HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes - 2016.02 - Approving the Sterling Natural Resource CenterRESOLUTION 2016.02
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE EAST VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT ADOPTING CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, A STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER
PROJECT AND APPROVING THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER
WHEREAS, the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (Valley District) is the
lead agency, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources
Code §§ 21000 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000 et
seq.), for the proposed Sterling Natural Resource Center (SNRC) Project; and
WHEREAS, the East Valley Water District (EVWD) is a responsible agency, pursuant
to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq.)
and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000 et seq.), for the proposed
SNRC Project; and
WHEREAS, the SNRC Project involves the construction of a wastewater treatment
facility and associated facilities that will provide tertiary treatment of wastewater generated
within the EVWD service area and make the treated water for beneficial uses within the Upper
Santa Ana River watershed; and
WHEREAS, the SNRC Project includes five project components: construction of the
SNRC Treatment Facility in the City of Highland, construction of a treated water conveyance
system that will be used to convey treated water to one of three groundwater recharge locations,
modifications to wastewater collection facilities, rehabilitation and reuse of the existing Santa
Ana River pipeline, and refurbishment of existing groundwater wells to potentially supply
supplemental water to the Rialto Channel when needed for environmental benefits; and
WHEREAS, in October 2014, as updated in March 2015, EVWD studied the feasibility
of a recycled water project to treat wastewater generated within the EVWD service area; on
April 8, 2015, the EVWD Board of Directors created an ad hoc committee comprised of two
members of the Board of Directors for the purpose of working cooperatively with Valley District
regarding such a recycled water project; on September 23, 2015, the EVWD Board of Directors
approved a Framework Agreement with Valley District, which became effective on October 6,
2015, that outlined the terms of the cooperation between the parties and established Valley
District as the lead agency for the SNRC Project; and
WHEREAS, on October 16, 2015, Valley District issued a Notice of Preparation of an
EIR for the SNRC Project, which commenced a 30 -day scoping period during which Valley
District held public scoping meetings at Valley District on October 29, 2015 and at EVWD on
November 5, 2015; and
WHEREAS, on December 17, 2015, Valley District posted a Notice of Availability of
the Draft EIR for the SNRC Project with the County Clerk of San Bernardino County, and made
East Valley Water District
Resolution 2016.01
Page 1 of 3
the Draft EIR available at three physical locations in San Bernardino County and on the SNRC
Project website and to the Board of Directors of EVWD; and
WHEREAS, during the public comment period for the Draft EIR, which ran from
December 17, 2015 through February 1, 2016, Valley District held public meetings on the Draft
EIR at Valley District on January 14, 2016, at EVWD on January 19, 2016, and thereafter
received comments from approximately 23 organizations, individuals, and public agencies; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2016, Valley District released the Final EIR for the Project
SCH #2015101058) which consists of the Draft EIR, the comments on the Draft EIR and the
identity of the commenters, the responses to comments on the Draft EIR, and corrections and
revisions to the Draft EIR, and made it available at three physical locations in San Bernardino
County and at the SNRC Project website and to the Board of Directors of EVWD; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR identified the significant adverse impacts of the SNRC
Project, feasible mitigation measures to reduce most SNRC Project impacts to less -than -
significant levels; and the SNRC Project impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -
significant level (including construction -related noise, construction -related air emissions,
cumulative air emissions, biological resources, and removal of an obstacle to growth) and
therefore remain significant and unavoidable; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR identified no new significant information or new significant
impacts requiring recirculation; and
WHEREAS, Valley District prepared CEQA Findings of Fact for the SNRC Project that
describe the environmental impacts of the SNRC Project as well as the measures that will
mitigate most of those impacts and identified impacts that cannot be fully mitigated and thus are
significant and unavoidable; and
WHEREAS, Valley District prepared a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the
SNRC Project that acknowledges the significant and unavoidable effects of the SNRC Project
and sets forth reasons for concluding that such impacts are acceptable because they are
outweighed by the benefits of the SNRC Project; and
WHEREAS, Valley District prepared a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP) for the SNRC Project's mitigation measures; and
WHEREAS, on March 15, 2016 Valley District approved Resolution 1038 certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the Sterling Natural Resources Center Project (SCH
2015101058) and Resolution No. 1039 adopting CEQA Findings of Fact, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Sterling
Natural Resource Center Project and approving the Sterling Natural Resource Center Project
SCH #2015101058); and
WHEREAS, none of the three conditions set forth in Section 15052 of the CEQA
Guidelines are present; and
East Valley Water District
Resolution 2016.02
Page 2 of3
WHEREAS, EVWD's Board of Directors has reviewed and considered the information
contained in the Final EIR, including without limitation the Draft EIR and all supporting
documents in the possession or under the control of Valley District. All references to the EIR
and FEIR shall include all documents referred to above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the East
Valley Water District as follows:
1. The CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the
SNRC Project, attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by reference, are hereby adopted.
2. East Valley Water District hereby adopts the MMRP, attached hereto as Exhibit 2
and incorporated by reference, as a set of conditions under which the SNRC Project will be
implemented and as legally binding upon East Valley Water District.
3. East Valley Water District hereby approves the proposed SNRC Project analyzed
in the Final EIR (SCH # 2015101058).
4. East Valley Water District staff shall sign and file the Notice of Determination for
the SNRC Project attached hereto as Exhibit 3 within five working days of the date of this
approval.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 23rd day of March, 2016.
ROLL CALL:
Ayes: Directors: Carrillo, Coats, Morales, Shelton, Smith
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Ronald L. Coats
Board President
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution
2016.02 adopted by the Board of Directors of East Valley Water District at its Regular Meeting
held March 23, 2016.
John J. Mura
Secretary, Board of D rectors
East Valley Water District
Resolution 2016.02
Page 3 of 3
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 1 of 51
EAST VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR THE
STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH # 2015101058)
March 23, 2016
I. FINDINGS OF FACT PURSUANT TO CEQA
A. Introduction
1. Project Overview and Background
On March 15, 2016, acting in its capacity as lead agency, the San Bernardino Valley Municipal
Water District (“Valley District”) approved resolutions certifying the Environmental Impact
Report (SCH #2015101058) (“EIR”) and adopting CEQA Findings of Fact, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Sterling
Natural Resource Center Project. The Sterling Natural Resource Center (“SNRC”) project
involves the construction of a wastewater treatment facility and associated facilities that will
provide tertiary treatment of wastewater generated within the East Valley Water District
EVWD”) service area and make the treated water available for beneficial uses within the
Upper Santa Ana River watershed. The SNRC project will produce a new, local supply of
recycled water, thus helping to reduce reliance on imported water supplies.
East Valley Water District is a responsible agency for the SNRC project. In October 2014, as
updated in March 2015, EVWD studied the feasibility of a recycled water project to treat
wastewater generated within the EVWD service area. On April 8, 2015, the EVWD Board of
Directors created an ad hoc committee comprised of two members of the Board of Directors for
the purpose of working cooperatively with Valley District regarding such a recycled water
project. On September 23, 2015, the EVWD Board of Directors approved a Framework
Agreement with Valley District, which became effective on October 6, 2015, that outlined the
terms of the cooperation between the parties and established Valley District as the lead agency
for the SNRC project. Valley District thereafter prepared the EIR, including the Draft and Final
EIR and all associated comments and records, with the participation of EVWD as a responsible
agency in this process.
In its capacity as a responsible agency, EVWD now proposes to consider the certified EIR and to
approve the SNRC project, which includes five components:
1. The SNRC Treatment Facility, proposed to be constructed on vacant property
in the City of Highland to provide tertiary treatment of wastewater to produce
recycled water that would meet California Code of Regulations Title 22
requirements for recycled water. The SNRC property would also include an
Administration Center to support the operations of the facility, a community
EXHIBIT 1”
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 2 of 51
learning center, a parking lot, and associated public open space area with garden
and water features.
2. A treated water conveyance system comprised of a pumping station on the
SNRC site and 24-inch diameter conveyance pipelines to the Santa Ana River and
one or more of three discharge facility options including at City Creek, the East
Twin Creek Spreading Grounds, and the Redlands Basins.
3. Modifications to wastewater collection facilities including construction of two
lift stations and forcemains connecting the lower portion of the EVWD collection
system to the treatment plant, as well as additional collection sewers including
East 5th Street from Victoria to North Del Rosa, and in North Del Rosa from
Baseline to East 6th Street to direct gravity flows to the SNRC.
4. Rehabilitation and utilization of the existing SAR Pipeline as a carrier pipe to
contain a 24-inch diameter pipeline. This 24-inch diameter pipeline would
connect the SNRC with the discharge pipeline of the San Bernardino Water
Reclamation Plant (“SBWRP”).
5. Refurbishing and equipping existing groundwater wells near the Rialto
Channel to potentially supply groundwater to the Rialto Channel when
supplemental water is needed in the Santa Ana River for environmental benefits.
Of the proposed project’s potential effects, the most notable is the potential impact to the Santa
Ana sucker (“SAS”). The SAS, which is listed as threatened under the federal Endangered
Species Act, is a small, bottom-feeding fish with an average length of 4.5 inches. It is one of the
few native fishes currently extant in Southern California. Its historical range included the upper
and lower portions of the Santa Ana River watershed in San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange
Counties. It was historically documented from the San Bernardino Mountains to Orange County,
including multiple tributaries such as City Creek, Warm Creek, Lytle Creek, Rialto Channel,
Evans Lake drain, Tequesquite Arroyo, Sunnyslope Creek, Anza Park drain, and Chino Creek.
Today, the species is currently restricted to the lowlands of the Santa Ana River watershed. The
Rialto Channel and SAR below its confluence support much of the last remaining SAS breeding
and foraging habitat still existing in the watershed. Above the Rialto Channel, the Santa Ana
River generally exhibits a dry gap for several miles where no surface water flows occur during
dry weather. As a result, the Rialto Channel and RIX discharge are the main contributors of
water into the SAR at this location. The proposed SNRC project will indirectly divert up to 6
million gallons per day (MGD) from the Santa Ana River at and below the RIX, because it will
reduce the amount of wastewater the RIX treats and discharges. That water will instead be
treated at the new SNRC facility, and then be devoted to beneficial uses in the region,
particularly recharging the Bunker Hill groundwater basin.
Recognizing, in light of the existing stressors to the SAS, that the diversion of water from the
Santa Ana River could significantly impact the sucker, the EIR identifies a comprehensive
mitigation plan that will address a variety of non-flow factors that contribute to SAS mortality.
Valley District intends to implement these measures through the proposed Upper Santa Ana
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 3 of 51
River Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), in which it will partner with regulatory agencies like
USFWS and the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (“CDFW”), as well as numerous local
agency partners including EVWD, which will benefit the species and begin progress towards
recovery, as many of the measures proposed are suggested in the draft Recovery Plan for SAS.
In the event the HCP is not finalized in a timely fashion, Valley District will implement the
mitigation measures through a Habitat Monitoring and Management Plan (HMMP). Thus,
although the proposed project will eventually reduce SAR flows, mitigation measures that are
specifically designed to improve the long-term survival of the SAS and provide a buffer against
catastrophic events that could extirpate the species from the area will be implemented before any
flow reductions occur. The USFWS, in its comments on the Draft EIR, stated that it believes this
approach to mitigation of SAS impacts will indeed chart a course towards recovery of the
species, and hopes that the approach set forth in the EIR will be emulated by other projects in the
San Bernardino Valley.
In short, the proposed project represents a 21st century water supply project for Southern
California. Rather than relying on the importation of water from the Colorado River Basin
which is in long-term drought) or the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (which could
adversely affect a number of federally listed species), the project recognizes that Southern
California needs to augment its water supply reliability through the use of recycled water. The
project proposes to make best use of recycled water by storing it in the local groundwater basin
the Bunker Hill groundwater basin) for subsequent extraction by retail water purveyors. As
mentioned above, because the diversion of the recycled water from the Santa Ana River is likely
to have significant and adverse effects on the SAS, however, the project proposes to develop and
implement a suite of mitigation measures that will help advance recovery efforts for the SAS. In
these ways, the project balances the need for both Valley District and EVWD to meet the
consumptive water demands of their ratepayers and the need to protect the environment of
Southern California to the greatest extent feasible. As a responsible agency, upon approval of
the EIR and the SNRC project, EVWD, together with Valley District, will also be committed to
the mitigation measures identified in the EIR.
2. Project Purpose and Objectives
The fundamental purpose of the SNRC project is to treat, recycle, and reuse wastewater
produced within EVWD’s service area for multiple beneficial uses within the Upper Santa Ana
River watershed. The SNRC project will provide the ratepayers of the region and of EVWD
with greater control over the cost of wastewater treatment and produce a new, local supply of
recycled water that will help reduce reliance on imported water supplies.
The primary objectives of the SNRC project are to:
Treat, recycle and reuse wastewater for multiple beneficial uses within the upper Santa
Ana River watershed to meet existing and future water demands.
Increase the use of recycled water to continue efforts toward resolving regional water
supply challenges in a cost effective and environmentally responsible manner.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 4 of 51
Increase groundwater replenishment opportunities in the Bunker Hill groundwater basin
with new local water resources.
Provide an administrative center that benefits the community in a manner that is
compatible with neighboring land uses.
Increase local water supply operational flexibility within the San Bernardino Valley
region to advance the integrated water management objectives of Valley District, EVWD
and the region.
3. Requirements for CEQA Findings
The California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq. and the
regulations implementing that statute, Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, §§ 15000 et seq. (the “CEQA
Guidelines”) (collectively, the Act and the CEQA Guidelines are referred to as “CEQA”) require
public agencies to consider the potential effects of their discretionary activities on the
environment and, when feasible, to adopt and implement mitigation measures that avoid or
substantially lessen the effects of those activities on the environment. Specifically, Public
Resources Code section 21002 provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as
proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]” The same statute
states that the procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in
systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible
alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such
significant effects.” Section 21002 goes on to state that “in the event [that] specific economic,
social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures,
individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.”
The mandate and principles announced in Public Resources Code Section 21002 are
implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies must adopt findings before
approving projects for which EIRs are required. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, subd. (a);
CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a).) For each significant environmental effect identified in an
EIR for a proposed project, the lead agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of
three permissible conclusions. The three possible findings are:
1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by the other agency.
3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, other considerations, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental
impact report.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 5 of 51
Public Resources Code Section 21081, subd (a); see also CEQA Guidelines Section 15091,
subd. (a).)
Public Resources Code section 21061.1 defines “feasible” to mean “capable of being
accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account
economic, environmental, social and technological factors.” CEQA Guidelines section 15364
adds another factor: “legal” considerations. (See also Citizens of Golden Valley v. Board of
Supervisors (Goleta II) (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 565.)
The concept of “feasibility” also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative or
mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project. (City of Del Mar
v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417 (City of Del Mar).) “[F]easibility” under
CEQA encompasses ‘desirability’ to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable
balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.” (Ibid.; see
also Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 715
Sequoyah Hills); see also California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177
Cal.App.4th 957, 1001 [after weighing “‘economic, environmental, social, and technological
factors’ … ‘an agency may conclude that a mitigation measure or alternative is impracticable or
undesirable from a policy standpoint and reject it as infeasible on that ground’”].)
With respect to a project for which significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened,
a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the
agency first adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the specific reasons
why the agency found that the project’s “benefits” rendered “acceptable” its “unavoidable
adverse environmental effects.” (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15093, 15043, subd. (b); see also Pub.
Resources Code, § 21081, subd. (b).) The California Supreme Court has stated, “[t]he wisdom of
approving…any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is
necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are
responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those
decisions be informed, and therefore balanced.” (Goleta II, 52 Cal.3d at p. 576)
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15050 and 15096 identify the special duties EVWD has when acting
as a responsible agency on the SNRC EIR. As a responsible agency, EVWD must certify that its
decision making body reviewed and considered the information contained in the lead agency’s
EIR on the project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15050, subd. (b).). Prior to reaching a decision
on the project, the responsible agency must consider the environmental effects of the project as
shown in the EIR. (CEQA Guidelines § 15096, subd. (f).) When an EIR has been prepared for a
project, a responsible agency shall not approve the project as proposed if the agency finds any
feasible alternative or feasible mitigation measures within its powers that would substantially
lessen or avoid any significant effect the project would have on the environment. (CEQA
Guidelines § 15096, subd. (g)(2).) Further, the responsible agency shall make the findings
required by Section 15091 for each significant effect of the project and shall make the findings in
Section 15093 if necessary. (CEQA Guidelines § 15096, subd. (h).)
Because the SNRC EIR identified significant effects that may occur as a result of the project, and
in accordance with the provisions of the CEQA Guidelines presented above, the EVWD Board
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 6 of 51
of Directors (“Board”) hereby adopts the following Findings, as originally prepared and adopted
by Valley District, as part of the EVWD approval of the SNRC Project. These Findings
constitute EVWD’s best efforts to set forth the evidentiary and policy bases for its decision to
approve the project in a manner consistent with the requirements of CEQA. These Findings, in
other words, are not merely informational, but rather constitute a binding set of obligations that
come into effect with EVWD’s approval of the SNRC project.
4. Organization of Findings
The Statement of Findings, Section 1 of this document, is organized as follows:
Section I.A provides the background and context of the project and describes the need for
these Findings as to the SNRC project
Section I.B includes a brief description of the project
Section I.C describes the CEQA environmental review process for the project
Section I.D describes the record of documents for the project
Section I.E summarizes the significant environmental impacts of the proposed SNRC
project and contains EVWD’s Findings of Fact regarding the project’s impacts
Section I.F contains EVWD’s Findings regarding alternatives to the project
Section I.G contains EVWD’s general Findings regarding the project and EIR
Section I.H describes and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP) for the project, specifically for the approved SNRC project site
B. Description of the Project
The EIR provides a detailed description of the components of the proposed SNRC project, which
are summarized below:
SNRC Facility. The project would include construction of the SNRC facility, which would
provide tertiary treatment to wastewater generated within the EVWD service area. The SNRC
would have a maximum capacity of 10 MGD and produce tertiary treated water in compliance
with California Code of Regulations Title 22 recycled water quality requirements for unrestricted
reuse. The SNRC design includes primary treatment, a membrane bio-reactor (MBR), ultraviolet
UV) light disinfection, and anaerobic solids processing with off-site solids disposal. The
proposed SNRC would consist of multiple buildings, to house the process components,
equipment, and offices.
All treatment processes would either be covered or housed in specific buildings equipped with
odor control facilities. The SNRC would consist of several treatment trains, each with a capacity
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 7 of 51
that could range from 1 MGD to 4 MGD and that combined would have an ultimate capacity of
10 MGD. Space will be provided for future expansion to meet planned growth within the service
area. The proposed Treatment Facility components are described in detail in Chapter 2 of the
EIR.
In addition, the 6-acre parcel west of the SNRC site would be developed into the SNRC
Administration Center. The Administration Center would consist of administration buildings and
pavilions housing administrative offices needed for the treatment plant, surrounded by publicly
accessible open space. The Administration Center would be designed to serve the community
with an interpretive center which will also act as an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) during
emergencies, with community gardens and community pavilions.
Treated Water Conveyance System. The project would include construction of a recycled water
conveyance system comprised of a pumping station on the SNRC site and 24-inch diameter
conveyance pipelines to one or more of three discharge facility options: the City Creek
Discharge Alternative, the East Twin Creek Spreading Grounds Discharge Alternative, and the
Redlands Basins Discharge Alternative. Each Discharge Alternative would consist of multiple
segments containing crossings and discharge structures. A list of these segments and their
associated crossings and structures are included below. A more detailed description of each
segment and their specific location can be found in Chapter 2 of the EIR, and in the Alternatives
section of these Findings. In addition, staff have prepared an executive summary addressing the
three Discharge Alternatives, which is part of the record of proceedings for the SNRC project.
Wastewater Collections Facilities. Two sewer lift stations and force mains would be constructed
in order to convey wastewater from EVWD’s service area to the SNRC. The influent, dry pit lift
station would have a capacity of 5.4 MGD and would include three dry pit submersible solids
handling pumps. The lift station would transfer flow from the collection system to the SNRC. In
addition, several diversion points will be installed internal to the existing collection system to
help capture and divert all of EVWD’s gravity fed wastewater flows to the SNRC facility.
Santa Ana River Pipeline. An existing 36-inch pipeline extends from Alabama Street to the
SBWRP. The pipeline was installed to convey treated water from the SBWRP to upper segments
of the SAR for discharge and is perforated in the upper 6,600 feet. As part of the proposed
project, the upper 6,600 feet of the existing pipeline would be relined with PVC liner to re-
purpose the pipeline to serve as a carrier pipe for the treated water conveyance pipeline
connecting the SNRC to the SBWRP discharge pipeline.
Refurbishing the Rialto Groundwater Wells. Four existing groundwater wells are located near
the Rialto Channel which is a tributary to the Santa Ana River. Valley District would obtain
approval to access and use the wells. With owner approval, Valley District would refurbish the
wells, including equipping the wells and re-tooling the pumps as needed. The wells will enable
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 8 of 51
groundwater to be used as supplemental water, to mitigate the potential direct and indirect effects
of reduced Santa Ana River flow. The groundwater would be conveyed into the Santa Ana River
as needed to maintain minimum flows established by the wildlife agencies. The wells would be
operated by Valley District.
C. Environmental Review Process
1. Notice of Preparation and Public Scoping
In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an
EIR was prepared and circulated by mail and email for review by applicable local, state and
federal agencies and the public. The NOP was also made available on the Sterling Natural
Resource Center website and published in the San Bernardino Sun, The Press-Enterprise, the
Highland Community News, and El Chicano. The 30-day project scoping period, which began
with the distribution of the NOP on October 16, 2015, remained open through November 16,
2015. Two public scoping meetings were held on October 29, 2015 at the Valley District office
and on November 5, 2015 at the EVWD office. The NOP provided the public and interested
public agencies with the opportunity to review the proposed project and to provide comments or
concerns on the scope and content of the environmental review document including: the range of
actions; alternatives; mitigation measures, and significant effects to be analyzed in depth in the
EIR. A summary report of the scoping process is included in the record of proceedings.
2. Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR and Invitation to Provide
Comments
The Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR was posted on December 17, 2015 with the
County Clerk in San Bernardino County. The Draft EIR was circulated to federal, state, and
local agencies and interested parties that requested a copy of the Draft EIR. Copies of the Draft
EIR were made available to the public at the following locations:
Sterling Natural Resource Center Web Site (http://www.sterlingnrc.com)
SBVMWD Headquarters, 380 E. Vanderbilt Way, San Bernardino, CA 92408
Norman F Feldheym Central Library, 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, CA 92410
Sam J. Ricardo Library & Environmental Learning Center, 7863 Central Avenue,
Highland, CA 92346
The Draft EIR was circulated for public review from December 17, 2015 through February 1,
2016.
During the public review period, Valley District held two public meetings to provide interested
persons with an opportunity to comment orally or in writing on the Draft EIR and the project.
The public meetings were held at the Valley District office in San Bernardino on January 14,
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 9 of 51
2016 and at the EVWD office in Highland on January 19, 2016, and followed the public
meetings followed the format described below:
Registration, where attendees were given the option to provide contact information in a
sign-in sheet, and receive copies of the NOA, a meeting agenda, and a comment slip. The
comment slip had space for individuals to write comments and/or questions for submittal
to Valley District.
Presentation of meeting purpose and format, overview of the proposed project,
presentation of the EIR process, issues analyzed in the Draft EIR and potential impacts,
and request for public comment.
Open house which consisted of poster stations staffed by project team representatives
who were available to answer questions and provide project information.
Comment station, where attendees could compose written comments to submit at the
meeting, or provide verbal comments one-on-one to a court reporter.
No members of the audiences of either public meeting offered comments. A summary report of
the outreach and public participation process for the Draft EIR is included in the record of
proceedings.
3. Circulation and Posting of the Final EIR
As required by section 15088(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, Valley District provided the Final
EIR, which includes written responses to all comments, to commenters on March 4, 2016, ten
days in advance of the March 15, 2016 meeting at which the Board of Valley District considered
and certified the EIR and approved of the project. In addition, Valley District made the Final
EIR available to the public at the following locations:
Sterling Natural Resource Center Web Site (http://www.sterlingnrc.com)
SBVMWD Headquarters, 380 E. Vanderbilt Way, San Bernardino, CA 92408
Norman F Feldheym Central Library, 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, CA 92410
Sam J. Ricardo Library & Environmental Learning Center, 7863 Central Avenue,
Highland, CA 92346
EVWD concludes that Valley District met the requirements of CEQA relating to public noticing
and outreach during the public review period of the DEIR. EVWD further concludes that Valley
District has provided ample time for agencies, organizations, and interested members of the
public to participate in the CEQA process by reviewing the DEIR and providing substantive
comments.
D. The Record of Proceedings
Valley District is the custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of
proceedings upon which the EVWD Board’s decision is based, and such documents and other
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 10 of 51
materials are located at Valley District’s offices, 380 East Vanderbilt Way, San Bernardino, CA
92408. Copies of the DEIR and FEIR are also available at the SNRC website,
http://sterlingnrc.com/.
For the purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the record of proceedings is composed of all non-
privileged documents relating to the project in Valley District’s files on this matter, including,
without limitation:
The Notice of Preparation (NOP) prepared for the project;
The DEIR for the Sterling Natural Resource Center Project, with all appendices to the
DEIR;
All comments or documents submitted by public agencies or by members of the public
during or after the comment period on the DEIR and up to Valley District’s approval of
the project;
The FEIR for the Sterling Natural Resource Center Project, with all appendices to the
FEIR;
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP);
All Findings and Resolutions adopted by Valley District in connection with the project
and all documents cited or referred to therein;
All staff reports and presentation materials related to the project, including internal
reports and analyses prepared by consultants to Valley District or EVWD;
All studies conducted for the project and contained in, or referenced by, staff reports, the
DEIR, the FEIR, or the MMRP;
All public reports and documents related to the project prepared for or by Valley District
or EVWD, including, without limitation, all planning documents;
All DEIR and FEIR references, whether or not the referenced documents are included in
the Appendices;
All documentary and oral evidence received and reviewed at public hearings, meetings
and workshops related to the project, the DEIR, the FEIR, or the MMRP;
All other public reports and documents relating to the project that were used by Valley
District or EVWD staff or consultants in the preparation of the DEIR, the FEIR or the
MMRP; and
All other documents, not otherwise included above, required by Public Resources Code
Section 21167.6.
E. Findings of Fact Regarding Project Impacts
1. Findings Regarding Less than Significant Impacts
The EIR concludes that that the project will result in no impacts or less than significant impacts
to the following resource areas:
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 11 of 51
Agriculture and Forestry Resources;
Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources;
Greenhouse Gas Emissions;
Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
Land Use and Planning; and
Recreation.
The EVWD Board finds, based on the EIR and the entire record, that the EIR’s conclusions
regarding the project’s impacts to these resource areas are correct.
The EIR also concludes that the following specific potential impacts will not actually
result from the project or will be less than significant, without the need for mitigation:
Aesthetic Impacts 3.1-1, 3.1-2, and 3.1-4;
Air Quality Impacts 3.3-1 and 3.3-4;
Biological Impacts 3.4-3, 3.4-5, and 3.4-6;
Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts 3.9-2, 3.9-8, and 3.9-9;
Noise Impacts 3.11-2, 3.11-5, and 3.11-6;
Population and Housing Impacts 3.12-2 and 3.12-2;
Public Services, Utilities, and Energy Impacts 3.13-1, 3.13-2, 3.13-3, 3.13-4, 3.13-5,
3.13-6, 3.13-7. and 3.13-8; and
Traffic Impacts 3.15-2 and 3.13-5.
The EVWD Board finds, based on the EIR and the entire record, that the EIR’s conclusions
regarding these specific potential impacts are correct.
2. Findings Regarding Potentially Significant Impacts That Will Be
Mitigated or Avoided
Aesthetics
Potentially Significant Impact 3.1-3: Degradation of the existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 12 of 51
Finding: Construction of the SNRC facility would temporarily alter views at the SNRC site
during construction, and the facility itself will modify the existing character of the neighborhood.
However changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project by Valley
District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the environment. With these
mitigation measures, the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.1-3 to a less-than-significant
level:
Mitigation Measure AES-1: Above-ground buildings/structures associated with the proposed
SNRC shall be designed to be consistent with the aesthetic qualities of existing structures in the
surrounding area to minimize contrasting features.
Mitigation Measure AES-2: During project design, a landscape plan shall be prepared for the
SNRC that restores disturbed areas and minimizes effects to local character. Valley District shall
implement and maintain the landscape plan.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-1 and AES-2 will reduce the project’s impact to
the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings to a less-than-significant
level because they will ensure that the SNRC facility’s visual character is compatible with the
surrounding area.
Air Quality
Potentially Significant Impact 3.3-5: Creation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people.
Finding: The proposed SNRC facility is expected to generate foul gas odors that could affect a
substantial number of people in the area surrounding the project site. However, changes or
alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate
or avoid this potential significant effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, the
project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.
Facts in Support of Finding:
Valley District has adopted and will implement the following mitigation measure that will reduce
potentially significant impact 3.3-5 to a less-than-significant level:
Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Valley District shall prepare and implement an Odor Impact
Minimization Plan that includes a monitoring and reporting plan. The plan shall include the
following elements at a minimum:
Identification of responsible parties
Description of odor control system design and performance standards
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 13 of 51
Odor control system operations plan
Identification of fence-line odor monitoring and reporting program
Achievable odor remediation actions and implementation protocol
Local community outreach program
Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2 will reduce the project’s odor-related impacts to a
less-than-significant level because it control the odors produced by the facility and enable Valley
District to rapidly address any complaints that might indicate the odor controls are not working
as expected.
Biological Resources
Potentially Significant Impact 3.4-1: Substantial adverse effects on plant and wildlife species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by CDFW or USFWS.
Finding: As noted in the EIR, the project could potentially affect numerous candidate, sensitive,
or special-status plant and wildlife species. Some construction of the project components will
occur in locations that provide suitable habitat for a number of species, including Nevin’s
barberry (Berberis nevinii), whitebracted spineflower (Chorizanthe xanti var. leucotheca),
slender-horned spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras), and Santa Ana River woolly-star
Eriastrum densifolium ssp. sanctorum). In addition, operation of the project will result in a
reduction in riparian habitat in the Santa Ana River, and is also expected to result in the
conversion of a portion of the RAFSS habitat in City Creek or other recharge areas to Southern
Cottonwood-Willow Riparian Forest.
However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project by
Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the environment. With
these mitigation measures, the project would not result in substantial adverse effects on plant and
wildlife species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFW or USFWS.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.4-1 to a less-than-significant
level for species other than the Santa Ana sucker:
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: The following measures will reduce potential project-related
impacts to special status plant species that may occur adjacent to the project site within City
Creek to a less than significant level. Potential project-related impacts may result from the
construction of the pipeline extension and discharge structure within City Creek, Redlands
Basins, and/or the East Twin Creek Spreading Grounds.
a) Prior to the start of construction within City Creek, Redlands Basins, and/or the East
Twin Creek Spreading Grounds, a focused botanical survey will be conducted to
determine the presence/absence of any of the special-status species with a moderate or
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 14 of 51
high potential to occur. The focused botanical survey will be conducted by a botanist or
qualified biologist knowledgeable in the identification of local special-status plant
species, and according to accepted protocol outlined by the CNPS and/or CDFW.
b) If a special status state or federally listed plant species is discovered in a project impact
area, informal consultation with CDFW and/or USFWS will be required prior to the
impact occurring to develop an appropriate avoidance strategy. Depending on the
sensitivity of the species, relocation, site restoration, or other habitat improvement actions
may be an acceptable option to avoid significant impacts, as determined through
consultation with the resource agencies.
c) If impact avoidance of a state or federally-listed species is not feasible, Valley District
shall quantify the impacted acreage supporting state or federally-listed plant species
within the construction area and estimated perennial flow area and prepare a Biological
Assessment pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and Section 2081 of the
State Endangered Species Act. The Biological Assessment shall quantify compensation
requirements for affected plants species. Valley District shall implement the conservation
measures and compensation requirements identified through consultation by USACE
with both CDFW and USFWS.
d) Permanent impacts to RAFSS habitat from construction and operation of the discharge
including within the City Creek channel resulting from perennial flow shall require on-
site replacement or off-site compensation at a ratio of at least 3:1 in consultation with
CDFW and USFWS. Temporary impacts to RAFSS habitat would be mitigated at a ratio
of at least 1:1 in consultation with CDFW and USFWS.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: The following measures will reduce potential project-related
impacts to special-status wildlife species that may occur within disturbed and native habitats, to a
less than significant level. Potential project-related impacts may result from construction of the
SNRC, construction of the discharge structures within City Creek and other discharge locations,
and perennial discharges to City Creek or other discharge locations.
a. Prior to the start of construction within City Creek or other discharge locations, Valley
District shall conduct focused surveys within the project impact areas to determine if any
state or federally-listed wildlife species (southwestern willow flycatcher, coastal
California gnatcatcher, San Bernardino kangaroo rat, and least Bell’s vireo) are located
within project impact areas. Focused surveys will be conducted by a qualified and/or
permitted biologist, following approved survey protocol. Survey results will be forwarded
to CDFW and USFWS. If state or federally-listed species are determined to occur on the
project site with the potential to be impacted by the project, consultation with CDFW
and/or USFWS will be required.
b. If impact avoidance is not feasible, Valley District shall quantify the impacted acreage
supporting state or federally-listed wildlife species within the construction area and
estimated perennial flow area and prepare a Biological Assessment pursuant to Section 7
of the Endangered Species Act and Section 2081 of the State Endangered Species Act.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 15 of 51
The Biological Assessment shall quantify compensation requirements for affected
wildlife species. Valley District shall implement the conservation measures and
compensation requirements identified through consultation by USACE with both CDFW
and USFWS.
c. Prior to the start of construction of the SNRC building and the recycled water pipeline
along 6th Street, focused burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted to determine the
presence/absence of burrowing owl adjacent to the project area. The focused burrowing
owl survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and following the survey
guidelines included in the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012). If
burrowing owl is observed within undeveloped habitat within or immediately adjacent to
the project impact area, avoidance/minimization measures would be required such as
establishing a suitable buffer around the nest (typically 500-feet) and monitoring during
construction, or delaying construction until after the nest is no longer active and the
burrowing owls have left. However, if burrowing owl avoidance is infeasible, a qualified
biologist shall implement a passive relocation program in accordance with the Example
Components for Burrowing Owl Artificial Burrow and Exclusion Plans of the CDFW
2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW, 2012).
d) Prior to the start of construction within City Creek, preconstruction site clearing
surveys will be conducted of the project impact area within natural habitats. Any special
status ground-dwelling wildlife will be removed from the immediate impact area and
released in the nearby area.
e) Permanent impacts to RAFSS habitat from construction and operation of the discharge
including within City Creek channel resulting from perennial flow shall require on-site
replacement or off-site compensation at a ratio of at least 3:1 in consultation with CDFW
and USFWS. Temporary impacts to RAFSS habitat would be mitigated at a ratio of at
least 1:1 in consultation with CDFW and USFWS.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2 will reduce the project’s impact to
plant and wildlife species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFW or USFWS to a less-than-significant level
because they will ensure that impacts to listed plants and wildlife are either avoided entirely, or
that if impacts do occur, they will be appropriately compensated. The expertise USFWS and
CDFW will bring to the consultation process will further ensure maximum protection of these
resources.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.4-2: Direct or indirect impacts to riparian habitat and other
sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or
by CDFW or USFWS resulting from construction of the project.
Finding: Construction of the discharge structure could occur in areas containing two sensitive
natural communities: RAFSS and southern cottonwood-willow riparian forest. However,
changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project by Valley District
that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the environment. With these mitigation
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 16 of 51
measures, construction of the project would not result in direct or indirect impacts to riparian
habitat and other sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by CDFW or USFWS.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.4-2 to a less-than-significant
level:
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: The following measures will reduce potential project-related impacts
to special status plant species that may occur adjacent to the project site within City Creek to a
less than significant level. Potential project-related impacts may result from the construction of
the pipeline extension and discharge structure within City Creek, Redlands Basins, and/or the
East Twin Creek Spreading Grounds.
a) Prior to the start of construction within City Creek, Redlands Basins, and/or the East
Twin Creek Spreading Grounds, a focused botanical survey will be conducted to
determine the presence/absence of any of the special-status species with a moderate or
high potential to occur. The focused botanical survey will be conducted by a botanist or
qualified biologist knowledgeable in the identification of local special-status plant
species, and according to accepted protocol outlined by the CNPS and/or CDFW.
b) If a special status state or federally listed plant species is discovered in a project impact
area, informal consultation with CDFW and/or USFWS will be required prior to the
impact occurring to develop an appropriate avoidance strategy. Depending on the
sensitivity of the species, relocation, site restoration, or other habitat improvement actions
may be an acceptable option to avoid significant impacts, as determined through
consultation with the resource agencies.
c) If impact avoidance of a state or federally-listed species is not feasible, Valley District
shall quantify the impacted acreage supporting state or federally-listed plant species
within the construction area and estimated perennial flow area and prepare a Biological
Assessment pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and Section 2081 of the
State Endangered Species Act. The Biological Assessment shall quantify compensation
requirements for affected plants species. Valley District shall implement the conservation
measures and compensation requirements identified through consultation by USACE
with both CDFW and USFWS.
d) Permanent impacts to RAFSS habitat from construction and operation of the discharge
including within the City Creek channel resulting from perennial flow shall require on-
site replacement or off-site compensation at a ratio of at least 3:1 in consultation with
CDFW and USFWS. Temporary impacts to RAFSS habitat would be mitigated at a ratio
of at least 1:1 in consultation with CDFW and USFWS.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3: The following measures will reduce potential project-related impacts
to avoid, minimize, and compensate for impacts to Santa Ana sucker while contributing to the
long-term conservation of the species.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 17 of 51
a. The diversion of wastewater flow to the new SNRC shall not occur until either the
Upper Santa Ana HCP has been fully executed by the USFWS and CDFW or
Valley District’s SAS HMMP has been approved by the USFWS and CDFW.
b. The Valley District will be a signatory to the Upper SAR HCP that will include
the proposed project as a covered activity. The HCP will include a menu of
projects to be implemented by the signatory agencies that will create habitat,
restore habitat, and establish self-sustaining populations in the watershed. The
HCP will be approved by the CDFW and USFWS.
c. In the event that the Upper Santa Ana River HCP is not approved in time to meet
the project schedule, Valley District shall prepare and implement a SAS Habitat
Monitoring and Management Plan (HMMP) that identifies habitat improvement
actions, implementation methods, monitoring, and maintenance methods. The
HMMP will consist of measures listed below to offset direct and indirect impacts
to the Santa Ana sucker and its habitat resulting from the loss of 6 MGD of
discharged water. The HMMP will be implemented by a contracted, qualified and
permitted entity such as the Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation District
RCRCD) in coordination with the USFWS and CDFW. The HMMP will identify
the goals and performance criteria of each conservation measure and will identify
annual reporting and work forecasting requirements. The HMMP will be
approved by the USFWS and CDFW under their authority to enforce the federal
and state Endangered Species Acts. The proposed diversion of 6 MGD from the
RIX discharge will not occur until the HMMP has been approved by USFWS and
CDFW. The HMMP will include the following elements:
a. SAS-1: Microhabitat Enhancements. The HMMP will identify
microhabitat enhancements within the upstream reach of the affected river
segment using natural materials to increase scour and pool formation. This
could include placement of large boulders and/or large woody debris to
increase velocity of flow and gravel bar patches as well as deep pool
refugia areas.
b. SAS-2: Aquatic Predator Control Program. The HMMP will include an
Aquatic Predator Control Program to be implemented within the upstream
reach of the affected river segment that will target and remove exotic fish,
amphibians, and reptiles immediately prior to the SAS spawning season.
c. SAS-3: Exotic Weed Management Program. The HMMP will include an
Exotic Weed Management Program targeting the removal of non-native
species such as tamarisk, castor bean, tree of heaven, etc. The HMMP will
include an annual maintenance and performance goal for non-native plant
removal within the upper reach of the affected river segment.
d. SAS-4: High Flow Pulse Events. The HMMP will identify means to create
high flow pulse events as needed based on substrate conditions, up to 2
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 18 of 51
times per year. The high flow pulse events would be implemented through
a cooperative agreement with the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water
Department.
e. SAS-5: Supplemental Water. Valley District will increase habitat
availability in Rialto Channel during the summer months by providing
cool supplemental water from nearby groundwater source to lower the
water temperature in this tributary. Supplemental water will be added to
the Rialto Channel when water temperatures reach 85 degrees.
Supplemental water could be pumped groundwater or other water source.
The discharge into the Rialto Drain will require a discharge permit from
the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
f. SAS-6: Upper Watershed SAS Population Establishment. The HMMP will
outline a plan for establishing a population of Santa Ana sucker in City
Creek, or other suitable watershed tributary, in coordination with the
Wildlife Agencies. The HMMP will identify measures to directly increase
the number of Santa Ana sucker in the SAR population, increase the
amount of suitable and occupied habitat in this watershed, and distribute
the risk of a catastrophic event between multiple locations. The HMMP
will identify the goals and success criteria of the establishment plan and
will identify the amount of financial assistance to be provided by Valley
District for the regionally beneficial population establishment program.
g. SAS-7: Monitoring. The HMMP will outline a monitoring program to
collect hydrology data in the segment of river between the RIX discharge
and Mission Boulevard. The data will include flow velocity and depth.
Mitigation Measure BIO-4: The Contractor shall implement the following Best Management
Practices during construction of the pipeline and discharge structure adjacent to and within City
Creek to protect any adjacent sensitive natural communities that provide habitat for special-status
species.
a. The following water quality protection measures shall be implemented during
construction:
Stationary engines, such as compressors, generators, light plants, etc., shall have
drip pans beneath them to prevent any leakage from entering runoff or receiving
waters.
All construction equipment shall be inspected for leaks and maintained regularly
to avoid soil contamination. Leaks and smears of petroleum products will be
wiped clean prior to use.
Any grout waste or spills will be cleaned up immediately and disposed of off-site.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 19 of 51
Spill kits capable of containing hazardous spills will be stored on-site.
b. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of common and special status wildlife during
construction, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two-feet deep shall
be covered with tarp, plywood or similar materials at the close of each working day to
prevent animals from being trapped. Ramps may be constructed of earth fill or wooden
planks within deep walled trenches to allow for animals to escape, if necessary. Before
such holes or trenches are backfilled, they should be thoroughly inspected for trapped
animals. If trapped wildlife are observed, escape ramps or structures shall be installed
immediately to allow escape. All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures that
are stored at a construction site for one or more overnight periods should be thoroughly
inspected for burrowing owls and nesting birds before the pipe is subsequently buried,
capped, or otherwise used or moved.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-3, and BIO-4 will reduce the project’s
construction-related impacts to riparian habitat and other sensitive natural communities to less-
than-significant levels because it will prevent construction of the project from adversely affecting
sensitive habitat or ensure that any impacts are properly compensated. The expertise USFWS
and CDFW will bring to the consultation process will further ensure maximum protection of
these resources.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.4-4: Construction-related interference with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
Finding: Construction of the project could result in impacts to habitat that provide suitable
nesting habitat for migratory and resident bird species. However, changes or alterations have
been required in, or incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this
potential significant effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, construction of
the project would not result in interference with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measure that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.4-4 to a less-than-significant
level:
Mitigation Measure BIO-5: To minimize potential construction-related project impacts to avian
species that may be nesting on or immediately adjacent to the project area, the following
measures will reduce any potential impact to a less than significant level.
a. To avoid potential impacts to birds that may be nesting on or immediately adjacent to
the project area, construction of the project should avoid the general avian breeding
season of February through August.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 20 of 51
b. If construction must occur during the general avian breeding season, a pre-construction
clearance survey should be conducted within 30 days prior to the start of construction, to
determine if any active nests or sign of nesting activity is located on or immediately
adjacent to the project area, specifically at the proposed SNRC location. An additional
survey shall be conducted within 3 days prior to the commencement of construction
activities. If no nesting activity is observed during the pre-construction survey,
construction may commence without potential impacts to nesting birds.
c. If an active nest is observed, a suitable buffer will be placed around the nest, depending
on sensitivity of the nesting species, and onsite monitoring may be required during
construction to ensure no disturbance or take of the nest occurs. Construction may
continue in other areas of the project and construction activities may only encroach
within the buffer at the discretion of the monitoring biologist. The buffer will remain in
place until the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer considered active.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-5 will reduce the project’s potential construction-
related impacts to wildlife nursery sites by ensuring that such impacts are avoided.
Cultural Resources
Potentially Significant Impact 3.5-1: Substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical or archaeological resource.
Finding: As the project includes ground-disturbing activities, there is potential for discovery of
currently unknown subsurface archaeological deposits that could be affected by the project.
However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project by
Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the environment. With
these mitigation measures, the project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical or archaeological resource.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.5-1 to a less-than-significant
level:
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities, Valley District shall
retain a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Standards for archaeology (U.S. Department of the Interior 2008) to carry out all mitigation
related to cultural resources. The qualified archaeologist shall conduct a Phase I survey for all
areas within the project impact area that have not received a survey within the last five years,
including treated conveyance pipeline corridors.
Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Prior to start of ground-disturbing activities, the qualified
archaeologist shall conduct cultural resources sensitivity training for all construction personnel.
Construction personnel shall be informed of the types of archaeological resources that may be
encountered, and of the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an inadvertent discovery
of archaeological resources or human remains. Valley District shall ensure that construction
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 21 of 51
personnel are made available for and attend the training and retain documentation demonstrating
attendance.
Mitigation Measure CUL-3: In the event of the unanticipated discovery of archaeological
materials, Valley District shall immediately cease all work activities within approximately 100
feet of the discovery until it can be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist. Construction shall
not resume until the qualified archaeologist has conferred with Valley District on the
significance of the resource.
If it is determined that a discovered archaeological resource constitutes a historic property under
the NHPA or a historical or unique archaeological resource under CEQA, avoidance and
preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigation. Preservation in place maintains the
important relationship between artifacts and their archaeological context and also serves to avoid
conflict with traditional and religious values of groups who may ascribe meaning to the resource.
Preservation in place may be accomplished by, but is not limited to, avoidance, incorporating the
resource into open space, capping, or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement.
In the event that preservation in place is demonstrated to be infeasible and data recovery through
excavation is the only feasible mitigation available, a Treatment Plan shall be prepared and
implemented by a qualified archaeologist in consultation with Valley District that provides for
the adequate recovery of the scientifically consequential information contained in the
archaeological resource. Valley District shall consult with appropriate Native American
representatives in determining treatment for prehistoric or Native American resources to ensure
cultural values ascribed to the resource, beyond that which is scientifically important, are
considered.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, and CUL-3 will reduce the project’s
impacts to the significance of historical or archaeological resources to less-than-significant levels
because in the event a new subsurface archaeological deposit is located, the measures will ensure
that any impacts to those resources is avoided.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.5-2: Direct or indirect destruction of a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Finding: Construction of the project has potential to result in excavation of currently unknown
paleontological resources. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant
effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, the project would not result in direct
or indirect destruction of a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measure that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.5-2 to a less-than-significant
level:
Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Paleontological resources monitoring shall be conducted for the
proposed SNRC in areas that are subject to excavations in excess of 15 feet below ground
surface. Paleontological monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 22 of 51
QPM). The QPM, in consultation with Valley District, may reduce or increase monitoring based
on observations of subsurface soil stratigraphy or other factors. If construction or other project
personnel discover any potential fossils during construction, regardless of the depth of work,
work at the discovery location shall cease within 50 feet of the find until the QPM has assessed
the discovery and made recommendations as to the appropriate treatment.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-4 will reduce the project’s impacts to unique
paleontological resources or sites or unique geologic features to less-than-significant levels
because it will ensure that impacts to such resources are avoided.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.5-3: Disturbance of human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries.
Finding: It is possible that the project could unearth, expose, or disturb unknown human remains.
However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project by
Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the environment. With
these mitigation measures, the project would not result in significant impacts to human remains.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measure that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.5-4 to a less-than-significant
level:
Mitigation Measure CUL-5: If human remains are encountered, Valley District shall halt work
within 100 feet of the find and contact the San Bernardino County Coroner in accordance with
PRC Section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If the County Coroner
determines that the remains are Native American, the NAHC shall be notified in accordance with
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, subdivision (c), and PRC Section 5097.98 (as amended
by Assembly Bill 2641). The NAHC shall designate a MLD for the remains per PRC Section
5097.98. Until the landowner has conferred with the MLD, Valley District shall ensure that the
immediate vicinity where the discovery occurred is not disturbed by further activity, is
adequately protected according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or
practices, and that further activities take into account the possibility of multiple burials.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-5 will reduce the project’s impacts to human
remains to less-than-significant levels because it will ensure that if any human remains are
encountered during construction of the project, the remains will be handled properly and further
project activity will take the existence of the remains into account.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.5-4: Substantial adverse changes in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource.
Finding: Unknown subsurface tribal cultural resources could be encountered during construction
of the project. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the
environment. With these mitigation measures, the project would not result in substantial adverse
changes in the significance of a tribal cultural resource.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 23 of 51
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.5-4 to a less-than-significant
level:
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities, Valley District shall
retain a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Standards for archaeology (U.S. Department of the Interior 2008) to carry out all mitigation
related to cultural resources. The qualified archaeologist shall conduct a Phase I survey for all
areas within the project impact area that have not received a survey within the last five years,
including treated conveyance pipeline corridors.
Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Prior to start of ground-disturbing activities, the qualified
archaeologist shall conduct cultural resources sensitivity training for all construction personnel.
Construction personnel shall be informed of the types of archaeological resources that may be
encountered, and of the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an inadvertent discovery
of archaeological resources or human remains. Valley District shall ensure that construction
personnel are made available for and attend the training and retain documentation demonstrating
attendance.
Mitigation Measure CUL-3: In the event of the unanticipated discovery of archaeological
materials, Valley District shall immediately cease all work activities within approximately 100
feet of the discovery until it can be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist. Construction shall
not resume until the qualified archaeologist has conferred with Valley District on the
significance of the resource.
If it is determined that a discovered archaeological resource constitutes a historic property under
the NHPA or a historical or unique archaeological resource under CEQA, avoidance and
preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigation. Preservation in place maintains the
important relationship between artifacts and their archaeological context and also serves to avoid
conflict with traditional and religious values of groups who may ascribe meaning to the resource.
Preservation in place may be accomplished by, but is not limited to, avoidance, incorporating the
resource into open space, capping, or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement.
In the event that preservation in place is demonstrated to be infeasible and data recovery through
excavation is the only feasible mitigation available, a Treatment Plan shall be prepared and
implemented by a qualified archaeologist in consultation with Valley District that provides for
the adequate recovery of the scientifically consequential information contained in the
archaeological resource. Valley District shall consult with appropriate Native American
representatives in determining treatment for prehistoric or Native American resources to ensure
cultural values ascribed to the resource, beyond that which is scientifically important, are
considered.
Mitigation Measure CUL-5: If human remains are encountered, Valley District shall halt work
within 100 feet of the find and contact the San Bernardino County Coroner in accordance with
PRC Section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If the County Coroner
determines that the remains are Native American, the NAHC shall be notified in accordance with
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, subdivision (c), and PRC Section 5097.98 (as amended
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 24 of 51
by Assembly Bill 2641). The NAHC shall designate a MLD for the remains per PRC Section
5097.98. Until the landowner has conferred with the MLD, Valley District shall ensure that the
immediate vicinity where the discovery occurred is not disturbed by further activity, is
adequately protected according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or
practices, and that further activities take into account the possibility of multiple burials.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, CUL-3, and CUL-5 will reduce the
project’s impacts to tribal cultural resources to less-than-significant levels because they will
ensure that tribal resources are either not affected, or if such resources are encountered they will
be handled properly.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Potentially Significant Impact 3.9-1: Violation of water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements.
Finding: Construction of the project will involve soil-disturbing activities that could potentially
contribute pollutants to local waterways. However, changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant
effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, the project would not result in
significant adverse impacts related to violations of water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.9-1 to a less-than-significant
level:
Mitigation Measure HYDRO-1: Valley District will prepare a Water Quality Management Plan
WQMP) to ensure that the SNRC facility design complies with stormwater management goals
of the MS4.
Mitigation Measure HYDRO-2: Valley District shall prepare and implement a groundwater
monitoring program that includes installation of an array of groundwater monitoring wells
sufficient to characterize the effects of the discharge on local groundwater quality. If monitoring
shows that beneficial uses of the groundwater may become adversely affected by the discharge,
the monitoring program would require either modifications to treatment, modify the well
screened area by sealing the affected portion of the screen in the impacted groundwater bearing
zone, or compensation for adversely affected groundwater wells through replacement of the
affected well or through providing replacement water.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures HYDRO-1 and HYDRO-2 will reduce the project’s
impacts to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements to less-than-significant
levels because they will ensure that construction activities associated with the project follow best
practices that will prevent the project from violating water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 25 of 51
Potentially Significant Impact 3.9-3: Substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner
which would result in substantial erosion, siltation or flooding on or offsite.
Finding: Construction of the project will involve excavation and grading that could contribute to
erosion, and operation of the project is expected to result in the growth of new riparian
vegetation that could alter drainage patterns. However, changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this
potential significant effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, the project
would not result in significant adverse impacts to the existing drainage pattern of the area.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.9-3 to a less-than-significant
level:
Mitigation Measure HYDRO-3: The City Creek discharge structures shall be designed with
velocity dissipation features as needed to prevent scour at the point of discharge. The design and
location of these discharge facilities would be approved by the SBCFCD and USACE to ensure
that they do not impede high flow capacity.
Mitigation Measure HYDRO-4: Valley District shall prepare a City Creek Channel Vegetation
Management Plan in coordination with SBCFCD and CDFW that outlines vegetation
management measures to minimize impacts to the flood control function within City Creek. The
plan will include periodic vegetation trimming to remove large trees that could impact flood
control facilities downstream. The plan will outline schedule, permitting and reporting
requirements.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures HYDRO-3 and HYDRO-4 will reduce the project’s
impacts to existing drainage patterns to less-than-significant levels because they will ensure that
construction activities associated with the project follow best practices that will reduce the
potential for sediment to be washed into local waterways and that instream vegetation will not
interfere with the flood protection function of local waterways.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.9-4: Creation of contribution of runoff water which could
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff.
Finding: Construction of the project will decrease the overall perviousness of the project site,
thus potentially creating a new source of runoff. However, changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this
potential significant effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, the project
would not result in significant adverse impacts related to runoff water.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measure that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.9-4 to a less-than-significant
level:
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 26 of 51
Mitigation Measure HYDRO-5: Valley District shall prepare an Operational Manual for the
discharge to City Creek that identifies when discharges would be conveyed to other discharge
basins to avoid contributing to flood flows in City Creek during peak flow periods.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure HYDRO-5 will reduce the project’s runoff water impacts
to less-than-significant levels by ensuring that any contribution to runoff resulting from the
project will not reach City Creek during peak flow periods.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.9-7: Placement of structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area.
Finding: The City Creek Discharge Alternative would place the discharge facility in the 100-
year flood zone. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the
environment. With these mitigation measures, the project would not result in significant adverse
impacts due to placement of structures which would impede or redirect flood flows.
Facts in Support of Finding:
Valley District has adopted and will implement the following mitigation measure that will reduce
potentially significant impact 3.9-7 to a less-than-significant level:
Mitigation Measure HYDRO-3: The City Creek discharge structures shall be designed with
velocity dissipation features as needed to prevent scour at the point of discharge. The design and
location of these discharge facilities would be approved by the SBCFCD and USACE to ensure
that they do not impede high flow capacity.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure HYDRO-5 will reduce the project’s impacts to flood
flows to less-than-significant levels because it will ensure that any discharge structure placed
within the City Creek 100-year flood zone will not adversely impede or redirect flood flows.
Noise and Vibration
Potentially Significant Impact 3.11-1: Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies.
Finding: It is anticipated that construction and operation of the project will comply with
applicable standards, but there is potential for noise impacts, particularly those resulting from
construction, to be significant. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant
effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, the project would not result in
exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of applicable standards, with the
exception of temporary construction noise.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 27 of 51
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.11-1 to a less-than-
significant level:
Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: Valley District shall implement the following measures during
construction:
Include design measures necessary to reduce construction noise levels to comply with
local noise ordinances. These measures may include noise barriers, curtains, or shields.
Place noise-generating construction activities (e.g., operation of compressors and
generators, cement mixing, general truck idling) away from the nearest noise-sensitive
land uses.
Contiguous properties shall be notified in advance of construction activities. A contact
name and number shall be provided to contiguous properties to report excessive
construction noise.
Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Noise-generating machinery at the proposed SNRC shall be
enclosed within structures that are designed with insulation sufficient to comply with applicable
nighttime noise standards at the facility fenceline.
Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: Valley District shall establish a 24-hour Hot-Line to serve the
local community. Valley District shall ensure that neighbor concerns are investigated and
addressed immediately. The Hot-Line number shall be provided to the neighboring properties
and be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the facility.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures NOISE-1, NOISE-2, and NOISE-3 will reduce most of
the impacts of the project’s exposure of persons to and generation of noise levels to less-than-
significant levels because they will ensure that noise levels resulting from the project adhere to
local noise standards. The exception is the temporary impact of construction noise, which is
discussed below as a significant and unavoidable impact of the project.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.11-3: Substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
Finding: Operation of the project would result in a permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the
environment. With these mitigation measures, the project would not result in substantial
permanent increases in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above those that would exist
without the project.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.11-3 to a less-than-
significant level:
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 28 of 51
Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Noise-generating machinery at the proposed SNRC shall be
enclosed within structures that are designed with insulation sufficient to comply with applicable
nighttime noise standards at the facility fenceline.
Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: Valley District shall establish a 24-hour Hot-Line to serve the
local community. Valley District shall ensure that neighbor concerns are investigated and
addressed immediately. The Hot-Line number shall be provided to the neighboring properties
and be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the facility.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures NOISE-2 and NOISE-3 will reduce the project’s
permanent increases in ambient noise to less-than-significant levels because they will ensure that
the stationary equipment the project will utilize will comply with local noise standards and is
located so as to minimize the exposure of neighboring land uses to noise generated by the
project.
Population, Housing, and Environmental Justice
Potentially Significant Impact 3.12-4: Significant and disproportionate effects on the health or
environment of minority or low income populations.
Finding: The proposed SNRC, a wastewater treatment facility, would be located within a
disproportionately low income area and so the project could thus disproportionately affect a low
income population. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the
environment. With these mitigation measures, the project would not disproportionately affect
the health or environment of minority or low income populations.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.12-1 to a less-than-
significant level:
Mitigation Measure AES-1: Above-ground buildings/structures associated with the proposed
SNRC shall be designed to be consistent with the aesthetic qualities of existing structures in the
surrounding area to minimize contrasting features.
Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Valley District shall prepare and implement an Odor Impact
Minimization Plan that includes a monitoring and reporting plan. The plan shall include the
following elements at a minimum:
Identification of responsible parties
Description of odor control system design and performance standards
Odor control system operations plan
Identification of fence-line odor monitoring and reporting program
Achievable odor remediation actions and implementation protocol
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 29 of 51
Local community outreach program
Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: Valley District shall implement the following measures during
construction:
Include design measures necessary to reduce construction noise levels to comply with
local noise ordinances. These measures may include noise barriers, curtains, or shields.
Place noise-generating construction activities (e.g., operation of compressors and
generators, cement mixing, general truck idling) away from the nearest noise-sensitive
land uses.
Contiguous properties shall be notified in advance of construction activities. A contact
name and number shall be provided to contiguous properties to report excessive
construction noise.
Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Noise-generating machinery at the proposed SNRC shall be
enclosed within structures that are designed with insulation sufficient to comply with applicable
nighttime noise standards at the facility fenceline.
Mitigation Measure TR-1: Valley District shall require the contractor to prepare a traffic control
plan that identifies specific traffic control measures to ensure access and safety on the local
roadway network. The traffic control plan will include the following elements at a minimum:
A schedule of lane closures and road closures over the construction period
Measures to maintain traffic flow at all times across the construction zone including
requiring flaggers to direct traffic when only one lane of traffic is available
Detour routes and notification procedures if full road closures are needed
Lane closure notifications to the City of Highland, City of San Bernardino and City of
Redlands and local emergency services providers
Temporary signalization modifications (if any) for intersection signals
On-road traffic control features and signage compliant with city traffic control
requirements
Maintain access to residence and business driveways, public facilities, and recreational
resources at all times to the extent feasible; Minimize access disruptions to businesses
and residences
Include the requirement that all open trenches be covered with metal plates at the end of
each workday to accommodate traffic and access
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 30 of 51
Identify all roadway locations where special construction techniques (e.g., horizontal
boring, directional drilling or night construction) will be used to minimize impacts to
traffic flow
Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-1, AIR-2, NOISE-1, NOISE-2, and TR-1 will
reduce the project’s potential impacts to the health and environment of minority or low income
populations to less-than-significant levels because they will reduce the project’s aesthetic, air
quality, noise, and traffic impacts to the neighboring population.
Public Services, Utilities, and Energy
Potentially Significant Impact 3.13-9: The project could encounter buried utilities.
Finding: Because construction of the project will involve excavation, construction activities
could result in encounters with buried utilities. However, changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this
potential significant effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, the project
would not adversely affect buried utilities.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.13-9 to a less-than-
significant level:
Mitigation Measure UTIL-1: During design and prior to construction, Valley District shall verify
the nature and location of underground utilities before the start of any construction that would
require excavation. Valley District shall notify and coordinate with public and private utility
providers at least 48 hours before the commencement of work adjacent to any located utility.
The contractor shall be required to notify the service provider in advance of service interruptions
to allow the service provider sufficient time to notify customers. The contractor shall be required
to coordinate timing of interruptions with the service providers to minimize the frequency and
duration of interruptions.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 will reduce the project’s potential impact to
buried utilities to less-than-significant levels because it will ensure that construction activities do
not encounter buried utilities, or that if an encounter cannot be avoided, that any service
disruptions will be minimized.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.13-10: Operation of the proposed project would require
additional power that could affect local and regional energy supplies.
Finding: The estimated power demand of the completed project is expected to be approximately
1,422 kilowatts per day, or 12,453,900 kwh per year, which could increase the demand on local
energy supplies. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the
environment. With these mitigation measures, the project would not adversely affect local and
regional energy supplies.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 31 of 51
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.13-10 to a less-than-
significant level:
Mitigation Measure UTIL-2: Valley District shall require the use of energy efficient equipment,
including but not limited to, pumps, conveyance features, and lighting for the proposed SNRC
and pumping stations.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-2 will reduce the project’s potential impact to
buried utilities to less-than-significant levels because it will ensure that the project’s energy
demands will not exceed the capacity of local energy suppliers.
Transportation and Traffic
Potentially Significant Impact 3.15-1: The project would result in increases in vehicle trips by
construction workers, facility operators, haul trucks, and deliveries that could conflict with
applicable plans and policies regarding the effectiveness of the circulation system.
Finding: Construction and operation of the project would increase traffic volumes on roadways
serving the project sites. The impact would be most acute during project construction. However,
changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project by Valley District
that mitigate or avoid this potential significant effect on the environment. With these mitigation
measures, the project would not adversely affect traffic volumes.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.15-1 to a less-than-
significant level:
Mitigation Measure TR-1: Valley District shall require the contractor to prepare a traffic control
plan that identifies specific traffic control measures to ensure access and safety on the local
roadway network. The traffic control plan will include the following elements at a minimum:
A schedule of lane closures and road closures over the construction period
Measures to maintain traffic flow at all times across the construction zone including
requiring flaggers to direct traffic when only one lane of traffic is available
Detour routes and notification procedures if full road closures are needed
Lane closure notifications to the City of Highland, City of San Bernardino and City of
Redlands and local emergency services providers
Temporary signalization modifications (if any) for intersection signals
On-road traffic control features and signage compliant with city traffic control
requirements
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 32 of 51
Maintain access to residence and business driveways, public facilities, and recreational
resources at all times to the extent feasible; Minimize access disruptions to businesses
and residences
Include the requirement that all open trenches be covered with metal plates at the end of
each workday to accommodate traffic and access
Identify all roadway locations where special construction techniques (e.g., horizontal
boring, directional drilling or night construction) will be used to minimize impacts to
traffic flow
Mitigation Measure TR-2: Valley District shall prepare a notification plan for communication
with affected residents and businesses prior to the start of construction. Advance public
notification shall include posting of notices and appropriate signage of construction activities.
The written notification shall include the construction schedule, the exact location and duration
of activities within each street (i.e., which lanes and access point/driveways would be blocked on
which days and for how long), and a toll-free telephone number for receiving questions for
complaints.
Mitigation Measure TR-3: Prior to installation of pipelines in East 5th Street, Valley District
shall coordinate with the City of Highland to ensure that the proposed East 5th Street curb and
drainage improvements are conducted simultaneously with the pipeline installation to avoid
impacting the street twice in a short period of time.
Mitigation Measure TR-4: Valley District shall ensure that deliveries, biosolids haul trips, and
worker shift transitions are discouraged during the period of 7:30 to 8:30 AM and 2:30 to 3:30
PM corresponding to peak pick up and drop off times at the high school.
Mitigation Measure TR-5: Valley District shall design turn-in and turnout ramps adjacent to 5th
Street to accommodate solids haul trips and material deliveries ingress and egress in a manner
that ensures safe traffic conditions. Roadway improvements including modifications to the curb
shall be approved by the City of Highland Public Works Department.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures TR-1. TR-2, TR-2, TR-4, and TR-5 will reduce the
project’s potential impact to traffic to less-than-significant levels because they will ensure that
construction-related traffic impacts are reduced and that operations-related traffic impacts void
peak traffic times and ensuring that local roads can accommodate delivery and haul trucks.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.15-3: The project could result in a substantial increase in
hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses.
Finding: The project is expected to require modifications to 5th Street to accommodate ingress
and egress of delivery and haul trucks. However, changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate or avoid this potential significant
effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, the project would not result in a
substantial increase in hazards.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 33 of 51
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.15-3 to a less-than-
significant level:
Mitigation Measure TR-4: Valley District shall ensure that deliveries, biosolids haul trips, and
worker shift transitions are discouraged during the period of 7:30 to 8:30 AM and 2:30 to 3:30
PM corresponding to peak pick up and drop off times at the high school.
Mitigation Measure TR-5: Valley District shall design turn-in and turnout ramps adjacent to 5th
Street to accommodate solids haul trips and material deliveries ingress and egress in a manner
that ensures safe traffic conditions. Roadway improvements including modifications to the curb
shall be approved by the City of Highland Public Works Department.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures TR-4 and TR-5 will reduce the project’s potential
impact to traffic-related hazards to less-than-significant levels because it will ensure that any
modifications to 5th Street are designed to provide for traffic safety and will reduce the project’s
operation traffic during peak traffic times.
Potentially Significant Impact 3.15-4: The project could result in inadequate emergency access.
Finding: Construction of the project will have traffic impacts that could delay emergency vehicle
response times or otherwise disrupt delivery of emergency services. However, changes or
alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project by Valley District that mitigate
or avoid this potential significant effect on the environment. With these mitigation measures, the
project would not significantly affect emergency access.
Facts in Support of Finding: Valley District has adopted and will implement the following
mitigation measures that will reduce potentially significant impact 3.15-4 to a less-than-
significant level:
Mitigation Measure TR-1: Valley District shall require the contractor to prepare a traffic control
plan that identifies specific traffic control measures to ensure access and safety on the local
roadway network. The traffic control plan will include the following elements at a minimum:
A schedule of lane closures and road closures over the construction period
Measures to maintain traffic flow at all times across the construction zone including
requiring flaggers to direct traffic when only one lane of traffic is available
Detour routes and notification procedures if full road closures are needed
Lane closure notifications to the City of Highland, City of San Bernardino and City of
Redlands and local emergency services providers
Temporary signalization modifications (if any) for intersection signals
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 34 of 51
On-road traffic control features and signage compliant with city traffic control
requirements
Maintain access to residence and business driveways, public facilities, and recreational
resources at all times to the extent feasible; Minimize access disruptions to businesses
and residences
Include the requirement that all open trenches be covered with metal plates at the end of
each workday to accommodate traffic and access
Identify all roadway locations where special construction techniques (e.g., horizontal
boring, directional drilling or night construction) will be used to minimize impacts to
traffic flow
Implementation of Mitigation Measure TR-4 will reduce the project’s potential impact to
emergency access to less-than-significant levels because it will reduce the project’s construction-
related impacts and thus avoid interference with emergency services.
The EVWD Board finds, based on the EIR and the entire record, that the EIR’s conclusions
regarding potentially significant impacts that will be mitigated or avoided are correct.
3. Findings Regarding Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
The EIR identified several impacts of the project that will be significant and unavoidable, which
impacts are described below. Additional information regarding significant and unavoidable
impacts is also contained in the statement of overriding considerations in Section 2 of this
document.
Air Quality
Construction Emissions of NOx.
Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible
mitigation measures that would reduce construction NOx emissions below the thresholds of
significance that have been adopted for this project. In addition, the project alternatives that
would fulfill the project objectives, described herein and in the EIR, would result in similar
construction-related NOx emissions and would not reduce or avoid this impact. Therefore, the
impact of the proposed project’s construction-related NOx emissions is considered significant
and unavoidable.
Facts in Support of Finding: Construction of the proposed project or any of the project
alternatives would necessarily result in NOx emissions. The NOx emissions construction of the
project is expected to produce exceed the thresholds of significance adopted for the
environmental analysis of the project. Therefore, the project would result in a significant impact
to air quality. Valley District has adopted mitigation measure AIR-1 to reduce this impact, but
even with this measure in place the maximum NOx emissions associated with construction
would not be reduced below the applicable threshold of significance. It is not feasible to further
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 35 of 51
reduce construction-related NOx emissions. For example, while one commenter suggested that
daily construction air emissions could be reduced by extending or prolonging the construction
period, the EIR concludes that extending the construction period would serve only to extend the
daily air emission impacts and also exacerbate other construction-related impacts, including
noise and traffic impacts, while increasing also increasing costs. No other mitigation measures
were suggested in comments on this impact. Accordingly, because Valley District has adopted
all feasible mitigation measures but those measures will not reduce the impact to less than
significant, this air quality impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
Cumulative Impact of Construction-Related NOx Emissions
Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible
mitigation measures that would reduce the project’s construction-related contribution to
cumulative NOx levels below the thresholds of significance that have been adopted for this
project. In addition, the project alternatives that would fulfill the project objectives, described
herein and in the EIR, would result in a similar contribution to cumulative NOx levels and would
not reduce or avoid this impact. Therefore, the impact of the proposed project’s contribution to
cumulative NOx emissions is considered significant and unavoidable.
Facts in Support of Finding: Construction of the proposed project or any of the project
alternatives would necessarily result in NOx emissions. The NOx emissions during construction
of the project is expected to exceed the thresholds of significance adopted for the environmental
analysis of the project. Therefore, the project would result in a significant impact to air quality.
Valley District has adopted mitigation measure AIR-1 to reduce this impact, but even with this
measure in place the maximum NOx emissions associated with construction would not be
reduced below the applicable threshold of significance. As noted above, it is not feasible to
further reduce construction-related NOx emissions and no other mitigation measures were
suggested in public comments. Thus, it is not feasible to further reduce construction-related
NOx emissions. Accordingly, as with construction emissions of NOx, this cumulative air quality
impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
Biological Resources
Impacts to Santa Ana Sucker
Finding: The project will eventually divert up to 6 MGD from the Santa Ana River, which is
designated as critical habitat and occupied by the threatened Santa Ana sucker. Even though the
quantifiable effect of this diversion can be deemed comparatively small, because of the heavy
existing stressors on the SAS and its habitat, even a small incremental impact is properly deemed
significant in this context. The same conclusion applies to project alternative 5, described herein
and in the EIR, because that alternative would also have an incremental impact that, in this
context, is properly deemed significant, even though that alternative involves a smaller diversion
from the Santa Ana River. As it is not feasible to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant
level, the impact is considered significant and unavoidable. This significant and unavoidable
impact is both a project specific impact and a cumulative impact.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 36 of 51
Facts in Support of Finding: A key purpose of the proposed project is production and use of a
local supply of tertiary treated wastewater. As a result, less water will be discharged to the Santa
Ana River, thus reducing SAR flows. Due to the highly stressed status of the Santa Ana sucker
and its habitat, a reduction in Santa Ana River flows is properly deemed significant.
Valley District has proposed a robust mitigation plan (Mitigation Measure BIO-3) to ameliorate
this significant impact by addressing a host of physical and biological factors, other than river
flows, that have been adversely affecting the overall fitness and long-term survival of the SAS
population in the Santa Ana River. By addressing these factors rather than focusing on flows
alone, Valley District intends to broadly reduce pressure on the species, thus charting a course
towards species recovery. However, given the current ecological conditions for the Santa Ana
sucker, Valley District cannot conclude that its mitigation strategy, no matter how robust, will
fully avoid or rectify the adverse impact of reduced river flows and associated habitat loss.
Valley District will attempt to ameliorate the impacts of the proposed project’s reduction of
flows by improving other strategic habitat variables, but cannot assume that improving those
other habitat variables will fully mitigate impacts related to flow reductions.
In other words, while Valley District has proposed a comprehensive mitigation strategy that has
the support of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the impact to the SAS will remain significant
and unavoidable. It is not feasible to mitigate this impact to less-than-significant levels under the
conservative approach Valley District has adopted for the analysis of SAS impacts, because
doing so would involve a watershed-wide, multi-pronged, approach to conservation of the
species that addresses baseline conditions currently limiting the health, abundance, and
distribution of the species; including but not limited to, lack of redundant spawning and refugia
tributaries, physiological stressors such as pollution and water temperature, highly abundant
predator populations throughout the entire Santa Ana River, off-road vehicular traffic through
occupied stream reaches, large streamside homeless encampments, and barriers to fish migration
throughout the system to promote genetic diversity. These issues have put stress on the sucker
populations and its habitat for decades. Valley District has neither the funds nor the authority to
impose or manage that level of mitigation. Furthermore, such a watershed-wide mitigation
obligation would far exceed the proportional contribution of the project to stress on the SAS,
which is all that Valley District is required to mitigate under CEQA. Population-level
improvement must be accomplished in partnership with many local and federal agencies that
have the ability to coordinate both authority and funding opportunities in order to achieve
maximum conservation value. Valley District fully supports such an approach to recovery of the
SAS, which is precisely why it is fully committed to the Upper SAR HCP and anticipates the
participation of local and regional agencies that must address SAS impacts.
As it is not feasible to mitigate the impacts of reduced flows to less-than-significant levels, this
impact is considered significant and unavoidable on both a project-specific and cumulative
level.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 37 of 51
Noise
Temporary Construction Noise
Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible
mitigation measures to reduce construction noise to less-than-significant levels during the entire
construction period. In addition, the project alternatives that would fulfill the project objectives,
described herein and in the EIR, would result in similar construction activities and thus would
not reduce or avoid the project’s construction-related noise impacts. Therefore, the construction-
related noise impacts associated with the proposed project is considered significant and
unavoidable.
Facts in Support of Finding: Construction of the project or any of the project alternatives would
result in a substantial (albeit temporary) increase in noise during the construction period. This
noise impact is considered significant. Valley District has adopted mitigation measure NOISE-1
to reduce this impact, but even with this measure in place noise levels associated with
construction would not be reduced below the applicable threshold of significance. It is not
feasible to further reduce construction-related noise emissions given existing limitations of
available noise-control devices and construction strategies, and so this noise impact is considered
significant and unavoidable.
Population, Housing, and Environmental Justice
Removal of an Obstacle to Growth
Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible
mitigation measures to reduce the project’s effect on growth to less-than-significant levels, and
there is no alternative that meets the project objectives and also avoids this impact. Therefore,
the project’s impact on growth is considered significant and unavoidable.
Facts in Support of Finding: A primary purpose of the project is to treat and reuse wastewater
generated in EVWD’s service area. Construction of a new wastewater treatment plant will
necessarily remove an obstacle to growth because it will expand the regional capacity for
wastewater treatment. In addition, the groundwater recharge component of the project could also
support future growth. Because the project will remove an obstacle to growth, this impact is
considered significant. Put another way, the proposed project will accommodate future growth,
but will not induce growth beyond that planned for in local General Plans. It is not feasible to
mitigate this impact because Valley District does not have the authority to approve or limit
growth and because the growth that will be accommodated is growth that has already been
approved in various general plans. There are no mitigation measures that were suggested that
would reduce this impact to a less than significant level; accordingly, this impact is considered
significant and unavoidable.
The EVWD Board finds, based on the EIR and the entire record, that the EIR’s conclusions
regarding the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts are correct. Further, the EVWD
Board finds, based on the EIR and the entire record, there are no additional feasible mitigation
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 38 of 51
measures within the power of EVWD that would substantially lessen or avoid any significant and
unavoidable impact of the project.
F. Findings Regarding Alternatives
The range of alternatives evaluated in the EIR included only those alternatives necessary to
permit a reasoned choice (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f]). As directed by CEQA, the
alternatives were focused on feasible alternatives that would reduce or avoid significant
environmental impacts associated with the project. Alternatives considered in an EIR need to
attain most of the project objectives in order to be considered feasible.
Valley District’s consideration of a broad range of alternatives to the SNRC project is described
below. Alternatives that were considered but found to be infeasible prior to the EIR are described
first. Second, the alternatives evaluated in the EIR are described and their associated
environmental impacts are summarized. The reasoning behind rejection of each of the evaluated
alternatives is provided.
The EVWD Board finds, based on the EIR and the entire record, that the EIR’s description,
discussion, reasoning and conclusions regarding alternatives are correct. Further, the EVWD
Board finds, based on the EIR and the entire record, there are no additional feasible alternatives
within the power of EVWD that would substantially lessen or avoid any significant and
unavoidable impact of the project.
1. Alternatives Considered and Dismissed from Further Consideration
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) provides that an EIR “should also identify any alternatives
that were considered by the lead agency but rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and
briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination.” The following
discussion describes alternatives that were considered but not evaluated in detail in the EIR.
EVWD Headquarters Alternative
The EVWD Headquarters Alternative would construct the SNRC at the EVWD Headquarters on
an undeveloped parcel south of the Headquarters building. The southern parcel has sloping
terrain with native undisturbed vegetation and boulder outcroppings. The parcel is within close
proximity to several existing and planned residential communities, including the proposed Arnott
Ranch Development which is directly to the northwest of the EVWD Headquarters. The site is
approximately 400 to 600 feet higher than the majority of the EVWD service area. Therefore,
this site would require pumping raw sewage a long distance up hill, significantly increasing
energy usage and risk of spills. For these reasons, the EVWD Headquarters Alternative was
rejected for further consideration as infeasible.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 39 of 51
Flood Control District Parcel Alternative
This alternative would construct the SNRC at a parcel owned by the SBCFCD. The parcel is
located at the northeast corner of the intersection of SR-210 and 5th Street. The southeast portion
of the parcel is approximately 13 acres. This parcel is located in a heavily traveled area near the
5th Street exit off of SR-210. Additionally, Greenspot Village and Marketplace is a proposed
major development east of the flood control district parcel. Due to the elevation of the site,
surrounding commercial development, and ownership of the parcel, the site was rejected from
further consideration.
Recharge Site Alternative
The use of the Santa Ana River Spreading Grounds and Mill Creek Spreading Grounds were
considered and determined not to be feasible since they are located too far from the proposed
SNRC facility and too high in elevation. The energy requirements to convey treated water to the
basins would make the alternative infeasible. In addition, impacts to natural habitats and to the
existing stormwater recharge operations conducted by the San Bernardino Valley Water
Conservation District would make the alternative infeasible.
Expanded Trunk Sewer Alternative
The SNRC is proposed to accommodate existing and future wastewater flows within the EVWD
service area. Valley District considered an alternative to constructing a new wastewater
treatment plant that would involve expanding the trunk sewer connecting EVWD collection
system to the SBWRP. The Expanded Trunk Sewer Alternative would expand the diameter of
the existing trunk sewer leading to the SBWRP. The sewer expansion would require open trench
construction within city streets to convey existing and future wastewater flows to the SBWRP.
Impacts of pipeline installation would be greater than the proposed project due to the size of the
pipe and depth requirements of the gravity fed sewer. Once installed, none of the operational
effects of the proposed project would occur. The Expanded Trunk Sewer Alternative was
rejected for failing to meet the project objectives of regional water supply benefits
2. Alternatives Considered in the EIR
In total, the EIR considered three variations of the proposed project (“Recharge Alternatives”)
and five Project alternatives, including the No Project Alternative.
Recharge Alternatives
The subsections of Chapter 3 of the DEIR include evaluations of three treated water conveyance
system alternatives and their potential impacts on various resource areas. One alternative would
discharge treated water into City Creek, one would discharge treated water into Redlands Basins,
and one would convey treated water to the East Twin Creek Spreading Grounds. The East Twin
Creek Spreading Grounds would be the farthest and highest in elevation, requiring higher energy
usage. Discharge to City Creek would create riparian and aquatic habitat within City Creek.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 40 of 51
However, the City Creek conveyance alignments would require crossing SR-210, increasing
installation difficulty. The DEIR identifies multiple alignments to reach City Creek from the
SNRC, but each alternative would require crossing flood control facilities and SR-210. The
Redlands Basins alternative would require approval from the City of Redlands since the basins
would be shared with the City’s discharge.
Each of the conveyance and discharge alternatives would require open trench construction within
city streets, but in differing locations. Each of the alternatives would result in groundwater
replenishment in the Bunker Hill groundwater basin. Each of the discharge locations will require
obtaining a discharge permit from the RWQCB. Discharge to City Creek will require an NPDES
permit since the creek is a Waters of the United States. Each of the treated water conveyance
system alternatives would meet all of the project objectives, and none of the treated water
conveyance alternatives would avoid a significant impact resulting from the proposed project.
Alternative 1: No-Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative represents a “no build” scenario in which the proposed project would
not be constructed or operated. It assumes that the proposed SNRC, treated water conveyance
pipeline system and sewage collection facilities along with other elements of the project would
not be implemented and no project components would be constructed. Under the No Project
Alternative, EVWD would continue to convey wastewater to the City of San Bernardino for
secondary treatment at SBWRP which in turn sends it for tertiary treatment at the RIX Facility
which discharges to the Santa Ana River. There would be no increase in the use of recycled
water to solve regional water supply challenges and there would be no use of recycled water for
multiple beneficial uses within the upper Santa Ana River watershed. The No Project Alternative
would not provide an opportunity to increase replenishment of the Bunker Hill groundwater
basin. Additionally, there would be no increase in the operational flexibility within the San
Bernardino Valley region by advancing the integrated recycled water management objectives of
the region.
The No Project Alternative would avoid each of the significant impacts of the project but would
not meet any of the project objectives. In addition, under this Alternative, future wastewater
treatment needs would not be met, resulting in a new significant and unavoidable impact to
public utilities.
Alternative 2: Sterling Property
The SNRC Location at the Sterling Property would construct the SNRC at a parcel located west
of SR-210 near the intersection of Sterling Avenue and 5th Street in the City of San Bernardino.
The 22-acre site is undeveloped and characterized by low lying shrubs and grasses. The
surrounding areas are zoned for commercial and light industrial, and existing surrounding land
uses consist of the SBIA located directly to the south, and commercial and low density
residential land uses to the north, east and west. The adjacent parcels to the north and west are
undeveloped. There is an SBIA flight easement that crosses the site in a northwest/southeast
direction on the west parcel.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 41 of 51
The Sterling Property Project Alternative would meet all of the project objectives but would not
reduce any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project.
Alternative 3: Reduced Treatment Capacity
The Reduced Capacity Treatment Plant Alternative would construct the SNRC similar to the
proposed project, but it would be sized to accommodate 6 MGD rather than 10 MGD. Each of
the other project components would be similar to the proposed project including the collection
system modifications, treated water conveyance system, SAR pipeline, and supplemental water
facilities.
The Reduced Treatment Capacity Project Alternative would meet all of the project objectives but
would not reduce any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project.
Alternative 4: Plunge Creek Basins
The Plunge Creek Basins Alternative would construct a treated water conveyance system to
recharge basins to be constructed near the confluence of Plunge Creek and the SAR. Under this
Alternative, each of the other components would be constructed similar to the proposed project
including the SNRC, collection system modifications, SAR pipeline, and supplemental water
facilities. The Plunge Creek Basins would be located in an area proposed by the SBCFCD for
new flood control basins. A pipeline from the SNRC would be installed within Greenspot Road
eastward to Church Street and south to the new basins. The Plunge Creek Basins would be
constructed either by Valley District or SBCFCD.
The Plunge Creek Basins Project Alternative would meet all of the project objectives but would
not reduce any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project.
Alternative 5: Reduced Diversion
The Reduced Diversion Alternative would construct the SNRC, collection system modifications,
and treated water conveyance system similar to the proposed project, but would return 3 MGD at
all times to the RIX discharge point through the Santa Ana River pipeline. The Treatment
Facility would have the same 10 MGD capacity, but would produce 3 MGD less recycled water
for groundwater replenishment.
Alternative 5 would meet the project objectives but to a lesser degree since less recycled water
would be available for groundwater replenishment. The potential quantifiable significant impact
to Santa Ana sucker through habitat modifications would occur at a reduced scale since only 3
MGD of flow would be diverted. However, Alternative 5 would not avoid any of the significant
and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project, primarily because it would still result in
approximately a 10% reduction in the Santa Ana River flow below the RIX facility (as noted in
the EIR, the reduced discharge study (ESA 2015b) concluded that a diversion of 6 MGD from
the Santa Ana River at the RIX discharge would reduce total flows by 18-21%, and so a 3 MGD
reduction would reduce flows by approximately 10%), which would produce a significant
incremental impact to an already-stressed Santa Ana River aquatic habitat with reduced
ecological function. Alternative 5 would meet the water supply and groundwater replenishment
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 42 of 51
objectives of the project but to a lesser degree. As a result Alternative 5 would not produce as
many benefits related to the treatment and reuse of locally produced wastewater to meet local
needs.
3. The Environmentally Superior Alternative
Section 15126.6(e) of the CEQA Guidelines requires the lead agency to identify which of the
alternatives other than the no-project alternative is environmentally superior. The EIR at Chapter
6.4 concludes that the proposed project is the environmentally superior alternative. Alternatives
2, 3, 4, and 5 are not environmentally superior because they would not result in any meaningful
reduction in environmental impacts compared to the proposed project. Alternative 5 would
divert 3 MGD less from the Santa Ana River than the proposed project, which represents
approximately 10% of the total flow of the Santa Ana River below the RIX facility. Under the
methodology Valley District has adopted for determining significance to the Santa Ana sucker,
Alternative 5 would therefore still result in significant and unavoidable Santa Ana sucker
impacts because like the proposed project it would have an incremental adverse impact on
already stressed Santa Ana sucker habitat. The benefits of a new local water supply, including
the benefits of groundwater recharge and reduced reliance on imported water supplies, would be
reduced with Alternative 5. Further, as the full suite of mitigation measures, particularly the
HMMP, set forth in the EIR is tied to the impacts of the proposed project, it is reasonable to
conclude that an alternative with fewer quantifiable impacts would not result in mitigation
activities on the same scale as the proposed project.
Two commenters questioned the EIR’s conclusion that the proposed project is the
environmentally superior alternative. Valley District has considered the comments and does not
find them persuasive, as they appear to stem from a misunderstanding of the importance of Santa
Ana River flows, the project’s water supply objectives, and the proposed mitigation measures.
The Santa Ana sucker needs water to survive, but the USFWS – the agency with primary
responsibility for protecting the Santa Ana sucker – has noted that the volume of flow in the
Santa Ana River is not the only factor that affects the long-term viability of the sucker in the
Santa Ana River watershed. Thus, even a 3 MGD diversion from the Santa Ana River – which
represents approximately 10% of the flow below the RIX facility, can be expected to result in
significant and unavoidable impacts to the sucker. In other words, in light of the stressed nature
of the system, Valley District cannot conclude that halving the amount of the diversion from the
Santa Ana River will also halve the impacts. As a consequence, the mitigation strategy
proposed in connection with the SNRC project is designed to address a suite of non-flow factors
that with management will strategically improve habitat conditions (i.e. availability of spawning
substrate, water temperatures, predation) that are believed to currently limit the health and
abundance of the population such that the overall ecological function of the existing habitat will
be improved and Santa Ana sucker and provide significant conservation benefit to the species.
In light of the potential impacts of even a small diversion from the stressed Santa Ana River, the
value of new water supplies of up to 6 MGD, and the benefits expected from the mitigation
measures that will be implemented if the proposed project is approved, the EVWD Board finds
that the EIR’s conclusion regarding the environmentally superior alternative is correct.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 43 of 51
G. Additional Findings
1. Certification of the EIR
In accordance with CEQA, EVWD and its Board have considered the effects of the project on
the environment, as shown in the DEIR, FEIR, and the whole of the administrative record, prior
to taking any action to approve one or more of the project sites. The FEIR was released for
public review and presented to the EVWD Board on March 4, 2016, and was the subject of a
Valley District workshop, which EVWD attended, on March 10, 2016. On March 15, 2016,
Valley District, the lead agency for the SNRC project, certified that the EIR was prepared and
completed in compliance with CEQA, and adopted CEQA Findings of Fact, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Sterling
Natural Resource Center Project. The EVWD Board now certifies that it has reviewed and
considered the DEIR and FEIR and the information relating to the environmental impacts of the
proposed project contained in those documents and that the EIR has been prepared and
completed in compliance with CEQA. By adopting these Findings, the EVWD Board ratifies
and adopts the conclusions of the FEIR as set forth in these Findings, except where such
conclusions are specifically modified by these Findings. The FEIR and these Findings represent
the independent judgment and analysis of the EVWD Board.
2. Changes to the DEIR; No Need to Recirculate
In the course of responding to comments received during the public review and comment period
on the DEIR, certain portions of the DEIR have been modified and new information has been
added for further clarification. None of this information has revealed the existence of: (1) a
significant new environmental impact that would result from the project or an adopted mitigation
measure; (2) a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact; (3) a feasible
project alternative or mitigation measure not adopted that is considerably different from others
analyzed in the DEIR that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the
project; or (4) information that indicates that the public was deprived of a meaningful
opportunity to review and comment on the DEIR.
Consequently, the EVWD Board finds that the amplifications and clarifications made to the
DEIR in the FEIR do not collectively or individually constitute significant new information
within the meaning of Public Resources Code §21092.1 and CEQA Guidelines §15088.5.
Recirculation of the DEIR or any portion thereof, is therefore not required.
In addition, the EVWD Board finds that none of the three conditions set forth in Section 15052
of the CEQA Guidelines are present.
3. Evidentiary Basis for Findings
These Findings are based upon substantial evidence in the entire record of Valley District, which
is now before EVWD. The references to the DEIR and FEIR set forth in these Findings are for
ease of reference and are not intended to provide an exhaustive list of the evidence relied upon
for these Findings.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 44 of 51
H. Adoption of Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program
1. Mitigation Measures Adopted
Except as otherwise noted, the mitigation measures herein referenced are those identified in the
FEIR and adopted by Valley District and EVWD as set forth in the MMRP.
2. Impact After Implementation of Mitigation Measures.
Except as otherwise stated in these Findings, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15092, the
EVWD Board finds that environmental effects of the project will not be significant or will be
mitigated to a less-than-significant level by the adopted mitigation measures. Valley District has
substantially lessened or eliminated all significant environmental effects where feasible. The
EVWD Board has determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment that are
found to be unavoidable under CEQA Guidelines §15091 are acceptable due to overriding
considerations as described in CEQA Guidelines §15093. These overriding considerations
consist of specific environmental, economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of
the project, which justify approval of the project and outweigh the unavoidable adverse
environmental effects of the project, as more fully stated in Section II (Statement of Overriding
Considerations). Except as otherwise stated in these Findings, the EVWD Board finds that the
mitigation measures incorporated into and imposed upon the project will not have new
significant environmental impacts that were not analyzed in the EIR.
3. Relationship of Findings and MMRP to the FEIR
These Findings and the MMRP are intended to summarize and describe the contents and
conclusions of the DEIR and FEIR for policymakers and the public. For purposes of clarity,
these impacts and mitigation measures may be worded differently from the provisions in the
FEIR and/or some provisions may be combined. Nonetheless, Valley District and EVWD will
implement all measures contained in the FEIR. In the event that there is any inconsistency
between the descriptions of mitigation measures in these Findings or the MMRP and the FEIR,
Valley District and EVWD will implement the measures as they are described in the FEIR. In
the event a mitigation measure recommended in the FEIR has inadvertently been omitted from
these Findings or from the MMRP, such a mitigation measure is hereby adopted and
incorporated in the Findings and/or MMRP as applicable.
II. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project, and authorizes a
public agency to approve a project with significant and unavoidable environmental impacts if it
concludes that such impacts are acceptable because they are outweighed by the benefits of the
project.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 45 of 51
Consistent with California Public Resources Code section 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15093 and 15096, Valley District and EVWD have made a good-faith effort to
eliminate, minimize, and render less-than-significant all potentially significant adverse impacts
that may result from the proposed project through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures.
Despite this effort, the EVWD Board concludes that the proposed project is likely to result in
significant and adverse impacts to aquatic biological resources, among other effects. However,
after considering the Sterling Natural Resource Center EIR and the entire administrative record
and weighing the proposed Project’s benefits against its potential environmental impacts, the
EVWD Board concludes that the benefits of the proposed project outweigh its potential
significant and unavoidable adverse environmental impacts.
In light of the project’s water supply and proposed habitat benefits, Valley District and EVWD
propose to approve and carry out the project despite the fact that it is not possible to feasibly
mitigate all of the project’s potential adverse impacts to less-than-significant levels. Drought,
limits on imported water, and cutbacks in Colorado River supplies all increase the need to
develop locally-produced reliable water supplies like the supplies that would be generated as a
result of the project. The State Water Resources Control Board and other water districts have
championed the need for the indirect potable reuse of tertiary treated wastewater for conjunctive
use projects like the proposed project as a way to meet these needs. At the same time, water
agencies in the region must not disregard the impacts their projects may have on instream flows
and the resulting effects on sensitive species like the Santa Ana sucker. Balancing these
competing needs for water, Valley District has endeavored to develop a mitigation strategy that
will result in numerous habitat improvements that will benefit aquatic species and, in particular,
chart a course towards recovery of the Santa Ana sucker. Although the impacts to the Santa Ana
sucker cannot be fully mitigated, Valley District and EVWD, with the support of the USFWS,
have concluded that this approach will allow it to reap the benefits of the project while
ameliorating, to the greatest extent feasible, the project’s impacts on the Santa Ana sucker and
helping to assure a reliable water supply for the ratepayers of Valley District and EVWD.
A. Impacts of the Project
The EIR identified numerous potentially significant but mitigatable impacts, and Valley District
and EVWD have adopted mitigation measures that will reduce those impacts to less-than-
significant levels.
However, the EIR also identified five impacts that will remain significant after the
implementation of all available and feasible mitigation measures:
The project-specific impact of construction-related NOx emissions.
The cumulative impact of construction-related NOx emissions.
The impact to the federally-listed Santa Ana sucker resulting from reducing Santa Ana
River flows.
The impact of construction-related noise.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 46 of 51
The impact of removing an obstacle to growth.
These five impacts are significant, unavoidable impacts of the SNRC project.
B. Mitigation Measures
The mitigation measures incorporated into the EIR and the MMRP demonstrate a commitment
by Valley District and EVWD to avoid, minimize, and compensate for environmental impacts of
the Project. Mitigation measures incorporated to specifically address the impacts that have been
deemed significant and unavoidable include the following:
Mitigation Measure AIR-1: For off-road construction equipment greater than 50 HP, all engines
shall be certified as USEPA Tier 3 at a minimum and Tier 4 where available.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3: The following measures will reduce potential project-related impacts
to avoid, minimize, and compensate for impacts to Santa Ana sucker while contributing to the
long-term conservation of the species.
a. The diversion of wastewater flow to the new SNRC shall not occur until either the
Upper Santa Ana HCP has been fully executed by the USFWS and CDFW or
Valley District’s SAS HMMP has been approved by the USFWS and CDFW.
b. Valley District will be a signatory to the Upper SAR HCP that will include the
proposed project as a covered activity. The HCP will include a menu of projects
to be implemented by the signatory agencies that will create habitat, restore
habitat, and establish self-sustaining populations in the watershed. The HCP will
be approved by the CDFW and USFWS.
c. In the event that the Upper Santa Ana River HCP is not approved in time to meet
the project schedule, Valley District shall prepare and implement a SAS Habitat
Monitoring and Management Plan (HMMP) that identifies habitat improvement
actions, implementation methods, monitoring, and maintenance methods. The
HMMP will consist of measures listed below to offset direct and indirect impacts
to the Santa Ana sucker and its habitat resulting from the loss of 6 MGD of
discharged water. The HMMP will be implemented by a contracted, qualified and
permitted entity such as the Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation District
RCRCD) in coordination with the USFWS and CDFW. The HMMP will identify
the goals and performance criteria of each conservation measure and will identify
annual reporting and work forecasting requirements. The HMMP will be
approved by the USFWS and CDFW under their authority to enforce the federal
and state Endangered Species Acts. The proposed diversion of 6 MGD from the
RIX discharge will not occur until the HMMP has been approved by USFWS and
CDFW. The HMMP will include the following elements:
a. SAS-1: Microhabitat Enhancements. The HMMP will identify
microhabitat enhancements within the upstream reach of the affected river
segment using natural materials to increase scour and pool formation. This
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 47 of 51
could include placement of large boulders and/or large woody debris to
increase velocity of flow and gravel bar patches as well as deep pool
refugia areas.
b. SAS-2: Aquatic Predator Control Program. The HMMP will include an
Aquatic Predator Control Program to be implemented within the upstream
reach of the affected river segment that will target and remove exotic fish,
amphibians, and reptiles immediately prior to the SAS spawning season.
c. SAS-3: Exotic Weed Management Program. The HMMP will include an
Exotic Weed Management Program targeting the removal of non-native
species such as tamarisk, castor bean, tree of heaven, etc. The HMMP will
include an annual maintenance and performance goal for non-native plant
removal within the upper reach of the affected river segment.
d. SAS-4: High Flow Pulse Events. The HMMP will identify means to create
high flow pulse events as needed based on substrate conditions, up to 2
times per year. The high flow pulse events would be implemented through
a cooperative agreement with the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water
Department.
e. SAS-5: Supplemental Water. Valley District will increase habitat
availability in Rialto Channel during the summer months by providing
cool supplemental water from nearby groundwater sources to lower the
water temperature in this tributary. Supplemental water will be added to
the Rialto Channel when water temperatures reach 85 degrees.
Supplemental water could be pumped groundwater or another water
source. The discharge into the Rialto Drain will require a discharge permit
from the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
f. SAS-6: Upper Watershed SAS Population Establishment. The HMMP will
outline a plan for establishing a population of Santa Ana sucker in City
Creek, or other suitable watershed tributary, in coordination with the
Wildlife Agencies. The HMMP will identify measures to directly increase
the number of Santa Ana sucker in the SAR population, increase the
amount of suitable and occupied habitat in this watershed, and distribute
the risk of a catastrophic event between multiple locations. The HMMP
will identify the goals and success criteria of the establishment plan and
will identify the amount of financial assistance to be provided by Valley
District for the regionally beneficial population establishment program.
g. SAS-7: Monitoring. The HMMP will outline a monitoring program to
collect hydrology data in the segment of river between the RIX discharge
and Mission Boulevard. The data will include flow velocity and depth.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 48 of 51
Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: Valley District shall implement the following measures during
construction:
Include design measures necessary to reduce construction noise levels to comply with
local noise ordinances. These measures may include noise barriers, curtains, or shields.
Place noise-generating construction activities (e.g., operation of compressors and
generators, cement mixing, general truck idling) away from the nearest noise-sensitive
land uses.
Contiguous properties shall be notified in advance of construction activities. A contact
name and number shall be provided to contiguous properties to report excessive
construction noise.
C. Benefits of the Project
1. The Project Will Serve Existing and Future Wastewater Treatment Needs Within
the East Valley Water District Service Area
a. Existing Needs
The proposed SNRC would have a capacity of 10 million gallons per day, enough to serve the
wastewater treatment needs of approximately 167,000 people. By treating the wastewater of the
current and future planned residents of the EVWD service area, the project will reduce demand
upon existing wastewater treatment plants, and, more importantly, will increase local control
over the costs of wastewater treatment and locally-available recycled water, as well as the use of
that water.
b. Future Needs
Compared to 2015, the population of San Bernardino Valley region is expected to increase by
approximately 94,352 people by the year 2020, and by approximately 288,652 people by the year
2035. EVWD expects the population in its service area to increase by approximately 24,000
people by 2020, and by approximately 41,000 people by 2035, a 40% increase.
Increases in population necessarily increase the need for wastewater treatment. The proposed
SNRC would increase the total wastewater treatment capacity in the San Bernardino Valley by
up to 10 million gallons per day. The ability to treat 10 MGD at the SNRC will accommodate
the expected population growth, eliminating the need to construct other facilities or increase the
capacity of existing facilities to meet the needs of the growing population. Neither Valley
District nor EVWD has authority as a land-use planning agency to control growth in the region;
those decisions are the responsibility of land-use agencies. Valley District and EVWD, by
contrast, have the responsibility to ensure that there are sufficient facilities to meet the needs of
expected growth. This project accommodates expected growth rather than encouraging new
growth. Nonetheless, Valley District and EVWD are treating the effects of growth associated
with the project as a significant and unavoidable adverse impact on the environment.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 49 of 51
By accommodating the wastewater treatment needs associated with the expected population
growth, though, the SNRC project will provide a valuable economic benefit to the San
Bernardino Valley Region by ensuring population growth is not unduly constrained. Combined
with the improved local control over wastewater treatment costs, the overall effect will be a
considerable economic benefit to the region.
2. The Project Will Result in Increased Local Availability and Use of Recycled
Water
a. The Project Will Create New Opportunities for Groundwater Replenishment
Groundwater is a significant component of the local water supply in the San Bernardino Valley
region. Reliance on groundwater typically increases when surface water supplies are short, and
decreases when surface water supplies are ample. However, “natural” groundwater recharge
during periods of higher surface flows is not always enough to replenish aquifers that are
depleted during dry periods. “Artificial” groundwater recharge, involving spreading surface
water in recharge areas so that it can percolate into the ground and replenish the aquifer, has
become an important strategy in regions that depend heavily on groundwater supplies.
The SNRC project will make a new source of recycled water that can be used to artificially
replenish groundwater in the region. Increased groundwater replenishment will result in benefits
by not only enhancing groundwater supplies, but by helping to avoid negative consequences of
groundwater use, such as land subsidence.
b. Water Produced by the Project Can Be Used to Meet Regional Water Supply
Needs
Currently, water demand in the San Bernardino Valley region is met with groundwater, imported
or wholesale water, and local surface water. The availability of these particular supplies is not
necessarily expected to increase in correlation with expected increased water demand that will
occur as population in the region grows, meaning that current supplies may fall short of demand
in the future. The SNRC project involves the recycling and reuse of water that has already been
used, thus maximizing water use efficiency in the region and enabling Valley District to meet
regional water supply needs with less reliance on increasing the regional demand for new sources
of groundwater, imported water, or local surface water supplies. Meeting the local water
demands of EVWD with local recycled water benefits not only the water users, but also the
existing supplies: every gallon of recycled water used in the region means one less gallon that
must be pumped from the ground, imported from other regions, or diverted from local surface
streams.
c. The Availability of New Recycled Water Will Increase Local Operational
Flexibility With Respect to Water Supplies
The project will make available a new source of recycled water that can be used in conjunction
with other sources to give EVWD and Valley District greater operational flexibility in managing
the two districts’ water supplies. When agencies like Valley District and EVWD have access to
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 50 of 51
a variety of water sources, they are better able to adapt their operations to meet changing
circumstances, which improves water supply management over the long and short term and
maximizes the beneficial use of water supplies. The SNRC project will benefit both districts by
increasing their operational flexibility and allowing them to adapt to a wider array of water
supply situations.
3. Mitigation For the Project Will Strategically Improve Habitat Conditions for the
Benefit of the Santa Ana Sucker
A direct consequence of the Project is the need for Valley District and EVWD to mitigate
potential adverse impacts to the Santa Ana sucker (SAS). Valley District has endeavored to
construct a mitigation plan that would, to the extent feasible, eliminate or avoid any significant
impacts to the SAS but, in order to maintain a conservative approach to the environmental
analysis, has deemed the potential impacts to the SAS to be significant and unavoidable because
it cannot rule out the possibility that, despite Valley District’s mitigation efforts, reductions in
flows resulting from the project will adversely affect the SAS.
However, water flows of a certain volume are not the only factor that contributes to the health of
the SAS population. Consequently, the mitigation plan adopts a comprehensive, habitat-focused
approach that is intended to address specific factors that currently limit the health and abundance
of the population, thus improving the long-term resiliency of the sucker population in the Santa
Ana River.
The mitigation plan will involve, among other things, the establishment of a distinct SAS
population in a suitable upper watershed tributary to the Santa Ana River, increasing summer
habitat for the SAS in the Rialto Channel, creating linked microhabitats (deep pools, exposed
gravel substrate, and areas of faster water flows) for SAS adults, creating linked microhabitats
edge habitat, refugia) for SAS juveniles and young-of-the-year, provision of artificial pulse
flows to mimic natural high-water events that remove sand from the gravel bed, and management
of predator species to increase survival of eggs, larval fish, and young-of-the-year. The proposed
mitigation plan will not restore the lost flows, but it will nevertheless provide important benefits
to the fitness and long term viability of the SAS population. In other words, though Valley
District and EVWD do not discount the potential adverse impact the project may have as a result
of reduced Santa Ana River flows, both have concluded that the mitigation measures that will be
adopted in connection with approval of the Project will also provide important benefits to the
SAS and will support the long-term conservation of the species.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service, which has primary responsibility for managing and
protecting the SAS, supports this approach to mitigation despite the conclusion that the project
will result in significant impacts to the SAS. One of the key benefits of Valley District’s
approach to mitigation of impacts to the SAS is that it will provide a valuable model that other
water projects in the San Bernardino area can emulate in the future. By taking the first steps
towards an innovative and robust recovery plan for the SAS, Valley District and EVWD will
chart a new course towards recovery of the species and help shift the regional paradigm from one
characterized by conflict to one characterized by cooperation and a multi-front approach to
addressing the various factors that threaten the long-term survival of the species.
East Valley Water District’s Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Sterling Natural Resource Center
March 23, 2016
Page 51 of 51
D. Conclusion
The EVWD Board acknowledges that despite the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures,
approval of the project will result in significant adverse and unavoidable impacts to air quality
and noise levels during construction of the project, to growth inducement, and to the Santa Ana
sucker. However, for the foregoing reasons and based on the EIR and the entire administrative
record, the EVWD Board hereby determines that although the SNRC project will potentially
result in these significant and unavoidable impacts, when the impacts are balanced against the
project’s specific benefits, on the whole the benefits of the project outweigh the impacts and
warrant approval of the project. The EVWD Board further finds that each of the overriding
considerations set forth above constitutes a separate and independent basis for finding that the
benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, and warrants
approval of the project.
APPENDIX L
Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
CEQA Requirements
Section 15091(d) and Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines require a public agency to adopt a
program for monitoring or reporting on the changes it has required in the project or conditions of
approval to substantially lessen significant environmental effects. This MMRP summarizes the
mitigation commitments identified in the Sterling Natural Resource Center Project Final EIR
State Clearinghouse No. 2015101058). Mitigation measures are presented in the same order as
they occur in the Final EIR.
The columns in the MMRP table provide the following information:
Mitigation Measure(s): The action(s) that will be taken to reduce the impact to a less-
than-significant level.
Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action: The appropriate steps to
implement and document compliance with the mitigation measures.
Responsibility: The agency or private entity responsible for ensuring implementation of
the mitigation measure. However, until the mitigation measures are completed, Valley
District, as the CEQA Lead Agency, remains responsible for ensuring that
implementation of the mitigation measures occur in accordance with the MMRP (CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15097(a)).
Monitoring Schedule: The general schedule for conducting each task, either prior to
construction, during construction and/or after construction.
Sterling Natural Resource Center L-1 ESA / 150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
EXHIBIT 2"
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Aesthetics
AES-1: Aboveground buildings/structures associated with the proposed SNRC shall be
designed to be consistent with the aesthetic qualities of existing structures in the
surrounding area to minimize contrasting features.
Include mitigation measure in project design
specifications.
Valley District Before Construction
AES-2: During project design, a landscape plan shall be prepared for the SNRC that
restores disturbed areas and minimizes effects to local character. Valley District shall
implement and maintain the landscape plan.
Include mitigation measure in project design
specifications.
Perform site inspections to ensure mitigation is being
implemented during construction.
Valley District Before and During
Construction
Air Quality
AIR-1: For off-road construction equipment greater than 50 HP, all engines shall be
certified as USEPA Tier 3 at a minimum and Tier 4 where available.
Include mitigation measure in construction equipment
list.
Valley District,
Construction
Contractor
Before Construction
AIR-2: Valley District shall prepare and implement an Odor Impact Minimization Plan
that includes a monitoring and reporting plan. The plan shall include the following
elements at a minimum:
Identification of responsible parties
Description of odor control system design and performance standards
Odor control system operations plan
Identification of fence-line odor monitoring and reporting program
Achievable odor remediation actions and implementation protocol
Local community outreach program
Prepare Odor Impact Minimization Plan prior to project
implementation.
Retain reporting plan and monitoring logs in project file.
Valley District Before Construction
Biological Resources
BIO-1: Disturbance to Special-Status Plants. The following measures will reduce
potential project-related impacts to special-status plant species that may occur adjacent
to the project site within City Creek to a less than significant level. Potential project-
related impacts may result from the construction of the pipeline extension and discharge
structure within City Creek, Redlands Basins, and/or the East Twin Creek Spreading
Grounds.
a)Prior to the start of construction within City Creek, Redlands Basins, and/or the
East Twin Creek Spreading Grounds, a focused botanical survey will be
conducted to determine the presence/absence of any of the special-status species
with a moderate or high potential to occur. The focused botanical survey will be
conducted by a botanist or qualified biologist knowledgeable in the identification of
local special-status plant species, and according to accepted protocol outlined by
A qualified biologist will conduct pre-construction
botanical survey as defined.
Prepare documentation to record results of the pre-
construction survey.
If a special status plant species is detected, then
implement measures as appropriate.
If impact avoidance is not feasible, then implement
measures as appropriate. Prepare Biological
Assessment as suggested.
Perform construction site inspections to ensure
measures are implemented properly. An inspection log
Valley District,
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
Sterling Natural Resource Center L-2 ESA / 150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
the CNPS and/or CDFW.
b)If a special status plant species is discovered in a project impact area, informal
consultation with CDFW and/or USFWS will be required prior to the impact
occurring to develop an appropriate avoidance strategy. Depending on the
sensitivity of the species, relocation, site restoration, or other habitat improvement
actions may be an acceptable option to avoid significant impacts, as determined
through consultation with the resource agencies.
c)If impact avoidance of a state or federally-listed species is not feasible, Valley
District shall quantify the impacted acreage supporting state or federally-listed
plant species within the construction area and estimated perennial flow area and
prepare a Biological Assessment pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act and Section 2081 of the State Endangered Species Act. The
Biological Assessment shall quantify compensation requirements for affected
plants species. Valley District shall implement the conservation measures and
compensation requirements identified through consultation by USACE with both
CDFW and USFWS.
d)Permanent impacts to RAFSS habitat from construction and operation of the
discharge including within the City Creek channel resulting from perennial flow
shall require on-site replacement or off-site compensation at a ratio of at least 3:1
in consultation with CDFW and USFWS. Temporary impacts to RAFSS habitat
would be mitigated at a ratio of at least 1:1 in consultation with CDFW and
USFWS.
will be maintained to document results of site
inspections.
Retain copies of pre-construction survey documentation
and any subsequent reports in the project file.
Consult with USFWS and CDFW to prepare and
implement on-site or off-site compensation of 3:1 or 1:1
and mitigate impacts to RAFSS habitat.
BIO-2: Disturbance to Special-Status Wildlife. The following measures will reduce
potential project-related impacts to special-status wildlife species that may occur within
disturbed and native habitats, to a less than significant level. Potential project-related
impacts may result from construction of the SNRC, construction of the discharge
structures within City Creek and other discharge locations, and perennial discharges to
City Creek or other discharge locations.
a.Prior to the start of construction within City Creek or other discharge locations,
Valley District shall conduct focused surveys within the project impact areas to
determine if any state or federally-listed wildlife species (southwestern willow
flycatcher, coastal California gnatcatcher, San Bernardino kangaroo rat, and least
Bell’s vireo) are located within project impact areas. Focused surveys will be
conducted by a qualified and/or permitted biologist, following approved survey
protocol. Survey results will be forwarded to CDFW and USFWS. If state or
federally-listed species are determined to occur on the project site with the
potential to be impacted by the project, consultation with CDFW and/or USFWS
will be required.
b.If impact avoidance is not feasible, Valley District shall quantify the impacted
acreage supporting state or federally-listed wildlife species within the construction
area and estimated perennial flow area and prepare a Biological Assessment
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
A qualified biologist will conduct pre-construction
surveys for state or federally-listed wildlife species
southwestern willow flycatcher, coastal California
gnatcatcher, San Bernardino kangaroo rat, and least
Bell’s vireo) as defined.
A qualified biologist will conduct pre-construction survey
for burrowing owl as defined.
A qualified biologist will conduct pre-construction site
clearing survey for project impact area of natural habitat
within City Creek.
Prepare documentation to record results of all of the
pre-construction survey.
If a state or federally-listed species is detected, then
implement measures as appropriate. If impact
avoidance is not feasible, implement measures as
Valley District,
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
Sterling Natural Resource Center Project L-3 ESA /150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and Section 2081 of the
State Endangered Species Act. The Biological Assessment shall quantify
compensation requirements for affected wildlife species. Valley District shall
implement the conservation measures and compensation requirements identified
through consultation by USACE with both CDFW and USFWS.
c.Prior to the start of construction of the SNRC building and the recycled water
pipeline along 6th Street, focused burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted to
determine the presence/absence of burrowing owl adjacent to the project area.
The focused burrowing owl survey must be conducted by a qualified biologist and
following the survey guidelines included in the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing
Owl Mitigation (2012). If burrowing owl is observed within undeveloped habitat
within or immediately adjacent to the project impact area, avoidance/minimization
measures would be required such as establishing a suitable buffer around the nest
typically 500-feet) and monitoring during construction, or delaying construction
until after the nest is no longer active and the burrowing owls have left. However, if
burrowing owl avoidance is infeasible, a qualified biologist shall implement a
passive relocation program in accordance with the Example Components for
Burrowing Owl Artificial Burrow and Exclusion Plans of the CDFW 2012 Staff
Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW, 2012).
d.Prior to the start of construction within City Creek, pre-construction site clearing
surveys will be conducted of the project impact area within natural habitats. Any
special status ground-dwelling wildlife will be removed from the immediate impact
area and released in the nearby area.
e.Permanent impacts to RAFSS habitat from construction and operation of the
discharge including within City Creek channel resulting from perennial flow shall
require on-site replacement or off-site compensation at a ratio of at least 3:1 in
consultation with CDFW and USFWS. Temporary impacts to RAFSS habitat would
be mitigated at a ratio of at least 1:1 in consultation with CDFW and USFWS.
appropriate. Prepare Biological assessment as
suggested.
If a burrowing owl is detected, then implement
measures as appropriate. If burrowing owl avoidance is
not feasible, implement measures as appropriate.
If any special status ground-dwelling wildlife are
detected, removed immediately from impact area and
release to nearby area.
Perform construction site inspections to ensure
measures are implemented properly. An inspection log
will be maintained to document results of site
inspections.
Retain copies of both of the pre-construction surveys
documentation in the project file.
Consult with USFWS and CDFW to prepare and
implement on-site or off-site compensation of 3:1 or 1:1
and mitigate impacts to RAFSS habitat.
BIO-3: Disturbance to Santa Ana Sucker. The following measures will reduce potential
project-related impacts to avoid, minimize, and compensate for impacts to Santa Ana
sucker while contributing to the long-term conservation of the species.
a)The diversion of wastewater flow to the new SNRC shall not occur until either the
Upper Santa Ana HCP has been fully executed by the USFWS and CDFW or
Valley District’s SAS HMMP has been approved by the USFWS and CDFW.
b)The Valley District will be a signatory to the Upper SAR HCP that will include the
proposed project as a covered activity. The HCP will include a menu of projects to
be implemented by the signatory agencies that will create habitat, restore habitat,
and establish self-sustaining populations in the watershed. The HCP will be
approved by the CDFW and USFWS.
c)In the event that the Upper Santa Ana River HCP is not approved in time to meet
Verify the Upper Santa Ana HCP is executed and
approved before project construction begins.
If Upper Santa Ana HCP is not approved in time,
prepare and implement SAS HMMP.
A contracted and qualified entity will implement the
HMMP
Verify that the HMMP has been prepared and approved
by the applicable entities.
Verify that the agreement for the high pulse flow events
has been approved by the City of San Bernardino
Municipal Water Department.
Valley District Before and During
Construction and on-
going operations
Sterling Natural Resource Center L-4 ESA / 150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
the project schedule, Valley District shall prepare and implement a SAS Habitat
Monitoring and Management Plan (HMMP) that identifies habitat improvement
actions, implementation methods, monitoring, and maintenance methods. The
HMMP will consist of measures listed below to offset direct and indirect impacts to
the Santa Ana sucker and its habitat resulting from the loss of 6 MGD of
discharged water. The HMMP will be implemented by a contracted, qualified and
permitted entity such as the Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation District
RCRCD) in coordination with the USFWS and CDFW. The HMMP will identify the
goals and performance criteria of each conservation measure and will identify
annual reporting and work forecasting requirements. The HMMP will be approved
by the USFWS and CDFW under their authority to enforce the federal and state
Endangered Species Acts. The proposed diversion of 6 MGD from the RIX
discharge will not occur until the HMMP has been approved by USFWS and
CDFW. The HMMP will include the following elements.
SAS -1: Microhabitat Enhancements. The HMMP will identify microhabitat
enhancements within the upstream reach of the affected river segment using
natural materials to increase scour and pool formation. This could include
placement of large boulders and/or large woody debris to increase velocity of
flow and gravel bar patches as well as deep pool refugia areas.
SAS -2: Aquatic Predator Control Program. The HMMP will include an
Aquatic Predator Control Program to be implemented within the upstream
reach of the affected river segment that will target and remove exotic fish,
amphibians, and reptiles immediately prior to the SAS spawning season.
SAS -3: Exotic Weed Management Program. The HMMP will include an
Exotic Weed Management Program targeting the removal of non-native
species such as tamarisk, castor bean, tree of heaven, etc. The HMMP will
include an annual maintenance and performance goal for non-native plant
removal within the upper reach of the affected river segment.
SAS -4: High Flow Pulse Events. The HMMP will identify means to create
high flow pulse events as needed based on substrate conditions, up to 2 times
per year. The high flow pulse events would be implemented through a
cooperative agreement with the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water
Department.
SAS -5: Supplemental Water. Valley District will increase habitat availability in
Rialto Channel during the summer months by providing cool supplemental
water from nearby groundwater source to lower the water temperature in this
tributary. Supplemental water will be added to the Rialto Channel when water
temperatures reach 85 degrees. Supplemental water could be pumped
groundwater or other water source. The discharge into the Rialto Drain will
require a discharge permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
SAS -6: Upper Watershed SAS Population Establishment. The HMMP will
Verify that the discharge permit has been prepared and
approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
Perform construction site inspections to ensure
measures are implemented properly and the
construction contractor is complying with construction
limitations. An inspection log will be maintained to
document results of site inspections.
Retain copies of Upper Santa Ana HCP or SAS HMMP
documentation and construction site inspection logs in
the project file.
Sterling Natural Resource Center Project L-5 ESA /150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
outline a plan for establishing a population of Santa Ana sucker in City Creek,
or other suitable watershed tributary, in coordination with the Wildlife
Agencies. The HMMP will identify measures to directly increase the number of
Santa Ana sucker in the SAR population, increase the amount of suitable and
occupied habitat in this watershed, and distribute the risk of a catastrophic
event between multiple locations. The HMMP will identify the goals and
success criteria of the establishment plan and will identify the amount of
financial assistance to be provided by Valley District for the regionally-
beneficial population establishment program.
SAS -7: Monitoring. The HMMP will outline a monitoring program to collect
hydrology data in the segment of river between the RIX discharge and Mission
Boulevard. The data will include flow velocity and depth.
BIO-4: Construction Best Management Practices. The Contractor shall implement the
following Best Management Practices during construction of the pipeline and discharge
structure adjacent to and within City Creek to protect any adjacent sensitive natural
communities that provide habitat for special-status species.
a) The following water quality protection measures shall be implemented during
construction:
Stationary engines, such as compressors, generators, light plants, etc., shall
have drip pans beneath them to prevent any leakage from entering runoff or
receiving waters.
All construction equipment shall be inspected for leaks and maintained
regularly to avoid soil contamination. Leaks and smears of petroleum products
will be wiped clean prior to use.
Any grout waste or spills will be cleaned up immediately and disposed of off-
site.
Spill kits capable of containing hazardous spills will be stored on-site.
b) To prevent inadvertent entrapment of common and special-status wildlife during
construction, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two-feet
deep shall be covered with tarp, plywood or similar materials at the close of each
working day to prevent animals from being trapped. Ramps may be constructed of
earth fill or wooden planks within deep walled trenches to allow for animals to
escape, if necessary. Before such holes or trenches are backfilled, they should be
thoroughly inspected for trapped animals. If trapped wildlife are observed, escape
ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to allow escape.
All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures that are stored at a
construction site for one or more overnight periods should be thoroughly inspected
for burrowing owls and nesting birds before the pipe is subsequently buried,
capped, or otherwise used or moved.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
Conduct evaluation of project area for trapped animals
during construction. If trapped animals are found within
construction sites, then implement measures as
defined.
Perform construction site inspections to ensure
mitigation measures are implemented properly.
Retain copies of survey documentation and
construction site inspection logs in the project file.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
Sterling Natural Resource Center L-6 ESA / 150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
BIO-5: To minimize potential construction-related project impacts to avian species that
may be nesting on or immediately adjacent to the project area, the following measures
will reduce any potential impact to a less than significant level.
a. To avoid potential impacts to birds that may be nesting on or immediately adjacent
to the project area, construction of the project should avoid the general avian
breeding season of February through August.
b. If construction must occur during the general avian breeding season, a pre-
construction clearance survey shall be conducted within 30 days prior to the start
of construction, to determine if any active nests or sign of nesting activity is located
on or immediately adjacent to the project area, specifically at the proposed SNRC
location. An additional survey shall be conducted within 3 days prior to the
commencement of construction activities. If no nesting activity is observed during
the pre-construction survey, construction may commence without potential impacts
to nesting birds.
c. If an active nest is observed, a suitable buffer will be placed around the nest,
depending on sensitivity of the nesting species, and onsite monitoring may be
required during construction to ensure no disturbance or take of the nest occurs.
Construction may continue in other areas of the project and construction activities
may only encroach within the buffer at the discretion of the monitoring biologist.
The buffer will remain in place until the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no
longer considered active.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
If construction must occur during avian breeding
season, a qualified biologist will conduct pre-
construction clearance survey for nesting birds as
defined.
Prepare documentation to record results of the pre-
construction survey.
If nests are detected, then implement measures as
appropriate. Perform construction site inspections to
ensure measures are implemented properly. An
inspection log will be maintained to document results of
site inspections.
Retain copies of pre-construction survey documentation
and construction site inspection logs in the project file.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
Cultural Resources
CUL-1: Prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities, Valley District shall retain a
qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Standards for archaeology (U.S. Department of the Interior 2008) to carry out all
mitigation related to cultural resources. The qualified archaeologist shall conduct a
Phase I survey for all areas within the project impact area that have not received a
survey within the last five years, including treated conveyance pipeline corridors.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey shall be
completed for all sites within project area that have not
been surveyed within the last five years.
Perform site inspections to ensure construction
contractor is in compliance with any avoidance
measures or other mitigation requirements.
Retain copies of construction site inspection logs in the
project file.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
Sterling Natural Resource Center Project L-7 ESA /150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
CUL-2: Prior to start of ground-disturbing activities, the qualified archaeologist shall
conduct cultural resources sensitivity training for all construction personnel. Construction
personnel shall be informed of the types of archaeological resources that may be
encountered, and of the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an inadvertent
discovery of archaeological resources or human remains. Valley District shall ensure that
construction personnel are made available for and attend the training and retain
documentation demonstrating attendance.
Perform mitigation measure prior to construction.
Verify all construction personnel have gone through
training by retaining login records in project file.
Valley District;
construction
contractor
Before Construction
CUL-3: In the event of the unanticipated discovery of archaeological materials, Valley
District shall immediately cease all work activities within approximately 100 feet of the
discovery until it can be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist. Construction shall not
resume until the qualified archaeologist has conferred with Valley District on the
significance of the resource.
If it is determined that a discovered archaeological resource constitutes a historic
property under the NHPA or a historical or unique archaeological resource under CEQA,
avoidance and preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigation. Preservation
in place maintains the important relationship between artifacts and their archaeological
context and also serves to avoid conflict with traditional and religious values of groups
who may ascribe meaning to the resource. Preservation in place may be accomplished
by, but is not limited to, avoidance, incorporating the resource into open space, capping,
or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. In the event that
preservation in place is demonstrated to be infeasible and data recovery through
excavation is the only feasible mitigation available, a Treatment Plan shall be prepared
and implemented by a qualified archaeologist in consultation with Valley District that
provides for the adequate recovery of the scientifically consequential information
contained in the archaeological resource. Valley District shall consult with appropriate
Native American representatives in determining treatment for prehistoric or Native
American resources to ensure cultural values ascribed to the resource, beyond that
which is scientifically important, are considered.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
In the event that paleontological resources are
discovered, documentation of the assessment of the
significance of the find will be prepared and retained in
the project file
Perform site inspections to ensure compliance with
cultural sensitivity requirements. Retain inspection
forms in the project file.
Paleontological monitoring reports and logs will be
retained in project file.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
CUL-4: Paleontological resources monitoring shall be conducted for the proposed SNRC
in areas that are subject to excavations in excess of 15 feet below ground surface.
Paleontological monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor
QPM). The QPM, in consultation with the Valley District, may reduce or increase
monitoring based on observations of subsurface soil stratigraphy or other factors. If
construction or other project personnel discover any potential fossils during construction,
regardless of the depth of work, work at the discovery location shall cease within 50 feet
of the find until the QPM has assessed the discovery and made recommendations as to
the appropriate treatment.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
Retain copies of the paleontological monitoring report
and logs in the project file.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
Sterling Natural Resource Center L-8 ESA / 150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
CUL-5: If human remains are encountered, Valley District shall halt work within 100 feet
of the find and contact the San Bernardino County Coroner in accordance with PRC
Section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If the County Coroner
determines that the remains are Native American, the NAHC shall be notified in
accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, subdivision (c), and PRC
Section 5097.98 (as amended by Assembly Bill 2641). The NAHC shall designate a MLD
for the remains per PRC Section 5097.98. Until the landowner has conferred with the
MLD, Valley District shall ensure that the immediate vicinity where the discovery
occurred is not disturbed by further activity, is adequately protected according to
generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, and that further
activities take into account the possibility of multiple burials.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
Perform site inspections to ensure contractor is
following procedures outlined in this measure.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
During Construction
Hydrology and Water Quality
HYDRO-1: Valley District will prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to
ensure that the SNRC facility design complies with stormwater management goals of the
MS4.
Prepare the WQMP prior to project implementation.
Retain copies of the plan in the project file.
Retain copies of sampling and analyses conducted in
accordance with the WQMP in the project file.
Conduct site inspections in accordance with the WQMP
to ensure proper implementation of stormwater
management goals.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
HYDRO-2: Valley District shall prepare and implement a groundwater monitoring
program that includes installation of an array of groundwater monitoring wells sufficient
to characterize the effects of the discharge on local groundwater quality. If monitoring
shows that beneficial uses of the groundwater may become adversely affected by the
discharge, the monitoring program would require either modifications to treatment,
modify the well screened area by sealing the affected portion of the screen in the
impacted groundwater bearing zone, or compensation for adversely affected
groundwater wells through replacement of the affected well or through providing
replacement water.
Prepare the groundwater monitoring program prior to
project implementation.
Retain copies of the program report in the project file.
During plan implementation, retain copies of the
monitoring reports in the project file.
Implement suggested mitigation measure if monitoring
shows groundwater is adversely affected.
Valley District Before and During
Construction
HYDRO-3: The City Creek discharge structures shall be designed with velocity
dissipation features as needed to prevent scour at the point of discharge. The design
and location of these discharge facilities would be approved by the SBCFCD and
USACE to ensure that they do not impede high flow capacity.
Include mitigation measure in project design
specifications.
Retain specifications related to discharge facilities in the
project file.
Valley District Before Construction
Sterling Natural Resource Center Project L-9 ESA /150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
HYDRO-4: Valley District shall prepare a City Creek Channel Vegetation Management
Plan in coordination with SBCFCD and CDFW that outlines vegetation management
measures to minimize impacts to the flood control function within City Creek. The plan
will include periodic vegetation trimming to remove large trees that could impact flood
control facilities downstream. The plan will outline schedule, permitting and reporting
requirements.
Prepare Vegetation Management Plan prior to project
implementation.
Retain Vegetation Management Plan in the project file.
Valley District Before Construction
HYDRO-5: Valley District shall prepare an Operational Manual for the discharge to City
Creek that identifies when discharges would be conveyed to other discharge basins to
avoid contributing to flood flows in City Creek during peak flow periods.
Prepare Operational Manual prior to project
implementation.
Retain Operation Manual in the project file.
Valley District Before Construction
Noise
NOISE-1: Valley District shall implement the following measures during construction:
a) Include design measures necessary to reduce construction noise levels to comply
with local noise ordinances. These measures may include noise barriers, curtains,
or shields.
b) Place noise-generating construction activities (e.g., operation of compressors and
generators, cement mixing, general truck idling) away from the nearest noise-
sensitive land uses.
c) Contiguous properties shall be notified in advance of construction activities. A
contact name and number shall be provided to contiguous properties to report
excessive construction noise.
Include mitigation measure in project design
specifications and contractor specifications.
Perform site inspections to ensure contractor is in
compliance with noise mitigation measures.
Retain copies of inspection logs in the project file.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
NOISE-2: Noise-generating machinery at the proposed SNRC shall be enclosed within
structures that are designed with insulation sufficient to comply with applicable nighttime
noise standards at the facility fenceline.
Include mitigation measure in project design
specifications.
Valley District Before Construction
NOISE-3: Valley District shall establish a 24-hour Hot-Line to serve the local community.
Valley District shall ensure that neighbor concerns are investigated and addressed
immediately. The Hot-Line number shall be provided to the neighboring properties and
be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the facility.
Organize and employ staff members for Hot-Line
Record all calls and retain copies of records
Publicize Hot Line number to customers and general
public
Valley District Post Construction
Sterling Natural Resource Center L-10 ESA / 150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Public Services, Utilities, and Energy
UTIL: During design and prior to construction, Valley District shall verify the nature and
location of underground utilities before the start of any construction that would require
excavation. Valley District shall notify and coordinate with public and private utility
providers at least 48 hours before the commencement of work adjacent to any located
utility. The contractor shall be required to notify the service provider in advance of
service interruptions to allow the service provider sufficient time to notify customers. The
contractor shall be required to coordinate timing of interruptions with the service
providers to minimize the frequency and duration of interruptions.
Conduct search for underground utilities prior to
construction.
Include mitigation measure in contractor specifications
and construction schedule.
Valley District,
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
UTIL-2: Valley District shall require the use of energy efficient equipment, including but
not limited to, pumps, conveyance features, and lighting for the proposed SNRC and
pump stations.
Include mitigation measure in project design
specifications and construction contractor
specifications.
Valley District,
Construction
Contractor
During Construction
Traffic and Transportation
TR-1: Valley District shall require the contractor to prepare a traffic control plan that
identifies specific traffic control measures to ensure access and safety on the local
roadway network. The traffic control plan will include the following elements at a
minimum:
A schedule of lane closures and road closures over the construction period
Measures to maintain traffic flow at all times across the construction zone
including requiring flaggers to direct traffic when only one lane of traffic is available
Detour routes and notification procedures if full road closures are needed
Lane closure notifications to the City of Highland, City of San Bernardino and City
of Redlands and local emergency services providers
Temporary signalization modifications (if any) for intersection signals
On-road traffic control features and signage compliant with city traffic control
requirements
Maintain access to residence and business driveways, public facilities, and
recreational resources at all times to the extent feasible; Minimize access
disruptions to businesses and residences
Include the requirement that all open trenches be covered with metal plates at the
end of each workday to accommodate traffic and access.
Identify all roadway locations where special construction techniques (e.g.,
horizontal boring, directional drilling or night construction) will be used to minimize
impacts to traffic flow
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
Verify that the Traffic Control Plan has been prepared
and approved by the applicable local jurisdiction(s).
Perform site inspections to routinely verify proper
implementation of the approved Plan.
Perform site inspections to ensure contractor is in
compliance with plan.
Retain copies of the Plan and inspection records in the
project file.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
Sterling Natural Resource Center Project L-11 ESA /150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE L-1 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE STERLING NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER PROJECT
Mitigation Measures Implementation, Monitoring, and Reporting Action Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
TR-2: Valley District shall prepare a notification plan for communication with affected
residents and businesses prior to the start of construction. Advance public notification
shall include posting of notices and appropriate signage of construction activities. The
written notification shall include the construction schedule, the exact location and
duration of activities within each street (i.e., which lanes and access point/driveways
would be blocked on which days and for how long), and a toll-free telephone number for
receiving questions or complaints.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
Verify that the notification plan has been prepared prior
to construction.
Retain copies of public notifications in the project file.
Retain copies of questions and complaints received by
telephone.
Valley District;
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
TR-3: Prior to installation of pipelines in East 5th Street, Valley District shall coordinate
with the City of Highland to ensure that the proposed East 5th Street curb and drainage
improvements are conducted simultaneously with the pipeline installation to avoid
impacting the street twice in a short period of time.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
Coordinate with City of Highland to schedule
construction of pipeline installation.
Valley District,
Construction
Contractor
Before Construction
TR-4: Valley District shall ensure that deliveries, biosolids haul trips, and worker shift
transitions are discouraged during the period of 7:30 to 8:30 AM and 2:30 to 3:30 PM
corresponding to peak pick up and drop off times at the high school.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications and instruct construction workers prior to
construction.
Verify construction workers are performing deliveries at
desired times but periodic site inspections.
Valley District,
Construction
Contractor
Before and During
Construction
TR-5: Valley District shall design turn-in and turn-out ramps adjacent to 5th Street to
accommodate solids haul trips and material deliveries ingress and egress in a manner
that ensures safe traffic conditions. Roadway improvements including modifications to
the curb shall be approved by the City of Highland Department of Transportation.
Include mitigation measure in construction contractor
specifications.
Verify that the roadway improvement has been
approved by the City of Highland Department of
Transportation.
Valley District Before Construction
Sterling Natural Resource Center L-12 ESA / 150005.00
Final Environmental Impact Report March 2016
Notice of Determination Appendix D
TO: FROM:
D Office of Planning and Research
For U.S. Mail: Street Address:
Public Agency: East Valley Water District
P.O. Box 3044 1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Sacramento, CA 95814
0 County Clerk
County of: San Bernardino Clerk of the Board
Address: 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92415
Address: 31111 Greenspot Road
Hioh)and, CA 92346
Contact: John Mura
Phone: (909) 885-4900
Lead Agency (if different from above):
San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District
Address: 380 East Vanderbilt Way
San Bernardino, CA 92408
Contact: Heather Dyer
Phone: (909) 387-9256
Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code.
State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse): -=2:..::0....:.l.::.5..:..10::....:...:10:..::5:..::8:...._ ____________ _
Project Title: Sterling Natural Resource Center (SNRC)
Project Location (include county): North Del Rosa Drive between East 5th Street and East 6th Street, Highland,
California, San Bernardino County
Project Description: The project would construct and operate the Sterling Natural Resource Center (SNRC) in the City of
Highland, which would provide tertiary treatment to wastewater generated within East Valley Water
District's (EVWD) service area and an Administration Center that would act as the operations
facility. In addition to the SNRC, the project would include modifications to EVWD's wastewater
collection facilities in order to convey flows to the new recycled water treatment plant, as well as a
treated water conveyance and discharge system. Currently, pursuant to an agreement, EVWD
conveys wastewater for secondary treatment at the San Bernardino Water Reclamation Plant
SBWRP) located in the City of San Bernardino. The SBWRP sends its treated wastewater for
tertiary treatment at the Rapid Infiltration and Extraction (RIX) facility located in the City of Colton
where it is discharged to the Santa Ana River (SAR). The proposed SNRC would produce
disinfected tertiary recycled water (Title 22 quality water) for unrestricted use. The treated water
would be discharged to City Creek, existing basins currently operated by the City of Redlan ds
Redlands Basins), to the East Twin Creek Spreading Grounds, other alternative recharge basins or to
the Santa Ana River. This project would also include utilizing the existing SAR pipeline as a carrier
pipe and refurbishing the groundwater wells near the Rialto channel to supply supplemental water in
the SAR.
This is to advise that the East Valley Water District has approved the above described project on
0 Lead Agency or Responsible Agency)
March 23, 2016
Date)
and has made the following determinations regarding the above described projects.
I.The project[ will D will not] have a significant effect on the environment.
2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
D A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code.
Reference: Section 21000-21174, Public Resources Code.
EXHIBIT 3"
3.Mitigation measures [ were D were not] made a condition of the approval of the project.
4.A mitigation repo11ing or monitoring plan[ was D was not] adopted for this project.
5.A statement of Overriding Considerations[ was D was not] adopted for this project.
6.Findings[ were D were not] made pursuant to the provisions ofCEQA.
This is to ce11ify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval, or the Negative
Declaration, is available to the General Public at:
East Valley Water District at 31111 Greenspot Road, Highland CA 92346
Signature (Public Agency) ----------------Title: ____________ _
Date: --------------Date Received filing at OPR: _____________ _
Authority cited: Section 2 I 083, Public Resources Code.
Reference: Section 2 I 000-2 I I 74, Public Resources Code.
Notice of Determination
TO:
Office of Planning and Research
For US. Mail: Street Address:
P.O. Box 3044 1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Sacramento, CA 95814
County Clerk
County of: San Bernardino Clerk of the Board
Address: 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92415
Appendix D
FROM:
Public Agency: East Valley Water District
Address: 31111 Greenspot Road
Highland_ CA 92346
Contact: John Mura
Phone: (909) 885-4900
Lead Agency (if different from above):
San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District
Address: 380 East Vanderbilt Way
San Bernardino CA 92408
Contact: Heather Dyer
Phone: (909)387-9256
Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code.
State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse): 2015101058
Project Title: Sterling Natural Resource Center (SNRC)
Project Location (include county): North Del Rosa Drive between East 5th Street and East 6th Street, Highland,
California San Bernardino County
Project Description: The project would construct and operate the Sterling Natural Resource Center (SNRC) in the City of
Highland, which would provide tertiary treatment to wastewater generated within East Valley Water
District's (EV WD) service area and an Administration Center that would act as the operations
facility. In addition to the SNRC, the project would include modifications to EV WD's wastewaterLr)
collection facilities in order to convey flows to the new recycled water treatment plant, as well as a
treated water conveyance and discharge system. Currently, pursuant to an agreement, EV WD
conveys wastewater for secondary treatment at the San Bernardino Water Reclamation Plant
SBWRP) located in the City of San Bernardino. The SBWRP sends its treated wastewater for
tertiary treatment at the Rapid Infiltration and Extraction (RIX) facility located in the City of Coltonrti
where it is discharged to the Santa Ana River (SAR). The proposed SNRC would produce
disinfected tertiary recycled water (Title 22 quality water) for unrestricted use. The treated water
would be discharged to City Creek, existing basins currently operated by the City of Redlands
Redlands Basins), to the East Twin Creek Spreading Grounds, other alternative recharge basins or to
the Santa Ana River. This project would also include utilizing the existing SAR pipeline as a carrier
pipe and refurbishing the groundwater wells near the Rialto channel to supply supplemental water in
the SAR.
This is to advise that the East Valley Water District has approved the above described project on
11Lead Agency or ® Responsible Agency)
March 23, 2016 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described projects.
Date)
1. The project [® will will not] have a significant effect on the environment.
2. ® An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code.
Reference: Section 21000-21174, Public Resources Cade.
3. Mitigation measures [® were were not] made a condition of the approval of the project.
4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan [® was was not] adopted for this project.
5. A statement of Overriding Considerations [® was was not] adopted for this project.
6. Findings [® were were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval, or the Negative
Declaration, is available to the General Public at:
Signature (Public Agency) Title: (mai Managee/rm
Date: March 23, 2016 Date Received filing at OPR:
Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code.
Reference: Section 21000.21174, Public Resources Code.