51 GHG emissions that define when permits under the New Source Review Prevention of Significant Deterioration and title V Operating Permit programs are required for new and existing industrial facilities.
In addition, the Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA (Supreme Court Case 05-1120) found that the USEPA has the authority to list GHGs as pollutants and to regulate emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) under the CAA. On April 17, 2009, the USEPA found that CO2, CH4, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride may contribute to air pollution and may endanger public health and welfare. This finding may result in the USEPA regulating GHG emissions; however, to date the USEPA has not propose regulations based on this finding.
3.8.2. State & Local Regulatory Setting
The City’s Resource Efficiency Plan as designed under the premise that the City, and the community it represents, is uniquely capable of addressing emissions associated with sources under the City’s jurisdiction and that the City’s emission reduction efforts should coordinate with the state strategies of reducing emissions in order to accomplish these reductions in an efficient and cost-effective manner. The City developed this document with the following purposes in mind:
▪ Local Control: The Efficiency Plan allows the City to identify strategies to reduce resource consumption, costs, and GHG emissions in all economic sectors in a way that maintains local control over the issues and fits the character of the community. It also may position the City for funding to implement programs tied to climate goals.
▪ Energy and Resource Efficiency: The Efficiency Plan identifies opportunities for the City to increase energy efficiency and lower GHG emissions in a manner that is most feasible within the community. Reducing energy consumption through increasing the efficiency of energy technologies, reducing energy use, and using renewable sources of energy are effective ways to reduce GHG emissions. Energy efficiency also provides opportunities for cost‐savings. ▪ Improved Public Health: Many of the GHG reduction strategies identified in the Efficiency Plan also have local public health benefits. Benefits include local air quality improvements; creating a more active community through implementing resource‐efficient living practices; and reducing health risks, such as heat stroke, that would be otherwise elevated by climate change impacts such as increased extreme heat days.
Demonstrating Consistency with State GHG Reduction Goals—A GHG reduction plan may be used as GHG mitigation in the General Plan to demonstrate that the City is aligned with State goals for reducing GHG emissions to a level considered less than cumulatively considerable.
3.8.3. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
See response below.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are referred to as greenhouse gases (GHGs) because they capture heat radiated from the sun as it is reflected back into the atmosphere, similar to a greenhouse. The
52 accumulation of GHGs has been implicated as a driving force for Global Climate Change. Definitions of climate change vary between and across regulatory authorities and the scientific community, but in general can be described as the changing of the climate caused by natural fluctuations and the impact of human activities that alter the composition of the global atmosphere. Both natural processes and human activities emit GHGs. Global Climate Change is a change in the average weather on earth that can be measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. Although there is disagreement as to the speed of global warming and the extent of the impacts attributable to human activities, the vast majority of the scientific community now agrees that there is a direct link between increased emission of GHGs and long-term global temperature. Potential global warming impacts in California may include, but are not limited to, loss in snowpack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more high ozone days, more large forest fires, and more drought years. Secondary effects are likely to include a global rise in sea level, impacts to agriculture, changes in disease vectors, and changes in habitat and biodiversity.
GHG impacts are considered to be exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective (CAPCOA).
The construction of multiple-family residences or other uses that could result from this GPA/RZ would create GHG emissions due to the use of motorized construction equipment. Once completed, vehicle traffic generated by auto use will contribute GHG gases. This project involves only a general plan amendment and rezoning. No physical development proposed. As such, this Project will not directly result in the generation of any GHG emissions. As such there will be no impact from increased GHG emissions.
Although actual development projects may result from this action, it is not possible to know which properties and what types and sizes of projects may be proposed. As such, it is premature and speculative at this time to determine what the impacts would be. Since the City’s review process of actual development proposals would likely trigger its own CEQA review, including GHG emissions, a review of GHG impacts will be conducted at the time a development project is proposed.
53 3.9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Table 3-9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X
d) Be located on a site, which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
X
3.9.1. Federal Regulatory Setting
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA): The USEPA was established in 1970 to consolidate in one agency a variety of federal research, monitoring, standard setting, and enforcement activities to ensure environmental protection. USEPA's mission is to protect human health and to safeguard the natural environment — air, water, and land — upon which life depends. USEPA works to develop and enforce regulations that implement environmental laws enacted by Congress, is responsible for researching and setting national standards for a variety of environmental programs, and delegates to states and tribes the responsibility for issuing permits and for monitoring and enforcing compliance. Where national standards are not met, USEPA can issue sanctions and take other steps to assist the states and tribes in reaching the desired levels of environmental quality.
54 Federal Toxic Substances Control Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act/Hazardous and Solid Waste Act: The Federal Toxic Substances Control Act (1976) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) established a program administered by the USEPA for the regulation of the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act (HSWA), which affirmed and extended the “cradle to grave” system of regulating hazardous wastes.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act/Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress on December 11, 1980. This law (U.S.
Code Title 42, Chapter 103) provides broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. CERCLA establishes requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites; provides for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites; and establishes a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party can be identified. CERCLA also enables the revision of the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The NCP (Title 40, Code of Federal Regulation [CFR], Part 300) provides the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and/or contaminants. The NCP also established the National Priorities List (NPL).
CERCLA was amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) on October 17, 1986.
Clean Water Act/SPCC Rule: The Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq., formerly the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972), was enacted with the intent of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States. As part of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. EPA oversees and enforces the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation contained in Title 40 of the CFR, Part 112 (Title 40 CFR, Part 112) which is often referred to as the “SPCC rule” because the regulations describe the requirements for facilities to prepare, amend and implement Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans: A facility is subject to SPCC regulations if a single oil storage tank has a capacity greater than 660 gallons, or the total above ground oil storage capacity exceeds 1,320 gallons, or the underground oil storage capacity exceeds 42,000 gallons, and if, due to its location, the facility could reasonably be expected to discharge oil into or upon the “Navigable Waters” of the United States.
Other federal regulations overseen by the U.S. EPA relevant to hazardous materials and environmental contamination include Title 40, CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter D – Water Programs and Subchapter I – Solid Wastes. Title 40, CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter D, Parts 116 and 117 designate hazardous substances under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act: Title 40, CFR, Part 116 sets forth a determination of the reportable quantity for each substance that is designated as hazardous. Title 40, CFR, Part 117 applies to quantities of designated substances equal to or greater than the reportable quantities that may be discharged into waters of the United States.
The NFPA 70®: National Electrical Code® is adopted in all 50 states. Any electrical work associated with the proposed project is required to comply with the standards set forth in this code. Several federal regulations govern hazards as they are related to transportation issues. They include:
Title 49, CFR, Sections 171-177 (49 CFR 171-177), governs the transportation of hazardous materials, the types of materials defined as hazardous, and the marking of the transportation vehicles. 49 CFR 350-399, and Appendices A-G, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, address safety considerations for the transport of goods, materials, and substances over public highways.
55 49 CFR 397.9, the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1974, directs the U.S. Department of Transportation to establish criteria and regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials.
3.9.2. State Regulatory Setting
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA): The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) was created in 1991 by Governor’s Executive Order. The six boards, departments, and office were placed under the CalEPA umbrella to create a cabinet-level voice for the protection of human health and the environment and to assure the coordinated deployment of State resources. The mission of CalEPA is to restore, protect, and enhance the environment to ensure public health, environmental quality, and economic vitality under Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR).
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC): DTSC is a department of Cal/EPA and is the primary agency in California that regulates hazardous waste, cleans-up existing contamination, and looks for ways to reduce the hazardous waste produced in California. DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California primarily under the authority of RCRA and the California Health and Safety Code. Other laws that affect hazardous waste are specific to handling, storage, transportation, disposal, treatment, reduction, cleanup, and emergency planning. Government Code Section 65962.5 (commonly referred to as the Cortese List) includes DTSC listed hazardous waste facilities and sites, DHS lists of contaminated drinking water wells, sites listed by the SWRCB as having UST leaks and which have had a discharge of hazardous wastes or materials into the water or groundwater and lists from local regulatory agencies of sites that have had a known migration of hazardous waste/material.
Unified Program: The Unified Program (codified CCR Title 27, Division 1, Subdivision 4, Chapter 1, Sections 15100- 15620) consolidates, coordinates, and makes consistent the administrative requirements, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities of the following six environmental and emergency response programs:
▪ Hazardous Waste Generator (HWG) program and Hazardous Waste On-site Treatment activities; ▪ Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) program Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan requirements;
▪ Underground Storage Tank (UST) program;
▪ Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory (HMRRP) program; ▪ California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) program; ▪ Hazardous Materials Management Plans and Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement (HMMP/HMIS) requirements.
The Secretary of CalEPA is directly responsible for coordinating the administration of the Unified Program.
The Unified Program requires all counties to apply to the CalEPA Secretary for the certification of a local unified program agency. Qualified cities are also permitted to apply for certification. The local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) is required to consolidate, coordinate, and make consistent the administrative requirements, permits, fee structures, and inspection and enforcement activities for these six program elements in the county. Most CUPAs have been established as a function of a local environmental health or fire department.
Hazardous Waste Management Program: The Hazardous Waste Management Program (HWMP) regulates hazardous waste through its permitting, enforcement, and Unified Program activities in
56 accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 25135 et seq. The main focus of HWMP is to ensure the safe storage, treatment, transportation, and disposal of hazardous wastes.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB): The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) was created by the California legislature in 1967. The mission of SWRCB is to ensure the highest reasonable quality for waters of the State, while allocating those waters to achieve the optimum balance of beneficial uses. The joint authority of water allocation and water quality protection enables SWRCB to provide comprehensive protection for California’s waters.
California Department of Industrial Relations – Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal OSHA): In California, every employer has a legal obligation to provide and maintain a safe and healthful workplace for employees, according to the California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 (per Title 8 of the CCR). The Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) program is responsible for enforcing California laws and regulations pertaining to workplace safety and health and for providing assistance to employers and workers about workplace safety and health issues. Cal/OSHA regulations are administered through Title 8 of the CCR. The regulations require all manufacturers or importers to assess the hazards of substances that they produce or import and all employers to provide information to their employees about the hazardous substances to which they may be exposed.
California Fire Code: The California Fire Code is Part 9 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, also referred to as the California Building Standards Code. The California Fire Code incorporates the Uniform Fire Code with necessary California amendments. This Code prescribes regulations consistent with nationally recognized good practice for the safeguarding to a reasonable degree of life and property from the hazards of fire explosion, and dangerous conditions arising from the storage, handling and use of hazardous materials and devices, and from conditions hazardous to life or property in the use or occupancy of buildings or premises and provisions to assist emergency response personnel.
3.9.3. Local Regulatory Setting
Sutter County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan: The SCACLUP was adopted in April 1994 by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG). SACOG is the designated Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba Counties under the provisions of the California Public Utilities Code, Chapter 4, Article 3.5, Section 21670.1 Airport Land Use Commission Law. The purpose of the ALUC law is to (1) protect public health, safety, and welfare through the adoption of land use standards that minimize the public’s exposure to safety hazards and excessive levels of noise, and (2) Prevent the encroachment of incompatible land uses around public-use airports, thereby preserving the utilities of these airports into the future.
3.9.4. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
The Project will allow for increased density of multiple-family residential uses and other uses that could develop on the proposed candidate sites. There will be standard hazardous materials such as gasoline and diesel fuels in use during the development, that may result from this Project. However, existing regulations are in place on several levels (Federal, State, and local) which directly address potential threats associated with this item. Assuming Federal, state, and local regulations are complied with, this potential impact is considered to be less than significant.
57 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? The presence of hazardous materials anticipated with development that could result from this GPA/RZ are primarily related to construction and grading equipment which includes solvents, oil, and fuel.
However, regulations are in place on several levels (Federal, State, and local) which directly address potential threats associated with these materials. Assuming Federal, state, and local regulations are complied with, this potential impact is considered less than significant. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Some proposed sites are located within a quarter mile of a school (Andros Karperos Middle School). The proposed Project is a General Plan Amendment and Rezone that will allow higher density residential development to occur on the Project sites, though no specific development project is currently proposed.
It is anticipated that future residential development would use household items that could contain hazardous chemicals including, but not limited to, motor oil and/ or diesel fuel, solvents, paint and paint waste, cleaning supplies, car batteries, and pesticides could adversely impact the school. However, the amount of materials used or stored associated with multiple-family construction (primarily fuel, oil and lubricants for equipment use) would be small. Since the use of such materials would be extremely limited and expected to be used according to manufacturers’ instructions, the impact on nearby schools will be less than significant.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
The sites are not on any listings of sites that are contaminated by hazardous wastes, including any wastes that may relate to historic agricultural use. No impact is anticipated. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
The Reginal Housing Authority owned properties are located within the boundary of the Sutter County Airport Compatibility Land Use Plan (Sutter County Airport CLUP). The Sutter County Airport CLUP provides polices regulating land uses near the airport. Regarding building height, any multiple-family residential development that may result from this GPA/RZ will be subject to the R-3 Zone District four story, 48-foot height limit which is below the several imaginary cones that limit height around the airport.
It may be possible in future years, however, that the trees planted to landscape the property could grow into one of those zones. This should not be significant as the trees can be topped if needed.
58 There are also three safety zones around the airport that limit uses, the Clear Zone, the Approach and Departure Zone, and the Overflight Zone. The RHA portion of the Project is outside of the Clear Zone, which is the area within 200 feet of the end of the runway. It is also outside of the Approach and Departure Zone which is the area extending in a cone pattern beyond the 200-foot Clear Zone for 2,000 feet. The Project is within the Overflight Zone, which is the area overflown by aircraft during normal traffic pattern procedures but outside of the Clear Zone and Approach and Departure Zone. The Overflight Zone limits the type of acceptable uses, but multiple-family residences are considered to be compatible in the Overflight Zone.
The proposed GPA/RZ is in conformance with the Sutter Airport CLUP and therefore is not a potential for significant impacts on future residents of the multi-family residences nor to airport operations. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The Yuba City Fire Department and Police Department currently provided emergency services to the Project sites. The Project would result in a residential density increase that may result from the potential construction of multiple-family residences. Neither agency has expressed concern over impacts the Project may have on any emergency response plans. As such there would be a less than significant impact. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
The Project sites are located in planned urban areas that are surrounded by a variety of land uses, including residential, commercial/office, and light industrial uses. There are no wildlands on the subject sites or in the immediate vicinity that would result in a potential risk of wildfire. There would be a less than significant impact.
59 3.10. Hydrology and Water Quality
Table 3-10: Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
X
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that
would:
X
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite? X ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite?
X
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
X
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation? X
e) Conflict with, or obstruct implementation of, a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
X
3.10.1. Federal Regulatory Setting
Clean Water Act: The Clean Water Act (CWA) is intended to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters (33 CFR 1251). The regulations implementing the CWA protect waters of the U.S. including streams and wetlands (33 CFR 328.3). The CWA requires states to set standards to protect, maintain, and restore water quality by regulating point source and some non-point source discharges. Under Section 402 of the CWA, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process was established to regulate these discharges.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Zones: The National Flood Insurance Act (1968) makes available federally subsidized flood insurance to owners of flood-prone properties. To facilitate identifying areas with flood potential, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has developed
60 Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) that can be used for planning purposes. Flood hazard areas identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map are identified as a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). SFHA are defined as the area that will be inundated by the flood event having a 1-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The 1-percent annual chance flood is also referred to as the base flood or 100- year flood. SFHAs are labeled as Zone A, Zone AO, Zone AH, Zones A1-A30, Zone AE, Zone A99, Zone AR, Zone AR/AE, Zone AR/AO, Zone AR/A1-A30, Zone AR/A, Zone V, Zone VE, and Zones V1-V30. Moderate flood hazard areas, labeled Zone B or Zone X (shaded) are also shown on the FIRM, and are the areas between the limits of the base flood and the 0.2-percent-annual-chance (or 500-year) flood. The areas of minimal flood hazard, which are the areas outside the SFHA and higher than the elevation of the 0.2- percent-annual-chance flood, are labeled Zone C or Zone X (unshaded).
3.10.2. State Regulatory Setting
State Water Resources Control Board: The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is the agency with jurisdiction over water quality issues in the State of California. The WRCB is governed by the PorterCologne Water Quality Act (Division 7 of the California Water Code), which establishes the legal framework for water quality control activities by the SWRCB. The intent of the Porter- Cologne Act is to regulate factors which may affect the quality of waters of the State to attain the highest quality which is reasonable, considering a full range of demands and values. Much of the implementation of the SWRCB's responsibilities is delegated to its nine Regional Boards. The project site is located within the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control board.
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB): administers the NPDES storm waterpermitting program in the Central Valley region. Construction activities on one acre or more are subject to the permitting requirements of the NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Runoff Associated with Construction Activity (General Construction Permit). Additionally, CVRWQCB is responsible for issuing Waste Discharge Requirements Orders under California Water Code Section 13260, Article 4, Waste Discharge Requirements.
State Department of Water Resources: California Water Code (Sections 10004 et seq.) requires that the State Department of Water Resources update the State Water Plan every five years. The 2013 update is the most current review and included (but is not limited to) the following conclusions:
▪ The total number of wells completed in California between 1977 and 2010 is approximately 432,469 and ranges from a high of 108,346 wells for the Sacramento River Hydrologic Region to a low of 4,069 wells for the North Lahontan Hydrologic Region. ▪ Based on the June 2014 California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) basin prioritization for California’s 515 groundwater basins, 43 basins are identified as high priority, 84 basins as medium priority, 27 basins as low priority, and the remaining 361 basins as very low priority.
▪ The 127 basins designated as high or medium priority account for 96 percent of the average annual statewide groundwater use and 88 percent of the 2010 population overlying the groundwater basin area.
▪ Depth-to-groundwater contours were developed for the unconfined aquifer system in the Central Valley. In the Sacramento Valley, the spring 2010 groundwater depths range from less than 10 feet below ground surface (bgs) to approximately 50 feet bgs, with local areas showing maximum depths of as much as 160 feet bgs.
61 ▪ The most prevalent groundwater contaminants affecting California’s community drinking water wells are arsenic, nitrate, gross alpha activity, and perchlorate.
California Government Code 65302 (d): The General Plan must contain a Conservation Element for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources including water and its hydraulic force, forests, soils, river and other waters, harbors, fisheries, wildlife, minerals, and other natural resources.
That portion of the conservation element including waters shall be developed in coordination with any County-wide water agency and with all district and city agencies which have developed, served, controlled, or conserved water for any purpose for the County or city for which the plan is prepared.
Coordination shall include the discussion and evaluation of any water supply and demand information described in Section 65352.5 if that information has been submitted by the water agency to the city or County. The conservation element may also cover:
▪ The reclamation of land and waters.
▪ Prevention and control of the pollution of streams and other waters. ▪ Regulation of the use of land in stream channels and other areas required for the accomplishment of the conservation plan.
▪ Prevention, control, and correction of the erosion of soils, beaches, and shores. ▪ Protection of watersheds.
▪ The location, quantity and quality of the rock, sand, and gravel resources. ▪ Flood control.
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act: On September 16, 2014, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. signed historic legislation to strengthen local management and monitoring of groundwater basins most critical to the state’s water needs. The three bills, SB 1168 (Pavley) SB 1319 (Pavley) and AB 1739 (Dickinson) together makeup the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act comprehensively reforms groundwater management in California. The intent of the Act is to place management at the local level, although the state may intervene to manage basins when local agencies fail to take appropriate responsibility. The Act provides authority for local agency management of groundwater and requires creation of groundwater sustainability agencies and implementation of plans to achieve groundwater sustainability within basins of high and medium-priority.
3.10.3. Local Regulatory Setting
The City requires demonstration of a viable water supply, storm water treatment planning and drainage controls as part of all new development.
3.10.4. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Due to the increase in density from lower density residential uses or planned office uses to high density residential development that would result from the Project, it is anticipated that once properties are developed there will be an increase in water consumption. Most of the City’s public water supply comes from the Feather River. The water is pumped from the river to the Water Treatment Plant located in northern Yuba City. Due to recent drought conditions, the plant also sometimes utilizes a well in addition
62 to surface water supplies. The Project will have no impact on the quality of City water, as the expected uses stemming from the GPA/RZ will be connected to the City’s wastewater disposal system which are not expected to violate any waste discharge standards.
Even though the area is relatively flat, during site grading a large storm could result in the loss of topsoil into the City drainage system. However, as part of future development of the Project sites, the developers will be subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. This triggers the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes City adopted Best Management Practices designed to prevent sediment and pollutants from contacting stormwaters moving offsite into receiving waters during the construction process. Assuming all necessary permits are acquired, impacts on water quality are anticipated to be less than significant.
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? While water consumption will increase from residential development that could result from the Project, very little, if any, groundwater will be utilized as the City primarily utilizes surface water in its system, resulting in a less than significant impact.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site in a manner that would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
No physical development is proposed on the sites as part of this Project. However, future multiple-family development that may result from this action will likely require the extension or enhancement of existing stormwater drainage infrastructure to convey storm water runoff from the sites into the City’s storm water drainage system. Future development will be required to meet City standards for underground utility infrastructure.
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Project sites are outside of the 100- year flood plain. These areas are classified as such because of the extensive series of levees and dams along the Feather River, which protects the City from potential flooding. The west Feather River levee has been improved in recent years due to work completed by the Sutter Buttes Flood Control Agency (SBFCA).
Levee improvements have established 200-year flood protection for all sites being considered by this Project. Drainage system improvements form development that may occur as a result of this GPA/RZ will provide stormwater relief to this area. Therefore, development that may result from this GPA/RZ will not result in placement of structures in a floodway or result in redirection of flood flows. Assuming all required standards are met there is not expected to be any significant impacts from additional storm water drainage from the Project.
63 d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? The City is not in proximity to the ocean or any large lakes, such that a seiche or tsunami is unlikely to happen in or near the City. Mudflows and landslides are unlikely to happen due to the relatively flat topography within the Project area. Thus, it is unlikely that the Project sites would be subject to inundation by a seiche, tsunami, mudflow, or landslide. Additionally, the anticipated multi-family residential development planned for the sites would not contain, store, or otherwise involve any large amounts of potential pollutants. Therefore, the increased risk from the release of pollutants is less than a significant impact.
e) Conflict with, or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
As previously stated, most of the City’s public water supply comes from the Feather River. The water is pumped from the river to the City’s Water Treatment Plant located in northern Yuba City. The plant also sometimes utilizes a well in addition to surface water supplies due to recent drought conditions. Since the Project sites will only receive water through the City system, it is unlikely that the Project could impact the water quality in the City system. There would be a less than significant impact.
3.11. Land Use and Planning
Table 3-11: Land Use and Planning
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to
a conflict with any land use plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
X
3.11.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
The Project includes 35 parcels located generally in four areas within the City. The sites are infill parcels that are intended for urban development per the Yuba City General Plan. The sites are surrounded by a variety of uses including single-family residential, commercial, and light industrial uses.
3.11.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
There are no federal or state regulations pertaining to land use and planning relevant to the proposed Project.
64 3.11.3. Local Regulatory Setting
The Land Use Element of the General Plan establishes guidance for the ultimate pattern of growth in the City’s Sphere of Influence. It provides direction regarding how lands are to be used, where growth will occur, the density/intensity and physical form of that growth, and key design considerations.
3.11.4. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Physically divide an established community?
The Project will not physically divide an established community. The sites are located throughout the City, and are surrounded by a variety of existing uses, including single-family residential, commercial, office, and light industrial. The Project amends land use designations for all 35 parcels to Medium/High Density Residential to allow for high density residential development. Infill development with multi-family residential structures and associated improvements will not divide the community. The development of the sites will improve public roadways and pedestrian connections and will facilitate a higher degree of connectivity within the community. The planned uses are compatible with the surrounding land uses, roadway network, and existing infrastructure serving the sites. Generally speaking, multi-family residential is a compatible land use with adjacent residential and commercial development with appropriate site design considerations implemented with a specific development proposal. The sites would have direct access to public roads and would not require a connection to an existing single-family neighborhood that would impact traffic on a roadway currently experiencing low traffic volumes. The sites are sized to accommodate multi-family development including necessary site improvements such as private driveways, pedestrian connectivity, onsite parking spaces, landscaping, and recreational amenities such as clubhouses, pools, or play equipment. Building orientations of multi-family buildings can also be designed to minimize intrusion to adjacent uses such as height reduction, locating buildings closer to public street frontage, landscape buffering, placement of solid waste enclosures, balconies, and lighting considerations. Additional City review and permitting will be required for any subsequent development proposals for the Project sites to ensure design compatibility with the existing neighboring uses. There would be a less than significant impact.
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The proposed GPA/RZ is consistent with the guiding goals and policies contained within the City of Yuba City General Plan. The Project supports and forwards the following highlighted goals contained within the General Plan:
3.4-I-5: Provide a variety of housing in all neighborhoods and reserve sites, where appropriate, for housing types that ensures that Yuba City remains an inclusive, affordable community.
2.5-G-7: Enhance aspects of the community that help economic development and draw residents to Yuba City, including small-town ambience, educational, cultural, environmental, and recreational resources, and affordable housing.
3.4-I-7: Promote infill development that maintains the scale and character of established neighborhoods.
3.5-G-6: Encourage and provide incentives for infill development, including affordable housing for low and very low-income residents, within existing residential areas at a density not less than
65 surrounding development, subject to appropriate standards to ensure compatibility with adjacent uses.
The Project will allow for future development of multi-family housing within the urbanized area of the City on underutilized or vacant infill sites. The sites are appropriately located along major transportation corridors within the City that provide an appropriate transition area from low density residential development to higher intensity uses such as multiple-family residential.
The proposed GPA/RZ will amend the current land use designations to allow higher density residential development thar enables the City to meet the lower income unit requirements as required by Program H-C-7 contained within the adopted the 2021-2029 Housing Element. No development is proposed as part of this Project as it is strictly an amendment to the existing General Plan land use designations and zoning of the sites. The proposed HDR designation and R-3 zoning is compatible with the surrounding residential, commercial, and office uses, and the subject parcels are appropriately situated along major roadways (Butte House Road, Walton Avenue and Garden Highway) that will support the anticipated traffic, pedestrian connectivity, and other infrastructure requirements associated with multiple-family development. While no physical development is proposed as part of this Project, it will result in the longterm construction of additional housing units within the City on the identified sites as envisioned by the General Plan for long term buildout of infill sites. The Project would therefore not conflict with the City’s adopted land use plan or zoning requirements and any related mitigation related to land use, making this impact less than significant.
3.12. Mineral Resources
Table 3-12: Mineral Resources
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or
other land use plan?
X
3.12.1. Federal Regulatory Setting
There are no federal regulations pertaining to mineral resources relevant to the proposed project.
3.12.2. State Regulatory Setting
California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975: Enacted by the State Legislature in 1975, the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA), Public Resources Code Section 2710 et seq., insures a continuing supply of mineral resources for the State. The act also creates surface mining and reclamation policy to assure that:
▪ Production and conservation of minerals is encouraged;
66 ▪ Environmental effects are prevented or minimized;
▪ Consideration is given to recreational activities, watersheds, wildlife, range and forage, and aesthetic enjoyment;
▪ Mined lands are reclaimed to a useable condition once mining is completed; and ▪ Hazards to public safety both now and in the future are eliminated.
Areas in the State (city or county) that do not have their own regulations for mining and reclamation activities rely on the Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Office of Mine Reclamation to enforce this law. SMARA contains provisions for the inventory of mineral lands in the State of California.
The State Geologist, in accordance with the State Board’s Guidelines for Classification and Designation of Mineral Lands, must classify Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) as designated below:
▪ MRZ-1. Areas where available geologic information indicates that there is minimal likelihood of significant resources.
▪ MRZ-2. Areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data indicate that significant mineral deposits are located or likely to be located.
▪ MRZ-3. Areas where mineral deposits are found but the significance of the deposits cannot be evaluated without further exploration.
▪ MRZ-4. Areas where there is not enough information to assess the zone. These are areas that have unknown mineral resource significance.
SMARA only covers mining activities that impact or disturb the surface of the land. Deep mining (tunnel) or petroleum and gas production is not covered by SMARA.
3.12.3. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
The 35 properties contain no known mineral resources and there is little opportunity for mineral resource extraction. The Yuba City General Plan does not recognize any mineral resource zones within the Project properties, and no mineral extraction facilities currently exist within the City. Additionally, the site is surrounded by uses that are generally considered incompatible with mineral extraction facilities. There would be no impact.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? See a) above.
67 3.13. Noise
Table 3.13: Noise
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or
ground borne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
X
3.13.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment for Noise Noise can be generally defined as unwanted sound. Sound, traveling in the form of waves from a source, exerts a sound pressure level (referred to as sound level) which is measured in decibels (dB), with 0 dB corresponding roughly to the threshold of human hearing and 120 to 140 dB corresponding to the threshold of pain.
Sound pressure fluctuations can be measured in units of hertz (Hz), which correspond to the frequency of a particular sound. Typically, sound does not consist of a single frequency, but rather a broad band of frequencies varying in levels of magnitude (sound power). The sound pressure level, therefore, constitutes the additive force exerted by a sound corresponding to the frequency/sound power level spectrum.
The typical human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies of the audible sound spectrum. As a consequence, when assessing potential noise impacts, sound is measured using an electronic filter that de-emphasizes the frequencies below 1,000 Hz and above 5,000 Hz in a manner corresponding to the human ear’s decreased sensitivity to low and extremely high frequencies instead of the frequency midrange. This method of frequency weighting is referred to as A-weighting and is expressed in units of Aweighted decibels (dBA). Frequency A-weighting follows an international standard methodology of frequency de-emphasis and is typically applied to community noise measurements.
Noise exposure is a measure of noise over a period of time. Noise level is a measure of noise at a given instant in time. Community noise varies continuously over a period of time with respect to the contributing sound sources of the community noise environment. Community noise is primarily the product of many distant noise sources, which constitute a relatively stable background noise exposure, with the individual contributors unidentifiable. The background noise level changes throughout a typical day, but does so gradually, corresponding with the addition and subtraction of distant noise sources such
68 as traffic and atmospheric conditions. What makes community noise constantly variable throughout a day, besides the slowly changing background noise, is the addition of short duration single event noise sources (e.g., aircraft flyovers, motor vehicles, sirens), which are readily identifiable to the individual receptor. These successive additions of sound to the community noise environment vary the community noise level from instant to instant, requiring the measurement of noise exposure over a period of time to legitimately characterize a community noise environment and evaluate cumulative noise impacts.
3.12.2. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment for Groundbourne Vibration Vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object. Vibration sources may be continuous, such as factory machinery, or transient, such as explosions. As is the case with airborne sound, ground borne vibrations may be described by amplitude and frequency. Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV), or root mean squared (RMS), as in RMS vibration velocity. The PPV and RMS (VbA) vibration velocity are normally described in inches per second (in/sec). PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal and is often used in monitoring of blasting vibration because it is related to the stresses that are experienced by buildings.
Although PPV is appropriate for evaluating the potential for building damage, it is not always suitable for evaluating human response. As it takes some time for the human body to respond to vibration signals, it is more prudent to use vibration velocity when measuring human response. The typical background vibration velocity level in residential areas is approximately 50 VdB. Groundborne vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For most people, a vibration-velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels.
Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground borne vibration are construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. Construction vibrations can be transient, random, or continuous. The approximate threshold of vibration perception is 65 VdB, while 85 VdB is the vibration acceptable only if there are an infrequent number of events per day.
3.12.3. Federal Regulatory Setting
Federal Vibration Policies: The Federal Railway Administration (FRA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have published guidance relative to vibration impacts. According to the FRA, fragile buildings can be exposed to ground-borne vibration levels of 90 VdB without experiencing structural damage. The FTA has identified the human annoyance response to vibration levels as 75 VdB.
3.12.4. State Regulatory Setting
California Noise Control Act: The California Noise Control Act was enacted in 1973 (Health and Safety Code §46010 et seq.), and states that the Office of Noise Control (ONC) should aid local communities in developing local noise control programs. It also indicates that ONC staff would work with the Department of Resources Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to provide guidance for the preparation of the required noise elements in city and county General Plans, pursuant to Government Code § 65302(f).
California Government Code § 65302(f) requires city and county general plans to include a noise element.
The purpose of a noise element is to guide future development to enhance future land use compatibility.
Title 24 – Sound Transmission Control: Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) codifies Sound Transmission Control requirements, which establishes uniform minimum noise insulation performance standards for new hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached
69 single-family dwellings. Specifically, Title 24 states that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room of new dwellings Title 24, Part 2 requires an acoustical report that demonstrates the achievements of the required 45 dBA CNEL. Dwellings are designed so that interior noise levels will meet this standard for at least ten years from the time of building permit application.
3.12.5. Local Regulatory Setting
City of Yuba City Municipal Code: Title 4, Chapter 17, Section 4-17.10(e) of the Yuba City Municipal Code prohibits the operation of noise‐generating construction equipment before 6:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. daily, except Sunday and State or federal holidays when the prohibited time is before 8:00 a.m. and after 9:00 p.m.
Figure 2: Noise Exposure
LAND USE CATEGORY
COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE - Ldn or CNEL (dBA)
50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Residential – Low Density
Single Family, Duplex, Mobile
Home
Residential – Multi-Family
Transient Lodging –
Motel/Hotel
Schools, Libraries, Churches,
Hospitals, Nursing Homes
Auditorium, Concert Hall,
Amphitheaters
Sports Arena, Outdoor
Spectator Sports
Playgrounds, Neighborhood
Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables,
Water Recreation,
Cemeteries
Office Buildings, Business,
Commercial and Professional
Industrial, Manufacturing,
Utilities, Agriculture
70 Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.
Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.
Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development generally should not be undertaken.
Source: State of California, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, 2003. General Plan Guidelines.
3.12.6. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
No physical development is proposed as part of this proposed project. However, the Project will allow for multiple-family residential development to occur on the Project sites that will result in site disturbance.
It is anticipated that there will be site grading and construction of new residential buildings, parking lots, landscaping, and clubhouse/amenity spaces. Construction would involve temporary noise sources that are anticipated to last for a short period that could impact the nearby single-family residences or other sensitive receptors located near Project sites. The noise source would include typical grading and paving equipment and miscellaneous equipment.
During construction, which would be required to occur during daylight hours, Monday through Friday, noise from construction activities would contribute to the noise environment in the immediate project vicinity. Activities involved in construction could generate maximum noise levels, as indicated in Table 3, ranging from 79 to 91 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, without feasible noise control (e.g., mufflers) and ranging from 75 to 80 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, with feasible noise control.
Table 6: Noise Levels of Typical Construction
Type of Equipment (1) dBA at 50 ft.
Without Feasible Noise Control (2) With Feasible Noise Control Dozer or Tractor 80 75
Excavator 88 80
Scraper 88 80
Front End Loader 79 75
Backhoe 85 75
Grader 85 75
Truck 91 75
(1) US Environmental Protection Agency. “Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment and Home Appliances.” Figure IV.H‐4. 1971.
(2) Feasible noise control includes the use of intake mufflers, exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds operating in accordance with manufacturers specifications Due to the short-term nature of construction noise and compliance with City noise standards will ensure that noise generated by Project related construction would not result in a significant impact.
71 b) Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods employed. Operation of construction equipment causes ground vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in strength with distance. Table 7 describes the typical construction equipment vibration levels.
Table 7: Typical Construction Vibration Levels
Equipment (1) VdB at 25 ft2
Small Bulldozer 58
Vibratory Roller 94
Jackhammer 79
Loaded Trucks 86
(1) US Environmental Protection Agency. “Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment and Home Appliances.” Figure IV.H‐4. 1971.
The Project will allow for future multiple-family development on the Project sites. However, no construction is proposed as part of this Project. The construction noise associated with the development of multi-family residential uses that could result from this action is anticipated to be similar to the construction of a low-density residential subdivision. Vibration levels of construction equipment in Table 7 are at a distance of 25 feet from the equipment. As noted above, construction activities are limited to daylight hours. Infrequent construction-related vibrations would be short-term and temporary, and operation of heavy-duty construction equipment would be intermittent throughout the day during construction. Therefore, with the relatively short duration of grading activities associated with the Project, the temporary impact to any uses in the vicinity of the Project would be less than significant. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? A portion of the Project, some of the properties owned by the Regional Housing Authority, are located within boundary of the Sutter County Airport Compatibility Land Use Plan (Sutter County Airport CLUP) and therefore subject to Sutter County Airport CLUP policies regarding its noise restrictions. The Sutter County Airport Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Noise provide that multiple-family uses outside of the 65 db (CNEL) are compatible with airport noise. Per the Sutter County Airport CLUP the properties are outside of the airport’s 65 db (CNEL) noise level. Because the sites are compatible with Sutter County Airport noise, the impact from airport noise is less than significant.
All of the other sites are outside the boundaries of the Sutter County Airport CLUP. There are no private airports or airfields located within Yuba City. The closest private airstrip is the Vanderford Ranch Company Airport, located approximately six miles southwest of the City, well beyond any safety or hazard zones.
Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact from airport noise.
72 3.14. Population and Housing
Table 3-14: Population and Housing
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X
3.14.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
The proposed Project sites are located within the urbanized area of the City and are surrounded by other types of urban uses. The Yuba City General Plan and the implementing zoning regulate the uses and development standards for these properties.
3.14.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
There are no federal regulations, plans, programs, or guidelines associated with population or housing that are applicable to the proposed project.
3.14.3. State Regulatory Setting
California law (Government Code Section 65580, et seq.) requires cities and counties to include a housing element as a part of their general plan to address housing conditions and needs in the community.
Housing Elements are prepared approximately every five years (eight following implementations of Senate Bill [SB] 375), following timetables set forth in the law. The Housing Element must identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs and “make adequate provision for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community,” among other requirements. The City adopted its current Housing Element in 2022.
3.14.4. Regional Regulatory Setting
State law mandates that all cities and counties offer a portion of housing to accommodate the increasing needs of regional population growth. The statewide housing demand is determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), while local governments and councils of governments decide and manage their specific regional and jurisdictional housing needs and develop a regional housing needs assessment (RHNA).
In the greater Sacramento region, which includes the City of Yuba City, SACOG has the responsibility of developing and approving an RHNA and a Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) every eight years
73 (Government Code, Section 65580 et seq.). This document has a central role of distributing the allocation of housing for every county and city in the SACOG region. Housing needs are assessed for very low income, low income, moderate income, and above moderate households.
As described above, SACOG is the association of local governments that includes Yuba City, along with other jurisdictions comprising the six counties in the greater Sacramento region. In addition to preparing the Metropolitan Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the region, SACOG approves the distribution of affordable housing in the region through its RHNP. SACOG also assists in planning for transit, bicycle networks, clean air and serves as the Airport Land Use Commission for the region.
3.14.5. Local Regulatory Setting
The City’s adopted Housing Element regulates Citywide housing goals and objectives.
3.14.6. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The Project sites are located within areas that are designated for various types of land uses and are intended by the General Plan to be built out within an urban environment supporting a mix of land uses, including residential development. The adopted Housing Element calls for creation of new housing opportunities to meet projected residential growth in the City as part of the City’s Regional Housing Need Allocation. This Project helps to achieve this regional housing goal through designation of 35 parcels for high-density residential development, including densities projected to be over 12 residences/acre, or in some cases, over 20 residences per acre. Assuming that development of the sites complies with City development standards and criteria, as required by law, and utilize the existing roadway and utility infrastructure, the impact from unplanned growth would be considered a less than significant impact. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed project will not result in any immediate displacement of substantial numbers of existing people or housing. If approved, development of the proposed sites could involve removal of several existing residences; however, new multiple-family development will significantly increase the density of the site and provide a larger net increase in dwelling units, potentially including lower income units consistent with Program H-C-7 of the Housing Element. Future development could also potentially be designed to retain the existing dwellings on the site, therefore not displacing any residents. As such, only a minimal amount of housing, if any, would be removed, and replaced with ultimately more housing units than exist today. Thus, the impact on the housing supply is considered a less than significant impact.
74 3.15. Public Services
Table 3-15: Public Services
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered government facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i) Fire protection? X
ii) Police protection? X
iii) Schools? X
iv) Parks? X
v) Other public facilities? X
3.15.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Law enforcement serving the various new uses is provided by the Yuba City Police Department. Fire protection is provided by the Yuba City Fire Department. Nearby parks and other urban facilities that may be utilized by new residents are also provided by the Yuba City Recreation Department.
3.15.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
National Fire Protection Association: The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is an international nonprofit organization that provides consensus codes and standards, research, training, and education on fire prevention and public safety. The NFPA develops, publishes, and disseminates more than 300 such codes and standards intended to minimize the possibility and effects of fire and other risks. The NFPA publishes the NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code, which provides requirements to establish a reasonable level of fire safety and property protection in new and existing buildings.
3.15.3. State Regulatory Setting
California Fire Code and Building Code: The 2013 California Fire Code (Title 24, Part 9 of the California Code of Regulations) establishes regulations to safeguard against hazards of fire, explosion, or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures, and premises. The Fire Code also establishes requirements intended to provide safety and assistance to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. The provision of the Fire Code includes regulations regarding fire-resistance rated construction, fire protection systems such as alarm and sprinkler systems, fire service features such as fire apparatus access roads, fire safety during construction and demolition, and wildland urban interface areas.
75 California Health and Safety Code (HSC): State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 13000 et seq. of the California HSC, which includes regulations for building standards (as set forth in the CBC), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers, smoke alarms, childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.
California Master Mutual Aid Agreement: The California Master Mutual Aid Agreement is a framework agreement between the State of California and local governments for aid and assistance by the interchange of services, facilities, and equipment, including but not limited to fire, police, medical and health, communication, and transportation services and facilities to cope with the problems of emergency rescue, relief, evacuation, rehabilitation, and reconstruction.
3.15.4. Local Regulatory Setting
The General Plan addresses the need for new development to be able to be serviced by the City with all essential services, including Police and Fire, before new development can be approved.
3.15.5. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire Protection: The Fire Department reviewed the proposal and did not express concerns. Since all new housing development pays development impact fees intended to offset the cost of additional fire facilities and equipment costs resulting from this growth, the impacts on fire services are considered a less than significant impact.
Police Protection: The Police Department reviewed the proposal sites and did not express concerns. Since all new housing will pay development impact fees intended to offset the cost of additional police facilities and equipment resulting from this growth, the impacts on police services are considered a less than significant impact.
Schools: New residences will pay the Yuba City Unified School District adopted school impact fee that is intended to provide the new resident’s fair share for expanded or new educational facilities needed to accommodate this new growth. Therefore, the impact on schools is considered a less than significant impact.
Parks: The City charges a park impact fee for each new residence that is utilized to purchase parkland and construct and equip new City parks. Further, many multiple-family developments provide on-site recreational facilities, further reducing impacts on the public park system. Therefore, the impact on parks from this Project is considered a less than significant impact.
Other Public Facilities: The Project will be connected to City water and wastewater systems. Each new residential connection to those systems is required to pay connection fees that are utilized for expansion of the respective treatment plants. The City also collects development impact fees for County services that are provided to the new residences, such as the library system and justice system.
Accordingly, the Project will have a less than significant impact with regard to the provision of public services.
76 3.16. Recreation
Table 3-16: Recreation
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
X
3.16.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Yuba City has 22 City-owned parks and recreational areas, managed by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. This consists of 4 community parks, 15 neighborhood parks, and 3 passive or mini-parks.
3.16.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
There are no federal regulations regarding parks and open space that are applicable to the proposed project.
3.16.3. State Regulatory Setting
State Public Park Preservation Act: The primary instrument for protecting and preserving parkland is the Public Park Preservation Act of 1971. Under the PRC section 5400-5409, cities and counties may not acquire any real property that is in use as a public park for any non-park use unless compensation or land, or both, are provided to replace the parkland acquired. This provides no net loss of parkland and facilities.
Quimby Act: California Government Code Section 66477, referred to as the Quimby Act, permits local jurisdictions to require the dedication of land and/or the payment of in-lieu fees solely for park and recreation purposes. The required dedication and/or fee are based upon the residential density and housing type, land cost, and other factors. Land dedicated and fees collected pursuant to the Quimby Act may be used for developing new or rehabilitating existing park or recreational facilities.
3.16.4. Local Regulatory Setting
The Yuba City General Plan and the City’s Parks Master Plan provide a goal of providing 5 acres of public parkland per 1,000 residents, while it also requires 1 acre of Neighborhood Park for every 1,000 residents.
The City’s development impact fee program collects fees for new development, which is allocated for the acquisition and development of open space in the City.
77 3.16.5. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The Project sites are located throughout the City and are often located in near proximity to existing parks.
While no physical development is proposed as part of this Project, the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would potentially result in a higher local population density than previously analyzed by the General Plan. This population increase would result in higher use of neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities in the vicinity of the Project sites. The City’s development impact fee program requires collection of fees for new residential development and allocates fees to the acquisition and planned development and maintenance of open space/park areas in the City. Further, multiple-family residential development often provides on-site recreational/open space amenities for residents which may partially offset usage of public recreational facilities. Given this system, this potential impact is considered to be less than significant.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The Project does not propose physical development of the sites as the Project is strictly an amendment to the existing General Plan land use designations and rezoning to accommodate high density residential development. But multiple-family residential development that could result from this Project often provides on-site recreational/open space amenities for residents which may partially offset usage of public recreational facilities. It would, however, be too speculative to anticipate where and what those recreation facilities may be. Instead, the City individual project review process will make that evaluation on an individual project basis. Given this system, which is already in place, this potential impact from this Project is considered to be less than significant.
78 3.17. Transportation
Table 3-17: Transportation
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
3.17.1. Federal Regulatory Setting
Federal Highway Administration: FHWA is the agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) responsible for the Federally-funded roadway system, including the interstate highway network and portions of the primary State highway network. FHWA funding is provided through the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficiency Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). SAFETEA- LU can be used to fund local transportation improvement projects, such as projects to improve the efficiency of existing roadways, traffic signal coordination, bikeways, and transit system upgrades.
Several federal regulations govern transportation issues. They include:
▪ Title 49, CFR, Sections 171-177 (49 CFR 171-177), governs the transportation of hazardous materials, the types of materials defined as hazardous, and the marking of the transportation vehicles.
▪ Title 49 CFR 350-399, and Appendices A-G, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, address safety considerations for the transport of goods, materials, and substances over public highways. ▪ Title 49 CFR 397.9, the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1974, directs the U.S.
Department of Transportation to establish criteria and regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials.
▪ Federal Aviation Administration: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulates aviation at regional, public, and private airports. The FAA regulates objects affecting navigable airspace.
3.17.2. State Regulatory Setting
State of California Transportation Department Transportation Concept Reports: Each District of the State of California Transportation Department (Caltrans) prepares a Transportation Concept Report (TCR) for every state highway or portion thereof in its jurisdiction. The TCR usually represents the first step in
79 Caltrans’ long-range corridor planning process. The purpose of the TCR is to determine how a highway will be developed and managed so that it delivers the targeted LOS and quality of operations that are feasible to attain over a 20-year period, otherwise known as the “route concept” or beyond 20 years, for what is known as the “ultimate concept”.
3.17.3. Local Regulatory Setting
The City’s General Plan Circulation Element contains a wide range of policies regulating new residential development, including provision of adequate roadways and circulation systems, provided at developer expense, to ensure safe and adequate vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian access is available.
3.17.4. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
The Project does not include a specific development proposal so it will not directly result in any construction or occupation of any residential units and the resultant generation of vehicle trips.
Therefore, there will be a less than significant impact with regard to conflicts with a program, plan, or policy addressing the circulation system from the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone.
However, future development of the Project sites will result in construction of multiple-family residences that will result in vehicle trips being generated. When development is proposed the densities could range from 12 to 36 residences per acre. As compared to the existing general plan designations of these properties of which 23 of the 35 parcels are already zoned R-3, and others are zoned for offices, duplexes, etc. the vehicle traffic would likely increase at buildout, but the amount would be too speculative to estimate. But considering that the roadways serving the 35 sites are (1) planned for urban growth, and (2) front on major arterials and major transportation corridors (Butte House Road, Walton Avenue, and Garden Highway), and (3) that all of these roadways are within the General Plan policy Level of Service (LOS) D or better, this GPA/RZ is consistent with General Plan policies.
Regarding conflicts with City adopted programs, street standards for auto, bicycle, pedestrian, and bus activities, future development would be reviewed for compliance with City Standards and conditioned to construct required improvements and/or payment of applicable traffic mitigation fees or fair share of public improvements. The projects would include new driveways connecting to public streets and an internal circulation network that would be reviewed for design adequacy based on the anticipated traffic and parking demands of the specific project design. Additionally, the projects would be reviewed and required to improve public street frontages and other facilities such as pedestrian infrastructure, public transportation improvements, and traffic signals as part of the entitlement review. This review would ensure site design is adequate to serve the projects and handle the anticipated traffic volumes produced from the development. Further, future residential development projects will be conditioned to contribute their fair share to the cost of circulation improvements via the existing citywide traffic impact fees that would be assessed. As such, the proposed re-designation and rezone of the Project sites does not create a conflict with City programs, ordinances, or policies addressing the circulation system. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 subdivision (b)? This CEQA section describes specific considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts in terms of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). SACOG, in “Technical Advisory: On Evaluating Transportation
80 Impacts in CEQA” provides two criteria for which if the project meets either of them, the traffic impacts are considered less than significant. One criterion is that the project generates less than 110 vehicle trips per day is considered to be less than a significant impact. Although the Project will not directly generate any vehicle trips, multiple-family development that could result will exceed this criterion, so it is not considered any further in this review. The second criterion is that if a project, on a per capita or per employee basis, the VMT will be at least 15 percent below that of existing development is a reasonable threshold for determining significance. SACOG also has released a draft document (SB 743 regional screening maps) that provides mapping data indicating the average miles traveled for different areas within and around Yuba City. The range of the categories are:
Less than 50% of regional average.
50-85% of regional average.
85-100% of the regional average.
115-150% of the regional average.
More than 150% of the regional average.
Per the SACOG maps for all of the various Project sites, the estimated average vehicle distance traveled is in the 50-85% range of the norm. In other words, per the SACOG regional screening maps this Project is located in an area that meets the 15 percent vehicle trip reduction criteria. Thus, the transportation impacts for VMT from development of the various sites are consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15063.4(b) and therefore considered a less than significant impact. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
The Project sites are primarily located on Butte House Road, Walton Avenue, and Garden Highway, all of which are major arterials designed to accommodate significant amounts of traffic. Both the Public Works Department and the Police Department have reviewed the Project and did not express concerns. The Project does not propose any physical development at this time; however, it has been determined that the existing arterial streets fronting the Project sites or are very nearby will adequately support highdensity residential development on each of the Project sites. There are no dangerous curves in the vicinity of any of the sites, and it is anticipated there will be no conflict with uses such as farm equipment. This is considered to be a less than significant impact.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
The Fire Department and Police Departments have reviewed the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone and did not express concerns about emergency access to the properties with the intended increase in residential density. Roadways will be built to City standards, ensuring emergency vehicle access is available. As such, impacts on emergency access are considered to be less than significant.
81 3.18. Tribal Cultural Resources
Table 3-18: Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Would the project cause of substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
X
3.18.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
This section describes the affected environment and regulatory setting for Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs). The following analysis of the potential environmental impacts related to TCRs is derived primarily from the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Yuba City General Plan (2004) and consultation record with California Native American tribes under Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18.
3.18.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended), Section 106: The significance of cultural resources is evaluated under the criteria for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), authorized under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. The criteria defined in 36 CFR 60.4 are as follows:
The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of state and local importance that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and:
▪ That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
▪ That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
82 ▪ That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or ▪ That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to prehistory or history.
Sites listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP are considered to be historic properties. Sites younger than 50 years, unless of exceptional importance, are not eligible for listing in the NRHP.
3.18.3. State Regulatory Setting
Assembly Bill 52: Effective July 1, 2015, Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) amended CEQA to require that: 1) a lead agency provide notice to any California Native American tribes that have requested notice of projects proposed by the lead agency; and 2) for any tribe that responded to the notice within 30 days of receipt with a request for consultation, the lead agency must consult with the tribe. Topics that may be addressed during consultation include TCRs, the potential significance of project impacts, type of environmental document that should be prepared, and possible mitigation measures and project alternatives.
Pursuant to AB 52, Section 21073 of the Public Resources Code defines California Native American tribes as “a Native American tribe located in California that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC for the purposes of Chapter 905 of the Statutes of 2004.” This includes both federally and non-federally recognized tribes.
Section 21074(a) of the Public Resource Code defines TCRs for the purpose of CEQA as:
1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes (geographically defined in terms of the size and scope), sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
a. included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; and/or
b. included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1; and/or
c. a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Because criteria a and b also meet the definition of a Historical Resource under CEQA, a TCR may also require additional consideration as a Historical Resource. TCRs may or may not exhibit archaeological, cultural, or physical indicators.
Recognizing that California tribes are experts in their TCRs and heritage, AB 52 requires that CEQA lead agencies initiate consultation with tribes at the commencement of the CEQA process to identify TCRs.
Furthermore, because a significant effect on a TCR is considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA, consultation is required to develop appropriate avoidance, impact minimization, and mitigation measures.
Senate Bill 18: Effective March 2005, this law requires city and county governments to consult with California Native American tribes early in the planning process with the intent of protecting traditional tribal cultural places. The purpose of involving the tribes at the early stage of planning efforts is to allow
83 consideration of tribal cultural places in context of broad local land use policy before project-level land use decisions are made by a local government. As such, SB 18 applies to the adoption or substantial amendment of general or specific plans. As AB 52 provides for a similar review process for all discretionary reviews including general plan amendments and specific plan amendments, the provisions of SB 18 fall within the SB 52 review process for purposes of this document.
3.18.4. Cultural Setting
The Nisenan (also referred to as Southern Maidu) inhabited the General Plan area prior to large-scale European and Euroamerican settlement of the surrounding area. Nisenan territory comprised the drainages of the Yuba, Bear, and American Rivers, and the lower drainages of the Feather River. The Nisenan, together with the Maidu and Konkow, their northern neighbors, form the Maiduan language family of the Penutian linguistic stock (Shipley 1978:89). Kroeber (1976:392) noted three dialects:
Northern Hill Nisenan, Southern Hill Nisenan, and Valley Nisenan. Although cultural descriptions of this group in the English language are known from as early as 1849, most of our current cultural knowledge comes from various anthropologists in the early part of the 20th century (Levy 1978:413; Wilson and Towne 1978:397).
The basic subsistence strategy of the Nisenan was seasonally mobile hunting and gathering. Acorns, the primary staple of the Nisenan diet, were gathered in the valley along with seeds, buckeye, salmon, insects, and a wide variety of other plants and animals. During the warmer months, people moved to mountainous areas to hunt and collect food resources, such as pine nuts. Bedrock and portable mortars and pestles were used to process acorns. Nisenan settlement patterns were oriented to major river drainages and tributaries. In the foothills and lower Sierra Nevada, Nisenan located their villages in large flats or ridges near major streams. These villages tended to be smaller than the villages in the valley. (Wilson and Towne 1978:389–390.)
Trade provided other valuable resources that were not normally available in the Nisenan environment.
The Valley Nisenan received black acorns, pine nuts, manzanita berries, skins, bows, and bow wood from the Hill Nisenan to their east, in exchange for fish, roots, grasses, shells, beads, salt, and feathers (Wilson and Towne 1978). To obtain, process, and utilize these material resources, the Nisenan had an array of tools to assist them. Wooden digging sticks, poles for shaking acorns loose, and baskets of primarily willow and redbud were used to gather vegetal resources. Stone mortars and pestles were used to process many of the vegetal foods; baskets, heated stones, and wooden stirring sticks were used for cooking. Basalt and obsidian were primary stone materials used for making knives, arrow and spear points, clubs, arrow straighteners, and scrapers. (Wilson and Towne 1978.)
Nisenan settlement locations depended primarily on elevation, exposure, and proximity to water and other resources. Permanent villages were usually located on low rises along major watercourses. Village size ranged from three houses to 40 or 50 houses. Larger villages often had semi-subterranean dance houses that were covered in earth and tule or brush and had a central smoke hole at the top and an entrance that faced east (Wilson and Towne 1978:388). Early Nisenan contact with Europeans appears to have been limited to the southern reaches of their territory. Spanish expeditions intruded into Nisenan territory in the early 1800s. In the two or three years following the gold discovery, Nisenan territory was overrun by immigrants from all over the world. Gold seekers and the settlements that sprang up to support them were nearly fatal to the native inhabitants. Survivors worked as wage laborers and domestic help and lived on the edges of foothill towns. Despite severe depredations, descendants of the Nisenan still live in their original land area and maintain and pass on their cultural identity.
84 3.18.5. Summary of Native American Consultation
In response to AB 52 and SB 18 the City supplied the following Native American tribes with a project description and map of the proposed Project areas and a request for comments:
▪ United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria ▪ Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
▪ Estom Yomeka Maidu Tribe of the Enterprise Rancheria
▪ Mechoopda Indian Tribe
▪ Pakan’yani Maidu of Strawberry Valley
▪ Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians
▪ Ione Band of Miwok Indians
3.18.6. Thresholds of Significance
AB 52 established that a substantial adverse change to a TCR has a significant effect on the environment.
The thresholds of significance for impacts to TCRs are as follows:
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change to a TCR, defined in Section 21074 as sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a Native American tribe that are:
▪ Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources;
▪ Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision k of Section 5010.1; and/or
▪ Determined by the City to be significant, as supported by substantial evidence, including:
o A cultural landscape with a geographically defined boundary; o A historical resource as described in Section 21084.1 (either eligible for or listed on the California Register of Historical Resources or listed on a local registry); o A unique archaeological resource as defined in Section 21083.2; and/or o A non-unique archaeological resource as defined in Section 21083.2.
In assessing substantial adverse change, the City must determine whether or not the project will adversely affect the qualities of the resource that convey its significance. The qualities are expressed through integrity. Integrity of a resource is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association [CCR Title 14, Section 4852(c)]. Impacts are significant if the resource is demolished or destroyed or if the characteristics that made the resource eligible are materially impaired [CCR Title 14, Section 15064.5(a)]. Accordingly, impacts to a TCR would likely be significant if the project negatively affects the qualities of integrity that made it significant in the first place. In making this determination, the City need only address the aspects of integrity that are important to the TCR’s significance.
85 3.18.7. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project cause of substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k).
There are no listings on the California Register of Historical Resources (as defined in Section 21074) within the proposed Project areas. It is not known if there remain sites within the 35 parcels that are part of this Project, but this proposal involves only a general plan amendment and rezoning, and there is no physical development proposed. As such, this Project will not directly result in the disturbance of any potential tribal cultural resource sites. Therefore, there will be impacts on Tribal cultural resources from this Project.
Although actual development projects may result from this action, it is not possible to know which properties and what types of projects may be proposed. As such, it is premature and speculative at this time to determine what the impacts would be. Since the City’s review process of actual development proposals would likely trigger its own CEQA review, including tribal cultural resources, a review of tribal cultural resource impacts will be conducted at the time a development project is proposed. ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Of the tribes that were contacted by the City, the United Auburn Indian Community responded verifying that no actual construction was permitted under this Project, but if and when any construction did occur, they may request consultation. Of particular concern to the Native American community was the properties owned by the Regional Housing Authority near the Feather River, as that is considered to be a sensitive area. As discussed in Part i) above, the City has a process in place to notify the Tribes of any potential construction activities. If and when a development project is proposed on these properties, this process will be triggered (either by the City discretionary review process or the use of federal or state money, or both).
86 3.19. Utilities and Service Systems
Table 3-19: Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water or wastewater
treatment or storm drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and multiple dry
years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
projected demand in addition to the existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
X
3.19.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Wastewater: Yuba City owns, operates, and maintains the wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal system that provides sewer service to over 60,000 residents and numerous businesses. The remainder of the residents and businesses in the Yuba City Sphere of Influence (SOI) are currently serviced by private septic systems. In the early 1970s, the City’s original sewage treatment plant was abandoned, and the current Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) was constructed.
Water: The water supply source for the City is surface water from the Feather River with use of a backup groundwater well. The City of Yuba City is a public water agency with over 18,000 connections. City policy only allows areas annexed within the city limits to be served by the surface water system. The site is served by the City’s water system.
Reuse and Recycling: Solid waste generated in Yuba City is collected by Recology Yuba-Sutter. Recology offers residential, commercial, industrial, electronic, and hazardous waste collection, processing, recycling, and disposal, as well as construction and demolition waste processing, diversion, and transfer to a disposal facility. The City’s municipal solid waste is delivered to the Ostrom Road Landfill; a Statepermitted solid waste facility that provides a full range of transfer and diversion services. As of June 2021, the Recology Ostrom Road Landfill Remaining Site Net Airspace is 33,764,000 cy; and has a remaining capacity of 21,297,000 tons; and remaining landfill service life is 53 years.
87 3.19.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System: Discharge of treated wastewater to surface water(s) of the U.S., including wetlands, requires an NPDES permit. In California, the RWQCB administers the issuance of these federal permits. Obtaining a NPDES permit requires preparation of detailed information, including characterization of wastewater sources, treatment processes, and effluent quality. Any future development that exceeds one acre in size would be required to comply with NPDES criteria, including preparation of a Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and the inclusion of BMPs to control erosion and offsite transport of soils.
3.19.3. State Regulatory Setting
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB): Waste Discharge Requirements Program. State regulations pertaining to the treatment, storage, processing, or disposal of solid waste are found in Title 27, CCR, Section 20005 et seq. (hereafter Title 27). In general, the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Program (sometimes also referred to as the “Non-Chapter 15 (Non 15) Program”) regulates point discharges that are exempt pursuant to Subsection 20090 of Title 27 and not subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Exemptions from Title 27 may be granted for nine categories of discharges (e.g., sewage, wastewater, etc.) that meet, and continue to meet, the preconditions listed for each specific exemption. The scope of the WDRs Program also includes the discharge of wastes classified as inert, pursuant to Section 20230 of Title 27. Several programs are administered under the WDR Program, including the Sanitary Sewer Order and recycled water programs.
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle): The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) is the State agency designated to oversee, manage, and track the 76 million tons of waste generated each year in California. CalRecycle develops laws and regulations to control and manage waste, for which enforcement authority is typically delegated to the local government. The board works jointly with local government to implement regulations and fund programs.
The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (PRC 40050 et seq. or Assembly Bill (AB 939, codified in PRC 40000), administered by CalRecycle, requires all local and county governments to adopt a Source Reduction and Recycling Element to identify means of reducing the amount of solid waste sent to landfills.
This law set reduction targets at 25 percent by the year 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000. To assist local jurisdictions in achieving these targets, the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991 requires all new developments to include adequate, accessible, and convenient areas for collecting and loading recyclable and green waste materials.
Regional Water Quality Control Boards: The primary responsibility for the protection of water quality in California rests with the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards. The State Board sets statewide policy for the implementation of state and federal laws and regulations. The Regional Boards adopt and implement Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans), which recognize regional differences in natural water quality, actual and potential beneficial uses, and water quality problems associated with human activities.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit: As authorized by the Clean Water Act (CWA), the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Program controls water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into water of the United States. In California, it is the responsibility of Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) to preserve and enhance the quality of the state’s waters through the development of water quality control plans and the
88 issuance of waste discharge requirements (WDRs). WDRs for discharges to surface waters also serve as NPDES permits.
California Department of Water Resources: The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is a department within the California Resources Agency. The DWR is responsible for the State of California's management and regulation of water usage.
3.19.4. Local Regulatory Setting
The City’s General Plan Public Utilities Element, along with various infrastructure Master Plans, address provision of water and wastewater services within the City.
3.19.5. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water or wastewater treatment or storm drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? The demand for treated water from developments that may occur as a result of this GPA/RZ is not anticipated by the Public Works Department to exceed the capacity of the water treatment plant and distribution system. In addition, City policies provide for adequate water treatment, storage, and distribution infrastructure for new development. Additionally, new development will pay service connection fees for wastewater and potable water to offset potential impacts to these systems. Finally, existing in-place utility systems of Pacific Gas and Electric Company for electric power and natural gas and telecommunications (AT&T), are sufficient to serve the proposed project because the Project sites are located adjacent to existing in-place infrastructure. As a result, the impact is considered to be less than significant.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? Water supplies have been determined by the City Public Works Department to be adequate to serve the Project sites in multiple dry year conditions. The City’s Urban Water Management Plan identifies adequate supplies to meet anticipated existing and planned demand for multiple years. This potential impact is considered to be less-than-significant impact. c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the projected demand in addition to the existing commitments? The City’s Wastewater Treatment Plan has been identified by the City as having adequate capacity to treat wastewater generated by the proposed project. This impact is anticipated to be less than significant.
The additional impermeable surface that will be created by future development associated with the General Plan Amendment and Rezone will generate additional storm water drainage, but not likely more than existing general Plan designations for these properties, since the percentage of impermeable surface generated by either will likely be similar. Future development will be subject to appropriate storm water drainage system impact fees which cover the Project’s fair share of the impact on the storm water collection system. This impact would be considered less than significant.
89 d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? As of June 25, 2021, the Recology Ostrom Road Landfill Remaining Site Net Airspace is 33,764,000 cy; Remaining Net Refuse Capacity is 21,297,000 tons; and Remaining Landfill Service Life is 53 years. The impact would be considered less than significant.
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Transportation and disposal of all waste due to future development of the subject sites would be facilitated in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. There would be a less than significant impact.
3.20. Wildfire
Table 3-20: Wildfire
If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose
project occupants to pollutant concentrations from
a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
3.20.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Wildland fires are an annual hazard in Sutter County and, to a lesser degree due to urbanized development, Yuba City. Wildland fires burn natural vegetation on undeveloped lands and include rangeland, brush, and grass fires. Long, hot, and dry summers with temperatures often exceeding 100°F add to the County’s fire hazard. Human activities are the major causes of wildland fires, while lightning causes the remaining wildland fires.
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program identifies fire threat based on a combination of two factors: 1) fire frequency, or the likelihood of a given area burning, and 2) potential fire behavior (hazard). These two factors are combined in determining the
90 following Fire Hazard Severity Zones: Moderate, High, Very High, Extreme. These zones apply to areas designated as State Responsibility Areas – areas in which the State has primary firefighting responsibility.
The project site is not within a State Responsibility Area and therefore has not been placed in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
3.20.2. Impact Assessment/ Environmental Consequences
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? As discussed in Section 3.17 of this Initial Study, future construction associated with the proposed sites is not expected to substantially obstruct emergency vehicles or any evacuations that may occur in the area.
Project operations likewise would not obstruct any roadways. Impacts related to emergency response or evacuations would be less than significant.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? The Project sites are not within a State Responsibility Area and therefore have not been placed in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone. But as noted in Section 3.11 of this Initial Study, the Project sites are within a planned urbanized area, and the urbanized area is surrounded by irrigated agricultural land, which typically is not subject to wildland fire. Impacts of the revised project related to wildland fire hazards are anticipated to be less than significant.
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No physical development is proposed as part of this Project. Future development that may result will require the installation of expanded or new roadways, and the utilization of existing utilities adjacent to or near the sites. The installation of these facilities is not expected to exacerbate the wildfire risk on any of the Project sites, as explained in b) above. Impacts of the Project would be less than significant. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? As noted in Section 3.7 of this document, the Project sites are located in a topographically flat area. There are no streams or other channels that cross the sites. As such, it is not expected that people or structures would be exposed to significant risks from changes resulting from fires in steeper areas, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides. Impacts related to these issues would be less than significant.
91 3.21. Mandatory Findings of Significance
Table 3-21: Mandatory Findings of Significance
Would the Project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important example of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
X
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
X
c) Have environmental effects, which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
3.21.1. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number, or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important example of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
The Project sites are located on previously disturbed areas or have been previously developed with urban uses. All are within the urbanized area. As such there is little plant or animal habitat value as the sites have been disturbed by historical agricultural operations, residential, and commercial uses. There are no wetlands or similar habitat on the Project sites. Therefore, the future anticipated development of the 35 sites will not significantly degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number, or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate an important example of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
Mitigation is also included addressing potential accidental discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources and for greenhouse gas emissions. With these mitigations, impacts are expected to be less than significant.
92 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(i) states that a Lead Agency shall consider whether the cumulative impact of a project is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. The assessment of the significance of the cumulative effects of a project must, therefore, be conducted in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects.
Development associated with the Project will generate new traffic with each individual site development.
As the Project sites are located on or near major transportation corridors that are within General Plan policy levels of service, traffic from the future multi-family developments will not adversely impact the level of service on streets and intersections in this vicinity. New construction will be required to pay transportation impact fees that offset any impacts the Project may have on City streets. Therefore, there are no significant cumulative traffic impacts.
Pertaining to potential cumulative impacts associated with GHG emissions, the site grading process shall comply with the GHG Reduction Measures provided in the adopted Yuba City Resource Efficiency Plan.
The additional paving area may create some minor air quality and greenhouse gas, noise, and hazardous material cumulative impacts, however those impacts have been found to be considered less than significant for the Project sites. Additionally, formal development proposals of each of the sites will require additional greenhouse gas screening or modeling to determine any project specific mitigation that may be necessary.
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
The proposed Project in and of itself would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. For development that may result from this action, construction-related air quality, noise, and hazardous materials exposure impacts would occur for a relatively short period and only be a minor impact during that time period. Therefore, the proposed Project would not have any direct or indirect adverse impacts on humans.
93 4. Section References and/or Incorporated by Reference According to Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines, an MND may incorporate by reference all or portions of another document that is a matter of public record. The incorporated language will be considered to be set forth in full as part of the text of the ND. All documents incorporated by reference are available for review at, or can be obtained through, the City of Yuba City Development Services Department located at the address provided above. The following documents are incorporated by reference:
Fehr & Peers, Inc. September 2020. SB 743 Implementation Guidelines for City of Yuba City.
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, November 2017. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA.
Sacramento Area Council of Governments. Hex Maps. Work VMT-2020 MTP/SCS (Adopted).
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection (CDC DLRP). 2014. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program – Sutter County Important Farmland 2012. August 2014.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection (CDC DLRP). 2013. Sutter County Williamson Act FY 2013/2014.
Carollo. 2011. City of Yuba City 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2011.
Airport Land Use Commission. 1994. Sutter County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. April 1994.
Airport Land Use Commission. 2011. Yuba County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Adopted March 17, 2011
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection (CDC DLRP). 2014. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program – Sutter County Important Farmland 2012. August 2014.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection (CDC DLRP). 2013. Sutter County Williamson Act FY 2013/2014.
Yuba City, City of. 2016. City of Yuba City Municipal Code. https://www.municode.com/library/ca/yuba_city/codes/code_of_ordinances Dyett & Bhatia. 2004. City of Yuba City General Plan. Adopted April 8, 2004.
Yuba City General Plan, 2004 Environmental Impact Report. (SCH #2001072105).
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 1995. Yuba-Sutter Bikeway Master Plan. December 1995. “Determination of 1-in-200 Year Floodplain for Yuba City Urban Level of Flood Protection Determination,” prepared for Yuba City by MBK Engineers, November 2015.
Sutter County General Plan.
94 Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD) CEQA Significance Thresholds.
Yuba Sutter Transit Route Map.
California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey. “Fault Zone Activity Map.” AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zones.
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2016. EnviroStor. Available at http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program – Sutter County Important Farmland Map.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Flood Insurance Rate Maps.
City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2011. California Scenic Highway Mapping System website. Updated September 7, 2011. Available at
http://dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm
95 Attachment 1:
MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PLAN
Implementation of the 2021-2029 Housing Element:
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration EA 22-07 For General Plan Amendment 22-03 and Rezoning 22-04
96 City of Yuba City
MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PLAN
Implementation of the 2021-2029 Housing Element:
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration EA 22-07 For General Plan Amendment 22-03 and Rezoning 22-04
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementing
Party
Monitoring
Party Timing
3.3 Air
Quality
AQ 1: For any development project on the Project
parcels that would involve excavation, grading, or
site preparation that would expose soil, the
Developer shall comply with all applicable Rules
of the Feather River Air Quality Management
District (FRAQMD) and shall include the required
FRAQMD Basic Construction Emission Control
Practices on all grading or improvement plans.
AQ 2: Compliance with FRAQMD standards related to a
Fugitive Dust Control Plan and permit
requirements relative to the operation of facility
heaters, fumigation, and boiler processes shall be
adhered to pursuant to established regulations.
AQ 3: Prior to individual project entitlement approval
for any future development project, each multifamily residential project shall be screened for construction emissions based on the thencurrent screening criteria established by the FRAQMD.
Developer Development
Services
Department
Prior to
issuance of
any grading
or building
permits
Agenda Item 11
CITY OF YUBA CITY
STAFF REPORT
Date: May 16, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Public Works Department
Presentation By: Ben Moody, Public Works & Development Services Director Summary
Subject: Sewer System Management Plan Update Adoption
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution adopting the City of Yuba City Sewer System Management Plan Update subject to minor editorial modifications
Fiscal Impact: Staff time associated with implementing new state requirements reflected in the Sewer System Management Plan Update. Compliance with state regulations preserves the City’s eligibility for various funding opportunities and minimizes potential fines
Purpose:
To comply with new Waste Discharge Requirements for sanitary sewer systems adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board.
Council’s Strategic Goal:
This item addresses Council’s Strategic Goal of Infrastructure by adopting a Sewer System Management Plan Update in compliance with state requirements.
Background:
The Sewer System Management Plan Update (SSMP) documents the City’s program to properly operate and maintain its sanitary sewer system.
In 2006, the State issued the first order requiring systems to develop SSMPs and systematically report sewage spills to the state.
Since 2008, the City has dramatically reduced the number and volume of sewage spills to the environment. This is a result of the City’s investment in rehabilitating and improving sewer infrastructure, acquisition of equipment and technology, and continual improvement in operational practices over time.
The State Water Resources Control Board issued an updated Sanitary Sewer Systems General Order in December 2022.
Analysis:
The reissued Order increases the focus on system resilience to minimize the number and volume of sewage spills contaminating the environment. The regulations require local agencies to maintain resilience through condition assessments, identification of operational changes, prioritization of capital improvements, and addressing high-priority rehabilitation and repairs.
The new regulation also requires systems to submit certified audit reports on their program compliance to the State every two years.
Staff worked with the consulting firm Holmes International to develop the SSMP. The plan must be updated every five (5) years.
Fiscal Impact:
Staff time associated with implementing new state requirements reflected in the Sewer System Management Plan Update. New regulations focus on increasing system resilience through prioritization of capital improvements and schedules to address high-priority rehabilitation and repairs. Compliance with state regulations preserves the City’s eligibility for various funding opportunities and minimizes potential fines.
Alternatives:
Provide staff direction regarding changes to the plan. Each Governing Board is required to approve a plan to meet the WDR requirements, therefore, there is no alternative without accepting regulatory noncompliance and associated fines.
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution adopting the City of Yuba City Sewer System Management Plan Update subject to minor editorial modifications.
Attachments:
1. Resolution - Sewer System Management Plan Update
2. Exhibit A - Sewer System Management Plan Update
Prepared By: Submitted By:
Katherine Willis
Environmental Compliance Manager
Diana Langley
City Manager
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. ___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF YUBA CITY ADOPTING THE SEWER
SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE SUBJECT TO MINOR EDITORIAL
MODIFICATIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council of Yuba City recognizes the value of managing its wastewater collection system in a manner protective of the health of the community; and WHEREAS, the City of Yuba City is committed to ensuring the long-term sustainability of the sewer infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the City of Yuba City has the authority to construct, operate, and maintain the wastewater collection system and is responsible for providing reliable wastewater conveyance to the community; and
WHEREAS, the State Water Resources Control Board has adopted Order No. 2022-0103- DWQ, Statewide Waste Discharge Requirements, General Order for Sanitary Sewer Systems; and
WHEREAS, an adopted Sewer System Management Plan Update is required to maintain compliance with the State Water Resources Control Board order effective June 5, 2023.
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved and ordered by the City Council of the City of Yuba City that the City Council adopts the City of Yuba City Sewer System Management Plan Update subject to minor editorial modifications.
The foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Yuba City at a regular meeting thereof held on the 16th of May, 2023.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Wade Kirchner, Mayor
ATTEST:
Ciara Wakefield, Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
COUNSEL FOR YUBA CITY:
Shannon Chaffin, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
Attachment(s):
A. Exhibit A – Sewer System Management Plan Update
EXHIBIT A
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan Update
May 2023
1 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table of Contents
Introduction.......................................................................................................................4 Service Area and Relevant Statistics............................................................................4 Wastewater Collection System .....................................................................................4 Section 1 Goals.............................................................................................................5
1.0 Regulatory Requirements....................................................................................5
1.1 Yuba City Goals...................................................................................................5
1.2 Sewer System Management Plan Update Schedule ..........................................6 Section 2 Organizational Structure ...............................................................................7
2.0 Regulatory Requirements....................................................................................7
2.1 Yuba City’s Legally Responsible Official .............................................................7
2.2 SSMP Implementation Organization Chart..........................................................7
2.1 Organizational Lines of Authority.........................................................................9
2.3 SSO Reporting Chain of Communication..........................................................12 Section 3 Legal Authority............................................................................................14
3.0 Regulatory Requirements..................................................................................14
3.1 Methods to Prevent Illicit Discharges ................................................................14
3.2 Methods to Ensure Proper Design and Construction Services .........................14
3.3 Access Maintenance, Inspection, and Repairs .................................................15
3.4 Methods to Limit the Discharge of FOG and other Debris into the Sewer System 15 Section 4 Operations and Maintenance Program.......................................................16
4.0 Regulatory Requirements..................................................................................16
4.1 Overview............................................................................................................16
4.2 Updated Maps ...................................................................................................20
4.3 Routine Preventive Operation and Maintenance Activities ...............................20
4.4 Closed-Circuit Television Inspection ................................................................24
4.4 Root Control ......................................................................................................24
4.5 SmartCovers......................................................................................................25
4.6 Lift Stations........................................................................................................25
4.7 Stonegate Village ..............................................................................................28
4.8 Rehabilitation and Replacement Plan ...............................................................28
2 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
4.9 Training..............................................................................................................32
4.10 Equipment and Replacement Part Inventory.....................................................34
4.11 Collection System Performance History............................................................39 Section 5 Design and Performance Provisions...........................................................42
5.0 Regulatory Requirements..................................................................................42
5.1 Standards for Installation, Rehabilitation and Repair of Sanitary Sewer Systems ......................................................................................................................42
5.2 Inspection and Testing Standards for New, Rehabilitation, and Repaired Facilities ......................................................................................................................43 Section 6 Spill Emergency Response Plan.................................................................44
6.0 Regulatory Requirements..................................................................................44
6.1 Notification Procedures to Primary Responders and Verbal Notification to regulatory Agencies ....................................................................................................44
6.2 SSO Response Program...................................................................................45
6.3 Notification Procedures to Impacted Entities and Reporting Program ..............46 Section 7 Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) Control Program ..........................................47
7.0 Regulatory Requirements..................................................................................47
7.1 Background .......................................................................................................47
7.2 Public Education Outreach Program .................................................................50
7.3 Legal Authority ..................................................................................................51
7.4 FOG Control Program Requirements................................................................51
7.5 FOG Compliance Inspection .............................................................................52
7.6 FOG Related Problem Areas.............................................................................53
7.7 Source Control ..................................................................................................54 Section 8 System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan......................................55
8.0 Regulatory Requirements..................................................................................55
8.1 Capacity Evaluation...........................................................................................55
8.2 Design Criteria...................................................................................................58
8.3 Capacity Enhancement Measures.....................................................................58
8.4 CIP Schedule.....................................................................................................59 Section 9 Monitoring, Measurement and Program Modifications ...............................60
9.0 Regulatory Requirements..................................................................................60
9.1 Maintenance Of Relevant Data .........................................................................60
3 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
9.2 Monitoring and Assessment ..............................................................................60
9.3 Assess the Success of Preventive Maintenance Program................................61
9.4 Update Program Elements based on Monitoring /Performance Evaluations ....61
9.5 Identify and Illustrate SSO Trends.....................................................................62 Section 10 SSMP Program Audits..................................................................................63
10.0 Regulatory Requirements..................................................................................63
10.1 SSMP Program Audits.......................................................................................63 Section 11 Communication Program.........................................................................65
11.0 Regulatory Requirements..................................................................................65
11.1 Communications with the Public........................................................................65
11.2 Communication with Satellite Agencies.............................................................65 Appendix A Organization Documents .........................................................................66 Appendix B Regulatory Requirements........................................................................67 Appendix C City Council Approval ..............................................................................68 Appendix D SSMP Program Audit Form .....................................................................69
4 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Introduction
The City of Yuba City, incorporated on January 23, 1908, is a full-service General Law City located in the northern part of the Sacramento Valley. Yuba City operates under the Council-Manager form of government, with each of the five Council members elected by district and serving four-year, staggered terms. From among its members, every year the Council selects the City's Mayor and Vice Mayor. The City Council appoints a full-time City Manager whose job is to carry out the Council's policy directives and coordinate, control and direct City operations, functions, and projects.
In making its policy determinations, the Council works with advisory committees made up of citizens appointed by the Council and receives other citizen input from the public at its regular and special meetings. The Council's business meetings are scheduled for the first and third Tuesday of each month in the Council Chambers at the City Hall.
Other special or study session meetings are scheduled as needed and are open to the public.
Service Area and Relevant Statistics
Figure 4-1 illustrates the boundary of Yuba City’s service area. Statistics provided in this SSMP as of 2020 and are subject to change over time. Statistics subject to change will be updated periodically as needed in the appendices.
The City’s service area is approximately 15 square miles. The City’s wastewater collection system serves a population of approximately 57,100. The wastewater is conveyed to the City’s Wastewater Treatment Facility for treatment and disposal.
Wastewater Collection System
The public wastewater collection system consists of approximately 173 miles of gravity pipeline ranging from 4-inches to 54-inches in diameter and 17 lift stations to lift the wastewater from deep sewers to shallower sewers. Most of the wastewater collection system is constructed of smaller pipelines to collect the wastewater from the homes and businesses. These pipelines discharge to larger pipelines that convey the wastewater to the Wastewater Treatment Facility.
5 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 1 Goals
This section identifies the goals for the management, operation and maintenance of the sewer system and discusses the role of the Sanitary Sewer Management Plan (SSMP) in supporting these goals. These goals provide focus for City staff to continue highquality work and to implement improvements in the management of the City’s sanitary sewer system (Collection System).
1.0 Regulatory Requirements
The goal of the SSMP, as defined by the State, is to provide a plan and schedule to:
1) Properly manage, operate, and maintain all parts of the sanitary sewer system
2) Reduce and prevent spills
3) Contain and mitigate spills that do occur
1.1 Yuba City Goals
The Public Works Department has established eight goals to guide the development, implementation and success of Yuba City’s SSMP. These goals are designed to facilitate the management, operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer collection system. The goals are also developed to achieve compliance with the State Water Resources Control Board’s General Waste Discharge Requirement for Sanitary Sewer Systems. These goals are:
1) To create and update a Sanitary Sewer Management Plan (SSMP). 2) To properly manage, operate, and maintain all portions of the City’s wastewater collection system.
3) To provide adequate capacity to convey peak wastewater flows. 4) To minimize the frequency and volume of SSOs.
5) To contain SSOs to the extent feasible.
6) To minimize public contact with SSOs.
7) To mitigate the impacts that are associated with all SSOs that may occur.
8) To comply with all applicable regulatory notification and reporting requirements.
6 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
1.2 Sewer System Management Plan Update Schedule
The SWRCB has designated the following schedule for updating the SSMP and conducting audits for the City of Yuba City and its satellite system, Stonegate Village:
City staff will conduct an annual review of sewer system performance for each calendar year in February of the following year. This will include setting milestones for incorporation of activities addressing prevention of sewer spills.
System Name WDID Number
Required
Plan
Update Due
End of
Required
Audit
Period
Audit
Due
Date
Yuba City CS 5SSO11100 8/2/2025 8/2/2024 2/2/2025
Stonegate Village CS 5SSO11060 8/2/2025 8/2/2024 2/2/2025
7 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 2 Organizational Structure
This section identifies city staff who are responsible for implementing the SSMP, responding to SSOs, and meeting the SSO reporting requirements. This section also includes the designation of the Legally Responsible Official who has the authority to ensure the sanitary sewer system complies with the December 2022 General Order for Sanitary Sewer Systems, and the authorized Data Submitters for reporting of spill data to meet the SWRCB requirements for completing and certifying spill reports.
2.0 Regulatory Requirements
The SSMP must identify:
a. The name of the agency’s responsible or authorized representative. b. The names and telephone numbers for management, administrative, and maintenance positions responsible for implementing specific measures in the SSMP program. The SSMP must identify lines of authority through an organization chart or similar document with narrative explanation. c. The chain of communication for reporting SSOs from receipt of a complaint or other information, including the person responsible for reporting SSOs to the State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Board and other agencies if applicable, such as the County Health Officer, County Environmental Health Agency, and California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES).
2.1 Yuba City’s Legally Responsible Official
The City’s Legally Responsible Official (LRO) is the Public Works and Development Services Director. The name of this responsible official is included in Appendix A.
2.2 SSMP Implementation Organization Chart
This section discusses the organizational staffing responsible and integral for implementing the SSMP. The organization chart for the management, administration, operations, and maintenance of the City’s sanitary sewer collection system identifying lines of authority is presented in Figure 2-1.
8 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Figure 2-1
SSMP Organizational Chart
Notes:
1. Only City Divisions and Departments responsible for portions of the Sewer System Management Plan are shown. Not all responsibilities listed for various positions shown.
City Council
Funds City Budget
and Approves SSMP
City Manager
Manages all City Departments
Public Works and
Developmental Services Dir1
Manages all Public Works Divisions
Legally Resp Official
Dep Dir - Maint
Manages Street, Fleet
and Fac Maint, Water Dist
& Wastewater Collection
Maint Admin Clerk
Sewer Coll Supv
Coll Sys O&M
Maint Worker I/II/III
Pipeline Cleaning
CCTV Inspection
Pipeline Repairs
Elect
Tech
I/II/III
Instrmt
Tech
I/II/III
Dep Dir - Utilities
Manages Water & Wastewater
Facilities, Envir Compliance &
Laboratory Srvs
WWTF Fac Supv
Plant Maint Supv
Lift Station O&M
Plant Maint
Mech
Envir Comp Mgr
WDR Compliance
Envir Comp Coord
FOG Prog Supv
Envir Comp Insp
FOG Inspector
Lab Supv
FOG Prog Support
Dep Dir - Engr
Design & Const Stds
Const Qual Control
Asst/Assoc
Civil Engr
Engr Tech
GIS Mapping
Const
Inspector
City Attorney
Interprets and Enforces
Municipal Code
9 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
2.1 Organizational Lines of Authority
City Council: Funds City Budget and approves SSMP and major changes.
City Attorney: Interprets and enforces Municipal Code.
City Manager: Manages all city departments.
Public Works and Development Services Director: Legally Responsible Official for ensuring the City complies with the 2023 Sewer System Management Plan. Directs, plans, organizes, and supervises the public works activities of the City. Advises the City Manager and City Council on engineering and public works matters including those involving collection system improvements, maintenance, and operation. Prepares and controls department budget.
Deputy Public Works Director – Maintenance: Plans, organizes, and supervises the maintenance, operations, and repair of public works infrastructure, including sanitary sewer/collection system. Controls budget expenditures within the Sewer Collections Division.
Deputy Public Works Director – Utilities: Plans, organizes, and supervises the maintenance, operations and repair of Water and Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Controls budget expenditures within the Utilities division.
Maintenance Administrative Clerk: Assists with data entry and report development using the City’s maintenance management system. Keeps track of training requirements and employee training histories.
Sewer Collections Supervisor: Recommends and assists in the implementation of goals and objectives. Oversees daily activities of sewer collections crews. Prepares various reports on operations and activities, including reporting sanitary sewer overflows and other regulated issues.
Recommends improvements and modifications. Supervises work in areas such as installation, repair, and cleaning of the wastewater collection system. Trains crew members in specific tasks, as needed, including collection system preventive maintenance and SSO response. Ensures the collection system is being maintained in accordance with the City’s SSMP.
Public Works Maintenance Worker I/II/III: Cleans sewer pipelines, conducts preventative maintenance, and repairs collection system sewer mains. Conduct Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) inspections. Enter data regarding work completed into the City’s maintenance management
10 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
system.
Electrical and Instrumentation Technicians, Maintenance Mechanics and Workers: Maintain the lift stations. Respond to lift station failures and lift station SSOs.
Wastewater Treatment Facility Supervisor: Manages wastewater treatment facility operations under the direction of the Deputy Public Works Director – Utilities. Coordinates with the other team members for the planning, design and construction of facilities identified by the 2020 Wastewater Treatment Facility and Collections System Master Plan (Wastewater Master Plan). Controls budget expenditures within the maintenance and operations of the wastewater treatment facility and sanitary sewer lift stations.
Wastewater Treatment Facility Plant Maintenance Supervisor: Manages day to day operation of the plant maintenance mechanics. Schedules work assignments associated with lift station maintenance and repairs.
Estimates needed equipment and equipment maintenance.
WWTF Plant Maintenance Mechanics: Repair and replace lift station pumps and valves. Conduct preventative maintenance at lift stations.
Respond to lift station emergency calls.
Environmental Compliance Manager: Monitors legislative process and regulatory rulemaking to prepare for future regulatory compliance and reporting requirements. Assists in the development of procedures, documents, and practices to facilitate regulatory compliance. Develops recommendations for capital expenditures and long-term planning to improve the resiliency of the City’s operations and maintenance of the collections system. Supervises the Wastewater Pretreatment and the Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) programs.
Environmental Compliance Coordinator: Responsible for the Pretreatment and FOG Control Program.
Environmental Compliance Inspector: Responsible for inspecting Food Service Establishments and other facilities with grease interceptors. Works with business owners and operators to ensure compliance with City regulations regarding FOG handling.
Wastewater Treatment Facility Operators: Monitor daily operation of lift stations using SCADA. Respond to lift station alarms, SmartCover alarms, and other lift station operational issues.
11 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Lab Supervisor: Manages Laboratory and laboratory staff.
Deputy Public Works Director - Engineering: Works under the policy guidance and direction of the Public Works Director. Assists the Public Works Director in development of department plans and programs, including the Capital Improvement Program. Maintains and updates the Design and Construction Standards. Develops and implements the Capital Improvement Program Updates of the Wastewater Master Plan.
Senior/Associate/Assistant Civil Engineer: Acts as project engineer/manager on wastewater infrastructure projects. Prepares and/or coordinates with engineering consultants to prepare plans, specifications, and preliminary cost estimates. Coordinates with other sanitary sewer management team members on wastewater infrastructure issues. Confers with contractors, consultants on engineering and construction matters.
Prepares reports on wastewater infrastructure projects.
Engineering Technician GIS: Produces maps with sewer lines, manhole locations, and pumping facilities as needed by the collections management and crews.
Construction Inspector: Reviews plans and specifications for proposed construction projects. Inspects sewer line installations along with associated facilities to ensure construction is in conformance with approved plans and specifications.
Wastewater Treatment Facility Chief Operator: Oversees the Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) operational staff. Ensures plant operators effectively monitor lift station operations and respond as needed to Lift Station and SmartCover alarms.
Wastewater Treatment Facility Operators: Responsible for daily monitoring of lift stations using SCADA. Respond to lift station alarms, SmartCover alarms, and other lift station operational issues. Conduct weekly lift station inspections.
Authorized Representatives
Data Submitter: The Sewer Collections Supervisor is authorized to certify electronic spill reports reported to the SWRCB through the California Integrated Water Quality System.
Data Submitter: The Environmental Compliance Manager is also a
12 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
authorized to certify electronic spill reports submitted to the SWRCB.
Responsibility for SSMP Implementation
Legally Responsible Official: The Public Works and Development Services Director is LRO regarding implementation and maintaining all elements of this SSMP.
13 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
2.3 SSO Reporting Chain of Communication
The Sewer Collections Supervisor and the Deputy Public Works DirectorMaintenance are the lead response coordinators in the event of an SSO.
Table 2-1 lists contact phone numbers for the parties included in the chain of communication.
Figure 2-2 shows a flowchart depicting the chain of communication for responding to and reporting SSOs, from observation of an SSO to reporting the SSO to the appropriate regulatory agencies.
Table 2-1: Contact Numbers for SSO Chain of Communication Contact Telephone Number
Public Works Department (530) 822-4626
Police Department Dispatch Center (530) 822-4660
Sewer Collections Supervisor (530) 822-4834
Deputy Public Works Director – Maintenance (530) 822-3241 Wastewater Treatment Facility Supervisor (530) 822-3264 x 3302 Wastewater Treatment Facility Operations Center (530) 822-3264 x 3306 Wastewater Treatment Facility Ops 1 (24-hr mobile) (530) 713-8732
14 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Figure 2-2 Chain of Communication Flowchart
for Responding to and Reporting SSOs
15 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 3 Legal Authority
3.0 Regulatory Requirements
Each enrollee must demonstrate, through sanitary sewer system use ordinances, service agreements, or other legally binding procedures, that it possesses the necessary legal authority to:
(a) Prevent illicit discharges into its sanitary sewer system (examples may include inflow and infiltration, stormwater, chemical dumping, unauthorized debris and cut roots, etc.)
(b) Require that sewers and connections be properly designed and constructed
(c) Ensure access for maintenance, inspection, or repairs for portions of the
lateral owned or maintained by the Public Agency
(d) Limit the discharge of fats, oils, and grease and other debris that may cause blockages, and
(e) Enforce any violation of its sewer ordinances
3.1 Methods to Prevent Illicit Discharges
City Sewer Ordinance – The City of Yuba City’s Sewer Ordinance prohibits illicit discharges into the sanitary sewer system.
Supporting Documents
➢ Chapter 5 (Wastewater Collection and Treatment) of Title 6 of the Yuba City Municipal Code
3.2 Methods to Ensure Proper Design and Construction Services QA/QC Process for Design and Construction
The City of Yuba City ensures that sewers and connections are properly designed and constructed by using various quality control mechanisms as described in Table 1 below.
16 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table 1: QA/QC Process for Design and Construction
Component QA/QC of Design Process QA/QC of Construction Process
Sewer Pipes
And Service
Connections
Use of City Standard
Specifications and Details
Project design reviewed by
Licensed Professional
Engineer of the appropriate
branch of Engineering and
approved by Public Works
Director (or authorized
representative)
Use of City of Yuba City
Standard Specifications
Inspection by the City’s
Construction Inspectors
Special Construction
inspection by consultant
hired by the Public Works
Department.
Sewer
Laterals
The City does not own or maintain laterals. However, the City inspects sewer lateral installation during construction.
Supporting Documents
➢ City of Yuba City Standard Specifications
➢ City of Yuba City Standard Details
➢ City of Yuba City Sewer Ordinance
➢ Chapter 5 (Wastewater Collection and Treatment) of Title 6 of the Yuba City Municipal Code
3.3 Access Maintenance, Inspection, and Repairs
The City of Yuba City does not own or maintain laterals and therefore, this requirement is not applicable.
3.4 Methods to Limit the Discharge of FOG and other Debris into the Sewer System
The City of Yuba City’s Sewer Ordinance regulates and limits the discharge of FOG and other debris into the sewer system.
Supporting Documents
➢ Chapter 5 (Wastewater Collection and Treatment) of Title 6 of the Yuba City Municipal Code
17 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 4 Operations and Maintenance Program
4.0 Regulatory Requirements
The SSMP must include those elements listed below that are appropriate and applicable to the Enrollee’s system:
(a) Maintain an up-to-date map of the sanitary sewer system, showing all gravity line segments and manholes, pumping facilities, pressure pipes and valves, and applicable stormwater conveyance facilities. (b) Describe routine preventive operation and maintenance activities by staff and contractors, including a system for scheduling regular maintenance and cleaning of the sanitary sewer system with more frequent cleaning and maintenance targeted at known problem areas.
The Preventative Maintenance (PM) program should have a system to document scheduled and conducted activities, such as work orders. (c) Develop a rehabilitation and replacement plan to identify and prioritize system deficiencies and implement short-term and long-term rehabilitation actions to address each deficiency. The program should include regular visual and TV inspections of manholes and sewer pipes, and a system for ranking the condition of sewer pipes and scheduling rehabilitation.
Rehabilitation and replacement should focus on sewer pipes that are at risk of collapse or prone to more frequent blockages due to pipe defects.
Finally, the rehabilitation and replacement plan should include a capital improvement plan that addresses proper management and protection of the infrastructure assets. The plan shall include a time schedule for implementing the short- and long-term plans plus a schedule for developing the funds needed for the capital improvement plan. (d) Provide training on a regular basis for staff in sanitary sewer system operations and maintenance, and require contractors to be appropriately trained; and
(e) Provide equipment and replacement part inventories, including identification of critical replacement parts.
4.1 Overview
The City of Yuba City (City) sanitary sewer collection system consists of approximately 173 miles of gravity sewer lines ranging from 4 inches to 54 inches in diameter, approximately 3.3 miles of force-main ranging from 4 inches to 20 inches in diameter and 17 pumping stations or lift stations.
18 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Information about the collection system, the distribution of the gravity pipelines sizes, material of construction, and age as presented by the decade(s) that the pipelines were installed is presented in Tables 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 below.
The distribution of the various sizes of the gravity pipelines are summarized in Table 4-1. What’s notable is that approximately 70 percent of the collection system gravity mains are 6-inch and 8-inch diameter lines. This has a direct impact on the sewer pipeline maintenance activities and the equipment needed to maintain the collection system.
Table 4-1 - Gravity Mains by Diameter1
Diameter, inches Length, feet Length, miles Percent of System, % 4 1,960 0.37 0.21
6 249,899 47.33 27.40
8 405,352 76.77 44.44
10 57,922 10.97 6.35
12 80,881 15.32 8.87
14 5,223 0.99 0.57
15 20,611 3.90 2.26
16 3,041 0.58 0.33
18 34,634 6.56 3.80
20 295 0.06 0.03
21 5,749 1.09 0.63
24 13,562 2.57 1.49
27 8,925 1.69 0.98
30 1,892 0.36 0.21
33 7,525 1.43 0.82
36 11,613 2.20 1.27
42 3,089 0.59 0.34
Total 912,174 172.76 100
(a) All existing GIS information is subject to confirmation, per City staff.
The pipe materials used to construct the gravity sanitary sewer pipelines are summarized in Table 4-2. The gravity mains in the collection system are composed of ten different materials. Again, what’s notable is that approximately 83 percent of the system by length is composed of vitrified clay pipe (VCP) and approximately 10 percent is asbestos cement (AC) pipe.
1 From City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan, West Yost & Associates, August 2020
19 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table 4-2. Gravity Mains by Material2
Pipe Material Length, feet Length, miles Percent of System Asbestos Cement (AC) 92,150 17.45 10.10
Cast Iron Pipe (CI) 1,464 0.28 0.16
Concrete (CONC) 38,998 7.39 4.28
Ductile Iron Pipe (DIP) 12,444 2.36 1.36
High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) 291 0.06 0.03
Heavy-Walled Centrifugal Pipe (HWCP) 1,192 0.23 0.13
Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) 377 0.07 0.04
Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) 1,354 0.26 0.15
Reinforced Plastic Mortar (RPM) 9,454 1.79 1.04
Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP) 754,449 142.89 82.71
Total 912,174 172.76 100
(a) All existing GIS information is subject to confirmation, per City staff.
The relative ages of the gravity mains can be inferred from the decade(s) in which they were installed. For example, if we assume that the middle of decade is at the 5 year mark for each decade, then the mid-point of 1990s decade would be 1995. This data is summarized in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3 – Approximate Age of Gravity Mains3
Installation Decade Approx Age, Yrs Length, feet Length, miles Percent of System Pre-1950s 80+ 51,371 9.73 5.63
1950s 70 20,812 3.94 2.28
1960s 60 14,445 2.74 1.58
1970s 50 71,294 13.50 7.82
1980s 40 142,410 26.97 15.61
1990s 30 216,549 41.01 23.74
2000s and later 20 or Less 208,202 39.43 22.82
Unknown Unknown 187,089 35.43 20.51
Total - 912,174 172.76 100
Figure 4.1 shows the existing collection system service area, existing City limits, the Sphere of Influence, the gravity sewer system, the locations of the lift stations, and the force mains.
2 From City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan, West Yost & Associates, August 2020 3 From City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan, West Yost & Associates, August 2020, Modified to add Approx age column
20 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Figure 4.1 – Existing Wastewater Collection System and Lift Stations
21 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
4.2 Updated Maps
The City uses a Geographic Information System (GIS) and associated databases that show locations and list attributes of gravity pipelines, maintenance structures (manholes), pressure lines and valves, pumping facilities, and applicable stormwater conveyance systems.
The mapping system includes a sanitary sewer collection system grid map for preventative maintenance activities. There are a total of 144 grids covering the entire sewer collection system.
Gilsizer Slough and Live Oak Canal, which are located close to major collection trunk lines, are also shown on the GIS maps.
The mapping system allows city staff to locate the collection system components and relevant features electronically (e.g., city streets, highways, critical structures, local waterways, city limits, addresses, and property tax roll data).
The city’s Information Technology department maintains the city GIS system including sanitary sewer collection system maps. As-built elements of the collection system are periodically added to the GIS system.
The GIS maps are available to the sewer maintenance field staff at the Corp Yard electronically. The GIS data and maps are also accessible on the computers used on the high-pressure hydraulic jet cleaning and combination vacuum trucks and the CCTV truck.
The maps serve as an aid to engineers in planning improvements and for the maintenance crews in locating various items in the field.
4.3 Routine Preventive Operation and Maintenance Activities The routine preventive operation and maintenance (O&M) activities are performed by a sewer maintenance staff consisting of 5 journey level (greater than 2 years of experience) people and one entry level person under the direction of the Wastewater Collections Supervisor.
The major equipment for routine preventive O&M activities includes:
– 2 Combination Jet-Vacuum
Trucks
– Easement Jetter
– 1 CCTV Truck
– Mini-Excavator,
– Dump Trailer
22 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Regular Maintenance and Cleaning.
Pipeline cleaning of the sanitary sewer system is routinely accomplished on a grid basis. A grid is selected and cleaned by one of the sewer maintenance crews with the city-owned combination jet cleaning and vacuum truck. The work is scheduled and documented through IWorQ computer maintenance management system (CMMS) sewer software.
The cleaning is performed from top to bottom of a grid, moving downstream from the upper reaches of the grid down to the collector sewers and trunk pipelines in a top-to-bottom approach. Once a crew is assigned a grid, they continue working in the assigned grid until all the pipelines are cleaned.
Progress slows down when the crews get into the older areas of the community which require much more work. Progress was also less during 2020 due to COVID-19 staff reductions and the needed on-the-job training for the new employees. The goal is to clean the whole collection system once every 3 years.
Computer based software (GraniteNet/GNET) is used by the crews through laptop computers used by combination cleaning truck and through the onboard computer in the CCTV inspection truck. The videos from the CCTV truck computer are stored on a dedicated computer drive for record-keeping purposes and for evaluations of rehabilitation work.
The collections crew have been averaging about 3,000 linear feet per day (LF/day) for the past several years. Production was off during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic due to the crews working a schedule of one week on / one week off to maintain service during the pandemic.
All crew members are National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO) Pipeline Assessment Certification Program (PACP) trained and certified operators.
The CCTV work follows behind the cleaning trucks, inspecting the pipelines that have been recently cleaned. Thus, all the pipeline cleaning work is inspected. Through this approach, if the CCTV crew encounters a pipeline where additional cleaning is needed, the CCTV crew calls the cleaning crew and has them complete the pipeline cleaning before they move on.
The pipeline cleaning, inspection, and maintenance crews also serve as a first responders to collection system blockages and/or SSO’s.
23 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
High-Frequency Cleaning
In addition to the routine PM activities, higher frequency cleaning and inspection is scheduled for pre-selected pipelines where history has shown that grease or debris will cause sewer backups or SSOs unless these pipelines are cleaned at a higher frequency. A list of these pipelines is shown in Table 4.1. These pipelines are scheduled to be cleaned once every two months. They are also scheduled to be inspected once every year.
24 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table 4.1
High-Frequency Cleaning Pipelines
Num Suff Pipe ID Location Address Reason on List
1 E9161 Anneka Ln@ Walton Ave 1590 Anneka Ln Apartments 2 C12167 Rickey Dr @ Railroad 1160 Rickey Dr Residential 3 D4100 Forestwood Dr @ E Onstott Rd 1299 Forestwood Dr Apartments 4 D5122 Peachtree Ln @ W Onstott Rd 1331 Peachtree Ln Residential 5 C9153 University Ave @ B St 807 B St
6 C9137 Park Ave @ B St 505 Park Ave
7 E11120 Richland Dr @ Walton Ave 633 Walton Ave Residential 8 A D7116 Rocca Way into Foodmaxx Parking Lot 1272 Colusa Ave #J FSE 8 B D7100 Rocca Way into Foodmaxx Parking Lot 940 Colusa Ave FSE 9 A C7124 The Mall (Front & Back) 1215 Colusa Ave FSE
9 B D7138 The Mall (Front & Back) 1215 Colusa Ave FSE
9 C D7139 The Mall (Front & Back) 1215 Colusa Ave FSE
9 D D7140 The Mall (Front & Back) 1215 Colusa Ave FSE
9 E D6121 The Mall (Front & Back) 1215 Colusa Ave FSE
9 F D6123 The Mall (Front & Back) 1215 Colusa Ave FSE
10 A C4123 Gray Ave From Casita Dr to Melton Dr 1630 Gray Ave Residential & FSE 10 B C4137 Gray Ave From Casita Dr to Melton Dr 1630 Gray Ave Residential & FSE 11 C4174 Gray Ave From Kenny Dr to Casita Dr 1579 Gray Ave Residential & FSE 12 A8111 B St @ Boyd St 311 B St
13 A C5234
Gray Ave - Washington Ave to
Charlotte Ave 1339 Gray Ave FSE
13 B C6156
Gray Ave - Washington Ave to
Charlotte Ave 1339 Gray Ave FSE
14 A E4129 Stabler Dr, Nadean Dr to Coats Dr 1591 Nadean Dr St Dr Crowns 14 B E4194 Stabler Dr, Nadean Dr to Coats Dr 1591 Nadean Dr St Dr Crowns 15 B9208 Rowe Ave @ Percy Ave 301 Percy Ave Apartments
16 C10106 Park Ave @ Orchard St 143 Orchard St Pipe Conn 17 D8127 Joy @ Bridge St 1483 Bridge St Apartments
18 B6160 Plumas St, Bird St to 1200 Palms Apts 1105 Plumas St Apartments 19 B6159 Ainsley Ave to Bird St 401 Aimsley Ave Flat slope Legend
FSE Food service establishments
St Dr Crowns Storm drain crowns
Pipe Conn Poor alignment of connecting pipe in manhole
The majority of the problems with these pipelines are believed to be related to sags or “flat bellies” that can be scheduled for repair or replacement in the relatively near term.
25 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
4.4 Closed-Circuit Television Inspection
The Sewer Collections team’s goal is to conduct CCTV inspections of the entire system over a five-year period.
The City conducts its CCTV inspections using a truck outfitted with GraniteNet/GNET software purchased for collecting data with the. The system is NASSCO Pipeline Assessment Certification Program compliant.
A pipe condition rating system is included with GraniteNet/GNET. The Engineering Division has a version of GraniteNet/GNET as well.
When the CCTV truck comes into the Corp Yard at the end of the shift, the data is uploaded as the truck drives into the bay where the truck is parked.
The data is then transferred to the Engineering Division where the data is reviewed.
If a significant defect or possible sewer failure is found during an inspection, the crew will either contact the Sewer Collections Supervisor and have him review the data in the truck or download an electronic copy on a flash drive for viewing.
4.4 Root Control
Root control is contracted out to a firm that specializes in root control in sanitary sewer systems. This is another key piece of the City’s efforts to minimize or eliminate problems that could lead to a sewer blockage or spill.
The City has been contracting out about 3 miles/year of sewer pipeline with Duke’s Root Control. Duke’s applies Razorooter II diquat-based herbicide into the sewer pipelines that are experiencing root intrusion with a foam that covers the roots with the herbicide. Duke’s has about 40 years of experience with controlling roots in sanitary sewer systems and has a oneyear warranty period where they guarantee that their treatment will remove the roots in the pipelines where the herbicide is applied. Duke’s crews will come back and re-apply when that occurs and sometimes will re-apply in recently treated areas that are out of the warranty period. The City has Duke’s crews apply the herbicide in the April to May time period. After the application, the City will use the CCTV inspection truck and equipment inspect the treated line multiple times after treatment to confirm that the herbicide was effective in killing the roots.
In Yuba City most root problems are located in backyard easements. The City tries to avoid jetting the lines that have been foamed to minimize damage to pipes, but will do so on occasion if needed. The City’s experience has been that the worst root intrusion conditions will occur after
26 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
a wet winter followed by a hot summer. The City crews use RootX for isolated root intrusion problems.
4.5 SmartCover Monitoring Systems
A key component of the City’s efforts to minimize or eliminate sewer blockage or spill problems is the use of SmartCover Monitoring and Alarm Systems. SmartCovers provide real time satellite manhole monitoring and alerts of rising water levels which allows managers and operators to dispatch sewer crews to address problems before spills occur.
Eighteen SmartCovers have been installed at strategic locations throughout the collections system. Eight of those also have flow-measurement capacities. The SmartCovers have allowed sewer crews to identify and clear many sewer blockages before they resulted in SSOs.
4.6 Lift Stations
In addition to the gravity pipeline network, the City’s owns, operates, and maintains 17 sewer lift or pumping stations. These pumping stations lift the wastewater flowing in deeper sewers to higher pipelines so that the sewers do not get excessively deep. Deep sewers are harder to maintain and are more costly to construct.
Table 4.2 summarizes the available information regarding the location, construction history, and operating characteristics of each station.
Lift Stations #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #10, #14, #15, #16, and #17 have full SCADA control from the Wastewater Treatment Facilities (WWTF) through radio communications. The SCADA system at the WWTF is monitored 24/7 and operational adjustments can be made from the WWTF for each of the lift stations that are currently monitored. Five of the City’s stormwater detention basins are also connected to the WWTF’s SCADA system which is monitored during storm events.
Cellular communications have been installed in five of the 17 lift stations:
Lift Stations #7, #9, #10, #11, and #13. Four of these previously had no direct communication capability. The cellular communications provide information on wet well levels, pump run status, and operational setpoints. The City is currently working to install cellular communications at all lift stations, then plans to incorporate the SCADA system onto the cellular communications system.
No remote monitoring or control features are installed at Lift Stations #8 and #12. These lift stations are solely reliant on SmartCovers from
27 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
manholes upstream of the lift stations to alert City staff of potential alarm conditions. Cellular communications are planned for these lift station in the near future.
Following a large sanitary sewer spill occurred in 2014, the City installed SmartCovers upstream of all the lift stations which were not monitored by the SCADA system at that time. The City now has SCADA monitoring at most lift stations and has continued to increase the number of SmartCover monitoring sites as a backup alarm system and for flow monitoring at some sites.
The two main lift stations, Lift Stations #2 and #10, had historical issues with odors and problems with Fats, Oil and Grease (FOG) building up in the wet wells. Approximately 5 years ago the City installed ozone units that sprays out a mist on top of the scum and FOG blanket which helps keep FOG from building up in the wet wells, minimizes odor problems, and lowers chemical costs at the City’s wastewater treatment Facility (WWTF).
City wastewater maintenance staff conducts an on-site physical inspection of each lift station every week. City staff also undertake an assessment of lift station maintenance needs once/month. As needed, the crew removes grease ring buildup and vacuum up debris. Six or seven of the lift stations have occasional grease ring buildup of 5 to 6 inches per month. The crews remove grease off walls with high pressure jet spray and clean the remaining wet wells to remove grease rings once per month. Permanent emergency generators are currently installed at Lift Stations #1, #2 and #10. Two new standby permanent generators have been purchased and are now on-site at Lift Stations #3 and #14 and will be connected soon.
Portable emergency generators are available for power failures at other lift stations.
Lift station bypass systems have been identified for each lift station. In some cases, bypass fittings and valves have been installed to make bypass pumping easier to set up.
Table 4.2 summarizes the available information regarding the location, construction history, and operating characteristics of each station.
28 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table 4.2 Wastewater Collection System Lift Station Summary4 Station
Name
Location Pump
Manufacturer
Year
Installed
(a)
No. of
Pumps
(b)
Firm
Capacity
(gpm)
Total
Dynamic
Head
Power
(HP)
Variable
Frequency
Drive
LS 1 Del Monte
Avenue and
Woodbridge
Avenue
Flygt 1994 3 1,450 18 5 No
LS 2 Market St. and
Bird St.
WEMCO 1992 3 4,500 40 5 Yes(c)
LS 3 Lassen Blvd.
and Harter
Parkway
Flygt 2004 3 1,960 30.6 10 No
LS 4 Butte House
and Blevin Road
Flygt 2002 2 702 16.4 5 No
LS 5 Palora Avenue
and Wyler Road
Flygt 1998 2 325 25 5 No
LS 6 Queens Avenue
and Hwy 99
Flygt 1998 2 450 25 5 No
LS 7 Richland Road
and Glenwood
Drive
Flygt 1989 2 350 32.5 5 No
LS 8 Louise Avenue
and Rocca Way
Flygt 1995 2 275 22.5 3 No
LS 9 Walton Avenue
and Smith Road
Flygt 1995 2 300 22.5 3 No
LS 10 Lincoln Avenue
and Hwy 99
Flygt 2002 3 4,200 24 30 Yes
LS 11 Garden Hwy.
and Shanghai
Bend
Flygt 1991 2 1,000 18 10 No
LS 12 Bogue Road and
Falls Drive
Flygt 1992 2 180 16 3 No
LS 13 Bogue Road and
Wild River
Drive
Flygt 1993 2 300 22 3 No
LS 14 Parc West Drive
and Stabler
Lane
Flygt 2000 2 700 20 5 No
LS 15 George
Washington
Blvd. and South
Colusa Frontage
Road
Flygt 2006 2 1,008 35.5 12 No
LS 16 East Onstott
Frontage Road
and Manchester
Way
Flygt 2005 2 324 25.1 5 No
LS 17 3301 East
Onstott
Frontage Road
Flygt 2011 2 Unknown Unknown Unknown No
(a) Pumps are being replaced and rehabilitated by WWTF’s Maintenance Division on as needed basis. (b) Capacity with the largest pump out of service.
(c) Only two of the three pumps are equipped with a VFD. 4 From City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan, West Yost & Associates, August 2020
29 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
4.7 Stonegate Village
The City operates and maintains a satellite sewer collection system known as Stonegate Village northeast of Monroe Drive and Royo Ranchero Drive.
These homes are served by septic tank effluent pumping (STEP) systems.
The STEP systems pump into common force mains along the streets in the neighborhood until they join the gravity main system at the intersection of Monroe Drive and Royo Ranchero Drive.
Maintenance crews conduct routine maintenance replacing critical components at each of the 112 services a minimum of once every three years.
The City eventually plans to install gravity sewer lines to replace the STEP system infrastructure.
Supporting Documents
• Wastewater Collection System Maps
• GIS Maps
• Sewer Map hard copies located at the City Hall, the Wastewater Treatment Facility and the Corp Yard
• Sewer Collection System as-built drawings located at City Hall • Collection system grid map
• Lift station cleaning logs and schedule
• GraniteNet/GNET computer program data records
• Line inspection videos
4.8 Rehabilitation and Replacement Plan
The Wastewater Master Plan provides the foundation for prioritizing the funding needed to repair or replace components of the system to maintain the City’s infrastructure.
Table 4.3 shows the Capital Improvement Program Budgets and Expenditures from 2012 through 2021 for recurring collection or rehabilitation system projects and lift station improvements and projects.
This table shows that the City has undertaken $2.4 million for recurring collection or rehabilitation system projects and approximately $470,00 for improvements or upgrades to the lift stations. In addition to these funds, starting in 2012 the City initiated Downtown Area Wastewater Collection System Rehabilitation and Replacement Project which had a final cost of $10.66 million utilizing a low interest Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) loan with principal forgiveness and Wastewater Service Charges.
30 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table 4.3 Capital Improvement Program Budgets and Expenditures Recurring Collection or
Rehabilitation System Projects Lift Station Improvements Downtown Area Collection System
Rehab/Replacement
2012
through
2021
Year
Current
Funding
Adopted
FY
Actual
Charges
Current
Funding
Adopted
FY
Actual
Charges
Prior Years
Expenditures
Current
Funding
Adopted
FY
2012 613,000 267,497 100,000 100,000 71,628 8,200,000
2013 159,731 104,496
2014 246,000 207,499 58,000 200,000 62,354 10,663,000 393,000 438,000 2015 111,000 210,000 58,029 165,000 150,000 51,602
2016 75,000 210,000 9,505 165,000 150,000 67,983
2017 361,000 150,000 100,138 379,000 150,000 5,162
2018 494,000 150,000 438,983 516,000 150,000 555
2019 104,569 1,000,000 548,043 666,608 150,000 16,751
2020 720,000 150,000 393,098 790,000 150,000 67,166
2021 656,088 250,000 248,699 884,418 100,000 19,164
Total 2,431,222 466,861
A synopsis of work completed during the past 10 years includes the following:
• Downtown Area Collection System Rehab/Replacement
o Over $10 million was invested to replace and rehabilitate sewer mains in the Yuba City downtown core district from 2012 through 2014. Many segments of the City’s collection system dated back to the early 1900s.
The majority of the sewer pipelines in this project area were constructed in 1926.
These sewer lines had been experiencing multiple failures. Most of the sewer lines in the project area were back lot mains located in the rear of customers’ properties and very difficult to access, maintain and repair.
The project involved construction of approximately 12,600 lineal feet of sewer mains in the street to replace backyard sewer mains, the removal and replacement of approximately 6,200 lineal feet of sewer mains already located in the street that was in too poor of condition for rehabilitate, and the rehabilitation of approximately 9,500 lineal feet of sewer mains. • SmartCover Monitoring
o The City started installing SmartCover System sensors in manholes beginning in 2014. Currently the City has 18 monitoring sites to detect
31 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
water levels throughout the sewer system. Six of the 18 monitoring sites also include flow monitoring capabilities.
• SCADA
o SCADA communications have been extended to 15 of the 17 sewer lift stations.
• Lift Station #2 Upgrade
o In 2017, a permanent standby generator was installed at Lift Station #2. o In 2020, the City replaced the obsolete odor control system in Lift Station #2 with a Titus Twister ozone odor control system.
• Sewer Main Lining Project
o In 2021, relined approximately 2,590 linear feet of 42-inch Techite pipe trunk line from Lincoln Road and the Garden Highway to the WWTF. The 2020 Wastewater Master Plan recommended the removal or rehabilitation of 9,420 feet of Techite reinforced plastic mortar pipe in the City’s wastewater collection system due to its high failure rate. • Lift Station #10 Odor Control
o Installed Vapex ozone odor control system in 2018.
• Operations and Maintenance Projects and Initiatives
Overall, City has focused on improving its operations and maintenance program as follows:
o Conducting preventative maintenance at each sewer lift station on an annual basis.
o Sewer jetting and conducting CCTV inspections systematically throughout the collection system.
o Upgrading SCADA controls and communications networks at lift stations.
The 2020 Wastewater Master Plan identified wastewater collection system near- and long-term needs. West Yost and Associates recommended that the City resolve condition-related issues for the sanitary sewer system. The Wastewater Master Plan recommended projects to address gravity main and manhole condition-related improvements issues with
1) Rehabilitation or replacement of sewer lines along Gilsizer Slough 2) Techite pipe replacement
3) Manholes of brick construction
4) Backyard sewers
5) Sewers prone to inflow and infiltration
6) Deteriorated pipe linings
32 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
7) Crescent Court sewer facilities (which are prone to settlement), and 8) pipe bellies (sags).
The Wastewater Master Plan also recommended projects to address Lift Station Condition/Capacity-Related Improvements to the collection system.
The project costs for these improvements and timing for implementing the projects are shown in Table 4.4. The projects were also staged in 5-year increments to prioritize projects based on need. Table 4.5 shows the same information for only collection system components.
Table 4.4 - CIP Project Costs(a) to Accommodate Existing Service Area Population5 Capital Costs, million dollars(b)
Facility 1–5 Year 6–10 Year 11–20 Year Total
Gravity Main and Manhole
Condition-Related Improvements 18.8 13.0 17.9 49.7
Lift Station Condition/Capacity-Related
Improvements 18.1 12.5 1.9 32.5
WWTF Capacity Improvements 1.3 – – 1.3
WWTF Condition-Related Improvements 16.7 35.7 12.6 65.0 WWTF Outfall Pipeline and Diffuser(c) 35.0 – – 35.0
Total $90.0 $61.2 $32.4 $183.5
(a) Costs shown are based on the October 2019 20-Cities ENR CCI of 11,326. (b) Construction costs include an estimating contingency of 25 percent. Capital costs include a construction contingency of 5 percent and an implementation factor of 30 percent, both applied to the construction cost. (c) Based on 30 percent design cost estimate prepared by others.
Table 4.5 - CIP Project Costs(a) to Accommodate Collection System Needs for the Existing Service Area Population5
Capital Costs, million dollars(b)
Facility 1–5 Year 6–10 Year 11–20 Year Total
Gravity Main and Manhole
Condition-Related Improvements 18.8 13.0 17.9 49.7
Lift Station Condition/Capacity-Related
Improvements 18.1 12.5 1.9 32.5
Total $36.9 $25.5 $19.8 $82.2
(a) Costs shown are based on the October 2019 20-Cities ENR CCI of 11,326. (b) Construction costs include an estimating contingency of 25 percent. Capital costs include a construction contingency of 5 percent and an implementation factor of 30 percent, both applied to the construction cost. (c) Based on 30 percent design cost estimate prepared by others. 5 From City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan, West Yost & Associates, August 2020
33 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
The adopted Capital Improvement Project Budget for FY 2022-2027 shows the following for 1) Recurring Collection or Rehabilitation System Projects and 2) Lift Station Improvements for the rehabilitation and replacement projects needed to address proper management and protection of the City’s existing wastewater collection system.
Project Name
Current
Funding
Adopted
2022-
2023
2023-
2024
2024-
2025
2025-
2026
2026-
2027
Project
Funding
Recurring Collection or
Rehab System Project 183,000 850,000 750,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 2,533,000 Lift Station Improvements 1,154,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 1,654,000 This demonstrates through the recently updated Wastewater Master Plan and the City’s adopted CIP Project Budget that the City has near- and longterm plans to implement and finance needed improvements.
4.9 Training
The City of Yuba City staff is trained to monitor, maintain, and operate the collection system during normal flow events and during high-flow events in order to manage the sanitary flows and avoid SSOs. The current City training program consists of both formal and informal elements described below.
The City’s Sewer Maintenance Team is responsible for the sewer collection system maintenance and operations and consists of:
Position Staff Count
Deputy PW Director - Maintenance 1
Sewer Supervisor 1
Collections Maintenance Worker III 2
Collections Maintenance Worker II 3
34 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
The City’s Wastewater Treatment Facility Operations Team is responsible for monitoring sewer lift station operations and alarms on SCADA in addition to the other duties, the WWTF team consists of the following:
On-the-Job Training and Craft Skills
The majority of on-the-job training and craft or skill related training occurs when new employees work closely with more experienced staff to become familiar with the City facilities and their mechanical, electrical, and control systems. City staff also attend training sessions, on a regular basis, certified by the State Water Resources Control Board and provided by the California Water Environment Association. The City typically uses a 1-year probationary period to evaluate employee development.
Operational Training
Sewer Collections Supervisor directs the O&M activities for the sewer collection system (excluding lift stations) during normal and high-flow events and the Wastewater Treatment Facility Plant Maintenance Supervisor directs O&M activities for lift stations during normal and highflow events. Current operational training for supervisors occurs through one-on-one mentoring at the supervisory level. The City staff attends the CWEA training sessions and other similar training opportunities on a regular basis.
Position Staff Count
WWTF Chief Plant Operator 1
WWTF Operator III 6
WWTF Operator II 1
WWTF Plant Supervisor 1
WWTF Plant Maintenance Supervisor 1
Mechanic Senior 1
Mechanic 3
Electrical Technicians 2
Instrumentation Technician 1
35 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Safety Training
The City provides safety training to the O&M staff that meets California Occupational Health and Safety Administration (CalOSHA) personnel safety and awareness requirements (e.g., confined space entries, lockout/tagout, etc.) on a continuous basis.
The O&M staff receive training provided by equipment suppliers and vendors when new facilities are constructed.
Training Documentation
Training sessions are documented using a training matrix and records are maintained using a training software program. The Training materials are stored at the Wastewater Treatment Facility and at the Corp Yard depending on the type of equipment/facility.
Training for Contractors
The City has all the resources and staff available to operate and maintain the collection system. However, the City uses local private contractors’ help as needed for backup support in case of equipment failure. Trained City staff are responsible for coordinating and directing the contractors during an SSO event, and for following all appropriate procedures. The City does not allow private Contractors to work on their own without the presence of City staff. Therefore, this requirement is not applicable.
Supporting Documents:
1. Safety Manuals located at WWTF and Corp Yard;
2. Weekly Safety meeting logs (Corp Yard) & WWTF;
3. Cal/OSHA Training Matrix – WWTF; and
4. Cal/OSHA Training matrix – Corp Yard.
4.10 Equipment and Replacement Part Inventory
The required sewer line repair parts (such as manhole covers, pipe repair parts etc.). are stored at the Corp Yard and lift station parts (such as pumps, electrical parts, etc.) are stored at the WWTF.
Criticality
The inventory of replacement parts is controlled by the assigned criticality of the part. The parts with high criticality have a higher stocking priority and inventory backlog to appropriately respond to an emergency.
Three lift stations, Lift Stations #1, #2, and #10, have permanent on-site generators. The onsite permanent generators supply power to these lift stations during a power outage. Two more permanent onsite generators have been purchased and delivered and will soon be functional for Lift
36 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Stations #3 and #14. Portable generators are stored at both the Corp Yard and the WWTF to be available to provide temporary power at all other lift stations.
Replacement and Spare Parts
The City purchases replacement and spare parts in advance and tracks these items in its inventory. The Sewer Collections Supervisor and WWTF Plant Maintenance Supervisor determine which parts need to be stored at their respective facilities. As these items are used, replacement parts are ordered.
The following reviews where different major items like pumps and generators are located or stored. It also discusses where replacement and repair parts are located and how inventories are kept up.
Corp Yard – Sewer mains and Stonegate system
Pipe and fittings for sewer line repairs and all replacement and repair parts associated with the Stonegate Septic Tank Effluent Pump (STEP) systems are stored at the Corp Yard.
Sewer crews maintain sewer mains and respond to emergencies throughout the City as scheduled and as needed. Sewer crews replace the pumps, valves, bio baskets, and inspect the associated electrical and mechanical equipment for each home in the Stonegate area on a threeyear rotation and respond to emergencies as needed.
The following are the minimum quantities of pipe, fittings and supplies stored at the Corp Yard. The Sewer System Supervisor tracks the inventory and ensures equipment and supplies are ordered as needed to maintain adequate inventories.
Corp Yard – General Inventory List
• 8-inch SDR 26 pipe
• 6-inch SDR 26 pipe
• 4-inch SDR pipe
• 4-inch ABS pipe
• 4-inch plastic-to-plastic Fernco
• 4-inch 90's ABS fittings
• 4-inch 45's ABS fittings
37 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
• 4-inch ABS couplings
• 6-inch Fernco couplings clay-to-clay
• 6-inch Fernco couplings concrete-to-clay
• 8-inch Fernco couplings clay-to-clay
• 8-inch Fernco couplings concrete-to-clay
Corp Yard – Stonegate supplies
Note: All 100-plus Stonegate systems use identical parts. Larger systems have additional tanks and use the same parts.
• 12 pumps
• 20 check valves
• 35 float trees
• 12 bio baskets
• 2 bio containers
• 8 lids/ bolt kits
• 12 valves on/off
• 6 alarm switches
• 2 panel boxes
SSO Response Equipment
Most equipment for responding to Sanitary Sewer Overflows is stored at the Corp Yard. Additional equipment is stored at the Wastewater Treatment Facility.
SSO Response Equipment Stored at Corp Yard
• Two 25 kW portable generators
• 150 kW portable generator
• One 6-inch portable trash pump
• Two Combination Vactor/Hydro-Jet trucks
• Off Roader Hydro-Jet
• One 3-inch portable submersible pump
• One CCTV Truck
• One mini-excavator
38 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
SSO Response Equipment Stored at WWTF
• Two 25-kW generators
• One 180 kW generator
• One 6-inch portable trash pump
WWTF – Lift Stations
Lift Station equipment and parts are stored at the WWTF Maintenance shop and warehouse. At least one spare pump is on hand for emergency replacement of any Flygt pump in the 16 lift stations running on Flygt pumps. Rebuild kits are also kept on hand for these pumps.
Normal practice is to rebuild or replace any pump immediately when a pump is taken out of service for repair. Rebuild kits are also ordered whenever a kit is used for a pump rebuild. Pump and parts inventories are updated and reported to Finance every year.
The Maintenance Supervisor and Lead Mechanic are responsible for tracking inventory over the course of the year and making sure the spare pumps, rebuild kits, and various repair parts are replaced as needed.
Lift Station #2 has three 30 HP Wemco pumps installed, which are scheduled for replacement with Flygt pumps in FY 2023/2024. There is not a spare pump in storage for this lift station. The station normally operates on one pump, with an occasional need for a second to run to keep up with flow. Therefore, a third pump is available if any pump needs to be taken out of service.
Lift Station #10 has three 30 HP pumps installed and is never allowed to run more than two at any time. There is no 30 HP Flygt pump in storage for this lift station. If one pump needs to be taken out of service, normal practice is to run on the remaining two. A spare 10 HP pump is available for temporary operation if needed.
39 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table 4.6 - Inventory – Lift Station Pumps and Generators LS Location Pumps Model Volts Generator Inventory notes 1 Del Monte Ave &
Woodbridge Ave 3 each 5 HP Flygt NP3102 460 Has a Standby 1 spare for all Flygt NP3102 pumps 2 Market St. & Ainsley
Ave
3 each 30 HP Wemco 460 Has a Standby No Wemco spares on the shelf.
Scheduled for replacement with
Flygt pumps. Station normally
operates on one pump out of
three, so a "spare" is effectively
available in case of mechanical
issue.
3 Lassen Ave & Harter
Rd 3 each 10 HP Flygt NP3127 460 No Generator/25 kVAStandby coming 1 spare for all Flygt NP3127
pumps
4 Blevin Rd & Butte
House Rd 3 each 5 HP Flygt NP3102 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA 1 spare for all Flygt NP3102
pumps
5 Palora Ave & Whyler
Rd 2 each 5 HP Flygt CS3102 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA
1 spare for all Flygt NP3102
pumps
6 Queens Rd & HWY
99 2 each 7.5
HP Flygt CP3127 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA
1 spare for all Flygt NP3127
pumps
7 Richland Rd &
Glenwood Dr 2 each 5 HP Flygt CP3102 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA 1 spare for all Flygt NP3102
pumps
8 Louise Ave & Rocca
Way 2 each 5 HP Flygt NP3102 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA
1 spare for all Flygt NP3102
pumps
9 Smith Rd & Walton
Ave 2 each 5 HP Flygt NP3102 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA
1 spare for all Flygt NP3102
pumps
10 Lincoln Rd Gilsizer &
Hwy 99
3 each 30 HP Flygt CP3201 460 Has a Standby Station normally operates on two of the three pumps. One spare
on the shelf. Also, can use spare
Flygt NP3085 (10 HP) if needed.
11 Garden Hwy &
Shanghai Bend Rd 2 each 10 HP Flygt NP3127 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA 1 spare for all Flygt NP3127
pumps
12 Bogue Rd & Falls Dr 2 each 5 HP Flygt CO3102 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA
1 spare for all Flygt NP3102
pumps
13 Bogue Rd & Wild
River Dr 2 each 3 HP Flygt NP3102 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA 1 spare for all Flygt NP3102
pumps
14 Stabler Ln & Parc
West Dr 2 each 5 HP Flygt NP3127 230
No Generator/ 25
kVA
Standby coming
1 spare for all Flygt NP3127
pumps
15 George Wash Blvd &
Hwy 20
2 each 12 HP Flygt NP3085 460 No Generator/ 25
kVA
No spares on the shelf. Can use
spare Flygt NP3085 (10 HP) if
needed. Rebuild kit in stock in
warehouse.
16 E Onstott Rd &
Manchester Ave 2 each 5 HP Flygt NP3102 230 No Generator/ 25 kVA 1 spare for all Flygt NP3102
pumps
17 3301 E Onstott Rd 2 each 5 HP Flygt NP3102 460 No Generator/ 25 kVA
1 spare for all Flygt NP3102
pumps
40 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
WWTF Warehouse Lift Station Repair Parts Inventory
Part Description Quantity
July 2022 Priority
Lift Station Spare Pumps
Flygt NP3102, 5 HP, 460 amps 1 Critical
Flygt CS3102, 5 HP, 230 amps 1 Critical
Flygt NP3127, 10 HP, 460 amps 1 Critical
Flygt CP3201, 30 HP, 460 amps 1 Critical
Other Lift Station Spart Parts
Flygt Basic Repair Kit 3127.090/180 2
Handle, Lifting, Steel, Flygt Pump 2
Wemco guide rail bracket 1
Flygt pump Guide Rail Bracket 1
Flygt pump O-ring kit 2
Flygt # 3068 Cutter Wheel #638 81 00 2
Flygt #3068 Cutter Ring #638 82 00 2
Flygt #3068 Impeller #638 84 04 2
Flygt basic repair kit 3102 3 Critical
Flygt basic repair kit 3127 3 Critical
Flygt basic repair kit 3068 1
Flygt basic repair kit 3085 3 Critical
Flygt basic repair kit 3170 2
Flygt basic repair kit 3153 1
Flygt basic repair kit 3300 1
4.11 Collection System Performance History
Table 4.7 lists the number of total spills that the City has experienced since 2008, the first full year of reporting, through 2022, the last complete year of reporting. The table also lists the causes of the spills throughout this same interval. A notable observation from this table is that the number of spills dropped off significantly after 2008, dropping from 15 spills to approximately 5 to 7 through 2016. After 2016 the City limited the number of spills to three or less.
Looking at the later data from 2016 through 2022, it is notable that the causes of the spills vary from year to year while the total number of spills stays low. This demonstrates the value of tracking all categories of spills and staying on top of the work needed to keep the number of spills low. If the City had not been so vigilant in working to minimize spills in all categories, the total number of spills per year would not have dropped to the low range seen. This shows how the City’s efforts to improve in
41 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
multiple categories has improved the resilience and has been beneficial in keeping the total number of spills low in all categories.
Table 4.7 -Total Spill Count by Cause – 2008 through 2022 Yr FOG Roots Debris
Pipe
Failure
PS
Failure Other
Total
Spills
2008 10 2 1 0 0 2 15
2009 3 0 3 1 0 0 7
2010 2 0 2 0 0 2 6
2011 4 0 1 0 0 1 6
2012 3 0 4 1 0 1 9
2013 1 0 2 0 0 2 5
2014 0 0 1 1 1 2 5
2015 2 0 0 0 0 5 7
2016 0 2 3 0 0 0 5
2017 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
2018 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
2019 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
2020 1 0 1 0 0 1 3
2021 1 2 0 0 0 0 3
2022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 28 7 19 3 1 16 74
Table 4.8 builds on the same spill count data in Table 4.6, adding in the total volume of the various spills (SSO Vol) along with the volume recovered and returned to the collection system (Vol Rcvd) and the volume of water that reached a surface water. What this expanded table shows is that there was one year where a very large amount of water spilled to a surface water (Gilsizer Slough) which technically is a surface water conveyance channel. Fortunately for the City, there was no water flowing through the slough so the sewer maintenance crews could construct temporary dams in the channel, capture all of the water, and return it to the sanitary sewer system. There were two large spills that year that spilled about 86,000 gallons during the first spill. The was caused by a control problem in one of the City’s main lift stations. The other was caused by a broken pipe.
42 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table 4.8 -Total Spill Count by Cause with Spill Volumes – 2008 through 2022 Yr SSOs FOG Roots Debris
Pipe
Failure
PS
Failure Other
Total
Spills
SSO
Vol
Vol
Rcvd
Vol
Surf
2008 15 10 2 1 0 0 2 15 4,300 3,700 0
2009 7 3 0 3 1 0 0 7 886 836 0
2010 6 2 0 2 0 0 2 6 804 804 0
2011 6 4 0 1 0 0 1 6 79 79 1
2012 9 3 0 4 1 0 1 9 366 356 0
2013 5 1 0 2 0 0 2 5 248 208 0
2014 5 0 0 1 1 1 2 5 95,621 95,601 86,335
2015 7 2 0 0 0 0 5 7 573 573 0
2016 5 0 2 3 0 0 0 5 55 53 0
2017 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 5 0
2018 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 10 0
2019 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 30 30 0
2020 3 1 0 1 0 0 1 3 748 715 100
2021 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 645 503 142
2022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
74 28 7 19 3 1 16 74 104,370 103,473 86,578
In response to the two large spills in 2014, the City took steps to prevent similar occurrences in the future.
Following the first spill, City staff determined measures for providing a higher level of redundant systems to address potential spills resulting from lift station operational failures. The City enhanced the Citywide SCADA system, increased the inventory of critical parts for the lift stations, provided a higher level of redundancy for power to keep the lift stations working all the time, and increased the service level of staff to physically visit each lift station once per week.
Following the second spill, the City improved its monitoring of water levels in strategic locations of the collection system through the installation of the SmartCovers. Both of these incidents caused the City to make improvements to reduce the risk of a major spill elsewhere in the collection system and improve resilience.
43 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 5 Design and Performance Provisions
5.0 Regulatory Requirements
(a) Design and construction standards and specifications for the installation of new sanitary sewer systems, pump stations and other appurtenances; and for the rehabilitation and repair of existing sanitary sewer systems; and
(b) Procedures and standards for inspecting and testing the installation of new sewers, pumps, and other appurtenances and for rehabilitation and repair projects.
5.1 Standards for Installation, Rehabilitation and Repair of Sanitary Sewer Systems
The City of Yuba City manages the installation, rehabilitation, and repair of Its sanitary sewer systems using the documents listed
below.
o City of Yuba City Standard Specifications & Details
(SSDs)
o City of Yuba City Special Provisions
(SPs)
The SSDs include the specifications and details for sanitary sewer manholes, service connections and cleanouts and the SPs include the requirements for work during construction (new installations, rehabilitation, and repair of sanitary sewer systems). The SPs and SSDs are used to define the project requirements to bid on a construction project. These documents (SSDs and SPs) function as guidelines and are used by City staff and consultants who perform design and construction services for the sanitary sewer system. In addition, the City uses the Standard Specifications of the California Department of Transportation as the City’s Standard Specifications for the Construction Projects.
Article 3 of the City’s existing sewer ordinance describes the requirements related to sanitary sewer design and construction. The City requires that the work related to sanitary sewer system design and construction must follow the City’s standard specifications, details, and special provisions. In addition, the City requires design plans, profiles, and specifications to be prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer.
The City’s Public Works Department and Utilities Department staff check the design plans, profiles, and specifications to ensure their compliance
44 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
with the City’s design standards before approving the plans, profiles, and specifications for construction. The City staff modifies and/or adds additional requirements to the design and specifications based on the project needs and site conditions.
Per Section 6-5.303 of the City’s existing sewer ordinance, the City’s Public Works and Development Services Director reviews the design parameters of all the pump stations before the detailed design begins.
Each pumping station is unique based on the location and design flows, which require the Public Works and Development Services Director’s input before detailed design.
The SSDs and SPs are typically updated when changes in the pipeline design and construction industry occur and/or when City policies change.
5.2 Inspection and Testing Standards for New, Rehabilitation, and Repaired Facilities
Per Section 6-5.304 of the City’s existing sewer ordinance, the City’s Construction Inspector conducts the inspections for all the sewer system construction work to ensure compliance with City requirements. The City will not accept any construction work which is covered/buried before inspection and approval has occurred. Typically, the City assigns a Construction Inspector to specific construction project(s). The Construction Inspector coordinates with the City’s Resident Engineer and Construction Manager to resolve issues related to the construction during the construction period.
Section 15.7 of the SPs include the requirements for testing; in general, these requirements apply to the new, rehabilitation and repair of sanitary sewer facilities. However, the City Engineer and staff may modify these requirements based on the specific project needs. Generally, the testing includes a water pressure test, an air test, and CCTV inspection. The City accepts the completed work only if all the required testing is completed to the satisfaction of the Resident Engineer and in conformance with the industry standards. Pump stations are also tested before final acceptance. The City requires a 1-year warranty to correct any defective construction work.
Supporting Documents
• City of Yuba City Sewer Ordinance
• City of Yuba City Standard Specifications & Details (SSDs) • Standard Specification of the California Department of Transportation • City of Yuba City Special Provisions (SPs).
45 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 6 Spill Emergency Response Plan
6.0 Regulatory Requirements
Each Enrollee shall develop and implement a spill emergency response plan that identifies measures to protect public health and the environment. At a minimum, this plan must include the following:
(a) Proper notification procedures so that the primary responders and regulatory agencies are informed of all SSOs in a timely manner (b) A program to ensure an appropriate response to all overflows (c) Procedures to ensure prompt notification to appropriate regulatory agencies and other potentially affected entities (e.g. health agencies, Regional Water Boards, water suppliers, etc.) of all SSOs that potentially affect public health or reach the waters of the State in accordance with the MRP. All SSOs shall be reported in accordance with this MRP, the California Water Code, other State Law, and other applicable Regional Water Board WDRs or NPDES permit requirements. The SSMP should identify the officials who will receive immediate notification (d) Procedures to ensure that appropriate staff and contractor personnel are aware of and follow the Emergency Response Plan and are appropriately trained; Procedures to address emergency operations, such as traffic and crowd control and other necessary response activities (e) A program to ensure that all reasonable steps are taken to contain and prevent the discharge of untreated and partially treated wastewater to waters of the United States and to minimize or correct any adverse impact on the environment resulting from the SSOs, including such accelerated or additional monitoring as may be necessary to determine the nature and impact of the discharge
6.1 Notification Procedures to Primary Responders and Verbal Notification to regulatory Agencies
The City of Yuba City’s Spill Emergency Response Plan (SERP) includes sections that define the proper notification protocols to be followed when the City experiences an interceptor overflow so that primary responders and regulatory agencies are informed in a timely manner.
The City generally receives notification of an SSO or sewer backup from the City customer(s), general public, or from the City staff. SERP
46 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
summarizes the chain of communication for the overflow and/or backup response and identifies the communication responsibilities of the SSO response team during and after the overflow event.
Typically, SSOs and sewer backups resulting from the City sewer mains are handled by the Sewer Collections Division, and sewer lift station problems are handled by several teams within the Public Works Department.
A simple chain of communication and proper training among the City staff ensures proper notification to the primary responders in a timely manner.
City staff is responsible for primary response reports regarding all SSOs and/or sewer-backups to the Wastewater Treatment Operations Manager/Chief Plant Operator or his/her designee 24 hours per day, 7 days a week.
The Sewer Collections Supervisor or his/her designee is fully informed and trained in the proper notification of the SSOs to the regulatory agencies in a timely manner including any verbal notifications.
The reporting procedures are clearly described in the SERP.
6.2 SSO Response Program
The SERP includes a standardized course of action for the City staff responsible for the SSO response and regulatory compliance in the event of an SSO and/or sewer backup. The SERP identifies the staff that will generally respond to SSOs and sewer backups and explains the procedures for SSO and sewer backup mitigation and documentation associated with mobilizing for, and responding to, an SSO or a sewer backup event.
The summary of the primary roles and responsibilities for the SERP is given below.
• Field Crew - First priorities are to ensure public safety, contain the overflow, and make every effort to keep it from reaching a waterway.
Once the SSO is contained, field crews will be responsible for mitigating the SSO, perform the initial cleanup activities, coordinate additional resources for response activities, and complete follow-up remediation activities.
• SSO Response - Sewer Collections Supervisor/ Deputy Public Works Director-Maintenance. Perform initial background investigation; determine best containment procedures; coordinate resources for traffic and crowd control; determine receiving water contamination, collect samples (if necessary) for follow-up analysis, assess the need
47 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
for posting warning signs and take pictures and gather documentation necessary to determine spill quantities, cause, and duration.
Sewer Collections Supervisor/Environmental Compliance Manager.
Follow regulatory reporting procedures, notify impacted agencies, and prepare all written reports.
6.3 Notification Procedures to Impacted Entities and Reporting Program • Notification to the general public
When an SSO to surface waters or public area has been confirmed, the SSO response crew will immediately inform the Sewer Collections Supervisor or Deputy Public Works Director – Maintenance. Following the consultation (specifically in case of public health threat) with the local health departments, Sewer Collections Supervisor or Deputy Public Works Director – Maintenance may consult with the Public Works Director and/or City Manager to issue a press release. The press release will identify:
o The problem;
o The cause(s)
o Actions being taken to resolve the issue
• Notification to Regulatory Agencies and Impacted Entities In order to protect public safety the City will conduct the 2-hour verbal notification to Sutter County Environmental Health Department, OES, California Department of Fish and Game Spill Prevention and Response, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. The City will also inform the Gilsizer Drainage District if a spill enters Gilsizer channels/drainage pipe(s). The SERP includes a list of additional agencies that will be notified if there is an SSO in the City’s area of service that may impact their facilities and/or regular operations.
The Sewer Collections Supervisor or Environmental Compliance Manager or his/her designee shall be responsible for the CIWQS Electronic Reporting. The City has developed Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the CIWQS Electronic Reporting Program in order to clearly define roles and responsibilities and ensure appropriate QA/QC of the reporting process.
48 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 7 Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) Control Program
7.0 Regulatory Requirements
Each Enrollee shall evaluate its service area to determine whether a FOG control program is needed. If an Enrollee determines that a FOG program is not needed, the Enrollee must provide justification for why it is not needed. If FOG
is found to be a problem, the Enrollee must prepare and implement a FOG source control program to reduce the amount of these substances discharged to the sanitary sewer system. This plan shall include the following as appropriate:
(a) An implementation plan and schedule for a public education outreach program that promotes proper disposal of FOG;
(b) A plan and schedule for the disposal of FOG generated within the sanitary sewer system service area. This may include a list of acceptable disposal facilities and/or additional facilities needed to adequately dispose of FOG generated within a sanitary sewer system service area;
(c) The legal authority to prohibit discharges to the system and identify measures to prevent SSOs and blockages caused by FOG;
(d) Requirements to install grease removal devices (such as traps or interceptors), design standards for the removal devices, maintenance requirements, BMP requirements, record keeping and reporting requirements;
(e) Authority to inspect grease producing facilities, enforcement authorities, and whether the Enrollee has sufficient staff to inspect and enforce the FOG ordinance;
(f) An identification of sanitary sewer system sections subject to FOG blockages and establishment of a cleaning maintenance schedule for each section; and
(g) Development and implementation of source control measures for all sources of FOG discharged to the sanitary sewer system for each section identified
in (f) above.
7.1 Background
Ten of the 15 SSOs in Yuba City during calendar years 2008 resulted from grease blockages, five times more than from any other single
49 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
source. Since FOG is a significant component of the wastewater generated by food service establishments (FSEs), they are an obvious target for source control measures to reduce SSOs. The City has had a FOG program for FSEs in place since 2008 and has encouraged the installation and proper maintenance of grease removal devices wherever feasible. As of this document’s publication date, a total of 205 FSEs are included in the program. 88% of those FSEs are known to have grease removal devices in operation. Through increased outreach, inspection, and enforcement, it is the City’s goal to minimize discharges of FOG to the sanitary sewer system through the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) by FSEs and cooperation from the City residents.
As Table 7.1 shows, the City has worked to reduce the number of SSOs caused by Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) to a point where there have been no spills or only one spill during the entire calendar year since 2015. The progress that the City has made in reducing FOG caused spills is also shown on Figure 7.1.
Table 7.1
Number of Sanitary Sewer System Spills by Cause
2008 Through Year 2022
Yr FOG Roots Debris
Pipe
Failure
PS
Failure Other
Total
Spills
2008 10 2 1 0 0 2 15
2009 3 0 3 1 0 0 7
2010 2 0 2 0 0 2 6
2011 4 0 1 0 0 1 6
2012 3 0 4 1 0 1 9
2013 1 0 2 0 0 2 5
2014 0 0 1 1 1 2 5
2015 2 0 0 0 0 5 7
2016 0 2 3 0 0 0 5
2017 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
2018 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
2019 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
2020 1 0 1 0 0 1 3
2021 1 2 0 0 0 0 3
2022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 28 7 19 3 1 16 74
50 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Figure 7.1
In addition to reducing the number of spills to one or none for the last 7 years, Table 7.2 shows how the City has been successful in containing these spills and returning almost all of the water spilled to the sanitary sewer system, minimizing safety concerns and helping to protect the environment. Table 7.2 also shows reducing the number of spills has also helped to reduce the total volume of FOG caused SSOs over time.
This progress has been made by:
• Outreach efforts
• Encouragement of the community and food service establishments (FSEs) to not discharge FOG into the sanitary sewer system • Enforcement of the City’s Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO)
• Emphasis on fast response to sewer system spill callouts and diligent work to contain, return, and clean up the spills that have occurred to help meet the City’s goals.
• Increasing inspection frequency for FSEs since 2019.
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Number of Spills Caused by FOG
51 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table 7.2
Volume of Water Reaching a Surface Water Vs Total Volumes Spilled for FOG Cause Spills - 2008 through 2022
FOG
Year
SSO
Vol
Vol Recovered
and Returned to
the Sanitary
Sewer System
Vol Reaching
a Surface
Water
2008 3,300 2,900 0
2009 721 721 0
2010 700 700 0
2011 53 53 1
2012 280 280 0
2013 40 0 0
2014 0 0 0
2015 315 315 0
2016 0 0 0
2017 0 0 0
2018 10 10 0
2019 0 0 0
2020 100 100 100
2021 103 103 0
2022 0 0 0
Total 5,622 5,182 101
7.2 Public Education Outreach Program
The Public Works Department participates in various public outreach events each year; including posting videos on social media and attending the Yuba Sutter County Fair where Department staff hand out various educational brochures and promotional items. The County Fair occurs in the month of June.
• FOG educational materials are distributed at these events including literature aimed at our residential customers on the proper disposal of fats, oils and grease.
• Pan scrapers are distributed to remove food, oils, and grease from cooking pans and dishes before cleansing and washing.
• Lid covers are distributed to encourage residents to pour their oil and grease into a can to cool it before disposing of it in the trash.
52 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
The Public Works Department outreach program includes developing new educational brochures. The department has several brochures that target FSEs and commercial businesses. The next goal of the Department is to create educational door hangers for the City’s residents. Department staff will target residential neighborhoods where there are known FOG high frequency cleaning pipelines in the collection system.
FOG generated in the collection system is currently removed by the Sewer Collections crew during routine maintenance of pipes and lift stations. The grease removed from the collection system is disposed of at the City’s wastewater treatment facility.
FOG generated by FSEs is collected in grease interceptors or grease traps and is maintained by the FSEs. The FOG that is accumulated is pumped out by licensed grease haulers hired by the FSEs at a frequency the City’s SUO requires. The FOG pumped out of the grease interceptors or grease traps is taken by the hired grease haulers to a location that accepts inedible kitchen grease. The City’s Environmental Compliance Coordinator monitors the frequency of pump outs by using LinkoFOG software. The licensed grease haulers provide monthly pump out records to the City.
7.3 Legal Authority
Article 12. Fats, Oils, and Grease Discharge from Food Service Establishment in the City’s sewer use ordinance was established to provide the City the legal authority to enforce the City’s FOG program.
Particularly, Section 6-5.1202.b states “No FSE shall discharge FOG or cause FOG to be discharged into the public sewer that causes an SSO, exceeds a concentration level set forth in Section 6-5.208, or that may accumulate and/or cause or contribute to blockages in the public sewer.” The Sewer Collections Division utilizes a CCTV truck which allows the City to video inspect the collection system. Video inspection of the collection system affords the City the ability to readily identify the cause and helps prevent SSOs.
7.4 FOG Control Program Requirements
The Public Works Department updated and revised the City’s Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO). One of the revisions to the SUO included the addition of a FOG Control Program which addresses all of the requirements of section 7.0 (d) of the FOG Control Program requirements of the WDR.
The SOU was adopted by City Council on July 19, 2011. The most recent SUO was adopted by City Council on January 18, 2022.
53 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 6-5.1201 through 6-5.1209, of the SUO, requires the installation of grease interceptors or grease traps, design standards as set forth in the most recent California Plumbing Code, maintenance requirements, best management practices requirements, record keeping, and reporting requirements.
In addition, the Environmental Compliance Coordinator reviews the development plans for all new construction and remodeling of food service establishments prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that the installation of a grease removal device is incorporated into the construction of the facility and that the City’s requirements and design standards are being met.
7.5 FOG Compliance Inspection
Section 6-5.1206.a (Inspection and Sampling Conditions) of the City’s Sewer Use Ordinance provides the authority for the Public Works Director or designee to inspect or order the inspection and sample of the wastewater discharges of any FSE to ascertain whether the intent of this chapter is being met and the FSE is complying with all requirements. The FSE shall allow the City access to the FSE premises during normal business hours for purposes of inspecting the FSE's grease removal devices and reviewing the manifests, receipts, and invoices relating to the cleaning, maintenance, and inspection of the grease removal device. In addition, Section 6-5.1204 Sewer system overflows, public nuisance, abatement orders, and cleanup cost notes that any excessive sewer maintenance expenses can be charged to the offending discharger by the City and any refusal to pay can constitute a violation of the ordinance.
Sec. 6-5.1209 (Enforcement of FOG program) of the City’s Municipal Code states the following for Noncompliance. “Failure on the part of any FSE to maintain continued compliance with any of the requirements set forth in Sections 6-5.1201 through Sections 6-5.1208 may result in the initiation of enforcement action, as outlined in Sections 6-5.1001- Sections 6-5.1003. Such enforcement action may include, but is not limited to, the issuance of a verbal warning, written warning, notice of violation (NOV), administrative order, administrative civil liability, and/or imposition of administrative fines and/or penalties.” (Ord. No. 001-22 , § 3, 1-18-2022)
The City’s SUO contains Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) procedures, Section Sec. 6-5.1003, which detail the procedures that shall be undertaken to mitigate any violation of the City’s Ordinance. The Enforcement Response Guide lists actions ranging from a range of Administrative actions to Judicial enforcement to criminal prosecution.
54 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Table 7.4 lists the number of Food Service Establishments (FSEs) that have been inspected since 2016 and the number of enforcement actions taken.
Table 7.4: Inspections Completed and Enforcement Actions Taken
1Enforcement actions include any letters, warning letters, or notice of violations sent.
In fiscal year 2010/11 the Public Works Department transferred management of the FOG Program to the City’s Pretreatment Coordinator.
The City purchased FOG management software allowing staff to easily manage and inspect Food Service Establishments (FSEs) and enforce the City’s FOG Control Program. The software streamlined management of the FOG Control Program. The City has purchased additional software and hardware to facilitate web-based FSE inspections, which enables staff to complete onsite inspection reports. In the years from 2016 to 2019, the City did not have staff performing FOG inspections on a regular basis. In FY 2020 and 2021, the City had an employee from the collections crew performing FSE inspections part-time. A full-time employee was hired as the Environmental Compliance Inspector to conduct FSE inspections on a full-time basis in May 2022.
7.6 FOG Related Problem Areas
Higher frequency cleaning and inspection is scheduled for pipelines where history has shown that grease or debris will cause sewer backups or SSOs unless these pipelines are cleaned at a higher frequency. A list of these pipelines was shown earlier in Table 4.1. These pipelines are scheduled to be cleaned once every other month. They are also scheduled to be internally inspected with closed-circuit television equipment once every year.
Some of the pipelines are on the high-frequency cleaning cycle due to sags or bellies in the pipelines. These pipelines must be rodded or cleaned using chain flails attached to the rotating high-pressure jet nozzles on the cleaning machines.
The majority of the pipelines on the high-frequency cleaning list are located in residential areas that do not have any restaurants located in the same 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
FSE inspections 10 32 3 372 129 124 144
All enforcement actions1 0 2 2 95 32 32 26
55 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
area. In these areas, the City has conducted outreach focused on FOG disposal practices in apartment complexes, multiplexes and single-family homes.
When there is a blockage or spill near a restaurant that is suspected of causing the blockage or spill, the City’s Wastewater Collections maintenance crews work with the Environmental Compliance Inspector to determine the source of the grease. If the source can be linked to an FSE, the Environmental Compliance Inspector will investigate and start the enforcement process to bring the FSE into compliance with the City’s FOG program. Until the solution has been implemented, the Wastewater Collections Supervisor will put the pipeline on the high-frequency cleaning cycle list to prevent another blockage or spill until a solution has been put into place.
The Public Works Department has contracted for repairs on some of the pipelines on the high frequency maintenance list and has set a goal to eliminate the need for the high-frequency cleaning cycle list within five years.
7.7 Source Control
The Public Works Department’s source control measures are directed at FSEs. The Environmental Compliance Division employs an inspector that is tasked with inspecting, monitoring compliance, and educating FSEs related to FOG discharge. The Environmental Compliance Division has staff to review plans for new development and tenant improvements to ensure that FSEs have grease control devices that are appropriately designed and sized. The Public Works Department will develop new outreach material targeting residential neighborhoods to encourage proper disposal of fats, oils, and grease in order to reduce FOG in the City’s collection system. In addition, see section (7.1) and (7.3) above for additional detail on source control measures for commercial and residential customers.
Supporting Documents
➢ City of Yuba City Sewer Use Ordinance
➢ Public Educational Outreach Handouts
56 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 8 System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan
8.0 Regulatory Requirements
The Enrollee shall prepare and implement a capital improvement plan (CIP) that will provide hydraulic capacity of key sanitary sewer system elements for dry weather peak flow conditions, as well as the appropriate design storm or wet weather event. At a minimum, the plan must include:
(a) Evaluation: Actions needed to evaluate those portions of the sanitary sewer system that are experiencing or contributing to an SSO discharge caused by hydraulic deficiency. The evaluation must provide estimates of peak flows (including flows from SSOs that escape from the system) associated with conditions similar to those causing overflow events, estimates of the capacity of key system components, hydraulic deficiencies (including components of the system with limiting capacity) and the major sources that contribute to the peak flows associated with overflow events.
(b) Design Criteria: Where design criteria do not exist or are deficient, undertake the evaluation identified in (a) above to establish appropriate design criteria; and
(c) Capacity Enhancement Measures: The steps needed to establish a short- and long-term CIP to address identified hydraulic deficiencies, including prioritization, alternatives analysis, and schedules. The CIP may include increases in pipe size, I/I reduction programs, increases and redundancy in pumping capacity, and storage facilities. The CIP shall include an implementation schedule and shall identify sources of funding.
(d) Schedule: The Enrollee shall develop a schedule of completion dates for all portions of the capital improvement program developed in (a)-(c) above. This schedule shall be reviewed and updated consistent with the SSMP review and update requirements as described in Section D. 14.
8.1 Capacity Evaluation
The City hired West Yost Associates to develop the 2020 Wastewater Treatment Facility and Collection System Master Plan (Wastewater Master Plan) which projected dry and wet weather scenarios with a hydraulic model using Innovyze® InfoSewer™ software that allows for a time-varying flow analysis of dry weather and peak wet weather conditions. While the 2006 hydraulic model analyzed trunk sewer lines that were 12” in diameter or larger, small diameter gravity mains that were not previously included in
57 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
the hydraulic model were added to the new model as part of the 2020 model update. The City’s GIS database was used to populate the model with the previously unmodeled lines.
The gravity line analysis found that 44 modeled manhole-to-manhole segments totaling approximately 11,000 lineal-feet of pipe ranging from 8- inches to 36-inches in diameter exceeded the performance criteria developed for existing peak hourly wet weather flow conditions (PHWWF) design conditions. However, the model results indicate that the exceedances in question all produced minimal surcharging (<1 foot). It was therefore concluded that no capacity improvements to existing gravity mains were required and that no sanitary sewer spills were expected in the near future. The hydraulic model also determined that of the existing collection system lift stations, only LS 9 and LS 10 have insufficient firm capacity to convey existing modeled peak flows. Due to the different options being considered for expanding the capacity of the collection system, it was recommended that any capacity improvements to these lift stations be evaluated within the context of future development.
While not included as part of the Wastewater Master Plan, the numerous extreme storms that pummeled Northern California during the 2022 – 2023 wet season did not result in any wet weather sewer overflows in Yuba City.
This seemed to confirm the results of the existing conditions modeling.
Presented earlier in Section 4 as Table 4.5, Table 8.1 lists the capital costs to accommodate collection system needs for the existing service area population.
Table 8.1 - CIP Project Costs(a) to Accommodate Collection System Needs for the Existing Service Area Population6
Capital Costs, million dollars(b)
Facility 1–5 Year 6–10 Year 11–20 Year Total
Gravity Main and Manhole
Condition-Related Improvements 18.8 13.0 17.9 49.7
Lift Station Condition/Capacity-Related
Improvements 18.1 12.5 1.9 32.5
Total $36.9 $25.5 $19.8 $82.2
(a) Costs shown are based on the October 2019 20-Cities ENR CCI of 11,326. (b) Construction costs include an estimating contingency of 25 percent. Capital costs include a construction contingency of 5 percent and an implementation factor of 30 percent, both applied to the construction cost. (c) Based on 30 percent design cost estimate prepared by others. 6 From City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan, West Yost & Associates, August 2020
58 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Modeling for the future considered buildout capacity needs first, as these needs influence what is required for near-term development. While different scenarios were analyzed, the hydraulic evaluation of four different buildout flow scenarios concluded that there were no significant differences among the collection system modeling results.
Table 8-2 summarizes capital improvements identified for the collection system to meet flows anticipated for the near-term and buildout conditions.
Table 8-2. Recommended Wastewater Collection System Capital Improvement Program for Future Growth7 CIP ID Improvement Description Location
Construction
Cost,
dollars(c)
Capital
Cost,
dollars(d)
Near-Term Capital Improvement Trunk Main Projects
GS-NT01 Construct 7,800 feet of new 18-inch force main(a) Bogue Road between Highway 99 and Intersection of Garden Highway and Burns Drive 4,660,000 6,280,000 GS-NT02
Construct 7,080 feet of new 10-inch pipe;
Construct 16,870 feet of new 12-inch pipe;
Construct 1,190 feet of new 18-inch pipe
South of Bogue Road 13,100,000 17,690,000
GS-NT03
Construct 2,660 feet of new 27-inch pipe;
Construct 3,320 feet of new 30-inch pipe;
Construct 5,270 feet of new 33-inch pipe;
Construct 3,950 feet of new 48-inch pipe
Sanborn Road between Bogue Road and
Franklin Avenue 21,160,000 28,560,000
GS-NT04
Construct 10,560 feet of new 15-inch pipe;
Construct 2,710 feet of new 24-inch pipe;
Construct 170 feet of new 27-inch pipe
Sanborn Road between Franklin Avenue and
Lassen Boulevard 9,310,000 12,570,000
Subtotal 48,230,000 65,100,000
Near-Term Capital Improvement Lift Station Projects
LS-NT01 Construct a new 17.7 mgd Lift Station(b) Highway 99 and Bogue Road 10,250,000 13,840,000 LS-NT02 Construct a new 5.4 mgd Lift Station Sanborn Road and Lincoln Road 4,610,000 6,230,000 Subtotal 14,860,000 20,070,000
Total Near-Term Capital Improvement Projects 63,090,000 85,170,000 Buildout Capital Improvement Trunk Main Projects
GS-NT01 Construct 7,800 feet of new 18-inch force main(a) Bogue Road between Highway 99 and Intersection of Garden Highway and Burns Drive 4,650,000 6,280,000 GS-BO01 Construct 11,770 feet of new 15-inch pipe Between Bogue Road and Franklin Avenue 7,260,000 9,810,000 GS-BO02Construct 16,910 feet of new 15-inch pipe;
Construct 12,510 feet of new 33-inch pipe
George Washington Avenue between Bogue
Road and Franklin Avenue 26,800,000 36,180,000
GS-BO03
Construct 3,860 feet of new 15-inch pipe;
Construct 2,710 feet of new 30-inch pipe;
Construct 5,290 feet of new 33-inch pipe
George Washington Boulevard between Franklin
Avenue and Highway 20 12,530,000 16,920,000
GS-BO04
Construct 6,170 feet of new 15-inch pipe;
Construct 13,320 feet of new 18-inch pipe;
Construct 2,760 feet of new 27-inch pipe;
Construct 2,450 feet of new 30-inch pipe
North of Highway 20 19,830,000 26,780,000
GS-BO05 Construct 8,840 feet of new 18-inch pipe Harter Parkway and Elmer Avenue 6,470,000 8,740,000 Subtotal 77,540,000 104,710,000
Buildout Capital Improvement Lift Station Projects
LS-BO01 Construct a new 5.5 mgd Lift Station George Washington Boulevard and Highway 20 4,670,000 6,300,000 7 Modified from City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan, West Yost & Associates, August 2020
59 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
LS-BO02 Construct a new 8.4 mgd Lift Station George Washington Boulevard and Lincoln Road 6,180,000 8,340,000 Subtotal 10,850,000 14,640,000
Total Buildout Capital Improvement Projects 88,390,000 119,350,000 Total Future Growth Capital Improvement Projects 151,480,000 204,520,000 (a) This improvement includes three force main projects described in Chapter 6. Two of the force mains are included in Near-Term, with the third force main included in Buildout.
(b) Initial cost may be reduced by installing smaller pumps and electrical equipment. A future cost to upsize would be added. (c) Costs include mark-ups equal to 25 percent (Estimating Contingency). (d) Capital Costs include an Estimating Contingency of 25 percent, a Construction Contingency of 5 percent, and an Implementation Multiplier of 30 percent, as described in this chapter.
8.2 Design Criteria
The Wastewater Master Plan includes the typical design criteria for new sanitary sewer system design. The Capacity analysis of the existing system was conducted using typical design criteria. The flow assumptions in the design criteria include an allowance for development density, flow per unit, and I&I contributions. The design criteria and the flow assumptions will be refined through future flow monitoring as needed.
8.3 Capacity Enhancement Measures
The City of Yuba City relies on the Wastewater Master Plan to plan for future growth, secure needed funding, and prioritize projects based on the City’s development needs. The Wastewater Master Plan identified alternatives to expand the City’s sewer collection system (including lift stations) to accommodate the new growth. The City updates the Hydraulic Model on a regular basis as needed. As stated previously, the City has not identified any portions of the sewer collection system that are currently experiencing or contributing to an SSO discharge caused by the hydraulic deficiency.
The capacity enhancement projects are completed through the short term (5 year) CIP and use the Wastewater Master Plan as a road map for longer term planning for intervals up to 20 years. As part of the Capital Improvement Program, projections are prepared to determine the future funding requirements.
The CIP projects are prioritized based on the latest master plan, hydraulic modeling results, and operational maintenance issues. The CIP projects are evaluated on an annual basis, and the evaluation process considers the latest issues, needs, and risks. I/I reduction measures are also implemented through the CIP projects.
The adopted Capital Improvement Project Budget for FY 2022-2027 shows the following for 1) Recurring Collection or Rehabilitation System Projects and 2) Lift Station Improvements for the rehabilitation and replacement
60 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
projects needed to address proper management and protection of the City’s existing wastewater collection system.
Project Name
Current
Funding
Adopted
2022-2023
2023-
2024
2024-
2025
2025-
2026
2026-
2027
Project
Funding
Recurring Collection or
Rehab Sys Proj 183,000 850,000 750,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 2,533,000 Lift Station
Improvements 1,154,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 1,654,000 Technical evaluations were prepared to ensure that the project met the design standards, City’s needs and other related requirements. The CIP projects were finalized based on the technical evaluations and are scheduled for design and construction.
The CIP list shows the project start and completion dates by fiscal year.
Typically, the projects are funded using the City’s CIP project reserves, existing rates, SRF loans and bond financing. New customers pay for CIP projects through the current connection fee. The CIP project list splits the cost of each individual project among existing and new customers based on the project benefits to existing and new customers.
8.4 CIP Schedule
The City prepared a comprehensive list of CIP projects over 20 years and this CIP project list and schedule are updated on an annual basis. The CIP project list shows the start and completion dates for each individual project by the fiscal year.
Supporting Materials
➢ 2020 Wastewater Master Plan
➢ Hydraulic Model
➢ 5 Year CIP List
➢ City’s CIP budget
61 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 9 Monitoring, Measurement and Program Modifications
9.0 Regulatory Requirements
The Enrollee shall:
a. Maintain relevant information that can be used to establish and prioritize appropriate SSMP activities.
b. Monitor the implementation and, where appropriate, measure the effectiveness of each element of the SSMP.
c. Assess the success of the preventative maintenance program. d. Update program elements, as appropriate, based on monitoring or performance evaluations.
e. Identify and illustrate SSO trends, including frequency, location, and volume.
9.1 Maintenance Of Relevant Data
The City tracks relevant information that is used to establish and prioritize appropriate SSMP activities. Field data such as pipe cleaning and inspection frequencies, food service establishments inspections, and SSOs are tracked in the CMMS and/or other systems.
9.2 Monitoring and Assessment
The City has selected certain performance indicators to assess the effectiveness of the SSMP and the Utilities Maintenance Division of the sanitary sewer collection system. These indicators were selected because they are straightforward, quantitative, and focused on results. Changes in the indicators over time can be used to assess the overall success of the SSMP or, conversely, to identify underlying conditions that inhibit success and necessary program revisions and changes to fully implement the SSMP.
The two categories of performance indicators are listed below:
Data Regarding Implementation of SSMP Measures
• Feet of sewer main cleaned/year
• Feet of sewer main inspected with CCTV/year
• Feet of sewer main treated for root control
62 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
• Feet of sewer main rehabilitated
• Number of FSEs inspected
• Number of FOG inspections
• Number of GCD inspections
• Number of Grease Investigations
• Average response time for SSO event (time between City becoming aware of potential SSO and first responder arriving on site).
Data Regarding Success of Preventative Maintenance
• SSO Rate (SSOs/100 miles/year);
• Number of SSOs per year,
• Number of SSOs for each cause (roots, grease, debris, pipe failure, lift station failure, and other causes
• SSO volume spilled (gallons);
• SSO volume recovered;
• SSO volume reaching surface water;
• Percentage of SSOs greater than 100 gallons; and
• Response time to SSOs (time from call received to first responder arriving on site),
• Record of pump station maintenance work orders completed annually.
The City will analyze the monitoring data and trends to measure the effectiveness of each element of the SSMP. The City will maintain a priority list of improvement opportunities that the City believes will improve the success of the SSMP. The City will update this list every two years as part of the SSMP Audits Program or as the City becomes aware of possible improvements or deficiencies.
9.3 Assess the Success of Preventive Maintenance Program The City’s preventative maintenance program was prepared to minimize corrective and emergency maintenance and equipment failures. The City will assess the success of the preventative maintenance program by retaining and analyzing Operations and Maintenance records and equipment failures. The preventative maintenance schedule will be adjusted (if needed) based on analysis of the operations and maintenance records, equipment failures, and equipment performance.
63 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
9.4 Update Program Elements based on Monitoring /Performance Evaluations
The City will modify or update the SSMP elements based on the review of the monitoring data through the SSMP Program Audits (SSMP – Section 10).
9.5 Identify and Illustrate SSO Trends
The SSO frequency, causes, volumes, locations, and other SSO relevant details are tracked by the City. The tracked data related to the SSO will be analyzed by City staff to prevent similar SSO occurrences through the implementation of the SSMP program elements.
64 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 10 SSMP Program Audits
10.0 Regulatory Requirements
As part of the SSMP, the Enrollee shall conduct periodic internal audits, appropriate to the size of the system and the number of SSOs. At a minimum, these audits must occur every three years and a report must be prepared and kept on file. This audit shall focus on evaluating the effectiveness of the SSMP and the Enrollee’s compliance with the SSMP requirements identified in this subsection (D.13), including identification of any deficiencies in the SSMP and steps to correct them.
10.1 SSMP Program Audits
a. Audit Procedures, Roles and Responsibilities
The Sewer Collections Division will perform periodic internal audits to determine the effectiveness of each element of the SSMP.
The Sewer Collections Division will generate the following information and system metrics on annual basis for the purpose of tracking, monitoring and adjusting the performance of the SSMP activities. ➢ System Information
➢ Sewer Maintenance
➢ Performance Measures
The primary focus in the evaluation of system metrics will be the elimination of preventable SSO and reduction of the impact of those SSOs that do occur.
The City will conduct audits every three years after the adoption and approval of this SSMP beginning with the due dates outlined in Section
1.2. The audit program will include a review of relevant data and trends maintained as part of the SSMP Monitoring and Measurements Program.
A list of priority improvement opportunities will be prepared and updated as part of the audit program. Improvement opportunities will be used to prioritize and develop program modifications and will be initiated based on the priority and the available funding. An overview of SSMP related work completed between audits will be included in the program audits.
The City will review the SSOs from the previous years and provide details in the Audit on the causes of the SSOs and what actions were taken to prevent similar SSOs from occurring in the future.
The program audit will include a final report reviewing the City’s
65 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
performance and identifying findings. The report will be kept on file.
This SSMP will be updated every six years from the date of adoption and approval and will include all significant program changes that have occurred following the last City Council certification/approval. b. SSMP Program Modification/Update Process
The Sewer Collections Division will monitor and review sewer performance metrics on a monthly basis and the status of each element of the SSMP on an annual basis for the first three years beginning in 2024. The Public Works and Community Services Director will initiate/direct corrective action to be taken when and if SSMP deficiencies are identified between/during periodic internal audits.
When significant changes are made to the SSMP that require recertification, the Legally Responsible Official (LRO) or his or her designee will enter the data in the online SSO database and the LRO will certify the information in the online SSO database.
66 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Section 11 Communication Program
11.0 Regulatory Requirements
The Enrollee shall communicate on a regular basis with the public on the development, implementation, and performance of its SSMP. The communication system shall provide the public the opportunity to provide input to the Enrollee as the program is developed and implemented.
The Enrollee shall also create a plan of communication with systems that are tributary and/or satellite to the Enrollee’s sanitary sewer system.
11.1 Communications with the Public
The City has created an SSMP page on its public website to inform the public regarding the development of the SSMP. This web page included the summary of the SSMP elements being developed and their schedule for public review and comments. The City plans to maintain the SSMP webpage on its website to facilitate questions and comments with regards to its WDR compliance. In addition, the City plans to communicate with the public at the Yuba-Sutter county fair (held annually in the month of July/August) regarding the implementation of the SSMP.
11.2 Communication with Satellite Agencies
As of May 2023, the City operates and maintains one satellite sewer collection system, called Stonegate Village. The City’s wastewater maintenance staff maintains and operates this satellite sewer collection system. The City will use the same approach to communicate with the satellite collection system residents as described in section 11.1 above.
67 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Appendix A Organization Documents
Appendix A includes the following:
Contact List of City Representatives and Employees
68 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Appendix B Regulatory Requirements
Appendix B includes the following:
State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2022-0103-DWQ Statewide Waste Discharge Requirements, General Order for Sanitary Sewer Systems
Adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board on December 6, 2022
69 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Appendix C City Council Approval
Appendix C includes the following:
Resolution adopting the City of Yuba City Sewer System Management Plan on May 16, 2023
70 | P a g e
City of Yuba City
Sewer System Management Plan
May 2023
Appendix D SSMP Program Audit Form
Appendix D includes the following:
SSMP Program Audit Form
Agenda Item 12
CITY OF YUBA CITY
STAFF REPORT
Date: May 16, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Administration Department
Presentation By: Diana Langley, City Manager
Summary
Subject: Letters in Support for H.R. 1586 and S. 796 - Forest Protection and Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2023
Recommendation: Submit letters of support for H.R. 1586 and S. 796 - Forest Protection and Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2023
Fiscal Impact: None
Purpose:
To ensure that fire retardant remains a readily accessible and viable option for Federal, State, Local and Tribal entities when used in connection with fire suppression, control, and prevention.
Council's Strategic Goal:
This supports Council's goal of Public Safety.
Background:
On March 14, 2023, Congressman LaMalfa introduced H.R. 1586 and Senator Lummis introduced S. 796, otherwise known as the Forest Protection and Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2023, to create a Clean Water Act exemption for federal, state, local and tribal firefighting agencies to use fire retardant to fight wildfires. These bills were introduced because the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics (FSEEE) group is suing the United States Forest Service (Forest Service) under the Clean Water Act to require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to use fire retardant. FSEEE has requested an injunction on the use of fire retardant until the Forest Service receives the permit, which could take years. Currently, the Forest Service and other agencies are operating under the assumption that a NPDES permit is not required. If the injunction is granted, fire retardant would not be available for use on wildfires.
Analysis:
At a time when California, in recent years, has experienced some of the largest wildfires on record, it is imperative to provide firefighters with the tools necessary for fire suppression, control, and prevention.
As Yuba City sends firefighters on strike teams to battle wildfires within California, and there is the potential for wildfires around Yuba City, this issue is relevant locally, in addition to the state and
national level.
As of this writing, H.R. 1586 has bi-partisan support with 30 cosponsors (27 Republican and 3 Democrat) and has been referred to three committees: House Transportation and Infrastructure, House Natural Resources, and House Agriculture. The companion bill sponsored by Senator Lummis, S. 796, has five cosponsors and has been referred to one committee: Environment and Public Works.
Congressman LaMalfa has requested letters of support from the City Council for H.R. 1586 and S. 796, with the support letter for S. 796 urging Senators Feinstein and Padilla to join in the effort. Attached are support letters for Council's consideration.
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Alternatives:
1. Do not submit a support letter for H.R. 1586 - Forest Protection and Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2023.
2. Modify the support letter.
Recommendation:
Submit letters of support for H.R. 1586 and S. 796 - Forest Protection and Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2023.
Attachments:
1. ATTACHMENT A - Support Letters
Prepared By: Submitted By:
Diana Langley
City Manager
Diana Langley
City Manager
ATTACHMENT A
May 16, 2023
Congressman Doug LaMalfa
408 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Re: SUPPORT – H.R. 1586 Forest Protection and Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2023 Dear Congressman LaMalfa:
The City Council of the City of Yuba City supports H.R. 1586, the Forest Protection and Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2023, and appreciates your leadership on this issue.
At a time when California, in recent years, has experienced some of the largest wildfires on record, it is imperative to provide firefighters with the tools necessary for fire suppression, control, and prevention. As the City of Yuba City sends firefighters on strike teams to battle wildfires within California, and there is the potential for wildfires around Yuba City, this issue is relevant locally, in addition to the state and national level.
The use of retardant is a vital tool for firefighters, and providing a Clean Water Act exemption so that firefighting agencies can continue to use fire retardant is critical to an effective wildfire response. H.R. 1586, and the companion bill in the U.S. Senate, S. 796, serve an essential role by clarifying that fire retardant remains a readily accessible and viable option for firefighting agencies.
For these reasons, the City Council of the City of Yuba City supports H.R. 1586 and S. 796, and urge you and your colleagues to support this important piece of legislation.
Thank you for your consideration,
Wade Kirchner Shon Harris Marc Boomgaarden
Mayor Vice Mayor Councilmember
Michael Pasquale Dave Shaw
Councilmember Councilmember
May 16, 2023
Senator Cynthia Lummis
127A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Re: SUPPORT – S. 796 - Forest Protection and Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2023 Dear Senator Lummis:
The City Council of the City of Yuba City supports S. 796, the Forest Protection and Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2023, and appreciates your leadership on this issue.
At a time when California, in recent years, has experienced some of the largest wildfires on record, it is imperative to provide firefighters with the tools necessary for fire suppression, control, and prevention. As the City of Yuba City sends firefighters on strike teams to battle wildfires within California, and there is the potential for wildfires around Yuba City, this issue is relevant locally, in addition to the state and national level.
The use of retardant is a vital tool for firefighters, and providing a Clean Water Act exemption so that firefighting agencies can continue to use fire retardant is critical to an effective wildfire response. S. 796 and the companion bill in the House of Representatives, H.R. 1586, serve an essential role by clarifying that fire retardant remains a readily accessible and viable option for firefighting agencies.
For these reasons, the City Council of the City of Yuba City supports S. 796 and H.R. 1586, and urge you and your colleagues to support this important piece of legislation.
Thank you for your consideration,
Wade Kirchner Shon Harris Marc Boomgaarden
Mayor Vice Mayor Councilmember
Michael Pasquale Dave Shaw
Councilmember Councilmember
Agenda Item 13
CITY OF YUBA CITY
STAFF REPORT
Date: May 16, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Finance/IT Department
Presentation By: Spencer Morrison, Finance Director
Summary
Subject: Presentation of Investment Report – Quarter Ended March 31, 2023 Recommendation: Note & File Quarterly Investment Report Fiscal Impact: Informational item only
Purpose:
To provide information regarding the investment of City funds.
Council's Strategic Goal:
This staff report addresses the City Council’s Strategic Goal of fiscal responsibility.
Background:
In accordance with the City’s adopted Investment Policies, staff prepared the attached investment report for City Council review for the previous quarter (January, February, and March 2023).
Analysis:
Portfolio Highlights:
• As of March 31, 2023, the City's overall investment portfolio (estimated market value) totaled $133,199,069, an increase of $115,814 from the previous quarter. • Notable transactions during the quarter that affected cash flow included:
o Sales tax receipts, $4.3 million;
o Property tax and fee receipts, $9.5 million;
o Smart Meter SRF loan proceeds, $2.0 million
o SBFCA receipts, $7.8 million and expenses, $2.9 million; o Debt service payments, various funds, $2.26 million;
• The portfolio shows a “paper loss” of $2,684,829 as of March 31st 2023. This represents the amount of value that the City would lose if it were to liquidate its entire portfolio at the end of the
reporting period. However, such losses will not be realized if the investments are held until maturity (which is the City’s general investment strategy). • The City’s portfolio is beginning to replace lower-yield instruments with higher yields with each maturing bond in this weak fixed income market, and the overall portfolio yield increased compared to past quarters due to a reduced cash position. The portfolio remains positioned for caution by keeping the maturity dates of our purchases to a more neutral position, currently
1.17 weighted average years to maturity, while remaining watchful for signs of an economic shift. For the quarter ended 3/31/23, 16 investments matured or sold, partially or in whole, with an average yield of 1.30%. These funds, along with LAIF holdings, were invested in 12 instruments with an average yield of 4.36%. The Weighted Average Yield to Maturity of the City’s total investment portfolio increased from 2.02% to 2.40% for the quarter. • The City’s cash flow needs will be met by roughly $56.5 million in liquid assets as of March 31st (approximately 43.4% of the City Held Investments portfolio value) that is currently invested in LAIF, CAMP, First American money management funds, and in the City’s Wells Fargo checking account.
Outlook: Aside from debt ceiling, CPI continues to be the big financial news each month as the Fed’s efforts to pull inflation down to around 2% continue to be ineffective, possibly until summer. For now, we expect the Fed will continue to adopt a cautious tone, particularly given excellent labor market data released each month. The Fed also faces a communication challenge to keep financial conditions tight enough to reduce inflation in the services categories. As such, we expect the Fed to continue to guide towards more rate hiking activity.
Summary Overview: The City’s investment portfolio continues to remain safe and stable. Each investment continues to be in compliance with state law and the City’s formal Investment Policies. Our three primary objectives for the City’s portfolio are safety, liquidity, and then yield. With this in mind, staff continues to conservatively look for opportunities in today’s marketplace while remaining focused on our primary objectives.
Fiscal Impact:
Informational item only.
Recommendation:
Note and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the period ending March 31, 2023.
Attachments:
1. Investment Report
Prepared By: Submitted By:
Spencer Morrison
City Treasurer
Spencer Morrison
City Treasurer
ATTACHMENT 1
City of Yuba City
Treasurer’s Quarterly
Investment Report
AS PRESCRIBED BY CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 53646 March 31, 2023
City of Yuba City – Month-By-Month Comparison Report
March 31, 2023
The following table provides a comparison of the portfolio for the quarter ended December, and the previous quarters ended June, September, and December 2022.
Portfolio Comparison
6/30/2022 9/30/2022 12/31/22 3/31/23
Cost Basis $153,903,521 $144,678,104 $136,994,697 135,883,897 Estimated Market Value 150,937,026 140,676,200 133,083,255 133,199,069 Unrealized Gains/(Losses) (1) (2,966,495) (4,001,904) (3,911,442) (2,684,829) Liquidity 62.76% 51.49% 44.14% 43.38%
Weighted Average Years:
Maturity of City Held Funds 0.95 years 1.06 years 1.17 years 1.24 years LAIF Interest Rate 0.750% 1.630% 2.070% 2.074%
CAMP Interest Rate 1.140% 2.610% 4.300% 4.800%
Portfolio: Weighted Average Yield
to Maturity at Market 0.70% 1.68% 2.02% 2.40%
CPI (Annualized) 9.1% 8.2% 6.5% 5.0%
Note: (1) This represents the amount of money that the City would gain (or lose) if it were to liquidate its entire portfolio at the end of the reporting period. However, such gains (or losses) will not be realized if the investments are held until maturity (which is the City’s historical investment strategy).
City of Yuba City – Quarterly Investment Report
March 31, 2022
Federal Home Ln Mtg
0%
Federal Home Loan Bank
3% Federal Natl Mtg Assn
2%
Federal Farm Credit Bank
4%
US Treasury Notes
28%
City Held Assessment
Districts/Munis
2% Corporate Bonds & AssetBacked Sec.
16%
California Asset Mgmt Program
1%
Local Agency Investment
Fund
38%
Certificates of Deposit
1%
Cash/Money Market
4%
Supranationals
1%
Composition of City Held Investments
City of Yuba City – Quarterly Investment Report
March 31, 2023
$-
$10.00
$20.00
$30.00
$40.00
$50.00
$60.00
In Millions
City Held Investment Portfolio Maturity Distribution
Cash Equiv 0-6 Months 6-12 Months 1-3 Years 3+ Years
43.4%
28.8%
9.3%
14.9%
3.6%
City of Yuba City
Monthly Investment Statement
City Held Investments
CUSIP Maturity Coupon Yield Estimated Unrealized
No. Description of Security NO. Date Rate to Maturity Cost Basis Market Value Gain/(Loss) U.S. Consumer Price Index (Inflation) 03/31/23 5.000%
1 Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) N/A Daily 2.740% 2.740% 50,465,5 $ 49,784,796 60 $ (680,764) $ 2 Calif. Asset Management Program (CAMP) N/A Daily 4.800% 4.800% 1,363 1,363,732 ,732 -3 Wells Fargo Money Market & Checking Accts. N/A Daily (Sweep) 0.010% 0.010% 5,023,922 5,023,922 -4 First American Institutional Prime 26200630S Daily 2.140% 2.140% 273 273,870 ,870 -5 American Honda Finance 02665WDH1 05/10/23 1.950% 1.770% 502,780 498,370 (4,410)6 US Treasury Notes 912828R69 05/31/23 1.625% 1.870% 247,695 248,760 1,0657 Federal Home Loan Bank 3133834G3 06/09/23 2.125% 1.796% 1,012,500 994,580 (17,920)8 US Treasury Notes 91282CCN9 07/31/23 0.125% 1.009% 671,077 669,718 (1,359)9 Federal Home Ln Mtg 3137EAEW5 09/08/23 0.250% 0.234% 600,222 588,108 (12,114) 10 Plumas Bank CD 269101799 09/17/23 0.000% 0.000% 1,046,940 1,046,940 -11 US Treasury Notes 912828T26 09/30/23 1.375% 1.742% 640,227 639,490 (737)12 Federal Farm Credit Bank 3133EMCQ3 10/13/23 0.280% 0.314% 999,000 974,820 (24,180)13 US Treasury Notes 912828T91 10/31/23 1.625% 1.433% 302,273 294,702 (7,571)14 Federal Farm Credit Bank 3133EHN25 11/01/23 2.200% 1.842% 1,014,870 982,200 (32,670)15 US Treasury Notes 9128285P1 11/30/23 2.875% 0.615% 1,044,925 988,010 (56,915)16 US Treasury Notes 91282CBE0 01/15/24 1.250% 0.443% 695,026 675,283 (19,743)17 US Bancorp MTNS Bank Notes 91159HHV5 02/05/24 3.375% 2.075% 1,049,04 980,920 0 (68,120)18 US Bancorp MTNS Bank Notes 91159HHV5 02/05/24 3.375% 3.190% 453,848 441,414 (12,434)19 Federal National Mortgage Assn Notes (Fannie Mae) 3135G0V34 02/05/24 2.500% 2.600% 1,393,700 1,373,372 (20,328)20 US Treasury Notes 912828B66 02/15/24 2.750% 4.270% 2,351,906 2,361,330 9,42421 US Treasury Notes 912828B66 02/15/24 2.750% 4.640% 1,271,563 1,276,658 5,09522 Schwab Charles Corp 808513BN4 03/18/24 0.000% 0.770% 84,958 80,911 (4,047)23 Federal Farm Credit Bank 3133EMBE1 03/28/24 0.300% 0.322% 1,099,175 1,052,293 (46,882)24 US Treasury Notes 912828W71 03/31/24 2.125% 1.673% 662,444 634,361 (28,083)25 Federal Home Loan Bank 3130AMQQ8 04/23/24 0.350% 0.350% 1,500,000 1,431,780 (68,220)26 US Treasury Notes 912828X70 04/30/24 2.000% 1.591% 509,004 486,270 (22,734)27 IBM Corporate Notes 459200JY8 05/15/24 3.000% 0.538% 540,180 492,931 (47,249)28 IBM Corporate Notes 459200JY8 05/15/24 3.000% 0.715% 535,390 488,559 (46,831)29 Caterpillar Mtn 14913R2L0 05/17/24 0.450% 0.497% 998,750 954,480 (44,270)30 American Honda Finance Corp Med Term Notes 02665WCZ2 06/27/24 2.400% 2.430% 249,603 242,578 (7,025)31 US Treasury Notes 912828XX3 06/30/24 2.000% 1.653% 761,191 720,547 (40,645)32 US Treasury Notes 912828XX3 06/30/24 2.000% 1.419% 1,127,113 1,066,930 (60,184)33 US Treasury Notes 912828XX3 06/30/24 2.000% 0.672% 422,578 400,014 (22,564)34 US Treasury Notes 912828XX3 06/30/24 2.000% 1.566% 815,500 771,955 (43,545)35 US Treasury Notes 91282CEX5 06/30/24 3.000% 3.410% 796,813 790,486 (6,326)36 US Treasury Notes 91282CEX5 06/30/24 3.000% 3.200% 2,192,008 2,174,604 (17,404)37 US Treasury Notes 91282CEX5 06/30/24 3.000% 3.410% 1,092,094 1,083,423 (8,671)38 US Treasury Notes 91282CEX5 06/30/24 3.000% 3.490% 2,181,266 2,163,947 (17,318) March, 2023
City of Yuba City
Monthly Investment Statement
City Held Investments
CUSIP Maturity Coupon Yield Estimated Unrealized
No. Description of Security NO. Date Rate to Maturity Cost Basis Market Value Gain/(Loss) March, 2023
39 US Treasury Notes 91282CEX5 06/30/24 3.000% 4.260% 2,251,215 2,233,341 (17,874)40 US Treasury Notes 91282CCL3 07/15/24 0.375% 0.409% 649,367 617,396 (31,971)41 US Treasury Notes 91282CCT6 08/15/24 0.375% 0.410% 1,198,922 1,136,532 (62,390)42 Walt Disney Co Corporate Bonds 254687FK7 08/30/24 1.750% 1.836% 273, 264,693 878 (9,185)43 Darrough Drive AD 09/02/24 6.000% 6.000% 23,798 23,798 -44 Deere John Mtn 24422EVU0 09/10/24 0.625% 0.650% 89,942 85,187 (4,755)45 Caterpillar Finl Mtn 14913R2P1 09/13/24 0.600% 0.650% 224,694 212,688 (12,006)46 Toyota Motor Credit Corp 89236TJN6 09/13/24 0.625% 2.770% 522,550 519,668 (2,882)47 Inter Amer Bk Mtn 4581X0DZ8 09/23/24 0.500% 0.520% 584,567 553,053 (31,514)48 US Treasury Notes 912828YH7 09/30/24 1.500% 0.474% 154,764 143,924 (10,840)49 Federal Farm Credit Bank 3133EMCN0 10/15/24 0.400% 0.432% 948,813 893,086 (55,727)50 MBART 2021-B A3 58769KAD6 11/15/24 0.400% 0.400% 118,630 115,968 (2,662)51 Toyota Auto Recv TR 2019-C A-4 89238UAE0 11/15/24 1.880% 0.920% 173, 168,469 661 (5,191)52 California St Dept Wtr Res Cent 13067WPG1 12/01/24 2.751% 1.486% 179 165,606 ,348 (13,743)53 US Treasury Notes 912828YY0 12/31/24 1.750% 0.326% 1,224,795 1,111,746 (113,049)54 US Treasury Notes 912828YY0 12/31/24 1.750% 0.180% 961,945 873,158 (88,788)55 US Treasury Notes 912828YY0 12/31/24 1.750% 0.270% 1,092,426 991,595 (100,831)56 US Treasury Notes 912828YY0 12/31/24 1.750% 0.280% 955,793 867,573 (88,220)57 US Treasury Notes 912828YY0 12/31/24 1.750% 0.290% 424,031 384,893 (39,138)58 US Treasury Notes 912828YY0 12/31/24 1.750% 2.940% 387,875 352,074 (35,801)59 BMWLT 2021-2 A4 09690AAD5 01/27/25 0.430% 0.431% 369,986 355,600 (14,386)60 US Treasury Notes 91282CDZ1 02/15/25 1.500% 2.840% 337,928 333,431 (4,497)61 American Express Co Corp Note 025816CQ0 03/04/25 2.250% 2.290% 79,91 76,198 9 (3,721)62 John Deere Med Term Notes 24422EWB1 03/07/25 2.125% 3.030% 975,850 954,610 (21,240)63 Roche Holdings Inc. (Callable) Corporate 771196BT8 03/10/25 2.130% 2.130% 365,000 348,312 (16,688)64 Home Depot Inc Corporate Notes 437076CM2 04/15/25 2.700% 2.760% 24,9 24,173 56 (783)65 Bank of New York Mellon 06406RAN7 04/24/25 1.600% 0.841% 437,402 395,025 (42,377)66 US Treasury Notes 912828ZL7 04/30/25 0.375% 2.710% 838,409 834,750 (3,659)67 Cintas Corporation 17252MAP5 05/01/25 3.450% 3.460% 59,987 58,543 (1,444)68 USAA Capital Corp 90327QD89 05/01/25 3.375% 3.490% 214,297 207,587 (6,710)69 Chevron Corp New Notes 166764BW9 05/11/25 1.554% 3.200% 572,040 565,806 (6,234)70 Apple Inc. 037833BG4 05/13/25 3.200% 0.814% 436,332 392,340 (43,992)71 The Goldman Sachs Group 38148LAE6 05/22/25 3.750% 1.026% 222,856 194,224 (28,632)72 National Australia 63254ABD9 06/09/25 3.500% 3.500% 250,000 242,040 (7,960)73 National Rural Med Term Notes 63743HFE7 06/15/25 3.450% 3.460% 44,98 43,814 8 (1,174)74 US Treasury Notes 912828ZW3 06/30/25 0.250% 0.360% 760,884 714,302 (46,582)75 US Treasury Notes 912828ZW3 06/30/25 0.250% 3.030% 551,627 553,008 1,38176 JP Morgan Chase & Co 46625HMN7 07/15/25 3.900% 1.024% 450,500 393,588 (56,912)77 GMALT 2021-3 A4 36262XAD6 07/21/25 0.500% 0.501% 69,997 67,214 (2,783)
City of Yuba City
Monthly Investment Statement
City Held Investments
CUSIP Maturity Coupon Yield Estimated Unrealized
No. Description of Security NO. Date Rate to Maturity Cost Basis Market Value Gain/(Loss) March, 2023
78 IBM Corporate Notes 459200KS9 07/27/25 4.000% 4.000% 200,000 197,742 (2,258)79 Federal National Mortgage (Fannie Mae) 3135G05X7 08/25/25 0.375% 0.410% 499,070 457,770 (41,300)80 Federal National Mortgage (Fannie Mae) 3135G05X7 08/25/25 0.375% 3.050% 918,880 915,540 (3,340)81 Buttes Vista 2000-1 AD, 2013 Refunding 09/02/25 2.730% 2.730% 143,4 143,453 53 -82 Walmart Inc. Corporate Notes 931142EW9 09/09/25 3.900% 3.920% 164,88 164,956 5 7183 Walmart Inc. Corporate Notes 931142EW9 09/09/25 3.900% 4.070% 398,16 398,332 0 17284 Federal Farm Credit Bank 3133ENP95 09/30/25 4.250% 4.191% 1,101,808 1,105,005 3,19785 United Health Group 91324PEN8 10/15/25 5.150% 5.150% 69,994 71,320 1,32786 National Rural Mtn 63743HFF4 10/30/25 5.450% 5.500% 64,913 66,201 1,28887 Citigroup Inc. Corporate Notes (Callable) 172967ND9 11/03/25 1.281% 1.281% 135,000 126,101 (8,899)88 HAROT 2021-3 A3 43815EAC8 11/18/25 0.410% 0.410% 129,998 125,165 (4,833)89 Amazon 023135CN4 12/01/25 4.600% 4.600% 624,963 630,100 5,13890 Bank of America Corp Notes (Callable) 06051GKE8 12/06/25 1.530% 1.530% 225,000 210,359 (14,641)91 US Treasury Notes 91282CBC4 12/31/25 0.380% 0.728% 368,965 341,805 (27,160)92 Hyundai Auto Rec TR 44934KAC8 01/15/26 0.590% 0.390% 178,745 172,661 (6,084)93 HAROT 2021-4 A3 43815GAC3 01/21/26 0.880% 0.885% 129,973 124,163 (5,810)94 Bank of America Corp F/R 06051GGZ6 01/23/26 3.366% 1.326% 219,558 192,348 (27,210)95 Morgan Stanley 61746BDZ6 01/27/26 3.875% 1.270% 224,686 195,172 (29,514)96 State Street Corp 857477BR3 02/06/26 1.746% 1.750% 65,000 61,026 (3,974)97 HART 2021-C A3 44935FAD6 05/15/26 0.740% 0.745% 99,978 95,402 (4,576)98 TAOT 2022 A3 89239KAC5 06/15/26 0.000% 1.230% 174,970 166,985 (7,985)99 MBART 2021-1 A3 58772WAC7 06/15/26 0.460% 0.463% 214,972 206,419 (8,553) 100 Carmx 2021-3 A3 14317DAC4 06/15/26 0.550% 0.550% 182,591 174,863 (7,728)101 GM Fin Cons Auto Rec TR 2021 A-3 380140AC7 06/16/26 0.580% 0.480% 11 109,712 4,361 (4,649)102 Toyota Motor Credit Corp 89236TJK2 06/18/26 1.125% 1.204% 224,145 202,896 (21,249)103 VALET 2021-1 A3 92868KAC7 06/22/26 1.020% 1.021% 169,993 162,522 (7,472)104 COMET 2021-A1 14041NFW6 07/15/26 0.550% 0.550% 279,989 265,124 (14,865)105 US Treasury Notes 91282CCP4 07/31/26 0.625% 3.030% 910,781 913,220 2,438106 US Treasury Notes 91282CCP4 07/31/26 0.625% 3.040% 1,274,984 1,278,398 3,414107 US Treasury Notes 91282CCP4 07/31/26 0.625% 3.330% 405,545 406,631 1,086108 US Treasury Notes 91282CCP4 07/31/26 0.625% 3.460% 807,785 809,948 2,163109 US Treasury Notes 91282CCP4 07/31/26 0.625% 3.930% 1,998,633 2,003,984 5,351110 COPAR 2021-1 A3 14044CAC6 09/15/26 0.770% 0.770% 129,998 123,267 (6,730)111 TAOT 2022-B A3 89238FAD5 09/15/26 2.931% 2.931% 89,998 87,319 (2,679)112 GM Fin Cons Auto Rec TR 2021-4 A-3 362554AC1 09/16/26 0.680% 0.681% 104,350 109,997 (5,647)113 Citigroup Inc. Corporate Notes 172967NX5 09/29/26 5.610% 5.610% 150, 151,118 000 1,118114 WOART 2021-D A3 98163KAC6 10/15/26 0.810% 0.813% 154,979 147,811 (7,168)115 US Treasury Notes 912828U24 11/15/26 2.000% 4.060% 857,648 869,935 12,286116 COMET 2021-A3 A3 14041NFY2 11/16/26 1.040% 1.043% 324,955 305,890 (19,065)117 Federal Home Loan Bank 3130AQF65 12/21/26 1.250% 4.122% 625,591 637,476 11,885
City of Yuba City
Monthly Investment Statement
City Held Investments
CUSIP Maturity Coupon Yield Estimated Unrealized
No. Description of Security NO. Date Rate to Maturity Cost Basis Market Value Gain/(Loss) March, 2023
118 Target Corporation 87612EBM7 01/15/27 1.950% 1.990% 39,932 36,976 (2,956)119 Microsoft Corp 594918BY9 02/06/27 3.300% 4.360% 673,813 686,707 12,894120 Berkshire Hathaway Financial Notes 084664CZ2 03/15/27 2.300% 2.690% 402,382 417,261 (14,879)121 CARMAX 2022-3 A3 14318MAD1 04/15/27 0.000% 3.970% 209,995 205,962 (4,033)122 US Treasury Notes 91282CEN7 04/15/27 2.750% 3.730% 841,572 843,316 1,744123 UnitedHealth Group 91324PEG3 05/15/27 3.700% 3.710% 39,978 39,126 (853)124 NAROT 2022-B A3 65480JAC4 05/17/27 4.580% 4.460% 174,964 173,801 (1,163)125 Mercedes Benz Auto 58768PAC8 08/16/27 5.210% 5.210% 349,931 353,549 3,618126 Buttes Vista 2002-1 AD, 2013 Refunding 09/02/27 2.730% 2.730% 222,7 222,720 20 -127 Apple Inc 037833DB3 09/12/27 2.900% 4.135% 473,730 478,580 4,850128 Apple Inc 037833DB3 09/12/27 2.900% 3.940% 286,863 287,148 285129 Discover Card 254683CX1 10/15/27 0.001% 5.030% 239,969 243,106 3,136130 Pepsico 713448DY1 10/15/27 3.000% 4.238% 711,060 718,418 7,358131 Federal Farm Credit Bank 3133EN5N6 01/06/28 4.000% 3.891% 433,099 434,569 1,470132 Bristol Myers Squibb 110122DE5 02/20/28 3.900% 4.930% 334,380 343,291 8,911133 Astrazeneca Finance 04636NAF0 03/03/28 4.875% 4.920% 324,344 334,360 10,017134 Mastercard 57636QAW4 03/09/28 4.875% 4.900% 324,685 335,023 10,338135 Federal Home Loan Bank 3130ATS57 03/10/28 4.500% 4.114% 1,017,260 1,032,280 15,020136 Nestle Holdings, Inc 641062BF0 03/14/28 5.000% 5.010% 674,825 701,771 26,946137 Home Depot Inc Corporate Notes 437076CE0 03/15/28 0.900% 4.193% 511, 512,580 974 606138 DCENT 2021-A1 A1 254683CP8 09/15/28 0.580% 0.584% 249,946 234,900 (15,046)139 Staple/Ashley/Cornwell AD 09/02/30 6.000% 6.000% 77,099 77,099 -140 WWTP Solar System (DS, June 30) 06/30/33 4.000% 4.000% 1,518,318 1,518,318 - --
Total City Held Investments $ 130, 132,809,371 $ (2 124,543 $ ,684,829)
City of Yuba City Investment Report
Investments Held By Trustees
Description of Maturity Coupon Yield Estimated Unrealized No. Description of Debt Issuance Account Type Security Date Rate to Maturity Cost Basis Market Value Gain/(Loss) 141 2013 Water Rev COP Debt Service Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.690% 4.690% 361 $ 361 - 142 Interest Blackrock T-Fund Daily 5.000% 5.000% 0 0 -142 TABs Refunding - 2015 Debt Service Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.690% 4.690% 572 572 - 143 Interest Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.690% 4.690% 8,268 8,268 -144 Interest Blackrock T-Fund Daily 0.000% 0.000% - - -145 Principal Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.860% 4.860% 1 1 -146 Reserve Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.650% 4.650% 0 0 -147 Reserve Assured Guaranty Daily 0.000% 0.000% 1,870,568 1,870,568 -148 Reserve Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.690% 4.690% 480,062 480,062 -149 Gauche Park Refunding - 2015 Debt Service Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.690% 4.690% 162 162 -150 Debt Service Blackrock T-Fund Daily 0.000% 0.000% - - -151 Reserve Assured Guaranty Daily 0.000% 0.000% 650,031 650,031 -152 CFD Refund 2015 Debt Service Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.690% 4.690% 838 838 - 153 Reserve Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.690% 4.690% 42,777 42,777 -154 I-Bank Paymnt Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.690% 4.690% 103 103 - 155 Wastewater Revenue Bonds (CREBS) - 2017 Bond Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.690% 4.690% 177 177 -156 Project Blackrock T-Fund Daily 0.000% 0.000% - - -157 Authority 2018 Wastewater Revenue Bonds Bond Blackrock T-Fund Daily 0.000% 0.000% - - 158 Authority 2018 Wastewater Revenue Bonds Bond Blackrock T-Fund Daily 4.400% 4.400% 574 574 159 Project First Am Treas Obl Daily 4.400% 4.400% 20,030 20,030 Total Trustee-Held Investments $ 3,074,526 3,074,526 $ - $ TOTAL CITY & TRUSTEE-HELD INVESTMENTS $ 133,199,069 135,883,897 $ (2,684,829) $ Signed: Date:
Spencer Morrison, City Treasurer/s/ Spencer Morrison 5/3/2023 March, 2023
I certify to the best of my knowledge: (i) That this statement reflecting all City investments is accurate and complete; (ii) That each investment conforms with the City's investment policies,as well as California's Government Code; and (iii) That sufficient cash flow liquidity is available to meet the next six months of estimated disbursements.