Sacramento City Council
March 26, 2024

City of Sacramento
City Council - 5PM Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2024-00534 3/26/2024 Consent Item 4.

Funding Agreement Between the City of Sacramento and the Regional Water Authority for Groundwater Enhancement Projects, Approval of Implementing Agreements with the Sacramento Suburban Water District and the Sacramento County Groundwater Agency, and Certification of Environmental Impact Report for the Groundwater Well Replacement Program File ID: 2024-00534
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or the City Manager’s designee to 1) certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopt the Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program; 2) execute an agreement with the Regional Water Authority (RWA) to receive a $7,060,000 grant and any related documents necessary to support the grant award to help fund groundwater well projects; 3) receive the grant funding through the Regional Water Authority’s grant agreement with the State of California Department of Water Resources (DWR); 4) adjust the revenue and expenditures budgets in the Groundwater Well Rehabilitation Program (Z14110100, Fund 6205) for an amount up to $7,060,000; 5) execute agreements with Sacramento Suburban Water District (SSWD) and Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) for receiving groundwater and recharging the groundwater basin; and 6) enter into minor amendments to the aforementioned agreements subject to approval by the City Attorney or her designee.

Contact: Kathy Sananikone, Project Manager, (916) 808-1425, [email protected]; Brett Ewart, Supervising Engineer, (916) 808-1438, [email protected]; Sherill Huun, Engineering & Water Resources Division Manager, (916) 808-1455, [email protected]; Pravani Vandeyar, Director, (916) 808-3765, [email protected], Department of Utilities
Presenter: None.

Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Resolution EIR
3-Resolution Agreements
4-Grant Agreement with RWA

File ID: 2024-00534 3/26/2024 Consent Item 4.
5-Agreement with SSWD
6-Agreement with SCWA
7-Mitigation and Monitoring Report
Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: On behalf of several water agencies in the Sacramento region, RWA applied for and has been awarded $55,000,000 in grant funding from DWR to improve the American River region’s groundwater production capabilities and operational flexibility of water systems. Along with nine other water agencies, the City of Sacramento (City) identified key projects to deliver as part of the grant.

The City will receive $7,060,000 of the grant to apply towards construction of a new groundwater well and for capacity enhancements of existing wells and in exchange will preferentially shift towards groundwater production during drier hydrologic years. Agreements with SSWD and SCWA will promote program success and groundwater basin sustainability.

Policy Considerations: This work is consistent with 2040 General Plan Policy PFS-4.4 to rehabilitate, replace, and expand critical infrastructure to ensure reliability and safety. Actions allowing the City to shift towards groundwater and leave equivalent increments of surface water in the river system, as opposed to an alternative pathway being considered by the State Water Resources Control Board, is consistent with the City Policy PFS-4.1 to protect its water rights into perpetuity, and with Policies ERC-1.6 and PFS-4.2 to promote sustainable groundwater management and maintain surface water/groundwater conjunctive use.

Economic Impacts: None.

Environmental Considerations: To comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City prepared a Draft EIR that was circulated for public comment as required by CEQA. The EIR evaluates the significant effects that could occur as a result of the proposed project, which involves the construction and operation of up to 38 replacement groundwater wells. The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review period beginning April 20, 2023, through June 5, 2023. Staff received six comment letters on the Draft EIR during the public comment period. All received comment letters, responses, and any technical changes are included in the Final EIR.

As a first step in the CEQA Compliance Process, an Initial Study (IS) was completed. Based on the findings, it was determined necessary for the City to proceed with an EIR, which will evaluate on a programmatic level the environmental impact of replacing all 38 wells identified in the Ground Water Master Plan (GMP) as needing to be replaced in the next 15 to 20 years. This will address the large- scale impact of the groundwater well replacement program, thereby simplifying and minimizing the necessary CEQA process for the individual well replacement projects.

A Notice of Preparation of the EIR was prepared and circulated for public review for a period of 30 days from March 25, 2022, through April 25, 2022. A virtual public Scoping Meeting was also held on

File ID: 2024-00534 3/26/2024 Consent Item 4.

April 13, 2022 to share information regarding the Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program, and to receive input from community members and other agencies.

The Final EIR document has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and together with the Draft EIR (and appendices) constitutes the EIR for the proposed project used by decision makers during project hearings. The Draft EIR was completed and circulated for public review and comment for a period of 45 days from April 20, 2023, through June 5, 2023. The Final EIR responds to all comments received on the Draft EIR and revised text and/or analyses where warranted. The comments and responses, including changes, do not alter the conclusions of the Draft EIR. Certification of the EIR, adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adoption of Findings of Fact by the City Council satisfies CEQA requirements relating to the project.

The Department of Utilities - Groundwater Master Plan and Well Replacement Program EIR may be found online at the City’s webpages at:
https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/community-development/planning/environmental/impact-reports https://www.cityofsacramento.org/Utilities/Water/Current-Projects/Groundwater-Well-Replacement Sustainability: The proposed project is consistent with the 2040 Climate Action Plan Goal A-6 to enhance water supply diversification, as well as the specific action items designed to meet the goal.

Overall, this set of actions improves infrastructure reliability and supports flexible water management practices whereby the City can shift between supplies to align with hydrologic conditions. The continued improvement of the City’s groundwater resources portfolio increases the reliability of water supply for city customers during periods of drought and provides opportunities to maintain the additional flow of water in the ecosystem.

Commission/Committee Action: Not Applicable.

Rationale for Recommendation: The State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) has a requirement to periodically update its regulations for how water is put to beneficial use in the Bay- Delta. As an alternative to potential changes to water rights being considered by the State Board, this region is developing a competing proposal. This “Voluntary Agreement” (VA) provides an alternative to the State Board’s regulatory process with a combination of habitat restoration, environmental outflows, a science program, and funding. While the disposition of State Board considerations and the full VA is not yet settled, the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA), Department of Water Resources (DWR) and RWA have entered into an agreement to provide $55 million for groundwater infrastructure projects as an early funding measure to support the VA. The City is one of the largest surface water users in the region and benefits from pathways that do not result in adverse water rights proceedings. Irrespective of the final decisions around the Bay-Delta needs, investment in groundwater infrastructure and the desire to exercise these facilities during periods of surface water scarcity has been a forecasted activity for the City for the last decade. The revenue being received would offset rate payers’ funds that would otherwise be considered for future projects.

File ID: 2024-00534 3/26/2024 Consent Item 4.

Beyond the City groundwater program, SSWD, and SCWA have groundwater facilities and physical connections with the City that can be leveraged to support a successful turn towards groundwater resources during drier periods and then a shift towards surface water during wetter periods to recharge the groundwater basin.

Ultimately, the proposed set of actions are designed to be protective of the City’s water entitlements, provide ecosystem benefits, and reinvest in the City’s groundwater infrastructure with external revenue.

Financial Considerations: Approval of the grant agreement with RWA will allow the City to receive $7,060,000 from RWA through its grant agreement with DWR with no matching City funds required.

Upon environmental clearance of the project, the City will develop groundwater well projects to deliver within the grant requirements. The acceptance of this revenue offsets future rate payer fund expenditures that would otherwise have been leveraged for improvements in groundwater infrastructure.

The proposed agreements with SSWD and SCWA provide for the exchange of water with the City at no cost to either party, unless there is a net positive delivery of surface water from the City for the purpose of maintaining healthy groundwater storage for all participants. Where there is a net positive delivery of surface water for either SSWD or SCWA, these agreements temporarily modify the pricing of surface water from existing wholesale agreements to recover the direct costs to produce an additional unit of water, plus 25% for overhead expenses. Current wholesale rates are prohibitively high and is a disincentive to the use of surface water to create a healthier store of groundwater resources.

There are no General Funds allocated or planned for this project.

Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not Applicable.

Background: The State Board is required to periodically update its regulations for how water is put to beneficial use in the Bay-Delta. VAs provide a collaborative alternative to the State Board’s regulatory process and provide for a combination of habitat restoration, environmental outflow, a science program, and funding. As part of the 2019 VA proposal for the American River region, 30 thousand acre-feet (TAF) of groundwater, coming from a combination of existing or new facilities, would be made available in up to 3 of 8 Dry or Critical years. The request from American River groundwater providers in the 2019 VA proposal included a request for a combined amount of $55 million for infrastructure to make this water available.

Late in 2022, the RWA (of which the City is a member) was approached by the CNRA and the DWR

File ID: 2024-00534 3/26/2024 Consent Item 4.
and asked if $55 million were made available now to American River groundwater providers, if groundwater infrastructure projects could be under contract and completed quickly, with a Funding Agreement allowing reimbursement of expenses incurred starting on June 1, 2023 through final payment plus three years, with work being completed by December 21, 2025 and no funds requested after March 31, 2026. RWA informed the State that there were many projects within the region that would fit the criteria. In response, RWA members prepared a list of potentially eligible projects.

State Funding Agreement with the Regional Water Authority The State has requested that, in exchange for the funding, the funding recipients would build needed infrastructure and make available 30 TAF of water in three dry and critical years over an eight-year period, after the State’s disposition on the VAs. Operationally, the Bureau of Reclamation would release this same quantity of water in the spring from Folsom Reservoir to the Lower American River, from March through May, and groundwater providers who receive state funding would forego diverting this water by shifting to groundwater supplies in years the water is called for (call years).

The water made available through this effort would be considered environmental outflow and would be allowed to continue to pass to the Delta. The Funding Agreement Between the State of California (Natural Resources Agency and Department of Water Resources) and Regional Water Authority - Voluntary Agreement Early Implementation for the American River (“Funding Agreement”) also specifies that if there are fewer than three call years during the eight-year period, that the State may call upon the funding recipients to provide groundwater in one dry call year in the three years following.

The Funding Agreement does not assign specific flow obligations to specific funding recipients.

Instead, it recognizes that the groundwater being provided is a regional contribution and is a shared obligation.

RWA member agencies, through an ad hoc committee, determined the proportional share of outflow commitments for a call year and funding for each agency.

Table 1: Flow and Funding Commitments Based on Regional Diversions Funding Recipient Flow Commitment
(AF)
State Funding
Provided (Million $)
Carmichael Water District 3,800 6.83
Citrus Heights Water District 1,963 3.53
City of Roseville 4,460 8.01
City of Sacramento 3,932 7.06
Fair Oaks Water District 1,374 2.47
Golden State Water Company 763 1.37
Orangevale Water Company 460 0.83
Sacramento Suburban Water
District
10,488 18.84
Sacramento County Water Agency 2,760 4.96
RWA Administration 1.10
Total 30,000 55.00

File ID: 2024-00534 3/26/2024 Consent Item 4.

Funding Recipient Flow Commitment
(AF)
State Funding
Provided (Million $)
Carmichael Water District 3,800 6.83
Citrus Heights Water District 1,963 3.53
City of Roseville 4,460 8.01
City of Sacramento 3,932 7.06
Fair Oaks Water District 1,374 2.47
Golden State Water Company 763 1.37
Orangevale Water Company 460 0.83
Sacramento Suburban Water
District
10,488 18.84
Sacramento County Water Agency 2,760 4.96
RWA Administration 1.10
Total 30,000 55.00
The Funding Agreement states, among other things, that funding recipients will provide quarterly reporting on project status and submit invoices to RWA. RWA will then compile and submit this information and will then receive reimbursement from the State. RWA will then distribute the reimbursement funds to the funding recipients. The funds received from the State are anticipated to satisfy the State’s obligations for $55 million from the 2019 VA proposal.

Project Agreement between RWA and Member Agencies
In addition to the Funding Agreement, the funding recipients will collectively participate in a Project Agreement with RWA as proposed in this proposed action. The Project Agreement has many similar terms as those in the Funding Agreement, and includes the flow commitments provided for in Table 1 and the amount of funding to be reimbursed to the funding recipient.

In exchange for preferentially utilizing 3,932 acre-feet of groundwater, the City will receive $7.06 million in grant funds. City staff will be responsible for coordination commitments such as technical team meetings, flow accounting, and annual collaboration to provide flow recommendations and reviews.

Project Agreements between City and both Sacramento Suburban Water District and Sacramento County Water District
SSWD and SCWA are also partners to the grant funding agreement and have the ability to preferentially utilize groundwater for their own customers or deliver groundwater to the City to further allow the region to meet the collective shift to 30 TAF of groundwater during call years. Their participation has reduced the direct needs of the City to generate additional groundwater when the region is called upon. Partnering agreements with each for the duration of RWA’s agreement with the State will approve delivery of groundwater to the City when requested, facilitate recharge of the basin, and modify the pricing of surface water returned to both SSWD and SCWA. Any water received by the City will incur zero charge from either SSWD or SCWA and will be returned to the respective agencies for zero charge as a drop for drop exchange. To ensure readiness for the shift to groundwater and to enhance groundwater conditions, delivery of surface water in non-call years is anticipated. Any additional water delivered by the City to improve basin conditions will be priced at the base incremental cost to produce water (e.g. power, chemicals, or other immediate cost to produce water) plus 25% for overhead, thereby ensuring City rate payers do not subsidize delivery costs.

File ID: 2024-00534 3/26/2024 Consent Item 4.

City Groundwater Assets and Local Groundwater Sustainability Plans The City’s groundwater wells support approximately 20% on average of the annual drinking water supply for the City’s drinking water system. Over the past decade, the wells have gone through a series of improvements, including rehabilitation and flush-to-waste systems, that have maintained the viability of the assets for meeting the City’s water groundwater supply needs, regional water transfers during the summer months and the voluntary agreement with the state. New regulations for water quality contaminants like PFAS (Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are anticipated to be implemented by the State. A number of wells currently have some level of contaminants and will require additional assessment, and possibly modification, to keep as many wells as possible as viable water supplies for the City. Projects, such as the ones listed to be delivered in the grant, will provide improvements to the City’s groundwater well program.

The 2017 Groundwater Master Plan (GMP) describes the role of groundwater in the City’s water supply portfolio and presents a plan for managing and expanding groundwater resource use in the context of long-term water supply security and implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 (SGMA). The GMP provides recommendations for changes to existing groundwater operations, new groundwater related infrastructure, and potential conjunctive use alternatives to allow the City to reliably meet its long-term water demands. Groundwater projects and programs were identified and prioritized. Included in the GMP is a program to replace the City’s existing wells that were found to be at the end or near the end of their useful life. Many of the current well locations are too small to accommodate same-site well replacement, and groundwater quality concerns impact or threaten the ability to utilize many of these wells. As such, new locations are required for most replacement wells.

The GMP evaluated maximum and minimum groundwater use scenarios based on future water demand projections and identified the number of replacement wells that would be needed under each scenario.

The City’s proposed program was included in the development of the regional Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSP) that were submitted to the State in 2022. In 2023 the State approved the relevant GSPs.

RESOLUTION NO. _________

Adopted by the Sacramento City Council

CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

AND ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR

THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO GROUNDWATER

WELL REPLACEMENT PROGRAM

BACKGROUND

On March 19, 2023, the City Council conducted a noticed public meeting (Sacramento City Code Section 17.812.030 (B)3(b) (publication) , and received and considered evidence concerning the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program and EIR (Project).

BASED ON THE FACTS SET FORTH IN THE BACKGROUND, THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council finds that the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program (EIR), which consists of the Draft EIR, and the Final EIR (Response to Comments and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), has been completed in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines , and the Sacramento Local Environmental Procedures.

Section 2. The City Council certifies that the EIR was prepa red, published, circulated, and reviewed in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines , and the Sacramento Local Environmental Procedures, and that it constitutes an adequate, accurate, objective, and complete Final E IR in full com pliance with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Sacramento Local Environmental Procedures.

Section 3. The City Council certifies that the EIR has been presented to the Council and that the City Council has reviewed the EIR and ha s considered the information contained in the EIR prior to acting on the Project, and that the EIR reflects the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis.

Section 4. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1) and in support of its approval of the Project, the City Council adopts the attached Findings of Fact in support of approval of the Project as set forth in the attached Exhibit A of this Resolution. No Statement of Overriding Considerations per Section 1509 3 of the CEQA Guidelines is

included in Exhibit A because the EIR concluded the Project would not result in any significant unavoidable impacts.

Section 5. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, and in support of its approval of the Project, the City Council adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to require all reasonably feasible mitigation measures be implemented by means of Project modifications and other measures, as set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in the attached Exhibit B of this Resolution.

Section 6. The City Council directs that, upon approval of the Project, the City’s Environmental Planning Services shall file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of Sacramento County and the State Office of Planning and Research, pursuant to the provisions of CEQA Section 21152.

Section 7. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(e), the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its decision are located in and may be obtained from, the Office of the City Clerk at 915 I Street, Sacramento, California. The City Clerk is the custodian of records for all matters before the City Council.

Table of Contents:

Exhibit A – CEQA Findings of Fact for the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program

Exhibit B – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program

Exhibit A

CEQA Findings of Fact
City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program

Description of the Project

The City of Sacramento Well Replacement Program involves the long-term (up to 15 years or potentially longer) replacement of up to 38 municipal groundwater wells that are at or near the end of their useful life (proposed Project). The program is an outgrowth of the City’s 2017 Groundwater Master Plan, a strategic guide for future planning that describes the role of groundwater in the City’s water supply portfolio and presents a plan for managing groundwater in the context of long-term water supply security and implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014. The Groundwater Master Plan identifies where, when, and how certain municipal production wells should be replaced, given current economic, regulatory and water quality constraints as well as variations in hydrologic and climate conditions affecting reliability of the City’s surface water supply.

Planning for replacement of wells was found to be necessary because many of the current well locations are too small to accommodate same-site well replacement, and groundwater quality concerns impact or threaten the ability to utilize many of the City’s existing wells. As such, new locations are required for most replacement wells.

Replacement wells are located within the City’s water service area, which overlies the North American and South American Subbasins of the Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin.

Of the 38 proposed replacement well sites, 20 sites are located within the North American Subbasin, and 18 sites are located within the South American Subbasin. This represents 11 new wells in the South American Subbasin total, compared to existing conditions in which there are six active and inactive wells.

The replacement well sites are proposed within residential, commercial, and industrial areas, schools, parks, and existing public facilities, such as existing City well sites, water storage facilities, and water treatment facilities. These well site locations were selected based on siting criteria in the Groundwater Master Plan and subject to change based on the results of exploratory drilling and site-specific design.

The proposed Project includes exploratory drilling, well drilling and equipping, and long-term operation and maintenance of the 38 replacement wells. Wells would consist of above-ground wellhead facilities, such as pumps and a chlorination/ fluoridation system, housed within a one story control building with perimeter security that may include concrete block wall and/or ornamental fencing, and landscaping, as appropriate, as well as below ground sanitary sewer, storm drain, electrical, communications, and

drinking water distribution system connections. Replacement wells would be constructed to produce approximately 1,250 gallons per minute of groundwater when in full operation. Wells in areas with groundwater quality concerns would require the construction and operation of necessary treatment systems. The Project also includes destruction of the 38 existing active and inactive City wells, which would take place after the replacement well is fully operational.

Findings Required Under CEQA

1. Procedural Findings

The City Council of the City of Sacramento finds as follows:

Based on the nature and scope of the Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2022030709, (herein after the Project), the City of Sacramento’s Environmental Planning Services determined, based on substantial evidence, that the Project may have a significant effect on the environment and prepared an environmental impact report (“EIR”) on the Project. The EIR was prepared, noticed, published, circulated, reviewed, and completed in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §21000 et seq. (“CEQA”), the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §15000 et seq.), and the City of Sacramento environmental guidelines, as follows:

a. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the Draft EIR was filed with the Office of Planning and Research and each responsible and trustee agency and was circulated for public comments from March 25, 2022, through April 25, 2022.

b. A Notice of Completion (NOC) and copies of the Draft EIR were distributed to the Office of Planning and Research on April 18, 2023, those public agencies that have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, or which exercise authority over resources that may be affected by the Project, and to other interested parties and agencies as required by law. The comments of such persons and agencies were sought.

c. An official 45-day public comment period for the Draft EIR was established by the Office of Planning and Research. The public comment period began on April 20, 2023, and ended on June 5, 2023.

d. A Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR was mailed to all interested groups, organizations, and individuals who had previously requested notice in writing on April 20, 2023. The NOA stated that the City of Sacramento had completed the Draft EIR and that the Draft EIR was available to review at the following two web pages:

 Utilities Department web page at:
http://www.cityofsacramento.org/Utilities/Water/Current-Projects/Groundwater- Well-Replacement

 Community Development Department, Environmental Impact Report webpage at:
https://www.cityofsacramento.org/Community-
Development/Planning/Environmental/Impact-Reports

The letter also indicated that the official 45-day public review period for the Draft EIR would end on June 5, 2023.

e. A public notice was placed in the Sacramento Bulletin on April 20, 2023, which stated that the Draft EIR was available for public review and comment.

f. A public notice was submitted to the office of the Sacramento County Clerk on April 20, 2023.

g. Following closure of the public comment period, all comments received on the Draft EIR during the comment period, the City’s written responses to the significant environmental points raised in those comments, and additional information added by the City were added to the Draft EIR to produce the Final EIR.

2. Record of Proceedings

The following information is incorporated by reference and made part of the record supporting these findings:

a. Draft and Final EIR for the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference;

b. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program;

c. All Notices of Preparation and other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the EIR for the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program;

d. The Sacramento City Code;

e. All testimony, documents, and other evidence contained in the City’s files that were submitted to and received by the City by or on behalf of landowners, private organizations, public agencies, and members of the public in connection with the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program;

f. Minutes and verbatim transcripts contained in the City’s files of all public meetings, and public hearings held by the City in connection with the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program Environmental Impact Report;

g. All testimony and documentary or other evidence contained in the City’s files that were submitted to the City at public meetings and public hearings held by the City in connection with the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program Environmental Impact Report;

3. Findings

Pursuant to Section 21080 of CEQA and Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines,

(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.

The possible findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.

(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

In support of its approval of the Project, the City Council makes the following findings for each of the significant or potentially significant environmental effects of the Project identified in the EIR pursuant Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines:

A. Findings Regarding Significant or Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to a Less Than Significant Level

The EIR for the City of Sacramento Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program identified the potential for the Project to cause significant environmental impacts in the

areas of Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils (Paleontological Resources); Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Transportation, and Tribal Cultural Resources. The EIR identified one or more feasible mitigation measures that would reduce the potential significant impact(s) to less than significant.

The Sacramento City Council hereby makes findings (a)(1), as stated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and as required by PRC Section 21081, with respect to the following effects.

Note that the Findings below do not attempt to describe the full analysis of each environmental impact contained in the Final EIR. Instead, the Findings provide a summary description of each impact, summarize the applicable mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR, and state findings on the significance of each impact after imposition of the mitigation measures. A full explanation of these environmental findings and conclusions can be found in the Final EIR.

AESTHETICS

Impact AES-1: In an urbanized area, conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

Mitigation Measure
AES-1: Design of Aboveground Structures

Findings
The Project incorporates design measures to reduce impacts to visual quality, however, some wells would be located in parks, and, depending on the facility design, the Project would have the potential to impact visual quality. This impact could conflict with the 2035 General Plan Goal ER 7.1 , which requires visual resource preservation to maintain and protect significant visual resources and aesthetics that define Sacramento. To avoid significantly impacting the visual quality of visually sensitive areas, such as parks, Mitigation Measure AES-1 (as specified in Exhibit B) would be implemented to ensure that the visual character of new facilities is consistent with the character of the surrounding area, including building height and color, architectural treatments, and landscaping. Thus, although the well sites may be visible to public and private viewers, they would be designed to match the architectural character of the surrounding communities and environments (i ncluding screening vegetation to soften views of the facilities as appropriate). Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES -1 would reduce visual impacts from Project facilities such that the Project would not conflict with the 2035 General Plan, applicable zoning, or other regulations governing scenic quality, and the impact would be less than significant.

Impact AES-2: Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Mitigation Measure
AES-2: Low Illumination Nighttime Construction Lighting

Findings
Because well-drilling activities would need to occur continuously and could require nighttime construction, there would be a need for construction lighting. Nighttime construction would affect views from adjacent residences, depending on their proximity to the well sites. Exposure of nearby residences to nighttime construction lighting would be a potentially significant impact of the Project. Mitigation Measure AES-2 (See Exhibit B) would be implemented to ensure that construction lighting would not result in adverse impacts associated with light and glare by limiting nighttime construction lighting to low illumination sources with warm light bulbs or screening that limits the effects of lighting beyond the construction area. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level because it would ensure that light is directed away from residences so that they would not be exposed to substantial light or glare from nighttime construction lighting.

AIR QUALITY

Impact AIR-1: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

Mitigation Measures
AIR-1: Basic Construction Fugitive Dust Emissions Control Practices AIR-2: Construction Diesel Exhaust Emission Control
AIR-3: Construction Equipment Inspection and Maintenance AIR-4: Phasing of Well Drilling

Findings
The EIR identifies applicable air quality plans for attainment of federal and state air quality standards and include: 1) Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan; 2) Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) Triennial Report and Air Quality Plan Revision to the Air Quality Attainment Plan; 3) PM10 Implementation/ Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County; 4) PM 2.5 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area and 5) 2004 Revision to the California State Implementation Plan for CO. SMAQMD’s framework for evaluating whether a project would conflict with implementation of the air quality plans, involves comparing an individual project’s estimated emissions to SMAQMD’s mass emissions thresholds, which are designed to achieve the state and federal ambient air standards.

The state and federal ambient air standards are set at levels that provide public health protection.

During construction, the Project would implement mitigation measures to reduce emissions of NOX, ROG, and PM to below the SMAQMD regional mass daily thresholds, which are designed to achieve state and federal ambient air quality standards, and thus, avoid conflicts with the air quality standards and applicable air quality plans. Mitigation Measure AIR-1, Mitigation Measure AIR-2 and Mitigation Measure AIR-3 require implementation of SMAQMD required Best Available Control Technologies (BACT)/Best Management Practices (BMPs) (see Exhibit B). Mitigation Measure AIR-1 controls fugitive dust emissions, including PM associated with fugitive dust. Mitigation Measure AIR-2 controls for diesel exhaust, a component of PM 2.5 exhaust. Mitigation Measure AIR-3 requires construction equipment to be kept in proper working condition, which would also control diesel exhaust. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-4 ensures Project well construction is conducted in phases (no more than three wells constructed at any one time) to limit potential NOX emissions to below SMAQMD thresholds. With incorporation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1, AIR-2, AIR-3, and AIR-4, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plans. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Impact AIR-2: Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

Mitigation Measures
AIR-1: Basic Construction Fugitive Dust Emissions Control Practices AIR-2: Construction Diesel Exhaust Emission Control
AIR-3: Construction Equipment Inspection and Maintenance AIR-4: Phasing of Well Drilling

Findings
Construction activities would result in emissions of criteria air pollutants (O3 precursors Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) and Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) Particulate Matter (PM) 10 and PM 25. These emissions would be primarily from the burning of fossil fuels to operate construction equipment, trucks for materials delivery and hauling, and vehicles for worker trips. Construction also leads to emissions of dust and particulate matter from earth moving activities and from materials and equipment transport on off-site roadways. The City would incorporate Mitigation Measures AIR-1, AIR-2, and AIR-3 (see Exhibit B), which would reduce emissions to below the SMAQMD thresholds.

The City would replace the 38 wells over a period of approximately 15 years (with a range of one to four wells in any given year), and construction would take approximately 9 to 12 months per well. Construction of a single well would not exceed SMAQMD thresholds of significance for NOx, ROG, PM 10 and PM 25, and therefore a significant

impact would not occur unless construction of multiple wells were to occur at the same time. Based on the air quality model, a maximum of three wells could be under construction at one time before the NOx emission threshold of 85 lbs/day would be exceeded and a potentially result in a significant considerable increase of criteria air pollutants. To reduce the potential for significant impact, Mitigation Measure AIR-4 would be required (see Exhibit B). This measure would reduce significant levels of NOX .

Thus, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1 through AIR-4, construction of the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard and impacts would be less than significant.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Impact BIO-1: Substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Mitigation Measures
BIO-1: Protocol-Level Special-Status Plant Surveys
BIO-2a: Initial Ground Disturbing Activities outside of Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Season
BIO-2b: Focused Swainson’s Hawk Surveys
BIO-3: Focused Burrowing Owl Surveys
BIO-4: Focused Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Surveys BIO-5a: Ground Disturbance and Work Activities During Dry Season BIO-5b: Focused Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Surveys
BIO-6: Nesting Bird Surveys

Findings
Three California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) special status plant species (valley brodiaea (Brodiaea rosea ssp. Vallicola), stinkbells (Fritillaria agrestis), and hoary navarretia (Navarretia eriocephala) were identified as having potential to occur on 11 of the well sites due to the presence of non-native grassland. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (see Exhibit B) would be implemented to reduce potential impacts to special-status plant populations. Surveys would be completed prior to construction to avoid observed populations or individual plant species that could be found within each well site, to the extent practical, and if avoidance is not possible habitat for species would be restored and protected. Thus, construction of the proposed Project would have less than a significant impact on special-status plants.

Six special-status wildlife species have potential to occur in the immediate vicinity of or in portions of the Study Area as follows:

 Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsonii), a CESA-listed raptor, regularly nests within the vicinity of the Project area and could use the proposed well sites as potential foraging habitat. No anticipated loss of habitat is anticipated as a result of the proposed Project; however, during construction some areas may be temporarily disturbed, and Swainson’s hawk may avoid the active construction areas at times.

No nesting trees for Swainson’s hawk would be removed for the proposed Project.

If Swainson’s hawk were to nest near a proposed well site, the construction activities could be sufficient to disturb the active nest to the extent that the active nest would be abandoned, which is considered “take” under CESA. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2a and BIO-2b (See Exhibit B) would limit potential impacts to Swainson’s hawk nests prior to the start of construction by timing construction activities to occur outside of the nesting season if feasible to completely avoid any impact and if not feasible then by conducting preconstruction surveys to identify active nests and developing an avoidance strategy with CDFW if nests are present within the Project work zone. By implementing measures to avoid Swainson’s hawk nests, the Project would not result in take and would not significantly impact Swainson’s hawk. Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on Swainson’s hawks with implementation of mitigation measures.  Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is a California Species of Special Concern and nests in ground burrow-like structures. Burrows that could be used as potential habitat for burrowing owl are present at several proposed well sites. To limit the potential impact to burrowing owls, Mitigation Measure BIO-3 (see Exhibit B) requires a pre-construction survey and avoidance measures to avoid the direct removal or destruction of active nests or occupied habitat. Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on burrowing owls.  Valley elderberry longhorn beetle (VELB) (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus), federally-threatened species, lives in elderberry (Sambucus) bushes. The proposed Project may potentially impact VELB by removing its host plant. Mitigation Measure BIO-4 (see Exhibit B) requires a survey for VELB prior to construction and requires 20- foot buffer separating construction activities from the plants if VELB are found, thus limiting the significance of potential impacts. Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on VELBs.  Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) is a broad-ranging federally-listed vernal pool crustacean that lives in wetlands, vernal pools, and man-made features such as ditches. Seasonal wetlands were found on well sites 2, 12, 13, 28, 29, 30, and 37, thus, if vernal pool fairy shrimp were present in those areas a potentially significant impact could occur. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-5a and BIO-5b (see Exhibit B) is required to limit impacts to vernal pool fairy shrimp by avoiding construction in aquatic features; if construction must occur within an aquatic feature, construction would be limited to the dry season or surveys conducted to document the absence of Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp prior to the start of construction.

Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on vernal pool fairy shrimp.
 White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) and common nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act could use trees within and surrounding the proposed well sites as potential nesting sites and habitat.

Construction activities could result in the direct removal or destruction of active nests and their habitats through noise and the removal of vegetation. To limit impacts, Mitigation Measure BIO-6 (see Exhibit B) requires a pre-construction survey for active bird nests prior to the start of construction and requires a work exclusion zone or coordination with CDFW for any identified active bird nests until nesting is complete.

Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on white-tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, and common nesting birds.

Existing well sites are already disturbed areas with existing facilities and regular operation; therefore, deconstruction activities would be less likely to impact special-status plant or wildlife species. Mitigation Measure BIO-6 would require surveys for nesting birds and avoidance of construction adjacent to nesting birds or coordination with CDFW to identify appropriate avoidance and minimization measures until nesting is complete.

Therefore, construction related impacts to special status species are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-6.

Impact BIO-3: Substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

Mitigation Measures
BIO-7a: Wetland Delineation
BIO-7B: Avoidance of Wetlands
BIO-5a: Ground Disturbance and Work Activities During Dry Season

Findings
Direct impacts to potential state or federally protected wetlands are avoided due to the preferential siting of Project activities in areas that do not contain these features. Potential for indirect impacts exist at well sites 2, 24, 28, and 30, as areas of proposed activities and staging are located within 100-feet of a drainage canal or ditch and no levee is present between the feature and the activity areas. Furthermore, one seasonal wetland located at well site 2 would be potentially impacted by well site activities, and due to its location adjacent to, and directly connected to a potential jurisdictional drainage canal, this feature would likely be a jurisdictional Waters of the US regulated by the USACE. To reduce potential impacts, Mitigation Measures BIO-7a, BIO-7b, and BIO-5a (see Exhibit B) would be implemented, requiring construction to occur during dry season, and specifying the needs for a wetland delineation, and the avoidance of any wetlands within the proposed Project sites. Thus, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on state or federally protected wetlands.

Impact BIO-5: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.

Mitigation Measures
BIO-7a: Wetland Delineation
BIO-7B: Avoidance of Wetlands
BIO-5a: Ground Disturbance and Work Activities During Dry Season

Findings
Several potential wetlands are present within the well site areas as discussed under Impact BIO-2 and BIO-3 above. Potential direct and indirect impacts to wetlands may occur and are subject to the 2035 General Plan Policy ER. 2.1.6, which requires on- or off- site preservation of equal amounts of wetlands impacted. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-5a, BIO-7a and BIO-7b (see Exhibit B) would limit and reduce potential impacts to wetlands. Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on the preservation of wetlands.

CULTURAL RESOURCES

Impact CUL-1: Substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.

Mitigation Measures
CUL-1: Conduct Cultural Resources Sensitivity and Awareness Training Program and Tribal Coordination Prior to Ground-Disturbing Activities CUL-2: In the Event that Cultural Resources Are Discovered During Construction, Implement Avoidance and Minimization Measures to Avoid Significant Impacts and Procedures to Evaluate Resources
Findings
Eleven cultural resources have been recorded within a 250-foot search radius of 11 of the 38 well locations (27 wells had no resources within the search radius). One resource is a combined historic/prehistoric cultural landscape with the remaining 10 identified as historic resources. A review of the 11 resources identified on these sites suggests that Project construction activities within the APE would have no effect or no adverse effect on any qualities that make the resources eligible for the two registers. The potential for intact, significant archaeological deposits that could qualify as historical resources to be present at the Project sites is considered low. However, it is possible that previously unidentified buried prehistoric or historic resources could be encountered during construction of Project facilities, such as pipelines or other below ground features, which could create a significant impact if resources were damaged or destroyed. Mitigation Measure CUL-1 (see Exhibit B) requires a resource sensitivity and awareness training and tribal coordination, and CUL-2 requires assessment, avoidance, and minimization requirements that would be implemented to ensure that resources are protected (full mitigation measure text described in Exhibit B).

These measures would ensure that construction crews are trained to recognize and respect cultural resources, and that measures to evaluate, avoid, or minimize effects on significant resources would be implemented if any resources are discovered. Thus, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on a historical resource.

Impact CUL-2: Substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.

Mitigation Measures
CUL-1: Conduct Cultural Resources Sensitivity and Awareness Training Program and Tribal Coordination Prior to Ground-Disturbing Activities CUL-2: In the Event that Cultural Resources Are Discovered During Construction, Implement Avoidance and Minimization Measures to Avoid Significant Impacts and Procedures to Evaluate Resources
Findings
No prehistoric archaeological sites are present at any of the 38 well locations. Thus, potential impacts to intact, unknown, subsurface archaeological resources present at the Project sites is considered unlikely. Despite the low potential for occurrence, impacts to a resource, should it be encountered, could be significant so Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would be required to be implemented prior to construction to ensure construction staff are trained, and Mitigation Measure CUL-2 (see Exhibit B) would be required to be implemented to ensure proper handling and procedures are in place if previously undiscovered resources are encountered during construction. Thus, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on a unique archaeological resource.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Impact GEO-5: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geographic feature

Mitigation Measures
GEO-1: Unanticipated Fossil Discovery

Findings
Project construction has the potential to damage important paleontological resources.

Potential for adverse impacts is primarily limited to excavations or grading in previously undisturbed deposits, particularly of undisturbed Pleistocene-age Riverbank formation.

Excavation is anticipated for construction of underground pipelines for water and sewer connections and grading would be associated with site preparation requiring areas of cut and fill. Without mitigation, the Project has the potential for a significant impact to occur when excavating or grading in areas of undisturbed Pleistocene-age Riverbank formation.

Mitigation Measure GEO-1 (see Exhibit B) would be implemented to ensure compliance

with City Policies and if any fossils are encountered the find would be preserved and documented, preventing the direct or indirect destruction of a unique paleontological resource or unique geographic feature. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 reduces the potential for significant impact by educating construction personnel and providing guidance for proper handling and assessment of paleontological resources. If a resource is evaluated and determined to be of unique paleontological character Mitigation Measure GEO-1 provides additional steps for monitoring, documentation, assessment, and/or avoidance to ensure the resources or site is not destroyed. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, the Project’s construction impacts to paleontological resources would be less than significant.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Impact GHG-1: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

Mitigation Measures
GHG-1: Phasing of Well Drilling
GHG-2: Fleet Electrification
GHG-3: SolarShares Participation
GHG-4: Purchase of Carbon Offsets for Methane GHG Emissions

Findings
The Project would result in temporary construction-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from fuel combustion for mobile heavy-duty diesel and gasoline-powered equipment, portable auxiliary equipment, material delivery trucks, and worker commuter trips. It is assumed that the City would replace 38 wells over a period of 15 years. Construction activity per well would be spread out over the course of 9 to 12 months and each well would result in GHG emissions of approximately 583 MTCO2e/year. Thus, in a single year, up to two wells could be constructed without exceeding the SMAQMD’s 1,100 MTCO2e emissions threshold for 2030. However, condensing construction of all 38 wells into a shorter time frame has the potential to result in significant emissions. Therefore, prior to mitigation, construction impacts would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 requires phasing of well drilling to ensure that emissions during construction do not exceed thresholds (see Exhibit B). Thus, with implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, impacts associated with emissions of GHG from project construction would be less than significant.

During long-term operation of the Project, GHG emissions would occur from vehicle maintenance trips, landscape maintenance, venting of well methane emissions, and indirect emissions associated with the Project’s demand for electricity, which would be partially offset in dry years. It was conservatively assumed that all 38 wells would require additional treatment facilities for manganese and other potential contaminants, which would require electricity, resulting in indirect GHG emissions. Eventually, all 38 wells would be operating simultaneously. In a dry/critically dry year (maximum case pumping), GHG emissions would

total 5,478 MTCO2e. If unmitigated, Project operations would exceed the SMAQMD’s 1,100 MTCO2e/year emissions threshold for 2030 (which incorporates the applicable SMAQMD Tier 1 BMPs: no natural gas usage and facilities ready for usage of electric vehicles), resulting in a potentially significant impact. The mass emissions screening threshold and GHG BMPs address 2030 statewide GHG reduction goals. However, longer term, SMAQMD recommends that projects demonstrate they would not impede the 2045 statewide carbon neutrality goal.

The proposed Project would adhere to all applicable GHG reduction measures, including the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Advanced Clean Cars, and In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled fleets regulations, and applicable measures adopted under the 2016 City of Sacramento Internal Operations CAP and Department of Utilities Sustainability Policy and Energy Management Policy, including fleet efficiency pledges and providing staff with training to implement energy savings. O&M activities may continue to be conducted in standard, gasoline- consuming vehicles. The City of Sacramento has set a goal of achieving zero carbon by 2045 and has policies in its General Plan and CAP to reduce the City fleet’s fuel GHG emissions by 75 percent by 2020 compared to the baseline year of 2005 and have City operations be substantially free of fossil fuels. Without mitigation to reduce GHG emissions from O&M activities, the proposed Project would result in potentially significant direct GHG emissions from mobile (vehicle) sources.

The City would purchase electricity for the Project from Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), which is committed to lowering its GHG emissions. SMUD’s carbon intensity factor for its electricity supply has generally declined over the past decade. As SMUD transitions to electricity sources that are less carbon intensive (goal of net zero carbon by 2030), the indirect GHG emissions from the proposed Project would also decline. However, when the City operates the replacement wells and additional treatment facilities at the wells to offset limited surface water supplies, the Project would potentially result in significant levels of indirect GHG emissions if SMUD’s carbon intensity factors do not decline.

Release of methane from operation of the wells would result in net additional GHG emissions each year, beginning when replacement wells that generate new methane emissions become operational, around 2040. Methane emissions would reduce over time as the wells are used. If methane levels rise abruptly in the future, the City would consider ways to capture or reduce emissions. The State has set a goal of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 and the City of Sacramento has set a goal of achieving zero carbon by 2045. Without mitigation to capture or reduce methane emissions, impacts would result in a significant amount of GHG emissions (approximately 2,100 MTCO2e per year from two wells) that would result in the proposed Project not contributing its fair share towards achieving the State and City long-term targets.

Mitigation Measure GHG-1 requires the City to prepare an updated assessment of GHG emissions from the Project’s construction phasing schedule, once it has been determined, and to ensure construction-related GHG emissions do not exceed established significance

thresholds. Mitigation Measure GHG-2 requires the City to prepare an updated assessment of GHG emissions from the Project’s O&M vehicle fleet, prior to the start of operations, and to ensure mobile source GHG emissions are substantially zero by the City’s target date, which is currently 2045 (see Exhibit B). Mitigation Measure GHG-3 (Exhibit B) requires the City to prepare an updated assessment of GHG emissions from the Project’s electricity use, prior to the start of operations, and to ensure net electricity-related GHG emissions are lower than the 2030 threshold by 2030 and substantially zero by the State and City’s zero carbon target date, which is currently 2045. Mitigation Measure GHG-4 requires the City to assess and then offset annual methane emissions with offsets from an approved registry (see Exhibit B). With incorporation of mitigation measure, impacts of GHG emissions from construction and operation of the Project would be less than significant.

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Impact HAZ-2: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Mitigation Measures
HAZ-1: Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Prevention and Control Plan

Findings
Construction activities would require the use of construction machinery, equipment, and other chemicals that could create a hazard through leaks or if hazardous materials are not properly handled. However, the City would implement Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, which would require preparation and implementation of a Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan (see Exhibit B), in addition to implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to limit the risk of hazardous material exposure through material use and accidents. In addition, the City would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations pertaining to the avoidance and, if necessary, mitigation of the accidental release of hazardous materials during construction. Thus, with implementation of HAZ-1, along with compliance with applicable federal, state and local regulations, the potential for the project to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant.

Impact H AZ-3: Emit Hazardous Emissions Or Handle Hazardous Or Acutely Hazardous Materials, Substances, Or Waste Within One-Quarter Mile Of An Existing Or Proposed School.

Mitigation Measures
HAZ-1: Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Prevention and Control Plan HAZ-2: Well Construction and Chemical Deliveries at Schools

Findings
There are existing schools located within one-quarter mile of the proposed well sites.

During construction of replacement wells and demolition of active wells, there would be emissions of toxic air pollutants, such as diesel particulate matter, within one-quarter mile of schools. Emissions would be below SMAQMD localized significance thresholds. As explained in response Impact HAZ-2 above, there is a risk of accidental release of hazardous materials during Project construction, including within one-quarter mile of schools. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would reduce impacts of an accidental release of hazardous materials. In addition, applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations would limit the risk of hazardous emissions or hazardous materials exposure at the proposed Project sites. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 would reduce impacts of well construction at proposed well locations located at schools by requiring coordination with schools to schedule construction activity when school is not in session (see Exhibit B). Thus, with implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ 2, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact related to hazardous emissions, materials, substances or waste within one quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

During operation, each proposed well would require storage of chemicals and transportation of hazardous chemicals to the facility once a month. Chlorine gas, which may be used for disinfection, is considered an extremely hazardous substance. As explained under Impact HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 above, each proposed well site would be compliant with local, regional, state, and federal regulations; therefore, there would be less than significant impacts related to hazardous material release associated with long-term Project operation.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 would also reduce impacts of delivery of chemicals at proposed well locations located at schools by coordinating with schools to schedule chemical deliveries before or after school hours. Thus, operation of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact related to hazardous emissions, materials, substances or waste within one quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

Impact HAZ-4: Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

Mitigation Measures
HAZ-3: Environmental Site Assessment and Remediation or Well Relocation

Findings
The proposed Project could potentially create a significant hazard to the public or environment if wells were located in a groundwater plume as this would contaminate the City’s water supply. Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 would require a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment be completed as a part of pre-construction and surveying activities to confirm the proposed wells sites and associated laterals are not on or near contaminated sites/plumes (see Exhibit B). This would include well sites on former agricultural land that may have used organochlorinated pesticides, and well sites near heavily traveled roads which could have aerially deposited lead in soils from tailpipe emissions from automobiles using leaded gasoline. Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 would evaluate the hazard conditions prior to the start of construction and allow for re-siting in the event that hazardous conditions are found, which would reduce the risk to less than significant. Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 would also allow for remediation to occur at the site in the event that contamination of soil or groundwater is identified at a proposed well site, with remediation oversight by the appropriate regulatory agency (i.e., Sacramento County, Regional Water Quality Control Board and/or Department of Toxic Substances Control); however, remediation is outside the scope of the Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact.

Impact HAZ-5: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Mitigation Measures
TRA-1: Traffic Control Plan

Findings
During construction, temporary closures of roads could occur for installation of pipelines, which could conflict with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, as identified in the City’s Emergency Operations Plan and Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, creating a potentially significant impact. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1 (see Exhibit B), coordination with local emergency responders would be required regarding lane closures and the potential for impairing or physically interfering with emergency response or evacuation would be reduced to less than significant.

NOISE

Impact NOI-1: Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies

Mitigation Measures
NOI-1: Noise Barrier
NOI-2: Construction Noise Reduction Measures

Findings
The proposed Project would have the potential to cause a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels during construction activities occurring near sensitive receptors (residences) and taking place during evening and nighttime hours. The wells would be constructed in multiple phases. Most construction phases (site preparation, mobilization/demobilization, well testing, well equipping, landscaping, paving, and well demolition) would occur during daytime hours having a relatively minor effect on already elevated ambient noise levels. However, the test and production well drilling would likely require continuous, 24-hour operation of the drill rig and support vehicles in order to prevent borehole collapse, thus requiring nighttime work. Drilling at an individual well site would last four weeks for test wells and five weeks for production wells, resulting in maximum noise level of 84 dBA and would exceed the City of Sacramento daytime (75 dBA) and nighttime standard (70 dBA) for residential properties. If not appropriately mitigated, this exceedance would constitute a significant impact.

As a conservative estimate, a potentially significant impact would occur within a distance of 300 feet of proposed Project sites and Mitigation Measure NOI-1 and Mitigation Measure NOI-2 would be required to reduce Project noise generation to below City noise standards.

Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Noise Barriers (see Exhibit B) was designed to mitigate the exceedance of City noise standards by requiring noise barriers be constructed to enclose nighttime activities and attenuate sound levels by at least 15 dBA. A reduction of 15 dBA would reduce noise levels from 84.4 LMAX to 69.4 LMAX, which would meet the standards of the City Noise Control Ordinance, thus reducing the potential significant impact to a less than significant level.

Daytime construction activities and truck trips would expose receptors at the well sites and along transportation routes to elevated noise levels. Due to the proximity of construction activities to residences and other noise-sensitive land uses, impacts from construction noise would be potentially disruptive to daily activities and potentially exceed City exterior noise standards. The City Municipal Code exempts temporary construction noise occurring during the hours permitted under the Code, as long as construction equipment engines are equipped with suitable exhaust and intake silencers that are in good working order. If construction equipment engines were not equipped with these features, impacts from construction noise could create a significant impact. Therefore, Mitigation Measure NOI-2 (see Exhibit B), which requires Construction Noise Reduction Measures such as maintaining equipment exhausts and intakes with silencers, would be required to reduce this potential impact to less than significant levels.

Construction of the Project could result in exceedances of the City’s exterior noise standards. These potential exceedances would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and NOI-2. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

TRANSPORTATION

Impact TRA-3: Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).

Mitigation Measures
TRA-1: Traffic Control Plan

Findings
The Project does not include any changes in roadway design but would entail short periods of construction within roadways to construct pipeline connections between the proposed wells and existing water and sewer lines. Pipeline construction would require lane closure that would temporarily change the configuration of the existing right-of- way along public roads; however, once installation is complete the road would be restored to pre-construction conditions. Lane closures could present a hazard to traffic.

To ensure safety of motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians during any construction that necessitates work in public roadways, the City would implement Mitigation Measure TRA-1, which requires preparation and implementation of a Traffic Control Plan (see Exhibit B). The Traffic Control Plan would limit potential hazards from construction activities by identifying construction staging locations and establishing alternative routes in the event of a road closure, and traffic controls in the event of a lane closure. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact with regard to increased hazards due to geometric design features.

TRA-4: Result in Inadequate Emergency Access

Mitigation Measure
TRA-1: Traffic Control Plan

Findings
During construction, temporary closures of roads could occur for installation of pipelines, which could interfere with emergency service access and emergency access, creating a potentially significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA -1 (see Exhibit B) would require the City to coordinate with local emergency responders in the event of a lane closure and ensure that access is maintained for emergency response traffic.

Mitigation Measu re TRA -1 would reduce the potential for impairing or physically interfering with emergency response, evacuation, and emergency access. Operational activities would generally occur on Project sites and not in public rights -of-way with the potential to rest rict emergency access. If maintenance work that restricts emergency access is required within roadways it would be considered a construction activity and would follow Mitigation Measure TRA -1, which requires coordination with emergency management services. Thus, construction and operation of the proposed Project would

have a less than significant impact with regard to inadequate emergency access.

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

Impact TCR-1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in PRC, Section 21074, as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

 Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC, Section 5020.1(k), or

 A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in PRC, Section 5024.1(c). In applying the criteria set forth in PRC, Section 5024.1(c), the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Mitigation Measures
TCR-1: Conduct Tribal Cultural Resources Sensitivity and Awareness Training Program and Tribal Coordination Prior to Ground-Disturbing Activities TCR-2: In the Event that Tribal Cultural Resources Are Discovered During Construction, Implement Avoidance and Minimization Measures to Avoid Significant Impacts and Procedures to Evaluate Resources TCR-3: Implement Procedures in the Event of the Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains
Findings
Construction of the proposed Project would include ground disturbing activities that would be limited to the relatively small Project footprint. Given the proposed Project activities and the tribal cultural resources identified by the United Auburn Indian Community, the potential to encounter human remains is considered high for well sites 5 and 24 and low for all remaining well sites. Implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR- 1 through TCR-3 would ensure training, tribal coordination, procedures, and handling would take place in the event of any tribal cultural resource discovery, including human remains (see Exhibit B). Thus, construction of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources.

B. Findings Regarding Significant and Unavoidable Effects.

The City Council has determined that there are no significant and unavoidable effects resulting from the proposed Project. Mitigation measures proposed in the EIR and MMRP will mitigate adverse environmental impacts to less-than-significant levels.

C. Findings Regarding Alternatives.

The EIR for Groundwater Master Plan Well Replacement Program identified no unavoidable significant environmental effects. Therefore, the City Council does not need to make a finding with respect to alternatives to the Project considered in the EIR, evaluating whether these alternatives could feasibly avoid or substantially lessen the unavoidable significant effects while achieving most of the project’s goals and objectives.

D. Findings Regarding Adoption of Mitigation Measures.

The City Council finds that the mitigation measures identified in the EIR are solely within the jurisdiction and control of the City. There are no mitigation measures within the jurisdiction and control of other agencies. Therefore, the City will be in control of and will implement mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project.

RESOLUTION NO. _________

Adopted by the Sacramento City Council

FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO AND THE REGIONAL

WATER AUTHORITY FOR GROUNDWATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS AND

APPROVAL OF IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENTS WITH THE SACRAMENTO

SUBURBAN WATER DISTRICT AND THE SACRAMENTO COUNTY GROUNDWATER AGENCY

BACKGROUND

A. The State of California Department of Water Resources (DWR) has made available grant funding for projects that will provide new and enhanced infrastructure to improve the American River region’s groundwater production capabilities and operational flexibility of water systems.

B. On behalf of several water agencies in the Sacramento region, the Regional Water Authority (RWA) applied for and was awarded $55,000,000 million in grant funding from DWR. The City of Sacramento (City), along with nine other water agencies, were identified to have key projects to deliver as part of the grant.

C. Under a project agreement with RWA, the City will receive up to $7,060,000 of the grant funding to apply towards construction of a new groundwater well and for capacity enhancements of existing wells and in exchange will preferentially shift towards groundwater production during drier hydrologic years.

D. The City will also execute agreements with Sacramento Suburban Water District (SSWD) and Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) for receiving groundwater and recharging the groundwater basin, which will promote program success and groundwater basin sustainability.

E. If approved, adjust the revenue and expenditure budgets in the Well Rehab Program (Z14110100, 6205) in a not-to-exceed amount of $7,060,000 from the Regional Water Authority. T

BASED ON THE FACTS SET FORTH IN THE BACKGROUND, THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Manager or the City Manager’s designee, the Director of the Department of Utilities, is authorized to:

A. Sign the funding agreement with RWA , prepare the necessary data, and execute all reporting, payment requests, and documentation of compliance applicable to the grant and completion of the project.

B. Adjust the revenue and expenditure budgets in the Groundwater Well Rehabilitation Program (Z14110100, Fund 6205) for a not-to-exceed amount of $7,060,000.

C. Execute agreements with Sacramento Suburban Water District (SSWD) and Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) for receiving groundwater and recharging the groundwater basin.

D. Enter into minor amendments of the agreements with SSWD and SCWA subject to approval by the City Attorney or her designee.

Table of Contents:

Exhibit A – Grant Agreement between the Regional Water Authority and the State of California Department of Water Resources

Exhibit B - Grant Agreement between Regional Water Authority and City of Sacramento

Exhibit C - Agreement between Sacramento Suburban Water District and City of Sacramento

Exhibit D - Agreement with between Sacramento County Water Agency and City of Sacramento

1 REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY
AMERICAN RIVER TERMS for ECOSYSTEM SUPPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE

ASSISTANCE NEEDS (ARTESIAN)

PROJECT AGREEMENT
This Agreement dated July 25, 2023 is entered into by Regional Water Agency, a California joint powers authority (“RWA”) and the RWA Members and Contracting Entities listed in Exhibit A (collectively “Participants”) who execute this Agreement and agree as follows:

1. Recitals
This Agreement is made with reference to the following background recitals:

1.1. The purpose of this Agreement is to create the American River Terms for Ecosystem Support and Infrastructure Assistance Needs (“ARTESIAN”) Project to govern administration of state funds provided to RWA on behalf of the Participants for early implementation of the American River region’s 2019 Voluntary Agreement proposal.

1.2. RWA is a joint powers authority, formed to serve and represent regional water supply interests and to assist its members in protecting and enhancing the reliability, availability, affordability, and quality of water resources.

1.3. The joint powers agreement pursuant to which RWA was formed and operates (“RWA JPA”), authorizes RWA to enter into a “Project or Program Agreement,” which is defined as an agreement between RWA and two or more of its Members or Contracting Entities to provide for carrying out a project or program that is within the authorized purposes of RWA, and sharing in the cost and benefits by the parties to the Project or Program Agreement.

1.4. Article 21 of the RWA JPA states: “The Regional Authority’s projects are intended to facilitate and coordinate the development, design, construction, rehabilitation, acquisition, or financing of water-related facilities (including sharing in the cost of federal, State or local projects) on behalf of Members and/or Contracting Entities.

The Regional Authority may undertake the development, design, construction, rehabilitation, acquisition or funding of all or any portion of such projects on behalf of Members and/or Contracting Entities in the manner and to the extent authorized by such Members and/or Contracting Entities as provided in this Agreement, but shall not accomplish these functions, nor acquire or own water-related facilities in its own name.”

1.5. Article 22 of the RWA JPA states: “Prior to undertaking a project or program, the Members and/or Contracting Entities who elect to participate in a project or program shall enter into a Project or Program Agreement. Thereafter, all assets, benefits and obligations attributable to the project shall be assets, benefits and obligations of those

2 Members and/or Contracting Entities that have entered into the Project or Program Agreement. Any debts, liabilities, obligations or indebtedness incurred by the Regional Authority in regard to a particular project or program, including startup costs advanced by the Regional Authority, shall be obligations of the participating Members and/or Contracting Entities, and shall not be the debts, liabilities, obligations and indebtedness of those Members and/or Contracting Entities who have not executed the Project or Program Agreement.”

1.6. As further described in this Agreement, RWA and the Participants desire to carry out a project and share in the costs and benefits of a project as provided for in Articles 21 and 22 of the RWA JPA.

1.7. As part of the (unratified and unexecuted) 2019 Voluntary Agreement proposal (“2019 VA Proposal”) for the American River region, American River groundwater providers, including the Participants, proposed to make available 30 thousand acre-feet (“TAF”) of water available through groundwater replenishment in up to 3 of 8 Dry (D) or Critical (C) years1 through a combination of existing or new facilities and the Sacramento Regional Water Bank. This water will be released from upstream storage through Folsom Reservoir by Reclamation or will occur downstream of Folsom Reservoir in the Lower American River as a result of reduced surface water diversions. Groundwater replenishment for flows made to the Lower American River will be completed no later than March 1 of the following calendar year. The 2019 VA Proposal included a request from American River groundwater providers for a combined amount of $55 million for infrastructure to make this water available.

1.8. On June 14, 2023, the RWA Board of Directors approved a form of funding agreement (“Funding Agreement”) between RWA and the California Natural Resources Agency (“CNRA”) and the Department of Water Resources (“DWR”) effective June 1, 2023 under which CNRA and DWR will fund up to $55 million in groundwater infrastructure projects through RWA as funding recipient in exchange for RWA obtaining commitments from the Participants to make available the 30 TAF according to the 2019 VA Proposal.

1.9. On June 30, 2023, the RWA Executive Committee approved the substantively final form of the Funding Agreement and authorized the RWA Executive Director to sign.

1.10. Upon the effective date of the Funding Agreement, the parties desire for this Agreement to govern their respective rights and obligations with respect to administration of state funding under the Funding Agreement.

1 Based on the Sacramento Valley Index as defined under the Revised State Water Resources Control Board’s Decision 1641.

3 2. Definitions
The following defined words and terms shall apply in this Agreement:

2.1. Call Year: A year type identified in this Agreement and the State Agreement in which outflow through groundwater replenishment will be provided and “called for” after assessing conditions through the Operations Review Group. This would occur in three out of eight D or C year types during the Agreement term, beginning in 2025.

If the total of C and D years from and including 2025 and 2032 is fewer than three, then the State may implement another call year in a D year from and including 2033 and 2036.

Specific details of this flow contribution are defined in Exhibit 1A and Exhibit 2, Appendix A.

2.2. Annual Flow Accounting Report (“AFAR”): A document to be produced annually to record the volume of outflow released by Reclamation at Folsom Dam, the flow volumes paid back from the Participants to Reclamation, and report a detailed accounting of which Participants made water available, the total volumes provided, mechanisms used to replenish water, deficits in contributions, over-production of contributions, any mitigation to make up for any Participant’s inability to meet its replenishment obligations, and a discussion of any challenges or lessons learned.

2.3. Master Flow Ledger (“MFL”): A document that will be updated regularly throughout the term of the Agreement to keep an accounting of outflow releases and replenishment. It will serve as a ledger that will summarize the total amount of water provided by each Participant and keep a running tally of total groundwater replenished by the region, provided as an estimate of the amount of water paid back during the current reporting period and the total amount paid back to-date. The MFL will carry forward from year-to-year through the Agreement term. When developing the MFL, Reclamation and the Participants will look at existing resources and sources of information to pull into its development.

2.4. Operations Review Group (“ORG”): The ORG will consist of operations and/or technical staff from Reclamation and each Participant who makes groundwater available for outflow. The ORG will serve as a collective entity to meet, review, confer, and report on water accounting for American River outflow.

2.5. Replenishment: The amount of water made available by Participants to backfill the amount released by Reclamation out of Folsom Reservoir.

2.6. Replenishment Schedule: An informed estimate that provides an explanation and forecast of how and when Participants are anticipating to pay back water releases that Reclamation has made available from Folsom Reservoir.

2.7. Readiness Review: A convening of Participants and other American River water providers with obligations to make outflow available meeting and discussing

4 each agency’s overall readiness to perform and meet their agreed-upon obligations for the upcoming year. The Readiness Review will include the preparation of the Replenishment Schedule.

2.8. Any other term not expressly defined in this Agreement shall have the meaning provided in the Funding Agreement.

3. Term. This Agreement will remain in effect for as long as any obligations under this Agreement remain outstanding.

4. Project Description

4.1. The project that RWA and the Participants create through this Agreement involves using state funds granted to RWA for Participants to design and construct a suite of proposed groundwater infrastructure projects which will make additional water supply capacity available for agencies that provide groundwater. These projects are identified in Exhibit 1 of this Project Agreement. This also includes making outflow available through 30 thousand acre-feet (“TAF”) of groundwater substitution in up to three D or C years, and related reporting and coordination requirements, a schedule for which is provided as Exhibit 4, all as further described in this Agreement.

4.2. Eligible Participants in this Project are those RWA Members or Contracting Entities who have a project listed on Exhibit 1.

4.3. This Agreement will become effective upon the execution of this Agreement by RWA and at least one of the named Participants on Exhibit 1.

5. RWA Responsibilities

5.1. RWA shall administer the Funding Agreement and this Agreement for the benefit of the Participants, including:
• Coordinating and administering all aspects of this Agreement; • Coordinating invoicing, reimbursement, and communication to DWR for projects funded under the Funding Agreement; and,
• Preparing and submitting reports required by the Funding Agreement.

5.2. RWA agrees to subgrant a portion of those funds granted to RWA under the Funding Agreement to each Participant for reimbursement of Eligible Project Costs, as that term is defined in the Funding Agreement, up to the project amounts identified in Exhibit 1A and Exhibit 1B. RWA shall not be responsible for payment of any amounts in excess of the project amounts identified in Exhibit 1A and 1B without written modification of this Agreement. Participants shall invoice RWA for eligible project-related costs, in arrears.

5 5.3. Each Participant shall reimburse RWA for any erroneous or disallowed disbursement of state funds. Reimbursement shall occur within 30 days of written demand by RWA.

5.4. RWA shall not be obligated to disburse any remaining unpaid portion of state funds unless and until sufficient funds identified for allocation to a Participant are released by the state to RWA for expenditure under the Funding Agreement. RWA shall expeditiously seek the release of state funds held by the state for projects funded by this Agreement.

6. Participant Responsibilities

6.1. Participants, acting as Local Project Sponsors under the Funding Agreement, shall have sole responsibility for design, construction, management, oversight, compliance, operations, maintenance and legal compliance for the projects funded by this Agreement. As a condition of receiving state funds under this Agreement, Participants agree to complete their funded projects and assume all project costs not reimbursed with state funds through this Agreement.

6.2. Except for the RWA responsibilities in section 5, the Participants shall also assume and perform all of RWA’s obligations under the Funding Agreement with respect to their projects funded under this Agreement. The responsibilities assumed by each Participant are those provided in the Funding Agreement attached Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 2, Appendix A of this Agreement.

6.3. Participants shall meet all reporting requirements in a timely manner, as well as providing an obligated portion of groundwater contributions to outflow as specified in Exhibit 1A. This includes participating in a regional total of 30 TAF available from groundwater replenishment in up to three D or C years out of eight years of the Agreement, and for an additional four years if three D or C years do not occur in the initial eight-year period, all in compliance with the specific terms of the Flow Contribution set forth in the Funding Agreement.

6.4. Participants agree not to take any action that will cause RWA or any other Participant to breach the Funding Agreement. RWA will have no obligation to prepare and submit invoices or take any other actions on behalf of, or liability for failing to take any action in regard to obtaining reimbursement for, any Participant that breaches one or more of its responsibilities provided in this Agreement hereof and that fails to cure such breach promptly after receipt of notice from RWA of the breach and requirements for curing the breach.

6.5. To ensure an external evaluation of water made available in support of the VA nets the 30 TAF of groundwater, participants agree that commensurate reductions of groundwater extractions at a level equal to or greater than water

6 commitments, or other beneficial actions such as direct groundwater recharge, during non- Dry or Critical years is vital.

6.6. Flow Contribution.

6.6.1. Each Participant agrees that, as part of a regional arrangement with Reclamation, it will make available the agreed-upon quantity of outflow in up to three out of eight D or C years, provided in Exhibit 1A.

6.6.2. Assuming Reclamation provides outflow from Folsom Dam as early as March 1 of a call year, Participants will begin to replenish releases made by Reclamation as early as March 1 by reducing surface water diversions and providing groundwater substitution. The timing to achieve this complete replenishment from groundwater will rely on the rate of demand for water within the region, but shall not go beyond March 1 of the following calendar year.

6.6.3. Each Participant represents and warrants that it has and will maintain for the term of this Agreement sufficient water rights or rights to contract water to meet its outflow obligation under this Agreement. This representation and warranty shall be made effective as of the date the Participant first incurs costs for a funded project that may be reimbursable under this Agreement. Each Participant further represents and warrants that it will take actions to the satisfaction of RWA and the other Participants to ensure that the agreed quantity of water is made available for outflow from Folsom Reservoir.

7. Project Coordination and Prioritization

7.1. Project Committee. The Participants may form a Project Committee consisting of one representative (and one or more alternates) designated by each Participant. The Project Committee may meet as necessary from time to time to administer and implement this Agreement on behalf of the Participants. The Project Committee may also use other forms of communication if appropriate, such as e-mail, in order to make decisions or reach intended outcomes.

7.1.1. The Project Committee may meet when needed to assess project status and review any related information. No later than December 31, 2023, if a project is determined by the Project Committee to be unforeseeably infeasible or impracticable, then the Project Committee may meet and confer with the project-specific Participant(s) with the affected project and provide recommendations to RWA on an alternative project that will still achieve the intended objectives of the Funding Agreement.

The Project Committee may consider Priority 2 Projects (Exhibit 1B and Exhibit 2, Appendix A – Exhibit A) and any other relevant information provided by the Participant(s).)

7 7.2. Collaboration Schedule. In order for there to be coordination among the Participants and ensure efficient, effective, and collaborative engagement of the implementation of outflow replenishment associated with this Agreement, a schedule has been developed as guidance for making recommendations and ultimate decisions. This schedule is provided as Exhibit 4.

7.3. Commitment to Participate in a Readiness Review

7.3.1. In early February of each year during the term of the Agreement, a group comprised of one member from each of the Participants and other American River water providers, as necessary, with obligations to make outflow available will convene and discuss each agency’s overall readiness to perform and meet their agreed- upon obligations (Readiness Review). From this conversation, parties will understand their commitments and will prepare to meet their current year’s obligations.

7.3.2. As part of the Readiness Review, Participants will provide a Replenishment Schedule by March 15 of each call year. The Replenishment Schedule will provide an explanation and forecast of how and when Participants are anticipating to pay back water releases that Reclamation has made from Folsom Reservoir. The Replenishment Schedule will also include whether replenishment would pass through Folsom Reservoir. If a Participant is making replenishment available at or above Folsom Reservoir, then Reclamation would physically see this water showing up in the lake and it would reflect in the overall accounting of Folsom storage. Passing through Folsom Reservoir is important as Reclamation will need to account for replenishment of flows downstream. Since downstream pay back of released outflow to the Lower American River is anticipated to come from groundwater providers via a reduction in surface diversions and increased groundwater production (i.e., groundwater replenishment), Reclamation will need to use the Participant’s predicted and real-time estimates of replenishment to keep an accounting. A designated RWA representative will compile feedback from each Participant to create the Replenishment Schedule and to submit it to Reclamation.

7.4. Commitment to Participate in the Operations Review Group (ORG)

7.4.1. A determination on whether releases will be made on an annual basis will be recommended by the ORG. By mid-February of each year of the Agreement term, the ORG will walk through various potential scenarios for the forthcoming water year, which includes the review of current information and forecasts, and discussion of potential risks that could cause changes to planned flow releases or replenishment.

7.4.2. If it appears to be a C or D year type, the ORG will discuss whether there should be environmental outflow, provided through groundwater substitution, in that year. Depending on current conditions, whether calls of a certain year type were made in prior years, whether future potential call years may have more favorable

8 conditions for flow releases, uncertainty related to initial Central Valley Project allocations, or other varying factors, the ORG may make a recommendation to Participants to make outflow releases that year or to hold off on providing outflow until a potential future year.

7.4.3. If the ORG determines that it will be a year that outflow will be provided (a “call year”), then it will also recommend a flow release schedule and assess biological conditions in the Lower American River to determine optimum timing and volumes of releases.

7.5. Flow Accounting

7.5.1. Starting as early as the week of March 1 or when Reclamation begins releasing outflow from Folsom Reservoir, the Master Flow Ledger (MFL) will begin keeping track of releases at Folsom Reservoir and of the following replenishment by Participants. The MFL will provide a running tally of outflow and replenishment, provided as an estimate of the amount of water paid back to Folsom storage during the current reporting period and the total amount paid back to-date within the year. The ledger will be placed in a readily and publicly accessible and version-controlled location. The ledger will be updated weekly throughout the year until committed replenishment volumes are fulfilled. Each Participant will provide weekly updates to the MFL during the course of their replenishment period.

7.5.2. In January following a call year, the ORG shall convene to review the accounting from Reclamation and the Participants and “true up” real-time flow numbers with actual volumes accounted for after outflows are fully replenished in Folsom Reservoir and through MFL accounting. These verified numbers will then be placed into an annual report summarizing findings, the Annual Flow Accounting Report (AFAR).

7.5.3. By February 1 of the year following a call year, the ORG will prepare and complete the AFAR. The AFAR will be made available after water is substantially replenished from all intended sources. This document will verify the flow volumes paid back and report a detailed accounting of which Participants made water available, the total volumes provided, mechanisms used to replenish water, deficits in contributions, over-production of contributions, any mitigation to make up for any Participant’s inability to meet its replenishment obligations, and a discussion of any challenges or lessons learned.

7.5.4. The MFL will be ongoing across all years of the term of the Agreement and is intended to carry forward into future years. This will allow Participants to have the ability to compare relative contributions across years, enable potential payback between Participants, and create multi-annual reports and assessments, as needed.

7.6. Role of RWA. The Executive Director of RWA will: (a) ensure that the interests of Members and Contracting Entities of RWA who do not participate in this Project are not adversely affected in performing this Agreement, (b) provide information to

9 the Participants on the status of implementation of the Project, (c) assist the Project Committee in carrying out its activities under this Agreement, and (d) administer implementation of the grant on behalf of RWA and the Participants consistent with the determinations of the Project Committee and the provisions of this Agreement.

7.7. RWA Project Management Expenses. RWA has developed an estimate of administrative expenses in coordinating aspects of the Funding Agreement, which is provided in Exhibit 3. RWA will submit invoices for reimbursement to DWR along with other project expenses from Participants. RWA will submit a quarterly statement to the Participants for the Project Management Expenses, which shall include a brief description of the work performed, the dates of work, number of hours worked, and staff positions in accordance with Exhibit 3. If RWA does not expend the estimated amount, the remaining funds will be utilized for Participant’s projects.

8. Breach; Termination; Withdrawal

8.1. Termination by Default. Any Participant’s failure to perform any obligation under this Agreement is a material breach of the Agreement. In the event of a material breach, the non-defaulting Participants or RWA may provide the defaulting Party with written notice of the breach and specify a reasonable opportunity to cure. If the defaulting Participant fails to cure a material breach after such notice and a reasonable opportunity to cure, the non-defaulting Participants and RWA may terminate a Participant’s participation in this Agreement upon 30 days written notice to the defaulting Participant identifying the reason for termination.

8.2. Termination by Mutual Agreement. This Agreement also may be terminated by mutual written agreement of the parties.

8.3. Termination for Lack of Funding. The primary source of funding for this Project is the State of California under the Funding Agreement. If state funding is reduced, deleted, or delayed by the budget process or other budget control actions, RWA shall provide written notice to the Participants either suspending or canceling the Agreement.

8.4. Withdrawal of a Participant. A Participant may withdraw from this Agreement at any time, effective upon sixty days’ notice to RWA and the other Participants.

8.5. Effect of Termination or Withdrawal.

8.5.1. A Participant whose participation in this Agreement has been terminated by default, withdrawal, or any other reason, and who have already submitted invoices and accepted state funds from RWA under the Funding Agreement, shall provide immediate reimbursement of all funds received.

10 8.5.2. A Participant whose participation in this Agreement has been terminated by withdrawal and who has not received any state funds from RWA under the Funding Agreement may withdraw without cost and shall be relieved of all future liability under this Agreement upon the effective date of the Participant’s withdrawal.

9. Project Liability and Indemnity

9.1. In accordance with the provisions of Articles 21 and 22 of the RWA JPA, any debts, liabilities, obligations or indebtedness incurred by RWA in regard to the Project will be the obligations of the Participants, and will not be the debts, liabilities, obligations and indebtedness of those RWA Members and/or Contracting Entities who have not executed this Agreement.

9.2. Participants acknowledge that RWA entered into the Funding Agreement at their request and for their benefit. Each Participant agrees to indemnify, defend, protect, and hold harmless RWA and its officers, employees, agents, Members, and Contracting Entities from and against any claims, liability, losses, damages and expenses (including attorney, expert witness, and litigation costs), including, but not limited to, any matter tendered to RWA for indemnification or defense under the Funding Agreement that arise out of, pertain to, or are related to this Agreement or the Funding Agreement. This indemnity provision will not apply to any claim or matter arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of RWA. Obligations under this indemnification provision are joint and several and shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

9.3. Each Participant agrees to indemnify, defend, protect, and hold harmless RWA and its officers, employees, agents, Members, and Contracting Entities, and each other Participant and their officers, employees, and agents, from and against any claims, liability, losses, damages and expenses (including attorney, expert witness, and litigation costs) that arise out of, pertain to, or are related to the facilities funded through this Agreement or the flow contribution obligations provided for in this Agreement. This indemnity provision will not apply to any claim or matter arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of RWA.

10. General Provisions

10.1. Recitals. The Recitals in Section 1 are incorporated into and shall constitute a part of this Settlement Agreement.

10.2. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended from time to time with the approval of all of the Participants and RWA.

10.3. Authority. Each person signing this Agreement on behalf of a party represents and warrants that he or she has the authority and capacity to make the promises set forth in this Agreement.

11 10.4. Compliance with Laws. Each party shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, statutes, and regulations.

10.5. Cooperation. Each party to this Agreement agrees to do all things that may be necessary, including, without limitation, the preparation and execution of documents which may be required hereunder, in order to implement and effectuate this Agreement.

10.6. Notice. Any notice to be given under this Agreement may be made by:
(a) depositing in any United States Post Office, postage prepaid, and shall be deemed received at the expiration of 72 hours after its deposit; (b) transmission by electronic mail; or (c) personal delivery.

10.7. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed by the parties in counterpart, each of which when executed and delivered shall be an original and all of which together will constitute one and the same document.

10.8. Governing Law. Except as otherwise required by law, the Agreement shall be interpreted, governed by, and construed under the laws of the State of California.

[Signatures on Following Pages]

12 [Participant Signature Blocks on Separate Pages – each Participant to provide their standard signature blocks]

13 EXHIBIT 1A

PROJECT PARTICIPANT FUNDING AWARD AND FLOW CONTRIBUTION

Funding Recipient Flow Commitment2
(AF)
State Funding
Provided
(Million $)
Carmichael Water District 3,800 6.83
Citrus Heights Water District 1,963 3.53
City of Roseville 4,460 8.01
City of Sacramento 3,932 7.06
Fair Oaks Water District 1,374 2.47
Golden State Water Company 763 1.37
Orangevale Water Company 460 0.83
Sacramento Suburban Water
District
10,488 18.84
Sacramento County Water Agency 2,760 4.96
RWA Administration 1.10
Total 30,000 55.00

2 The total commitment provided here assumes streamflow depletion factor is included.

14 EXHIBIT 1B

PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED
Projects here are divided into two categories: Priority 1 Projects and Priority 2 Projects.

Priority 1 Projects are projects that as the date of execution of the Funding Agreement that Participants intend to complete and for which they plan to seek reimbursement through the Funding Agreement. Priority 2 Projects are projects that are provided for in the Funding Agreement in the event that one or more Priority 1 Projects become unforeseeably infeasible or impracticable. RWA and Participants will work together as identified in ARTESIAN article 7.1.1 to identify another acceptable project. In the event a Priority 1 Project is determined to be infeasible or impracticable, RWA and the Participant will recommend an alternative Priority 2 project to DWR, and all entities shall mutually agree on a Priority 2 Project to replace the Priority 1 Project.

Priority 1 Projects

Agency Project Name
City of Roseville ASR Well - Mistywood
ASR Well - Campus Oaks
Sacramento County Water Agency Elk Grove Automall Well
Poppy Ridge Storage Tank
Sacramento Suburban Water District
Well 84 Antelope/Don Julio (ASR-equipped)
Wells 81, 82, and 83 Antelope North/Poker
Carmichael Water District Construct two ASR wells (Ladera and Winding Way)
City of Sacramento Groundwater Wells - Capacity Enhancements Well 168
Golden State Water Company
Upgrade existing connection between GSWC with
SCWA in the Cordova System (Mercantile and
Foyer)
Citrus Heights Water District ASR Well Equipping
Fair Oaks Water District Northridge Replacement Well
Orange Vale Water Company Well 4 or Well 5

15 Priority 2 Projects
Agency Project Name
City of Roseville ASR Well - Pleasant Grove
ASR Well - Marlin Drive
Sacramento Suburban Water District Well N35 Antelope North (Granular activated carbon treatment for PCE)
Carmichael Water District
Replace Garfield-San Juan-Lincoln transmission
lines between two wells (includes intertie with
CHWD)
Backup power at existing well sites
Intertie and pump station with SSWD
City of Sacramento
Florin Booster Pump Station
Well 170
Well 171
Well 172
Groundwater Treatment at Wells (133,134,164,
166)
Water Quality Sampling
GW Power Reliability Project
Fair Oaks Water District
Fair Oaks Water District Regional Distribution
Facility
Carmichael Water District Interconnection
Pipeline & Booster Facility
Phoenix Park Well Project
Orange Vale Water Company Well No. 4 or 5
Well No.3 Storage Tank Booster Pump Station

16 EXHIBIT 2

PARTICIPANT/LOCAL PROJECT SPONSOR OBLIGATIONS UNDER CNRA AND

DWR VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT EARLY INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING
Each Participant listed in Exhibit 1A and 1B, acting as a Local Project Sponsor, agrees that it will fully and timely perform all Local Project Sponsor obligations. Under Article 4 of the Funding Agreement, each Local Project Sponsor is to assume RWA’s obligations for the purposes of individual project management, oversight, compliance, and operations and maintenance, and to act on behalf of RWA in the fulfillment of RWA’s responsibilities under the Funding Agreement. For each Participant and its project or projects, these Funding Agreement obligations include, but are not limited to:
• Flow Contribution (Paragraph 1 and Exhibit A);

• Project CEQA compliance (Paragraph 5.C);

• Continuing Eligibility (Paragraph 12);

• DWR’s Facilitating Improvements to Systemwide Habitat Program Guidelines Funding Requirements (Paragraph 12.F);

• Operation and Maintenance (Paragraph 14);

• Standard Conditions (Exhibit D); and,

• State Audit Document Requirements and Funding Match Guidelines for Funding Recipients (Exhibit H).

To the extent any Funding Agreement obligation assumed by a Participant requires coordination, communication, or submission of information to DWR, Participant shall coordinate its activities with RWA.

The Funding Agreement is attached as Appendix A to this Exhibit 2 and made a part hereof. The attached current draft agreement will be replaced as necessary with any amended drafts and, when executed, with the final document. RWA will provide each Participant with a copy of the operative Funding Agreement and any amendments to it.

Any new or amended terms and conditions in subsequent versions of the Funding Agreement will govern over the similar terms and conditions stated in this Exhibit 2 Appendix A. Each Participant will include all applicable provisions in this Exhibit 2, Appendix A as contract terms, conditions or specifications in any consulting, construction or other contract let to a contractor or subcontractor to carry out any portion of a project funded under the Grant Agreement.

17 EXHIBIT 2, APPENDIX A

FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
(DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES) AND REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY

VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT EARLY IMPLEMENTATION FOR THE

AMERICAN RIVER

18 Project Management Tasks Staff Hrs Rate Total Assumptions Hrs Rate Total Assumptions Hrs Rate Total Assumptions Finalize Grant Agreement with DWR Mgr of Strategic Services 48 160.48 7,703$ 168.50 -$ 176.93 -$ (includes update of scope, schedule, budget) Finance Manager 24 118.96 2,855$ 124.91 -$ 131.15 -$ Senior Project Manager 0 120.68 -$ 126.71 -$ 133.05 -$ Project Research Asst. 8 72.88 583$ 76.52 -$ 80.35 -$ Grant Agreement Support to Grant Recipients Mgr of Strategic Services 120 160.48 19,258$ 10 hr/month 120 168.50 20,220$ 10 hr/month 96 176.93 16,985$ 8 hr/month (includes modification requests) Finance Manager 240 118.96 28,550$ 20 hr/month 240 124.91 29,978$ 20 hr/month 120 131.15 15,738$ 10 hr/month Senior Project Manager 60 120.68 7,241$ 5 hr/month 60 126.71 7,603$ 5 hr/month 60 133.05 7,983$ 5 hr/month Project Research Asst. 24 72.88 1,749$ 2 hr/month 24 76.52 1,837$ 2 hr/month 24 80.35 1,928$ 2 hr/month Conduct and Document Grant Recipient Meetings Mgr of Strategic Services 8 160.48 1,284$ 2 hr/mtg 8 168.50 1,348$ 2 hr/mtg 8 176.93 1,415$ 2 hr/mtg (up to 4 meetings) Finance Manager 96 118.96 11,420$ 8 hr/mtg 96 124.91 11,991$ 8 hr/mtg 96 131.15 12,591$ 8 hr/mtg Senior Project Manager 16 120.68 1,931$ 4 hr/mtg 16 126.71 2,027$ 4 hr/mtg 16 133.05 2,129$ 4 hr/mtg Project Research Asst. 16 72.88 1,166$ 4 hr/mtg 16 76.52 1,224$ 4 hr/mtg 16 80.35 1,286$ 4 hr/mtg Compile and Submit Requirements for Disbursement for Projects Mgr of Strategic Services 4 160.48 642$ 4 168.50 674$ 4 176.93 708$ (includes Performance Monitoring Plan) Finance Manager 198 118.96 23,554$ 6 hr/project 198 124.91 24,732$ 6 hr/project 198 131.15 25,968$ 6 hr/project Senior Project Manager 99 120.68 11,947$ 3 hr/project 99 126.71 12,545$ 3 hr/project 99 133.05 13,172$ 3 hr/project Project Research Asst. 33 72.88 2,405$ 1 hr/project 33 76.52 2,525$ 1 hr/project 33 80.35 2,652$ 1 hr/project Prepare Invoices for Grant Reimbursement to DWR Mgr of Strategic Services 4 160.48 642$ 1 hr/invoice 4 168.50 674$ 1 hr/invoice 4 176.93 708$ 1 hr/invoice (up to 20 total) (4 per year) Finance Manager 48 118.96 5,710$ 12 hr/invoice 96 124.91 11,991$ 12 hr/invoice 96 131.15 12,591$ 12 hr/invoice Senior Project Manager 120.68 -$ 120.68 -$ 120.68 -$ Project Research Asst. 72.88 -$ 65.20 -$ 65.20 -$ Prepare Quarter Reports to DWR (up to 14) Mgr of Strategic Services 16 160.48 2,568$ 4 hr/report 16 168.50 2,696$ 4 hr/report 16 176.93 2,831$ 4 hr/report Finance Manager 96 118.96 11,420$ 24 hr/report 96 124.91 11,991$ 24 hr/report 96 131.15 12,591$ 24 hr/report Senior Project Manager 8 120.68 965$ 2 hr/report 8 120.68 965$ 2 hr/report 8 120.68 965$ 2 hr/report Project Research Asst. 72.88 -$ 100 65.20 6,520$ 100 65.20 6,520$ Prepare Project Completion Reports Mgr of Strategic Services 160.48 -$ 1 hr/project 168.50 -$ 1 hr/project 33 176.93 5,839$ 1 hr/project (33 projects) Finance Manager 118.96 -$ 4 hr/project 124.91 -$ 4 hr/project 132 131.15 17,312$ 4 hr/project Senior Project Manager 120.68 -$ 1 hr/project 126.71 -$ 1 hr/project 33 133.05 4,391$ 1 hr/project Project Research Asst. 72.88 -$ 76.52 -$ 40 80.35 3,214$ Prepare Grant Completion Report Mgr of Strategic Services 160.48 -$ 168.50 -$ 40 176.93 7,077$ Finance Manager 118.96 -$ 124.91 -$ 240 131.15 31,477$ Senior Project Manager 120.68 -$ 126.71 -$ 16 133.05 2,129$ Project Research Asst. 72.88 -$ 76.52 -$ 8 80.35 643$ Coordination Meetings with DWR (up to 6 meetings) Mgr of Strategic Services 12 166.58 1,999$ 2 hr.mtg 12 174.91 2,099$ 2 hr.mtg 12 183.65 2,204$ 2 hr.mtg Finance Manager 24 4 hr.mtg 24 4 hr.mtg 24 4 hr.mtg
Senior Project Manager 12 120.68 1,448$ 2 hr.mtg 12 126.71 1,521$ 2 hr.mtg 12 133.05 1,597$ 2 hr.mtg Project Research Asst. 72.88 -$ 76.52 -$ 80.35 -$ Legal Support - Agreement Review and Amendments 10,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ Consultant Support for Grant Administration Consultant 100,000$ (annual estimate) 130,000$ (annual estimate) 150,000$ (annual estimate) Total Costs
Total RWA Project Management 1214 257,041$ 1282 290,162$ 1680 369,642$ 916,845$ Contingency 20% 183,369$
Total 1,100,214$
FY 2023/2024 FY 2024/2025 FY 2025/2026
EXHIBIT 3
RWA COST ESTIMATE – PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
Project administration by RWA shall not exceed $1,100,000 of the Funding Agreement award, which is approximately 2% of the total funded amount. The table below outlines the estimate of administrative costs.

19 EXHIBIT 4
{00312718.1} 1
DRAFT

AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO
AND

SACRAMENTO SUBURBAN WATER DISTRICT
AMERICAN RIVER TERMS for ECOSYSTEM SUPPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE

ASSISTANCE NEEDS (ARTESIAN)
This Agreement in support of the AMERICAN RIVER TERMS for ECOSYSTEM SUPPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE ASSISTANCE NEEDS (“ARTESIAN Agreement”) is made effective this February 27, 2024, between the Sacramento Suburban Water District, a public agency formed under the County Water District Law, Government Code sections 30000 et seq . (“SSWD”), and the City of Sacramento, a charter city (“City”). For purposes of this Agreement the SSWD and the City also will each be called a “Party” and collectively the “Parties.” Recitals
A. City owns and operates a public water system for the provision of retail treated water service to its residents, including facilities on both the lower American River for diverting and treating surface water known as the E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant (“Fairbairn WTP”) and on the Sacramento River, (“Sacramento WTP”). City diverts untreated surface water from the Sacramento and Lower American River into the respective Water Treatment Plants pursuant to water rights permits 11358 through 11361 issued by the California State Water Resources Control Board. City’s permitted appropriative water rights are supplemented by a water rights settlement contract (the “City Settlement Contract”) between City and the United States Bureau of Reclamation (“Reclamation”) dated June 28, 1957.

B. On January 20, 2004, City and SSWD entered into a Wholesale Water Supply Agreement (“2004 Wholesale Agreement”), which provides SSWD with a firm treated water supply of up to 20 million gallons per day subject to restrictions based on certain hydrologic conditions set forth in the Water Forum Agreement to which City and SSWD are signatories.

C. SSWD is operating a conjunctive use program, which has permitted SSWD to bank amounts of groundwater sufficient to induce stable-to-increasing groundwater levels in the aquifer it utilizes as a source of supply for its customers. Since 2007, SSWD has taken treated surface water from City under the 2004 Wholesale Agreement to increase its existing conjunctive use groundwater banking efforts.

D. As part of its conjunctive use program and for the purposes of obtaining and using City treated surface water, SSWD constructed the Enterprise Water Storage and Pumping Plant (“Enterprise Plant”). SSWD also participated in City’s construction of the Howe Avenue Pipeline Project that conveys treated surface water from the Sacramento River WTP and the Fairbairn WTP to the Enterprise Plant for distribution into SSWD’s South Service {00312718.1} 2
Area. The above-described facilities include an intertie and metering station between SSWD’s and City’s water systems that permits potable water supplies to be conveyed in either direction between the two agencies.

E. In July 2023, the Regional Water Authority (“RWA”) and California Department of Water Resources entered into an agreement (“Funding Agreement”) to receive $55 million dollars in exchange for the American River region shifting to 30,000 acre-feet (“30 TAF”) of groundwater production in three dry and critical years over an eight-year period. The Funding Agreement does not assign specific flow obligations to specific funding recipients.

Instead, it recognizes that the groundwater being provided is a regional contribution and is a shared obligation. Operationally, the Bureau of Reclamation will release the American River region’s volume of requested quantity of water in the spring from Folsom Reservoir to the Lower American River, from March through May, and groundwater providers who receive state funding would forego diverting this water by shifting to groundwater supplies in years the water is called for (Call Years). The Funding Agreement with the State also specifies that if there are fewer than three call years during the eight-year period, that the State may call upon the funding recipients to provide groundwater in one dry call year in the three years following.

F. RWA member agencies, through an ad hoc committee, determined the proportional share of outflow commitments for a call year and funding for each agency. In July 2023 RWA approved the execution of the AMERICAN RIVER TERMS for ECOSYSTEM SUPPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE ASSISTANCE NEEDS (ARTESIAN). The City and SSWD have been identified for the receipt of funding and responsibility to shift to groundwater in the ARTESIAN agreement.

G. In order to provide water supplies for the above purpose, City will forgo the use of a portion of its surface water supplies available under City’s Water Right Permits 11358-11361, which City would otherwise divert, treat, and provide to SSWD and City water customers.

To make this surface water available, SSWD is willing to pump banked groundwater for its own internal use as well as deliver it through the Enterprise intertie for distribution to City customers in lieu of delivering City treated surface water from Sacramento WTP and Fairbairn WTP.

H. In non-call years, the Parties recognize that maintaining sustainable groundwater conditions is vital for local water supply reliability and meeting expectations embedded within local Groundwater Sustainability Plans and will seek opportunities to recharge the groundwater basin by shifting to surface water supplies.

Agreement
Based on the foregoing Recitals, the Parties agree as follows:
{00312718.1} 3

1. Making Environmental Water Available Using SSWD Groundwater. City and SSWD shall make water available to the ecosystem in alignment with the ARTESIAN agreement during a call year by one or both of the following two methods: (1) SSWD shall reduce its purchase and use of treated surface water otherwise available for delivery from City under the 2004 Wholesale Agreement during the agreement period and make up for this reduction with a corresponding increase in the amount of groundwater used by SSWD during the term of this Agreement; and (2) SSWD shall pump and deliver groundwater supplies to the City that are either historically used or banked by SSWD under its conjunctive use program and accounted for in annual reports filed with the California State Water Resources Control Board (“SWRCB”) and through the Sacramento Groundwater Authority’s (“SGA”) Groundwater Accounting Framework. The groundwater will be delivered to City through the Enterprise intertie permit City to forego use of surface water that it would otherwise treat and deliver to its customers under Permits 11358-11360. By using one or both methods of making surface water available, City and SSWD will make available to the environment such increment of surface water (hereafter referred to as the “Environmental Water”) that is not diverted from the American River by City for treatment and delivery to SSWD and City customers during the term of the ARTESIAN agreement as a result of a corresponding increased pumping of groundwater by SSWD. The maximum amount of Environmental Water to be made by SSWD and City shall be 30,000 acre-feet in any Call Year. The Environmental Water shall be made available consistent with the timing set forth in the ARTESIAN Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement affects City’s or SSWD’s authority to make Environmental Water available or to conduct a separate water transfer using surface water made available by substituting groundwater pumped from City’s wells to serve City customer demand.

2. Consideration for City Reliance on SSWD’s Pumping of Banked Groundwater in Lieu of Surface Water.

A. City will not pay SSWD for the groundwater pumped to make Environmental Water available during a Call Year. For purposes of this Agreement only, the Parties agree that the value of each acre-foot of groundwater provided by SSWD to enable City to make the Environmental Water available is equivalent to the value of each acre-foot of treated surface water that City would make available to SSWD under the 2004 Wholesale Agreement. As a result of the Parties’ sources of supply having an equivalent value, City will deliver an equal amount of treated surface water to SSWD to reimburse SSWD’s costs of supplying the pumped groundwater when surface water is available to SSWD in the future under the 2004 Wholesale Agreement.

B. To demonstrate a benefit to the groundwater basin in addition to the benefits to the basin provided by SSWD’s existing conjunctive use program operations, and to maintain readiness for a Call Year, the City will also continue delivery of additional water to SSWD under the terms of the 2004 Wholesale Agreement. Recognizing the reciprocal nature of both agencies guaranteeing access to capital infrastructure and staffing support for {00312718.1} 4
generation of water, which was not contemplated in 2004, this agreement will supersede pricing language in the 2004 Wholesale Agreement (Section 9.A.1). For the term of this Agreement, the unit rate pricing for additional increments of water will be based on City’s variable cost to produce an acre-foot of water at the time of return delivery + 25% of the variable cost and a share of the City’s water rights expense. Monthly Service charges as described in the Wholesale Agreement shall remain in place except for periods of time the City owes SSWD a balance of water. As an example, an acre-foot of water in FY23 would be valued at $172 per acre-foot . Exhibit 1 of this agreement provides an example of the City’s current rate calculation. Both Parties acknowledge that the City maintains the discretion to modify the variable rate calculation exhibit as deemed necessary.

C. If the modified pricing approach identified in 2.B is found by the City to be inadequate for recovery of costs due to unforeseen or other circumstances, both Parties agree to meet and confer to ensure no one party is unlawfully subsidizing another.

D. If RWA terminates the ARTESIAN Agreement in accordance with its terms, City shall be obligated to return an equal amount of surface water to SSWD for all received, but unbilled groundwater delivered at the time of termination of the Artesian Agreement.

3. Term of Agreement. This Agreement is intended to apply only to City’s provision of Environmental Water and SSWD’s pumping of groundwater to make that supply available during the entire period of the ARTESIAN Agreement. The funding agreement between RWA and the State of California, as well as the ARTESIAN Agreements both identify an eight- year term with provisions for a three-year extension if insufficient Call Years occur in the first eight-year period. The term of this agreement will be 4 years with the option to extend it until the end of the ARTESIAN term. Any extension of this Agreement will be by written amendment under authorities granted to the City Manager or designee and the SSWD General Manager. This Agreement will automatically terminate upon satisfaction of the terms of the ARTESIAN agreement or any earlier termination, and City’s return of any water owed to SSWD.

4. Cooperation; Approvals. City and SSWD will cooperate as necessary with RWA, the State, and USBR to implement City’s provision of Environmental Water subject to the following conditions:

A. SSWD and City will be jointly responsible for all costs of obtaining any governmental approval(s) and compliance with applicable laws, including but not limited to meeting the terms of the ARTESIAN agreement.

B. Each Party is responsible for maintaining all permits and approvals necessary to maintain its own operations and infrastructure and compliance with CEQA for purposes of this Agreement.
{00312718.1} 5
C. Except as otherwise provided in Section 2, each Party will bear its own costs for staff time, engineering and technical expenses, attorneys’ fees, and other expenses related to performing their respective duties under this Agreement.

5. Water Rights.

A. The only rights granted to the Parties as a result of this Agreement are those expressly set forth in this Agreement. City’s reduced diversions of surface water pursuant to this Agreement will not confer any appropriative, public trust or other right to water on SSWD or any other person or entity.

B. Nothing in this Agreement will be construed to act as a forfeiture, diminution, or impairment of any water right or contractual entitlement of City or SSWD.

C. City and SSWD have each determined that the pumping of groundwater under this Agreement would not create nor contribute to conditions of long-term overdraft in the affected groundwater basin.

6. Indemnification. To the extent permitted by State law, each Party will indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other Party and its officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims, lawsuits (including but not limited to CEQA lawsuits), judgments, damages, penalties, costs, liabilities and losses (including without limitation, sums paid in settlement of claims, actual attorneys' fees, paralegal fees, consultant fees, engineering fees, expert fees and any other professional fees) that arise from or are related in any way to City’s provision of Environmental Water. Each Party acknowledges their individual responsibilities under the ARTESIAN agreement. The provisions of this section shall survive any termination of this Agreement.

7. Agreement Not a Precedent. The Parties intend that the provisions of this Agreement will not bind the Parties as to the provisions of any future agreement between them. This Agreement was developed specifically to facilitate providing Environment Water in support of the ARTESIAN agreement with RWA during the term of the agreement.

8. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the sole, final, complete, exclusive, and integrated expression and statement of the terms of agreement between the Parties concerning the subject matter of this Agreement. No modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless and until such modification is evidenced by a writing signed by both Parties.

There are no written or oral agreements, conditions, representations, warranties, or promises with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement except those contained in or referred to in this document.

9. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement is deemed invalid or unenforceable by any court of final jurisdiction, it is intended by the Parties that all other {00312718.1} 6
provisions of this Agreement be construed to remain fully valid, enforceable and binding on the Parties.

10. Interpretation. City and SSWD each had a full and fair opportunity to consult independent counsel in the negotiation and execution of this Agreement. For the purposes of interpretation of this Agreement, neither Party will be deemed to have been its drafter.

11. Notices. Any notice, demand, or request made in connection with this Agreement will be in writing and will be deemed to have been duly given on the date of service, if (a) served personally on the person to whom notice is to be given, or (b) sent by electronic mail, and the recipient acknowledges receipt, or (c) on the third day after mailing, if mailed to the person to whom notice is to be given by first-class United States mail, postage-prepaid, and properly addressed to the following designated representatives of City and SSWD:

To City: City of Sacramento
Department of Utilities
Attn: Brett Ewart
1395 35th Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95822
E-mail: [email protected]
To SSWD: Sacramento Suburban Water District
Attn: Dan York, General Manager
3701 Marconi Avenue, Suite 100
Sacramento, CA 95821
E-mail: [email protected]

12. Governing Law. This Agreement is governed by and will be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. This Agreement is deemed to have been executed in Sacramento County and therefore, the state or federal court where the Parties’ offices are located shall be venue for any litigation concerning the enforcement or construction of this Agreement.

13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in original or electronic counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same Agreement.

The foregoing is hereby agreed to by the Parties on the date first written above. {00312718.1} 7
CITY OF SACRAMENTO: SACRAMENTO SUBURBAN WATER DISTRICT:

By: _____________________________ By: _____________________________ Ryan Moore Daniel R. York
Assistant City Manager General Manager
Attest: Approved as to form:
______________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk City Attorney
{00312718.1} 8
EXHIBIT 1

{00273230.1} 1

AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO
AND

SACRAMENTO COUNTY WATER AGENCY
AMERICAN RIVER TERMS for ECOSYSTEM SUPPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE

ASSISTANCE NEEDS (ARTESIAN)

This Agreement in support of the AMERICAN RIVER TERMS for ECOSYSTEM SUPPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE ASSISTANCE NEEDS (“ARTESIAN Agreement”) is made effective this February ____, 2024 between the Sacramento County Water Agency (hereinafter referred to as “SCWA), a statutorily created district operating under the authority of and pursuant to the provisions of the Sacramento County Water Agency Act (California Water Code-Appendix, chapter 66, commencing at section 66-1 et seq.), and the City of Sacramento, a charter city (“City”). For purposes of this Agreement, SCWA and the City also will each be called a “Party” and collectively the “Parties.”

Recitals

A. City owns and operates a public water system for the provision of retail treated water service to its residents, including facilities on the Sacramento River and lower American River for diverting and treating surface water known respectively as the Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant (“Sacramento River WTP”) and the E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant (“Fairbair n WTP”). Collectively, these two facilities are hereafter defined as “City Diversion Facilities.” City diverts untreated surface water from the Lower American River and Sacramento River into City Diversion Facilities pursuant to water rights permits 11358 through 11361 issued by the California State Water Resources Control Board. The City also diverts surface water at Sacramento WTP pursuant to water right permit 992 and Pre-1914 water entitlements. City’s permitted appropriative water rights are supplemented by a water rights settlement contract (the “City Settlement Contract”) between City and the United States Bureau of Reclamation (“Reclamation”) dated June 28, 1957.

B. On April 4, 2000, City and SCWA entered into a Wheeling Agreement (“2000 Agreement”), and exercised subsequent actions within said Agreement, which provides firm wheeling capacity of 11 MGD of SCWA surface water to SCWA through SCWA’s Franklin Inter-tie located near the City and SCWA boundary on Franklin Boulevard.

C. SCWA operates a conjunctive use program, which allows SCWA to bank amounts of groundwater sufficient to induce stable -to-increasing groundwater levels in the aquifer it utilizes as a source of supply for its customers.

D. Between 1995 and 2000, SCWA had single year contr acts to purchase surface water from Browns Valley Irrigation District. This surface water was diverted and treated at the

{00273230.1} 2

City of Sacramento’s Sacramento River WTP and wheeled through City of Sacramento facilities and delivered to SCWA through the Franklin inter-tie.

E. SCWA has permanent surface water contracts with the USBR and a State Appropriative Water Right. Under the 2000 Agreement, SCWA has taken its surface water wheeled through the City’s facilities to enhance its existing conjunctive use progra m, resulting in banked groundwater efforts.

F. As part of its conjunctive use program and for purposes of obtaining and using treated surface water, SCWA constructed the Franklin Inter -tie, located along Franklin Boulevard near the County/City boundary, capable of taking up to 11 MGD of surface water from the Sacramento River WTP. As groundwater banking and water transfers are becoming an important activity for regional reliability and helping meet SGMA goals, SCWA is modifying the Franklin inter-tie to allow for pumping water in either direction such that City surface water can be pumped to SCWA users and SCWA groundwater can be pumped to City users.

G. In July 2023, the Regional Water Authority (RWA) and California Department of Water Resources entered into an agreement (Funding Agreement) to receive $55 million dollars in exchange for the region shifting to 30,000 (30TAF) of groundwater production in three dry and critical years over an eight-year period. The Funding Agreement does not assign specific flow obligations to specific funding recipients. Instead, it recognizes that the groundwater being provided is a regional contribution and is a shared obligation.

Operationally, the Bureau of Reclamation would release this regions volume of requested quantity of water in the spring from Folsom Reservoir to the Lower American River, from March through May, and groundwater providers who receive state funding would forego diverting this water by shifting to groundwater supplies in years the water is called for (“Call Years”). The Funding Agreement with the State also specifies that if there are fewer than three call years during the eight-year period, that the State may call upon the funding recipients to provide groundwater in one dry call year in the three years following.

H. RWA member agencies, through an ad hoc committee, determined the proportional share of outflow commitments for a call year and funding for each agency. In July 2023 RWA approved the execution of the AMERICAN RIVER TERMS for ECOSYSTEM SUPPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE ASSISTANCE NEEDS (ARTESIAN). The City and SCWA have been identified for the receipt of funding and responsibility to shift to groundwater in the ARTESIAN agreement.

I. In order to provide water supplies for the above purpose, City will forgo the use of a portion of its surface water supplies available under City’s Pre-14 Water Entitlements or Permits 992 and 11358-11361, which City would otherwise divert, treat, and provide to City water customers. To make this surface water available to Buyers, SCWA is willing to pump banked groundwater and deliver it through the Franklin Inter -tie for distribution to City customers in lieu of City delivering treated surface water from its Diversion Facilities. This

{00273230.1} 3

substitution of groundwate r for surface water will enable City to leave its forgone surface water supplies within the environments to support the ARTESIAN Agreement.

J. In non-call years, the Parties recognize that maintaining sustainable groundwater conditions is vital for local water supply reliability and meeting expec tations embedded within local Groundwater Sustainability Plans and will seek opportunities to recharge the groundwater basin by shifting to surface water supplies.

Agreement

Based on the foregoing Recitals, the Parties agree as follows:

1. Making Environmental Water Available Using SCWA Groundwater.

A. Principally, SCWA will identify opportunities to self-perform its obligations under the ARTESIAN Agreement through use of its own facilities and entitlements. Such action will be independent of any commitments in this agreement.

B. When the Parties mutually determine that the preferred method of meeting collective obligations under the ARTESIAN agreement is fully or partially through reduction of City entitlements, the City shall make water available to ecosystem in alignment with the ARTESIAN agreement during a call year through SCWA pump ing and deliver ing to City groundwater either historically used or banked by SCWA under its conjunctive use program and accounted for in annual reports filed with the California State Water Resources Control Board (“SWRCB”). SCWA will pump up to 10,000 acre-feet of groundwater to the City through the Franklin inter -tie in a Call Year in order to permit City to forego use of surface water that it would otherwise treat and deliver to its customers under its entitlement s. By using this method of making surface water available, City will make available to the environment such increment of surface water (hereafter referred to as the “Environmental Water”). Nothing in this Agreement affects City’s authority to make Environmental Water or to conduct a separate water transfers using surface water made available by substituting groundwater p umped from City’s wells to serve City customer demand. Nothing in this agreement is intended to prevent SCWA from self-performing under the ARTESIAN by reducing operation of its own surface water facilities and increasing groundwater production.

2. Consideration for City Reliance on SCWA’s Pumping of Banked Groundwater in Lieu of Surface Water.

{00273230.1} 4

A. City will not pay SCWA for the groundwater pumped to facilitate the water made available during a Call Year . For purposes of this Agreement only, the Parties agree that the cost of each acre-foot of groundwater provided by SCWA to enable City to make the Environmental Water Available is equivalent to the cost of each acre-foot of treated surface water that City would make available to SCWA under its Pre-1914 water entitlements or SCWA’s entitlements. As a result of the Parties’ sources of supply having an equivalent value, City will deliver an equal amount of treated surface water to SCWA to reimburse SCWA costs of supplying the pumped groundwater when surface water is available to SCWA in the future.

B. To demonstrate a benefit to the groundwater basin in addition to the benefits to the basin provided by SCWA’s existing conjunctive use program operations, and to maintain readiness for a Call Year, the City may also continue delivery of additional water to SCWA through continued use of the City’s entitlements.

Recognizing the reciprocal nature of both agencies guaranteeing access to capital infrastructure and staffing support for the generation of water, for the term of this Agreement the Unit Rate pricing for additional increments of City water entitlements will be based on City’s marginal cost to produce an acre - foot of water at the time of return delivery + 10%. Any Monthly Service charges as described in the Wheeling Agreement shall remain in place except for periods of time the City owes SCWA a balance of water. As an example, an acre-foot of water in FY23 was valued at $138 per acre-foot.

C. If the modified pricing approach identified in 2.B is found by either Party to be inadequate for recovery of costs due to unforeseen or other circumstances, both Parties agree to meet and convene to resolve the needs to ensure no one party is subsiding another.

D. If RWA terminates the ARTESIAN Agreement in accordance with its terms , City shall be obligated to return to SCWA all received, but unbilled Environmental Water delivered at the time of termination of the Artesian Agreement.

3. Term of Agreement. This Agreement is intended to apply only to City’s deferral of surface water to the environment and SCWA pumping of groundwater to make that supply available during the entire period of the Funding and ARTESIAN Agreement.

Both Agreements identify an eight year term with provisions for a three year extension if insufficient Call Years are identifie d in the first eight year period. This agreement will automatically terminate upon fulfillment of the ARTESIAN agreement and return of any water owed to SCWA.

{00273230.1} 5

4. Termination. Either Party may terminate this Agreement immediately upon the material breach of any term by the other Party, within reasonable time to cure. Such termination does not negate responsibility under the ARTESIAN Agreement with RWA.

5. Cooperation; Approvals. City and SCWA will cooperate as ne cessary with RWA, the State, and USBR to implement the ARTESIAN Agreement provision for Environmental Water subject to the following conditions:

A. SCWA and City will be jointly responsible for all costs of obtaining any governmental approval(s) and compliance with applicable laws, including but not limited to meeting the terms of the ARTESIAN agreement.

B. Each Party is responsible for maintaining compliance of its own operations and infrastructure with CEQA for purposes of this Agreement.

C. Except as otherwise provided in Section 2 , each Party will bear its own costs for staff time, engineering and technical expenses, attorneys’ fees, and other expenses related to performing their respective duties under this Agreement.

6. Water Rights.

A. The only rights granted to the Parties as a result of this Agreement are those expressly set forth in this Agreement. City’s reduced diversions of surface water pursuant to this Agreement will not confer any appropriative, public trust or other right to water on any person or entity.

B. Nothing in this Agreement will be construed to act as a forfeiture, diminution or impairment of any water right or contractual entitlement of City or SC WA.

Consistent with the provisions of California Water Code sections 109, 475, 1011, 1014 through 1017, 1244 and 11961, SCWA pumping of groundwater in lieu of taking delivery of treated surface water from the City under the 2004 Wholesale Agreement and subsequent provision of Environmental Water pursuant to the ARTESIAN Agreement, or this Agreement itself, will not be evidence of either the existence of surplus water after this Agreement expires, or of the lack of beneficial use of the water involved, and the Parties will not contend otherwise.

C. City and SCWA shall comply with Water Code Section 1732 . In accordance with the provisions of Water Code section 1745.10, City and SCWA have each determined that the pumping of groundwater under this Agreement would not create nor contribute to conditions of long -term overdraft in the affected

{00273230.1} 6

groundwater basin.

7. Indemnification. To the extent permitted by State law, each Party will indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other Party and its officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims, lawsuits (including but not limited to CEQA lawsuits), judgments, damages, penalties, costs, liabilities and losses (including without limitation, sums paid in settlement of claims, actual attorneys' fees, paralegal fees, consultant fees, engineering fees, expert fees and any other professional fees) that arise from or are related in any way to City’s provision of Environmental Water . Ea ch Party acknowledges individual responsibilities under the ARTESIAN agreement. The provisions of this section shall survive any termination of this Agreement.

8. Agreement Not a Precedent. The Parties intend that the provisions of this Agreement will not b ind the Parties as to the provisions of any future agreement between them. This Agreement was devel oped specifically to facilitate providing Environment Water in support of the ARTESIAN agreement with RWA during the term of the agreement.

9. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the sole, final, complete, exclusive, and integrated expression and statement of the terms of agreement between the Parties concerning the subject matter of this Agreement. No modification of this Agreement shall be effective un less and until such modification is evidenced by a writing signed by both Parties. There are no written or oral agreements, conditions, representations, warranties, or promises with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement except those contained in or referred to in this document.

10. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement is deemed invalid or unenforceable by any court of final jurisdiction, it is intended by the Parties that all other provisions of this Agreement be construed to remain fully valid, enforceable and binding on the Parties.

11. Interpretation. City and SCWA each had a full and fair opportunity to consult independent counsel in the negotiation and execution of this Agreement. For the purposes of interpretation of this Agreement, neither Party will be deemed to have been its drafter.

12. Notices. Any notice, demand, or request made in connection with this Agreement will be in writing and will be deemed to have been duly given on the date of service, if (a) served personally on the person to whom notice is to be given, or (b) sent by electronic mail, and the recipient acknowledges receipt, or (c) on the third day after mailing, if mailed to the person to whom notice is to be given by first -class United States mail, postage-prepaid, and properly addressed to the following designated representatives of City and SCWA:

{00273230.1} 7

To City: City of Sacramento
Department of Utilities
Attn: Brett Ewart
1395 35th Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95822
E-mail: [email protected]

To SCWA: Sacramento County Water Agency
Attn: Michael Grinstead
10151 Florin Road
Sacramento, CA 95829
E-mail: [email protected]

13. Governing Law. This Agreement is governed by and will be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. This Agreement is deemed to have been executed in Sacramento County and therefore, the state or federal court where the Parties’ offices are locat ed shall be venue for any litigation concerning the enforcement or construction of this Agreement.

14. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in original or electronic counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same Agreement.

The foregoing is hereby agreed to by the Parties on the date first written above.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO: SACRAMENTO COUNTY WATER AGENCY:
:

By: _____________________________ By: _____________________________ Ryan Moore Matt Satow
Assistant City Manager Director of Water Resources

Attest: Approved as to form:

______________________________ _____________________________

{00273230.1} 8

City Clerk City Attorney

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-1 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Wells Replacement Program February 2024

4. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

4.1 Introduction
Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines require public agencies to establish monitoring or reporting programs for projects approved by a public agency whenever approval involves the adoption of either a mitigated negative declaration or specified environmental findings related to environmental impact reports.

The following is the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting P rogram (MMRP) for the City of Sacramento Groundwater Well Replacement Program. The intent of the MMRP is to track and successfully implement the mitigation measures identified within the Draft EIR prepared for this project.

4.2 Mitigation Measures
The mitigation measures are taken from the Groundwater Well Replacement Program Draft EIR and are assigned the same number as in the Draft EIR. No changes to the mitigation measures were required as a result of public and agency comments on the Draft EIR . Revisions to two mitigation measures (CUL -1 and TRC -1) were required as a result of AB 52 tribal consultation, however t hese revisions did not result in cha nges to impact findings . Table 4 -1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, lists each mitigation measure to be implemented to reduce impacts to less than significant.

4.3 MMRP Components
The components of Table 4-1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are as follows:

Impact Statement: This column summarizes the impact stated in the Draft EIR. Not all impact statements from the Draft EIR are included in the MMRP table; the table only contains impact statements that required a mitigation measure to reduce impacts to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: All mitigation measures identified in the Groundwater Well Replacement Program Draft EIR are presented and numbered accordingly.

Implementing Party: This item identifies the entity that will undertake the required action.

Timing: Implementation of the action must occur prior to or during some part of project approval, project design or construction or on an ongoing basis. The timing for each measure is identified.

Monitoring Party: The City of Sacramento Department of Utilities is primarily responsible for ensuring that mitigation measures are successfully implemented.

Verification: Date Completed/Initials: This item provides a space for the monitoring party to verify successful implementation of each mitigation measure upon completion by providing date completed and initials.

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-2 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Table 2-1: City of Sacramento Groundwater Well Replacement Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials

3.1 Aesthetics
AES-1: In an urbanized area,
conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality.

Mitigation Measure AES-1: Design of
Aboveground Structures
To avoid conflicts with zoning and other policies
related to scenic quality, aboveground structures
(such as control buildings, well facilities and any
treatment systems) shall be designed to blend
into the existing visual character of their
surroundings, including building and wall height,
color, exterior architectural treatments, lighting,
and landscaping.

City Department
of Utilities
During design of
aboveground
structures
City Department
of Utilities

AES-2: Create a new source
of substantial light or glare
that would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the
area.

Mitigation Measure AES-2: Low Illumination
Nighttime Construction Lighting
To minimize impacts from construction nighttime
lighting, all nighttime construction lighting shall
be of the lowest illumination necessary for
Project construction, attached to motion sensors,
and shielded and directed downward to avoid
light spillage onto neighboring properties.

Additionally, where feasible, warm lighting tones
shall be selected. If not feasible, shielding or
other measures shall be implemented to avoid
light spillage onto neighboring properties.

Project contractor During all
construction and
demolition
activities
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-3 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials

3.2 Air Quality
AIR-1: Conflict with or
obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality
plan.

Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Basic Construction
Fugitive Dust Emissions Control Practices
The following Basic Construction Emissions
Control Practices for controlling fugitive dust
from a construction site shall be implemented
during construction.
• Water all exposed surfaces two times daily.

Exposed surfaces include, but are not limited
to soil piles, graded areas, unpaved parking
areas, staging areas, and access roads.
• Cover or maintain at least two feet of free
board space on haul trucks transporting soil,
sand, or other loose material on the site. Any
haul trucks that would be traveling along
freeways or major roadways should be
covered.
• Use wet power vacuum street sweepers to
remove any visible trackout mud or dirt onto
adjacent public roads at least once a day.

Use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
• Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15
miles per hour (mph).
• All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, parking
lots to be paved should be completed as
soon as possible. In addition, building pads
should be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are
used.

Project contractor

During all
construction and
demolition
activities.

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-4 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
• As required by SMAQMD Rule 403, and
enforced by SMAQMD staff, fugitive dust
emissions shall not be allowed beyond the
property line from which construction
originates. Reasonable precautions shall
include, but are not limited to:
o Use, where possible, of water or
chemicals for control of dust in
construction operations.
o Application of asphalt, oil, water, or
suitable chemicals on dirt roads,
materials stockpiles, and other surfaces
which can give rise to airborne dusts.
o Other means approved by the Air
Pollution Control Officer.

Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Construction Diesel
Exhaust Emission Control
The following practices, which describe exhaust
emission control from diesel powered fleets, shall
be implemented at the construction site.

California regulations limit idling from both on-
road and off-road diesel-powered equipment.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB)
enforces idling limitations and compliance with
diesel fleet regulations.
• Minimize idling time either by shutting
equipment off when not in use or reducing
the time of idling to 5 minutes [California
Project contractor

During all
construction and
during
demolition
activities

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-5 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
Code of Regulations, Title 13, sections
2449(d)(3) and 2485]. Provide clear signage
that posts this requirement for workers at
the entrances to the site.
• Provide current certificate(s) of compliance
for CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled
Fleets Regulation [California Code of
Regulations, Title 13, sections 2449 and
2449.1].

Mitigation Measure AIR-3: Construction
Equipment Inspection and Maintenance
Although not required by local or state
regulation, the construction contractor shall have
an equipment inspection and maintenance
program to ensure work and fuel efficiencies. The
program shall maintain all construction
equipment in proper working condition
according to manufacturer’s specifications. The

equipment must be checked by a certified
mechanic and determine to be running in proper
condition before it is operated.

Project contractor

Prior to
construction
equipment
operation

City Department
of Utilities

Mitigation Measure AIR-4: Phasing of Well
Drilling
To ensure that daily emissions of NOX do not
exceed the SMAQMD significance threshold, prior
to the start of construction, the City or its
designee shall prepare a plan, to the satisfaction
City Department
of Utilities
Prior to the start
of construction
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-6 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
of the SMAQMD, that demonstrates the
construction phasing schedule will achieve
maximum daily NOX emissions of 85 lbs/day or
less. If a plan is not prepared, the City shall limit
Project construction activities such that a
maximum of three wells are under construction at
any one time, or the City shall submit a final
report at the end of each construction year to
demonstrate compliance. If construction-
generated emissions of NO
X as modeled in the
final report are not reduced to a level below
SMAQMD’s recommended maximum daily level
of 85 lbs/day or less, then the City shall pay a
mitigation fee into SMAQMD’s off-site mitigation
program. By paying the appropriate off-site
mitigation fee, construction-generated emissions
of NO
X would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level. The fee calculation to offset daily
NO
X emissions shall be based on the SMAQMD-
determined cost to reduce one ton of NOX
applicable at the time (currently $30,000 per ton
but subject to change in future years).

AIR-2: Result in a
cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the
project region is non-
attainment under an
Mitigation Measure AIR-1: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure AIR-2: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure AIR-3: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure AIR-4: above, shall apply.

Refer to
Mitigation
Measures AIR-1,
AIR-2, AIR-3, and
AIR-4, above
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures AIR-1,
AIR-2, AIR-3,
and AIR-4,
above
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures AIR-1,
AIR-2, AIR-3, and
AIR-4, above

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-7 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard.

3.4 Biological Resources
BIO-1: Substantial adverse
effect, either directly or
through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional
plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Protocol-Level
Special-Status Plant Surveys
Conduct protocol-level special-status plant
surveys in April and May within areas of non-
native grassland and suitable wetlands at well
sites 7, 11, 12, 13, 15, 20, 21, 24, 28, 31, 32 and

37. The surveys shall be performed in accordance
with those described by resource experts and
agencies (CNPS, 2001; CDFW, 2018a; USFWS,
1996). If individuals or populations are observed,
they shall be mapped and notes regarding size of
population, quality of habitat and potential
threats taken. Populations shall be avoided to the
greatest extent practical, with a recommended
minimum 25-foot buffer from the edge of the
population. Prior to Project activities within the
vicinity of the populations, the population and
associated 25-foot buffer shall be flagged or
otherwise made visible. No work shall occur
within that flagged area and personnel shall
avoid entering the area to the greatest extent
practical.

City Department
of Utilities

Prior to the start
of construction
at well sites 7,
11, 12, 13, 15,
20, 21, 24, 28,
31, 32 and 37
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-8 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials

If avoidance of a population or individual is not
practical, a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring
Plan (HMMP) shall be drafted for the species
being impacted. The HMMP shall provide
guidance for restoring, enhancing, and/or
creating suitable habitat for the species being
impacted, and shall also provide success criteria
which will ensure success of mitigation efforts.

Mitigation ratios shall be a minimum of 2:1 for
either percent cover or number of individuals.

The HMMP shall be final upon approval by the
City of Sacramento and interested regulatory
agencies.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2a: Initial Ground
Disturbing Activities Outside of Swainson’s Hawk
Nesting Season
Initial ground disturbing activities will commence
outside of the SWHA nesting season (March 1-
September 15).

City Department
of Utilities

Prior to the start
of construction
City Department
of Utilities

Mitigation Measure BIO-2b: Focused
Swainson’s Hawk Surveys
If initial ground disturbing activities will
commence during the SWHA nesting season
(March 1- September 15), surveys based on
CDFW’s survey protocol shall be conducted.

These surveys will include a pre-arrival
City Department
of Utilities

Prior to the start
of construction
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-9 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
assessment conducted between January 1 and
March 1, to identify areas with suitable nesting
sites within 0.25 miles of the well sites that will
have activity in that year. The survey extent will
include areas up to 0.5 miles for well sites located
in the NBHCP area (well sites 15, 19, 20, 23 and
39). For well sites determined to
have suitable nesting habitat within 0.25 miles or
within 0.5 miles in the NBHCP area, surveys will
be conducted for SWHA nesting during the nest-
building period (April 1-April 30) if work will
begin between April 1 and May 30. For activities
that will commence after June 1, surveys for
active nests will be conducted between June 1
and August 1. Any active nests shall be avoided
at a distance sufficient to ensure that nest
abandonment will not occur, and this distance
shall be determined through observation of the
nest by a qualified biologist.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Focused Burrowing
Owl Surveys
An assessment survey for burrowing owls shall be
conducted at all well sites by a qualified biologist
within a week prior to the start of any new Project
activities (vegetation removal, grading, or other
initial ground-disturbing activities) regardless of
time of year. The survey shall be conducted in a
sufficient area around the well site to identify the

City Department
of Utilities

Within a week
prior to the start
of any new
ground
disturbing
activities

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-10 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
location and status of any nests that could
potentially be directly or indirectly affected by
vegetation removal, or ground disturbing
activities if these activities commence between
February 1 and August 31, the timeframe that
corresponds to the burrowing owl nesting
season. If the results of the surveys indicate that
burrowing owl may be impacted by Project
activities or if the well site is in the NBHCP area,
the following measure shall apply:

• Preconstruction surveys in accordance with
CDFW burrowing owl guidelines shall be
conducted, summarized as: The Project Area
and surrounding area (up to 500 feet if
habitat has potential to support burrowing
owl and no barriers preclude burrowing
owls) shall be traversed on foot to detect
burrowing owls. The survey will be
conducted using transects spaced no more
than 50 feet apart. For sites determined to
have potential to support nesting burrowing
owls, at least 3 site visits for burrowing owl
shall occur between April 15 and July 15,
with at least one site visit after June 15. Visits
are to be at least 15 days apart.

• If any burrowing owl nest is identified during
preconstruction surveys, the applicant shall
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-11 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
comply with all CDFW guidelines regarding
the minimization of impacts to the
burrowing owl, including not disturbing an
occupied nest during nesting season
(February 1 through August 31) unless a
qualified biologist approved by the
Department verifies through noninvasive
methods that either:
1) the owls have not begun egg-laying
and incubation; or
2) that juveniles from the occupied
burrows are foraging independently
and are capable of independent
survival.

Any owls identified in the preconstruction surveys
shall be relocated to appropriate locations using
passive relocation techniques approved by the
CDFW [CDFG] and mitigation for impacts to
burrowing owl nests shall be provided and
funded by the applicant in accordance with CDFG
guidelines and requirements.

Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Focused Valley
Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Surveys
Prior to initial ground disturbance, a survey for
the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (VELB) host
plant, Sambucus, will be conducted at all sites
where Sambucus has been detected (well sites 38
City Department
of Utilities

Prior to initial
ground
disturbance at
wells sites 38
and 23, and sites
within NBHCP
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-12 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
and 24) and all sites within the Natomas Basin
Habitat Conservation Plan (NBHCP). Sambucus
plants, if detected, shall be avoided by at least 20
feet from the dripline of the plant and this
avoidance buffer shall be clearly demarcated
using lathe and flagging. If Sambucus plants with
a stem diameter of greater than 1 inch cannot be
avoided, they shall be inspected for evidence of
VELB presence and if any evidence of VELB is
detected, the plants shall be avoided and
consultation with the USFWS shall occur to
determine next steps, which may include
relocation of the plant. If the well site where the
Sambucus is located is in the NBHCP, new
consultation would not be required, but removal
of Sambucus shall be conducted and mitigated
for in accordance with the NBHCP.

area: well sites
15, 19, 20, 23
and 39

Mitigation Measure BIO-5a: Ground
Disturbance and Work Activities During Dry
Season
Ground disturbance activities at well sites 2, 24,
28, and 30 shall be conducted in the dry season
(May through October) and work at other sites
shall be in the dry season to the greatest extent
practical. Work
within 200 feet of wetlands and ephemeral
ditches will occur only in the dry season (June 1-
October 31) and only in dry soils. Wetlands will
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

During ground
disturbing
activities and
during all work
activities.

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-13 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
be avoided by at least 100 feet and best
management practices shall be implemented to
prevent any potential increased erosion of
sediment or turbid water from Project activities
into these features. If work is to be conducted
from November through April, silt fencing shall
be installed prior to ground disturbance around
the perimeter and associated 25-foot buffer of
avoided wetlands and the top of bank of
drainage canals. Silt fencing adjacent to drainage
canals shall be installed the greatest distance
possible from the top of bank, while still
maintaining prevention of runoff into the feature.

Mitigation Measure BIO-5b: Focused Vernal
Pool Fairy Shrimp Surveys
Prior to initial ground disturbance, protocol-level
surveys for vernal pool fairy shrimp (VPFS) will be
conducted at all sites with potential to support
VPFS (well sites 2, 24, 28, and 30). If VPFS are
detected, and cannot be avoided, a permit for
take coverage of the species, pursuant to the
Federal Endangered Species Act will be acquired
prior to commencement of Project Activities.

City Department
of Utilities

Prior to initial
ground
disturbance at

well sites 2, 24,
28, and 30

City Department
of Utilities

Mitigation Measure BIO-6: Nesting Bird Surveys
A survey for active bird nests shall be conducted
at all well sites by a qualified biologist no more
than 14 days prior to the start of Project activities
City Department
of Utilities

No more than
14 days prior to
the start of
Project activities.

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-14 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
(exploratory drilling, vegetation removal, grading,
or other initial ground-disturbing activities) if
ground disturbing activities commence during
the nesting season (February 1 through August
31). The survey shall be conducted in a sufficient
area around the well site to identify the location
and status of any nests that could potentially be
directly or indirectly affected by vegetation
removal, or grading activities. For white-tailed
kite, the survey area shall extend at least 0.25
miles from the area of potential disturbance.

Based on the results of the pre-construction
breeding bird survey, the following measure shall
apply:

If active nests of protected species are found
within the well site, or close enough to the area
to affect nesting success, a work exclusion zone
shall be established around each nest. Established
exclusion zones shall remain in place until all
young in the nest have fledged or the nest
otherwise becomes inactive (e.g., due to
predation). Appropriate exclusion zones shall be
established by a qualified biologist; sizes vary
dependent upon bird species, nest location,
existing visual buffers, ambient sound levels, and
other factors; an exclusion zone radius may be as
small as 25 feet (for common, disturbance-
adapted species) or more than 250 feet for
raptors. Listed species are typically provided
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-15 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
more extensive exclusion zones, which may be
specific to the species and/or follow CDFW
guidance. Exclusion zone size may also be
reduced from established levels if supported with
nest monitoring by a qualified biologist
indicating that work activities are not adversely
impacting the nest.

BIO-2: Substantial adverse
effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural
community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, or
regulations or by the
California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or US Fish and
Wildlife Service.

Mitigation Measure BIO-5a: above, shall apply.

Refer to
Mitigation
Measure BIO-5a

Refer to
Mitigation
Measure BIO-5a

Refer to
Mitigation
Measure BIO-5a

Mitigation Measure BIO-7a: Wetland
Delineation
A wetland delineation shall be conducted at well
sites 2, 12, 13, 28, 29 30 and 37 to confirm
previous site evaluations and collect information
on the three wetland parameters at each of the
potential wetlands, according to the methods
described in the USACE Wetlands Delineation
Manual (“Corps Manual”; Environmental
Laboratory 1987), the Regional Supplement to
the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Arid West (“Arid West Supplement”;
USACE 2008), and A Field Guide to the
City Department
of Utilities

Prior to ground
disturbance at
well sites 2, 12,
13, 28, 29 30
and 37

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-16 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark
(OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western
United States (Lichvar and McColley, 2008). Arid
West data forms shall be filled out and a report
on the results will be provided. The report will
provide the information and results of the
delineation. A final jurisdictional determination
shall be obtained from the USACE if deemed
necessary.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7b: Avoidance of
Wetlands
Any wetlands within the Study Area shall be
avoided. A 25-foot buffer around the perimeter
of each wetland shall be included and avoided.

Prior to ground disturbance, the 25-foot buffer
shall be clearly flagged by a
qualified biologist. If wetlands cannot be avoided,
appropriate permits shall be obtained from the
appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., CDFW,
RWQCB and USACE). Mitigation measures
outlined in the permits shall be followed;
however, mitigation ratios shall be no less than
1:1 for impacted wetland acreage, which follows
the City of Sacramento 2035 General Plan EIR
Policy ER 2.1.6, which requires on- or off-site
preservation of equal amounts impacted. If
impacts to seasonal wetlands shall occur,
mitigation may include, but are not limited to on-
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

Prior to ground
disturbing
activities

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-17 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
site restoration/enhancement/creation, or
purchase of credits at an approved mitigation
bank. Mitigation Measure BIO-5a as described
above shall also be implemented for the
protection of wetlands.

Mitigation Measure BIO-8: Focused Creeping
Ryegrass Flats Surveys
Prior to ground disturbance or staging of
materials at well site 28, the edge of the creeping
ryegrass flats and associated 10-foot buffer shall
be flagged by a qualified biologist and shall be
avoided. If Project activities cannot avoid the
buffered area, then a Habitat Mitigation and
Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be drafted. The
HMMP shall provide guidance for restoring,
enhancing, and/or creating suitable habitat for
the creeping ryegrass flat, and shall also provide
success criteria which will ensure success of
mitigation efforts. Mitigation ratios shall be a
minimum of 2:1 for percent cover. The HMMP
shall be final upon approval by the City of
Sacramento and interested regulatory agencies.

City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

Prior to ground
disturbing
activities or
staging of
materials at well
site 28

City Department
of Utilities

BIO-3: Substantial adverse
effect on state or federally
protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal,
Mitigation Measure BIO-5a: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7a: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7b: above, shall apply.

Refer to
Mitigation
Measures BIO-5a,
BIO-7a, and BIO-
7b
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures BIO-
5a, BIO-7a, and
BIO-7b
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures BIO-
5a, BIO-7a, and
BIO-7b

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-18 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means.

BIO-5: Conflict with any local
policies or ordinances
protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or
ordinance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-5a: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7a: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7b: above, shall apply.

Refer to
Mitigation
Measures BIO-5a,
BIO-7a, and BIO-
7b
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures BIO-
5a, BIO-7a, and
BIO-7b
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures BIO-
5a, BIO-7a, and
BIO-7b

3.4 Cultural Resources
CUL-1: Substantial adverse
change in the significance of
a historical resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Conduct Cultural
Resources Sensitivity and Awareness Training
Program and Tribal Coordination Prior to
Ground-Disturbing Activities Prior to Ground-
Disturbing Activities
The City shall require the contractor to provide a
cultural resources sensitivity and awareness
training program (Worker Environmental
Awareness Program [WEAP]) for all personnel
involved in Project construction, including field
consultants and construction workers. The WEAP
will be developed in coordination with an
archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for
Archeology. The WEAP shall be conducted before
any Project-related construction activities begin
at the Project site. The WEAP will include relevant
information regarding sensitive cultural resources
and tribal cultural resources, including applicable
regulations, protocols for avoidance, and
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor
Prior to ground
disturbing
activities
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-19 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
consequences of violating State laws and
regulations.

The WEAP will also describe appropriate
avoidance and impact minimization measures for
cultural resources that could be located at the
Project site and will outline what to do and who
to contact if any potential cultural resources are
encountered.

For well sites 5 and 24, at the time the final
location of the well sites are established the City
shall coordinate with Tribal Representatives from
United Auburn Indian Community on the status
of the location and whether a Native American
Tribal Monitor (monitor) shall be required. If
required, the contractor shall ensure a monitor is
present for all ground disturbing activities and
the measures described in CUL-2 and CUL-3 shall
apply. The monitor shall possess the knowledge,
skills, abilities, and experience established by the
NAHC’s Guidelines for Native American Monitors
(See also Mitigation Measure TCR-1).

Mitigation Measure CUL-2: In the Event that
Cultural Resources are Discovered During
Construction, Implement Avoidance and
Minimization Measures to Avoid Significant
Impacts and Procedures to Evaluate Resources
If cultural resources (such as structural features,
unusual amounts of bone or shell, artifacts, or
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

During ground
disturbing
activities in the
event cultural
resources are
discovered
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-20 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
human remains) are encountered at the Project
site during construction, work shall be suspended
within 100 feet of the find (based on the
apparent distribution of cultural materials), and
the construction contractor shall immediately
notify the Project’s City representative. Avoidance
and preservation in place are the preferred
manner of mitigating impacts to cultural
resources and tribal cultural resources. This will
be accomplished, if feasible, by several alternative
means, including:
• Planning construction to avoid tribal cultural
resources, archaeological sites and/or other
cultural resources; incorporating cultural
resources within parks, green-space or other
open space; covering archaeological
resources; deeding a cultural resource to a
permanent conservation easement; or other
preservation and protection methods
agreeable to consulting parties and
regulatory authorities with jurisdiction over
the activity.
• Recommendations for avoidance of cultural
resources and tribal cultural resources will be
reviewed by the City representative and
other appropriate agencies, in light of factors
such as costs, logistics,

• feasibility, design, technology and social,
cultural and environmental considerations,
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-21 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
and the extent to which avoidance is
consistent with Project objectives. Avoidance
and design alternatives may include
realignment within the Project site to avoid
cultural resources, modification of the design
to eliminate or reduce impacts to cultural
resources or modification or realignment to
avoid highly significant features within a
cultural resource.
• If the discovered cultural resource can be
avoided, the construction contractor(s), will
install protective fencing outside the site
boundary, including a 100-foot buffer area,
before construction restarts.
• The construction contractor(s) will maintain
the protective fencing throughout
construction to avoid the site during all
remaining phases of construction. The area
will be demarcated as an “Environmentally
Sensitive Area”.
• If a cultural resource cannot be avoided, the
following performance standard shall be met
prior to continuance of construction and
associated activities that may result in
damage to or destruction of cultural
resources or tribal cultural resources:
• Each resource will be evaluated for California
Register of Historical Resources- (CRHR)
eligibility through application of established
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-22 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
eligibility criteria (California Code of
Regulations 15064.636).

If a cultural resource is determined to be eligible
for listing in the CRHR, the City will avoid
damaging effects to the resource in accordance
with California PRC Section 21084.3, if feasible.

The City shall coordinate the investigation of the
find with a qualified archaeologist (meeting the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards for Archeology)
approved by the City. A written report detailing
the site assessment, coordination activities, and
management recommendations shall be
provided to the City representative by the
qualified archaeologist. These recommendations
will be documented in the Project record. (See
also Mitigation Measure TCR-2)
CUL-2: Substantial adverse
change in the significance of
a unique archaeological
resource pursuant to Section
15064.5.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2: above, shall apply.

Refer to
Mitigation
Measures CUL-1
and CUL-2
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures CUL-1
and CUL-2
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures CUL-1
and CUL-2

CUL-3: Disturb any human
remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Implement
Procedures in the Event of the Inadvertent
Discovery of Human Remains
If an inadvertent discovery of human remains is
made at any time during Project-related
construction activities or Project planning, the
following performance standards shall be met
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor
During ground
disturbing
activities in the
event of
inadvertent
discovery of
human remains
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-23 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
prior to implementing or continuing actions such
as construction, which may result in damage to or
destruction of human remains. In accordance
with the California Health and Safety Code (HSC),
if human remains are encountered during
ground-disturbing activities, the City shall
immediately halt potentially damaging excavation
in the area of the remains and notify the
Sacramento County Coroner and a professional
archaeologist to determine the nature of the
remains. The Coroner is required to examine all
discoveries of human remains within 48 hours of
receiving notice of a discovery on private or State
lands (HSC Section 7050.5[b]).

If the human remains are of historic age and are
determined to be not of Native American origin,
the City will follow the provisions of the HSC
Section 7000 (et seq.) regarding the disinterment
and removal of non-Native American human
remains. (See also Mitigation Measure TCR-3).

3.6 Geology and Soils
GEO-5: Directly or indirectly
destroy a unique
paleontological resource or
site or unique geographic
feature.

Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Unanticipated Fossil
Discovery
To reduce the potential for impacts to
paleontological resources the following
procedures shall be adhered to for all ground
disturbing activities.

Prior to the start of construction, a qualified
paleontologist shall be retained to prepare a
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor
Prior to the start
of construction
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-24 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
paleontological resources Worker Environmental
Awareness Program (WEAP) training. The WEAP
training will include the types of fossils that may
be encountered, the procedures to be followed if
unanticipated paleontological resources are
unearthed at the Project site, contact information
for the paleontological personnel, and the
regulatory requirements for the protection of
paleontological resources. All earthmoving
personnel and their supervisors shall receive the
WEAP training prior to beginning work on the
site.

In the event of unanticipated paleontological
resource discoveries, all activities in the vicinity of the discovery (50-foot buffer) shall be temporarily
halted until a qualified paleontologist has
documented and evaluated the resource(s),
completed the appropriate mitigation and
treatment of the resource(s), and authorized work
in the discovery area to resume. If determined to
be significant, the paleontological resource(s)
shall be collected and transferred to a
paleontological laboratory for preparation,
identification, and analysis, and curated at an
accredited fossil repository. If paleontological
resources are discovered, and upon conclusion of
ground disturbing activities, a paleontological
mitigation report shall be prepared that
documents the dates of field work, methods,
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-25 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
fossil analyses, significance evaluations,
conclusions, and an itemized list of specimens.

3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG-1: Generate
greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant
impact on the environment.

Mitigation Measure GHG-1: Phasing of Well
Drilling
To ensure that annual emissions of GHG do not
exceed the SMAQMD significance threshold, prior
to the start of construction of any replacement
well, the City or its designee shall provide
documentation that includes a licensed
engineer’s or qualified analyst’s estimate of the
annual GHG emissions from construction that
demonstrates the construction phasing schedule
will achieve maximum annual GHG emissions of
1,100 MTCO2e/year or less. If a plan is not
prepared, the City shall limit Project construction
activities such that, in any single year, a maximum
of two wells are constructed.

City Department
of Utilities

Prior to the start
of construction
of any
replacement well
City Department
of Utilities

Mitigation Measure GHG-2: Fleet Electrification
In order for the Project to be consistent with the
Mayor’s Commission on Climate Change target
that all public shared fleets be fully electrified by
2045, prior to the commencement of operations
of any Project well, the City shall provide
documentation that includes a licensed
engineer’s or qualified analyst’s estimate of the
average annual CO
2e emissions from the Project’s
O&M vehicle fleet. The documentation shall
City Department
of Utilities

Prior to the
commencement
of operations of
any Project well

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-26 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
demonstrate that O&M activities will be
conducted using a carbon-zero vehicle fleet by
2045, the year in which the City currently seeks to
achieve carbon zero.

Mitigation Measure GHG-3: SolarShares
Participation
Prior to the commencement of operations of any
Project well, the City shall provide documentation
that includes a licensed engineer’s or qualified
analyst’s estimate of the average annual CO2e
emissions from the well’s electricity consumption
in operational years 2030 and 2045. The
documentation shall include the number of wells
that participate in the SolarShares program in
addition to the baseline participation of 124 (well
22), 156 (well 25), and 158 (well 34). If total CO2e
from well electricity consumption exceeds 1,100
CO2e/year in operational year 2030, then the City
shall enroll 62 percent of the replacement wells in
the SolarShares program or provide an
equivalent level of the Project’s electricity from
renewable power. If total CO2e from well
electricity consumption exceeds 0 CO2e/year in
operational year 2045, then the City shall enroll
all replacement wells in the SolarShares program
or provide an equivalent level of the Project’s
electricity from renewable power.

City Department
of Utilities

Prior to the
commencement
of operations of
any Project well

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-27 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
Mitigation Measure GHG-4: Purchase of Carbon
Offsets for Methane GHG Emissions
Prior to the commencement of operations of any
Project well, the City shall provide documentation
that includes a licensed engineer’s estimate of
the average annual net methane (CH4) emissions
that have been deemed to be unavoidable to
operations due to infeasibility of methane
capture or reduction technologies. The
documentation shall include verification of
purchase and retirement of credits to offset the
methane emissions to net zero for each year of
operations during the 40-year life of the Project,
using verified carbon offset credits.

The carbon offset credits shall be from a registry
approved by CARB, and be quantified and
verified using protocols that are consistent with
the criteria identified in the California Code of
Regulations, title 17, section 95972 – namely that
they be real; permanent; quantifiable; verifiable;
additional as defined by Health and Safety Code
section 38562, subdivisions(d)(1) and (d)(2) and
California Code of Regulations, title 17, section
95802, subdivision (a); and enforceable. In
addition, any offsets originating outside
California must have GHG emissions programs
equivalent to, or more stringent than, California's
cap and trade program. Within 120 days of City
City Department
of Utilities

Prior to the
commencement
of operations of
any Project well
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-28 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
approval of the documented emissions estimates,
the City shall provide evidence that carbon offset
credits have been purchased and retired for the
purpose of offsetting the City-approved
emissions estimates for the 40-year life of the
Project.

GHG-2: Conflict with an
applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse
gases.

Mitigation Measure GHG-1: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure GHG-2: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure GHG-3: above, shall apply.

Mitigation Measure GHG-4: above, shall apply.

Refer to
Mitigation
Measures GHG-1,
GHG-2, GHG-3,
and GHG-4
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures GHG-
1, GHG-2, GHG-
3, and GHG-4
Refer to
Mitigation
Measures GHG-
1, GHG-2, GHG-
3, and GHG-4

3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-2: Create a significant
hazard to the public or the
environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions
involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Hazardous
Materials Management and Spill Prevention and
Control Plan
Before construction begins, the City shall prepare
a Hazardous Materials Management Spill
Prevention and Control Plan that includes a
project-specific contingency plan for hazardous
materials and water operations. The Plan will be
applicable to construction activities and will
establish policies and procedures according to
applicable codes and regulations, including but
not limited to the California Building and Fire
Codes, and federal and OSHA regulations. The
City Department
of Utilities

Prior to the start
of construction
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-29 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
Plan will include, but is not limited to the
following:
• A discussion of hazardous materials
management, including delineation of
hazardous material storage areas, access
and egress routes, waterways,
emergency assembly areas, and
temporary hazardous waste storage
areas;
• Notification and documentation of
procedures; and
• Spill control and countermeasures,
including employee spill
prevention/response training.

HAZ-3: Emit hazardous
emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: above, shall apply.

Refer to
Mitigation
Measure HAZ-1

Refer to
Mitigation
Measure HAZ-1

Refer to
Mitigation
Measure HAZ-1

Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Well Construction
and Chemical Deliveries at Schools
The City will coordinate with school officials for
proposed well sites located at schools to
schedule well construction when school is not in
session and schedule chemical deliveries before
or after school hours.

City Department
of Utilities
Prior to the start
of construction
at proposed well
sites located at
schools
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-30 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
HAZ-4: Be located on a site
which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as result, would
it create a significant hazard
to the public or the
environment.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: Environmental Site
Assessment and Remediation or Well Relocation
After exploratory drilling and before construction
begins, a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment
will be conducted for each proposed municipal
well site to identify contaminated sites at or near
each proposed well site that pose a hazard for
construction or to the City’s potable water supply.

In the event that a recognized environmental
concern exists, additional investigation would be
conducted, typically under a Phase II
Environmental Site Assessment, to identify the
presence and extent of any contamination that
would need remediation, or a Well Relocation
Plan would be developed to determine if the well
location could be moved to a location that is not
affected by contaminant releases. Remediation, if
needed, would be conducted in accordance with
federal and state requirements for remediation of
soil and/or groundwater contamination with
oversight by the appropriate local and/or state
agency, such as the County of Sacramento,
RWQCB and/or DTSC.

City Department
of Utilities
After exploratory
drilling and
before
construction
begins
City Department
of Utilities

HAZ-5: Impair
implementation of or
physically interfere with an
adopted emergency
response plan or emergency
evacuation plan.

Mitigation Measure TRA-1: below, shall apply Refer to
Mitigation
Measure TRA-1

Refer to
Mitigation
Measure TRA-1

Refer to
Mitigation
Measure TRA-1

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-31 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials

3.10 Noise and Vibration
NOI-1: Generate a
substantial temporary or
permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the Project in
excess of standards
established in the local
general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies.

Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Noise Barriers
The City shall require its contractor to install
temporary construction noise barriers prior to the
start of well construction activities for all activities requiring “nighttime” work outside the hours of
7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. or 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on
Sundays. These barriers shall follow the Federal
Highways Administration Construction Noise
Handbook guidance and block the line of sight
between the equipment and the noise-sensitive
receptor(s). The barriers shall provide enough
noise attenuation that noise levels at nearby
receptors meet the City’s Noise Control
Ordinance. In residential areas this includes a
minimum of 15 dBA of noise attenuation at
residences 50 feet away from drilling activities.

Due to the height of the drill rig, the noise barrier
shall be at least 24 feet tall. The construction
noise barrier shall be constructed of a material
with a minimum weight of one pound per square
foot with no gaps or perforations. It shall remain
in place until conclusion of the nighttime
construction activities. The Project plans and
specifications shall include documentation from a
noise consultant verifying the appropriate design
details for an effective noise barrier.

City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

Prior to the start
of well
construction
activities for
wells requiring
nighttime work

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-32 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: Construction Noise
Reduction Measures
The City shall require its contractor to implement
the following actions relative to construction
noise:
• The City shall conduct construction activities
to between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., on
Monday through Saturday, and between 9:00
a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sunday, in accordance
with the City of Sacramento Municipal Code,
Section 8.68.080, with the exception of
specific well drilling and testing activities,
which require 24-hour continuous work.
• Prior to construction, the City in coordination
with the construction contractor, shall
provide written notification to all properties
within 1,000 feet of the construction site,
informing occupants of the type and
duration of construction activities.

Notification materials shall identify a method
to contact the City’s program manager with
noise concerns. Prior to construction
commencement, the City program manager
shall establish a noise complaint process to
allow for resolution of noise problems. This
process shall be clearly described in the
notifications.
• Stationary noise-generating equipment shall
be located as far from sensitive receptors as
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

Prior to the start
of well
construction
activities
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-33 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
possible. Such equipment shall also be
oriented to minimize noise that would be
directed toward sensitive receptors.

Whenever possible, other non-noise
generating equipment (e.g., water tanks, roll-
off dumpsters) shall be positioned between
the noise source and sensitive receptors.
• Equipment and staging areas shall be
located as far from sensitive receptors as
possible. At the staging location, equipment
and materials shall be kept as far from
adjacent sensitive receptors as possible.
• Construction vehicles and equipment shall
be maintained in the best possible working
order; operated by an experienced, trained
operator; and shall utilize the best available
noise control techniques (including mufflers,
use of intake silencers, ducts, engine
enclosures and acoustically attenuating
shields or shrouds).
• Unnecessary idling of internal combustion
engines shall be prohibited. In practice, this
would require turning off equipment if it
would idle for five or more minutes.
• Electrically powered equipment shall be used
instead of pneumatic or internal combustion
powered equipment, where feasible.

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-34 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
• The use of noise-producing signals, including
horns, whistles, alarms, and bells, shall be for
safety warning purposes only.

3.12 Transportation
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-35 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
TRA-3: Substantially increase
hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous
intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)
Mitigation Measure TRA-1: Traffic Control Plan
Prior to construction, the City of Sacramento shall
require its construction contractor to prepare and
implement a Traffic Control Plan, to be approved
by the construction inspector and the City
Transportation Division. The Traffic Control Plan
may be prepared for the entire Project at once so
long as enough construction specifics for each
individual well are available; otherwise, a new
plan or an amendment to the overarching plan
shall be prepared for each construction activity.

The Traffic Control Plan shall:
• Identify staging locations to be used
during construction
• Identify safe ingress and egress points
from staging areas
• Identify potential road or lane closures
• Establish haul routes for construction-
related vehicle traffic
• Identify alternative safe routes to
maintain pedestrian and bicyclist safety
during construction

The City’s project manager shall coordinate with
emergency services (police, fire, and others) to
notify these entities regarding construction
schedule, Project alignment and siting, and
potential delays due to construction. The City
shall identify roadways and access points for
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

Prior to
construction
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-36 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
emergency services and minimize disruptions to
or closures of these locations.

The Traffic Control Plan shall include provisions
for traffic control measures including barricades,
warning signs, cones, lights, and flag persons, to
allow safe circulation of vehicle, bicycle,
pedestrian, and emergency response traffic. The
Traffic Control Plan shall be reviewed and
approved by the City’s project manager and the
construction inspector prior to Project
construction. The City’s construction inspector
shall also provide the construction schedule and
Traffic Control Plan to the City Transportation
Division for review to ensure that construction of
the proposed Project does not conflict with other
construction projects that may be occurring
simultaneously in the Project vicinity.

TRA-4: Result in inadequate
emergency access.

Mitigation Measure TRA-1: above, shall apply. Refer to
Mitigation
Measure TRA-1
Refer to
Mitigation
Measure TRA-1
Refer to
Mitigation
Measure TRA-1

3.13 Tribal Cultural Resources
TCR-1: Cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a tribal
cultural resource as defined
in PRC, Section 21074, as
Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Conduct Cultural
Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
Sensitivity and Awareness Training Program and
Tribal Coordination Prior to Ground-Disturbing
Activities
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

Prior to ground
disturbing
activities

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-37 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
either a site, feature, place,
or cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in
terms of the size and scope
of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for
listing in the California
Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local
register of historical
resources as defined in PRC,
Section 5020.1(k), or
ii) A resource determined
by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in PRC,
Section 5024.1(c). In applying
the criteria set forth in PRC,
Section 5024.1(c), the lead
agency shall consider the
significance of the resource
to a California Native
American tribe.

The City shall require the applicant/contractor to
provide a cultural resources and tribal cultural
resources sensitivity and awareness training
program (Worker Environmental Awareness
Program [WEAP]) for all personnel involved in
project construction, including field consultants
and construction workers. The WEAP will be
developed in coordination with culturally
affiliated Native American tribes. The WEAP shall
be conducted before any project-related
construction activities begin at the project site.

The WEAP will include relevant information
regarding sensitive cultural resources and tribal
cultural resources, including applicable
regulations, protocols for avoidance, and
consequences of violating state laws and
regulations.

The WEAP will also describe appropriate
avoidance and impact minimization measures for
cultural resources and tribal cultural resources
that could be located at the project site and will
outline what to do and who to contact if any
potential cultural resources or tribal cultural
resources are encountered. The WEAP will
emphasize the requirement for confidentiality
and culturally appropriate treatment of any
discovery of significance to Native Americans and
will discuss appropriate behaviors and responsive
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-38 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
actions, consistent with Native American tribal
values.

For well sites 5 and 24, at the time the final
location of the well sites are established the City
shall coordinate with Tribal Representatives from
United Auburn Indian Community on the status
of the location and whether a Native American
Tribal Monitor (monitor) shall be required. If
required, the contractor shall ensure a monitor is
present for all ground disturbing activities and
the measures described in TCR-2 and TCR-3 shall
apply. The monitor shall possess the knowledge,
skills, abilities, and experience established by the
NAHC’s Guidelines for Native American Monitors.

Mitigation Measure TCR-2: In the Event that
Cultural Resources or Tribal Cultural Resources
are Discovered During Construction, Implement
Avoidance and Minimization Measures to Avoid
Significant Impacts and Procedures to Evaluate
Resources
If cultural resources or tribal cultural resources
(such as structural features, unusual amounts of
bone or shell, artifacts, or human remains) are
encountered at the project site during
construction, work shall be suspended within
100-feet of the find (based on the apparent
distribution of cultural materials), and the
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

During ground
disturbing
activities if
cultural or tribal
cultural
resources are
discovered.

City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-39 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
construction contractor shall immediately notify
the project’s City representative. Avoidance and
preservation in place is the preferred manner of
mitigating impacts to cultural resources and tribal
cultural resources. This will be accomplished, if
feasible, by several alternative means, including:
• Planning construction to avoid tribal cultural
resources, archaeological sites and/or other
cultural resources; incorporating cultural
resources within parks, green-space, or other
open space; covering archaeological
resources; deeding a cultural resource to a
permanent conservation easement; or other
preservation and protection methods
agreeable to consulting parties and
regulatory authorities with jurisdiction over
the activity.
• Recommendations for avoidance of cultural
resources and tribal cultural resources will be
reviewed by the City representative,
interested culturally affiliated Native
American tribes and other appropriate
agencies, in light of factors such as costs,
logistics, feasibility, design, technology and
social, cultural and environmental
considerations, and the extent to which
avoidance is consistent with project
objectives. Avoidance and design
alternatives may include realignment within
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-40 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
the project site to avoid cultural resources or
tribal cultural resources, modification of the
design to eliminate or reduce impacts to
cultural resources or tribal cultural resources
or modification or realignment to avoid
highly significant features within a cultural
resource or tribal cultural resource.
• Native American representatives from
interested culturally affiliated Native
American tribes will be consulted on the
analyses and shall have the opportunity to
meet with the City representative and its
representatives who have technical expertise
to identify and recommend feasible
avoidance and design alternatives, so that
appropriate and feasible avoidance and
design alternatives can be identified.
• If the discovered cultural resource or tribal
cultural resource can be avoided, the
construction contractor(s), will install
protective fencing outside the site boundary,
including a 100-foot buffer area, before
construction restarts. The boundary of a
cultural resource or a tribal cultural resource
will be determined in consultation with
interested culturally affiliated Native
American tribes. Use of temporary and
permanent forms of protective fencing will
be determined in consultation with Native
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-41 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
American representatives from interested
culturally affiliated Native American tribes.
• The construction contractor(s) will maintain
the protective fencing throughout
construction to avoid the site during all
remaining phases of construction. The area
will be demarcated as an “Environmentally
Sensitive Area”.

If a cultural resource or a tribal cultural resource
cannot be avoided, the following performance
standard shall be met prior to continuance of
construction and associated activities that may
result in damage to or destruction of cultural
resources or tribal cultural resources:
• Each resource will be evaluated for California
Register of Historical Resources (CRHR)
eligibility through application of established
eligibility criteria (California Code of
Regulations 15064.636), in consultation with
consulting Native American Tribes, as
applicable.

If a cultural resource or a tribal cultural resource
is determined to be eligible for listing in the
CRHR, the City will avoid damaging effects to the
resource in accordance with California PRC
Section 21084.3, if feasible. The City shall
coordinate the investigation of the find with a
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-42 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
qualified archaeologist (meeting the Secretary of
the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Standards for Archeology) approved by the City
and with interested culturally affiliated Native
American tribes that respond to the City’s
invitation. As part of the site investigation and
resource assessment, the City and the
archaeologist shall consult with interested
culturally affiliated Native American tribes to
assess the significance of the find, make
recommendations for further evaluation and
treatment as necessary and provide proper
management recommendations should potential
impacts to the resources be determined by the
City to be significant. A written report detailing
the site assessment, coordination activities, and
management recommendations shall be
provided to the City representative by the
qualified archaeologist. These recommendations
will be documented in the project record. For any
recommendations made by interested culturally
affiliated Native American tribes that are not
implemented, a justification for why the
recommendation was not followed will be
provided in the project record.

Native American representatives from interested
culturally affiliated Native American Tribes and
the City representative will also consult to
develop measures for long-term management of
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-43 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
any discovered tribal cultural resources.

Consultation will be limited to actions consistent
with the jurisdiction of the City and taking into
account ownership of the subject property. To
the extent that the City has jurisdiction, routine
operation and maintenance within tribal cultural
resources retaining tribal cultural integrity shall
be consistent with the avoidance and
minimization standards identified in this
mitigation measure.

If the City determines that the project may cause
a significant impact to a tribal cultural resource,
and measures are not otherwise identified in the
consultation process, the following are examples
of mitigation capable of avoiding or substantially
lessening potential significant impacts to a tribal
cultural resource or alternatives that would avoid
significant impacts to the resource. These
measures may be considered to avoid or
minimize significant adverse impacts and
constitute the standard by which an impact
conclusion of less-than significant may be
reached:
• Avoid and preserve resources in place,
including, but not limited to, planning
construction to avoid the resources and
protect the cultural and natural context, or
planning greenspace, parks, or other open
space, to incorporate the resources with
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-44 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
culturally appropriate protection and
management criteria.
• Treat the resource with culturally appropriate
dignity taking into account the Tribal cultural
values and meaning of the resource,
including, but not limited to, the following:
o Protect the cultural character and
integrity of the resource.
o Protect the traditional use of the
resource.
o Protect the confidentiality of the
resource.
• Establish permanent conservation easements
or other interests in real property, with
culturally appropriate management criteria
for the purposes of preserving or using the
resources or places.
• Protect the resource.

Mitigation Measure TCR-3: Implement
Procedures in the Event of the Inadvertent
Discovery of Human Remains
If an inadvertent discovery of human remains is
made at any time during Project-related
construction activities or Project planning, the
following performance standards shall be met
prior to implementing or continuing actions such
as construction, which may result in damage to or
destruction of human remains. In accordance
City Department
of Utilities and
Project contractor

During ground
disturbing
activities in
event of
inadvertent
discovery of
human remains
City Department
of Utilities

Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-45 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
with the California Health and Safety Code (HSC),
if human remains are encountered during
ground-disturbing activities, the City shall
immediately halt potentially damaging excavation
in the area of the remains and notify the
Sacramento County Coroner and a professional
archaeologist to determine the nature of the
remains. The Coroner is required to examine all
discoveries of human remains within 48 hours of
receiving notice of a discovery on private or State
lands (HSC Section 7050.5[b]).

If the human remains are of historic age and are
determined to be not of Native American origin,
the City will follow the provisions of the HSC
Section 7000 (et seq.) regarding the disinterment
and removal of non-Native American human
remains.

If the Coroner determines that the remains are
those of a Native American, he or she must
contact the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) by phone within 24 hours of
making that determination (HSC Section 7050[c]).

After the Coroner’s findings have been made, the
archaeologist and the NAHC-designated Most
Likely Descendant (MLD), in consultation with the
landowner, shall determine the ultimate
treatment and disposition of the remains. The
Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Sacramento (0011900.00) 4-46 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Groundwater Well Replacement Program February 2024
Impact Statement Mitigation Measures Implementing
Party Timing Monitoring
Party
Verification:

Date
Completed
Initials
responsibilities of the City for acting upon
notification of a discovery of Native American
human remains are identified in California PRC
Section 5097.9 et seq.