months and 6:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. during the summer months. Thus, construction activities would occur during the noise exempt hours for both the City and County, and therefore, would not result in an exceedance of adopted noise standards. Further, based on anticipated project phasing and construction schedule, all daily activity would be shorter than other more standard construction projects, resulting in only temporary increases in noise. In addition, anticipated phasing for each construction activity would be very short-term. For example, pipeline construction is anticipated to take 13 days to complete; thus, noise generated by this activity would be minimal at any one location, as equipment moves along the alignment, therefore, exposing receptors to even shorter periods of increased noise levels. Given that all construction activity would occur during the daytime hours when people are less sensitive to disruption and less likely to be adversely affected (e.g., sleep awakening leading to tiredness, stress) and the very limited exposure period (i.e., 13-day phase, but likely less than 13 days of noise exposure at any one location) even daytime disturbance leading to adverse effects (e.g., repeated interruptions leading to increased anxiety/stress during work or other daily activities) would be highly unlikely. Noise levels associated with mass excavation would be only just perceptible and would also only occur during daytime noise exempt hours. Therefore, construction from this activity would also not exceed City or County standards or result in substantial temporary increases in noise leading to adverse effects to sensitive receptors.

Operational
Less-than-significant impact. The project is expected to develop 20 new pumps serving different tasks in the treatment process. Three new diesel fuel generators which would provide backup power to the main treatment facilities are also proposed. With the development of such stationary noise sources, the possibility of noise levels exceeding above acceptable levels may occur. Pumps and generators are expected to generate noise levels of approximately 77 dBA and 82 dBA (Lmax) at approximately 50 feet according to (FTA 2018: 176). For this analysis, since exact locations of the pumps and generators are unknown the distance from the equipment was calculated from the WWTP property boundary to the nearest sensitive receptors to assess the potential for a stationary noise impact to occur. All pumps and generators were combined and attenuated to determine the Leq and Lmax at the nearest receptors. The results are summarized in Table 3.13-12 and the calculations are included in Appendix D.

Table 3.13-12 Stationary Equipment Operational Noise
Noise-Sensitive
Receptor
Stationary
Equipment
Leq Exterior
threshold Allowed
by City of Riverbank
Estimated
Leq at 50
feet, dBA
Estimated
Combined Leq at
Sensitive
Location
Lmax Exterior
Threshold Allowed
by City of
Riverbank
Estimated
Lmax at 50
feet, dBA
Estimated
Combined Lmax
at Sensitive
Location
2806 River Cove Dr. Pump Electric
Generator
60 dBA from
7 am to 10 pm 87.7

59.0 75 dBA from
7 am to 10 pm 91.7

63.0 23665 Santa Fe Rd. 58.5 62.4
Notes: dB= A-weighted decibels; Leq=hourly-average levels; Lmax=maximum instantaneous levels Source: Appendix D.

When comparing the results in Table 3.13-13 to non-transportation related noise standards for the City of Riverbank (Table 3.13-7) it shows that the new stationary equipment would not exceed City standards ( 60 dBA Leq and 75 dBA Lmax ) at the nearest sensitive receptors. The highest value from the 20 new pumps and three electric generators would produce up to 59.0 dBA Leq and 63.0 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptor. Therefore, operational noise Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-115 from project-related new stationary sources would not exceed City or County standards or result in substantial increases in noise leading to adverse effects to sensitive receptors.

Summary
Because construction-generated noise would be temporary and would occur in the day time during hours exempted from noise requirements by the City and the County, and project-related operational noise would not exceed City or County standards at any noise sensitive receptors, adverse noise-related impacts to humans would be less than significant.
57Bb) Result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less-than-significant impact. Construction activities generate varying degrees of temporary ground vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and activities involved. Ground vibration generated by construction equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with increases in distance. The effects of ground vibration may be imperceptible at the lowest levels, result in low rumbling sounds and detectable vibrations at moderate levels, and, at high levels, cause annoyance, sleep disturbance, or damage to nearby structures.

Pile driving and blasting are the types of construction activities that typically generate the highest vibration levels and are, therefore, of greatest concern when evaluating construction-related vibration impacts. However, pile driving and blasting would not be conducted as part of the project.

Based on reference vibration levels for typical construction equipment that would be used, the piece of equipment that could generate the greatest levels of ground vibration for this project would be a large bulldozer which generates ground vibration levels of 0.089 inches per second (in/sec) peak particle velocity (PPV) and 87 vibration decibels (VdB) at 25 feet (FTA 2018: 184). Other typical equipment that was also evaluated includes delivery trucks.

Reference vibration levels for this equipment are included in Table 3.13-13 below. Using reference vibration levels and the distance to nearby receptors, potential vibration levels were modeled and are summarized below in Table 3.13-13.

Table 3.13-13 Vibration Emission Levels from Construction Equipment Noise-Sensitive
Receptor
Construction
Equipment
Estimated VdB
at 25 feet
Estimated VdB at
Sensitive Location
Estimated PPV at
25 feet
Estimated PPV at
Sensitive Location
2806 River Cove Dr.

Large Bulldozer
Loaded Trucks
87 86

45.3 44.3 .089
.076
.001
.001
23665 Santa Fe Rd. 44.7

43.7 .001
.001
Source: Appendix D.

When evaluating impacts from vibration-inducing activities, annoyance/disturbance to sensitive land uses and the potential for structural damage to occur are both considered. FTA’s criteria of 80 VdB was applied to evaluate disturbance to sensitive receptors and 0.2 PPV in/sec was applied to evaluate the potential for structural damage.

Considering the nearest sensitive receptor to construction activity is the single-family home at 23665 Santa Fe Road located approximately 615 feet east of the project site, at 615 feet the assumed equipment to be used as shown in Table 3.13-13 shows that the peak VdB reaches at most 45.3 VdB and 0.001 PPV in/sec. These levels are below both the 80 VdB criteria for assessing disturbance to sensitive receptors (i.e., human annoyance) and the 0.2 PPV in/sec criteria for evaluating potential for structural damage. Thus, the impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation will be required.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-116 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 58Bc) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The project is not located within an airport land use plan (Stanislaus County 2016). The nearest airport is the Oakdale Airport, located approximately 7.55 miles east of the project site. Based upon the Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the project site is not located within the Oakdale Airport’s Influence Area (Stanislaus County 18). Therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from the airport. Noise impacts would not be of concern. No mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-117

3.14 96BPOPULATION AND HOUSING

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XIV. Population and Housing.

Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?

3.14.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to population and housing are applicable to the project.

STATE
No state plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to population and housing are applicable to the project.

LOCAL
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
San Joaquin County’s 2035 General Plan supports focused growth within incorporated cities and calls for annexation to the City prior to development of lands outside city limits. The following policies from the Community Development Element are relevant to population and housing with respect to the project:
 Policy C-1.9. Available Infrastructure: The County shall only approve new development in Urban Communities and City Fringe Areas where adequate infrastructure is available or can be made available from an existing City, agency, or special district for the development and there are adequate provisions for long term infrastructure maintenance and operations.
 Policy C-3.4. Public Services in Rural Communities: To use financial resources efficiently, reduce growth pressure, and maintain the character of rural communities, the County shall not develop new urban-level infrastructure in Rural Communities (e.g., curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and public water and sewer systems), unless those changes respond specifically to stated local needs (e.g., Safer Routes to School). The County shall discourage other public agencies from developing urban-level infrastructure within Rural Communities, unless it is part of a project or process to convert the community into an Urban Community.  Policy C-3.5. Service Maintenance in Rural Communities: The County may fund, as necessary, the maintenance and upgrading of existing facilities and services within Rural Communities to protect public health and safety. The County shall not fund the upgrading of facilities and services within Rural Communities that would result in additional capacity for new growth.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-118 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The City of Riverbank’s General Plan provides a guide for land use development within the City of Riverbank. The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to population and housing with respect to the project:
 Policy PUBLIC-1.1: The City will coordinate the planning and construction of capital improvements with the timing of urban development within the Planning Area.
 Policy PUBLIC-1.5: The City will upgrade facilities and services that experience deterioration or obsolescence in existing developed areas of the City, as funding permits, to maintain levels of public service established by the City.
 Policy PUBLIC-3.3: The City will not induce urban growth by providing wastewater facilities to areas outside the Planning Area or areas not planned for urban development, such as areas designated for agriculture or open space.

3.14.2 Environmental Setting
According to the California Department of Finance, the City of Riverbank had a total population of 24,583 in 2022, an approximately 8.4 percent increase from 2010. In 2022, the City had 7,493 housing units, of which 7,312 (97.5%) are occupied (DOF 2022). No houses are located within the project site, which is an existing wastewater treatment plant and agricultural land. The nearest residences are located approximately 615 feet to the south of the project site, across the Stanislaus River.

3.14.3 Discussion
59Ba) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less-than-significant impact. The project would not include the construction of new housing. It would also not require additional/new full-time employees to operate the expanded WWTP and recycled water distribution facilities, beyond current staffing levels (i.e., seven City employees). Construction activities would require anywhere between 10 and 53 workers per day, depending on the activity. Although the project would generate temporary demand for construction employees, it is anticipated that because the number of construction employees would be low and the project would be completed in less than 2.25 years, this temporary demand for construction employees would be met by existing residents in Riverbank or nearby areas (e.g., Modesto, Ripon, Manteca, Turlock, Oakdale). Because the project would not involve constructing new housing, would not provide short-term employment opportunities that would indirectly stimulate the need for additional housing and services, and would not provide substantial new permanent employment opportunities, it would not be directly growth inducing.

The project would increase the capacity of the existing WWTP. By so doing, the project would accommodate planned growth in the City through 2050, as envisioned in the City’s General Plan. As noted in Chapter 2, “Project Description,” the city’s population is estimated to reach approximately 36,766 by 2050 (KSN and BC 2022: Table 12). New wastewater collection infrastructure (e.g., piping and lift stations) would likely be required for new development within the City, and construction of such collection system improvements would be subject to additional CEQA review conducted for each development application. Nevertheless, the projected growth that could be served by the project was planned for and anticipated to occur within the WWTP’s service area as part of the City’s General Plan. Goals and policies are outlined in the City’s General Plan to accommodate this new growth and its impacts were addressed in the General Plan EIR. As a result, the project would not indirectly induce unplanned growth.

An impact is only deemed to occur when it directly or indirectly affects the ability of agencies to provide needed public services, or if it can be shown that the growth would significantly affect the environment in some other way.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-119 While the project in question would accommodate some level of growth (i.e., development), the growth in population accommodated by the project was already identified and its effects disclosed and mitigated within the City’s General Plan and associated EIRs, as well as subsequent CEQA analyses that have been prepared for existing and proposed development within the wastewater service area. Therefore, the project would not induce unplanned population growth either directly or indirectly and the impact would be less than significant. 60Bb) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No impact. The project would be constructed within the existing WWTP boundary and adjacent agricultural properties. No existing homes would be removed or displaced by either construction or operation of the project, nor would replacement housing be constructed elsewhere. Therefore, no impact related to construction or displacement of people or housing would occur.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-120 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.15 97BPUBLIC SERVICES

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XV. Public Services.

Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, or the need for new
or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:

Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?

3.15.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to public services are applicable to the project.

STATE
California Fire Code
The CFC (CCR Title 24, Part 9), which is based on the International Fire Code, contains regulations consistent with nationally recognized and accepted practices for safeguarding life and property from the hazards of fire and explosion; dangerous conditions arising from the storage, handling, and use of hazardous materials and devices; and hazardous conditions in the use or occupancy of buildings or premises. The CFC also contains provisions to assist emergency response personnel. Specific topics addressed in the CFC include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire-safety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises.

California Health and Safety Code
State fire regulations are set forth in HSC Sections 13000 et seq.. This includes regulations for building standards (as also set forth in the CBC), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers and smoke alarms, high‐rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-121 California Occupational Safety and Health Administration In accordance with CCR Title 8 Sections 1270 “Fire Prevention” and 6773 “Fire Protection and Fire Equipment,” Cal/OSHA has established minimum standards for fire suppression and emergency medical services. The standards include guidelines on the handling of highly combustible materials, fire hose sizing requirements, restrictions on the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance and use of all firefighting and emergency medical equipment.

California Building Code
The CBC (CCR Title 24 Part 2) contains general building design and construction requirements relating to fire and life safety, structural safety, and access compliance. CBC provisions provide minimum standards to safeguard life or limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of all buildings and structures and certain equipment. The CBC is based on the International Building Code, but has been amended for California conditions. It is generally adopted on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis, subject to further modification based on local conditions. Commercial and residential buildings are plan-checked by local building officials for compliance with the CBC. Typical fire safety requirements of the CBC include the installation of sprinklers in all high-rise buildings; the establishment of fire resistance standards for fire doors, building materials, and particular types of construction; and the clearance of debris and vegetation within a prescribed distance from occupied structures in wildfire hazard areas.

LOCAL
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The following policy from the Community Development Element is relevant to public services with respect to the project:
 Policy C-3.5. Service Maintenance in Rural Communities: The County may fund, as necessary, the maintenance and upgrading of existing facilities and services within Rural Communities to protect public health and safety. The County shall not fund the upgrading of facilities and services within Rural Communities that would result in additional capacity for new growth.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The City of Riverbank’s General Plan provides a guide for land use development within the City of Riverbank. The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities and Land Use Elements of the City’s General Plan are relevant to public services with respect to the project:
 Policy PUBLIC-1.5: The City will upgrade facilities and services that experience deterioration or obsolescence in existing developed areas of the City, as funding permits, to maintain levels of public service established by the City.
 Policy PUBLIC-7.3: The City will require that fire stations be located to ensure the appropriate level of service (including adequate response time per Policy Public 7.5), community compatibility, and efficiency, including the location of such facilities relative existing and planned public parks, libraries, and other activity centers.  Policy PUBLIC-7.4: The City will coordinate with fire protection providers, including through reciprocity arrangements, to ensure equipment, staffing, and facilities for emergency medical services, urban search and rescue, hazardous materials emergency response, and other relevant needs, as appropriate. The City will ensure consistency with National Fire Protection Association and Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District response requirements, to ensure adequate fire protection is available.  Policy PUBLIC-7.5: The City will coordinate with fire protection providers to an emergency response system capable of achieving the following standards in 95% of all cases: first fire emergency response unit within six minutes of dispatch; full alarm assignment within 10 minutes of dispatch; second alarm assignment within 15 minutes of dispatch; and an ISO rating of Class 2 for areas within the City.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-122 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  Policy LAND-5.1: The City will maintain public services and facilities in the existing developed City and make improvements as necessary to maintain a consistent Citywide level of service.  Policy LAND-5.5: Approved projects, plans, and subdivisions in new growth areas will set aside adequate land for, and shall otherwise accommodate public infrastructure and service needs consistent with General Plan policy.

3.15.2 Environmental Setting
Fire protection, emergency medical services, and hazardous materials management within the City are provided by Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District (SCFPD). However, as the project site is located across the Stanislaus River and within San Joaquin County, fire protection services at the project site are provided by Escalon Fire Protection District, which operates a fire station located at 1749 Coley Avenue in Escalon (approximately 5 miles northwest of the project site.)
Law enforcement within the City is provided by Riverbank Police Services (RPS), which are under contract to the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department. The project site, which is located in San Joaquin County, is located within the jurisdiction of and is served by the San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Department (SJCSD). The SJCSD consists of seven divisions: Civil and Custody Division, Coroner’s Office, Internal Affairs Division, Public Information and Records Division, Administration Division, Investigations Division, and Operations Services Division. SJCSD headquarters is located at 7000 Michael Canlis Blvd, French Camp, approximately 24 miles northwest of the project site.

The nearest school to the project site is the Cardozo Middle School located approximately 0.7 mile southeast of the site, which serves grades six through eight. With respect to park facilities, Jacob Myers Park is located immediately south and southeast of the project site and provides 8 acres of developed recreational amenities and 47 acres of undeveloped open space and passive recreational opportunities.

3.15.3 Discussion
61Ba) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services? Less-than-significant impact. The project would involve the expansion of the existing WWTP and construction/operation of recycled water distribution facilities. However, the project would not increase the boundaries of the existing WWTP property or incorporate the WWTP within the City of Riverbank. Off-site improvements (i.e., recycled water distribution facilities) would consist of subterranean distribution lines that would offset potable water demands at nearby agricultural properties and would not result in the need for additional public services to or for the project site. As a result, changes in how and to what degree public services would need to be provided to the project site due to project implementation are anticipated to be minimal. No increase in on-site population or City population would occur as a result of project implementation that could result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities (e.g., parks, schools, and other governmental facilities). However, the proposed additional on-site structures would represent new/improved on-site facilities that may require service in the event of an emergency (police and/or fire). These facilities would be constructed in accordance with applicable code requirements, including the CFC (see above), and the site would be appropriately secured, similar to existing conditions, which would minimize the potential need for additional police and fire service as a result of project implementation. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-123

3.16 98BRECREATION

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XVI. Recreation.

Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
that might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?

3.16.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
There are no federal plans or policies addressing recreation that pertain to the project.

STATE
Quimby Act
The Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477) preserves open space and parkland in urbanizing areas of the state by authorizing local governments to establish ordinances requiring developers of new subdivisions to dedicate land for parks, pay an in-lieu fee, or perform a combination of the two. The Quimby Act provides two standards for the dedication of land for use as parkland. If the existing area of parkland in a community is 3 acres or more per 1,000 persons, then the community may require dedication based on a standard of 5 acres per 1,000 persons residing in the subdivision. If the existing amount of parkland in a community is less than 3 acres per 1,000 persons, then the community may require dedication based on a standard of only 3 acres per 1,000 persons residing in the subdivision. The Quimby Act requires a city or county to adopt standards for recreational facilities in its general plan recreation element if it is to adopt a parkland dedication/fee ordinance.

The amount of land dedicated or fees paid shall be based upon the residential density, which shall be determined on the basis of the approved or conditionally approved tentative map or parcel map and the average number of persons per household. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that the average number of persons per household by units in a structure is the same as that disclosed by the most recent available federal census or a census taken pursuant to Chapter 17 (commencing with Section 40200) of Part 2 of Division 3 of Title 4.

LOCAL
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
In 2016, San Joaquin County adopted an update to its General Plan, which guides land use development for the unincorporated lands of the County. The 2035 General Plan supports focused growth within incorporated cities and Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-124 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration calls for annexation to the City prior to development of lands outside city limits. The following policies from the Community Development Element are relevant to recreation with respect to the project:
 Policy LU-4.6. Residential Support Services: The County shall encourage the development and siting of residential support services (e.g., convenience commercial uses, parks, schools) in Urban Communities that are accessible by all residents.
 Policy LU-8.3. Waterway Conservation and Restoration: The County shall encourage the conservation and restoration of rivers, creeks, and sloughs as multi-functional open space corridors that complement adjoining development and connect city and County recreation facilities (e.g., parks).  Policy LU-8.4: New Parks and Open Spaces. The County shall ensure that sufficient parks, open space, waterways, and trails are planned throughout the County, to ensure adequate facilities are available to existing and future residents, including underserved areas and low-income neighborhoods.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The City of Riverbank’s General Plan provides a guide for land use development within the City of Riverbank. The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to recreation with respect to the project:
 Policy PUBLIC-11.3: The City will maintain and improve existing parks and develop new parks to serve existing developed portions of the City, as feasible.
 Policy PUBLIC-11.4: The City will encourage the use of greenways and natural open space areas for certain compatible recreational opportunities, such as pedestrian pathways, while preserving important ecological habitats.

3.16.2 Environmental Setting
The City of Riverbank Parks and Recreation Department operates public parks and recreational facilities within its jurisdictional boundaries (i.e., incorporated City limits). San Joaquin County Parks and Recreation Department operates regional parks and recreational facilities within unincorporated San Joaquin County. The project site is located within the unincorporated county, but is bordered to the south by Jacob Myers Park, a City owned and operated facility. Jacob Myers Park provides 8 acres of developed recreational amenities and 47 acres of undeveloped open space and passive recreational opportunities. The existing WWTP and the park share access to both facilities via Henry Road from South Santa Fe Road.

3.16.3 Discussion
62Ba) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
No impact. The project does not include development of new residences or involve any employment population change. Furthermore, the temporary demand for construction employees would be met by existing residents in Riverbank or construction workers that would commute from nearby areas (e.g., Modesto, Ripon, Manteca, Turlock, Oakdale) during the workday. Therefore, the project would not affect the population in the project area such that it would increase the demand for use of existing neighborhood or regional parts or other recreational facilities and there would be no impact.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-125 63Bb) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No impact. The project would not involve the construction of recreational facilities and as stated in item a) above, the project would not include development of new residences or involve any employment population change that would increase the demand for public facilities, such that the construction of new or physical alteration of existing parks or other recreational facilities would be required. In addition, the project would not reduce the City of Riverbank’s or San Joaquin County’s recreational inventory, as the project would not alter existing facilities or otherwise develop any such facilities. Therefore, would be no impact.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-126 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.17 9BTRANSPORTATION

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XVII. Transportation.

Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?

3.17.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to transportation are applicable to the project.

STATE
Senate Bill 743
SB 743, passed in 2013, required OPR to develop new CEQA guidelines that address traffic metrics under CEQA. As stated in the legislation (and Section 21099[b][2] of CEQA), upon adoption of the new guidelines, “automobile delay, as described solely by level of service (LOS) or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to this division, except in locations specifically identified in the guidelines, if any.”
In November 2017, OPR published its proposal for the comprehensive updates to the State CEQA Guidelines, which included proposed updates related to analyzing transportation impacts pursuant to SB 743. The Office of Administrative Law approved the updated CEQA Guidelines on December 28, 2018, and according to the new CEQA Guidelines (Section 15064.3), vehicle miles traveled (VMT) replaced congestion as the metric for determining transportation impacts. The provisions of this section became applicable statewide on July 1, 2020.

PRC Section 21099 directs that automobile delay and congestion “shall not” be considered a significant impact on the environment upon certification of the guidelines. The guidance provided relative to VMT significance criteria is focused on residential, office, and retail uses. However, as noted in the updated guidelines, agencies are directed to choose metrics that are appropriate for their jurisdiction to evaluate the potential impacts of a project in terms of VMT.

OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA In December 2018, OPR published the most recent version of the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory), which provides guidance for VMT analysis. The Office of Administrative Law approved the updated State CEQA Guidelines, and as of July 1, 2020, implementation of Section 15064.3 of the updated CEQA Guidelines applies statewide.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-127 The OPR Technical Advisory states that lead agencies may screen out VMT using project size, maps, transit availability, and provision of affordable housing. Many agencies use these screening thresholds to identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. The Technical Advisory identifies the following screening thresholds:
 Small Project: Projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to result in a less-than-significant transportation impact.
 Map-Based Screening for Residential and Office Projects: Residential and office projects that are located in areas with low VMT and that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility) tend to exhibit similarly low VMT. Maps created with VMT data, for example from a travel survey or a travel demand model, can illustrate areas that are currently below threshold VMT. Because new development in such locations would likely result in a similar level of VMT, such maps can be used to screen out the need to prepare a detailed VMT analysis for some residential and office projects.
 Presumption of Less-Than-Significant Impact Near Transit Stations: Lead agencies generally should presume that certain projects (including residential, retail, and office projects, as well as projects that are a mix of these uses) proposed within one-half mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor will have a less-than-significant impact on VMT.  Presumption of Less-Than-Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development: Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves the jobs-housing match, in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT.

Further, low-wage workers in particular would be more likely to choose a residential location close to their workplace if one is available. In areas where the existing jobs-housing match is closer to optimal, low-income housing nevertheless generates less VMT than market-rate housing. Therefore, a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis for the lead agency to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

LOCAL
San Joaquin County Encroachment Permit
As part of an encroachment permit, the San Joaquin County Department of Public Works requires the preparation of a traffic control plan. The Encroachment Permit General Provisions and Encroachment Permit Application Requirements provide guidance to applicants, including the following items related to potential transportation hazards:
 The application must include the work schedule, including dates and all pertinent information.  Four sets of traffic control plans must be prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
 Four sets of improvement plans (11 x 17 inches if clearly legible; otherwise, 24 x 36 inches) must be prepared.  All work shall be done subject to the supervision of and the satisfaction of the grantor. The permittee shall at all times during the progress of the work keep the county highway as neat and clean as is possible and, upon completion of the work authorized herein, shall leave the county highway in a thoroughly neat, clean, and usable condition.  All work shall be planned and carried out with as little inconvenience as possible to the traveling public. No material shall be stacked within 8 feet of the edge of the pavement or traveled way unless otherwise provided herein.

Adequate provision shall be made for the protection of the traveling public. Traffic control standards, including barricades, approved signs and lights, and flagmen, shall be used as required by the particular work in progress.  Whenever it becomes necessary to secure permission from abutting and/or underlying property owners for the proposed work, such authority must be secured by the permittee before starting work.  The current and future safety and convenience of the traveling public shall be given every consideration in the location and methods of construction used.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-128 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.17.2 Environmental Setting

ROADWAY NETWORK
Access to the project site is served by the surrounding roadway network, which includes Santa Fe Road, Henry Road, and Burwood Lane.
 Santa Fe Road is a two-lane bidirectional roadway that is generally fronted by rural farmland in the vicinity of the project site. The posted speed limit near the project site is 45 miles per hour. No sidewalks or bicycle facilities are present on either side of the roadway in the vicinity of the project site.  Henry Road is a two-lane bidirectional roadway that provides direct access to the existing WWTP, as well as Jacob Myers Park. The portion of Henry Road that provides access to the WWTP is approximately 15 feet wide with limited dirt shoulders on either site. No sidewalks or bicycle facilities are present on either side of the roadway in the vicinity of the project site.
 Burwood Lane is a two-lane bidirectional roadway north of the project site. The approximate right-of-way of Burwood Lane is 20 feet with limited dirt shoulders on either side.

3.17.3 Discussion
64Ba) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? Less-than-significant impact. The project would involve construction activities, including construction of a temporary access point and road to support the transportation of construction labor, materials, and equipment, and pipeline construction along existing roadways and within private lands. that would affect the circulation system. These activities could occur within portions of public and private roadway rights-of-way. However, no transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities currently exist or are planned in the areas where this construction work would take place.

Additionally, implementation of the project would not require the construction, redesign, or alteration of any public roadways. Therefore, implementing the project would not adversely affect any existing or planned transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. Furthermore, because of the temporary nature of construction activities at individual locations and the rural character of much of the transportation network in and around the areas where construction activities could occur, the project would not generate substantial transit, roadway, bicycle, or pedestrian demand. Thus, the project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing transit, roadway, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, and this impact would be less than significant. 65Bb) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b), which pertains to vehicle miles traveled?
Less-than-significant impact. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, which was added on December 28, 2018, to address the determination of significance for transportation impacts, requires that VMT be used as the basis of transportation analysis instead of congestion (such as LOS). The change in the focus of transportation analysis is intended to shift the focus from congestion to, among other things, reducing GHG emissions, encouraging mixed-use development, and other factors. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) identifies criteria for analyzing the transportation impacts of a project.

Section 15064.3(b)(3), “Qualitative Analysis,” states that if existing models or methods are not available to estimate the VMT for the particular project being considered, a lead agency may analyze the project’s VMT qualitatively.

Additionally, this section notes that for many projects, a qualitative analysis of construction traffic may be appropriate. Given the nature of the project, for which almost all trip generation would be construction related, this section is applicable to the project.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-129 Section 15064.3(b)(4), “Methodology,” explains that lead agencies, such as the City of Riverbank, have discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate VMT subject to other applicable standards, such as State CEQA Guidelines Section 15151 (standards of adequacy for EIR analyses).

The stated intent of SB 743, as described above, is to promote the reduction of GHG emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. The GHG emissions of trips associated with heavy vehicles serving the project site are addressed in Section 3.8, “Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Moreover, heavy-vehicle trips associated with construction would occur regardless of the available modes of transportation (e.g., walking, bicycling, public transit) or the mix of land uses in the project vicinity. Further, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(a) states that VMT refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project (emphasis added).

The OPR Technical Advisory describes that the term “automobile,” as used in Section 15064.3(a), refers to on-road passenger vehicles, specifically cars and light trucks; heavy vehicles are not included in the definition.

Therefore, limiting the VMT analysis to automobile travel would be consistent with the intent of SB 743 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(a) and the intent to reduce GHG emissions through land use decisions and the availability of alternatives to automobile travel. For this reason, heavy-vehicle (i.e., larger on-road construction vehicles) VMT associated with construction is not a consideration for determining a significant transportation impact under CEQA in the impact analysis presented below.

The OPR Technical Advisory (OPR 2018) notes that projects generating or attracting fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact, absent substantial evidence indicating otherwise. Therefore, using OPR guidance, if implementation of the project would generate fewer than 110 trips per day, then it would result in a less-than-significant VMT impact.

Construction
Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in October 2024 and last approximately 27 months, ending in December 2026. Trips associated with construction activities would include heavy-vehicle trips to haul equipment and materials and trips associated with the workers commuting to and from the construction sites. As stated above, heavy-vehicle VMT associated with construction is not a consideration in this impact analysis. The average number of daily workers expected onsite over the 566 total working days of project construction is approximately 28.

The VMT of construction workers is not newly generated; instead, it is redistributed throughout the regional roadway network based on the different work sites that workers travel to each day. Therefore, construction workers would not generate new trips each day; they would only redistribute them. The location from which construction workers are traveling is not known, and it would be speculative to try to quantify the change in VMT associated with these redistributed construction worker trips. However, assuming two trips per day for each construction worker (28*2=56), total trip generation would not exceed 110 trips per day. As described in the OPR Technical Advisory (OPR 2018), if a project generates fewer than 110 trips per day, it is generally assumed to cause a less-than-significant VMT impact.

Additionally, as described above, construction activities would be temporary and intermittent and thus would not result in long-term increases in vehicular trips or VMT. Therefore, construction activities are not expected to result in a significant increase to VMT, and the impact related to construction would be less than significant.

Operations
The existing WWTP is currently served by three employees (i.e., one supervisor and two maintenance workers), and implementation of the project would not result in an increase in the number of employees or employee trips. The project could result in an increase in the number of maintenance-related trips because the size and number of facilities associated with implementation of the project would be increased. However, the trips would be temporary and intermittent and thus would not result in long-term increases in vehicular trips or VMT. Therefore, the number of new daily trips generated by the project would be fewer than 110 trips per day, thus satisfying the screening threshold for small projects as detailed in the OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts. Therefore, operational activities are not expected to significantly increase VMT in the region. The impact would be less than significant.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-130 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 6Bc) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. As detailed above, the project would involve construction of a temporary access point and road to support the transportation of construction materials and equipment and recycled water distribution pipeline construction along existing roadways and within private lands. The proposed temporary access road would be outside public rights-of-way in the secured construction area, and there would be no public access to this new construction access road. Therefore, constructing a temporary access point and road would not result in a substantial increase in transportation hazards.

Pipeline construction would occur within portions of public and private roadway rights-of-way, and the affected roadway segments may be closed temporarily during the installation activities. The roadway facilities that would be affected by pipeline construction would include private unpaved farm roads, Henry Road (i.e., the entrance to Jacob Myers Park and the Riverbank WWTP), and the location where the pipeline would cross Santa Fe Road. As detailed in Chapter 2, “Project Description,” if any such temporary roadway disruptions were to occur, the changes to traffic control operations would be noticed at the location of the temporary traffic restrictions a week in advance of any roadwork that would impede the flow of traffic (i.e., closes the road, closes a traffic lane, or closes the road shoulder).

Additionally, encroachment permits for the temporary access point would be acquired as required by San Joaquin County, and temporary easements would be obtained from individual property owners as required for the temporary construction access point and road on private property. However, construction associated with covered activities may include disruptions to the transportation network, including the possibility of temporary lane closures and road closures. Additionally, the hauling of heavy machinery (e.g., bulldozers, excavators) and operation of large trucks associated with construction activities along the surrounding roadway network could necessitate travel along roadways with limited lane width and little or no roadway shoulders. Therefore, construction associated with the project could potentially result in a substantial increase in transportation hazards. This impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure 3.17-1: Prepare and Implement a Temporary Traffic Control Plan Before project construction is begun in any existing public roadway rights-of-way, the City of Riverbank shall coordinate with the agency with jurisdictional control of the affected roadway (e.g., County of San Joaquin) to determine the required process, permits, and approvals. Additionally, the construction coordinator shall prepare a temporary traffic control (TTC) plan in accordance with the latest edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and to the satisfaction of the appropriate agency. The TTC plan shall be subject to review by all affected agencies and, at a minimum, shall:
 describe the proposed work zone (e.g., include a site plan and vicinity map showing right-of-way lines, the centerline, the edge of pavements, the curb, the gutter, the sidewalk, and all existing utilities);  describe the type of work and location clearly (e.g., dimensions relative to the right-of-way, centerline, edge of pavement);
 describe detours and/or lane closures if applicable;
 identify the need for flag-persons where warranted;
 describe appropriate tapers and lengths, signs, and spacing;  describe appropriate channelization devices and spacing;  identify work hours/work days;
 identify proposed speed limit changes if applicable;
 describe roadways affected by the work;
 describe trucks, including the number and size of trucks per day, expected arrival/departure times, and truck circulation patterns;
 identify all staging areas; and
 ensure that adequate emergency vehicle access to all surrounding parcels and properties is maintained at all times.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-131 Significance after Mitigation
The implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.17-1 would reduce temporary traffic hazards associated with project construction by requiring coordination between the City and San Joaquin County, which has jurisdiction over an affected roadway, and requiring that the construction contractor prepare and implement a TTC plan that meets with the approval of that agency. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.17-1, the project would not substantially increase traffic hazards and the impact would be clearly reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
67Bd) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Construction associated with the project could occur within portions of public roadway rights-of-way, as well as nonpublic rights-of-way used to access various residences and facilities. As described above, construction associated with proposed activities may include disruptions to the transportation network, including the possibility of temporary lane closures and street closures related to construction of the recycled water distribution pipeline along existing roadways. Additionally, the hauling of heavy machinery (e.g., bulldozers, excavators) and operation of large trucks along the roadway network near where construction could occur would necessitate travel along roadways with limited lane width and little or no roadway shoulders. Therefore, emergency access could potentially be impeded or delayed during such construction activities. Thus, construction associated with the project could potentially result in inadequate emergency access, and this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure 3.17-1: Prepare and Implement a Temporary Traffic Control Plan Mitigation Measure 3.17-1 shall be implemented, as described above.

Significance after Mitigation
The implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.17-1 would reduce temporary impacts associated with emergency access by requiring the construction contractor to prepare and implement a TTC plan that meets with the approval of San Joaquin County, the agency with jurisdiction over the affected roadways, and ensures that adequate emergency vehicle access to all surrounding parcels and properties is maintained at all times. Therefore, the potentially significant impact on emergency access would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-132 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.18 10BTRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources.

Has a California Native American Tribe requested
consultation in accordance with Public Resources Code
section 21080.3.1(b)?
Yes No
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code section 5020.1(k)?
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe?

3.18.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to tribal cultural resources are applicable to the project.

STATE
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA requires public agencies to consider the effects of their actions on tribal cultural resources. PRC Section 21084.2 establishes that “[a] project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” PRC Section 21074 states:
a) “Tribal cultural resources” are either of the following:
1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:

A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources.

B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1. 2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-133 subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. b) A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape. c) A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a “nonunique archaeological resource” as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a Tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a).

AB 52, signed by the California governor in September 2014, established a new class of resources under CEQA: “tribal cultural resources,” defined in PRC Section 21074. Pursuant to CEQA requirements, lead agencies undertaking CEQA review must, upon written request of a California Native American tribe, begin consultation before the release of an EIR, negative declaration, or mitigated negative declaration.

Under PRC Sections 21080.3.1 and 21082.3, the City must consult with tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area that have requested formal notification and responded with a request for consultation. The parties must consult in good faith. Consultation is deemed concluded when the parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect on a tribal cultural resource when one is present or when a party concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached. Mitigation measures agreed on during the consultation process must be recommended for inclusion in the environmental document.

LOCAL
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The following policy from the Natural and Cultural Resources Element of the San Joaquin County General Plan is relevant to tribal cultural resources with respect to the project:
 Policy NCR-6.6. Tribal Consultation: The County shall consult with Native American tribes regarding proposed development projects and land use policy changes consistent with the State’s Local and Tribal Intergovernmental Consultation requirements.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The following policies from the Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to tribal cultural resources with respect to the project:
 Policy CONS-2.2: All Native American cultural and archaeological sites shall be protected permanently from urban development, wherever possible.
 Policy CONS-2.3: The City shall restrict the circulation of cultural resource locational information to prevent potential site vandalism.
 Policy CONS-2.5: As guided by State law, in the event of the inadvertent discovery of previously unknown archaeological sites during excavation or construction, all construction affecting the site shall cease and the contractor shall contact the appropriate City agency. If Native American human remains are discovered, the City shall work with local Native American representatives to ensure that the remains and associated artifacts are treated in a respectful and dignified manner.

3.18.2 Environmental Setting
On July 12, 2022, the City of Riverbank sent notification letters that the project was being addressed under CEQA, as required by PRC 21080.3.1, to the Native American tribes on NAHC’s contact list for Stanislaus County; because the lead agency, the City of Riverbank, is located in Stanislaus County, the list obtained from NAHC is appropriate to use.

Notifications were sent to the Calaveras Band of Mi-Wuk Indians, Gloria Grimes, chairperson; Calaveras Band of MiWuk Indians-Grimes, Debra Grimes, cultural resources specialist; North Valley Yokuts Tribe, Timothy Perez; North Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-134 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Valley Yokuts Tribe, Katherine Perez, chairperson; California Valley Miwok Tribe; Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation, Sandra Chapman, chairperson; California Valley Miwok Tribe (also known as Sheep Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California); Wilton Rancheria, Jesus Tarango, chairperson; Wilton Rancheria, Dahlton Brown, director of administration; Wilton Rancheria, Steven Hutchason, tribal historic preservation officer; Tule River Indian Tribe, Kerri Vera, Environmental Department; Tule River Indian Tribe, Joey Garfield, tribal archaeologist; Tule River Indian Tribe, Neil Peyron, chairperson; and Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, Kenneth Woodrow, chairperson. Wilton Rancheria replied on July 25, 2022, stating that the project lies within the tribe’s ancestral territory. Wilton Rancheria requested to be notified if any archaeological or tribal cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities. No known resources within the project area have been identified as tribal cultural resources as defined in PRC Section 21074.

A records search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed on April 26, 2022. The NAHC search indicated that the SLF was negative for the presence of Native American resources within the project site (Ascent Environmental 2022b).

3.18.3 Discussion
68BWould the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
69Ba) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
No impact. The project area contains no tribal cultural resources that are listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR or in a local register of historical resources. There would be no impact. 70Bb) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Wilton Rancheria requested to be notified if any archaeological or tribal cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities; however, no tribal cultural resources were identified in the project area based on this tribal consultation. Nevertheless, the possibility remains that tribal cultural resources could be encountered during construction-related ground-disturbing activities. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure 3.18-1: Protect Unanticipated Discoveries of Potential Tribal Cultural Resources If any suspected tribal cultural resources, including midden soil, artifacts, chipped stone, exotic rock (nonnative), or unusual amounts of baked clay, shell, or bone, are discovered during ground-disturbing construction activities, all work shall cease within 100 feet of the find. Appropriate tribal representative(s) shall be immediately notified and shall determine whether the find is a tribal cultural resource (pursuant to PRC Section 21074). If the find is determined to be a tribal cultural resource, the appropriate tribal representative(s) will make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment, as necessary. If the find is determined not to be a tribal cultural resource as defined in PRC Section 21074, construction may proceed.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-135 Preservation in place is the preferred alternative under CEQA and the tribes’ protocols, and every effort must be made to preserve the resources in place, including through project redesign. Culturally appropriate treatment may be, but is not limited to, processing materials for reburial, minimizing handling of cultural objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, or returning objects to a location within the project vicinity where they will not be subject to future impacts. Tribes do not consider curation of tribal cultural resources to be appropriate or respectful and request that materials not be permanently curated unless approved by the tribal representative. Treatment that preserves or restores the cultural character and integrity of a tribal cultural resource may include tribal monitoring, culturally appropriate recovery of cultural objects, and reburial of cultural objects or cultural soil (soils containing and surrounding the discovery).

Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.18-1 would reduce impacts on tribal cultural resources by requiring appropriate treatment and proper care of significant tribal cultural resources, in the case of a discovery. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-136 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.19 10BUTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XIX. Utilities and Service Systems.

Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of construction of new or expanded water, wastewater
treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
b) Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it
has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand, in addition to the provider’s
existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
e) Fail to comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?

3.19.1 Regulatory Setting

WATER SUPPLIES
Federal
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to water supplies are applicable to the project.

State
Urban Water Management Planning Act
In 1983, the California Legislature enacted the Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMPA) (California Water Code Sections 10610–10656). The UWMPA states that every urban water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers, or that provides more than 3,000 acre-feet (af) of water annually, should make every effort to ensure a level of reliability in its water service sufficient to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. This effort includes the adoption of an urban water management plan (UWMP) by every urban-water supplier and an update of the plan every 5 years on or before December 31, of every year ending in a 5 or 0. The project area is within the service area of the South San Joaquin Irrigation District, which adopted its most recent UWMP in June 2021.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-137 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014
SGMA, which became law on January 1, 2015, applies to all groundwater basins in the state (Water Code Section 10720.3). By enacting SGMA, the legislature intended to provide “GSAs with the authority and the technical and financial assistance necessary to sustainably manage groundwater within their jurisdictions (Water Code Section 10720.1). SGMA is a follow-up to SB X7-6, adopted in November 2009, which mandated a statewide groundwater elevation monitoring program to track seasonal and long-term trends in groundwater elevations in California’s groundwater basins. In accordance with this amendment to the Water Code, DWR developed the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring program.

Pursuant to SGMA, any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin may decide to become a GSA for that basin, with the exception of a list of existing public agencies that the legislature designated as GSAs for their basins (Water Code Section 10723). The project area is within the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin, which is a critically overdrafted basin. The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority, which is the GSA for the subbasin, adopted the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) in November 2019.

SGMA also requires DWR to categorize each groundwater basin in the state as high, medium, low, or very low priority (Water Code Sections 10720.7, 10722.4). All basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins must be managed by a GSA under a GSP that complies with Water Code Section 10727 et seq. If required to be prepared, GSPs must be prepared by January 31, 2020, for all high- and medium-priority basins that are subject to critical conditions of overdraft, as determined by DWR, or by January 31, 2022, for all other high- and medium-priority basins. In lieu of preparation of a GSP, a local agency was permitted to submit an alternative that complies with SGMA no later than January 1, 2017 (Water Code Section 10733.6).

Following DWR’s approval of adopted GSPs, the affected high- and medium-priority basins are to be managed under the GSPs. The basins should reach sustainability within 20 years of adoption of their GSPs. SGMA defines “sustainable groundwater management” as the “management and use of groundwater in a manner that can be maintained during the planning and implementation horizon without causing undesirable results.” The legislation defines “undesirable results” to be any of the following effects caused by groundwater conditions occurring throughout the basin:
 chronic lowering of groundwater levels, indicating a significant and unreasonable depletion of supply,  significant and unreasonable reduction of groundwater storage,  significant and unreasonable seawater intrusion,
 significant and unreasonable land subsidence,
 significant and unreasonable degraded water quality, and  surface water depletions that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water.

Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB X7-7)
The Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB X7-7) requires that urban and agricultural water suppliers increase their water use efficiency through implementing water conservation strategies, monitoring water use, and reporting data to DWR. SB X7-7 includes 18 actions, or “projects,” that DWR is responsible for carrying out. It requires that urban water retail suppliers determine baseline water use and set reduction targets according to specified requirements, and it requires agricultural water suppliers to prepare plans and implement efficient water management practices.

Water Conservation Legislation (AB 1668 and SB 606)
Enacted on May 31, 2018, SB 606 and AB 1668 establish guidelines for efficient water use and a framework for the implementation and oversight of the new standards, which must be in place by 2022. The two bills strengthen the state’s water resiliency in the face of future droughts with provisions that include:

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-138 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  establishing water use objectives and long-term standards for efficient water use that apply to urban retail water suppliers (composed of indoor and outdoor residential water use; commercial, industrial, and institutional irrigation with dedicated meters; water loss; and other unique local uses);  providing incentives for water suppliers to recycle water;  identifying small water suppliers and rural communities that may be at risk of drought and water shortage vulnerability and providing recommendations for drought planning; and  requiring both urban and agricultural water suppliers to set annual water budgets and prepare for drought.

Local
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The guiding principles of the Public Services and Facilities Element of the San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan include (1) enhancing and maintaining existing infrastructure and services to meet the unique circumstances of each unincorporated community and the needs of residents and businesses and (2) ensuring that development does not outpace the provision of services and infrastructure. The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element are relevant to water supplies with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):
 Policy IS-4.1. Water Agency Support: The County shall support efforts of local water agencies, special districts, and water conservation districts to ensure that adequate high-quality water supplies are available to support existing and future residents and businesses.
 Policy IS-4.6. Coordinate Efforts for Adequate Water Supply: The County shall support coordinated efforts to obtain adequate water supplies and develop water storage facilities to meet expected water demand.  Policy IS-4.9. Groundwater Management: The County shall continue to support cooperative, regional groundwater management planning by local water agencies, water users, and other affected parties to ensure a sustainable, adequate, safe, and economically viable groundwater supply for existing and future uses within the County.
 Policy IS-4.19. Water Efficient Landscaping: The County shall encourage water efficient landscaping and use of native, drought-tolerant plants consistent with the Model Landscape Ordinance.  Policy IS-4.20. Water Efficient Agricultural Practices: The County shall encourage farmers to implement irrigation practices, where feasible and practical, to conserve water. 2020 Urban Watershed Management Plan for the City of Riverbank The City of Riverbank is the water service provider to all residential, commercial, and institutional/governmental water users within the city limits, including the WWTP. As required under the UWMPA, the City prepared a 2020 UWMP to assess availability and reliability of water supplies and projected water use over the next 20–25 years. As part of the UWMP, the City also prepared a water shortage contingency plan to outline steps to follow in the event of a water shortage that may result from years of consecutive dry-year conditions, contamination, or natural or human-caused disasters (City of Riverbank 2021).

Agricultural Water Management Plan
The South San Joaquin Irrigation District (SSJID or District) is a wholesale water agency that supplies water to the agricultural lands in the project area. Because SSJID supplies agricultural water to more than 50,000 acres, the District is required to adopt and implement an agricultural water management plan (AWMP), prepared in accordance with the Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB x7-7) and the 2018 Water Conservation Legislation (AB 1668 and SB 606). The SSJID AWMP was adopted on March 23, 2021. The AWMP includes a detailed description of the District’s physical setting operations and facilities; an inventory of water supplies and uses; a discussion of the District water budget, water management objectives, and water use efficiency; a discussion of climate change adaptation strategies; and the District’s drought management plan (SSJID 2021).

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-139 City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025 evaluates existing sewer, water, storm drainage, and other utility facilities, as well as solid waste collection. The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element are relevant to water supplies with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy PUBLIC-1.2: New development must pay for the public facilities, services, and infrastructure required to serve the needs of such development based on service standards applied by the City. The mechanisms for such funding will be part of the development approval, or as set forth in any applicable development agreement or specific plan, which, with the approval of the City Council, may provide for alternative financing mechanisms inlieu of City development fee programs and ordinances. The use of in-lieu fees or in-lieu financing will be reserved for communitywide facilities that serve areas beyond the proposed project or plan. Construction and dedication of facilities will be the method for providing facilities that serve the proposed project or plan area. The City may make exceptions on the basis of financial hardship or small projects or plans, allowing payment of an in-lieu fee.  Policy PUBLIC-2.1: The City will require that water supply, treatment, and delivery meet or exceed local, State, and federal standards.
 Policy PUBLIC-2.3: New developments shall incorporate water conservation techniques to reduce water demand in new growth areas, including the use of reclaimed water for landscaping and irrigation.

WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER
Federal
Refer to the discussion of the CWA and NPDES in the “Regulatory Setting” section of Section 3.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality.”
State
Refer to the discussion of the Porter-Cologne Act and California Water Code in the “Regulatory Setting” section of Section 3.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality.”
Local
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the San Joaquin County General Plan are relevant to wastewater treatment with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):
 Policy IS-6.1. Wastewater System Maintenance and Expansion: The County shall encourage public wastewater system operators to maintain and expand their systems to meet the development needs of the County.  Policy IS-6.2. Reclaimed Water: The County shall encourage public wastewater system operations to upgrade existing wastewater treatment systems to produce reclaimed water suitable for reuse.  Policy IS-6.3. Adequate Wastewater Facilities: The County shall ensure through the development review process that wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal facilities are sufficient to serve existing and new development, and are scalable to meet capacity demands when needed.
 Policy IS-6.6. Wastewater Treatment System Standards: The County shall require that the development, operation and maintenance of wastewater treatment systems meet the requirements and standards of the wastewater treatment agency and the County, including the requirements and standards of the County Environmental Health Department.

The following policy from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the County’s General Plan is relevant to stormwater with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-140 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration  Policy IS-7.1. Adequate Stormwater Facilities: The County shall require that stormwater drainage facilities are properly designed, sited, constructed, and maintained to efficiently capture and dispose of runoff and minimize impacts to water quality.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to wastewater treatment with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy PUBLIC-1.1: The City will coordinate the planning and construction of capital improvements with the timing of urban development within the Planning Area.
 Policy PUBLIC-1.5: The City will upgrade facilities and services that experience deterioration or obsolescence in existing developed areas of the City, as funding permits, to maintain levels of public service established by the City.
 Policy PUBLIC-1.6: The City will require that the methods, materials, and design of infrastructure and utilities achieve the City’s environmental, public health and safety, and community character goals and policies, in addition to the City’s level of service standards for public services, facilities, and infrastructure.  Policy PUBLIC-2.1: The City will require that water supply, treatment, and delivery meet or exceed local, State, and federal standards.
 Policy PUBLIC-2.3: New developments shall incorporate water conservation techniques to reduce water demand in new growth areas, including the use of reclaimed water for landscaping and irrigation.  Policy PUBLIC-3.1: The City will require that wastewater collection, conveyance, and treatment facilities meet or exceed local, State, and federal standards, as addressed in the City’s Sewer Collection System Master Plan.  Policy PUBLIC-3.2: The City will identify and utilize, as feasible, best environmental practices and technologies for wastewater collection, conveyance, and treatment.
 Policy PUBLIC-3.3: The City will not induce urban growth by providing wastewater facilities to areas outside the Planning Area or areas not planned for urban development, such as areas designated for agriculture or open space.

The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to stormwater with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy PUBLIC-4.3: The City will consider a variety of means for floodplain management, depending on the context, which may include development, improvement, and maintenance of structural flood control facilities; land use policy and zoning to prohibit incompatible urban development within the floodplain; erosion control techniques; set backs from flood-prone areas; and other measures, as circumstances dictate.  Policy PUBLIC-4.4: The City will identify areas, such as wetlands, low-lying natural runoff areas, and pervious surfaces and percolation ponds, for natural storm water collection and filtration, in concert with the City’s existing and future drainage infrastructure, to help reduce the amount of runoff and encourage groundwater recharge.  Policy PUBLIC-4.5: New development shall be designed to control surface runoff discharges to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit and the receiving water limitations assigned by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
 Policy PUBLIC-4.6: The City will establish and new development shall implement nonpoint source pollution control measures and programs designed to reduce and control the discharge of pollutants into the City's storm drains and river.
 Policy PUBLIC-4.7: The City will require minimization of the amount of new impervious surfaces and directly connected impervious surfaces in areas of new development and redevelopment and, where feasible, maximize onsite infiltration of stormwater runoff.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-141  Policy PUBLIC-4.8: The City will encourage pollution prevention methods, supplemented by pollutant source controls and treatment. Use small collection strategies located at, or as close to possible to the source (i.e., the point where water initially meets the ground) to minimize the transport or urban runoff and pollutants off-site.  Policy PUBLIC-4.10: The City will limit disturbances of natural water bodies and natural drainage systems cause by development, including roads, highways, and bridges.
 Policy PUBLIC-4.11: The City will require that new development avoid development in areas that are particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss; or, will require that these areas are identified and protected from erosion and sediment loss.
 Policy PUBLIC-4.12: The City will encourage and/or require the use of open, vegetated swales, stormwater cascades, and small wetland ponds instead of pipes and vaults, as a part of urban development proposed outside current City limits to mitigate stormwater impacts.
 Policy PUBLIC-4.13: The City will enforce a no-net-runoff policy for areas proposed for development outside the current City limits
ENERGY
Federal
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to energy are applicable to the project.

State
California Environmental Quality Act
Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines sets forth goals for energy conservation, including decreasing per capita energy consumption and reliance on fossil fuels and increasing reliance on renewable energy sources. CEQA requires environmental documents to describe potential energy impacts of projects, with an emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy (PRC Section 21100[b][3]).

The California Energy Commission (CEC) prepares an integrated policy report every 2 years that assesses major energy trends and issues facing the state’s electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuel sectors and provides policy recommendations to conserve resources; protect the environment; ensure reliable, secure, and diverse energy supplies; enhance the state’s economy; and protect public health and safety (CEC 2021b). Energy efficiency is one of the key components of the state’s strategy to reduce GHG emissions and to achieve reduction targets set forth by AB 32, SB 32, and Governor Brown’s Executive Order B-30-15. Efficiency achieved through building codes, appliance standards, and ratepayer-funded programs has had a positive impact on GHG emissions in recent years (CEC 2021b).

The policy report discusses efforts to decarbonize California’s energy system and recognizes transitioning to zeroand near-zero-emission vehicles will be a fundamental part of meeting the state’s climate goals.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) 2008 Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan established goals of having all new residential construction in California be zero net energy (ZNE) by 2020 and all new commercial construction ZNE by 2030 (CPUC 2008).

Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act
On October 7, 2015, the Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act (SB 350) was signed into law, establishing new clean energy, clean air, and GHG reduction goals for 2030 and beyond. SB 350 codifies Governor Brown’s clean energy goals to increase California’s renewable electricity procurement goal from 33 percent by 2020 to 50 percent by 2030 and is part of California’s overall strategy to address climate change (CEC 2017). SB 350 enhances the state’s ability to meet its long-term climate goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent of 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 (CEC 2017).

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-142 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration California Code of Regulations, Energy Efficiency Standards Energy consumption of new buildings in California is regulated by state Building Energy Efficiency Standards contained in CCR Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 2-53. Title 24 applies to all new construction of both residential and nonresidential buildings, and regulates energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting.

The 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards have improved efficiency requirements from previous codes, and the updated standards are expected to result in a statewide energy consumption reduction. Effective January 1, 2011, CALGreen became California’s first green building standards code. It is formally known as the California Green Building Standards Code (CCR Title 24, Part 11).

Green Building Initiative
In 2012, Governor Brown’s Executive Order B-18-12 and its related Green Building Action Plan stated the following energy and water efficiency improvement goals for facilities owned, funded, and leased by the state:
 All new state buildings beginning design after 2025 shall be constructed as ZNE facilities with an interim target for 50 percent of new facilities beginning design after 2020 to be ZNE. State agencies shall also take measures toward achieving ZNE for 50 percent of the square footage of existing state-owned building area by 2025.  The state shall identify at least three buildings by January 1, 2013, to pursue ZNE as pilot projects.  New and major renovated state buildings shall be designed and constructed to exceed the applicable version of CCR Title 24, Part 6, by 15 percent or more, and include building commissioning, for buildings authorized to begin design after July 1, 2012.
 Any proposed new or major renovation of state buildings larger than 10,000 square feet shall use clean, on-site power generation, such as solar photovoltaic, solar thermal, and wind power generation, and clean backup power supplies, if economically feasible.
 New and major renovated state buildings larger than 10,000 square feet shall obtain Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) “Silver” certification or higher.  State agencies shall reduce water use at the facilities they operate by 10 percent by 2015 and by 20 percent by 2020, as measured against a 2010 baseline.
 All new and renovated state buildings and landscapes shall utilize alternative sources of water wherever costeffective. Sources may include, but are not limited to, recycled water, graywater, rainwater capture, stormwater retention, and other water conservation measures.
 Landscape plants shall be selected based on their suitability to local climate and site conditions and reduced water needs and maintenance requirements.
 State agencies shall identify and pursue opportunities to provide electric vehicle charging stations and accommodate future charging infrastructure demand, at employee parking facilities in new and existing buildings.

Local
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The following policies from the Land Use, Community Development, Public Facilities and Services, Public Health and Safety, and Natural and Cultural Resources Elements of the San Joaquin County General Plan are relevant to energy with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):
 Policy LU-2.2. Sustainable Building Practices: The County shall promote and, where appropriate, require sustainable building practices that incorporate a “whole system” approach to designing and constructing buildings that consume less energy, water and other resources, facilitate natural ventilation, use daylight effectively, and are healthy, safe, comfortable, and durable.  Policy LU-6.8. Sustainable Technologies: The County shall encourage all employment and industrial projects to incorporate sustainable technologies including energy and water efficient practices.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-143  Policy ED-2.4. Green Economy: The County shall encourage the development and expansion of industries and businesses that rely on environmentally-sustainable products and services, such as renewable energy, green building, clean transportation, water conservation, waste management and recycling, and sustainable land management.
 Policy IS-1.6. Efficient Infrastructure and Facilities: When performing maintenance, upgrading, or expanding infrastructure and facilities, the County shall use technologies that improve energy efficiency and conserve water, when feasible.
 Policy IS-3.6. Clean Energy and Fuel Sources: The County shall use available clean energy and fuel sources where feasible to operate its buildings, vehicles, and maintenance/construction equipment.  Policy PHS-5.14. Energy Consumption Reduction: The County shall encourage new development to incorporate green building practices and reduce air quality impacts from energy consumption.  Policy NCR-5.11. Green Building Practices: The County shall encourage green building practices in new construction.
 Policy NCR-5.12. Energy Efficient Industry: The County shall support energy efficiency of industrial processes.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The following policy from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the City’s General Plan is relevant to energy with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy PUBLIC-6.3: The City will require the demonstration of adequate energy supply through a will-serve letter from the appropriate energy service provider prior to approval of new or expanded structures that have the potential for significant energy use.

SOLID WASTE
Federal
Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge (40 CFR 503) Title 40, Part 503 of the CFR establishes standards, which consist of general requirements, pollutant limits, management practices, and operational standards, for the final use or disposal of sewage sludge generated during the treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works. Standards are included in this part for sewage sludge applied to the land, placed on a surface disposal site, or fired in a sewage sludge incinerator. Also included in this part are pathogen and alternative vector attraction reduction requirements for sewage sludge applied to the land or placed on a surface disposal site.

State
California Green Building Standards Code (CCR Title 24 Part 11) The California Green Building Standards Code (CCR Title 24 Part 11), known as CALGreen, establishes mandatory minimum green building standards and requirements for construction and demolition (C&D) material diversion.

Under Section 5.408 of CALGreen, projects involving C&D activities are required to recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of their nonhazardous C&D material. Applicable projects are required to prepare and implement a construction waste management plan.

California Integrated Waste Management Act
To minimize the amount of solid waste that must be disposed of in landfills, the California Legislature passed the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), effective January 1990. According to AB 939, all cities and counties were required to divert 25 percent of their generated waste from landfill facilities by January 1, 1995 and 50 percent by January 1, 2000. Solid waste plans are required to explain how each city’s AB 939 plan will be Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-144 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration integrated with the county plan. In order of priority, the plans must promote source reduction, recycling and composting, and environmentally safe transformation and land disposal.

In 1999, Governor Davis signed AB 75 (Chapter 764, Statutes of 1999), which mandated that state agencies comply with AB 939 diversion requirements.

In addition to the requirements of AB 75, the following policies and statutes address state agency recycling:
 Executive Order W-7-91 requires California state agencies to buy recycled products and set up recycling programs.
 Public Contract Code (PCC) Sections 12164.5–12167.1 require the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to develop a recycling plan and implement recycling programs for the legislature and all state-owned and -leased buildings.
 PCC Section 12167.1 requires state agencies and institutions to report materials collected for recycling to CalRecycle.
 PRC Sections 42560–42562 require CalRecycle to recycle high-grade white office paper in California state offices.  California State Administration Manual Chapter 1990 encourages employees at state facilities to prevent waste, reuse, and recycle.

Discharges of Hazardous Waste to Land (CCR Chapter 15, Division 3, Title 23) CCR Chapter 15, Division 3, Title 23 establishes waste and site classifications and waste management requirements for waste treatment, storage, or disposal in landfills; surface impoundments; waste piles; and land treatment facilities.

Requirements in this chapter are minimum standards for proper management of each waste category. Individual RWQCBs may impose more stringent requirements to accommodate regional and site-specific conditions. In addition, the requirements of this chapter apply to cleanup and abatement actions for unregulated discharges of hazardous waste to land (e.g., spills).

Local
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The following program from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the San Joaquin County General Plan is relevant to solid waste with respect to the project (San Joaquin County 2017a):
 Program IS-J. Mandatory Collection Ordinance: The County shall develop and adopt an ordinance requiring solid waste collection, including recycling, from all Urban and Rural communities.

San Joaquin County Construction, Demolition, and Landscaping Debris Recycling and Diversion Ordinance In 2009, the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance #4370, also known as the Construction, Demolition and Landscaping Debris Recycling and Diversion Ordinance. This ordinance requires that all applicable projects must divert 50 percent of all construction and demolition debris, excluding inert and organic material, and 90 percent of inert and organic materials from the landfill through reuse and recycling. All waste materials and materials that cannot be recycled or reused must be delivered to a facility designated by San Joaquin County’s director of Public Works. The ordinance is intended to help the local construction and demolition projects achieve the statemandated requirement under CALGreen that 65 percent of construction and demolition materials be diverted from the landfill.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element of the City’s General Plan are relevant to solid waste collection with respect to the project (City of Riverbank 2009):
 Policy PUBLIC-5.1: The City will approve new development projects only if adequate capacity exists to accommodate solid waste demand, including processing, recycling, transportation, and disposal.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-145  Policy PUBLIC-5.2: The City will encourage provision of recycling and conservation service and public education to reduce the amount of solid waste at the landfill.

3.19.2 Environmental Setting
WATER
Water service is provided to the WWTP by the City of Riverbank. The City produces and supplies all its water from groundwater wells located within the service district. In 2020, the City supplied 3,932 af of water to 6,853 municipal connections. As a result of population growth, water demand is projected to increase to 4,867 af by 2030. As demonstrated in the City’s UWMP, future demand is projected to be sufficiently met by the Modesto groundwater subbasin with water supplies estimated to be 5,309 af in 2040. Additionally, the City anticipates that water supplies from the subbasin are reliable to withstand the effects of a 5-year drought. Furthermore, the City has identified water conservation measures to be implemented in the event of water shortages, including water waste prevention ordinances, metering, conservation pricing, public education and outreach, programs to assess and manage distribution system loss, and water conservation program coordination and staffing support (City of Riverbank 2021).

Existing water supplies in the potential recycled water use areas are a mix of surface water supplied by SSJID and groundwater supplies from privately owned groundwater wells in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The SSJID canal is the main distribution system for agricultural water.

WASTEWATER
The project area includes the City WWTP, which treats and disposes of the wastewater collected from residential, commercial, and industrial sources in the city. The WWTP treats effluent to a secondary level and discharges the treated effluent to land on the WWTP site through percolation and evaporation. An average of 1.6 million gallons of wastewater is treated per day, and the WWTP has a treatment capacity of 1.8 mgd. Existing facilities at the 150-acre WWTP consist of a headworks system, two aerated treatment ponds, two polishing ponds, eight evaporation/percolation ponds, 13 groundwater monitoring wells, and associated piping and mechanical components.

STORMWATER DRAINAGE
Stormwater runoff from the WWTP does not drain to the municipal storm drain system; rather, stormwater runoff is captured and stored for future use or discharged to on-site percolation ponds.

ENERGY
PG&E provides electricity to the main office at the WWTP, and the Modesto Irrigation District (MID) provides electricity to the equipment. The WWTP does not use natural gas.

SOLID WASTE
The project would be served by the Forward Landfill in Manteca, California, and other permitted land application sites within approximately 70 miles of the WWTP. The Forward Landfill is classified as a Class I, II, and III facility. Class I landfills accept hazardous and nonhazardous wastes, Class II landfills accept “designated” and nonhazardous wastes, and Class III landfills accept nonhazardous municipal wastes. The Forward Landfill is permitted to receive 8,668 tons per day of solid waste, and the maximum permitted capacity of the landfill is 59,160,000 acres. As of January 31, 2020, the Forward Landfill had a remaining capacity of 24,720,669 cubic yards. The landfill is anticipated to cease operations on January 1, 2036. Additionally, the Forward Landfill is permitted to receive 300 tons per day of domestic septage with approximately 60 acres of the landfill dedicated for land application (CalRecycle 2019).

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-146 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.19.3 Discussion
71Ba) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less-than-significant impact. The project’s effects on water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities are described in the following sections.

Water
Construction activities would require the consumption of water for suppressing dust, preparing and placing concrete, and other general uses. Construction-related water use would represent a small and temporary demand on local and regional water supplies that could be accommodated by the City.

Following construction, potable water use at the WWTP is anticipated to increase by 10–20 percent over existing use to accommodate the expanded operations at the WWTP. The projected growth that could be served by the project was planned for and anticipated to occur in the WWTP’s service area as part of the City’s General Plan. Goals and policies are outlined in the City’s General Plan to accommodate this new growth, and its impacts on water supply were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the City’s existing and future water source and supply would be adequate to meet the project’s increase in water demand. The project would not require construction of new or expanded water facilities with the potential to result in significant environmental effects beyond those evaluated in the City’s General Plan EIR.

Wastewater
During construction, wastewater requiring treatment would be limited to wastewater generated from on-site construction personnel and activities. These activities would not generate a substantial amount of new wastewater.

The project would involve upgrades to the City’s existing WWTP, including construction of new secondary and tertiary treatment and disinfection facilities, construction of a recycled water storage tank, reconfiguration of existing percolation ponds to provide additional seasonal recycled water storage, and installation of a distribution system to initially serve nearby agricultural users. The environmental effects of constructing and operating these facilities are evaluated in Sections 3.1 through 3.21 of this Initial Study. As described throughout this Initial Study, the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the project would be less than significant through compliance with applicable permits, programs, and regulations and with implementation of required mitigation measures. Therefore, the project would not result in significant environmental effects associated with the construction of expanded wastewater facilities.

Stormwater Drainage
Stormwater runoff from the existing WWTP is stored for future use or discharged to on-site percolation ponds. Onsite drainage would be designed such that runoff would continue to be stored or discharged to on-site percolation ponds. No connections to the City’s municipal storm drain system would be required for the project. Therefore, the project would not require construction of new or expanded municipal stormwater drainage facilities with the potential to result in significant environmental effects.

Electric Power and Natural Gas
Construction activities would require the consumption of diesel fuel associated with the operation of heavy-duty construction equipment, material deliveries, and debris hauling; gasoline associated with worker commute trips; and minor amounts of electricity associated with operation of electric-powered construction equipment. Constructionrelated energy use would represent a small demand on local and regional fuel and electricity supplies that could be accommodated by existing facilities and infrastructure.

Project operations would not require the consumption of natural gas, but electricity consumption would increase to accommodate the expanded operations at the WWTP. As discussed in Section 3.6, “Energy,” electricity consumption Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-147 during project operations is estimated to be 4,624 MWh in the first year and 6,332 MWh at peak flow. The project would not require modifications to off-site MID infrastructure or upsizing of off-site power systems or supplies to meet the project’s energy demands. However, the City would initiate review with MID to determine whether the project would require on-site modifications to electric power infrastructure to meet the expanded WWTP power needs, such as relocating power poles, upsizing an existing transformer, or constructing a new transformer within the project site. The environmental effects of on-site modifications to electrical infrastructure would be within the scale of what was evaluated in Sections 3.1 through 3.21 of this IS/MND. As described throughout this IS/MND, the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the project would be less than significant through compliance with applicable permits, programs, and regulations and with implementation of required mitigation measures. Therefore, the project would not require construction of new or expanded electric power or natural gas facilities with the potential to result in significant environmental effects.

Telecommunication
Construction and operation of the project would not contribute to an increase in telecommunication demand.

Therefore, the project would not require construction of new or expanded telecommunication facilities with the potential to result in significant environmental effects.

Summary
The project would not require or result in the construction of new water, stormwater drainage, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities. The project would include upgrades to the City’s existing WWTP, and the environmental effects of the expanded wastewater treatment facilities, and potential modifications to electric power infrastructure are evaluated in Sections 3.1 through 3.21 of this IS/MND. As described throughout this IS/MND, the environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of these facilities would be less than significant through compliance with applicable permits, programs, and regulations and with implementation of required mitigation measures. Therefore, the project would not result in significant environmental effects associated with the construction of expanded wastewater facilities.
72Bb) Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less-than-significant impact. The existing potable water supply would continue to be used for the expanded facility, with nonpotable water provided by the treatment process as recycled water or process water. It is anticipated that the project would increase potable water use by approximately 10–20 percent over existing use. As discussed in Section

3.19.2, the City’s 2020 UWMP demonstrates that water supplies from the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin are sufficient to meet the City’s current and future water demands, including during multiple consecutive dry years. As discussed in Section 3.19.3(a), the projected growth that could be served by the project was planned for and anticipated to occur within the WWTP’s service area as part of the City’s General Plan. Goals and policies are outlined in the City’s General Plan to accommodate this new growth and its impacts on water supply were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the City’s existing and future water source and supply would be adequate to meet the project’s increase in water demand.

Following completion of project construction, WWTP operations have the potential to produce approximately 1.6 mgd, or 2,500 af, of Title 22 recycled water at a peak irrigation flow rate of 2,610 gpm. This amount would be sufficient to irrigate a 30-acre block of agricultural land in the proposed use area once every 7 days, or a total of 210 acres (KSN and BC 2022). At the future projected recycled water production rate of 2.29 mgd anticipated by 2050, the WWTP could produce and deliver up to 2,500 af of Title 22 recycled water at a peak irrigation flow rate of 4,350 gpm, enough to irrigate a 50-acre block once every 7 days, or a total of 350 acres (KSN 2022). Thus, the project would create a source of high-quality irrigation water that could contribute to greater water balance in the San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin by replacing some of the groundwater that would otherwise be used for irrigation.

Furthermore, production of recycled water at the Riverbank WWTP has the potential to reduce the use of on-site percolation basins, leading to potential improved conditions for the groundwater underlying the project area.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-148 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Therefore, the project is anticipated to have beneficial impacts with respect to water supplies. Impacts would be less than significant.
73Bc) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? No Impact. The project would not contribute to an increase in population growth or the demand for wastewater treatment. Rather, the project would increase wastewater treatment capacity at the existing WWTP from 1.8 mgd to approximately 2.29 mgd to accommodate planned growth in the City through 2050. Because the project would be designed to accommodate planned growth, projected demand for wastewater treatment services would be adequately served. No impact would occur.
74Bd) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Less-than-significant impact. The potential for project construction and operation to generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals is described in the following sections.

Construction
Project construction would not require the demolition of any structures. Construction activities would generate small amounts of solid waste, such as trash and debris. General construction debris would be diverted from landfills through reuse and recycling in accordance with the San Joaquin County Construction, Demolition, and Landscaping Debris Recycling and Diversion Ordinance (Ordinance #4370). Cut and fill would largely be balanced on site, except approximately 24,000 cubic yards of sludge from pond T-4 and 800 cubic yards of liner from pond T-2 would be exported to the Forward Landfill in Manteca, California. As discussed in Section 3.19.2, the Manteca Landfill has a remaining capacity of 24,720,669 cubic yards. Construction-generated waste from the project would represent approximately 0.1 percent of the landfill’s remaining capacity. Therefore, the Manteca Landfill would have adequate capacity to accommodate the solid waste generated during project construction.

Operation
The project would not contribute to an increase in population growth. The project would increase wastewater treatment capacity at the existing WWTP from 1.8 mgd to approximately 2.29 mgd to accommodate planned growth in the City through 2050. Therefore, the amount of biosolids generated as part of the wastewater treatment process would increase with implementation of the project by up to 27 percent through 2050. Biosolids would be disposed of at a permitted land application site within approximately 70 miles of the WWTP.

The projected growth that could be served by the project was planned for and anticipated to occur within the WWTP’s service area as part of the City’s General Plan. Goals and policies are outlined in the City’s General Plan to accommodate this new growth, and its impacts on solid waste were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, existing and planned land application sites serving the City would have adequate capacity to accommodate the project’s increase in biosolids associated with planned growth within the City. Thus, the project would not generate solid waste in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure.

Summary
Based on the above discussion, project construction and operation would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Impacts would be less than significant.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-149 75Be) Fail to comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less-than-significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.19.3(d), construction activities would comply with the San Joaquin County Construction, Demolition, and Landscaping Debris Recycling and Diversion Ordinance (Ordinance #4370). Additionally, sludge disposal required during construction and operational activities would continue to meet the requirements specified in WDR Order No. 94-100, as follows: (1) collected screenings, sludges, and other solids removed from liquid wastes shall be disposed of in a manner that is consistent with CCR Chapter 15, Division 3, Title 23 and approved by the executive officer, and (2) use and disposal of sewage shall comply with existing federal and state law and regulations, including permitting requirements and technical standards included in 40 CFR 503. The project would comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-150 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.20 102BWILDFIRE

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XX. Wildfire.

Is the project located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as high fire hazard severity zones? If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Yes No
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary
or ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?

3.20.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to wildfire are applicable to the project.

STATE
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Regulations The State of California has determined that some nonfederal lands in unincorporated areas with watershed value are of statewide interest and have classified those lands as State Responsibility Areas (SRAs). SRAs are managed by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), the state agency established for fire protection and stewardship of more than 31 million acres of the state’s privately owned wildlands and to provide emergency services in 36 of California’s 58 counties through contracts with local governments.

CAL FIRE is required by law to map areas of significant fire hazards based on fuels, terrain, weather, and other relevant factors (PRC Sections 4201-4204 and Government Code Section 51175-89). Factors that increase an area’s susceptibility to fire hazards include slope, vegetation type and condition, and atmospheric conditions. CAL FIRE has identified two types of wildland fire risk areas: (1) wildland areas that may contain substantial forest fire risks and hazards and (2) very high fire hazard risk zones.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-151 California Fire Code
The CFC is contained within CCR Title 24. The CFC establishes requirements for development design to safeguard public health, safety and general welfare from the hazards of fire. This includes standards on building design, materials, fire flow, and other suppression provisions. The CFC also regulates the use, handling, and storage requirements for hazardous materials at fixed facilities. The CFC and the CBC use a hazard classification system to determine what protective measures are required to protect life and provide fire safety. These measures may include applying construction standards, requiring separation between structures and property lines, and using specialized equipment. To ensure that these safety measures are met, the CFC employs a permit system based on hazard classification. The CFC is updated every 3 years.
2019 Strategic Plan for California
The 2019 Strategic Plan prepared by CAL FIRE and the California Natural Resources Agency lays out central goals for reducing and preventing the impacts of fire in the state (CAL FIRE 2019). The goals are meant to establish, through local, state, federal, and private partnerships, a natural environment that is more resilient and human-made assets that are more resistant to the occurrence and effects of wildland fire. The goals of the 2019 Strategic Plan include improving core capabilities; enhancing internal operations; ensuring health and safety; and building an engaged, motivated, and innovative workforce.

In addition to the 2019 Strategic Plan, individual CAL FIRE units develop fire plans, which are major strategic documents that establish a set of tools for each CAL FIRE unit for its local area. Updated annually, unit fire plans identify wildfire protection areas, initial attack success, assets and infrastructure at risk, strategic areas for prefire planning and fuel treatment and prefire management strategies, and accountability within the unit’s geographical boundaries. The plans include contributions from local collaborators and stakeholders and are aligned with other plans for the area.

Unit Strategic Fire Plan – Tuolumne-Calaveras Unit of CAL FIRE The 2021 Unit Strategic Fire Plan seeks to reduce firefighting costs and property losses, increase firefighter safety, and contribute to ecosystem health. The Tuolumne-Calaveras Unit of CAL FIRE encompasses approximately 2.9 million acres (more than 1 million acres are located in an SRA) and includes San Joaquin County.

The Tuolumne-Calaveras Unit, with the cooperation of key stakeholders, has designed this plan with the intention of meeting the goals set by both the stakeholders and the California Strategic Fire Plan. The 2021 Unit Strategic Fire Plan is designed to provide a comprehensive framework of how the Tuolumne-Calaveras Unit will assess the current and anticipated hazards/risks, develop objectives to mitigate those hazards/risks, establish benchmarks for success, develop strategies to meet its objectives, implement those strategies, and facilitate a monitoring system to ensure that the plan remains connected to the needs of the Unit and stakeholders.

The Tuolumne-Calaveras Unit is committed to the following goals:
 Continually assess values at risk, including life, property, and our natural resources.  Actively partner in the promotion and support of fire wise land use planning.  Seek opportunities for contribution and collaboration with local, county, and regional leaders in developing of fire protection plans.
 Maintain an active Public Information team committed to the promotion of current and future projects/actions which reduce or have reduced our identified hazards and risks.  Continue integration with all stakeholders to develop a seamless implementation of our plan across the unit.  Continually evaluate and mitigate strategy for all our resources (personnel, equipment, and facilities) to provide for the best possible level of service related to the hazards and risks identified. Adopt site-specific plans to address post-fire recovery.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-152 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration State of California Emergency Plan
The State of California Emergency Plan, adopted on October 1, 2017, describes how state government mobilizes and responds to emergencies and disasters in coordination with partners in all levels of government, the private sector, nonprofits, and community-based organizations. The plan also works in conjunction with the California Emergency Services Act and outlines a robust program of emergency preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation for all hazards, both natural and human-caused. All local governments with a certified disaster council are required to develop their own emergency operations plan (EOP) for their jurisdiction that meet state and federal requirements.

Local EOPs contain specific emergency planning considerations, such as evacuation and transportation, sheltering, hazard specific planning, regional planning, public-private partnerships, and recovery planning.

LOCAL
San Joaquin County 2035 General Plan
The following policies from the Public Health and Safety Element of the San Joaquin County General Plan are relevant to wildland and urban fire hazards with respect to the project:
 Policy PHS-1.13. Public Awareness of Climate Change: The County shall support public awareness of water conservation measures, agricultural changes, storm and flood preparedness, wildfire fire protection, air quality effects, extreme weather events, heat and human health, and disease prevention to help prepare for the potential impacts of climate change.
 Policy PHS-4.1. Community Wildfire Protection Plan: The County shall maintain and implement the Community Wildfire Protection Plan as a mechanism for community input and identification of areas with high fire hazard risk.
 Policy PHS-4.2. Residential Densities in High Hazard Areas: The County shall restrict development to rural residential densities or lower and require on-site fire suppression measures in areas with high or extreme wildfire hazards.
 Policy PHS-4.3. Fire Prevention Measures: The County shall implement State recommendations for fire prevention in Fire Hazard Severity Zones and require new and/or existing development to provide clearance around structures, use fire-resistant ground cover, build with fire-resistant roofing materials, participate in fuel load reduction, and take other appropriate measures.
 Policy PHS-4.4. Clear Zones: The County shall require clear zones and regular weed abatement around residential structures in high fire hazard areas and assist property owners in identifying how clear zones should be maintained.
 Policy PHS-4.5. Vegetation and Fuel Management: The County shall require new development in high fire-hazard areas to have fire-resistant vegetation, cleared fire breaks separating communities or clusters of structures from native vegetation, or a long-term comprehensive vegetation and fuel management program consistent with State codes 4290 and 4291 for wildland fire interface and vegetation management.  Policy PHS-4.6. Fire Protection Coordination: The County shall encourage well-organized and efficient coordination among fire agencies, CalFire, and the County.

City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025
The following policies from the Public Services and Facilities and Safety Elements of the City’s General Plan are relevant to wildland and urban fires with respect to the project:
 Policy PUBLIC-7.1: The City will ensure that adequate fire flow pressure is available in relation to structure size, design, requirements for construction, and/or built-in fire protection systems. Maintenance of adequate fire flows includes factors such as adequate storage, system gridding, hydrant spacing, and spacing and sizing of water mains, as specified in the City’s Water Master Plan.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-153  Policy PUBLIC-7.2: For new development, the City will require a minimum fire flow pressure of 1,500 GPM (sustainable for at least two hours) for residential use. For new development, the City will require a minimum fire flow pressure of approximately 3,600 GPM (sustainable for longer periods) for larger residences and for other building types, depending on the particular use and structure characteristics, and in coordination with the fire service provider.
 Policy PUBLIC-7.3: The City will require that fire stations be located to ensure the appropriate level of service (including adequate response time per Policy Public 7.5), community compatibility, and efficiency, including the location of such facilities relative existing and planned public parks, libraries, and other activity centers.  Policy PUBLIC-7.4: The City will coordinate with fire protection providers, including through reciprocity arrangements, to ensure equipment, staffing, and facilities for emergency medical services, urban search and rescue, hazardous materials emergency response, and other relevant needs, as appropriate. The City will ensure consistency with National Fire Protection Association and Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District response requirements.
 Policy PUBLIC-7.5: The City will coordinate with fire protection providers to an emergency response system capable of achieving the following standards in 95% of all cases: first fire emergency response unit within six minutes of dispatch; full alarm assignment within 10 minutes of dispatch; second alarm assignment within 15 minutes of dispatch; and an Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of Class 2 for areas within the City.  Policy PUBLIC-7.6: The City will work with property owners in existing developed portions of the City to achieve a minimum fire flow pressure of 1,500 GPM (sustainable for at least two hours) for residential use and approximately 3,600 GPM (sustainable for longer periods) for larger residences and for other building types, depending on the particular use and structure characteristics, and in coordination with the fire service provider.  Policy SAFE-1.2: The City will continue to enforce State of California Building Standards Commission uniform codes, such as the California Building Code and California Fire Code with adopted Fire District amendments.  Policy SAFE-1.3: The City will encourage the retrofitting of older buildings to current safety standards, and require compliance to recommendations of the fire and law enforcement service providers and the State Building Standards Commission uniform codes in coordination with major remodeling or additions.  Policy SAFE-1.4: The City will require set backs, ignition resistant building materials, or other measures to reduce exposure to potential wildfires in areas designated for natural open space preservation, in coordination with California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection recommendations and Maintenance of Defensible Space Measures, as appropriate.
 Policy SAFE-1.5: Approved plans, projects, and subdivision requests will ensure adequate fire flow per City and Fire District standards. The installation of automatic fire sprinklers may, at the discretion of the City and the Fire Chief, allow for a reduction in the required fire flow, while still complying with the California Fire Code requirements.
 Policy SAFE-2.1: The City will require development and maintenance of a road system that provides adequate access for emergency equipment.
 Policy SAFE-2.2: The City will consult with fire protection service providers in reviewing development proposals.

Development proposals will include City conditions that respond to concerns of fire protection service providers.  Policy SAFE-2.3: The City will improve fire flow in existing developed areas of the City, as feasible, to meet standards presented in the Public Facilities and Services Element of the General Plan and relevant City Master Plans.
 Policy SAFE-2.4: The City will coordinate with the County Office of Emergency Services to identify evacuation routes and operational plans to be used in case of dam failure, flood disaster, and wildfire for any new growth areas in addition to any updates required to serve the existing developed City.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-154 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.20.2 Environmental Setting
Wildland fires occur in areas with extensive vegetation, such as forests and grasslands. Most vegetated areas in the vicinity of the Riverbank WWTP are irrigated agricultural lands, including pastures, field crops, orchards, and vineyards with a low potential for wildfire. The most significant area of vegetation potentially subject to wildfire is the riparian area along the Stanislaus River. The bottom of the river, when dry, also poses a great fire hazard, especially to sections of Riverbank where houses are built along the top of the bluff alongside the river.

As discussed in Section 3.9, “Hazards and Hazardous Materials,” the project site, as well as the surrounding area is within a Local Responsibility Area (CAL FIRE 2022a). No portion of the project site is located within or near an SRA, or within lands classified as very-high fire hazard severity zones (CAL FIRE 2022b).

EVACUATION ROUTES
Evacuation routes to be used by a city depend on the nature and location of the disaster that prompts an evacuation.

Nevertheless, some general routes can be determined, based upon capacity. The main evacuation route through Riverbank is SR 108. This roadway is capable of handling heavy truck traffic, as well as traffic from passenger vehicles, and would be a primary route for evacuations. Other roadways that may be used as evacuation routes include the following (Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025):
 Patterson Road,
 Claribel Road,
 Sylvan Avenue,
 Coffee Road,
 Oakdale Road,
 Roselle Avenue,
 Claus Road, and
 Terminal Avenue/Santa Fe Avenue.

WILDFIRE BEHAVIOR AND CONTROLLING FACTORS
Wildfire behavior is a product of several variables, primarily weather, vegetation, topography, and human influences, which intermix to produce local and regional fire regimes that affect how, when, and where fires burn. The fire regime in any area is defined by several factors, including fire frequency, intensity, severity, and area burned. Each of these is important for an understanding of how the variables that affect fire behavior produce fire risks. “Fire frequency” refers to the number of fires that occur in a given area over a given period; “fire intensity” refers to the speed at which fire travels and the heat that it produces; “fire severity” refers to the extent to which ecosystems and existing conditions are affected or changed by a fire; and “area burned” is the size of the area burned by wildfire.

3.20.3 Discussion
76Ba) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less-than-significant impact. As discussed above in Section 3.20.2 “Environmental Setting,” no portion of the project site is located within or near a State Responsibility Area (SRA) or within lands classified as very-high fire hazard severity zones. Access to the WWTP site (as discussed in Section 2.0, “Project Description”) is limited, and a temporary access point and road would be required to support the transportation of construction materials and equipment during project construction. The proposed temporary access point would be located northwest of the project site, off Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-155 Burwood Road. The approximately 9,000-foot-long temporary access road would be constructed between the access point and the WWTP site on a combination of private farm roads and existing WWTP roads, both currently unimproved. Improvements would include fine grading followed by placement of aggregate base rock on the existing roads. The temporary construction access road would be maintained throughout the construction timeline.

Watering of this road would be required to prevent fugitive dust caused by vehicular traffic as necessary.

Encroachment permits for the temporary access point would be acquired as required by San Joaquin County. As part of this encroachment permit application, the project applicant would be required to prepare and implement a traffic control plan, which would require temporary traffic controls during construction to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided.

Furthermore, affected roadway segments may be closed temporarily during pipeline installation activities. However, traffic control operations would be noticed at the location of the temporary traffic restrictions a week in advance of any roadwork that would impede the flow of traffic (i.e., closes the road, closes a traffic lane, or closes the road shoulder). All roadways would be repaved and returned to preproject conditions upon completion of project construction. After it becomes operational, the project would not conflict with emergency response or evacuation plans. Therefore, the project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. This impact would be less than significant. 7Bb) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No impact. As discussed above in Section 3.20.2 “Environmental Setting,” no portion of the project site is located within or near an SRA or within lands classified as very-high fire hazard severity zones. Furthermore, the project site is in an area that does not have a steep incline. Implementation of the project would not result in any alterations to slope, wind, or other factors that could potentially exacerbate wildfire risks on-site or within the project vicinity. No impact would occur.
78Bc) Require the installation of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No impact. As discussed above in Section 3.20.2 “Environmental Setting,” no portion of the project site is located within or near an SRA or within lands classified as very-high fire hazard severity zones. The post-project continued operation of the WWTP would not exacerbate fire risk in the project area because it would be similar to existing operations at the WWTP and would not introduce associated infrastructure, such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities. Because the project would not require the installation of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts on the environment, no impact would occur.
79Bd) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No impact. As discussed above in Section 3.20.2, “Environmental Setting,” no portion of the project site is located within or near an SRA or within lands classified as very-high fire hazard severity zones. The project does not include any residential components, and all aboveground buildings and structures would be located outside of Special Flood Hazard Areas (see Section 3.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality”). Therefore, people and structures would not be subject to postfire runoff or debris flow related to flooding. The project would be subject to the local building permit approval process, including the requirement to comply with CFC requirements applicable to the facilities being constructed. Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, postfire slope instability, or drainage changes. No impact would occur.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-156 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

3.21 103BMANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number
or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or
threatened species, or eliminate important examples
of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?

3.21.1 Regulatory Setting
CEQA Guidelines Section 15065 provides that a lead agency shall prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment where there is substantial evidence that any of the following conditions may occur:

The project has the potential to: substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.

The project has possible environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.

The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3-157 An EIR need not be prepared when a project proponent agrees to mitigation measures or project modifications that would avoid any significant effect on the environment or would mitigate the significant effect to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur.

3.21.2 Environmental Setting
Refer to the “Environmental Setting” discussion in Sections 3.1 through 3.20 of this Initial Study for a summary of the existing environmental conditions in the project area.

3.21.3 Discussion
80Ba) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. As discussed in Section 3.1, “Aesthetics”; Section 3.3, “Air Quality”; Section 3.9, “Hazards and Hazardous Materials”; Section 3.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality”; and Section 3.13, “Noise,” project construction would result in short-term and temporary changes to the visual environment, increases in air pollutants and noise levels, erosion and degradation of water quality, and potential releases of hazardous materials into the environment. However, with implementation of required BMPs and compliance with applicable permits, programs, and regulations during construction, the project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment.

As discussed in Section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” project construction has potential to result in direct and indirect effects on biological resources, including damage to or removal of special-status plant species and disturbance to or injury or death of special-status wildlife. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.4-1 through 3.4-7, impacts on biological resources would be less than significant. Therefore, the project would not substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; or substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species.

As described in Section 3.5, “Cultural Resources,” and Section 3.18, “Tribal Cultural Resources,” no built-environment historical resources, previously identified archaeological resources, known cemeteries or burials, or tribal cultural resources have been identified within the project site. However, ground-disturbing activities during project construction could result in discovery or damage of yet undiscovered buried resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5-1 and 3.18-1 and compliance with HSC Section 7050.5 and PRC Section 5097 would ensure that these resources are properly identified, evaluated, and recovered. Additionally, as described in Section 3.7, “Geology and Soils,” paleontological resources may be present below the original layer of fill material and may be encountered during construction-related excavations. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.7-1 through 3.7-3, the project would not result in the destruction of paleontological resources. Therefore, the project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 81Bb) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Cumulative environmental effects are multiple individual effects that, when considered together, would be considerable or compound or increase other environmental impacts.

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
3-158 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Individual effects may result from a single project or a number of separate projects and may occur at the same place and point in time or at different locations and over extended periods of time.

As described in Sections 3.1 through 3.21 of this Initial Study, construction activities would result in short-term and temporary effects on the environment, including the following: changes to the visual setting; increases in air pollutants and noise levels; erosion and degradation of water quality; potential releases of hazardous materials into the environment; damage to or removal of special-status plant species; disturbance to or injury or death of specialstatus wildlife; destruction of cultural, tribal cultural, and paleontological resources; and increases in demand for utilities and services. These effects would cease following the approximately 27-month construction period.

Additionally, compliance with applicable permits, programs, regulations, and Mitigation Measures 3.4-1 through 3.4- 7, 3.5-1, 3.7-1 through 3.7-3, and 3.18-1 would ensure that the project’s construction-related impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

As described in Sections 3.1 through 3.21 of this Initial Study, ongoing operation and maintenance of the expanded WWTP would not result in significant environmental effects. Additionally, the project would increase the City’s production of recycled water, which would create a source of high-quality irrigation water that could contribute to greater water balance in the San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin by replacing some of the groundwater that would otherwise be used for irrigation. Production of recycled water at the Riverbank WWTP has the potential to reduce the use of on-site percolation basins, leading to potential improved conditions for the groundwater underlying the project area. As such, project operation is anticipated to have beneficial effects on water supplies.

Furthermore, the purpose of the project is to increase wastewater treatment capacity at the City’s existing WWTP to accommodate planned growth in the City. The projected growth that could be served by the project was planned for and anticipated to occur within the WWTP’s service area as part of the City’s General Plan. Goals and policies are outlined in the City’s General Plan to accommodate this new growth and its impacts were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Based on the above discussion, the project’s contribution to environmental impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
82Bc) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less-than-significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.3, “Air Quality”; Section 3.9, “Hazards and Hazardous Materials”; Section 3.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality”; Section 3.13, “Noise”; and Section 3.17, “Transportation”; project construction would result in the short-term and temporary increases in air pollutants and noise levels, degradation of water quality, potential releases of hazardous materials into the environment, and disruptions to the transportation network. However, with implementation of required BMPs; Mitigation Measure 3.17-1; and compliance with applicable permits, programs, and regulations during construction, these environmental effects would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings.

3.21.4 Mitigation Measures
With implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.4-1 through 3.4-7, 3.5-1, 3.7-1 through 3.7-3, 3.17-1, and 3.18-1, the project would not result in significant impacts.

City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4-1 4 COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS
This chapter summarizes the federal environmental laws and regulations that apply to the project and describes the project’s compliance with those laws and regulations. The federal regulations addressed in this chapter are based on guidance from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for CEQA-Plus environmental documentation related to State Revolving Fund loans and in accordance with EPA guidance for environmental information documents related to Special Appropriation Fund Grants (EPA 2008).

4.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT
Passed and signed into law in 1974, the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act (AHPA) amended and expanded the Reservoir Salvage Act of 1960. The AHPA provides for the preservation of historical and archaeological data that might otherwise be irreparably lost or destroyed as the result of (1) flooding, the building of access roads, the erection of workmen’s communities, the relocation of railroads and highways, and other alterations of the terrain caused by the construction of a dam by any agency of the United States, or by any private person or corporation holding a license issued by any such agency, or (2) any alteration of the terrain caused as a result of any federal construction project or federally licensed activity or program. According to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, if a project would affect historic properties that have archaeological value, the AHPA may impose additional requirements on an agency.

As discussed in Section 3.5, “Cultural Resources,” the Central California Information Center records search did not identify any historic properties that have archaeological value in the area of potential effects. One potential burial was identified; however, the burial was excavated, and all materials removed in 1971. Documentation of the burial did not include a precise location. Although the general location given was partially inside the project site, ground disturbance associated with the project would not occur in this general location. The pedestrian survey conducted on April 28, 2022, identified no archaeological sites (Ascent Environmental 2022). Therefore, no historic properties on the project site have archaeological value, and the AHPA does not apply.

4.2 CLEAN AIR ACT

4.2.1 Regulatory Background
The project site is in San Joaquin County, which is within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) and is under the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD. Air quality in the county is regulated by such agencies as the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Air Resources Board (CARB) at the federal and state levels, respectively, and SJVAPCD at the local level.

At the federal level, EPA implements the national air quality programs. EPA’s air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the federal Clean Air Act (CAA), enacted in 1970. The most recent major amendments were made by Congress in 1990, known as the federal CAA Amendments. The CAA requires EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA has established primary and secondary NAAQS for the following criteria air pollutants:
ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10), and fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5), and lead. The primary standards protect public health and the secondary standards protect public welfare.

The CAA also requires each state to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as a State Implementation Plan (SIP). The objective of each SIP is to attain and maintain the NAAQS for all criteria air pollutants in the state. Areas that are not in attainment of NAAQS for any criteria air pollutant are referred to as nonattainment or maintenance areas. The federal CAA Amendments added requirements for states with nonattainment areas to revise their SIPs to incorporate additional control measures to reduce air pollution.

Compliance with Federal Regulations Ascent Environmental City of Riverbank
4-2 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Specifically, Section 176(c) of the CAA (42 USC 7506[c]) requires any entity of the federal government that engages in, supports, or in any way provides financial support for, licenses or permits, or approves any activity to demonstrate that the action conforms to the applicable SIP required under Section 110(a) of the CAA (42 USC 7401[a]) before the action is approved. In this context, conformity involves ensuring that such federal actions are consistent with the SIP’s objective to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Each federal agency must determine that any action it proposes conforms with the applicable SIP before the action is taken. This requirement is commonly known as the General Conformity Rule.

On November 30, 1993, EPA promulgated the final general conformity rule at 40 CFR 93 Subpart B for all federal activities except those covered under the transportation conformity rule. The general conformity rule applies to a proposed federal action in a nonattainment or maintenance area of a particular criteria air pollutant if the total of direct and indirect emissions of the relevant criteria pollutant, or its precursors, caused by the proposed action equals or exceeds applicable de minimis levels. This step is often referred to as the general conformity applicability analysis.

If an applicable de minimis level is exceeded, then a full general conformity analysis is needed to make a general conformity determination. A general conformity applicability analysis for the project is provided below.

4.2.2 Affected Environment
EPA designates each county (or portions of counties) in California as attainment, maintenance, or nonattainment based on the area’s ability to comply with NAAQS. Areas are designated as attainment for a particular criteria air pollutant if ambient air concentrations of the pollutant (or its precursors) are less than the NAAQS. Areas are designated as nonattainment for a particular criteria air pollutant if ambient air concentrations of the pollutant exceed the NAAQS. Areas previously designated as nonattainment that subsequently demonstrated compliance with the NAAQS are designated as maintenance areas. Table 4-1 shows the designation status of the project area within the SJVAB for each air pollutant.

Table 4-1 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Attainment Status Pollutant Federal Attainment Designation
Ozone (O3) Nonattainment (Extreme)
Respirable particulate matter (PM10) Attainment
Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) Nonattainment (Serious) Carbon monoxide (CO) Attainment
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) Attainment
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) Attainment
Lead (Pb) No designation
Source: EPA 2022a.

As mentioned above, a general conformity determination is required if a federal action would result in the generation of air pollutants for which the total of direct and indirect emissions equals or exceeds de minimis thresholds, shown in Table 4-2. These emission rates are expressed in tons per year and are compared to the total of direct and indirect emissions caused by the project for each calendar year when construction activities would take place.

Ascent Environmental Compliance with Federal Regulations City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4-3 Table 4-2 De Minimis Thresholds for Determining Applicability of General Conformity Requirements for Federal Actions in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin
Pollutant Federal Attainment Designation General Conformity De Minimis Levels (tons per year) 1 Ozone Nonattainment (extreme) 10
VOC (as an ozone precursor) Nonattainment (extreme) 10
NOX (as an ozone precursor) Nonattainment (extreme) 10
PM10 Attainment NA
PM2.5
Nonattainment (2012 standard)
Nonattainment (moderate) (2006
24-hour standard)
Attainment (1997 annual standard)
100
CO Attainment NA
NO2 Attainment NA
SO2 Attainment NA
Pb No designation NA
Notes: CO = carbon monoxide; NA = not applicable; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; Pb = lead; PM10 = respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers or less; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less; SO2 = sulfur dioxide; VOC = volatile organic compound. 1 General conformity de minimis levels apply to pollutants for which the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin is in nonattainment.

Source: EPA 2022b.

It should be noted that because ozone is a secondary pollutant (i.e., it is not emitted directly into the atmosphere but is formed in the atmosphere from the photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight), the applicable de minimis level is emissions of ozone precursor pollutants: oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). If the net emissions levels for either NOX or VOCs would exceed the applicable de minimis levels, then the federal action is subject to a general conformity evaluation for ozone.

4.2.3 Environmental Consequences
Construction emissions were estimated based on assumptions outlined in the project description and default model settings using emission factors and methodologies from the CalEEMod emissions model (version 2020.4.0) and emission factors from CARB’s EMFAC emissions model (CARB 2021). Construction emissions are summarized in Table 4-3. See attached modeling results for further detail (Appendix B).

Table 4-3 Summary of Construction-Generated Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants and Precursors Emissions (tons/year)
ROG1 NOX
1 PM10 PM2.5
2024 0.1 1.0 0.3 0.1
2025 0.2 1.6 0.3 0.1
2026 0.1 1.4 0.4 0.1
De minimis thresholds 10 10 NA 100
Notes: tons/year = tons per year; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; ROG = reactive organic gases; PM10 = respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers or less; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less.

Refer to Appendix B for detailed assumptions and modeling output files. 1 Emissions reported as ROG from CalEEMod and EMFAC based on CARB’s list of ROG emissions. However, EPA has a de minimis threshold for VOCs. Most pollutants between CARB’s definition of ROG and EPA’s definition of VOC overlap. Generally, most ROG emissions are included as a subset of VOCs. Thus, ROG is assumed to be a suitable substitute for VOC for the purposes of this analysis.

Source: Data modeled by Ascent Environmental in 2022.

Compliance with Federal Regulations Ascent Environmental City of Riverbank
4-4 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration As shown in Table 4-3, estimated emissions of ozone precursors (i.e., VOCs and NOX), PM10, and PM2.5 are less than the applicable de minimis thresholds; therefore, the General Conformity Rule would not apply to the project.

4.3 COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES ACT
The Coastal Barrier Resources Act (Public Law [PL] 97-348) designated various undeveloped coastal barrier islands, depicted by specific maps, for inclusion in the Coastal Barrier Resources System. Areas so designated were made ineligible for direct or indirect federal financial assistance that might support development, including flood insurance, except for emergency life-saving activities. Exceptions for certain activities, such as fish and wildlife research, are provided, and national wildlife refuges and other otherwise protected areas are excluded from the system. The system includes relatively undeveloped coastal barriers along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, as well as the Great Lakes and Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

The project and surrounding lands are not located in the system; therefore, compliance with this act is not required.

4.4 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT
The Coastal Zone Management Act (PL 92-583), administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service’s (NOAA Fisheries’) Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, provides for management of the nation’s coastal resources, including the Great Lakes, and balances economic development with environmental conservation.

The act outlines three national programs: the National Coastal Zone Management Program, the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, and the Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program (CELCP). The National Coastal Zone Management Program aims to balance competing land and water issues through state and territorial coastal management programs, the reserves serve as field laboratories that provide a greater understanding of estuaries and how humans impact them, and CELCP provides matching funds to state and local governments to purchase threatened coastal and estuarine lands or obtain conservation easements.

The project and surrounding lands are not located in California’s coastal zone, which generally extends 1,000 yards inland from the mean high tide line; therefore, compliance with this act is not required.

4.5 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
Pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) (PL 93-205), the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) have regulatory authority over federally listed species. Under the ESA, a permit to “take” a listed species is required for any federal action that may harm an individual of that species. “Take” is defined under ESA Section 9 as “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” Under the ESA, “take” is further defined to include habitat modification or degradation where it would be expected to result in death or injury to listed wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. ESA Section 7 outlines procedures for federal interagency cooperation to conserve federally listed species and designated critical habitat. Section 7(a)(2) requires federal agencies to consult with USFWS and/or NOAA Fisheries to ensure that they are not undertaking, funding, permitting, or authorizing actions likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species.

As discussed in Section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” of this IS/MND, implementing the project would not affect the Central Valley Distinct Population Segment of steelhead, or the southern Distinct Population Segment of green sturgeon; however, the project may affect valley elderberry longhorn beetle. Implementation of Mitigation Measures

3.4-1 and 3.4-2 would reduce any potential project impacts on these species to a less-than-significant level, and take of the species would be avoided. It is anticipated that SWRCB will issue a “not likely to adversely affect” determination based on the intended implementation of these mitigation measures and SWRCB will request and receive a letter of Ascent Environmental Compliance with Federal Regulations City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4-5 concurrence from USFWS, or the project may participate in the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan.

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
EO 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 Federal Register 7629 [1994]), directs federal agencies to identify and address the disproportionately high and adverse health or environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. The EO also directs each federal agency to develop a strategy for implementing environmental justice. EO 12898 is also intended to promote nondiscrimination in federal programs that affect human health and the environment, as well as provide minority and low-income communities access to public information and public participation.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has oversight of the federal government’s compliance with EO 12898. To facilitate compliance, CEQ prepared and issued, in consultation with EPA, Environmental Justice Guidance Under the National Environmental Policy Act (CEQ 1997). According to CEQ’s environmental justice guidance, the first step in conducting an environmental justice analysis is to define “minority and low-income populations.” According to these guidelines, a minority population is present in a project area if either (a) the minority population of the affected area exceeds 50 percent or (b) the minority population percentage of the affected area is meaningfully greater than the minority population percentage in the general population. By the same rule, a low-income population exists if the project area consists of 50 percent or more people living below the poverty threshold, as defined by the US Census Bureau, or the low-income population percentage of the affected area is meaningfully greater than the poverty percentage of the general population. A definition of “meaningfully greater” is not given by CEQ or EPA, although the Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice and NEPA Committee (2016) use “10 or 20 percent greater than the reference community” as an example of a reasonable, subjective threshold for comparison. For the purposes of this analysis, “meaningfully greater” was conservatively defined to mean that the affected area has a minority or lowincome population percentage that is at least 5 percent greater than that found in the general population.

The second step of an environmental justice analysis requires a finding of whether the project would result in a high or adverse effect. The CEQ guidance indicates that when determining whether the effects are high and adverse, agencies are to consider whether the risks or rates of impact “are significant (as employed by NEPA) or above generally accepted norms” (CEQ 1997) The final step requires a finding as to whether the effect on the minority or low-income population is disproportionately high and adverse. CEQ offers a nonquantitative definition, stating that an effect is disproportionate if it appreciably exceeds the risk or rate experienced by the general population.

The following population characteristics are considered in this analysis:
 race and ethnicity data from the US Census Bureau and  per capita income as it relates to the federal poverty threshold.

To make a finding that disproportionately high and adverse effects would likely fall on a minority or low-income population, three conditions must be met simultaneously: (1) there must be a minority or low-income population in the affected area, (2) a high and adverse effect must exist, and (3) the effect on the minority or low-income population must be disproportionately high and adverse.

The demographic and economic information presented in this analysis is based on the most recent data from the US Census Bureau 2016–2020 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates and 2020 Decennial Census. Minority and low-income populations are identified by analyzing the demographic and economic characteristics of the affected area and comparing those to the characteristics of the larger community. For the purposes of this analysis, the “affected area,” herein referred to as the “environmental justice study area,” encompasses the census block groups that make up the project area or that may experience indirect effects from the project (e.g., elevated noise, traffic, and air pollutant levels during project construction). Census block groups are subdivisions of census tracts and are the smallest geographic units for which the US Census Bureau collects data. Census block groups generally have Compliance with Federal Regulations Ascent Environmental City of Riverbank
4-6 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration a population size of 600–3,000 people. According to EPA, either the county or the state can be used when considering the characteristics of the “larger community.” Table 4-4 summarizes census tract block groups that make up the environmental justice study area and the larger communities that the census tract block groups are compared against. The project site is entirely within Block Group 1, Census Tract 49.05, which is in San Joaquin County. The block groups that may experience indirect effects from the project are located south of the Stanislaus River, in Stanislaus County: Block Group 1, Census Tract 4.07; Block Groups 1, 2, and 3, Census Tract 3.02; and Block Groups 1 and 2, Census Tract 3.01.

Table 4-4 Environmental Justice Study Area
Environmental Justice Study Area (Affected Area) County (Larger Community) Block Group 1, Census Tract 49.05 San Joaquin County
Block Group 1, Census Tract 4.07 Stanislaus County
Block Group 1, Census Tract 3.02 Stanislaus County
Block Group 2, Census Tract 3.02 Stanislaus County
Block Group 3, Census Tract 3.02 Stanislaus County
Block Group 1, Census Tract 3.01 Stanislaus County
Block Group 2, Census Tract 3.01 Stanislaus County
Source: US Census Bureau 2020a.

4.6.1 Demographics
Table 4-4 presents the demographics of the environmental justice study area, San Joaquin County, and Stanislaus County from the US Census 2020 Decennial Census (US Census Bureau 2020b). As shown in Table 4-5, the overall minority population makes up 72 percent of the total population in San Joaquin County and 62 percent of the total population in Stanislaus County. The overall minority population ranged from 41 to 84 percent of the total population in the census block groups that make up the environmental justice study area. The total minority population exceeded 50 percent of the total population in the following five block groups:
 Block Group 1, Census Tract 49.05, San Joaquin County;  Block Group 1, Census Tract 3.02, Stanislaus County;
 Block Group 2, Census Tract 3.02, Stanislaus County;
 Block Group 1, Census Tract 3.01, Stanislaus County; and  Block Group 2, Census Tract 3.01, Stanislaus County.

In Block Group 1, Census Tract 49.05 in San Joaquin County, the proportion of people with two or more races exceeded that of the county by 5 percent. In Block Group 1, Census Tract 3.02; Block Group 1, Census Tract 3.01; and Block Group 2, Census Tract 3.01 in Stanislaus County, the proportion of the Hispanic and Latino population exceeded that of the county by 5 percent or greater. In Block Group 1, Census Tract 3.02 and Block Group 1, Census Tract 3.01, the proportion of the overall minority population exceeded that of the county by greater than 5 percent.

4.6.2 Income and Poverty Status
Table 4-6 presents household income, per capita income, and poverty status for the environmental justice study area, San Joaquin County, and Stanislaus County based on the 2016–2020 ACS 5-Year Estimates (US Census Bureau 2020c, US Census Bureau 2020d). The median household income was $68,628 in San Joaquin County and $62,873 in Stanislaus County. The median household income ranged from $33,287 to $201,250 in the census block groups that make up the environmental justice study area. In 2020, the weighted average federal poverty threshold was $13,171 for a household of one person and $26,496 for a household of four people (US Census Bureau 2022).

Ascent Environmental Compliance with Federal Regulations City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4-7 Table 4-5 Demographics of the Environmental Justice Study Area, San Joaquin County, and Stanislaus County Race/Ethnicity
Number (Percent of Population)
San Joaquin
County
Stanislaus
County
Block Group 1,
Census Tract

49.05, San
Joaquin County
Block Group 1,
Census Tract

4.07, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 1,
Census Tract

3.02, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 2,
Census Tract

3.02, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 3,
Census Tract

3.02, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 1,
Census Tract

3.01, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 2,
Census Tract

3.01, Stanislaus
County
White 215,530 (28%) 207,908 (38%) 728 (55%) 434 (59%) 143 (16%) 339 (41%) 562 (52%) 370 (27%) 262 (39%) Black or African
American 56,898 (7%) 14,302 (3%) 2 (<1%) 6 (1%) 7 (1%) 13 (2%) 33 (3%) 11 (1%) 10 (1%) American
Indian and
Alaska Native
3,135 (<1%) 2,621 (<1%) 10 (1%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (<1%) 1 (<1%) 12 (1%) 6 (1%) Asian 134,684 (17%) 33,169 (6%) 24 (2%) 35 (5%) 8 (1%) 15 (2%) 19 (2%) 7 (1%) 9 (1%) Native
Hawaiian and
Other Pacific
Islander
4,977 (1%) 3,713 (1%) 0 (0%) 5 (1%) 3 (<1%) 3 (<1%) 8 (1%) 0 (0%) 0 (<1%) Some Other
Race 4,192 (1%) 2,734 (<1%) 7 (1%) 3 (<1%) 1 (<1%) 7 (1%) 15 (1%) 3 (<1%) 2 (<1%) Two or More
Races 34,092 (4%) 22,453 (4%) 117 (9%) 37 (5%) 11 (1%) 30 (4%) 47 (4%) 41 (3%) 28 (4%) Hispanic or
Latino 325,725 (42%) 265,978 (48%) 426 (32%) 217 (29%) 694 (80%) 417 (50%) 403 (37%) 925 (68%) 352 (53%) Total minority
population 563,703 (72%) 344,970 (62%) 586 (65%) 303 (41%) 724 (84%) 488 (59%) 526 (48%) 999 (73%) 407 (61%) Total
population 779,233 (100%) 552,878 (100%) 1,314 (100%) 737 (100%) 867 (100%) 827 (100%) 1,088 (100%) 1,369 (100%) 669 (100%) Notes: Cells highlighted in gray indicate census block groups where the proportion of the minority population exceeds that of the county by 5 percent or more.

Sources: US Census Bureau 2020b.

Compliance with Federal Regulations Ascent Environmental City of Riverbank
4-8 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Table 4-6 Income and Poverty Status in the Environmental Justice Study Area, San Joaquin County, and Stanislaus County Household Income
Number (Percent of Population)
San Joaquin
County
Stanislaus
County
Block Group 1,
Census Tract

49.05, San
Joaquin
County
Block Group 1,
Census Tract

4.07, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 1,
Census Tract

3.02, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 2,
Census Tract

3.02, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 3,
Census Tract

3.02, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 1,
Census Tract

3.01, Stanislaus
County
Block Group 2,
Census Tract

3.01, Stanislaus
County
Less than $10,000 11,555 (5%) 7,518 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (2%) 20 (9%) 66 (18%) 47 (10%) 18 (9%) $10,000 to $14,999 8,550 (4%) 8,042 (5%) 0 (0%) 7 (5%) 22 (9%) 0 (0%) 35 (10%) 11 (2%) 34 (18%) $15,000 to $24,999 18,487 (8%) 15,035 (9%) 61 (17.2%) 18 (12%) 6 (2%) 34 (15%) 8 (2%) 47 (10%) 17 (9%) $25,000 to $34,999 19,412 (8%) 15,909 (9%) 53 (14.9%) 7 (5%) 26 (10%) 5 (2%) 0 (0%) 39 (8%) 46 (24%) $35,000 to $49,999 25,420 (11%) 23,077 (13%) 23 (6.5%) 0 (0%0 62 (25%) 41 (18%) 39 (11%) 115 (25%) 21 (11%) $50,000 to $74,999 41,134 (18%) 32,518 (19%) 47 (13.2%) 7 (5%) 50 (20%) 35 (15%) 84 (23%) 74 (16%) 21 (11%) $75,000 to $99,999 30,042 (13%) 23,252 (13%) 48 (13.5%) 0 (0%) 54 (22%) 15 (7%) 37 (10%) 60 (13%) 24 (12%) $100,000 to $149,999 39,286 (17%) 27,972 (16%) 73 (20.6%) 21 (14%) 0 (0%) 35 (15%) 36 (10%) 42 (9%) 7 (4%) $150,000 to $199,999 19,412 (8%) 11,539 (7%) 28 (7.9%) 17 (11%) 24 (10%) 16 (7%) 8 (2%) 25 (5%) 0 (0%) $200,000 or more 17,794 (8%) 10,140 (6%) 22 (6.2%) 77 (50%) 0 (0%) 25 (11%) 50 (14%) 6 (1%) 5 (3%) Total households 231,092 (100%) 174,826 (100%) 355 (100%) 154 (100%) 248 (100%) 226 (100%) 363 (100%) 466 (100%) 193 (100%) Median household
income
$68,628 $62,873 $62,094 $201,250 $53,167 $65,227 $56,295 $44,414 $33,287 Per capita income $28,928 $27,225 $35,025 $84,297 $21,911 $44,076 $31,410 $21,067 $17,743 Poverty status –
percent of
households
13% 13% 13% 5% 11% 16% 36% 14% 34%
Poverty status –
percent of
individuals
14% 14% 18% 4% 11% 12% 24% 8% 35%
Notes: Cells highlighted in gray indicate census block groups where the proportion of the households and individuals below the poverty level exceeds that of the county by 5 percent or more.

Sources: US Census Bureau 2020c, US Census Bureau 2020d.

Ascent Environmental Compliance with Federal Regulations City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4-9 None of the census block groups in the environmental justice study area had a median household income below the federal poverty threshold. Approximately 13.7 percent of individuals in San Joaquin County and 13.5 percent of individuals in Stanislaus County were below the poverty level. The proportion of individuals in the census block groups that make up the environmental justice study area that were below the poverty level ranged from 4 to 35 percent.

4.6.3 Impact Evaluation
As described above in Section 4.6.1, the minority population exceeds 50 percent of the total population in five of the census block groups that make up the environmental justice study area. In addition, four of the census block groups that make up the environmental justice study area have minority populations that are meaningfully greater (i.e., 5 percent or more) than that of the respective county. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, minority populations are present in the project area and in the adjacent areas that may experience indirect effects from the project.

As described above in Section 4.6.2, between 4 and 35 percent of individuals in the census block groups that make up the environmental justice study area were below the poverty level. Therefore, each census block group in the environmental justice study area has fewer than 50 percent of individuals living below the poverty threshold, as defined by the US Census Bureau. However, two of the census block groups in Stanislaus County have percentages of households and individuals that are meaningfully greater (i.e., 5 percent or more) than that of the county. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, low-income populations are present in areas that may experience indirect effects from the project.

Based on the above discussion, minority and low-income populations have been identified in the environmental justice study area. Temporary construction impacts associated with the project would occur primarily on the WWTP property and private farm roads and existing WWTP roads. Nearby residences could be subject to constructionrelated impacts described in Sections 3.1 through 3.21 of this IS/MND, including increased noise and traffic. However, these impacts would be short term, and construction would take place when most residents are not expected to be home (i.e., during working hours). In addition, these temporary impacts would be distributed throughout the project area and would affect all communities in the environmental justice study area, regardless of demographic or socioeconomic characteristics. Therefore, project construction would not have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority and low-income populations.

The purpose of the project is to upgrade and expand the Riverbank WWTP to accommodate planned growth in the city through 2050 and produce recycled water, which would create a source of high-quality irrigation water that could contribute to greater water balance in the San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin by replacing some of the groundwater that would otherwise be used for irrigation. After it is operational, the project would improve service for all customers equally by increasing wastewater treatment capacity and efficiency and offsetting the existing use of groundwater on adjacent agricultural lands with the use of recycled water. The project would benefit all communities in the environmental justice study area, regardless of demographic or socioeconomic characteristics. Furthermore, as described in Sections 3.1 through 3.21 of this IS/MND, project operations would not result in substantial adverse effects on humans or on the physical environment. Therefore, project operation would not have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority and low-income populations.

4.7 FARMLAND PROTECTION POLICY ACT
The purpose of the federal Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) of 1981 (PL 97-98) is to minimize federal contributions to the conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses by ensuring that federal programs are administered in a manner compatible with state government, local government, and private programs designed to protect farmland. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is the agency primarily responsible for implementing the FPPA.

Compliance with Federal Regulations Ascent Environmental City of Riverbank
4-10 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration US Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulations (7 CFR Part 658) implementing the FPPA require federal agencies to conduct a farmland conversion impact rating (using USDA Form AD-1006) when a project may convert farmlands to nonagricultural uses. This impact rating should be done when the impacts of a project would affect farmlands in the following categories:
 prime farmland: the highest-quality land for food and fiber production having the best chemical and physical characteristics for producing;
 unique farmland: land capable of yielding high value crops, such as citrus fruits and olives; and  farmlands designated as important by state and local governments, with the approval of the Secretary of Agriculture.

Neither the FPPA nor the regulations apply if:
 the project area does not contain farmland in the categories identified above;  the project is on prime farmland that is already “committed” to urban development or water storage (applies to prime farmland only; refer to 7 CFR 658.2[a]);
 projects were beyond the planning stage before August 6, 1984; or  projects involve grants, loans, or mortgage insurance for purchase or rehabilitation of existing structures.

As discussed in Section 3.2, “Agriculture and Forestry Resources,” of this IS/MND, the project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land (DOC 2018). Project construction and operation would occur within existing developed uses, including under existing private roadways and at the existing WWTP facility. Therefore, the project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to nonagricultural use.

Consultation with NRCS (including submittal of the Farmland Conservation Impact Rating form) does not apply to project sites that do not contain farmland in categories identified above and therefore is not required for the project.

4.8 FISH AND WILDLIFE COORDINATION ACT
Pursuant to 16 USC Section 662(a) of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA), whenever the waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed or authorized to be impounded, diverted, the channel deepened, or the stream or other body of water otherwise controlled or modified for any purpose whatever, including navigation and drainage, by any department or agency of the United States, or by any public or private agency under federal permit or license, such department or agency first shall consult with USFWS, and with the head of the agency exercising administration over the wildlife resources of the particular state wherein the impoundment, diversion, or other control facility is to be constructed, with a view to the conservation of wildlife resources by preventing loss of and damage to such resources, as well as providing for the development and improvement thereof in connection with such water resource development. The provisions of Section 662(a) do not apply to those projects involving the impoundment of water where the maximum surface area of such impoundments would be less than 10 acres, nor to activities for or in connection with programs primarily for land management and use carried out by federal agencies with respect to federal lands under their jurisdiction.

As discussed in Section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” of this IS/MND, there are no jurisdictional waters on the project site; therefore, implementing the project would not result in the impoundment, diversion, deepening, or modification of any waters.

4.9 FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
EO 13690, “The Federal Flood Risk Management Standard” (January 30, 2015), revises EO 11988, “Floodplain Management” (May 24, 1977), and directs federal agencies to take the appropriate actions to reduce risk to federal investments, specifically to “update their flood-risk reduction standards.” The goal of this directive is to improve the Ascent Environmental Compliance with Federal Regulations City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4-11 resilience of communities and federal assets against the impacts of flooding and recognizes the risks and losses related to climate change and other threats.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) are used to determine whether properties are located in Special Flood Hazard Areas. The project site is included on FEMA FIRM panels 06077C0690F, 06077C0695F, 06077C0830F, and 06077C0835F (FEMA 2019). As discussed in Section 3.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality,” and shown in Figure 3.10-1 in Section 3.10.2 of this IS/MND, portions of the project site are mapped in a Special Flood Hazard Area (100-year flood zone), areas of 0.2 percent annual chance flood (500-year flood zone), and areas of minimal flood hazard (Zone X). However, project features in the Special Flood Hazard Area are limited to the agricultural lands that would receive recycled water following project implementation.

The headworks facility, vactor truck receiving station, electrical and controls building, shop and maintenance building, tertiary treatment facilities, and seasonal storage basins would be located in areas of minimal flood hazard. Project features that would be located within the 500-year flood zone include a temporary staging area, secondary treatment facilities, improved access routes, and underground recycled water distribution pipelines. Because all aboveground buildings and structures would be located outside Special Flood Hazard Areas, implementing the project would not result in additional exposure of people or structures to risk of flooding. The project would have no impact related to a 100-year flood hazard area or risk of flooding.

4.10 MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND

MANAGEMENT ACT
In response to growing concern about the status of US fisheries, Congress passed the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (PL 104-297) to amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (PL 94-265), the primary law governing marine fisheries management in the federal waters of the United States. The MagnusonStevens Conservation and Management Act, as amended (USC 180 et seq.), requires that Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) be identified and described in federal fishery management plans. Federal action agencies must consult with NOAA Fisheries on any activity that they fund, permit, or carry out that may adversely affect EFH. NOAA Fisheries is required to provide EFH conservation and enhancement recommendations to the federal action agencies. EFH is defined as those waters and substrates necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity.

The project site is in the Upper Stanislaus–Below Goodwin watershed, which is identified as EFH for Chinook salmon.

As discussed in Section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” of this IS/MND, there are no aquatic features in the project area that would serve as suitable fish habitat. Therefore, the project would have no direct effects on Chinook salmon EFH.

The project area is adjacent to the Stanislaus River, which provides suitable habitat for Chinook salmon; however, because of the distance from suitable habitat, construction activities are not likely to result in indirect effects on Chinook salmon EFH, such as increased vibration or polluted runoff. Implementation of the project would not affect fisheries or waters or the substrates necessary for fisheries.

4.11 MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 USC Section 703 et seq.), first enacted in 1918, provides for protection of international migratory birds and authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to regulate the taking of migratory birds.

Under the MBTA, it is unlawful, except as permitted by regulations, to pursue, take, or kill any migratory bird, or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird. The current list of species protected by the MBTA can be found in Title 50 of the CFR, Section 10.13 (50 CFR 10.13). The list includes nearly all birds native to the United States.

As discussed in Section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” of this IS/MND, the project site provides potential nesting and foraging habitat for burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, and white-tailed kite. Suitable nesting habitat for Cooper’s hawk, osprey, sharp-shinned hawk, tricolored blackbird, great egret, snowy egret, great blue heron, black-crowned night heron, yellow warbler, and yellow-breasted chat may occur in the riparian habitat adjacent to the project site. In addition, California horned lark may nest in adjacent grasslands, loggerhead shrike in adjacent shrub savannah, and Compliance with Federal Regulations Ascent Environmental City of Riverbank
4-12 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration the project site also provides suitable nesting habitat for common bird species. Project activities that occur during the nesting season (February 1–August 31) could result in nest abandonment and the mortality of eggs and chicks.

However, implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.4-5 and 3.4-6 would reduce impacts on burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, white-tailed kite, Cooper’s hawk, osprey, sharp-shinned hawk, California horned lark, loggerhead shrike, great egret, snowy egret, great blue heron, black-crowned night heron, tricolored blackbird, yellow warbler, yellow-breasted chat, and common nesting birds to a less-than-significant level because these measures would prevent project-related disturbance during the breeding season and would reduce the likelihood of nest abandonment and loss of eggs or young.

4.12 NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT
Federal protection of resources is legislated by the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 as amended by 16 US Code 470, the Archaeological Resource Protection Act of 1979, and the Advisory Council on Historical Preservation. These laws and organizations maintain processes for determining the effects on historical properties eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Federal and federally sponsored programs and projects are reviewed pursuant to Section 106 of the NHPA. Section 106 requires federal agencies to consider the effects of proposed federal undertakings on historic properties. The NHPA requires federal agencies to initiate consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) as part of the Section 106 review process.

4.12.1 Determination of Effects
The Stanislaus River Bridge (P-39-000564/P-50-001735) is an NRHP-eligible historic property. Although this bridge is located on the project site, project activities (specifically construction of Pipeline B) would be limited to the roadway beneath the bridge. No part of the project would demolish, relocate, or alter the bridge, or its immediate surroundings, such that the significance of the historic property would be materially impaired. Because the bridge would not be altered, the project would have no adverse effect on the historic property (Ascent Environmental 2022).

SWRCB will initiate consultation with the SHPO with a finding of no adverse effect on historic properties—a finding that the project would have no significant impact on properties listed, or eligible for listing, on the NRHP. It is anticipated that the SHPO will concur with this finding. However, pursuant to the regulations at 36 CFR Section 800.5(c), the SHPO has 30 days from receipt to review an agency finding. Therefore, the project would not be implemented until the Section 106 process is complete. Upon completion of the Section 106 process and implementation of the project in the event of a post-review discovery, SWRCB would follow the procedures outlined at 36 CFR Section 800.13.

4.13 PROTECTION OF WETLANDS
The purpose of EO 11990 (May 24, 1977) is to “minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands.” To meet these objectives, EO 11990 requires federal agencies, in planning their actions, to consider alternatives to wetland sites and limit potential damage if an activity affecting a wetland cannot be avoided. EO 11990 applies to the acquisition, management, and disposition of federal lands and facilities construction and improvement projects that are undertaken, financed, or assisted by federal agencies, as well as federal activities and programs affecting land use, including water and related land resources planning, regulation, and licensing activities.

As discussed in Section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” of this IS/MND, no potentially jurisdictional wetlands or other waters of the United States and/or state are located within 50 feet of the access road or pipeline alignment or within the existing WWTP. Furthermore, no indirect effects on state- or federally protected wetlands are anticipated, because the project would employ water quality BMPs to control runoff from ground-disturbing activities, and the application of recycled water would occur at agronomic rates and using methods that are the same as existing conditions. Therefore, the project would have no impact on state- or federally protected wetlands.

Ascent Environmental Compliance with Federal Regulations City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4-13

4.14 RIVERS AND HARBORS ACT
If a project requires the construction of any structure in or over a navigable water of the United States, action under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (Section 10, 33 USC Section 403) is triggered, regardless of whether the applicant is pursuing federal funding. In addition, structures or work outside the defined area for a navigable water of the United States could trigger the need for a Section 10 permit if the structure or work would affect the course, location, or condition of the water body. A Section 10 permit is issued by the Secretary of the Army through the US Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant will initiate the process of obtaining a Section 10 permit itself and will supply a copy to SWRCB.

The project would not require construction of any structure in or over a navigable water of the United States; therefore, compliance with the Rivers and Harbors Act would not be applicable.

4.15 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AND SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER

PROTECTION
The Safe Drinking Water Act (42 USC Section 300f et seq.) was established to protect the quality of drinking water in the United States. This law focuses on all waters actually or potentially designed for drinking use, whether from aboveground or underground sources.

The act authorizes EPA to establish minimum standards to protect tap water and requires all owners or operators of public water systems to comply with these primary (health-related) standards. The 1996 amendments to the act require that EPA consider a detailed risk and cost assessment and best available peer-reviewed science when developing these standards. State governments, which can be approved to implement these rules for EPA, also encourage attainment of secondary (nuisance-related) standards. Under the act, EPA also establishes minimum standards for state programs to protect underground sources of drinking water from endangerment by underground injection of fluids.

The project site is not within a sole source aquifer (SSA). The nearest SSAs are the Santa Margarita, Scotts Valley SSA, approximately 72 miles southwest of the project site, and the Fresno County Aquifer SSA, approximately 77 miles southeast of the project site (EPA 2020). In addition, the recycled water from the project would not be designated for drinking use, and the project would have no adverse effect on any public water systems or other drinking water sources.

4.16 WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 USC Section 1271 et seq.) established a National Wild and Scenic Rivers System for the protection of rivers with important scenic, recreational, fish and wildlife, and other values. Rivers are classified as wild, scenic, or recreational. The act designates specific rivers for inclusion in the system and prescribes the methods and standards by which additional rivers may be added.

No designated wild and scenic rivers are located in the project area. The nearest designated wild and scenic river is a section of the Tuolumne River located approximately 35 miles northeast of the project site (US Forest Service 2016).

This section of the Tuolumne River is located upstream of the project site and is in a watershed separate from watershed in which the project site is located. Therefore, the project would not affect a wild and scenic river, river segments, or the adjacent land.

Compliance with Federal Regulations Ascent Environmental City of Riverbank
4-14 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank.

City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 5-1 5 REFERENCES
1 Introduction
State Water Resources Control Board. 2017 (April). State Environmental Review Process for the State Water Resources Control Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program. Sacramento, CA.

SWRCB. See State Water Resources Control Board.
2 Project Description
California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Central Valley Region. 2019 (February). The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the Sacramento River Basin and the San Joaquin River Basin. Fifth edition. Revised February 2019 (with approved amendments). Sacramento, CA. ———. 2020. Resolution R5-2020-0057: Revisions to the Amendments of the Water Quality Control Plans for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins and the Tulare Lake Basin Plan to Incorporate a Central Valley-Wide Salt and Nitrate Control Program. Sacramento, CA.

City of Riverbank. 2022. Statistics | Riverbank, CA. Available: https://www.riverbank.org/256/Statistics. Accessed April 20, 2022.

CVRWQCB. See California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Central Valley Region.

Kjeldsen, Sinnock, & Neudeck, Inc. 2022a (June 11). Existing and Future Land Use and Flows and Loads. West Sacramento, CA. Technical memorandum to Michael Riddell, Public Works Director, City of Riverbank, Riverbank, CA.
———. 2022b (January). City of Riverbank Recycled Water Use Study. West Sacramento, CA. Prepared for City of Riverbank.

Kjeldsen, Sinnock, & Neudeck, Inc., and Brown and Caldwell. 2022 (January). City of Riverbank Recycled Water Production Study. West Sacramento, CA. Prepared for City of Riverbank.

KSN. See Kjeldsen, Sinnock, & Neudeck, Inc.

KSN and BC. See Kjeldsen, Sinnock, & Neudeck, Inc. and Brown and Caldwell.

Whittlesey, Steven. Civil Engineer. Kjeldsen, Sinnock, Neudeck, West Sacramento, CA. June 15, 2022—email to Andrea Shephard of Ascent Environmental regarding project-related construction and operations assumptions. 3 Environmental Checklist
Ascent Environmental. 2022a. Aquatic Resources Delineation Report for the City of Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project. City of Riverbank, San Joaquin County. Sacramento, CA. Prepared for the City of Riverbank. ———. 2022b. Cultural Resources Inventory and Assessment Report for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project, City of Riverbank, San Joaquin County. Sacramento, CA. Prepared for City of Riverbank.

Bryant, W. A., and E. W. Hart. 2007. Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps. Interim revision. California Geological Survey Special Publications 42.

CalEPA. See California Environmental Protection Agency.

CAL FIRE. See California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

California Air Resources Board. 2016. Ambient Air Quality Standards. Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/aaqs2.pdf. Accessed July 2022.

References Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
5-2 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ———. 2017 (November). California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Available:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf. Accessed July 2022. ———. 2020. 2020 State Area Designations - Appendix C: Maps and Tables of Area Designations for State and National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Available: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/rulemaking/2021/sad2020.

Accessed July 2022.
———. 2022a. Diesel Exhaust and Health. Available: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-andhealth. Accessed August 2022. ———. 2022b. Draft 2022 Scoping Plan Update. Available: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/2022- draft-sp.pdf. Accessed August 2022.

California Department of Conservation. 2016. Mines Online. Available:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/index.html. Accessed June 14, 2022. ———. 2018. Rural Land Mapping Edition San Joaquin County Important Farmland 2018. Available:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/SanJoaquin.aspx. Accessed July 5, 2022.

California Department of Finance. 2022. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2022. Available: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housingestimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2022/. Accessed July 5, 2022.

California Department of Fish and Game. 2012 (March 7). Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2019. (January) Strategic Plan 2019. Available:
https://www.fire.ca.gov/media/bo2fdzfs/strategicplan2019-final.pdf. Accessed July 6, 2022. ———. 2022a. State Responsibility Area Viewer. Available: https://calfireforestry.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=468717e399fa4238ad86861638765ce1.

Retrieved July 6, 2022.
———. 2022b. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Retrieved July 6, 2022.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. 2019. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details, Forward Landfill, Inc. (39-AA-0015). Available: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1434?siteID=3106.

Accessed July 11, 2022.

California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2022. (July). EnviroStor – Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List. Available: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=riverbank+. Retrieved July 7, 2022.

California Department of Transportation. 2008. 2008 California Motor Vehicle Stock, Travel and Fuel Forecast.

Available: rosap.ntl.bts.gov. Accessed July 2022.
———. 2018. State Scenic Highway System Map. Available:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa.

Accessed July 5, 2022.
———. 2022. Scenic Highways - Frequently Asked Questions. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/laplandscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways-faq2.

Accessed July 5, 2022.

California Department of Water Resources. 2020 (January). California’s Critically Overdrafted Groundwater Basins.

Available: https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/GroundwaterManagement/Basin-Prioritization/Files/CODBasins_websitemapPAO_a_20y.pdf. Accessed June 15, 2022.

California Energy Commission. 2008 (February). 2008 Update Energy Action Plan. Available:
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/uploadedFiles/CPUC_Public_Website/Content/Utilities_and_Industries/Energy_- _Electricity_and_Natural_Gas/2008%20Energy%20Action%20Plan%20Update.pdf. Accessed July 2022.

Ascent Environmental References
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study 5-3 ———. 2017. Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act - SB 350. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/rules-andregulations/energy-suppliers-reporting/clean-energy-and-pollution-reduction-act-sb-350. Accessed August 2022.
———. 2019. 2019 California Energy Efficiency Action Plan Final Staff Report. Available:
https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/business_meetings/2019_packets/2019-12- 11/Item_06_2019%20California%20Energy%20Efficiency%20Action%20Plan%20(19-IEPR-06).pdf. Accessed July 2022.
———. 2021a. 2020 Power Content Label. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3882.

Accessed July 28.
———. 2021b. 2021 Integrated Energy Policy Report. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2021-integrated-energy-policy-report. Accessed July 8, 2022.
———. 2022. 2021 Total System Electric Generation. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energyalmanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total-system-electricgeneration#:~:text=Total%20generation%20for%20California%20was,from%2090%2C208%20GWh%20in%2 02020). Accessed July 28, 2022.

California Geological Survey. 2015. Geologic Map of California. Available: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/gmc/.

Accessed June 28, 2022.
———. 2021 (September). Earthquake Zones of Required Investigations. Available:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed June 15, 2022.

California Native Plant Society. 2022. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03

0.39). Available: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed May 5, 2022.

California Natural Diversity Database. 2022a. Results of electronic records search. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Biogeographic Data Branch. Sacramento. Accessed April 29, 2022. ———. 2022b. Wildlife Corridors – San Joaquin Valley [ds 423]. Available: htts:// www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/bios/.www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/bios/. Accessed June 30, 2022.

California Public Utilities Commission. 2008 (September). California Long Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan.

Available: https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/files/legacyfiles/e/5305-eestrategicplan.pdf.

Accessed July 28, 2022.

CalRecycle. See California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery.

Caltrans. See California Department of Transportation.

CARB. See California Air Resources Board.

CDFG. See California Department of Fish and Game.

CEC. See California Energy Commission.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2019 (February). The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region. Fifth edition. The Sacramento River Basin and the San Joaquin River Basin. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/basin_plans/sacsjr_201902.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2022.

Central Valley RWQCB. See Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.

CGS. See California Geological Survey.

References Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
5-4 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Riverbank. 2009. City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025. Available:
https://www.riverbank.org/DocumentCenter/View/236/2005-2025-Riverbank-General-Plan-Adopted-April2009-. Accessed August 4, 2022. ———. 2021 (October). 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Prepared by Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc., West Sacramento, CA. Available: https://www.riverbank.org/DocumentCenter/View/2817/Final-CoR-UWMP2020?bidId=. Accessed July 19, 2022. ———. 2022 (January). City of Riverbank Recycled Water Use Study. Prepared by Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc., West Sacramento, CA.

CNDDB. See California Natural Diversity Database.

CNPS. See California Native Plant Society.

CPUC. See California Public Utilities Commission.

DOC. See California Department of Conservation.

DOF. See California Department of Finance.

DTSC. See California Department of Toxic Substances Control.

DWR. See California Department of Water Resources.

Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority. 2022 (June). Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Adopted November 2019; revised June 2022. Available:
https://www.sjgov.org/docs/default-source/public-works-documents/water-resources/final-esj-revisedgsp_june2022_clean.pdf?sfvrsn=675b059b_5. Accessed July 8, 2022.

EIA. See US Energy Information Administration.

EPA. See US Environmental Protection Agency.

ESJGA. See Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2009 (October). FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer.

Available: https://hazardsfema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd&extent=- 120.98145532577335,37.72935248247626,-120.89837121932813,37.763286884202145. Accessed June 15, 2022.

Federal Highway Administration. 2004. Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5. Available:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/traffic_noise_model/tnm_v25/. Accessed June 2022. ———. 2006 (January). Roadway Construction Noise Model User's Guide. Available:
https://www.placer.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8271/FHWA-2006-Roadway-Construction-Noise-ModelUser-Guide-PDF. Accessed June 2022.

Federal Interagency Committee on Noise. 1992 (August). Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues. Available:
https://nwtteis.com/portals/nwtteis/files/references/FICON_1992_Federal_Agency_Review.pdf. Accessed June 2022.

FEMA. See Federal Emergency Management Agency.

FHWA. See Federal Highway Administration.

FICON. See Federal Interagency Committee on Noise.

FTA. See Federal Transit Administration.

Governor's Office of Planning and Research. 2017. “General Plan Guidelines - Appendix D - California.” Available:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_Appendix_D_final.pdf. Accessed August 2022.

Ascent Environmental References
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study 5-5 ———. 2018 (December). Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Available:
http://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2022.

Governor's Office of Planning and Research, California Energy Commission, and California Natural Resources Agency. 2019. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report.

Available:https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/Statewide_Reports-SUM-CCCA4-2018- 013_Statewide_Summary_Report_ADA.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2022.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Available: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2022.

IPCC. See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Kjeldsen, Sinnock, & Neudeck, Inc. 2022 (January). City of Riverbank Recycled Water Use Study. West Sacramento, CA.

Prepared for City of Riverbank.

Kjeldsen, Sinnock, & Neudeck, Inc., and Brown and Caldwell. 2022 (January). City of Riverbank Recycled Water Production Study. West Sacramento, CA. Prepared for City of Riverbank.

KSN. See Kjeldsen, Sinnock, & Neudeck, Inc.

KSN and BC. See Kjeldsen, Sinnock, & Neudeck, Inc. and Brown and Caldwell.

National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration. 2020 (March 31). NHTSA and EPA Finalize CAFE and Carbon Dioxide Standards for Model Years 2021 – 2026. Available: https://www.nhtsa.gov/corporate-average-fueleconomy/safe. Accessed July 2022.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2002. “Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Seven Evolutionary Significant Units of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead in California.” Final Rule. Federal Register 70: 52488 – 52627.
———. 2022. Protected Resources APP. Critical Habitat Steelhead (California Central Valley DPS). Available:
https://www.webapps.nwfsc.noaa.gov/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=7514c715b8594944a6e468d d25aaacc9. Accessed: May 12, 2022.

NHTSA. See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

NOAA. See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

NRCS. See US Natural Resources Conservation Service.

OEHHA. See Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2003 (August). Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Available:
https://www.cityofdavis.org/home/showpublisheddocument/4231/635803240370600000. Accessed August 8, 2022.

OPR. See Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.

OPR et al. See Governor's Office of Planning and Research, California Energy Commission, and California Natural Resources Agency .

River Partners. 2007 (May 10). VELB Habitat and Colonization of Remnant and Planted Elderberry along the Stanislaus and San Joaquin Rivers. Prepared for US Bureau of Reclamation.

San Joaquin Council of Governments. 2000 (November 14). San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP).

References Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
5-6 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ———. 2022. Online Map of Habitat Preserves - San Joaquin County. Available:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1zrnfC_ORv1AmzOREHQcDjPWtPiJQr2T&hl=en&ll=37.79088061332161%2C-120.99689174174806&z=12 Accessed June 30, 2022.

San Joaquin County. 1992 (July). IV.B Extractive Resources. Available: https://www.sjgov.org/commdev/cgibin/cdyn.exe/handouts-planning_GP-V3-IV-B?grp=handouts-planning&obj=GP-V3-IVB#:~:text=The%20primary%20extractive%20resources%20in,County%20to%20a%20lesser%20extent.

Accessed June 14, 2022.
———. 2017a. (December). San Joaquin County General Plan Policy Document. Available:
https://www.sjgov.org/commdev/cgibin/cdyn.exe/file/Planning/General%20Plan%202035/GENERAL%20PLAN%202035.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2022.
———. 2017b. San Joaquin County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan – Revised 2017. Available:
https://www.sjgov.org/docs/default-source/office-of-emergency-services-documents/lhmp/local-hazardmigration-plan.pdf?sfvrsn=b92c072_11. Accessed July 15, 2022. ———. 2019. San Joaquin County Zoning. Available:
https://gisweb.ci.manteca.ca.us/portal/home/item.html?id=4c108f9a82db4f239bc12e652a0291f5. Accessed July 5, 2022.
———. 2022 (February). San Joaquin County Emergency Operations Plan. Office of Emergency Services. Available:
https://www.sjgov.org/docs/default-source/office-of-emergency-services-documents/emergencyplans/2022-sjc-emergency-operations-plan.pdf. Accessed July 15, 2022.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2015. Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts.

Available: http://www.sjvapcd.dst.ca.us/transportation/GAMAQI.pdf. Accessed July 23, 2022. ———. 2022 (April 29). Best Available Control Technology (BACT) Requirements for Diesel-Fired Emergency IC Engines > 50 bhp Powering Electrical Generators. Available: https://www.valleyair.org/busind/pto/bact/BACTGuideline-3.1.1.pdf. Accessed July 2022.

San Joaquin Valley Gateway. 2015. San Joaquin County Williamson Act Parcels. Available:
https://sjvp.databasin.org/maps/new/#datasets=a32f8f44b4524b07b1861e779a0857c0. Accessed July 5, 2022.

SJCOG. See San Joaquin Council of Governments.

SJVAPCD. See San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.

SJV Gateway. See San Joaquin Valley Gateway.

Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. 2010. Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. Available: https://vertpaleo.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/01/SVP_Impact_Mitigation_Guidelines-1.pdf. Accessed July 8, 2022.

South San Joaquin Irrigation District. 2021 (March). 2020 Agricultural Water Management Plan. Available:
https://www.ssjid.com/wp-content/uploads/2020-Ag-Water-Management-Plan.pdf. Accessed July 11, 2022.

SSJID. See South San Joaquin Irrigation District.

Stanislaus County. 2018 (November 15). Modesto City-County Airport, Oakdale Municipal Airport, Crows Landing Airport – Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Prepared by Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development Department, Angela Freitas, Director for the Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Commission.

Available: https://www.stancounty.com/planning/agenda-aluc/Revised06_04_2020.pdf. Accessed August, 2022.

Ascent Environmental References
City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study 5-7 State Water Resources Control Board. 2021 (January). 2018 Integrated Report for Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d). Adopted on October 20, 2020. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/2018state_ir_reports_final/102020_6_final_stffrp t.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2022.
———. 2022. GeoTracker. Available: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?global_id=WDR100035552.

Retrieved July 7, 2022.

SWRCB. See State Water Resources Control Board.

United Nations. 2015. Paris Agreement. Available: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf.

Accessed July 2022
USDA. See US Department of Agriculture.

US Energy Information Administration. 2022. California Energy Consumption by End-Use Sector, 2020. Last updated March 17, 2022. Available: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2. Accessed July 28, 2022.

US Environmental Protection Agency. 2018. Criteria Air Pollutants homepage. Available: https://www.epa.gov/criteriaair-pollutants. Accessed July 2022 ———. 2019. EPA Finalizes Affordable Clean Energy Rule, Ensuring Reliable, Diversified Energy Sources while Protecting our Environment. Available: https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-finalizes-affordable-clean-energy-ruleensuring-reliable-diversifiedenergy. Accessed August 5, 2022. ———. 2022. Greenbook - Criteria Pollutant Nonattainment Summary Report. Available:
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/ancl3.html. Accessed July 27, 2022.

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017a. Framework for Assessing Impacts to the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus). Sacramento, CA.
———. 2017b. Recovery Plan for the Central California Distinct Population Segment of the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense). Pacific Southwest Region. Sacramento, CA.

USFWS. See US Fish and Wildlife Service.

US Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1988. Soil Survey of San Joaquin County, California. Available:
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_MANUSCRIPTS/california/CA077/0/san%20joaquin.pdf. Accessed:

June 15, 2022.

Volpe, J. A. 2018 (September). Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. Federal Transportation Administration. Available: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf.

Accessed June 2022.

Whittlesey, Steven. Civil engineer. Kjeldsen, Sinnock, Neudeck, West Sacramento, CA. June 15, 2022—email to Andrea Shephard of Ascent Environmental regarding project-related construction and operations assumptions. 4 Compliance with Federal Regulations
Ascent Environmental. 2022. Cultural Resources Inventory and Assessment Report for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project, City of Riverbank, San Joaquin County. Sacramento, CA. Prepared for City of Riverbank.

California Air Resources Board. 2021. EMission FACtor Model (EMFAC 2021). Available: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/.

Accessed August 2022.

California Department of Conservation. 2018. Rural Land Mapping Edition San Joaquin County Important Farmland 2018. Available: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/SanJoaquin.aspx. Accessed July 5, 2022.

CARB. See California Air Resources Board.

CEQ. See Council on Environmental Quality.

References Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
5-8 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Council on Environmental Quality. 1997 (December 10). Environmental Justice Guidance Under the National Environmental Policy Act. Executive Office of the President, Washington, D.C.

DOC. See California Department of Conservation.

EPA. See US Environmental Protection Agency.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2009 (October). FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer.

Available: https://hazardsfema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd&extent=- 120.98145532577335,37.72935248247626,-120.89837121932813,37.763286884202145. Accessed June 15, 2022.

Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice and NEPA Committee. 2016 (March). Promising Practices for EJ Methodologies in NEPA Reviews. Available: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016- 05/documents/iwg_promising_practices_final_5-16-2016.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2022.

FEMA. See Federal Emergency Management Agency.

US Census Bureau. 2020a. Explore Census Data. Available: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/. Accessed June 17, 2022. ———. 2020b. Hispanic or Latino, and not Hispanic or Latino by race, 2020 Decennial Redistricting Data. Retrieved from: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/. Accessed June 17, 2022. ———. 2020c. Household income in the past 12 months (in 2020 inflation-adjusted dollars), 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from: https://api.census.gov/data/2020/acs/acs5/subject.

Accessed June 17, 2022.
———. 2020d. Poverty Status in the past 12 months, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-year estimates.

Retrieved from: https://api.census.gov/data/2020/acs/acs5/subject. Accessed June 17, 2022. ———. 2022. Poverty Thresholds for 2020 by Size of Family and Number of Related Children under 18 Years.

Available: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-povertythresholds.html. Accessed June 17, 2022.

US Environmental Protection Agency. 2008 (April). Environmental Review Guide for Special Appropriation Grants.

Available: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2014-08/documents/environmental-review-guide-grantspg.pdf. Accessed August 2, 2022. ———. 2020. Sole Source Aquifers. Available:
https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=9ebb047ba3ec41ada1877155fe31356b.

Accessed June 16, 2022.
———. 2022a (July 31). Details of Criteria Pollutant Nonattainment Area Summary Report. Available:
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/ancl2.html. Accessed August 2022. ———. 2022b (July 20). General Conformity De Minimis Tables. Available: https://www.epa.gov/generalconformity/de-minimis-tables. Accessed: August 2022.

US Forest Service. 2016 (November). National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Available:
https://www.rivers.gov/documents/nwsrs-map.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2022.

City of Riverbank
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 6-1 6 REPORT PREPARERS
City of Riverbank (Lead Agency and Applicant)
Marisela Garcia ...............................................................................................................................................................................City Manager Michael Riddell ..........................................................................................................................................................Director of Public Works KSN (Civil Engineer)
Neal Colwell, PE..................................................................................................................................................................... Principal Engineer Steven Whittlesey, PE ............................................................................................................................................................. Project Engineer David Carr....................................................................................................................................................................... Construction Manager Ascent Environmental (CEQA Compliance)
Sydney Coatsworth, AICP ............................................................................................................................................... Principal-in-Charge Andreas Shephard, PhD......................................................................................Project Manager, Introduction, Project Description Reida Khan ................................................ Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use and Planning, Wildfire
Nicole Greenfield...........................................Geology, Hydrology and Water Quality, Minerals, Utilities and Service Systems, Mandatory Findings, Compliance with Federal Laws and Regulations Chris Mundhenk................................................................................................. Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation Matt Brehmer.................................................................................................................Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Matt McFalls ...................................................................Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Reviewer Ted Thayer ......................................................................................................................................................................... Biological Resources Hannah Weinberger....................................................................................................................................................... Biological Resources Josh Boldt.....................................................................................................................................Biological Resources Technical Reviewer Alta Cunningham..............................................................................................................Cultural Resources, Tribal Cultural Resources Emilie Zelazo, RPA............................................................................................................Cultural Resources, Tribal Cultural Resources Abdul Khan ......................................................................................................................................................................................................Noise Dimitri Antoniou, AICP..........................................................................................................................................Noise Technical Reviewer Jazmin Amini .................................................................................................................................................................................Transportation Zach Miller, AICP...................................................................................................................................Transportation Technical Reviewer Jim Merk....................................................................................................................................................................................... Technical Editor Lisa Merry ..........................................................................................................................................................................................GIS Specialist Brian Perry................................................................................................................................................................................Graphic Specialist Corey Alling .............................................................................................................................................................................Graphic Specialist Gayiety Lane .......................................................................................................................................................................Publishing Specialist Michele Mattei ...................................................................................................................................................................Publishing Specialist Report Preparers Ascent Environmental
City of Riverbank
6-2 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank.

Ascent Environmental Report Preparers
Agency
XXXXXXXXXX Project Initial Study 6-3
Appendix A
Project Construction Assumptions
Construction Phase Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date Duration in Weeks Duration Calendar Days Duration Working Days Number of Workers per
day
(8 hrs/day)
Equipment List: Total # of
equipment for phase and
hours per equipment per
day – Tier 4?
General Summary: Assumed 8 Hours / Day
Tier 4
Off Road - Yes
Overall Construction 12/1/2026 113 566 On Road - No
Construction Management Staff
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 1 6 4 6
2 Pickup Trucks
2 Utility Trucks
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 2 15 11 6
2 Pickup Trucks
1 Water Truck
1 140 Motor Grader
1 950 Wheel Loader
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 4 30 21 5
1 Pickup Truck
1 Utility Truck
3 Pumps - T4 No
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 2 14 10 5 1 Pickup Truck
1 Utility Truck
1 Vacuum Truck
1 Back Hoe
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 3 20 14 6 1 Pickup Truck
1 Utility Truck
1 Dump truck
1 Back Hoe
1 Water Truck
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 3 20 14 12 2 Pickup Truck
4 657 Scrapers
2 Dump Trucks
2 LGP D6 Dozers
1 Water Truck
1 140 Motor Grader
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/20/2025 4 30 21 12
2 Pickup Trucks
2 Dump Trucks
4 657 Scrapers
2 LGP D6 Dozers
1 Water Truck
1 140 Motor Grader
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 2 15 11 8
2 Pickup Trucks
2 623 Scrapers
2 LGP D6 Dozers
1 815 Compactor
1 Water Truck
1 140 Motor Grader
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 4 30 21 12 2 Pickup Trucks
1 Service Truck
1 Water Truck
1 Dump Truck
2 320 Excavator
1 950 Wheel Loader
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic
Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 38 265 189 10
2 Pickup Trucks
1 All Terrain Crane
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic
Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 2 14 10 8
2 Pickup Trucks
2 623 Scrapers
1 LGP D6 Dozer
1 815 Compactor
1 320 Excavator
Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2
and
Anoxic Basin
Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 29 200 143 8 2 Pickup Trucks
1 All Terrain Crane
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 1 10 7 8 2 Pickup Trucks
1 623 Scraper
1 LGP D6 Dozer
1 815 Compactor
1 320 Excavator
1 Water Truck
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and
Solids Storage 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 11 75 54 5
2 Pickup Trucks
1 Utility Truck
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Construct Splitter Structures and Pump
Stations (Primary and Secondary
Treatment)
9/22/2025 12/6/2025 11 75 54 6
2 Pick Up Trucks
1 Boom Truck
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump
Stations (Primary and Secondary
Treatment)
12/6/2025 12/20/2025 2 14 10 5
2 Pickup Trucks
1 950 Wheel Loader
1 320 Excavator
1 Water Truck
TABLE 1
2 Pickup Trucks
1 Backhoe
1 Dump Truck
10/1/2024 791 10
12/10/2025 12/24/2025 2 14 10 5
6/15/2022
Construction Phase Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date Duration in Weeks Duration Calendar Days Duration Working Days Number of Workers per
day
(8 hrs/day)
Equipment List: Total # of
equipment for phase and
hours per equipment per
day – Tier 4?
TABLE 1
Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter
structures Secondary Treatment 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 11 75 54 8 2 Pickup Trucks
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
1 315 Excavator
1 Dump Truck
1 Water Truck
Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2
Splitter Structures, Pump Stations, and
Solids Handling
12/20/2025 2/18/2026 9 60 43 5
1 Pickup Truck
1 Backhoe
1 Dump Truck
Construct Electrical Building, Generator
Pad and Shop / Maintenance Building 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 36 250 179 5 1 Pickup Truck
1 Boom Truck
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Construct misc above grade equipment
pads / equipment 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 9 60 43 4 1 Pickup Truck1 All Terrain Fork Lift Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 31 220 157 6 2 Pickup Trucks 1 All Terrain Crane
Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 1 10 7 4 1 Pickup Truck
1 315 Excavator
1 Water Truck
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions,
splitter structures 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 4 30 21 8
2 Pickup Trucks
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
1 315 Excavator
1 Dump Truck
1 Water Truck
Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 3 18 13 8 2 Pickup Trucks
2 320 Excavator
1 Water Truck
1 950 Wheel Loader
1 Dump Truck
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 3 18 13 8 2 Pickup Trucks
2 320 Excavator
1 Water Truck
1 950 Wheel Loader
1 Dump Truck
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 26 180 129 6 2 Pick Up Trucks
1 Boom Truck
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 13 90 64 6 2 Pick Up Trucks
1 Boom Truck
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Construct Control Structures, Pump
Stations, and Misc. (Tertiary and
Disinfection)
5/1/2026 7/20/2026 11 80 57 6
2 Pick Up Trucks
1 Boom Truck
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
Electrical Underground Tertiary and
Disinfection Area 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 6 40 29 5
1 Pickup Truck
1 Backhoe
1 Dump Truck
Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 11 75 54 9 2 Pickup Trucks
1 623 Scraper
1 LGP D6 Dozer
1 815 Compactor
1 320 Excavator
1 Water Truck
1 140 Motor Grader
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 4 30 21 4 1 Pickup Truck
1 352 Excavator
1 Water Truck
1 140 Motor Grader
Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 2 15 11 6
2 Pickup Trucks
2 Utility Trucks
1 All Terrain Fork Lift
6/15/2022
Surface Improvement Work
Item Footprint Area (ft2) Length (ft) Width (ft) Depth (ft) Volume (ft3) Volume (CY) Truck Sizing (CY) Estimated Weight
(Tons)
Estimated Truck
Loads Delivered
Temp Construction Access Road
- AB or Crushed Rock 109,500 9,125 12 0.5 54,750 2,028 14 3,549 148 Secondary Treatment Area - 4"
AC Paving 22,400 1,400 16 0.33 7,392 274 14 479 20
Secondary Treatment Area - 12"
AB/Rock Subgrade 22,400 1,400 16 1 22,400 830 14 1,452 60 Tertiary Treatment Area - 4" AC
Paving 11,200 700 16 0.33 3,696 137 14 240 10
Tertiary Treatment Area - 12"
AB/Rock Subgrade 11,200 700 16 1 11,200 415 14 726 30
Re-Pave AC Existing Plant Site 22,500 150 150 0.33 7,425 275 14 481 20 Restoration of Distribution
Pipeline - AB or Crushed Rock 67,616 4,226 16 0.33 67,616 2,504 14 4,383 183 Subgrade for Treatment Facilities
& Buildings 182,436 6,757 14 11,825 493
Concrete for Treatment Facilities
& Buildings 345,127 12,782 9 22,369 1,420
Earthwork Item Cut/Borrow Location Fill Location Percent Solids Earthwork Cut
Volume (CY)
Earthwork Cut
Weight (Tons)
High Side Semi
Truck Size (CY)
Total Truckloads
Transported
Transport Distance
(Miles)
Mass Excavation T-4 Earth Cut T-2 & T-3 100% 128,200 224,400 27 4,748 0.5 Sludge Excavation T-4 Sludge - 91% Solids Off Site Export to Landfill 91% 24,000 42,000 27 889 20 Pond T-2 Liner T-2 Liner Scraping Off Site Export to Landfill -- 800 1,400 27 30 20 Earthwork Item
Equipment Used for
Earthwork Equipment Number
Loads Exc. per
Scraper per Hour
Total Loads
Excavated per Hour
Workday Duration
(hr/day)
Loads Excavated
per Day
High Side Semi
Truck Size (CY)
Daily Volume
Excavated (CY/d)
Days of Mass
Excavation
Mass Excavation 657 Scrapers 4 7 28 8 224 27 6,048 21
Sludge Excavation 657 Scrapers 4 4 16 8 128 27 3,456 7
Pond T-2 Liner 657 Scrapers 2 2 4 8 32 27 864 1
TABLE 2
Import for Improved Surfaces and Pavement Repair Calculations and Quantities Worker/Equipment Excavation and Site Earthwork
Calculated Earthwork Quantities for Excavation
6/15/2022
Appendix B
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, and Energy Modeling
Assumptions and Results
Construction Schedule 10/1/2024 11/30/2026 565 12/31/2024 12/31/2025 12/31/2026 Construction Phase Start Date End Date Working Days 2024 2025 2026 Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10 10 Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21 7 14
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143 143 Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solids Storage 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (Primary and Secondary Treatment) 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (Primary and Secondary Treatment) 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures Secondary Treatment 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 8 46 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter Structures, Pump Stations, and Solids Handling 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 8 35 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and Shop / Maintenance Building 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / equipment 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 109 48 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7 7 Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter structures 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, and Misc. (Tertiary and Disinfection) 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection Area 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54 54 Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11 11
MAX DAY SHEET 1 = PHASE ACTIVE ON THAT DAY
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
10/1/202410/2/202410/3/202410/4/202410/5/202410/6/202410/7/202410/8/202410/9/202410/10/202410/11/202410/12/202410/13/202410/14/202410/15/2024 202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date Daily Emissions
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 1.88 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 0.00 0.00 1.73 1.73 NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 0.00 0.00 15.33 12.93 12.93 12.93 12.93 0.00 0.00 12.93 12.93 CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 0.00 0.00 18.95 17.09 17.09 17.09 17.09 0.00 0.00 17.09 17.09 SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.56 PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.30 PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85 PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.52 PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
10/16/202410/17/202410/18/202410/19/202410/20/202410/21/202410/22/202410/23/202410/24/202410/25/202410/26/202410/27/202410/28/202410/29/202410/30/2024 202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4
Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1.73 1.73 1.73 0.00 0.00 1.73 1.55 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.44

12.93 12.93 12.93 0.00 0.00 12.93 10.61 3.87 3.87 3.87 0.00 0.00 3.87 3.87 3.87

17.09 17.09 17.09 0.00 0.00 17.09 15.25 3.61 3.61 3.61 0.00 0.00 3.61 3.61 3.61

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.56 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.49 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.12

0.30 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.22 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.08

0.85 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.71 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.20

0.52 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.46 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.12

0.08 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02

0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.51 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.14

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
10/31/202411/1/202411/2/202411/3/202411/4/202411/5/202411/6/202411/7/202411/8/202411/9/202411/10/202411/11/202411/12/202411/13/202411/14/2024 202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5
Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.63 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19

3.87 3.87 0.00 0.00 3.87 3.87 6.23 2.36 2.36 0.00 0.00 2.36 2.36 2.36 2.36

3.61 3.61 0.00 0.00 3.61 3.61 5.53 1.92 1.92 0.00 0.00 1.92 1.92 1.92 1.92

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.12 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.19 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07

0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.17 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10

0.20 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.37 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17

0.12 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.18 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06

0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

0.14 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.23 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
11/15/202411/16/202411/17/202411/18/202411/19/202411/20/202411/21/202411/22/202411/23/202411/24/202411/25/202411/26/202411/27/202411/28/202411/29/2024 202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.19 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.36 0.00 0.00 2.36 2.36 2.36 2.36 2.36 0.00 0.00 2.36 2.36 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.92 0.00 0.00 1.92 1.92 1.92 1.92 1.92 0.00 0.00 1.92 1.92 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.07 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.17 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.06 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
11/30/202412/1/202412/2/202412/3/202412/4/202412/5/202412/6/202412/7/202412/8/202412/9/202412/10/202412/11/202412/12/202412/13/202412/14/2024 202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00 6.51 6.51 6.51 6.51 6.51 0.00 0.00 6.51 6.51 6.51 6.51 6.51 0.00

0.00 0.00 50.48 50.48 50.48 50.48 50.48 0.00 0.00 50.48 50.48 50.48 50.48 50.48 0.00

0.00 0.00 68.18 68.18 68.18 68.18 68.18 0.00 0.00 68.18 68.18 68.18 68.18 68.18 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 2.63 2.63 2.63 2.63 2.63 0.00 0.00 2.63 2.63 2.63 2.63 2.63 0.00

0.00 0.00 14.64 14.64 14.64 14.64 14.64 0.00 0.00 14.64 14.64 14.64 14.64 14.64 0.00

0.00 0.00 17.27 17.27 17.27 17.27 17.27 0.00 0.00 17.27 17.27 17.27 17.27 17.27 0.00

0.00 0.00 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 0.00 0.00 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 0.00

0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 0.00

0.00 0.00 4.62 4.62 4.62 4.62 4.62 0.00 0.00 4.62 4.62 4.62 4.62 4.62 0.00

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
12/15/202412/16/202412/17/202412/18/202412/19/202412/20/202412/21/202412/22/202412/23/202412/24/202412/25/202412/26/202412/27/202412/28/202412/29/2024 202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024202420242024 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1
Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 6.51 6.51 6.51 6.51 6.51 0.00 0.00 6.71 6.71 6.71 6.71 6.71 0.00 0.00

0.00 50.48 50.48 50.48 50.48 50.48 0.00 0.00 47.32 47.32 47.32 47.32 47.32 0.00 0.00

0.00 68.18 68.18 68.18 68.18 68.18 0.00 0.00 71.45 71.45 71.45 71.45 71.45 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 2.63 2.63 2.63 2.63 2.63 0.00 0.00 2.48 2.48 2.48 2.48 2.48 0.00 0.00

0.00 14.64 14.64 14.64 14.64 14.64 0.00 0.00 15.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 0.00 0.00

0.00 17.27 17.27 17.27 17.27 17.27 0.00 0.00 17.94 17.94 17.94 17.94 17.94 0.00 0.00

0.00 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 0.00 0.00 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 0.00 0.00

0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 0.00 0.00 2.23 2.23 2.23 2.23 2.23 0.00 0.00

0.00 4.62 4.62 4.62 4.62 4.62 0.00 0.00 4.51 4.51 4.51 4.51 4.51 0.00 0.00

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
12/30/202412/31/20241/1/20251/2/20251/3/20251/4/20251/5/20251/6/20251/7/20251/8/20251/9/20251/10/20251/11/20251/12/20251/13/2025 202420242025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2
Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6.71 6.71 6.71 6.71 6.71 0.00 0.00 6.71 6.71 6.71 6.71 6.71 0.00 0.00 6.71

47.32 47.32 47.32 47.32 47.32 0.00 0.00 47.32 47.32 47.32 47.32 47.32 0.00 0.00 47.32

71.45 71.45 71.45 71.45 71.45 0.00 0.00 71.45 71.45 71.45 71.45 71.45 0.00 0.00 71.45

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.48 2.48 2.48 2.48 2.48 0.00 0.00 2.48 2.48 2.48 2.48 2.48 0.00 0.00 2.48

15.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 0.00 0.00 15.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 0.00 0.00 15.46

17.94 17.94 17.94 17.94 17.94 0.00 0.00 17.94 17.94 17.94 17.94 17.94 0.00 0.00 17.94

2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 0.00 0.00 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 0.00 0.00 2.28

2.23 2.23 2.23 2.23 2.23 0.00 0.00 2.23 2.23 2.23 2.23 2.23 0.00 0.00 2.23

4.51 4.51 4.51 4.51 4.51 0.00 0.00 4.51 4.51 4.51 4.51 4.51 0.00 0.00 4.51

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
1/14/20251/15/20251/16/20251/17/20251/18/20251/19/20251/20/20251/21/20251/22/20251/23/20251/24/20251/25/20251/26/20251/27/20251/28/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3
Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6.71 6.71 6.71 6.71 0.00 0.00 3.73 3.73 3.73 3.73 3.73 0.00 0.00 3.73 3.73

47.32 47.32 47.32 47.32 0.00 0.00 22.34 22.34 22.34 22.34 22.34 0.00 0.00 22.34 22.34

71.45 71.45 71.45 71.45 0.00 0.00 37.42 37.42 37.42 37.42 37.42 0.00 0.00 37.42 37.42

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.48 2.48 2.48 2.48 0.00 0.00 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 0.00 0.00 1.50 1.50

15.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 0.00 0.00 18.19 18.19 18.19 18.19 18.19 0.00 0.00 18.19 18.19

17.94 17.94 17.94 17.94 0.00 0.00 19.69 19.69 19.69 19.69 19.69 0.00 0.00 19.69 19.69

2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 0.00 0.00 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.38 0.00 0.00 1.38 1.38

2.23 2.23 2.23 2.23 0.00 0.00 2.56 2.56 2.56 2.56 2.56 0.00 0.00 2.56 2.56

4.51 4.51 4.51 4.51 0.00 0.00 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94 0.00 0.00 3.94 3.94

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
1/29/20251/30/20251/31/20252/1/20252/2/20252/3/20252/4/20252/5/20252/6/20252/7/20252/8/20252/9/20252/10/20252/11/20252/12/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4
Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3.73 3.73 3.73 0.00 0.00 3.73 4.53 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80

22.34 22.34 22.34 0.00 0.00 22.34 33.56 11.23 11.23 11.23 0.00 0.00 11.23 11.23 11.23

37.42 37.42 37.42 0.00 0.00 37.42 44.32 6.90 6.90 6.90 0.00 0.00 6.90 6.90 6.90

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.50 1.50 1.50 0.00 0.00 1.50 1.74 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24

18.19 18.19 18.19 0.00 0.00 18.19 18.38 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.19

19.69 19.69 19.69 0.00 0.00 19.69 20.11 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.43

1.38 1.38 1.38 0.00 0.00 1.38 1.60 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.22

2.56 2.56 2.56 0.00 0.00 2.56 2.61 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05

3.94 3.94 3.94 0.00 0.00 3.94 4.20 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
2/13/20252/14/20252/15/20252/16/20252/17/20252/18/20252/19/20252/20/20252/21/20252/22/20252/23/20252/24/20252/25/20252/26/20252/27/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5
Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80

11.23 11.23 0.00 0.00 11.23 11.23 11.23 11.23 11.23 0.00 0.00 11.23 11.23 11.23 11.23

6.90 6.90 0.00 0.00 6.90 6.90 6.90 6.90 6.90 0.00 0.00 6.90 6.90 6.90 6.90

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24

0.19 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19

0.43 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43

0.22 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22

0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05

0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
2/28/20253/1/20253/2/20253/3/20253/4/20253/5/20253/6/20253/7/20253/8/20253/9/20253/10/20253/11/20253/12/20253/13/20253/14/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 1.74 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94

11.23 0.00 0.00 11.23 11.23 11.23 19.41 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18

6.90 0.00 0.00 6.90 6.90 6.90 17.09 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.24 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.58 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34

0.19 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.88 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69

0.43 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.43 1.46 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03

0.22 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.54 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31

0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.18 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13

0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.71 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
3/15/20253/16/20253/17/20253/18/20253/19/20253/20/20253/21/20253/22/20253/23/20253/24/20253/25/20253/26/20253/27/20253/28/20253/29/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00

0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00

0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00

0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
3/30/20253/31/20254/1/20254/2/20254/3/20254/4/20254/5/20254/6/20254/7/20254/8/20254/9/20254/10/20254/11/20254/12/20254/13/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1
Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00

0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00

0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00

0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
4/14/20254/15/20254/16/20254/17/20254/18/20254/19/20254/20/20254/21/20254/22/20254/23/20254/24/20254/25/20254/26/20254/27/20254/28/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2
Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94

8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18

10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34

0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69

1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03

0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31

0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13

0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
4/29/20254/30/20255/1/20255/2/20255/3/20255/4/20255/5/20255/6/20255/7/20255/8/20255/9/20255/10/20255/11/20255/12/20255/13/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3
Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94

8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18

10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34

0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69

1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03

0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31

0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13

0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
5/14/20255/15/20255/16/20255/17/20255/18/20255/19/20255/20/20255/21/20255/22/20255/23/20255/24/20255/25/20255/26/20255/27/20255/28/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4
Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94

8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18

10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34

0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69

1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03

0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31

0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13

0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
5/29/20255/30/20255/31/20256/1/20256/2/20256/3/20256/4/20256/5/20256/6/20256/7/20256/8/20256/9/20256/10/20256/11/20256/12/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5
Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94

8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18

10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34

0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69

1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03

0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31

0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13

0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
6/13/20256/14/20256/15/20256/16/20256/17/20256/18/20256/19/20256/20/20256/21/20256/22/20256/23/20256/24/20256/25/20256/26/20256/27/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94

8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18

10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34

0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69

1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03

0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31

0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13

0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
6/28/20256/29/20256/30/20257/1/20257/2/20257/3/20257/4/20257/5/20257/6/20257/7/20257/8/20257/9/20257/10/20257/11/20257/12/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00

0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00

0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00

0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
7/13/20257/14/20257/15/20257/16/20257/17/20257/18/20257/19/20257/20/20257/21/20257/22/20257/23/20257/24/20257/25/20257/26/20257/27/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1
Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00

0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 0.00 0.00

0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00

0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.00

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
7/28/20257/29/20257/30/20257/31/20258/1/20258/2/20258/3/20258/4/20258/5/20258/6/20258/7/20258/8/20258/9/20258/10/20258/11/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2
Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.29 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.00 1.29

8.18 8.18 8.18 8.18 9.94 0.00 0.00 9.94 9.94 9.94 9.94 9.94 0.00 0.00 9.94

10.19 10.19 10.19 10.19 13.80 0.00 0.00 13.80 13.80 13.80 13.80 13.80 0.00 0.00 13.80

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.48

0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.78

1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26

0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44

0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15

0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
8/12/20258/13/20258/14/20258/15/20258/16/20258/17/20258/18/20258/19/20258/20/20258/21/20258/22/20258/23/20258/24/20258/25/20258/26/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3
Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29

9.94 9.94 9.94 9.94 0.00 0.00 9.94 9.94 9.94 9.94 9.94 0.00 0.00 9.94 9.94

13.80 13.80 13.80 13.80 0.00 0.00 13.80 13.80 13.80 13.80 13.80 0.00 0.00 13.80 13.80

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48

0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.78

1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26 1.26

0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44

0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15

0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
8/27/20258/28/20258/29/20258/30/20258/31/20259/1/20259/2/20259/3/20259/4/20259/5/20259/6/20259/7/20259/8/20259/9/20259/10/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4
Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1.29 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 1.29

9.94 9.94 9.94 0.00 0.00 9.94 9.94 9.94 9.94 9.94 0.00 0.00 9.94 9.94 9.94

13.80 13.80 13.80 0.00 0.00 13.80 13.80 13.80 13.80 13.80 0.00 0.00 13.80 13.80 13.80

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.48 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48

0.78 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.78 0.78

1.26 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26 1.26 1.26

0.44 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.44

0.15 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.15

0.59 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.59

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
9/11/20259/12/20259/13/20259/14/20259/15/20259/16/20259/17/20259/18/20259/19/20259/20/20259/21/20259/22/20259/23/20259/24/20259/25/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5
Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1.29 1.29 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 0.00 0.00 3.76 3.29 3.29 3.29

9.94 9.94 0.00 0.00 9.94 9.94 9.94 9.94 9.94 0.00 0.00 29.99 25.88 25.88 25.88

13.80 13.80 0.00 0.00 13.80 13.80 13.80 13.80 13.80 0.00 0.00 38.63 33.59 33.59 33.59

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.48 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.00 1.44 1.27 1.27 1.27

0.78 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.00 13.12 12.59 12.59 12.59

1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 14.56 13.85 13.85 13.85

0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 1.32 1.16 1.16 1.16

0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 1.91 1.82 1.82 1.82

0.59 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.00 3.24 2.99 2.99 2.99

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
9/26/20259/27/20259/28/20259/29/20259/30/202510/1/202510/2/202510/3/202510/4/202510/5/202510/6/202510/7/202510/8/202510/9/202510/10/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3.29 0.00 0.00 3.29 3.29 3.29 3.29 1.10 0.00 0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10

25.88 0.00 0.00 25.88 25.88 25.88 25.88 10.68 0.00 0.00 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68

33.59 0.00 0.00 33.59 33.59 33.59 33.59 12.25 0.00 0.00 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.27 0.00 0.00 1.27 1.27 1.27 1.27 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38

12.59 0.00 0.00 12.59 12.59 12.59 12.59 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42

13.85 0.00 0.00 13.85 13.85 13.85 13.85 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80

1.16 0.00 0.00 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35

1.82 0.00 0.00 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10

2.99 0.00 0.00 2.99 2.99 2.99 2.99 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
10/11/202510/12/202510/13/202510/14/202510/15/202510/16/202510/17/202510/18/202510/19/202510/20/202510/21/202510/22/202510/23/202510/24/202510/25/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 0.00 0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 0.00

0.00 0.00 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 0.00 0.00 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 0.00

0.00 0.00 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 0.00 0.00 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.00

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
10/26/202510/27/202510/28/202510/29/202510/30/202510/31/202511/1/202511/2/202511/3/202511/4/202511/5/202511/6/202511/7/202511/8/202511/9/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1
Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 0.00 0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 0.00 0.00

0.00 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 0.00 0.00 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 0.00 0.00

0.00 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 0.00 0.00 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.00

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
11/10/202511/11/202511/12/202511/13/202511/14/202511/15/202511/16/202511/17/202511/18/202511/19/202511/20/202511/21/202511/22/202511/23/202511/24/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2
Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 0.00 0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 0.00 0.00 1.10

10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 0.00 0.00 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 10.68 0.00 0.00 10.68

12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 0.00 0.00 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 12.25 0.00 0.00 12.25

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.38

0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.42

0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80

0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.35

0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10

0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.46

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
11/25/202511/26/202511/27/202511/28/202511/29/202511/30/202512/1/202512/2/202512/3/202512/4/202512/5/202512/6/202512/7/202512/8/202512/9/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3
Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1.10 4.04 3.56 3.56 0.00 0.00 3.56 3.56 3.56 3.56 3.56 0.00 0.00 3.76 3.76

10.68 31.85 27.77 27.77 0.00 0.00 27.77 27.77 27.77 27.77 27.77 0.00 0.00 28.20 28.20

12.25 40.69 35.53 35.53 0.00 0.00 35.53 35.53 35.53 35.53 35.53 0.00 0.00 35.85 35.85

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.38 1.54 1.37 1.37 0.00 0.00 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 0.00 0.00 1.43 1.43

0.42 12.58 12.43 12.43 0.00 0.00 12.43 12.43 12.43 12.43 12.43 0.00 0.00 12.33 12.33

0.80 14.13 13.81 13.81 0.00 0.00 13.81 13.81 13.81 13.81 13.81 0.00 0.00 13.77 13.77

0.35 1.42 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.32 1.32

0.10 1.82 1.78 1.78 0.00 0.00 1.78 1.78 1.78 1.78 1.78 0.00 0.00 1.76 1.76

0.46 3.24 3.05 3.05 0.00 0.00 3.05 3.05 3.05 3.05 3.05 0.00 0.00 3.08 3.08

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
12/10/202512/11/202512/12/202512/13/202512/14/202512/15/202512/16/202512/17/202512/18/202512/19/202512/20/202512/21/202512/22/202512/23/202512/24/2025 202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025202520252025 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4
Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3.93 0.99 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98

30.48 9.31 9.31 0.00 0.00 9.31 9.31 9.31 9.31 9.31 0.00 0.00 11.24 11.24 11.24

37.57 9.14 9.14 0.00 0.00 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 0.00 0.00 10.43 10.43 10.43

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.49 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34

12.41 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.37

13.90 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.72

1.37 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.32

1.78 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09

3.15 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.41

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
12/25/202512/26/202512/27/202512/28/202512/29/202512/30/202512/31/20251/1/20261/2/20261/3/20261/4/20261/5/20261/6/20261/7/20261/8/2026 202520252025202520252025202520262026202620262026202620262026 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5
Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.82 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82

8.95 8.95 0.00 0.00 8.95 8.95 8.95 8.95 8.95 0.00 0.00 8.95 8.95 8.95 8.95

8.70 8.70 0.00 0.00 8.70 8.70 8.70 8.70 8.70 0.00 0.00 8.70 8.70 8.70 8.70

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.29 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29

0.29 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29

0.58 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58

0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27

0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07

0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34

MAX DAY SHEET
Workdays/Week
Project Start Date: 10/1/2024 5
Project End Date: 11/30/2026
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Phase Name Start Date End Date # of Workdays
Mobilization 10/1/2024 10/7/2024 4
Construct Haul Road 10/7/2024 10/22/2024 11
Dewatering T2, T3 and T4 10/7/2024 11/6/2024 21
Utility Locating / Potholing 10/7/2024 10/21/2024 10
Demolition – T2, T3, and T4 11/6/2024 11/26/2024 14
Sludge Handling T4 to P3 12/1/2024 12/21/2024 14
Mass Excavation 12/21/2024 1/17/2025 21
Rough Grading 1/20/2025 2/4/2025 11
Pipeline excavation, lay and backfill (deep) 2/4/2025 3/6/2025 21 Construct Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 3/6/2025 11/26/2025 189 Backfill Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and Anoxic Basin 11/26/2025 12/10/2025 10 Electrical underground Oxidation Ditch 1, 2 and 12/10/2025 12/24/2025 10 Construct Clarifiers 1 and 2 3/6/2025 9/22/2025 143
Backfill Clarifiers 1 and 2 9/22/2025 10/2/2025 7
Construct Sludge Handling Equipment and Solid 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Construct Splitter Structures and Pump Stations 9/22/2025 12/6/2025 54 Backfill Splitter Structures and Pump Stations (P 12/6/2025 12/20/2025 10 Process Piping Pump Stations, splitter structures 12/20/2025 3/5/2026 54 Electrical underground Clarifiers 1 & 2 Splitter St 12/20/2025 2/18/2026 43 Construct Electrical Building, Generator Pad and 2/1/2026 10/9/2026 179 Construct misc above grade equipment pads / e 3/1/2026 4/30/2026 43 Construct Recycled Storage Tank 1 8/1/2025 3/9/2026 157 Backfill Recycled Storage Tank 1 3/9/2026 3/19/2026 7
Process Piping Tertiary Pump Staions, splitter str 3/19/2026 4/18/2026 21 Construct Alt 1A Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Alt 1B Distribution Pipeline 4/18/2026 5/6/2026 13 Construct Tertiary Treatment Facility 4/18/2026 10/15/2026 129 Construct UV Disinfection Facility 7/18/2026 10/16/2026 64 Construct Control Structures, Pump Stations, an 5/1/2026 7/20/2026 57 Electrical Underground Tertiary and Disinfection 10/16/2026 11/25/2026 29 Fine Grading and paving site. 9/1/2026 11/15/2026 54
Off Haul Dewatered Sludge From Site 10/1/2026 10/31/2026 21 Demobilization 11/15/2026 11/30/2026 11
Daily Maximum Emissions
Pollutant Name Pollutant
Daily Max
Emissions
(lb/day) Max Day Date
ROG ROG 6.71 12/23/2024
NOX NOX 50.48 12/2/2024
CO CO 71.45 12/23/2024
SOx SOx 0.0028 10/1/2026
PM10 Exhaust PM10 ex 2.63 12/2/2024
PM10 Fugitive PM10 d 18.38 2/4/2025
PM10 Total PM10 total 20.11 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 ex 2.42 12/2/2024
PM2.5 Fugitive PM2.5 d 2.61 2/4/2025
PM2.5 Total PM2.5 total 4.62 12/2/2024
1/9/20261/10/20261/11/20261/12/20261/13/20261/14/20261/15/20261/16/20261/17/20261/18/20261/19/20261/20/20261/21/20261/22/20261/23/2026 202620262026202620262026202620262026202620262026202620262026 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Monday Tuesday Wed Thurs Fri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0