2007 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

REGIONAL SALINITY MANAGEMENT PROJECT HUENEME OUTFALL

REPLACEMENT PROJECT

SCH NO. 2007021026

September 2007

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

FOR THE REGIONAL SALINITY MANAGEMENT PROJECT - HUENEME OUTFALL REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Prepared for:

Calleguas Municipal Water District 2100 Olsen Road

Thousand Oaks, California 91360

Prepared by:

Padre Associates, Inc. 1861 Knoll Drive

Ventura, California 93003 805/644-2220, 805/644-2050 (fax)

September 2007

Calleguas Municipal Water District Regional Salinity Management Project Hueneme Outfall Replacement Project Table of Contents

Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

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

1.1 DOCUMENT PURPOSE AND LEGAL AUTHORITY ............................................1-1

1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES/PURPOSE AND NEED ................................................1-6

1.3 SCOPE AND CONTENT.......................................................................................1-8

1.4 RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES .......................................................1-9

1.5 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN.....................................................................1-10

1.6 PROJECT APPROVALS AND PERMITS ...........................................................1-10

2.0 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................2-1

2.1 PROJECT SYNOPSIS ..........................................................................................2-1

2.2 AREAS OF KNOWN CONTROVERSY.................................................................2-3

2.3 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES AND ALTERNATIVES......................................................................2-3

2.4 COMPARISON OF THE ALTERNATIVES..........................................................2-11

2.5 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE............................................2-12

3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT/PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................3-1

3.1 PROJECT LOCATION ..........................................................................................3-1

3.2 PROJECT PROPONENT......................................................................................3-1

3.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS...........................................................................3-1

3.4 CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES AND METHODLOLGIES.............................3-11

3.5 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AND DURATION.............................................3-32

3.6 DISCHARGE EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS.................................................3-39

3.7 OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING ..........................................3-40

4.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION ..........................................................4-1

4.1 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES....................................................................4-2

4.2 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS...............................................................................4-13

4.3 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE............................................4-19

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS...................................................................................5.0-1

5.1 LAND USE .........................................................................................................5.1-1

5.2 GEOLOGY .........................................................................................................5.2-1


Page ii

5.3 AIR QUALITY .....................................................................................................5.3-1

5.4 WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................5.4-1

5.5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES..............................................................................5.5-1

5.6 AGRICULTURE..................................................................................................5.6-1

5.7 NOISE ................................................................................................................5.7-1

5.8 AESTHETICS.....................................................................................................5.8-1

5.9 TRANSPORTATION ..........................................................................................5.9-1

5.10 RISK OF UPSET ..............................................................................................5.10-1

5.11 CULTURAL RESOURCES...............................................................................5.11-1

5.12 INDIAN ASSETS ..............................................................................................5.12-1

5.13 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ..........................................................................5.13-1

5.14 PUBLIC SERVICES .........................................................................................5.14-1

5.15 RECREATION..................................................................................................5.15-1

6.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS..6-1

6.1 PROJECTS CONSIDERED IN ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS ...............................6-1

6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES................................................................6-3

6.3 SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS.............................................................6-6

7.0 GROWTH INDUCEMENT..............................................................................................7-1

8.0 IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES ...............8-1

9.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION......................................................................9-1

9.1 PERSONS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED .........................................................9-1

9.2 SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ............................................................9-1

9.3 SECTION 7 CONSULTATION UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT .....9-2

9.4 SECTION 106 CONSULTATION UNDER THE NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT ..........................................................................................9-2

10.0 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES/ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS......10-1

11.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................................................................11-1

11.1 PADRE ASSOCIATES, INC................................................................................11-1

11.2 CONEJO ARCHEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS..................................................11-1

11.3 ENGINEERING SUPPORT.................................................................................11-1

11.4 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION ............................................................................11-1


Page iii

12.0 DISTRIBUTION LIST ...................................................................................................12-1

13.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS .....................................................................................13-1

APPENDICES A Notice of Preparation and Initial Study

B Responses to Notice of Preparation

C Air Quality Emissions Calculations

D Noise Model Output

E Summary NPDES Permit Application Water Quality Summary

F Hueneme Outfall Replacement - Technical Memorandum No. 1A: Evaluation of Outfall Alternatives

G Hueneme Outfall Replacement - Technical Memorandum No. 1B: Outfall Siting Study

H Draft Calleguas Municipal Water District Site Characterization Study: Proposed Port Hueneme Ocean Outfall Project

I Essential Fish Habitat Assessment

LIST OF FIGURES Page

1.1-1 Regional Salinity Management Project Primary Pipeline Alignment...........................1-3

3.1-1 Regional Location Map ..................................................................................................3-3

3.3-1 Proposed Project Facilities Onshore Pipeline Alignment ............................................3-7

3.3-2 Proposed Project Facilities Offshore Outfall Alignment...............................................3-9

3.4-1 Proposed Project Facilities Onshore Pipeline Alignment Details ..............................3-13

3.4-2 Typical HDD Three Stage Process ..............................................................................3-17

3.4-3 Preliminary HDD Rig Site Plan.....................................................................................3-18

3.4-4 Bottom Hole Assembly.................................................................................................3-21

3.4-5 Soft Soil Flycutter .........................................................................................................3-22

3.4-6 Soft Soil Barrel Reamer ...............................................................................................3-23

3.4-7 Pipeline Stringing Site Alternatives ..............................................................................3-27

3.6-1 Project Construction Schedule.....................................................................................3-39

4.1-1 Alternative Project Pipeline Stringing Locations.............................................................4-9

5.1-1 Ormond Beach Watershed Boundaries ......................................................................5.1-1

5.2-1 Project Area Geology ..................................................................................................5.2-2

5.2-2 Soil Types in Project Area...........................................................................................5.2-3


Page iv

LIST OF FIGURES (CONT.) Page

5.2-3 Active/Potentially Active Faults and Earthquakes in Project Area...............................5.2-5

5.2-4 Earthquake Probability ................................................................................................5.2-6

5.2-5 Outfall Location and Bathymetry ...............................................................................5.2-10

5.4-1 Project Site Historical Sample Locations ....................................................................5.4-2

5.5-1 Project Site Historical Sample Locations ....................................................................5.5-4

5.5-2 California Department of Fish and Game Regional and Site Fish Blocks.................5.5-10

5.6-1 Arial Photograph of Current Land Uses (Agriculturally Developed Areas) within Project Area.............................................................................................................................5.6-2

5.6-2 Department of Conservation Soil Survey of Project Area (2004) ................................5.6-4

5.7-1 Project Location with Noise Measurement Locations and Adjacent Receptors..........5.7-4

5.8-1 Project Area ................................................................................................................5.8-1

5.8-2 Project Location with Sensitive View Receptors .........................................................5.8-5

5.8-3 View from Hueneme Road of Ormond Beach Power Plant.........................................5.8-7

5.8-4 View of Perkins Road Looking South..........................................................................5.8-7

5.8-5 View of Perkins Road Oxnard WWTP.........................................................................5.8-7

5.8-6 View of Surfside Drive Right-of-Way from Pedestrian Walkway near Moranda Park .....................................................................................................5.8-8

5.8-7 View of Residential Development Along Surfside Drive..............................................5.8-8

5.8-8 View of Port Hueneme Fishing Pier ............................................................................5.8-9

5.8-9 View of Port Hueneme to the Northwest of Port Hueneme Fishing Pier .....................5.8-9

5.8-10 View of Proposed HDD Staging Area/Port Hueneme Beach Parking Lot A ...........5.8-10

5.8-11 View of Offshore Visual resources including Port Hueneme Fishing Pier.................5.8-10

5.9-1 Regional Access to Project Site ..................................................................................5.9-1

5.13-1 Ethnic Composition of Ventura County Showing Hispanic or Latino as Dominant Minority Population ..................................................................................5.13-2

5.13-2 2000 Ventura County Percent Ethnicity ....................................................................5-13-3

5.13-3 Distribution of Individuals Below Poverty Line within the City of Oxnard and Port Hueneme ............................................................................5.13-5

5.13-4 Distribution of Hispanic or Latino Population within the City of Oxnard and Port Hueneme ............................................................................5.13-5

5.13-5 City of Port Hueneme/Oxnard Locally Impacted Community Study Area ................5.13-7

5.15-1 Project Location and Recreation Areas.....................................................................5.15-2

5.15-2 View of Ormond Beach and Adjacent Dunes............................................................5.15-3


Page v

LIST OF FIGURES (CONT.) Page

5.15-3 Moranda Park from Bubbling Springs Recreation Corridor .......................................5.15-4

5.15-4 Bubbling Springs Recreation Corridor Between Surfside Drive and Moranda Park ...........................................................................................5.15-4

5.15-5 Hueneme Beach with Ormond Beach.......................................................................5.15-5

5.15-6 Hueneme Beach and Picnicking Areas.....................................................................5.15-5

LIST OF TABLES

Page

2.3-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures ......................................2-4

3.4-1 Drilling Fluid Usage Estimate .......................................................................................3-26

3.5-1 Manpower and Equipment Requirements Onshore Pipeline Construction ...............3-32

3.5-2 Manpower and Equipment Requirements Mobilize HDD Site...................................3-33

3.5-3 Manpower and Equipment Requirements Pre-Construction Marine Survey Operations ...............................................................3-34

3.5-4 Manpower and Equipment Requirements Marine Excavation ..................................3-34

3.5-5 Manpower and Equipment Requirements Pilot Hole and Pre-Reaming Operations ......................................................................3-35

3.5-6 Manpower and Equipment Requirements Pipe Pullback ..........................................3-36

3.5-7 Manpower and Equipment Requirements Pipe Stringing .........................................3-36

3.5-8 Manpower and Equipment Requirements Seafloor and Diffuser Section Installation ....................................................................3-37

3.5-9 Manpower and Equipment Requirements Post-Construction Marine Survey Operations..............................................................3-37

3.5-10 Vault Construction Activities Summary ........................................................................3-38

4.1-7 Summary of Alternative Outfall Siting Study ..................................................................4-8

4.3-1 Summary of Alternative Impact Comparison................................................................4-19

5.3-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards ....................................................................................5.3-2

5.3-2 Air Quality Standard Exceedances .............................................................................5.3-4

5.3-3 Onshore Construction Emissions................................................................................5.3-9

5.3-4 Ocean Outfall Construction Emissions......................................................................5.3-10

5.3-5 Peak Day Construction Emissions ............................................................................5.3-11


Page vi

LIST OF TABLES (CONT.)

Page

5.4-1 Summary Marine Water Quality Data Offshore Oxnard and Port Hueneme...............5.4-3

5.4-2 Modeling Results Using Receiving Water Data ..........................................................5.4-7

5.5-1 Special Status Species Within or Near Project Site ....................................................5.5-7

5.5-2 Summary of Commercial Catch per Year..................................................................5.5-11

5.6-1 Value of Ventura County Crops .................................................................................5.6-1

5.7-1 Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments......................................5.7-2

5.7-2 Typical Noise Levels ...................................................................................................5.7-3

5.7-3 Measured Ambient Noise Levels in Project Area........................................................5.7-5

5.7-4 City of Oxnard and City of Port Hueneme Noise Thresholds......................................5.7-6

5.7-5 Construction Noise Levels at Work Sites ....................................................................5.7-8

5.8-1 Scenic Variety Classes ...............................................................................................5.8-2

5.8-2 Criteria for Rating Sensitivity Levels ...........................................................................5.8-3

5.8-3 Visual Condition Rating Guidelines.............................................................................5.8-3

5.8-4 Summary of Aesthetic Ratings for Pipeline Portions.................................................5.8-11

5.9-1 Level of Service (LOS) Definitions ..............................................................................5.9-4

5.9-2 Roadway Physical Characteristics ..............................................................................5.9-5

5.10-1 Characteristics of Discharge to Affected Waterbodies Due to Pipeline Failure.........5.10-3

5.13-1 2000 U.S. Census Regional Demographic Comparison Table .................................5.13-6

5.13-2 Summary of Census Tract Information Within the City of Port Hueneme/ Oxnard/County of Ventura Locally Impacted Community Study Area................................................5.13-8

5.14-1 Service Providers ......................................................................................................5.14-1

6.1-1 Onshore Project List.......................................................................................................6-1

6.3-1 Summary of Cumulative Impacts ...................................................................................6-6

9.0-1 Summary of Community/Interest Group Outreach Meetings .........................................9-2

Calleguas Municipal Water District Regional Salinity Management Project Section 1.0 Hueneme Outfall Replacement Project Introduction

Section 1 Introduction Page 1-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 DOCUMENT PURPOSE AND LEGAL AUTHORITY

The proposed project is a component of the Calleguas Regional Salinity Management Project (CRSMP) which was the subject of a Final Program Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (2002 EIR/EA), dated August 2, 2002 (State Clearinghouse Number 2000101104 and EA No. 01-LC-007). This document is incorporated by reference and provides a basis for elements of the environmental review in this document, including portions of the currently proposed project, alternatives and cumulative analysis.

The CRSMP, as a whole, consists of a pipeline system to transport concentrate from demineralization of brackish groundwater and excess tertiary treated municipal wastewater1 for reuse, where possible, or to an ocean outfall for disposal outside the Calleguas Creek Watershed, when no reuse opportunities are available (see Figure 1.1-1). Over time, the project would result in a net reduction in the salinity of surface and ground waters within the Calleguas Creek Watershed. A portion of the CRSMP has already been constructed.

Originally, the project was envisioned to connect with an existing ocean outfall at the Reliant Energy Ormond Beach Power Generation Station. Discharge through this outfall was identified as the preferred alternative in the 2002 EIR/EA. However, when the Report of Waste Discharge was submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to discharge project related flows from the Reliant Energy ocean outfall, the RWQCB raised concerns about the adequacy of this outfall. Specifically the dilution ratio of the Reliant outfall is low, which limits the projects ability to meet the discharge requirements of the Ocean Plan. Due to these newly identified constraints, Calleguas is pursuing the potential replacement of a previously decommissioned outfall located in the City of Port Hueneme.

The Hueneme Outfall was constructed in 1961 and operated until the mid 1970s. The outfall is located northwest of the Port Hueneme Fishing Pier and runs roughly parallel to the pier before turning to the southwest. Both the pier and outfall are located within an easement issued by the California State Lands Commission under Permit No. PRC 1560.9. The outfall extends approximately 4,500 feet offshore of the beach and terminates in approximately 45 feet of water. The existing outfall is a steel pipeline of approximately 18 inches inside diameter, with an exterior concrete weight coat resulting in a total outside diameter of approximately 31 inches. The outfall lies beneath the sea floor in the vicinity of the Fishing Pier and for a distance of approximately 1,000 feet from the shore, and lies on the sea floor from that point to its termination in a multi-port diffuser section, consisting of eight small diffuser ports spaced along the larger pipeline to help disperse the flow. After extensive engineering evaluation of the

1 Effluent is defined as tertiary-treated municipal wastewater and concentrate from brackish groundwater demineralization plants.



Page intentionally left blank

C

F

E

D

E21

G

FIGURE 1.1-1Calleguas Municial Water District

May 2007Project No. 0502-1202

Regional Salinity Management Program

REGIONAL SALINITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

AB

H2

PRIMARY PIPELINE ALIGNMENT




Backside Figure 1.1-1



existing outfall it has been determined that uncertainties regarding the structural integrity and hydraulic capacity of the existing outfall require that a replacement outfall be constructed.

The following discusses the proposed actions that are associated with the construction and operation of the portion of the CRSMP addressed in this document. This project is comprised of the following elements:

Onshore, subterranean pipelines within Hueneme Road from its intersection with Edison Drive to its intersection with Surfside Drive and south on Surfside Drive to Port Hueneme Beach Park parking lot A (parking lot) at the south end of Surfside Drive and within Perkins Road from its intersection with Hueneme Road to a location approximately 1,000 feet south of Hueneme Road.

Hueneme Outfall Replacement would involve the installation of an offshore pipeline below the sea floor using a Horizontal Directional Drilling methodology extending from the parking lot to an exit point offshore from the surf zone, a diffuser on the seafloor for effluent discharge, and a pipe laid on the seafloor to connect the exit portal and diffuser.

Due to the fact the Hueneme Outfall was not identified or addressed in the 2002 EIR/EA, Calleguas has determined that a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (SEIR/EA) is needed to address potential environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed replacement outfall and related facilities.

1.1.1 State Requirements

The State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations) define lead, responsible, and trustee agencies. Calleguas Municipal Water District (CMWD or Calleguas) as a public agency, has the principal responsibility for carrying out and approving the proposed project. Therefore, Calleguas is the CEQA lead agency as well as the project proponent.

Responsible agencies are defined as non-federal public agencies that have discretionary authority over certain aspects of the project. These agencies may utilize this SEIR/EA in their decision-making process. Responsible agencies for the proposed project include the City of Oxnard, City of Port Hueneme, California State Lands Commission, California Coastal Commission, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Department of Fish and Game.

Trustee agencies refer to agencies having jurisdiction by law over the natural resources affected by a project. Based upon this definition, the California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which have jurisdiction over biological resources that may be impacted by the proposed project are trustee agencies.



Funding for this project has been provided in full or in part through an agreement with the State Water Resources Control Board. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the State Water Resources Control Board, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. (Gov. Code, 7550; 40 CFR 31.20)

1.1.2 Federal Requirements

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is the lead Federal agency for the Environmental Assessment portion of the SEIR/EA and will be responsible for compliance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Calleguas will be seeking funding assistance for a portion of the project from Reclamation through the Title XVI (Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Feasibility Act) of Public Law 102-575. Other Federal agencies issuing permits or approvals for the proposed project will utilize this SEIR/EA in their decision making process.

CEQA requires the use of the word significant to identify environmental impacts that require mitigation and/or must be addressed under a finding of overriding considerations. Under NEPA, the word significant identifies an impact that is severe based on context and intensity, and cannot be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Under the EA process, the use of the word significant is limited to the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). However, since this EIR/EA is a joint CEQA/NEPA document, the word significant is used to identify impacts significant under CEQA. In compliance with Section 3.12.3 of Reclamations NEPA Handbook, any significant residual impact (significant following mitigation) under CEQA is also considered significant under NEPA and would require preparation of an EIS.

1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES/PURPOSE AND NEED

As outlined in the PEIR/EA prepared for the overall project, the objectives of the proposed CRSMP project and the subject project subcomponent are:

Enable both public and private water agencies to develop new water sources that at the present time cannot be widely used due to poor quality;

Manage the use of high salinity groundwater and treated municipal wastewater, and

Reuse or disposal of concentrate produced by demineralization of brackish groundwater and excess tertiary treated municipal wastewater from enhanced water treatment.

The project is located in the Calleguas Creek Watershed (Watershed) which faces a number of environmental challenges involving both surface and groundwater resources. Most of the surface waters within the Watershed have been identified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) as impaired, meaning they do not fully support designated beneficial uses such as water supply or wildlife habitat.



A major concern of local agencies and regulators is salt accumulation in soils and water supplies. Most of the groundwater basins in the region contain high levels of total dissolved solids (TDS) and in some cases, high chloride and nitrate levels, which limits their use as a water supply for urban and agricultural uses. TDS is a general indicator of overall water quality and salt loading.

High TDS levels are, in part, the result of historic and ongoing use of high TDS surface and groundwater supplies and resultant agricultural return flows, and to a lesser extent, discharges from wastewater treatment plants. Collectively, these contributors recharge local groundwater basins. Continuing production of water from these basins for both domestic and agricultural irrigation needs is concentrating salts to a point where they cannot support the basins designated beneficial uses. For example, rising TDS levels can result in a reduction in crop yield and render local groundwater resources unsuitable for potable water needs.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is mandated by the Clean Water Act to establish pollutant allocations (Total Maximum Daily Loads, TMDLs) for point and non-point sources that discharge to water bodies designated as impaired, including Calleguas Creek and its tributaries. The establishment of a TMDL allocates the amount of a pollutant that can be discharged to a water body, and still meet water quality requirements for designated beneficial uses.

Concurrently, a broad coalition of local stakeholders have combined their efforts to develop a comprehensive management plan for the Calleguas Creek Watershed. This effort is a public-private alliance to develop an integrated strategy for the sustainable development of the watershed and its resources. The formation of this coalition was driven by a need to resolve water quality, flood control, land use, habitat conservation, and property development issues in the region. Planning of proposed project has been adopted as an early action item by the Calleguas Creek Watershed Management Plan Steering Committee.

In response to the need to address increasing salinity levels in the Watershed, CMWD, working with other public water and wastewater agencies, has undertaken the design and construction of a regional project to manage high salinity water use and disposal. The project consists of a pipeline system that will collect tertiary treated wastewater and treatment concentrates from wastewater treatment plants, groundwater wells (both municipal and agricultural), and concentrate from reverse osmosis treatment processing of potable water for high-tech industrial applications located within the Calleguas Creek watershed, and convey the effluent to other areas for direct use or an ocean outfall. Ocean disposal would allow substantial reductions in the amounts of dissolved salts and other water pollutants that are currently released into Calleguas Creek and its tributaries. This is expected to result in substantial improvements in water quality of affected creeks and groundwater supplies.

The proposed project will enable both public and private water agencies to utilize brackish groundwater that at the present time cannot be widely used due to poor quality. However, with advancements in treatment technologies and reduced costs, opportunities to recover brackish groundwater are becoming cost-effective. Groundwater recovery projects



would entail the extraction and treatment of brackish groundwater with reverse osmosis or other type of membrane treatment to remove salt mineral concentrations. Many groundwater basins throughout Ventura County have concentrations of total dissolved solids, sulfate, chloride and other constituents that either exceed secondary (aesthetic) drinking water standards or are unsuitable for other uses such as irrigation of certain agricultural crops (e.g, salt-sensitive crops such as strawberries and avocados). The proposed project would facilitate disposal of brines associated with new treatment facilities, allowing use of the treated water for beneficial uses and increasing water supply reliability.

1.3 SCOPE AND CONTENT

A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the preparation of a Supplemental EIR/EA and associated Initial Study were prepared according the State CEQA Guidelines and distributed to responsible and trustee agencies in February 2007 (see Appendix A). CMWD received comment letters in response to the NOP from the following agencies and interested parties (see Appendix B):

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation;

California State Lands Commission;

State of California, Public Utilities Commission;

County of Ventura, Resource Management Agency;

County of Ventura, Public Works Agency, Transportation Dept;

Ventura County, Watershed Protection District; and

City of Port Hueneme, Community Development Director Greg Brown and City Council Member Murray Rosenbluth.

The Initial Study and NOP comment letters are attached as Appendices A and B, respectively. Effects found not to be significant are identified in the attached Initial Study. Based on the findings of the Initial Study, NEPA requirements, and concerns identified in comment letters submitted in response to the NOP, the EIR/EA is focused on the following issue areas:

Aesthetics;

Agricultural Resources;

Air Quality;

Biological Resources;

Cultural Resources;

Geology/Soils;

Hazards/Risk of Upset;



Water Resources;

Land Use;

Noise;

Public Services;

Recreation; and

Transportation.

This Supplemental EIR/EA addresses the issues above and identifies any significant environmental impacts. The Supplemental EIR/EA also recommends feasible mitigation measures, where possible, that would reduce or eliminate significant environmental effects.

The discussion of project alternatives in this Supplemental EIR/EA has been prepared in accordance with Section 15126(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines. This Supplemental EIR/EA examines the relative impacts of the proposed project, alternative ocean outfall locations, alternative pipeline stringing areas and the "No Project" alternative for each issue area. The "environmentally superior" alternative is identified in the Summary section of this Supplemental EIR/EA.

The level of detail contained throughout this Supplemental EIR/EA is consistent with the requirements of CEQA and recent court decisions. The State CEQA Guidelines provide the standard by which the adequacy of this EIR/EA is based. The Guidelines state:

"An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision-makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure." [emphasis added] (Section 15151).

1.4 RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES

The State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations) define lead, responsible, and trustee agencies. Calleguas, as a public agency, has the principal responsibility for carrying out and approving the proposed project. Therefore, Calleguas is the CEQA lead agency as well as the project proponent.

Responsible agencies are defined as non-federal public agencies that have discretionary authority over certain aspects of the project. These agencies may utilize this SEIR/EA in their decision-making process. Responsible agencies for the proposed project



include the City of Oxnard, City of Port Hueneme, California State Lands Commission, California Coastal Commission, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Department of Fish and Game.

Trustee agencies refer to agencies having jurisdiction by law over the natural resources affected by a project. Based upon this definition, the California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which have jurisdiction over biological resources that may be impacted by the proposed project are trustee agencies.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is the lead Federal agency for the Environmental Assessment portion of the SEIR/EA and will be responsible for compliance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Calleguas will be seeking funding assistance for a portion of the project from Reclamation through the Title XVI (Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Feasibility Act) of Public Law 102-575. Other Federal agencies issuing permits or approvals for the proposed project will utilize this SEIR/EA in their decision making process.

1.5 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, a Mitigation Monitoring Plan will be developed to ensure the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Supplemental EIR/EA. The Plan would be adopted by the CMWD Board of Directors in conjunction with the findings required under CEQA, when the CMWD Board certifies the Supplemental EIR/EA and approves the proposed project.

1.6 PROJECT APPROVALS AND PERMITS

1.6.1 Federal Agencies:

Bureau of Reclamation Record of Decision and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)

Army Corps of Engineers - Clean Water Act Section 404 permit/Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Section 7 Consultation under the Endangered Species Act

NOAA Fisheries Service - ESA, Section 7/Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) assessment

1.6.2 State Agencies

California State Lands Commission State Tidelands Lease Agreement

California Coastal Commission Coastal Development Permit/Federal Consistency Certification

Department of Fish and Game 1603 Permit



Regional Water Quality Control Board - National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Ocean Discharge Permit, NPDES groundwater dewatering permit, and 401 Water Quality Certification

California Public Utilities Commission Approval of all railroad crossings

1.6.3 Local Agencies

County of Ventura - Flood control and road encroachment permits

City of Oxnard Coastal Development Permit, road encroachment permits

City of Port Hueneme Coastal Development Permit, road encroachment permits

1.6.4 Private Corporations

None identified at this time

1.7 CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL PROGRAM EIR/EA

The Draft Supplemental EIR/EA was circulated for review by public agencies and interested members of the public from July 19 through September 4, 2007. CMWD prepared responses to all comments received (see Section 13). This Final Supplemental EIR/EA is comprised of the Draft Program EIR/EA, comments and responses to comments received during circulation of the draft, and a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies that commented on the Draft Program EIR/EA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132. CMWD is the lead agency for the Program EIR/EA and has the responsibility of determining the adequacy of the Program EIR/EA pursuant to CEQA.

Calleguas Municipal Water District Regional Salinity Management Project Section 2.0 Hueneme Outfall Replacement Project Summary

Section 2 Summary Page 2-1

2.0 SUMMARY

This section has been prepared in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, and is divided into two components. The first summarizes the characteristics of the proposed project, and the second identifies environmental impacts, mitigation measures and residual impacts. In addition, the project alternatives are summarized.

2.1 PROJECT SYNOPSIS

2.1.1 Project Proponent

Calleguas Municipal Water District 2100 Olsen Road Thousand Oaks, California 91360 Contact: Mr. Eric Bergh (805) 579-7128 [email protected]

2.1.2 Location

The Calleguas Regional Salinity Management Project (CRSMP) is located with Ventura County, California and extends from the City of Simi Valley (eastern most location) west-southwest towards the City of Oxnard and the Pacific Ocean (see Figure 1.1-1). The portion of the proposed project that is the focus of this SEIR/EA is located in the City of Oxnard and the City of Port Hueneme. The existing Hueneme Outfall is located within an easement issued by the California State Lands Commission (CSLC) under Permit No. PRC 1560.9 and extends from the shore approximately 4,500 feet into the Pacific Ocean. The replacement outfall would be located in a new offshore lease to be issued by the CSLC.

2.1.3 Proposed Action

The proposed project is located in the cities of Port Hueneme and Oxnard and includes the following two primary components.

Onshore Pipelines: As indicated above, the project involves the installation and operation of approximately 2 miles (10,500 feet) of 48-inch diameter pipeline that would comprise a portion of the CRSMP and 0.2 miles (1,000 feet) of 12-inch diameter pipe that would comprise a lateral connection to the Port Hueneme Water Agencys Brackish Water Reclamation Demonstration Facility. The 48-inch diameter pipeline would be installed within or adjacent to a portion of Hueneme Road from its intersection with Edison Drive to its intersection with Surfside Drive and south on Surfside Drive to the Port Hueneme Beach Park parking lot. The 12-inch diameter pipeline would extend within Perkins Road south approximately 1,000 feet from its intersection with Hueneme Road.



The pipeline would be installed using traditional trenching methods, except where crossing channels or railroad rights-of-way, where trenchless methods (such as horizontal directional drilling [HDD], microtunneling, or boring and jacking) would be necessary. It is anticipated that the trench would be within or adjacent to the street rights-of-way and would average eight feet wide and twelve feet deep. Trenchless methods would be used under railroad crossings on Hueneme Road near Arcturus and on Surfside Drive and under two stream/drain crossings: the J-Street drain in Hueneme Road and at Bubbling Springs Creek in Surfside Drive.

Hueneme Outfall Replacement: The general orientation of the replacement outfall line would parallel the existing decommissioned outfall as shown on Figure 3.3-2. The onshore portion extends from a point near the center of the public parking lot to the shoreline approximately 550 ft west of the Port Hueneme Fishing Pier. The outfall pipeline length from beach parking lot to offshore end, including the diffuser, would be 4,900 to 5,100 feet long and would terminate in approximately 48 feet of water. The 30-inch outfall pipeline would be installed using trenchless techniques from the beach parking lot offshore to the connection to the offshore extension and associated diffuser section. The offshore extension and diffuser section would be laid on the seabed using a pipe barge. The anticipated trenchless installation technique to install the outfall pipeline is Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD). The offshore installation method described below is typical, and details will be finalized over the next few months as geotechnical work is completed and input is gathered from permitting agencies.

The drilled section of pipe would emerge from the sea floor in approximately 30 to 50 feet of water, approximately 2,500 to 4,500 feet from the start of the trenchless installation. The offshore portion of the outfall would be either high density polyethylene (HDPE) or steel pipeline with a diffuser that may taper down in stages along its length. The diffuser would be fitted with a number of small diameter ports uniformly distributed along the diffuser length. Each port will be fitted with a non-return valve of the duckbill type or similar. Rock may be placed over sections of the diffuser and exposed portion of the pipe to secure them from wave action or concrete weights may be fitted for stability on the sea floor.

2.1.4 Alternatives Considered

The original Program EIR/EA evaluated the use of the Ormond Beach Power Generation Station intake/outfall structure and the Oxnard Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall as project alternatives. The Oxnard Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall ultimately was eliminated from further consideration due to the limited capacity of the facility. The preferred alternative, Ormond Beach Outfall has subsequently been shown to not provide adequate dilution performance to meet the requirements of the State Regional Water Quality Control Board NPDES permit requirements.

Alternatives addresses in this Supplemental EIR/EA are discussed in Section 4.0 and include:

Alternatives associated with the reuse of the existing Hueneme Outfall Structure;



Alternative locations for a replacement outfall;

Alternative involving an HDD boring of the entire outfall with the exception of the diffuser portion of the outfall.

Alternative outfall stringing areas;

Removal of the existing outfall versus abandonment in place.

Discussion of these alternatives include technical feasibility and the ability to achieve the projects objectives while reducing potential environmental impacts.

2.2 AREAS OF KNOWN CONTROVERSY

The proposed project is well known within the Ventura County environmental community, through meetings and presentations conducted by CMWD. To date, no controversy has been communicated to CMWD.

2.3 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES AND ALTERNATIVES

This section identifies two types of project impacts:

Significant, Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. These are impacts for which specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Supplemental EIR/EA. Should the CMWD Board of Directors decide to approve the project, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted for any significant unavoidable adverse impacts. In compliance with Section 3.12.3 of Reclamations NEPA Handbook, any significant unavoidable adverse impact under CEQA is also considered significant under NEPA and would require preparation of an EIS.

No significant, unavoidable adverse impacts were identified for the proposed project or alternatives.

Significant Adverse Impacts. These are significant impacts that can be feasibly mitigated to less than significant levels. Therefore, by definition, residual impacts would be less than significant. All project related impacts are summarized in the following Table 2.3-1.



Table 2.3-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

Section Category Potential Impact Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts

5.1 Land Use No significant adverse impacts were identified.

No mitigation measures necessary.

5.2 Geology HDD drilling may potentially result in accidental release of drilling fluid.

Less than significant with implementation of HDD Plan.

A horizontal directional drilling (HDD) Plan will be implemented for HDD drilling. The HDD Plan will include specific operations to avoid accidental releases of drilling fluid.

5.3 Air Resources Onshore and offshore air pollution would be generated by construction activities and would include exhaust emissions and wind-blown (fugitive) dust.

Construction-related emissions may cause or substantially contribute to local exceedances of the State ozone standard or cumulatively hinder progress towards attainment of the State ozone standard.

Less than significant No mitigation measures necessary

5.4 Water Quality Increased turbidity from sediment re-suspension is expected to result during excavation of the exit pit at the offshore HDD exiting point, and during construction vessel anchoring as well as pipeline stringing.

The release of petroleum into the marine environment from any of the construction vessels could result in potentially significant impacts to the






water quality.

5.5 Biology Offshore construction could temporarily impact sessile (immobile) marine organisms.

An increase in water column turbidity could result in the temporary avoidance of the area by marine biota, burying sessile marine biota, and/or clog the gills and disrupt filter-feeding organisms.

Release of petroleum into the marine environment from any of the construction vessels could result in potentially significant impacts to the marine biota.

An accidental release of HDD drilling fluid could result in increased turbidity and water quality degradation.

Preclusion of commercial fishing within construction areas.

Pipeline stringing could lead to seafloor alteration, turbidity from resuspended seafloor sediments, accidental discharge of petroleum products, vessel-anchor-marine mammal interaction, and nesting bird disturbance.

Less than significant No mitigation measures necessary.





5.6 Agricultural Resources Short-term impacts resulting from the generation of dust may adversely affect crops located along Hueneme Road by increasing their susceptibility to pests and deteriorating their appearance, among other issues.

Potential increase in erosion of soils to agricultural areas adjacent to the project site.


5.7 Noise Night time Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) and onshore boring activities would exceed noise limits

Less than significant with implementation of the Night Operation Noise Impact Reduction Program requiring measures to a level no greater than 5 dBA over ambient noise levels at the individual sites. The Night Operation Noise Impact Reduction Program contains, but is not limited to the following:

The drill rig floor and key power units, including generators, would be enclosed or acoustically packaged to reduce potential noise impacts.

Mud Pumps and Engines would be fully enclosed or acoustically packaged to reduce potential noise impacts.

Mud mixing and cleaning equipment would be partially enclosed or appropriate noise barriers placed around equipment to reduce potential noise impacts.

Light sets would be enclosed or acoustically packaged to reduce potential noise impacts.

Upgraded silencers would be placed on all





applicable engines.

Include quiet mode specification for all work from 7 pm to 7 am including:

o Use of signalers for all backup operations;

o Minimize use of crane and pipe handling operations; and

o Restrict materials deliveries to site.

5.8 Aesthetics Construction activities requiring the use of construction and marine equipment, including a derrick barge, support tugs, materials barges and diver support vessels could temporarily block offshore views.

Onshore noise reduction barriers will result in temporary blocking of ocean views.


5.9 Transportation Potential increase in offshore and onshore traffic during construction related activities.


5.10 Risk of Upset Potential pipeline failure due to erosion and/or impact with debris during storm events at stream crossings or due to geologic hazards.


5.11 Cultural Resources Trenching associated with the proposed project could potentially disrupt the stratigraphic integrity of

Within CA-VEN-662s boundaries, two archaeologists and a Chumash representative shall be retained to monitor all earth disturbances. The two archaeologists shall be prepared to





CA-VEN-662 and artifacts may be lost as a result of pipeline installation.

professionally retrieve any features that might be exposed during excavation in a timely manner.

Within the known extents of CA-VEN-662, the Districts soils engineer will be on-site to observe all excavation and determine whether the materials are previously disturbed or undisturbed. If previously undisturbed materials are encountered, the contractor will use a bladed, rather than toothed bucket, for excavation through the extent of the undisturbed materials.

The following measures shall be fully implemented to reduce potential impacts to unknown/buried cultural resources, should they occur, to a less than significant level:

If disturbance to the Ventura County Railway is determined necessary during project construction activities, a Memorandum of Agreement shall be drafted for mitigation of historic properties. All requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act shall be fully implemented.

Plans for monitoring, treatment of human remains and unplanned discoveries shall be written in consultation with the United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), Native Americans, interested parties, and Advisory Council, if they choose to participate.

A professional archaeologist and Chumash representative should be retained to monitor all initial earth disturbances from Perkins Road to the entrance Port Hueneme Beach Park.

o At the commencement of project construction, the archaeological monitor shall give all workers





associated with earth-disturbing procedures an orientation regarding the probability of exposing cultural resources, tips on recognizing cultural resources and directions as to what steps are to be taken if a find is encountered.

o The archaeologist shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect project construction in the event that potentially significant cultural resources are exposed. Based on monitoring observations and the actual extent of project disturbance, the lead archaeologist shall have the authority to refine the monitoring requirements as appropriate (i.e., change to spot checks, reduce or increase the area to be monitored) in consultation with the lead agency.

o A monitoring report shall be prepared upon completion of construction and provided to Reclamation and the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC).

In the event that archaeological resources are exposed during project construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find must be temporarily suspended until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. Reclamation and CMWD shall be notified of any such find.

If human remains are unearthed, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has





24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission. Reclamation and CMWD shall be notified of any such find.

5.12 Indian Assets No significant adverse impacts were identified

No mitigation measures necessary

5.13 Environmental Justice Noise. As discussed above and within Section 5.7 (Noise), the project would generate short-term construction-related noise during installation of the onshore pipelines. This impact would be most prevalent in areas adjacent to sensitive receptors. Specifically, construction activities that require tunneling in the City of Port Hueneme (showing the highest concentrated percentage in relation to regional demographics) would have the potential to generate a noise-related nuisance during daytime hours that remains after mitigation has been applied, and a significant impact would result.

Project-incorporated noise reduction measures included within Section 5.7 - Noise

5.14 Public Services Additional personnel will be required for both onshore and offshore construction activities.


5.15 Recreation Temporary Reduction in access to recreation areas during HDD installation activities, staging operations and offshore pipeline installation.




2.4 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES

The environmental impacts of the alternatives considered for the proposed project are summarized in Table 2.3-2 below.

Table 2.3-2. Summary of Alternative Impact Comparison

Pipeline Stringing Areas

Nav

al S

tatio

n VC

Po

int

Mug

u

(Site

Nos

. 1-4

)

Ve

ntur

a H

arbo

r

Nav

al S

tatio

n VC

Port

Hue

nem

e

Arn

old

Roa

d 1&2 3 4

LB H

arbo

r/LA

H

arbo

r

Offs

hore

Bar

ge Removal of

Existing Outfall vs. Abandonment

In Place

Land Use = = + + = + = - +

Geology = = = = = = = = +

Air Quality = = = = = = + = +

Water Quality = = + + + + = + +

Biology = = = + = = = + +

Agriculture = = - - - - = - =

Noise + + - - - - + = +

Aesthetics = = - - - - = = +

Transportation + + + + + + + + +

Risk of Upset = = = = = = = = +

Cultural Resources = = = = = = = = =

Indian Assets = = = = = = = = =

Environmental Justice - - = = = = + = =

Public Services = = = = = = = = =

Recreation = = = + = = = = +

# OF INCREASED IMPACTS 2 2 3 5 2 3 4 3 10

+ Increased Impacts As Compared to Other Alternatives. - Decreased Impacts As Compared to Other Alternatives. = Impacts are Similar to Those of Other Alternatives.



2.5 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE

As indicated above and summarized in Table 2.3-2, the Ventura Harbor, NBVC - Port Hueneme and Site No. 3 within the NBVC - Point Mugu have the fewest number of impacts if used to support the pipeline stringing activities. Actual selection of site cannot be made at this time due to uncertainties regarding construction contractor requirements and the actual availability of the sites. However, the environmental superior alternative sites for pipeline stringing are the Ventura Harbor, NBVC - Port Hueneme and Site No. 3 within the NBVC - Point Mugu sites. Should none of these site meet the contractors requirements and/or are not available at the time of the project, sites at Arnold Road, Site No. 4 within the NBVC Point Mugu and the offshore barge alternative represent a secondary group of alternative sites.

Additionally, abandonment-in-place (as currently proposed) of the existing idle Hueneme Outfall is the environmentally superior alternative to the removal alternative due to the additional incremental impacts associated with outfall removal activities.

Calleguas Municipal Water District Regional Salinity Management Project Section 3.0 Hueneme Outfall Replacement Project Proposed Project/Proposed Action

Section 3 Project Description Page 3-1

3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT/PROPOSED ACTION

This section provides a detailed description of the preferred project. The information in this section is intended to provide the public, reviewing agencies, and decision-makers a thorough understanding of the proposed project and the basis for the environmental analysis. More specifically the section provides information on the following topics: project location; project proponent; project characteristics; construction procedures and methodologies; construction equipment; schedule; discharge effluent characteristics; and finally the operational procedures.

It should be noted that these topics address only the Hueneme Outfall Replacement component (extending from Edison Drive to the end of the replacement outfall) of the Calleguas Regional Salinity Management Project (CRSMP). Information related to the other components of the project was previously addressed in the original Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment prepared by the District in 2002 (CMWD, 2002).

3.1 PROJECT LOCATION

The CRSMP is located with Ventura County, California and extends from the City of Simi Valley (easternmost location) west-southwest towards the City of Oxnard and the Pacific Ocean (see Figure 3.1-1). The portion of the proposed project that is the focus of this SEIR/EA is located in the City of Oxnard and the City of Port Hueneme. The existing Hueneme Outfall is located within an easement issued by the California State Lands Commission (CSLC) under Permit No. PRC 1560.9 and extends from the shore approximately 4,500 feet into the Pacific Ocean. The replacement outfall would be located in a new offshore lease to be issued by the CSLC.

3.2 PROJECT PROPONENT

Calleguas Municipal Water District 2100 Olsen Road Thousand Oaks, California 91360 Contact: Mr. Eric Bergh (805) 579-7128 [email protected]

3.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

The proposed project components are located in the cities of Port Hueneme and Oxnard (see Figure 3.1-1) and include the following two primary components.

Onshore Pipelines: As indicated above, the project involves the installation and operation of approximately 2 miles (10,500 feet) of 48-inch diameter pipeline that would comprise a portion of the CRSMP and 0.2 miles (1,000 feet) of 12-inch diameter pipe that would comprise a lateral connection to the Port Hueneme Water Agencys Brackish Water Reclamation Demonstration Facility. The 48-inch diameter pipeline would be installed within and adjacent to a portion of Hueneme Road from its intersection with Edison Drive to its



Backside Figure 3.1-1



intersection with Surfside Drive and south on Surfside Drive to the Port Hueneme Beach Park parking lot A (parking lot) (see Figure 3.3-1). The 12-inch diameter pipeline would extend within Perkins Road south approximately 1,000 feet from its intersection with Hueneme Road.

Both the main pipeline and 12-inch pipeline would be installed using traditional trenching methods, except where crossing channels or railroad rights-of-way, where trenchless methods (such as horizontal directional drilling [HDD], microtunneling, or boring and jacking) would be necessary. It is anticipated that the trench would be within or adjacent to the street rights-of-way and would average eight feet wide and twelve feet deep. Trenchless methods would be used under two railroad crossings on Hueneme Road near Arcturus and one on Surfside Drive and under three stream/drain crossings: the J-Street drain and Oxnard drain in Hueneme Road and at Bubbling Springs Creek in Surfside Drive. The Oxnard drain crossing would be combined with one of the railroad crossings.

Hueneme Outfall Replacement: The general orientation of the replacement outfall line would approximately parallel the existing decommissioned outfall as shown on Figure 3.3-2. The onshore portion extends from a point in the parking lot to the shoreline approximately 550 feet west of the Port Hueneme Fishing Pier. The outfall will be installed in two discrete sections: the outfall HDD section and the offshore seafloor and diffuser section.

The Outfall HDD Section - The shoreline crossing and nearshore component will be constructed using horizontal directional drilling (HDD) techniques to bore a hole from the parking lot out to a predetermined point offshore in approximately (-) 30 feet of water below the sea surface (all water depths designed by a (-) negative number). The HDD bore length will be approximately 2,350 feet overall and the bore diameter up to 54 inches in diameter. The HDD bore will pass underneath the beach and sea floor at a maximum depth of approximately 40 to 60 feet below the surface. A steel or high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe (subsurface outfall section), up to 42 inches in outside diameter, will be constructed offsite, towed to the location, and then inserted into this bore from the offshore exit point of the HDD bore back to the parking lot. The HDD methodology will enable the shoreline crossing to be installed without disturbance, impacts or restrictions to the beach.

The Outfall Seafloor and Diffuser Section The offshore component will be constructed with steel or high density polyethylene pipe. The combined length of the seafloor and diffuser section will total approximately 2,750 feet with the last approximately 400 feet of this length dedicated to diffuser pipe. The seafloor and diffuser section will either consist of 30-inch inside diameter (ID) steel pipe with an external anti-corrosive coating, an external concrete weight coating about 3 inches thick and an internal anti-corrosive coating, or high-density polyethylene pipe (HDPE). The seafloor and diffuser section will be constructed offsite, towed to the location, and then laid on the seafloor. The shoreward end of the seafloor pipe will be connected to the HDD subsurface outfall section at the HDD exit point in approximately (-) 30 feet of water using a tie-in connection. The seafloor and diffuser section will extend offshore to a depth of approximately (-) 50 feet of water and will rest on the seafloor. If steel pipe is used, it will be coated with a thick concrete weight coating to provide adequate gravity anchoring and, if high

PROJECTLOCATION




Backside of Figure 3.3-1

Proposed Project FacilitiesOffshore Outfall Alignment Figure 3.3-2



density polyethylene is used, additional weights or mechanical anchors will be provided as and where necessary for stability. The diffuser will be fitted with a number of small diameter ports uniformly distributed along the diffuser length. Each port will be fitted with a non-return valve of the duckbill type or similar. Rock will be placed on the seafloor exit point of the outfall and possibly also over the sections of the diffuser and exposed sections of the outfall to secure it from wave action. Alternatively, the entire length of pipeline could be towed and installed in one piece to avoid jointing underwater.

3.4 CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES AND METHODOLOGIES

The proposed project would be constructed in two primary phases: 1. Installation of onshore pipeline in or adjacent to Hueneme Road from Edison Dr. to

Surfside Dr., in Surfside Dr. from Hueneme Road to the parking lot, and in Perkins Road south of Hueneme Road.

2. Installation of nearshore and offshore pipeline from the parking lot to the discharge point (Hueneme Outfall Replacement).

3.4.1 Onshore Pipeline Construction

The majority of the onshore construction would be open cut trenching within or adjacent to Hueneme Road, Surfside Drive, and Perkins Road (see Figure 3.4-1). Pipe sections would be placed in a trench and covered using conventional equipment, such as backhoes, side-boom cranes, wheeled loaders, sheepsfoot compactors and excavators. Typically, earth cover over the pipe would be five feet, but may be as deep as 20 feet. Variations to this depth would be required to accommodate local topography, hydraulic grade and existing utilities, among other factors. The trench width would range from 7 to 10 feet, averaging eight feet wide. Due to high water tables along the proposed alignment, trench dewatering would be performed during most pipeline installation. Construction for the 12-inch pipeline would be similar to the 48-inch, except that the trench for the 12-inch pipeline would be narrower.

Typically, work tasks for onshore pipeline installation are anticipated to proceed as follows:

Saw cutting and removal of existing pavement; Trenching and hauling of excess spoils; Relocation of utilities, if required; Delivery of the pipe and pipe bedding material; Installation of pipe bedding material; Installation of the pipe; Backfilling the trench; Hydrostatic testing; and Restoration of the rights-of-way.

Along portions of Hueneme Road and smaller urban streets such as Surfside and Perkins Road, work would include:

Proposed Project FacilitiesOnshore Pipeline Alignment Details Figure 3.4-1



Cutting and replacement of pavement, which may include resurfacing of portions of the entire street width, depending on local agency requirements. Removal of excess trench spoil to the local landfill for use as cover material, or

storage for re-use at other construction sites. Traffic control and coordination with local residents and property owners.

The area directly around the pipe would be backfilled with imported sand material. This material would be imported and trucked to the site in 10-wheel dump trucks, then compacted using the sheepsfoot attachment on excavators or backhoes, or similar equipment. A dump truck can carry approximately 10 cubic yards of sand, which is adequate to backfill approximately 10 linear feet of 48-inch pipeline.

From the top of the sand to the bottom of the pavement, the contractor may choose one of three approaches to backfilling the pipeline trench as follows:

1. Slurry: Slurry is a blend of aggregate (sand or rock), water, and cement. It is essentially concrete with a lower cement content. It is produced by concrete-batch plants and transported to the site in concrete mixer trucks, which discharge the slurry directly into the trench. The slurry is consolidated using a vibratory tool. A concrete truck can carry 10 cubic yards of slurry, which is adequate to backfill approximately 5 linear feet of pipeline.

2. Soil-Cement: Soil-cement is a blend of soil and cement, with some water. The material is produced at a temporary pugmill, which would be located off-site at a location to be selected by the contractor. Native soil is typically excavated from the trench and transported to the pugmill in 10-wheel dump trucks. The soil-cement is typically transported to the site in 10-wheel dump trucks, unloaded into the trench, and then compacted using the sheepsfoot attachment on excavators or backhoes, or similar equipment. A dump truck can carry 10 cubic yards of soil-cement, which is adequate to backfill approximately 5 linear feet of pipeline.

3. Soil-Slurry: Soil-slurry is a blend of soil, water and cement. It is produced at a temporary mill, which can be located either on-site or off-site at a location to be selected by the contractor and transported to the site in concrete mixer trucks, which discharge the soil-slurry directly into the trench. The soil-slurry is consolidated using a vibratory tool. A concrete truck can carry 10 cubic yards of soil-slurry, which is adequate to backfill approximately 5 linear feet of pipeline.

Work hours for the trenched portions of the pipeline would be established to minimize noise in the evenings and minimize disruption to traffic during peak periods. These work hours would also be largely dependent upon encroachment permit conditions from the Cities of Port Hueneme and Oxnard and the County of Ventura. All roadways and surface improvements disturbed during pipeline installation would be restored following construction. Generally, trench spoils would be hauled off site to the local landfill for use as cover material, or stored for re-use at other construction sites. Based upon an installation rate of 200 feet per day, the average amount of excess spoils requiring removal would be approximately 100 to 200 cubic yards per day. This would require approximately 10 to 20 truck trips per day per construction team. The average daily number of trucks hauling material to and from a typical construction team



(including the delivery of pipe sections, miscellaneous supplies, hauling of imported materials, and removal of excess spoils) would be about 35.

Construction would typically occur 8 hours per day, 5 days per week, except for the trenchless crossings, which would occur 24 hours per day, and where traffic conditions require non-traditional working hours. All construction activities would be restricted to the rights-of-way approved by the applicable landowner or agency.

Staging for the project would be dependent upon the contractor and subcontractors. Typically, the pipe would be transported to the site and staged along the alignment ready for placement. Equipment and other construction materials may require a storage site. If the contractor is local, they may stage equipment and materials in their own yard. Alternately, and in the case of contractors from outside of the area, staging would likely be accomplished at strategic locations on leased land along selected alignments of the pipeline.

The width of the disturbance corridor for the pipeline construction would, under typical circumstances, be 20 to 65 feet depending on the availability of land. Trenchless methods may require larger areas to facilitate construction.

For crossings of railroads, creeks, and flood control channels, it is expected that a trenchless technology would be used. Trenchless technologies include microtunneling, HDD, and boring and jacking. Typical trenchless crossings involve the construction of pits on each side of the crossing, and a machine is used to excavate a horizontal hole under the structure, either inserting a casing or directly installing the pipeline segment. If a pipe casing is used, pipeline segments are installed into the casing and connected to the in-place segments of pipeline on either side of the crossing.

3.4.2 Outfall Installation

The following installation description is based upon the anticipated trenchless installation technique of horizontal directional drilling (HDD) to install the initial 2,350 feet of outfall pipeline, while the remaining 2,750 feet, which includes the diffuser section, will be installed directly on the seafloor. The offshore installation methods described below are typical, and a final installation work plan will be developed in coordination with the final engineering design and further refined based on the contactors chosen methodology and available equipment. The final installation work plan will need to address critical procedures to ensure safe installation of the proposed facilities.

Pipe materials being considered for the HDD segment consist of steel and high density polyethylene (HDPE). In either case, the pipe wall thickness will be designed to withstand loading conditions anticipated both during and after HDD installation. If steel is used for the HDD section, the outside diameter (OD) of the pipeline will be approximately 32 inches; if HDPE is utilized, the OD of the pipeline will be approximately 36 to 42 inches in diameter to provide a 30-inch ID.

Description of the offshore outfall installation has been divided into four primary components: outfall HDD installation; pipe stringing; outfall seafloor and diffuser installation; and onshore vault construction.



3.4.2.1 Outfall HDD Installation Procedures

HDD is a well-established trenchless installation method used to construct underground utilities and pipelines beneath environmentally sensitive obstacles, such as waterways and beaches. It has been used to install numerous pipelines under rivers and creeks and along the U.S. east, west, and gulf coasts over the past 20 years.

Installation of a pipeline by HDD is generally accomplished in three primary stages. The first stage, known as the pilot hole, consists of directionally drilling a small diameter pilot hole along a designated directional path. The second stage, typically referred to as either prereaming or reaming, involves enlarging this pilot hole to a diameter suitable for installation of the pipeline. The third and final stage, known as pullback, consists of pulling the prefabricated pipeline pull section through the enlarged hole to the HDD rig. This three-stage process is illustrated schematically in Figure 3.4-2. Drilling fluid is utilized in all three stages of the process, and is discussed later in this Section.

Figure 3.4-2 Typical HDD Three Stage Process



Mobilization and Rig Up. Rig-up consists of moving the drill rig and associated auxiliary equipment onto the drill site and positioning it for drilling. The HDD rig will be positioned at the onshore entry point within the parking lot. The proposed HDD spread will be moved onto a site in approximately eight to twelve tractor-trailer loads. A workspace of 130 feet by 300 feet is anticipated for the proposed operations. Space requirements will vary depending on the make and model of the drilling rig and how the various components are positioned. The locations of the principal components of the spread (rig ramp, drill pipe, and control trailer) are fixed by the entry point. The rig ramp must be positioned in line with the drilled segment and typically less than 25 feet back from the entry point. The control trailer and drill pipe must be positioned adjacent to the rig. A typical HDD rig site plan is shown in Figure 3.4-3. It is anticipated that the rig-up process will take two to three days.

Figure 3.4-3 Preliminary HDD Rig Site Plan

Pre-Construction Marine Site Survey. Prior to the start of any marine construction activities at the site, an electronic underwater survey will be conducted to establish baseline seafloor bathymetry and to locate any objects or features on the seafloor. This inspection data will be used for comparative analysis at the end of the marine construction work to ensure that

Calleguas Municipal Water District Regional Sa

Documents

2007 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report