Agenda packet — Wheatland City Council, November 10, 2025 (part 7 of 13)

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Reservoir Painting, paving, interior Off-Highway Trucks 2 8.00 250 0.38 Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Rough Grading/Well
Drilling
16 40.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Piping and Electrical 10 25.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Lighting and Tank 10 25.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Foundation
and Walls
17 18.00 7.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Generator and Well
Pump
9 18.00 7.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Booster Station 9 18.00 7.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Reservoir Erection 5 18.00 7.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Final Electrical and
Painting
9 4.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Reservoir Painting,
paving, interior
12 30.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ! : ----------------~--------------◄~,-------+----------~---------.!. __________ • ---------- ! I :
•••••••••••••••-~-------------- I ----------~---------.!_ __________ I---------- 1 I :
! i ----------~---------..!,__________ I _________ _ ----------------r-------------- ! I I ! I
----------------~-------------- ~ ----------~---------.!. __________ • ---------- ! I :
----------------~-------------- ~ ----------~---------.!. __________ • ---------- ! I :
•••••••••••••••-~-------------- I ----------~---------.!_ __________ I---------- 1 I :
----------------~--------------: ----------~---------.!. __________ • ---------- ' I : : ----------------l--------------~---------- ----------~ ---------~ -----------!.--------- . - .
.
---------- ------------- ----------~ ----------
---------- ------------- ----------~ ----------
---------- ------------- ----------~ ----------
---------- ------------- ----------~ ----------
---------- ------------- ----------~ ----------
---------- ------------- ----------~ ----------
---------- ------------- ----------~ ----------
I
--------. .;. . -----------. ,. . ---------~ ---------- 1325
Section 3, Item # 3.1

3.2 Rough Grading/Well Drilling - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 5.3119 0.0000 5.3119 2.5686 0.0000 2.5686 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.2143 25.4395 26.6315 0.0754 0.9887 0.9887 0.9147 0.9147 7,236.544 6 7,236.544
6 2.2795 7,293.531
4 Total 3.2143 25.4395 26.6315 0.0754 5.3119 0.9887 6.3006 2.5686 0.9147 3.4832 7,236.544 6 7,236.544
6 2.2795 7,293.531
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1112 0.0730 0.8661 2.4400e0030.3286 1.4200e0030.3300 0.0872 1.3100e0030.0885 256.1929 256.1929 7.8400e0037.7000e003258.6849 Total 0.1112 0.0730 0.8661 2.4400e0030.3286 1.4200e0030.3300 0.0872 1.3100e0030.0885 256.1929 256.1929 7.8400e0037.7000e003258.6849 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 -----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t-------:-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : I : : : : : I
:: : : : : : : : : I : : : : :
., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
I
I
I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1326
Section 3, Item # 3.1

3.2 Rough Grading/Well Drilling - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 5.3119 0.0000 5.3119 2.5686 0.0000 2.5686 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.2143 25.4395 26.6315 0.0754 0.9887 0.9887 0.9147 0.9147 0.0000 7,236.544 6 7,236.544
6 2.2795 7,293.531
4 Total 3.2143 25.4395 26.6315 0.0754 5.3119 0.9887 6.3006 2.5686 0.9147 3.4832 0.0000 7,236.544 6 7,236.544
6 2.2795 7,293.531
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1112 0.0730 0.8661 2.4400e0030.3286 1.4200e0030.3300 0.0872 1.3100e0030.0885 256.1929 256.1929 7.8400e0037.7000e003258.6849 Total 0.1112 0.0730 0.8661 2.4400e0030.3286 1.4200e0030.3300 0.0872 1.3100e0030.0885 256.1929 256.1929 7.8400e0037.7000e003258.6849 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 -----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t-------:-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : I : : : : : I
:: : : : : : : : : I : : : : :
., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
I
I
I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1327
Section 3, Item # 3.1

3.3 Piping and Electrical - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.9157 12.8803 15.1098 0.0470 0.5046 0.5046 0.4675 0.4675 4,515.174 9 4,515.174
9 1.4292 4,550.904
6 Total 1.9157 12.8803 15.1098 0.0470 0.5046 0.5046 0.4675 0.4675 4,515.174 9 4,515.174
9 1.4292 4,550.904
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0695 0.0456 0.5413 1.5200e0030.2054 8.9000e0040.2063 0.0545 8.2000e0040.0553 160.1206 160.1206 4.9000e0034.8200e003161.6780 Total 0.0695 0.0456 0.5413 1.5200e0030.2054 8.9000e0040.2063 0.0545 8.2000e0040.0553 160.1206 160.1206 4.9000e0034.8200e003161.6780 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1328
Section 3, Item # 3.1

3.3 Piping and Electrical - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.9157 12.8803 15.1098 0.0470 0.5046 0.5046 0.4675 0.4675 0.0000 4,515.174 9 4,515.174
9 1.4292 4,550.904
6 Total 1.9157 12.8803 15.1098 0.0470 0.5046 0.5046 0.4675 0.4675 0.0000 4,515.174 9 4,515.174
9 1.4292 4,550.904
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0695 0.0456 0.5413 1.5200e0030.2054 8.9000e0040.2063 0.0545 8.2000e0040.0553 160.1206 160.1206 4.9000e0034.8200e003161.6780 Total 0.0695 0.0456 0.5413 1.5200e0030.2054 8.9000e0040.2063 0.0545 8.2000e0040.0553 160.1206 160.1206 4.9000e0034.8200e003161.6780 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.4 Site Lighting and Tank - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.9157 12.8803 15.1098 0.0470 0.5046 0.5046 0.4675 0.4675 4,515.174 9 4,515.174
9 1.4292 4,550.904
6 Total 1.9157 12.8803 15.1098 0.0470 0.5046 0.5046 0.4675 0.4675 4,515.174 9 4,515.174
9 1.4292 4,550.904
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0695 0.0456 0.5413 1.5200e0030.2054 8.9000e0040.2063 0.0545 8.2000e0040.0553 160.1206 160.1206 4.9000e0034.8200e003161.6780 Total 0.0695 0.0456 0.5413 1.5200e0030.2054 8.9000e0040.2063 0.0545 8.2000e0040.0553 160.1206 160.1206 4.9000e0034.8200e003161.6780 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.4 Site Lighting and Tank - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.9157 12.8803 15.1098 0.0470 0.5046 0.5046 0.4675 0.4675 0.0000 4,515.174 9 4,515.174
9 1.4292 4,550.904
6 Total 1.9157 12.8803 15.1098 0.0470 0.5046 0.5046 0.4675 0.4675 0.0000 4,515.174 9 4,515.174
9 1.4292 4,550.904
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0695 0.0456 0.5413 1.5200e0030.2054 8.9000e0040.2063 0.0545 8.2000e0040.0553 160.1206 160.1206 4.9000e0034.8200e003161.6780 Total 0.0695 0.0456 0.5413 1.5200e0030.2054 8.9000e0040.2063 0.0545 8.2000e0040.0553 160.1206 160.1206 4.9000e0034.8200e003161.6780 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.5 Building Foundation and Walls - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 3.0413 20.8138 25.0670 0.0761 0.7975 0.7975 0.7386 0.7386 7,312.925 8 7,312.925
8 2.3185 7,370.887
9 Total 3.0413 20.8138 25.0670 0.0761 0.7975 0.7975 0.7386 0.7386 7,312.925 8 7,312.925
8 2.3185 7,370.887
9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 8.9500e0030.4092 0.0912 1.4900e0030.0472 2.3500e0030.0496 0.0136 2.2500e0030.0158 156.7254 156.7254 4.7000e0040.0225 163.4548 Worker 0.0501 0.0328 0.3897 1.1000e0030.1479 6.4000e0040.1485 0.0392 5.9000e0040.0398 115.2868 115.2868 3.5300e0033.4700e003116.4082 Total 0.0590 0.4421 0.4809 2.5900e0030.1951 2.9900e0030.1981 0.0528 2.8400e0030.0556 272.0122 272.0122 4.0000e0030.0260 279.8630 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.5 Building Foundation and Walls - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 3.0413 20.8138 25.0670 0.0761 0.7975 0.7975 0.7386 0.7386 0.0000 7,312.925 8 7,312.925
8 2.3185 7,370.887
9 Total 3.0413 20.8138 25.0670 0.0761 0.7975 0.7975 0.7386 0.7386 0.0000 7,312.925 8 7,312.925
8 2.3185 7,370.887
9 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 8.9500e0030.4092 0.0912 1.4900e0030.0472 2.3500e0030.0496 0.0136 2.2500e0030.0158 156.7254 156.7254 4.7000e0040.0225 163.4548 Worker 0.0501 0.0328 0.3897 1.1000e0030.1479 6.4000e0040.1485 0.0392 5.9000e0040.0398 115.2868 115.2868 3.5300e0033.4700e003116.4082 Total 0.0590 0.4421 0.4809 2.5900e0030.1951 2.9900e0030.1981 0.0528 2.8400e0030.0556 272.0122 272.0122 4.0000e0030.0260 279.8630 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.6 Generator and Well Pump - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.1048 7.9051 9.9967 0.0265 0.3014 0.3014 0.2802 0.2802 2,530.617 5 2,530.617
5 0.7851 2,550.245
7 Total 1.1048 7.9051 9.9967 0.0265 0.3014 0.3014 0.2802 0.2802 2,530.617 5 2,530.617
5 0.7851 2,550.245
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 8.9500e0030.4092 0.0912 1.4900e0030.0472 2.3500e0030.0496 0.0136 2.2500e0030.0158 156.7254 156.7254 4.7000e0040.0225 163.4548 Worker 0.0501 0.0328 0.3897 1.1000e0030.1479 6.4000e0040.1485 0.0392 5.9000e0040.0398 115.2868 115.2868 3.5300e0033.4700e003116.4082 Total 0.0590 0.4421 0.4809 2.5900e0030.1951 2.9900e0030.1981 0.0528 2.8400e0030.0556 272.0122 272.0122 4.0000e0030.0260 279.8630 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.6 Generator and Well Pump - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.1048 7.9051 9.9967 0.0265 0.3014 0.3014 0.2802 0.2802 0.0000 2,530.617 5 2,530.617
5 0.7851 2,550.245
7 Total 1.1048 7.9051 9.9967 0.0265 0.3014 0.3014 0.2802 0.2802 0.0000 2,530.617 5 2,530.617
5 0.7851 2,550.245
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 8.9500e0030.4092 0.0912 1.4900e0030.0472 2.3500e0030.0496 0.0136 2.2500e0030.0158 156.7254 156.7254 4.7000e0040.0225 163.4548 Worker 0.0501 0.0328 0.3897 1.1000e0030.1479 6.4000e0040.1485 0.0392 5.9000e0040.0398 115.2868 115.2868 3.5300e0033.4700e003116.4082 Total 0.0590 0.4421 0.4809 2.5900e0030.1951 2.9900e0030.1981 0.0528 2.8400e0030.0556 272.0122 272.0122 4.0000e0030.0260 279.8630 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.7 Booster Station - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.2220 8.6543 12.1410 0.0287 0.3402 0.3402 0.3170 0.3170 2,725.203 5 2,725.203
5 0.8303 2,745.960
7 Total 1.2220 8.6543 12.1410 0.0287 0.3402 0.3402 0.3170 0.3170 2,725.203 5 2,725.203
5 0.8303 2,745.960
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 8.9500e0030.4092 0.0912 1.4900e0030.0472 2.3500e0030.0496 0.0136 2.2500e0030.0158 156.7254 156.7254 4.7000e0040.0225 163.4548 Worker 0.0501 0.0328 0.3897 1.1000e0030.1479 6.4000e0040.1485 0.0392 5.9000e0040.0398 115.2868 115.2868 3.5300e0033.4700e003116.4082 Total 0.0590 0.4421 0.4809 2.5900e0030.1951 2.9900e0030.1981 0.0528 2.8400e0030.0556 272.0122 272.0122 4.0000e0030.0260 279.8630 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r------- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1336
Section 3, Item # 3.1

3.7 Booster Station - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.2220 8.6543 12.1410 0.0287 0.3402 0.3402 0.3170 0.3170 0.0000 2,725.203 5 2,725.203
5 0.8303 2,745.960
7 Total 1.2220 8.6543 12.1410 0.0287 0.3402 0.3402 0.3170 0.3170 0.0000 2,725.203 5 2,725.203
5 0.8303 2,745.960
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 8.9500e0030.4092 0.0912 1.4900e0030.0472 2.3500e0030.0496 0.0136 2.2500e0030.0158 156.7254 156.7254 4.7000e0040.0225 163.4548 Worker 0.0501 0.0328 0.3897 1.1000e0030.1479 6.4000e0040.1485 0.0392 5.9000e0040.0398 115.2868 115.2868 3.5300e0033.4700e003116.4082 Total 0.0590 0.4421 0.4809 2.5900e0030.1951 2.9900e0030.1981 0.0528 2.8400e0030.0556 272.0122 272.0122 4.0000e0030.0260 279.8630 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.8 Reservoir Erection - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.8227 6.8137 7.4134 0.0171 0.2663 0.2663 0.2474 0.2474 1,626.725 3 1,626.725
3 0.4906 1,638.989
6 Total 0.8227 6.8137 7.4134 0.0171 0.2663 0.2663 0.2474 0.2474 1,626.725 3 1,626.725
3 0.4906 1,638.989
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 8.9500e0030.4092 0.0912 1.4900e0030.0472 2.3500e0030.0496 0.0136 2.2500e0030.0158 156.7254 156.7254 4.7000e0040.0225 163.4548 Worker 0.0501 0.0328 0.3897 1.1000e0030.1479 6.4000e0040.1485 0.0392 5.9000e0040.0398 115.2868 115.2868 3.5300e0033.4700e003116.4082 Total 0.0590 0.4421 0.4809 2.5900e0030.1951 2.9900e0030.1981 0.0528 2.8400e0030.0556 272.0122 272.0122 4.0000e0030.0260 279.8630 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.8 Reservoir Erection - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.8227 6.8137 7.4134 0.0171 0.2663 0.2663 0.2474 0.2474 0.0000 1,626.725 3 1,626.725
3 0.4906 1,638.989
6 Total 0.8227 6.8137 7.4134 0.0171 0.2663 0.2663 0.2474 0.2474 0.0000 1,626.725 3 1,626.725
3 0.4906 1,638.989
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 8.9500e0030.4092 0.0912 1.4900e0030.0472 2.3500e0030.0496 0.0136 2.2500e0030.0158 156.7254 156.7254 4.7000e0040.0225 163.4548 Worker 0.0501 0.0328 0.3897 1.1000e0030.1479 6.4000e0040.1485 0.0392 5.9000e0040.0398 115.2868 115.2868 3.5300e0033.4700e003116.4082 Total 0.0590 0.4421 0.4809 2.5900e0030.1951 2.9900e0030.1981 0.0528 2.8400e0030.0556 272.0122 272.0122 4.0000e0030.0260 279.8630 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I •• I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
• • • •

3.9 Reservoir Painting, paving, interior - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.9140 15.1165 17.7505 0.0462 0.6008 0.6008 0.5543 0.5543 4,451.800 2 4,451.800
2 1.4243 4,487.406
4 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.9140 15.1165 17.7505 0.0462 0.6008 0.6008 0.5543 0.5543 4,451.800 2 4,451.800
2 1.4243 4,487.406
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0834 0.0547 0.6496 1.8300e0030.2464 1.0700e0030.2475 0.0654 9.8000e0040.0664 192.1447 192.1447 5.8800e0035.7800e003194.0137 Total 0.0834 0.0547 0.6496 1.8300e0030.2464 1.0700e0030.2475 0.0654 9.8000e0040.0664 192.1447 192.1447 5.8800e0035.7800e003194.0137 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 -----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t-------:-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : I : : : : : I
:: : : : : : : : : I : : : : :
., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
I
I
I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1340
Section 3, Item # 3.1

3.9 Reservoir Painting, paving, interior - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.9140 15.1165 17.7505 0.0462 0.6008 0.6008 0.5543 0.5543 0.0000 4,451.800 2 4,451.800
2 1.4243 4,487.406
4 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.9140 15.1165 17.7505 0.0462 0.6008 0.6008 0.5543 0.5543 0.0000 4,451.800 2 4,451.800
2 1.4243 4,487.406
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0834 0.0547 0.6496 1.8300e0030.2464 1.0700e0030.2475 0.0654 9.8000e0040.0664 192.1447 192.1447 5.8800e0035.7800e003194.0137 Total 0.0834 0.0547 0.6496 1.8300e0030.2464 1.0700e0030.2475 0.0654 9.8000e0040.0664 192.1447 192.1447 5.8800e0035.7800e003194.0137 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 -----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t-------:-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : I : : : : : I
:: : : : : : : : : I : : : : :
., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
I
I
I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1341
Section 3, Item # 3.1

3.10 Final Electrical and Painting - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 97.3350 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.1019 7.8843 10.3758 0.0303 0.2842 0.2842 0.2618 0.2618 2,924.496 5 2,924.496
5 0.9426 2,948.060
2 Total 98.4369 7.8843 10.3758 0.0303 0.2842 0.2842 0.2618 0.2618 2,924.496 5 2,924.496
5 0.9426 2,948.060
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0111 7.2900e0030.0866 2.4000e0040.0329 1.4000e0040.0330 8.7200e0031.3000e0048.8500e00325.6193 25.6193 7.8000e0047.7000e00425.8685 Total 0.0111 7.2900e0030.0866 2.4000e0040.0329 1.4000e0040.0330 8.7200e0031.3000e0048.8500e00325.6193 25.6193 7.8000e0047.7000e00425.8685 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 -----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t-------:-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : I : : : : : I
:: : : : : : : : : I : : : : :
., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
I
I
I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1342
Section 3, Item # 3.1

3.10 Final Electrical and Painting - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 97.3350 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.1019 7.8843 10.3758 0.0303 0.2842 0.2842 0.2618 0.2618 0.0000 2,924.496 5 2,924.496
5 0.9426 2,948.060
2 Total 98.4369 7.8843 10.3758 0.0303 0.2842 0.2842 0.2618 0.2618 0.0000 2,924.496 5 2,924.496
5 0.9426 2,948.060
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0111 7.2900e0030.0866 2.4000e0040.0329 1.4000e0040.0330 8.7200e0031.3000e0048.8500e00325.6193 25.6193 7.8000e0047.7000e00425.8685 Total 0.0111 7.2900e0030.0866 2.4000e0040.0329 1.4000e0040.0330 8.7200e0031.3000e0048.8500e00325.6193 25.6193 7.8000e0047.7000e00425.8685 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 -----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t-------:-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : I : : : : : I
:: : : : : : : : : I : : : : :
., I I I I I I I I I
:: : : : : : : : : I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------=~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------t------- :: : : : : : : : : I :: : : : : : : : : I
I
I
I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r··----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1343
Section 3, Item # 3.1

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.3000e0041.2000e0041.4700e0030.0000 5.1000e0040.0000 5.1000e0041.4000e0040.0000 1.4000e0040.3973 0.3973 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.4016 Unmitigated 1.3000e0041.2000e0041.4700e0030.0000 5.1000e0040.0000 5.1000e0041.4000e0040.0000 1.4000e0040.3973 0.3973 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.4016

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.08 0.08 0.08 245 245 Total 0.08 0.08 0.08 245 245
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 0.00 41.00 92 5 3

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I I i ' I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I -----------=~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------: -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ ------- ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . ., . ' ' ' ' ' ., . ., .

I I I I I I I I I I I I I
1344
Section 3, Item # 3.1

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I . ,I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I . ,I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I -----------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------: -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ ------- .. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . .. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . .. . ' ' ' ' ' .. .

I 1, I I I I I I I I ' i I I I I I
I 1, I I I I I I I I ' ' ' I I I I
I 1, I I I I I I I I ' ' ' I I I I
I 1, I I I I I I I I ' ' ' I I I I
1345
Section 3, Item # 3.1

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.1659 4.0000e0054.2800e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0059.1900e0039.1900e0032.0000e0059.7900e003 Unmitigated 1.1659 4.0000e0054.2800e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0059.1900e0039.1900e0032.0000e0059.7900e003

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 36 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I 1, I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
I 1, I I I I I I I I ' i I I I I I
I 1, I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
I 1, I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
., I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I
., I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I -----------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------: -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ -------~ ------- ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . ., ' ' ' ' ' I I I ' ' ' I I I . I I I I I ., ' I I ' I I I I I . ' I I I I
., I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I
1346
Section 3, Item # 3.1

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.2667 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.8988 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 3.9000e0044.0000e0054.2800e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0059.1900e0039.1900e0032.0000e0059.7900e003 Total 1.1659 4.0000e0054.2800e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0059.1900e0039.1900e0032.0000e0059.7900e003 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 37 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -----------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : : I I I I I I I I I I -----------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : : : : I I
I
I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r······· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r······· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1347
Section 3, Item # 3.1

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.2667 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 38 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ~ !
I I I I I I I I I : I I I I I I I I I I
-----------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : : I I I I I I I I I I -----------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~------- :: : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : : : : I I
I
I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r······· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -------r-------r-------r-------r-------r······· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1348
Section 3, Item # 3.1

11.0 Vegetation
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Emergency Generator 1 0.5 6 805 0.73 Diesel
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

10.1 Stationary Sources
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type lb/day lb/day
Emergency
Generator -
Diesel (750 -
9999 HP)

0.6605 2.9539 1.6842 3.1700e0030.0972 0.0972 0.0972 0.0972 337.9044 337.9044 0.0474 339.0888 Total 0.6605 2.9539 1.6842 3.1700e0030.0972 0.0972 0.0972 0.0972 337.9044 337.9044 0.0474 339.0888 Unmitigated/Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 39 of 39 Date: 2/7/2023 3:24 PM Forty Mile Water Plant - Yuba County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied .1 I I I I I I I I . I I I
I .1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
.1 I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I :I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I .1 I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I . I
1349
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 9.0.0
Daily Emission Estimates for -> Total Exhaust Fugitive Dust Total Exhaust Fugitive Dust Project Phases (Pounds) ROG (lbs/day) CO (lbs/day) NOx (lbs/day) PM10 (lbs/day) PM10 (lbs/day) PM10 (lbs/day) PM2.5 (lbs/day) PM2.5 (lbs/day) PM2.5 (lbs/day) SOx (lbs/day) CO2 (lbs/day) CH4 (lbs/day) N2O (lbs/day) CO2e (lbs/day) Grubbing/Land Clearing 1.10 8.75 8.78 0.58 0.38 0.20 0.38 0.34 0.04 0.02 2,060.91 0.46 0.04 2,085.19 Grading/Excavation 3.59 31.70 38.78 1.74 1.54 0.20 1.34 1.30 0.04 0.11 10,727.31 2.17 0.61 10,964.59 Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 3.47 33.59 37.80 1.67 1.47 0.20 1.27 1.23 0.04 0.11 10,897.70 1.59 0.69 11,144.45 Paving 1.56 18.91 14.09 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.00 0.04 3,349.84 0.77 0.10 3,399.98 Maximum (pounds/day) 3.59 33.59 38.78 1.74 1.54 0.20 1.34 1.30 0.04 0.11 10,897.70 2.17 0.69 11,144.45 Total (tons/construction project) 0.15 1.39 1.57 0.07 0.06 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 435.86 0.08 0.02 445.30 Notes: Project Start Year -> 2025
Project Length (months) -> 5
Total Project Area (acres) -> 2
Maximum Area Disturbed/Day (acres) -> 0
Water Truck Used? -> Yes
Phase Soil Asphalt Soil Hauling Asphalt Hauling Worker Commute Water Truck Grubbing/Land Clearing 0 0 0 0 320 40
Grading/Excavation 480 0 900 0 400 40
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 560 0 1,050 0 400 40
Paving 0 48 0 90 320 40
CO2e emissions are estimated by multiplying mass emissions for each GHG by its global warming potential (GWP), 1 , 25 and 298 for CO2, CH4 and N2O, respectively. Total CO2e is then estimated by summing CO2e estimates over all GHGs.

Total Emission Estimates by Phase for -> Total Exhaust Fugitive Dust Total Exhaust Fugitive Dust Project Phases
(Tons for all except CO2e. Metric tonnes for CO2e) ROG (tons/phase) CO (tons/phase) NOx (tons/phase) PM10 (tons/phase) PM10 (tons/phase) PM10 (tons/phase) PM2.5 (tons/phase) PM2.5 (tons/phase) PM2.5 (tons/phase) SOx (tons/phase) CO2 (tons/phase) CH4 (tons/phase) N2O (tons/phase) CO2e (MT/phase) Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.20 0.00 0.00 9.36 Grading/Excavation 0.08 0.71 0.86 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 238.95 0.05 0.01 221.57 Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.05 0.50 0.56 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 161.83 0.02 0.01 150.14 Paving 0.01 0.14 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.87 0.01 0.00 22.90 Maximum (tons/phase) 0.08 0.71 0.86 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 238.95 0.05 0.01 221.57 Total (tons/construction project) 0.15 1.39 1.57 0.07 0.06 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 435.86 0.08 0.02 403.97 CO2e emissions are estimated by multiplying mass emissions for each GHG by its global warming potential (GWP), 1 , 25 and 298 for CO2, CH4 and N2O, respectively. Total CO2e is then estimated by summing CO2e estimates over all GHGs.

The CO2e emissions are reported as metric tons per phase.

Daily VMT (miles/day)
Total PM10 emissions shown in column F are the sum of exhaust and fugitive dust emissions shown in columns G and H. Total PM2.5 emissions shown in Column I are the sum of exhaust and fugitive dust emissions shown in columns J and K.

Wastewater Pipeline - SCSA Sanitary Sewer
PM10 and PM2.5 estimates assume 50% control of fugitive dust from watering and associated dust control measures if a minimum number of water trucks are specified.

Total PM10 emissions shown in column F are the sum of exhaust and fugitive dust emissions shown in columns G and H. Total PM2.5 emissions shown in Column I are the sum of exhaust and fugitive dust emissions shown in columns J and K.

Total Material Imported/Exported Volume
(yd3/day)
1350
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 1
Road Construction Emissions Model Version 9.0.0
Data Entry Worksheet
Optional data input sections have a blue background. Only areas with a yellow or blue background can be modified. Program defaults have a white background.

The user is required to enter information in cells D10 through D24, E28 through G35, and D38 through D41 for all project types.

Please use "Clear Data Input & User Overrides" button first before changing the Project Type or begin a new project.

Input Type
Project Name Wastewater Pipeline - SCSA Sanitary Sewer
Construction Start Year 2025 Enter a Year between 2014 and 2040 (inclusive)
Project Type 1) New Road Construction : Project to build a roadway from bare ground, which generally requires more site preparation than widening an existing roadway 2) Road Widening : Project to add a new lane to an existing roadway 3) Bridge/Overpass Construction : Project to build an elevated roadway, which generally requires some different equipment than a new roadway, such as a crane 4) Other Linear Project Type: Non-roadway project such as a pipeline, transmission line, or levee construction Project Construction Time 4.50 months
Working Days per Month 22.00 days (assume 22 if unknown) Predominant Soil/Site Type: Enter 1, 2, or 3 1) Sand Gravel : Use for quaternary deposits (Delta/West County) 2) Weathered Rock-Earth : Use for Laguna formation (Jackson Highway area) or the Ione formation (Scott Road, Rancho Murieta) 3) Blasted Rock : Use for Salt Springs Slate or Copper Hill Volcanics (Folsom South of Highway 50, Rancho Murieta) Project Length 4.40 miles
Total Project Area 1.60 acres
Maximum Area Disturbed/Day 0.02 acres
Water Trucks Used? 1 1. Yes

Select "20% NOx and 45% Exhaust PM reduction" option if the project will be required to use a lower emitting off-road construction fleet. The SMAQMD Construction Mitigation Calculator can be used to confirm compliance with this mitigation measure (http://www.airquality.org/Businesses/CEQA-Land-Use-Planning/Mitigation).

Please note that the soil type instructions provided in cells E18 to E20 are specific to Sacramento County. Maps available from the California Geologic Survey (see weblink below) can be used to determine soil type outside Sacramento County.
http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/information/geologic_mapping/Pages/googl emaps.aspx#regionalseries
1 Note: Required data input sections have a yellow background.

Soil
Asphalt
All Tier 4 Equipment
(for project within "Sacramento County", follow soil type selection instructions in cells E18 to E20 otherwise see instructions provided in cells J18 to J22) 2 To begin a new project, click this button to
clear data previously entered. This button
will only work if you opted not to disable
macros when loading this spreadsheet.

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN
,_.

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
I I
I
1351
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 2
n Calculator can be used to confirm compliance
1352
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 3
Note: The program's estimates of construction period phase length can be overridden in cells D50 through D53, and F50 through F53.

Program Program
User Override of Calculated User Override of Default
Construction Periods Construction Months Months Phase Starting Date Phase Starting Date Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.45 4/19/25 1/1/25
Grading/Excavation 2.03 5/3/25 1/15/25
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 1.35 7/4/25 3/18/25
Paving 0.68 8/15/25 4/29/25
Totals (Months)
Note: Soil Hauling emission default values can be overridden in cells D61 through D64, and F61 through F64.

Soil Hauling Emissions User Override of Program Estimate of User Override of Truck Default Values Calculated User Input Miles/Round Trip Miles/Round Trip Round Trips/Day Round Trips/Day Daily VMT Miles/round trip: Grubbing/Land Clearing 30.00 0 0.00
Miles/round trip: Grading/Excavation 30.00 30 900.00
Miles/round trip: Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 30.00 35 1050.00 Miles/round trip: Paving 30.00 0 0.00
Emission Rates ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Grading/Excavation (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Paving (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grading/Excavation (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling Emissions ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Pounds per day - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pounds per day - Grading/Excavation 0.06 0.82 6.37 0.22 0.10 0.03 3,319.27 0.00 0.52 3,474.82 Tons per const. Period - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 73.94 0.00 0.01 77.40 Pounds per day - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.07 0.95 7.44 0.26 0.11 0.04 3,872.49 0.00 0.61 4,053.96 Tons per const. Period - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.51 0.00 0.01 60.20 Pounds per day - Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons per construction project 0.00 0.03 0.25 0.01 0.00 0.00 131.44 0.00 0.02 137.60 Note: Asphalt Hauling emission default values can be overridden in cells D91 through D94, and F91 through F94.

Asphalt Hauling Emissions User Override of Program Estimate of User Override of Truck Default Values Calculated User Input Miles/Round Trip Miles/Round Trip Round Trips/Day Round Trips/Day Daily VMT Miles/round trip: Grubbing/Land Clearing 30.00 0 0.00
Miles/round trip: Grading/Excavation 30.00 0 0.00
Miles/round trip: Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 30.00 0 0.00 Miles/round trip: Paving 30.00 3 90.00
Emission Rates ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Grading/Excavation (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Paving (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grading/Excavation (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Emissions ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Pounds per day - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pounds per day - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pounds per day - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pounds per day - Paving 0.01 0.08 0.64 0.02 0.01 0.00 331.93 0.00 0.05 347.48 Tons per const. Period - Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.46 0.00 0.00 2.58 Total tons per construction project 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.46 0.00 0.00 2.58 5 I I I I I I

I I I I I I

I I I I I I
1353
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 4
Note: Worker commute default values can be overridden in cells D121 through D126.

Worker Commute Emissions User Override of Worker
User Input Commute Default Values Default Values
Miles/ one-way trip 20 Calculated Calculated
One-way trips/day 2 Daily Trips Daily VMT
No. of employees: Grubbing/Land Clearing 8 14 16 320.00 No. of employees: Grading/Excavation 10 27 20 400.00
No. of employees: Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 10 24 20 400.00 No. of employees: Paving 8 20 16 320.00
Emission Rates ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/mile) 0.01 0.78 0.06 0.05 0.02 0.00 295.84 0.00 0.01 297.52 Grading/Excavation (grams/mile) 0.01 0.78 0.06 0.05 0.02 0.00 295.84 0.00 0.01 297.52 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/mile) 0.01 0.78 0.06 0.05 0.02 0.00 295.84 0.00 0.01 297.52 Paving (grams/mile) 0.01 0.78 0.06 0.05 0.02 0.00 295.84 0.00 0.01 297.52 Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/trip) 0.93 2.56 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.73 0.06 0.03 73.77 Grading/Excavation (grams/trip) 0.93 2.56 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.73 0.06 0.03 73.77 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/trip) 0.93 2.56 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.73 0.06 0.03 73.77 Paving (grams/trip) 0.93 2.56 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.73 0.06 0.03 73.77 Emissions ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Pounds per day - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.04 0.64 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 210.95 0.00 0.00 212.50 Tons per const. Period - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.04 0.00 0.00 1.05 Pounds per day - Grading/Excavation 0.05 0.80 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 263.69 0.01 0.01 265.62 Tons per const. Period - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.87 0.00 0.00 5.92 Pounds per day - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.05 0.80 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 263.69 0.01 0.01 265.62 Tons per const. Period - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.92 0.00 0.00 3.94 Pounds per day - Paving 0.04 0.64 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 210.95 0.00 0.00 212.50 Tons per const. Period - Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.57 0.00 0.00 1.58 Total tons per construction project 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.40 0.00 0.00 12.49 Note: Water Truck default values can be overridden in cells D153 through D156, I153 through I156, and F153 through F156.

Water Truck Emissions User Override of Program Estimate of User Override of Truck Default Values Calculated User Override of Default Values Calculated User Input Default # Water Trucks Number of Water Trucks Round Trips/Vehicle/Day Round Trips/Vehicle/Day Trips/day Miles/Round Trip Miles/Round Trip Daily VMT Grubbing/Land Clearing - Exhaust 1 5 5 8.00 40.00
Grading/Excavation - Exhaust 1 5 5 8.00 40.00
Drainage/Utilities/Subgrade 1 5 5 8.00 40.00
Paving 1 5 5 8.00 40.00
Emission Rates ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Grading/Excavation (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Paving (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.06 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,672.88 0.00 0.26 1,751.28 Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grading/Excavation (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Emissions ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Pounds per day - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.04 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 147.52 0.00 0.02 154.44 Tons per const. Period - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.76 Pounds per day - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.04 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 147.52 0.00 0.02 154.44 Tons per const. Period - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.29 0.00 0.00 3.44 Pounds per day - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.04 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 147.52 0.00 0.02 154.44 Tons per const. Period - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.19 0.00 0.00 2.29 Pounds per day - Paving 0.00 0.04 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 147.52 0.00 0.02 154.44 Tons per const. Period - Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.10 0.00 0.00 1.15 Total tons per construction project 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.30 0.00 0.00 7.64 Note: Fugitive dust default values can be overridden in cells D183 through D185.

User Override of Max Default PM10 PM10 PM2.5 PM2.5
Acreage Disturbed/Day Maximum Acreage/Day pounds/day tons/per period pounds/day tons/per period Fugitive Dust - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.04 0.00 Fugitive Dust - Grading/Excavation 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.04 0.00 Fugitive Dust - Drainage/Utilities/Subgrade 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.04 0.00 Fugitive Dust

I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I
1354
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 5
Off-Road Equipment Emissions
Default
Grubbing/Land Clearing Number of Vehicles Override of Default ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Override of Default Number of Vehicles Program-estimate Default Equipment Tier (applicable only when
"Tier 4 Mitigation" Option Selected) Equipment Tier Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Aerial Lifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Air Compressors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Bore/Drill Rigs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Concrete/Industrial Saws 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cranes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crawler Tractors 0.37 2.10 3.96 0.15 0.14 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crushing/Proc. Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Excavators 0.17 3.26 1.22 0.06 0.06 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Generator Sets 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Graders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Trucks 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Construction Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other General Industrial Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Material Handling Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pavers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Paving Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Plate Compactors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pressure Washers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pumps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rollers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rough Terrain Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Scrapers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Signal Boards 0.52 2.71 3.23 0.13 0.13 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Skid Steer Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Surfacing Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Sweepers/Scrubbers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Trenchers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Welders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User-Defined Off-road Equipment If non-default vehicles are used, please provide information in 'Non-default Off-road Equipment' tab ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grubbing/Land Clearing pounds per day 1.06 8.07 8.41 0.34 0.32 0.02 Grubbing/Land Clearing tons per phase 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mitigation Option

0.00 0.00
N/A

0.00 0.00
N/A
N/A

0.00 N/A

0.00 Number of Vehicles

0.00 N/A
N/A
N/A
Equipment Tier
I
1355
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 6
Default
Grading/Excavation Number of Vehicles Override of Default ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Override of Default Number of Vehicles Program-estimate Default Equipment Tier (applicable only when
"Tier 4 Mitigation" Option Selected) Equipment Tier Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Aerial Lifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Air Compressors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Bore/Drill Rigs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Concrete/Industrial Saws 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cranes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crawler Tractors 0.37 2.10 3.96 0.15 0.14 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crushing/Proc. Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.00 3 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Excavators 0.17 3.26 1.22 0.06 0.06 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Generator Sets 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Graders 0.31 1.59 3.46 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Trucks 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Construction Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other General Industrial Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Material Handling Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pavers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Paving Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Plate Compactors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pressure Washers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pumps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rollers 0.27 3.69 2.89 0.15 0.13 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rough Terrain Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Loaders 0.23 1.47 1.86 0.06 0.06 0.01 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Scrapers 1.34 10.76 12.74 0.50 0.46 0.03 9 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Signal Boards 0.52 2.71 3.23 0.13 0.13 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Skid Steer Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Surfacing Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Sweepers/Scrubbers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.26 4.46 2.67 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Trenchers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Welders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User-Defined Off-road Equipment If non-default vehicles are used, please provide information in 'Non-default Off-road Equipment' tab ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading/Excavation pounds per day 3.48 30.05 32.03 1.27 1.18 0.07 Grading/Excavation tons per phase 0.08 0.67 0.71 0.03 0.03 0.00 Mitigation Option
N/A
Number of Vehicles

0.00 0.00

0.00 N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Equipment Tier
1356
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 7
Default
Drainage/Utilities/Subgrade Number of Vehicles Override of Default ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Override of Default Number of Vehicles Program-estimate Default Equipment Tier (applicable only when
"Tier 4 Mitigation" Option Selected) Equipment Tier pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Aerial Lifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Air Compressors 0.23 2.41 1.53 0.07 0.07 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Bore/Drill Rigs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Concrete/Industrial Saws 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cranes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crawler Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crushing/Proc. Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Excavators 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Generator Sets 0.27 3.66 2.40 0.10 0.10 0.01 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Graders 0.31 1.59 3.46 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Trucks 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Construction Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other General Industrial Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Material Handling Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pavers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Paving Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Plate Compactors 0.04 0.21 0.25 0.01 0.01 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pressure Washers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pumps 0.29 3.72 2.43 0.10 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rollers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rough Terrain Forklifts 0.10 2.29 1.28 0.04 0.03 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Scrapers 1.34 10.76 12.74 0.50 0.46 0.03 9 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Signal Boards 0.52 2.71 3.23 0.13 0.13 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Skid Steer Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Surfacing Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Sweepers/Scrubbers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.26 4.46 2.67 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Trenchers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Welders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User-Defined Off-road Equipment If non-default vehicles are used, please provide information in 'Non-default Off-road Equipment' tab ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade pounds per day 3.35 31.81 29.99 1.16 1.10 0.07 Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade tons per phase 0.05 0.47 0.45 0.02 0.02 0.00 Mitigation Option

0.00 0.00
Number of Vehicles

0.00 0.00

0.00 N/A
Equipment Tier
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1357
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 8
Default
Paving Number of Vehicles Override of Default ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Override of Default Number of Vehicles Program-estimate Default Equipment Tier (applicable only when
"Tier 4 Mitigation" Option Selected) Equipment Tier Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Aerial Lifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Air Compressors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Bore/Drill Rigs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Concrete/Industrial Saws 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cranes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crawler Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crushing/Proc. Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Excavators 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Generator Sets 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Graders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Trucks 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Construction Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other General Industrial Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Material Handling Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pavers 0.17 2.90 1.58 0.07 0.07 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Paving Equipment 0.15 2.55 1.26 0.06 0.06 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Plate Compactors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pressure Washers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pumps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rollers 0.41 5.54 4.33 0.22 0.20 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rough Terrain Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Scrapers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Signal Boards 0.52 2.71 3.23 0.13 0.13 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Skid Steer Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Surfacing Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Sweepers/Scrubbers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.26 4.46 2.67 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Trenchers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Welders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User-Defined Off-road Equipment If non-default vehicles are used, please provide information in 'Non-default Off-road Equipment' tab ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Paving pounds per day 1.51 18.15 13.08 0.59 0.55 0.03
Paving tons per phase 0.01 0.13 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Emissions all Phases (tons per construction period) => 0.14 1.32 1.30 0.05 0.05 0.00 Mitigation Option

0.00 0.00
Number of Vehicles

0.00 0.00

0.00 N/A
N/A
N/A
Equipment Tier
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1358
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 9
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
758.27 0.25 0.01 766.45

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
500.34 0.16 0.00 505.73

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
443.82 0.05 0.00 446.08

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1,702.43 0.45 0.02 1,718.26

8.43 0.00 0.00 8.51
1359
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 10
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
758.27 0.25 0.01 766.45

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
500.34 0.16 0.00 505.73

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
640.24 0.21 0.01 647.14

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
508.12 0.16 0.00 513.60

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
605.62 0.20 0.01 612.16
2,936.30 0.95 0.03 2,967.95
443.82 0.05 0.00 446.08

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
604.11 0.20 0.01 610.61

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
6,996.83 2.17 0.06 7,069.71
155.85 0.05 0.00 157.48
1360
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 11
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
375.26 0.02 0.00 376.62

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
623.04 0.02 0.00 625.01
640.24 0.21 0.01 647.14

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

34.48 0.00 0.00 34.65

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
623.04 0.03 0.00 625.06

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
333.72 0.11 0.00 337.31

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2,936.30 0.95 0.03 2,967.95
443.82 0.05 0.00 446.08

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
604.11 0.20 0.01 610.61

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
6,614.00 1.58 0.06 6,670.43

98.22 0.02 0.00 99.06
1361
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 12
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
454.99 0.15 0.00 459.90
394.32 0.13 0.00 398.57

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
762.19 0.25 0.01 770.40

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
443.82 0.05 0.00 446.08

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
604.11 0.20 0.01 610.61

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2,659.43 0.76 0.02 2,685.56

19.75 0.01 0.00 19.94
282.25 0.08 0.00 284.98
1362
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 13
Equipment default values for horsepower and hours/day can be overridden in cells D403 through D436 and F403 through F436.

User Override of Default Values User Override of Default Values Equipment Horsepower Horsepower Hours/day Hours/day
Aerial Lifts 63 8
Air Compressors 78 8
Bore/Drill Rigs 221 8
Cement and Mortar Mixers 9 8
Concrete/Industrial Saws 81 8
Cranes 231 8
Crawler Tractors 212 8
Crushing/Proc. Equipment 85 8
Excavators 158 8
Forklifts 89 8
Generator Sets 84 8
Graders 187 8
Off-Highway Tractors 124 8
Off-Highway Trucks 402 8
Other Construction Equipment 172 8
Other General Industrial Equipment 88 8
Other Material Handling Equipment 168 8
Pavers 130 8
Paving Equipment 132 8
Plate Compactors 8 8
Pressure Washers 13 8
Pumps 84 8
Rollers 80 8
Rough Terrain Forklifts 100 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 247 8
Rubber Tired Loaders 203 8
Scrapers 367 8
Signal Boards 6 8
Skid Steer Loaders 65 8
Surfacing Equipment 263 8
Sweepers/Scrubbers 64 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 8
Trenchers 78 8
Welders 46 8

END OF DATA ENTRY SHEET
1363
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 9.0.0
Daily Emission Estimates for -> Total Exhaust Fugitive Dust Total Exhaust Fugitive Dust Project Phases (Pounds) ROG (lbs/day) CO (lbs/day) NOx (lbs/day) PM10 (lbs/day) PM10 (lbs/day) PM10 (lbs/day) PM2.5 (lbs/day) PM2.5 (lbs/day) PM2.5 (lbs/day) SOx (lbs/day) CO2 (lbs/day) CH4 (lbs/day) N2O (lbs/day) CO2e (lbs/day) Grubbing/Land Clearing 1.38 10.21 10.58 0.65 0.45 0.20 0.45 0.41 0.04 0.03 2,298.55 0.48 0.04 2,323.90 Grading/Excavation 3.88 33.19 40.86 1.82 1.62 0.20 1.41 1.37 0.04 0.11 11,032.00 2.20 0.63 11,273.54 Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 3.87 36.10 40.82 1.78 1.58 0.20 1.37 1.33 0.04 0.12 11,654.27 1.76 0.71 11,909.90 Paving 1.85 20.37 15.89 0.72 0.72 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.04 3,583.44 0.79 0.10 3,634.45 Maximum (pounds/day) 3.88 36.10 40.86 1.82 1.62 0.20 1.41 1.37 0.04 0.12 11,654.27 2.20 0.71 11,909.90 Total (tons/construction project) 0.26 2.30 2.62 0.12 0.10 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.01 710.56 0.13 0.04 725.62 Notes: Project Start Year -> 2026
Project Length (months) -> 7
Total Project Area (acres) -> 3
Maximum Area Disturbed/Day (acres) -> 0
Water Truck Used? -> Yes
Phase Soil Asphalt Soil Hauling Asphalt Hauling Worker Commute Water Truck Grubbing/Land Clearing 0 0 0 0 320 40
Grading/Excavation 496 0 930 0 400 40
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 576 0 1,080 0 400 40
Paving 0 48 0 90 320 40
CO2e emissions are estimated by multiplying mass emissions for each GHG by its global warming potential (GWP), 1 , 25 and 298 for CO2, CH4 and N2O, respectively. Total CO2e is then estimated by summing CO2e estimates over all GHGs.

Total Emission Estimates by Phase for -> Total Exhaust Fugitive Dust Total Exhaust Fugitive Dust Project Phases
(Tons for all except CO2e. Metric tonnes for CO2e) ROG (tons/phase) CO (tons/phase) NOx (tons/phase) PM10 (tons/phase) PM10 (tons/phase) PM10 (tons/phase) PM2.5 (tons/phase) PM2.5 (tons/phase) PM2.5 (tons/phase) SOx (tons/phase) CO2 (tons/phase) CH4 (tons/phase) N2O (tons/phase) CO2e (MT/phase) Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.70 0.00 0.00 16.23 Grading/Excavation 0.13 1.15 1.42 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 382.26 0.08 0.02 354.38 Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.09 0.83 0.94 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 269.21 0.04 0.02 249.59 Paving 0.02 0.24 0.18 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 41.39 0.01 0.00 38.08 Maximum (tons/phase) 0.13 1.15 1.42 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 382.26 0.08 0.02 354.38 Total (tons/construction project) 0.26 2.30 2.62 0.12 0.10 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.01 710.56 0.13 0.04 658.28 CO2e emissions are estimated by multiplying mass emissions for each GHG by its global warming potential (GWP), 1 , 25 and 298 for CO2, CH4 and N2O, respectively. Total CO2e is then estimated by summing CO2e estimates over all GHGs.

The CO2e emissions are reported as metric tons per phase.

Water Supply and Delivery Pipeline
PM10 and PM2.5 estimates assume 50% control of fugitive dust from watering and associated dust control measures if a minimum number of water trucks are specified.

Total Material Imported/Exported Volume
(yd3/day)
1364
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 1
Road Construction Emissions Model Version 9.0.0
Data Entry Worksheet
Optional data input sections have a blue background. Only areas with a yellow or blue background can be modified. Program defaults have a white background.

The user is required to enter information in cells D10 through D24, E28 through G35, and D38 through D41 for all project types.

Please use "Clear Data Input & User Overrides" button first before changing the Project Type or begin a new project.

Input Type
Project Name Water Supply and Delivery Pipeline
Construction Start Year 2026 Enter a Year between 2014 and 2040 (inclusive)
Project Type 1) New Road Construction : Project to build a roadway from bare ground, which generally requires more site preparation than widening an existing roadway 2) Road Widening : Project to add a new lane to an existing roadway 3) Bridge/Overpass Construction : Project to build an elevated roadway, which generally requires some different equipment than a new roadway, such as a crane 4) Other Linear Project Type: Non-roadway project such as a pipeline, transmission line, or levee construction Project Construction Time 7.00 months
Working Days per Month 22.00 days (assume 22 if unknown) Predominant Soil/Site Type: Enter 1, 2, or 3 1) Sand Gravel : Use for quaternary deposits (Delta/West County) 2) Weathered Rock-Earth : Use for Laguna formation (Jackson Highway area) or the Ione formation (Scott Road, Rancho Murieta) 3) Blasted Rock : Use for Salt Springs Slate or Copper Hill Volcanics (Folsom South of Highway 50, Rancho Murieta) Project Length 7.00 miles
Total Project Area 2.50 acres
Maximum Area Disturbed/Day 0.02 acres
Water Trucks Used? 1 1. Yes

2. No
Material Hauling Quantity Input
Material Type Phase Haul Truck Capacity (yd3
) (assume 20 if
unknown) Import Volume (yd3
/day) Export Volume (yd3/day)
Grubbing/Land Clearing
Grading/Excavation 16.00 496.00
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 16.00 576.00
Paving
Grubbing/Land Clearing
Grading/Excavation
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade
Paving 16.00 16.00 32.00
Mitigation Options
On-road Fleet Emissions Mitigation Select "2010 and Newer On-road Vehicles Fleet" option when the on-road heavy-duty truck fleet for the project will be limited to vehicles of model year 2010 or newer Off-road Equipment Emissions Mitigation
Select "Tier 4 Equipment" option if some or all off-road equipment used for the project meets CARB Tier 4 Standard Will all off-road equipment be tier 4?
The remaining sections of this sheet contain areas that can be modified by the user, although those modifications are optional. (for project within "Sacramento County", follow soil type selection instructions in cells E18 to E20 otherwise see instructions provided in cells J18 to J22) 2 Soil
Asphalt
All Tier 4 Equipment
Please note that the soil type instructions provided in cells E18 to E20 are specific to Sacramento County. Maps available from the California Geologic Survey (see weblink below) can be used to determine soil type outside Sacramento County.
http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/information/geologic_mapping/Pages/googl emaps.aspx#regionalseries
1 Note: Required data input sections have a yellow background.

To begin a new project, click this button to
clear data previously entered. This button
will only work if you opted not to disable
macros when loading this spreadsheet.

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN
,_.

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
I I
I
1365
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 2
n Calculator can be used to confirm compliance
1366
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 3
Note: The program's estimates of construction period phase length can be overridden in cells D50 through D53, and F50 through F53.

Program Program
User Override of Calculated User Override of Default
Construction Periods Construction Months Months Phase Starting Date Phase Starting Date Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.70 1/1/26
Grading/Excavation 3.15 1/23/26
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 2.10 4/29/26
Paving 1.05 7/2/26
Totals (Months)
Note: Soil Hauling emission default values can be overridden in cells D61 through D64, and F61 through F64.

Soil Hauling Emissions User Override of Program Estimate of User Override of Truck Default Values Calculated User Input Miles/Round Trip Miles/Round Trip Round Trips/Day Round Trips/Day Daily VMT Miles/round trip: Grubbing/Land Clearing 30.00 0 0.00
Miles/round trip: Grading/Excavation 30.00 31 930.00
Miles/round trip: Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 30.00 36 1080.00 Miles/round trip: Paving 30.00 0 0.00
Emission Rates ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Grading/Excavation (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Paving (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grading/Excavation (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling Emissions ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Pounds per day - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pounds per day - Grading/Excavation 0.06 0.85 6.66 0.23 0.10 0.03 3,388.09 0.00 0.53 3,546.86 Tons per const. Period - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.03 0.23 0.01 0.00 0.00 117.40 0.00 0.02 122.90 Pounds per day - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.07 0.99 7.73 0.27 0.12 0.04 3,934.55 0.00 0.62 4,118.94 Tons per const. Period - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.02 0.18 0.01 0.00 0.00 90.89 0.00 0.01 95.15 Pounds per day - Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total tons per construction project 0.00 0.05 0.41 0.01 0.01 0.00 208.29 0.00 0.03 218.05 Note: Asphalt Hauling emission default values can be overridden in cells D91 through D94, and F91 through F94.

Asphalt Hauling Emissions User Override of Program Estimate of User Override of Truck Default Values Calculated User Input Miles/Round Trip Miles/Round Trip Round Trips/Day Round Trips/Day Daily VMT Miles/round trip: Grubbing/Land Clearing 30.00 0 0.00
Miles/round trip: Grading/Excavation 30.00 0 0.00
Miles/round trip: Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 30.00 0 0.00 Miles/round trip: Paving 30.00 3 90.00
Emission Rates ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Grading/Excavation (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Paving (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grading/Excavation (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Emissions ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Pounds per day - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pounds per day - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pounds per day - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons per const. Period - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pounds per day - Paving 0.01 0.08 0.64 0.02 0.01 0.00 327.88 0.00 0.05 343.24 Tons per const. Period - Paving 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.79 0.00 0.00 3.96 Total tons per construction project 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.79 0.00 0.00 3.96 7 I I I I I I

I I I I I I

I I I I I I
1367
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 4
Note: Worker commute default values can be overridden in cells D121 through D126.

Worker Commute Emissions User Override of Worker
User Input Commute Default Values Default Values
Miles/ one-way trip 20 Calculated Calculated
One-way trips/day 2 Daily Trips Daily VMT
No. of employees: Grubbing/Land Clearing 8 20 16 320.00 No. of employees: Grading/Excavation 10 33 20 400.00
No. of employees: Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 10 30 20 400.00 No. of employees: Paving 8 27 16 320.00
Emission Rates ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/mile) 0.01 0.72 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.00 285.85 0.00 0.01 287.41 Grading/Excavation (grams/mile) 0.01 0.72 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.00 285.85 0.00 0.01 287.41 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/mile) 0.01 0.72 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.00 285.85 0.00 0.01 287.41 Paving (grams/mile) 0.01 0.72 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.00 285.85 0.00 0.01 287.41 Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/trip) 0.87 2.47 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.59 0.06 0.03 71.10 Grading/Excavation (grams/trip) 0.87 2.47 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.59 0.06 0.03 71.10 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/trip) 0.87 2.47 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.59 0.06 0.03 71.10 Paving (grams/trip) 0.87 2.47 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.59 0.06 0.03 71.10 Emissions ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Pounds per day - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.04 0.60 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.00 203.83 0.00 0.00 205.27 Tons per const. Period - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.57 0.00 0.00 1.58 Pounds per day - Grading/Excavation 0.05 0.75 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.00 254.79 0.00 0.01 256.58 Tons per const. Period - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.83 0.00 0.00 8.89 Pounds per day - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.05 0.75 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.00 254.79 0.00 0.01 256.58 Tons per const. Period - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.89 0.00 0.00 5.93 Pounds per day - Paving 0.04 0.60 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.00 203.83 0.00 0.00 205.27 Tons per const. Period - Paving 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.35 0.00 0.00 2.37 Total tons per construction project 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.64 0.00 0.00 18.77 Note: Water Truck default values can be overridden in cells D153 through D156, I153 through I156, and F153 through F156.

Water Truck Emissions User Override of Program Estimate of User Override of Truck Default Values Calculated User Override of Default Values Calculated User Input Default # Water Trucks Number of Water Trucks Round Trips/Vehicle/Day Round Trips/Vehicle/Day Trips/day Miles/Round Trip Miles/Round Trip Daily VMT Grubbing/Land Clearing - Exhaust 1 5 5 8.00 40.00
Grading/Excavation - Exhaust 1 5 5 8.00 40.00
Drainage/Utilities/Subgrade 1 5 5 8.00 40.00
Paving 1 5 5 8.00 40.00
Emission Rates ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Grading/Excavation (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Paving (grams/mile) 0.03 0.41 3.10 0.11 0.05 0.02 1,652.48 0.00 0.26 1,729.92 Grubbing/Land Clearing (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grading/Excavation (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Draining/Utilities/Sub-Grade (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving (grams/trip) 0.00 0.00 4.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Emissions ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Pounds per day - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.04 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 145.72 0.00 0.02 152.55 Tons per const. Period - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.00 1.17 Pounds per day - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.04 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 145.72 0.00 0.02 152.55 Tons per const. Period - Grading/Excavation 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.05 0.00 0.00 5.29 Pounds per day - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.04 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 145.72 0.00 0.02 152.55 Tons per const. Period - Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.37 0.00 0.00 3.52 Pounds per day - Paving 0.00 0.04 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 145.72 0.00 0.02 152.55 Tons per const. Period - Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.68 0.00 0.00 1.76 Total tons per construction project 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.22 0.00 0.00 11.75 Note: Fugitive dust default values can be overridden in cells D183 through D185.

User Override of Max Default PM10 PM10 PM2.5 PM2.5
Acreage Disturbed/Day Maximum Acreage/Day pounds/day tons/per period pounds/day tons/per period Fugitive Dust - Grubbing/Land Clearing 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.04 0.00 Fugitive Dust - Grading/Excavation 0.02 0.20 0.01 0.04 0.00 Fugitive Dust - Drainage/Utilities/Subgrade 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.04 0.00 Fugitive Dust

I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I
1368
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 5
Off-Road Equipment Emissions
Default
Grubbing/Land Clearing Number of Vehicles Override of Default ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Override of Default Number of Vehicles Program-estimate Default Equipment Tier (applicable only when
"Tier 4 Mitigation" Option Selected) Equipment Tier Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Aerial Lifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Air Compressors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Bore/Drill Rigs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Concrete/Industrial Saws 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cranes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crawler Tractors 0.37 2.10 3.96 0.15 0.14 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crushing/Proc. Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Excavators 0.17 3.26 1.22 0.06 0.06 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Generator Sets 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Graders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Trucks 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Construction Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other General Industrial Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Material Handling Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pavers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Paving Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Plate Compactors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pressure Washers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pumps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rollers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rough Terrain Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Scrapers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Signal Boards 0.80 4.21 5.03 0.20 0.20 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Skid Steer Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Surfacing Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Sweepers/Scrubbers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Trenchers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Welders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User-Defined Off-road Equipment If non-default vehicles are used, please provide information in 'Non-default Off-road Equipment' tab ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grubbing/Land Clearing pounds per day 1.34 9.58 10.21 0.41 0.39 0.02 Grubbing/Land Clearing tons per phase 0.01 0.07 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A
N/A
N/A
Equipment Tier

0.00 Number of Vehicles

0.00 0.00 N/A
Mitigation Option

0.00 0.00
N/A

0.00 0.00
N/A
N/A
I
1369
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 6
Default
Grading/Excavation Number of Vehicles Override of Default ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Override of Default Number of Vehicles Program-estimate Default Equipment Tier (applicable only when
"Tier 4 Mitigation" Option Selected) Equipment Tier Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Aerial Lifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Air Compressors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Bore/Drill Rigs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Concrete/Industrial Saws 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cranes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crawler Tractors 0.37 2.10 3.96 0.15 0.14 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crushing/Proc. Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.00 3 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Excavators 0.17 3.26 1.22 0.06 0.06 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Generator Sets 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Graders 0.31 1.59 3.46 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Trucks 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Construction Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other General Industrial Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Material Handling Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pavers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Paving Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Plate Compactors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pressure Washers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pumps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rollers 0.27 3.69 2.89 0.15 0.13 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rough Terrain Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Loaders 0.23 1.47 1.86 0.06 0.06 0.01 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Scrapers 1.34 10.76 12.74 0.50 0.46 0.03 14 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Signal Boards 0.80 4.21 5.03 0.20 0.20 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Skid Steer Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Surfacing Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Sweepers/Scrubbers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.26 4.46 2.67 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Trenchers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Welders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User-Defined Off-road Equipment If non-default vehicles are used, please provide information in 'Non-default Off-road Equipment' tab ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading/Excavation pounds per day 3.77 31.56 33.82 1.34 1.25 0.08 Grading/Excavation tons per phase 0.13 1.09 1.17 0.05 0.04 0.00 N/A
N/A
Equipment Tier
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Number of Vehicles

0.00 0.00

0.00 Mitigation Option
N/A
1370
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 7
Default
Drainage/Utilities/Subgrade Number of Vehicles Override of Default ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Override of Default Number of Vehicles Program-estimate Default Equipment Tier (applicable only when
"Tier 4 Mitigation" Option Selected) Equipment Tier pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Aerial Lifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Air Compressors 0.23 2.41 1.53 0.07 0.07 0.00

1.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Bore/Drill Rigs 0.10 1.02 0.93 0.03 0.03 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Concrete/Industrial Saws 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cranes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crawler Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crushing/Proc. Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Excavators 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Generator Sets 0.27 3.66 2.40 0.10 0.10 0.01 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Graders 0.31 1.59 3.46 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Trucks 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Construction Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other General Industrial Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Material Handling Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pavers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Paving Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Plate Compactors 0.04 0.21 0.25 0.01 0.01 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pressure Washers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pumps 0.29 3.72 2.43 0.10 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rollers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rough Terrain Forklifts 0.10 2.29 1.28 0.04 0.03 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Scrapers 1.34 10.76 12.74 0.50 0.46 0.03 14 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Signal Boards 0.80 4.21 5.03 0.20 0.20 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Skid Steer Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Surfacing Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Sweepers/Scrubbers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.26 4.46 2.67 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Trenchers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Welders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User-Defined Off-road Equipment If non-default vehicles are used, please provide information in 'Non-default Off-road Equipment' tab ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade pounds per day 3.74 34.33 32.72 1.26 1.20 0.08 Drainage/Utilities/Sub-Grade tons per phase 0.09 0.79 0.76 0.03 0.03 0.00 N/A
N/A
N/A
Equipment Tier
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Number of Vehicles
Mitigation Option

0.00 1371
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 8
Default
Paving Number of Vehicles Override of Default ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Override of Default Number of Vehicles Program-estimate Default Equipment Tier (applicable only when
"Tier 4 Mitigation" Option Selected) Equipment Tier Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Aerial Lifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Air Compressors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Bore/Drill Rigs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Concrete/Industrial Saws 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Cranes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crawler Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Crushing/Proc. Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Excavators 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Generator Sets 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Graders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Tractors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Off-Highway Trucks 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Construction Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other General Industrial Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Other Material Handling Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pavers 0.17 2.90 1.58 0.07 0.07 0.00 1 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Paving Equipment 0.15 2.55 1.26 0.06 0.06 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Plate Compactors 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pressure Washers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Pumps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rollers 0.41 5.54 4.33 0.22 0.20 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rough Terrain Forklifts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Rubber Tired Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Scrapers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Signal Boards 0.80 4.21 5.03 0.20 0.20 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Skid Steer Loaders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Surfacing Equipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Sweepers/Scrubbers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.26 4.46 2.67 0.11 0.10 0.01 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Trenchers 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Model Default Tier Model Default Tier Welders 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User-Defined Off-road Equipment If non-default vehicles are used, please provide information in 'Non-default Off-road Equipment' tab ROG CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx Type pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Paving pounds per day 1.80 19.66 14.88 0.66 0.62 0.03
Paving tons per phase 0.02 0.23 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.00
Total Emissions all Phases (tons per construction period) => 0.25 2.19 2.18 0.09 0.08 0.01 N/A
N/A
Equipment Tier
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

0.00 Number of Vehicles

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Mitigation Option
1372
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 9
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
758.27 0.25 0.01 766.45

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
500.34 0.16 0.00 505.73

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
690.39 0.07 0.01 693.90

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1,949.00 0.48 0.02 1,966.08

15.01 0.00 0.00 15.14
1373
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 10
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
758.27 0.25 0.01 766.45

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
500.34 0.16 0.00 505.73

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
640.24 0.21 0.01 647.14

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
508.12 0.16 0.00 513.60

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
605.62 0.20 0.01 612.16
2,936.30 0.95 0.03 2,967.95
690.39 0.07 0.01 693.90

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
604.11 0.20 0.01 610.61

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
7,243.39 2.19 0.07 7,317.54
250.98 0.08 0.00 253.55
1374
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 11
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
375.26 0.02 0.00 376.62
458.63 0.15 0.00 463.57

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
623.04 0.02 0.00 625.01
640.24 0.21 0.01 647.14

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

34.48 0.00 0.00 34.65

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
623.04 0.03 0.00 625.06

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
333.72 0.11 0.00 337.31

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2,936.30 0.95 0.03 2,967.95
690.39 0.07 0.01 693.90

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
604.11 0.20 0.01 610.61

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
7,319.20 1.75 0.06 7,381.83
169.07 0.04 0.00 170.52
1375
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 12
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
454.99 0.15 0.00 459.90
394.32 0.13 0.00 398.57

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
762.19 0.25 0.01 770.40

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
690.39 0.07 0.01 693.90

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
604.11 0.20 0.01 610.61

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day pounds/day

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2,906.00 0.79 0.03 2,933.38

33.56 0.01 0.00 33.88
468.63 0.13 0.00 473.09
1376
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Road Construction Emissions Model, Version 8.1.0 2/13/23 Data Entry Worksheet 13
Equipment default values for horsepower and hours/day can be overridden in cells D403 through D436 and F403 through F436.

User Override of Default Values User Override of Default Values Equipment Horsepower Horsepower Hours/day Hours/day
Aerial Lifts 63 8
Air Compressors 78 8
Bore/Drill Rigs 221 4.00 8
Cement and Mortar Mixers 9 8
Concrete/Industrial Saws 81 8
Cranes 231 8
Crawler Tractors 212 8
Crushing/Proc. Equipment 85 8
Excavators 158 8
Forklifts 89 8
Generator Sets 84 8
Graders 187 8
Off-Highway Tractors 124 8
Off-Highway Trucks 402 8
Other Construction Equipment 172 8
Other General Industrial Equipment 88 8
Other Material Handling Equipment 168 8
Pavers 130 8
Paving Equipment 132 8
Plate Compactors 8 8
Pressure Washers 13 8
Pumps 84 8
Rollers 80 8
Rough Terrain Forklifts 100 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 247 8
Rubber Tired Loaders 203 8
Scrapers 367 8
Signal Boards 6 8
Skid Steer Loaders 65 8
Surfacing Equipment 263 8
Sweepers/Scrubbers 64 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 8
Trenchers 78 8
Welders 46 8

END OF DATA ENTRY SHEET
1377
Section 3, Item # 3.1

APPENDIX D
South County Infrastructure Project
Biological Resources Technical Report
1378
Section 3, Item # 3.1

OLIVEHURST PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT

SOUTH COUNTY INFRASTRUCTURE

PROJECT

BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT

YUBA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Project No. 2002-6911
Prepared for:

Olivehurst Public Utilities District
1970 9th Avenue
Olivehurst, CA 95961
Prepared by:

Padre Associates, Inc.
350 University Avenue, Suite 250
Sacramento, California 95827
In Association with:

Environmental Planning Partners, Inc.
3110 Gold Pan Court, Suite 3
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670-6136
FEBRUARY 2023
nadre
l(";ssociates, inc.

ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
~ ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
1379
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- i -

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................... 2

2.1 WASTEWATER PIPELINE SSO REDUCTION MEASURES (COMPONENT 1) ............. 2

2.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADES (COMPONENT 2) .......................... 3

2.3 WASTEWATER PIPELINES IN THE SOUTH COUNTY SERVICE AREA (COMPONENT 3) AND WHEATLAND WASTEWATER PIPELINE CONNECTOR (COMPONENT 5) ..... 3

2.3.1 Pipeline Crossings ..................................................................................................... 4

2.3.2 Pump Stations and Lift Stations ................................................................................. 8

2.4 WATER PLANT AND DISTRIBUTION LINES (COMPONENT 4) ................................... 10

3.0 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................ 12

3.1 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................... 12

3.2 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE SURVEYS ......................................................................... 12

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................................................................. 13

4.1 LOCATION ...................................................................................................................... 13

4.2 GEOLOGY/GEOMORPHOLOGY ................................................................................... 13

4.3 CLIMATE ......................................................................................................................... 13

4.4 SOILS .............................................................................................................................. 13

4.5 HABITAT DESCRIPTIONS AND VEGETATION ............................................................ 14

4.5.1 Waters and Wetlands ............................................................................................... 15

4.6 WILDLIFE ........................................................................................................................ 16

4.7 SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ......................................................................................... 17

4.7.1 Special-Status Plants ............................................................................................... 29

4.7.2 Special-Status Wildlife ............................................................................................. 29

4.8 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS ................................................................................................. 35

5.0 REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................................................... 37

5.1 FEDERAL REGULATIONS ............................................................................................. 37

5.1.1 Federal Endangered Species Act. ........................................................................... 37

5.1.2 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. ........................... 37

5.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act / Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act ................ 38

5.1.4 Clean Water Act ....................................................................................................... 38

5.1.5 Rivers and Harbors Act ............................................................................................ 39

5.2 STATE REGULATIONS .................................................................................................. 39

5.2.1 California Endangered Species Act ......................................................................... 39

5.2.2 Fully Protected Species, Fish and Game Code Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 ......................................................................................................................... 39

5.2.3 California Fish and Game Code Section 3503 ......................................................... 39

5.2.4 California Native Plant Protection Act ...................................................................... 39

5.2.5 California Fish and Game Code Section 1600 ......................................................... 40

5.2.6 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act ............................................................... 40

5.2.7 Clean Water Act ....................................................................................................... 40 nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1380
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- ii -

5.2.8 Oak Woodland Protection ........................................................................................ 40

5.3 LOCAL AND REGIONAL PLANS ................................................................................... 41

5.3.1 Yuba County General Plan ...................................................................................... 41

6.0 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ................................................................................................. 44

7.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGAITON MEASURES ........................................................................ 45

7.1 IMPACT CATEGORIES .................................................................................................. 45

7.2 PROJECT IMPACTS ...................................................................................................... 45

7.2.1 Vegetation Communities .......................................................................................... 46

7.2.2 Aquatic Resources ................................................................................................... 48

7.2.3 Special-Status Plants ............................................................................................... 49

7.2.4 Special-Status Wildlife ............................................................................................. 50

7.3 EVALUATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS ............................ 61

7.3.1 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act ..................................................................... 61

7.3.2 Federal Endangered Species Act and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act .............. 61

7.3.3 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) ................. 61

7.3.4 Marine Mammal Protection Act ................................................................................ 61

7.3.5 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ......................................................................................... 62

7.3.6 Wetlands Protection (Section CWA Section 404 and 401 Wetlands) ...................... 62

7.3.7 Rivers and Harbors Act ............................................................................................ 62

7.3.8 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act ...................................................................................... 62

8.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 63 TABLES
Table 1. Wastewater Pipeline Summary ....................................................................................... 4 Table 2. Trenchless Crossing Details ........................................................................................... 6 Table 3. Pump Station and Lift Station Details ............................................................................. 9 Table 4. Treated Water Pipeline Summary ................................................................................. 11 Table 5. Special-Status Species Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity of the South County Infrastructure Project ................................................................................................................... 18 Table 6. South County Infrastructure Project Impacts ................................................................ 46

FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Vicinity
Figure 2. Biological Impact Map
Figure 3. Special-status Species Occurrence

APPENDICES
A. USFWS Species List
B. CNDDB 9-Quadrangle Summary Table
C. Plant List
D. Wildlife List
E. NRCS Custom Soil Resource Report
nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1381
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 1 -

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to detail the findings of the biological reconnaissance surveys of the proposed Olivehurst Public Utility District (OPUD) South County Infrastructure Project Site in the community of Olivehurst in Yuba County, California. This Biological Technical Report includes a review of pertinent literature, a review of regulatory requirements, results of reconnaissance field surveys, and a preliminary analysis of general impacts of project implementation on biological resources.

Following this introduction, there is a description of the OPUD South County Infrastructure Project (Project), followed by the methodology section, which describes field studies and analytical methods used to assess the project site. The methodology section includes a review of the regulatory requirements; a review of literature concerning special-status species, sensitive habitats, and general biological conditions; and a description of field reconnaissance survey methods. The environmental setting describes abiotic and biotic conditions at the project site including climate, soils, typical habitats and associated plant and wildlife species, and specialstatus species reported in or near the project area. The final section details the anticipated impacts of project implementation along with suggested general mitigation measures to reduce project impacts to less than significant levels.
nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1382
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 2 -

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
OPUD provides urban water and wastewater services within and adjacent to the community of Olivehurst in an unincorporated area of Yuba County (Figure 1). OPUD is proposing to expand its water and sewer systems to accommodate planned urban development within the recently annexed South Yuba County Service Area. The proposed Project is intended to provide water and sewer conveyance system improvements, including improvements to assist in the mitigation of sanitary sewer overflows (SSO) within the existing service area of historic Olivehurst, upgrades to the existing wastewater treatment plant, and construction of a water plant as part of a five component Project identified as the South County Infrastructure Project. Following are the five components of the proposed Project:
 Wastewater Pipeline SSO Reduction Measures
 Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades
 Wastewater Pipelines in the South County Service Area  Water Plant and Distribution Pipelines
 Wheatland Wastewater Pipeline Connector

2.1 WASTEWATER PIPELINE SSO REDUCTION MEASURES (COMPONENT 1) All facilities associated with wastewater Pipeline SSO Reduction Measures are located within the existing urbanized community of Olivehurst. Pipelines associated with Component 1 would be constructed within paved travel lanes of existing roadways. Two new pump stations would be constructed (PS-1 and PS-26) and an existing pump station (PS-2) would be fitted with upgraded equipment.

The identified collection system improvements are intended to reduce the hydraulic grade line in the Old Olivehurst sewage collection system, thereby reducing the possibility of overflows during peak rainfall events. SSO components to be constructed with implementation of the proposed project include:
 Increase the capacity of Pump Station 1 (PS-1), decommission and remove the existing pump station and replace with a new pump station at the same general location
 Construct a new 16-inch diameter force main from the new PS-1 to 14th Avenue  Re-equip the existing PS-2 and revise the downstream piping from PS-2 so that flow will be diverted to a new PS-26 at McGowan Parkway and Mary Avenue.  Replace the existing 8-inch force main in poor condition with a 12-inch force main on McGowan Parkway from PS-2 to PS-26.
 Abandon the existing 8-inch force main within McGowan Parkway from PS-26 to Donald Drive.
 Construct a new PS-26, sized to divert sewage from the existing 8-inch diameter gravity collector sewer in McGowan Parkway into the project pipeline. nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1383
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 3 -

2.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADES (COMPONENT 2)
Improvements and modifications to OPUD’s wastewater treatment plant would take place within the existing plant site located at the westerly terminus of Mary Avenue. OPUD is implementing modifications to their wastewater collection system to provide SSO relief and accept wastewater from the City of Wheatland. An increase in Average Dry Weather Flows (ADWF) capacity would not be provided as part of the South County Infrastructure Project, because the WWTP has sufficient ADWF capacity to handle near term flow increases. However, peak wet weather flows (PWWF) are expected to increase as a result of SSO mitigation described above.

The improvements are required to increase the PWWF capacity of the WWTP, and to upgrade and replace existing equipment. The SSO mitigation improvements will result in up to

3.0 mgd of additional PWWF being conveyed to the WWTP during periods of significant rainfall.

Increasing the amount of wastewater that the collection system can convey to the WWTP will result in lower hydraulic grade lines in the collection system, thereby resulting in fewer SSO events. WWTP improvements consist of the addition of new equipment, modification and upgrades to existing equipment, and the addition of a concrete lined Emergency Storage Basin at the south end of the plant site to act as an equalization basin that will store increased flows that occur during significant storms. A dewatering pump station will also be added in this area to allow for sending stored secondary effluent back to plant headworks. All of the proposed improvements would be within the developed and disturbed footprint of the existing WWTP.

2.3 WASTEWATER PIPELINES IN THE SOUTH COUNTY SERVICE AREA (COMPONENT 3) AND WHEATLAND WASTEWATER PIPELINE CONNECTOR (COMPONENT 5)
Facilities to be constructed within Components 3 and 5 are located primarily in an undeveloped area south of the existing community of Olivehurst. Pipelines would be constructed primarily within the paved travel lanes of existing roadways. These components consist of sewer pipelines, pump stations, and lift stations required to provide a backbone wastewater collection and transmission system to serve future demands for the South County Services Area consistent with the Yuba County General Plan and to convey City of Wheatland wastewater to the Olivehurst WWTP.

Wastewater system improvements include force mains and gravity sewer pipelines ranging in size from 8 to 30 inches in diameter. The size of the sewer conveyance system is based on the demands from the service area and the City of Wheatland. Some private facilities (e.g., Pacific Gas and Electric [PG&E] yard, Hard Rock Fire Mountain Casino, and Toyota Amphitheatre) are currently served by an on-site wastewater disposal system or another WWTP.

Plans for connecting these proposed facilities to the OPUD’s sewer collection system are assumed for sizing, but they may not connect until a later date. The estimated wastewater ADWF for the South County Service Area at buildout and City of Wheatland contributions is 5.0 mgd.

This amount includes 1.5 mgd ADWF for the City of Wheatland.

Pipelines associated with Components 1, 3, and 5 are summarized in Table 1.

nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1384
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 4 -
Table 1. Wastewater Pipeline Summary
The vertical alignment of trench installed pipelines within roadways would maintain a minimum of 48 inches from the top of pipe to the pavement surface. Trench depths would range from 60 inches to 22 feet. All pipeline alignments would provide for a one-foot separation from the pipe edge to any existing utility being crossed while maintaining the minimum cover. Any existing utilities would be surveyed and potholed by the design engineer/team to determine the proposed vertical alignment and crossing method. At culvert crossing locations where trench installed pipeline is proposed within the paved roadway or shoulder, the pipeline will be installed under shallow culverts within the trench in the paved roadway without disturbance to the culvert or the waterway it conveys. For large waterway crossings, trenchless methods are proposed.

2.3.1 Pipeline Crossings
Trenchless installations at roadway and waterway crossings would be achieved using attachment to an existing bridge where possible, such as the wastewater crossing on McGowan Parkway Bridge across SR 70. Horizontal directional drill (HDD) or pipe ramming/auger bore trenchless installation methods are proposed where bridge attachment is not feasible. Table 2 outlines the trenchless stream and roadway pipeline crossing methodology proposed for wastewater pipeline crossings in Component 3 and water pipeline crossings in Component 4.

Following is a brief summary of the trenchless pipeline installations and existing site conditions at the crossing locations:

McGowan Parkway at SR 70 Crossing (Sewer Force Main)
At this location the pipeline will be installed under SR 70 using HDD techniques. The HDD entry location, exit location and HDD workspace, including the pipe string location occur entirely within paved roadway of McGowan Parkway and an adjacent parking lot within an urban developed area (Figure 2D)
Olive Avenue to Rancho Road at SR 65 Crossing (Sewer Force Main) At this location the pipeline will be installed under SR 65 using HDD techniques. The HDD entry location is located in upland annual grasslands adjacent to Olive Avenue. The HDD exit location is on the paved roadway and unpaved shoulder of Rancho Road. The pipe string staging area extends from a paved cul-de-sac into an undeveloped disturbed area between a residence and the railroad track with seasonally wet depressions (Figure 2E).

Type
Size
Range
(inches)
Overall
Length
(feet)
Overall
Length
(miles)
Number
of Pump
Stations
Number of
Lift
Stations
Number of Crossings
Roadway Waterway
Force Main 6 - 30 44,440 8.4 5 n/a 3 5
Sanitary Sewer 8 - 24 23,130 4.4 n/a 3 2 5
Total Length of
Wastewater
Pipelines
n/a 65,570 12.8 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Source: Jacobs/MHM/Planning Partners 2023.
nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc .. rs3 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
~ EHVlROMMENTAL SClENTISTS
1385
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 5 -
Rancho Road at Reeds Creek Crossing (Sewer Force Main and Water Main) At this location the wastewater and water pipelines will be installed under Reeds Creek using HDD techniques. The HDD entry locations on both sides of Rancho Road are within an unpaved roadside area with roadside ditches and depressions that are seasonally inundated northwest of the Reeds Creek crossing. The HDD exit locations and pipe string staging areas on both sides of Rancho Road are within upland annual grasslands southeast of the Reeds Creek crossing (Figure 2F).

Rancho Road at Hutchinson Creek Crossing (Sewer Force Main and Water Main) At this location the wastewater and water pipelines will be installed under Hutchinson Creek using HDD techniques. The HDD Entry locations on both sides of Rancho Road are within upland annual grassland areas with some tree cover. The HDD exit location and pipe string laydown area on the southwest side of Rancho Road is within upland annual grassland with Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus) tree cover. The HDD exit location and pipe string laydown area northeast of Rancho Road is primarily within upland annual grasslands. There is a roadside ditch at this location, but it does not support seasonal inundation or wetland vegetation (Figure 2G).

Rosser Road to Shimer Road at SR 65 Crossing (Sewer Force Main) At this location the wastewater pipeline will be installed under SR 65 using HDD techniques. The HDD entry location is within an unpaved area adjacent to Rosser Road and the HDD workspace is located in cattle grazed pastureland. Portions of this pasture northwest of the workspace appear to be wet meadow pastureland; however, the pasture was not surveyed due to access constraints. The HDD exit location and pipe string staging area are within a paved roadway (Shimer Road) (Figure 2H).

Rancho Road at Kimball Creek Crossing (Sewer Force Mains and Water Main) At this location the wastewater and water pipelines will be installed under Kimball Creek using HDD techniques. The HDD entry locations on both sides of Rancho Road are within an unpaved roadside area with roadside ditches and depressions that are seasonally inundated northwest of the Kimball Creek crossing. The HDD exit location on the northeast side of Rancho Road is within an unpaved roadside area that is upland annual grassland. The pipe string staging area is primarily within upland annuals grassland with an adjacent seasonally wet depression.

The HDD exit location and pipe string laydown area on southwest side of Rancho Road is within an upland annual grassland area and the road shoulder (Figure 2J).

Rancho Road at Virginia Road Crossing (Sewer Force Mains and Water Main) At this location the wastewater and water pipelines will be installed under Virginia Creek using pipe ramming/auger bore techniques. The bore launch shafts and receiving shafts are within the paved roadway and unpaved shoulder for both trenchless crossings at this location. There are wet depressions within roadside ditches that are seasonally inundated on both sides of Rancho Road at this location (Figure 2L).
40 Mile Road at Kimball Creek Crossing (Sewer Force Main and Water Main) At this location the pipelines will be installed under Kimball Creek using pipe ramming/auger bore techniques. The bore launch shafts and receiving shafts are within the paved roadway and unpaved shoulder for both trenchless crossings at this location (Figure 2O). nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1386
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 6 -
Table 2. Trenchless Crossing Details
Crossing Name Utility Crossing Type
SurfaceLength:

Linear
Feet
Bore
Length:

Feet
Entry Location Entry Work Area Exit Location Exit Work Area Pipe String Area SR 70 west of Power Line Rd - Dan Ave
Waste
water
HDD 1,517 1,317 Within paved
turn
lane/centerline
of McGowan
Pkwy
Within paved turn
lane/centerline of
McGowan Pkwy
Within
westbound
paved travel
lane or shoulder
Within
westbound
paved travel lane
or shoulder
Within
westbound
unpaved shoulder
SR 65 between Olive Ave / Rancho Rd
Waste
water
HDD 742 611 Within unpaved
area / cultivated
field
Within unpaved
area / cultivated
field
Within paved
roadway and
unpaved
shoulder area
Within paved culde-sac Within paved cul-de-sac /
unpaved area
Rancho Rd / Reeds Creek
Waste
water
HDD 1,500 1,468 Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within
unpaved area
Rancho Rd / Reeds Creek
Water HDD 1,500 1,300 Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within
unpaved area
Rancho Rd / Hutchinson Creek
Waste
water
HDD 746 532 Within unpaved
area / cultivated
field
Within unpaved
area / cultivated
field
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within
unpaved area
Rancho Rd / Hutchinson Creek
Water HDD 590 411 Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within
unpaved area
Rancho Rd / Kimball Creek
Waste
water
HDD 519 467 Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within
unpaved area
Rancho Rd / Kimball Creek
Water HDD 477 317 Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within
unpaved area
nadre l';~socfate.s, Inc ..
rr.3 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
l'.!il EHVlAONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
1387
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 7 -
Crossing Name Utility Crossing Type
SurfaceLength:

Linear
Feet
Bore
Length:

Feet
Entry Location Entry Work Area Exit Location Exit Work Area Pipe String Area Rancho Rd / Virginia Creek
Waste
water
Pipe
ramming/
auger
boring
50 50 Receiving Shaft:

In paved area
Receiving Shaft:

In paved area
Launch Shaft:

Within unpaved
shoulder area
Launch Shaft:

Within unpaved
shoulder area
n/a
Rancho Rd / Virginia Creek
Water Pipe
ramming/
auger
boring
50 50 Receiving Shaft:

Within unpaved
area
Receiving Shaft:

Within unpaved
area
Launch Shaft:

Within paved
travel lane
Launch Shaft:

Within paved
travel lane
n/a
SR 65 between Slaughterhouse Rd / Shimer Rd
Waste
water
HDD 748 601 Within unpaved
area
Within unpaved
area
Within paved
cul-de-sac
Within paved culde-sac and
paved travel lane
Within paved
cul-de-sac
and paved
travel lane
40 Mile Rd / Kimball Creek
Waste
water
Pipe
ramming/
auger
boring
82 82 Receiving Shaft:

Within paved
travel lane
Receiving Shaft:

Within paved
travel lane
Launch Shaft:

Within paved
travel lane
n/a
40 Mile Rd / Kimball Creek
Water Pipe
ramming/
auger
boring
82 82 Receiving Shaft:

Within paved
travel lane
Receiving Shaft:

Within paved
travel lane
Launch Shaft:

Within paved
travel lane
n/a
Source: Jacobs/MHM 2023, Planning Partners 2023.
nadre l';~socfate.s, Inc ..
rr.3 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
l'.!il EHVlAONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
1388
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 8 -

2.3.2 Pump Stations and Lift Stations
Most of the pump stations and lift stations are located in upland annual grasslands or disturbed and developed areas. Following is a brief summary of the pump station and lift station locations and details regarding the construction of pump stations and lift stations associated with the proposed wastewater pipeline are outlined in Table 3.

Pump station 1 and pump station 26 are both within vacant lots within urban areas. These areas support upland annual grasslands or ruderal (weedy) vegetation. Pump station 21 and lift station 24 are in upland annual grasslands adjacent to the paved roadway. Pump station 25 is located within a dirt parking lot and staging area east of 40 Mile Road. The pipeline connection to Pump station 25 may cross a roadside channel or ditch with wetland vegetation. Pump station 22 is within upland annual grassland adjacent to Rancho Road; however, this pump station is immediately adjacent to Kimball Creek and associated wetlands. Lift station 23 is partially within a rice field along Rancho Road and will remove a small portion of the field used for rice cultivation.

The footprint of lift station 23 also extends into a wet depression within a roadside ditch that is seasonally inundated between Rancho Road and the rice field. nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1389
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 9 -
Table 3. Pump Station and Lift Station Details
Facility
PS 1
Olivehurst
Ave/ 11th
Ave
PS 2
McGowan
Pkwy/East of SR
70 PS 26
McGowan
Pkwy/ Mary
Ave
PS 21
Rancho
Rd/ Shimer
Rd
LS 22
Rancho Rd/ Kimball Crk
LS 23
Rancho Rd/
Virginia Crk
LS 24
40 Mile Rd
PS 25
40 Mile Rd
Site Area (approx. square feet) 8,215 n/a 20,400 10,260 4,330 5,075 6,160 10,220 Depth of Wet Well(s) (feet below ground surface) 24 - 33 To be determined 40.5 41.3 23.4 27.2 40.7 37.05 Height of Soundwall (feet) 11 To be determined 11 11 11 11 11 11 Existing Facilities to be Abandoned or Improved Existing
Sewer Lift
Station
Improvements to
be determined
Existing 8”
sanitary sewer
in McGowan
Pkwy west of
PS 26
Existing
fence Existing fence None None None
Outside of Existing Roadway Prism (Travel Lane + Improved Shoulder) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Serves Component Number 1 1 1/3/5 3/5 3 3 3 3 Source: Jacobs/Domenichelli & Associates 2022/Planning Partners 2023. Note: *– Potential improvements limited to existing disturbed area nadre l';~socfate.s, Inc ..
rr.3 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
l'.!il EHVlAONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
1390
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 10 -

2.4 WATER PLANT AND DISTRIBUTION LINES (COMPONENT 4)
Facilities to be constructed within Component 4 include a new water well and water plant east of Forty Mile Road. This component consists of a production well and water plant to meet a portion of the demand for treated water for municipal and industrial needs and fire protection, and a backbone distribution system to meet future treated water demands for the South County Services Area consistent with the Yuba County General Plan.

Water Plant
As proposed, the water plant (WP) would be constructed on a 0.95-acre site located east of Forty Mile Road and north of the newly constructed Hard Rock Casino. The WP would consist of a new water well (OPUD Well #35), well pump, reservoir, booster station, and chorine feed system. As planned, the new well would provide 1,500 gallons per minute (gpm), although ultimate production could approach 3,000 gpm depending upon the type and timing of future development within the WP service area. A new welded steel reservoir would be constructed with an approximate capacity of 1,017,000 gallons. The tank dimensions would be 76-foot diameter by 32-foot shell height. The tank color is planned to be equivalent to Engard’s “Desert Sand” or Glidden’s “Pelt” subject to final approval by the District. The booster station is designed to pump out of the reservoir and maintain a desired pressure of 65 pounds per square inch (psi) with a pressure range of between 60 and 70 psi in the water system. A chlorine feed system would inject chlorine to be used for disinfection as part of the WP’s treatment process. A backup generator supplied by an on-site propane tank would be provided to power the WP if necessary. Water provided by the WP and transmitted to the regional grid in Forty Mile Road would be provided by a 24-inch pipeline from the WP to a proposed pipeline to be constructed along the southbound travel lane of Forty Mile Road.

Water needs during construction would be provided by a temporary above ground pipeline from an existing agricultural well south of the Hard Rock Casino which would be removed upon completion of construction.

Water Distribution Pipelines
This subcomponent consists of treated water pipelines required to provide a backbone water distribution system to serve future demands for the South County Services Area consistent with the Yuba County General Plan. Water system improvements include water pipelines ranging in size from 16 to 24 inches in diameter.

The size of the water distribution system is based on the projected demands from future urban uses within the South Yuba County Service area. Additionally, the water distribution system would connect with the existing OPUD water system serving the community of Olivehurst.

Pipelines associated with Component 4 are summarized in Table 4.

nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1391
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 11 -
Table 4. Treated Water Pipeline Summary
The vertical alignment of trench installed pipelines within roadways would maintain a minimum of 48 inches from the top of pipe to the pavement surface. Trench depths would range from 60 inches to 12 feet. All pipeline alignments would provide for a one-foot separation from the pipe edge to any existing utility being crossed while maintaining the minimum cover. Any existing utilities would be surveyed and potholed by the design engineer/team to determine the proposed vertical alignment and crossing method.

Trenchless installations at roadway and waterway crossings would be achieved using attachment to an existing bridge where possible, such as the water line crossing on the McGowan Parkway Bridge over SR 65. Horizontal directional drill (HDD) or pipe ramming/auger bore trenchless installation methods are proposed where bridge attachment is not feasible. Table 2 above outlines the trenchless stream and roadway pipeline crossing methodology proposed for wastewater pipeline crossings in Component 3 and water pipeline crossings in Component 4.

Type Size Range
(inches)
Overall Length
(feet)
Overall Length
(miles)
Crossings
Roadway Waterway
Water Main 16 – 24 36,939 7.0 2 5
Source: Jacobs/MHM/Planning Partners 2023.
nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc .. rs3 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
~ EHVlROMMENTAL SClENTISTS
1392
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 12 -

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 LITERATURE REVIEW
Padre biologists reviewed available project information, county soil survey maps, topographic maps, and other environmental documents. The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) was queried for records of special-status species reported within the Olivehurst and Wheatland, California quadrangles and the surrounding seven quadrangles (California Department of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW], 2022). A list of federally listed Threatened and Endangered species was obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (USFWS, 2022a). An unofficial species list was obtained from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for the two quadrangles that the project occurs within (NMFS, 2022). The federal species lists and CNDDB query results are included in Appendix A and Appendix B. Specialstatus taxa that are known to exist or have the potential to exist on the project site were also identified through a review of relevant literature (California Native Plant Society [CNPS], 2022; Zeiner et al., 1988; 1990a, b). A query of the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) was reviewed for information regarding mapped waters and wetlands in the project area (USFWS, 2022b).

3.2 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE SURVEYS
Reconnaissance level field surveys were conducted by Padre biologists between February 15-17, 2022 to assess the biological resources and to determine the likelihood of occurrence for special-status species or sensitive and regulated habitats on the project site. Follow-up surveys were conducted in June 2022 for the purposes of detecting elderberry shrubs during the blooming season, and follow-up surveys were conducted of various aspects of the project in August and December 2022 and January 2023 to resurvey areas for changes to the project design and to review the depressional features along Rancho Road during the wet season to confirm areas of inundation.

Detection methods included direct observation with binoculars; examination and identification of tracks, scats, burrows/diggings, and carcasses/skeletal remains; and identification of vocalizations (calls and songs). No trapping or netting was performed during surveys. Plants not identified in the field were collected and returned to the lab for identification using standard taxonomic references (Baldwin, 2012). Prior to the field surveys, the CNDDB query was reviewed to identify occurrences of special-status plant and animal species in the project vicinity. During the field surveys, vegetative cover types and significant habitat features, such as wetlands, potential nest trees, and potential dens or burrow clusters, were noted and mapped for avoidance to the extent feasible during Project design and planning. Lists of plants and wildlife observed during surveys were compiled and are included in Appendix C and Appendix D.

It should be noted that some portions of the study area were on private property that was inaccessible during the field surveys, including the HDD workspace adjacent to Rosser Road.

Reconnaissance surveys for this location were conducted using binoculars from the fence line and aerial imagery. Aquatic resource features were generally mapped based on surface indicators; an aquatic resource delineation was not performed. nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1393
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 13 -

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

4.1 LOCATION
The Project study area is located within the community of Olivehurst and unincorporated area of southern Yuba County approximately 40 miles north of Sacramento and four miles south of Marysville (Olivehurst and Wheatland, California 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle) (USGS, 1947; USGS, 1952) (Figure 1). The study area within the existing urbanized community of Olivehurst is surrounded by residential and commercial properties. The study area within the south County area is primarily surrounded by agricultural and rural residential land along with areas supporting industrial uses and sports and entertainment uses (Hard Rock Casino). There are several natural drainages that run from northeast to southwest across the study area.

4.2 GEOLOGY/GEOMORPHOLOGY
The project is situated in the Butte Sink-Sutter Basin subsection of the Great Valley Ecological Region of California (Miles and Goudey, 1997).

The Butte Sink-Sutter Basin subsection is on the alluvial plain between the Feather and Sacramento Rivers. Elevations in the subsection range from approximately 30 to 150 feet. Fluvial erosion and deposition are the main geomorphic processes (Miles and Goudey, 1997).

4.3 CLIMATE
The project site is situated in Climate Zone 8, which includes California’s cold air basins of the Central Valley. This zone has hot summers and mild winters and is outside of the influence of the Pacific Ocean (Clark, 1985).

The nearest meteorological station (045385) is located in Marysville, just to the north of the project site. Based on the 110-year period of record (1897 through 2007) at the station, the average maximum monthly temperature ranges from 54.1°F in January to 96.3°F in July (Western Regional Climate Center, 2022). The average minimum monthly temperature ranges from 37.7°F in January to 61.3°F in July. The average annual temperature ranges from 49.0°F to 75.3°F. The average monthly precipitation ranges from 0.03 inches in July to 4.01 inches in January. The total average annual precipitation is 20.96 inches (Western Regional Climate Center, 2022).

4.4 SOILS
A review of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Web Soil Survey for Yuba County (Natural Resource Conservation Service [NRCS], 2022) identified nine soil mapping units within the study area (Appendix E). These include Hollenbeck silty clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes (131); Hollenbeck-Urban land complex, 0-1 percent slopes (134); Conejo loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17 (141); Conejo loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded, MLRA 17 (142); Conejo-Urban land complex, 0 percent slopes, MLRA 17 (143); Oakdale sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes (197); Oakdale-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes (198); San Joaquin loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes (214); Urban land-San Joaquin complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes (217).

None of these soil mapping units are hydric, though five of them (131,134,143, 214, and 217) include minor components that are considered hydric.
nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1394
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 14 -

4.5 HABITAT DESCRIPTIONS AND VEGETATION
The majority of the study area consists of lands within developed urban areas, disturbed habitat along roadway shoulders or in vacant lots, and land within or adjacent to agricultural fields.

Wetlands and riparian cover types occur along the waterways at the trenchless crossing locations.

The agricultural fields in the area are primarily used to produce rice and other grain crops.

Disturbed areas and road shoulders that had vegetation present support annual grassland and ruderal cover types. Proposed pipeline alignments are limited to developed lands within the paved roadway and disturbed shoulder with minimal vegetation present. Workspace associated with HDD crossings are within natural and undeveloped lands or agricultural lands. Pump stations and lift stations are within developed and disturbed lands, vacant lots, natural and undeveloped lands, or agricultural lands.

Dominant species observed in annual grasslands and ruderal habitat include ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus), rye grass (Festuca perennis), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceous), wild oat (Avena fatua), Medusa head (Elymus caput-medusae), redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium), yellow star thistle (Centauria solstitialis), black mustard (Brassica nigra), Dove's-foot geranium (Geranium molle), and California burclover (Medicago polymorpha).

There are several natural drainage crossings throughout the pipeline alignments. These include crossings of Hutchinson Creek, Reeds Creek, Kimball Creek, and Virginia Creek. At these crossings, the vegetation communities observed were a mix of natural riparian communities, emergent wetland vegetation, and annual grassland cover types. Dominant species observed at these drainage crossings varied from crossing to crossing. Kimball Creek supported predominantly emergent wetland vegetation with little or no riparian corridor. Hutchinson Creek and Reeds Creek supported a riparian corridor. Virginia Creek is a channelized canal that supports little to no vegetation (See Section 4.5.1 below for more detail regarding the drainage crossings). The dominant species observed at the drainage crossings that had emergent vegetation include dense stand of broad-leaved cattail (Typha latifolia) and tule (Schoenoplectus acutus var. occidentalis). Drainage crossings with a riparian canopy often included Valley oak (Quercus lobata), Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.), willow (Salix sp.) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) growing along the banks. Annual grasslands around these crossings had a cover of herbaceous species similar to the grasslands described above.

At multiple locations along the pipeline alignment, roadside ditches and depressions are present that support a range of hydrologic characteristics which affect the types of vegetation that grow. Ditches with prolonged or perennial inundation supported wetland species like broad-leaved cattail, iris-leaved rush (Juncus xiphoides), tall cyperus (Cyperus eragrostis), and creeping spikerush (Eleocharis macrostachya). The roadside ditches with a shorter hydroperiod supported more facultative wetland species like curly dock (Rumex crispus) and rye grass or were barren of vegetation. Many of these ditches supported algal matting or biotic crust on the ground’s surface, an indicator of hydrology and inundation during the wet season.

See Figure 4 for site photos of locations described above, including photos of each of the drainage crossing locations. A complete list of plant species observed during the field survey is compiled in Appendix C.
nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1395
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 15 -

4.5.1 Waters and Wetlands
The site was examined for evidence of regulated habitats, such as waters and wetlands, under regulatory authority of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map of the study area was reviewed to assist in the identification of waters and wetlands on the Site (USFWS, 2022b).

There are several riverine features identified on the NWI map within the project area.

These include Hutchinson Creek, Reeds Creek, Kimball Creek, and Virginia Creek. In addition to the natural riparian crossings, NWI identifies several man-made features including stock ponds, irrigation canals, and the artificially flooded portions of the Olivehurst Public Utility District Wastewater Treatment Plant. In addition to the features mapped on NWI, there were many roadside ditches and depressions that had evidence of wetland vegetation and hydrology. The potential wetland areas were defined by the presence of hydrophytic vegetation and supported a combination of facultative (FAC), facultative-wetland (FACW), and obligate wetland (OBL) plant species. In addition, evidence of hydrology was commonly noted as in the form of algal matting and saturated soil.

The northernmost trenchless creek crossing is Reeds Creek on Rancho Road. Reeds Creek at the Rancho Road crossing has a mix of emergent wetland vegetation and shrubby riparian cover. Growing from the bed of the channel were dense stands of emergent wetland plants like tule and overhanging the banks were thick patches of Himalayan blackberry. In addition to the blackberry, willow trees and shrubs grew along the banks in varying densities. Reeds Creek is mapped as an intermittent waterway (USGS, 1952).

The next major riparian crossing along Rancho Road is Hutchison Creek. Hutchison Creek at this location supported a tall riparian canopy composed primarily of eucalyptus trees with some Valley oaks. Similar to Reed’s Creek, dense blackberry briar patches cover much of Hutchison Creek’s banks. There was very little emergent wetland vegetation growing from the channel.

Hutchinson Creek is mapped as an intermittent waterway (USGS, 1952).

The next riparian crossing along Rancho Road is Kimball Creek. The Kimball Creek crossing can be characterized by two elements that make it distinct from the other creek crossings. On both the north and south sides of Rancho Road, the creek forms a wide sprawling wetland rather than a narrow and defined channel. Additionally, Kimball Creek can be characterized by an almost complete cover of dense cattail growing from the creek’s bed. There was little to no riparian cover at this location with several scattered willows growing from the wetland area but not forming a canopy. As Kimball Creek flows to the southwest, it meets Forty Mile Road and the pipeline alignment crosses at that location as well. At the Forty Mile Road crossing of Kimball Creek, there was a thick dominant cover of cattail; however, the channel was narrower and water could be seen through the cattails. Kimball Creek is mapped as an intermittent waterway (USGS, 1952); however, based on a review of historic aerial imagery Kimball Creek appears to support summer water in the low flow channel as evidenced by imagery from August of 2016 and September of 2018 (GoogleEarth Pro, 2023).

The southernmost creek crossing on Rancho Road is Virginia Creek. Virginia Creek is a highly altered waterway that has been channelized to flow around the perimeter of agricultural farmland within the study area. There was no emergent wetland vegetation growing from Virginia Creek and the banks of the channel were barren. The top of bank supports weedy grassland nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1396
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 16 -
species like black mustard and no riparian canopy was present. Virginia Creek is not mapped on the USGS Wheatland, CA 7.5-minute quadrangle map (USGS, 1947) and based on historic aerial imagery appears to have been constructed sometime between 1988 and 1993 (GoogleEarth Pro, 2023).

The pipeline alignment crosses another significant waterway and wetland feature in the southern portion of the alignment along Forty Mile Road consisting of a channelized canal that’s connected to the Virginia Creek canal and appears to have been constructed around the same time. This waterway is characterized by a wide sprawling wetland dominated by emergent wetland vegetation with no riparian corridor. The dominant species in the wetland was tule, although cattail was dominant in some areas. A channelized canal was approximately 15 feet wide, conveys water to the west through three large culverts under Forty Mile Road.

The Project is designed to avoid impacts to drainage crossings by using trenchless methods at all major waterway crossings. Trenchless methods include HDD crossings at some locations and pipe ramming or auger boring methods in the roadway at other locations. At these trenchless crossing locations, temporary impact footprints will be sited outside of the riparian community and/or adjacent wetlands. In several cases, culverted crossings may be trench installed within the paved roadway and beneath the existing shallow culverts without disturbance to the culverts or the waterway.

In addition to the waterway crossings, there are multiple roadside ditches and depressions that support a range of hydrologic characteristics. Roadside ditches that have been constructed for drainage were prevalent along much of the pipeline alignments in roadways. These features range from unvegetated roadside ditches or dry roadside ditches supporting a mix of upland or facultative wetland grasses to wet roadside ditches supporting emergent wetland vegetation. In addition, roadside depressions occur, primarily along Rancho Road and often in the low lying area between the roadway and the adjacent railroad tracks. Many of these depressions had indicators of hydrology and inundation during the wet season including algal mat or biotic crust formation.

Some of these depressions support wetland plant species like creeping spikerush and California loostrife (Lythrum hyssopifolia). Because of their proximity to the road, these areas often had deep tire ruts from vehicular use during the wet season and are highly disturbed wet depressions.

4.6 WILDLIFE
Wildlife observed at the project site were characteristic of the region and the time of year that surveys were conducted. Species observed during the survey are listed in Appendix D.

Special-status wildlife species occurring, or potentially occurring, within the study area are discussed in Section 4.7 below.

The vegetation communities within and surrounding the study area provide habitat for resident and migratory wildlife species. The composition, density, distribution, and physical characteristics of vegetative communities determine the diversity and abundance of wildlife species residing in the project area. Wildlife species observed and expected within the vegetative cover types present on the site are discussed below.

A large portion of the study area is in active agricultural production or is surrounded by urban development that limits use by wildlife. However, the waterways, riparian corridors and wetlands provide forage and cover for a variety of resident and migratory wildlife species. In nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1397
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 17 -
addition, certain types of agricultural fields, such as rice, can provide wildlife habitat. Surveys were conducted during the non-nesting season; therefore, many species observed are nonresident migratory species that would not be present in the project area during the spring and summer breeding season.

Some of the species observed include house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), brewer’s blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), and black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans). At the waterway crossings and in riparian habitat, some of the bird species observed included red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris), American goldfinch (Spinus tristis), Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii), and ruby-crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula). Signs of mammals moving through the riparian corridors were observed for several species including raccoon (Procyon lotor), coyote (Canis latrans), and mink (Mustela vison).

Species observed in ponded agricultural fields included killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), greater yellowlegs (Tringa melanoleuca), great egret (Ardea alba). Long-range migratory birds including snow goose (Chen caerulescens), greater white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons), and Canada goose (Branta canadensis) were also observed in these ponded areas. Raptors observed soaring above the project site included red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), northern harrier (Circus hudsonius), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), and American kestrel (Falco sparverius).

4.7 SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Based on the literature review and species list from USFWS (Project Code: 2022- 0002318) and NMFS, a list of special-status species that have been reported in the vicinity of the project site (Olivehurst quadrangle and surrounding eight quadrangles), or within Yuba County, has been compiled. Special-status species that have the potential to occur in the vicinity of the project site are listed in Table 5.

An analysis of the likelihood of occurrence for each species was conducted on the basis of species ranges, previous observations, contemporary sightings, and presence of suitable habitat elements within the study area. The Project site may be located outside of the known range of some species, or it may be within the geographic range for a certain species, but suitable habitat, such as chenopod scrub, chaparral, or cismontane woodland is absent within the study area. For the purpose of this analysis, potential special-status species that occur in the general area of the project and for which the project may provide habitat are discussed in greater detail in Sections 4.7.1 and 4.7.2 below.
nadre
r-ssoc1ates, Inc- ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:51 EHVlRONMENTAL SClENTISTS
1398
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 18 -
Table 5. Special-Status Species Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity of the South County Infrastructure Project Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
PLANTS Astragalus tener var. ferrisiae Ferris’ milk-vetch CRPR 1B.1
Vernally mesic meadows and seeps and subalkaline flats of Valley and foothill grasslands at elevations ranging from 5 to approximately 245 feet. Blooms from April to May.

Low
Habitat along the pipeline alignment is poor quality and alkaline soils not present. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #16) is from 1891 and is approximately 3.9 miles north of the northernmost extent of the project.

Delphinium recurvatum Recurved larkspur
CRPR 1B.2
Chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland. On alkaline soils; often in valley saltbush or valley chenopod scrub. Found regionally in slightly alkaline beds of vernal pools. Occurs at elevations ranging from 10 to approximately 2,250 feet. Blooms from March to June.

None
No suitable habitat present. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #104) is from 1900 and is approximately 3.9 miles north of the northernmost extent of the project. This occurrence is considered extirpated and there are no recent occurrences near the project site.

Downingia pusilla Dwarf downingia
CRPR 2B.2
Valley and foothill grasslands and vernal pools at elevations ranging from 1 to 1,460 feet. Blooms from March to May.

Low
Potentially suitable habitat occurs in seasonally inundated depressions and ditches. Due to proximity to roads, habitat is highly disturbed by offroad vehicle use. The nearest occurrence (Occ. #95) from 1999 is approximately 2.8 miles east of the project site.

Hibiscus lasiocarpos var. occidentalis
Woolly rose-mallow
CRPR 1B.2
Freshwater marshes and swamps, often on the side of levees at elevations ranging from sea level to approximately 400 feet. Blooms from June to September.

Low
Potentially suitable habitat occurs along waterways. Project activities will avoid waterways through trenchless installation methods. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #69) from 2009 is approximately 9.4 miles west of the project site in levees along the Sutter Bypass. nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1399
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 19 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
Legenere limosa Legenere
CRPR 1B.1
Vernal pools at elevations ranging from sea level to approximately 2,900 feet. Blooms from April to June.

Low
Potentially suitable habitat occurs in seasonally inundated depressions and ditches. Due to proximity to road habitat is highly disturbed by offroad vehicle use. The nearest occurrence (Occ. #52) from 1999 is approximately 4.7 miles northeast of the project site.

Monardella venosa Veiny monardella
CRPR 1B.1
Cismontane woodlands and Valley and foothill grasslands, usually in clayey soil, at elevations ranging from 195 to approximately 1,345 feet. Blooms from May to July.

None
No suitable habitat is present at the project site. One historic occurrence in the area is considered extirpated.

Navarretia leucocephala ssp. Bakeri Baker’s navarretia
CRPR 1B.1
Mesic cismontane woodlands, lower montane coniferous forests, meadows and seeps, valley and foothill grasslands, and vernal pools. Typically occurs at elevations ranging from 15 to approximately 5,700 feet. Blooms from April to July.

Low
Potentially suitable habitat occurs at in seasonally inundated depressions and ditches. Due to proximity to road habitat is highly disturbed by offroad vehicle use. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #56) from 1999 is approximately 11.7 miles northwest of the project site.

Pseudobahia bahiifolia Hartweg’s golden sunburst

FE, SE,
CRPR 1B.1
Cismontane woodlands and Valley and foothill grasslands, often in acidic clayey soil, at elevations ranging from 50 to approximately 490 feet. Blooms from March to April.

None
No suitable habitat is present at the project site. One historic occurrence in the area is considered extirpated.

Sagittaria sanfordii Sanford’s arrowhead
CRPR 1B.2
Assorted freshwater habitats including swamps and marshes at elevations ranging from 0 to 2130 feet. Blooms from May to October, sometimes into November.

Moderate
Potentially suitable habitat present at the waterway crossings along the pipeline alignment or in roadside ditches that have a long period of inundation. Project activities will avoid waterways through trenchless installation methods at waterway crossings. Nearest occurrence nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1400
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 20 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
(Occ. #98) from 1955 is approximately 3.1 miles southwest of the project site.

Wolffia brasiliensis Brazilian watermeal
CRPR 2B.3
Shallow freshwater marshes and swamps at elevations ranging from 65 to approximately 330 feet. Blooms from April to December.

Moderate
Potentially suitable habitat present at drainage crossings along pipeline alignment with shallow ponded water. Project activities will avoid waterways through trenchless installation methods at waterway crossings. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #5) from 2002 is approximately 10.2 miles east of the project site.

INVERTEBRATES Branchinecta conservation Conservancy fairy shrimp FE
Large, cool-water vernal pools with moderately turbid water where pools generally last until June; however, the shrimp are gone long before then.

Low
Wet depression and inundation in roadside ditches within the study area would not remain inundated for the duration of time typical of vernal pools that support this species. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #36) from 2012 is approximately 10.6 miles south of the southernmost extent of the pipeline alignment.

Branchinecta lynchi Vernal pool fairy shrimp
FT
Endemic to the grasslands of the central valley, central coast mountains, and south coast mountains, in astatic rainfilled pools. Regionally inhabits small, clear-water sandstone depression pools and grass swale, earth slump or basaltflow vernal pools.

High
Potentially suitable habitat occurs in seasonally inundated depressions and ditches. Due to proximity to roads habitat in the study area is highly disturbed by offroad vehicle use; however, other occurrences in region occur in similar habitat. Two occurrences are located less than 0.5 miles from the northern portion of the project site. Occ #708 from 2007 was in an irrigation ditch along Bernice Avenue and occ #709 from 2013 occurs in pools nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1401
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 21 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
surrounded by mowed grassland east of Powerline Road in Olivehurst.

Danaus plexippus Monarch butterfly
FC
Monarchs roost in eucalyptus, Monterey cypress, Monterey pine, and other trees in groves along the Pacific coastline of California, arriving starting in late October. Dispersal from these roosts generally begins in mid-February. Milkweed and nectar plant availability throughout the spring, summer and fall is important for monarch migration. In areas of the desert southwest, monarchs use nectar and milkweed plants throughout much of the year.

None
There is no suitable habitat (milkweed) to support this species within the study area. The nearest occurrence is over 60 miles southwest of the site.

Desmocerus californicus dimorphus Valley elderberry longhorn beetle FT
Occurrences of the VELB are primarily in the vicinity of moist valley oak woodlands associated with riparian corridors in the lower Sacramento River and upper San Joaquin River drainages (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1984). Blue elderberry plants are obligate hosts for the VELB, providing a source of food and brood wood.

Low
(Habitat
present)
Surveys during the blooming season identified four elderberry shrubs within 165 feet (VELB encroachment buffer) along Rancho Road; however, these shrubs were east of the railroad and would not be impacted by the Project. A single elderberry shrub occurs on the shoulder of Forty Mile Road and within 20 feet of Project activities (VELB core area), but this shrub was very small and exposed to disturbance due to proximity to road and utility pole. No emergence holes occur and disjunct from riparian or other elderberry shrubs. Nearest occurrence of VELB (Occ. #193) from 1998 is approximately 0.4 miles south of the southernmost extent of the pipeline alignment; however, all elderberry shrubs at this location have been removed and the occurrence is considered extirpated. nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1402
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 22 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
The nearest recent occurrence (Occ. #190) from 2006 is approximately 3.8 miles west of the project site.

Lepidurus packardi Vernal pool tadpole shrimp
FE
Inhabits vernal pools and swales in the central valley containing clear to highly turbid water. Pools commonly found in grass-bottomed swales of unplowed grasslands. Some pools are mud bottomed and highly turbid.

Moderate
Potentially suitable habitat occurs in seasonally inundated depressions and ditches. Due to proximity to roads habitat in the study area is highly disturbed by offroad vehicle use. There are three occurrences located less than 1 mile from the northern portions of the project stie. Occurrence #380 from 2016 is located approximately 700 feet from the pipeline alignment on Mary Avenue in artificial seasonal wetlands. Occurrence #221 from 2004 is located approximately 0.3 miles from the wastewater treatment plant in a field that has since been developed.

FISHES Acipenser medirostris pop. 1 Green sturgeon – Southern DPS FT
Anadromous fish species found in near shore marine and estuarine environments from Alaska to Baja California, Mexico. Green sturgeon depend on large rivers to spawn, typically in deep pools in large turbulent mainstem rivers. The Sacramento River watershed is the only confirmed present and historical spawning area. Spawning occurs in the Sacramento River and has recently been documented in the Feather River and Yuba River (tributaries to the Sacramento River).

None
No suitable habitat present. Project activities will avoid waterways through trenchless installation methods and will result in no impact to fish. Nearest known occurrences in Feather and Yuba River.
nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1403
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 23 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
Hypomesus transpacificus Delta smelt
FT, SE
Endemic to the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta, they occur in the Delta primarily below Isleton on the Sacramento River, below Mossdale on the San Joaquin River, and in Suisun Bay. Delta smelt mainly inhabits the freshwater-saltwater mixing zone of the estuary, except during its spawning season, when it moves into freshwater during the early spring months from March until May.

None
No suitable habitat present. Project activities will avoid waterways through trenchless installation methods and will result in no impact to fish.

Oncorhyncus mykiss irideus pop. 11 Steelhead – Central Valley DPS FT Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their tributaries. Low Project activities will avoid waterways through trenchless installation methods and will result in no impact to fish.

Oncorhynchus tshawytscha pop. 11 Chinook salmon – Central Valley spring-run ESU FT, ST Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their tributaries. Low Project activities will avoid waterways through trenchless installation methods and will result in no impact to fish.

Pogonichthys macrolepidotus Sacramento splittail
CSC Slow moving rivers, lakes, and sloughs in the Sacramento San Joaquin valleys. Low Project activities will avoid waterways through trenchless installation methods and will result in no impact to fish.

AMPHIBIANS Rana draytonii California red-legged frog

FT, CSC
Marshes, lakes, reservoirs, ponds, slow moving segments of streams, and other usually permanent water in lowlands, foothill woodlands, and grasslands. Requires aquatic habitat with extensive emergent vegetation.

None
The project site is outside of the known range of the species. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #814) from 2005 is approximately 29.9 miles south of the project site. nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1404
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 24 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
Spea hammondii Western spadefoot
CSC
Primarily found in grasslands but can be found in other open areas of woodlands, coastal sage scrub, and chaparral. Breeding requires ponded water, often occurring seasonally from rainfall.

Low
Poor quality habitat occurs at in seasonally inundated depressions and ditches. Due to proximity to roads, habitat is highly disturbed by offroad vehicle use. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #1295) from 2016 is approximately 10.4 miles southeast of the project site REPTILES Emys marmorata Western pond turtle
CSC
Ponds, marshes, rivers, streams and irrigation ditches with aquatic vegetation. Needs basking sites and suitable upland habitat (sandy banks, grassy open fields) for egg laying Moderate
Potentially suitable habitat occurs at several of the drainage crossings along the pipeline alignment. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #334) from 1998 is approximately 2.2 miles south of the project site.

Thamnophis gigas Giant gartersnake
FT, ST
Freshwater marshes and streams with summer water, emergent wetland vegetation and suitable basking habitat. Has adapted to drainage canals and irrigation ditches. Rice fields in the Central Valley are known to support GGS.

Moderate
Suitable habitat within Kimball Creek and rice fields in the area. Rice fields have been shown to be suitable aquatic habitat in the absence of natural aquatic habitat. Nearest contemporary occurrence (Occ. #192) from 2014 is located in a rice field approximately 8.2 miles west of the project site.

BIRDS Accipiter cooperii Cooper’s hawk
WL
Typical nesting and foraging habitat includes riparian woodland, dense oak woodland, and other woodland near water. Breeding range from Central Valley and Sierra Nevada and Coast ranges.

Moderate
Species could forage or nest within trees in or near the project site. Nesting occurrences of this species are not always reported to CNDDB although it is relatively common in the region of project. nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1405
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 25 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
Accipiter striatus Sharp-shinned hawk
WL
Species feeds and nests in oak and pine woodlands and preys mainly on small birds but will also eat small mammals and insects.

Low
Species could forage in the vicinity of the project site, primarily in forested riparian at crossings. Nesting habitat along the pipeline alignment is very limited.

Agelaius tricolor Tricolor blackbird

ST, CSC
Colonial nesting species. Nesting habitat is often found near a source of water and in emergent wetland, grassland, or agricultural cropland.

High
Suitable nesting habitat is present within the study area, primarily at riparian crossings or in nearby wetlands with emergent vegetation. Individuals were observed during field surveys. There are approximately 8 occurrences of tricolor blackbird within 0.5 miles of the pipeline alignment. Notably, occurrence #508 from 2014 is located along the pipeline alignment on Forty Mile Road in blackberry habitat.

Ammodramus savannarum Grasshopper sparrow
CSC
Forages and nests in grasslands, fields, and prairies. Often nests in open fields with tall grasses and forbes and may nest in overgrown pastures and hayfields.

Low
Species is a very rare breeder in the region surrounding the project site. Potentially suitable nesting habitat is present along the pipeline alignment in several locations that support weedy grasslands. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #3) from 1994 is approximately 10.4 miles east of the project site.

Athene cunicularia Burrowing owl

CSC, BCC
Dry, open short grass, treeless plains that are associated with burrowing species. Underground nesting habitat in burrows.

High
Suitable burrowing habitat is present in the berm at the southern end of the wastewater treatment plant. An extensive California ground squirrel colony was observed and several of the burrows showed sign of renovation by burrowing owl. Nearest contemporary occurrence (Occ. #2003) from 2016 is approximately 8.1 miles southeast of the project site. nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1406
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 26 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
Branta hutchinsii leucopareia Cackling (=Aleutian Canada) goose WL Breeds in the Aleutian Islands and winters in the Central Valley of California. During the winter, it occurs in agricultural fields and pastures.

High
(foraging) /
None
(nesting)
Overwintering foraging habitat is present in agricultural land surrounding the study area. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #12) from 1997 is located approximately 9.6 miles west of the project site.

Buteo swainsoni Swainson’s hawk ST, BCC
Breeds in stands with few trees in juniper-sage flats, riparian areas and in oak savanna. Requires adjacent suitable foraging areas such as grasslands, or alfalfa or grain fields supporting rodent populations.

High
Suitable nesting habitat is present in study
area within riparian corridors or other areas with large trees like Valley oak and eucalyptus. There are approximately 73 nesting occurrences within 10 miles of the pipeline alignment. Nearest occurrence (Occ. # 1529) from 2003 is less than 400 feet west of the pipeline alignment on Forty Mile Road.

Circus hudsonius Northern harrier
CSC
Forages and nests in freshwater and brackish marshes and their adjacent grasslands.

Present
Species was observed foraging over emergent wetland habitat during surveys. Potentially suitable nesting habitat occurs in grasslands that receive minimal levels of disturbance. Nearest occurrences (Occ #38) include nesting occurrences from 2000 at Beale Air Force Base approximately 4.5 miles east of the site.

Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Western yellow-billed cuckoo

FT, SE,

CSC, BCC
During the summer breeding season, it can be rarely found in valley foothill and desert riparian habitats in California. Typically breeds in dense deciduous riparian vegetation.

Low
Potentially suitable habitat present at drainage crossings with riparian cover; however, riparian habitat in the Project area is lacking preferred size and density for nesting. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #91) from 1976 is approximately 2.9 miles northwest of the project site.

Elanus leucurus FP Rolling foothills / valley margins with scattered oaks and river bottomlands or
Present Species was observed foraging near the
project site during surveys. Potentially
nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1407
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 27 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
White-tailed kite marshes next to deciduous woodland.

Forages over grasslands, marshes, and oak savannas close to isolated, densetopped trees for nesting and perching. suitable nesting habitat is located within the study area primarily in riparian corridors with trees.

Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus California black rail

ST, FP, BCC
Permanent resident of brackish and freshwater marshes with tall, dense, emergent vegetation.

Low
Potentially suitable habitat is present at waterway crossings in the study area with dense emergent vegetation; however, the likelihood of occurrence is low due to a paucity of occurrences in the region. Occurrences of the year-round resident Sierra Nevada populations of California black rail are located approximately 10 miles east of the project site. Occurrence #235 from 2006 is located approximately 8.4 miles west of project site adjacent to a rice field.

Melospiza melodia Song sparrow (“Modesto” population)
CSC
Marsh and riparian scrub; Resident of the north-central portion of the Central Valley. Nests in emergent freshwater marshes, riparian habitat, and vegetated irrigation canals.

High
Suitable habitat is present within the study area particularly at waterway crossings and wetland habitat. Song sparrows were observed during surveys. The nearest contemporary occurrence (Occ. #86) from 2005 is approximately 8.5 miles southwest of the project site.

Riparia riparia Bank swallow
ST
Can be found along rivers and streams along the steep eroded banks where they nest. Can also be found nesting in quarries and road cuts.

None
There is no suitable nesting habitat at any of the waterway crossings along the pipeline alignment. Although the species may pass through or forage in the area, there is no suitable nesting habitat present. Nearest occurrences are located along the Feather River approximately 3 miles west of the project site. nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1408
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 28 -
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status1 Habitat Likelihood of Occurrence Rationale
Vireo bellii pusillus Least Bell’s vireo
FE, SE
Typically nests in riparian habitat with dense shrub cover and a structurally diverse canopy.

Low
Potentially suitable nesting habitat present at riparian crossings along the pipeline alignment with dense tree and shrub cover. The species is very rare in the region. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #524) from 1878 is approximately 4 miles northwest of the project site. The nearest contemporary occurrence of this species is approximately 36 miles south of the project site.

MAMMALS Antrozous pallidus Pallid bat
CSC
Day roosts is caves and crevices; occasionally roosts in hollow trees and buildings.

Low
Preferred habitat is not present at the project site. Potentially suitable habitat present in snags along riparian crossings. Nearest occurrence (Occ. #425) from 2015 is approximately 9.3 miles south of the project site.

Corynorhinus townsendii Townsend’s big-eared bat
CSC
Coniferous forests, deciduous riparian woodlands, and semi-desert and montane shrub lands. Roost in dark places like caves and buildings.

None No suitable habitat present at the project site.
1 Status:

FE = Federal Endangered FT = Federal Threatened FC = Federal Candidate SE = California State Endangered ST = California State Threatened SCT = California State Candidate Threatened SCT = California State Candidate Endangered FP = CDFW Fully Protected California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1B.1 = Threatened in California and elsewhere, seriously threatened in California CRPR 1B.2 = Threatened in California and elsewhere, moderately threatened in California CRPR 2B = Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere CRPR 3 = Plants about which more information is needed CRPR 4 = Plants of limited distribution CSC = California Species of Special Concern BCC = USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern WL = CDFW Watchlist nadre l";ssoclatea, Inc. CJ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS 6
EHVlRONIMIENTAL SCIEH'TISTS
1409
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 29 -

4.7.1 Special-Status Plants

4.7.1.1 Sanford’s arrowhead (Saggitaria sanfordii)
Sanford’s arrowhead is a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species occurs in shallow freshwater wetland habitat. It is a perennial herbaceous species that blooms from May to October. The nearest occurrence (Occ. #98) which is an occurrence from 1955 located approximately 3.1 miles southwest of the project site. There is potentially suitable habitat for this species within creeks and large ditches or depressions supporting prolonged hydroperiod.

4.7.1.2 Brazilian watermeal (Wolffia brasiliensis)
Brazilian watermeal is a CRPR 2B.3 species. This species occurs in shallow freshwater marshes with perennial water. It is a perennial herbaceous species that floats above the water and blooms from April to December. The nearest occurrence (Occ. #5) from 2002 is located approximately 10.2 miles east of the project site. There is potentially suitable habitat for this species within the perennially ponded areas in drainage crossings.

The proposed Project will avoid impacts to these areas through trenchless installation methods at waterway crossings and perennial ponded habitat.

4.7.2 Special-Status Wildlife

4.7.2.1 Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi)
Vernal pool fairy shrimp is a Federally threatened species that occurs through much of the Central Valley and as far south as the Santa Rosa Plateau in Riverside County. This species occurs in two types of vernal pools; pooled water in small depressions of sandstone outcrops surrounded by foothill grasslands, and ponded water in small swales or depression basins with grassy or muddy bottoms in un-plowed grasslands (Eriksen and Belk, 1999). The habitat characteristics typical of the pools that support the vernal pool fairy shrimp include small, cool water pools, low to moderate concentrations of dissolved solids, and short and unpredictable durations. The vernal pool fairy shrimp can also occur in wet depression features with an appropriate hydroperiod.

There are two occurrences located less than 0.5 miles from the northern portion of the project site (CNDDB, 2022) that occur in roadside habitat similar to wet depression habitat observed along Rancho Road. Occurrence 708 is an occurrence within an irrigation ditch on Bernice Avenue recorded in 2007. Occurrence 709 is within pools surrounded by mowed grassland east of Powerline Road in Olivehurst recorded in 2013.

Potentially suitable habitat occurs in seasonally inundated ditches and depressions, primarily along Rancho Road (Figures 2A through 2T). Due to proximity to the roadway, habitat in the study area is often highly disturbed by offroad vehicle use, trash dumping, and other urban influences and may be suboptimal for fairy shrimp occurrence; however, given proximity to other occurrences of this species in similar roadside habitat, occurrence cannot be ruled out. The southern portion of the existing WWTP emergency storage basin also supports ponded areas in the wet season; however, because of it’s location within the existing WWTP and the routine disturbance of this area associated with WWTP operations, it was not considered suitable habitat.
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1410
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 30 -

4.7.2.2 Valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus) Valley elderberry longhorn beetle (VELB) is a federally threatened insect species.

It is a moderate-sized, brightly colored, and sexually dichromatic beetle, and was listed as a Threatened species by the USFWS on August 10, 1980. The range of the VELB extends throughout California’s Central Valley and associated foothills from about the 2,200-foot elevation contour on the east and the watershed of the Central Valley on the west According to Barr (1991), the evidence of VELB occurrence extends from Shasta County to the north, Kern County to the south, Placer and El Dorado counties to the east, and along the Middle River southwest of Stockton, San Joaquin County to the west.

Occurrences of the VELB are primarily in the vicinity of moist valley oak woodlands associated with riparian corridors in the lower Sacramento River and upper San Joaquin River drainages (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1984). Blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana) plants are obligate hosts for the VELB, providing a source of food and broodwood. Because of the relatively large size of the VELB (0.5 to 1.0 inch), it is generally restricted to the larger branches and stems of older elderberry plants. Emergence holes are circular-to-slightly oval and usually 0.25 to 0.5-inch in diameter. Emergence holes are generally found on plants with branch and trunk girths with an average diameter of 3.3 inches but can occur in stems one inch or larger. Emergence holes have been found from a few inches above ground up to 10 feet, but over 70 percent are found are below 4 feet (Barr 1991).

The adult VELB lays eggs on the bark of the elderberry stem. The eggs hatch and the larvae bore into and feed upon the pith of the stem. When the larvae are ready to pupate, they bore exit holes in the stem, and then return to complete pupation. Adult beetles emerge from the pupae in late spring and can be found on foliage, flowers, stems, adjacent vegetation, or flying among elderberry plants between late April and early June.

The entire life cycle is believed to encompass about two years from egg laying until the adults die (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1984).

The nearest recent occurrence (Occ. #190) is from 2006 and is approximately 3.8 miles west of the project site (CDFW, 2022). Surveys during the blooming season identified four elderberry shrubs within 165 feet (VELB encroachment buffer) of the project site along Rancho Road; however, these shrubs were east of the railroad and would not be impacted by the Project. A single elderberry shrub occurs on the shoulder of Forty Mile Road and within 20 feet (VELB core area) of proposed trench installed pipeline within the paved roadway. This shrub was very small though several stems were greater than one inch in diameter and is exposed to disturbance within the VELB Core Area due to its location at the edge of pavement on Forty Mile Road. No emergence holes occur on the shrub and this shrub is highly disjunct from riparian habitat and other elderberry shrubs. It is very unlikely this the VELB occurs in the study area, though habitat is present due to the presence of this single shrub.

4.7.2.3 Vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) Vernal pool tadpole shrimp is a Federally Endangered species. Vernal pool tadpole shrimp occurs in vernal pools within the Central Valley and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta east of San Francisco Bay (Rogers, 2001). This species inhabits freshwater habitats nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1411
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 31 -
containing clear to highly turbid water, with water temperatures ranging from 50 to 84 degrees Fahrenheit and pH ranging from 6.2 to 8.5.

There are three occurrences located less than one mile from the northern portion of the project stie. Occurrence #380 is located approximately 700 feet from the pipeline alignment on Mary Avenue in artificial seasonal wetlands recorded in 2016. Occurrence #221 is a 2004 occurrence located approximately 0.3 miles from the wastewater treatment plant in a field that has since been developed. Potentially suitable habitat occurs in seasonally inundated ditches and depressions. Due to proximity to the roadway, habitat in the study area is often highly disturbed by offroad vehicle use and may be suboptimal for tadpole shrimp occurrence.

4.7.2.4 Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata)
Western pond turtle (WPT) is a California species of special concern. The WPT occurs in open water habitats throughout much of California, although at much lower numbers and fewer localities than historical populations, especially in urban areas. WPT prefer slack or slow water habitats with dense stands of submergent or emergent vegetation for food and cover, and with abundant basking habitat. WPT are a semi-aquatic species inhabiting streams, marshes, ponds, and irrigation ditches within woodland, grassland, and open forest communities, but they require upland sites for nesting and over-wintering. Presence of nearby nesting sites and lack of exotic predators are also good habitat components (Bury, 1986).

The nearest occurrence (Occ. #334) is from 1998 and is approximately 2.2 miles south of the project site (CDFW, 2022). The project site has potentially suitable habitat for western pond turtle at several of the drainage crossings in the study area. There was, however, limited basking habitat identified during surveys and no western pond turtles were observed during field surveys.

4.7.2.5 Giant gartersnake (Thamnophis gigas)
Giant gartersnake (GGS) is a State and federally listed Threatened species found in emergent marsh habitats associated with waterways during spring and summer and hibernates in adjacent upland habitat during the winter. Due to extensive habitat loss, giant gartersnakes now inhabit remaining wetlands as well as highly modified habitats, such as agricultural areas. Active rice fields and their associated irrigations systems serve as an alternative habitat that is commonly used by giant gartersnake. These fields provide the habitat components typically required by giant gartersnake. Essential components of giant gartersnake habitat include:
 A fresh-water aquatic component with adequate water from early spring through fall to provide foraging habitat and cover;
 Emergent herbaceous wetland vegetation to provide foraging habitat, cover, and basking areas;
 An upland component near the aquatic habitat that can be used for thermoregulation, cover, and retreat; and
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1412
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 32 -
 An upland refugia component at higher elevation sites that will serve as winter hibernacula and provide cover and refuge from flood waters (Hansen and Brode, 1980; USFWS, 1997).

The nearest contemporary occurrence (Occ. #192) of GGS is a 2014 occurrence located in a rice field approximately 8.2 miles west of the project site. Potentially suitable habitat occurs within Kimball Creek and active rice fields in the area based on the presence of summer water, emergent wetland vegetation, and surrounding upland habitat.

Reeds Creek may also provide potentially suitable habitat for GGS; however, the pipeline will be installed using trenchless techniques under Reeds Creek and all Project activities are setback more than 200 feet from Reeds Creek, and therefore will not impact GGS or its habitat at this location.

Hutchinson Creek has riparian cover and does not provide potential habitat for this species. Virginia Creek does not support emergent wetland vegetation thereby limiting its potential to provide suitable habitat for this species. Some other agricultural ditches or rice fields in the study area may provide suitable aquatic habitat for GGS; however, Project activities will be limited to pipeline installation activities within the paved roadway and will avoid disturbance to suitable aquatic or upland habitat at these locations.

4.7.2.6 Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii)
Cooper’s hawk is on the CDFW Watch List. These birds breed over much of California in forests, open woods and streamside trees. They utilize additional habitats for hunting, including chaparral and other scrub communities. Cooper’s hawks have also become well adapted to heavily treed urban environments where they are commonly observed in public parks and around bird feeders. Nests can be built in a variety of trees, typically at heights ranging from 25 to 50 feet off of the ground. There are no recorded occurrences of this species near the project site and it was not observed during reconnaissance surveys (CDFW, 2022), however, nesting occurrences of this species are not commonly reported to CNDDB and this species is common in the region of the Project.

Suitable foraging and nesting habitat for this species occurs along the pipeline alignment at forested riparian crossings.

4.7.2.7 Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor)
Tricolored blackbird is a state-listed Threatened species, California Species of Special Concern, and a Bird of Conservation Concern. The tricolored blackbird is a nomadic resident of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys and lower foothills of the Sierra Nevada. This species is a colonial nesting species that nests near freshwater in dense cattails and bulrush, and also in thickets of willow, blackberry, wild rose, and tall herbs (Zeiner et al., 1990a). Estimates for colony size range from 15 to 47,000 birds.

Flooded lands, pond margins, grass fields and agricultural fields constitute typical foraging habitat. Individual tricolored blackbirds were observed during field surveys along Forty Mile Road and Rancho Road.

There are approximately eight occurrences of tricolor blackbird within 0.5 miles of the pipeline alignment (CNDDB, 2022). Occurrence #508 is a 2014 occurrence located along the pipeline alignment on Forty Mile Road in a blackberry bramble that is still in nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1413
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 33 -
place near the southernmost waterway crossing. Suitable nesting habitat is present in many locations within the study area, but primarily at the waterway crossings with emergent vegetation and in the dense blackberry patch along Forty Mile Road.

4.7.2.8 Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia)
Burrowing owl is a California Species of Special Concern and a Bird of Conservation Concern. The burrowing owl is a small, long-legged owl that differs from other species of owls by its use of underground burrows and its diurnal activity pattern (Mallette and Gould, 1976). It occurs throughout California except in humid northwest coastal forests and high mountains (Zeiner et al., 1990a). It’s breeding range is dry, open short grass, treeless plains associated with burrowing mammals. It is also found on golf course, cemeteries, road rights-of-way, airports, vacant lots in residential areas, campuses, and fairgrounds (Haug et al., 1993).

Burrowing owls are semicolonial with 5 to 6 pairs per acre. The owls usually enlarge burrows excavated by ground squirrels or other fossorial species, but may excavate their own in soft, friable soils. The owls show a high level of site fidelity, and reuse burrows, but burrows may be used by different pairs in different years. Several burrows may be excavated with one used for nesting, while satellite burrows are used for escape, perching, and observation. They will also use pipes, culverts, debris piles, and nest boxes in areas where burrows are scarce. Burrows are generally surrounded by bare ground or short grass that afford unrestricted views. High perches and elevated areas with clear lines-of-sight, such as mounds, fences, or other structures, are used as for hunting and detecting predators including skunks, badgers, bobcats, coyotes, and barn owls.

The nearest recorded occurrence (Occ. #2003) is from 2016 and is approximately

8.1 miles southeast of the project site. Suitable burrowing owl habitat is present at the southern end of the wastewater treatment plant where an extensive California ground squirrel colony was observed on an earthen berm. Within this colony, several of the burrows showed signs of renovation by burrowing owls.

4.7.2.9 Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni)
Swainson’s hawk is a state-listed Threatened species and a Bird of Conservation Concern. This species breeds in open habitats in western North America from Alaska south to Mexico. It breeds in California, found mainly in the Central Valley, Klamath Basin, Northeastern Plateau, and Mojave Desert. It winters primarily on the pampas of southern South America, and Mexico, and a few winter in California, the southwestern U.S. and Florida.

This species forages in grassland or areas of sparse trees or shrubs, and often forages in agricultural areas in the Central Valley. It nests in the scattered trees within these habitats, particularly those along waterways. During the breeding season, it feeds primarily on small mammals and reptiles. During other seasons, large insects (especially grasshoppers) are the bulk of its diet.

In California, it usually arrives in March and April and departs in September or October. Loss of habitat is the major threat to this species in California. Residential and commercial development continues to replace Swainson’s hawk habitat. Pesticides and nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1414
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 34 -
herbicides are also a major threat, particularly on their wintering grounds. They are also sensitive to disturbance while nesting and may abandon nests if disturbed before the eggs hatch.

The project site is in a region that has very high Swainson’s hawk nesting activity.

There are approximately 73 nesting occurrences within 10 miles of the study area. The nearest occurrence (Occ. # 1529) is from 2003 and is less than 400 feet west of the pipeline alignment on Forty Mile Road (CDFW, 2022). This species was not observed during field surveys because surveys were conducted during the winter when Swainson’s hawk is not present in California. Suitable nesting habitat is present in many locations along the pipeline alignments particularly within riparian corridors with large trees like Valley oak, Fremont cottonwood, and eucalyptus. Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat also occurs within agricultural fields and grasslands in the area.

4.7.2.10 Northern harrier (Circus hudsonius)
Northern harrier is a California Species of Special Concern. The Northern Harrier inhabits meadows, grasslands, open rangelands, desert sinks, fresh and saltwater emergent wetlands; seldom found in wooded areas. It forages mostly on voles and other small mammals, birds, frogs, small reptiles, crustaceans, insects, and, rarely on fish.

Breeding typically occurs April to September, with peak activity June through July.

Destruction of wetland habitat, native grassland, and moist meadows, and the burning and plowing of nesting areas during early stages of breeding cycle, are major reasons for the decline (Remsen, 1978).

Nearest occurrences are nesting occurrences at Beale Air Force Base approximately 4.5 miles east. This species was observed foraging over emergent wetland habitat within the study area during surveys. Potentially suitable nesting habitat occurs in grasslands in the area that receive minimal levels of disturbance.

4.7.2.11 White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus)
White-tailed kite is a California Fully Protected species. It is a small raptor with a total length of about 12 inches and is often identified from a distance by its hovering or “kiting” behavior while hunting. White-tailed kites primarily prey on voles and other diurnal mammals, but will occasionally prey on birds, insects, reptiles, and amphibians. It typically forages over open grasslands and emergent wetlands. White-tailed kites nest in dense foliage in treetops near grassy foothills, marshes, riparian woodland, savanna, and partially cleared fields. Preferred nesting trees include oak, willow, sycamores, or other tree stands. White-tailed kites range from western California and southwestern Oregon to southeastern Arizona, and along the Gulf Coast from Texas to Florida (Wheeler and Clark, 1995).

There are no recorded occurrences of this species near the project site; however, it was observed foraging in the study area during surveys. The project site provides suitable foraging habitat for this species and suitable nesting habitat is present in the area. nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1415
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 35 -

4.7.2.12 Song sparrow (“Modesto population”) (Melospiza medlodia) The Modesto population of the song sparrow is endemic to California, where it resides only in the north-central portion of the Central Valley. Highest densities occur in the Butte Sink area of the Sacramento Valley and in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

Song sparrows breed from mid-March to early August and are resident species of the Sacramento Valley and Delta. Song sparrows are frequently seen within mature riparian corridors, such as the Cosumnes and Stanislaus Rivers, and less frequently within irrigation canals and levees. The Modesto population of song sparrow has an affinity for emergent freshwater marshes dominated by bullrush and cattails as well as riparian willow (Salix sp.) thickets. Song sparrows also nest in riparian forests of valley oak (Quercus lobata) with a sufficient understory of blackberry, along vegetated irrigation canals and levees (Shuford et al., 2008); however, nest appear to be more successful in early succession riparian wetland communities, such as restoration sites.

The nearest contemporary occurrence (Occ. #86) is a 2005 occurrence approximately 8.5 miles southwest of the project site. Suitable habitat is present within the study area particularly at waterway crossings and in emergent wetland habitat. Song sparrows were observed during surveys.

4.8 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS
Wildlife migration corridors are generally defined as connections between fragmented habitat patches that allow for physical and genetic exchange between otherwise isolated wildlife populations. Migration corridors may be local, such as those between foraging and nesting or denning areas, or they may be regional in extent.

Migration corridors are not unidirectional access routes; however, reference is usually made to source and receiver areas in discussions of wildlife movement networks. “Habitat linkages” are migration corridors that contain contiguous strips of native vegetation between source and receiver areas. Habitat linkages provide cover and forage sufficient for temporary inhabitation by a variety of ground-dwelling animal species. Wildlife migration corridors are essential to the regional fitness of an area as they provide avenues of genetic exchange and allow animals to access alternative territories as fluctuating dispersal pressures dictate.

Within the study area there are several natural drainages and riparian corridors that provide suitable migratory corridors for an array of species. These drainages and riparian areas include Reeds Creek, Hutchinson Creek, Kimball Creek, and Virginia Creek and other smaller unnamed waterways. These creeks help to provide access for wildlife to move from foothill habitat areas to valley habitat areas, including the Feather River, Sutter National Wildlife Refuge, and other wildlife areas. At the drainage crossings within the study area, the vegetation communities observed were a mix of natural riparian communities, emergent wetland vegetation, and annual grassland cover types. Signs of mammals moving through the riparian corridors were observed for several species including raccoon, coyote, and mink.

The Project is designed to avoid impacts to the drainage crossings and associated riparian corridors using trenchless installation methods for pipeline crossings at these nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1416
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 36 -
locations. Impacts to wildlife corridors will be limited to indirect temporary disturbance during construction, primarily during daytime hours.
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1417
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 37 -

5.0 REGULATORY SETTING

5.1 FEDERAL REGULATIONS

5.1.1 Federal Endangered Species Act.

The federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), administered by the USFWS and the NMFS (collectively referred hereafter as the “Services”), provides protection to species listed as Threatened (FT) or Endangered (FE), or proposed for listing as Threatened (PFT) or Endangered (PFE). The Services maintain lists of species that are neither formally listed nor proposed but could be listed in the future. These federal candidate species (FC) include taxa for which substantial information on biological vulnerability and potential threats exists and are maintained in order to support the appropriateness of proposing to list the taxa as an endangered or threatened species.

Projects that will result in the “take” of a federally listed or proposed species (as defined by FESA Section 9) are required to consult with the Services. The objective of consultation is to determine whether the project will jeopardize the continued existence of a listed or proposed species, and to determine what mitigation measures will be required to avoid jeopardy. Consultations are conducted under Sections 7 or 10 of FESA depending on the involvement by the federal government.

Under Section 7, the Services are authorized to issue Incidental Take Permits (ITP) for the take of a listed species that results from, but is not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity conducted by the federal agency. A Biological Assessment is usually required as part of the Section 7 consultation to provide sufficient information for the Services to fully determine the project’s potential effect on listed species. The Services must make one of three possible findings for each species potentially affected:

No effect: The proposed action will not affect the listed species or critical habitat; Not likely to adversely affect: Effects of the proposed action on the listed species are expected to be discountable (extremely unlikely to occur), insignificant (minimal impact without take), or beneficial; and
Likely to adversely affect: An adverse effect may occur as a direct or indirect result of the proposed action, and the effect is not discountable, insignificant, or beneficial.

Section 10 consultation is conducted when there is no federal involvement in a project except compliance with FESA.

5.1.2 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

The NMFS administers the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) (16 USC 1801 et seq.). The MSA is the primary law governing marine fisheries management in U.S. Federal waters. The MSA was first enacted in 1976 and amended in 1996. Amendments to the 1996 MSA require the identification of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for federally managed species and the implementation of measures to conserve and enhance this habitat. Any project requiring Federal authorization is required to complete and submit an EFH Assessment with the application and either show that no significant impacts to the essential habitat of managed species nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1418
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 38 -
are expected or identify mitigations to reduce those impacts. Under the MSA, Congress defined EFH as “those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity” (16 USC 1802(10)). The EFH provisions of the MSA offer resource managers a means to heighten consideration of fish habitat in resource management. Pursuant to section 305(b)(2), Federal agencies shall consult with the NMFS regarding any action they authorize, fund, or undertake that might adversely affect EFH.

5.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act / Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act The USFWS administers the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 USC 703-711) and the Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC 668-688).

The MBTA prevents the removal of trees, shrubs, and other structures containing active nests of migratory bird species that may result in the loss of eggs or nestlings. Adherence to construction windows either before the initiation of breeding activities or after young birds have fledged is a typical step to protect migratory birds and comply with the MBTA.

The Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act prohibits the taking or possession of bald and golden eagles, their eggs, or their nests without a permit from the USFWS.

5.1.4 Clean Water Act
The Corps and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulate the discharge of dredge and fill material into jurisdictional “waters of the United States” and wetlands under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

The Corps is responsible for the issuance of permits for the placement of dredged or fill material into Waters of the U.S. (WoUS) pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). As defined by the Corps at 33 CFR 328.3(a)(3), WoUS are those waters that are used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; tributaries and impoundments to such waters; interstate waters including interstate wetlands; and, territorial seas.

The Corps asserts jurisdiction over traditional navigable waters (TNW) and adjacent wetlands. Under Corps and EPA regulations, wetlands are defined as: “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” In non-tidal waters, the lateral extent of Corps jurisdiction is determined by the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) which is defined as the: “…line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.” (33 CFR 328[e]). nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1419
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 39 -

5.1.5 Rivers and Harbors Act
The Corps regulates activities affecting “navigable waters of the United States” under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC 403). Navigable waters are defined as “…those waters of the United States that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide shoreward to the mean high water mark and/or are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible to use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.” Structures or work under or over a navigable WoUS is considered to have an impact on the navigable capacity of the waterbody.

5.2 STATE REGULATIONS

5.2.1 California Endangered Species Act
CESA was enacted to protect fish, wildlife, and plant species in danger of, or threatened with, extinction in the State of California (Fish and Game Code §2051). CESA prohibits “take” of a state-listed species. Take is defined as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill” (Fish and Game Code §86). Under Section 2081 of CESA, CDFW may authorize an incidental take permit allowing the otherwise unlawful take of a SE or ST species.

CDFW maintains lists of Candidate-Endangered species (SCE) and CandidateThreatened species (SCT). These candidate species are afforded the same level of protection as listed species. CDFW designates Species of Special Concern (SSC) that are species of limited distribution, declining populations, diminishing habitat, or unusual scientific, recreational, or educational value. These species do not have the same legal protection as listed species but may be added to official lists in the future. The SSC list is intended by CDFW as a management tool for consideration in future land use decisions.

5.2.2 Fully Protected Species, Fish and Game Code Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515
This section of the California Fish and Game Code provides particular and special state protection to a list of 37 wildlife species and prohibits take or possession “at any time” with few exceptions and the CDFW cannot authorize incidental take of fully protected species.

5.2.3 California Fish and Game Code Section 3503
This section of the California Fish and Game Code prohibits the take, possession or needless destruction of nests or eggs of birds. It also prohibits the take, possession, or destruction of hawks or owls and the nests or eggs of any hawk or owl.

5.2.4 California Native Plant Protection Act
CDFW manages the California Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) of 1977 (F&G Code Section 1900, et seq.), which was enacted to identify, designate, and protect rare plants. There are 64 species, subspecies, and varieties of plants that are designated rare under the NPPA. F&G Code Section 1913 provides utilities with an exemption from CESA permitting requirements for listed plants within the utility right of way. Specifically, Section 1913(b) states: “…the removal of endangered or rare native plants from a canal, lateral ditch, building site, road, or other right-of-way by the owner of the land or his agent, or the nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1420
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 40 -
performance by a public agency or a publicly or privately owned public utility of its obligation to provide service to the public, shall not be restricted because of the presence of rare or endangered plants.” Section 1913(c) of the CNPPA requires the landowner to provide the CDFW with at least 10 days’ notice to allow for plant salvage prior to affecting the species. In addition to NPPA designated rare plants, all California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1 (A and B), Rank 2 (A and B), Rank 3, and some Rank 4 plants meet the definition of Rare or Endangered under the CEQA Guidelines §15125 and/or §15380. Potential impacts to these species are considered during CEQA review of a proposed project.

5.2.5 California Fish and Game Code Section 1600
Pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code, a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) between the CDFW and state or local governmental agency, public utility, or private citizen is required before the initiation of a construction project that will: (1) divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow or the bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake; (2) use materials from a streambed; or (3) result in the disposal or deposition of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass into a river, stream, or lake. The CDFW claims jurisdiction over the bed, bank, and channel of drainage features with regard to activities regulated under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code.

5.2.6 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act mandates that waters of the State of California shall be protected. Current policy in California is that activities that may affect waters of the State shall be regulated to attain the highest quality. Waters of the State include any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, and any aquatic features that meet the state definition of a wetland, within the boundaries of the state. The Porter-Cologne Act establishes that the state assumes responsibility for implementing portions of the federal Clean Water Act, rather than operating separate state and Federal water pollution control programs in California. Consequently, the state is involved in activities such as setting water quality standards, issuing discharge permits, and operating grant programs.

5.2.7 Clean Water Act
Pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the Corps cannot issue a federal permit until the State of California first issues a water quality certification to ensure that a project will comply with state water quality standards. The California State Water Resources Control Board or one of the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) issues water quality certifications.

5.2.8 Oak Woodland Protection
California Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 17 (1989) is a Senate resolution that requests that… “all state agencies having land use planning duties and responsibilities…to assess and determine the effects of their land use decisions or actions within any oak woodland” and that agencies ...preserve and protect native oak woodlands to the maximum extent feasible…or provide for replacement plantings where designated oak species are removed from oak woodlands”.
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1421
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 41 -
The Oak Woodlands Conservation Act (Section 1363 of the Fish and Game Code) was enacted in 2001. The program, which is managed by the Wildlife Conservation Board, is intended to:
 Support and encourage voluntary, long-term private stewardship and conservation of California oak woodlands by offering landowners financial incentives to protect and promote biologically functional oak woodlands;  Provide incentives to protect and encourage farming and ranching operations that are operated in a manner that protect and promote healthy oak woodlands;  Provide incentives for the protection of oak trees providing superior wildlife values on private land, and;
 Encourage planning that is consistent with oak woodlands preservation.

5.3 LOCAL AND REGIONAL PLANS

5.3.1 Yuba County General Plan
The Yuba County General Plan contains goals and policies that are relevant to biological resource issues. The project site and pipeline alignments are within the County of Yuba and is therefore within the jurisdiction of this general plan. Policies within the general plan applicable to the proposed project are outlined below. The applicable sections of the General Plan are under the Natural Resources Element. Policies within the general plan applicable to the proposed project are outlined below (County of Yuba, 2011).

5.3.1.1 Biological Resources
Goal: Protect and restore habitat for special-status species that have the potential to occur in Yuba County.

Implementing Policies
Policy NR-5.1: New developments that could adversely affect special-status species habitat shall conduct a biological resources assessment and identify design solutions that avoid such adverse effects. If, after examining all feasible means to avoid impacts to special-status species habitat through project design, adverse effects cannot be avoided, then impacts shall be mitigated in accordance with guidance from the appropriate state or federal agency charged with the protection of the subject species, including pre-construction surveys conducted according to applicable standards and protocols, where necessary.

Policy NR-5.2: The County will coordinate its environmental review and mitigation requirements with the Yuba-Sutter NCCP/HCP, once adopted.

Policy NR-5.3: The County will support the continued development and implementation of the Yuba-Sutter NCCP/HCP, once adopted.

Policy NR-5.4: New developments shall be located and designed to preserve and incorporate existing native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Fire safety standards may override consideration of retaining existing vegetation in certain circumstances.
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1422
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 42 -
Policy NR-5.5: The County will support cooperative restoration, development, and promotion of natural resources with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Forest Service, and other public agencies with an interest in the Yuba County’s water and wildlife assets.

Policy NR-5.6: The County will seek funding to enhance and restore habitat along the Yuba River, in coordination with development of recreational facilities and public access.

Policy NR-5.7: New developments and public investments near Yuba County’s streams and rivers shall be designed to avoid tree removal, erosion, or other modifications that would adversely affect salmonid habitat.

Policy NR-5.8: New private developments adjacent to riparian areas shall provide a buffer designed and maintained to preserve existing wildlife habitat; provide habitat conditions favorable to native local wildlife; restrict activities that may adversely affect wildlife habitat quality; and restore degraded habitat, where feasible.

Policy NR-5.9: New developments shall be designed to avoid the loss of jurisdictional wetlands. If loss is unavoidable, the County will require applicants to mitigate the loss on a “no net loss” basis through a combination of avoidance, minimization, restoration, and/or constructed wetlands, in accordance with federal and state law.

Policy NR-5.10: The County will encourage measures on agricultural lands that conserve or restore habitat.

Policy NR-5.11: The County will support the use of mitigation fees from the YubaSutter Natural Community Conservation/Habitat Conservation Plan to fund preservation and restoration elements of the County’s open space strategy.

Policy NR-5.12: Any new developments adjacent to the Spenceville Wildlife Refuge, Marysville Wildlife Area, Feather River Wildlife Area, Daugherty Hill Wildlife Area, or Starbend Fishing Access shall be buffered from wildlife areas or otherwise designed to avoid adverse direct and indirect effects on wildlife. Buffers related to firearm use, if necessary, should occur within the public wildlife area.

Policy NR-5.13: New developments that could adversely affect wildlife movement corridors shall conduct a biological assessment and avoid placing any temporary or permanent barriers within such corridors, if they are determined to exist on-site. Avoiding barriers to wildlife movement may be accomplished at the project or community plan level.

Policy NR-5.14: The County will discourage development that would substantially and adversely affect the designated winter and critical winter range of the Mooretown or Downieville deer herd.

Policy NR-5.15: Roads, water lines, sewer lines, drainage facilities, and other public facilities constructed to serve unincorporated County development shall be located and designed to avoid substantial impacts to stream courses, associated riparian areas, and wetlands, to the greatest extent feasible.
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1423
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 43 -

5.3.1.2 Trees and other Important Vegetation
Goal: Preserve the County’s trees and other vegetation that provide aesthetic and habitat benefits.

Implementing Policies
Policy NR-10.1: Building placement, grading, and circulation should be planned to retain as much existing native vegetation as feasible, with a priority on preserving existing oak trees that have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 6 inches or greater and all other trees that have a dbh of 30 inches or greater. The County’s policies and standards for fire safety may override consideration of retaining existing vegetation in certain circumstances.

Policy NR-10.2: The County will encourage the preservation of healthy, attractive native vegetation during land development. Where this is not feasible, the County will require landscaping that uses climate-appropriate plant materials. nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1424
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 44 -

6.0 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
The impact of the project on biological resources was evaluated in terms of mandatory findings of significance at Section 15065 of CEQA and Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, 1999). The various components of the project were considered in association with site conditions and were evaluated against CEQA criteria and County General Plan policies pertaining to biological issues. In accordance with these CEQA Guidelines, a project will normally result in a significant impact if any of the following conditions would result from project implementation:
 Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or specialstatus species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW, USFWS, or NMFS;
 Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulation, or by the CDFW, USFWS, or NMFS;
 Have a 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;  Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery site;  Conflict with any local polices or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; and,
 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan.

Additionally, the CEQA Guidelines Initial Study Land Use and Planning checklist notes that conflicts with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations of an agency with jurisdiction over the project should be considered during a project’s environmental review.
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1425
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 45 -

7.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGAITON MEASURES
Effects on biological resources in the Project area will be primarily temporary with permanent impact limited to above ground project features such as the WTP and lift stations and pump stations. There will be temporary impacts to wildlife habitat during pipeline installation and construction of above ground structures. General construction may temporarily alter the natural movement and behavior of wildlife in the Project area.

Construction may also result in indirect impacts that affect the quality of habitat in the Project area.

7.1 IMPACT CATEGORIES
Short-term and long-term impacts are analyzed for the proposed project. Each impact statement is classified as to the level of significance, based on the significance thresholds from Section 6.0, and the availability of measures to feasibly mitigate project effects. Impact categories include:
 Potentially Significant Impact is an adverse effect that cannot be mitigated.

This category of impact is one for which a solution has not been formulated, either because of the limits of technical and/or scientific knowledge, or unfeasibility from a technical, economic, and/or political perspective. Under CEQA, a Significant Unavoidable impact would require a “finding of overriding consideration” by the Lead Agency to approve the project;  Less than Significant with Mitigation is an adverse environmental effect that can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Measures have been identified that can feasibly be implemented and will avoid the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; minimize impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation; rectify the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; or compensate for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments;  Less than Significant Impact is an environmental effect that is less than significant or has no identified impact. These impacts may be adverse, but are not of a sufficient magnitude, intensity, or duration to disrupt the environment, and have no serious consequences. As a result, no mitigation is required; and  No Impact is when the Project would not result in any impact in the category, or the category does not apply.

7.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Effects on biological resources in natural or semi-natural areas due to development take the form of direct impacts, including habitat loss and fragmentation, introduction of barriers to movement and dispersion, and conversion of native communities to developed conditions. Development may also result in indirect impacts that affect the quality of habitat on the project site and in the project area. Indirect impacts include invasion of non-native plants into natural areas, noise disturbances, and declines in air and water quality. The proposed improvements associated with the South County Infrastructure Project are nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1426
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 46 -
primarily within developed areas in the community of Olivehurst and in developed roadways and disturbed areas in rural southern Yuba County. All of the proposed alignments for trench installed pipelines are within the paved roadway and disturbed shoulder, with the exception of short overland connections to permanent above ground features (e.g. WP, Lift Stations, and Pump Stations). Trenchless construction methods are proposed for large drainage crossings to avoid impacts to waterways and riparian habitat.

Permanent above ground Project features are sited within upland areas and disturbed or developed areas to the extent feasible to minimize habitat loss.

The following analysis provides an assessment of potential impacts from the proposed Project activities and includes Project-specific applicant proposed measures, and/or prescribed mitigation measures to reduce impacts to special-status species or other biological resources to a level of less than significant.

7.2.1 Vegetation Communities
The permanent, above ground features associated with this Project will result in approximately 2.43 acres of conversion to developed lands. Construction of the Pump Stations and Lift Stations and the WP will occur in annual grassland, ruderal, developed, disturbed, and agricultural lands. Installation of the pipeline alignments using trench installation and bored trenchless methods will result in temporary impacts, primarily within the paved roadway and unvegetated road shoulder but include pipeline connections to pump stations, lift stations, and the WP through overland areas including annual grassland, disturbed lands, and roadside ditches and depressions that are seasonally inundated. HDD installed highway and waterway crossings will result in temporary impacts from the HDD workspace and the pipe string staging area. Table 6 summarizes the permanent and temporary impacts associated with the Project.

Table 6. South County Infrastructure Project Impacts
Feature Cover Type
Impact
Area
(Acres)
Permanent Impacts
Pump Station 1 Annual Grassland, Ruderal (urban vacant lot) 0.19 Pump Station 26 Annual Grassland, Ruderal (urban vacant lot) 0.46 Pump Stations 21 Annual Grassland 0.24
Lift Station 22 Annual Grassland 0.10
Lift Station 23 Agricultural (rice), Roadside ditch / depression (seasonally inundated)

0.12 Pump Station 25 Disturbed land (Unpaved parking lot) 0.23 nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:11 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1::51 EHVLRONMENTAL SClEHTISTS
1427
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 47 -
Feature Cover Type
Impact
Area
(Acres)
Pump Station 24 Annual Grassland 0.14
Water Plant Disturbed land (Stockpile / staging area) 0.95 Temporary Impacts
SR 70 HDD (McGowan Pkwy) Developed land (paved roadway) 0.29 SR 65 HDD (Olive Ave – Rancho Rd) Annual Grassland, Wet depression (seasonally inundated) 0.95
Reeds Creek HDD (Rancho Rd)
Disturbed land (road shoulder), Roadside ditch /
depression (seasonally inundated), annual
grassland, agricultural

0.88 Hutchinson Creek HDD (Rancho Rd) Annual grassland, Disturbed land (road shoulder), agricultural 1.28
SR 65 HDD (Rosser Rd – Shimer Rd) Grazed pasture, developed land (paved road) 0.69 Kimball Creek HDD (Rancho Rd) Annual grassland, Roadside ditch / depression (seasonally inundated) 0.90
Virginia Creek Bore (Rancho Rd) Developed land (paved road), disturbed land (road shoulder) 0.02
Kimball Creek Bore (Forty Mile Rd) Developed land (paved road) 0.03 Trench Installed Pipeline1
Developed land (paved road), Disturbed land
(road shoulder), Annual Grassland, Roadside
ditch / depression (seasonally inundated)
--
1Total acreage not available for 32.6 miles of trench installed pipeline because trench width and depths are variable and not fully defined. Trench installed pipeline will occur primarily in existing roadways in developed and disturbed land.

Temporary disturbance areas within or near sensitive areas (e.g. riparian corridors, waterways and wetlands, and suitable habitat for special-status species) will require work within designated workspace and delineation of the work areas to prevent encroachment on sensitive areas. Limited tree removal may occur in some of these work areas though the number, type, and size of trees that may need to be removed is unknown.

No mitigation is proposed for permanent or temporary impacts to developed lands, disturbed lands, and upland annual grasslands and ruderal areas. Yuba County does not have a tree ordinance that would require mitigation for the loss of individual oak trees and no mitigation for tree removal is proposed.
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:11 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1::51 EHVLRONMENTAL SClEHTISTS
1428
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 48 -
Cover types that are regulated habitats or potentially suitable habitat for specialstatus species will be addressed by recommended mitigation outlined by resource or species below.

7.2.2 Aquatic Resources
The proposed Project may result in impacts to aquatic resources at Lift Station 23, several of the HDD workspace areas, and several of the pipeline connection crossings.

Additionally, the HDD waterway crossings will involve the use of drilling fluids that present the unlikely potential for inadvertent returns to the waterways. These aquatic resources may be regulated by the Corps under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the RWQCB under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, and/or the CDFW under Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code. These areas were identified and mapped for the purposes of avoidance during biological reconnaissance surveys (Figures 2A through 2T).

A preliminary aquatic resource delineation was not conducted as part of the reconnaissance surveys and full avoidance of these features may not be feasible; therefore, some of the following authorizations may be required:
 Clean Water Act Section 404 Discharge/Fill Permit by the Corps;  Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification by the CVRWQCB; and,
 Fish and Game Code Section 1600 Lake/Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW
Construction of the project may result in impacts to regulated aquatic resources. (Potentially significant)
Mitigation BIO-1:

BIO-1A: Prior to the initiation of construction, OPUD or its contractor shall conduct a preliminary aquatic resource delineation of the project site to define the limits of jurisdictional areas and determine the extent of project impacts. The delineation will be verified by the Corps. The verified delineation will provide OPUD with the impact acreage necessary for preparing a WoUS/Wetland Mitigation Plan and/or permit application if impacts to jurisdictional areas cannot be avoided. If the Project can fully avoid delineated aquatic resources, no further mitigation would be required. If the Project cannot fully avoid delineated aquatic resources, 1A-1 will apply.
1B-1: If project impacts to federal and state jurisdictional areas are identified, OPUD shall obtain all necessary permits for impacts to WoUS and wetlands from the Corps and RWQCB and/or for potential impacts to stream features from CDFW prior to project implementation. Implementation of the Project shall comply with all permit conditions. Compensatory mitigation must be consistent with the Corps’ standards pertaining to mitigation type, location, and ratios, but will be accomplished with a minimum of 1:1 replacement ratio.

If compensatory mitigation is needed, OPUD may satisfy all or a portion of WoUS and wetlands mitigation through the purchase of “credits” at a mitigation bank approved by the Corps, RWQCB, and/or CDFW for compensatory mitigation of nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1429
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 49 -
impacts to hydrologically similar WoUS, or through other means, such as on- or off-site wetland creation, conservation easement, contribution to approved in-lieu habitat fund, etc. The mitigation plan must be approved by the permitting agencies and shall be implemented by OPUD subsequent to plan approval.

BIO-1B: The proposed HDD installations under regulated drainages have a small potential to “frac out” or inadvertently release drilling muds to the surface during the drilling operations. Because of the potential for a frac-out to impact waters and wetlands at the drainage crossings, OPUD or its contractor shall prepare and implement an Inadvertent Returns Contingency Plan that outlines the measures that will be taken to prevent inadvertent returns and outlines the response measures to be employed and response equipment to be maintained onsite for use in the unlikely event of an inadvertent return during drilling operations.

7.2.3 Special-Status Plants
The likelihood of occurrence of special-status plant species within Project disturbance areas is limited because most impacts are within cover types not known to support special status plants. Potential for occurrence of special-status plants within suitable habitat areas is limited due to the level of disturbance in roadside ditches and depressions that provide seasonally inundated habitat. Two plant species were identified as having a moderate potential for occurrence within creeks or large ditches or depressions that support a prolonged hydroperiod. The Project will avoid impacts to the drainage crossings through the use of trenchless pipeline construction methods; however, impacts to seasonally inundated ditches and depressions may provide habitat for Sanford’s arrowhead, particularly in large ditch or depression features that support a prolonged hydroperiod, such as those along the southern portion of Rancho Road. Project impacts to some of these areas can not be avoided.

Because of this, there is some potential for Project related impact to special-status plants in locations where impacts to seasonally inundated ditches and depressions could not be avoided or where workspaces and trench installed pipeline will occur in close proximity to these features. Construction of these features may have an impact on specialstatus plants. (Potentially significant) Mitigation BIO-2:

BIO-2A: Pre-construction special-status species plant surveys shall be conducted by OPUD or its contractor in all impact areas that provide potentially suitable habitat for special-status plants prior to initiating Project construction activities. All surveys shall be conducted in accordance with agency approved survey protocols during the appropriate blooming period. If no special-status species are identified in protocol surveys, no additional mitigation is required. If surveys determine that special-status species occur within impact areas, BIO-2B shall apply.

BIO-2B: If special-status plants are identified within Project impact areas, one of the following measures shall apply:
2B-1: If feasible, the Project shall be adjusted to avoid impacts to special-status plants. If modifications can be made to avoid special-status species, the installation of protective fencing may be necessary to prevent accidental encroachment. If nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1430
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 50 -
adjustment of construction areas or methods is not feasible, MM BIO 2B-2 shall apply.
2B-2: If there is no feasible alternative to special-status plant species impacts, OPUD shall mitigate for impacts to special-status plants. A Mitigation Plan shall be prepared and implemented that provides for plant salvage, transplantation, seed collection and replanting, and/or topsoil collection and replacement as appropriate for the species identified within the project impact area. Transplantation or seed placement shall be within suitable habitat within restored habitat after completion of construction for temporary impacts or within offsite habitat at a mitigation site for permanent impacts. The Mitigation Plan shall outline monitoring requirements to ensure successful establishment of special-status plants, performance criteria established are achieved, and no net loss of special-status plants after the prescribed monitoring period.

7.2.4 Special-Status Wildlife

7.2.4.1 Vernal Pool Branchiopods
Seasonally inundated wetlands, vernal pools, ditches and depressions provided suitable habitat for vernal pool branchiopods (VPBs) including the listed vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) and vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi). There are two occurrences of vernal pool fairy shrimp located less than 0.5 miles from the northern portion of the project site (CNDDB, 2022) that occur in seasonally inundated roadside habitat similar to wet ditch and depression habitat observed within the study area.

There are no classic vernal pool landscapes within the study area, but potentially suitable habitat for VPBs occurs in seasonally inundated ditches and depressions that provide a sufficient hydroperiod primarily along Rancho Road (Figures 2A through 2T). Due to proximity to the roadway, habitat in the Project area is often highly disturbed by offroad vehicle use, trash dumping, and other urban influences and therefore may be suboptimal for fairy shrimp occurrence; however, given proximity to other occurrences of this species in similar roadside habitat, occurrence cannot be ruled out.

Project impacts to seasonally inundated ditches and depressions may provide habitat for VPBs, particularly the vernal pool fairy shrimp. Because of this, there is some potential for Project related impacts to VPBs in locations where impacts to seasonally inundated ditches and depressions could not be avoided or where workspaces and trench installed pipeline will occur in close proximity to these features. Construction of these features may have an impact on VPBs. (Potentially significant).

Mitigation BIO-3:

A Section 7 Consultation with USFWS shall be conducted to analyze the direct and indirect effects on listed species and to obtain regulatory permits and authorizations for impacts to listed species and loss of habitat. Measures and requirements outlined in agency authorizations may supersede the following measures.

Indirect Impacts:

The trench installed pipeline within Rancho Road is proposed to be constructed in or on the shoulder of the existing paved roadway and will not directly impact seasonally inundated ditch or depression features. Trench installation of the pipeline alignment on nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1431
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 51 -
this road will involve construction in close proximity to potentially suitable habitat for VPBs in seasonally inundated ditches and depressions immediately adjacent to the roadway.

Additionally, HDD workspace at several locations occurs immediately adjacent to potentially suitable habitat for VPBs. Indirect impacts could occur in areas where construction will be in close proximity to seasonally inundated ditch and depression features. These include the following:
 Pipe string staging area off north end of Rancho Road at the SR 65 HDD crossing
 Trench installed pipelines in the paved roadway or disturbed road shoulder on Rancho Road
 Pipe string staging area adjacent to Shimer Road at the SR HDD crossing  HDD workspace and pipe stating area southeast of Kimball Creek and northeast side of Rancho Road
 Bore pit locations in the paved road and disturbed road shoulder on Rancho Road at the Virginia Creek crossing.

BIO-3A: Trench excavation and stockpiling for pipeline installation shall be entirely located within the paved roadway or disturbed shoulder on Rancho Road in areas where seasonally wet ditches and depressions were mapped adjacent to the roadway.

Equipment staging and trench excavation in these areas will be limited to designated workspace areas in the paved roadway and shoulder. To reduce the potential for indirect impacts to seasonally inundated ditches and depressions in close proximity to construction activities, but where no direct impacts will occur, the following measures shall apply:
3A-1: Prior to the initiation of construction, crews shall attend an environmental Awareness Training Program will include information regarding the potential presence of listed branchiopod species and the importance of avoiding impacts to these species and their habitat.
3A-2: All work shall be conducted during the dry season when potential habitat features on or near the proposed pipeline installation areas are dry. 3A-3: Fencing shall be placed and maintained to delineate the approved work areas and prevent encroachment on seasonally inundated ditch and depression features. A qualified biologist shall oversee the installation of fencing. Once fencing is installed, a biologist will inspect fencing weekly to ensure its integrity and effectiveness.
3A-4: All excavation, construction staging, and stockpiles shall be limited to paved roadways, disturbed shoulder, and approved work areas.
3A-5: Storm water BMPs (silt fencing and straw waddles) shall be placed around construction disturbance and dirt stockpiles to reduce potential for erosion and sedimentation into potential branchiopod habitat features. 3A-6: No application of water (e.g., dust suppression) shall occur in seasonally inundated ditch or depression features without additional measures (such as barriers and/or use of low flow water truck nozzles) in place to keep water out of potential or known VPB habitat features during the dry season. nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1432
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 52 -
3A-7: Any groundwater encountered within the trench excavation shall not be discharged to areas where seasonally inundated ditch or depression features are located.

Direct Impacts:

Direct impacts may occur in areas where impacts to seasonally inundated ditch and depressions cannot be avoided including HDD workspace areas at two of the drainage crossings and Lift Station 23. These include:
 Pipe string staging area off north end of Rancho Road at the SR 65 HDD crossing
 HDD workspace on the northwest side of the Reed Creek crossing on Rancho Road
 HDD workspace on the northwest side of the Kimball Creek crossing on Rancho Road
 Lift Station 23 and the pipeline connection to Lift Station 23 BIO-3B: If avoidance of habitat features as outlined in BIO-3A is not feasible and direct impacts (temporary or permanent) will occur to seasonally inundated ditch and depression features, compliance with one of the following mitigation measures (3B-1 or 3B-2) shall be required:
3B-1: Prior to the initiation of construction, surveys conducted in accordance with USFWS protocols shall be conducted in all potentially suitable habitat to be impacted. If protocol surveys determine that the seasonally inundated ditch and depression features are not occupied by federally listed vernal pool branchiopod species, no further mitigation is required for impact to species habitat (mitigation for jurisdictional aquatic features consistent with BIO-1 may still apply). If protocol surveys detect the presence of federally listed species, then the following measures shall be implemented:
(a) Prior to the initiation of construction, construction crews shall attend an Environmental Awareness Training Program will include information regarding the potential presence of listed branchiopod species and the importance of avoiding impacts to these species and their habitat.
(b) All work shall be conducted during the dry season when potential habitat features on or near the proposed pipeline installation areas are dry. (c) Fencing shall be placed and maintained around any avoided (preserved) seasonally inundated ditch and depression features to prevent encroachment.

A qualified biologist shall oversee the installation of fencing. Once fencing is installed, a biologist will inspect fencing weekly to ensure its integrity and effectiveness.
(d) A USFWS approved biologist shall monitor construction activities in known or potential vernal pool branchiopod habitat that results in temporary or permanent impacts.
(e) For temporary impacts that will be restored after construction, a Site Restoration Plan outlining requirements for topsoil collection, preservation, and nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1433
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 53 -
restoration will be prepared and approved by the USFWS. Implementation of the approved Plan shall include the following requirements at minimum. Prior to excavation in locations with potential or known vernal pool branchiopod habitat, the uppermost soil layer that may contain branchiopods eggs (cysts) shall be collected, labelled, and stored under appropriate climatic conditions until construction in temporary impact areas is complete. Once construction is complete, topsoil shall be placed back in the feature from which it was collected.
(f) For permanent impacts, loss of vernal pool branchiopod habitat shall be mitigated through the purchase of mitigation credits at a USFWS approved mitigation bank in accordance with mitigation ratios approved by the USFWS. 3B-2: If the applicant chooses not to conduct protocol-level surveys, they may assume presence of listed vernal pool branchiopod species within seasonally inundated ditch and depression features that provide potentially suitable habitat. If presence of listed species is assumed, then measures 3B-1(a) and 3B-1(f) outlined above shall apply to mitigate impacts to a less than significant level.

7.2.4.2 Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle
Surveys during the blooming season identified four elderberry shrubs within 165 feet (VELB encroachment buffer) of Project activities along Rancho Road; however, these shrubs were east of the railroad and would not be impacted by the Project by accidental encroachment. A single elderberry shrub occurs on the shoulder of Forty Mile Road and within 20 feet (VELB core area) of a proposed trench installed pipeline within the paved roadway. This shrub was very small, though several stems were greater than one inch in diameter. The shrub is exposed to frequent disturbance within 20 feet of the canopy due to its location at the edge of pavement on Forty Mile Road. No emergence holes occur on the shrub and this shrub is highly disjunct from riparian habitat and other elderberry shrubs. It is very unlikely that the VELB occurs, though habitat is present due to the presence of this single shrub and could be indirectly impacted (Potentially significant).

Mitigation BIO-4:

Implementation of the Project will not require removal of the shrub; however, a 20- foot protective buffer is not possible because that would extend the buffer into the paved travel lane. The following measures will ensure that the blue elderberry shrub is not directly impacted by the Project. Prior to the initiation of construction, a Section 7 Consultation with USFWS shall be conducted to analyze the direct and indirect effects on listed species and to obtain regulatory permits and authorizations for impact to listed species and loss of habitat. Measures and requirements outlined in agency authorizations may supersede the following measures.

BIO-4A: A 20-foot exclusion zone extending from the dripline of the shrub shall be maintained during construction in all directions away from the pavement. The exclusion zone will be reduced on the pavement side of the shrub to the edge of gravel roadway shoulder so that the fencing will not interfere with the roadway. Consistent with measures outlined by the USFWS to mitigate potential impacts to VELB, the following measures shall be implemented:
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1434
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 54 -
4A-1: Fence and flag the elderberry shrub to be avoided and provide a minimum setback of at least 20 feet from the dripline of the elderberry plant for ground disturbance activities (e.g. trenching) to ensure that activities will not damage or kill the elderberry shrub. Due to its location at the edge of pavement on Forty Mile Road, the 20-foot setback will be adjusted (reduced) consistent with the edge of the gravel road shoulder so that fencing does not interfere with the paved roadway. 4A-2: Prior to the initiation of any construction, environmental training shall brief the contractors and key employees of the need to avoid any impacts to the elderberry plants, and to advise them of penalties associated with damage or destruction of the plants. The work crew shall be instructed regarding the status of the VELB and the need to protect its elderberry host plant, and possible penalties for non-compliance with avoidance and minimization measures.
4A-3: A qualified biologist shall monitor the work area at project-appropriate intervals to assure that all avoidance and minimization measures are implemented. The amount and duration of monitoring will depend on the timing of Project activities, and shall be determined in coordination with the USFWS biologist.
4A-4: As much as feasible, all activities within 165 feet of the elderberry shrub, will be conducted outside the flight season of the VELB (March-July). 4A-5: No insecticides, herbicides, fertilizers, or other chemicals that might harm the VELB or its host plant shall be used within 100 feet of any elderberry plant with a stem measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter at ground level. 4A-6: Mechanical vegetation removal within the dripline of an elderberry shrub shall be limited to the season when adult VELB are not active (August-February) and shall avoid damaging the elderberry.
4A-7: Erosion control will be implemented, and the affected construction area shall be revegetated with appropriate native plants.

7.2.4.3 Giant Garter Snake
Potentially suitable habitat occurs within Kimball Creek and active rice fields in the Project area based on the presence of the three habitat components necessary to support giant garter snake (GGS), which include, aquatic habitat in the summer with emergent vegetation and a prey base, an upland component near aquatic habitat for thermoregulation and summer shelter in burrows, and an upland refugia component for use as winter hibernacula (USFWS, 1993). Reeds Creek may also provide potentially suitable habitat for GGS; however, the pipeline will be installed using trenchless techniques under Reeds Creek and all Project activities are setback more than 200 feet from Reeds Creek, and therefore will not impact GGS or its habitat at this location. Other suitable habitat in the study area, including agricultural ditches and rice fields along Forty Mile Road, were in areas where pipeline installation activities are limited to the paved roadway and will avoid impacts to suitable aquatic or upland habitat.

Impacts associated with the construction of Lift Station 22 adjacent to Kimball Creek will impact suitable upland habitat for GGS and the loss of a small portion of suitable aquatic habitat within the northwest corner of a rice field associated with construction of Lift Station 23, which will be inactive at the time of construction, will result in a small amount of suitable aquatic habitat for GGS (Potentially Significant). nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1435
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 55 -
Mitigation BIO-5:

BIO-5A: The Project will result in approximately 0.12-acre of loss of rice field for the construction of Lift Station 23 and 0.10-acre of upland grassland habitat adjacent to Kimball Creek. Because these features provide potentially suitable upland and aquatic habitat for GGS, the following measures are identified. 5A-1: Prior to the initiation of construction, construction staff shall attend an Environmental Awareness Training Program that will include information regarding identification of giant gartersnake and its habitat, protection measures for the species, and procedures to follow if a giant gartersnake or unknown snake is observed.
5A -2: Construction of Lift Station 23 will occur when the rice field is inactive and has been dry for a minimum of 15 days.
5A -3: Construction of Lift Station 22 and Lift Station 23 and the HDD installation of pipelines under Kimball Creek, including all activities within 200 feet of Kimball Creek and the rice field at LS 23, shall be restricted to the period between May 1 and October 1. This is the active period for GGS when the potential for direct mortality is reduced because GGS can actively avoid disturbance. 5A -4: Prior to the start of the Kimball Creek HDD, construction of Lift Station 22, or the construction of Lift Station 23, a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for GGS at these locations prior to the initiation of disturbance. Exclusion fencing shall be installed, as directed by the qualified biologist, to isolate the workspace within 200 feet of suitable aquatic habitat and exclude snakes from the work areas. Exclusion fencing will be buried at the base to prevent snakes from moving under the fence into the construction area.

Exclusion fencing shall be maintained for the duration of work in these areas and shall be routinely inspected by the qualified biologist to ensure the fencing is intact and effective. The workspace shall be inspected prior to the start of work each day to ensure that no snakes have entered the work area.
5A -5: If a GGS is observed, the USFWS and CDFW shall be notified immediately.

Construction will be suspended in the area until the snake leaves the site of its own volition.
5A -6: All excavations within 200 feet of suitable GGS habitat shall be covered or have escape ramps installed to prevent entrapment prior to the end of work each day. These excavations shall be inspected by the qualified biologist prior to the start of work the following day.
5A -7: Erosion control materials shall consist of tightly woven fibers and netting to prevent entanglement of reptiles and amphibians. No monofilament materials will be allowed.

7.2.4.4 Western pond turtle
The project site has potentially suitable habitat for western pond turtle at the drainage crossings and wetlands in the study area, though suitable basking habitat was limited. nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1436
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 56 -
Suitable habitat for western pond turtle includes aquatic habitat with basking sites available for thermoregulation and nearby upland breeding habitat. Because of the proximity of the Project to potential western pond turtle habitat, there is potential for impact to the western pond turtle. (Potentially significant).

Mitigation BIO-6:

BIO-6A: A preconstruction survey for western pond turtle shall be conducted no more than 48 hours prior to the start of construction within 150 feet of the drainages or other suitable wetland habitat. If no western pond turtles are observed, no further mitigation is necessary. If a western pond turtle is observed within the Project area, a qualified biologist will relocate the individual to a suitable habitat location outside of the construction area. If a pond turtle nest is identified, exclusion fencing shall be placed a minimum of 25 feet around the nest and disturbance to the area will be avoided until the hatchlings have emerged. The nest will be monitored daily by the qualified biologist to ensure nestlings emerge to a suitable habitat area safely outside the construction zone.

7.2.4.5 Swainson’s Hawks
Nest Disturbance. The state-threatened Swainson’s hawk is known to nest and forage in the Project vicinity and suitable nest trees occur within the study area, particularly within riparian habitat with large trees surrounded by foraging habitat in agricultural fields and grasslands. The project site is in a region that has very high Swainson’s hawk nesting activity. There are approximately 73 nesting occurrences within 10 miles of the study area.

The nearest occurrence (Occ. # 1529) is from 2003 and is less than 400 feet west of the pipeline alignment on Forty Mile Road (CDFW, 2022). This species was not observed during field surveys because surveys were conducted during the winter when Swainson’s hawk is not present in California.

Because Swainson’s hawk is a State-listed species, and there are known nesting occurrences in the vicinity of the Project area, there is the potential that construction near Swainson’s hawk nesting areas could disrupt breeding activities if construction occurs during the nesting season.

The following mitigation measure would reduce impacts to nesting Swainson’s hawk resulting from Project construction (Potentially significant).

Mitigation BIO-7 – Nest Disturbance:

BIO-7A: If construction or vegetation removal work occurs outside of Swainson’s hawk nesting season (August 31 to Feb 1), impacts to the Swainson’s hawk would be avoided.

Surveys would not be required for work conducted during that part of the year, and no further mitigation for nest disturbance would be required. If construction is scheduled to occur during the Swainson’s hawk nesting season (Feb 1 to August 31), the following measures would be required to reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

BIO-7B: If project activities occur between February 1 to August 31, surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for active Swainson’s hawk nests. OPUD or its contractor shall conduct a protocol-level survey in conformance with the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley, (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee, 2000) hereby incorporated by nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1437
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 57 -
reference. This protocol prescribes minimum standards for survey equipment, mode of survey, angle and distance to tree, speed, visual and audible clues, distractions, notes and observations, and timing of surveys. If the surveys show that there are no active Swainson’s hawk nests within 0.25-mile of construction activities, then no further mitigation for nest disturbance will be required. If active Swainson’s hawk nests are identified near the project area, a 0.25-mile nest protection buffer shall be identified, and the following measures shall be required:
7B-2: Apply a nest protection buffer with a minimum distance of 0.25-mile from an active nest. Postpone Project activities within the nest protection buffer until after the young have fledged and are no longer dependent on the nest tree. The minimum nest protection buffer may be reduced in coordination with CDFW if existing site conditions, habituation to disturbance, proposed disturbance levels, and nest concealment or barriers between the nest and activities indicate a reduced buffer would be effective.
7B-3: If it is not possible to postpone Project activities within the minimum nest protection buffer, construction activities may proceed with CDFW approval and monitoring of the nest by a qualified raptor biologist. If the monitoring biologist observes signs of distress, they shall have the authority to stop construction work and coordinate with CDFW to establish additional protection measures to ensure avoidance of nest abandonment prior to the re-start of Project activities.

BIO-7C: A written report summarizing the pre-construction survey results shall be provided to OPUD and CDFW within 30 days of survey completion.

Loss of Foraging Habitat: Swainson’s hawks generally forage within 10 miles of their nest tree, and more commonly within five miles of their nest tree (CDFW, 1994).

According to the CDFW Staff Report regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (CDFW, 1994), the following vegetation types are considered small mammal and insect foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawks: alfalfa; fallow fields; beet, tomato, and other low-growing row or field crops; dry-land and irrigated pasture; rice land (when not flooded); and cereal grain crops (including corn after harvest). Small disjunct parcels of habitat seldom provides foraging habitat; therefore, infill development in urbanized areas which have less than five acres of foraging habitat and are surrounded by existing urban development, would not be considered foraging habitat unless within 0.25-mile of a nest tree (CDFW, 1994).

Swainson’s hawk is a state-listed species, because approximately 0.6-acre of foraging habitat (annual grassland and agricultural land) would be removed with construction of Pump Station 21 (0.24-acre), Lift Station 22 (0.10-acre), Lift Station 23 (0.12-acre) and Pump Station 24 (0.14-acre), and due to the abundance of potential nesting habitat in close proximity to the pipeline alignment, this would be a potentially significant impact, and the following compensatory mitigation would be required. (Potentially significant).

Mitigation BIO-8 – Foraging Habitat:
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1438
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 58 -
BIO-8A: If nesting occurrences of Swainson’s hawks occur within 10 miles of the permanent impact areas (e.g. pump station, lift station, and WP sites) mitigation for loss of foraging habitat shall be required. Generally, CDFW requires mitigation for loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat based on the presence of active nests within 10 miles of the Project. If an active nest site occurs within ten miles of the Project, the applicant will be required by CDFW to provide off-site foraging habitat management lands at a specified Mitigation Ratio that is based on nest proximity to the project site, as follows:

Distance from Project Boundary Mitigation Acreage Ratio* Within 1 mile 1.00:1**
Between 1 and 5 miles 0.75:1
Between 5 and 10 miles 0.50:1
*Ratio means [acres of mitigation land] to [acres of foraging habitat impacted]. **This ratio shall be 0.5:1 if the acquired lands can be actively managed for prey production.

CDFW provides options for off-site habitat management by fee title acquisition or conservation easement acquisition with a CDFW-approved management plan, and by the acquisition of comparable habitat. Mitigation credits may be obtained through a CDFWapproved mitigation bank for Swainson’s hawk with a service area that covers the Project site.

7.2.4.6 Burrowing Owl
The burrowing owl, a California Species of Special Concern, is known to occur within grassland habitat in the region. Suitable burrowing owl habitat is present at the southern end of the wastewater treatment plant where an extensive California ground squirrel colony was observed on an earthen berm. Within this colony, several of the burrows showed signs of renovation by burrowing owls. Additionally, grassland habitat with ground squirrel burrows present could provide habitat. Due to the proximity of suitable habitat, impact to nesting burrowing owls could occur as a result of construction disturbance. Nest disturbance would be a potentially significant impact, and the following mitigation is recommended (Potentially significant).

Mitigation BIO-9
BIO-9A: A pre-construction survey of areas providing suitable burrowing owl habitat within 1,640 feet (500 meters) of construction at the WWTP shall be conducted by a qualified raptor biologist within 14 days prior to ground disturbance. Surveys shall follow guidelines outlined by CDFW in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW, 2012).

If the required pre-construction surveys show there are no active burrowing owl nests within the 1,640 feet (500 meters) of construction activities, then no further mitigation for burrowing owl nest disturbance will be required. If occupied burrows are identified during surveys the following shall be required:

BIO-9B: If an occupied burrow is discovered during pre-construction surveys, a protective buffer consistent with CDFW guidelines shall be established. Appropriate protective buffers depend on the type of burrowing owl occurrence (nesting or overwinter), level of nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1439
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 59 -
project disturbance, and time of year that the disturbance occurs. Nest protective buffers consistent with CDFW guidelines are outlined below.

Location Time of Year
Level of Disturbance
Low Med High
Nesting Site April 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m
Nesting Site Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m
Nesting Site Oct 16 – March 31 50 m 100 m 500 m
A reduced buffer may be implemented upon CDFW approval and based upon site specific conditions, nesting phenology, and the recommendation of the qualified biologist.

BIO-9C: A written report summarizing the pre-construction survey results shall be provided to OPUD and CDFW within 30 days of survey completion.

BIO-9D: If occupied burrows cannot be avoided, the applicant shall conduct a survey during the non-nesting season (September 30 through January 31) to identify occupied burrows within the disturbance footprint, exclude burrowing owls from burrows within the disturbance footprint, and then collapse the burrows in accordance with methodology outlined by the CDFW. Burrowing owl exclusion and burrow collapse must be conducted in coordination with CDFW and with the approval of CDFW.

7.2.4.7 Nesting Birds
The Project has the potential to impact nesting migratory birds, including specialstatus species such as tricolored blackbird, Modesto song sparrow, and other MBTA protected species. Suitable habitat for tree and ground-nesting raptors, including specialstatus species such as northern harrier, or white tailed kite occur in the Project area.

Construction disturbance has the potential to impact nesting birds and the following mitigation is recommended (Potentially significant).

Mitigation BIO-10:

BIO-10A: If construction or vegetation removal work occurs outside of nesting season (August 31 to Feb 1), impacts would be avoided. Surveys would not be required for work conducted during this part of the year, and no further mitigation for nest disturbance would be required. If construction is scheduled to occur during nesting season (Feb 1 to August 31), the following measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

BIO-10B: If vegetation removal or construction activities occur between February 1 to August 31, pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist of suitable habitat within 500 feet of worksites and disturbance areas for passerines and within 0.25- mile of worksites and disturbance areas for raptors. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted within 14 days prior to the start of construction of vegetation removal. If nests are identified, a suitable nest protection buffer shall be recommended by the qualified biologist based on the species, nest phenology, and site-specific conditions. Construction nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1440
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 60 -
activities shall be prohibited within the established buffer zones until the young have fledged. If a lapse in Project-related activities occurs for 14 days or longer during the nesting season, another focused survey shall be conducted before construction activities can be reinitiated.

BIO-10C: A written report summarizing the pre-construction survey results shall be provided to OPUD and CDFW within 30 days of survey completion. nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1441
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 61 -

7.3 EVALUATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS
This biological technical report considers the potential for Project activities to affect biological resources protected by State and Federal regulation, including species listed as Threatened or Endangered by the FESA or CESA, wetlands and WoUS, and migratory birds protected by the MBTA (see Section 7.2 above for impacts analysis to resources protected by these regulations). This section of the report includes an analysis of compliance with other Federal Environmental Regulations related to biological resources.

7.3.1 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The Project has the potential to affect nesting bald or golden eagles protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Implementation of Measure BIO-10 (Section

7.2) addresses the potential for Project activities to affect raptors, including eagles, and provides mitigation measures to reduce those impacts.

7.3.2 Federal Endangered Species Act and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act The Project has the potential to affect listed species. A Section 7 Consultation will be conducted between the Federal Lead Agency and the USFWS. A Biological Assessment has been prepared to facilitate the Section 7 Consultation and ensure compliance with the FESA.

The Project will not impact the waters of a stream or other water body by impounding, diverting, or deepening a channel or otherwise modify flow as a result of this Project and will not require compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.

7.3.3 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) EFH is defined as “…those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity”. “Waters”, as used in this definition, are defined as “aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and biological properties that are used by fish”. These may include “…areas historically used by fish where appropriate; ‘substrate’ to include sediment, hard bottom, structures underlying the waters, and associated biological communities. Necessary” means, “the habitat required to support a sustainable fishery and the managed species’ contribution to a healthy ecosystem.” EFH is described as a subset of all habitats occupied by a species (NMFS, 1998).

The Olivehurst area is within the Honcut Headwaters-Lower Feather River and Upper Bear River-Below Camp Far West watersheds (Hydrologic Unit Code 18020159 and 18020126), which are mapped as Chinook salmon EFH. However, there is no potential for the Project to affect EFH because Project activities will avoid impacts to waterways through trenchless installation methods and will result in no impacts to fish.

7.3.4 Marine Mammal Protection Act
The Project has no potential to affect marine mammals due to the distance of the Project site from marine habitat and because marine mammals are not expected to occur within the Project area.
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1442
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 62 -

7.3.5 Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Project has the potential to affect migratory birds protected by the MBTA.

Implementation of measure BIO-10 (Section 7.2) addresses the potential for Project activities to affect bird species protected by the MBTA and provides mitigation measures to reduce those impacts.

7.3.6 Wetlands Protection (Section CWA Section 404 and 401 Wetlands) Natural drainage crossings, wetlands, and other aquatic resources occur within the Project site that are potential waters of the U.S. and/or wetlands regulated under Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act. Project design measures such as trenchless pipeline installation under waterways are included in the Project Description to minimize the potential for impact to Waters of the U.S. Implementation of measure BIO-1 (Section 7.2) will ensure compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act.

7.3.7 Rivers and Harbors Act
There are no Navigable Waters of the U.S. on the project site, and Project implementation will have no effect on navigable waters of the U.S.

7.3.8 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
The project site is within the Honcut Headwaters-Lower Feather River and Upper Bear River watersheds (Hydrologic Unit Code 18020159 and 18020126). There are no designated Wild and Scenic Rivers adjacent to the project site, and Project implementation will not affect any designated Wild and Scenic Rivers.
nadre
l";'ssoclates, Inc. 15:1 ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
ir::51 ENVLROHMENTA.L SCIENTISTS
1443
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 63 -

8.0 REFERENCES
Baldwin, Bruce G., Goldman, Douglas H., Keil, David J., Rosatti, Thomas J. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition. University of California Press.

Berkeley, CA.

Barr, C.B. 1991. The Distribution, Habitat, and Status of the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle, Desmocerus californicus dimorphus Fisher (lnsecta: Coleoptera: Cerambycidae. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Sacramento, CA.

Barry, S. 2002. History and Status of the California Red-Legged Frog in the Sierra Nevada. In: A California Red-Legged Frog Workshop. Sacramento-Shasta Chapter of The Wildlife Society.

April 8-10, 2002. Marshall, CA.

Bury, R.B. 1986. Feeding ecology of the turtle, Clemmys mamorata. Journal of Herpetology, Vol. 20, No. 4 pp. 515-521.

California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2022. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v8-02). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed February 2022].

California Department of Fish and Game. 1994. State Fish and Game Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks in the Central Valley of California. November 6, 1994.
------ 2012. State of California Natural Resource Agency Department of Fish and Game Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. March 7, 2021.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2022. California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) RAREFIND-4 Query for Sutter, Yuba City, Browns Valley, Gilsizer Slough, Olivehurst, Wheatland, Sutter Causeway, Nicolaus, and Sheridan 7.5-minute quadrangles. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA.

Clark, D., ed. 1985. Sunset New Western Garden Book. Lane Publishing Co. Menlo Park, CA.

County of Yuba, 2011. Yuba County 2030 General Plan. Adopted June 2011.

Eriksen, C. and D. Belk. 1999. Fairy Shrimps of California’s Puddles, Pools, and Playas. Mad River Press, Inc. Eureka, CA.

Google Earth Pro V 7.3.6.9345. 2023. (Historic: 1985-2022). Olivehurst, Yuba County. 39°3’5.04” N, 121°29’13.64”W, Eye alt 1178 feet. Landsat/Copernicus, Maxar Technologies, NASA, USDA Farm Service Agency, USGS. http://www.earth.google.com [February 2023].

Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 1999. Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines). Sacramento, CA.

Hansen, G. E., and J. M. Brode. 1980. Status of the giant garter snake Thamnophis couchi gigas (Fitch). California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Endangered Species Program Special Publication 80-5, 14 pp.

Haug, E., B. Millsap, and M. Martell. 1993. Burrowing Owl (Speotyto cunicularia). In: The Birds of North America, No. 61 (A. Poole and F. Gill, Eds.). Philadelphia: The Academy of Natural Sciences, Washington, D.C., and The American Ornithologists’ Union. nadre
rassociate.s, Inc. ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:31 EJ4VlAONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
1444
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 64 -
Holland, D. 1993. Rangewide Overview of Western Pond Turtle. Presentation at Western Section of The Wildlife Society, February 22-27, 1993. Monterey, CA.

Mallette, R. and G. Gould. 1976. Raptors of California. California Department of Fish and Game.

Sacramento, CA.

Miles, S. and C. Goudey. 1997. Ecological Subregions of California: Section and Subsection Descriptions. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region Publication R5-EM-TP005. San Francisco, CA.

National Marine Fisheries Service. 1998. Essential Fish Habitat: New Marine Fish Habitat Conservation Mandate for Federal Agencies. Habitat Conservation Division, Southwest Regional Office. Long Beach, CA.
------ 2022. California Species List Tools-Species query for Olivehurst (39121-A5) and Wheatland (39121-A4) 7.5-minute Quadrangles. Accessed on February 23, 2022.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 1998. Keys to Soil Taxonomy, Eighth Edition.

United States Department of Agriculture
------ 2022. Web Soil Survey for Olivehurst Public Utility District Water/Wastewater Improvements Project, Yuba County.

Rathbun, G., T. Murphey, and N. Siepel. 1993. Use of Upland Habitats by Western Pond Turtles in Coastal Central California. Presentation at Western Section of The Wildlife Society, February 22-27, 1993. Monterey, CA.

Remsen, J.V. 1978. Bird California Species of Special Concern in California: An Annotated List of Declining or Vulnerable Bird Species. California Department of Fish and Game. Wildlife Management Branch Administrative Report No. 78-1. Sacramento, CA.

Rogers, Christopher D. 2001. Revision of the Nearctic Lepidurus (Notostraca). Journal of Crustacean Biology 21(4): 991-1006.

Sawyer, John O., Keeler-Wolf, Todd, Evens, Julie, 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation Second Edition. California Native Plant Society. Berkeley, CA.

Shuford, W. D., and Gardali, T., editors. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento.

Stebbins, R. 1985. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Peterson Field Guide Series. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, MA.

Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee (SHTAC). 2000. Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley.

Sacramento, CA.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Memorandum:

Supreme Court Ruling Concerning CWA Jurisdiction over Isolated Waters. January 19, 2001. Washington, D.C.
------ 2006. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States. Memorandum. nadre
rassociate.s, Inc. ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:31 EJ4VlAONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
1445
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 65 -
------ 2007. Coordination on Jurisdictional Determinations (JDs) under Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 in Light of the SWANCC and Rapanos Supreme Court Decisions.

Memorandum For Director of Civil Works and US EPA Regional Administrator.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2001. Memorandum: Supreme Court Ruling Concerning CWA Jurisdiction over Isolated Waters. January 19, 2001. Washington, D.C. ------ 2007. Practices for Documenting Jurisdiction under Sections 9 & 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) of 1899 and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 07-01. Washington, D.C.
------ 2020. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.5 http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/.

Engineer Research and Development Center. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1984. Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Recovery Plan. Regional Office. Portland, OR.
------ 1993. Determination of Threatened Status for the Giant Garter Snake: Final Rule. ------ 1997. Programmatic formal consultation for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 permitted projects with relatively small effects on the giant garter snake within Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Fresno, Merced, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter and Yolo Counties, California. Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office. November 1997. ------ 2014. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Withdrawal of the Proposed Rule to Remove the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 180. September 17, 2014. ------ 2017. Framework for Assessing Impacts to the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Sacramento, California. 28pp.
------ 2022a. Species List for Olivehurst Public Utility District Water/Wastewater Improvement Project (Project Code: 2022-0002318). Sacramento, CA. Updated February 2, 2023. ------ 2022b. National Wetland Inventory-Wetland Mapper. Website:
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html
U.S. Geological Survey. 1947. 7.5-minute Topographical Map of the Wheatland, CA. quadrangle.

Photorevised in 1973.
------ 1952. 7.5-minute Topographical Map of the Olivehurst, CA. quadrangle. Photorevised in 1973.

U.S. Supreme Court. 2001. Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, No. 99-1178. January 9, 2001.
------ 2006. Rapanos v. United States, Nos. 04-1034 and 04-1384. June 19, 2006.

Western Regional Climate Center. 2022. Mean and Historical Weather Data. Desert Research Institute. accessed in February 2022. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Wheeler, B. and W. Clark. 1995. A Photographic Guide to North American Raptors. Academic Press. London.
nadre
rassociate.s, Inc. ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:31 EJ4VlAONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
1446
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Olivehurst Public Utility District
South County Infrastructure Project
- 66 -
Zeiner, D., W. Laudenslayer, Jr. and K. Mayer. 1988. California's Wildlife, Volume I, Amphibians and Reptiles. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA.

Zeiner, D., W. Laudenslayer, Jr., K. Mayer, and M. White. 1990a. California's Wildlife, Volume II, Birds. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. ------ 1990b. California's Wildlife, Volume III, Mammals. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA.
nadre
rassociate.s, Inc. ~ ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &
1:31 EJ4VlAONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
1447
Section 3, Item # 3.1

FIGURES

1448
Section 3, Item # 3.1

PROJECT VICINITY MAP
Source: Esri Online Topo Basemap, County of Yuba
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

OPUD South County Infrastructure Project
FIGURE
1 OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:
0 2 4
MILES
MAP EXTENT:

Project
Location

YUBA COUNTY
Z:\GIS Projects\GIS Maps\Map Project\OPUD South County\Project Vicinity Map.mxd 2/8/2023 2002-6911 February 2023
Sutter
'=R BAS/,'
L
,,
Robbins.

I
(
r
/
I
I
I
\
I
\
\
I
I
I 10~0
PLACER
I
I
I
I
l
I
Pie - 1l
Bro ..,ns. \t lley
Be.JleAFB
l
-N
i
In
'-1'i13--
1449
Section 3, Item # 3.1
2I
2J
2L
2T
2F
2S
2E
2P
2A
2K
2N
2B
2H
2C
2R
2D
2Q
2O
2G
2M
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Mapbook Extent
FIGURE
2 OPUD WATER/WASTEWATER

IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:

YUBA
COUNTY

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE
1 inch = 2,500 feet IMPACT INDEX MAP
0 1,250 2,500
FEET
Z:\GIS Projects\GIS Maps\Map Project\OPUD South County\Biological Resource Impact Maps Index Map.mxd 2/1/2023 2002-6911 February 2023
\.
1r~ • ~- ( H'A.1.r.11
fA»N~<:i:..
;--
{..,.,.

Lc...c:...!_.

I ., '
,•
,i :
j,' i ;/ , .... ·'/
\-:J.\rL~~
,.
;:_·\:·----~/
7 ....

1.' ,,._/~·
,,,,.
ll
j
Radre
••oclate•, Inc. ENGINEERS, GEOLOBISTS &:
§ ENVIRONM.ENT AL SCIENTl,STS
-.;';: N
I
-.,_.,·-~,.,
·~
D
·~-----l~J.~¼ ·, •:... l,
11 -- -~r- -·1 ... ,\.
c.- -
--r ------=-:'.

C -
- .
--,
..
1450
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Lift
Station 1
Pump
Station 1
S U
N
D
A
R I A
V E

ELEV ENT H AVE OL IVEH UR ST AVE
A R
D
M
O
R
E
A
V
E

HICKS AVE

DU KE S C T

COLL EGE WAY

SHAY AVE

F OUR T EEN T H ST

SUMM ERS AV E

T HIRT E EN T H ST

GR IE GO AVE

SKINN ER AVE
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Proposed Force Main
Lift Station
Pump Station
FIGURE
2A

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

MARY AVE

P URP LE MA RTI N
R
D

KES T RE L C T

CH U CK AR C T

BLUE JAY CT

BIGL OW DR

MAP LE HU R ST S T

GEOR GE AVE
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Proposed Force Main
Biological Resources
Large Burrow Cluster
FIGURE
2B

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE
1 inch = 220 feet IMPACT MAP
0 110 220
FEET
Z:\GIS Projects\GIS Maps\Map Project\OPUD South County\Biological Resource Impact Maps_Dec2022.mxd 2/13/2023 2002-6911 February 2023
0 1452
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Pump
Station 26

FL EMING W AY

ARD MORE AV E

OL IVEH UR ST AVE

DEAT ON DR

MC GOWA N P KW Y

BEL L IS C T

YU BA M OBIL E

BEVERLY AVE

GEOR GE AVE

COLL EGE WAY

EIGH TEEN T H AVE

LA RRY ST

MARY AVE

EIGH TEEN T H AVE
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
HDD / Boring Workspace
Pump Station
FIGURE
2C

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

MC GOWA N P KW Y

AUGUS T W AY

POW ER L INE R D

T WA IN D R

EVELYN DR
G
O
L
D
L
E
A
F
W
AY

JEF F E RY C T
MA
R
T
E
L
D

RFIESTA WAY

EIGH TEEN T H AVE

BEVERLY AVE
HW Y 7 0
HW Y 7 0
HW Y 7 0
HW Y 7 0

DAN AVE

VIR GILIA LN
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Proposed Force Main
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
HDD / Boring Workspace
Pipe String Laydown Space
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
FIGURE
2D

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

VIA L EON A

MC GOWA N P KW Y

VIA NOVATO

VIA R OBE RT O VIA R AN C H O

VIA GR AN D E

VIA C AS A

VIA FL OR A

VIA M AR IA

VIA B IAN CA

MAR T EL D R

BE RNI CE AVE

HA LE RD

RA NC H O RD

OL I VE
A
V E
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Water Main
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
Trenchless Crossing - Water
HDD / Boring Workspace
Pipe String Laydown Space
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
FIGURE
2E

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

MAGE AVE

PEB BL E T R L
HW Y 6 5

B E RN I CE AV E
HW Y 6 5

RA NC H O RD
HW Y 6 5
Reeds
Cre
ek
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Water Main
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
Trenchless Crossing - Water
HDD / Boring Workspace
Pipe String Laydown Space
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Roadside Ditch, Wetland
Vegetation
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
FIGURE
2F

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

S HI ME R R D

OST R OM R D

RA NC H O RD
HW Y 6 5

PL UT E RD
Hu
t
c
h
i
n
s
o
n
C
r
e
ek
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
Trenchless Crossing - Water
HDD / Boring Workspace
Pipe String Laydown Space
Pump Station
Biological Resources
Blue Elderberry Shrub Location
VELB Core Area (Avoidance
Fencing)
VELB Encroachment Buffer
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
FIGURE
2G

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

F ORTY MIL E R D

OST R OM R D

RA NCHO RD
S HI M
E
R
R
D
HW Y 6 5

PL UT E RD

RO SS E R
RD
HW Y 6 5
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
HDD / Boring Workspace
Pipe String Laydown Space
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
FIGURE
2H

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

RA NC H O RD

PL UT E RD
HW Y 6 5

F ORTY MIL E R D
HW Y
6 5
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Pipe String Laydown Space
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
FIGURE
2I

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

RA NC H O RD
Kimb all Slou gh
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
Trenchless Crossing - Water
HDD / Boring Workspace
Pipe String Laydown Space
Pump Station
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Wetland Vegetation
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
FIGURE
2J

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

RA NC H O RD
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
FIGURE
2K

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

RA NC H O RD

VIR GINIA RD
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
Trenchless Crossing - Water
HDD / Boring Workspace
Lift Station
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
Rice Field
FIGURE
2L

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

RA NC H O RD
HW Y 6 5
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
Trenchless Crossing - Water
HDD / Boring Workspace
Lift Station
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
Approximate Wetland Boundary
Rice Field
FIGURE
2M

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE
1 inch = 200 feet IMPACT MAP 0 100 200
FEET
Z:\GIS Projects\GIS Maps\Map Project\OPUD South County\Biological Resource Impact Maps_Dec2022.mxd 2/13/2023 2002-6911 February 2023
Radre
••oclate•, Inc. ENGINEERS, GEOLOBISTS &:
§ ENVIRONM.ENT AL SCIENTl,STS
N
I
I
m
D
IZ]
1463
Section 3, Item # 3.1
HW Y 6 5
HW Y 6 5
RA
NCHO
R
D
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Roadside Ditch / Depression,
Seasonally Inundated
Approximate Wetland Boundary
FIGURE
2N

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

F ORTY MIL E R D
Ki
mb
a
ll
Slo
ug h
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Project Features
HDD / Bore Pit Location
Fire Hydrant
Proposed Force Main
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Trenchless Crossing - Sewer
Trenchless Crossing - Water
HDD / Boring Workspace
Lift Station
Biological Resources
Wet Depression, Seasonally
Inundated
Roadside Ditch, Wetland
Vegetation
Rice Field
FIGURE
2O

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

F ORTY MIL E R D
Kimball Slough
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

F ORTY MIL E R D
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Fire Hydrant
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Roadside Ditch, Wetland
Vegetation
Rice Field
FIGURE
2Q

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

F ORTY MIL E R D
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Fire Hydrant
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Lift Station
Roadside Ditch, Wetland
Vegetation
Rice Field
FIGURE
2R

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

F ORTY MIL E R D
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Fire Hydrant
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Biological Resources
Blue Elderberry Shrub Location
VELB Core Area (Avoidance
Fencing)
VELB Encroachment Buffer
Roadside Ditch, Wetland
Vegetation
FIGURE
2S

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

F ORTY MIL E R D
Source: Esri Online Imagery Basemap
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet Notes: This map was created for informational and display purposes only.

LEGEND:

Fire Hydrant
Proposed Sanitary Sewer
Proposed Water Main
Roadside Ditch, Wetland
Vegetation
FIGURE
2T

OPUD SOUTH COUNTY

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

YUBA COUNTY, CA
PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:

PROJECT NAME:

MAP EXTENT:
2A
2C 2D
2E
2G
2J
2M
2O
2H
2R
2B
2P
2F
2I
2K
2L
2N
2S
2Q
2T

CNDDB Geospatial Data is Confidential - Figure available upon request. 1471
Section 3, Item # 3.1

APPENDIX A

USFWS SPECIES LIST

1472
Section 3, Item # 3.1
February 02, 2023
United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
Phone: (916) 414-6600 Fax: (916) 414-6713
In Reply Refer To:

Project Code: 2022-0002318
Project Name: Olivehurst Public Utility District Water/Wastewater Improvements Project Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:

The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.

The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat.

A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) 1473
Section 3, Item # 3.1
02/02/2023 2
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.

If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to protect native birds from project-related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more information regarding these Acts see https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations.php.

The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan (when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize the production of project-related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and their resources to the project-related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and recommended conservation measures see https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-tobirds.php.

In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/ executive-orders/e0-13186.php.

We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office.
1474
Section 3, Item # 3.1
02/02/2023 3
▪
Attachment(s):

Official Species List
1475
Section 3, Item # 3.1
02/02/2023 1
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".

This species list is provided by:

Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
(916) 414-6600
1476
Section 3, Item # 3.1
02/02/2023 2
Project Summary
Project Code: 2022-0002318
Project Name: Olivehurst Public Utility District Water/Wastewater Improvements Project Project Type: Water Supply Facility - Maintenance / Modification Project Description: The proposed Project involves construction of a well site, water treatment plant, pump stations, and lift stations on approximately 2.5 acres of land, improvements within the existing wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and the construction of approximately 13.6 miles of new water lines and sewer lines primarily in roadways or on the road shoulder, with some overland segments of pipeline alignment (approximately 3 miles of overland pipe). Additionally, 13 bore locations have been identified, seven bore crossings for pipeline installation under waterways, and six bore crossings for pipeline installation under highways.

Project Location:

Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@39.05587985,-121.49323332098848,14z Counties: Yuba County, California
l
111ft
1477
Section 3, Item # 3.1
02/02/2023 3

1. Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 9 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.

Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species.

IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce.

See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.

NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

Birds

NAME STATUS
Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus
Population: Western U.S. DPS
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3911
Threatened
Reptiles

NAME STATUS
Giant Garter Snake Thamnophis gigas
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4482
Threatened
Fishes

NAME STATUS
Delta Smelt Hypomesus transpacificus
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/321
Threatened
1 1478
Section 3, Item # 3.1
02/02/2023 4
Insects

NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate
Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7850
Threatened
Crustaceans

NAME STATUS
Conservancy Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta conservatio
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8246
Endangered
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened
Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp Lepidurus packardi
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2246
Endangered
Flowering Plants

NAME STATUS
Hartweg's Golden Sunburst Pseudobahia bahiifolia
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1704
Endangered
Critical habitats

THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION.
1479
Section 3, Item # 3.1
02/02/2023 5
IPaC User Contact Information
Agency: Padre Associates Inc.

Name: Nathan Tallman
Address: 350 University Avenue, Suite 250
City: Sacramento
State: CA
Zip: 95827
Email [email protected]
Phone: 9163335920
1480
Section 3, Item # 3.1

APPENDIX B

CNDDB NINE QUAD SUMMARY TABLE

1481
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.

Extirp. Extirp.

Acipenser medirostris pop. 1
green sturgeon - southern DPS
G2T1
S1
Threatened
None
AFS_VU-Vulnerable
IUCN_EN-Endangered
24 129
14 S:4
0 0 2 0 0 2 1 3 4 0 0
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
G1G2
S1S2
None
Threatened
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_EN-Endangered
NABCI_RWL-Red
Watch List
USFWS_BCC-Birds of
Conservation Concern
15 160
955
S:28
1 1 0 0 7 19 19 9 21 7 0
Anthicus antiochensis
Antioch Dunes anthicid beetle
G1
S3
None
None
20 20
6 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Anthicus sacramento
Sacramento anthicid beetle
G1
S4
None
None
IUCN_EN-Endangered 20
20 13
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
G4
S3
None
None
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
USFS_S-Sensitive
92 92
420
S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Astragalus tener var. ferrisiae
Ferris' milk-vetch
G2T1
S1
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1 18
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
G4
S3
None
None
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
USFWS_BCC-Birds of
Conservation Concern
150
150
2011
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Branchinecta conservatio
Conservancy fairy shrimp
G2
S2
Endangered
None
IUCN_EN-Endangered 100
100
53 S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
G3
S3
Threatened
None
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable 52
174
796
S:15
2 4 0 2 0 7 2 13 15 0 0
Query Criteria: Quad IS (Sutter (3912126) OR Yuba City (3912125) OR Browns Valley (3912124) OR Gilsizer Slough (3912116) OR Olivehurst (3912115) OR Wheatland (3912114) OR Sutter Causeway (3812186) OR Nicolaus (3812185) OR Sheridan (3812184)) Report Printed on Thursday, February 02, 2023
Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2023 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 4 Information Expires 7/1/2023
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
1482
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.

Extirp. Extirp.

Branta hutchinsii leucopareia
cackling (=Aleutian Canada) goose
G5T3
S3
Delisted
None
CDFW_WL-Watch List 35
35 19
S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
G5
S3
None
Threatened
BLM_S-Sensitive
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
10 130
2548
S:89
10 5 0 0 0 74 8 81 89 0 0
Cicindela hirticollis abrupta
Sacramento Valley tiger beetle
G5TH
SH
None
None
15 25
6 S:2
0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 2
Circus hudsonius
northern harrier
G5
S3
None
None
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
USFWS_BCC-Birds of
Conservation Concern
82 120
54 S:4
0 2 2 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0
Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh
Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh
G3
S2.1
None
None
35 35
60 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
western yellow-billed cuckoo
G5T2T3
S1
Threatened
Endangered
BLM_S-Sensitive
NABCI_RWL-Red
Watch List
USFS_S-Sensitive
25 50
165
S:4
0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 4 0 0
Delphinium recurvatum
recurved larkspur
G2?
S2?
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
BLM_S-Sensitive
SB_SBBG-Santa
Barbara Botanic
Garden
119
S:1
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1
Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
valley elderberry longhorn beetle
G3T2T3
S3
Threatened
None
35 103
271
S:18
3 3 2 2 1 7 12 6 17 0 1
Downingia pusilla
dwarf downingia
GU
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 2B.2 93
250
132
S:3
0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 3 0 0
Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
G5
S3S4
None
None
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_FP-Fully
Protected
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
60 60
184
S:1
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Emys marmorata
western pond turtle
G3G4
S3
None
None
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable
USFS_S-Sensitive
25 150
1421
S:6
2 1 0 0 0 3 6 0 6 0 0
Report Printed on Thursday, February 02, 2023
Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2023 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 4 Information Expires 7/1/2023
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
1483
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.

Extirp. Extirp.

Erethizon dorsatum
North American porcupine
G5
S3
None
None
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
47 102
523
S:2
0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 0
Great Valley Cottonwood Riparian Forest
Great Valley Cottonwood Riparian Forest
G2
S2.1
None
None
35 50
56 S:4
0 0 2 0 0 2 4 0 4 0 0
Great Valley Mixed Riparian Forest
Great Valley Mixed Riparian Forest
G2
S2.2
None
None
33 50
68 S:2
0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 0
Hibiscus lasiocarpos var. occidentalis
woolly rose-mallow
G5T3
S3
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
SB_UCBG-UC
Botanical Garden at
Berkeley
25 30
173
S:2
0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 0
Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus
California black rail
G3T1
S1
None
Threatened
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_FP-Fully
Protected
IUCN_EN-Endangered
NABCI_RWL-Red
Watch List
40 300
303
S:8
0 0 0 0 0 8 6 2 8 0 0
Legenere limosa
legenere
G2
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
BLM_S-Sensitive
SB_UCBG-UC
Botanical Garden at
Berkeley
85 95
83 S:3
1 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 0
Lepidurus packardi
vernal pool tadpole shrimp
G4
S3
Endangered
None
IUCN_EN-Endangered 34
120
329
S:19
1 6 3 2 0 7 6 13 19 0 0
Linderiella occidentalis
California linderiella
G2G3
S2S3
None
None
IUCN_NT-Near
Threatened
34 102
508
S:24
0 5 2 0 0 17 18 6 24 0 0
Melospiza melodia pop. 1
song sparrow ("Modesto" population)
G5T3?Q
S3?
None
None
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
60 60
92 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Monardella venosa
veiny monardella
G1
S1
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
SB_UCBG-UC
Botanical Garden at
Berkeley
100
100
4 S:1
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
Report Printed on Thursday, February 02, 2023
Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2023 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 4 Information Expires 7/1/2023
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
1484
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.

Extirp. Extirp.

Navarretia leucocephala ssp. bakeri
Baker's navarretia
G4T2
S2
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
115
115
64 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool
Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool
G3
S3.1
None
None
70 95
126
S:4
0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 4 0 0
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 11
steelhead - Central Valley DPS
G5T2Q
S2
Threatened
None
AFS_TH-Threatened 31
S:2
0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 0
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha pop. 11
chinook salmon - Central Valley spring-run
ESU
G5T2Q
S2
Threatened
Threatened
AFS_TH-Threatened 120
120
13 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
Pogonichthys macrolepidotus
Sacramento splittail
G3
S3
None
None
AFS_VU-Vulnerable
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
20 20
15 S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Pseudobahia bahiifolia
Hartweg's golden sunburst
G1
S1
Endangered
Endangered
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
27 S:1
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1
Riparia riparia
bank swallow
G5
S2
None
Threatened
BLM_S-Sensitive
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
20 60
299
S:24
0 6 0 0 0 18 9 15 24 0 0
Sagittaria sanfordii
Sanford's arrowhead
G3
S3
None
None
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
BLM_S-Sensitive
143
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
G2G3
S3S4
None
None
BLM_S-Sensitive
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_NT-Near
Threatened
103
103
1425
S:1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Thamnophis gigas
giant gartersnake
G2
S2
Threatened
Threatened
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable 20
65 373
S:38
2 24 0 0 0 12 6 32 38 0 0
Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell's vireo
G5T2
S2
Endangered
Endangered
NABCI_YWL-Yellow
Watch List
50 50
504
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Report Printed on Thursday, February 02, 2023
Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2023 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 4 of 4 Information Expires 7/1/2023
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
1485
Section 3, Item # 3.1

APPENDIX C

PLANT LIST
1486
Section 3, Item # 3.1

Plant Species Observed at the OPUD South County Infrastructure Project Site Common Name/Family Scientific Name Growth
Habit
Wetland
Indicator
Status
Sensitivity /
Listing
Status
Native
Status
EQUISETACEAE (Horsetail Family)
Scouring rush Equisetum hymale ssp. affine H FACW N
ADOXACEAE (Muskroot Family)
Blue elderberry Sambucus mexicana S FACU N
APIACEAE (Carrot Family)
Coyote thistle Eryngium sp. H N
Fennel Foeniculum vulgare H NL I
APOCYNACEAE (Dogbane Family)
Narrow-leaved milkweed Asclepias fascicularis H FAC N
ASTERACEAE (Sunflower Family)
Western ragweed Ambrosia psilostachya H FACU N
Mayweed Anthemis cotula H FACU I
Coyote brush Baccharis pilularis S NL N
Italian thistle
Carduus pycnocephalus ssp.
pycnocephalus H NL I
Yellow star-thistle Centaurea solstitialis H NL I
Common spikeweed Centromadia pungens H FAC N
Chicory Cichorium intybus H FACU I
Bull thistle Cirsium vulgare H FACU I
Stinkwort Dittrichia graveolens H NL I
Gumplant Grindelia sp. H
Hayfield tarweed
Hemizonia congesta ssp.
luzulifolia H NL N
Cat's-ear Hypochaeris glabra H NL I
Prickly lettuce Lactuca serriola H FACU I
Cudweed Pseudognaphalium sp. H
Common groundsel Senecio vulgaris H FACU I
Milk thistle Silybum marianum H NL I
Prickly sow thistle Sonchus asper ssp. asper H FAC I
Common dandelion Taraxacum officinale H FACU I
Salsify Tragopogon porrifolius H NL I
Cocklebur Xanthium strumarium H FAC N
BORAGINACEAE (Borage Family)
Fiddleneck Amsinckia sp. H N
Common fiddleneck Amsinckia menziesii H NL N
BRASSICACEAE (Mustard Family)
Mouse-ear cress Arabidopsis thaliana H NL I
Black mustard Brassica nigra H NL I
Field mustard Brassica rapa H FUPL I
Shepard's purse Capsella bursa-pastoris H FACU I
Few-seed bittercress Cardamine oligosperma H FAC N
Mediterranean mustard Hirschfeldia incana H NL I
Peppergrass Lepidium nitidum H FAC N
Radish Raphanus sativus H NL I
CARYOPHYLLACEAE (Pink Family)
Common chickweed Stellaria media H FACU I
1487
Section 3, Item # 3.1

Plant Species Observed at the OPUD South County Infrastructure Project Site Common Name/Family Scientific Name Growth
Habit
Wetland
Indicator
Status
Sensitivity /
Listing
Status
Native
Status
CHENOPODIACEAE (Goosefoot Family)
Russian thistle Salsola tragus H FACU I
CONVOLVULACEAE (Morning-Glory Family)
Bindweed Convolvulus arvensis H NL I
CRASSULACEAE (Stonecrop Family)
Moss pygmy weed Crassula tillaea H FACU I
DIPSACACEAE (Teasel Family)
Wild teasel Dipsacus fullonum H FAC I
EUPHORBIACEAE (Spurge Family)
Turkey mullein Croton setiger H NL N
Spotted spurge Euphorbia maculata H UPL I
FABACEAE (Legume Family)
Spanish clover
Acmispon americanus var.
americanus H UPL N
Bird's-foot trefoil Lotus corniculatus H FAC I
Miniature lupine Lupinus bicolor H NL N
California burclover Medicago polymorpha H FACU I
Clover Trifolium sp. H
Rose clover Trifolium hirtum H NL I
Vetch Vicia sp. H
Spring vetch Vicia sativa H FACU I
Winter vetch Vicia villosa H NL I
FAGACEAE (Oak Family)
Valley oak Quercus lobata T FACU N
GERANIACEAE (Geranium Family)
Storksbill Erodium sp. H
Long-beaked storksbill Erodium botrys H FACU I
Redstem filaree Erodium cicutarium H NL I
Cut-leaf geranium Geranium dissectum H NL I
Dove's-foot geranium Geranium molle H NL I
JUGLANDACEAE (Walnut Family)
Northern California black walnut Juglans hindsii T FAC N 1B.1 LAMIACEAE (Mint Family)
Vinegar weed Trichostema lanceolatum H FACU N
MALVACEAE (Mallow Family)
Cheeseweed Malva parviflora H NL I
MONTIACEAE (Miner's Lettuce Family)
Red maids Calandrinia menziesii H NL N
Miner's lettuce Claytonia perfoliata H FAC N
MYRTACEAE (Myrtle Family)
Eucalyptus Eucalyptus sp. T I
Blue gum Eucalyptus globulus T NL I
OLEACEAE (Olive Family)
Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia T FACW N
Olive Olea europaea T NL I
ONAGRACEAE (Evening Primrose Family)
1488
Section 3, Item # 3.1

Panicled willow herb Epilobium brachycarpum H NL N
Floating water primrose Ludwigia peploides H OBL I
OROBANCHACEAE (Broom-Rape Family)
Butter-and-eggs Triphysaria eriantha H NL N
OXALIDACEAE (Oxalis Family)
Bermuda buttercup Oxalis pes-caprae H NL I
PAPAVERACEAE (Poppy Family)
California poppy Eschscholzia californica H NL N
PLANTAGINACEAE (Plantain Family)
English plantain Plantago lanceolata H FAC I
POLYGONACEAE (Buckwheat Family)
Willow weed Persicaria lapathifolia H FACW N
Knotweed Polygonum aviculare H FAC I
Sheep sorrel Rumex acetocella H FACU I
Curly dock Rumex crispus H FAC I
RANUNCULACEAE (Buttercup Family)
Buttercup Ranunculus sp. H
ROSACEAE (Rose Family)
Himalayan blackberry Rubus armeniacus V FAC I
RUBIACEAE (Madder Family)
Bedstraw Galium sp. H
California button willow Cephalanthus occidentalis S OBL N SALICACEAE (Willow Family)
Fremont cottonwood Populus fremontii ssp. fremontii T NL N Lombardy poplar Populus nigra T NL I
Willow Salix sp. T OBL
Gooding's black willow Salix goodingii T FACW N
Arroyo willow Salix lasiolepis T FACW N
URTICACEAE (Nettle Family)
Stinging nettle Urtica dioica H FACW N
VERBENACEAE (Vervain Family)
Verbena Verbena lasiostachys H FAC N
VISCACEAE (Mistletoe Family)
Oak mistletoe
Phoradendron leucarpum ssp.
tomentosum H NL N
ZYGOPHYLLACEAE (Caltrop Family)
Puncture vine Tribulus terrestris H NL I
CYPERACEAE (Sedge Family)
Sedge Carex sp. H
Tall cyperus Cyperus eragrostis H FACW N
Spikerush Eleocharis sp. H
Creeping spikerush Eleocharis macrostachya H FACW N
Tule
Schoenoplectus acutus var.
occidentalis H OBL N
JUNCACEAE (Rush Family)
1489
Section 3, Item # 3.1

Plant Species Observed at the OPUD South County Infrastructure Project Site Common Name/Family Scientific Name Growth
Habit
Wetland
Indicator
Status
Sensitivity /
Listing
Status
Native
Status
Rush Juncus sp. H
Baltic rush Juncus balticus ssp. ater H FACW N
Lamp rush Juncus effusus H FACW N
Iris-leaved rush Juncus xiphoides H OBL N
POACEAE (Grass Family)
Slender wild oat Avena barbata G NL I
Wild oat Avena fatua G NL I
Little quaking grass Briza minor G FAC I
Ripgut grass Bromus diandrus G NL I
Soft chess Bromus hordeaceus G FACU I
Bermuda grass Cynodon dactylon G FACU I
Salt grass Distichlis spicata G FAC N
Barnyard grass Echinochloa crus-galli G FACW I
Medusa head Elymus caput-medusae G NL I
Brome fescue Festuca bromoides G FACU I
Rattail sixweeks grass Festuca myuros G FACU I
Rye grass Festuca perennis G FAC I
Mediterranean barley
Hordeum marinum ssp.
gussoneanum G FAC I
Hare barley Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum G FACU I
Dallis grass Paspalum dilatatum G FAC I
Harding grass Phalaris aquatica G FACU I
Annual blue grass Poa annua G FAC I
Rabbitfoot grass Polypogon monspeliensis G FACW I
Johnson grass Sorghum halepense G FACU I
Purple needlegrass Stipa pulchra G NL N
THEMIDACEAE (Brodiaea Family)
Brodiaea Brodiaea sp. H N
Blue dicks Dipterostemon capitatus H FACU N
TYPHACEAE (Cattail Family)
Broad-leaved cattail Typha latifolia H OBL N
Wetland Indicator Status
OBL = Obligate wetland species, occurs almost always in wetlands (>99% probability) FACW = Facultative wetland species, usually found in wetlands (67-99% probability) FAC = Facultative species, equally likely to occur in wetland and non-wetlands (34-66% probability) FACU = Facultative upland species, not usually found in wetlands (1-33% probability) UPL = Upland species, almost never found in wetlands (<1% probability) NI = No indicator has been assigned due to a lack of information to determine indicator status NL = Not listed, assumed upland species
Growth Habit Native Status
G = Grass
H = Herb
S = Shrub
T = Tree
N = Native
I = Introduced

1490
Section 3, Item # 3.1

APPENDIX D

WILDLIFE LIST
1491
Section 3, Item # 3.1

Wildlife Species Observed at the OPUD South County Infrastructure Project Site Common Name/ Family Scientific Name Sensitivity / Listing Status1

AMPHIBIANS
HYLIDAE (Tree Frogs)
Pacific Treefrog Pseudacris sierra

REPTILES
PHRYNOSOMATIDAE (spiny lizards)
Western Fence Lizard Sceloporus occidentalis
BIRDS
ANATIDAE (Ducks, Geese, and Swans)
Greater White-fronted Goose Anser albifrons M
Snow Goose Chen caerulescens M
Canada Goose Branta canadensis M
Mallard Anas platyrhynchos M
PHASIANIDAE (Partridges, Grouse, Turkeys, and Old World Quail) Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus
Wild Turkey Meleagris gallopavo
COLUMBIDAE (Pigeons and Doves)
Rock Pigeon Columba livia
Eurasian Collared-Dove Streptopelia decaocto
Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura M
TROCHILIDAE (Hummingbirds)
Anna's Hummingbird Calypte anna M
CHARADRIIDAE (Lapwings and Plovers)
Killdeer Charadrius vociferus M
SCOLOPACIDAE (Sandpipers, Phalaropes, and Allies)
Greater Yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca M
LARIDAE (Gulls, Terns, and Skimmers)
California Gull Larus californicus M, WL
Herring Gull Larus argentatus M
PHALACROCORACIDAE (Cormorants)
Double-crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus M, WL
ARDEIDAE (Bitterns, Herons, and Allies) M
Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias M
Great Egret Ardea alba M
CATHARTIDAE (New World Vultures)
Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura M
ACCIPITRIDAE (Hawks, Kites, Eagles, and Allies)
White-tailed Kite Elanus leucurus M, FP
Northern Harrier Circus hudsonius M, CSC
Red-shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus M
Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis M
PICIDAE (Woodpeckers and Allies)
Nuttall's Woodpecker Picoides nuttallii M
Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus M
FALCONIDAE (Caracaras and Falcons)
American Kestrel Falco sparverius M
TYRANNIDAE (Tyrant Flycatchers)
1492
Section 3, Item # 3.1

Wildlife Species Observed at the OPUD South County Infrastructure Project Site Common Name/ Family Scientific Name Sensitivity / Listing Status1 Black Phoebe Sayornis nigricans M
CORVIDAE (Jays and Crows)
California Scrub-Jay Aphelocoma californica M
American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos M
Common Raven Corvus corax M
SITTIDAE (Nuthatches)
Red-breasted Nuthatch Sitta canadensis M
TROGLODYTIDAE (Wrens)
Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris M
REGULIDAE (Kinglets)
Ruby-crowned Kinglet Regulus calendula M
TURDIDAE (Thrushes)
American Robin Turdus migratorius M
MIMIDAE (Mockingbirds and Thrashers)
Northern Mockingbird Mimus polyglottos M
STURNIDAE (Starlings)
European Starling Sturnus vulgaris
PASSERIDAE (Old World Sparrows)
House Sparrow Passer domesticus
FRINGILLIDAE (Fringilline and Cardueline Finches and Allies) House Finch Haemorhous mexicanus M
Lesser Goldfinch Spinus psaltria M
American Goldfinch Spinus tristis M
PARULIDAE (Wood-Warblers)
Yellow-rumped Warbler Setophaga coronata M
EMBERIZIDAE (Emberizids)
Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis M
Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia M
White-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys M
Golden-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia atricapilla M
ICTERIDAE (Blackbirds)
Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus M
Tricolor Blackbird Agelaius tricolor ST, CSC
Western Meadowlark Sturnella neglecta M
Brewer's Blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus M

MAMMALS
TALPIDAE (Moles)
Broad-footed Mole Scapanus latimanus
LEPORIDAE (Rabbits and Hares)
Black-tailed Hare Lepus californicus
SCIURIDAE (Chipmunks, Squirrels, and Marmots)
California Ground Squirrel Spermophilus beecheyi
GEOMYIDAE (Pocket Gophers)
Botta’s Pocket Gopher Thomomys bottae
CRICETIDAE (Deer Mice, Voles, and Relatives)
Western Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys megalotis
1493
Section 3, Item # 3.1

Wildlife Species Observed at the OPUD South County Infrastructure Project Site Common Name/ Family Scientific Name Sensitivity / Listing Status1 California Vole Microtus californicus
CANIDAE (Foxes, Wolves, and Relatives)
Coyote Canis latrans
PROCYONIDAE (Raccoons and Relatives)
Raccoon Procyon lotor
MUSTELIDAE (Weasels, Badgers, and Relatives)
Mink Mustela vison
Striped Skunk Mephitis mephitis
FELIDAE (Cats)
Domestic Cat Felis catus
Sensitivity / Listing Status1
M = Protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) FE = Federally Endangered
FT = Federally Threatened
FDL = Federally Delisted
FSS = Forest Service Sensitive
SE = California State Endangered
ST = California State Threatened
CSC = California Species of Special Concern
FP = California Fully Protected Species
BCC = USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
WL = CDFW Watch List

1494
Section 3, Item # 3.1

APPENDIX E

NRCS CUSTOM SOIL RESOURCE REPORT
1495
Section 3, Item # 3.1
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Yuba County,
California
OPUD Water/Wastewater
Improvement Project
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
February 24, 2022
USDA
"-?;;;777
NRCS
0 ----------10,000 ft
1496
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.

They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.

Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.

The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 1497
Section 3, Item # 3.1
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
3 1498
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Yuba County, California.................................................................................. 14 131—Hollenbeck silty clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes..............................14 134—Hollenbeck-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes.................... 15 141—Conejo loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17..................................16 142—Conejo loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded, MLRA

17..........................................................................................................18 143—Conejo-Urban land complex, 0 percent slopes, MLRA 17.................19 197—Oakdale sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes.......................................20 198—Oakdale-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes.........................22 214—San Joaquin loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes...........................................23 217—Urban land-San Joaquin complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes..................24 References............................................................................................................27 4 1499
Section 3, Item # 3.1
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.

Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).

Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 1500
Section 3, Item # 3.1
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.

The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.

The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.

These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.

Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.

Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report
6 1501
Section 3, Item # 3.1
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Custom Soil Resource Report
7 1502
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 1503
Section 3, Item # 3.1
9 Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4321000 4322000 4323000 4324000 4325000 4326000 4327000 4328000 4321000 4322000 4323000 4324000 4325000 4326000 4327000 4328000 623000 624000 625000 626000 627000 628000 629000 630000 631000 632000 633000 634000 623000 624000 625000 626000 627000 628000 629000 630000 631000 632000 633000 634000 39° 5' 39'' N
121° 35' 0'' W
39° 5' 39'' N
121° 26' 35'' W
39° 1' 23'' N
121° 35' 0'' W
39° 1' 23'' N
121° 26' 35'' W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 2500 5000 10000 15000
Feet
0 500 1000 2000 3000
Meters
Map Scale: 1:55,600 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. 1504
Section 3, Item # 3.1

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: Yuba County, California
Survey Area Data: Version 15, Sep 6, 2021
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Dec 6, 2018—Jul 2, 2019
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Custom Soil Resource Report
10 §
□ (I
D lb
~
{j
□ ....
~
181 ,,,.....,
* +-H
◊ ~
X ~
..
. ~
0 ~
A.
~ •
0 0
V
+
....
.. ..
0 ~
tJ
1505
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 131 Hollenbeck silty clay loam, 0 to
1 percent slopes
106.7 6.4%
134 Hollenbeck-Urban land
complex, 0 to 1 percent
slopes

22.8 1.4%
141 Conejo loam, 0 to 1 percent
slopes, MLRA 17

11.6 0.7%
142 Conejo loam, 0 to 2 percent
slopes, occasionally flooded,
MLRA 17
132.4 7.9%
143 Conejo-Urban land complex, 0
percent slopes, MLRA 17

21.5 1.3%
197 Oakdale sandy loam, 0 to 5
percent slopes

10.7 0.6%
198 Oakdale-Urban land complex, 0
to 1 percent slopes

11.8 0.7%
214 San Joaquin loam, 0 to 1
percent slopes
1,200.6 71.7%
217 Urban land-San Joaquin
complex, 0 to 1 percent
slopes
156.2 9.3%
Totals for Area of Interest 1,675.1 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.

Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties Custom Soil Resource Report
11 1506
Section 3, Item # 3.1
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.

Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.

These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.

The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.

An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report
12 1507
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report
13 1508
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Yuba County, California
131—Hollenbeck silty clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hg3g
Elevation: 30 to 120 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 20 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 to 290 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Hollenbeck, silty clay loam, and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Hollenbeck, Silty Clay Loam
Setting
Landform: Basin floors
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Clayey alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 8 inches: silty clay loam
H2 - 8 to 43 inches: silty clay
H3 - 43 to 47 inches: clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 39 to 65 inches to duripan Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R017XY901CA - Clayey Basin Group
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
14 1509
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Minor Components
Capay
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Basin floors
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Kimball
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
San joaquin
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
134—Hollenbeck-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hg3n
Elevation: 50 to 60 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 20 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 to 290 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Hollenbeck, silty clay loam, and similar soils: 45 percent Urban land: 40 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Hollenbeck, Silty Clay Loam
Setting
Landform: Basin floors
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Clayey alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 8 inches: silty clay loam
H2 - 8 to 43 inches: silty clay
H3 - 43 to 47 inches: clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 43 to 65 inches to duripan Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Custom Soil Resource Report
15 1510
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Urban Land
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 60 inches: variable
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
San joaquin
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Capay
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Basin floors
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
141—Conejo loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2xc97
Elevation: 30 to 140 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 20 to 28 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 62 to 62 degrees F
Frost-free period: 319 to 328 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Custom Soil Resource Report
16 1511
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Map Unit Composition
Conejo, loam, and similar soils: 80 percent
Minor components: 20 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Conejo, Loam
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 7 inches: loam
Bt - 7 to 30 inches: loam
Bw - 30 to 62 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 1.42 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: RareNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.2 to 0.5 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Marcum
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Tisdale
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Perkins
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Horst
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
17 1512
Section 3, Item # 3.1
142—Conejo loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded, MLRA 17 Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2y0fl
Elevation: 50 to 100 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 21 to 26 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 62 to 62 degrees F
Frost-free period: 319 to 327 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Conejo, loam, and similar soils: 95 percent
Minor components: 5 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Conejo, Loam
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: loam
Bw1 - 6 to 12 inches: clay loam
Bw2 - 12 to 24 inches: clay loam
Bw3 - 24 to 48 inches: loam
Bw4 - 48 to 57 inches: loam
BC - 57 to 65 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.64 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: NoneOccasional
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.2 to 0.5 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Custom Soil Resource Report
18 1513
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Horst
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: No
143—Conejo-Urban land complex, 0 percent slopes, MLRA 17 Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2y0fp
Elevation: 60 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 22 to 22 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 62 to 62 degrees F
Frost-free period: 320 to 321 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Conejo, loam, and similar soils: 45 percent
Urban land: 40 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Conejo, Loam
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: loam
Bw1 - 6 to 12 inches: clay loam
Bw2 - 12 to 24 inches: clay loam
Bw3 - 24 to 48 inches: loam
Bw4 - 48 to 57 inches: loam
BC - 57 to 65 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.64 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Custom Soil Resource Report
19 1514
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.2 to 0.5 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3c
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Urban Land
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 60 inches: variable
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 percent
Runoff class: Very high
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Minor Components
Columbia
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
San joaquin
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Capay
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
197—Oakdale sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hg5z
Elevation: 50 to 150 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 to 290 days
Custom Soil Resource Report
20 1515
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Oakdale, sandy loam, and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Oakdale, Sandy Loam
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Mixed alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 9 inches: sandy loam
H2 - 9 to 53 inches: sandy clay loam
H3 - 53 to 70 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 5 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
San joaquin
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Oakdale, steep
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
21 1516
Section 3, Item # 3.1
198—Oakdale-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hg60
Elevation: 50 to 150 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 to 290 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Oakdale, sandy loam, and similar soils: 45 percent
Urban land: 40 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Oakdale, Sandy Loam
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Mixed alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 9 inches: sandy loam
H2 - 9 to 53 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 53 to 70 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3c
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
22 1517
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Description of Urban Land
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 60 inches: variable
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
San joaquin
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
214—San Joaquin loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hg6j
Elevation: 60 to 130 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 to 290 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
San joaquin, loam, and similar soils: 80 percent
Minor components: 20 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of San Joaquin, Loam
Setting
Landform: Fan terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Mixed alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 16 inches: loam
H2 - 16 to 25 inches: clay
H4 - 25 to 35 inches: duripan
Custom Soil Resource Report
23 1518
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches; 20 to 40 inches to duripan Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 1 percent
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R017XD079CA - CLAYPAN TERRACE
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Perkins
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Redding
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
217—Urban land-San Joaquin complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hg6m
Elevation: 20 to 500 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 to 290 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Urban land: 50 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
24 1519
Section 3, Item # 3.1
San joaquin, loam, and similar soils: 40 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Urban Land
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 60 inches: variable
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of San Joaquin, Loam
Setting
Landform: Fan terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Mixed alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 16 inches: loam
H2 - 16 to 25 inches: clay
H4 - 25 to 35 inches: duripan
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches; 20 to 40 inches to duripan Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 1 percent
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Depressions
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
25 1520
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Kilaga
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Perkins
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
26 1521
Section 3, Item # 3.1
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.

Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.

Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.

Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.

National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 27 1522
Section 3, Item # 3.1
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report
28 1523
Section 3, Item # 3.1

APPENDIX E
South County Infrastructure Project
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Basis of Design Report 1524
Section 3, Item # 3.1
Prepared for:
2485 Natomas Park Drive, Suite 600
Sacramento, CA 95833
Prepared by:
4186 W. Swift Avenue, Suite 107
(559) 438 - 8411

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY

GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN
REPORT
Olivehurst Public Utilities District
South Yuba Sewer and Water
Infrastructure Project
Olivehurst, CA
April 2021
DRAFT

BLACKBURN
CONSU_TING
~
1525
Section 3, Item # 3.1
West Sacramento Office:
2491 Boatman Ave
West Sacramento, CA 95691 Auburn (530) 887-1494
(916) 375-8706 Fresno (559) 438-8411
Blackburn File No. 3842.X
April 30, 2021
Mr. Steve DeCou
Vice President and Principal Project Manager
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.
2485 Natomas Park Drive, Suite 600
Sacramento, CA 95833
Subject: UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT Olivehurst Public Utilities District
South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project
Olivehurst, California
Dear Mr. DeCou,
Blackburn Consulting (Blackburn) is pleased to submit this Updated Draft Preliminary Geotechnical Basis of Design Report for the Olivehurst Public Utilities District (OPUD) South Yuba County Sewer and Water Infrastructure project in Olivehurst, California. Blackburn prepared this report in accordance with our May 14, 2020 Proposal and August 21, 2020 Agreement. This updated report includes responses to Jacobs review comments. It does not include information on borings completed since our original report, because laboratory tests are pending.

Thank you for selecting Blackburn to be on your design team. Please call if you have questions or require additional information.

Sincerely,

BLACKBURN CONSULTING
Prepared by: Reviewed by:

Rob Pickard, C.E.G. Bob Lokteff, G.E., P.E.

Senior Engineering Geologist Principal Geotechnical Engineer Copies: 1 to Addressee (PDF).

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1526
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 Purpose........................................................................................................................................ 1 Scope of Services......................................................................................................................... 1 Project Description and Location ................................................................................................ 2 2 PROJECT GEOLOGY AND SOIL SURVEY ..........................................................................................2 Geology and Soil Survey .............................................................................................................. 2 3 SEWER AND WATER PIPELINES .....................................................................................................3 Site Location and Description...................................................................................................... 3 Geology, Soil Survey, Faulting ..................................................................................................... 8 Field Work and Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................. 8 Exploratory Borings............................................................................................................. 8 Laboratory Testing.............................................................................................................. 9 Subsurface Findings..................................................................................................................... 9 General Subsurface Soil Conditions.................................................................................... 9 Groundwater.....................................................................................................................13 Existing Pavement Sections ..............................................................................................13 Preliminary Design Considerations – Sewer and Gravity Force Main .......................................14 Alignment Ground Suitability............................................................................................14 Geologic Hazards ..............................................................................................................14 Seismic Design ..................................................................................................................15 Soil Excavatability and Trench Stability ............................................................................15 Trench Dewatering ...........................................................................................................16 Trench Backfill and Compaction .......................................................................................16 Pipeline Thrust Blocks.......................................................................................................18 Soil Corrosivity ..................................................................................................................18 4 TRENCHLESS PIPELINE CROSSINGS..............................................................................................19 Site Location and Description....................................................................................................19 Geology......................................................................................................................................20 Geology .............................................................................................................................20 Field Work and Laboratory Testing ...........................................................................................20 Exploratory Borings...........................................................................................................20 Laboratory Testing............................................................................................................21 Subsurface Findings...................................................................................................................21 DRAFT

1.1 1.2

1.3 2.1

3.1 3.2

3.3 3.4

3.5 4.1

4.2 4.3

4.4 3.3.1

3.3.2 3.4.1

3.4.2 3.4.3

3.5.1 3.5.2

3.5.3 3.5.4

3.5.5 3.5.6

3.5.7 3.5.8

4.2.1 4.3.1

4.3.2 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1527
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
General Subsurface Soil Conditions..................................................................................21 Groundwater.....................................................................................................................26 Existing Pavement Sections ..............................................................................................26 5 PUMP STATIONS & LIFT STATIONS..............................................................................................27 Site Location and Description....................................................................................................27 Geology......................................................................................................................................30 Field Work and Laboratory Testing ...........................................................................................30 Subsurface Findings...................................................................................................................30 General Subsurface Soil Conditions..................................................................................30 Groundwater .....................................................................................................................31 Preliminary Design Considerations – Pump/Lift Stations..........................................................32 Geologic Hazards ..............................................................................................................33 Seismic Design ..................................................................................................................33 General Grading Recommendations .................................................................................34 Dewatering........................................................................................................................35 Temporary Excavations.....................................................................................................36 Foundations......................................................................................................................36 Soil Corrosivity ..................................................................................................................39 6 WWTP IMPROVEMENTS.............................................................................................................40 Site Location and Description....................................................................................................40 Project Description ....................................................................................................................41 Previous Studies ........................................................................................................................41 Geology......................................................................................................................................41 Field Work and Laboratory Testing ...........................................................................................42 Exploratory Test Pits.........................................................................................................42 Laboratory Testing............................................................................................................42 Subsurface Findings...................................................................................................................42 General Subsurface Soil Conditions..................................................................................42 Groundwater.....................................................................................................................42 Preliminary Design Considerations – WWTP Improvements....................................................43 Facility Ground Suitability................................................................................................. 43 Geologic Hazards ..............................................................................................................43 Seismic Design ..................................................................................................................44 General Grading Recommendations.................................................................................45 Dewatering........................................................................................................................47 DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~

4.4.1 4.4.2

4.4.3 5.1

5.2 5.3

5.4 5.4.1

5.4.2 5.5

5.5.1 5.5.2

5.5.3 5.5.4

5.5.5 5.5.6

5.5.7 6.1

6.2 6.3

6.4 6.5

6.5.1 6.5.2

6.6 6.6.1

6.6.2 6.7

6.7.1 6.7.2

6.7.3 6.7.4

6.7.5 1528
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
Temporary Excavations.....................................................................................................47 Foundations......................................................................................................................48 Soil Corrosivity ..................................................................................................................52 Concrete Slabs on Grade...................................................................................................52 Trench Backfill and Compaction .......................................................................................53 Equalization Basin Concrete Lining...................................................................................55 7 WATER TANK AND BOOSTER STATION........................................................................................55 Site Location and Description....................................................................................................55 Previous Studies ........................................................................................................................56 Geology......................................................................................................................................56 Subsurface Findings...................................................................................................................56 General Subsurface Soil Conditions..................................................................................56 Groundwater.....................................................................................................................56 Preliminary Design Considerations – Water Tank and Booster Station....................................57 Facility Ground Suitability................................................................................................. 57 Geologic Hazards ..............................................................................................................57 Seismic Design ..................................................................................................................57 General Grading Recommendations.................................................................................58 Dewatering........................................................................................................................59 Temporary Excavations.....................................................................................................60 Foundations......................................................................................................................60 Soil Corrosivity ..................................................................................................................61 Concrete Slabs on Grade...................................................................................................62 Trench Backfill and Compaction .......................................................................................62 8 RISK MANAGEMENT ..................................................................................................................64 9 LIMITATIONS .............................................................................................................................65 DRAFT

6.7.6 6.7.7

6.7.8 6.7.9

6.7.10 6.7.11

7.1 7.2

7.3 7.4

7.4.1 7.4.2

7.5 7.5.1

7.5.2 7.5.3

7.5.4 7.5.5

7.5.6 7.5.7

7.5.8 7.5.9

7.5.10 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1529
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
Table of Contents (Cont’d)

FIGURES
Vicinity Map
Overall Project Map
Regional Geologic Map
USDA Soil Map
Regional Fault Map
APPENDIX A: Sewer and Water Pipelines
A1: Site Plan
A2: Boring and Test Pit Logs Legend
Boring and Test Pit Logs
A3: Laboratory Test Results
APPENDIX B: Trenchless Pipeline Crossings
B1: Site Plan
B2: Boring and Test Pit Logs Legend
Boring and Test Pit Logs
B3: Laboratory Test Results
APPENDIX C: Pump Stations
C1: Site Plan
C2: Boring and Test Pit Logs Legend
Boring and Test Pit Logs
C3: Laboratory Test Results
APPENDIX D: WWTP Improvements
D1: Site Plan
D2: Boring and Test Pit Logs Legend
Boring and Test Pit Logs
D3: Laboratory Test Results
D4: Site Specific Analysis
D5: Previous Geotechnical Studies and Data
APPENDIX E: Water Tank and Booster Station
E1: Site Plan
E2: Boring and Test Pit Logs Legend
Boring and Test Pit Logs
E3: Laboratory Test Results
APPENDIX F: Blackburn Response to Jacobs Comments on December 11, 2020 Draft Preliminary Geotechnical Basis of Design Report
APPENDIX G: Important Information about This Geotechnical Engineering Report, Geoprofessional Business Association, 2019
DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1530
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
1 1 INTRODUCTION
Purpose
Blackburn Consulting (Blackburn) prepared this Updated Draft Preliminary Geotechnical Basis of Design Report (Draft Preliminary GBODR) for the Olivehurst Public Utility District (OPUD) South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project (Project) in Olivehurst, California. This report includes the responses to Jacobs’ review comments. It does not include information on borings completed since our original report, because laboratory tests are pending. This report contains descriptions of the surface and subsurface conditions, site geology, and preliminary geotechnical design considerations.

Blackburn prepared this report for Jacobs Engineering Group (Jacobs) and the project design team to use during preliminary design. This report shall not be used for final design or relied upon by others, or for different locations or improvements without the written consent of Blackburn. The design considerations in this report are based on limited information and knowledge of the project alignment and structure locations. Blackburn will perform additional subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis and prepare a Final GBODR for final design.

This report contains separate sections for Sewer and Water Pipelines, Trenchless Pipeline Crossings, Pump Stations and Lift Stations, WWTP Improvements, and Water Tank and Booster Station. Each section contains subsections on subsurface conditions, laboratory test results, site geology and seismicity, ground water, and design considerations (except for trenchless crossings). Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. is providing geotechnical design recommendations for the trenchless crossings separate from this report. Geotechnical information pertinent to each project component is repeated in each report section as necessary to facilitate ease of preliminary design by different companies that are using this report.

Scope of Services
To prepare this report, Blackburn:
• Discussed the proposed improvements with Mr. Steve DeCou and Ms. Myra Au (Jacobs); Mr.

Sean Minard (MHM); Joe Domenichelli, Sara Rogers, and Daryl Heigher (Domenichelli and Associates); and Jim Carson (Affinity Engineering).
• Reviewed the Draft Preliminary Plan and Profile sheets provided by MHM. • Reviewed available geotechnical information for the Olivehurst WWTP and Caltrans Log of Test Borings for bridge structures near the project alignment. • Observed the subsurface conditions in forty-three borings drilled along the project alignment in August and September 2020 and in five test pits excavated at the Olivehurst Wastewater Treatment Plant on October 19, 2020.
• Performed laboratory tests on representative soil samples obtained from the exploratory borings.
• Performed preliminary engineering analysis and calculations to develop our preliminary design considerations.
• Reviewed and responded to Jacobs’ comments on our December 11, 2020 Draft Preliminary Geotechnical Basis of Design Report.

DRAFT

1.1 1.2

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1531
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
2 Project Description and Location
The proposed project components include:
• About 8½ miles of 8” to 24” diameter sewer gravity and force main, • About 9 miles of 24” diameter water force water main, • One Highway 70 water line trenchless crossing,
• One Highway 70 sewer line trenchless crossing,
• Two Highway 65 sewer line trenchless crossings,
• Six to eight sewer and/or water line creek/canal crossings, • Eight new sewer pump/lift stations.
• Olivehurst WWTP improvements consisting of a new secondary clarifier, concrete-lined equalization basin, and on-site piping.
• A new water well site including a 1 MG steel storage tank, booster station and on-site piping near the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino.

Figure 1 shows the general location of the proposed improvements and Figure 2 shows the site location. 2 PROJECT GEOLOGY AND SOIL SURVEY
Geology and Soil Survey
We reviewed geology maps and the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Web Soil Survey (https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm). The “Geologic Map of the Late Cenozoic Deposits of the Sacramento Valley and Northern Sierra Foothills, California” (Helley and Harwood, 1985) shows the project is underlain by:
• Holocene Alluvium - unweathered gravel, sand, and silt deposited by present-day stream and river systems.
• Holocene Basin Deposits - Undivided as silt and clay derived from the same sources as modern alluvium. Thickness in the valley varies from 3 to 6 ft. along the perimeter up to 200 ft. in the center.
• Upper Member, Modesto Formation - unconsolidated, unweathered gravel, sand, silt, and clay.

Deposits belonging to the upper member of the Modesto are only a few meters thick and generally form a thin veneer deposited on older alluvial deposits. • Upper Member, Riverbank Formation - Unconsolidated but compact, dark-brown to red alluvium composed of gravel, sand, silt and clay.

Figure 3 shows the geologic formations within the project area.

The Fault Activity Map of California1 does not identify Historic or Holocene age faults (displacement within the last 11,700 years) within or adjacent to the project site. The nearest mapped fault is the Late 1 Jennings, Charles W., and Bryant, William A., 2010 Fault Activity Map of California: California Geological Survey, Geologic Data Map No. 6.

DRAFT

1.3 2.1

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1532
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
3 Quaternary Foothills Fault System, Spenceville fault, located about 12 miles to the east. The nearest active mapped fault is the Cleveland Hill Fault located approximately 25 miles north of the site.

The USDA web soil survey indicates that the site is underlain by mostly San Joaquin loam (Map Unit 214, 217) and also Hollenbeck silty clay loam (Map Unit 131, 134), Conejo Loam (Map Units 141, 142, 143), and Oakdale Sandy loam (Map Unit 197, 198). Table 2.1 presents classification properties of these soil units according to the USDA soil survey.

Table 2.1: USDA Soil Properties
Map Unit
Name/Symbol
Depth
(in)
USCS
Classification
Percent
fines
Liquid Limit Plasticity
Index
San Joaquin
loam/214, 217
0 to 25 Silt, Silty Clay,
Lean Clay
50 to 70 15 to 50 0 to 35
Hollenbeck silty
clay loam/131,
134
0 to 43 Lean Clay, Fat
Clay
85 to 95 40 to 60 20 to 35
Conejo
loam/141,142,143
0 to 65 Lean Clay 58 to 79 31 to 49 13 to 25
Oakdale Sandy
loam/197, 198
0 to 70 Silty Sand, Clayey
Sand
15 to 50 20 to 30 0 to 10
Figure 4 shows where these USDA soil units underlie the project site. 3 SEWER AND WATER PIPELINES
Site Location and Description
The proposed Project sewer and water pipeline alignments extend along the following streets in and near Olivehurst in South Yuba County, California:
• Olivehurst Avenue between 11th Avenue and 14th Avenue. • Mary Avenue.
• McGowan Parkway between Mary Avenue and Rancho Road.
• Olive Avenue from McGowan Parkway approximately 500 ft north, where it crosses Highway 65 to the cul de sac at the north end of Rancho Road.
• Rancho Road, from the northern cul de sac south to where it crosses Highway 65 to Morrison Road.
• Forty Mile Road from the Toyota Amphitheater to Rancho Road. • Rossler Road from Forty Mile Road approximately 1250 ft north, where it crosses Highway 65 to the cul de sac at the south end of Shimer Road.
• Shimer Road.

DRAFT

3.1 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1533
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
4 Pipeline depths will generally range from 5 to 18 feet below the ground surface (bgs) based on input from design team members. However, final pipe sizes and depths have not been determined.

The pipeline alignment is generally level, with ground surface elevations ranging from about 60 to 70 feet and up to about 76 feet in the south.

The western portion of the pipeline along Olivehurst Ave, Mary Ave, McGowan Pkwy, and Olive Ave extends predominantly through residential portions of Olivehurst. Photos 1 through 3 show the conditions along these streets.

Photo 1: Olivehurst Avenue
Looking north on Olivehurst Avenue from 9th Ave.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1534
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
5 Photo 2: Mary Avenue
Looking south along Project alignment near Station 118+00.

Photo 3: McGowan Avenue
Looking west along Project alignment near Station 206+60.

The eastern and southern pipeline alignments extend along rural roads (Rancho Rd, Morrison Rd, Forty Mile Rd, and Shimer Rd). The roads in these portions of the alignment are generally flanked by a drainage ditch on one or both sides. Photos 4 through 8 show the conditions along these streets.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1535
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
6 Photo 4: Rancho Road
Looking northwest along Project alignment near Station 329+60.

Photo 5: Rancho Road
Looking southeast along Project alignment near Station 442+30.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1536
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
7 Photo 6: Shimer Road
Looking south along Project Alignment towards intersection of Shimer Road and Plute Road near station 33+00.

Photo 7: Forty Mile Road
Looking north along Project alignment near Station 119+90.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1537
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
8 Photo 8: Forty Mile Road
Looking north along Project alignment near Station 404+60.

Appendix A1 shows the proposed pipeline alignments and Figure 2 shows the pipeline alignments, our approximate subsurface exploratory boring locations (all pipeline boring locations have been drilled and laboratory testing is ongoing)and the proposed improvements.

Geology, Soil Survey, Faulting
See Section 2.1 for a discussion of geology and faulting along the pipeline alignment. Figure 3 shows the mapped geologic units within the project site. Figure 4 shows the USDA soil types mapped within the project area. Figure 2.1 shows the mapped geologic formations and USDA soil types within each pipeline segment.

Field Work and Laboratory Testing
Exploratory Borings
Blackburn drilled, logged and sampled 43 borings along the pipeline alignments to characterize the site subsurface conditions. Our subcontractor, Taber Drilling, drilled the borings to depths ranging from about 15 to 50 feet below the existing ground elevation. Appendix A1 shows the proposed site improvements and approximate boring locations. The borings logs are included in Appendix A2 (does not include borings where laboratory testing is ongoing).

Taber drilled the borings using a combination of 4-inch diameter solid-stem auger and mud-rotary. Soil samples were obtained by Taber at various intervals using a 3.0-inch O.D. Modified California (MC) sampler (equipped with 2.4-inch diameter steel liners) or 2–inch O.D. Standard Penetration (SPT) sampler. Samples were driven with an automatic hammer, weighing 140-pounds and falling approximately 30-inches per blow. We also collected bulk samples at various depths within the borings.

DRAFT

3.2 3.3

3.3.1 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1538
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
9 Blackburn’s project engineers/geologists Daniel Contreras, Luke Morrell, and Sophie Stuart logged the borings and retained samples for laboratory testing.

Laboratory Testing
We performed the following laboratory tests on representative soil samples from the exploratory borings:
• Unit weight and moisture content tests for in-situ soil property characterization. • Sieve analysis and Plasticity index for soil classification. • Direct shear and unconfined compression tests for soil strength analysis. • Soil corrosivity (pH, resistivity, sulfate and chlorides) for corrosion considerations.

Refer to Section 3.5.8 for a description and evaluation of the corrosivity test results.

The boring logs in Appendix A2 show unit weight and moisture content results. Appendix A3 presents the other laboratory test results.

Subsurface Findings
General Subsurface Soil Conditions
We predominantly encountered very stiff to hard clay and sandy clay in borings drilled along the proposed alignment. We encountered medium dense to very dense sand and clayey sand lenses in scattered areas throughout the alignment. Some of the soil layers contained gravel.

Table 3.1 summarizes the subsurface soil conditions we encountered along the pipeline alignment.

DRAFT

3.3.2 3.4

3.4.1 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1539
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
10 Table 3.1: Subsurface Soil Conditions
Street Reach ID
(Approximate
Station)*
Boring
ID
Boring
Depth Approximate
Boring Station
Approximate Existing
Pavement Approximate
Depth to GW
(ft)
Mapped
Geologic
Unit*
USDA
Soil
Type*
General Subsurface Soil Conditions within upper 20 feet** AC (in) AB (in)
Mary Ave Reach 1
(100+00 - 139+81)
P-1 21.5 102+00 6.5 Not
Encountered
Not
Encountered
Riverbank
Formation
214
Very stiff to hard lean clay and sandy lean clay within the upper 15 ft., underlain by medium dense clayey sand and very stiff sandy clay. P-2 21.5 118+00 4 3 Not Encountered 217
P-3 21.5 132+70 1 6 Not
Encountered 217
McGowan
Pkwy
Reach 2
(200+00 - 222+00)
LS-2 - lab pending - - -
Riverbank
Formation
-
Hard sandy lean clay in upper 5 ft., underlain by hard lean clay with sand and medium stiff lean clay.

P-4 15.0 206+60 6 15 Not
Encountered 217
TC-1A - planned future
boring - - - -
TC-1C - planned future
boring - - - -
Reach 3
(222+00 - 232+00)
LS-3 - planned future
boring - - - Holocene
Alluvium
-
Hard silt and lean clay in upper 9 ft., underlain by hard lean clay.

P-5 21.5 229+60 3 3 Not
Encountered 198
Reach 4
(232+00 - 264+36)
P-6 16.5 237+30 4 6 Not
Encountered Riverbank
Formation
and Basin
Deposits
217
Lean clay to sandy lean clay.

P-7 16.5 245+50 3 4 Not
Encountered 217
Olive Ave Reach 5
(10+00 - 16+20)
TC2AA 51.5 19+60 6 Not
Encountered 29 Basin Deposits 134 Very stiff to hard lean clay and sandy lean clay.

Rancho Rd
Reach 6
(300+00 - 318+00)
TC-2C 51.5 300+10 2.5 12 27.5 Riverbank
Formation
134
Hard lean clay, lean clay with sand, and silt. P-8 15.0 309+90 NA NA Not Encountered 214
Reach 7
(318+00 - 326+50)
TC-7A 51.5 321+30 9 12 23 Modesto
Formation
214 Stiff to hard lean clay and lean clay with sand within the upper 15 ft., underlain by hard silt to sandy silt TC-7B 51.5 323+30 8.5 16 15 142 and lean clay.

Reach 8
(326+50 - 396+00)
TC-8A 51.5 329+60 9 9 14
Riverbank
Formation
and
Modesto
Formation
142
Very stiff to hard lean clay and lean clay with sand within the upper 10 to 15 ft., underlain by approximately 1 to 6 ft. of medium dense to dense sand to clayey sand and stiff to very stiff sandy lean clay (pockets with gravel)
TC-8B 51.5 331+10 8 16 15 142
P-9 15.0 340+60 NA NA Not
Encountered 214
TC-9A 51.5 349+70 8 16 25 142
TC-9B 51.5 351+20
DRAFT
6 12 25 142
----------------::::::================================================================================ .......

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
1540
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
11 Table 3.1: Subsurface Soil Conditions
Street Reach ID
(Approximate
Station)*
Boring
ID
Boring
Depth Approximate
Boring Station
Approximate Existing
Pavement Approximate
Depth to GW
(ft)
Mapped
Geologic
Unit*
USDA
Soil
Type*
General Subsurface Soil Conditions within upper 20 feet** AC (in) AB (in)
P-10 15.0 357+60 NA NA Not
Encountered 214
LS-4 - lab pending - - - 214
P-11 21.5 376+10 NA NA Not
Encountered 214
P-12 14.5 388+10 9 15 Not
Encountered 214
Reach 9
(396+00 - 401+00)
TC10A 51.5 400+00 7 10 24 Riverbank
Formation 214 Very stiff to hard silt and clay with varying amounts of sand.

Reach 10
(401+00 - 448+00)
TC10B 51.5 402+60 NA NA 24
Riverbank
Formation
214
Stiff to hard lean clay to sandy lean clay in upper 12 to 16 ft., underlain by medium dense to dense sand to clayey sand (depth to sand generally decreases up station). Very dense clayey gravel present near Kimball creek.

LS-5 - lab pending - - - 214
P-13 21.5 410+00 NA NA Not
Encountered 214
TC-14 41.5 427+90 8 12 28 214
P-14 21.0 442+30 3 10 Not
Encountered 214
Reach 11
(448+00 – 484+00)
P-15 16.5 450+10 NA NA Not
Encountered
Riverbank
Formation
131
Hard lean clay within the upper 5 ft, underlain by approximately 10 ft of medium dense clayey sand and hard sandy clay over hard lean clay.

LS-6 - planned future
boring - - - 131
P-16 21.5 468+40 4 32 Not
Encountered 131
P-17 21.5 483+80 NA NA Not
Encountered 214
Reach 12
(***) P-18 15.0 *** NA NA Not Encountered
Riverbank
Formation 214 Hard lean clay.
40 Mile Rd
Reach 14
(70+00 - 125+00)
P-24 15.0 70+00 7 10 Not
Encountered
Basin
Deposits
and
Riverbank
Formation
214
Very stiff to hard lean clay, lean clay with sand, silt, silt with sand within the upper 20 ft. (Very dense poorly-graded sand with silt below 18 ft. in Boring P-26) P-25 20.0 78+30 7 10 Not
Encountered 214
TC-13 51.4 85+80 6.5 12 26 214
P-26 21.5 94+60 6.5 14 Not
Encountered 131
P-27 21.0 119+90 6 12 Not
Encountered 214
Reach 15
(125+00 - 155+00) P-28 21.5 139+00 6 12 Not Encountered Riverbank
Formation 214 Very stiff to hard lean clay to sandy lean clay within the upper 8 to 10 ft., underlain by a layer of very DRAFT
stiff to hard silt with sand which is approximately 13 ft. thick in boring TC-12B and pinches out to the ----------------::::::================================================================================ .......

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
1541
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
12 Table 3.1: Subsurface Soil Conditions
Street Reach ID
(Approximate
Station)*
Boring
ID
Boring
Depth Approximate
Boring Station
Approximate Existing
Pavement Approximate
Depth to GW
(ft)
Mapped
Geologic
Unit*
USDA
Soil
Type*
General Subsurface Soil Conditions within upper 20 feet** AC (in) AB (in)
TC12A 51.5 147+50 3 4 24 and
Modesto
Formation
142 south (by boring P-28). Underlain by approximately 3 to 6 ft. of medium dense to very dense clayey sand over medium dense poorly-graded sand to poorly-graded sand with clay.

TC12B 51.5 149+80 7 12 17 142
LS-8 - planned future
boring - - - - -
Reach 16
(155+00 - 188+00)
P-29 16.5 163+50 6 12 Not
Encountered Riverbank
Formation
214
Hard sandy lean clay and gravelly lean clay within the upper 4 to 5 ft., underlain by medium dense to dense clayey sand and stiff sandy lean clay to approximately 14 to 15 ft. deep. P-30 14.5 180+10 NA NA Not Encountered 214
Reach 17
(188+00 - 203+00) P-32 15.0 196+90 NA NA Not Encountered Riverbank
Formation 214 Very stiff silt with sand within the upper 3 ft., underlain by hard lean clay and lean clay with sand to depth of 15 ft.

Rossler Rd Reach 18
(550+00 - 562+70) TC-4A - planned future boring - - - Riverbank Formation - TC-4B - planned future
boring - - - Riverbank Formation - -
Olivehurst
Ave
*** OS-1 21.5 *** 6 6 Not
Encountered
Riverbank
Formation 217
Very stiff to hard lean clay and sandy lean clay within the upper 9 ft., underlain by approximately 6 ft of very dense clayey sand over very stiff lean clay. Hard sandy silt greater than 20 ft. below ground surface.
*** OS-2 21.5 *** 9 Not
Encountered
Not
Encountered Riverbank
Formation
217 Very stiff to hard lean clay and sandy lean clay.

LS-1 lab pending - - - -
*Refer to Section 2.1 for description of geologic formation and USDA mapped soil type. **Depths are approximate.
***Stationing not available at time of this report.

DRAFT
----------------::::::================================================================================ .......

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
1542
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
13 Groundwater
We generally observed groundwater at depths of 23 to 29 feet below the ground surface in borings drilled August through September 2020. In three borings near Reeds Creek on Rancho Road, we observed groundwater at depths of 14 to 15 feet. We encountered groundwater 17 feet below the ground surface in one boring on Forty Mile Road just north of Kimball Creek.

Table 3.2 lists the borings and depths where we encountered groundwater.

Table 3.2: Groundwater Summary
Boring Approximate
Station
Boring Depth
(ft)
Approximate
Depth to
Water (ft)
TC-2AA 19+60 51.5 29
TC-2C 300+10 51.5 27.5
TC-7A 321+30 51.5 23
TC-7B 323+30 51.5 15
TC-8A 329+60 51.5 14
TC-8B 331+10 51.5 15
TC-9A 349+70 51.5 25
TC-9B 351+20 51.5 25
TC-10A 400+00 51.5 24
TC-10B 402+60 51.5 24
TC-12A 147+50 51.5 24
TC-12B 149+80 51.5 17
TC-13 85+80 51.4 26
TC-14 427+90 41.5 28
We reviewed groundwater level data for nearby wells available at the California Department of Water Resources website (http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/) and using the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) data viewer
(https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#gwlevels). Based on this information, the depth to groundwater across the site typically ranges from 20 to 30 feet, although it occasionally is measured above 20 feet or below 30 feet. Relatively shallow perched water may occur within the nearsurface soils during the winter and spring months, and adjacent to the existing canals and streams.

Groundwater and perched water levels can fluctuate due to changes in precipitation, creek levels, canal levels, irrigation, pumping of wells, and other factors.

Existing Pavement Sections
We drilled 30 of the 43 borings in the paved roadway.

DRAFT

3.4.2 3.4.3

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1543
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
14 • Along Olivehurst Ave, the pavement section consisted of about 6 to 9 inches of AC over 0 to 6 inches of AB.
• Along Mary Ave, the pavement section consisted of about 1 to 6½ inches of Asphalt Concrete (AC) over 0 to 3 inches of Aggregate Base (AB).
• Along McGowan Ave west of Highway 70, the pavement section consisted of about 6 inches of AC over 15 inches of AB.
• Along McGowan Ave east of Highway 70, the pavement section consisted of about 3 to 6 inches of AC over 3 to 6 inches of AB.
• Along Rancho Rd, the pavement section consisted of about 2½ to 9 inches of AC over 9 to 16 inches of AB (Boring P-16 had approximately 32 inches of AB). • Along Forty Mile Rd, the pavement section generally consisted of about 6 to 7 inches of AC over 10 to 14 inches of AB (boring log TC-12A indicates 3 inches of AC over 4 inches of AB).

Table 3.1 includes approximate pavement section thickness encountered in each boring.

Preliminary Design Considerations – Sewer and Gravity Force Main Alignment Ground Suitability
The ground conditions along the proposed pipeline alignment will be suitable for the planned improvements when constructed in accordance with the project plans, industry standards, and our geotechnical recommendations.

Geologic Hazards
• Faulting—The potential for surface rupture or creep due to faulting at the site is very low. The Fault Activity Map of California2 and the Geologic Map of the Sacramento Quadrangle3 does not identify Historic or Holocene age faults (displacement within the last 11,700 years) within or immediately adjacent to the site. The site does not lie within or adjacent to an Alquist–Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone4
.
• Ground Shaking—For the Maximum Considered Earthquake, a peak horizontal ground acceleration (PGA) of approximately 0.21g could be expected. • Liquefaction—Our investigation shows a soil profile that consists of stiff to hard clays and medium dense to dense silty and clayey sands that are not liquefiable. Therefore, the potential for damaging liquefaction at the site is very low.
• Landslides and Slope Stability—Due to the relatively low topographic relief and existing slope gradients we do not expect landslides or natural slope failure. 2 Jennings, Charles W., and Bryant, William A., 2010 Fault Activity Map of California: California Geological Survey, Geologic Data Map No. 6. 3 Saucedo, G.J. and Wagner, D.L., et al, 1992, Geologic map of the Chico quadrangle, California, 1:
250,000: California Division of Mines and Geology, Regional Geologic Map 7A, scale 1: 250,000. 4 Bryant, W.A., and Hart, E.W., 2007 (Interim Revision), Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42.

DRAFT

3.5 3.5.1

3.5.2 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1544
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
15 • Seismically Induced Settlement—During a seismic event, ground shaking can cause densification of granular soil that can result in settlement of the ground surface. Considering the cohesive soils and medium dense to very dense sandy soils observed in the borings, we consider the potential for significant seismically induced settlement to be very low.

Seismic Design
Based on the mapped geology and our subsurface exploration, most of the preliminary pipeline alignment is underlain by stiff soil and a Site Class “D” (California Building Code, 2019).

Table 3.3 presents the California Building Code5 (CBC) design parameters for the alignment. These values are based on Blackburn’s review of design parameters at the approximate midpoint of the pipeline alignment.

Table 3.3: 2019 CBC Seismic Design Parameters (Site Class D) Ss – MCER ground motion (0.2 second period) 0.496 g
S1 – MCER ground motion (1.0 second period) 0.241 g
Fa – Site Coefficient 1.403
Fv – Site Coefficient 2.121
SMS – Adjusted MCE* Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter 0.696 g SM1 – Adjusted MCE* Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter 0.511 g1 SDS – Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter 0.464 g
SD1 – Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter 0.341 g1
Seismic Design Category D1
**TL – Long Period Transition Period 12 sec
PGA 0.21
* Maximum Considered Earthquake
** Figure 22-14, ASCE 7-16
1 – We assume that the seismic response coefficient, Cs, is determined by ASCE 7-16 Eq. (12.8-2) for values of T ≤ 1.5Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either ASCE 7-16 Eq. (12.8-3) for TL ≥T > 1.5Ts or Eq. (12.8-4) for T > TL. Contact Blackburn to re-evaluate the above parameters if this assumption is not valid.

If the proposed design does not meet the exception noted above (note 1) a site-specific response analysis will be required for final design.

Soil Excavatability and Trench Stability
We anticipate that the site soil will be excavatable with a medium to large size excavator (such as a CAT 320 or similar).
5 California Building Code, 2016, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2 (Volume 2); published by International Conference of Building Officials and the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC).

DRAFT

3.5.3 3.5.4

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1545
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
16 Open excavations 5 feet or deeper will require sloping and/or shoring in accordance with Section 8.4 of the Yuba County Standard Specifications and Cal OSHA requirements. For planning and preliminary design, anticipate sloping/shoring requirements within the soil along the alignment for Type A soil.

Excavations near waterway crossings or where perched groundwater/seepage or a sand layer is encountered will require shoring/sloping requirements for a Type C soil (shoring or sloping at a gradient of 1.5:1).

The contractor is responsible for the safety of all temporary excavations and must provide trench sloping and shoring in accordance with current Cal OSHA requirements based on exposed soil and groundwater/seepage conditions. The contractor is also responsible for the protection of existing facilities and improvements. The Contractor must retain an engineer to evaluate the impact of construction traffic vibrations, actual soil conditions exposed in the open excavations, seepage and/or groundwater conditions, surcharges adjacent to excavations, proximity of excavations to existing structures, and other factors that may promote excavation wall instability or cause excavation related damage to existing facilities and improvements and adjust excavation sloping/shoring methods accordingly.

Trench Dewatering
We did not encounter groundwater in our pipeline borings at anticipated trench depths. We anticipate that groundwater/seepage could be encountered at/near trenchless crossings or perched at shallower depths along the project alignment. Section 3.4.2 shows the depth of groundwater encountered in our borings. Groundwater levels may be higher during the late fall through late spring months, resulting from higher water levels in creeks and precipitation infiltrating the shallow surficial soil and ponding above the hard clay layers. Similarly, landscape irrigation along the project alignment could infiltrate and pond above the hard clay layer.

Sump pumps should be adequate to dewater excavations if groundwater/seepage is encountered. during excavation. The contractor is solely responsible for design and performance of dewatering systems.

We strongly recommend scheduling the project excavations and backfill during the summer through early fall months to reduce potential groundwater/seepage impacts.

Dewatering needs may differ near creak crossings. Refer to Jacobs’ trenchless crossing design for dewatering recommendations for trenches near creek crossings.

Trench Backfill and Compaction

3.5.6.1 Pipe Bedding and Pipe Zone Material
Support pipe on a minimum of 4-inches of granular bedding and in accordance with the pipe manufacturer’s recommendations. Although we do not anticipate soft, unsuitable pipe subgrade at any particular location, it can occur where shallow perched groundwater conditions or sandy soils are encountered. If unsuitable subgrade conditions exist, notify the project engineer and Blackburn for review and mitigation recommendations. Typical mitigation, to achieve a stable and non-yielding subgrade suitable for pipe placement and backfilling, may include replacement of unsuitable subgrade with ¾-inch DRAFT

3.5.5 3.5.6

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1546
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
17 minus crushed rock (minimum of 6 inches), enclosed in geotextile filtration fabric such as Mirafi 140N (or equivalent). A granular pipe zone material may also be used.

Native soils will contain a significant amount of fines (passing #200 sieve) and will not be suitable for bedding or pipe zone backfill. For pipe zone backfill material (which extends a minimum 12 inches above the top of pipe), Yuba County, Department of Public Works, Standard Plans and Specifications specifies the following:

1. ¾-inch crushed rock or clean sand compacted to 95% or

2. 2 sack slurry
Use a modulus of soil reaction (E’) of:
• 2,000 psi for granular pipe zone backfill outlined above (or another approved granular material) if compacted to >85% relative compaction (ASTM D 1557) or 4,000 psi at >90%. • 3,000 psi for native soils that consist of stiff to hard clays.

3.5.6.2 Trench Backfill
Yuba County Department of Public Works Trench Details show backfill within existing roadways is to be ¾-inch Class 2 AB compacted to 95% relative compaction (based on ASTM 1557) unless recommended by an engineer and approved by the County. Intermediate trench backfill above the pipe zone material may consist of native excavated soil provided the following recommendations are followed. Fill should be free of debris and concentrations of vegetation.

If import fill is required for trench backfill, it should be graded and have material properties as follows:
• 100% passing the 1-inch sieve
• 75% to 100% passing the #4 sieve
• Minimum 12% passing the #200 sieve
• Plasticity Index not greater than 20
• Free of debris and concentrations of vegetation.

Use ¾-inch Class 2 AB in the upper 12-inches of the trench within roadways.

3.5.6.3 Trench Backfill Compaction
It is important to achieve compaction of Pipe Bedding and Pipe Zone materials at the pipe haunches and spring line; compaction below the pipe spring line will be a difficult task for the contractor. Follow the pipe manufacturer’s requirements for initial backfill to avoid damage to the pipe. To facilitate compaction in the pipe zone area (top of bedding up to 12 inches above pipe), use a trench width that provides a minimum clearance of 12 inches between the pipe and trench wall. We recommend a compaction demonstration section to test placement and compaction means and methods for each material type that will be used.

Moisture condition trench backfill above the Pipe Zone material to within 2% of optimum moisture content. Compact pipe backfill:
• To a minimum 92% relative compaction (based on ASTM 1557) below depths of 10 feet.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1547
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
18 • To a maximum of 90% relative compaction (based on ASTM 1557) above depths of 10 feet • In roadways, compact upper 12-inches of AB subgrade to 95% relative compaction (based on ASTM 1557).

To protect the pipe, use a maximum loose lift thickness of 12 inches for the first lift of fill placed above the top of the pipe. Use a maximum loose lift thickness of 8 inches for subsequent lifts. . Jetting is not acceptable for compaction.

Test all trench backfill (bedding, pipe zone backfill, trench zone, etc.) at vertical increments of not more than 1 foot and at final grade or pavement subgrade. For horizontal testing frequency consider a frequency of at least one test for every 200 linear feet of pipe (both sides of pipe in pipe zone). Complete at least one compaction curve (Proctor) for each material type, source location (for import), and as changes in native materials occur. Material changes include a change in material designation based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Testing frequency can be adjusted based on contractor performance, ease of compaction, and material variability.

Soil excavated during pipe installation can have moisture contents well over optimum, especially during the winter and spring months or if perched water is encountered. In this case, it will be necessary to dry back the soil to within 2% of optimum moisture content prior to use as backfill.

3.5.6.4 Trench Backfill Settlement
The magnitude of potential trench backfill settlement will be largely dependent on the degree and uniformity of compaction; therefore, it is important that backfill materials and compaction are checked at frequent intervals to limit potential settlement.

Pipeline Thrust Blocks
We expect thrust blocks to be installed at depths greater than 10 feet. For design of thrust blocks, use a lateral bearing of 200 psf per foot of depth below the surface, up to a maximum of 3,000 psf.

Soil Corrosivity
Our sulfate and chloride content tests indicate that Type II or V Portland cement can be used for concrete mix design. Our pH and resistivity tests generally indicate that the onsite soil exhibits a corrosive to extremely corrosive potential to metal pipes. We are not corrosion consultants and cannot evaluate the potential corrosion impacts to metallic elements embedded in, or in contact with, the ground. A corrosion consultant should provide specific corrosion protection recommendations for buried metallic elements used at the site. Table 3.4 presents the soil corrosivity test results.

DRAFT

3.5.7 3.5.8

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1548
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
19 Table 3.4: Soil Corrosivity Test Results
Sample No. Depth
(ft.) pH
Minimum
Resistivity
(ohm-cm)
Sulfate
Content
(ppm)
Chloride
Content (ppm)
P-2-3C 16-16.5 6.02 2,040 4.1 15.4
P-4-4C 14.5-15 6.03 3,220 0.2 6.7
P-7-3B 10-10.5 6.33 1,420 5.0 9.1
P-8-3B 10.5-11 6.24 1,150 19.8 3.1
P-11-3B 10.5-11 7.09 1,230 40.7 17.4
P-16-3C 15.5-16 7.26 1,630 7.5 2.2
P-18-4B 14-14.5 7.25 910 31.5 10.9
P-24-2B 5.5-6 7.18 1,020 40.6 1.3
P-28-1C 3-3.5 6.58 1,070 30.0 2.5
P-32-3B 10.5-11 7.33 1,630 8.0 1.5
4 TRENCHLESS PIPELINE CROSSINGS
Site Location and Description
The sewer and water pipelines described in Sections 1.3 and 3.1 will use trenchless technologies to cross various waterways and Caltrans freeways. The final size, depths, and trenchless methods have not been determined at this time. Table 4.1 summarizes the location of each trenchless Caltrans crossing and Table 4.2 summarizes the location of each waterway crossing.

Table 4.1: Caltrans Crossing Locations
Pipeline(s) Freeway
Crossed
Upstream
Road
Downstream
Road
Water &
Sewer Hwy 70 McGowan Pkwy
McGowan
Pkwy
Sewer Hwy 65 Rancho Rd Olive Ave
Sewer Hwy 65 Rossler Rd Shimer Rd
The Highway 70 grade at the McGowan Pkwy crossing and the Highway 65 grade at the Rancho Rd to Olive Ave crossing are approximately 15 to 20 feet lower than the adjacent roadway grades. At the Highway 65 Rossler Rd to Shimer Rd crossing, the Highway 65 grade is at a similar elevation to the surrounding area.

DRAFT

4.1 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1549
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
20 Table 4.2: Waterway Crossing Locations
Pipeline(s) Waterway
Crossed
Alignment
Road
Approximate
station of
waterway
Water &
Sewer Reeds Creek Rancho Rd 322+00
Water &
Sewer Reeds Creek Rancho Rd 330+00
Water &
Sewer
Hutchinson
Creek Rancho Rd 350+00
Water &
Sewer Kimball Creek Rancho Rd 401+00
Water &
Sewer Culvert Rancho Rd 428+00
Water Unnamed
creek Morrison Rd 879+50
Water &
Sewer Culvert McGowan Pkwy 83+50
Water &
Sewer Kimball Creek McGowan Pkwy 149+00
The depths of the waterways vary from crossing to crossing. Near the waterway crossings, the roadway is generally lined with trees, bushes and other vegetation.

Geology
Geology
Tables 4.3 and 4.4 show the mapped geologic formation and USDA soil type within each proposed trenchless crossing area.

Field Work and Laboratory Testing
Exploratory Borings
To characterize the site subsurface conditions, Blackburn drilled, logged and sampled 17 borings near proposed sending and receiving shaft locations. Jacobs reviewed and approved of the boring locations.

Our subcontractor, Taber Drilling, drilled the borings to depths ranging from + 40 to 50 feet below existing site grades. Appendix B1 shows the proposed site improvements and approximate boring locations. We include the borings logs of borings drilled as of November 10, 2020 in Appendix B2.

Taber drilled the borings using 4-inch diameter solid-stem auger. Soil samples were obtained by Taber at various intervals using a 3.0-inch O.D. Modified California (MC) sampler (equipped with 2.4-inch diameter steel liners) or 2–inch O.D. Standard Penetration (SPT) sampler. Samples were driven with an automatic hammer, weighing 140-pounds and falling approximately 30-inches per blow. We also DRAFT

4.2 4.2.1

4.3 4.3.1

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1550
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
21 collected bulk samples at various depths within the borings. Blackburn’s project engineers/geologist Daniel Contreras, Luke Morrell, and Sophie Stuart logged the borings and retained samples for laboratory testing.

Laboratory Testing
Jacobs assigned laboratory tests for trenchless crossing borings. We performed the following laboratory tests on representative soil samples from the exploratory borings as requested:
• Sieve analysis and Plasticity index
• Unconfined compressive strength tests.

Appendix B3 presents the laboratory test results (as of November 10, 2020).

Subsurface Findings
General Subsurface Soil Conditions
Table 4.3 and 4.4 summarize subsurface soil conditions at the trenchless crossing alignments (based on borings drilled as of November 10th, 2020).

DRAFT

4.3.2 4.4

4.4.1 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1551
Section 3, Item # 3.1

U P D ATED DR AFT PRELI MI N A RY GE O TE C H NIC AL B ASIS OF D E SIG N RE P O R T OP U D – South Yuba Se wer and Water Infrastruct ure Project, Olive h urst, C A A pril 3 0, 2 0 2 1
22 Table 4 . 3 : Su bs urfac e Soil C o n ditions at Caltrans Trenc hless Crossings Crossing
B oring
I D
B oring
Depth
(ft)
A p proxi m ate
B oring Station
A p proxi m ate
Existing
Pavement
A p proxi m ate
D e pth to G W
(ft)
M apped
G e ologic
U nit *
U S D A Soil
Type*
G e n eral Su bs urface Soil
C o n ditions * *
AC
(in)
AB
(in)
M c Go wan
Pkwy
under H wy
70 T C - 1A - planned
future boring - - -
Riverbank
For mation
214, 217 -
T C - 1C - planned
future boring - - -
Olive Ave
to Rancho
Rd under
H wy 65
T C - 2A A 51.5 19+60 6 N A 29
Basin
D e p osits
134, 214
V ery stiff to har d lea n clay
a n d sa n d y lea n clay.

T C - 2 C 51.5 300+10 2.5 12 27.5
H ar d silt an d lea n clay in
u p p er 2 7 ft., u n d erlain by 11
ft. of de ns e silty sa n d. H ar d
lean clay an d sa n d y silt to
d e pth of 50 ft.

Rossler Rd
to Shi m er
Rd under
H wy 65
T C - 4A - planned
future boring - - - Riverbank
For mation
214 -
T C - 4B - planned
future boring - - -
* Refer to Section 2.1 for d escriptio n of g eol o gic for m atio n a n d U S D A m a p p e d s oil ty p e. * * D e pths are approxi m ate
DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1552
Section 3, Item # 3.1

U P D ATED DR AFT PRELI MI N A RY GE O TE C H NIC AL B ASIS OF D E SIG N RE P O R T OP U D – South Yuba Se wer and Water Infrastruct ure Project, Olive h urst, C A A pril 3 0, 2 0 2 1
23 Table 4 . 4 : Su bs urfac e Soil C o n ditions
Crossing
B oring
I D
B oring
Depth
(ft)
A p proxi m ate
B oring
Station
A p proxi m ate
Existing
Pavement
A p proxi m ate
D e pth to G W
(ft)
M apped
G e ologic
U nit *
USDA
S oil
Type*
G e n eral Su bs urface Soil Co n ditio ns* *
AC
(in)
AB
(in)
Rancho
R d under
Reeds
Creek
T C - 7A 51.5 321+30 9 12 23
M o desto
For matio
n
214 Stiff to har d lea n clay an d le a n clay with san d wit hin th e u p p er 1 5 ft., u n d erlain by h ar d silt to sa n d y silt an d lea n clay to de pt h of 26 to 29 ft.

M e diu m dense to very den se s and and clayey
sand to maxi m u m depth explored.

T C - 7B 51.5 323+30 8.5 16 15 142
T C - 8A 51.5 329+60 9 9 14
M o desto
For matio
n and
Riverban
k
For matio
n
142,
214
V ery stiff to har d lea n clay a n d lea n clay with san d wit hin th e u p p er 1 4 ft., u n d erlain by
ap proxi mately 1 0 (TC - 8A) to 20 f t (TC - 8B) of
thickly bed ded m e diu m dense to dense sand with
v arying a m o u nts of fin es w ith thick inter b e ds of stiff to hard sa n d y lea n clay . stiff to har d lea n clay in TC - 8 A fro m ap pr oxi m ately 24 to 38 ft deep.

B ot h b orings indicate de nse clea n san d to
m axi m u m depth explored.

T C - 8B 51.5 331+10 8 16 15
Rancho
Rd under
H utchins
on Creek
T C - 9A 51.5 349+70 8 16 25
M o desto
For matio
n
142
S tiff to har d lea n clay to san d y lea n clay within the u p p er 30 ft. (lay er of m e diu m d e n s e clay ey sa n d fro m ap pr oxi m ately 10.5 to 14 ft.) un d erlain by
a p pr oxi m at ely 5 ft. of m e diu m d e ns e silty san d.

Lea n clay to sa n dy lea n clay to m a xi m u m d e pth explored.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1553
Section 3, Item # 3.1

U P D ATED DR AFT PRELI MI N A RY GE O TE C H NIC AL B ASIS OF D E SIG N RE P O R T OP U D – South Yuba Se wer and Water Infrastruct ure Project, Olive h urst, C A A pril 3 0, 2 0 2 1
24 Table 4 . 4 : Su bs urfac e Soil C o n ditions
Crossing
B oring
I D
B oring
Depth
(ft)
A p proxi m ate
B oring
Station
A p proxi m ate
Existing
Pavement
A p proxi m ate
D e pth to G W
(ft)
M apped
G e ologic
U nit *
USDA
S oil
Type*
G e n eral Su bs urface Soil Co n ditio ns* *
AC
(in)
AB
(in)
T C - 9B 51.5 351+20 6 12 25
Stiff to har d lea n clay, silty clay, an d sa n dy lea n clay within th e u p p er 2 9 ft. (lay er of m e di u m d ense clayey sand fro m approxi m ately 23 to 25.5
ft.) u n d erlain by 5 ft. of m e diu m d e n s e silty san d and v ery stiff silt. V ery stiff sa n d y lea n clay an d loose to m ediu m dense clayey sand to m axi m u m
depth explored.

Rancho
Rd under
Ki m b all
Creek
T C - 10A 51.5 400+00 7 10 24
Riverban
k
For matio
n
214
Very stiff to har d lea n clay a n d sa n d y lea n clay within the u p p er 9 ft. un d e rlain by 5 ft. of m e diu m d e n s e clay ey sa n d. V ery stiff san d y silt fro m ap pr oxi m ately 15 to 19 ft. above 7 feet of mediu m
d e n s e sa n d a n d sa n d wit h silt u n d erlai n by 3 ft. of very stiff sa n d y silt. M e di u m d e n s e to d e n s e sa n d a n d silty san d fro m 2 9 ft. de e p to m a xi m u m d e pt h explored.

T C - 10B 51.5 402+60 N A N A 24
Stiff to h ar d lea n clay within th e u p p er 2 4 ft. (lay er of very dense gravel with clay and sand fro m
a p pr oxi m at ely 1 4 to 1 7 ft.) u n d erlain by
a p pr oxi m at ely 5 ft. of m e diu m d e ns e silty san d.

Stiff to har d lea n clay an d sa n d y lea n clay fro m 2 9 to 38 ft. dee p u n d erlain by d e nse sa n d a n d silty sand to maxi m u m depth explored.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1554
Section 3, Item # 3.1

U P D ATED DR AFT PRELI MI N A RY GE O TE C H NIC AL B ASIS OF D E SIG N RE P O R T OP U D – South Yuba Se wer and Water Infrastruct ure Project, Olive h urst, C A A pril 3 0, 2 0 2 1
25 Table 4 . 4 : Su bs urfac e Soil C o n ditions
Crossing
B oring
I D
B oring
Depth
(ft)
A p proxi m ate
B oring
Station
A p proxi m ate
Existing
Pavement
A p proxi m ate
D e pth to G W
(ft)
M apped
G e ologic
U nit *
USDA
S oil
Type*
G e n eral Su bs urface Soil Co n ditio ns* *
AC
(in)
AB
(in)
Rancho
Rd
culvert
T C - 14 41.5 427+90 8 12 28
Riverban
k
For matio
n
214
H ar d lea n clay to lea n clay with sa n d in up p er 13 ft., u n d erlain by m e di u m d e n s e to very dense sa n d, silty san d, an d clay ey san d t o de pt h of 38 ft. (l ayer of v ery d e n s e clay ey grav el fro m 2 4 ft. to 2 9 f t. ) . S tiff lea n clay bel o w 3 8 ft de pth to maxi m u m depth explored .
40 Mile
R d
culvert
T C - 13 51.4 85+80 6.5 12 26
Basin
D e p osits
131,
214
S tiff to har d lea n clay and silt wit hi n t h e u p p er 35 ft. un d erlain by 11 ft. of hard san dy silt an d de ns e silty san d. V ery stiff silt fro m a p pr oxi m at ely 4 6 to 5 0 ft. de e p u n d erlain by v ery de ns e sa n d wit h silt. 40 Mile
R d under
Ki m b all
Creek
T C - 12A 51.5 147+50 3 4 24
Basin
D e p osits
u n d erlain
by
Riverban
k
For matio
n
142,
214
Stiff to v er y stiff lea n clay an d silt with sa n d withi n the u p p er 15 ft. un d erlain b y ap proxi m ately 15 ft. of m e di u m d e n s e clay ey san d a n d sa n d with silt.

H ar d silt fro m 3 0 ft. to 4 0 ft. u n d erlain by very d e n s e sa n d with silt to m a x i m u m d e pt h ex pl ore d.

T C - 12B 51.5 149+80 7 12 17
H ar d lea n clay an d silt with san d within the u p p er 3 3 ft. (lay er of m e di u m d e n se clay ey sa n d fro m 2 2 to 2 5.5 ft.) u n d erlain by d e n s e to v ery d e n s e silty san d an d san d to m axi m u m d e pth ex plored (lens of v ery stiff san dy silt at ap proxi m at ely 40 ft.
deep).
* Refer to Section 2.1 for d escriptio n of g eol o gic for m atio n a n d U S D A m a p p e d s oil ty p e. ** D e pths are approxi m ate
DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1555
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
26 Groundwater
We generally observed groundwater at depths of 23 to 29 feet below the ground surface in our borings drilled August through September 2020. In three (3) borings near Reeds Creek on Rancho Road, we observed groundwater at depths of 14 to 15 feet. We encountered groundwater 17 feet below ground surface in our boring on Forty Mile Road just north of Kimball Creek.

Table 4.5 lists the borings where we encountered groundwater and depth to groundwater.

Table 4.5: Groundwater Summary
Boring Approximate
Station
Approximate
Depth to
Water (ft.)
TC-2AA 19+60 29
TC-2C 300+10 27.5
TC-7A 321+30 23
TC-7B 323+30 15
TC-8A 329+60 14
TC-8B 331+10 15
TC-9A 349+70 25
TC-9B 351+20 25
TC-10A 400+00 24
TC-10B 402+60 24
TC-12A 147+50 24
TC-12B 149+80 17
TC-13 85+80 26
TC-14 427+90 28
We reviewed groundwater level data for nearby wells available at the California Department of Water Resources website (http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/) and using the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) data viewer
(https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#gwlevels). Based on this information, the depth to groundwater at the site typically ranges from 20 to 30 feet, although it occasionally is measured above 20 feet. Relatively shallow perched water may occur within the near-surface soils during the winter and spring months, and adjacent to the existing canals and streams.

Groundwater and perched water levels can fluctuate due to changes in precipitation, creek and canal levels, irrigation, pumping of wells, and other factors.

Existing Pavement Sections
Table 4.6 shows approximate pavement conditions encountered in borings for the trenchless crossings.

DRAFT

4.4.2 4.4.3

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1556
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
27 Table 4.6: Pavement Conditions
Boring Approximate
Station
Approximate
AC Thickness
(in)
Approximate
AB Thickness
(in)
TC-2AA 19+60 6 NA
TC-2C 300+10 2.5 12
TC-7A 321+30 9 12
TC-7B 323+30 8.5 16
TC-8A 329+60 9 9
TC-8B 331+10 8 16
TC-9A 349+70 8 16
TC-9B 351+20 6 12
TC-10A 400+00 7 10
TC-10B 402+60 NA NA
TC-12A 147+50 3 4
TC-12B 149+80 7 12
TC-13 85+80 6.5 12
TC-14 427+90 8 12
5 PUMP STATIONS & LIFT STATIONS
Site Location and Description
Final pump station and lift station locations and wet well depths were not determined at the time of this report. Table 5.1 presents proposed lift and pump station locations based on available information from the design team.

Table 5.1: Lift/Pump Station Locations
Lift/Pump Station Street Nearest Cross Street of
Creek
Approximate
Station
LS 1 Olivehurst Ave 11th Ave *
PS 26 Mary Ave McGowan Pkwy 139+10
PS 2 McGowan Pkwy Dan Ave 226+30
PS 21 Rancho Rd Ostrom Rd
Or Shimer Rd
368+50 or
355+50
LS 22 Rancho Rd Kimball Creek 404+60
LS 23 Rancho Rd Virginia Rd 462+00
LS 24 Forty Mile Rd Morrison Rd 102+90
PS 25 Forty Mile Rd Kimball Creek 154+90
*Stationing not available at time of this report.

DRAFT

5.1 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1557
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
28 The preliminary locations are generally flat and covered in grassy vegetation. Photos 9 through 12 represent typical proposed pump/lift station locations.

Photo 9: Pump/Lift Stations
Looking northwest at proposed Lift Station #1 site on corner of Olivehurst Ave and 7th Ave.

Photo 10: Pump/Lift Stations
Looking west at proposed Pump Station #26 site on corner of Mary Ave and McGowan Pkwy.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1558
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
29 Photo 11: Pump/Lift Stations
Looking south at proposed Lift Station #23 site on Rancho Rd near Virginia Rd.

Photo 12: Pump/Lift Stations
Looking southeast at proposed Pump Station #25 site on Forty Mile Rd near Kimball Creek. Hard Rock Hotel and Casino can be seen in the background.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1559
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
30 Geology
Table 5.2 shows the geologic formation and USDA soil type mapped within each proposed lift/pump station location.

Field Work and Laboratory Testing
Field work or laboratory testing for pump or lift stations is ongoing at the time of this report. Blackburn will complete drilling borings and laboratory testing at each pump/lift station once the locations have been confirmed. The following subsurface sections are based on the exploratory borings Blackburn drilled, logged, and sampled for the pipeline and trenchless crossing preliminary design.

Subsurface Findings
General Subsurface Soil Conditions
Table 5.2 shows subsurface conditions in the borings drilled (as of November 10th, 2020) closest to the planned pump station/lift station location.

Table 5.2: Mapped Geology
Lift/Pump
Station
Approximate
Station
Geologic
Formation*
USDA
Soil
Type*
Nearest
borings
**
General Subsurface Soil Conditions***
LS 1 **** Riverbank
Formation 217 OS-1
Very stiff to hard lean clay and sandy lean clay
within the upper 9 ft., underlain by
approximately 6 ft of very dense clayey sand
over very stiff lean clay. Hard sandy silt greater
than 20 ft. below ground surface.

PS 26 139+10 Riverbank
Formation 217 P-3, P-4
Hard lean clay to sandy lean clay within the
upper 7 to 10 ft. underlain by medium stiff to
very stiff lean clay and lean clay with sand to
approximately 18 ft. deep. Medium dense
clayey sand to maximum depth explored.

PS 2 226+30
Riverbank
Formation
or
Holocene
Alluvium
198 P-5 Very stiff to hard lean clay, sandy lean clay and silt.

PS 21 368+50 or
355+50
Riverbank
Formation 214 TC-9B
Stiff to hard lean clay, silty clay, and sandy lean
clay within the upper 29 ft. (layer of medium
dense clayey sand from approximately 23 to

25.5 ft.) underlain by 5 ft. of medium dense
silty sand and very stiff silt. Very stiff sandy
lean clay and loose to medium dense clayey
sand to maximum depth explored.

DRAFT

5.2 5.3

5.4 5.4.1

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1560
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
31 Table 5.2: Mapped Geology
Lift/Pump
Station
Approximate
Station
Geologic
Formation*
USDA
Soil
Type*
Nearest
borings
**
General Subsurface Soil Conditions***
P-10
Hard lean clay and lean clay with sand within
the upper 9 ft. underlain by dense to very
dense clayey sand and silty sand.

LS 22 404+60 Riverbank
Formation 214
TC-10B
Stiff to hard lean clay within the upper 24 ft.
(layer of very dense gravel with clay and sand
from approximately 14 to 17 ft.) underlain by
approximately 5 ft. of medium dense silty
sand. Stiff to hard lean clay and sandy lean clay
from 29 to 38 ft. deep underlain by dense sand
and silty sand to maximum depth explored.

P-13
Hard lean clay to sandy lean clay within the
upper 15 ft. underlain by medium dense sand
with silt.

LS 23 462+00 Riverbank
Formation 131 P-15,
P-16
Stiff to hard lean clay within the upper 5 ft,
underlain by 5 to 10 ft of medium dense clayey
sand and hard sandy clay over hard lean clay
and silt.

LS 24 102+90 Riverbank
Formation 214 P-26,
P-27
Very stiff to hard lean clay, lean clay with sand,
silt with sand, and sandy silt within the upper
20 ft. (Very dense poorly-graded sand with silt
below 18 ft. in Boring P-26)
PS 25 154+90 Riverbank
Formation 214 TC-12B
Hard lean clay and silt with sand within the
upper 33 ft. (layer of medium dense clayey
sand from 22 to 25.5 ft.) underlain by dense to
very dense silty sand and sand to maximum
depth explored (lens of very stiff sandy silt at
approximately 40 ft. deep).
*Refer to Section 2.1 for description of geologic formation and USDA mapped soil type. **Nearest boring drilled by Blackburn as of Nov. 10, 2020 ***Depths are approximate
****Stationing not available at time of this report.

Groundwater
We generally observed groundwater at depths of 24 to 29 feet below ground surface in the borings drilled nearest the proposed pump/lift station locations in August through September 2020. In boring TC-12B (near proposed Pump Station #25) we measured groundwater at a depth of 17 feet below ground surface.

DRAFT

5.4.2 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1561
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
32 We reviewed groundwater level data for nearby wells available at the California Department of Water Resources website (http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/) and using the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) data viewer
(https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#gwlevels). Based on this information, the depth to groundwater at the site typically ranges from 20 to 30 feet, although it occasionally is measured above 20 feet. Relatively shallow perched water may occur within the near-surface soils during the winter and spring months, and adjacent to the existing canals and streams.

Groundwater and perched water levels can fluctuate due to changes in precipitation, creek and canal levels, irrigation, pumping of wells, and other factors.

Table 5.3 lists groundwater depth in the 2 borings nearest to each pump station in which the driller encountered groundwater.

Table 5.3 Groundwater Summary
Lift/Pump Station
Proposed Location
Approximate
Station
Nearest
Borings
Approximate Distance from
Lift/Pump Station (yd)
Approximate
Depth to
Water (ft.)**
LS 1 *** TC-2AA 2,230 29
B8* 2,640 20.7
PS 26 139+10 B8* 1,380 20.7
TC-2AA 1,620 29
PS 2 226+30 TC-2AA 870 29
TC-2C 1,030 27.5
PS 21 368+50 or
355+50
TC-9B Pump station location not
determined at time of this report
25 TC-10A 24
LS 22 404+60 TC-10B 30 24
TC-10A 110 24
LS 23 462+00 TC-6A 1,500 NA
TC-10B 1,960 24
LS 24 102+90 TC-13 540 26
TC-12A 1,520 24
PS 25 154+90 TC-12B 160 17
TC-12A 250 24
*Drilled in 2004 for CH2M HILL WWTP Expansion and Upgrade Project Schematic Design – Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration Report
** Depth to groundwater measured from ground surface at boring location. Elevation of ground surface at pump/lift station may differ from elevation of ground surface at boring location. ***Stationing not available at time of this report.

Preliminary Design Considerations – Pump/Lift Stations
The final locations of the pump/lift stations have not been determined. Our subsurface investigation and laboratory testing will be completed once Jacobs determines the final locations and obtains the RightsDRAFT

5.5 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1562
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
33 of-Entry. Based on nearby borings completed for the pipeline and trenchless crossings, we anticipate the soil conditions within the proposed pump/lift station sites will be suitable for the planned facilities when constructed in accordance with the project plans, industry standards, and our final geotechnical recommendations. The recommendations below are for preliminary design only and will need to be finalized after we complete the site-specific borings, laboratory tests, and further analysis.

Geologic Hazards
• Faulting—The potential for surface rupture or creep due to faulting at the site is very low. The Fault Activity Map of California6 and the Geologic Map of the Sacramento Quadrangle7 does not identify Historic or Holocene age faults (displacement within the last 11,700 years) within or immediately adjacent to the site. The site does not lie within or adjacent to an Alquist–Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone8
.
• Ground Shaking—For the Maximum Considered Earthquake, a peak horizontal ground acceleration (PGA) of approximately 0.21g could be expected. • Liquefaction—Our investigation shows a soil profile that consists of stiff to hard clays and medium dense to dense silty and clayey sands that are not liquefiable. Therefore, the potential for damaging liquefaction at the site is very low.
• Landslides and Slope Stability—Due to the relatively low topographic relief and existing slope gradients, we do not expect landslides or natural slope failure. • Seismically Induced Settlement—During a seismic event, ground shaking can cause densification of granular soil that can result in settlement of the ground surface. Considering the cohesive soils and medium dense soils observed in the borings, we consider the potential for significant seismically induced settlement to be very low.

Seismic Design
Based on the mapped geology and our boring data, use a Site Class “D” (stiff soil). Table 5.4 presents the 2019 California Building Code (Chapter 16) and ASCE 7-16 seismic design parameters for the site. 6 Jennings, Charles W., and Bryant, William A., 2010 Fault Activity Map of California: California Geological Survey, Geologic Data Map No. 6. 7 Saucedo, G.J. and Wagner, D.L., et al, 1992, Geologic map of the Chico quadrangle, California, 1: 250,000:

California Division of Mines and Geology, Regional Geologic Map 7A, scale 1: 250,000. 8 Bryant, W.A., and Hart, E.W., 2007 (Interim Revision), Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42.

DRAFT

5.5.1 5.5.2

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1563
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
34 Table 5.4: 2019 CBC Seismic Design Parameters (Site Class D) Ss – MCER ground motion (0.2 second period) 0.496 g
S1 – MCER ground motion (1.0 second period) 0.241 g
Fa – Site Coefficient 1.403
Fv – Site Coefficient 2.121
SMS – Adjusted MCE* Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter 0.696 g SM1 – Adjusted MCE* Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter 0.511 g1 SDS – Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter 0.464 g
SD1 – Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter 0.341 g1
Seismic Design Category D1
**TL – Long Period Transition Period 12 sec
PGA 0.21
* Maximum Considered Earthquake
** Figure 22-14, ASCE 7-16
1 – We assume that the seismic response coefficient, Cs, is determined by ASCE 7-16 Eq. (12.8-2) for values of T ≤ 1.5Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either ASCE 7- 16 Eq. (12.8-3) for TL ≥T > 1.5Ts or Eq. (12.8-4) for T > TL. Contact Blackburn to re-evaluate the above parameters if this assumption is not valid.

If the proposed design does not meet the exception noted above (note 1) a site-specific response analysis will be required for final design.

General Grading Recommendations

5.5.3.1 Excavation Conditions
Based on the soil conditions and drilling performance for nearby explorations, excavation is likely possible with conventional equipment (common earthmoving equipment and large backhoe/excavator).

The fine-grained and hard soil conditions can create slow excavation conditions.

5.5.3.2 Site Clearing
Prior to excavation or making any cuts and fills, remove existing underground utilities, foundations, vegetation (root balls and roots), debris, and other underground features in accordance with this Geotechnical Report. Remove loose and disturbed soil caused by the removal(s) and widen the excavation/depression so it is accessible to compaction equipment. Remove strippings from the site or use as landscape soil in designated areas.

5.5.3.3 Original Ground and Subgrade Preparation
After clearing, process and compact the exposed soil in at-grade, cut, and fill areas as follows:
• Scarify the exposed soil to a depth of approximately 8 inches. • Moisture condition subgrade to within 3% of the optimum moisture content. • Compact the subgrade soil to a minimum 90% relative compaction based on ASTM D1557 DRAFT

5.5.3 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1564
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
35 Where fill is placed on sloping ground, blade back slopes horizontally during placement of embankment fill to create a stepped (or benched) fill surface (such that a uniform, sloping fill surface is avoided).

Benching must remove loose surficial soils and result in stepped benches, generally one to two feet in height and depth into the existing slope. The lower bench should be sloped a minimum of 2% into the slope. Where benching will interfere with existing structures, utilities, or vegetation, Blackburn can review modifications on a case-by-case basis.

5.5.3.4 General Fill Placement and Compaction
General Fill (not structure backfill) may consist of on-site soil. Fill should be free of debris and concentrations of vegetation.

If import fill is required, it should be graded and have material properties as follows:
• 100% passing the 1-inch sieve
• 75% to 100% passing the #4 sieve
• Minimum 12% passing the #200 sieve
• Plasticity Index not greater than 20
• Free of debris and concentrations of vegetation.
• Approval from Blackburn prior to placement
Place fill in maximum 8-inch thick loose lifts, moisture condition 1% to 2% above optimum, and compact to a minimum of 90% relative compaction based on ASTM D 1557 test procedure. Compact fill using a sheepsfoot or padded drum type roller.

Construct fill slopes no steeper than 2(H):1(V). To achieve adequate compaction on the face of fill slopes, over-build the slopes and then cut back to the design grade. Track-walking is not an adequate method to compact the face of slopes.

Dewatering
Dewatering may be required for installations greater than approximately 20 feet deep. Significant groundwater inflow may occur at the pump stations, particularly those located near water ways during winter and spring months.

Dewatering can consist of:
• Deep sumps within the excavation. Considering the presence of fine-grained soils and relatively flat lying bedding, sumps within the excavation are not likely to provide good drawdown. • Well points. Well points will likely work better to cut off flow into the excavation and drawdown the water level over a larger area.

To facilitate work at the base of the excavation, groundwater should be drawn down at least 3 feet below the planned bottom of excavation. The need for dewatering can be reduced by planning excavations during the lowest anticipated seasonal water levels (expected during the late summer and fall months.

DRAFT

5.5.4 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1565
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
36 Temporary Excavations
Temporary excavations will require sloping and/or shoring in accordance with Cal OSHA requirements.

Based on our subsurface exploration and laboratory testing, preliminary excavation and shoring design may be based on Type A soil to planned excavation depth that may be sloped at 3/4(H):1(V).

Where groundwater is present or cohesionless/uncemented granular soils are encountered, Type C soil conditions will apply and a 1.5(H):1(V) slope gradient is required.

The Contractor must retain an engineer to evaluate the impact of existing structures, traffic vibrations, actual soil conditions exposed in the open trenches, and other factors that may promote trench wall instability and adjust trench sloping/shoring accordingly. Surcharge loads such as trench spoils, equipment, etc. should not be placed adjacent to an open excavation (within a distance of ½ the height of the trench). The above is guideline information only. The contractor is responsible for the safety of all excavations and should provide appropriate excavation sloping and shoring in accordance with current Cal OSHA requirements and observe conditions observed during construction for necessary modification and safety.

Foundations

5.5.6.1 Below-Grade Foundations

5.5.6.1.1 Bearing Capacity
The pump/lift stations are below-grade structures and the net pressure exerted upon the subsurface will be similar to or less than the current soil pressure at the bottom of the pump station wet wells.

Excavation for below-grade structures reduces the net pressure by removing soil that acts as a “preload” to the underlying soils, thus “unloading” the bearing materials before “loading” by placement of the structure.

We understand that below grade structures will use mat type foundations for support. For structures at depths greater than 15 feet:
• Use a maximum net contact pressure for mat foundation of 3,000 psf. • Use a Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, ks, equal to 25 pci. • We expect settlement of mat foundations is expected to be less than 1 inch with differential settlement less than ½-inch across the pump station structure. • Clean footing excavations of debris and loose soil prior to placing concrete. • Blackburn must observe all footing excavations prior to reinforcement placement to verify competent bearing materials.
• For subgrade uniformity, Caltrans Class 2 aggregate baserock as underlayment (this is not geotechnically necessary provided a firm uniform subgrade is obtained). If an aggregate underlayment is used, place a minimum thickness of 6-inches and compact to a minimum of 95% relative compaction (per ASTM D 1557 test method).
• Crushed rock underlayment may also be used (and can benefit excavation dewatering).

Underlay the crushed rock with a geotextile filter fabric (i.e., Mirafi 140N) and compact the rock with at least 6 passes of a static roller.

DRAFT

5.5.5 5.5.6

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1566
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
37 If isolated spread footings or piers are required for column support, Blackburn can provide additional recommendations when the planned design and approximate loading is available.

5.5.6.1.2 Structure Backfill
Native material encountered in our borings for the pipeline and trenchless crossings primarily consist of fine-grained soils and are not suitable for structure backfill.

Use the specifications in Table 5.5 for imported structure backfill for all below-grade structures:

Table 5.5: Import Structure Backfill Requirements
Gradation Test Procedures
Sieve Size Percent Passing ASTM Caltrans
1 inch 100 D6913 202
¾ inch 70-100 D6913 202
No. 4 50-100 D6913 202
No. 200 12-40 D6913 202
Plasticity
Plasticity Index <12 D4318 204
As shown below, the zone of placement for structure backfill should extend up from the base of the wall at a slope of 1(H):1(V) and at least 3 feet behind the wall. • Moisture condition structure backfill to within 2% of optimum and place in maximum 8-inch thick, horizontal, loose lifts.
• Compact structure backfill to a minimum 92% relative compaction based on the ASTM D 1557 test method.

To minimize the residual lateral earth pressures on structure walls, restrict compaction equipment behind the walls (by load and distance from wall) so that wall design values are not exceeded. We Wall
DRAFT
Fin'ish grade
Native,
Engineered
Fill
No Scale

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1567
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
38 recommend compaction within a horizontal distance equal to one-half of the wall height (to a maximum distance of 5 feet), be completed with hand-operated equipment (i.e., jumping jack).

To minimize the potential for significant settlement around deep walls, controlled low strength material (CLSM) can be used to backfill to the surface or to a manageable depth (e.g., 10 feet below grade).

5.5.6.1.3 Lateral Earth Pressures
The pump/lift stations are below grade structures that will act as restrained retaining structures. Walls will retain compacted select native soils and/or imported soils meeting the requirement for structure backfill. For evaluation of lateral earth pressures, use the backfill equivalent fluid weights (EFW) for level ground conditions shown below in Table 5.6.

Table 5.6: LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES
Condition Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf)
Seismic Equivalent Fluid Weight
(pcf)
At-Rest 85 6
Passive 150 140*
*Total passive EFW for passive condition
The above pressures assume structure backfill placed against the structure wall in accordance with our recommendations, a saturated (total) unit weight of approximately 135 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and a minimum internal angle of friction of 32 degrees. Notify Blackburn if these assumptions are not valid so that we may assess the situation and provide additional recommendations, if necessary. Backfill with CLSM is an acceptable alternative.

For seismic loading, add the Seismic EFW to the at-rest EFW and apply the total force as a uniform load on the wall with a resultant located at 0.5H where H is the backfill height. We estimated the EFWs for seismic loading using the Mononobe-Okabe equation and a horizontal seismic acceleration coefficient, kh, of approximately ½ the expected PGA (0.22). This kh value assumes that the walls displace at least 1- inch during the design seismic event.

Surface loads (footings, storage, vehicle traffic) applied near the wall will increase the lateral pressure on the wall. A uniform surface load of 240 psf to 300 psf is often used to approximate construction traffic loading on walls. In general, if surface loads are closer to the edge of the retaining wall than threefourths of the retained height, increase the design wall pressure by 0.5q over the area of the retaining wall. In this expression, q is the surface surcharge load in psf. This is a conservative procedure and lower design pressures may be applicable upon evaluation of individual surface loads and setback distances.

5.5.6.1.4 Buoyancy Resistance
Based on nearby borings we estimate a groundwater depth of approximately 20 feet, as discussed in Section 5.4.2. In undrained conditions, structures below a depth of approximately 20 feet, may be subjected to an uplift load (buoyancy). The uplift force will be resisted by the weight of the structure and the weight of the backfill overlying foundation extensions (if any).

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1568
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
39 If Jacobs designs foundation extensions to resist buoyancy forces, calculate the resistance against uplift due to the weight of the soil. Use a backfill total unit weight of 130 pcf above groundwater and 67 pcf below groundwater, with a soil wedge extending vertically up from foundation extensions

5.5.6.1.5 Lateral Resistance
Lateral resistance for retaining structures can be achieved through friction and passive earth pressures acting on the foundation. For design, use a coefficient of friction of 0.40 (below or above groundwater) at the base of the concrete footing and a passive earth pressure of 150 psf per foot of embedment depth. Limit passive earth pressures to a maximum of 3,000 psf (additional passive pressure can be evaluated for specific locations if necessary). Do not include the upper 1-foot of soil in passive resistance calculations. Where passive pressure or friction alone is used against sliding, use a minimum factor of safety of 1.5 for lateral stability (1.1 if seismic loading is included). Where both passive pressure and friction are used to resist sliding, use a minimum factor of safety of 2.0.

5.5.6.2 Minor Structures
Provided that the recommendations in this report are followed, we anticipate minor structures (such as valve vaults, etc.) may be founded on concrete mat or strip footings, or a compacted granular base (minimum of 6 inches of Class 2 baserock) if appropriate. • Embed the foundations a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent prepared subgrade into firm native soil or compacted fill/backfill.
• Footings must be a minimum of 12 inches wide and sized not to exceed an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third if seismic and/or wind loads are included.
• If additional bearing capacity is required for specific minor structures, we can review and provide recommendations on a case-by-case basis.
• To resist lateral movement, use a coefficient of friction of 0.40 at the base of the foundation and an ultimate passive earth pressure of 150 psf (undrained condition) per foot of embedment depth up to a maximum of 2,000 psf. Ignore the upper one-foot of footing depth (below the lowest adjacent soil grade) in determination of the passive pressure. Both frictional resistance and passive earth pressure can be combined for lateral resistance; when combined, increase the safety factor against sliding from a minimum of 1.5 to 2.0.

Soil Corrosivity
Our sulfate and chloride content tests on pipeline samples indicate that Type II or V Portland cement can be used for concrete mix design. Our resistivity tests generally indicate that the onsite soils may exhibit corrosive to extremely corrosive conditions for metal pipes. We are not corrosion consultants and cannot evaluate the potential corrosion impacts to metallic elements embedded in or in contact with the ground. A corrosion consultant should provide specific corrosion protection recommendations for buried metallic elements used at the site.

DRAFT

5.5.7 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1569
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
40 6 WWTP IMPROVEMENTS
Site Location and Description
The proposed WWTP expansion will be constructed at the existing WWTP on Mary Ave in Olivehurst.

The proposed secondary clarifier location is generally level and covered in gravel. The site for the proposed equalization basin is generally flat but depressed approximately 3 to 4 feet below the WWTP ground surface and is covered in seasonal grass and weeds. Photos 9 and 10 represent site conditions at the time of our October 19, 2020 site visit.

Photo 13: Secondary Clarifier
Looking northwest at proposed secondary clarifier location. Existing secondary clarifier can be seen on the left in the background.

DRAFT

6.1 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1570
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
41 Photo 14: Equalization Basin
Looking south across the proposed equalization basin. Existing slope along east side of basin can be seen in background.

Project Description
The proposed WWTP improvements consist of an additional secondary clarifier, a 30.7 Acre-ft concretelined equalization basin, a 4.37 Acre-ft Stormwater Detention Basin, and a 16-inch-diameter force main.

Previous Studies
Geotechnical conclusions and recommendations for the proposed secondary clarifier presented in this report are primarily based on the CH2M HILL WWTP Expansion and Upgrade Project Schematic Design – Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration Report, February 2004 (CH2M Report).

Geology
We reviewed geology maps and the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Web Soil Survey (https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm) to infer likely subsurface conditions at the site. The “Geologic Map of the Late Cenozoic Deposits of the Sacramento Valley and Northern Sierra Foothills, California” (Helley and Harwood, 1985) generally maps Upper Member, Riverbank Formation under the site. Refer to Section 2.1 for a description of the Riverbank Formation.

The web soil survey indicates that the site is underlain by San Joaquin loam (214). The survey states this unit has the following relevant properties from 0 to 25 inches deep: Silt (ML), Silty Clay (CL-ML) and Clay (CL) with fines content ranging from 50 to 70 percent.

DRAFT

6.2 6.3

6.4 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1571
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
42 Field Work and Laboratory Testing
Exploratory Test Pits
Blackburn excavated, logged, and sampled 5 test pits to characterize the site subsurface conditions at the equalization basin site. Our subcontractor, Burke Construction, excavated the test pits to a depth of 8 feet below existing site grades. Appendix D1 shows the proposed site improvements and approximate test pit locations. The test pit logs are included in Appendix D2. Burke Construction excavated the test pits using a CAT 420 backhoe equipped with a 2-foot wide bucket. Blackburn’s project engineer, Luke Morrell, logged the test pits, collected samples from various depths and retained samples for laboratory testing.

Blackburn drilled an exploratory boring for the clarifier but lab has not been completed at this time, so no recommendations in this report are based on conditions in Blackburn’s boring.

Laboratory Testing
We have not completed laboratory tests on the samples collected from the equalization basin site.

Subsurface Findings
General Subsurface Soil Conditions
We generally encountered hard lean clay to sandy lean clay in the test pits, excavated October 19, 2020.

In the southeast portion of the equalization basin (TP-5), we encountered dense clayey sand below a depth of approximately 2.5 feet.

The CH2M Report (2004) indicates that the subsurface soils in boring B8 near the proposed secondary clarifier location consist of:
• Approximately 3 feet of sandy clay over a lean clay with sand hardpan layer to approximately 8 feet below ground surface.
• Sandy clays and clayey sands from depths of about 8 to 23 feet, • Sandy gravel from depths of 23 to 30 feet.
• Sandy clay and clayey sand to the maximum depth explored (41.5 ft).

Groundwater
We did not encounter groundwater in our test pits excavated October 19, 2020.

According to the CH2M Report (2004) and associated boring logs, perched groundwater was encountered in the sandy clay above the hardpan layer and groundwater was measured 20.7 feet below the ground surface near the proposed secondary clarifier location. The logs indicate that the groundwater elevation ranges from 29.8 to 33.3 feet across the WWTP site (CH2M Report does not specify datum used).

We reviewed groundwater level data for nearby wells available at the California Department of Water Resources website (http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/) and using the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) data viewer
DRAFT

6.5 6.5.1

6.5.2 6.6

6.6.1 6.6.2

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1572
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
43 (https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#gwlevels). Based on this information, the groundwater elevation at the site typically ranges from 25 to 40 feet above mean sea level (NAVD88).

Relatively shallow perched water may occur within the near-surface soils during the winter and spring months, and adjacent to the existing canals and streams.

Groundwater and perched water levels can fluctuate due to changes in precipitation, canal levels, irrigation, pumping of wells, and other factors.

Preliminary Design Considerations – WWTP Improvements
At the time of this report, basin design was not finalized. Blackburn will provide updated recommendations in the design-level geotechnical report based on final basin design.

Facility Ground Suitability
The soil conditions at the site are suitable for the planned facilities when constructed in accordance with the project plans, industry standards, and our geotechnical recommendations.

Some of the more significant site limitations include the presence of clay soils that will not be suitable for structure backfill, and relatively shallow groundwater that may require dewatering for some structure installations.

Geologic Hazards
• Faulting—The potential for surface rupture or creep due to faulting at the site is very low. The Fault Activity Map of California9 and the Geologic Map of the Sacramento Quadrangle10 does not identify Historic or Holocene age faults (displacement within the last 11,700 years) within or immediately adjacent to the site. The site does not lie within or adjacent to an Alquist–Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone11.
• Ground Shaking— For the Maximum Considered Earthquake, a peak horizontal ground acceleration (PGA) of approximately 0.22g could be expected. • Liquefaction—Our investigation shows a soil profile that consists of stiff to hard clays and medium dense to dense silty and clayey sands that are not liquefiable. Therefore, the potential for damaging liquefaction at the site is very low.
• Landslides and Slope Stability—Due to the relatively low topographic relief we do not expect landslides or natural slope failure.
• Seismically Induced Settlement—During a seismic event, ground shaking can cause densification of granular soil that can result in settlement of the ground surface. Considering the cohesive soils and medium dense soils observed in the borings, we consider the potential for significant seismically induced settlement to be very low.
9 Jennings, Charles W., and Bryant, William A., 2010 Fault Activity Map of California: California Geological Survey, Geologic Data Map No. 6.
10 Saucedo, G.J. and Wagner, D.L., et al, 1992, Geologic map of the Chico quadrangle, California, 1: 250,000:

California Division of Mines and Geology, Regional Geologic Map 7A, scale 1: 250,000 11 Bryant, W.A., and Hart, E.W., 2007 (Interim Revision), Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42.

DRAFT

6.7 6.7.1

6.7.2 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1573
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
44 Seismic Design
We assumed, based in part on our boring data, an average shear wave velocity, VS30, of 850 ft/sec that corresponds to a site class “D” (Section 2.3). Per ASCE 7-16 a site-specific analysis is required for a site class “D” site unless one of the exceptions noted in ASCE7-16, Section 11.4.8, is used. We understand that for this project the exception will not be used. Therefore, we performed a site-specific analysis per ASCE 7-16, Chapter 21. We analyzed probabilistic and minimum code values to develop a site-specific spectra for 5% damping. A deterministic analysis is not required because the largest spectral response acceleration of the probabilistic ground motion response calculated in accordance with ASCE 7-16 21.2.1 is less than 1.2 Fa. The recommended spectra are presented in Graph 2 and digitized spectral values in Table 2. Appendix D4 presents details of our site specific response analysis.

Graph : Site-Specific Design Spectra
Use the SMS, SM1, SDS, and SD1 values in Table 3. We calculated the values in accordance with ASCE 7-16, Section 21.4 and 21.5.

DRAFT

6.7.3 V,
~
C

0.7 0.6

0.5 g 0.4
"' .;
w
u
u
<(
~ 03
w
Ill
a.

0.2 0.1

0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
Period !seconds)
-Design Response Spectrum {Greater of 2/3 'SaM or 80% of General Response Spectrum) -ASCE 7-1611.4.6 Design Response Spectrum
-ASCE 7-16 21.3 80% of 11.4.6 Design Response Spectrum

4.0 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~

4.5 5.0
1574
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
45 Table C-3: Comparison of Recommended and ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.6 Spectra Period
Recommended
Design Response
Spectrum
ASCE 7-16 11.4.6
Response
Spectrum
80% of ASCE 7-16

11.4.6 Response
Spectrum
0 0.223 0.189 0.151

0.1 0.400 0.359 0.288

0.166 0.507 0.472 0.378

0.2 0.553 0.472 0.378

0.3 0.604 0.472 0.378

0.5 0.580 0.472 0.378

0.75 0.481 0.472 0.378

0.865 0.440 0.472 0.378

1.0 0.402 0.408 0.327

2.0 0.225 0.204 0.163

3.0 0.156 0.136 0.109

4.0 0.120 0.102 0.082

5.0 0.098 0.082 0.065
Table C-4: Design Spectral Acceleration Values and Peak Ground Acceleration Parameter Acceleration Value (g’s)
SMS 0.8151
SM1 0.7352
SDS 0.5443
SD1 0.4904
PGAM 0.3175
1 SMS 1.5 times the SDS value in Table C-4 2
SM1 1.5 times the SD1 value in Table C-4 3
SDS 90% of the maximum spectral acceleration from the site-specific spectrum (0.399) 4 SD1 Maximum value of the product of TSa (time multiplied by spectral acceleration value) for periods of 1 to 2 seconds for sites with VS30 of greater than 1,200 ft/s) 5 The site-specific MCEG peak ground acceleration (PGAM) is the lesser of the probabilistic or deterministic mean peak ground acceleration.

General Grading Recommendations

6.7.4.1 Excavation Conditions
Based on the soil conditions and drilling performance, excavation is possible with conventional equipment (common earthmoving equipment and large backhoe/excavator). The fine-grained and hard soil conditions can create slow excavation conditions and is not suitable for structure backfill.

DRAFT

6.7.4 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1575
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
46 6.7.4.2 Site Clearing
Prior to trenching or making any cuts and fills, remove existing underground utilities, foundations, vegetation (root balls and roots), debris, and other underground features in accordance with this Geotechnical Report. Remove loose and disturbed soil caused by the removal(s) and widen the excavation/depression so it is accessible to compaction equipment. Remove strippings from the site or use as landscape soil in designated areas.

6.7.4.3 Original Ground and Subgrade Preparation
Process and compact the exposed soil in at-grade, cut, and fill areas as follows:
• Scarify the exposed soil to a depth of approximately 8 inches. • Moisture condition subgrade to within 3% of the optimum moisture content. • Compact the subgrade soil to a minimum 90% relative compaction based on ASTM D1557.

Where fill will be placed on or against slopes with a gradient of 5(H):1(V) or steeper, fill must be benched into the slope. Benching must remove loose surficial soils and result in stepped benches, generally one to two feet in height and depth into the existing slope. Where benching will interfere with existing structures, utilities, or vegetation, Blackburn can review modifications on a case-by-case basis.

For fills that are 5 feet or higher and placed on or against a slope with a gradient of 5:1 or steeper, provide a key at the toe of the fill slope. The key must be a minimum of 10 feet wide, one foot deep, sloped a minimum of 2% into the slope, and extend 2 feet beyond the fill toe. Where restricted access will not allow for a toe-bench 10 feet wide, the bench can be reduced to a minimum width of 6 feet provided the fill slope is less than 10 feet in height and the contractor can show that compaction equipment can achieve the specified compaction for the full width of the bench.

6.7.4.4 General Fill Placement and Compaction
General fill (not trench or structure backfill) may consist of on-site soil provided it contains no rocks larger than 4 inches in maximum dimension. Fill should be free of debris and concentrations of vegetation.

If import for general fill is required, it must be free of debris and meet the following requirements:

Table 6.4: General Backfill Import Requirements
Gradation Test Procedures
Sieve Size Percent Passing ASTM Caltrans
1 inch 100 D6913 202
No. 4 75-100 D6913 202
No. 200 12-100 D6913 202
Plasticity Index
Less than 20 D4318
• Approved by Blackburn prior to site delivery.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1576
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
47 Place and compact fill as follows:
• Place fill in maximum 8-inch-thick loose lifts,
• Moisture condition the soil within 3% of optimum
• Compact the soil to a minimum 90% relative compaction based on ASTM D1557.

Test all fill at vertical increments of not more than 1 foot and at final grade or pavement subgrade. For horizontal testing frequency, use the following minimums:
• One test for every 100 square feet around structures
• One test for every 500 square feet for structure pads Complete at least one compaction curve (Proctor) for each material type, source location (for import), and as changes in native materials occur. Material changes include a change in material designation based on the Unified Soil Classification System.

6.7.4.5 Fill Slopes
Construct fill slopes no steeper than 2(H):1(V). To achieve adequate compaction on the face of fill slopes, over-build the slopes and then cut back to the design grade. Track-walking is not an adequate method to compact the face of slopes.

Dewatering
Dewatering may be required for installations greater than approximately 15 feet deep (see Section

6.6.2). Significant groundwater inflow should be anticipated at the deeper excavations for the clarifier.

Temporary Excavations
Temporary excavations will require sloping and/or shoring in accordance with Cal OSHA requirements.

Based on previous subsurface explorations by CH2M Hill, preliminary excavation and shoring design may be based on Type A soil to planned excavation depth. For Type A soil conditions, temporary excavations may be sloped at ¾(H):1(V).

Where groundwater is present or cohesionless/uncemented granular soils are encountered, Type C soil conditions will apply and a 1.5(H):1(V) slope gradient is required.

DRAFT

6.7.5 6.7.6

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1577
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
48 The Contractor must retain an engineer to evaluate the impact of existing structures, traffic vibrations, actual soil conditions exposed in the open trenches, and other factors that may promote trench wall instability and adjust trench sloping/shoring accordingly. Surcharge loads such as trench spoils, equipment, etc. should not be placed adjacent to an open excavation (within a distance of ½ the height of the trench). The above is guideline information only. The contractor is responsible for the safety of all excavations and should provide appropriate excavation sloping and shoring in accordance with current Cal OSHA requirements and observe conditions observed during construction for necessary modification and safety.

Foundations

6.7.7.1 At-Grade Shallow Foundations
If the designers and contractors follow our grading and construction recommendations below, foundations for at grade structures can be supported on shallow strip footings and isolated spread footings. We expect footings for at-grade structures to be founded on compacted fill and/or firm native soils.
• Embed continuous strip and isolated footings a minimum of 18 inches into the lowest adjacent prepared subgrade.
• Both strip and isolated footings must be a minimum of 18 inches wide. Size strip and isolated footings not to exceed an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (dead load plus live load). The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third if seismic and/or wind loads are included.
• Total settlement is expected to be less than ¾-inch and differential settlement less than ½-inch over a length of 50 feet.
• To resist lateral movement, use a coefficient of friction of 0.40 psf at the base of the foundation and a passive earth pressure of 200 psf per foot of embedment depth up to a maximum of 2,000 psf. Ignore the upper one-foot of footing depth (below the lowest adjacent soil grade) in determination of the passive pressure. Both frictional resistance and passive earth pressure can be combined for lateral resistance; when combined, increase the safety factor against sliding from a minimum of 1.5 to 2.0.
• Concrete slabs with crushed rock underlayment may be designed using a Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, ks, of 25 pounds per cubic inch (pci) in cut or fill locations where engineered fill is placed as recommended in this report.
• Clean footing excavations of debris and loose soil prior to placing concrete. • Blackburn must observe all footing excavations prior to reinforcement placement to verify competent bearing materials.
• Slope the ground surface away from foundations at a minimum of 2 percent for a distance of at least 5 feet.

6.7.7.2 Below-Grade Foundations

6.7.7.2.1 Bearing Capacity
The planned clarifier is a below-grade structure and the net pressure exerted upon the subsurface will be similar to or less than the existing soil pressure at the bottom of the clarifier. Excavation for belowDRAFT

6.7.7 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1578
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
49 grade structures reduces the net pressure by removing soil that acts as a “preload” to the underlying soils, thus “unloading” the bearing materials before “loading” by placement of the structure.

Below grade structures will use mat type foundations for support. For structures at depths greater than 20 feet:
• Use a maximum net contact pressure of 3,000 psf.
• Use a Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, ks, equal to 25 pci. • We expect settlement of mat foundations is expected to be less than 1 inch with differential settlement less than ½-inch over a distance of approximately 100 feet. • Clean footing excavations of debris and loose soil prior to placing concrete. • Blackburn must observe all footing excavations prior to reinforcement placement to verify competent bearing materials.
• For ground preparation and subgrade uniformity, Class 2 aggregate baserock can be used as underlayment (this is not geotechnically necessary provided a firm uniform subgrade is obtained). If an aggregate underlayment is used, place a minimum thickness of 6-inches and compact to a minimum of 95% relative compaction (per ASTM D 1557 test method). • Crushed rock underlayment may also be used (and can benefit excavation dewatering).

Envelope the crushed rock with a geotextile filter fabric (ie. Mirafi 140N) and compact the rock with a static roller.

Blackburn can provide additional recommendations when the planned design and approximate loading is available if isolated spread footings or piers are required for column support.

6.7.7.2.2 Structure Backfill
Native soils in approximately the upper 23± feet consist of lean clay which will not be suitable for structure backfill.

Blackburn must approve import structure backfill prior to delivery. Use the specifications in Table 6.5 for import structure backfill for all below-grade structures:

Table 5.5: Import Structure Backfill Requirements
Gradation Test Procedures
Sieve Size Percent Passing ASTM Caltrans
1 inch 100 D6913 202
¾ inch 70-100 D6913 202
No. 4 50-100 D6913 202
No. 200 12-40 D6913 202
Plasticity
Plasticity Index <12 D4318 204
As shown below, the zone of placement for structure backfill should extend up from the base of the wall at a slope of 0.75(H):1(V) and at least 3 feet behind the wall. Native, engineered fill may be placed beyond the structure backfill zone.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1579
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
50 • Moisture condition backfill to within 2% of optimum and place in maximum 8-inch thick, horizontal, loose lifts.
• Compact backfill to a minimum 92% relative compaction based on the ASTM D 1557 test method.

To minimize the residual lateral earth pressures on structure walls, compaction equipment used behind the walls must be restricted (by load and distance from wall) so that wall design values are not exceeded. We recommend compaction within a horizontal distance equal to one-half of the wall height (to a maximum distance of 5 feet), be completed with hand-operated equipment (i.e., jumping jack).

6.7.7.2.3 Lateral Earth Pressures
The below grade structure will act as retaining structure. Walls will retain compacted select imported soils meeting the requirement for structure backfill. For evaluation of lateral earth pressures, use the backfill equivalent fluid weights (EFW) for level ground conditions shown below in Table 5.6.

Table 6.6: LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES
Condition Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf)
Seismic Equivalent Fluid Weight
(pcf)
At-Rest 85 6
Passive 150 140*
*Total passive EFW for passive condition
The above pressures assume structure backfill placed against the structure wall in accordance with our recommendations, a saturated (total) unit weight of approximately 135 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and a minimum internal angle of friction of 32 degrees. Notify Blackburn if these assumptions are not valid so that we may assess the situation and provide additional recommendations, if necessary. Backfill with CLSM is an acceptable alternative.

Wall
DRAFT
Finish grade
---·-· - • ..,...'?"""T..,...,'?"""T..,...,'?'""T-,-;.-rlructure Native, kfill turw
Engineered
Fill ..,..._~ - L ~
No Scale

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1580
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
51 For seismic loading, add the Seismic EFW to the at-rest or active EFW and apply the total force as a uniform load on the wall with a resultant located at 0.5H where H is the backfill height. We estimated the EFWs for seismic loading using the Mononobe-Okabe equation and a horizontal seismic acceleration coefficient, kh, of approximately ½ the expected PGA. This kh value assumes that the walls displace at least 1-inch during the design seismic event.

Surface loads (footings, storage, vehicle traffic) applied near the wall will increase the lateral pressure on the wall. A uniform surface load of 200 psf to 300 psf is often used to approximate construction traffic loading on walls. In general, if surface loads are closer to the edge of the retaining wall than threefourths of the retained height, increase the design wall pressure by 0.5q over the area of the retaining wall. In this expression, q is the surface surcharge load in psf. This is a conservative procedure and lower design pressures may be applicable upon evaluation of individual surface loads and setback distances.

For drained conditions, provide adequate drainage to avoid build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Positive drainage for retaining walls should consist of a vertical layer of permeable material, such as a graded sand and gravel (graded to meet Caltrans Standard Specifications for Class 1, Type A Permeable Material), pea gravel, or crushed rock, at least 6 inches thick, positioned between the retaining wall and the backfill.

If pea gravel or crushed rock is used, place a nonwoven filter fabric between it and the backfill to prevent the drain from becoming clogged. A synthetic drainage fabric, such as Enkadrain (Colbond Geosynthetics Co.), Miradrain (TC Mirafi) or an equivalent, may be substituted for the permeable layer.

Use care during installation to assure that the filter part of the material faces the backfill. Remove collected water by installing weep holes along the bottom of the wall or by a perforated drainage pipe along the bottom of the permeable material or drainage fabric continuously sloped towards suitable drainage facilities (i.e., gravity drain or sump pump).

6.7.7.2.4 Buoyancy Resistance
As discussed in Section 6.6.2, groundwater may occur at depths as shallow as 15 feet bgs. In undrained conditions, below grade structures may be subjected to an uplift load (buoyancy). The uplift force will be resisted by the weight of the structure and the weight of the backfill overlying foundation extensions (if any).

If foundation extensions are used to resist buoyant forces, calculate the resistance against uplift due to the weight of the soil. Use a backfill unit weight of 130 pcf above groundwater and 73 pcf below groundwater, with a soil wedge extending vertically up from foundation extensions.

6.7.7.2.5 Lateral Resistance
Lateral resistance for retaining structures can be achieved through friction and passive earth pressures acting on the foundation. For design, use a coefficient of friction of 0.40 (below or above groundwater) at the base of the concrete footing and an ultimate passive earth pressure of 200 psf per foot of embedment depth. Limit passive earth pressures to a maximum of 2,000 psf (additional passive pressure can be evaluated for specific locations if necessary). Decrease the passive pressure to 75 psf per foot of depth when below design groundwater levels. Do not include the upper 1-foot of soil in passive resistance calculations. Where passive pressure or friction alone is used against sliding, use a minimum factor of safety of 1.5 for lateral stability (1.1 if seismic loading is included). Where both passive pressure and friction are used to resist sliding, use a minimum factor of safety of 2.0.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1581
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
52 6.7.7.3 Minor Structures
Provided that the recommendations in this report are followed, minor structures (such as valve or blowoff vaults, access ways, etc.) may be founded on concrete mat or strip footings, or a compacted granular base (minimum of 6 inches of Class 2 baserock) if appropriate. • Embed the foundations a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent prepared subgrade into firm native soil or compacted fill/backfill.
• Footings must be a minimum of 12 inches wide and sized not to exceed an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third if seismic and/or wind loads are included.
• Concrete slabs with crushed rock underlayment may be designed using a Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, ks, of 25 pci on structural fill placed as recommended in this report. • If additional bearing capacity is required for specific minor structures, we can review and provide recommendations on a case-by-case basis.
• To resist lateral movement, use a coefficient of friction of 0.40 at the base of the foundation and a passive earth pressure of 200 psf per foot of embedment depth up to a maximum of 2,000 psf.

Ignore the upper one-foot of footing depth (below the lowest adjacent soil grade) in determination of the passive pressure. Both frictional resistance and passive earth pressure can be combined for lateral resistance; when combined, increase the safety factor against sliding from a minimum of 1.5 to 2.0.

If necessary for evaluation of lateral loading on shallow vaults, use an At-Rest equivalent fluid weight of 65 pcf for the drained condition and 95 pcf for undrained. The drained condition assumes groundwater does not accumulate; the undrained condition would be applied below an assumed groundwater level.

We based these values on foundations bearing on native soil and native soil backfill compacted against vault walls.

Soil Corrosivity
We have not completed our subsurface explorations or laboratory testing for the proposed structures.

Based on data from pipeline borings for similar materials (lean clays) we expect clay soils to be corrosive to extremely corrosive conditions to metal pipes. We are not corrosion consultants and cannot evaluate the potential corrosion impacts to metallic elements embedded in or in contact with the ground. A corrosion consultant should provide specific corrosion protection recommendations for buried metallic elements used at the site.

Concrete Slabs on Grade

6.7.9.1 Slab Underlayment
For minor structures, concrete slabs-on-grade may be used provided the contractor(s) prepares the structure pads in accordance with our grading recommendations and any addenda by Blackburn. Use a minimum slab thickness of 4 inches. Underlay the concrete slabs with a minimum of 4 inches of washed, crushed, and compacted rock to provide uniform support. Concrete reinforcement, doweling, curing, joint spacing, and mix design should conform to ACI guidelines. The above recommendations are not for DRAFT

6.7.8 6.7.9

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1582
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
53 slabs subject to equipment or forklift loads. Moderately expansive clay potentially underlay the site. To mitigate potential expansive soil, consider a slab thickness of 6-inches with 8-inches of crushed rock.

Trench Backfill and Compaction

6.7.10.1 Pipe Bedding and Pipe Zone Material
Support pipe on a minimum of 4 inches of granular bedding and in accordance with the pipe manufacturer’s recommendations. Although we do not anticipate soft, unsuitable pipe subgrade at any particular location, it can occur with shallow groundwater conditions and sandy soils. Notify the project engineer and Blackburn for review and mitigation recommendations if encountered. To achieve a stable and non-yielding subgrade suitable for pipe placement and backfilling, typical mitigation may include:
• Replacement of unsuitable subgrade with ¾-inch minus crushed rock (minimum of 6 inches) • Enclose rock in geotextile filtration fabric such as Mirafi 140N (or equivalent).

A granular pipe zone material may be used. Native soils will contain a significant amount of fines (passing #200 sieve) and will not be suitable for bedding or pipe zone backfill. For pipe bedding and initial backfill material (which extends to 1 foot above the top of pipe) use material that meet the specification in Table 6.7.

Table 6.7: Pipe Bedding and Initial Backfill Requirements Gradation Test Procedures
Sieve Size Percent Passing ASTM Caltrans
1 inch 100 D6913 202
¾ inch 90-100 D6913 202
No. 4 35-60 D6913 202
No. 30 10-30 D6913 202
No. 200 2-5 D6913 202
Sand Equivalent
Minimum 25 D2974
Blackburn considers the following materials to be suitable as alternative pipe zone (bedding) backfill material:
• Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM)
• Controlled Density Fill (CDF)

6.7.10.2 Trench Backfill
Trench backfill above the Pipe Zone material may consist of excavated soils. Fill should be free of debris and concentrations of vegetation or clay soils and meet the specifications in Table 6.8.

DRAFT

6.7.10 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1583
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
54 Table 6.8: Intermediate Trench Backfill Requirements Gradation Test Procedures
Sieve Size Percent Passing ASTM Caltrans
3 inch 100 D6913 202
No. 200 20-70 D6913 202
Organic Content
Less than 3% D2974
Expansion Index
Less than 20 D4829
If import fill is required for trench backfill, it should be graded and have material properties as follows:
• 100% passing the 1-inch sieve
• 75% to 100% passing the #4 sieve
• Minimum 12% passing the #200 sieve
• Plasticity Index not greater than 20
• Free of debris and concentrations of vegetation.

Use ¾-inch Class 2 AB in the upper 12-inches of the trench within roadways.

6.7.10.3 Trench Backfill Compaction
Follow the pipe manufacturer’s requirements for initial backfill to avoid damage to the pipe. To facilitate compaction in the pipe zone area (top of bedding up to 12 inches above pipe), use a trench width that provides a minimum clearance of 12 inches between the pipe and trench wall. • Moisture condition trench backfill to within 2% of optimum moisture content and compact to a minimum 92% relative compaction (based on ASTM 1557) below 10 feet and 90% relative compaction (based on ASTM 1557) above 10 feet.
• Use a maximum compacted lift thickness of 8 inches unless field performance testing can demonstrate adequate compaction of thicker lifts.
• Jetting is not acceptable for compaction.

Test all trench backfill (bedding, pipe zone backfill, trench zone, etc.):
• At vertical increments of not more than 1 foot and at final grade or pavement subgrade. • At horizontal testing frequencies of at least one test for every 200 linear feet of pipe (both sides of pipe in pipe zone).
• Complete at least one compaction curve (Proctor) for each material type, source location (for import), and as changes in native materials occur. Material changes include a change in material designation based on the Unified Soil Classification System. • Testing frequency can be adjusted based on contractor performance, ease of compaction, and material variability.

DRAFT

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1584
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
55 Soil excavated during pipe installation can have moisture contents well over optimum, especially during the winter and spring months or if perched water is encountered. In this case, it will be necessary to dry back the soil to within 2% of optimum moisture content prior to use as backfill.

It is important to achieve compaction of pipe zone materials at the pipe haunches and spring line; compaction below the pipe spring line will be a difficult task for the contractor. We recommend a compaction demonstration section to test placement and compaction means and methods for each material type that will be used.

Equalization Basin Concrete Lining
Concrete pavement is proposed to line the Equalization Basin. Prepare the subgrade as discussed in Section 6.7.4.2 and 6.7.4.3. We understand the pavement will not be subject to regular wheel loads.

Design concrete pavement in accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI) Guide for the Design and Construction of Concrete Parking Lots (ACI 330R-08). • Use a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pci.
• Use a minimum of 6 -inches of concrete over 8 inches of Class 2 AB. • Concrete reinforcement, doweling, curing, joint spacing, and mix design should conform to ACI guidelines.

Aggregate base (AB) should conform to Caltrans Class 2 requirements. Moisture condition and compact AB to a minimum 95% relative compaction based on ASTM D1557. Prior to placing concrete, the aggregate base should be stable under the weight of a loaded water truck. Mitigate unstable areas as recommended by Blackburn.

Concrete pavement must meet the following requirements:
• Minimum 28-day compressive strength of 3,500 psi.
• Joint spacing will be determined by the structural engineer in accordance with ACI 350-06.

The Civil Engineer should design the final joint types/spacing and appropriate concrete mix design. 7 WATER TANK AND BOOSTER STATION
Site Location and Description
The OPUD South Yuba Sewer Infrastructure Project includes a 1 MG steel storage tank, water well, booster station, and on-site piping. Appendix E1 shows the proposed improvement location.

The proposed water tank and booster station will be constructed in a vacant lot northeast of the existing Casino water tank. Based on aerial photographs the lot appears to be free of vegetation and graded level.

DRAFT

6.7.11 7.1

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1585
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
56 Previous Studies
To prepare this section of the report, Blackburn reviewed Geocon Consultants, Inc.’s “Geotechnical Investigation – Enterprise Rancheria Casino, October 2014” (Geocon Investigation) and limited explorations from our pipeline exploration for the OPUD project. We will perform site-specific subsurface explorations, laboratory testing, and analysis to provide final design recommendations for the water tank and booster station.

Geology
We reviewed geology maps and the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Web Soil Survey (https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm). The “Geologic Map of the Late Cenozoic Deposits of the Sacramento Valley and Northern Sierra Foothills, California” (Helley and Harwood, 1985) shows the site underlain by the Upper Member, Riverbank Formation that consists of unconsolidated, but compact, dark brown to red, alluvium composed of gravel, sand, silt, and clay.

Subsurface Findings
General Subsurface Soil Conditions
In Blackburn boring TC-12A, drilled on September 9, 2020 approximately 2,000 feet from the proposed tank site, we generally encountered stiff to very stiff lean clay and silt with sand within the upper 15 feet underlain by approximately 15 feet of medium dense clayey sand and sand with silt. Hard silt from 30 feet to 40 feet underlain by very dense sand with silt to maximum depth explored (51.5 feet).

The Geocon Investigation (2014) indicates that the subsurface soils across the Casino site consist of:
• Approximately 2.5 to 4 feet of moderately to highly expansive clay (the upper 1 to 1.5 feet of which is loose due to disturbance by agricultural operations), underlain by • Very stiff to hard clays and silts with varying sand contents and sands with varying fines contents to the maximum depth explored (41.5 feet).
• Some zones of cementation encountered throughout the subsurface soil profile.

Groundwater
In our borings TC-12A and TC-12B, drilled September 9, 2020, we measured groundwater at depths of 24 and 17 feet (respectively) below ground surface.

Geocon’s Investigation for the casino drilled only one boring deeper than 27 feet. That boring log (Boring B1) indicates groundwater at 29 ft below ground surface.

7.2 7.3

7.4 7.4.1

7.4.2 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1586
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
57 (https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#gwlevels). Based on this information, the depth to groundwater at the site typically ranges from 20 to 30 feet, although it occasionally is measured above 20 feet. Relatively shallow perched water may occur within the near-surface soils during the winter and spring months, and adjacent to the existing canals and streams.

Groundwater and perched water levels can fluctuate due to changes in precipitation, canal and creek levels, irrigation, pumping of wells, and other factors.

Preliminary Design Considerations – Water Tank and Booster Station Facility Ground Suitability
The site will be suitable for the planned facilities when constructed in accordance with the project plans, industry standards, and our geotechnical recommendations.

Geologic Hazards
• Faulting—The potential for surface rupture or creep due to faulting at the site is very low. The Fault Activity Map of California12 and the Geologic Map of the Sacramento Quadrangle13 does not identify Historic or Holocene age faults (displacement within the last 11,700 years) within or immediately adjacent to the site. The site does not lie within or adjacent to an Alquist–Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone14.
• Ground Shaking— For the Maximum Considered Earthquake, a peak horizontal ground acceleration (PGA) of approximately 0.21g could be expected. • Liquefaction—Our investigation shows a soil profile that consists of stiff to hard clays and medium dense to dense sands ad silty and clayey sands that are not liquefiable. Therefore, the potential for damaging liquefaction at the site is very low. • Landslides and Slope Stability—Due to the relatively low topographic relief we do not expect landslides or natural slope failure.
• Seismically Induced Settlement—During a seismic event, ground shaking can cause densification of granular soil that can result in settlement of the ground surface. Considering the cohesive soils and medium dense to dense soils observed in the borings, we consider the potential for significant seismically induced settlement to be very low.

Seismic Design
Based on the mapped geology and nearby boring data, use a Site Class “D” (stiff soil). Table 7.1 presents the 2019 California Building Code (Chapter 16) and ASCE 7-16 seismic design parameters for the site.
12 Jennings, Charles W., and Bryant, William A., 2010 Fault Activity Map of California: California Geological Survey, Geologic Data Map No. 6.
13 Saucedo, G.J. and Wagner, D.L., et al, 1992, Geologic map of the Chico quadrangle, California, 1: 250,000:

California Division of Mines and Geology, Regional Geologic Map 7A, scale 1: 250,000 14 Bryant, W.A., and Hart, E.W., 2007 (Interim Revision), Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42.

DRAFT

7.5 7.5.1

7.5.2 7.5.3

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1587
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
58 Table 7.1: 2019 CBC Seismic Design Parameters (Site Class D) Ss – MCER ground motion (0.2 second period) 0.495 g
S1 – MCER ground motion (1.0 second period) 0.24 g
Fa – Site Coefficient 1.404
Fv – Site Coefficient 2.111
SMS – Adjusted MCE* Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter 0.695 g SM1 – Adjusted MCE* Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter 0.509 g1 SDS – Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter 0.464 g
SD1 – Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter 0.339 g1
Seismic Design Category C1
**TL – Long Period Transition Period 12 sec
PGA 0.213
* Maximum Considered Earthquake
** Figure 22-14, ASCE 7-16
1 – We assume that the seismic response coefficient, Cs, is determined by ASCE 7-16 Eq. (12.8-2) for values of T ≤ 1.5Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either ASCE 7- 16 Eq. (12.8-3) for TL ≥T > 1.5Ts or Eq. (12.8-4) for T > TL. Contact Blackburn to re-evaluate the above parameters if this assumption is not valid.

If the proposed design does not meet the exception noted above (note 1) a site-specific response analysis will be required for final design.

General Grading Recommendations

7.5.4.1 Excavation Conditions
Based on the soil conditions and drilling performance, excavation is possible with conventional equipment (common earthmoving equipment and large backhoe/excavator). The fine-grained and hard soil conditions can create slow excavation conditions and is not suitable for structure backfill.

7.5.4.2 Site Clearing
Prior to making any cuts and fills, remove existing underground utilities, foundations, vegetation (root balls and roots), debris, and other underground features in accordance with this Geotechnical Report.

Remove loose and disturbed soil caused by the removal(s) and widen the excavation/depression so it is accessible to compaction equipment. Remove strippings from the site or use as landscape soil in designated areas.

7.5.4.3 Original Ground and Subgrade Preparation
The site has historically been covered by agricultural fields. To avoid loose disturbed soils and adverse settlement, overexcavate the tank footprint and 5 feet beyond to a depth of 3 feet below existing grade.

After overexcavation, compact the exposed soil at the bottom of the excavation as follows:
• Scarify the exposed soil to a depth of approximately 8 inches.

DRAFT

7.5.4 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1588
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
59 • Moisture condition subgrade to within 3% of the optimum moisture content. • Compact the subgrade soil to a minimum 90% relative compaction based on ASTM D1557. • Backfill the excavation with General Fill as recommended below.

7.5.4.4 General Fill Placement and Compaction
General fill (not trench or structure backfill) may consist of on-site soil provided it contains no rocks larger than 3 inches in maximum dimension. Fill should be free of debris and concentrations of vegetation.

If import for general fill is required, it must be free of debris and meet the following requirements:

Table 7.2: General Backfill Import Requirements
Gradation Test Procedures
Sieve Size Percent Passing ASTM Caltrans
1 inch 100 D6913 202
No. 4 75-100 D6913 202
No. 200 12-100 D6913 202
Plasticity Index
Less than 20 D4318
• Approved by Blackburn prior to site delivery.

Place and compact general fill as follows:
• Place fill in maximum 8-inch-thick loose lifts,
• Moisture condition the soil within 3% of optimum
• Compact the soil to a minimum 90% relative compaction based on ASTM D1557.

Dewatering
We do not expect deep excavations for the water tank construction. Dewatering may be required for installations greater than approximately 15 feet deep (see Section 7.4.2).

Dewatering can consist of:

DRAFT

7.5.5 BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1589
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
60 • Deep sumps within the excavation. Considering the presence of fine-grained soils and relatively flat lying bedding, sumps within the excavation are not likely to provide good drawdown. • Well points. Well points will likely work better to cut off flow into the excavation and drawdown the water level over a larger area.

Temporary Excavations
Temporary excavations will require sloping and/or shoring in accordance with Cal OSHA requirements.

Based on our subsurface explorations for other portions of the Project, preliminary excavation and shoring design may be based on Type A soil to planned excavation depth. For Type A soil conditions, temporary excavations may be sloped at ¾(H):1(V).

Where groundwater is present or cohesionless/uncemented granular soils are encountered, Type C soil conditions will apply and a 1.5(H):1(V) slope gradient is required.

Foundations

7.5.7.1 Shallow Foundations
We expect the tank foundation to consist of a perimeter (ring) footing, with a compacted baserock interior.
• Embed the footing a minimum of 18 inches into the lowest adjacent prepared subgrade. • Footings must be a minimum of 18 inches wide.
• Size footings not to exceed an allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot (dead load plus live load). The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third if seismic and/or wind loads are included.
• Clean footing excavations of debris and loose soil prior to placing concrete. • Blackburn must observe all footing excavations prior to reinforcement placement to verify competent bearing materials.
• Slope the ground surface away from foundations at a minimum of 2 percent for a distance of at least 5 feet.

DRAFT

7.5.6 7.5.7

BLACKBURN

CONSULTING
~
1590
Section 3, Item # 3.1

UPDATED DRAFT PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT OPUD – South Yuba Sewer and Water Infrastructure Project, Olivehurst, CA April 30, 2021
61 • To resist lateral movement, use a coefficient of friction of 0.35 psf at the base of the foundation and a passive earth pressure of 200 psf per foot of embedment depth up to a maximum of 3,000 psf. Ignore the upper one-foot of footing depth (below the lowest adjacent soil grade) in determination of the passive pressure. Both frictional resistance and passive earth pressure can be combined for lateral resistance; when combined, increase the safety factor against sliding from a minimum of 1.5 to 2.0.
• Based on typical Riverbank soils we anticipate total settlement to be less than 1-2 inches and differential settlement less than ½-inch over a length of 50 feet. We anticipate approximately half of the total settlement will occur during loading of the foundations and half will occur when the tank is filled.

7.5.7.2 Minor Structures
Provided that the recommendations in this report are followed, minor structures may be founded on concrete mat or strip footings, or a compacted granular base (minimum of 6 inches of Class 2 baserock) if appropriate.
• Embed the foundations a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent prepared subgrade into firm native soil or compacted fill/backfill.
• Footings must be a minimum of 12 inches wide and sized not to exceed an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third if seismic and/or wind loads are included.
• Concrete slabs with crushed rock underlayment may be designed using a Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, ks, of 25 pounds per cubic inch (pci) in cut or fill locations where engineered fill is placed as recommended in this report.
• If additional bearing capacity is required for specific minor structures, we can review and provide recommendations on a case-by-case basis.
• To resist lateral movement, use a coefficient of friction of 0.40 at the base of the foundation and a passive earth pressure of 200 psf per foot of embedment depth up to a maximum of 2,000 psf.

Wheatland City CouncilNovember 10, 2025

Wheatland City Council
November 10, 2025