Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-07-12 e-packet@7:00Wednesday, July 12, 2017 7:00 PM City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA Municipal Services Building, Council Chambers 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA City Council Regular Meeting Agenda July 12, 2017City Council Regular Meeting Agenda PEOPLE OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO You are invited to offer your suggestions. In order that you may know our method of conducting Council business, we proceed as follows: The regular meetings of the City Council are held on the second and fourth Wednesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. in the Municipal Services Building, Council Chambers, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. The City Clerk will read successively the items of business appearing on the Agenda. As she completes reading an item, it will be ready for Council action. PRADEEP GUPTA, Mayor LIZA NORMANDY, Vice Mayor KARYL MATSUMOTO, Councilwoman RICHARD A. GARBARINO, Councilman MARK ADDIEGO, Councilman FRANK RISSO, City Treasurer KRISTA MARTINELLI, City Clerk MIKE FUTRELL, City Manager JASON ROSENBERG, City Attorney PLEASE SILENCE CELL PHONES AND PAGERS HEARING ASSISTANCE EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE HEARING IMPAIRED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS In accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.5, any writing or document that is a public record, relates to an open session agenda item, and is distributed less than 72 hours prior to a regular meeting will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall. If, however, the document or writing is not distributed until the regular meeting to which it relates, then the document or writing will be made available to the public at the location of the meeting, as listed on this agenda. The address of City Hall is 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, California 94080. Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017 July 12, 2017City Council Regular Meeting Agenda CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AGENDA REVIEW PRESENTATIONS Proclamation recognizing July as Parks and Recreation Month. (Pradeep Gupta, Mayor) 1. Recognition of Natalie Cedeno for being named “2017 Mother of the Year” by Everything South City. (Liza Normandy, Vice Mayor) 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS COUNCIL COMMENTS/REQUESTS PUBLIC HEARING A report regarding an ordinance establishing the Antoinette Lane underground utility district (CIP project no. st1702). (Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer and Kathleen Phalen, Swinerton) 3. Ordinance establishing the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District (CIP Project st1702). 3a. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS Report regarding a resolution making findings and adopting the addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Project, and directing staff to begin implementation of the Project. (Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer) 4. A resolution making findings and adopting the addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Project, and directing staff to begin implementation of the Project. 4a. Report regarding a resolution awarding the construction contract to Blocka Construction, Inc., of Fremont, California for the Sign Hill Generator Replacement Project (Project No. pf1506) in an amount of $464,000 and authorizing a total construction budget of $580,000. (Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer & Scott Christie, Swinerton) 5. Page 3 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017 July 12, 2017City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Resolution awarding the construction contract to Blocka Construction of Fremont, California for the Sign Hill Generator Replacement Project (Project No. pf1506) in an amount of $464,000 and authorizing a total construction budget of $580,000. 5a. Report regarding a resolution approving participation by the City of South San Francisco in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative. (Eliza Manchester, Management Analyst) 6. Resolution approving the participation by the City of South San Francisco in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative. 6a. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion to approve the Minutes from the meeting of June 28, 2017.7. Motion confirming payment registers for July 12, 2017. (Richard Lee, Director of Finance) 8. Report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $9,303 in donations to support the Library’s Summer Learning Challenge and the Community Learning Center, and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year 2017-18 Operating Budget. (Valerie Sommer, Library Director) 9. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of $9,303 in donations to support the Library’s Summer Learning Challenge and the Community Learning Center, and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year 2017-18 Operating Budget. 9a. Report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $35,000 in grant funding from the Woodlawn Foundation to support Project Read’s Learning Wheels Family Literacy Program and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year 2017-18 Operating Budget. (Valerie Sommer, Library Director) 10. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of $35,000 in grant funding from the Woodlawn Foundation to support Project Read’s Learning Wheels Family Literacy Program and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year 2017-18 Operating Budget. 10a. Report regarding resolutions to pledge Sewer Service Charges to repayment of State Water Resources Control Board Loan financing and declaring the City Council’s intent to reimburse the Sewer Enterprise Fund from State Water Resources Control Board Loan proceeds for the Water Quality Control Plant Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project capital expenditures made in the Sewer Enterprise Fund prior to the receipt of those Loan proceeds. (Richard Lee, Director of Finance and Justin Lovell, Public Works Administrator) 11. Page 4 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017 July 12, 2017City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Resolution declaring the City of South San Francisco’s intent to reimburse the Sewer Enterprise Fund from State Water Resources Control Board loan proceeds for South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Wet Weather and Digester Improvements project capital improvement expenditures made by the City of South San Francisco prior to the receipt of those loan proceeds and prior to the issuance of related state funding. 11a. Resolution pledging sewer service charges revenue from the Sewer Enterprise Fund to payments to the State Water Resources Control Board for loan repayments to finance the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Wet Weather and Digester Improvement Project. 11b. ITEMS FROM COUNCIL – COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT Page 5 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-628 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:1. Proclamation recognizing July as Parks and Recreation Month. (Pradeep Gupta, Mayor) City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ IN RECOGNITION OF JULY AS PARKS AND RECREATION MONTH IN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO: GET YOUR PLAY ON! July 12, 2017 WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation programs are an integral part of South San Francisco and communities throughout this country; and WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation are vitally important to establishing and maintaining the quality of life in South San Francisco, ensuring the health of all citizens, and contributing to the economic and environmental well-being of a community and region; and WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation facilities are the places where everyone can discover the power of play, regardless of age or ability, from learning a new sport to meeting new friends on the playground or field; and WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation programs go hand-in-hand with the City of South San Francisco’s Healthy Living, Healthy City Initiative, helping to build strong, active communities that aid in the prevention of chronic disease, provide therapeutic recreation services for those who are mentally or physically disabled, and also improve the mental and emotional health of all citizens; and WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation programs provide opportunities for people of all ages to achieve healthier lifestyles, promote and understand nature and conservation, as well as bringing members of the community closer; and WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation open spaces and natural areas ensure the ecological beauty of our communities and provide places for children and children-at- heart to connect with nature, as well as appreciate and respect the great outdoors; WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco recognizes and values the many benefits derived from Parks and Recreation resources and encourages everyone in the community and nation to, “Get Your Play On!” NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby proclaim July as Parks and Recreation Month. ________________________________ Pradeep Gupta, Mayor ________________________________ Liza Normandy, Vice Mayor ________________________________ Mark Addiego, Councilmember ________________________________ Richard Garbarino, Councilmember ________________________________ Karyl Matsumoto, Councilmember Dated: July 12, 2017 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-639 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:2. Recognition of Natalie Cedeno for being named “2017 Mother of the Year” by Everything South City.(Liza Normandy, Vice Mayor) City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO Certificate of Recognition Natalie Cedeno The South San Francisco City Council does hereby congratulate Natalie Cedeno for being named “2017 Mother of the Year” by Everything South City. Your dedication and commitment as a loving mother of four children is truly valued by the City of South San Francisco. Presented on this 12th day of July, 2017, by the City Council of South San Francisco Pradeep Gupta, Mayor Liza Normandy, Vice Mayor Mark Addiego, Councilmember Richard Garbarino, Councilmember Karyl Matsumoto, Councilmember City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-661 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:3. A report regarding an ordinance establishing the Antoinette Lane underground utility district (CIP project no. st1702).(Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer and Kathleen Phalen, Swinerton) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council hold a public hearing and,if finding it to be in the public interest,introduce an ordinance establishing an underground utility district along Antoinette Lane.It is further recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute all agreements and make all acknowledgements needed to initiate the undergrounding project upon the district establishment. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION On May 24,2017,the City Council directed staff to set a public hearing date to establish an underground utility district (District)along Antoinette Lane,a relatively short public street extending approximately 1,300 feet from one block south to one block north of Chestnut Avenue.The proposed District also included an additional 350 foot,4-pole spur.However,as discussed below,staff now recommends excluding the parcels served by this spur segment from the District due to private development concerns. The proposed District will qualify for California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)Rule 20A and Telecommunication Rule 32 funding,and the City has sufficient Rule 20A work credits to direct the Utility Companies to participate in the project and fund the work.This District will be adjacent to the City’s Centennial Trail and will provide access to the City’s planned Community Civic Campus.Four existing City- owned streetlights that are mounted on utility poles will need to be replaced at the City’s expense,which is roughly estimated at $15,000 per streetlight.Replacement lights will be coordinated with the street theme to be developed for the Community Civic Center Campus project. SSFMC §13.16.020 authorizes the City Council to hold public hearings to ascertain whether public necessity, health,safety,or welfare requires removal of overhead utilities and the underground installation of those facilities.Staff notified all affected property owners thirty days prior to this public hearing.If,after the public hearing,the City Council finds establishing a District to be in the general public interest,it may adopt an ordinance establishing the District boundaries. This ordinance must require: ·Removal of all overhead electric and communications facilities; ·Retrofit of all properties to receive underground services within the District; ·Authorize PG&E to discontinue overhead service; and ·Fix a time within which such work must be done. Underground Utility District Boundaries The boundaries of the district map (Exhibit A of the associated ordinance)have been revised to remove several parcels previously shown as included in the May 24,2017 presentation to the City Council.Subsequent to that staff presentation,a developer applied to the City to build housing on the parcels southwest of the Chestnut/Antoinette intersection and served by the 350-foot spur line.The developer asked that these parcels not be included in the District because it plans to reroute all on-site utilities to underground trenches around the City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-661 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:3. not be included in the District because it plans to reroute all on-site utilities to underground trenches around the perimeter of the development,an action that cannot be conducted under Rule 20A.Omitting the 1,300 foot 4- pole spur from the District saves the City about $400,000 of its Rule 20A credits.Staff also removed the parcels owned by BART and the shopping center (anchored by Safeway)because these parcels do not have overhead utilities. The revised District proposal now contains 11 utility poles along the Antoinette Lane right-of-way and only two privately-owned apartment buildings that have active overhead services.The Pet Club has overhead service but no undergrounding work is needed to restore this service because the building will be demolished and the land developed consistent with the Community Civic Campus project. Eligibility for Rule 20A Funding To be eligible for Rule 20A funding,the City Council must find that a utility underground district is in the general public interest for one or more of the following reasons: a.Undergrounding avoids or eliminates an unusually heavy concentration of overhead electric facilities; b.The street right-of-way is extensively used by the general public and carries a heavy volume of pedestrian or vehicular traffic; c.The street right-of-way adjoins or passes through a civic area,public recreation area,or an area of unusual scenic interest to the general public; and/or d.The street or road or right-of-way is an arterial street or major collector. The adjacent Centennial Trail and the planned Community Civic Center allow the proposed Antoinette Lane District to satisfy the third criterion and so qualify it for Rule 20A funding. Rule 20A requires that the City Council acknowledge that wheelchair access is in the public interest and has been considered as a basis for defining the boundaries of the District.Replacing the utility poles with a smaller number of carefully placed streetlight and utility cabinets and repairing the sidewalks will improve wheelchair access, and so the City Council may make this acknowledgement. Rule 20A(3)allows the City Council to direct PG&E to use City credits to pay for up to 100 feet of property underground electric service laterals and up to $1,500 per service for electric panel conversions per affected property within the District.Staff recommends this use of credits rather than requiring individual property owners to bear this cost. California Environment Quality Act The project is categorically exempt from California Environment Quality Act (CEQA)requirements in accordance with 14 CCR 15302(d),which exempts conversion of overhead electric utility distribution system facilities to underground including connection to existing overhead electric utility distribution lines where the surface is restored to the condition existing prior to the undergrounding. FUNDING Funding of approximately $475,000 is budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2017-18 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)project number st1702.This funding will pay for the joint trench design and project management.The City will be reimbursed from Rule 20A money for the design and construction work.The total cost to underground the utilities is estimated to be $3 million. CONCLUSION After holding the public hearing,if the City finds utility undergrounding to be in the public interest,it may City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-661 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:3. After holding the public hearing,if the City finds utility undergrounding to be in the public interest,it may waive the reading and introduce the attached ordinance to initiate establishment of the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District.Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute all agreements and forms needed to initiate the design and construction work upon establishment of the District. The City Council may then adopt this ordinance at its next regular meeting on July 26, 2017. Attachment: Presentation - Antoinette Underground Utility District City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ An t o i n e t t e L a n e Un d e r g r o u n d U t i l i t y D i s t r i c t Ju l y 1 2 , 2 0 1 7 Su m m a r y  Re c e i v e r e p o r t o n t h e p r o p o s e d A n t o i n e t t e L a n e Un d e r g r o u n d U t i l i t y D i s t r i c t  Ho l d p u b l i c h e a r i n g t o r e c e i v e p u b l i c c o m m e n t o n th e p r o p o s e d d i s t r i c t  Wa i v e t h e r e a d i n g a n d i n t r o d u c e a n o r d i n a n c e t o es t a b l i s h t h e S p r u c e A v e n u e U n d e r g r o u n d U t i l i t y Di s t r i c t Pr o p o s e d D i s t r i c t D e s c r i p t i o n  CP U C R u l e 2 0 A a n d R u l e 3 2 a l l o w c i t i e s t o d i r e c t U t i l i t i e s to u n d e r g r o u n d t h e i r o v e r h e a d f a c i l i t i e s  Pr o p o s e d D i s t r i c t q u a l i f i e s a s b e i n g i n t h e g e n e r a l p u b l i c in t e r e s t b e c a u s e A n t o i n e t t e L a n e a d j o i n s a c i v i c a n d pu b l i c r e c r e a t i o n a r e a  An t o i n e t t e L a n e i s 1 , 3 0 0 ’ w i t h 1 1 p o l e s s u p p o r t i n g P G & E , AT & T , a n d C o m c a s t a n d 4 C i t y s t r e e t l i g h t s  Tw o c o m m e r c i a l p r o p e r t i e s w i l l n e e d n e w u n d e r g r o u n d se r v i c e s Pr o p o s e d A n t o i n e t t e D i s t r i c t  Sc o p e o f w o r k i s d e s i g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n o f un d e r g r o u n d d i s t r i b u t i o n l i n e s , n e w s e r v i c e l a t e r a l s , an d e l e c t r i c p a n e l c o n v e r s i o n a n d r e c o n n e c t i o n .  Co n c e p t u a l p r o j e c t e s t i m a t e i s ~ $ 3 m i l l i o n ( C I P s t 1 7 0 2 )  Co n c e p t u a l e s t i m a t e o f P G & E ’ s s h a r e i s ~ $ 1 . 5 4 m i l l i o n  Ci t y ’ s P G & E w o r k c r e d i t s a r e ~ $ 7 . 6 m i l l i o n ( $ 6 . 6 m i l l i o n ac c r u e d b a l a n c e + $ 1 m i l l i o n l o a n )  Co m m u n i c a t i o n u t i l i t i e s w i l l r e i m b u r s e C i t y f o r t h e i r sh a r e o f t h e w o r k  Ci t y w i l l p a y f o r n e w s t r e e t l i g h t s ~ $ 6 0 , 0 0 0 Sc o p e a n d B u d g e t Co n t e n t o f O r d i n a n c e Re c i t a l : J u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g u n d e r g r o u n d ut i l i t y d i s t r i c t Se c t i o n 1 : F i n d i n g t h a t u n d e r g r o u n d i n g i s i n t h e ge n e r a l p u b l i c i n t e r e s t Se c t i o n 2 : A u t h o r i z i n g C i t y M a n a g e r t o e x e c u t e ag r e e m e n t s Se c t i o n 3 : D i r e c t i o n t o u t i l i t i e s a n d p r o p e r t y o w n e r s Se c t i o n 4 : S e v e r a b i l i t y Se c t i o n 5 : P u b l i c a t i o n a n d E f f e c t i v e D a t e Di r e c t i o n t o U t i l i t i e s  Ut i l i t i e s s h a l l c o m m e n c e w o r k o n i n s t a l l a t i o n o f un d e r g r o u n d f a c i l i t i e s  PG & E s h a l l u s e R u l e 2 0 A c r e d i t s t o p r o v i d e p r o p e r t i e s up t o 1 0 0 f e e t o f n e w u n d e r g r o u n d s e r v i c e l a t e r a l s  PG & E s h a l l m a n a g e t h e e l e c t r i c p a n e l c o n v e r s i o n s an d s h a l l u s e C i t y ’ s R u l e 2 0 A c r e d i t s f o r t h i s e f f o r t .  Th e d a t e f o r c o n v e r s i o n s h a l l b e e s t a b l i s h e d a t t h e ti m e o f c o n s t r u c t i o n c o n t r a c t a w a r d Di r e c t i o n f o r P r o p e r t i e s  Ow n e r s s h a l l g r a n t R i g h t s o f E n t r y f o r i n s p e c t i o n a n d co n s t r u c t i o n  Pr o p e r t y o w n e r s s h a l l c o r r e c t n o n - c o m p l i a n t p a n e l s as a c o n d i t i o n o f r e c e i v i n g s e r v i c e s  On c e a l l e l e c t r i c a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n s e r v i c e s h a v e be e n c o n v e r t e d t o u n d e r g r o u n d , n o n e w a b o v e g r o u n d el e c t r i c o r c o m m u n i c a t i o n s e r v i c e s m a y b e i n s t a l l e d Co n c e p t u a l R u l e 2 0 A B u d g e t * Pr o p o s e d  An t o i n e t t e  La n e  Un d e r g r o u n d  Ut i l i t y  Di s t r i c t Av a i l a b l e  PG & E  Cr e d i t s Ac c u m u l a t e d  Cr e d i t s $ 6 , 5 7 8 , 0 0 0   Av a i l a b l e  to  Bo r r o w $ 1 , 0 1 6 , 0 0 0   Co m m i t t e d  to  Sp r u c e  Av e  UU D ($ 3 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) To t a l  Av a i l a b l e  Cr e d i t s $ 4 , 5 9 4 , 0 0 0   Pr e l i m i n a r y  Es t i m a t e  of  PG & E  Co s t s Q u a n t i t y U n i t  Co s t Ut i l i t y  Un d e r g r o u n d i n g 1 , 3 0 0  lf $ 1 , 2 0 0 / l f $ 1 , 5 6 0 , 0 0 0   Se r v i c e  La t e r a l s 2 $ 1 , 5 0 0   $3 , 0 0 0   Co m m e r c i a l  Pa n e l  Co n v e r s i o n s 2 $ 5 , 0 0 0   $1 0 , 0 0 0   Es t i m a t e d  Wo r k  Cr e d i t  Co s t $ 1 , 5 7 3 , 0 0 0   Re m a i n i n g  Ru l e  20 A  Cr e d i t  Ba l a n c e $ 3 , 0 2 1 , 0 0 0   * V a l u e s a r e a p p r o x i m a t e a n d h a v e b e e n r o u n d e d t o n e a r e s t $ 1 0 0 0 Co n c e p t u a l S c h e d u l e ` 20 1 7 2 0 1 8 2 0 1 9 Q1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Es t a b l i s h  Di s t r i c t Ci t y Qu e u e  (R e p l a c i n g  Sp r u c e  UU D ) PG & E Ci v i l / J o i n t  Tr e n c h  In t e n t  De s i g n JT  Co n s u l t a n t Ut i l i t y  Co m p a n y  De s i g n s PG & E ,  AT & T ,   Co m c a s t Ci v i l / J o i n t  Tr e n c h  Co m p o s i t e  De s i g n JT  Co n s u l t a n t Co n t r a c t  Bi d d i n g / A w a r d Ci t y Su b m i t t a l s / E q u i p m e n t  Pr o c u r e m e n t Jo i n t  Tr e n c h / S e r v i c e  La t e r a l  Co n s t r u c t i o n Co n t r a c t o r St r e e t l i g h t  Co n s t r u c t i o n  (C o o r d i n a t e  w/ C C ) Wi r i n g  an d  Eq u i p m e n t  In s t a l l a t i o n Se r v i c e  Co n v e r s i o n s Po l e  Re m o v a l Si t e  Re s t o r a t i o n Co n t r a c t  Cl o s e o u t / C o u n c i l  Ac c e p t a n c e Ci t y U t i l i t i e s C o n s u l t a n t C o n t r a c t o r Ne x t S t e p s  Ad o p t t h e o r d i n a n c e t o e s t a b l i s h t h e A n t o i n e t t e La n e U t i l i t y U n d e r g r o u n d D i s t r i c t  De v e l o p j o i n t t r e n c h i n t e n t d e s i g n  Co n t i n u e c l o s e c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h U t i l i t i e s w h i l e pr o j e c t e n t e r s q u e u e p r i o r t o t h e i r d e s i g n w o r k Qu e s t i o n s ? City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-592 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:3a. Ordinance establishing the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District (CIP Project st1702). WHEREAS,the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”)has authorized electric and telecommunication utilities to convert overhead utility lines and facilities to underground pursuant to Electric Rule 20 and Telecommunication Rule 32; and WHEREAS,pursuant to certain criteria,CPUC rules allow participating cities and counties to adopt legislation establishing underground utility districts within which existing overhead electric distribution and telecommunication distribution and service facilities will be converted to underground facilities; and WHEREAS,the City of South San Francisco (“City’)Municipal Code Chapter 13.16 authorizes the City Council,after holding a public hearing,to designate districts within which all existing overhead poles,overhead wires and overhead equipment associated with the distribution of electric power,telecommunication services, and cable television, will be removed and replaced with underground wires and facilities; and WHEREAS,the City’s Fiscal Year 2017-2018 Capital Improvement Program project st1702 calls for converting the overhead utility lines and facilities on Antoinette Lane to underground; and WHEREAS,Pacific Gas &Electric (PG&E),AT&T (formerly American Telephone &Telegraph),and Comcast,together known as the “Utilities,”have overhead power and telecommunications along Antoinette Lane; and WHEREAS,to effect this undergrounding,the City desires to establish an Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District,extending approximately 1,300 feet from one block south to one block north of Chestnut Avenue,as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS,upon finding that undergrounding the overhead utilities along Antoinette Lane is in the public interest,the City may establish an underground utility district containing all of the parcels within the district,as identified on the Exhibit A district boundary map,thereby allowing the City to expend a portion of its accumulated Rule 20A work credits to fund the utility conversion; and WHEREAS,the City has accumulated $6,578,321 of PG&E Rule 20A work credits as of March 31,2017,and may borrow up to five years of future credits estimated at $1,015,945,yielding $7,594,266 in work credits that may be used for qualified underground utility conversion projects pursuant to CPUC Rule 20A; and WHEREAS,the City has committed approximately $3,000,000 of its Rule 20A work credit balance to the previously established Spruce Avenue Underground Utility District,leaving an uncommitted work credit balance of approximately $4,594,000; and WHEREAS,the estimated draw of Rule 20A work credits to complete the Antoinette Lane utility undergrounding is $1,573,000,an amount within the limit that may be funded from the City’s available balance; City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-592 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:3a. and WHEREAS,the City and the Utilities have consulted and agreed that each utility shall complete the engineering design of its respective portion of the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District project; and WHEREAS,the City and the affected utilities have consulted and agreed that the City shall be designated as “Lead Agent”also known as “Trenching Agent,”responsible for preparing the trench profile and composite joint trench drawings,and managing trenching,installation of substructures,pavement restoration,and such other trench-related work; and WHEREAS,as Lead Agent,the City will award and manage contracts for the joint trench intent and joint trench composite designs and for construction of the work; and WHEREAS,the costs for design and construction,conceptually estimated at $3 million will be budgeted and paid from the Capital Improvement Program project number st1702; and WHEREAS,in accordance with the Form B cost allocation,the Utilities will reimburse the City for the costs to design and construction the underground facilities,with half of the estimated reimbursement due upon construction contract award,and the remaining reimbursable costs due upon construction contract completion; and WHEREAS,the City and the affected utilities have agreed to work to a schedule which meets their respective capabilities and have further agreed to waive any administrative fees,costs,or special street restoration requirements for the purposes of this project; and WHEREAS,the City desires to expedite this project by all means feasible to minimize interference with construction of the adjacent Community Civic Center project and so requests that PG&E substitute this project for the Spruce Avenue Underground Utility District placed in the PG&E queue in Fall 2016 such that the Antoinette Lane utility design may begin in Fall 2017 and the construction phase may begin in Spring 2018; and WHEREAS,the City notified all affected property owners within the proposed Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District and invited same to attend a public hearing to discuss formation of the proposed district; and WHEREAS,the City Council has received the staff report recommending that the area identified in Exhibit A should be designated as an underground utility district within which all existing overhead poles,overhead wires,and overhead equipment associated with the distribution of electric power,telecommunication services, and cable television should be removed and replaced with underground wires and facilities; and WHEREAS,a public hearing was duly held on July 12,2017 in the Council Chambers of the City of South San Francisco,at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard,and the City Council did consider any and all objections or protests that were raised by the owners of property within the proposed district, pertaining to designating this area an underground utility district; and WHEREAS,the City Council has determined that,pursuant to Section 13.16.020 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code,the public necessity,health,safety,and welfare requires the removal of overhead wires and overhead structures along Antoinette Lane, with underground re-installation of said wires and facilities; and City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-592 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:3a. WHEREAS,the City has consulted with the affected utilities and such utilities have agreed that the proposed underground conversion district,designated the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District,as described in Exhibit A,adjoins or passes through a civic area or public recreation area or an area of unusual scenic interest to the general public, thereby qualifying as a Rule 20A District in accordance with CPUC rules; and WHEREAS,after establishing the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District,the City will need to enter into standard agreements with PG&E and complete other standard forms and documentation,including,but not limited to,the “Agreement to Perform Tariff Scheduled Related Work,Rule 20A -General Conditions,”the “Agreement to Perform Tariff Schedule Related Work,Rule 20A -Electric Panel Service Conversion,”the “Letter of Streetlight Agreement,” and the “Rule 20A Wheelchair Access Consideration,”; and WHEREAS,upon the recommendation of staff,the City Council has determined that the proposed Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1.Findings The City Council of the City of South San Francisco (“City”) hereby makes the following findings: 1. Finds and determines that the above recitals are true and correct. 2.The establishment of the Antoinette Underground Utility District,the areas as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto,is in the general public interest because the street right-of-way adjoins or passes through a civic area, public recreation area, or an area of unusual scenic interest to the general public. 3.The City Council acknowledges that wheelchair access is in the public interest and has been considered as a basis for defining the boundaries of the Antoinette Underground Utility District in that replacing the utility poles with a smaller number of carefully placed streetlight and utility cabinets and repairing the sidewalks will improve wheelchair access. 4.The public interest requires the removal of all existing utility poles,(excepting those poles supporting streetlights and traffic signals),overhead utility wires,and associated overhead structures,and the installation of underground wires and facilities for supplying electric power,communication,or similar associated services within the areas as shown in Exhibit A,attached hereto,along Antoinette Lane,with such area being designated and established by the City Council as the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District. SECTION 2.Authorization to Execute Agreements Upon establishment of the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District (“District”),the City Council authorizes the City Manager to complete,execute,and transmit on behalf of the City all agreements, acknowledgements,and forms necessarily to complete the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 3 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-592 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:3a. acknowledgements,and forms necessarily to complete the Antoinette Lane Underground Utility District project,subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney and to provide PG&E direction to implement the City’s desires for an expedited schedule. SECTION 3.Undergrounding of Utilities in the District A.The affected utility companies,cable television services,and other affected services shall commence work on design for installation of underground facilities in the District and,as the design phase of the project is complete and ready for conversion from overhead to underground utility facilities,all fronting property owners shall be notified by first class letter, postage pre-paid, of the schedule for conversion of all utility service lines. B.PG&E shall use the Rule 20A underground conversion allocation computed pursuant to decisions of the CPUC for the purpose of providing to each premises requiring it in the District a maximum of one hundred (100)feet of individual electric service trenching and conductor,as well as backfill,paving and conduit,if required,and each other utility serving each property shall provide service trenching and conductor in accordance with its rules and tariffs on file with the CPUC or as required by its Franchise Agreement with the City of South San Francisco. C.PG&E shall use said underground conversion allowance allocation to manage the conversion of the electric service panels in the District,up to a maximum amount of $1,500 per service entrance excluding permit fees.The City shall request that PG&E manage the conversion of electric service panels in the District to accept underground service in accordance with the option made available by PG&E in its “Agreement to Perform Tariff Schedule Related Work -Rule 20A Electric Panel Service Conversion”(Form 79-1113)and use Rule 20A credits for any remaining expense.Each property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the conduit and termination box located on, under, or within any structure on the premises served. D.Owners of property within the District affected by the undergrounding project shall additionally be responsible for correcting any existing violations of the City’s electrical code with regard to their electrical panel and downstream facilities and for executing Right of Entry agreements with the City so that PG&E may connect the premises to the new underground electrical facilities. E.Once all services have been converted from overhead to underground,the utility companies,cable television services and other affected services shall remove all poles (except as specified above)and associated overhead facilities in the District. F.The City Council does hereby establish that the date on which affected property owners within the District must have installed on their premises all electrical facility changes necessary to receive service from the underground facilities of PG&E and the order to remove all poles,overhead wires and associated overhead structures and the underground installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric communicant or similar or associate service with the District,shall be established by a schedule determined at the time a bid is awarded for construction of the project,as required by a phasing plan,or by dates as may be set by a subsequent City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 4 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-592 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:3a. schedule, or before July 1, 2019. G.Once all services have been converted from overhead to underground and all related above-ground structures have been removed within the District,it shall be unlawful for any person to erect,construct,place, keep,maintain,continue,employ or operate any pole,overhead wire or associated overhead structure in any public street,alley or way within the District,pursuant to Section 13.16.040 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code. SECTION 4.Severability If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid or unconstitutional,the remainder of this Ordinance,including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances,shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect.To this end, provisions of this Ordinance are severable.The City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby declares that it would have passed each section,subsection,subdivision,paragraph,sentence,clause,or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections,subsections,subdivisions,paragraphs,sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable. SECTION 5.Publication and Effective Date Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933,a summary of this Ordinance shall be prepared by the City Attorney.At least five (5)days prior to the Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted,the City Clerk shall (1)publish the Summary,and (2)post in the City Clerk’s Office a certified copy of this Ordinance.Within fifteen (15)days after the adoption of this Ordinance,the City Clerk shall (1) publish the summary,and (2)post in the City Clerk’s Office a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance along with the names of those City Council members voting for and against this Ordinance or otherwise voting. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 5 of 5 powered by Legistar™ 0933300 4 0 922 920 918 942 950 AN T O I N E T T E L N MISSION RD ANTOINETTE LN EL CAMINO REAL CH E S T N U T A V E A ST O A K A V E ANT O I N E T T E L N Exhibit A City of South San FranciscoProposed Antoinette LaneUtility Underground District 0 250 500125 Feet Legend Utility District Boundary Properties in Utility District City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-662 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:4. Report regarding a resolution making findings and adopting the addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Project,and directing staff to begin implementation of the Project.(Sam Bautista,Principal Engineer) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution making findings and adopting the addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Project and directing staff to begin implementation of the Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Project,including the Wet Weather Improvements,Digester Rehabilitation,and Green Energy Projects at the Water Quality Control Plant (collectively referred to as the “Project”). BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION In 1997,the City of South San Francisco (“City”)completed a facility plan for the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP)to address the need to comply with its national pollutant discharge elimination system (NPDES)permit requirements,add treatment capacity,and improve treatment reliability.In 2011,the City prepared and adopted an update to the 1997 Facility Plan.The 2011 Facility Plan Update was developed to address future capacity expansion and regulatory compliance needs across a 20-year planning horizon.It also provided the basis for the project designs that were proposed and analyzed in the South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects (CIPs)Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (adopted IS/MND) prepared in June 2013. The proposed projects included three different components of the WQCP’s Capital Improvements Projects: •Wet Weather Improvements Project •Green Energy Project (solar panels over a covered parking area) •Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project The IS/MND was published on June 24,2013 and adopted on September 11,2013.Subsequently,the City revisited which type of digestion processing system to build.A more efficient,alternative processing system was developed,designed,sized,and selected for implementation.The City’s modified digester project elements were integrated into a somewhat modified design for the Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project portion of the overall set of CIPs that were covered in the adopted 2013 IS/MND.The other two elements (Wet Weather Improvements and Green Energy) are unchanged from that in the adopted IS/MND. The following bullet list presents the proposed project modifications for the Digester City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-662 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:4. Replacement/Rehabilitation Project: •Digesters 1 and 2 will still be demolished,but only Digester 1 will be rebuilt,maintaining the same size and location as the original project. •The rebuilt Digester 1 will include a high-solids digestion system,instead of the conventional digester included in the original design and analyzed in the adopted IS/MND. •The rebuilt Digester 1 will have a different set of heating and mixing equipment in its control building than was proposed in the previous project designs.However,the equipment will be placed in the same building and be of similar construction/operational details to those in the previous designs.As in the previous design, there would also be piping improvements made to Digester Control Building 2. •Thickening equipment which supports the operation of Digester 1 will be included. •A polymer storage facility in the Dissolved Air Flotation Thickening (DAFT)Building to support the new thickener will be added •Digester Control Building 3 will be demolished without replacement. •A new element called the digester gas conditioning system,to be constructed on a concrete slab that would be placed at existing grade,will be included.The proposed digester gas conditioning system would remove digester gas contaminants,including hydrogen sulfide (H2S),siloxanes,and water, which would otherwise cause problems with the WQCP’s cogeneration equipment if not removed through fuel conditioning. •A new element called the primary sludge screen,to be placed on existing paved areas or on top of existing structures within the previous project footprint, will be included. •The support equipment (e.g.,air compressors,pumps,heat exchangers)for the new digester system will also be also modified to address the different functional demands of that system. The Wet Weather Improvements and the Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation elements are now formally called the “Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project”.These two elements are the same as were described and analyzed in the adopted IS/MND,except for the minor design changes described above.The Green Energy Project,which remains unchanged from that described in the adopted IS/MND,will be implemented separately from the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project. The environmental consulting firm of Environmental Science Associates (ESA)prepared the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND)for the Project in 2013 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).The 2013 IS/MND analyzed the potential impacts related to air quality, biological resources,cultural resources,hazardous materials,and noise associated with the original Project.The IS/MND identified mitigation measures that will reduce all potential impacts to a less than significant level. Subsequently,an addendum to the adopted IS/MND was developed in April 2017 that evaluated an improved digestion process relative to the original project in the adopted IS/MND,and to demonstrated that the modified Project does not bring any new significant impacts.The addendum to the IS/MND is a required document to obtain loans from state and Federal agencies, such as the State Revolving Fund and WIFIA programs. The addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was distributed to the State Clearinghouse and circulated for public review and comment on April 21,2017;the 30-day public review period ended on May 21,2017.One comment letter was received from the State Water Resources Control Board.Though the City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-662 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:4. May 21,2017.One comment letter was received from the State Water Resources Control Board.Though the CEQA does not require a lead agency to formally respond to written comments received on an IS/MND or its Addendum,a response memo has been prepared,which addresses all comments received,and is included in Appendix E of Exhibit A of the resolution associated to this staff report.The CEQA resolution,including the necessary findings, is associated with the staff report for the Council’s consideration and adoption. CONCLUSION Approval of the Project will increase facility reliability and sustainability at the Water Quality Control Plant in compliance with the NPDES permit.In accordance with CEQA,an addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared,which thoroughly reviewed and analyzed the potential environmental impacts of the modified Project.Therefore,staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution making findings to certify the addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared by ESA dated April 2017,and direct staff to begin implementation of the Project. Attachment:Addendum to IS/MND Presentation City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-663 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:4a. A resolution making findings and adopting the addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Project,and directing staff to begin implementation of the Project. WHEREAS,the City of South San Francisco and City of San Bruno are co-owners of the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (“Water Quality Control Plant”); and WHEREAS,the City of South San Francisco (“City”)operates the Water Quality Control Plant and proposes to perform capital improvements,which include the Wet Weather Improvements Project -Phase 2,the Digester Rehabilitation Project, and the Green Energy Project (collectively “Project”); and WHEREAS,City seeks approval for the proposed Project,which is considered a Project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act, Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21000,et seq. (CEQA); and WHEREAS,in accordance with CEQA,an initial study was performed,the result of which was preparation and circulation of a mitigated negative declaration (IS/MND)analyzing the proposed Project and concluding that approval of the Project could not have a significant effect on the environment because the impacts of the Project could all be mitigated to levels below established CEQA thresholds of significance with the adoption of mitigation measures; and WHEREAS,the adopted IS/MND was distributed to the State Clearinghouse and circulated for a 30-day public review on June 24, 2013; and WHEREAS,the City revisited the type of digestion processing system to build and an alternative processing system was developed, designed, sized, and selected for implementation; and WHEREAS,the City’s modified digester project elements were integrated into a somewhat modified design for the Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project portion of the overall set of CIPs that were covered in the adopted 2013 IS/MND and the other two elements (Wet Weather Improvements and Green Energy)are unchanged from that in the adopted IS/MND; and WHEREAS,an addendum to the adopted IS/MND was developed to evaluate the modified and improved digestion process relative to the original project in the adopted IS/MND and to demonstrate that the modified City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-663 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:4a. Project does not bring any new significant impacts; and WHEREAS,the addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was distributed to the State Clearinghouse and circulated for public review and comment on April 21,2017 and the 30-day public review period ended on May 21, 2017; and WHEREAS,one comment letter was received from the State Water Resources Control Board and though the CEQA does not require a lead agency to formally respond to written comments received on an IS/MND or its addendum,a response memo has been prepared,which addresses all comments received,and is included in Appendix E of Exhibit A, which is attached to this resolution; and WHEREAS,the addendum to the IS/MND is a required document to obtain loans from state and Federal agencies, such as the State Revolving Fund and WIFIA programs; and WHEREAS,the Engineering Division has reviewed the addendum to the IS/MND and the comments received, and recommends that the City Council adopt the addendum to the IS/MND,as an objective and accurate document that reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City in the discussion of the Project’s environmental impacts; and WHEREAS,the City Council has reviewed and carefully considered the information in the addendum to the IS/MND and the comments received,and makes the findings contained in this resolution,and adopts the addendum to the IS/MND,as an objective and accurate document that reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City in the discussion of the Project’s environmental impacts. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that based on the entirety of the record before it,which includes without limitation,the California Environmental Quality Act,Public Resources Code §§21000,et seq.(CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines,14 California Code of Regulations §15000,et seq.;the South San Francisco 1999 General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report,including the 2001 updates to the General Plan and 2001 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report;the South San Francisco Municipal Code;the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Projects,Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration,State Clearinghouse No.2013062051,adopted September 11,2013;the addendum to the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project;and all reports,minutes,public testimony submitted as part of the City Council’s July 12,2017 meeting,and City Council deliberations;and any other evidence (within the meaning of Public Resources Code §21080(e)and §21082.2),the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby finds as follows: 1.The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. 2.The Addendum to the IS/MND for the Project,attached as Exhibit A and the Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,attached as Exhibit B to this resolution are incorporated by reference as part of this resolution, as if it were set forth fully herein. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-663 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:4a. 3.The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings are located at the Engineering Division for the City of South San Francisco,315 Maple Avenue,South San Francisco,CA 94080, and in the custody of Principal Engineer, Sam Bautista, P.E. 4.The proposed Project is consistent with the City of South San Francisco General Plan because the land use,development standards,densities and intensities,buildings and structures proposed are compatible with the goals,policies,and land use designations established in the General Plan (see Gov’t Code,§ 65860),and none of the land uses,development standards,densities and intensities,buildings and structures will operate to conflict with or impede achievement of the any of the goals,policies,or land use designations established in the General Plan. 5.In accordance with CEQA,the City Council has considered the addendum to the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project,and based on the entirety of the record,as described above,the City Council,exercising its independent judgment and analysis,makes the following findings regarding the environmental analysis of the Project: a.In October 1999,the City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan;in 2001 the City Council certified a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for updates to the General Plan.CEQA allows for streamlined approval of actions that are consistent with adopted General Plans for which an EIR was certified.(Pub.Resources Code,§21083; CEQA Guidelines,§§15152,15183.)An initial study was prepared for the proposed Project and a mitigated negative declaration analyzed the potential for impacts that were peculiar to the Project or not analyzed as significant impacts in the General Plan EIR,or Supplemental EIR. The Addendum to the IS/MND,which expressly considers the City’s previous EIRs,concludes that approval of the Project will not result in any significant environmental impacts. b.Design features of the Project,as well as the mitigation measures proposed in the addendum to the IS/MND,will operate to ensure the impacts of the proposed Project will not exceed established CEQA thresholds of significance.Therefore,and as further documented in the addendum to the IS/MND for the Project,additional mitigation measures beyond those established in the addendum to the IS/MND are not required for the Project. c.For the reasons stated in this resolution,the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence in the record supporting a fair argument that approval of the Project will result in a significant environmental effect. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby makes the findings contained in this resolution,and adopts the addendum to the IS/MND for the Project,attached as Exhibit A,subject to the Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,attached as Exhibit B. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-663 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:4a. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ EXHIBIT A Page 1 of 148 EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 148 EXHIBIT A Page 3 of 148 | EXHIBIT A Page 4 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project i ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Addendum Page Chapter 1, Background and Purpose of This Addendum ............................................... 1-1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................... 1-2 1.2 Purpose of This Addendum ............................................................................... 1-3 Chapter 2, Project Description .......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Project Overview ................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Original Project Description ............................................................................... 2-3 2.3 Proposed Changes to the Project ...................................................................... 2-4 2.4 Operational Characteristics ............................................................................... 2-5 2.5 Construction Characteristics .............................................................................. 2-6 Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts ................... 3-1 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 3-2 3.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ....................................................... 3-3 3.3 Environmental Checklist .................................................................................... 3-4 3.3.1 Aesthetics .............................................................................................. 3-4 3.3.2 Agricultural and Forest Resources ........................................................ 3-6 3.3.3 Air Quality .............................................................................................. 3-8 3.3.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................... 3-14 3.3.5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................. 3-18 3.3.6 Energy ................................................................................................. 3-21 3.3.7 Geology, Soils, and Seismicity ............................................................ 3-23 3.3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................ 3-26 3.3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................... 3-28 3.3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................... 3-32 3.3.11 Land Use and Land Use Planning ....................................................... 3-36 3.3.12 Mineral Resources............................................................................... 3-37 3.3.13 Noise ................................................................................................... 3-39 3.3.14 Population and Housing ...................................................................... 3-43 3.3.15 Public Services .................................................................................... 3-44 3.3.16 Recreation ........................................................................................... 3-46 3.3.17 Transportation and Traffic ................................................................... 3-47 3.3.18 Utilities and Service Systems .............................................................. 3-50 3.3.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................................................... 3-52 Chapter 4, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ... 4-1 4.1 Air Quality .......................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Biological Resources ......................................................................................... 4-3 4.3 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................ 4-5 4.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................... 4-6 4.5 Noise ................................................................................................................. 4-7 EXHIBIT A Page 5 of 148 Table of Contents Page South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project ii ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Chatper 5, Report Preparers ............................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Lead Agency ...................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Addendum Consultants ..................................................................................... 5-1 Appendices A. Updated Special Status Species Lists ........................................................................A-1 B. Air Quality Emissions Estimates .................................................................................B-1 C. Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map ...................... C-1 D. Alternatives Analysis .................................................................................................. D-1 E. Comment Letters ........................................................................................................E-1 List of Figures 2-1 Project Site Location ................................................................................................... 2-2 2-2 Project Location .......................................................................................................... 2-7 List of Tables 3-1 Project Construction Annual Emissions .................................................................... 3-10 3-2 Project Construction Annual GHG Emissions ........................................................... 3-27 3-3 Typical Noise Levels from Construction Activities and Construction Equipment ....... 3-40 EXHIBIT A Page 6 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 1-1 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 CHAPTER 1 Background and Purpose of This Addendum Project Title South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Project Lead Agency Contact Address Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer City of South San Francisco Engineering Division 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA, 94080 Project Applicant Contact and Address Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer City of South San Francisco Engineering Division 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA, 94080 Project Location The Wet Weather and Digester Improvements portion of the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Project (Project) would be located at the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP), located in the city of South San Francisco at 195 Belle Aire Road. The WQCP is on the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, just north of San Francisco International Airport and south of Colma Creek. The project site lies on a peninsula with protected inlets of San Francisco Bay to the east and south. EXHIBIT A Page 7 of 148 1. Background and Purpose of This Addendum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 1-2 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 1.1 Background The City of South San Francisco (City) and the City of San Bruno are members of the North Bayside System Unit (NBSU), a joint powers authority that also includes San Francisco International Airport and the Cities of Burlingame and Millbrae. Treated, disinfected wastewater from the WQCP enters the NBSU force main and combines with treated, disinfected wastewater from other NBSU members. In addition to processing wastewater from the cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno, and the Town of Colma, the WQCP provides dechlorination treatment of the chlorinated effluent from San Francisco International Airport and the cities of Burlingame and Millbrae prior to discharging the treated wastewater into Lower San Francisco Bay. The wastewater discharge is regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) No. CAS0038130, Order No. R2-2008-0094 issued to the Cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In the event of peak wet weather flows that exceed secondary treatment capacity, the excess primary effluent bypasses the secondary treatment train and is disinfected and blended with secondary effluent prior to discharge. In the rare event of an emergency when all onsite storage of effluent has been filled to capacity and with adequate notice to the RWQCB, blended effluent is discharged into a near-shore outfall in Colma Creek. In 1997, the City completed a facility plan for the WQCP. The facility plan was developed to address the need to comply with the NPDES permit requirements, add treatment capacity, and improve treatment reliability. The facility plan provided the basis for several WQCP improvement projects from 1998 to 2005, which included the Capacity Expansion and Improvements Project (completed in 2000) and the Wet Weather Improvements Project (completed in 2005).1 The improvements identified in the facility plan and conducted at the WQCP allow full secondary treatment of the design dry weather flow (13 MGD) with peak wet weather flows up to 30 MGD. In 2011, the City prepared and adopted an update to the 1997 facility plan. The 2011 Facility Plan Update was developed to address future capacity expansion and regulatory compliance needs across a 20-year planning horizon. The 2011 Facility Plan Update provided the basis for the project designs that were proposed and analyzed in the South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (adopted IS/MND)2 prepared in June 2013 in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). That proposed project included three different components of the WQCPs Capital Improvements Projects, which had stemmed from the Facility Plan Update. Those components included the following projects:  Wet Weather Improvements Project  Green Energy Project (solar panels over a covered parking area)  Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project 1 Carollo Engineers, South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Facility Plan Update, 2011. 2 City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco/ San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Projects, Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration, State Clearinghouse No. 2013062051, adopted September 11, 2013. EXHIBIT A Page 8 of 148 1. Background and Purpose of This Addendum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 1-3 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 The IS/MND was published on June 24, 2013 and adopted on September 13, 2013. Subsequently, the City revisited the type of digestion processing system to build. An alternative processing system was developed, designed, sized, and selected for implementation. The City’s modified digester project elements were integrated into a somewhat modified design for the Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project portion of the overall set of Capital Improvements Projects that were covered in the adopted 2013 IS/MND. The other two components (Wet Weather Improvements and Green Energy) are unchanged from the adopted IS/MND. The Wet Weather Improvements and the Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation elements are now formally called the “Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project.” These two elements are the same as were described and analyzed in the adopted IS/MND except for the minor design changes described and analyzed in this Addendum. The Green Energy Project is also unchanged from that described in the adopted IS/MND and will be implemented separately from the components covered in this Addendum. 1.2 Purpose of This Addendum The CEQA Guidelines (Sections 15162 and 15164) require that a lead agency prepare an addendum to a previously adopted IS/MND if some ch anges or additions to the environmental evaluation of a project are necessary, but none of the following occurs: 1. There are no substantial changes in the project which require major revisions to the IS/MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2. There are no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the IS/MND due to involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3. No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous IS/MND was adopted, which shows any of the following: a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the IS/MND; b. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; The project will result in impacts substantially more adverse than those disclosed in the EIR; or c. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous IS/MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Accordingly, the purpose of this Addendum is to evaluate the modified digestion process as a modification to the adopted IS/MND for the original project and to demonstrate that the modified Project does not trigger any of the conditions described above. EXHIBIT A Page 9 of 148 1. Background and Purpose of This Addendum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 1-4 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Chapter 2 of this Addendum presents a description of the modified portions of the project description included in the adopted IS/MND. Chapter 3 presents an updated version of the CEQA checklist used in the adopted IS/MND. For those impacts that would not be changed by the different digester or other project design changes, brief explanatory statements are included. For other impacts, additional or updated data and analysis are presented as necessary. Chapter 4 presents the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program that will be implemented for the modified Project. Chapter 5 presents the preparers of this Addendum. EXHIBIT A Page 10 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 2-1 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 CHAPTER 2 Project Description 2.1 Project Overview The project site consists of the Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) located in the City of South San Francisco (City) at 195 Belle Aire Road (see Figure 2-1). The WQCP provides wastewater treatment for the cities of South San Francisco, San Bruno and portions of Daly City and Colma. The WQCP is located on the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, just north of San Francisco International Airport and south of Colma Creek. The project site lies on a peninsula with protected inlets of San Francisco Bay to the east and south. The WQCP site consists entirely of previously developed or landscaped areas with mostly industrial land use in the vicinity such as petroleum storage, warehousing, shipping and light manufacturing,1 though there are some wholesale/retail and other commercial enterprises nearby. The current average dry weather flow through the WQCP is approximately 9 million gallons per day (MGD) with peak wet weather flows of over 60 MGD.2 The permitted average dry weather flow capacity is 13 MGD.3 Wastewater treatment processes at the WQCP include screening and grit removal, primary clarification, secondary treatment4 by an activated sludge process, secondary clarification, disinfection, and dechlorination. Biosolids are concentrated using dissolved air flotation thickeners, anaerobically digested, and dewatered with belt filter presses. Biosolids are hauled from the WQCP site and deposited in a permitted landfill.5 The Cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno are members of the North Bayside System Unit (NBSU), a joint powers authority that also includes the San Francisco Airport and the Cities of Burlingame and Millbrae. Treated, disinfected wastewater from the WQCP enters the NBSU effluent pump station and force main and combines with treated, disinfected wastewater from other NBSU members. 1 Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), City of South San Francisco Permit No. 8-98. July 29, 1998. This permit is amended as needed to address ongoing changes to the WQCP. 2 City of South San Francisco, California, Water Quality Control Plant. Available online at http://www.ssf.net/index.aspx?NID=506. Accessed on January 26, 2017. 3 San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Order No. R2-2014-0012, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) No. CA0038130, 2014. 4 Secondary treatment is a biological process that removes biochemical oxygen demand, suspended solids and some dissolved solids through biological conversion. 5 San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Order No. R2-2014-0012, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) No. CA0038130, 2014. EXHIBIT A Page 11 of 148 Costco San Francisco International Airport Belle Aire Rd North Access Rd S o u t h A i r p o r t B l v d Costco SamTrans Peninsula SamTrans Peninsula San Francisco International Airport Belle Aire Rd North Access Rd S o u t h A i r p o r t B l v d C o l m a C r e e k Figure 2-1 Project Site Location SOURCE: Google Maps; adapted by ESA, 2017 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP CIP. 120473.02 0 400 Feet San Francisco Bay Project Site Pacific Ocean SANRAFAEL MOUNTAIN VIEW SAN JOSE FREMONT HAYWARD SANRAMON WALNUT CREEK CONCORD ALAMEDASANFRANCISCO DALYCITY BERKELEY REDWOOD CITY SANMATEO OAKLAND RICHMOND 680 580 880 280 280 101 PROJECT SITE EXHIBIT A Page 12 of 148 2. Project Description South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 2-3 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 In addition to processing wastewater from the cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno, and the Town of Colma, the WQCP provides dechlorination treatment of the chlorinated effluent from San Francisco Airport and the Cities of Burlingame and Millbrae prior to discharging the treated wastewater into Lower San Francisco Bay. The wastewater discharge is regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) No. CA0038130, Order No. R2-2014-0012 issued to the Cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In the event of peak wet weather flows that exceed secondary treatment capacity, the excess primary effluent bypasses the secondary treatment train and is disinfected and blended with secondary effluent prior to discharge. In the rare emergency when all onsite storage of effluent has been filled to capacity and with adequate notice to the RWQCB, blended effluent is discharged into a near-shore outfall in Colma Creek.6 2.2 Original Project Description In the South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (adopted IS/MND)7 the City proposed the Wet Weather Improvements Project, Green Energy Project, and Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project. The Wet Weather Improvements Project would increase the peak secondary treatment capacity at the WQCP by 10 MGD to a total capacity of 40 MGD. This would be achieved by installing a new secondary clarifier with associated equipment and piping and upgrading associated secondary treatment facilities. The Green Energy Project would involve installation of 500 solar panel canopies that would cover the entire 10,555-square foot WQCP parking lot near Area 42. The solar panels would provide 150 kilowatts of alternative, sustainable energy onsite. The solar energy generated would be connected to the motor control center in the maintenance building onsite. The area would continue to be used for parking purposes following the solar panel installation. The Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project would result in two out of five of the digesters currently at the WQCP (Digesters No. 1 and 2) to be demolished and replaced in the same location and one digester (Digester No. 3) to be rehabilitated. The size of the new digesters would remain consistent with the existing digesters at approximately 70 feet in diameter and 25 feet in height with structure height of 20 feet above grade. Along with the two digesters, two associated support buildings that house heating and mixing equipment in the 20,000-square foot area, would be demolished and replaced with a new larger building. The new building would continue supporting the operations of the digesters. As noted in Chapter 1 of this Addendum, the Wet Weather Improvements Project and the Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project are now being implemented together under the new name “Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project”, and the Green Energy Project is moving 6 The NPDES permit otherwise prohibits the discharge of flows that do not undergo secondary treatment. 7 City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco/ San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Projects, Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration, State Clearinghouse No. 2013062051, adopted September 11, 2013. EXHIBIT A Page 13 of 148 2. Project Description South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 2-4 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 forward as a separate project. This Addendum only addresses changes to the portions of the project that relate to the digesters; there are no planned changes to the wet weather improvement designs. 2.3 Proposed Changes to the Project Following the adoption of the IS/MND, the City proceeded to move forward with design changes to the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project (modified Project). The following bullet list presents the proposed changes to the project previously described.  The previous project would have demolished existing Digesters 1 and 2, while leaving Digester 3 in place. Digesters 1 and 2 would have been rebuilt in place and with the same design and functionality as the existing systems. In the modified Project, Digesters 1 and 2 would still be demolished, but only Digester 1 would be rebuilt, and with the same size and in the same location.  In the modified designs, the rebuilt Digester 1 would include a more efficient digester system (called high-solids digestion (HSD) system) instead of the conventional digester that was included in the previous designs and analyzed in the adopted IS/MND. The proposed digester system uses thickening and mixing technologies to increase solids concentration in the digester, enabling a single HSD digester to process the flows of multiple conventional digesters. The system necessitates the inclusion of several of the new elements or modified versions of the elements described previously. It also enables the WQCP to reduce the number of onsite digesters it operates.  The rebuilt Digester 1 would also have a different set of heating and mixing equipment in its control building than was proposed in the previous project designs. The equipment would be placed in the same building and would have similar construction and operational details to those in the previous designs. There would also be piping improvements made to Digester Control Building 2. This is not a change; it is noted here for completeness.  The modified Project includes thickening equipment which supports the operation of Digester 1. The equipment would be constructed on existing pavement and on grade under a sun canopy where Digester 2 is currently located.  The modified Project also proposes the addition of a polymer storage facility in the Dissolved Air Flotation Thickening (DAFT) Building in order to support the new thickener.  The previous project designs planned to demolish and replace Digester Control Building 3. In the revised design, Digester Control Building 3 would instead be demolished without replacement.  Digester 3 would be structurally and mechanically rehabilitated as stated in the adopted IS/MND. This is not a change; it is noted here for completeness.  The modified Project includes a new element called the digester gas conditioning system, to be constructed on a concrete slab that would be placed at existing grade. The proposed digester gas conditioning system would remove digester gas contaminants, including hydrogen sulfide (H2S), siloxanes, and water, which would otherwise cause problems with the WQCP’s cogeneration equipment if not removed through fuel conditioning. The system EXHIBIT A Page 14 of 148 2. Project Description South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 2-5 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 would have H2S removal vessels, a gas compressor, a single-stage refrigeration moisture removal system, and siloxane removal vessels. The proposed system would require approximately 50 horsepower to operate, a demand that can be met by existing onsite equipment.  The modified Project includes a new element called the primary sludge screen, to be placed on existing paved areas or on top of existing structures within the previous project footprint. Sludge screens are enclosed pressurized systems consisting of screening and dewatering in each unit. The screens are enclosed to help contain odors and have a relatively small footprint. Sludge flow enters a screening unit at one end and passes through a tapered screen where solids greater than the screen opening size are trapped and removed. The screened sludge exits through the central connection and is piped to downstream processes. The separated debris remains in the sludge screen where it is compacted and dewatered before being discharged into a receptacle or conveyor.  The support equipment (e.g., air compressors, pumps, heat exchangers) for the new digester system was also modified to address the different functional demands of that system. As noted above, the modified project designs do not propose any changes to the Wet Weather Improvements Project or the Green Energy (solar-paneled carport roof) Project that are described in the adopted IS/MND. They are noted here for completeness and consistency with the adopted IS/MND. 2.4 Operational Characteristics Consistent with current operations and with what was characterized in the adopted IS/MND, the City would continue operating the WQCP 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The WQCP would continue receiving wastewater consistent with its average and peak weather flow capacities. The proposed modified design for the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project, however, would modify the WQCP’s existing process flows through the facility’s digesters and other processing infrastructure. The proposed modified design provides the flexibility to feed approximately half of the sludge into Digester 1 and the other half into two existing conventional digesters. The two conventional digesters would also receive the digestate (a by-product of that first step) from the proposed newer system. The digestate would be pumped into the sludge feed loop and fed to the conventional digesters to mix with the thinner conventionally digested sludge. That mixture would be transferred to the existing sludge storage tank and dewatered as a combined stream like the current operation. By mixing the high solids digestate in the conventional digesters, the combined digested sludge stream transferred to the sludge storage tank and dewatering system would be thinner and more uniform. This proposed modification would not change the amount of raw sludge that would need to be digested or the amount of digested sludge that needs to be dewatered. This proposed process would, however, provide enough treatment capacity for a remaining conventional digester to act as standby. This configuration would provide the necessary redundancy to take one digester out of service for maintenance without interrupting solids treatment. The change would replace older and less efficient equipment with newer and more efficient equipment. EXHIBIT A Page 15 of 148 2. Project Description South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 2-6 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 2.5 Construction Characteristics Project construction would occur on previously developed or disturbed land within the WQCP property as stated in the adopted IS/MND. Almost all of the project activities would occur on asphalt surfaces; the others are part of the Wet Weather Improvements Project or the Green Energy Project and have not changed in the modified project description for the digester improvement portion of the project. As shown on Figure 2-2, some of the project facilities are located within 100 feet of the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, which lies in the shoreline band jurisdiction of San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC). The City would obtain the necessary approvals and permits prior to project implementation. 2.5.1 Digester Improvement Construction The construction duration for the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project would be approximately three years. Construction is expected to begin in 2018 and finish in 2021. The construction sequencing requirements established in the adopted IS/MND and the associated designs would change only slightly to incorporate a high solids digestion system. Existing Digesters 3, 4, and 5 would remain in service with existing equipment during the demolition of Digesters 1 and 2. Demolishing Digesters 1 and 2 and replacing Digester 1 and the existing support buildings would first involve tearing down and removing the existing structures. As the demolition takes place, the associated equipment within Digester Control Building 1 would be removed, and modifications within that building could start. Following demolition, the 20,000-square foot site would be excavated to a depth of approximately six feet. The excavated material would be hauled away for offsite disposal or otherwise handled as described in the adopted IS/MND. Construction of the new Digester 1 would begin. The new digester would be constructed such that it would be partly aboveground with approximately five feet below grade. During the time when Digester 1 is under construction, all equipment associated with Digester 3 (i.e., gas mixing compressor, heating system, sludge-transfer system, feed valving, and digester gas system) would remain in operation. This equipment and the electrical power supply for this equipment would remain in service until the new Digester 1 is operational and Digester No. 3 can be taken out of service. EXHIBIT A Page 16 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP CIP. 120473.02 Figure 2-2 Project Layout SOURCE: Carollo Engineers, 2017 EXHIBIT A Page 17 of 148 2. Project Description South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 2-8 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 This page intentionally left blank EXHIBIT A Page 18 of 148 2. Project Description South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 2-9 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 The primary sludge screen construction is estimated to last approximately 6 to 10 months and would occur in parallel to the digester construction. The area would be excavated to a depth of up to 5 feet. Any pipes under the structure would be relocated outside the footprint of the concrete slab or receive a protective support if they are to remain in place. An on-grade concrete slab would be constructed to support the screening equipment and a metal personnel access structure around the equipment. The facility would be connected to the existing electrical infrastructure on site. Once the facility is constructed, it would be tested and placed into service. The digester gas conditioning system construction is estimated to last approximately 6 to 12 months and would occur in parallel to the digester construction. The area would be excavated to a depth of up to 5 feet. Any pipes under the structure would be relocated outside the footprint of the concrete slab or receive a protective support if they are to remain in place. A concrete slab on grade supporting the equipment would be constructed. The facility would be connected to the existing electrical infrastructure on site. Once the facility is constructed, it would be tested and placed into service. The sequencing associated with the proposed preliminary design is slightly simpler than the original design because it avoids constructing Digester Control Building 3 and Digester 2. 2.5.2 Other Construction Activities The construction activities associated with more general project components are largely unchanged from how they were described in the adopted IS/MND. Construction of new aboveground facilities would involve site preparation, minor grading, building of new facilities, and site restoration. New underground pipelines associated with the project would be installed using the shored trench technique with excavation of up to 10 feet of depth and 200 feet of length. Following construction or installation of the facilities, imported fill would be used as backfill and the site would be restored to pre-construction conditions. During project construction, approximately 13,750 cubic yards of soil would be excavated and hauled 15 miles offsite to a waste processing facility or to a recycling yard. A temporary contractor staging area would be constructed west of Aeration Basins No. 5-7 in Area 44 shown on Figure 2-2. As stated in the adopted IS/MND, the types of equipment, which would be used during various phases of construction, may include but are not limited to the following:  Asphalt Pavers  Brooms & Sweeping Equipment, Water trucks  Compactors/Rollers  Concrete Mixers/Pumps/Vibrators  Electric Generators  Graders  Air Hammers  Excavators  Backhoes  Cranes and/or Booms  Loaders  Trucks/Trailers  Sprayers and rollers  Welding and Cutting Equipment Construction safety activities at the WQCP would be unchanged from the previous project description and would include standard construction practices and guidelines including worker safety training and use of personal protective equipment. EXHIBIT A Page 19 of 148 2. Project Description South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 2-10 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Similarly, the adopted IS/MND’s description of environmental protection measures would be implemented as described therein. The adopted IS/MND includes dust control measures, tents and covers during equipment recoating, wildlife exclusion fencing, silt fencing and other erosion control measures. The City will obtain necessary approvals and permits from the regulatory agencies as described previously. In compliance with the regulatory requirements, the City will implement best management practices to avoid and control any environmental impacts from the project activities. The City’s environmental compliance group located at the WQCP conducts regular inspections of City construction sites, including at the WQCP. The environmental compliance group ensures that erosion and storm water control measures such as swales and waddles are in place especially during wet seasons; these practices would be implemented during project construction. The environmental compliance group serves as the City’s inspectors and oversees compliance with regulatory permit requirements. EXHIBIT A Page 20 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-1 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 CHAPTER 3 Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts 1. Project Title: South San Francisco / San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) Capital Improvements Project 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of South San Francisco, California 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer City of South San Francisco Engineering Division 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA, 94080 4. Project Location: 195 Belle Aire Road, South San Francisco, California 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: City of South San Francisco 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA, 94080 6. General Plan Designation(s): Public Lands 7. Zoning: Public/Quasi-public Land 8. Description of Project: See Chapter 2. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting. The Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) is surrounded by Mixed Industrial (MI) zone on the south with facilities such as the Shell fuel storage tanks and a long term airport parking structure, and by a freeway commercial (FC) zoning area on the west that runs parallel to U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) and North Airport Boulevard with a small section of business commercial (BC) land to the southwest. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required. Notice of Intent to obtain the General Construction Permit from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB); Amendment to Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) Permit No. 8-98; Authority to Construct and an amendment to the existing Permit to Operate from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. EXHIBIT A Page 21 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-2 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.1 Introduction This chapter describes any changes that have occurred in the existing environmental conditions within and near the project area, as well as environmental impacts associated with the Project, based on the current project footprint. The following sections provide revised California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) checklists, based on the City’s standard CEQA procedure, and as provided in the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) Capital Improvements Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (adopted IS/MND).1 For the purposes of this Addendum, the checklists have been modified to clarify any potential changes that would result from Project implementation, as compared to Project implementation as discussed in the adopted IS/MND. As shown below, no new significant environmental impacts were identified. The adopted IS/MND found that the proposed project could potentially affect the environmental factor(s) checked below. However, with implementation of the mitigation measures developed for that proposed project, the impacts would be reduced to less than less than significant. In this Addendum, the proposed design changes were described and evaluated. The potential impacts were found to be similar or slightly reduced in magnitude and potential to occur. The following discussion reviews revisions to setting information provided in the adopted IS/MND, and discusses potential resulting changes in environmental impacts, for each CEQA resource area. 1 City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco/ San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Projects, Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration, State Clearinghouse No. 2013062051, adopted September 11, 2013. EXHIBIT A Page 22 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-3 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated in the adopted IS/MND and the Addendum checklist on the following pages. ☐ Aesthetics ☐ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ☒ Air Quality ☒ Biological Resources ☒ Cultural Resources ☐ Geology/Soils ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☒ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ☐ Hydrology/Water Quality ☐ Land Use/Planning ☐ Mineral Resources ☒ Noise ☐ Population/Housing ☐ Public Services ☐ Recreation ☐ Transportation/Traffic ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Utilities/Service Systems ☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this Addendum: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. The MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION prepared and adopted in 2013 adequately described and addresses those potential environmental impacts. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, no further environmental documentation is required. Signature Date Printed Name For EXHIBIT A Page 23 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-4 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3 Environmental Checklist 3.3.1 Aesthetics Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact than Approved Project 1. AESTHETICS — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.1.1 Setting The setting surrounding the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project (modified Project) site has not changed in comparison to that described in the adopted IS/MND. No noticeable additional ground disturbance over the Project site is proposed in the modified Project compared to the approved Project. The modified Project would still demolish Digesters 1 and 2 but only Digester 1 would be rebuilt, and with the same size and in the same location. Digester Control Building 3 would be demolished without replacement in the modified project. None of these modifications would change the setting discussed in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.1.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified less-than-significant impacts for potential adverse effects on scenic vistas, potential to damage scenic resources, and potential to degrade existing visual character or quality of the site or surroundings. There was no impact identified for creating a new source of nighttime lighting. 3.3.1.3 Discussion The activities proposed under the modified Project would include demolition and construction of features within the WQCP’s boundaries as discussed in the adopted IS/MND. The project site is developed with asphalt and paved surfaces, buildings, and wastewater treatment process units and structures. The vista in the project area largely constitutes the urbanized portion of South San Francisco with commercial buildings on the eastern side toward San Francisco Bay. The modified Project would not install additional facilities that could obstruct or alter views or vistas. The EXHIBIT A Page 24 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-5 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 modified Project would not be visible from a listed state scenic highway.2 The modified Project would not change the industrial nature of the surrounding site. The proposed changes to the Project would not increase nighttime lighting. Therefore, all potential impacts on aesthetics would be the same as the approved Project. 3.3.1.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts related to creating a new source of light or glare than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to a scenic vista, scenic resources within a state scenic highway, or existing visual character or quality of the site than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less Than Significant Impact] 2 California Department of Transportation, California Scenic Highway Mapping System, San Mateo County. Available online at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm. Accessed on January 30, 2017. EXHIBIT A Page 25 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-6 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.2 Agricultural and Forest Resources Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significan t Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact than Approved Project 2. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES — In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.2.1 Setting The setting surrounding the project site has not changed in comparison to that described in the adopted IS/MND. The project site consists of the existing WQCP property, which is developed land, and the proposed modified Project involves upgrades to the facilities and treatment processes at the existing WQCP. 3.3.2.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impacts for all checklist items relating to agricultural and forest resources. EXHIBIT A Page 26 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-7 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.2.3 Discussion As described in the adopted IS/MND, the project would not involve converting farmland to non- agricultural use. The project site is designated as public lands in the South San Francisco General Plan3 with a zoning designation of public-quasi public land.4 The proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract and thus. The proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning or cause rezoning of forest land, or result in the loss of forest land to non-forest use. There would be no change in the existing environment, which could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. The project would result in no impacts. 3.3.2.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to agricultural and forest resources than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) 3 City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco General Plan, Land Use Element, 1999. 4 City of South San Francisco, Planning Division, Zoning District Map, August 2016. EXHIBIT A Page 27 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-8 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.3 Air Quality Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 3. AIR QUALITY — Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.3.1 Setting The air quality setting relevant to the Project site, including applicable regulations and air quality conditions, has not appreciably changed since the adoption of the IS/MND. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) maintains regional authority for air quality management in the Project area and vicinity. The BAAQMD’s 2010 Clean Air Plan5 serves as a multi-pollutant air quality plan to protect public health and the climate, and includes emissions control measures for stationary sources, mobile sources, and transportation related sources. Sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project site, as identified in the adopted IS/MND, have not changed. Those discussed in the adopted IS/MND remain applicable to the modified Project. The nearest residential receptors to the project site are located 3,500 feet to the southwest with a medical clinic located approximately 400 feet west of the site. The Project site is located within the City of South San Francisco in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. The Project site is located entirely within the existing WQCP that was analyzed in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.3.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impacts with respect to the potential for the project to conflict with the applicable air quality plan. Less-than-significant impacts were identified for the cumulative net increase in criteria air pollutants for which the region is non-attainment, and for 5 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan, adopted September 15, 2010. EXHIBIT A Page 28 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-9 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 exposure to substantial pollutant concentrations and objectionable odors. The potential to violate any air quality standards was determined to be a less than significant impact with mitigation. 3.3.3.3 Discussion Potential for Violation of an Air Quality Standard Construction To be conservative, the same construction hours and equipment estimates from the adopted IS/MND were used for the air quality analyses of this Addendum. Due to only reconstructing one digester after demolition instead of two, emissions from construction activities will be slightly less than those identified in the adopted IS/MND. Construction of the modified Project would include site preparation, excavation, installation of pipelines, building of higher channel walls, installation of underground pumps, creation of a bypass channel, backfilling, building demolition, and site restoration. These activities were included and analyzed in the adopted IS/MND and are not substantially changed in the modified project designs. As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, these activities would have the potential to affect air quality through the use of heavy-duty construction equipment, haul trucks for import and export of materials, and vehicles used by workers to travel to and from the construction site. In addition to exhaust emissions caused by the use of mobile equipment, trenching and earthmoving activities would result in emissions of fugitive dust including PM10. Activities such as the demolition of the two existing digesters and the associated control buildings, and excavation and backfilling of the site would cause fugitive dust emissions on an intermittent and temporary basis, generating similar impacts as project construction. According to BAAQMD, impacts from construction-related fugitive dust would be considered less than significant if all applicable recommended measures are applied.6 Implementation of these measures (as part of the Mitigation Measure AIR-1a below) will ensure that the modified Project will result in construction impacts from fugitive dust emissions that are less than significant. As described in the adopted IS/MND, construction and demolition equipment would also generate ozone precursors such as reactive organic gases and nitrogen oxides from exhaust emissions. However, the City found that exhaust emissions from construction equipment would not be expected to impede attainment of ozone standards in the Bay Area nor would they interfere with the applicable clean air plan. Since construction emissions under the modified Project will be slightly less than those identified in the adopted IS/MND, they would also not be expected to impede attainment of ozone standards in the Bay Area nor would they interfere with the applicable clean air plan. The associated impacts would be less than significant. To determine whether federal conformity rule analysis is required, annual emissions from the modified Project construction activities were calculated for ozone precursors (reactive organic gases [ROG] and oxides of nitrogen [NOx]), respirable particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and CO and compared to the de minimis thresholds for the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Table 3-1 below provides the estimated tons of ROG, CO, PM10, PM2.5, and NOx emissions that would be generated from each year of construction of the modified Project. Subsequent to the 6 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, May 2012. EXHIBIT A Page 29 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-10 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 approval of the original Project, PM10 exhaust and PM10 and PM2.5 fugitive dust emissions have been estimated for the modified Project per State Water Resources Control Board’s CCWSRF application process. Those emissions are combined with the emissions presented in the adopted IS/MND and presented in Table 3-1. As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, for construction haul truck and work commute vehicle emissions, it was assumed that the applicable project components would be constructed during the same calendar year for a conservative analysis. As illustrated in Table 3-1, construction emissions of ROG, CO, PM2.5, and NOx are estimated to be well under the annual de minimis threshold levels applicable to the project area. Same as indicated for the original Project in the adopted IS/MND, the modified Project therefore would be exempt from General Conformity determination requirements, and the annual emissions would result in a less- than-significant impact. TABLE 3-1 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ANNUAL EMISSIONS (TONS/YEAR) Emissions ROG CO PM10* PM2.5* NOX Construction Equipment Emissions Calendar Year 1 Emissions 0.36 1.47 2.85 0.74 2.64 Calendar Year 2 Emissions 0.25 1.05 2.80 0.69 1.93 Calendar Year 3 Emissions 0.14 1.35 2.84 0.73 2.40 Calendar Year 4 Emissions 0.12 0.50 2.72 0.62 0.91 On-road Vehicle Emissions Haul Truck Emissions 0.02 0.10 0.01 0.01 0.67 Work Vehicle Emissions 0.07 0.68 0.01 0.01 0.07 Total Construction-Related Emissions Calendar Year 1 Emissions 0.45 2.25 2.88 0.76 3.38 Calendar Year 2 Emissions 0.34 1.83 2.82 0.71 2.67 Calendar Year 3 Emissions 0.23 2.13 2.86 0.75 3.14 Calendar Year 4 Emissions 0.21 1.28 2.74 0.64 1.65 de minimis thresholds (tons/year) 100 100 NA 100 100 Conformity Determination required? No No NA No No * See Emissions Supplement that follows this memorandum for information regarding the PM10 and PM2.5 emission estimates. N/A: Not applicable. SOURCE: City of South San Francisco, 2013. While exhaust emissions are not expected to result in a significant impact to air quality, exhaust emissions from idling of vehicles could add to regional ozone precursor emissions. Same as for the approved Project, the impact for the modified Project would be minimized by implementing Mitigation Measure AIR-1b to further ensure a less-than-significant impact. Mitigation Measure AIR-1a: During construction activities, the City shall require the construction contractor(s) to implement a dust abatement program that includes, but is EXHIBIT A Page 30 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-11 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 not necessarily limited to, the following BAAQMD-recommended measures as needed to control dust:  All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.  All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.  All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.  All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour.  All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.  Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.  All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.  A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Mitigation Measure AIR-1b: During construction activities, the City shall ensure that the construction contractor(s) implement the following measures:  On-road construction vehicle idling time shall not exceed five minutes. Additionally, off-road equipment engines shall not idle for longer than five minutes per Section 2449(d)(3) of Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9 of the California Code of Regulations. Operation As determined in the adopted IS/MND, it was found that there would be no operational emissions as a result of the original Project that would result in a significant adverse impact. The City currently operates the WQCP under a Permit to Operate from the BAAQMD; an application would be submitted to amend the existing permit to incorporate the proposed project elements. New pumps and equipment associated with the modified Project would be operated using electrical power. Long-term project operation would not result in an increase in daily vehicle trips to the WQCP because it would not result in a permanent increase in employees working onsite. The modified Project operations would result in a less-than-significant impact, and there would not be any new or more significant impacts than those identified in the adopted IS/MND. EXHIBIT A Page 31 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-12 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Potential for Cumulative Increases in Non-Attainment Criteria Pollutants As demonstrated in the text above and in the adopted IS/MND, the modified Project would be consistent with the adopted Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan and would not result in a significant operational air quality impact. The project also remains in compliance with the air quality policies outlined in the South San Francisco General Plan.7 As such, the modified project would not conflict with an applicable local or regional air quality plan, and cumulative impacts would be the same as identified in the adopted IS/MND, less than significant. Potential for Conflict with the Applicable Air Quality Plan, Exposure of Sensitive Receptors, and Creation of Objectionable Odors The attainment status of the San Francisco Bay air basin has not changed since the adoption of the IS/MND, and is currently designated as non-attainment for the State 1- and 8-hour ozone standards as well as the State particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) standards.8 With respect to the federal standards, the basin is designated as non-attainment for federal 8-hour ozone standard and the federal PM2.5 (24-hour) standard.9 Since air pollutant emissions are a function of population and human activity, emission reduction strategies set forth in the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan were developed based on regional population, employment, and housing projections. The modified Project would not facilitate an increase in population in the air basin nor would it generate housing or substantial employment opportunities leading to increased population or vehicle miles travelled in t he region. As such, the modified Project would be consistent with the assumptions contained within the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan, and would not result in any new or more significant impacts than those identified in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.3.4 Conclusion The modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts related to conflicting with implementation of an applicable air quality plan than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) The modified Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in criteria pollutants, additional exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or create additional objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact]) With implementation of the measures included in the adopted IS/MND to reduce possible impacts associated with violation of any air quality standards, the modified Project would not result in any 7 City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco General Plan, 1999. 8 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status, last updated January 5, 2017. Available online at http://www.baaqmd.gov/research-and-data/air-quality-standards-and-attainment-status# eleven. Accessed on February 8, 2017. 9 The Bay Area is in attainment for CO but still designated as a maintenance area; thus, the de minimis level applies; Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status, last updated January 5, 2017. Available online at http://www.baaqmd.gov/research-and-data/air-quality-standards-and-attainment-status# eleven. Accessed on February 8, 2017. EXHIBIT A Page 32 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-13 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 new or more significant impacts than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation]) EXHIBIT A Page 33 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-14 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.4 Biological Resources Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.4.1 Setting Biological resources located within the Project area remain the same as those described in the adopted IS/MND. The Project area consists entirely of previously developed or landscaped areas within the existing WQCP and is adjacent to tidal portions of Colma Creek, the San Bruno Slough, the San Bruno Canal and the San Francisco Bay shoreline. The proposed modified Project components are not directly located in areas supporting special-status plants or wildlife or their habitat. Therefore, setting discussions from the adopted IS/MND for biological resources are applicable to the modified Project. EXHIBIT A Page 34 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-15 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.4.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impact for potential conflicts with the provisions of an adopted Habitation Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved plan. The adopted IS/MND identified less than significant impacts for the potential for the project to have a substantial adverse effect on federally protect wetlands, interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, and conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Impacts that were identified as less than significant with mitigation incorporated were those that had a substantial adverse effects on species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special-status species and any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Fame or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 3.3.4.3 Discussion Effects on Special Status Species and Riparian and Sensitive Habitats The California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) documents 68 special-status species within the San Francisco South U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5 -minute quadrangle which includes the project site.10 These species, as well as other special-status species identified by the United Sates Fish and Wildlife Service11 and California Native Plant Society12 are listed in Appendix A. Due to updates to the contents of these online databases or to different search parameters used in the queries, the record searches for this Addendum returned five additional species than the search done for the adopted IS/MND. As shown in Appendix A, these additional species included the American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum), longfin smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys), California seablite (Suaeda californica), Franciscan manzanita (Arctostaphylos franciscana), and the San Bruno Elfin butterfly (Callophrys mossii bayensis). None of the occurrence records were in or near the Project area, and no suitable habitat for these species is present at the WQCP. These added species would not be disturbed by the construction activities in ways not already addressed by the analysis in the adopted IS/MND. As described in the adopted IS/MND, the project area consists entirely of previously developed or landscaped areas within the existing WQCP and is adjacent to tidal portions of Colma Creek, the San Bruno Slough, the San Bruno Canal and the San Francisco Bay shoreline. The modified Project components are not directly located in areas supporting special-status plants or wildlife or their habitat, but project activities could affect other raptors and special-status bird species that have the potential to occur on the site. As stated in the adopted IS/MND, construction noise, vibrations, and human disturbance could cause nest abandonment, death of the young, or loss of reproductive potential at active nests located near project activities. The low potential of the presence of sensitive habitat and no historic sightings of the species onsite would reduce the likelihood of the impact. However, if construction activities were to occur during the breeding season for the bird species (February 1 through August 31), there could be a significant impact, which would be minimized to 10 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) for 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle of San Francisco South, Commercial version, January 30, 2017. 11 United State Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Official Species List for SSF-SB WQCP Improvements, January 30, 2017. 12 California Native Plant Society, Rare and Endangered Plants, Online Inventory, 8th Edition, January 30, 2017. EXHIBIT A Page 35 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-16 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 a less-than-significant by implementing Mitigation Measure BIO-1a and Mitigation Measure BIO-1b. The adopted IS/MND discussed the potential for project activities such as demolition of the digesters near potential wildlife habitat to increase the noise levels temporarily, which may affect species like the California Ridgway’s rail (formerly the California clapper rail), if present, by hindering mate attraction or disrupting reproductive success of breeding birds. This could be a significant impact, which would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, discussed below. In the long term, the operational noise would be similar to the conditions under existing WQCP operations; hence, the project is expected to have a negligible impact on any wildlife foraging in the area. The modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to these biological resources than those evaluated in the adopted IS/MND. Mitigation Measure BIO-1a: The City will implement the following measure prior to construction: No more than two weeks in advance of any ground-disturbing activity, or other construction activity that would commence during the bird breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys of potential nesting habitat in the vicinity of the planned activity. No surveys shall be conducted for California Ridgway’s rail nests, as they would disturb the species and constitute “take” under Federal Endangered Species Act. If surveys indicate presence of nests, Mitigation Measure BIO-1b will be implemented. Mitigation Measure BIO-1b: The City will implement the following measure if pre- construction surveys conducted under Mitigation Measure BIO-1a indicate presence of nests: If active nests are found during pre-construction surveys, the results of the surveys shall be discussed with California Department of Fish and Wildlife and avoidance procedures would be adopted, if necessary, on a case-by-case basis and construction in the vicinity would be initiated only after avoidance measures are adopted. Avoidance measures shall include maintaining construction buffer areas (up to several hundred feet in the case of raptors) or seasonal avoidance, as needed. If buffers are created, a no-disturbance zone shall be created around active nests for the remainder of the breeding season, or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged. The size of the buffer zones and types of construction activities restricted shall take into account factors such as the following:  Noise and human disturbance levels at the proposed project site and the nesting site at the time of the survey and the noise and disturbance expected during the construction activity;  Distance, line of sight, and amount of vegetation or other screening between the proposed project site and the nest; and  Sensitivity of individual nesting species and behaviors of the nesting birds. EXHIBIT A Page 36 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-17 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Mitigation Measure BIO-2: The City shall implement the following measures during excavation for Storm Water Pump Stations Nos. 4 and 5 (an action identified in the adopted IS/MND) and demolition of the digesters:  Project construction activities shall take place between September and January, i.e., in the months outside of the California Ridgway’s rail breeding season (February 1 through August 31); or  Noise reduction measures, including solid plywood fences, sound blankets, or other barriers with noise-dampening materials shall be constructed along the northwest, north, and northeast-facing edges of the project site prior to initiation of construction to serve as noise attenuation barriers. Noise barriers shall be installed in all locations along the exterior fence of the project boundary to minimize any direct or reflected noise above current ambient levels in salt marsh habitats outside the project site. The noise attenuation barrier shall be a minimum of eight feet in height, but sufficient in height to reduce any noise from construction on upper stories or building rooftops. The fences shall shield the marshes from major noise generating phases of construction to attenuate noise emanating from the project site. Effects on Wetlands, Migration, Local Policies or Ordinances, and Habitat Conservation Plans Revisions under the modified Project would not have any additional effects on wetlands, species migration, local policies or ordinances, or habitat conservation plans. The modified Project would include obtaining an amendment to the existing San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Permit No. 8-98 as stated in the adopted IS/MND. The modified Project would comply with the City of South San Francisco General Plan and other local policies and ordinances. Therefore, no change in impact significance would occur under the modified Project in comparison to the approved Project. 3.3.4.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts from conflicts with applicable habitat conservation plans than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to federally protected wetlands, to the movement of any applicable native or migratory fish or wildlife species, to local policies or ordinances than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact]) Implementation of the mitigation measures included in this Addendum and in the adopted IS/MND would reduce possible impacts to special-status species or to riparian habitats or other applicable sensitive communities to a less-than-significant level, and the proposed modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation]) EXHIBIT A Page 37 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-18 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.5 Cultural Resources Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.5.1 Setting The environmental setting relevant to cultural resources for the Project site has not changed in comparison to that described in the adopted IS/MND. Setting discussions from the adopted IS/MND for historical resources, archaeological resources and human remains, and paleontological resources are applicable to the entire Project. 3.3.5.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impact for the potential of the project to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource. The potential for the project to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature was determined to be a less than significant impact. The adopted IS/MND identified the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource and the potential to disturb any human remains as less than significant with mitigation incorporated impacts. 3.3.5.3 Discussion A Cultural Resources Survey Report (CRSR) was completed for the originally proposed project in August 2013. That report was updated in August 2014. The CRSR summarized the cultural resources studies that have been completed at the WQCP and included background research at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Inventory System, an on- foot survey of the WQCP, and correspondence with Native American groups. The records search was updated on January 31, 2017 (File No. 16-1113) to ensure that no new information has been made available since the completion of the August 2014 CRSR. The study concluded that based on the original and updated archival research; the results of the on-foot surface survey; the topography and environmental context; and the previous archaeological monitoring of the Colma Creek channel, the south bank, and the WQCP there is low sensitivity for prehistoric and historic- period archaeological resources. Additionally, the WQCP does not qualify as a historic property. EXHIBIT A Page 38 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-19 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 The CRSR concluded that the proposed project would not affect historic properties and that there is a low potential for uncovering previously undiscovered archaeological resources. The revised 2017 project is entirely within the original Area of Potential Effects (APE), which included the subterranean portion of the project footprint down to the planned excavation depth. Therefore, there are no changes to the previous finding of No Historic Properties Affected. Architectural/Structural Historical Resources Based on the analysis completed for the adopted IS/MND and updated for this Addendum, the modified Project would result in no impacts to historical resources or cultural landscapes. A January 2017 records search of the Northwest Information Center had the same results as those in the search conducted in support of the adopted IS/MND. Both searches indicated that there are no historic- period resources of the built environment in the search radius, and therefore the modified Project would have no direct or indirect effects on a historical resource. Archaeological Resources Based on the analysis completed for the adopted IS/MND and revised for this Addendum, the modified Project has a low potential for uncovering archaeological resources. While unlikely, the inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources cannot be entirely discounted. Mitigation Measure CUL-1 from the adopted IS/MND would ensure that impacts to archaeological resources are reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure CUL-1: The City shall implement the following measure: Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources. If prehistoric or historic-period cultural materials are unearthed during ground-disturbing activities, halt all work within 100 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative can assess the significance of the find. Prehistoric materials might include obsidian and chert flaked-stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil (“midden”) containing heat-affected rocks and artifacts; stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); and battered-stone tools, such as hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic-period materials might include stone, concrete, or adobe footings and walls; filled wells or privies; and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse. If the find is determined to be potentially significant, the archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American representative, will develop a treatment plan that could include site avoidance, capping, or data recovery. Paleontological Resources Based on the analysis completed for the adopted IS/MND and revised for this Addendum, there is a very low potential for paleontological resources and/or unique geologic features to be in the Project site. As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, the Project site is underlain by artificial fill over Bay Mud, and is not likely to yield significant paleontological remains because they are surface deposits that are not considered fossil-bearing rock units. In addition, construction of the modified Project would not require s ubstantial excavation to depths at which paleontological resources could be encountered; therefore, the impact would remain less than significant. No mitigation is required. EXHIBIT A Page 39 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-20 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Human Resources Based on the analysis completed for the adopted IS/MND and revised for this Addendum, there is no indication that the Project site has been used for burial purposes in the recent or distant past. While unlikely, during excavation associated with Project construction, it is possible that previously unknown human remains could be discovered. Mitigation Measure CUL-2 from the adopted IS/MND would ensure that impacts to archaeological resources are reduced to a less-than- significant level. Mitigation Measure CUL-2: The City shall implement the following measure: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are encountered during ground disturbing activities, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance will occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) 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. The Native American Heritage Commission will then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Native American, who will make recommendations for the treatment of any human remains. 3.3.5.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to historical resources than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to paleontological resources than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact]) Implementation of the measures included in this Addendum and the adopted IS/MND would reduce possible impacts to archaeological resources and human remains uncovered during construction to a less-than-significant level, and the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation] EXHIBIT A Page 40 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-21 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.6 Energy Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 6. ENERGY — Would the project: a) Result in a substantial increase in overall or per capita energy consumption? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Result in wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Require or result in the construction of new sources of energy supplies or additional energy infrastructure capacity the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Conflict with applicable energy efficiency policies or standards? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.6.1 Setting The environmental setting relevant to energy use for the project has not changed in comparison to that described in the adopted IS/MND. The purpose of the modified Project remains to increase reliability and efficiency of wastewater treatment processes at the WQCP and comply with the regulatory requirements. 3.3.6.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified less than significant impacts for all checklist items related to energy usage. 3.3.6.3 Discussion The purpose of the proposed modified Project is to increase reliability and efficiency of wastewater treatment processes at the WQCP and comply with the regulatory requirements. The WQCP would continue to be operated consistent with current practices and the modified Project would not result in a substantial increase in energy consumption. The modified Project does not change the Green Energy or the Wet Weather Improvement portions of the project evaluated in the adopted IS/MND. The Digester Improvement portion of the modified Project would make the WQCP’s processes more energy efficient than the existing conditions and those in the designs analyzed in the adopted IS/MND, and would not require the construction of new sources of energy supplies or energy infrastructure. There would be no wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy, and the project would not conflict with energy efficiency policies or standards. 3.3.6.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts from the potential for an increase in energy consumption, wasteful or unnecessary energy consumption, the construction of new sources of energy supplies or energy infrastructure, or conflicts with applicable energy efficiency policies or standards than those identified in the EXHIBIT A Page 41 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-22 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 42 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-23 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.7 Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 7. GEOLOGY and Soils — Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.) ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ iv) Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994)13, creating substantial risks to life or property? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.7.1 Setting The environmental setting relevant to geology, soils, and seismicity for the modified Project remains the same as that described in the adopted IS/MND. The modified Project would not disturb any additional soils outside of the area discussed in the adopted IS/MND. Setting discussions from the adopted IS/MND for geology, soils, and seismicity in the Project area are applicable to the modified Project. 13 The 2016 California Building Code (CBC), based on the International Building Code and the now defunct Uniform Building Code, no longer includes a Table 18-1-B. Instead, Section 1803.5.3 of the CBC describes the criteria for analyzing expansive soils. EXHIBIT A Page 43 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-24 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.7.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impact for exposing people or structures to the rupture of a known earthquake fault or landslides, and for potential use of septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems, because such systems would not be used on site. Less than significant impacts were identified for the project’s potential to expose people or structures to strong seismic ground shaking or seismic-related ground failure, result in substantial soil erosion, be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or would become unstable, and be located on expansive soil. 3.3.7.3 Discussion Geology and Soils Ground disturbance within the WQCP boundaries were discussed and analyzed in the adopted IS/MND. No additional ground disturbance activities are proposed under the modified Project, therefore, no additional risks from loss of topsoil, landslides, liquefaction, subsidence, expansive soil, or soil collapse would occur. Construction activities would be subject to the 2016 version of the California Building Code, which regulates and controls the design, construction, quality of materials, use/occupancy, location, and maintenance of all buildings and structures within its jurisdiction. Also, the modified Project would not generate wastewater and does not propose septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Seismic Conditions Although seismic groundshaking or liquefaction may occur at the site, as discussed in the adopted IS/MND, the potential damage would likely be minimized through the implementation of current building code requirements. Project improvements would be required to adhere to the most current version of the California Building Code (2016), which includes specifications and seismic design criteria that are created to minimize damage from anticipated groundshaking and secondary effects of liquefaction. No additional risks from seismic ground shaking and seismic failure are anticipated from activities under the modified Project. Furthermore, as described in the adopted IS/MND, no Alquist-Priolo zones or fault hazard zones are mapped in the Project vicinity; and thus the modified Project would have no impact from the rupture of a known or unknown earthquake fault. 3.3.7.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts from the potential for exposure to earthquake fault ruptures or landslides, or to the resources related to the use of septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 44 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-25 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts from the potential for exposure to strong seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, landslides, topsoil erosion, unstable soils, or expansive soils than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 45 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-26 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS — Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.8.1 Setting The environmental setting relevant to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the Project site has not substantially changed in comparison to that described in the adopted IS/MND. Applicable BAAQMD and CEQA requirements discussed in greater detail in the adopted IS/MND remain in effect. 3.3.8.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified less than significant impacts resulting from the generation of GHG emissions during construction and operation, and resulting from the potential for a conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted to reduce the emission of GHG. 3.3.8.3 Discussion Greenhouse Gas Emissions The modified Project would generate GHG emissions from temporary construction activities, including from mobile equipment, building demolition, site preparation, excavation, backfilling, and site restoration. The projected emissions for the approved Project are presented in Table 3-2. It is anticipated that the construction emissions for the modified Project would be slightly less than those presented in the adopted IS/MND, and are therefore considered to be a conservative representation of the modified Project emissions due to its rebuilding of only one digester instead of two. During the project’s operational phase, the modified designs are expected to increase the overall efficiency of the WQCP relative to both the existing operations and those assessed in the adopted IS/MND. Therefore, there would be no substantial changes to operational emissions as a result of the modified Project, and there would be no significant adverse impact. EXHIBIT A Page 46 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-27 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 TABLE 3-2 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ANNUAL GHG EMISSIONS (METRIC TONS/YEAR) Emissions CO2e Construction Equipment Emission Calendar Year 1 Emissions 224.45 Calendar Year 2 Emissions 165.44 Calendar Year 3 Emissions 203.42 Calendar Year 4 Emissions 76.53 Construction Haul Truck Emissions 91.75 Construction Worker Commute Vehicles Emissions 92.72 Total Construction-related Emissions Calendar Year 1 Emissions 408.92 Calendar Year 2 Emissions 349.91 Calendar Year 3 Emissions 387.89 Calendar Year 4 Emissions 261.00 Federal reporting threshold 25,000 Project construction emissions were estimated using custom emissions calculations. Construction equipment calculations were based on emission and load factors from the OffRoad2011 Model. Construction equipment default horsepower were derived from CalEEMod. Construction haul truck and worker commute vehicle emissions factors were derived from an EMFAC2011 model run. Equipment numbers and types are based on the project description and experience of the consultant. See Appendix B for details. Conflict with Applicable GHG Emissions Policies or Plans No changes to the modified Project were identified that would incite a potential conflict with existing GHG laws, plans, policies, or regulations adopted by the California legislature or the California Air Resources Board. The modified Project is also compliant with City of South San Francisco Local Sustainability and Climate Change Mitigation Activities as described in the adopted IS/MND. Therefore, this impact would remain less than significant. 3.3.8.4 Conclusion The modified Project would not result in new or more significant impacts related to the generation of GHG emissions than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact]) The modified Project would not result in new or more significant impacts related to conflicting with an applicable plan, policy or regulation for the reduction of GHG emissions than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 47 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-28 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significan t Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS — Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.9.1 Setting The environmental setting relevant to Hazards and Hazardous Materials for the modified Project site has not changed in comparison to that described in the adopted IS/MND. While the Project area would include excavation and other construction activities within the WQCP, the modified Project would not include additional ground disturbance to an area that would intersect any known hazardous materials sites. The setting discussion from the adopted IS/MND for this resource area is therefore applicable to the Project area. EXHIBIT A Page 48 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-29 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.9.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impact for emitting hazardous emissions or handling hazardous substances within one-quarter mile of a school, resulting in a safety hazard for people at a public airport or private airstrip in the project area, and exposing people or structures to significant risks involving wildland fires. The adopted IS/MND identified less than significant impacts for the project’s potential to be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites and to impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or evacuative plan. Impacts that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment though transport, use, or disposal of hazard materials and/or reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials in to the environment were determined to be less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures. 3.3.9.3 Discussion Release of Hazardous Materials As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, project construction activities would likely require the use of limited quantities of hazardous materials such as fuels, oils, lubricants, and solvents. The improper use, storage, handling, transport or disposal of hazardous materials du ring construction could result in an accidental release exposing construction workers, the public and the environment, including soil and/or ground or surface water, to adverse effects. The transport, use, storage, handling and disposal of hazardous materials for the modified Project would be adequately controlled through existing regulatory requirements as noted in the adopted IS/MND, and the potential impacts during construction would remain less than significant. In parallel with the adopted IS/MND, project construction would include the demolition of the Digesters No. 1 and 2 and associated control support buildings. If these structures contain hazardous building materials such as asbestos or lead-based paint, then demolition activities could expose workers or visitors to adverse effects associated with contact of these known hazardous materials, resulting in a potentially significant impact. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, any hazardous building materials would be identified and abated prior to demolition activities in a manner that would minimize potential exposure to these hazards. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: The City shall implement the following measure: Prior to commencement of demolition activities, the City shall contract with a licensed professional to conduct hazardous building material surveys for asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint for all structures proposed for demolition. Any subsequently identified hazardous building materials shall be removed and abated in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) rule “Lead: Renovation, Repair and Painting Activities that Disturb Lead-Based Paint”, 40 CFR 745; California Code of Regulations 1529, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and any local requirements that govern the protection, collection, transport, and disposal of hazardous building materials including asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint. EXHIBIT A Page 49 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-30 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Compliance with existing safety regulations and widely-accepted industry standards would minimize the hazard to the public and the environment. Construction and operation of the project would be required to comply with the California fire code and local building codes. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database14 and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database15 were reviewed to determine if any additional hazardous materials sites have been identified in the Project area since the approval of the IS/MND. As stated in the adopted IS/MND, the database lists a neighboring petroleum product distribution terminal located at 135 North Access Road, which is used to store gasoline, diesel fuel , jet fuel, and fuel additives. The petroleum product distribution terminal is known to have released fue l adjacent and south of the proposed project area; cleanup activities are ongoing. No additional hazardous materials sites or other known hazardous materials spills were identified. As described in the adopted IS/MND, in the case that contamination is present in areas proposed for excavation, the workers, the public or the environment could become exposed to adverse effects, which could be a significant impact. However, with implementation of a soil management plan, as required by Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, the potential impact would be reduced to less than significant. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: The City shall implement the following measure: Prior to commencement of construction activities, the City shall prepare and implement a Soil Management Plan as approved by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The Soil Management Plan shall be prepared by a qualified environmental consulting firm and shall include protocols for all earthwork activities that might encounter suspected contamination, emergency contact information, and minimum personal protective equipment requirements for onsite construction workers. Any suspected contaminated subsurface materials shall be segregated, covered, and profiled for appropriate offsite disposal in accordance with CalOSHA requirements and the receiving facilities requirements. The RWQCB shall be notified of any suspected contamination and the City shall only proceed with earthwork activities following direction from the RWQCB or local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Any required further excavation as directed by the overseeing agency shall be completed prior to recommencement of construction. As part of work on this Addendum and in compliance with Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, a Contaminated Soil Management Plan (CSMP) has been written for the modified Project. Other Hazards The modified Project would not be close to any school or airport, such that additional impacts could occur. Also, changes during construction or operation under the modified Project would not 14 State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), GeoTracker Database, 2017. Available at http://geotracker. waterboards.ca.gov/. Accessed on January 31, 2017. 15 California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), 2017. EnviroStor Database. Available online at http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed on January 31, 2017. EXHIBIT A Page 50 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-31 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 introduce additional impacts to emergency response or exposure to wildfires. Therefore, all potential impacts on other hazards would be the same as the approved Project. 3.3.9.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts from wildland fires or to schools or public or private airports than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts from being located on a hazardous materials site or impairing implementation of emergency response than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less Than Significant Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts from the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials or reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less Than Significant with Mitigation Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 51 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-32 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY — Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.10.1 Setting Setting information relevant to hydrology and water quality within the Project area remains the same as discussed in the adopted IS/MND. As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, the project site is located in the lower San Francisco Bay basin. The footprint of ground disturbance would be the EXHIBIT A Page 52 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-33 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 same as the modified Project. Setting discussions from the adopted IS/MND for hydrology and water quality in the project area are otherwise applicable. 3.3.10.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impact for the project’s potential to place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area. All other impacts on the checklist above were determined to be less than significant for Hydrology and Water Quality in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.10.3 Discussion Water Quality Under the modified Project, the area of ground disturbance and area of new impervious surfaces would be the same as the project in the adopted IS/MND. Therefore, the impacts on water quality during construction would be the same under the modified Project. Any water quality impacts from construction and operational activities under the modified Project would be minimized by adhering to the requirements of the following permits: Statewide Industrial Storm Water Permit (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit No. CAS000001), 2014 San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board NPDES permit16 for point discharges, and the NPDES Industrial Storm Water Permit. Construction best management practices would also be implemented by the City of South San Francisco in compliance with NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002; as amended by Orders 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ). The Construction General Permit regulates discharges of pollutants in stormwater associated with construction activity to waters of the U.S. from construction sites that disturb one or more acres of land surface, or that are part of a common plan of development or sale that disturbs more than one acre of land surface. The permit regulates stormwater discharges associated with construction or demolition activities, such as clearing and excavation; construction of buildings; and linear underground projects, including installation of water pipelines and other utility lines. The construction contractor would be required to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to identify pollutant sources that may affect the quality of stormwater discharge, and to implement Best Management Practices to reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges. The permits and practices are described in further detail in the adopted IS/MND. Implementation of the modified Project, in compliance with existing regulatory requirements, would be effective in reducing potential impacts related to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements to less-than-significant levels. Groundwater As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, the project site is currently developed and largely covered by impervious surfaces, and all of the proposed modified Project improvements would occur on asphalt surfaces. As such, there is likely very little groundwater recharge that occurs at the 16 San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Order No. R2-2014-0012, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) No. CA0038130, 2014. EXHIBIT A Page 53 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-34 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 project site. In addition, groundwater at the project site is in close proximity to the Bay and is not a source of water supply. For these reasons, the modified Project would not result in any new of more significant impacts with respect to the depletion or recharge of groundwater supplies than those identified in the previously approved IS/MND. Drainage, Runoff, and Flooding As mentioned in the adopted IS/MND and above, the modified Project site is currently largely covered by impervious surfaces and would not otherwise alter the course of any stream or river. All proposed improvements would be required to comply with the existing NPDES Industrial Storm Water Permit, as well as the NPDES Construction General Permit. Construction and operation of the modified Project would not increase the size of impervious surfaces within the Project area or increase runoff. All modified Project activities would occur within the existing WQCP boundaries. The potential impacts related to erosion and siltation, flooding on- or off –site from changes in drainage patterns, and existing or planned stormwater drainage systems would remain the same as those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has mapped the entire site within the 100-year coastal floodplain revised the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panel that includes the WQCP on September 9, 2013.17 The revised map shows that the WQCP is no longer designated as a special flood hazard area (SFHA) subject to inundation by the 100-year flood (i.e., the 1% annual flood risk). The north side of the WQCP, where Colma Creek runs adjacent to the site, and the east side of the site, adjacent to the San Francisco Bay, remain the same category of SFHA as in the previous version of the FIRM. However, tThe modified Project does not propose additional structures or housing-only installation. Therefore, the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to housing or structures from coastal flood risks, from increases in stormwater runoff, or from impeding or redirecting flood flows. Inundation The modified Project would not include any construction or placement of structures on, adjacent to, or within a levee, dam, or other flood control feature, and therefore would not directly affect such facilities. As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, the project site could be subject to inundation from a tsunami event, but many of the sources for tsunamis are located from distant sources (e.g., Alaska, South America, etc.) and would provide the WQCP time to prepare for such an event. The proposed modified Project would not include any habitable structures, and any damage incurred from a tsunami would likely be relatively easily repaired, if any were even necessary. The project site is relatively flat with no evident sources of mudflow in the vicinity and therefore would not be 17 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Flood Insurance Rate Map, San Mateo County, California and Incorporated Areas, Map Number 06021C0044E, effective date October 16, 2012, Revised to reflect Letter of Map Revision September 9, 2013. This FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map is included as Appendix C of this Addendum. EXHIBIT A Page 54 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-35 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 considered susceptible to mudflows. Therefore, impacts related to inundation from seiche, tsunami, or mudflow would be the same as those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. 3.3.10.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts related to the placement of housing within a 100-year flood hazard area than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in any new or more significant impacts related to the violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, depletion of groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge, erosion or siltation, surface runoff, degrading water quality, impeding or redirecting flood flows, and inundation risks from levee or dam failure, seiche, tsunami, or mudflow than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less Than Significant Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 55 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-36 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.11 Land Use and Land Use Planning Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 11. LAND USE AND LAND USE PLANNING — Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.11.1 Setting The setting related to land use and land use planning remains the same as that discussed in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.11.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impacts for any checklist item related to land Use and land use planning. 3.3.11.3 Discussion As discussed in the adopted IS/MND, the improvements as part of the modified Project would occur at the existing WQCP, thus, the project would not result in the direct or indirect physical division of an established community. No impact is expected. The modified Project improvements would not conflict with public lands designation or current uses at the site. Therefore, the modified Project is compatible with applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations. 3.3.11.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in a new or more significant impacts related to physically dividing an established community, conflicting with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation, or conflicting with a habitat conservation plan than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 56 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-37 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.12 Mineral Resources Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 12. MINERAL RESOURCES — Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.12.1 Setting The setting related to mineral resources remains the same as that discussed in the adopted IS/MND. The project site is located in an area classified as MRZ-1, with no known significant mineral deposits present and there are no mines, mineral pants, oil, gas, or geothermal wells located at the project site.18 3.3.12.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impact for any checklist items related to mineral resources. 3.3.12.3 Discussion As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, the project site is located in an area classified as MRZ-1, with no known significant mineral deposits present. In addition, there are no mines, mineral plants, oil, gas, or geothermal wells located at the project site.19 The local land use plans do not indicate presence of locally important mineral resources for the project site. The modified Project would be located within an already developed site that has existing facilities, and would not involve mining onsite. Therefore, the construction or operation of the modified Project would not alter, destroy, or limit access to any existing significant mineral resources. 18 California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), Mineral Land Classification: Aggregate Materials in the San Francisco-Monterey Bay Area, Special Report 146, Part II, 1987. 19 California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), DOGGR Well Finder, 2014. Available online at http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/#close. Accessed on February 13, 2017.; U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Mineral Resources On-Line Spatial Data, Active mines and mineral plants in the US (2003), modified December 20, 2016. Available online at https://mrdata.usgs.gov/mineral-resources/active- mines.html. Accessed on February 13, 2017. EXHIBIT A Page 57 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-38 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.12.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in a new or more significant impacts related to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or a locally important mineral resource recovery site than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 58 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-39 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.13 Noise Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 13. NOISE — Would the project result in: a) 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ f) For a project located in the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.13.1 Setting Noise related setting information for modified Project remains the same as discussed in the adopted IS/MND. Ambient noise levels remain as documented therein, and no new sensitive receptors have been identified. Significance thresholds and policies pursuant to the City’s General Plan have not changed since adoption of the IS/MND. 3.3.13.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impacts related to the project being located in the vicinity of a private airstrip, and less than significant impacts for exposure to noise levels in excess of applicable standards, excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise, permanent increases in ambient noise levels, and exposure of people to airport noise. The project’s potential impact to result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity was determined to be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation. EXHIBIT A Page 59 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-40 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.13.3 Discussion Construction Noise Impacts Construction activities under the modified Project would remain similar to those identified in the adopted IS/MND and Chapter 2, Project Description of this Addendum. As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, construction activities would comply with Policy 9-I-8 of the City of South San Francisco General Plan Noise Element20, and Section 8.32 of the City of South San Francisco’s Municipal Code.21 This noise ordinance establishes standards for both operational noise and construction-related noise. With regard to construction-related noise, the ordinance establishes permissible hours of construction of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday; 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays; and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Noise from individual pieces of construction equipment is restricted to a noise level of 90 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at a distance of 25 feet. Table 3-3 below presents the noise levels generated by the proposed equipment and activities. As the data indicates the only equipment/activity with the potential to exceed the limits of the City’s noise ordinance would be the grader and the sandblasting activity. TABLE 3-3 TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS FROM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Construction Equipment Noise Level (dBA, Leq at 50 feet) Noise Level (dBA, Leq at 25 feet) Paver 77 83 Compactor 83 89 Roller 80 86 Generator 81 87 Backhoe 78 84 Loader 79 85 Concrete mixer 79 85 Concrete pump 81 87 Grader 85 91 Excavator 81 87 Crane 81 87 Welder 74 80 Sandblasting 96 102 dBA = A-weighted decibels SOURCES: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide, January 2006.; Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, May 2006. No large or impact equipment that would create vibration impacts from construction activities are proposed for project construction elements and, consequently, there would be a less than significant impact from construction related vibration. 20 City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco General Plan, Noise Element, 1999. 21 City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco Municipal Code, Title 8 Health and Welfare, Chapter 8.32 Noise Regulations. Available online at http://qcode.us/codes/southsanfrancisco/. Accessed on February 2, 2017. EXHIBIT A Page 60 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-41 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 As discussed in the adopted IS/MND and shown in Table 3-3, proposed temporary construction activities would generate noise from construction equipment and sandblasting. Workers engaged in sandblasting activities would be required to follow actions under the Occupational Safety and Hazards Act standards, including wearing hearing protection. During substantial increases in construction noise, implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would minimize potentially significant impacts excessive noise levels to less-than-significant levels, and all construction noise related impacts of the modified Project would be the same as discussed in the adopted IS/MND. Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Construction Noise Reduction Measures. The City shall require the contractor to implement the following measures:  Construction equipment shall be well maintained and used judiciously to be as quiet as practical.  All sandblasting activities shall be fully contained with appropriate tenting.  Limit demolition and construction activities to daytime hours between 8:00 AM and 8:00 PM on weekdays and 9:00 AM to 8:00 PM on Saturdays.  Use “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.  Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.  Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.  Prohibit construction worker radios from being audible beyond the limits of the construction site. Operational Noise Impacts Operational noise impacts have not changed compared to those indicated in the adopted IS/MND. With regard to operational noise, the noise ordinance establishes a maximum permissible sound level of 70 dBA for medium-industrial or M-1 zoned land uses, which surround the project site.22 Most of the proposed noise sources would be installed either underground or within pump station structures or both which would attenuate noise levels. The facilities proposed under the modified Project would not result in operations that would be expected to result in vibration impacts, which are generally associated with confined movement of heavy loads (e.g., railway extensions) or mining activity, and the project would therefore have a less-than-significant impact from operational vibration. As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, the modified Project would have a less-than-significant impact with regard to exposure of people residing or working to excessive noise levels from a 22 This restriction applies only to stationary noise sources and not to construction equipment, which are exempt and which are addressed with a special provision described previously which restricts their noise levels to 90 dBA at 25 feet, above; City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco Municipal Code, Title 8 Health and Welfare, Chapter 8.32 Noise Regulations. Available online at http://qcode.us/codes/southsanfrancisco/. Accessed on February 2, 2017. EXHIBIT A Page 61 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-42 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 public airport. The modified Project would not be located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and would therefore have no impact with regard to exposure of people residing or working to excessive noise levels from a private airstrip. All operational noise related impacts of the modified Project would be the same as discussed in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.13.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in a new or more significant impacts related to the exposure of people to noise levels associated with a private airstrip than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in a new or more significant impacts related to exposure of people to noise levels in excess of applicable standards, excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise, permanent increases in ambient noise levels, and exposure of people to airport noise within two miles of a public airport than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less Than Significant Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in a new or more significant impacts related to temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less Than Significant with Mitigation]) EXHIBIT A Page 62 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-43 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.14 Population and Housing Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 14. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.14.1 Setting The setting related to population and housing remains the same as that discussed in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.14.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impacts for any checklist items related to population and housing. 3.3.14.3 Discussion As discussed in the adopted IS/MND, the modified Project would involve upgrades to the existing WQCP to comply with regulatory requirements. There would be no change in operations that would induce population growth in the area. The modified Project would not displace people or existing housing units or necessitate construction of replacement housing, and no impact is expected. 3.3.14.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in a new or more significant impacts related to the inducing substantial population growth, or displacing substantial numbers of existing housing units or people than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 63 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-44 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.15 Public Services Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 15. PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: i) Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ ii) Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ iii) Schools? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ iv) Parks? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ v) Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.15.1 Setting The setting related to public services remains the same as that discussed in the adopted IS/MND. Public services in the project area would be provided by the South San Francisco Fire Department, the South San Francisco Police Department, the South San Francisco School District, the South San Francisco Public Works Department and the Department of Park and Recreation, as indicated in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.15.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified less than significant impacts to all public services listed in the checklist above. 3.3.15.3 Discussion As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, the modified Project would involve short-term construction activities and the operations would continue consistent with the existing practices. The project would not significantly increase demand for fire or police protection services. The modified Project would only result in a temporary increase of construction worker employees in the project area; which would have no substantial adverse impacts to schools. The modified Project is not located in the immediate vicinity of any city parks and would not disrupt any park-related activities or access, or not result in an increase of employees, therefore it would not result in an increase in the use of existing park and recreation facilities. EXHIBIT A Page 64 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-45 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.15.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in a new or more significant impacts related to adverse physical impacts associated with the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities for fire protection, police protection, school, parks, or other public facilities than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 65 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-46 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.16 Recreation Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 16. RECREATION — a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.16.1 Setting The setting related to recreation remains the same as that discussed in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.16.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no impacts for either checklist items related to recreation. 3.3.16.3 Discussion As discussed in the adopted IS/MND, the project site is located approximately 0.5 miles north of Walnut Park in the City of South San Francisco, and is not anticipated to increase the use of the existing neighborhood and regional parks in the project vicinity. The modified Project also does not include a residential component that could contribute to a direct increase in the use of existing recreational facilities in the area or require the expansion or construction of new facilities. Furthermore, the modified Project would not result in the alteration or deterioration of existing recreational facilities. No impact is expected. 3.3.16.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in a new or more significant impacts related to increasing the use of existing parking or recreational facilities or constructing or expanding recreational facilities than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 66 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-47 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.17 Transportation and Traffic Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 17. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC — Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.17.1 Setting Setting information relevant to transportation and traffic as relevant to the modified Project remains the same as discussed in the adopted IS/MND. Construction access routes would be the same as discussed in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.17.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified no potential impacts to the project resulting in a change in air traffic patterns and/or resulting in inadequate emergency access. Less than significant impacts were identified for including conflicts with applicable transportation and traffic plans, ordinances, and policies; conflicts with congestion management plans; substantial increases in traffic related hazards; and conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and other such facilities. EXHIBIT A Page 67 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-48 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.17.3 Discussion Traffic Plans, Ordinances, Policies, and Programs As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, construction activities that would generate off-site traffic would include the delivery of construction vehicles and equipment to the project site, the daily arrival and departure of construction workers, the delivery of materials throughout the construction period, and the removal of construction debris. Construction equipment would be delivered to and removed from the project site in phases for the different construction activities. The estimated haul truck traffic would vary depending on the activity, but would peak at approximately up to 26 trucks per day, which would yield up to 52 daily one-way trips to and from the project site, which would be spread over the course of the work day.23 There would be up to 16 construction workers on a peak day and up to 8 on an average day, and they would commute to and from the worksite primarily before or after peak traffic hours. Construction- generated traffic would be temporary, and therefore, would not result in any long-term degradation in operating conditions on any locally used roadways for the project. Project construction-related traffic would not be substantial in relation to traffic flow conditions on U.S. 101, I-380 and South Airport Boulevard. Long-term project operation would be similar to the existing traffic and circulation conditions within the project area, consisting of continuing maintenance trips, with no expected increase in permanent employees working onsite. The modified Project would not exceed level-of-service standards established by the San Mateo County Congestion Management Agency (i.e., the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County) for roadways. Traffic impacts associated with operation and maintenance of the modified Project would remain the same as the discussed in the adopted IS/MND. Implementation of the modified Project would neither directly nor indirectly eliminate existing or planned alternative transportation corridors or facilities (e.g., bike paths, lanes, bus turnouts, etc.), include changes in policies or programs that support alternative transportation, nor construct facilities in locations in which future alternative transportation facilities are planned. As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, the project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans and programs supporting alternative transportation. Other Traffic Impacts As indicated in the adopted IS/MND, the project would not place any object within the flight path for airplanes in the area. The modified Project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. Also, neither project construction nor project operations would alter the physical configuration of the existing roadway network serving the area, and would have no effect on access to local streets or adjacent uses (including access for emergency vehicles). 23 The estimated truck trips are based on a quantity of about 13,000 cubic yards of excavated soils being transported to an offsite location in 20-cubic yard-trucks over 40 to 60 work days, plus an additional 5 to 10 extra trucks per day delivering materials. There also would be haul trucks carrying fill material, but those in-fill trips would be less than the off-haul trips. EXHIBIT A Page 68 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-49 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Neither project construction nor project operations would alter the physical configuration of the existing roadway network serving the area, and would not introduce unsafe design features. The modified Project also would not introduce uses that are incompatible with existing uses already served by the road system that serves the project area. Therefore, traffic impacts associated with air traffic patterns, emergency access, and traffic related hazards for the modified Project would remain the same as the discussed in the adopted IS/MND. 3.3.17.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in new or more significant impacts than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND related to changes in air traffic patterns or inadequate emergency access. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [No Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in new or more significant impacts than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND related to conflicts with applicable transportation and traffic plans, ordinances, and policies; conflicts with congestion management plans; increases in traffic related hazards; and conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and other such facilities. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less Than Significant Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 69 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-50 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.18 Utilities and Service Systems Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS — Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.18.1 Setting Setting information relevant to utilities and service systems for the modified Project remains the same as that discussed in the adopted IS/MND. There would be no expansion of utility service beyond the WQCP. Setting discussions from the adopted IS/MND for this resource area are therefore applicable to the modified Project. 3.3.18.2 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND The adopted IS/MND identified less than significant impacts for all checklist items above related to utilities and service systems. 3.3.18.3 Discussion Stormwater, Wastewater, and Water Supply The WQCP is a wastewater treatment facility. As described in the adopted IS/MND, the purpose of approved and modified Project is to comply with the wastewater treatment requirements of San Francisco Bay RWQCB. The modified Project would result in increased efficiency, EXHIBIT A Page 70 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-51 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 reliability, and secondary treatment capacity at the WQCP along with other upgrades. It would also remain in compliance with regulatory requirements. The modified Project would continue operations as regulated under the 2014 NPDES permit, and would not disrupt capacity needed by existing users. The designs analyzed in the adopted IS/MND included actions to improve facilities such as new storm sewers and discharge piping; these elements are unchanged in the proposed modified design. The modified Project would not include any new or different storm water drainage facilities. The modified Project would not require new water entitlement, as the project does not propose to increase the water supply demand. Any construction activities associated with the project (as discussed in other sections of this chapter) would not cause new or more significant water supply impacts than those identified in the adopted IS/MND. Other Impacts on Utilities and Service Systems Activities proposed under the modified Project would not generate additional impacts on utilities and service systems. During construction the modified Project would generate a similar volume and type of construction-related waste and debris as described in the adopted IS/MND. The contractor would be required to comply with all pertinent regulations regarding the disposal of solid waste generated by construction activities. No long-term solid waste generation would be associated with the modified Project. The impact would remain less than significant. 3.3.18.4 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in new or more significant impacts than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND related to exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board; adequate capacity to serve the projected demand in addition to the wastewater treatment provider’s existing commitments; the construction of new water treatment facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, new storm water drainage facilities and expansion of existing facilities, which could cause significant environmental effects; water supply availability to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources; sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the solid waste disposal needs during construction and operation; and compliance with statutes and regulations related to solid waste. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less Than Significant Impact]) EXHIBIT A Page 71 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-52 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 3.3.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): New Potentially Significant Impact New Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated New Less Than Significant Impact Same Impact as Approved Project Less Impact Than Approved Project 19. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE — a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 3.3.19.1 Findings of Previously Adopted IS/MND Impact analyses in the adopted IS/MND found that the proposed project would not significantly degrade the quality of the environment. Potential impacts associated with resources such as increased dust, noise, traffic, biological resources, and hazards were determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The adopted IS/MND identified less than significant impacts related to the Project’s potential to have impacts that make a cumulatively considerable contribution and have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings. 3.3.19.2 Discussion Direct or Indirect Impacts to the Quality of the Environment; Fish, Wildlife, or Plant Species, Habitat, or Community; California Prehistory or History Impact analyses in the sections above show that the modified Project would not significantly degrade the quality of the environment. Potential impacts associated with resources such as increased dust, noise, traffic, biological resources, and hazards would be reduced to less-than- significant levels with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures in the individual sections EXHIBIT A Page 72 of 148 3. Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-53 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Cumulatively Considerable Impacts and Effects on Human Beings Projects that are proposed or planned to occur concurrently with the modified Project in or near the project area include a parking garage expansion of approximately 1,531 spaces for an airport parking facility.24 The project is located directly south of the WQCP site at 195 North Access Road in South San Francisco. The parking garage expansion was approved in March 2014, and construction is expected to start in the first quarter of 2017. As discussed in the adopted IS/MND and previous sections of this Addendum, environmental impacts from the modified Project would be limited primarily to short-term effects related to construction. The impacts would be less than significant or less than signification with mitigation. If the projects in South San Francisco were to be implemented concurrently with the proposed project, the cumulative impacts could be significant. However, construction of the parking garage expansion would not occur at the same time as project construction. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in this document would reduce the project impacts to a less-than- significant level and would ensure that the modified Project’s contribution is less than cumulatively considerable. Compliance of the project discharges with necessary permits would ensure protection of the receiving waters and would not degrade the water quality. As such, when considered with other projects within the region, the proposed modified Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, potential cumulative impacts remain the same as in the adopted IS/MND, less than significant. The impact analysis in the adopted IS/MND and throughout this chapter indicates that the modified Project would not have environmental effects that would not cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings. Regulatory compliance and implementation of protective measures as part of the modified Project would ensure that the impacts would be minimal, and the impact would remain less than significant. 3.3.19.3 Conclusion Implementation of the modified Project would not result in new or more significant individually limited but cumulatively considerable impacts or cause substantial direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant Impact]) Implementation of the modified Project would not result in new or more significant impacts related to the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory than those identified in the previously adopted IS/MND. (Same Impact as Previously Approved Project [Less than Significant with Mitigation]) 24 City of South San Francisco, Major Projects, February-2017, February 2017. EXHIBIT A Page 73 of 148 3.Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3-54 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 This page intentionally left blank EXHIBIT A Page 74 of 148 South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 4-1 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 CHAPTER 4 Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program This chapter summarizes the mitigation measures that would be integrated into the modified Project to reduce the potentially significant impacts to a less -than-significant level. The chapter provides a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) organized in a tabular format, keyed to each mitigation measure incorporated into the project. The tables following each measure provide a breakdown of how the mitigation measure would be implemented, who would be responsible, and when it would occur. The tables consist of four column headings which are defined as follows: Implementation Procedure: If needed, this column provides additional information on how the mitigation measures would be implemented. Monitoring and Reporting Actions: This column contains an outline of the appropriate steps to verify compliance with the mitigation measure. Monitoring Responsibility: This column contains an assignment of responsibility for the monitoring and reporting tasks. Monitoring Schedule: The general schedule for conducting each monitoring and reporting task, identifying where appropriate both the timing and the frequency of the action. 4.1 Air Quality Mitigation Measure AIR-1a During construction activities, the City shall require the construction contractor(s) to implement a dust abatement program that includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the following BAAQMD- recommended measures as needed to control dust: All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. EXHIBIT A Page 75 of 148 4.Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 4-2 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City includes dust abatement requirements in construction specifications. 1.City reviews dust abatement program. 1.City 1.Prior to construction 2.Contractor implements measures in the program. 2.City documents that measures are being implemented. 2.City 2.During construction and final inspection Mitigation Measure AIR-1b During construction activities, the City shall ensure that the construction contractor(s) implement the following measures: On-road construction vehicle idling time shall not exceed five minutes. Additionally, off-road equipment engines shall not idle for longer than five minutes per Section 2449(d)(3) of Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9 of the California Code of Regulations. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City includes vehicle idling requirements in construction specifications. 1.City reviews contract.1.City 1.Prior to construction 2.Contractor implements measures in the program. 2.City documents that measures are being implemented. 2.City 2.During construction and final inspection EXHIBIT A Page 76 of 148 4.Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 4-3 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 4.2 Biological Resources Mitigation Measure BIO-1a The City will implement the following measure prior to construction: No more than two weeks in advance of any ground-disturbing activity, or other construction activity that would commence during the bird breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys of potential nesting habitat in the vicinity of the planned activity. No surveys shall be conducted for California Ridgway’s rail nests, as they would disturb the species and constitute “take” under Federal Endangered Species Act. If surveys indicate presence of nests, Mitigation Measure BIO-1b will be implemented. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City shall contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a worker education program. 1.City executes contract.1.Onsite foreman, City 1.No more than 2 weeks prior to construction, and prior to the removal of any vegetation 2.City shall contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a pre-construction survey for California Ridgway’s rail. 2.City executes contract.2.Qualified biologist, City 2.Between two and four weeks prior to construction, and prior to the removal of any vegetation Mitigation Measure BIO-1b The City will implement the following measure if pre-construction surveys conducted under Mitigation Measure BIO-1a indicate presence of nests: If active nests are found during pre-construction surveys, the results of the surveys shall be discussed with California Department of Fish and Wildlife and avoidance procedures would be adopted, if necessary, on a case-by-case basis and construction in the vicinity would be initiated only after avoidance measures are adopted. Avoidance measures shall include maintaining construction buffer areas (up to several hundred feet in the case of raptors) or seasonal avoidance, as needed. If buffers are created, a no-disturbance zone shall be created around active nests for the remainder of the breeding season, or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged. The size of the buffer zones and types of construction activities restricted shall take into account factors such as the following: Noise and human disturbance levels at the proposed project site and the nesting site at the time of the survey and the noise and disturbance expected during the construction activity; Distance, line of sight, and amount of vegetation or other screening between the proposed project site and the nest; and Sensitivity of individual nesting species and behaviors of the nesting birds. EXHIBIT A Page 77 of 148 4.Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 4-4 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City shall contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a pre-construction survey if during the nesting season. 1.City executes contract.1.City 1.No more than 14 days prior to construction 2.City shall include potential work limitations in construction specifications. 2.City reviews construction specifications. 2.City 2.Prior to construction 3.If nesting raptors are found biologist shall identify appropriate actions to avoid effects. 3.Sign-off by City that measures are being implemented. 3.City 3.During construction Mitigation Measure BIO-2 The City shall implement the following measures during excavation for Stormwater Pump Stations Nos. 4 and 5 and demolition of the digesters: Project construction activities shall take place between September and January, i.e., in the months outside of the California Ridgway’s rail breeding season (February 1 through August 31); or Noise reduction measures, including solid plywood fences, sound blankets, or other barriers with noise-dampening materials shall be constructed along the northwest, north, and northeast-facing edges of the project site prior to initiation of construction to serve as noise attenuation barriers. Noise barriers shall be installed in all locations along the exterior fence of the project boundary to minimize any direct or reflected noise above current ambient levels in salt marsh habitats outside the project site. The noise attenuation barrier shall be a minimum of eight feet in height, but sufficient in height to reduce any noise from construction on upper stories or building rooftops. The fences shall shield the marshes from major noise generating phases of construction to attenuate noise emanating from the project site. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City shall obtain required permits and include work limitations such as exclusionary fencing in construction specifications. 1.City reviews construction specifications. 1.City 1.Prior to construction 2.Contractor shall implement required measures including fencing. 2.Periodic inspections during construction along the drainage ditch. Sign-off by City that measures are being implemented. 2.City 2.During construction EXHIBIT A Page 78 of 148 4.Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 4-5 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 4.3 Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CUL-1 The City shall implement the following measure: Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources. If prehistoric or historic-period cultural materials are unearthed during ground-disturbing activities, halt all work within 100 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative can assess the significance of the find. Prehistoric materials might include obsidian and chert flaked-stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil (“midden”) containing heat-affected rocks and artifacts; stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); and battered-stone tools, such as hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic-period materials might include stone, concrete, or adobe footings and walls; filled wells or privies; and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse. If the find is determined to be potentially significant, the archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American representative, will develop a treatment plan that could include site avoidance, capping, or data recovery. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City shall contract with an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for professional archaeology to monitor all ground-disturbing activities. 1.City executes contract.1.City, qualified archaeologist 1.Prior to and during construction 2.City shall review construction specifications to ensure procedures for cultural resources discovery are included. 2.City reviews construction specifications. 2.City 2.Prior to construction 3.In the event subsurface cultural resources are discovered, construction within 100 feet of the find shall be halted and the qualified archaeologist shall be notified 3.City shall notify the County of the discovery. 3.City 3.During construction 4.The archaeologist shall complete a final monitoring report 4.Archaeologist completes report 4.Qualified archaeologist 4.Following construction Mitigation Measure CUL-2 The City shall implement the following measure: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are encountered during ground disturbing activities, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance will occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) 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. The Native American Heritage EXHIBIT A Page 79 of 148 4.Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 4-6 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Commission will then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Native American, who will make recommendations for the treatment of any human remains. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City shall retain a Native American monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities 1.City executes contract 1.City Native American Monitor 1.Prior to and during construction 2.City shall review construction specifications to ensure procedures for human remains discovery are included. 2.City reviews construction specifications. 2.City 2.Prior to construction 3.In the event human remains are discovered, construction in the area shall be halted and City shall consult the County Coroner. 3.The contractor shall notify City of the discovery. 3.City 3.During construction 4.City shall review construction specifications to ensure procedures for human remains discovery are included. 4.City reviews construction specifications. 4.City 4.Prior to construction 4.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 The City shall implement the following measure: Prior to commencement of demolition activities, the City shall contract with a licensed professional to conduct hazardous building material surveys for asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint for all structures proposed for demolition. Any subsequently identified hazardous building materials shall be removed and abated in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) rule “Lead: Renovation, Repair and Painting Activities that Disturb Lead-Based Paint”, 40 CFR 745; California Code of Regulations 1529, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and any local requirements that govern the protection, collection, transport, and disposal of hazardous building materials including asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City incorporates requirements in construction specifications. 1.City reviews construction specifications. 1.City 1.Prior to construction 2.Contractor implements measures in the program. 2.City documents that measures are being implemented. 2.City 2.During construction EXHIBIT A Page 80 of 148 4.Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 4-7 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 The City shall implement the following measure: Prior to commencement of construction activities, the City shall prepare and implement a Soil Management Plan as approved by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The Soil Management Plan shall be prepared by a qualified environmental consulting firm and shall include protocols for all earthwork activities that might encounter suspected contamination, emergency contact information, and minimum personal protective equipment requirements for onsite construction workers. Any suspected contaminated subsurface materials shall be segregated, covered, and profiled for appropriate offsite disposal in accordance with CalOSHA requirements and the receiving facilities requirements. The RWQCB shall be notified of any suspected contamination and the City shall only proceed with earthwork activities following direction from the RWQCB or local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Any required further excavation as directed by the overseeing agency shall be completed prior to recommencement of construction. As part of the preparation of the Addendum and in compliance with Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, a Contaminated Soil Management Plan (CSMP) has been written for the modified Project. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City includes procedures in the event that contaminated soils are identified in construction specifications. 1.City reviews construction specifications. 1.City 1.Prior to construction 2.Contractor implements measures in the program. 2.City documents that measures are being implemented. 2.City 2.During construction 4.5 Noise Mitigation Measure NOI-1 Construction Noise Reduction Measures. The City shall require the contractor to implement the following measures: Construction equipment shall be well maintained and used judiciously to be as quiet as practical. All sandblasting activities shall be fully contained with appropriate tenting. Limit demolition and construction activities to daytime hours between 8:00 AM and 8:00 PM on weekdays and 9:00 AM to 8:00 PM on Saturdays. Use “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. EXHIBIT A Page 81 of 148 4.Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco/ San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 4-8 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. Prohibit construction worker radios from being audible beyond the limits of the construction site. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1.City incorporates the noise control measures and requirements in construction specifications. 1.City reviews construction specifications. 1.City 1.Prior to construction 2.The contractor implements measures. 2.City documents that measures are being implemented. 2.City 2.During construction EXHIBIT A Page 82 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 5-1 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 CHAPTER 5 Report Preparers 5.1 Lead Agency City of South San Francisco 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Sam Bautista, Principle Engineer 5.2 Addendum Consultants Carollo Engineers 2700 Ygnacio Valley Rd, Suite 300 Walnut Creek, CA 94598 Rick Chan, P.E., Project Manager Becky Gherini, P.E., Project Engineer Daniel Chien, P.E., Design Engineer Seema Chavan, P.E., Environmental Engineer Environmental Science Associates 550 Kearny Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94108 Jim O’Toole, Project Director David Halsing, Project Manager, Technical Reviewer Alena Maudru, Deputy Project Manager, Environmental Planner, Section Author Michael Burns, Contaminated Soil Management Plan, Technical Reviewer Matthew Fagundes, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Technical Reviewer Heidi Koenig, Cultural Resources, Technical Reviewer EXHIBIT A Page 83 of 148 5.Report Preparers South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 5-2 ESA / 120473.02 Addendum June 2017 This page intentionally left blank EXHIBIT A Page 84 of 148 A-1 ESA / 120473.02 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Addendum June 2017 APPENDIX A Updated Special Status Species Lists •California Native Plant Society Species List •California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database •U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Official Species List EXHIBIT A Page 85 of 148 This page intentionally left blank A-2 EXHIBIT A Page 86 of 148 Sc i e n t i f i c  Na m e Co m m o n  Na m e Fa m i l y Li f e f o r m Ra r e  Pl a n t  RSt a t e  Ra n k G l o b a l  Ra n k CE S A F E S A E l e v a t i o n  Hi El e v a t i o n  Lo CA  En d e m i c Am s i n c k i a  lu n a r i s be n t ‐fl o w e r e d  fi d d l e n e c k Bo r a g i n a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 S 3 G 2 G 3 N o n e N o n e 50 0 3 T Ar a b i s  bl e p h a r o p h y l l a co a s t  ro c k c r e s s Br a s s i c a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  he r b 4. 3 S 4 G 4 N o n e N o n e 11 0 0 3 T Ar c t o s t a p h y l o s  fr a n c i s c a n a Fr a n c i s c a n  ma n z a n i t a Er i c a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  ev e r g r e e n  sh r u b 1B . 1 S 1 G 1 N o n e F E 30 0 6 0 T Ar c t o s t a p h y l o s  im b r i c a t a Sa n  Br u n o  Mo u n t a i n  ma n z a n i t a E r i c a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  ev e r g r e e n  sh r u b 1B . 1 S 1 G 1 C E N o n e 37 0 2 7 5 T Ar c t o s t a p h y l o s  mo n t a n a  ss p .  ra v e n i i P r e s i d i o  ma n z a n i t a Er i c a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  ev e r g r e e n  sh r u b 1B . 1 S 1 G 3 T 1 C E F E 21 5 4 5 T Ar c t o s t a p h y l o s  mo n t a r a e n s i s M o n t a r a  ma n z a n i t a Er i c a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  ev e r g r e e n  sh r u b 1B . 2 S 1 G 1 N o n e N o n e 50 0 8 0 T Ar c t o s t a p h y l o s  pa c i f i c a Pa c i f i c  ma n z a n i t a Er i c a c e a e ev e r g r e e n  sh r u b 1B . 2 S 1 G 1 C E N o n e 33 0 3 3 0 T As t r a g a l u s  nu t t a l l i i  va r .  nu t t a l l i i oc e a n  bl u f f  mi l k ‐ve t c h Fa b a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  he r b 4. 2 S 4 G 4 T 4 N o n e N o n e 12 0 3 T As t r a g a l u s  te n e r  va r .  te n e r al k a l i  mi l k ‐ve t c h Fa b a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 2 T 2 N o n e N o n e 60 1 T Ce n t r o m a d i a  pa r r y i  ss p .  pa r r y i p a p p o s e  ta r p l a n t As t e r a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 3 T 2 N o n e N o n e 42 0 0 T Ch o r i z a n t h e  cu s p i d a t a  va r .  cu s p i d a t a S a n  Fr a n c i s c o  Ba y  sp i n e f l o w e r P o l y g o n a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 1 G 2 T 1 N o n e N o n e 21 5 3 T Ch o r i z a n t h e  ro b u s t a  va r .  ro b u s t a r o b u s t  sp i n e f l o w e r Po l y g o n a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 1 S 1 G 2 T 1 N o n e F E 30 0 3 T Ci r s i u m  an d r e w s i i Fr a n c i s c a n  th i s t l e As t e r a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 3 G 3 N o n e N o n e 15 0 0 T Ci r s i u m  oc c i d e n t a l e  va r .  co m p a c t u m c o m p a c t  co b w e b b y  th i s t l e A s t e r a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 1 G 3 G 4 T 1 N o n e N o n e 15 0 5 T Co l l i n s i a  mu l t i c o l o r Sa n  Fr a n c i s c o  co l l i n s i a Pl a n t a g i n a c e a e a n n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 2 N o n e N o n e 25 0 3 0 T Eq u i s e t u m  pa l u s t r e ma r s h  ho r s e t a i l Eq u i s e t a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  rh i z o m a t o u s  he r b 3 S 1 S 3 G 5 N o n e N o n e 10 0 0 4 5 F Er y s i m u m  fr a n c i s c a n u m Sa n  Fr a n c i s c o  wa l l f l o w e r B r a s s i c a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  he r b 4. 2 S 3 G 3 N o n e N o n e 55 0 0 T Fr i t i l l a r i a  li l i a c e a fr a g r a n t  fr i t i l l a r y Li l i a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  bu l b i f e r o u s  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 2 N o n e N o n e 41 0 3 T Gi l i a  ca p i t a t a  ss p .  ch a m i s s o n i s b l u e  co a s t  gi l i a Po l e m o n i a c e a e a n n u a l  he r b 1B . 1 S 2 G 5 T 2 N o n e N o n e 20 0 2 T Gi l i a  mi l l e f o l i a t a da r k ‐ey e d  gi l i a Po l e m o n i a c e a e a n n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 2 N o n e N o n e 30 2 F Gr i n d e l i a  hi r s u t u l a  va r .  ma r i t i m a Sa n  Fr a n c i s c o  gu m p l a n t As t e r a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  he r b 3. 2 S 1 G 5 T 1 Q N o n e N o n e 40 0 1 5 T He l i a n t h e l l a  ca s t a n e a Di a b l o  he l i a n t h e l l a As t e r a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 2 N o n e N o n e 13 0 0 6 0 T He m i z o n i a  co n g e s t a  ss p .  co n g e s t a c o n g e s t e d ‐he a d e d  ha y f i e l d  ta r p l a n t As t e r a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 1 S 2 G 5 T 1 T 2 N o n e N o n e 56 0 2 0 T He s p e r e v a x  sp a r s i f l o r a  va r .  br e v i f o l i a s h o r t ‐le a v e d  ev a x As t e r a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 4 T 3 N o n e N o n e 21 5 0 F He t e r a n t h e r a  du b i a wa t e r  st a r ‐gr a s s Po n t e d e r i a c e a e p e r e n n i a l  he r b 2B . 2 S 1 G 5 N o n e N o n e 14 9 5 3 0 F Ho r k e l i a  cu n e a t a  va r .  se r i c e a K e l l o g g ' s  ho r k e l i a Ro s a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  he r b 1B . 1 S 1 ? G 4 T 1 ? N o n e N o n e 20 0 1 0 T Ho r k e l i a  ma r i n e n s i s Po i n t  Re y e s  ho r k e l i a Ro s a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 2 N o n e N o n e 75 5 5 T Ir i s  lo n g i p e t a l a co a s t  ir i s Ir i d a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  rh i z o m a t o u s  he r b 4. 2 S 3 G 3 N o n e N o n e 60 0 0 T Le s s i n g i a  ge r m a n o r u m Sa n  Fr a n c i s c o  le s s i n g i a As t e r a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 1 S 1 G 1 C E F E 11 0 2 5 T Ma l a c o t h a m n u s  ar c u a t u s ar c u a t e  bu s h ‐ma l l o w Ma l v a c e a e pe r e n n i a l  ev e r g r e e n  sh r u b 1B . 2 S 2 G 2 Q N o n e N o n e 35 5 1 5 T Mo n a r d e l l a  si n u a t a  ss p .  ni g r e s c e n s n o r t h e r n  cu r l y ‐le a v e d  mo n a r d e l l a L a m i a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 3 T 2 N o n e N o n e 30 0 0 T Pe n t a c h a e t a  be l l i d i f l o r a wh i t e ‐ra y e d  pe n t a c h a e t a A s t e r a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 1 S 1 G 1 C E F E 62 0 3 5 T Pl a g i o b o t h r y s  ch o r i s i a n u s  va r .  ch o r i s i a n u Ch o r i s '  po p c o r n f l o w e r Bo r a g i n a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 3 T 2 Q N o n e N o n e 16 0 3 T Si l e n e  ve r e c u n d a  ss p .  ve r e c u n d a S a n  Fr a n c i s c o  ca m p i o n Ca r y o p h y l l a c e a e p e r e n n i a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 G 5 T 2 N o n e N o n e 64 5 3 0 T Su a e d a  ca l i f o r n i c a Ca l i f o r n i a  se a b l i t e Ch e n o p o d i a c e a e p e r e n n i a l  ev e r g r e e n  sh r u b 1B . 1 S 1 G 1 N o n e F E 15 0 T Tr i f o l i u m  am o e n u m tw o ‐fo r k  cl o v e r Fa b a c e a e an n u a l  he r b 1B . 1 S 1 G 1 N o n e F E 41 5 5 T Tr i p h y s a r i a  fl o r i b u n d a Sa n  Fr a n c i s c o  ow l ' s ‐cl o v e r O r o b a n c h a c e a e a n n u a l  he r b 1B . 2 S 2 ? G 2 ? N o n e N o n e 16 0 1 0 T Tr i q u e t r e l l a  ca l i f o r n i c a co a s t a l  tr i q u e t r e l l a Po t t i a c e a e mo s s 1B . 2 S 2 G 2 N o n e N o n e 10 0 1 0 F Ca l i f o r n i a N a t i v e P l a n t S o c i e t y S p e c i e s R e s u l t s Ja n u a r y 3 0 , 2 0 1 7 EXHIBIT A Page 87 of 148 Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Adela oplerella Opler's longhorn moth IILEE0G040 None None G2 S2 Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum Franciscan onion PMLIL021R1 None None G5T1 S1 1B.2 Amsinckia lunaris bent-flowered fiddleneck PDBOR01070 None None G2G3 S2S3 1B.2 Arctostaphylos franciscana Franciscan manzanita PDERI040J3 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1 Arctostaphylos imbricata San Bruno Mountain manzanita PDERI040L0 None Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Arctostaphylos montana ssp. ravenii Presidio manzanita PDERI040J2 Endangered Endangered G3T1 S1 1B.1 Arctostaphylos montaraensis Montara manzanita PDERI042W0 None None G1 S1 1B.2 Arctostaphylos pacifica Pacific manzanita PDERI040Z0 None Endangered G1 S1 1B.2 Astragalus tener var. tener alkali milk-vetch PDFAB0F8R1 None None G2T2 S2 1B.2 Banksula incredula incredible harvestman ILARA14100 None None G1 S1 Bombus caliginosus obscure bumble bee IIHYM24380 None None G4?S1S2 Bombus occidentalis western bumble bee IIHYM24250 None None G2G3 S1 Caecidotea tomalensis Tomales isopod ICMAL01220 None None G2 S2S3 Callophrys mossii bayensis San Bruno elfin butterfly IILEPE2202 Endangered None G4T1 S1 Carex comosa bristly sedge PMCYP032Y0 None None G5 S2 2B.1 Chorizanthe cuspidata var. cuspidata San Francisco Bay spineflower PDPGN04081 None None G2T1 S1 1B.2 Chorizanthe robusta var. robusta robust spineflower PDPGN040Q2 Endangered None G2T1 S1 1B.1 Cicindela hirticollis gravida sandy beach tiger beetle IICOL02101 None None G5T2 S2 Cirsium andrewsii Franciscan thistle PDAST2E050 None None G3 S3 1B.2 Cirsium occidentale var. compactum compact cobwebby thistle PDAST2E1Z1 None None G3G4T1 S1 1B.2 Quad<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(San Francisco South (3712264)) Query run on 30-January-2017. Query Criteria: Report Printed on Monday, January 30, 2017 Page 1 of 4Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2017 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2017 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database EXHIBIT A Page 88 of 148 Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Collinsia corymbosa round-headed Chinese-houses PDSCR0H060 None None G1 S1 1B.2 Collinsia multicolor San Francisco collinsia PDSCR0H0B0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Corynorhinus townsendii Townsend's big-eared bat AMACC08010 None None G3G4 S2 SSC Dufourea stagei Stage's dufourine bee IIHYM22010 None None G1G2 S1? Emys marmorata western pond turtle ARAAD02030 None None G3G4 S3 SSC Eucyclogobius newberryi tidewater goby AFCQN04010 Endangered None G3 S3 SSC Euphydryas editha bayensis Bay checkerspot butterfly IILEPK4055 Threatened None G5T1 S1 Falco peregrinus anatum American peregrine falcon ABNKD06071 Delisted Delisted G4T4 S3S4 FP Fritillaria liliacea fragrant fritillary PMLIL0V0C0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Geothlypis trichas sinuosa saltmarsh common yellowthroat ABPBX1201A None None G5T3 S3 SSC Gilia capitata ssp. chamissonis blue coast gilia PDPLM040B3 None None G5T2 S2 1B.1 Gilia millefoliata dark-eyed gilia PDPLM04130 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Grindelia hirsutula var. maritima San Francisco gumplant PDAST470D3 None None G5T1Q S1 3.2 Helianthella castanea Diablo helianthella PDAST4M020 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Hemizonia congesta ssp. congesta congested-headed hayfield tarplant PDAST4R065 None None G5T1T2 S1S2 1B.2 Hesperevax sparsiflora var. brevifolia short-leaved evax PDASTE5011 None None G4T3 S2 1B.2 Heteranthera dubia water star-grass PMPON03010 None None G5 S2 2B.2 Horkelia cuneata var. sericea Kellogg's horkelia PDROS0W043 None None G4T1?S1?1B.1 Horkelia marinensis Point Reyes horkelia PDROS0W0B0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Hydroporus leechi Leech's skyline diving beetle IICOL55040 None None G1?S1? Ischnura gemina San Francisco forktail damselfly IIODO72010 None None G2 S2 Report Printed on Monday, January 30, 2017 Page 2 of 4Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2017 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2017 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database EXHIBIT A Page 89 of 148 Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Lasiurus cinereus hoary bat AMACC05030 None None G5 S4 Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus California black rail ABNME03041 None Threatened G3G4T1 S1 FP Layia carnosa beach layia PDAST5N010 Endangered Endangered G2 S2 1B.1 Leptosiphon rosaceus rose leptosiphon PDPLM09180 None None G1 S1 1B.1 Lessingia germanorum San Francisco lessingia PDAST5S010 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Lichnanthe ursina bumblebee scarab beetle IICOL67020 None None G2 S2 Malacothamnus arcuatus arcuate bush-mallow PDMAL0Q0E0 None None G2Q S2 1B.2 Melospiza melodia pusillula Alameda song sparrow ABPBXA301S None None G5T2?S2S3 SSC Monardella sinuata ssp. nigrescens northern curly-leaved monardella PDLAM18162 None None G3T2 S2 1B.2 Mylopharodon conocephalus hardhead AFCJB25010 None None G3 S3 SSC Pentachaeta bellidiflora white-rayed pentachaeta PDAST6X030 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Phalacrocorax auritus double-crested cormorant ABNFD01020 None None G5 S4 WL Plagiobothrys chorisianus var. chorisianus Choris' popcornflower PDBOR0V061 None None G3T2Q S2 1B.2 Plebejus icarioides missionensis Mission blue butterfly IILEPG801A Endangered None G5T1 S1 Rallus longirostris obsoletus California clapper rail ABNME05016 Endangered Endangered G5T1 S1 FP Rana draytonii California red-legged frog AAABH01022 Threatened None G2G3 S2S3 SSC Riparia riparia bank swallow ABPAU08010 None Threatened G5 S2 Sanicula maritima adobe sanicle PDAPI1Z0D0 None Rare G2 S2 1B.1 Silene verecunda ssp. verecunda San Francisco campion PDCAR0U213 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2 Speyeria callippe callippe callippe silverspot butterfly IILEPJ6091 Endangered None G5T1 S1 Spirinchus thaleichthys longfin smelt AFCHB03010 Candidate Threatened G5 S1 SSC Report Printed on Monday, January 30, 2017 Page 3 of 4Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2017 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2017 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database EXHIBIT A Page 90 of 148 Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Suaeda californica California seablite PDCHE0P020 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1 Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia San Francisco gartersnake ARADB3613B Endangered Endangered G5T2Q S2 FP Trachusa gummifera San Francisco Bay Area leaf-cutter bee IIHYM80010 None None G1 S1 Trifolium amoenum two-fork clover PDFAB40040 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1 Triphysaria floribunda San Francisco owl's-clover PDSCR2T010 None None G2?S2?1B.2 Triquetrella californica coastal triquetrella NBMUS7S010 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Record Count: 68 Report Printed on Monday, January 30, 2017 Page 4 of 4Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2017 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2017 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database EXHIBIT A Page 91 of 148 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office FEDERAL BUILDING, 2800 COTTAGE WAY, ROOM W-2605 SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 PHONE: (916)414-6600 FAX: (916)414-6713 Consultation Code: 08ESMF00-2017-SLI-0953 January 30, 2017 Event Code: 08ESMF00-2017-E-02174 Project Name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements Subject:List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the Service under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 ).et seq. Please follow the link below to see if your proposed project has the potential to affect other species or their habitats under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/protected_species/species_list/species_lists.html New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) EXHIBIT A Page 92 of 148 of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 ), Federal agencies are requiredet seq. to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat. A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12. If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 ), and projects affecting these species may requireet seq. development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and bats. Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/comtow.html. We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office. Attachment 2 EXHIBIT A Page 93 of 148 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 01/30/2017 03:47 PM 1 Official Species List Provided by: Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office FEDERAL BUILDING 2800 COTTAGE WAY, ROOM W-2605 SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 (916) 414-6600 Consultation Code: 08ESMF00-2017-SLI-0953 Event Code: 08ESMF00-2017-E-02174 Project Type: WASTEWATER FACILITY Project Name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements Project Description: Infrastructure improvements within the footprint of an existing municipal Water Quality Control Plant. Please Note: The FWS office may have modified the Project Name and/or Project Description, so it may be different from what was submitted in your previous request. If the Consultation Code matches, the FWS considers this to be the same project. Contact the office in the 'Provided by' section of your previous Official Species list if you have any questions or concerns. United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements EXHIBIT A Page 94 of 148 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 01/30/2017 03:47 PM 2 Project Location Map: Project Coordinates: MULTIPOLYGON (((-122.39407896995546 37.64388603051884, - 122.39349961280824 37.64406443221661, -122.3931133747101 37.64356320730992, - 122.39313483238222 37.64335082285475, -122.39357471466064 37.64288357491589, - 122.39443302154542 37.642135972100654, -122.3954737186432 37.641651725353114, - 122.39663243293764 37.64149880467178, -122.39661097526552 37.64140535298932, - 122.39534497261049 37.64154128267038, -122.39526987075807 37.64132039681234, - 122.39678263664247 37.641141988524495, -122.39672899246216 37.640929597146965, - 122.39691138267519 37.64076817929393, -122.39721179008485 37.6407087094702, - 122.3971474170685 37.640351889528056, -122.39832758903505 37.64015648740492, - 122.39862799644472 37.641311901189326, -122.39991545677186 37.64109101464927, - 122.39989399909975 37.641532787072606, -122.3996686935425 37.64174517672564, - 122.399400472641 37.6418811057849, -122.39946484565736 37.64201703459546, - 122.39927172660829 37.64214446762945, -122.39852070808412 37.64239083754201, - 122.39616036415102 37.642866584026386, -122.39466905593873 37.64356320730992, - 122.39407896995546 37.64388603051884))) United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements EXHIBIT A Page 95 of 148 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 01/30/2017 03:47 PM 3 Project Counties: San Mateo, CA United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements EXHIBIT A Page 96 of 148 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 01/30/2017 03:47 PM 4 Endangered Species Act Species List There are a total of 23 threatened or endangered species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Critical habitats listed under the Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your project area section further below for critical habitat that lies within your project. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. Amphibians StatusHas Critical HabitatCondition(s) California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) Population: Wherever found ThreatenedFinal designated Birds California Clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus) Population: Wherever found Endangered California Least tern (Sterna antillarum browni) Population: Wherever found Endangered Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) Population: U.S.A. (CA, OR, WA) ThreatenedFinal designated Short-Tailed albatross (Phoebastria (=diomedea) albatrus) Population: Wherever found Endangered western snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus ssp. nivosus) Population: Pacific Coast population DPS- ThreatenedFinal designated United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements EXHIBIT A Page 97 of 148 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 01/30/2017 03:47 PM 5 U.S.A. (CA, OR, WA), Mexico (within 50 miles of Pacific coast) Fishes Delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) Population: Wherever found ThreatenedFinal designated steelhead (Oncorhynchus (=salmo) mykiss) Population: Northern California DPS ThreatenedFinal designated Tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi) Population: Wherever found EndangeredFinal designated Flowering Plants Franciscan manzanita (Arctostaphylos franciscana) Population: Wherever found EndangeredFinal designated Presidio Manzanita (Arctostaphylos hookeri var. ravenii) Population: Wherever found Endangered Robust spineflower (Chorizanthe robusta var. robusta) Population: Wherever found EndangeredFinal designated San Francisco lessingia (Lessingia germanorum (=l.g. var. germanorum)) Population: Wherever found Endangered Showy Indian clover (Trifolium amoenum) Population: Wherever found Endangered United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements EXHIBIT A Page 98 of 148 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 01/30/2017 03:47 PM 6 White-Rayed pentachaeta (Pentachaeta bellidiflora) Population: Wherever found Endangered Insects Bay Checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis) Population: Wherever found ThreatenedFinal designated Callippe Silverspot butterfly (Speyeria callippe callippe) Population: Wherever found Endangered Mission Blue butterfly (Icaricia icarioides missionensis) Population: Wherever found Endangered Myrtle's Silverspot butterfly (Speyeria zerene myrtleae) Population: Wherever found Endangered San Bruno Elfin butterfly (Callophrys mossii bayensis) Population: Wherever found Endangered Mammals Salt Marsh Harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris) Population: wherever found Endangered Southern Sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis) Population: Wherever found Threatened Reptiles San Francisco Garter snake Endangered United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements EXHIBIT A Page 99 of 148 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 01/30/2017 03:47 PM 7 (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) Population: Wherever found United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements EXHIBIT A Page 100 of 148 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 01/30/2017 03:47 PM 8 Critical habitats that lie within your project area There are no critical habitats within your project area. United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: SSF-SB WQCP Improvements EXHIBIT A Page 101 of 148 This page intentionally left blank A-18 EXHIBIT A Page 102 of 148 B-1 ESA / 120473.02 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Addendum June 2017 APPENDIX B Air Quality Emissions Estimates EXHIBIT A Page 103 of 148 This page intentionally left blank B-2 EXHIBIT A Page 104 of 148 Co n s t r u c t i o n - O n - s i t e E q u i p m e n t No t e : R o a d C o n s t r u c t i o n M o d e l u s e d f o r e m i s s i o n f a c t o r s a n d l o a d f a c t o r s . D e f a u l t C a l E E M o d h o r s e p o w e r s w e r e u s e d f o r e a c h p i e c e o f e q u i p m e n t . P r o j e c t e q u i p m e n t l i s t u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e t y p e s a n d n u m b e r o f e q u i p m e n t f o r e a c h a c t i v i t y . Ca l E E M O D de f a u l t a c t i v i t y c o n s t r u c t i o n e q u i p m e n t l i s t s w e r e u s e d w h e r e e q u i p m e n t l i s t d e t a i l w a s n o t s u f f i c i e n t . No t e : A v e r a g e d a y s p e r m o n t h i s a s s u m e d t o b e 3 0 . 4 d a y s Ca l c u l a t e d C H 4 a n d N 2 O C o n t r i b u t i o n s 1 Ty p e o f E q u i p m e n t HP Lo a d F a c t o r Hr s / D a y To t a l D a y s RO G CO NO X PM 2 . 5 CO 2 RO G CO NO X PM 2 . 5 CO 2 RO G CO NO X PM 2 . 5 CO 2 CH 4 N2 O CO 2 e Ye a r 1 1 m o n t h Gr a d i n g : Gr a d e r 16 2 0. 4 0 8 7 8 30 0. 3 6 2 1 . 1 3 3 3 . 5 5 7 0 . 2 0 0 2 1 8 . 3 6 9 19 2 60 0 1, 8 8 4 10 6 11 5 , 6 6 5 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 3. 8 8 2 m o n t h s Ex c a v a t i o n : Ex c a v a t o r 15 7 0. 3 8 1 9 8 61 0. 1 5 6 0 . 9 7 3 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 0 8 7 1 9 9 . 8 2 6 75 46 7 85 3 42 95 , 8 5 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 6. 4 2 Ex c a v a t o r 15 7 0. 3 8 1 9 8 61 0. 1 5 6 0 . 9 7 3 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 0 8 7 1 9 9 . 8 2 6 75 46 7 85 3 42 95 , 8 5 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 6. 4 2 Ex c a v a t o r 15 7 0. 3 8 1 9 8 61 0. 1 5 6 0 . 9 7 3 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 0 8 7 1 9 9 . 8 2 6 75 46 7 85 3 42 95 , 8 5 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 6. 4 2 12 m o n t h s Bu i l d i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n : Cr a n e s 20 8 0. 2 8 8 1 8 36 5 0. 1 9 9 0 . 7 5 4 2 . 2 6 5 0 . 1 0 4 1 5 0 . 9 7 2 96 36 1 1, 0 8 6 50 72 , 3 7 6 0. 0 4 0. 1 5 0. 4 4 0. 0 2 29 . 1 0 Ge n e r a t o r S e t s 84 0. 7 4 8 36 5 0. 5 3 2 2 . 6 1 2 3 . 8 0 1 0 . 2 8 5 4 2 0 . 5 4 2 26 4 1, 2 9 9 1, 8 9 0 14 1 20 9 , 1 2 7 0. 1 1 0. 5 2 0. 7 6 0. 0 6 84 . 0 9 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 36 5 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 2 0. 0 8 0. 1 8 0. 0 1 17 . 3 5 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 36 5 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 2 0. 0 8 0. 1 8 0. 0 1 17 . 3 5 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 36 5 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 2 0. 0 8 0. 1 8 0. 0 1 17 . 3 5 We l d e r s 46 0. 6 8 36 5 0. 8 4 9 2 . 5 7 9 2 . 3 8 6 0 . 2 1 2 2 5 5 . 7 3 5 18 7 56 9 52 7 47 56 , 4 6 6 0. 0 8 0. 2 3 0. 2 1 0. 0 2 22 . 7 1 Sw e e p e r s / S c r u b b e r s 88 0. 4 5 5 6 8 36 5 0. 3 9 7 1 . 3 9 3 3 . 1 5 9 0 . 2 7 8 2 3 9 . 3 0 5 12 7 44 7 1, 0 1 3 89 76 , 7 5 5 0. 0 5 0. 1 8 0. 4 1 0. 0 4 30 . 8 7 Ce m e n t a n d M o r t a r M i x e r s 9 0. 5 6 8 36 5 0. 3 7 3 1 . 9 4 3 2 . 3 4 7 0 . 0 9 9 3 1 8 . 2 4 8 15 78 95 4 12 , 8 3 2 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 4 0. 0 0 5. 1 6 0. 3 6 1. 4 7 2. 6 4 0. 1 9 24 7 . 1 1 0. 0 1 0. 0 0 24 7 . 4 1 TP Y 22 4 . 4 5 MT / y r Ye a r 2 2 m o n t h s De m o l i t i o n : Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 61 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 0 2. 8 9 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 61 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 0 2. 8 9 Ex c a v a t o r 15 7 0. 3 8 1 9 8 61 0. 1 5 6 0 . 9 7 3 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 0 8 7 1 9 9 . 8 2 6 75 46 7 85 3 42 95 , 8 5 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 6. 4 2 Ex c a v a t o r 15 7 0. 3 8 1 9 8 61 0. 1 5 6 0 . 9 7 3 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 0 8 7 1 9 9 . 8 2 6 75 46 7 85 3 42 95 , 8 5 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 6. 4 2 Ex c a v a t o r 15 7 0. 3 8 1 9 8 61 0. 1 5 6 0 . 9 7 3 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 0 8 7 1 9 9 . 8 2 6 75 46 7 85 3 42 95 , 8 5 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 6. 4 2 1 m o n t h Gr a d i n g : Gr a d e r 16 2 0. 4 0 8 7 8 30 0. 3 6 2 1 . 1 3 3 3 . 5 5 7 0 . 2 0 0 2 1 8 . 3 6 9 19 2 60 0 1, 8 8 4 10 6 11 5 , 6 6 5 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 3. 8 8 1 m o n t h Ex c a v a t i o n : Ex c a v a t o r 15 7 0. 3 8 1 9 8 30 0. 1 5 6 0 . 9 7 3 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 0 8 7 1 9 9 . 8 2 6 75 46 7 85 3 42 95 , 8 5 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 2 0. 0 3 0. 0 0 3. 2 1 Ex c a v a t o r 15 7 0. 3 8 1 9 8 30 0. 1 5 6 0 . 9 7 3 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 0 8 7 1 9 9 . 8 2 6 75 46 7 85 3 42 95 , 8 5 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 2 0. 0 3 0. 0 0 3. 2 1 Ex c a v a t o r 15 7 0. 3 8 1 9 8 30 0. 1 5 6 0 . 9 7 3 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 0 8 7 1 9 9 . 8 2 6 75 46 7 85 3 42 95 , 8 5 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 2 0. 0 3 0. 0 0 3. 2 1 7 m o n t h s Bu i l d i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n : Cr a n e s 20 8 0. 2 8 8 1 8 21 3 0. 1 9 9 0 . 7 5 4 2 . 2 6 5 0 . 1 0 4 1 5 0 . 9 7 2 96 36 1 1, 0 8 6 50 72 , 3 7 6 0. 0 2 0. 0 8 0. 2 5 0. 0 1 16 . 9 8 Ge n e r a t o r S e t s 84 0. 7 4 8 21 3 0. 5 3 2 2 . 6 1 2 3 . 8 0 1 0 . 2 8 5 4 2 0 . 5 4 2 26 4 1, 2 9 9 1, 8 9 0 14 1 20 9 , 1 2 7 0. 0 6 0. 3 0 0. 4 4 0. 0 3 49 . 0 6 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 21 3 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 1 0. 0 5 0. 1 1 0. 0 1 10 . 1 2 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 21 3 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 1 0. 0 5 0. 1 1 0. 0 1 10 . 1 2 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 21 3 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 1 0. 0 5 0. 1 1 0. 0 1 10 . 1 2 We l d e r s 46 0. 6 8 21 3 0. 8 4 9 2 . 5 7 9 2 . 3 8 6 0 . 2 1 2 2 5 5 . 7 3 5 18 7 56 9 52 7 47 56 , 4 6 6 0. 0 4 0. 1 3 0. 1 2 0. 0 1 13 . 2 5 Sw e e p e r s / S c r u b b e r s 88 0. 4 5 5 6 8 21 3 0. 3 9 7 1 . 3 9 3 3 . 1 5 9 0 . 2 7 8 2 3 9 . 3 0 5 12 7 44 7 1, 0 1 3 89 76 , 7 5 5 0. 0 3 0. 1 0 0. 2 4 0. 0 2 18 . 0 0 Ce m e n t a n d M o r t a r M i x e r s 9 0. 5 6 8 21 3 0. 3 7 3 1 . 9 4 3 2 . 3 4 7 0 . 0 9 9 3 1 8 . 2 4 8 15 78 95 4 12 , 8 3 2 0. 0 0 0. 0 2 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 3. 0 1 1 m o n t h Sa n d b l a s t i n g : Ro l l e r s 84 0. 3 7 5 2 8 30 0. 2 7 3 1 . 0 6 4 2 . 3 9 8 0 . 1 7 9 1 9 7 . 0 3 4 69 26 8 60 5 45 49 , 6 7 9 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 6 6 Ro l l e r s 84 0. 3 7 5 2 8 30 0. 2 7 3 1 . 0 6 4 2 . 3 9 8 0 . 1 7 9 1 9 7 . 0 3 4 69 26 8 60 5 45 49 , 6 7 9 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 6 6 1 m o n t h Pa v i n g : Pa v e r s 89 0. 4 1 5 4 8 30 0. 2 9 7 1 . 2 7 4 2 . 5 7 5 0 . 2 0 1 2 1 6 . 2 9 1 88 37 7 76 2 59 63 , 9 7 1 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 0 2. 1 4 Pa v i n g E q u i p m e n t 82 0. 3 5 5 1 8 30 0. 2 5 2 1 . 1 7 7 2 . 2 6 2 0 . 1 7 3 1 8 6 . 2 2 3 59 27 4 52 7 40 43 , 3 8 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 4 5 Pa v i n g E q u i p m e n t 82 0. 3 5 5 1 8 30 0. 2 5 2 1 . 1 7 7 2 . 2 6 2 0 . 1 7 3 1 8 6 . 2 2 3 59 27 4 52 7 40 43 , 3 8 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 4 5 Ro l l e r s 84 0. 3 7 5 2 8 30 0. 2 7 3 1 . 0 6 4 2 . 3 9 8 0 . 1 7 9 1 9 7 . 0 3 4 69 26 8 60 5 45 49 , 6 7 9 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 6 6 1 m o n t h Si t e R e s t o r a t i o n : Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 30 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 4 5 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 30 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 4 5 0. 2 5 1. 0 5 1. 9 3 0. 1 4 18 2 . 1 5 0. 0 1 0. 0 0 18 2 . 3 7 TP Y 16 5 . 4 4 MT / y r Eq u i p m e n t Co n s t r u c t i o n A c t i v i t y E m i s s i o n F a c t o r s ( g / h p / h r ) Em i s s i o n R e s u l t s i n g / d a y Em i s s i o n R e s u l t s i n t o t a l t o n s B-3 EXHIBIT A Page 105 of 148 Ye a r 3 12 m o n t h s Bu i l d i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n : Cr a n e s 20 8 0. 2 8 8 1 8 36 5 0. 1 9 9 0 . 7 5 4 2 . 2 6 5 0 . 1 0 4 1 5 0 . 9 7 2 96 36 1 1, 0 8 6 50 72 , 3 7 6 0. 0 4 0. 1 5 0. 4 4 0. 0 2 29 . 1 0 Ge n e r a t o r S e t s 84 0. 7 4 8 36 5 0. 5 3 2 2 . 6 1 2 3 . 8 0 1 0 . 2 8 5 4 2 0 . 5 4 2 26 4 1, 2 9 9 1, 8 9 0 14 1 20 9 , 1 2 7 0. 1 1 0. 5 2 0. 7 6 0. 0 6 84 . 0 9 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 36 5 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 2 0. 0 8 0. 1 8 0. 0 1 17 . 3 5 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 36 5 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 2 0. 0 8 0. 1 8 0. 0 1 17 . 3 5 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 36 5 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 2 0. 0 8 0. 1 8 0. 0 1 17 . 3 5 We l d e r s 46 0. 6 8 36 5 0. 8 4 9 2 . 5 7 9 2 . 3 8 6 0 . 2 1 2 2 5 5 . 7 3 5 18 7 56 9 52 7 47 56 , 4 6 6 0. 0 8 0. 2 3 0. 2 1 0. 0 2 22 . 7 1 Sw e e p e r s / S c r u b b e r s 88 0. 4 5 5 6 8 36 5 0. 3 9 7 1 . 3 9 3 3 . 1 5 9 0 . 2 7 8 2 3 9 . 3 0 5 12 7 44 7 1, 0 1 3 89 76 , 7 5 5 0. 0 5 0. 1 8 0. 4 1 0. 0 4 30 . 8 7 Ce m e n t a n d M o r t a r M i x e r s 9 0. 5 6 8 36 5 0. 3 7 3 1 . 9 4 3 2 . 3 4 7 0 . 0 9 9 3 1 8 . 2 4 8 15 78 95 4 12 , 8 3 2 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 4 0. 0 0 5. 1 6 0. 3 4 1. 3 5 2. 4 0 0. 1 8 22 3 . 9 7 0. 0 1 0. 0 0 22 4 . 2 4 TP Y 20 3 . 4 2 MT / y r Ye a r 4 4 m o n t h s Bu i l d i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n : Cr a n e s 20 8 0. 2 8 8 1 8 12 2 0. 1 9 9 0 . 7 5 4 2 . 2 6 5 0 . 1 0 4 1 5 0 . 9 7 2 96 36 1 1, 0 8 6 50 72 , 3 7 6 0. 0 1 0. 0 5 0. 1 5 0. 0 1 9. 7 0 Ge n e r a t o r S e t s 84 0. 7 4 8 12 2 0. 5 3 2 2 . 6 1 2 3 . 8 0 1 0 . 2 8 5 4 2 0 . 5 4 2 26 4 1, 2 9 9 1, 8 9 0 14 1 20 9 , 1 2 7 0. 0 4 0. 1 7 0. 2 5 0. 0 2 28 . 0 3 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 12 2 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 5. 7 8 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 12 2 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 5. 7 8 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 12 2 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 6 0. 0 0 5. 7 8 We l d e r s 46 0. 6 8 12 2 0. 8 4 9 2 . 5 7 9 2 . 3 8 6 0 . 2 1 2 2 5 5 . 7 3 5 18 7 56 9 52 7 47 56 , 4 6 6 0. 0 3 0. 0 8 0. 0 7 0. 0 1 7. 5 7 Sw e e p e r s / S c r u b b e r s 88 0. 4 5 5 6 8 12 2 0. 3 9 7 1 . 3 9 3 3 . 1 5 9 0 . 2 7 8 2 3 9 . 3 0 5 12 7 44 7 1, 0 1 3 89 76 , 7 5 5 0. 0 2 0. 0 6 0. 1 4 0. 0 1 10 . 2 9 Ce m e n t a n d M o r t a r M i x e r s 9 0. 5 6 8 12 2 0. 3 7 3 1 . 9 4 3 2 . 3 4 7 0 . 0 9 9 3 1 8 . 2 4 8 15 78 95 4 12 , 8 3 2 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 1 0. 0 0 1. 7 2 1 m o n t h Pa v i n g : Pa v e r s 89 0. 4 1 5 4 8 30 0. 2 9 7 1 . 2 7 4 2 . 5 7 5 0 . 2 0 1 2 1 6 . 2 9 1 88 37 7 76 2 59 63 , 9 7 1 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 3 0. 0 0 2. 1 4 Pa v i n g E q u i p m e n t 82 0. 3 5 5 1 8 30 0. 2 5 2 1 . 1 7 7 2 . 2 6 2 0 . 1 7 3 1 8 6 . 2 2 3 59 27 4 52 7 40 43 , 3 8 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 4 5 Pa v i n g E q u i p m e n t 82 0. 3 5 5 1 8 30 0. 2 5 2 1 . 1 7 7 2 . 2 6 2 0 . 1 7 3 1 8 6 . 2 2 3 59 27 4 52 7 40 43 , 3 8 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 4 5 Ro l l e r s 84 0. 3 7 5 2 8 30 0. 2 7 3 1 . 0 6 4 2 . 3 9 8 0 . 1 7 9 1 9 7 . 0 3 4 69 26 8 60 5 45 49 , 6 7 9 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 6 6 1 m o n t h Si t e R e s t o r a t i o n : Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 30 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 4 5 Tr a c t o r s / L o a d e r s / B a c k h o e s 75 0. 3 6 8 5 8 30 0. 2 2 5 0 . 9 1 4 2 . 0 5 7 0 . 1 6 2 1 9 5 . 0 9 3 50 20 2 45 5 36 43 , 1 3 5 0. 0 0 0. 0 1 0. 0 2 0. 0 0 1. 4 5 0. 1 2 0. 5 0 0. 9 1 0. 0 7 84 . 2 6 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 84 . 3 6 4 TP Y 1GH G S p e c i a t i o n Fr o m C C A R G P R 3 . 1 ( 2 0 0 9 ) Ta b l e C - 6 Di e s e l e m i s s i o n o f C O 2 10 . 1 5 kg C O 2 / g a l 0. 0 0 0 5 8 kg C H 4 / g a l 0. 0 0 0 2 6 kg N 2 O / g a l So f o r D i e s e l s o u r c e s … CH 4 e m i s s i o n = 5. 7 1 E - 0 5 pe r c e n t o f C O 2 E m i s s i o n s N2 O e m i s s i o n s = 2. 5 6 E - 0 5 pe r c e n t o f C O 2 E m i s s i o n s B-4 EXHIBIT A Page 106 of 148 Co n s t r u c t i o n - H a u l T r u c k s Pe a k 2 6 t r u c k s / d a y = 5 2 o n e - w a y t r i p s t o a n d f r o m p r o j e c t s i t e ( a s s u m e s 2 0 - c y t r u c k s o v e r 4 0 - 6 0 d a y s + 5 t o 1 0 e x t r a t r u c k s p e r d a y d e l i v e r i n g m a t e r i a l s ) ; As s u m p t i o n s : 26 Tr u c k s P e r D a y 1. 0 0 E + 0 6 gr a m s / M T 2 Tr i p s P e r D a y P e r T r u c k 0. 9 0 7 1 8 5 MT / t o n 50 Da y s o f T r u c k T r i p s 26 0 0 To t a l T r u c k T r i p s 20 mi l e s f r o m p r o j e c t s i t e t o d u m p s i t e 52 0 0 0 To t a l C o n s t r u c t i o n h a u l t r u c k m i l e s t r a v e l l e d t h r o u g h t h e l e n g t h o f t h e p r o j e c t 0. 0 0 1 9 4 3 1 8 9 T o n s C O 2 / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 r u n ) 0. 0 0 4 8 g C H 4 / m i l e 1 0. 0 0 5 1 g N 2 O / m i l e 1 21 CH 4 G W P 31 0 N2 O G W P Re s u l t s : 10 1 . 0 5 To n s C O 2 0. 0 0 MT C H 4 0. 0 0 MT N 2 O 91 . 6 7 MT C O 2 0. 0 1 To n s C H 4 i n M T C O 2 e 0. 0 8 To n s N 2 O i n M T C O 2 e 91 . 7 5 MT C O 2 e 4. 2 5 1 6 6 E - 0 7 To n s R O G / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 r u n ) 0. 0 2 To n s R O G 1. 9 4 5 1 E - 0 6 To n s C O / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 r u n ) 0. 1 0 To n s C O 1. 2 8 6 0 1 E - 0 5 To n s N O X / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 r u n ) 0. 6 7 To n s N O X 2. 5 5 1 6 6 E - 0 7 To n s P M 2 . 5 / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 r u n ) 0. 0 1 To n s P M 2 . 5 Re f e r e n c e s : 1(L G O P 1 . 1 , T a b l e G . 1 2 , D i e s e l H e a v y D u t y V e h i c l e ) B-5 EXHIBIT A Page 107 of 148 Co n s t r u c t i o n - W o r k e r C o m m u t e 16 p e a k w o r k e r s / d a y , 8 o n a v e r a g e / d a y As s u m p t i o n s : 1. 0 0 E + 0 6 gr a m s / M T 8 Av e r a g e n u m b e r o f d a i l y w o r k e r s 0. 9 0 7 1 8 5 MT / t o n 13 7 2 . 5 Da y s o f c o n s t r u c t i o n 12 . 4 mi l e s p e r a v e r a g e v e h i c l e t r i p f o r t h e a v e r a g e w o r k e r , t o a n d f r o m t h e s i t e 2 2 tr i p s p e r d a y 27 2 3 0 4 To t a l w o r k e r c o m m u t e m i l e s t r a v e l l e d t h r o u g h t h e l e n g t h o f t h e p r o j e c t 0. 0 0 0 3 7 4 9 8 1 T o n s C O 2 / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 ) 0. 0 0 0 5 g C H 4 / m i l e 3 0. 0 0 1 g N 2 O / m i l e 3 21 CH 4 G W P 31 0 N2 O G W P Re s u l t s : 10 2 . 1 1 To n s C O 2 0. 0 0 MT C H 4 0. 0 0 MT N 2 O 92 . 6 3 MT C O 2 0. 0 0 To n s C H 4 i n M T C O 2 e 0. 0 8 To n s N 2 O i n M T C O 2 e 92 . 7 2 MT C O 2 e 2. 4 2 5 0 3 E - 0 7 To n s R O G / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 r u n ) 0. 0 7 To n s R O G 2. 5 0 2 4 7 E - 0 6 T o n s C O / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 r u n ) 0. 6 8 To n s C O 2. 4 6 8 0 3 E - 0 7 To n s N O X / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 r u n ) 0. 0 7 To n s N O X 2. 2 3 9 0 9 E - 0 8 To n s P M 2 . 5 / m i l e ( d e r i v e d f r o m E M F A C 2 0 1 1 r u n ) 0. 0 1 To n s P M 2 . 5 Re f e r e n c e s : 2 Ca l E E M O D v a l u e f o r S a n M a t e o C o u n t y 3(L G O P 1 . 1 , T a b l e G . 1 2 , G a s P a s s e n g e r C a r , M o d e l Y e a r s 1 9 9 6 - 2 0 0 7 ) B-6 EXHIBIT A Page 108 of 148 PM10 Exhaust Emission Estimates Emissions PM2.5*PM10** Construction Equipment Emissions Calendar Year 1 Emissions0.19 0.21 Calendar Year 2 Emissions0.14 0.16 Calendar Year 3 Emissions0.18 0.20 Calendar Year 4 Emissions0.07 0.08 On-road Vehicle Emissions Haul Truck Emissions 0.010.01 Worker Vehicle Emissions0.010.01 Total Construction-Related Emissions Calendar Year 1 Emissions0.21 0.24 Calendar Year 2 Emissions0.16 0.18 Calendar Year 3 Emissions0.2 0.22 Calendar Year 4 Emissions0.09 0.10 *PM2.5 exhaust emissions are obtained from the 2013 IS/MND Table 2-1. Fugitive Dust from Construction Activity Emission Factor (tons/acre/month) 1 (acres)PM10 PM10 PM2.5 2 1 0.22 2.6 0.5 1 2 Total Combined PM 10 and PM2.5 Exhaust and Fugitive Dust Emission Estimates Emissions PM2.5 PM10 Construction Equipment Emissions Calendar Year 1 Emissions0.742.85 Calendar Year 2 Emissions0.692.80 Calendar Year 3 Emissions0.732.84 Calendar Year 4 Emissions0.622.72 On-road Vehicle Emissions Haul Truck Emissions0.010.01 Worker Vehicle Emissions 0.010.01 Total Construction-Related Emissions Calendar Year 1 Emissions0.762.88 Calendar Year 2 Emissions0.712.82 Calendar Year 3 Emissions0.752.86 Calendar Year 4 Emissions0.642.74 PM2.5 fraction of PM10 for soil disturbance and earth moving were obtained from SCAQMD, 2006. The Midwest Research Institute has derived a value of 0.11 tons/acre/month. The California Air Resources Board has reviewed this factor and concluded that it represents PM10 emissions with watering. Consequently, CARB concludes that 0.22 tons/acre/month is more appropriate for unmitigated fugitive dust conditions (CARB, 2002). EMISSIONS SUPPLEMENT: CONSTRUCTION PM10 and PM2.5 EMISSIONS Area Disturbed Emissions (tons/year) For a conservative analysis, it is assumed that an average of 1 acre would be disturbed every construction workday. **PM10 emissions are estimated based on the assumption that 89 percent of off-road equipment exhaust PM 10 emissions are comprised of PM2.5 (SCAQMD, 2006). B-7 EXHIBIT A Page 109 of 148 This page intentionally left blank B-8 EXHIBIT A Page 110 of 148 C-1 ESA / 120473.02 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Addendum June 2017 APPENDIX C Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map The Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issued a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) Determination Document on April 25, 2013 for four maps within the City of South San Francisco, in San Mateo County, California. The basis of the revision was to update the relevant maps with new topographic data. The following flood insurance rate maps (FIRMs) had an original effective date of October 12, 2012, but were revised to reflect the LOMR on September 9, 2013: •Panel No. 06081C0041E •Panel No. 06081C0042E •Panel No. 06081C0043E •Panel No. 06081C0044E Panel No. 06081C0044E is relevant to this Addendum because it contains the entire South San Francisco/ San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant, at 195 Belle Air Road and surrounding areas. It is the only updated panel that is included in this document. The other maps and supporting information in the LOMR can be found online at http://map1.msc.fema.gov/data/06/L/13-09-1038P-065062.pdf? LOC=98e44ee8b50d5d5d107e5b3a90afcb22 EXHIBIT A Page 111 of 148 This page intentionally left blank C-2 EXHIBIT A Page 112 of 148 MAR C O W A Y SAN FRANCISCO BAY S A I R P O R T B L V D HT0644 LAWRENCE AVE HT0643 ZONE A CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO (AREA NOT INCLUDED) BELLE AIR E R D BE A C O N S T LI T T L E F I E L D A V E C O R E Y W A Y W A T T S W A Y S A I R P O R T B L V D ZONE VE (EL 10) 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD DISCHARGE CONTAINED IN CHANNEL CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO (AREA NOT INCLUDED) ZONE AE (EL 10) KI M B A L L W A Y HT0640 HT0641 HT0642 LI T T L E F I E L D A V E REVISED AREA E HARRIS AVE DN A W A Y SAN MATEO COUNTY UNINCORPORATED AREAS 060311 ZONE A HA R B O R W A Y G R A N D V I E W D R W HARRIS AVE E GR A N D A V E ZONE A POINT SAN BRUNO BLVD WONDERCOLOR LN E JAMIE CT LIMIT OF STUDY HA S K I N S W A Y SWIFT AVE E GRAND AVE Channel Navigable Slough MI T C H E L L C T ZONE D ZONE A SYLVESTER RD SAN MATEO COUNTY UNINCORPORATED AREAS 060311 E G R A N D A V E San Bruno Channel MITCHELL AVE UTAH AVE CITY OF SAN BRUNO 060326 ZONE AO BURI BURI LAND GRANT (DEPTH 2’) ZONE A Underground Storm Drain Underground Storm Drain C o l m a C r e e k CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 065062 CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO (AREA NOT INCLUDED) WETLANDS LAND GRANT ZONE VE (EL 10) NOTE: MAP AREA SHOWN ON THIS PANEL IS LOCATED WITHIN TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 5 WEST AND BURI BURI WETLAND LAND GRANT 553000m E 554000m E 555000m E 4165000m N 4166000m N 4167000m N 6445000 FT 6450000 FT 1630000 FT 1635000 FT 122°24’22.5" 37°39’22.5" 122°24’22.5" 37°37’30.0"122°22’30.0" 37°37’30.0" 122°22’30.0" 37°39’22.5" JO I N S P A N E L 0 0 6 3 JOINS PANEL 0132 JO I N S P A N E L 0 0 4 3 JOINS PANEL 0042 ZONE A ZONE AE ZONE AH ZONE AO ZONE AR ZONE A99 ZONE V ZONE VE ZONE X ZONE X ZONE D ~~~~~~~~~~ (EL 987) A A ---------23 23 97°07’30", 32°22’30" 4275000mN 6000000 FT DX5510 M1.5 MAP REPOSITORIES - - - Refer to Map Repositories list on Map Index EFFECTIVE DATE OF COUNTYWIDE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP October 16, 2012 EFFECTIVE DATE(S) OF REVISION(S) TO THIS PANEL MAP SCALE 1" = 500’ PANEL 0044E Notice to User: The shown below should be used when placing map orders; the Community Number shown above should be used on insurance applications for the subject community. Map Number CONTAINS: COMMUNITY NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX Federal Emergency Management Agency SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND INCORPORATED AREAS SAN MATEO COUNTY 0603110044E SAN BRUNO, CITY OF 0603260044E SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CITY OF 0650620044E (SEE MAP INDEX FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT) This map is for use in administering the National Flood Insurance Program.It does not necessarily identify all areas subject to flooding, particularly fromlocal community map repositorydrainage sources of small size. The shouldbe consulted for possible updated or additional flood hazard information. Base FloodElevationsTo obtain more detailed information in areas where floodways(BFEs) and/or have been determined, users are encouraged toconsult the Flood Profiles and Floodway Data and/or Summary of StillwaterElevations tables contained within the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report thataccompanies this FIRM. Users should be aware that BFEs shown on the FIRMrepresent rounded whole- foot elevations. These BFEs are intended for floodinsurance rating purposes only and should not be used as the sole source offlood elevation information. Accordingly, flood elevation data presented in theFIS report should be utilized in conjunction with the FIRM for purposesof construction and/or floodplain management. Coastal Base Flood Elevations shown on this map apply only landward North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88).of 0.0’Users of this FIRM should be aware that coastal flood elevations are also provided inthe Summary of Stillwater Elevations table in the Flood Insurance Studyreport for this jurisdiction. Elevations shown in the Summary of StillwaterElevations table should be used for construction and/or floodplain managementpurposes when they are higher than the elevations shown on this FIRM. floodwaysBoundaries of the were computed at cross sections andinterpolated between cross sections. The floodways were based on hydraulicconsiderations with regard to requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program.Floodway widths and other pertinent floodway data are provided in the FloodInsurance Study report for this jurisdiction. Certain areas not in Special Flood Hazard Areas may be protected by flood control structures. Refer to Section 2.4 "Flood Protection Measures"of the Flood Insurance Study report for information on flood controlstructures for this jurisdiction. projectionThe used in the preparation of this map was UniversalTransverse horizontal datumMercator (UTM) zone The was 10.NAD83, GRS1980 spheroid. Differences in datum, spheroid, projection or UTM zones usedin the production of FIRMs for adjacent jurisdictions may result in slightpositional differences in map features across jurisdiction boundaries. Thesedifferences do not affect the accuracy of this FIRM. Flood elevations on this map are referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of1988.These flood elevations must be compared to structureand vertical datum.ground elevations referenced to the same For information regarding conversion between the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of1929 and the North American Vertical Datum of 1988, visit the NationalGeodetic http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/Survey website at or contact the National Geodetic Survey at the following address: NGS Information Services NOAA, N/NGS12 National Geodetic Survey SSMC- 3, #9202 1315 East- West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910- 3282 To obtain current elevation, description, and/or location information for bench marks shown on this map, please contact the Information Services Branch ofthe (301) 713- 3242,National Geodetic Survey at or visit its website at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/. This map may reflect more detailed or up to datestream channel configurations than those shown on the previous FIRM. The floodplains and floodwaysthat were transferred from the previous FIRM may have been adjusted to conformto these new stream channel configurations and improved topographic data. Theprofile baselines depicted on this map represent the hydraulic modelingbaselines that match the flood profiles and Floodway Data Tables if applicable, in theFIS report. As a result, the profile baselines may deviate significantly from the newbase map channel representation and may appear outside of the floodplain. Corporate limits shown on this map are based on the best data available at the time of publication. Because changes due to annexations orde- annexations may have occurred after this map was published, map users shouldcontact appropriate community officials to verify current corporate limit locations. Map IndexPlease refer to the separately printed for an overview map of the county showing the layout of map panels; community map repositoryaddresses; and a Listing of Communities table containing National Flood InsuranceProgram dates for each community as well as a listing of the panels on whicheach community is located. For information and questions about this map, available products associated withthis FIRM including historic versions of this FIRM, how to order products or theNational Flood Insurance Program in general, please call the FEMA Map InformationeXchange at 1-877-FEMA-MAP (1-877-336-2627) or visit the FEMA Map Service Center website at http://msc.fema.gov. Available products may include previously issued Letters ofMap Change, a Flood Insurance Study Report, and/or digital versions of this map. Manyof these products can be ordered or obtained directly from the website. Usersmay determine the current map date for each FIRM panel by visiting the FEMAMap Service Center website or by calling the FEMA Map Information eXchange. REVISED TO REFLECT LOMR EFFECTIVE: September 9, 2013 EXHIBIT A Page 113 of 148 This page intentionally left blank C-4 EXHIBIT A Page 114 of 148 D-1 ESA / 120473.02 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Addendum June 2017 APPENDIX D Alternatives Analysis EXHIBIT A Page 115 of 148 This page intentionally left blank D-2 EXHIBIT A Page 116 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 1 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 ENVIRONMENTAL ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project This document develops and describes alternatives for the South San Francisco / San Bruno (SSF- SB) Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project (proposed project). This Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum (TM) is structured to address the alternatives-related requirements of both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Both regulations require inclusion and discussion of a situation in which no project is undertaken. This TM first describes several alternatives and then proceeds to do a comparative analysis of their adverse and beneficial effects on the existing and future environment. All alternatives are compared to the proposed project, which is analyzed in the Addendum to the South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (adopted IS/MND).1,2 This document is presented as Appendix D to that 2017 Addendum. The adopted IS/MND is also presented as Appendix E to the Addendum. Tables near the end of this TM present the elements of the different alternatives and summarize a comparison of the characteristics of the proposed project with those of the following four alternatives: • Alternative A: No Project/No Action • Alternative B: Original Design • Alternative C: Reduced Impacts • Alternative D: Alternate Technology 1 City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco/ San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvements Projects, Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration, State Clearinghouse No. 2013062051, adopted September 11, 2013. 2 The name of the project as originally proposed and analyzed in the IS/MND was the “South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project”. As part of the design changes that led to the need for a CEQA Addendum, the project name was also changed to “South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project”. EXHIBIT A Page 117 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 2 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Following are descriptions of each alternative and their impacts, benefits, and ability to meet the proposed objectives. There is also a section explaining why the proposed project was the alternative selected for implementation. Project Objectives and Need The 2011 Facility Plan Update 3 identified the following needs at the WQCP: • Comply with regulatory requirements for effluent discharge including minimizing blending of primary and secondary effluents during wet weather events; • Replace aging infrastructure at the WQCP for improving reliability in the treatment process; and • Adapt to the effects of climate change on the WQCP. As part of the Facility Plan Update, the City developed the South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects (CIP) to meet the following objectives: 1) Satisfy effluent discharge requirements including the 2008 and 2014 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and future requirements for increasing secondary treatment capacity and minimizing blending of primary and secondary effluents; 2) Improve reliability of the treatment process; and 3) Develop green energy resources to reduce dependence on the local power utility (Pacific Gas & Electric). Proposed Project Alternative Description of Alternative The main text of the 2017 Addendum to the adopted IS/MND (2014) provides the modified project description and updates the environmental analysis that was presented in the adopted IS/MND. The adopted IS/MND is provided as Appendix E to the Addendum, and it contains the original project description for the proposed project. That document can be consulted for more information. The proposed project consists of the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project. The project would include demolishing two of the five existing digesters at the WQCP. Digester 1 would be rebuilt with the same size and at the same location, and with a more efficient high- solids digestion (HSD) system. Thickening equipment to support the operation of the new Digester 1 would be constructed on the existing site where Digester 2 was located. Digester 3 would be structurally and mechanically rehabilitated, while Digester Control Building 3 would be 3 Carollo Engineers, South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant, Final Facility Plan Update, April 2011. EXHIBIT A Page 118 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 3 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 demolished without replacement. A digester gas conditioning system and a primary sludge screen would also be included as part of the project improvements. Under this alternative, the Wet Weather Improvements Project would increase the peak secondary treatment capacity at the WQCP by 10 MGD to a total capacity of 40 MGD. This would be achieved by installing a new secondary clarifier with associated equipment and piping and upgrading associated secondary treatment facilities. The proposed project would not result in any cumulatively considerable impacts, meaning that the incremental effects of the project are not considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past, current, or probably future projects. The proposed project benefits the WQCP, the community, and the environment by upgrading the technology, resulting in more efficient use of energy and water, and improved water quality. The proposed project would improve the efficiency and reliability of the WQCP’s operations and maintenance with relatively few impacts from construction. Operation of the proposed project would result in benefits to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and water quality at the WCQP due to improved technology like the HSD system and increased treatment capacity. Alternative A: No Project/No Action Description of Alternative As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e), the No Project Alternative is evaluated to allow decision-makers to compare the environmental effects of approving the project with the effects of not approving the project. Similarly, under NEPA (Section 1502.14(d), the No Action Alternative is evaluated. The No Project/No Action Alternative, as described below, represents what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the proposed project were not to be approved. Under this alternative, there would be no demolition or construction of any digester or other facilities at the WQCP. The peak secondary treatment capacity would remain the same as the existing capacity, 30 million gallons per day (MGD). Ability to Meet Project Objectives The No Project/No Action Alternative would fail to meet any of the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements objectives. The No Project/No Action Alternative would not satisfy new effluent discharge requirements nor improve reliability of the treatment process. The City would be in violation of their discharge permit, which could result in costly regulatory fines or other enforcement measures. This alternative would not replace the existing aging facilities with new modern and more efficient treatment technologies, and would use equipment beyond its useful life. Due to the uncertainties associated with future facilities and equipment failures and potential catastrophic breakdown, it is unknown if, in the long term, the No Project//No Action Alternative would maintain rate payer affordability. The No Project/No Action Alternative would not provide any benefits to the WQCP. By not implementing the proposed project or any of the alternatives, there would be no improvements to EXHIBIT A Page 119 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 4 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 the WQCP facilities, which would result in benefits from improved efficiency in energy or water use. There would also be no improvements to effluent water quality. Environmental Impacts Under "normal" conditions (without breakdowns and equipment failure), the No Project/No Action Alternative would avoid all construction and operational impacts that were identified for the proposed project, but under possible future scenarios with breakdowns, equipment failures and increased discharge of blended effluent, a wide range of impacts could occur, depending on the nature and extent of those breakdowns. With the No Project/No Action Alternative, there would be greater adverse water quality impacts because the performance of the treatment plant would not be improved relative to the existing condition or to the proposed project. However, the No Project/No Action Alternative would avoid all construction-related impacts that all of the other alternatives would risk. Alternative A would not result in any cumulatively considerable impacts. Alternative B: Original Design Description of Alternative In the adopted IS/MND the City proposed the Wet Weather Improvements Project, Green Energy Project, and Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project. These projects collectively are referred to as Alternative B, the Original Design Alternative. The project description and impact analyses of the Original Design Alternative are included in the adopted IS/MND (Appendix E to this Addendum) and can be reviewed for more detail. Under this alternative, the Wet Weather Improvements Project would increase the peak secondary treatment capacity at the WQCP by 10 MGD to a total capacity of 40 MGD. This would be achieved by installing a new secondary clarifier with associated equipment and piping and upgrading associated secondary treatment facilities. The Digester Replacement/Rehabilitation Project would result in two out of five of the digesters currently at the WQCP (Digesters No. 1 and 2) to be demolished and replaced in the same location, and one digester (Digester No. 3) to be rehabilitated. The size of the new digesters would remain consistent with the existing digesters at approximately 70 feet in diameter and 25 feet in height, with structure height of 20 feet above grade. Along with the two digesters, two associated support buildings that house heating and mixing equipment in the 20,000-square foot area, would be demolished and replaced with a new larger building. The new building would continue supporting the operations of the digesters. The Green Energy Project, while not an element of the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project, would involve installation of 500 solar panel canopies that would cover the entire 10,555- square foot WQCP parking lot near Area 42. The solar panels would provide 150 kilowatts of alternative, sustainable energy onsite. The solar energy generated would be connected to the motor control center in the maintenance building onsite. The area would continue to be used for parking purposes following the solar panel installation. EXHIBIT A Page 120 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 5 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Ability to Meet Project Objectives The Original Design Alternative would meet most of the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements objectives. This alternative would satisfy new effluent discharge requirements and future requirements for increasing secondary treatment capacity and minimizing blending of primary and secondary effluents, and would improve reliability of the treatment process. The Wet Weather element of this alternative would be the same as the proposed project. The digester improvements would not be as efficient as the proposed project since they would not include the high-solids digester technology, but existing digesters would still be improved from their current condition. Alternative B provides similar benefits to the WCQP, the community, and the environment as the proposed project. Although facilities at the WQCP would be improved, this alternative does not involve the HSD and gas conditioning systems, and would therefore not be as energy efficient as the proposed project. Environmental Impacts The environmental impacts under the Original Design Alternative would be very similar to the proposed project. The original design was analyzed in the adopted IS/MND and the proposed project was analyzed in an Addendum to adopted IS/MND, where it was determined that all environmental impacts were the same as the proposed project in terms of their significance determinations. The project described in the Original Design Alternative would not result in any cumulatively considerable impacts. Alternative C: Reduced Impacts Description of Alternative Under this Reduced Impacts Alternative, a smaller secondary clarifier, only capable of treating 5 MGD peak flow, would be built. Only one high-solids digester would be built, with no others built or rehabilitated. Only one storm water pump station would be included in this alternative. The nature of the project designs, construction implementation, and ongoing operations and maintenance of these parts of the WQCP would be similar to those described for Alternative B, except that they would be somewhat reduced in scale relative to that alternative. Ability to Meet Project Objectives This alternative was not selected because it fails to meet the project goals and objectives. With only three digesters (Digesters 4 & 5 and the new high solids digester), the WQCP would not have the minimum required redundancy of one digester. This would leave the plant vulnerable to emergencies if one of the digesters, especially the high solids digester, fails. This also leaves the WQCP unable to take a digester out of service to perform planned maintenance. In the secondary treatment system, a smaller clarifier with only 5 MGD of capacity would only expand the total secondary treatment capacity to 35 MGD, which falls short of the permit required expansion to 40 MGD total capacity. In the storm water management system, construction of only one pump EXHIBIT A Page 121 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 6 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 station could leave a portion of the WQCP site with stormwater runoff running off the plant boundaries untreated. This would be a violation of the stormwater management permit requirements for wastewater treatment plants. Accordingly, this alternative was not selected for implementation. Environmental Impacts Alternative C would bring fewer benefits to the WQCP than the proposed project or Alternative B would. It would not improve the facility’s process efficiency as much or provide the same degree of redundancy or secondary treatment capacity. The construction-related environmental impacts under the Reduced Impacts Alternative would be less than the construction-related impacts of the proposed project. This alternative would involve less construction, and would therefore have less impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, biological resources, hydrology and water quality, and traffic. The decrease in severity of impacts is largely due to the project construction schedule being approximately six months shorter than the proposed project. This alternative would require approximately 30% fewer trucks and truck trips and less earth moving, with a total of about 9,300 cubic yards. Operational impacts related to hydrology and water quality may be more significant due to having only one wet weather pump station, thereby leaving a portion of the site stormwater runoff passing off the plant boundaries untreated. All other impacts are likely to remain the same as or similar to those identified for the proposed project. This alternative would not result in any cumulatively considerable impacts. Alternative D: Alternate Technology Description of Alternative Alternative D is composed of several different technological components identified in the Facility Plan Update 4 and subsequently considered for implementation. Advanced digestion technologies, which break down sludge using chemicals and/or heat prior to digestion, could be used in the improved digesters. The advantage of this process is that more of the energy from the sludge can be captured, and depending on the selected technology, fewer digesters are needed. However, these advanced digestion technologies are usually not economically viable due to the long payback period. They also require more site space and require handling of chemicals, high pressure high temperature steam, and sludge which can be unsafe and is not operationally desirable. An advanced digestion system would have approximately the same site area, construction trips and noise as the proposed project. While it may be possible to decrease the size of the digester, a separate sludge processing facility would need to be built to treat the sludge. This component would have greater greenhouse gas emissions during operation, as additional 4 Carollo Engineers, South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant, Final Facility Plan Update, April 2011. EXHIBIT A Page 122 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 7 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 energy is required to provide the heat to treat the sludge beyond the heat that is required for conventional anaerobic digestion. An equalization storage pond, in lieu of a new clarifier, could be built to store all of the water that exceeds the existing secondary treatment capacity of 30 MGD. Once a storm had passed, the excess water could be sent back through the existing processes. This would require a large tank or pond sized to hold 3-7 million gallons. There is no space on-site for another tank or pond of this size. The proposed location for another storage basin is the ship locks on the south and east side of the plant. The area was initially considered, but it was found to be infeasible from a regulatory standpoint since the alternative would require adding fill to San Francisco Bay. During discussions between the City and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), BCDC biologist Bob Batha indicated that the agency would only issue a permit for this type of fill if there were no other technically feasible option.5 Instead of building new storm water pump stations, site drainage piping could be routed to the existing site drainage pump station located in the Old Sludge Control Building. This element was not selected since it would be very disruptive to the site and require deep trenches for new pipes through congested utility corridors. Additionally, this component was not feasible since the Old Sludge Control Building was constructed in 1949 and is not seismically sound. The electrical infrastructure supporting the existing pumps would need to be upgraded as well. This component would remain within the previously analyzed project footprint, and would not materially change the volume of dirt moving, or change the greenhouse gas emissions during construction or operation. Ability to Meet Project Objectives Alternative D, the Alternate Technology Alternative was not selected because it would fail to meet all of the project objectives. Because there is no room on the site for an equalization storage pond, the WQCP would not be able to store the water that exceeds the existing secondary treatment capacity of 30 MDG. Therefore, this would not satisfy the WQCP's effluent discharge permit requirements and future requirements for increasing secondary treatment capacity and minimizing blending of primary and secondary effluents. The reliability of the treatment process would be improved with advanced digestion, but this technology is not economically feasible. Environmental Impacts The environmental impacts under the Alternate Technology Alternative would be slightly greater than the proposed project. Although the advanced digestion system would require approximately the same site area as the proposed project’s digesters, the equalization storage basin would add an additional 17,000 cubic yards of project footprint and earthmoving to the project. Overall, this alternative would result in greater construction related impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, biological resources, hydrology and water quality, and traffic. Other 5 Notes from City of South San Francisco and Carollo Engineers meeting with BCDC; February 28, 2012. EXHIBIT A Page 123 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 8 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 components in this alternative would have brought unacceptable environmental impacts, such as adding fill to San Francisco Bay. The advanced digestion technology would have greater greenhouse gas emissions during operation as additional energy is required to provide the heat to treat the sludge. Routing site drainage piping to the Old Sludge Control Building could result in an increase in adverse environmental impacts to geology, soils, and seismicity since the building is not seismically sound. Alternative D would not result in any cumulatively considerable impacts. Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice Though potential impacts related to socioeconomics and environmental justice were not analyzed in either of the CEQA documents prepared for this WQCP project, clear consideration of potential effects on minority and low-income populations is required in NEPA documents. For this CEQA-Plus Alternatives Analysis, that requirement is being addressed here. Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations (1994), directs Federal agencies to take the appropriate and necessary steps to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse effects of Federal projects on the health or environment of minority and low-income populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. Setting The socioeconomic analysis describes the potential impacts of the project on population growth, employment, and housing in the counties, cities, and census tracts within 1 mile of the edge of the WQCP. Impacts to the socioeconomic climate are also covered to the extent that the project relates to the businesses in the surrounding communities. Those communities include portions of the City of South San Francisco (in which the WQCP is located) and of the City of San Bruno, which is nearby to the south. The environmental justice (EJ) analysis provides an overview of minority and low-income populations in the vicinity. Specifically, data from the 2011–2015 American Community Survey are presented to demonstrate the difference, if any, between percentage of minority and low-income populations in census tracts within 1 mile of the WQCP. Table 1 summarizes the demographics and economic characteristics in the two cities bordering the WQCP, South San Francisco (SSF) and San Bruno (SB). Small population increases (less than 3,400 in SSF and less than 2,000 in SB), were seen in the two cities in recent years. Employment declined with a 5% decrease in South San Francisco from 2011 to 2015, and a 1% decrease in San Bruno from 2011 to 2015. Table 1 also compares the percentage of non-white residents living in South San Francisco and San Bruno in 2011 and 2015. For the purposes of this analysis, an area with a non-white population exceeding 50 percent considered to have a minority population. The percentage of individuals living below the poverty level (according to the 2011– 2015 American Community Survey) is also shown in Table 1. EXHIBIT A Page 124 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 9 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Given the WQCP’s location in an almost entirely industrial/commercial area, surrounded by San Francisco International Airport, business parks, light industrial uses (e.g., auto body shops), U.S. Highway 101, and San Francisco Bay, very small percentages of the local citywide populations are within 1 mile of the WQCP. A one-mile radius around the WQCP does include small portions of each city’s residential base. TABLE 1 CITY DEMOGRAPHICS AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS City Population Employed Population Percent of Citywide Population that is Non-White Percent of Citywide Population that is Below Poverty Line 2011 2015 2011 2015 2011 2015 2011 2015 South San Francisco 62,822 66,217 68% 63% 58% 63% 5.6% 7.8% San Bruno 40,677 42,506 72% 71% 47% 48% 6.5% 6.2% SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Fact Finder, ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates, 2007-2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, South San Francisco city and San Bruno city, California. ; U.S. Census Bureau, American Fact Finder, ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates, 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, South San Francisco city and San Bruno city, California.; U.S. Census Bureau, American Fact Finder, Economic Characteristics, 2007-2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, South San Francisco city and San Bruno city, California.; U.S. Census Bureau, American Fact Finder, Economic Characteristics, 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, South San Francisco city and San Bruno city, California. Regulatory Setting Federal Regulations Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations (1994), directs Federal agencies to take the appropriate and necessary steps to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse effects of Federal projects on the health or environment of minority and low-income populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. State Regulations There are no specific requirements for the analysis of socioeconomic and environmental justice issues under state law. CEQA Guidelines Section 15131(a) through (c) provides guidance on the discussion of economic and social effects in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (AEP 2017). Specifically, such effects may be included in an EIR but “shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment.” However, economic and social effects may be used to determine the significance of physical changes caused by a project, but these changes “need not be analyzed in any detail greater than necessary to trace the chain of cause and effect.” CEQA Guidelines provide for the consideration of economic, social, and particularly housing factors, together with technological and environmental factors, to determine whether changes in a project are feasible to reduce or avoid the significant effects on the environment identified in the EIR. EXHIBIT A Page 125 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 10 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Regional/Local Regulations This section discusses the policies and goals relevant to socioeconomics and environmental justice in the cities surrounding the WQCP. City of South San Francisco The City of South San Francisco General Plan (1999) and its 2015 Housing Element Update include the following policies and goals: • 2-G-2 Maintain a balanced land use program that provides opportunities for continued economic growth, and building intensities that reflect South San Francisco’s prominent inner bay location and excellent regional access. • 2-G-4 Provide for continued operation of older industrial and service commercial businesses at specific locations. • 6-G-5 Establish land use priorities based on economic criteria and sound fiscal planning; reserve sites for designated uses rather than accepting any development. • 6.6 Assure Equal Access to Housing City of San Bruno The Economic Development section of the 2009 City of San Bruno General Plan includes the following goals: • ED-B Provide development opportunities that allow for establishment of jobs within San Bruno, commensurate with local residents’ education and skills. • ED-9 Coordinate with the Redevelopment Agency and Public Works Department on strategic improvements—infrastructure upgrade and extension, environmental remediation, land acquisition and/or assembly—as necessary to provide for orderly development of commercial, industrial, and mixed-use sites. • ED-11 Improve environmental quality by coordinating the remediation of sites that have been identified as having leaking underground storage tanks or Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanup (SLIC), particularly where upfront private sector investment is unlikely due to perceived or actual environmental constraints or liabilities. The Public Facilities and Services section of the 2009 City of San Bruno General Plan includes the following goal: • PFS-D Ensure that the City’s wastewater collection and treatment systems are adequate to serve the city’s present and anticipated needs, are safe, and are environmentally sound. EXHIBIT A Page 126 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 11 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance Criteria For the purposes of this CEQA-Plus Alternatives Analysis, the project would have a significant impact if it would result in any of the following: • Displace, relocate, or increase area businesses; • Change local employment opportunities or community tax bases; • Disproportionately affect minority communities or low-income communities; • Change the ethnic or racial composition in the community; or • Change lifestyles and social interactions. These significance criteria were developed from Executive Order 12898, described above, and a combination of guidance and significance standards used by various federal agencies. Alternative A: No Project/No Action Alternative No Impact. Under the No Project/No Action Alternative, no new activities would occur at the WQCP, which would continue to be operated and maintained according to its current practices. Wastewater treatment activities and other facility operations would remain similar to existing conditions, and would not be expected to change business conditions in the long term. Therefore, no impact to area businesses would occur, and there would be no changes in the local employment opportunities, community tax bases, or other aspects of the socioeconomic character of the nearby communities. Similarly, because the WQCP would remain functioning as it has, there would be no changes to the ethnic or racial composition or the lifestyles or social interactions of the community. Since there would be no project action, there could be no disproportionate effects on minority or low-income communities. Alternative A would have no impact on socioeconomics or environmental justice. Proposed Project Alternative No Impact. Under the proposed project the infrastructure and operating systems at the WQCP would be upgraded and made more resilient and more efficient. The operation and maintenance would be adjusted from the current practices to be appropriate to the new systems; however, these changes would be minimal and would not substantially change the employment opportunities or tax bases of the surrounding communities. Similarly, no impact to other area businesses would occur, and neither the socioeconomic character of the nearby communities nor the ethnic or racial compositions or the lifestyles or social interactions would change. The IS/MND and the Addendum to it showed that under the proposed project, the potential for adverse effects to people in the surrounding communities – from things like air quality emissions, water quality releases, increases in flood risk, hazardous materials mobilization, noise levels, and EXHIBIT A Page 127 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 12 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 so on – was not found to be significant. In addition, there would be earthmoving and other construction activities, such as noise or traffic that might have a short-term and temporary potential to affect local residents if they were located near the WQCP. However, these actions would occur at some distance from residents and be similarly experienced by non-residents in the business parks and on public roads and trails. Users of these facilities are drawn from the general population. These actions would not take place exclusively in minority and low-income areas, and would not disproportionately affect minority or low-income communities. Following construction, the WQCP would remain functioning as it has with improvements in efficiency and energy and water use – and would not bring adverse impacts to the local residents. There would be no disproportionate effects on minority or low-income communities. The Proposed Project would have no impact on socioeconomics or environmental justice. Other Alternatives Considered No Impact. Under Alternatives B, C, and D, the impacts relating to socioeconomics and environmental justice would be the same as the proposed project: no impact. Under all of these alternatives, the infrastructure and operating systems at the WQCP would be upgraded and made more efficient. No impact to other area businesses would occur, and neither the socioeconomic character of the nearby communities nor the ethnic or racial compositions or the lifestyles or social interactions would change. Similar to the proposed project, the potential for adverse effects to people in the surrounding communities – from things like air quality emissions, water quality releases, increases in flood risk, hazardous materials mobilization, noise levels, and so on – would not be significant under Alternatives B, C, and D. In addition, there would be earthmoving and other construction activities, such as noise or traffic that might have a short-term and temporary potential to affect local residents if they were located near the WQCP. However, these actions would occur at some distance from residents and be similarly experienced by non-residents in the business parks and on public roads and trails. Users of these facilities are drawn from the general population. These actions would not take place exclusively in minority and low-income areas, and would not disproportionately affect minority or low-income communities. Alternatives B, C, and D would have no impact on socioeconomics or environmental justice. EXHIBIT A Page 128 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 13 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 TABLE 2 COMPARISON OF PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES Project Element Project Component Proposed Project Alternative A: No Project/No Action Alternative B: Original Design Alternative C: Reduced Impact Alternative D: Alternate Technology Digester Improvements Number of Digesters Improved 2 0 3 1 2 Types of Digesters 1conventional; 1 HSD N/A 3 conventional 1 HSD Advanced digestion, such as thermos-chemical processing of sludge prior to digestion Wet Weather Improvements Increase in Treatment Capacity 10 MGD increase (40 MGD total) 0 MGD increase (30 MGD total) 10 MGD increase (40 MGD Total) 5 MGD increase (35 MGD total) Increase equalization storage at the wastewater treatment plant Stormwater Improvements 2 underground pump stations and associated facilities None 2 underground pump stations and associated facilities 1 underground pump stations and associated facilities Improve site drainage pump station and route all pipes to that pump station NOTES: MGD= million gallons per day HSD= High-Solids Digester EXHIBIT A Page 129 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 14 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 TABLE 3 COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT TO IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES Environmental Resource Proposed Project Alternative A: No Action Alternative B: Original Design Alternative C: Reduced Impacts Alternative D: Alternate Technology Aesthetics Impact 1.a: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic resource. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 1.b: The project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 1.c: The project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 1.d: The project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Agricultural and Forest Resources Impact 2.a: The project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 2.b: The project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 2.c: The project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)). (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 2.d: The project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 2.e: The project would not involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Air Quality Impact 3.a: The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 3.b: Project construction could violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. (LSM) No impact. Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) This alternative would involve less construction, resulting in less of possibility to violate an air quality standard, but the impact and mitigation would remain similar to the project. (LSM) This alternative would involve more construction, resulting in a greater possibility to violate an air quality standard, but the impact and mitigation would remain similar to the project. (LSM) Impact 3.c: The project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 3.d: The project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 3.e: The project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Biological Resources Impact 4.a: The project could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, No impact. Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) EXHIBIT A Page 130 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 15 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Environmental Resource Proposed Project Alternative A: No Action Alternative B: Original Design Alternative C: Reduced Impacts Alternative D: Alternate Technology policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (LSM) Impact 4.b: The project could have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (LSM) No impact. Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact 4.c: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 4.d: The project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 4.e: The project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 4.f: The project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Cultural Resources Impact 5.a: The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 5.b: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5. (LSM) No impact. Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact 5.c: The project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 5.d: The project could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. (LSM) No impact. Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Energy Impact 6.a: The project would not result in a substantial increase in overall or per capita energy consumption. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 6.b: The project would not result in wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 6.c: The project would not require or result in the construction of new sources of energy supplies or additional energy infrastructure capacity the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 6.d: The project would not conflict with applicable energy efficiency policies or standards. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Impact 7.a: The project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.) (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) EXHIBIT A Page 131 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 16 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Environmental Resource Proposed Project Alternative A: No Action Alternative B: Original Design Alternative C: Reduced Impacts Alternative D: Alternate Technology ii) Strong seismic ground shaking (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) The Old Sludge Control Building was constructed in 1949 and is not seismically sound. Impact would be greater than that of the proposed project and mitigation measures including seismic retrofits may be necessary. (LSM) iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) The Old Sludge Control Building was constructed in 1949 and is not seismically sound. Impact would be greater than that of the proposed project and mitigation including seismic retrofits may be necessary. (LSM) iv) Landslides (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 7.b: The project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 7.c: The project would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 7.d: The project would not be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994)6, creating substantial risks to life or property. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 7.e: The project would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact 8.a: The project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) This alternative would involve less construction, resulting in less of possibility to generate greenhouse gas emissions, and the impact would remain similar to the project. (LS) This alternative would involve slightly more construction, resulting in greater greenhouse gas emissions during that phase of the project. The advanced digestion technology would also have greater greenhouse gas emissions during operation. Overall, emissions would slightly increase relative to the proposed project, but would remain less than significant. (LS) Impact 8.b: The project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project and would thus not conflict with a plan, policy, or regulation regarding emissions. (LS) This alternative would involve less construction, resulting in reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and the impact would remain similar to the project. It would thus not conflict with a plan, policy, or regulation regarding emissions. (LS) This alternative would involve slightly more construction, resulting in greater greenhouse gas emissions during that phase of the project. The advanced digestion technology would also have greater greenhouse gas emissions during operation. Emissions increases would be slight and would not conflict with policies, plans, or regulations. Impacts would remain less than significant. (LS) Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impact 9.a: The project could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. (LSM) No impact. Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact 9.b: The project could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. (LSM) No impact. Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact 9.c: The project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. (NI) Same as the project (NI) Same as the project (NI) Same as the project (NI) Same as the project (NI) 6 The 2016 California Building Code (CBC), based on the International Building Code and the now defunct Uniform Building Code, no longer includes a Table 18-1-B. Instead, Section 1803.5.3 of the CBC describes the criteria for analyzing expansive soils. EXHIBIT A Page 132 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 17 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Environmental Resource Proposed Project Alternative A: No Action Alternative B: Original Design Alternative C: Reduced Impacts Alternative D: Alternate Technology Impact 9.d: The project would not be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 9.e: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 9.f: For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 9.g: The project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 9.h: The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 10.a: The project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. (LS) Without implementation of the proposed project, the WQCP would continue to discharge stormwater into Colma Creek and would not comply with the NPDES Industrial Storm Water Permit. (PS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Only building one pump station would leave a portion of the site with stormwater runoff passing off the plant boundaries untreated, which would be a violation of the stormwater management permit requirements unless additional mitigation measures were developed and implemented. Impact would be more significant that of the proposed project, and may require mitigation. (PS) or (LSM) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 10.b: The project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted). (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 10.c: The project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 10.d. The project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 10.e: The project would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 10.f: The project would not otherwise substantially degrade water quality. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 10.g: The project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. (NI) Same as the project (NI) Same as the project (NI) Same as the project (NI) Same as the project (NI) Impact 10.h: The project would not place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) EXHIBIT A Page 133 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 18 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Environmental Resource Proposed Project Alternative A: No Action Alternative B: Original Design Alternative C: Reduced Impacts Alternative D: Alternate Technology Impact 10.i: The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 10.j: The project would not cause inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Land Use and Land Use Planning Impact 11.a: The project would not physically divide an established community. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 11.b: The project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 11.c: The project would not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Mineral Resources Impact 12.a: The project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 12.b: The project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Noise Impact 13.a: The project would not result in 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. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) The duration of construction would be shorter in this alternative, therefore reducing the duration of noise impacts. Daily construction noise levels would remain below standards. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) The duration of construction would be longer in this alternative, therefore increasing the overall duration of noise impacts. Daily construction noise levels would remain below standards. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 13.b: The project would not result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) The duration of construction would be shorter in this alternative, therefore reducing the duration of noise impacts. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) The duration of construction would be longer in this alternative, therefore increasing the overall duration of noise impacts. Project construction would not result in the exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 13.c: The project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 13.d: The project could result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. (LSM) No impact. Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact 13.e: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 13.f: For a project located in the vicinity of a private airstrip, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Population and Housing Impact 14.a: The project would not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure). (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) EXHIBIT A Page 134 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 19 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Environmental Resource Proposed Project Alternative A: No Action Alternative B: Original Design Alternative C: Reduced Impacts Alternative D: Alternate Technology Impact 14.b: The project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 14.c: The project would not displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Public Services Impact 15.a: The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: i) Fire protection (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) ii) Police protection (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) iii) Schools (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) iv) Parks (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) v) Other public facilities (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Recreation Impact 16.a: The project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 16.b: The project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Transportation and Traffic Impact 17.a: The project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 17.b: The project would not conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 17.c: The project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Impact 17.d: The project would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 17.e: The project would not result in inadequate emergency access. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) EXHIBIT A Page 135 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 20 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Environmental Resource Proposed Project Alternative A: No Action Alternative B: Original Design Alternative C: Reduced Impacts Alternative D: Alternate Technology Impact 17.f: The project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Utilities and Service Systems Impact 18.a: The project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 18.b: The project would not require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 18.c: The project would not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 18.d: The project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 18.e: The project would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 18.f: The project would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 18.g: The project would comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Mandatory Findings of Significance Impact 19.a: The project could have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. (LSM) No impact. Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact and mitigation would be similar to the proposed project. (LSM) Impact 19.b: The project does not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact 19.c: The project does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. (LS) No impact. Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Impact would be similar to that of the proposed project. (LS) Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice New Impact – Adverse impacts that disproportionately affect minority or low-income populations: The proposed project would not bring adverse socioeconomic or environmental impacts to surrounding communities or disproportionately affect minority or low-income communities. (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) Same as the proposed project (NI) LEGEND: NI =No Impact LS = Less than Significant LSM = Less than Significant with Mitigation PS =Potentially Significant EXHIBIT A Page 136 of 148 Environmental Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 21 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 This page intentionally left blank EXHIBIT A Page 137 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project 22 ESA / 120473.02 Environmental Alternatives Analysis June 2017 Summary of Selection To understand the basis of selection of the proposed project, it is important to recognize that the proposed project would upgrade and improve technologies at an existing wastewater treatment plant, and it would do so within the existing footprint. Given the existing use of the site and the rigid space constraints on the site, the alternatives that were developed and investigated for possible implementation tend to be alternative technologies and/or design-related changes in capacity and plant processes. Many of those possible alternate concepts are not feasible on the site or would not meet the project goals. Thus, there are relatively minor differences between many of the assessments of the alternatives, including those of long-term or future impacts, beneficial outcomes, or cumulative impacts. The proposed project would improve the efficiency and reliability of the WQCP’s operations and maintenance with relatively few impacts from construction or ongoing operation. The proposed project would not change the current land use or bring a substantial adverse environmental change to the WQCP or to the built or natural environments around it. As Table 3 indicates, in almost all cases, the long-term impacts to the environment from the proposed project would be reduced relative to the existing conditions as well as to the other action alternatives, including the one initially studied and analyzed in the adopted IS/MND. The proposed alternative provides similar or improved benefits while reducing construction impacts and decreasing long-term operations impacts. Further, the nature of the project itself is to reduce the risks of adverse environmental impacts from failures or disruptions in services provided by the WQCP, by increasing the energy- and water-use efficiencies, and by modernizing the facility as a whole. EXHIBIT A Page 138 of 148 E-1 ESA / 120473.02 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Addendum June 2017 APPENDIX E Comment Letters •Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit - May 23, 2017 •State Water Resources Control Board - May 22, 2017 •Comment and Response Summary Table for the Addendum to the IS/MND EXHIBIT A Page 139 of 148 This page intentionally left blank E-2 EXHIBIT A Page 140 of 148 Agency #Content of Comment Response State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) 5/22/17 1 This comment expresses the SWRCB's understanding that the City is also applying for a loan from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) and explains the SWRCB's role in that program. It also clarifies the application processes and points to three enclosurs to assist the City in that application. The City appreciates this clarification and will follow the application procedures. SWRCB 5/22/17 2 This comment notes that CWSRF projects are subject to provisions of the ESA, and must obtain Section 7 clearance from US Department of the Interior, USFWS and/or NOAA, NMFS for any potential effects to special-status species. City will need to identify project effects from construction activities, or other indirect effects, and identify applicable conservation measures to reduce such effects. The City has performed the analyses necessary to comply with these provisions. The proposed project would not affect any endangered species. Any significant impacts to biological resources would be reduce to less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures included in the IS/MND and the Addendum. SWRCB 5/22/17 3 CWSRF projects must comply with Section 106 of the NHPA. The State Water Board is responsible for ensuring compliance with Section 106, and must consult directly with the CA SHPO. SHPO consultation is initiated when sufficient information is provided by the CWSRF application. City will need to identify APE, including construction and staging areas, and the depth of any excavation. Text has been added to the Cultural Resources section of the Addendum to summarize the updated records search that was conducted in ssupport of the origanlly adopted IS/MND. The revised 2017 project is entirely within the original Area of Potential Effects (APE) and therefore there are no changes to the previous finding of No Historic Properties Affected. The added text also clarifies that the IS/MND and Addendum identify the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for the project, which did include the subterranean portion of the project footprint down to the planned excavation depth. SWRCB 5/22/17 4 The comment lists Federal environmental requirements pertinent to the Project under the CWSRF Program and also notes that a complete list of federal requirements that are included on the CWSRF Application. The City has prepared an application for the CWSRF loan program that includes evaluations and demonstrates compliance with these requirements. SWRCB 5/22/17 5 The comment requests a copy of the FEMA flood zone map for the Project area. The Final Addendum to the IS/MND includes an updated FEMA map and additional text to explain what has changd since that update was completed. SWRCB 5/22/17 6 The comment requests that the analysis addresses any changes between the October 2012 FEMA FIRM and the September 2013 FEMA FIRM in regards to Project area. The Final Addendum to the IS/MND includes an updated FEMA map and additional text to explain what has changd since that update was completed. The revised map shows that the WQCP is no longer designated as a special flood hazard area (SFHA) subject to inundation by the 100-year flood (i.e., the 1% annual flood risk). The north side of the WQCP, where Colma Creek runs adjacent to the site, and the east side of the site, adjacent to the San Francisco Bay, remain the same category of SFHA as in the previous version of the FIRM. SWRCB 5/22/17 7 CWSRF projects must undergo an alternatives analysis except for projects that are statutorilly or categorically exempt. The State Water Board must ensure that the applicant has evalutaion criteria and processes which allow for several criteria to be met. An alternatives analsyis was written for the SRF Application for the Project. The Final Addendum to the IS/MND includes the alternatives analysis as an appendix. SWRCB 5/22/17 8 Comment requests a list of documents that will be necessary for the SWRCB to complete its reconsideration of the application for the CWSRF loan. These included the Draft and Final IS/MND (and presumably also this Addendum to it, as well as comments and responses, noticies, and the adopted MMRP. It also reqeusts that notices of hearings or meetings to be held regarding of environmental review of any projects to be funded by the State Water Board. The City will provide these documents to the SWRCB as requested. Comment and Response Summary Table for the Addendum to the IS/MND South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Addendum 1 ESA / 120473.02 June 2017 EXHIBIT A Page 141 of 148 EXHIBIT A Page 142 of 148 EXHIBIT A Page 143 of 148 EXHIBIT A Page 144 of 148 EXHIBIT A Page 145 of 148 EXHIBIT A Page 146 of 148 EXHIBIT A Page 147 of 148 EXHIBIT A Page 148 of 148 South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvement Project June 2017 CEQA ATTACHMENT B South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Project Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration CEQA Attachment B Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvement Project June 2017 This page intentionally left blank South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects 1 ESA / 120473 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program August 2013 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO / SAN BRUNO WQCP CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program This document summarizes the mitigation measures that would be integrated into the proposed project to reduce the potentially significant impacts to a less-than-significant level. The document provides a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) organized in a tabular format, keyed to each mitigation measure incorporated into the project. The tables following each measure provide a breakdown of how the mitigation measure would be implemented, who would be responsible, and when it would occur. The tables consist of four column headings which are defined as follows: Implementation Procedure: If needed, this column provides additional information on how the mitigation measures would be implemented. Monitoring and Reporting Actions: This column contains an outline of the appropriate steps to verify compliance with the mitigation measure. Monitoring Responsibility: This column contains an assignment of responsibility for the monitoring and reporting tasks. Monitoring Schedule: The general schedule for conducting each monitoring and reporting task, identifying where appropriate both the timing and the frequency of the action. 3.1 Air Quality Mitigation Measure AIR-1a During construction activities, the City shall require the construction contractor(s) to implement a dust abatement program that includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the following BAAQMD- recommended measures as needed to control dust: All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects 2 ESA / 120473 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program August 2013  All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.  All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour.  All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.  Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.  All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.  A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City includes dust abatement requirements in construction specifications. 1. City reviews dust abatement program. 1. City 1. Prior to construction 2. Contractor implements measures in the program. 2. City documents that measures are being implemented. 2. City 2. During construction and final inspection Mitigation Measure AIR-1b During construction activities, the City shall ensure that the construction contractor(s) implement the following measures:  On-road construction vehicle idling time shall not exceed five minutes. Additionally, off- road equipment engines shall not idle for longer than five minutes per Section 2449(d)(3) of Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9 of the California Code of Regulations. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City includes vehicle idling requirements in construction specifications. 1. City reviews contract. 1. City 1. Prior to construction 2. Contractor implements measures in the program. 2. City documents that measures are being implemented. 2. City 2. During construction and final inspection Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects 3 ESA / 120473 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program August 2013 3.2 Biological Resources Mitigation Measure BIO-1a The City will implement the following measure prior to construction:  No more than two weeks in advance of any ground-disturbing activity, or other construction activity that would commence during the bird breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys of potential nesting habitat in the vicinity of the planned activity. If surveys indicate presence of nests, Mitigation Measure BIO-1b will be implemented. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City shall contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a worker education program. 1. City executes contract. 1. Onsite foreman, City 1. No more than 2 weeks prior to construction, and prior to the removal of any vegetation 2. City shall contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a pre-construction survey for California clapper rail. 2. City executes contract. 2. Qualified biologist, City 2. Between two and four weeks prior to construction, and prior to the removal of any vegetation Mitigation Measure BIO-1b The City will implement the following measure if pre-construction surveys conducted under Mitigation Measure BIO-1a indicate presence of nests: If active nests are found during pre-construction surveys, the results of the surveys shall be discussed with California Department of Fish and Wildlife and avoidance procedures would be adopted, if necessary, on a case-by-case basis and construction in the vicinity would be initiated only after avoidance measures are adopted. Avoidance measures shall include maintaining construction buffer areas (up to several hundred feet in the case of raptors) or seasonal avoidance, as needed. If buffers are created, a no-disturbance zone shall be created around active nests for the remainder of the breeding season, or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged. The size of the buffer zones and types of construction activities restricted shall take into account factors such as the following: - Noise and human disturbance levels at the proposed project site and the nesting site at the time of the survey and the noise and disturbance expected during the construction activity; - Distance, line of sight, and amount of vegetation or other screening between the proposed project site and the nest; and - Sensitivity of individual nesting species and behaviors of the nesting birds. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects 4 ESA / 120473 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program August 2013 Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City shall contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a pre-construction survey if during the nesting season. 1. City executes contract. 1. City 1. No more than 14 days prior to construction 2. City shall include potential work limitations in construction specifications. 2. City reviews construction specifications. 2. City 2. Prior to construction 3. If nesting raptors are found biologist shall identify appropriate actions to avoid effects. 3. Sign-off by City that measures are being implemented. 3. City 3. During construction Mitigation Measure BIO-2 The City shall implement the following measures during excavation for Stormwater Pump Stations Nos. 4 and 5 and demolition of the digesters:  Project construction activities shall take place between September and January, i.e., in the months outside of the clapper rail breeding season (February 1 through August 31); or  Noise reduction measures, including solid plywood fences, sound blankets, or other barriers with noise-dampening materials shall be constructed along the northwest, north, and northeast-facing edges of the project site prior to initiation of construction to serve as noise attenuation barriers. Noise barriers shall be installed in all locations along the exterior fence of the project boundary to minimize any direct or reflected noise above current ambient levels in salt marsh habitats outside the project site. The noise attenuation barrier shall be a minimum of eight feet in height, but sufficient in height to reduce any noise from construction on upper stories or building rooftops. The fences shall shield the marshes from major noise generating phases of construction to attenuate noise emanating from the project site. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City shall obtain required permits and include work limitations such as exclusionary fencing in construction specifications. 1. City reviews construction specifications. 1. City 1. Prior to construction 2. Contractor shall implement required measures including fencing. 2. Periodic inspections during construction along the drainage ditch. Sign-off by City that measures are being implemented. 2. City 2. During construction Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects 5 ESA / 120473 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program August 2013 3.3 Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CUL-1 The City shall implement the following measure: Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources. If prehistoric or historic-period cultural materials are unearthed during ground-disturbing activities, halt all work within 100 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative can assess the significance of the find. Prehistoric materials might include obsidian and chert flaked-stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil (“midden”) containing heat-affected rocks and artifacts; stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); and battered-stone tools, such as hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic-period materials might include stone, concrete, or adobe footings and walls; filled wells or privies; and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse. If the find is determined to be potentially significant, the archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American representative, will develop a treatment plan that could include site avoidance, capping, or data recovery. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City shall contract with an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for professional archaeology to monitor all ground-disturbing activities. 1. City executes contract. 1. City, qualified archaeologist 1. Prior to and during construction 2. City shall review construction specifications to ensure procedures for cultural resources discovery are included. 2. City reviews construction specifications. 2. City 2. Prior to construction 3. In the event subsurface cultural resources are discovered, construction within 100 feet of the find shall be halted and the qualified archaeologist shall be notified 3. City shall notify the County of the discovery. 3. City 3. During construction 4. The archaeologist shall complete a final monitoring report 4. Archaeologist completes report 4. Qualified archaeologist 4. Following construction Mitigation Measure CUL-2 The City shall implement the following measure: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are encountered during ground disturbing activities, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance will occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects 6 ESA / 120473 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program August 2013 notify the Native American Heritage Commission. The Native American Heritage Commission will then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Native American, who will make recommendations for the treatment of any human remains. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City shall retain a Native American monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities 1. City executes contract 1. City Native American Monitor 1. Prior to and during construction 2. City shall review construction specifications to ensure procedures for human remains discovery are included. 2. City reviews construction specifications. 2. City 2. Prior to construction 3. In the event human remains are discovered, construction in the area shall be halted and City shall consult the County Coroner. 3. The contractor shall notify City of the discovery. 3. City 3. During construction 4. City shall review construction specifications to ensure procedures for human remains discovery are included. 4. City reviews construction specifications. 4. City 4. Prior to construction 3.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 The City shall implement the following measure: Prior to commencement of demolition activities, the City shall contract with a licensed professional to conduct hazardous building material surveys for asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint for all structures proposed for demolition. Any subsequently identified hazardous building materials shall be removed and abated in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) rule “Lead: Renovation, Repair and Painting Activities that Disturb Lead-Based Paint”, 40 CFR 745; California Code of Regulations 1529, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and any local requirements that govern the protection, collection, transport, and disposal of hazardous building materials including asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City incorporates requirements in construction specifications. 1. City reviews construction specifications. 1. City 1. Prior to construction 2. Contractor implements measures in the program. 2. City documents that measures are being implemented. 2. City 2. During construction Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects 7 ESA / 120473 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program August 2013 Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 The City shall implement the following measure: Prior to commencement of construction activities, the City shall prepare and implement a Soil Management Plan as approved by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The Soil Management Plan shall be prepared by a qualified environmental consulting firm and shall include protocols for all earthwork activities that might encounter suspected contamination, emergency contact information, and minimum personal protective equipment requirements for onsite construction workers. Any suspected contaminated subsurface materials shall be segregated, covered, and profiled for appropriate offsite disposal in accordance with CalOSHA requirements and the receiving facilities requirements. The RWQCB shall be notified of any suspected contamination and the City shall only proceed with earthwork activities following direction from the RWQCB or local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Any required further excavation as directed by the overseeing agency shall be completed prior to recommencement of construction. Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City includes procedures in the event that contaminated soils are identified in construction specifications. 1. City reviews construction specifications. 1. City 1. Prior to construction 2. Contractor implements measures in the program. 2. City documents that measures are being implemented. 2. City 2. During construction 3.5 Noise Mitigation Measure NOI-1 Construction Noise Reduction Measures. The City shall require the contractor to implement the following measures:  All sandblasting activities shall be fully contained with appropriate tenting.  Limit demolition and construction activities to daytime hours between 8:00 AM and 8:00 PM on weekdays and 9:00 AM to 8:00 PM on Saturdays.  Use “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.  Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.  Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.  Prohibit construction worker radios from being audible beyond the limits of the construction site. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Capital Improvements Projects 8 ESA / 120473 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program August 2013 Implementation Procedure Monitoring and Reporting Actions Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule 1. City incorporates the noise control measures and requirements in construction specifications. 1. City reviews construction specifications. 1. City 1. Prior to construction 2. The contractor implements measures. 2. City documents that measures are being implemented. 2. City 2. During construction City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-684 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:5. Report regarding a resolution awarding the construction contract to Blocka Construction,Inc.,of Fremont, California for the Sign Hill Generator Replacement Project (Project No.pf1506)in an amount of $464,000 and authorizing a total construction budget of $580,000.(Sam Bautista,Principal Engineer &Scott Christie, Swinerton) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution awarding the construction contract to Blocka Construction of Fremont,California for the Sign Hill Generator Replacement Project (Project No. pf1506) in an amount of $464,000. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Project pf1506 was originally included in the Fiscal Year (FY)2014-15 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)in order to remove an aging interior 12 KW backup generator (installed in 1974)located inside the communication facility on Sign Hill.The Project would replace the old backup generator with an exterior 25 KW generator, and associated automatic transfer switch, new HVAC facilities, and upgraded exterior lighting. The project was initially advertised for bid in September 2016;however,the bids received exceeded the engineer’s estimate and the available project funding,and therefore,all bids were rejected.Subsequently, additional funding was transferred to the project budget and the City re-advertised for bids on April 10 and April 14, 2017. Mandatory pre-bid meetings were held and were attended by six contractors. On May 4,2017,staff received three bids in response.Staff determined that the lowest responsive and responsible bidder was Blocka Construction (the third low apparent bidder).Staff has verified Blocka’s current contractor’s license with the California State Licensing Board and found it to be in good standing.The first and second lowest apparent bidder,Cal Elite and Minerva,were found to be non-responsive and rejected for the following reasons: ·The Notice Inviting Bids required that in addition to holding a valid General Building Contractor License,Listed subcontractors shall possess the required contractor’s license for each specialty work specified.Cal Elite holds a B and a C-10 (electrical)license,issued October 26,2004.However,their bid proposal did not list a subcontractor with a C-20 license (HVAC)and Cal Elite does not possess the C-20 license themselves.The HVAC work is a substantial part of the work,and Cal Elite did not list a licensed C-20 subcontractor to perform the work.Since the portion of HVAC work is valued over one- half of one percent of the contractor amount,a C-20 subcontractor must be listed.Since no HVAC contractor was listed, the bid was considered non-responsive. ·Minerva holds an A license,issued on September 22,2012.When analyzing Minerva’s bid documents, City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-684 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:5. ·Minerva holds an A license,issued on September 22,2012.When analyzing Minerva’s bid documents, Minerva failed to provide the required qualifying experience list for generator work for their electric subcontractor,Phoenix.They did provide Phoenix’s qualifying experience list after the bids were due. However,this is considered late and therefore cannot be taken into consideration.For these reason,the bid was considered non-responsive. The following is a summary of all bids received: Bid Cal Elite Builders of Fairfield , California (non-responsive)$228,000 Minerva Construction of San Francisco, California (non-responsive)$433,000 Blocka Construction of Fremont, California $464,000 The Engineer’s Estimate for Base Bid was $400,000. Shown below is the project budget: Construction Contract $464,000 Construction Contingency (12%)$ 55,680 Inspection, Testing & Administration (13%)$ 60,320 Total Construction Budget $580,000 The Construction Contingency will be used for any additional costs related to unforeseen conditions or design changes during the construction operations.There is no Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)requirement for the project since no federal funds are being utilized. FUNDING This project is funded by the Equipment Replacement Fund and the project is included in the City of South San Francisco’s FY 2017-18 Capital Improvement Program (CIP/pf1506)with a current account balance of $601,600. CONCLUSION Awarding the construction contract to Blocka Construction of Fremont,California,for Sign Hill Generator Replacement Project will allow for the installation of an upgraded backup generator and HVAC equipment to more effectively condition the interior space at the critical Sign Hill communications facility. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-685 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:5a. Resolution awarding the construction contract to Blocka Construction of Fremont,California for the Sign Hill Generator Replacement Project (Project No.pf1506)in an amount of $464,000 and authorizing a total construction budget of $580,000. WHEREAS,the Sign Hill Generator Replacement Project will remove an aging interior 12 KW backup generator (installed in 1974)located inside the communication facility on Sign Hill,and replace it with an exterior 25 KW generator,and associated automatic transfer switch,new HVAC facilities,and upgraded exterior lighting; and WHEREAS,staff bid the project last fall and the bids exceeded the available project funding and therefore all bids were rejected; and WHEREAS,City of South San Francisco (“City”)staff issued a notice inviting new bids for the Sign Hill Generator Replacement Project (“Project”) and on May 4, 2017, received three (3) bids in response; and WHEREAS,Blocka Construction of Fremont,California was determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder; and WHEREAS,staff recommends awarding the construction contract to Blocka Construction in an amount of $464,000, which is a lump sum bid; and WHEREAS,the Project is included in the City of South San Francisco’s Fiscal Year 2017-18 Capital Improvement Program (“CIP”) and there are sufficient funds available to cover the Project cost. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby awards the construction contract for the Sign Hill Generator Replacement Project (Project No. pf1506)to Blocka Construction of Fremont,California in an amount not to exceed $464,000,conditioned on Blocka Construction’s timely execution of the Project contract and submission of all required documents, including but not limited to,certificates of insurance and endorsements,in accordance with the Project documents. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes a total project construction budget of $580,000 and authorizes the City Manager to utilize any unspent amount of the total project budget,if necessary,towards City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-685 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:5a. additional construction contingency budget. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the Finance Department to establish the Project Budget consistent with the information contained in the staff report. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the City Manager to execute the documents on behalf of the City upon timely submission by Blocka Construction of the signed contract and all other documents, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the City Manager to take any other related actions consistent with the intention of this Resolution. ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ - 12 - CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ENGINEERING DIVISION PART II PROJECT NAME: SIGN HILL GENERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT PROJECT NO. PF1506 ENGINEERING FILE NO. PB-14-8 CONTRACTOR NAME: BLOCKA CONSTRUCTION, INC. 4455 ENTERPRISE STREET FREMONT, CA 94538 BID NUMBER: 2593 AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS GENERAL PROVISIONS 315 MAPLE AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94080 (650) 829-6652 EXHIBIT A - 13 - FORM OF AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1. Scope of Work A-1 2. The Contract Documents A-1 3. Equipment - Performance of Work A-2 4. Contract Price A-2 5. Time for Performance A-2 6. Rights of City to Increase Working Days A-2 7. Option of City to Terminate Agreement in A-2 Event of Failure to Complete Work 8. Termination of Contract for Convenience A-3 9. Liquidated Damages A-5 10. Performance by Sureties A-5 11. Care of the Work A-5 12. Payments to Contractor A-5 13. Contract Security A-6 14. Hold-Harmless Agreement and Contractor's Insurance A-7 15. Insurance A-7 16. Proof of Carriage of Insurance A-8 17. Emergency - Additional Time for Performance A-8 Procurement of Materials 18. Provisions Cumulative A-9 19. Notices A-9 20. Interpretation A-10 Attachment A – Escrow Agreement for Security Deposits in Lieu of Retention EXHIBIT A - 14 - FORM OF AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 12th day of July, 2017, between the CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of California, hereinafter called “CITY” and BLOCKA CONSTRUCTION, INC., hereinafter called “CONTRACTOR”1. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of the public work and improvements herein provided and execution of this contract. WHEREAS, a notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvements hereinafter described. WHEREAS, on July 12, 2017, notice duly given, the City Council of said City awarded the contract for the construction of the improvements hereinafter described to the Contractor, which Contractor said Council found to be the lowest responsible bidder for said improvements. WHEREAS, City and Contractor desire to enter into this agreement for the construction of said improvements pursuant to the terms, definitions and conditions set forth in the General Provisions and other Contract Documents. IT IS AGREED as follows: 1. Scope of Work. Contractor shall perform the Work described briefly as follows: The Work consists of the furnishing of all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services necessary for the construction of the SIGN HILL GENERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT, PROJECT NO. PF1506, ENGINEERING FILE NO. PR-14-8; in accordance with the contract documents. Also included are any such other items or details not mentioned above that are required by the Contract Documents, which are to be constructed or furnished and installed as shown on the plans, as specified herein and as directed by the Engineer. The aforementioned improvements are further described in the "Contract Documents" hereinafter referred to. 2. The Contract Documents. The complete contract consists of the following documents: This Agreement; Notice Inviting Bids; the Accepted Bid; the complete plans, profiles, detailed drawings, Standard Plans and Specifications, including Standard Specifications, General Provisions, Special Provisions and Technical Provisions; Faithful Performance Bond; Payment Bond; Bid Schedule and Wage Scale. 1The term "Contractor" as used herein is employed without distinction as to either number or gender and shall include whenever the context shall permit all agents, representatives, employees, servants, subcontractors and business or social invitees. EXHIBIT A - 15 - All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the contract documents. All of the above named documents are intended to cooperate, so that any work called for in one and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. The documents comprising the complete contract will hereinafter be referred to as “the Contract Documents.” 3. Equipment - Performance of Work. Contractor shall furnish all tools, equipment, apparatus, facilities, labor and materials necessary to perform and complete in a good and workmanlike manner the Work of general construction as called for, and for the manner designated in, and in strict conformity with, the plans and specifications for said Work entitled: SIGN HILL GENERATOR REPLACEMET PROJECT, PROJECT NO. PF1506, ENGINEERING FILE NO. PR-14-8. The equipment, apparatus, facilities, labor and materials shall be furnished and said Work performed and completed as required in said plans and specifications under the direction and supervision and subject to the approval of the Engineer of said City or the Engineer’s designated assistant. 4. Contract Price. City shall pay, and Contractor shall accept, in full payment for the Work agreed to be done the sum of Four Hundred Sixty Four Thousand Dollars ($464,000.00). Said price is determined by the lump sum price contained in Contractor's bid. The lump sum price and unit prices are set forth in the completed Bid forms attached hereto and made a part hereof as if set forth herein verbatim. In the event work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's bid and the specifications herein, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in installments as hereinafter provided. 5. Time for Performance. The Contractor shall complete the Work called for under the contract in all parts and requirements within Ninety (90) calendar days as defined in the Special Provisions. The Engineer shall furnish the Contractor a monthly statement showing the number of working days charged to the contract for the preceding month, the number of working days specified for the completion of the contract, and the number of working days remaining to complete the contract. 6. Rights of City to Increase Working Days. If such Work is not completed within the time specified, the Engineer shall have the right to increase the number of working days in the amount it may determine will best serve the interest of the City. If it desires to increase said number of working days, it shall have the further right to charge to Contractor and deduct from the final payment for the Work the actual cost of engineering, inspection, superintendence, and other overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to Contractor and which accrue during the period of such extension, except that the cost of the final service and preparation of the final estimates shall not be included in such charges, provided, however, that no extension of time for the completion of such Work shall be allowed unless at least twenty (20) days prior to the time herein fixed for the completion thereof or the time fixed by the Engineer for such completion as extended, Contractor shall have filed application for extension thereof, in writing with the Engineer. 7. Option of City to Terminate Agreement in Event of Failure to Complete Work. If Contractor shall have refused or failed to prosecute the Work or any severable part thereof, with such diligence as will insure its work, or any completion within the time specified, or any extensions thereof, or shall have failed to complete said work within such time, or if Contractor should be adjudged a bankrupt, or if Contractor should make a general assignment for the benefit of Contractor's creditors, or if a receiver should be appointed in the event of Contractor's insolvency, or if Contractor, or any Subcontractor, should violate any of the provisions of this Agreement, the Engineer may give written EXHIBIT A - 16 - notice to Contractor, and Contractor's sureties of its intention to terminate this Agreement, such notice to contain the reasons for such intention to terminate this Agreement, and unless within five (5) days after the serving of such notice, such violation shall cease and satisfactory arrangements for the correction thereof be made, this Agreement may, at the option of City, upon expiration of said time, cease and terminate. 8. Termination of Contract for Convenience. The City also reserves the right to terminate the contract at any time upon a determination by the Engineer in the Engineer's sole discretion that termination of the contract is in the best interest of the City. If the City elects to terminate the contract for convenience, the termination of the contract and the total compensation payable to the Contractor shall be governed by the following: (A) The City will issue the Contractor a written notice signed by the Engineer, specifying that the contract is terminated. Upon receipt of said written notice, the Contractor will be relieved of further responsibility for damage to the Work (excluding materials) as specified in Section 7- 1.16, "Contractor's Responsibility for the Work and Materials," of the Standard Specifications and, except as otherwise directed in writing by the Engineer, the Contractor shall: (1) Stop all work under the contract except that specifically directed to be completed prior to acceptance. (2) Perform work the Engineer deems necessary to secure the project for termination. (3) Remove equipment and plant from the site of the Work. (4) Take such action as is necessary to protect materials from damage. (5) Notify all subcontractors and suppliers that the contract is being terminated and that their contracts or orders are not to be further performed unless otherwise authorized in writing by the Engineer. (6) Provide the Engineer with an inventory list of all materials previously produced, purchased or ordered from suppliers for use in the Work and not yet used in the Work, including its storage location, and such other information as the Engineer may request. (7) Dispose of materials not yet used in the Work as directed by the Engineer. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to provide the City with good title to all materials purchased by the City hereunder, including materials for which partial payment has been made as provided in Section 9-1.06, "Partial Payments," of the Standard Specifications and with bills of sale or other documents of title for such materials. (8) Subject to the prior written approval of the Engineer, settle all outstanding liabilities and all claims arising out of subcontracts or orders for materials terminated hereunder. To the extent directed by the Engineer, the Contractor shall assign to the City all the right, title and interest of the Contractor under subcontracts or orders for materials terminated hereunder. (9) Furnish the Engineer with the documentation required to be furnished by the Contractor under the provisions of the contract including, on projects as to which Federal and State funds are involved, all documentation required under the Federal and State requirements included in the contract. (10) Take such other actions as the Engineer may direct. (B) Acceptance of the contract as hereinafter specified shall not relieve the Contractor of responsibility for damage to materials. The Contractor shall continue to be responsible for damage to materials after issuance of the Notice of Termination, except as follows: (1) The Contractor’s responsibility for damage to materials for which partial payment has been made as provided in Section 9-1.06, “Partial Payments,” of the Standard Specifications and for materials furnished by the City for use in the Work and unused shall terminate when the EXHIBIT A - 17 - Engineer certifies that such materials have been stored in the manner and at the locations the Engineer has directed. (2) The Contractor’s responsibility for damage to materials purchased by the City subsequent to the issuance of the notice that the contract is to be terminated shall terminate when title and delivery of such materials has been taken by the City. (3) When the Engineer determines that the Contractor has completed the Work under the contract directed to be completed prior to termination and such other work as may have been ordered to secure the project for termination, the Contractor will recommend that the Engineer formally accept the contract to the extent performed, and immediately upon and after such acceptance by the Engineer, the Contractor will not be required to perform any further Work thereon and shall be relieved of the Contractor's contractual responsibilities for injury to persons or property which occurs after the formal acceptance of the project by the Engineer. (C) Termination of the contract shall not relieve the surety of its obligation for any just claims arising out of the work performed. (D) The total compensation to be paid to the Contractor shall be determined by the Engineer on the basis of the following: (1) The reasonable cost to the Contractor, without profit, for all work performed under the contract, including mobilization, demobilization and work done to secure the project for termination. In determining the reasonable cost, deductions will be made for the cost of materials to be retained by the Contractor, amounts realized by the sale of materials, and for other appropriate credits against the cost of the work. When, in the opinion of the Engineer, the cost of a contract item of work is excessively high due to costs incurred to remedy or replace defective or rejected work, the reasonable cost to be allowed will be the estimated reasonable cost of performing such work in compliance with the requirements of the plans and specifications and the excessive actual cost shall be disallowed. (2) A reasonable allowance for profit on the cost of the work performed as determined under Subsection (1), provided the Contractor establishes to the satisfaction of the Engineer that it is reasonably probable that the Contractor would have made a profit had the contract been completed and provided further, that the profit allowed shall in no event exceed four (4) percent of said cost. (3) The reasonable cost to the Contractor of handling material returned to the vendor, delivered to the City or otherwise disposed of as directed by the Engineer. (4) A reasonable allowance for the Contractor’s administrative costs in determining the amount payable due to termination of the contract. (5) A reasonable credit to the City for defective or incomplete work not corrected. All records of the Contractor and subcontractors necessary to determine compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Section 8 shall be open to inspection or audit by representatives of the City at all times after issuance of the Notice of Termination and for a period of three (3) years, thereafter, and such records shall be retained for that period. After acceptance of the Work by the Engineer, the Engineer may make payments on the basis of interim estimates pending issuance of the Final Estimate in accordance with Section 9-1.07B, “Final Payment and Claims,” of the Standard Specifications when, in the Engineer's opinion, the amount thus paid, together with all amounts previously paid or allowed, will not result in total compensation in excess of that to which the Contractor will be entitled. All payments, including payment upon the Final Estimate shall be subject to deduction for prior payments and amounts, if any, to be kept or retained under the provisions of the contract. EXHIBIT A - 18 - If this contract is terminated by the City for cause, and it is later determined that the proper basis for a termination for cause did not exist, the termination shall be deemed to have been a termination for convenience and governed by the terms of this contract dealing with such termination. If the contract is terminated by the City for cause or convenience, such termination shall neither act as a waiver by the City of its right to require the Contractor to correct defects in the Work performed by the Contractor nor void any warranties applicable to the Work performed under the contract. The provisions of this Section 8 shall be included in all subcontracts. In the event of conflict between the termination provisions of this Section 8 and any other provision or the contract, this Section 8 shall prevail. 9. Liquidated Damages. If the overall deadline for project completion and/or any of the milestone deadlines are not met and/or particular contract requirements are not met, damages will be sustained by the City, and it is and will be impracticable and extremely difficult to ascertain and determine the actual damage which the City will sustain. As such the Contract will be subject to the liquidated damages named in the Special Provisions or $500 per calendar day, whichever is greater, and should the Contractor fail to meet any milestone deadline or overall project deadline or fail to meet particular contract requirements as named in the general provisions. 10. Performance by Sureties. In the event of any termination as herein before provided, City shall immediately give written notice thereof to Contractor and Contractor's sureties and the sureties shall have the right to take over and perform the Agreement, provided, however, that if the sureties, within five (5) days after giving them said notice of termination, do not give the City written notice of their intention to take over the performance of the Agreement and do not commence performance thereof within five (5) days after notice to the City of such election, City may take over the Work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or by any other method it may deem advisable, for the account, and at the expense, of Contractor, and the sureties shall be liable to City for any excess cost or damages occasioned City thereby; and, in such event, City may, without liability for so doing, take possession of and utilize in completing the Work such materials, appliances, plant and other property belonging to Contractor as may be on the site of the Work and necessary therefore. Should Contractor contract in an individual capacity, the surety bond shall contain the following provision: “Should Contractor contract in the Contractor’s individual capacity, the death of the Contractor shall not relieve the surety of its obligations.” 11. Care of the Work. Contractor has examined the site of the Work and is familiar with its topography and condition, location of property lines, easements, building lines and other physical factors, and limitations affecting the performance of this Agreement. Contractor, at Contractor’s expense, shall obtain any permission necessary for any operations conducted off the property owned or controlled by City. Contractor shall be responsible for the proper care and protection of all materials delivered and work performed until completion and final acceptance. 12. Payments to Contractor. (A) Monthly Progress Payments. On or before the tenth day of each and every month during the progress of the Work following the Notice to Proceed, Contractor shall submit to the City Engineer a complete itemized statement of all labor and materials incorporated into the improvement during the preceding month and the portion of the contract sum applicable thereto. On approval in writing of said statement by the Engineer, the payment request shall be submitted to the City Council for approval and within ten (10) days after approval thereof by the City Council, City shall pay Contractor a EXHIBIT A - 19 - sum based upon ninety-five percent (95%) of the contract price apportionment of the labor and materials incorporated into the improvement under the contract during the month covered by said statement. (B) Notice of Completion and Final Payment. City shall file with the County Recorder's Office a Notice of Completion within ten (10) days after said improvements shall have been completed and accepted by City and written proof of said filling shall be delivered to the City Clerk. The remaining five percent (5%), less that amount withheld by City to correct defective work or otherwise complete the contract, shall be paid Contractor thirty (30) days after recordation of the notice of completion of the Work, on duly certified voucher therefore, after Contractor shall have furnished City with a release of, or bond against all claims against City, if required by City, arising under and by virtue of this contract, and work done, and materials furnished hereunder. In the event that there are any claims specifically excepted by Contractor, if permitted by City, from the operation of the release, there shall be retained by City stated amounts to be set forth therein and approved by the Engineer. If there be any claims filed against the Work, City shall withhold final payment until the validity of such claims shall have been properly determined and in this regard City is hereby empowered to pay directly to claimant the full amount of any valid claims. (C) Escrow Account for Retention. Pursuant to Chapter 13 (commencing with Section 4590) Division 5, Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California, securities may be substituted for any moneys withheld by a public agency to ensure performance under a contract. At the request and expense of the Contractor, securities equivalent to the amount withheld shall be deposited with the City, or with a State or Federally Chartered Bank as the escrow agent, who shall release such securities to Contractor following the expiration of thirty (30) days from the date of filing of a Notice of Completion of the Work by City, unless such securities are to be withheld by City to correct defective work or otherwise complete the contract or are subject to withholding by City to satisfy stop notices or other calms and costs associated therewith. The request for substitution of securities to be deposited with the City, or with a State or Federally Chartered Bank as escrow agent, shall be submitted on the form entitled "Supplemental Agreement No. ___ Substitution of Securities for Funds Withheld", which, when executed by the Contractor and the City, shall constitute a Supplemental Agreement forming a part of this Contract. The City shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of any written request, properly completed and signed by the Contractor and, if applicable, accompanied by an escrow agreement in a form acceptable to City, to approve said request and effect the substitution. City shall not unreasonably withhold approval of said request. City shall determine the value of any security so deposited. Such Supplemental Agreement, see Attachment A, and any escrow agreement shall provide for the release of the securities to Contractor as set forth herein and shall also set forth the manner in which City may convert the securities or portions thereof to cash and apply the proceeds to the accomplishment of any purposes for which moneys may be withheld and utilized as described in this Contract, including but not limited to the completion of the contract, correction of defective work and the answering of any stop notice claims and litigation cost thereof. Securities eligible for investment under this Section shall be those listed in California Government Code Section 16430 or bank or savings and loan certificates of deposit. The Contractor shall be the beneficial owner of any securities substituted for moneys withheld and shall receive any interest thereon. EXHIBIT A - 20 - 13. Contract Security. Concurrently with the execution hereof, Contractor shall furnish: (1) a surety bond in an amount equal to at least one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price as security for the faith performance of this contract; and (2) a separate surety bond in an amount equal to at least one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price as security for the payment of all persons performing labor and furnishing materials in connection with this contract in accordance with Section 4200-4208, inclusive, of the Government Code of the State of California. Sureties on each of said bonds and the form thereof shall be issued by a California-admitted surety, satisfactory to the City and be approved by the Engineer. 14. Hold-Harmless Agreement and Contractor's Insurance. Contractor agrees to, and shall, hold City, its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents, and employees harmless from any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, as well as from claims for property damage which may arise from Contractor's or any of Subcontractor's operations under this Agreement, whether such operations be by Contractor or by any Subcontractor or Subcontractors, or by any one or more persons directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for, Contractor or any Subcontractor or Subcontractors. Contractor agrees to, and shall, defend City and its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents, and employees from any suits or actions at law or in equity for damages caused, or alleged to have been caused, by reason of any of the aforesaid operations, provided as follows: (A) The City does not, and shall not waive any rights against Contractor which it may have by reason of the aforesaid hold-harmless agreement, because of the acceptance by City, or the deposit with City by Contractor, of any of the insurance policies hereinafter described in Paragraph 15, “Insurance” hereof. (B) That the aforesaid hold-harmless agreement by Contractor shall apply to all damages and claims for damages of every kind suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of any of the aforesaid operations of Contractor or any Subcontractor, regardless of whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages. 15. Insurance. The Contractor shall take out and maintain during the life of this Agreement the following policies of insurance: (A) Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Insurance providing full statutory coverage. In signing this Agreement, the Contractor makes the following certification, required by Section 1861 of the California Labor Code: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Agreement". (B) Comprehensive General Liability Insurance. Public Liability Insurance (includes premises, elevator - if applicable, products, completed operations, personal injury and contractual): (1) Bodily Injury Liability: EXHIBIT A - 21 - $ 500,000 each person $1,000,000 each occurrence (2) Property Damage Liability [includes XCU (explosion, collapse, and underground damage); water damage and broad form property damage or third party liability]: $ 500,000 per occurrence (C) Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance (includes owned, non-owned, and hired vehicles): (1) Bodily Injury Liability: $ 500,000 per person $1,000,000 each occurrence (2) Property Damage Liability: $ 500,000 each occurrence (D) It is agreed that the insurance required by Subsections B and C, in an aggregate amount of not less than ONE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,500,000), shall be extended to include as additional insured the City of South San Francisco, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, with respect to operations performed by the Contractor, as described herein. Evidence of this insurance described above shall be provided to City upon execution of this Agreement and shall be subject to approval of the City Attorney as to form, amount and carrier. The policy of insurance shall also contain a provision indicating that such insurance shall not be reduced or cancelled except upon thirty (30) days written notice to City. In addition, the following endorsement shall be made on said policy of insurance: "The following are named as additional insured on the above policies: The City of South San Francisco, its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents, employees." "Notwithstanding any other provision in this policy, the insurance afforded hereunder to the City of South San Francisco shall be primary as to any other insurance or re-insurance covering or available to the City of South San Francisco, and such other insurance or reinsurance shall not be required to contribute to any liability or loss until and unless the approximate limit of liability afforded hereunder is exhausted." The above requirements that the City be named as additional insured, that the insurance shall be primary to any other, and that the insurance not be cancelled without notice, shall be provided in the form of an endorsement signed by an authorized representative of the insurance company providing coverage, who shall declare his or her authority to sign on behalf of the insurer. 16. Proof of Carriage of Insurance. Contractor shall furnish City through the Engineer, concurrently with the execution hereof, with satisfactory proof of carriage of the insurance required and that each carrier shall give City at least thirty (30) days prior notice of the cancellation or change of any policy during the effective period of this contract. Further, If the Contractor’s insurance policy includes a self-insured retention that must be paid by a named insured as a precondition of the insurer’s liability, or which has the effect of providing that payments of the self-insured retention by others, including additional insureds or insurers do not serve to satisfy the self-insured retention, such provisions must be modified by special endorsement so as to not apply to the additional insured coverage required by this EXHIBIT A - 22 - agreement so as to not prevent any of the parties to this agreement from satisfying or paying the self- insured retention required to be paid as a precondition to the insurer’s liability. Additionally, the certificates of insurance must note whether the policy does or does not include any self-insured retention and also must disclose the deductible. 17. Emergency - Additional Time for Performance - Procurement of Materials. If, because of war or other declared national emergency, the Federal or State government restricts, regulates or controls the procurement and allocation of labor or materials, or both, and if solely because of said restrictions, regulation or controls, Contractor is, through no fault of Contractor, unable to perform this agreement, or the work is thereby suspended or delayed, any of the following steps may be taken: (A) City may, pursuant to resolution of the Council, grant Contractor additional time for the performance of this agreement, sufficient to compensate in time, for said delay or suspension. To qualify for such extension of time, Contractor, within ten (10) days of Contractor’s discovering such inability to perform, shall notify the Engineer in writing thereof and give specific reason therefore; Engineer shall thereupon have sixty (60) days within which to procure such needed materials or labor as is specified in this agreement, or permit substitution, or provide for changes in Work in accordance with other provisions of this agreement. Substituted materials, or changes in the Work, or both, shall be ordered in writing by the Engineer and the concurrence of the Council shall not be necessary. All reasonable expenses of such procurement incurred by the Engineer shall be defrayed by Contractor; or (B) If such necessary materials or labor cannot be procured through legitimate channels within sixty (60) days after the filing of the aforesaid notice, either party may, upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other, terminate this agreement. In such event, the Contractor shall be compensated for all work executed upon a unit or upon a cost-plus ten percent (10%) basis, whichever is the lesser. Materials on the ground, in process of fabrication or in route upon the date of notice of termination specially ordered for the project and which cannot be utilized by Contractor, shall be compensated for by City at cost, including freight, provided that Contractor shall take all steps possible to minimize this obligation; or (C) City Council, by resolution, may suspend this agreement until the cause of inability is removed, but for a period not to exceed (30) days. If this agreement is not cancelled and the inability of Contractor to perform continues, without fault on Contractor's part, beyond the time during which the agreement may have been suspended, as herein provided, City Council may further suspend this agreement, or either party hereto may, without incurring any liability, elect to declare this agreement terminated upon the ground of impossibility of performance. In the event City declares this agreement terminated, such declaration shall be authorized by the City Council, by resolution, and, Contractor shall be notified in writing thereof within five (5) days after the adoption. In such event, the Contractor shall be entitled to proportionate compensation at the agreement rate for such portion of the agreement as may have been performed; or (D) City may terminate this agreement, in which case Contractor shall be entitled to proportionate compensation at the agreement rate for such portion of the agreement as may have been performed. Such termination shall be authorized by resolution of the Council. Notice thereof shall be forthwith given in writing to Contractor and this agreement shall be terminated upon receipt by Contractor of such notice. In the event of the termination in this subparagraph (D), none of the covenants, conditions or provisions hereof shall apply to the work not performed and City shall be liable to Contractor only for the proportionate compensation last herein mentioned. EXHIBIT A - 23 - 18. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of the Agreement are cumulative, and in addition to and not in limitation of, any other rights or remedies available to City. 19. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows: City Clerk City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, California 94080 Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows: _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ Notices required to be given sureties of Contractor shall be addressed as follows: _________________________________________________________________________ Notices required to be given to the Escrow Agent of Contractor, if any, shall be addressed as follows: _________________________________________________________________________ 20. Interpretation. As used herein, any gender includes each other gender, the singular included the plural and vice versa. EXHIBIT A - 24 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, two (2) identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of twelve (12) pages (being pages A-1 through A-12), each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed an original of said Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named, on the day and year first hereinabove written. ATTEST: CITY: City of South San Francisco, a municipal corporation _______________________________ By: _____________________________ City Clerk Mike Futrell, City Manager CONTRACTOR:_______________________ __________________________________ ATTEST: By:_______________________________ (If Contractor is an individual, so state. _____________________________ Contractor is a Corporation, a corporate seal City Attorney or signatures of the President or Vice President and the Secretary Treasurer are required). EXHIBIT A - 25 - ATTACHMENT A ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY DEPOSITS IN LIEU OF RETENTION THIS ESCROW AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of South San Francisco whose address is 400 Grand Ave., P.O. Box 711, South San Francisco, CA 94083, hereinafter referred to as "City" and ________________________________________,whose address is ___________________________________________________________hereinafter called “Contractor” and ______________________________________________________________,whose address is ___________________________________________________________, hereinafter called “Escrow Agent.” For the consideration hereinafter set forth, the Owner, Contractor, and Escrow Agent agree as follows: 1. Pursuant to Section 22300 of the Public Contract Code of the State of California, Contractor has the option to deposit securities with Escrow Agent as a substitute for retention earnings required to be withheld by Owner pursuant to the Construction Contract entered into between the Owner and Contractor for __________________ in the amount of _______________dollars ($_____) dated ___________ (hereinafter referred to as the “Contract”). Alternately, on written request of the Contractor, the Owner shall make payments of the retention earnings directly to the Escrow Agent. When the Contractor deposits the securities as a substitute for Contract earnings, the Escrow Agent shall notify the Owner within 10 days of the deposit. The market value of the securities at the time of the substitution shall be at least equal to the cash amount then required to be withheld as retention under the terms of the Contract between the Owner and Contractor. Securities shall be held in the name of _______________, and shall designate the Contractor as the beneficial owner. 2. The Owner shall make progress payments to the Contractor for those funds which otherwise would be withheld from progress payments pursuant to the Contract provisions, provided that the Escrow Agent holds securities in the form and amount specified above. 3. When the Owner makes payment of retentions earned directly to the Escrow Agent, the Escrow Agent shall hold them for the benefit of the Contractor until the time that the escrow created under this contract is terminated. The Contractor may direct the investment of the payments into securities. All terms and conditions of this agreement and the rights and responsibilities of the parties shall be equally applicable and binding when the Owner pays the Escrow Agent directly. 4. Contractor shall be responsible for paying all fees for the expenses incurred by Escrow Agent in administering the Escrow Account and all expenses of the Owner. These expenses and payment terms shall be determined by the Owner, Contractor, and Escrow Agent. 5. The interest earned on the securities or the money market accounts held in escrow and all interest earned on that interest shall be for the sole account of Contractor and shall be subject to withdrawal by Contractor at any time and from time to time without notice to the Owner. 6. Contractor shall have the right to withdraw all or any part of the principal in the Escrow Account only by written notice to Escrow Agent accompanied by written authorization from the Owner to the Escrow Agent that Owner consents to the withdrawal of the amount sought to be withdrawn by Contractor. 7. The Owner shall have a right to draw upon the securities in the event of default by the Contractor. Upon seven day’s written notice to the Escrow Agent from the owner of the default, the Escrow Agent shall immediately convert the securities to cash and shall distribute the cash as instructed by the Owner. EXHIBIT A - 26 - 8. Upon receipt of written notification from the Owner certifying that the Contract is final and complete, and that the Contractor has complied with all requirements and procedures applicable to the Contract, Escrow Agent shall release to Contractor all securities and interest on deposit less escrow fees and charges of the Escrow Account. The escrow shall be closed immediately upon disbursement of all moneys and securities on deposit and payments of fees and charges. 9. Escrow Agent shall rely on the written notifications from the Owner and the Contractor pursuant to Sections (5) to (8), inclusive, of this Agreement and the Owner and Contractor shall hold Escrow Agent harmless from Escrow Agent’s release and disbursement of the securities and interest as set forth above. 10. The names of the persons who are authorized to give written notice or two receive written notice on behalf of the Owner and on behalf of Contractor in connection with the foregoing, and exemplars of their respective signatures are as follows: On behalf of Owner: On behalf of Contractor: __________________________________ __________________________________ Title Title __________________________________ __________________________________ Name Name __________________________________ __________________________________ Signature Signature __________________________________ __________________________________ Address Address On behalf of Escrow Agent: __________________________________ Title __________________________________ Name __________________________________ Signature __________________________________ Address At the time the Escrow Agent is opened, the Owner and Contractor shall deliver to the Escrow Agent a fully executed counterpart of this Agreement. EXHIBIT A - 27 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement by their proper officers on the date first set forth above. Owner: Contractor: __________________________________ __________________________________ Title Title __________________________________ __________________________________ Name Name __________________________________ __________________________________ Signature Signature Approved as to form: Attest: __________________________________ __________________________________ City Attorney Date City Clerk EXHIBIT A - 28 - GENERAL PROVISIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION Page No. SECTION I - DEFINITION OF TERMS GP-1 SECTION II - PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS GP-3 1. General Information 2. Proposal Form 3. Bid Prices to Cover Entire Work 4. Examination of Plans, Specifications, Special Provisions and Site of Work 5. Proposal Guaranty 6. Rejection of Proposals Containing Alterations, Erasures or Irregularities 7. Competency of Bidders – Proposal Requirements 8. Subcontractors SECTION III - AWARD AND EXECUTION OF CONTRACT GP-5 1. Award of Contract 2. Return of Proposal Guaranties 3. Contract Bonds 4. Liability Insurance Required 5. Execution of Contract SECTION IV - SCOPE OF WORK GP-6 1. Work to be Done 2. Safety Program 3. Removal of Obstructions 4. City Directed Change Orders 5. Alterations 6. Contractor Proposed Change Orders 7. All Change Orders 8. Change Order Pricing 9. Liability for Unapproved Change Orders 10. Change Order Disputes SECTION V - CONTROL OF WORK GP-9 1. Authority of the Engineer 2. Conformity with Plans 3. Coordination of Plans, Specifications and Special Provisions 4. Conflict between Parts of Contract Documents EXHIBIT A - 29 - 5. Interpretation of Plans and Specifications 6. Superintendence 7. Lines and Grades 8. Inspection 9. Removal of Defective and Unauthorized Work 10. Final Inspection 11. Record Drawings 12. Cost Reduction Incentive SECTION VI - CONTROL OF MATERIALS GP-14 1. Source of Supply and Quality of Materials 2. Defective Materials 3. Samples and Tests 4. General Materials and Substitutions Requirements 5. Storage or Disposal of Materials Outside of the Right of Way 6. Construction and Demolition Waste Management Plan (WMP) SECTION VII - LEGAL RELATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITY GP-17 1. Laws to be Observed 2. Trench Safety and Differing Subsurface Conditions 3. Hours of Labor 4. Review of Per Diem Rates 5. Prevailing Wage 6. Registration of Contractors 7. Permits and Licenses 8. Patents 9. Contractor's Field Office 10. Utilities 11. Contractor Cooperation & Coordination 12. Public Convenience 13. Public Safety 14. Preservation of Property 15. Responsibility for Damage 16. Contractor’s Indemnities 17. Contractor's Responsibility for Work 18. Portion of Work which may be Placed in Service 19. No Personal Liability 20. No Abrogation of Codes, Standards, Laws and Ordinances 21. Guaranty 22. General Safety Requirements 23. Fair Employment Provisions 24. Employment of Apprentices SECTION VIII - PROSECUTION AND PROGRESS GP-29 1. Subcontracting 2. Assignment 3. Time of Completion and Statement of Working Days EXHIBIT A - 30 - 4. Progress of the Work and Time of Completion 5. Character of Workers 6. Temporary Suspension of Work 7. No Contractor Damages for Avoidable Delays 8. Impact of Unavoidable Delays 9. No Contractor Damages for Contractor Caused Delay 10. No Contractor Damages for Delay Not Caused by the City, Delay Contemplated by the Parties, or other Reasonable Delay 11. Delays Caused by the City and/or Its Privities 12. Delay Claims 13. Contractor Coordination of the Work 14. Liquidated Damages 15. Suspension of Contract 16. Communications 17. Audit and Examination of Records 18. Project Schedule SECTION IX - MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT GP-37 1. Measurement of Quantities 2. Progress Payments 3. Scope of Payment 4. Stop Notice Retention 5. Progress Payment Deductions 6. Acceptance of the Work 7. Final Payment 8. Travel & Subsistence Payments 9. Notice of Potential Claim 10. Claims 11. False Claims Affidavit 12. Claims Processing and Review 13. Extra Work 14. Force Account Work EXHIBIT A - 31 - SECTION I DEFINITION OF TERMS 1. Bidder. Any individual, firm or corporation submitting a proposal for the work contemplated, acting directly or through a duly authorized representative. 2. Calendar Day. A calendar day shall be any day including all legal holidays, Saturdays, and Sundays. 3. City. The City of South San Francisco, State of California, acting through the City Council, or other duly authorized agents. 4. Contract. The written agreement covering the performance of the work. The complete contract includes the Agreement for Public Improvements, the Notice Inviting Bids, the proposal, plans, specifications, contract bonds, and all supplemental agreements affecting the work. 5. Contractor. The person or persons, firm, partnership, corporation, or combination thereof, private or municipal, who have entered into the contract with the City, or the City’s legal representative. 6. Engineer or Works Engineer. The duly appointed Engineer of the City of South San Francisco, acting directly or through properly authorized agents limited by the particular duties entrusted to them. 7. Inspector. The Inspector or Inspectors of the Engineer of the City of South San Francisco, limited by the particular duties entrusted to them. 8. Notice of Award. Written notice from the City to the successful lowest responsive and responsible bidder stating that upon compliance with all contract prerequisites and conditions, the City will execute the Contract with that bidder for the Work. 9. Notice to Proceed. Written notice from the City to the Contractor setting a date on which Contract time will start and authorizing the Contractor to proceed with the Work. 10. Plans. The drawings, or reproduction thereof, approved by the Engineer, pertaining to the work, and made a part of the contract, including City’s Standard Drawings and Caltrans’ Standard Plans dated May 2006. 11. Specifications. The information, directions, provisions, and requirements pertaining to the work, and contained herein including Special Provisions, Technical Specifications, General Provisions, those administrative subsections of Caltrans’ Standard Specifications that are specifically referenced in this Contract and the non- administrative sections (Sections 10 through 95) of Caltrans’ Standard Specifications dated May 2006. EXHIBIT A - 32 - 12. Superintendent of Streets. The Engineer (Ex-officio Superintendent of Streets) of the City of South San Francisco, acting directly or through properly authorized agents. 13. The Work. The improvement, structure, project, or construction contemplated in the contract, the furnishing of all necessary labor, materials, tools and other devices, and the doing or performing by the Contractor of all things required to be done for the fulfillment of the contract as provided therein. 14. Working Day. A working day is defined as any day, except as follows: a. Saturdays, Sundays and Legal Holidays; b. Days on which the Contractor is prevented by inclement weather or conditions resulting immediately there from adverse to the current controlling operation or operations, as determined by the Engineer, from proceeding with at least 75 percent of the normal labor and equipment force engaged on such operation or operations for at least 60 percent of the total daily time being currently spent on the controlling operation or operations; c. Days on which the Contractor is prevented, by reason of requirements in the "Maintaining Traffic and Working Hours" section of the Special Provisions, from working on the controlling operation or operations for at least 60 percent of the total daily time being currently spent on such controlling operation or operations; d. The current controlling operation or operations are defined to include any feature of the work (e.g., an operation or activity, or a settlement or curing period) considered at the time by the Engineer, which if delayed or prolonged, will delay the time of completion of the Work; or e. Legal Holidays are defined as those holidays observed by the City of South San Francisco as specified in the current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of South San Francisco and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1569, AFL-CIO, except that half holidays in the MOU shall be considered full holidays under the Contract. EXHIBIT A - 33 - SECTION II PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS 1. General Information. Sealed proposals, addressed to the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, will be received by the Purchasing Officer and will be publicly opened and read at the time and place stated in the Notice to Inviting Bids. Any bid may be withdrawn at any time prior to the hour fixed in the Notice Inviting Bids for the opening of the bids provided that a request in writing, executed by the bidder or the bidder’s duly authorized representative, for the withdrawal of such shall not prejudice the right of a bidder to file a new bid. 2. Proposal Form. The City will furnish to each bidder a standard proposal form, which, when filled out and executed shall be submitted as their bid. Bids not presented on forms so furnished may, in the City's sole discretion, be deemed non- responsive and rejected on that basis. On all bid items for which bids are to be received on a unit price basis, the unit price for all items bid shall be shown, as well as the extended price (unit price multiplied by the number of units shown on the proposal form) for each bid item bid. In the case of any discrepancy between the extended price for any bid item bid, the unit price multiplied by the number of units shall prevail. In the event of any discrepancy between the total contract amount and the sum of the extended prices of all items, the sum of the extended prices of all items shall prevail. The proposal shall set forth the item prices and totals, in clearly legible figures, in the respective spaces provided and shall be signed by the bidder, who shall fill out all blanks in the proposal form as therein required. The bidder shall also fill out all blanks in the proposal forms for any alternative to the project proposed by the City; failure to do so may, in the City's sole discretion, result in the proposal being considered non-responsive and rejected on that basis. 3. Bid Prices to Cover Entire Work. Payment for the work done under this contract shall be as set forth on the Bidder’s Sheet for Proposal. Bidder shall include the entire cost of the work contemplated in the contract, as required by the plans, drawings, specifications, Special Provisions, and General Provisions: and, furthermore, it shall be understood and agreed that the cost of all labor, materials and equipment and all incidentals expense of whatever nature necessary to complete the Work is included. Any part of the Work which is not mentioned in the Specifications, and/or in the Special Provisions, but is shown on the plans, or any part not shown on the plans but described in the Specifications and/or in the Special Provisions, or any part not shown in the plans nor described in the Specifications or Special Provisions, but which is reasonably implied by either, or is necessary or usual in the performance of such work, shall be performed as incidental work, without extra cost to the City, by the Contractor as if fully described in the Specifications or Special Provisions and shown on the plans, and the expense thereof shall be included in the total bid. EXHIBIT A - 34 - 4. Examination of Plans, Specifications, Special Provisions, and Site of Work. The bidder is required to examine carefully the site of and the proposal, plans, specifications, and correct forms for the work contemplated, and it will be assumed that the bidder has investigated and is satisfied as to the conditions to be encountered, as to the character, quality, and quantities of work to be performed and materials to be furnished, and as to the requirements of the specifications, the special provisions and the contract. It is mutually agreed that submission of a proposal shall be considered prima facie evidence that the bidder has made such examination. The City will not be responsible for any loss or unanticipated cost incurred by the Contractor as a result of the Contractor’s failure to estimate in advance all conditions pertaining to the Work, including underground facilities and sewers that may have to be relocated. 5. Proposal Guaranty. All bids shall be presented under sealed cover and shall be accompanied by cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, made payable to the City of South San Francisco, for the amount equal to at least ten per cent (10%) of the amount of said bid, and no bid shall be considered unless such cash, cashier's check, or certified check, or bidder's bond is enclosed therewith. 6. Rejection of Proposals Containing Alterations, Erasures, or Irregularities. Proposals may be rejected if they show any alterations of form, additions not called for, conditional or alternative bids, incomplete bids, erasures, or irregularities of any kind. 7. Competency of Bidders - Proposal Requirements. Before entering into a contract, the bidder shall satisfy the City that he possesses adequate equipment and has the necessary experience and forces to perform the Work in the manner set forth in these specifications. He shall be a licensed Contractor in the State of California. A City of South San Francisco license will be required before the contract for the Work is signed by the City. 8. Subcontractors. Proposals shall comply with the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act (Government Code Section 4100 et seq). Pursuant to Section 4104 of said Act, bidder shall in the bid set forth: a. The name and the location of the place of business of each sub-contractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the prime Contractor in or about the construction of the Work or improvement in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent of the prime Contractor’s total bid. b. The portion of the Work, which will be done by each such subcontractor under this Act. The prime Contractor shall list only one subcontractor for each of such portions as is defined by the prime Contractor in the Contractor’s bid. EXHIBIT A - 35 - SECTION III AWARD AND EXECUTION OF CONTRACT 1. Award of Contract. The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. The award of the contract, if it is awarded, will be to the lowest responsible bidder, and will be made within sixty (60) calendar days after the opening of the proposal. All bids will be compared on the basis of the Engineer's cost estimate. 2. Return of Proposal Guaranties. Within ten (10) working days after the execution of the Contract, the City will return the proposal guaranties accompanying the proposals that are not to be considered in making the award. All other proposal guaranties will be held until the contract has been finally executed, after which they will be returned to the respective bidders whose proposals they accompany. 3. Contract Bonds. The bidder to whom the contract is awarded shall execute a performance bond satisfactory to the City for the Faithful performance of the Work in a sum equal to the amount of the contract. A payment bond shall be furnished securing the claims of persons employed by the Contractor and the claims of persons who furnish materials, supplies or equipment used or consumed by the Contractor in the performance of the Work. This bond shall be in a sum equal to the amount of the contract. 4. Liability Insurance Required. See Section 14, “Hold-Harmless Agreement and Contractor’s Insurance” and Section 15, “Insurance” of the Agreement for Public Services. 5. Execution of Contract. The contract shall be signed by the successful bidder and returned, together with the contract bonds, within ten (10) working days, after the bidder has received the Notice of Award. Failure to execute the contract and file acceptable bonds within the specified time shall be just cause for the annulment of the award and the forfeiture of the proposal guaranty. EXHIBIT A - 36 - SECTION IV SCOPE OF WORK 1. Work to be Done. The work to be done consists of furnishing all labor, materials, methods or processes, implements, tools, and machinery, except as otherwise specified, which are required to construct and put into complete order for use the Work described in the Special Provisions, and to leave the grounds in a neat condition. 2. Safety Program. a. The Contractor shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining to safety established by the California Division of Industrial Safety and to all requirements as set forth in the State of California Construction Safety Orders (CAL/OSHA), and in particular, Article 3 of these Safety Orders, regarding Accident Prevention and safety meetings. Within ten (10) working days following Notice of Award the Contractor must submit to the City a copy of the Contractor’s Safety Plan. b. Full compensation for furnishing all labor, materials, tools and equipment and doing all the work involved in this item of work as above specified, shall be considered as included in the prices paid for the various contract items of work and no additional compensation will be made therefore. 3. Removal of Obstructions. The Contract shall remove and dispose of all structures, debris, or other obstructions of any character to the Work to be performed. 4. City Directed Change Orders. The City may, at any time during the progress of the Work, direct any amendments to the Work or any of the Contract Documents. Such amendments shall in no way void the Contract, but will be applied to amend the Contract Price, if such amendments affect the Contract Price, the Project schedule (if such amendments affect the Project schedule), or any other provision of the Contract Documents based on a fair and reasonable valuation of the amendment in accordance with this Section IV. 5. Alterations. Subject to the provisions of Section 4-1.03, “Changes” of the Standard Specifications and unless otherwise specified, the City reserves the right to increase or decrease the quantity of any item or portion of the Work or to omit portions of the Work as may be deemed necessary or advisable by the Engineer, also to make such alterations or deviations, additions to, or omissions from the plans and Specifications, as may be determined during the progress of the Work to be necessary and advisable for the property completion thereof. Upon written order of the Engineer, the Contractor shall proceed with the Work as increased, decreased or altered. When alterations in plans or quantities of work are ordered and performed, the Contractor shall accept payment in full at the contract unit price for the actual quantities of work done. No allowance will be made in any case for loss of anticipated profits. Increased or decreased work involving supplemental agreements will be paid for as stipulated in such agreements. EXHIBIT A - 37 - 6. Contractor Proposed Change Orders. The Contractor shall submit proposed changes to the Engineer no later than 15 days before the proposed change. 7. All Change Orders. All change orders or amendments to Contract Documents must be approved by the Engineer prior to the change or amendment and must be evidenced by a writing executed by authorized representatives of the City and the Contractor. All change order proposals must specify any change in the Project schedule, or any project milestone, including, but not limited to, the Time for Completion, under the change order. It is understood that change orders that do not specify a change in any milestone, including, but not limited to, the Time for Completion, may be accomplished by the Time for Completion then in effect. 8. Change Order Pricing. Change order pricing for all change orders, whether additive, deductive, or both, will be governed by the following: a. Prices specified in the Contract Documents will apply to cost impacts involving items for which the Contract Documents specify prices. b. Cost impacts involving items for which the Contract Documents do not specify prices, charges or credits will be paid on a time and materials basis in accordance with the following. All costs listed in this Subsection (b) will constitute incidentals, full compensation for which will be deemed included in the markups for labor, material, and equipment specified below, and no additional compensation for such cost impacts will be allowed: (1) Labor. The Contractor will be paid the cost of labor for workers (including foremen when authorized by the Engineer), used in the actual and direct performance of the work, plus a fixed mark up of 15% of such labor cost. (2) Materials. Materials costs will be the direct costs for materials actually exhausted, consumed, or entering permanently into the Work, plus a fixed markup of 15% of such direct materials costs. (3) Equipment. All equipment used will be paid in accordance with the established rates for equipment rental in the Contract Documents, plus a fixed markup of 10% of each such equipment rates. (4) Subcontractors. The Contractor will be paid the cost of Subcontractors plus a fixed markup of 5%. The additional 5% markup shall reimburse the Contractor for additional administrative costs, and no other additional payment will be made by reason of performance of the extra work by a Subcontractor. 9. Liability For Unapproved Change Orders. The Contractor will be solely responsible for any and all losses, costs, or liabilities of any kind incurred by the Contractor, any subcontractor engaged in the performance of the Work, any party supplying material or equipment for the Work or any third party that is/are retained pursuant to Contractor- proposed change orders prior to issuance of an approved change order executed according to the terms of this Section IV. The Contractor shall have all of the obligations and the City EXHIBIT A - 38 - will have all of the rights and remedies that are specified in these Contract Documents concerning any work or resulting losses, costs, or liabilities pursuant to an unapproved Contractor-proposed change order. 10. Change Order Disputes. a. Disputed City-Directed Change Orders. If the Contractor disputes a City- directed change order following a reasonable effort by the City and the Contractor to resolve the dispute, including, at a minimum, a meeting between appropriate representatives of the Contractor and the City, the Contractor must commence performing the Work consistent with the disputed change order within five (5) working days of the last meeting between representatives of the Contractor and the City to resolve the dispute, or within the time specified in the disputed City-directed change order, whichever is later. In performing work consistent with a disputed City-directed change order pursuant to this provision, the Contractor will have all of the Contractor’s rights concerning claims pursuant to the Contract Documents and applicable law. b. Disputed Contractor-Proposed Change Orders. If the City disputes a Contractor-proposed change order, the City and the Contractor will use reasonable efforts to resolve the dispute including, at a minimum, holding a meeting between appropriate representatives of the Contractor and the City. Regardless of and throughout any such efforts to resolve the dispute, the Contractor must continue performing the Work irrespective of and unmodified by the disputed change order. In continuing to perform the Work, the Contractor will retain all of the Contractor’s rights under contract or law pertaining to resolution of disputes and protests between contracting parties. Disputes between the City and the Contractor concerning any Contractor-proposed change order or other amendment do not excuse the Contractor’s obligation to perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents excluding such Contractor-proposed change order or other amendment by the Time for Completion or waive any other Project milestone or other requirement of the Contract Documents. EXHIBIT A - 39 - SECTION V CONTROL OF WORK 1. Authority of the Engineer. The Engineer shall decide any and all questions which may arise as to the quality or acceptability of materials furnished and work performed, and as to the manner of performance and rate of progress of the Work; all questions which may arise as to the interpretation of the plans and specifications; all questions as to the acceptable fulfillment of the contract on the part of the Contractor; and all questions as to compensation. The Engineer’s decision shall be final and he shall have authority to enforce and make effective such decisions and orders as the Contractor fails to carry out promptly. 2. Conformity with Plans. Finished surfaces in all cases shall conform to the lines, grades, cross-sections and dimensions shown on the approved plans. 3. Coordination of Plans, Specifications, and Special Provisions. These specifications, general provisions, special provisions, standard specifications, plans and all supplementary documents are essential parts of the contract, and a requirement occurring in one is as binding as though occurring in all. They are intended to be cooperative, to describe and to provide for a complete work. 4. Conflict Between Parts of Contract Documents. If there is any conflict between the requirements of the various contract documents, the following shall be the order of precedence (in order from highest precedence to lowest): a. Agreement for Public Improvements b. Special Provisions c. Technical Specifications d. Drawings e. City Standard Drawings f. General Provisions g. Standard Specifications h. Standard Plans 5. Interpretation of Plans and Specifications. Should it appear that the work to be done or any matter relative thereto are not sufficiently detailed or explained in the these specifications, plans, and the Special Provisions, the Contractor shall apply to the Engineer well in advance of the time a clarification is needed for such further explanations as may be necessary and shall conform to those explanations as part of the contract, so far as may be consistent with the original specifications. The Engineer’s decision regarding definitions or clarifications will be final. In the event of any discrepancy between any drawing and the figures written thereon, the figures shall be taken as correct. 6. Superintendence. Contractor shall give personal superintendence to the work on said improvements or have a competent foreman or superintendent, satisfactory to the Engineer, at the work site at all times during progress with authority to act for the EXHIBIT A - 40 - Engineer. Whenever the Contractor is not present on any part of the work site where it may be desired to give direction, orders will be given by the Engineer, which shall be received and obeyed by the Superintendent or foremen in charge of the particular work in reference to which the orders are given. 7. Lines and Grades. Contractor shall be responsible to set lines and grades for construction. 8. Inspection. The Engineer shall at all times have access to the Work during construction, and shall be furnished with every reasonable facility for ascertaining full knowledge respecting the progress, workmanship, and character of materials used and employed in the Work. Whenever the Contractor varies the period during which work is carried on each day, he shall give due notice to the Engineer so that proper inspection may be provided. Any work done in the absence of the Engineer will be subject to rejection. The inspection of the Work shall not relieve the Contractor of any of the Contractor’s obligations to fulfill the contract as prescribed. Defective work shall be made good, and unsuitable materials may be rejected, notwithstanding the fact that such defective work and unsuitable materials have been previously overlooked by the Engineer and accepted or estimated for payment. 9. Removal of Defective and Unauthorized Work. All work, which has been rejected, shall be remedied, or removed and replaced by the Contractor in an acceptable manner and no compensation will be allowed for such removal or replacement. Any work done beyond the lines and grades shown on the plans or established by the Engineer, or any extra work done without written authority will be considered as unauthorized and will not be paid for. Work so done may be ordered removed at the Contractor's expense. Upon failure on the part of the Contractor to comply forthwith with any order of the Engineer made under the provisions of this article, the Engineer shall have authority to cause defective work to be removed, and to deduct the costs from any monies due or to become due the Contractor 10. Final Inspection. Whenever the Work provided and contemplated by the contract shall have been satisfactorily completed and the final cleaning up performed, the Engineer will make the final inspection. 11. Record Drawings. The Contractor shall keep and maintain, on the job site, one record set of Drawings. On these, the Contractor shall mark all project conditions, locations, configurations, and any other changes or deviations which may vary from the details represented on the original Contract Documents, including buried or concealed construction and utility features which are revealed during the course of construction. Special attention shall be given to recording the horizontal and vertical location of all buried utilities that differ from the locations indicated in the Contract Documents. Said record drawings shall be supplemented by any detailed sketches as necessary or directed to indicate, fully, the work as actually constructed. These master record drawings of the contractor's representation of as built conditions, including all revisions made necessary by addenda, change orders, and the like shall be maintained up to date during the progress of the work. EXHIBIT A - 41 - In the case of those drawings which depict the detailed requirements for equipment to be assembled and wired in the factory, such as motor control centers and the like, the record drawing shall be updated by indicating those portions which are superseded by change order drawings or final shop drawings, and by including appropriate reference information describing the change orders by number and the shop drawings by manufacturer, drawing, and revision numbers. Record drawings shall be accessible to the Engineer at all times during the construction period and shall be delivered to the Engineer upon completion of the Work. Final payment will not be approved until the Contractor prepared record drawings have been delivered to the Engineer. Said up to date record drawings may be in the form of a set of prints with carefully plotted information as approved by the Engineer. Upon substantial completion of the Work and prior to final acceptance, the Contractor shall complete and deliver a complete set of record drawings to the Engineer for transmittal to the City, conforming to the construction records of the Contractor. This set of drawings shall consist of corrected plans showing the reported location of the Work. The information submitted by the Contractor and incorporated by the Engineer into the Record Drawings will be assumed to be reliable, and the Engineer will not be responsible for the accuracy of such information, nor for any errors or omissions that may appear on the Record Drawings as a result. 12. Cost Reduction Incentive. The Contractor may submit to the Engineer, in writing, proposals for modifying the plans, specifications or other requirements of the contract for the sole purpose of reducing the total cost of construction. The cost reduction proposal shall not impair, in any manner, the essential functions or characteristics of the project, including but not limited to service life, economy of operation, ease of maintenance, desired appearance, or design and safety standards. Cost reduction proposals shall contain the following information: a. A description of both the existing contract requirements for performing the Work and the proposed changes. b. An itemization of the contract requirements that must be changed if the proposal is adopted. c. A detailed estimate of the cost of performing the Work under the existing contract and under the proposed change. The estimates of cost shall be determined in the same manner as if the Work were to be paid for on a force account basis as provided in Section IX-14, "Force Account Work" of these General Provisions. d. A statement of the time within which the Engineer must make a decision thereon. e. The contract items of work affected by the proposed changes, including any quantity variation attributable thereto. The provisions of this section shall not be construed to require the Engineer to consider any cost reduction proposal which may be submitted hereunder; proposed EXHIBIT A - 42 - changes in basic design of a bridge or of a pavement type will not be considered as an acceptable cost reduction proposal; the City will not be liable to the Contractor for failure to accept or act upon any cost reduction proposal submitted pursuant to this section nor for any delays to the Work attributable to any such proposal. If a cost reduction proposal is similar to a change in the plans or specifications, under consideration by the City for the project, at the time said proposal is submitted or if such a proposal is based upon or similar to Standard Specifications, standard special provisions or Standard Plans adopted by the City after the advertisement for the contract, the Engineer will not accept such proposal and the City reserves the right to make such changes without compensation to the Contractor under the provisions of this section. The Contractor shall continue to perform the Work in accordance with the requirements of the contract until an executed change order, incorporating the cost reduction proposal has been issued. If an executed change order has not been issued by the date upon which the Contractor’s cost reduction proposal specifies that a decision thereon should be made, or such other date as the Contractor may subsequently have specified in writing, such cost reduction proposal shall be deemed rejected. The Engineer shall be the sole judge of the acceptability of a cost reduction proposal and of the estimated net savings in construction costs from the adoption of all or any part of such proposal. In determining the estimated net savings, the right is reserved to disregard the contract bid prices if in the judgment of the Engineer, such prices do not represent a fair measure of the value of work to be performed or to be deleted. The City reserves the right where it deems such action appropriate, to require the Contractor to pay in part or whole the City’s costs of investigating a cost reduction proposal submitted by the Contractor as a condition of considering such proposal. Where such a condition is imposed, the Contractor shall indicate acceptance thereof in writing, and such acceptance shall constitute full authority for the City to deduct amounts payable to the City from any monies due or that may become due to the Contractor under the contract. If the Contractor’s cost reduction proposal is accepted in whole or in part, such acceptance will be by a contract change order, which shall specifically state that it is executed pursuant to this section. Such change order shall incorporate the changes in the plans and specifications which are necessary to permit the cost reduction proposal or such part of it as has been accepted to be put into effect, and shall include any conditions upon which the City's approval thereof is based if the approval of the City is conditional. The change order shall also set forth the estimated net savings in construction costs attributable to the cost reduction proposal effectuated by the change order, and shall further provide that the Contractor be paid 50 percent of said estimated net savings amount. The Contractor’s cost of preparing the cost reduction incentive proposal and the City’s cost of investigating a cost reduction incentive proposal, including any portion thereof paid by the Contractor, shall be excluded from consideration in determining the estimated net savings in construction costs. Acceptance of the cost reduction proposal and performance of the work thereunder shall not extend the time of completion of the contract unless specifically provided for in the contract change order authorizing the use of the cost reduction EXHIBIT A - 43 - proposal. The amount specified to be paid to the Contractor in the change order which effectuates a cost reduction proposal shall constitute full compensation to the Contractor for the cost reduction proposal and the performance of the work thereof pursuant to the said change order. The City expressly reserves the right to adopt a cost reduction proposal for general use on contracts administered by the City when it determines that said proposal is suitable for application to other contracts. When an accepted cost reduction proposal is adopted for general use, only the Contractor who first submitted such proposal will be eligible for compensation pursuant to this section, and in that case, only as to those contracts awarded to the Contractor prior to submission of the accepted cost reduction proposal and as to which such cost reduction proposal is also submitted and accepted. Cost reduction proposals identical or similar to previously submitted proposals will be eligible for consideration and compensation under the provisions of this section if the identical or similar previously submitted proposals were not adopted for general application to other contracts administered by the City. Subject to the provisions contained herein, the City or any other public agency shall have the right to use all or any part of any submitted cost reduction proposal without obligation or compensation of any kind to the Contractor. This Section V-12, “Cost Reduction Incentive” of these General Provisions shall apply only to contracts awarded to the lowest bidder pursuant to competitive bidding. EXHIBIT A - 44 - SECTION VI CONTROL OF MATERIALS 1. Source of Supply and Quality of Materials. At the option of the Engineer the source of supply of each of the material shall be approved by the Engineer before the delivery is started. Only materials conforming to the requirements of these specifications and approved by the Engineer shall be used in the Work. Materials used for the Work must be new and of the quality specified. When not particularly specified, materials must be the best of their class or kind. The Contractor must, if required, submit satisfactory evidence as to the kind and quality of materials. All materials proposed for use may be inspected or tested at any time during their preparation and use. After trial, if it is found that source of supply which have been approved so not furnish a uniform product or if the product from any source proves unacceptable at any time the Contractor shall furnish approved material from other approved sources. No material, which, after approval, has in any way become unfit for use shall be used in the Work. 2. Defective Materials. All materials not conforming to the requirements of these specifications shall be considered as defective and all such materials, whether in place or not, shall be rejected. They shall be removed immediately from the site of the Work, unless otherwise permitted by the Engineer. No rejected material, the defects of which have been subsequently corrected, shall be used until approval in writing has been given by the Engineer. Upon failure on the part of the Contractor to comply forthwith with any order of the Engineer made under the provisions of this article, the Engineer shall have authority to remove and replace defective material and to deduct the cost of removal and replacement from any monies due or to become due the Contractor. 3. Samples and Tests. Representative preliminary samples of the character and quality prescribed shall be submitted by the Contractor or producer of all materials to be used in the Work, for testing or examination as desired by the Engineer. All tests of materials furnished by the Contractor shall be made in accordance with commonly recognized standards of national organizations and such special methods and tests as are prescribed in these specifications. The Contractor shall furnish such samples of materials as are requested by the Engineer, without charge. Samples will be secured and tested whenever necessary to determine the quality of material. Contractor shall notify City a sufficient time in advance of the manufacture or production of materials to be supplied by Contractor under this contract in order that City may arrange for mill or factory inspection and testing of same. Any materials shipped by Contractor from factory prior to having satisfactorily passed such testing and inspection by City's representatives, or prior to the receipt of notice from such representative that such testing and inspection will not be required, shall not be incorporated on the job of said improvements. Contractor shall also furnish City, in triplicate, certified copies of all required factory and mill test reports. EXHIBIT A - 45 - 4. General Materials and Substitutions Requirements. a. If the Contractor submitted complete information to the Engineer for products proposed as equals in accordance with the bid package, and the City approved such products proposed as equals in writing, the Contractor may either furnish such products approved as equals, or furnish the products listed by manufacturer name, brand or model number in the Technical Specifications or Project Plans. The City retains the right, in its sole discretion, to accept or reject any other proposed substitution. To be considered, proposals concerning products proposed as equals must include sufficient information to permit the City to determine whether the products proposed as equals will satisfy the same performance requirements as products listed by manufacturer’s name, brand or model number. Such performance requirements may include, but are not limited to, size, strength, function, appearance, ease of maintenance and repair, and useful life requirements. If the City does not accept a proposed substitution, the Contractor must furnish the product specified in the Technical Specifications or Project Plans for the Contract Price, regardless of whether the product is specified by manufacturer’s name, brand or model number, or otherwise. b. During the performance of the Work, all materials must be neatly stacked, properly protected from the weather and other adverse impacts, and placed so as to avoid interference with efficient progress of the Work, with other activities of the City, or with the use of existing City facilities by the public. Materials may not be stored in a manner that presents a safety hazard or a nuisance. All materials must be delivered so as to ensure efficient and uninterrupted progress of the Work. Materials must be stored so as to cause no obstruction and so as to prevent overloading of any portion of the Work. The Contractor will be responsible for damage or loss of materials delivered to and/or stored at the work site due to weather or other causes. The Contractor must promptly remove from the work site all materials rejected by the City or its representatives as failing to conform to the requirements of the Contract Documents, whether such non-conforming materials have been incorporated in the Work or not. If the City or its representatives so direct, the Contractor must promptly replace and re-execute work performed by the Contractor and order the replacement and re-execution of work performed by subcontractors using non-conforming materials with materials that satisfy the requirements of the Contract Documents without expense to the City. The Contractor will bear the expense of making good all work destroyed or damaged by such removal. The Contractor will have all of the obligations and the City will have all of the rights and remedies that are specified in this section concerning any failure by the Contractor to replace or re-execute work using non-conforming materials, and/or to make good all work destroyed or damaged by such removal and/or execution. c. If any portion of the Work done or material furnished under this Contract proves defective and not in accordance with the Project Plans or Technical Specifications, and if the Engineer determines that the imperfection of the same is not of sufficient magnitude or importance to make the Work dangerous or undesirable, or if the removal of such work, is impractical or will create conditions which are dangerous or undesirable, the Engineer may retain such work, instead of requiring the imperfect work to be removed and reconstructed, and make such deductions therefore in the payments due or to become due the Contractor as are just and reasonable. EXHIBIT A - 46 - 5. Storage or Disposal of Material Outside the Public Right of Way. If the Contractor stores or disposes of material outside of the public right of way, and the City has not made arrangement for storage or disposal of the material, the Contractor shall first obtain written authorization from the property owner on whose property the storage or disposal is to be made and the Contractor shall file with the Engineer the authorization or a certified copy thereof together with a written release from the property owner absolving the City from any and all responsibility in connection with the storage or disposal of material on the property. Contractor must also obtain any necessary permits, licenses and environmental clearances to store or dispose of material on private property. Before any material is stored or disposed of on private property, the Contractor shall obtain written permission from the Engineer to store or dispose of the material at the location designated in the authorization. If the Contractor elects to store or dispose of material subject to this paragraph, the Contractor shall pay those charges that are provided for in the agreement between the owner and the Contractor. Where the City has made arrangements with owners of land in the vicinity of a project for the storage or disposal of materials on a private owner’s property, the arrangements are made solely for the purpose of providing all Bidders an equal opportunity to store or dispose of the materials on the property. Bidders or Contractors may, upon written request, inspect the documents evidencing the arrangements between property owners and the City. The Contractor may, if the Contractor so elects, exercise any rights that have been obtained. If the Contractor elects to store or dispose of materials on private property subject to this paragraph, the use of the private property shall be subject to the terms, conditions, and limitations of the arrangement made between the property owner and the City and the Contractor shall pay those charges that are provided for in the arrangement made by the City with the property owner, and deductions will be made from any moneys due or that may become due the Contractor under the Contract sufficient to cover the charges for the material stored or disposed of. When material is stored or disposed of as provided in this section, and the storage or disposal location is visible from public view, the Contractor shall store or dispose of the material in a neat and uniform manner to the satisfaction of the Engineer. Material storage as used in this section also includes vehicle parking. 6. Construction and Demolition Waste Management Plan (WMP). The City is mandated by the State of California to divert 50% of all solid waste from landfills either by reusing or recycling. To help meet this goal, a City ordinance requires completion of a solid waste management plan (WMP) for covered building and public works projects. The WMP shall identify how at least 50% on non-inert project waste materials and 100% inert materials (50/100) will be diverted from the landfill through recycling, reuse and/or salvage. The Contractor shall submit and implement an approved WMP as indicated in the Special Provisions. EXHIBIT A - 47 - SECTION VII LEGAL RELATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITY 1. Laws to be Observed. The Contractor shall stay fully informed of all existing and future State and National Laws, including all provisions of Section 1776 of the Labor Code, and Municipal Ordinances and Regulations which in any manner affect those engaged or employed in the Work, or the materials used in the Work, or which in any way affect the conduct of the Work, and of all such orders and decrees of bodies or tribunals having any jurisdiction or authority over the same. He shall at all times observe and comply with all such existing and future laws, ordinances, regulations, orders and decrees. In addition, the Contractor shall meet all standards of the State and Federal Government for air, water and noise pollution. The Contractor shall inform the City of the location of the records enumerated under Section 1776(a) of the Labor Code, including the street address, city and county, and shall within five working days, provide a notice of a change of location and address. If there is any conflict between these specification and provisions and any laws or regulations, the matter shall be brought to the attention of the Engineer immediately. All necessary permits or approvals from any involved agency shall be obtained by the Contractor before any work is started. 2. Trench Safety and Differing Subsurface Conditions. a. Excavation More Than Four Feet Deep. In accordance with California Public Contract Code Section 7104, if work involves excavation more than four feet deep, the Contractor must promptly notify the City in writing before any of the following are disturbed: any material that the Contractor believes may be material that is hazardous waste, as defined in Section 25117 of the Health and Safety Code, that is required to be removed to a Class I, Class II, or Class III disposal site in accordance with provisions of existing law; any subsurface or latent physical conditions at the work site different from those indicated; or any unknown physical conditions at the work site of any unusual nature, different materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in the Contract Documents. The City will promptly investigate any such conditions for which notice is given. If the City finds that the conditions do materially differ, or do involve hazardous waste, and cause a decrease or increase in the cost or time of performance of the Work, the City will issue a change order pursuant to Section IV-4, “City Directed Change Orders” of these General Provisions If a dispute arises between the City and the Contractor concerning whether the conditions materially differ, or involve hazardous waste, or cause a decrease or increase in the cost or time of performance, the Contractor shall not be excused from any completion date provided in the Contract Documents, but shall proceed with all work to be performed under the Contract Documents. The Contractor shall retain any and all rights provided either by contract or by law pertaining to the resolution of disputes and protests between the contracting parties. b. Excavation of Five Feet or More. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 6705, if this contract exceeds $25,000 in cost and involves excavation five or EXHIBIT A - 48 - more feet deep must submit for the City’s acceptance, prior to excavation, a detailed plan showing the design of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection from the hazard of caving ground during the excavation of such trench or trenches. No trench safety plan shall be less effective than that required by the Construction Safety Orders and other mandates of the Division of Occupational Safety and Health. If the plan varies from the shoring system standards established by the Construction Safety Orders and other applicable mandates, it must be prepared by a licensed civil or structural engineer. Acceptance by the City of the detailed trench safety plans submitted is only an acknowledgement of the submission and does not constitute review or approval of the designs, design assumptions, criteria, completeness, applicability to areas of intended use, or implementation of the trench safety plans, which are solely the responsibility of the Contractor and the Contractor’s Licensed Engineer. 3. Hours of Labor. The Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of South San Francisco, fifty dollars ($50) for each worker employed in the execution of the contract by the Contractor or by any subcontractor under the Contractor for each calendar day during which any worker is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of the provisions of the Labor Code and in particular, Section 1810 to Section 1816 thereof, inclusive. 4. Review of Per Diem Rates. Reference is hereby made to the prevailing rate of per diem wages adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco in accordance with Labor Code Section 1770 et seq., copies of which are on file in the office of the City Clerk and the Office of the Engineer, City Hall, South San Francisco, California, and available for inspection by interested parties. If a petition is filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 1773.4 calling for a review of the rates as so established, the closing rate for the submission of bids or the start of work, whichever is applicable shall be extended as in such section provided, and the determination made by the Director of Industrial Relations shall be deemed included in the contract for this Work. 5. Prevailing Wage. The wages to be paid for a day's work to all classes of laborers, workmen, or mechanics on the work contemplated by this contract, shall be not less than the prevailing rate for a day’s work in the same trade or occupation in the locality within the state where the work hereby contemplates to be performed as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations pursuant to the Director’s authority under Labor Code Section 1770 et seq. Each laborer, worker or mechanic employed by a Contractor or by any subcontractor shall receive the wages herein provided for. The Contractor shall pay fifty dollars ($50) per day penalty for each worker paid less than prevailing rate of per diem wages. The difference between the prevailing rate of per diem wages and the wage paid to each worker shall be paid by the Contractor to each worker. The City will not recognize any claim for additional compensation because of the payment by the Contractor for any wage rate in excess of prevailing wage rate set forth in the contract. The possibility of wage increases is one of the elements to be considered by the Contractor in determining the Contractor’s bid, and will not, under any circumstances be considered as the basis of a claim against the City on the contract. EXHIBIT A - 49 - NOTE: An error on the part of an awarding body does not relieve the Contractor from responsibility for payment of the prevailing rate of per diem wages and penalties pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1770-1775. a. Posting of Schedule of Prevailing Wage Rates and Deductions. If the schedule of prevailing wage rates is not attached hereto pursuant to Labor Code Section 1773.2, the Contractor shall post at appropriate conspicuous points at the site of the project a schedule showing all determined prevailing wage rates for the various classes of laborers and mechanics to be engaged in work on the project under this contract and all deductions, if any, required by law to be made from unpaid wages actually earned by the laborers and mechanics so engaged. b. Payroll Records. The Contractor and subcontractor’s attention is directed to the provisions of Section 1776 of the California Labor Code and to the requirements therein pertaining to the keeping, availability, and filing of accurate payroll records of all journeymen, apprentices, and other workers performing work under this Contract. The Contractor agrees to comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to each monthly progress payment, the Contractor shall deliver to the Engineer copies of certified payrolls of its and all subcontractors’ forces performing work at the job site (or sites established primarily for the work) for labor compliance purposes and extra/force account considerations. Such records shall be kept current on an effective day or period basis and in a form acceptable to the Engineer. At a minimum, the form shall include the following information: 1. Employee identification by name 2. Employee’s address and social security number 3. Employee’s craft and classification (in accordance with Director of Industrial Relations’ wage determinations) 4. Employee’s actual per diem wages (in compliance with Part I, Notice to Contractors, and this Section GC-20, Laws and Regulations) 5. Employee’s subsistence and travel allowance (as applicable) 6. Employee’s straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week 7. Itemized deductions made from employee’s wages 8. Apprentices and ratio of apprentices to journeymen 9. Contractor’s or subcontractor’s firm or company name, date or period for which applicable wage rates and allowances are effective, and the employer’s signature. EXHIBIT A - 50 - The certified payroll records shall be kept on forms provided by the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, or shall contain the same information as the forms provided by the Division in addition to the above-listed information. For all projects awarded on or after April 1, 2015, in addition to submitting the certified payrolls to the Engineer, the Contractor shall furnish the records specified in California Labor Code section 1776, including but not limited to the certified payrolls, directly to the Labor Commissioner. The Contractor shall furnish the records specified in California Labor Code section 1776 to the Labor Commissioner for all projects, whether such project is a new project awarded on or after, or an ongoing project awarded prior to, January 1, 2016. Each payroll record shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that is made under penalty of perjury stating: (1) The information contained in the payroll is true and correct; and (2) The employer has complied with the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1771, 1811, and 1815 for any work performed by its employees on the Project. The Contractor shall inform the City of the location of the above payroll records, including the street address, city and county, and shall, within five (5) working days, provide a notice of change of location and address. The contractor or subcontractor has 10 days in which to comply subsequent to receipt of a written notice requesting certified payroll records. In the event that the contractor or subcontractor fails to comply within the 10-day period, he or she shall, as a penalty to the District, forfeit one hundred dollars ($100) for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker, until strict compliance is effectuated. Upon the request of the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, these penalties shall be withheld from progress payments then due. The Contractor is not subject to a penalty assessment pursuant to this section due to the failure of a subcontractor to comply with this section. Any copy of records made available for inspection as copies and furnished upon request to the public or any public agency by the District shall be marked or obliterated in accordance with California Labor Code section 1776. Compliance with the above provisions of this Part II, and California Labor Code, Section 1776, shall be the responsibility of the Contractor or subcontractor. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1771.4, Contractor is required to post all job site notices prescribed by law or regulation that include, but are not limited to, payment of prevailing wages. 6. Registration of Contractors. Before submitting bids, Contractors shall be licensed in accordance with the provisions of the State Contractors' License Law, Business and Professions Code 7000 et seq. as amended. Pursuant to California Labor Code section 1771.1, by execution below, the Bidder and its Subcontractors certify that they are registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to section 1725.5 of the California Labor Code, subject to limited legal exceptions. EXHIBIT A - 51 - 7. Permits and Licenses. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices necessary and incidental to the due and lawful prosecution of the Work. A City of South San Francisco Business License will be required before the contract is signed by the City. 8. Patents. The Contractor shall assume all costs arising from the use of patented materials, equipment, services, or processes used on or incorporated in the Work, and agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City of South San Francisco, the City Council, and the Engineer, and their duly authorized representatives, for all suits at law, or actions of every nature for, or on account of the use of any patented materials, equipment, services, or processes. 9. Contractor’s Field Office. a. The Contractor and the Contractor’s subcontractors may maintain such office facilities within or near the project area as are necessary for the proper conduct of the Work. The locations for such office facilities shall be as approved by the Engineer. Before or during this contract, should the Contractor desire a new or different location, he shall apply to the Engineer for the change of locations and shall only make such change with the approval of the Engineer. All office facilities used by the Contractor and/or its privities must conform to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations. The cost of such facilities will be paid from and included in the Contract Price. b. The City and its authorized representatives will at all reasonable times while such office facilities are located at the work site (including, at a minimum, all times during which the Work is performed), have access to any such work site office facilities used by the Contractor and/or its privities. With respect to the right of access of the City and its authorized representatives, neither the Contractor nor its privities will have a reasonable expectation of privacy pursuant to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution or other applicable law concerning such Work site office facilities used by the Contractor and/or its privities. Without exception, any and all Project related materials located at such work site facilities will be deemed at all times to be City property subject to inspection and copying by the City and its authorized representatives at all reasonable times while such facilities are located at the work site (including at a minimum, all times during which the Work is performed). Any interference by the Contractor or its privities with the City’s rights of access and/or ownership pursuant to this section will constitute a material breach of the Contract subject to any and all remedies available pursuant to the Contract Documents and at law and equity. 10. Utilities. The location in public streets of pipes, conduits and other underground facilities of the public utility companies and of the City may not be indicated on the plans. Bidders are instructed to apply to companies and City departments concerned for any information, which may be needed concerning utilities. 11. Contractor Cooperation & Coordination. The Contractor is advised that other construction and maintenance work may be performed by local utility companies, the City and/or their contractors in the project area concurrent with work performed under this contract. The Contractor shall be responsible for contacting the various utility companies to ascertain the times when such other work will occur and schedule the Contractor’s work in EXHIBIT A - 52 - coordination with others such that no delays shall occur in the Contractor’s work schedule or in others who are working in the area. Failure on the Contractor's part to coordinate with others in overlapping work areas shall not be the basis for any claims against the City, additional compensation nor extension of time. In addition, the Contractor shall be solely responsible for any claims made against the City by others as a result of the Contractor's lack of coordination. This shall include businesses and homeowner's adjacent to the project area. 12. Public Convenience. The Contractor shall so conduct the Contractor’s operations as to cause the least possible obstruction and inconvenience to public traffic. Where work is being done on existing public roads or streets, and no detours are available, all traffic shall be permitted to pass through the work with as little inconvenience and delay as possible. Due to the need to accommodate and minimize inconvenience to the public, unless expressly specified or approved in writing by the Engineer, no road closures will be permitted. Public vehicular and pedestrian traffic must be allowed to travel through the work area with an absolute minimum of interruption or impedance unless otherwise provided for in writing by the Engineer. The Contractor must make provisions for the safe passage of pedestrians around the area of work at all times. Residents affected by construction must be provided passage and access through the work area to the maximum extent possible. Where existing driveways occur on the street, the Contractor must make provisions for the trench crossings at these points, either by means of backfill or by temporary bridges acceptable to the Engineer, so that the length of shut-down of any driveway is kept to a minimum. In addition, all driveways must be accessible at the beginning and end of each work day, and no driveway or property access may be closed for more than four (4) hours during the work day. Access to driveways, houses, and buildings along the road or street must be as convenient as possible and well maintained, and all temporary crossings must be maintained in good condition. To minimize the need for and complexity of detours, not more than one crossing or street intersection or road may be closed at any one time without the written approval of the Engineer. Except as otherwise provided by the Engineer, the stockpiling or storing of material in City streets or right of ways shall be prohibited. Where the Contractor has received Engineer approval, all such materials must be piled or stored in a manner that will not obstruct sidewalks, driveways, or pedestrian crossings. Gutters and drainage channels must be kept clear and unobstructed at all times. All such materials shall be stored and handled in a manner that protects City streets, sidewalks, or other facilities from damage. Throughout performance of the Work, the Contractor must construct and adequately maintain suitable and safe crossings over trenches and such detours as are necessary to care for the public and private traffic at all times including Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. EXHIBIT A - 53 - Water shall be applied as directed the Engineer for the prevention of dust nuisance in connection with public convenience. No additional payment will be made for applying water for the prevention of dust. The Contractor shall be responsible for keeping all emergency services, including the South San Francisco police and fire departments informed of obstructions to, or detours around any public or private roads caused by reasons of the Contractor’s operations. The Contractor must comply with the State of California, Department of Transportation Manual of warning signs, lights, and devices for use and performance of work within the job site. No work shall begin before 7:00 a.m. nor continue after 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, nor shall any work be done on weekends or holidays observed by the City of South San Francisco unless approved in advance by the Engineer. The fact that rain or other causes, either within or beyond the control of the Contractor, may force suspension or delay of the Work, shall in no way relieve the Contractor of Contractor’s responsibility of maintaining traffic through the Project and providing local access as specified in this section. The Contractor must, at all times, keep on the job such materials, force, and equipment as may be necessary to keep roads, streets and driveways within the Project open to traffic and in good repair and shall expedite the passage of such traffic, using such force and equipment as may be necessary. Full compensation for furnishing all labor, materials, tools and equipment and doing all the work involved in this item of work as above specified, shall be considered as included in the prices paid for the various contract items of work and no additional compensation will be made therefore. 13. Public Safety. The Contractor shall furnish, erect, and maintain such fences, barriers, lights, signs and watchmen as are necessary to give adequate warning to the public at all times that the Work is under construction and of any dangerous conditions to be encountered as a result thereof. At any and all points along the Work where the nature of construction operations in progress and the Contractor's equipment and machinery in use is of such character as to endanger passing traffic, the Contractor shall provide such lights and signs and station such guards as may appear necessary to prevent accidents and avoid damage or injury to passing traffic. No material or equipment shall be stored where it will interfere with the free and safe passage of public traffic. At the end of each days work and at other times when construction operations are suspended for any reason, the Contractor shall remove all equipment and other obstructions from that portion of the roadway open for use by public traffic. Full compensation for furnishing all labor, materials, tools and equipment and doing all the work involved in this item of work as above specified, shall be considered as included in the prices paid for the various contract items of work and no additional compensation will be made therefore. Should the Contractor fail to provide public safety EXHIBIT A - 54 - as specified, or if, in the opinion of the Engineer, the warning devices furnished by the Contractor are not adequate, the City may place any warning lights or barricades or take any necessary action to protect or warn the public of any dangerous condition connected with the Contractor’s operations and the Contractor will be liable to the City for, and the City may deduct from amounts due or that may become due the Contractor under the Contract, all costs incurred including, but not limited to, administrative costs. Nothing in this section will be construed to impose tort liability on the City or Engineer. 14. Preservation of Property. Roadside trees and shrubbery that are not to be removed, and pole lines, fences, signs, survey markers and monuments, buildings and structures, conduits, pipe lines under or above ground, sewer and water lines, all street facilities, and any other improvements or facilities within or adjacent to the Work shall be protected from injury or damage. If such objects are injured or damaged by reason of the Contractor's operations, they shall be replaced or restored, at the Contractor's expense, to a condition as good as when the Contractor entered upon the Work, or as good as required by the specifications accompanying the contract, if any such objects are a part of the Work being performed under the contract. The Contractor shall examine all bridges, culverts and other structures on or near the Work, over which he will move the Contractor’s materials and equipment, and before using them, the Contractor shall properly strengthen such structures, where necessary. The Contractor will be held responsible for any and all injury or damage to such structures caused by reason of the Contractor’s operations. The fact that any such pipe or other underground facility is not shown upon the plans shall not relieve the Contractor of the Contractor’s responsibility under this article. It shall be the Contractors' responsibility to ascertain the existence of any underground improvements or facilities, which may be subject to damage by reason of the Contractor’s operations, and if it is necessary to lower such underground facility or encase it to protect it from damage, it shall be done at the Contractor’s expense. 15. Responsibility for Damage. The City of South San Francisco, the City Council, or the Engineer shall not be answerable or accountable in any manner, for any loss or damage that may happen to the Work or any part thereof; or for any of the materials or other things used or employed in performing the Work; or for injury or damage to any person or persons, either workmen or the public; or for damage to adjoining property from any cause whatsoever during the progress of the Work or at any time before final acceptance. 16. Contractor’s Indemnities. a. The Contractor will take all responsibility for the Work, and will bear all losses and damages directly or indirectly resulting to the Contractor, any subcontractors engaged in performance of the Work, the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers and consultants, and to third parties on account of the performance or character of the Work, unforeseen difficulties, accidents, or occurrences of other causes predicated on active or passive negligence of the Contractor or of any subcontractor EXHIBIT A - 55 - engaged in performance of the Work. To the fullest extent permitted by law the Contractor will indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers and consultants from and against any or all loss, liability, expense, claims, costs (including costs of defense), suits, and damages of every kind, nature and description (including, but not limited to, penalties resulting from exposure to hazards in violation of the California Labor Code) directly or indirectly arising from the performance of the Work (“Claims”). b. The Contractor will indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, the City’s officials, officers, employees, volunteers, agents and the Engineer and Architect for all liability on account of any patent rights, copyrights, trade names or other intellectual property rights that may apply to the Contractor’s performance of the Work. The Contractor will pay all royalties or other charges as a result of intellectual property rights that may apply to methods, types of construction, processes, materials, or equipment used in the performance of the Work, and will furnish written assurance satisfactory to the City that any such charges have been paid. c. The Contractor assumes all liability for any accident or accidents resulting to any person or property as a result of inadequate protective devices for the prevention of accidents in connection with the performance of the Work. The Contractor will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers and consultants from such liability. d. Approval of the Contractor’s certificates of insurance and/or endorsements does not relieve the Contractor of liability under this provision. The Contractor will defend, with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to the City, any action or actions filed in connection with any Claims and will pay all related costs and expenses, including attorney's fees incurred. The Contractor will promptly pay any judgment rendered against the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers or consultants for any Claims. In the event the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers or consultants is made a party to any action or proceeding filed or prosecuted against Contractor for any Claims, Contractor agrees to pay the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers and consultants any and all costs and expenses incurred in such action or proceeding, including but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees. e. The Contractor will indemnify, hold harmless and defend with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to the City the City and its officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers from and against any and all Claims related to damage to surface or underground facilities caused by the Contractor or any of the Contractor’s privities or agents. f. The Contractor will indemnify, hold harmless and defend with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to the City the City and its officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers from and against any and all Claims, including any fines or other penalties, related to failure of the Contractor and/or privities or agents of the Contractor to comply with the requirements of the State of California’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System General Permit, or to implement the project specific Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with the Technical Specifications. The City may withhold from amounts due or that may become due the Contractor under this EXHIBIT A - 56 - Contract amounts that equal or are estimated to equal the amount of Claims, including fines, resulting from failure of the Contractor and/or privities or agents of the Contractor to comply with the requirements of the General Permit, or to implement the SWPPP in accordance with the Technical Specifications. g. In accordance with California Civil Code Section 2782(a), nothing in the Contract will be construed to indemnify the City for its sole negligence, willful misconduct, or for defects in design furnished by City. In accordance with California Civil Code Section 2782(b), nothing in the Contract will be construed to impose on the Contractor or to relieve the City from liability for the City’s active negligence. By execution of the Contract Documents the Contractor acknowledges and agrees that the Contractor has read and understands the insurance and indemnity requirements of the Contract Documents, which are material elements of consideration. 17. Contractor’s Responsibility for Work. Except as provided above, until the formal acceptance of the Work by the City, the Contractor shall have the charge and care thereof and shall bear the risk of injury or damage to any part thereof by the action of the elements or from any other cause, whether arising from the execution or from the non-execution of the Work. The Contractor shall rebuild, repair, restore, and make good all injuries or damages to any portion of the Work occasioned by any of the above caused before its completion and acceptance and shall bear the expense thereof, except for such injuries or damages as are directly and proximately caused by acts of the Federal Government or the public enemy. In case of suspension of work from any cause whatever, the Contractor shall be responsible for the work as above specified and he shall also be responsible for all materials delivered to the Work including materials for which he has received partial payment. 18. Portion of the Work, Which May be Placed in Service. If desired by the City of South San Francisco, the Work, as completed, may be placed in service. The Contractor shall give proper access to the Work for this purpose but such use and operations shall not constitute an acceptance of the Work, and the Contractor shall remain liable for defects due to faulty construction, material and/or workmanship. 19. No Personal Liability. Neither the Engineer nor the City Council, nor any other officer or authorized assistant or agent shall be personally responsible for any liability arising under the contract. 20. No Abrogation of Codes, Standards, Laws and Ordinances. The Contractor and all subcontractors engaged in the performance of the Work must conform to the following specific rules and regulations as well as all other laws, ordinances, rules and regulations that apply to the Work. Nothing in the General Provisions or plans is to be construed to permit Work not conforming to these codes: • National Electrical Safety Code, U. S. Department of Commerce • National Board of Fire Underwriters' Regulations EXHIBIT A - 57 - • California Building Standards Code as adopted by the City • Manual of Accident Prevention in Construction, latest edition, published by A.G.C. of America • Industrial Accident Commission's Safety Orders, State of California • Regulations of the State Fire Marshall (Title 19, California Code of Regulations) and Applicable Local Fire Safety Codes • Labor Code of the State of California - Division 2, Part 7, Public Works and Public Agencies. 21. Guaranty. Unless specified otherwise, the Contractor guarantees all of the Work for one year from the date the City accepts the Work. Upon receiving written notice of a need for repairs which are directly attributable to defective materials or workmanship the Contractor must make good any defects arising or discovered in any part of the Work by diligently commencing the necessary repairs within seven (7) days from the date of notice from the City. If the Contractor fails to make good any defects in the Work in accordance with this provision, in addition to any other available remedy under the Contract or at law or equity, the City may make good or have made good such defects in the Work and deduct the cost from amounts that may be due or become due the Contractor, and/or call on the Contractor’s maintenance bond for the cost of making good such defects and for the City’s reasonable legal costs, if any, of recovering against the bond. The Contractor will remain responsible for repairing any Work found to be defective regardless of when such defect is discovered by the City. Contractor shall file with City a corporate surety bond in the sum of ten percent (10%) of the final contract price (including all change orders for extra work securing this guaranty to City, and said bond shall be filed at the time final acceptance of this Work is requested. Should Contractor not file said bond as required herein, City may retain the remaining ten percent (10%) of the contract price as a cash bond for said one (1) year period. Should Contractor within a reasonable time after demand made fail to make any and all such repairs or replacements, City may undertake said repairs and replacements with its own forces or through contract, and Contractor shall reimburse City for any and all costs of said repairs or replacements, even if said cost exceed the principal sum of the corporate surety bond which is security for the performance of this guaranty. Contractor and the Contractor’s surety may provide the aforegoing guaranty in the original performance bond. 22. General Safety Requirements. a. In accordance with generally accepted construction practices and applicable law, the Contractor will be solely and completely responsible for conditions of the work site, including safety of all persons and property during performance of the Work. This requirement will apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours. For purposes of California Labor Code Section 6400 and related provisions of law, the Contractor and the Contractor’s privities and any other entities engaged in the performance of the Work will be “employers” responsible for furnishing employment and a place of employment that is safe and healthful for the employees, if any, of such entities EXHIBIT A - 58 - engaged in the performance of the Work. Neither the City nor its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers or consultants will be “employers” pursuant to California Labor Code Section 6400 and related provisions of law with respect to the Contractor, the Contractor’s privities or other entities engaged in the performance of the Work. The Contractor agrees that neither the City, the Architect, nor the Engineer will be responsible for having hazards corrected and/or removed at the work site. The Contractor agrees that the City will not be responsible for taking steps to protect the Contractor’s employees from such hazards, or for instructing the Contractor’s employees to recognize such hazards or to avoid the associated dangers. The Contractor agrees with respect to the Work and the Work site, the Contractor will be responsible for not creating hazards and for having hazards corrected and/or removed, for taking appropriate, feasible steps to protect the Contractor’s employees from such hazards and that the Contractor has instructed and/or will instruct its employees to recognize such hazards and how to avoid the associated dangers. b. Review and inspection by the City, the Engineer, the Architect or Engineer, and/or other representatives of the City of the Contractor’s performance of the Work will not constitute review of the adequacy of the Contractor’s safety measures in, on, or near the Work site. Such reviews and inspections do not relieve the Contractor of any of the Contractor’s obligations under the Contract Documents and applicable law to ensure that the work site is maintained and the Work is performed in a safe manner. c. The Contractor will be solely responsible for the implementation and maintenance of safety programs to ensure that the work site is maintained and the Work is performed in a safe manner in accordance with the Contract Documents and applicable law. d. The Contractor must furnish and place proper guards and systems for the prevention of accidents, including, but not limited to, those systems required pursuant to Title 8, Section 1670 and following of the California Code of Regulations concerning safety belts and nets. The Contractor must provide and maintain any other necessary systems or devices required to secure safety of life or property at the work site in accordance with accepted standards of the industry and applicable law. The Contractor must maintain during all night hours sufficient lights to prevent accident or damage to life or property. 23. Fair Employment Provision. The Contractor will not willfully discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, ancestry or national origin. The Contractor will take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, ancestry or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination: rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided by the awarding authority setting forth the provisions of this fair employment practices section. 24. Employment of Apprentices. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 (Chapter 1411, Statutes of 1968) and 1777.8 of the Labor Code EXHIBIT A - 59 - concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under the Contractor. Section 1777.5, as amended, required the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticeable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five (1:5) except: a. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of fifteen percent (15%) in the ninety (90) days prior to the request for certificate, or b. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five (1:5), or c. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or d. When the Contractor provided evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of the Contractor’s contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticeable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and any subcontractor under the Contractor shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. EXHIBIT A - 60 - SECTION VIII PROSECUTION AND PROGRESS 1. Subcontracting. No subcontractor will be recognized as such, and all persons engaged in the Work or construction will be considered as employees of the Contractor and he will be held responsible for their work, which shall be subject to the provisions of the contract and specifications. The Contractor shall give the Contractor’s personal attention to the fulfillment of the contract and shall keep the Work under the Contractor’s control. The Contractor shall be responsible for the Contractor’s own and subcontractors' compliance with Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code regarding apprenticeable occupations as in said section provided. Any Contractor willfully failing to comply with this section shall be denied the right to bid on a public works contract for a period of six (6) months from the date the determination is made. Where a portion of the Work, which has been subcontracted by the Contractor, has not been prosecuted in a manner satisfactory to the Engineer, the subcontractor shall be removed immediately on the requisition of the Engineer and shall not again be employed on the Work. 2. Assignment. The performance of the contract may not be assigned except upon the written consent of the City. Consent will not be given to any proposed assignment, which would relieve the original, Contractor or the Contractor’s surety of their responsibilities under the contract nor will the City consent to any assignment of a part of the Work under the contract. 3. Time of Completion and Statement of Working Days. The Contractor shall complete all or any designated portion of the work called for under the contract in all parts and requirements within the time set forth in the Special Provisions. Determination that a day is a non-working day by reason of inclement weather or conditions resulting immediately therefrom, shall be made by the Engineer. The Engineer will furnish the Contractor a monthly statement showing the number of working days charged to the contract for the preceding month, the number of working days of time extensions being considered or approved, the number of working days originally specified for the completion of the contract and the number of working days remaining to complete the contract and the extended date for completion thereof, except when working days are not being charged in conformance with the provisions in Section VIII-6, “Temporary Suspension of Work” of these General Provisions. The Contractor will be allowed 15 days from the issuance of the monthly statement of working days in which to file a written protest setting forth in what respects the Contractor differs from the Engineer; otherwise, the decision of the Engineer shall be deemed to have been accepted by the Contractor as correct. EXHIBIT A - 61 - 4. Progress of the Work and Time of Completion. The Contractor shall begin work upon receipt of the Notice to Proceed. However, the Contractor shall begin work no earlier than the twenty-first (21st) day after the commencement of the advertisement of the call for bids. 5. Character of Workers. If any subcontractor or person employed by the Contractor shall fail or refuse to carry out the direction of the Engineer or shall appear to the Engineer to be incompetent or to act in a disorderly or improper manner, he shall be discharged immediately on the requisition of the Engineer, and such person shall not again be employed on the Work. 6. Temporary Suspension of Work. The Engineer shall have the authority to suspend the Work wholly or in part, for such period as he may seem necessary, due to unsuitable weather, or to such other conditions as are considered unfavorable prosecution of the Work, or for such time as he may seem necessary due to the failure on the part of the Contractor to carry out orders given, or to perform any provision of the contract. The Contractor shall immediately comply with the written order of the Engineer to suspend work wholly or in part. The Work shall be resumed when conditions are favorable and methods are corrected, as ordered or approved in writing by the Engineer. 7. No Contractor Damages for Avoidable Delays. All delays in the Work that might have been avoided by the exercise of care, prudence, foresight and diligence of the Contractor or any privities of the Contractor will be deemed avoidable delays. Delays in the Work that may be unavoidable but that do not necessarily affect other portions of the Work or prevent completion of all work within the Time for Completion, including, but not limited to, reasonable delays in Engineer approval of shop drawings, placement of construction survey stakes, measurements and inspection, and such interruption as may occur in prosecution of the Work due to reasonable interference of other contractors of the City, will be deemed avoidable delays. The Contractor will not be awarded a change in the Project schedule, the Time for Completion, and/or additional compensation in excess of the contract price for avoidable delays. 8. Impact of Unavoidable Delays. All delays in the Work that result from causes beyond the control of the Contractor and that the Contractor could not have avoided through exercise of care, prudence, foresight, and diligence will be deemed unavoidable delays. Orders issued by the City changing the amount of Work to be done, the quantity of materials to be furnished, or the manner in which the Work is to be prosecuted, and unforeseen delays in the prosecution of the Work due to causes beyond the Contractor’s control, such as strikes, lockouts, labor disturbances, fires, epidemics, earthquakes, acts of God, neglect by utility owners or other contractors that are not privities of the Contractor will be deemed unavoidable delays to the extent they actually delay the Contractor’s completion of the Work. The Contractor will be awarded a change in the Project schedule, the Time for Completion, and/or additional compensation in excess of the contract price for unavoidable delays to the extent such delays actually delay the Contractor’s completion of the Work and/or result in the Contractor incurring additional costs in excess of the Contract Price. Delay due to normal, adverse weather conditions will not be deemed unavoidable. The Contractor should understand that normal adverse weather conditions are to be EXHIBIT A - 62 - expected and plan the Work accordingly, such as by incorporating into the Project Schedule normal, adverse weather delays as reflected in historical data of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the U.S. Department of Commerce for the weather station most applicable to the Work site. 9. No Contractor Damages for Contractor Caused Delay. Contractor will not be entitled to additional compensation for extended field or home office overhead, field supervision, costs of capital, interest, escalation charges, acceleration costs or other impacts for any delays to the extent such delays are caused by the failure of the Contractor or any subcontractor or other entity engaged in performance of the Work to perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. 10. No Contractor Damages for Delay Not Caused By the City, Delay Contemplated by the Parties, or other Reasonable Delay. Contractor will not be entitled to damages for delay to the Work caused by the following, which the City and Contractor agree will be deemed for purposes of California Public Contract Code Section 7102 either not caused by the City, and/or within the contemplation of the City and the Contractor, and/or reasonable under the circumstances: Exercise of the City’s right to sequence the Work in a manner that would avoid disruption to the City and other contractors based on: the failure of the Contractor or any subcontractor or other entity engaged in the performance of the Work to perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents, enforcement by the City or any other governmental agency of competent jurisdiction of any government act or regulation, or enforcement by the City of any provisions of the Contract. Requests for clarification or information concerning the Contract Documents or proposed change orders or modifications to the Contract Documents, including extensive and/or numerous such requests for clarification or information or proposed change orders or modifications, provided such clarifications or information or proposed change orders or modifications are processed by the City or its representatives in a reasonable time in accordance with the Contract Documents. 11. Delays Caused by the City and/or Its Privities. Delay caused by the City and/or other contractors of the City will be deemed unavoidable delays. Either the City or the Contractor may propose a change in the Time for Completion and/or the Project Schedule for delays that are purported to be caused by the City and/or its privities and that are not reasonable under the circumstances involved and/or that are not within the contemplation of the City and the Contractor. Such proposed changes in the Time for Completion will constitute a change order proposal. The City and the Contractor may agree upon pricing for the cost impacts, if any, resulting from such delays. If such pricing and/or changes in the Time for Completion and/or the Project Schedule are in anticipation of impacts that may, but have not yet occurred, the City will be obligated to pay the Contractor for such anticipated impacts or to award a change in the Time for Completion and/or the Project Schedule in accordance with the Contract and any applicable, approved change orders only to the extent the Contractor actually incurs the anticipated impacts. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the City and the Contractor may agree to a daily rate or cap or lump sum that will apply to the cost impacts, if any, resulting from delay purportedly caused by the City and/or its privities EXHIBIT A - 63 - subject to this provision. However, if such daily rate or cap or lump sum is in anticipation of cost impacts that have not yet occurred, the City will be obligated to pay such daily rate or cap or lump sum only to the extent the Contractor actually incurs such cost impacts. 12. Delay Claims. Whenever the Contractor claims a delay for which the Time for Completion may be extended, the Contractor must request an extension of time within five (5) days of the start of the delay. The request must be in writing and describe in detail the cause for the delay, and, if possible, the foreseeable extent of the delay. 13. Contractor Coordination of the Work. The City reserves the right to do other work in connection with or in the vicinity of the Project by contract or otherwise, and Contractor must at all times conduct the Work so as to impose no hardship on the City, others engaged in the Work or other contractors working at the work site. The Contractor will adjust, correct and coordinate the Work with the work of others so that no delays result in the Work or other work at or near the work site. If any part of the Work depends on proper execution or results upon the Work of the City or any other contractor, the Contractor will, before proceeding with such Work, promptly report to the City any apparent discrepancies or defects in such other work. Failure of the Contractor to promptly report any apparent discrepancy or defect will be deemed an acceptance of the City’s or other contractor’s work as fit and proper. The Contractor will anticipate the relations of the various trades to the progress of the Work and will ensure that required anchorage or blocking is furnished and set at proper times. Anchorage and blocking necessary for each trade will be part of the Work except where stated otherwise. The Contractor will provide proper facilities at all times for access of the City, the Engineer, Architect, and other authorized City representatives to conveniently examine and inspect the Work. 14. Liquidated Damages. The Contractor shall complete the work called for under the contract in all parts and requirements within the number of working days specified. It is agreed by the parties of the contract that in case all the work called for under the contract is not completed before or upon the expiration of the time limit as set forth in the Agreement for Public Improvements, damage will be sustained by the City, and that it is and will be impracticable to determine the actual damage which the City will sustain in the event of and by reason of such delay; and it is therefore agreed that the Contractor will pay to the City the sum prescribed in the Special Provisions per working day for each and every working day's delay beyond the time prescribed to complete the Work; and the Contractor agrees to pay such liquidated damages as herein provided, and in case the same are not paid, agrees that the City may deduct the amount thereof from any money due or that may become due the Contractor under the contract. It is further agreed that in case the work called for under the contract is not finished and completed in all parts and requirements within the time specified, the City EXHIBIT A - 64 - shall have the right to extend the time for completion or not, as may seem best to serve the interest of the City; and if the City decided to extend the time for completion of the contract, it shall further have the right to charge to the Contractor, the Contractor’s heirs, assigns, or sureties, and to deduct from the final payment for the Work, all or any part as it may seem proper, of the actual cost of engineering, inspection, superintendence and other overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to the contract and which accrue during the period of such extension, except that the cost of final surveys and preparation of final estimate shall not be included in such charges. The Contractor shall not be assessed with liquidated damages nor the cost of Engineering and inspection during any delay in the completion of the Work caused by acts of God or of the public enemy, acts of the City, fire, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, freight embargoes, and unusually severe weather or delays of subcontractors due to such causes; provided, that the Contractor shall within ten (10) days from the beginning of any such delay notify the Engineer in writing of the causes of delay, who shall ascertain the facts and the extent of delay, and the Engineer’s finding of facts thereon shall be final and conclusive. If the Contractor is delayed by any act of the Engineer or of the City, not contemplated by the contract, the time of completion shall be extended proportionately and the Contractor shall be relieved during the period of such extension of any claim for liquidated damages, engineering or inspection charges or other penalties. The Contractor shall have no claim for any other compensation for any such delay. 15. Suspension of Contract. If at any time in the opinion of the Engineer, the Contractor has failed to supply an adequate working force, or material of proper quality, or has failed in any other respect to prosecute the Work with the diligence and force specified and intended in and by the terms of the contract, notice thereof in writing will be served upon the Contractor, and should he neglect or refuse to provide means for a satisfactory compliance with the contract, as directed by the Engineer, within the time specified in such notice, the City in any such case shall have the power to suspend the operation of the contract. Upon receiving notice of such suspension, the Contractor shall discontinue said work, or such parts of it as the Engineer may designate. Upon such suspension, the Contractor’s control shall terminate and thereupon the City or its duly authorized representative may take possession of all or any part of the Contractor's materials, tools, equipment, and appliances upon the premises, and use the same for the purpose of completing said contract, and hire such force and buy or rent such additional machinery, tools, appliances, and equipment, and buy such additional materials and supplies at the Contractor's expense as may be necessary for the proper conduct of the Work and for the completion thereof, or may employ other parties to carry the contract to completion, employ the necessary workmen, substitute other machinery or materials, and purchase the materials contracted for, in such manner as the Engineer may seem proper; or the City may annul and cancel the contract and re-let the Work or any part thereof. Any excess of cost arising therefrom over and above the contract price will be charged against the Contractor and the Contractor’s sureties who will be liable therefore. In the event of such suspension, all money due the Contractor or retained under the terms of this contract shall be forfeited to the City; but such forfeiture will not release the Contractor or the Contractor’s sureties from liability or failure to fulfill the contract. The EXHIBIT A - 65 - Contractor and the Contractor’s sureties will be credited with the amount of money so forfeited toward any excess of cost over and above the contract price, arising from the suspension of the operations of the contract and the completion of the Work by the City as above provided, and the Contractor will be so credited with any surplus remaining after all just claims for such completion have been paid. In the determination of the question whether there has been any such noncompliance with the contract as to warrant the suspension or annulment thereof, the decision of the Engineer shall be binding on all parties to the contract. 16. Communications. a. All notices, demands, requests, instructions, approvals, proposals, and claims must be in writing. b. Any notice to or demand upon the Contractor shall be sufficiently given if delivered at the office of the Contractor stated on the signature page of the Proposal (or at such other office as the Contractor may from time to time designate in writing to the City), or if deposited in the United States mall in a sealed envelope, or delivered with charges prepaid to any telegraph company for transmission, in each case addressed to such office. c. All correspondence to the City, related to this contract, including request for payment, shall be addressed to the Engineer, City of South San Francisco, P.O. Box 711, South San Francisco, California 94083, and any notice to or demand upon the City shall be sufficiently given if so delivered or if deposited in the United States mail in a sealed envelope, or to other such representatives of the City to such other address as the Agency may subsequently specify in writing to the Contractor for such purpose. Any such notice shall be deemed to have been given as of the time of actual delivery of (in the case of mailing) when the same should have been received per receipt, or in the case of telegrams, at the time of actual receipt, as the case may be. 17. Audit and Examination of Records. The City may examine and audit at no additional cost to the City all books, estimates, records, contracts, documents, bid documents, bid cost data, subcontract job cost reports and other Project related data of the Contractor, subcontractors engaged in performance of the Work, and suppliers providing supplies, equipment and other materials required for the Work, including computations and projections related to bidding, negotiating, pricing or performing the Work or Contract modifications and other materials concerning the Work, including, but not limited to, Contractor daily logs, in order to evaluate the accuracy, completeness, and currency of cost, pricing, scheduling and any other project related data. The Contractor will make available all such Project related data at all reasonable times for examination, audit, or reproduction at the Contractor’s business office at or near the work site, and at any other location where such Project related data may be kept until three years after final payment under the Contract. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds to be expended is in excess of $10,000, this Contract will be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the request of the City, or as EXHIBIT A - 66 - part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the Contract. 18. Project Schedule. Within ten (10) working days after the Notice of Award, the Contractor must deliver to the Engineer a bar chart and critical path method (CPM) schedule detailing the Contractor’s intended schedule of work for the entire Project. The schedules must be detailed to clearly show the relative sequence of the items of work, their inter-relationships, start and completion dates, float, the critical path, and any other item deemed necessary by the Engineer. The schedule must allow for the completion of the entire Work within the time for completion and also conform to the City’s milestone deadlines. a. City Review of Schedule. The City may review the Contractor’s submitted schedule and may note any exceptions. The Contractor must correct any exceptions noted by the City within five (5) working days of being notified of the exceptions. b. Update of Schedule. After submission of a schedule to which the City has taken no exceptions, the Contractor must submit an updated schedule on a monthly basis or as otherwise specified by the City until completion of the Work. The updated schedule must show the progress of work as of the date specified in the updated schedule and its relation to milestone dates. c. Float. The schedule must show early and late completion dates for each task. The number of days between these dates will be designated as “Float”. The Float will be designated to the Project and will be available to both the City and the Contractor as needed to complete the Work in accordance with the Contract. d. Failure to Submit Schedule. If the Contractor fails to submit schedules within the time periods specified in this section, or submits a schedule to which the City has taken uncorrected exceptions, the City may withhold payments to the Contractor until such schedules are submitted and/or corrected in accordance with the Contract Documents. e. Responsibility for Schedule. The Contractor will be solely and exclusively responsible for creating the schedule and properly updating it. The City may note exceptions to any schedule submitted by the Contractor. However, the Contractor will be solely responsible for determining the proper method for addressing such exceptions and the City’s review of the schedule will not create scheduling obligations of the City. EXHIBIT A - 67 - SECTION IX MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT 1. Measurement of Quantities. All work to be paid for at a contract price per unit of measurement will be measured by the Engineer in accordance with Section 9- 1.01, “Measurement of Quantities” of the Standard Specifications. When required by the Engineer, the operator of each vehicle weighed shall obtain a weight or load slip from the weigher and deliver said slip to the Engineer at the point of delivery of the material. All loads in vehicles hauled over streets and highways shall be legal loads and no payment will be made for the loads in excess of the legal load limits. Quantities of material wasted or disposed of in a manner not called for under the contract, or rejected loads of material, including material rejected after it has been placed by reason of the failure of the Contractor to conform to the provisions of the contract, or material not unloaded from the transporting vehicle, or material placed outside of the lines indicated on the plans or established by the Engineer, or material remaining on hand after completion of the work; will not be paid for and such quantities will be deducted from the final total quantities. No compensation will be allowed for hauling and disposing of rejected material. 2. Progress Payments. The City once in each month shall cause an estimate in writing to be made by the Engineer of the total amount of work done and the acceptable materials furnished and delivered by the Contractor on the ground and not used, to the time of such estimate, and the value thereof. The City shall retain five percent (5%) of such estimated value of the work done and fifty percent (50%) of the value of the materials so estimated to have been furnished and delivered and unused as aforesaid as part security for the fulfillment of the contract by the Contractor and shall pay monthly to the Contractor, while carrying on the Work, the balance not retained, as aforesaid, after deducting therefrom all previous payments and all sums to be kept or retained under the provisions of the contract. No such estimate or payment shall be required to be made when, in the judgment of the Engineer, the work is not processing in accordance with the provisions of the contract, or when in the Engineer’s judgment the total value of the work done since the last estimate amounts to less than three hundred dollars ($300). No such estimate or payment shall be construed to be an acceptance of any defective work or improper materials. For any monies earned by the Contractor and withheld by the City to ensure the performance of the contract, the Contractor may, at Contractor’s request and expense, substitute securities equivalent to the amount withheld in the form and manner and subject to the conditions provided in Chapter 13 (commencing with Section 4590), Division 5, Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California. 3. Scope of Payment. The Contractor shall accept the compensation, as herein provided, in full payment for furnishing all materials, labor, tools, and equipment necessary for the completion of the contract; also for loss or damage arising from the nature of the Work, or from the action of the elements, except as hereinbefore provided, or from any unforeseen difficulties which may be encountered during the prosecution of EXHIBIT A - 68 - the Work until the final acceptance by the City and for all risks of every description connected with the prosecution of the Work, also for all expenses incurred in the consequence of the suspension or discontinuance of the Work as herein specified; and for completing the work according to the plans and specifications. Neither the payment of any estimate nor of any retained percentage shall relieve the Contractor of any obligation to make good any defective work or material. 4. Stop Notice Retention. The City may at its option and at any time retain out of any amounts due the Contractor, sums sufficient to cover claims filed pursuant to Section 3179 et seq. of the Civil Code. 5. Progress Payment Deductions. The Contractor hereby agrees and acknowledges that progress payments are subject to deduction for failure to comply with certain Contract requirements which include but are not limited to traffic control, cleanliness/daily clean-up, “buttoning-up,” open trenches, environmental compliance, maintaining services, etc. In the event such non-compliance occurs, the City may cure these deficiencies with its own crews or with other contractors/vendors. The full cost the City incurs to cure these deficiencies will be deducted from the next progress payment. “Full costs” include all labor, materials, and equipment plus applicable “mark-ups,” including overhead, should the City perform the work with its own forces. Should the City elect to have the work performed by a contractor/vendor, the “full cost” will include the invoiced amount plus a 20 % mark-up to cover handling expenses for the City. 6. Acceptance of the Work. When the final inspection is completed and it has been determined that the Work is done in accordance with the plans and specifications, the Engineer will accept the Work and 95% of the payment based on the final quantities will be paid to the contractor, the balance will be paid 30 days after the Notice of Completion has been filed with the County and upon furnishing of the specified guaranty bond to the City. 7. Final Payment. Within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Work and its acceptance by the City, the Engineer will make a proposed final estimate in writing of the quantities of work done under the contract and the value of such work and will submit such estimate to the Contractor. Within thirty (30) days thereafter the Contractor shall submit to the Engineer the Contractor’s written approval of said proposed final quantities or a written statement of all claims, which he has for additional compensation claimed to be due under the contract. On the Contractor's approval or if he files no claims within said period of thirty (30) days, the Engineer will issue a final written estimate as submitted to the Contractor and the City shall pay the entire sum so found to be due after deducting therefrom all previous payments and all amounts to be kept and all amounts to be due after deducting therefrom all previous payments and all amounts to be kept and all amounts to be retained under the provisions of the contract. If the Contractor within said period of thirty (30) days files claims, the Engineer will issue as a semi-final estimate the proposed estimate submitted to the Contractor and the City will within thirty (30) days pay the sum found due thereon after deducting all prior payments and all amounts to be kept and retained under the provisions of the contract. EXHIBIT A - 69 - The Engineer shall then consider and investigate the Contractor’s claims and shall make such revision in the said estimate as he may find to be due, and shall then make and issue the Engineer’s final written estimate. The City will pay the amount so found due, after deducting all previous payments and amounts to be retained under the contract. All prior partial estimate and payments shall be subject to correction in the final estimate and payment. The final estimate shall be conclusive and binding against both parties to the contract on all questions relating to the performance of the contract and the amount of work done thereunder and compensation therefore, except in the case of gross error. Payment on the semi-final estimate will be due within thirty (30) days from the date the same is issued by the Engineer. Payment on the final estimate is due within thirty (30) days from the date the same is issued. 8. Travel and Subsistence Payment. Travel and subsistence payments shall be made to each worker needed to execute the Work, as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Section 1773.8. 9. Notice of Potential Claim. The Contractor shall not be entitled to the payment of any additional compensation for any act, or failure to act, by the Engineer, including failure or refusal to issue a change order, or for the happening of any event, thing, occurrence, or other cause, unless the Contractor shall have given the Engineer due written notice of potential claim as hereinafter specified. The written notice of potential claim shall set forth the reasons for which the Contractor believes additional compensation will or may be due, the nature of the costs involved, and, insofar as possible, the amount of the potential claim. The notice as above required must have been given to the Engineer prior to the time that the Contractor shall have performed the Work giving rise to the potential claim for additional compensation, if based on an act or failure to act by the Engineer, or in all other cases within 15 days after the happening of the event, thing, occurrence, or other cause, giving rise to the potential claim. City may request additional information from Contractor regarding the Contractor's claim, which shall be provided, to City within 10 days of the request. It is the intention of this section that differences between the parties arising under and by virtue of the contract are brought to the attention of the Engineer at the earliest possible time in order that such matters may be settled, if possible, or other appropriate action promptly taken. The Contractor hereby agrees that they shall have no right to additional compensation for any claim that may be based on any such act, failure to act, event, thing or occurrence for which no written notice of potential claim as herein required was filed. 10. Claims. a. General. A “Claim” means a written demand or written assertion by Contractor to adjust, alter, modify, or otherwise change the Contract price or the Contract time, or both. EXHIBIT A - 70 - All claims filed hereunder shall strictly comply with all requirements of the Contract Documents. In order to qualify as a Claim, the written demand must state that it is a claim submitted according to the terms of the Contract Documents. A letter, voucher, invoice, payment application, or other routine or authorized form of request for payment is not a Claim under the Contract Documents. If such a request is disputed as to liability or amount, then the disputed portion of the submission may be converted to a Claim under the Contract Documents by submitting a separate claim in compliance with claim submission requirements. A Claim must be stated with specificity, including identification of the event or occurrence giving rise to the Claim, the date of the event, and the asserted affect on the Contract price and the Contract time, if any. The Claim shall include adequate supporting data. Adequate supporting data for a Claim for an adjustment of the Contract time shall include scheduling data demonstrating the impact of the event on the controlling operation and completion of the Project. Adequate supporting data for a Claim for an adjustment in the Contract price shall include a detailed cost breakdown of items included within the Claim and documentation supporting each item of cost. Notwithstanding and pending the resolution of any Claim, the Contractor shall diligently prosecute the disputed work to final completion of the Work. Contractor shall impose the Claim notice and documentation requirements in this Contract on Contractor’s subcontractors of all tiers, and require them to submit to the Contractor all Claims against Contractor and/or the City within the times and containing the documentation required by these provisions. The Claim notice and documentation procedures described in these provisions applies to all claims and disputes arising under the Contract Documents, whether or not specifically referred to in any specific portion of the Contract. If additional information or details are required by the Engineer to determine the basis and amount of any Claims, the Contractor shall furnish additional information or details so that the additional information or details are received by the Engineer no later than the fifteenth calendar day after receipt of the written request form the Engineer. If the fifteenth day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, then receipt of the information or details by the Engineer shall not be later than close of business of the next business day. Contractor understands and agrees that failure to submit the information and details to the Engineer within the time specified shall result in Contractor waiving that Claim. The Contractor and all subcontractors shall keep full and complete records of the costs and additional time incurred for any work for which a Claim for additional compensation is made. The Engineer or any designated claim investigator or auditor shall have access to those records and any other records as may be required b the Engineer or designated claim investigator to determine the facts or contentions involved in the claim(s). Contractor agrees that failure to permit access to those records waives Contractor’s Claims. EXHIBIT A - 71 - The City of South San Francisco, or its authorized representatives, shall have access, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours, to Contractor’s and subcontractors’ books, documents and accounting records, including, but not limited to, bid worksheets, bids, subcontractor bids and proposals, estimates, cost accounting data, accounting records, payroll records, time sheets, canceled checks, profit and loss statements, balance sheets, project correspondence including but not limited to all correspondence between Contractor and its sureties and subcontractors/vendors, project files, scheduling information, and other records of the Contractor and all subcontractors directly or indirectly pertinent to the work, original as well as change and claimed extra work, to verify and evaluate the accuracy of cost and pricing data submitted with any change order, prospective or completed, or any claim for which additional compensation has been requested or claim has been tendered. Such access shall include the right to examine and audit such records, and make excerpts, transcriptions and photocopies of the City’s cost. The parties agree that in the event Contractor or any subcontractor fails to comply with this section, it would be difficult for the City to determine its actual damages; therefore, Contractor agrees to pay the City, as liquidated damages, the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1000.00), which Contractor agrees is reasonable under the circumstances, for each and every working day which Contractor or subcontractor fails or refuses to provide the City access to the materials specified in this section. b. Disputes. (1) Contract Interpretation Disputes. Should it appear to the Contractor that the work to be performed or any of the matters relative to the Contract Documents are not satisfactorily detailed or explained therein, or should any questions arise as to the meaning or intent of the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall give written notice to the City. The Contractor shall bear all costs incurred in giving such notice. All issues regarding the interpretation of the plans or specifications shall be referred to the City for interpretation. The City shall have the right but not the obligation to affirm or disaffirm any interpretation of the plans or specifications, which affirmance or disaffirmance shall be final. If the Contractor should disagree with the City’s decision, the Contractor’s sole and exclusive remedy is to file a Claim in accordance with these provisions. (2) Work Disputes. Should any disputes arise under the Contract Documents respecting the true value of any work performed, the implementation of the Work required by the Contract Documents, any Work omitted, any extra work which the Contractor may be required to perform or time extensions, respecting the size of any payment to the Contractor during the performance of the Contract Documents, or of compliance with Contract Document procedures, the dispute shall be decided by the City and its decisions shall be final and conclusive. If the Contractor disagrees with the City’s decision, the Contractor’s sole and exclusive remedy is to file a claim in accordance with these provisions. EXHIBIT A - 72 - (3) Delays. As used herein, the following terms shall have the following meanings: “Excusable Delay” means any delay of the completion of the Project beyond the expiration of the Contract time caused by conditions beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Contractor such as strikes, embargoes, fire, unavoidable casualties, unusual delays in transportation, national emergency, and stormy and inclement weather conditions in which the Work cannot continue. The financial inability of the Contractor or any subcontractor and default of any subcontractor, without limitation, shall not be deemed conditions beyond the Contractor’s control. An Excusable Delay may entitle the Contractor to an adjustment in the Contract time. “Compensable Delay” means any delay of the completion of the Work beyond the expiration date of the Contract time caused by the gross negligence or willful acts of the City, and which delay is unreasonable under the circumstances involved, and not within the contemplation of the parties. A Compensable Delay may entitle the Contractor to an extension of the Contract time and/or Contract price. Except as provided herein, the Contractor shall have no claim for damage or compensation for any delay, interruption, hindrance, or disruption. “Unexcusable Delay” means any delay of the completion of the Project beyond the expiration of the Contract time resulting from causes other than those listed above. An Unexcusable Delay shall not entitle the Contractor to an extension of the Contract time or an adjustment of the Contract price. The Contractor may make a claim for an extension of the Contract time, for an Excusable Delay or a Compensable Delay, subject to the following: (i) If an Excusable Delay and a Compensable Delay occur concurrently, the maximum extension of the Contract time shall be the number of days from the commencement of the first delay to the cessation of the delay which ends last. (ii) If an Unexcusable Delay occurs concurrently with either an Excusable Delay or a Compensable Delay, the maximum extension of the Contract time shall be the number of days, if any, by which the Excusable Delay or the C0ompensable Delay exceeds the Unexcusable Delay. (iii) If an Unexcusable Delay occurs concurrently with both an Excusable Delay and a Compensable Delay, the maximum extension in the Contract time shall be the number of days, if any, by which the number of days determined pursuant to Subparagraph (ii) exceeds the number of days of the Unexcusable delay. (iv) For a Compensable Delay, the Contractor shall only be entitled to an adjustment in the Contract price in an amount equal to the actual additional labor costs, material costs, and unavoidable equipment costs incurred by the Contractor as a result of the Compensable Delay, plus the actual additional wages or salaries and fringe benefits and payroll taxes of supervisory and administrative EXHIBIT A - 73 - personnel necessary and directly employed at the Project site for the supervision of the Work during the period of Compensable Delay. Except as provided herein, the Contractor shall have no claim for damage or compensation for any delay, interruption, hindrance, or disruption. There shall be no Compensable Delay unless the event or occurrence giving rise to the Compensable Delay extends the actual completion of the Project past the Contract time. The parties agree that the City’s exercise of its right to order changes in the Work, regardless of the extent and number of changes, or to suspend the work, is within the contemplation of the parties and shall not be the basis for any Claim or Compensable Delay. c. Claim Procedures. Should any clarification, determination, action or inaction by the City, or any event, in the opinion of the Contractor, exceed the requirements of or not comply with the Contract Documents, or otherwise result in the Contractor seeking additional compensation in time or money for any reason, (collectively “Disputed Work”), then the Contractor and the City shall make good faith attempts to resolve informally any and all such issues and/or disputes. The Contractor must file a written Notice of Potential Claim with the City before commencing the Disputed Work, or within seven (7) calendar days after Contractor’s first knowledge of the Disputed Work, whichever is earlier, stating clearly and in detail its objection and reasons for contending the Work or interpretation is outside the requirements of the Contract Documents. If a written Notice of Potential Claim is not filed within this period, or if the Contractor proceeds with the Disputed Work without first having filed the notice required by these provisions, the Contractor shall waive any rights to further claim on the specific issue. The City will review the Contractor’s timely notice of potential claim and provide a decision. The City may require supplemental information from the Contractor to clarify that contained in the Notice of Potential Claim. If, after receiving the City’s decision, the Contractor disagrees with the decision, the Contractor shall so notify the City, in writing, within seven (7) calendar days after receiving the decision, that a formal Claim will be filed. The Contractor shall submit the Claim in the form specified herein and all arguments, justification, costs or estimates, schedule analyses, and detailed documentation supporting the Contractor’s position within thirty (30) calendar days after receiving the City’s decision on the notice of potential claim. The Contractor’s failure to furnish notification within seven (7) calendar days and all justifying documentation within thirty (30) calendar days will result in the Contractor waiving all rights to the subject Claim. If Disputed Work persists longer than thirty (30) calendar days after receiving the City’s decision on the Notice of Potential Claim, then the Contractor shall, every thirty (30) calendar days until the Disputed Work ceases, submit to the City a document titled “Claim Update” which shall update and quantify all elements of the Claim as completely as possible. The Contractor’s failure to submit a Claim Update or to quantify all costs and impacts every thirty (30) days shall result in a waiver of that portion of the Claim for that thirty (30) calendar day period. Claims or Claim Updates stating that damages will be determined at a later date shall not comply with the requirements of these provisions and shall result in the Contractor waiving such Claim(s) and/or Claim Updates. EXHIBIT A - 74 - All claims must be submitted to Engineer before the issuance of the final estimate. Contractor hereby expressly waives all Claims not submitted, in complete and proper form, on or before the date of issuance of the final estimate. Upon receipt of the Contractor’s formal Claim including all arguments, justification, costs or estimates, schedule analyses, and documentation supporting the Contractor’s position as previously stipulated, the City or its designate will review the Claim and render a final determination according to the processing and review procedures listed in Section IX-12, “Claims Processing and Review” of these General Provisions. No costs arising out of or in connection with the performance of Claims of any nature, other than those specifically listed herein may be recovered by the Contractor. Except where provided by law, or elsewhere in these Contract Documents (if applicable), the City shall not be liable for special or consequential damages, and Claims shall not include special or consequential damages. d. Claim Format. The Contractor shall submit the Claim justification in the following format: (1) Cover letter and certification of the accuracy of the contents of the Claim; (2) Summary of Claim including underlying facts, entitlement, quantum calculations, and Contract Document provision supporting relief; (3) List of documents relating to the Claim, including plans, specifications, clarifications/requests for information, schedules and others; (4) Chronology of events and correspondence; (5) Analysis of Claim merit; (6) Analysis of Claim costs; (7) Attached supporting documents referenced in item (3) above. e. Exclusive Remedy. The Contractor’s performance of its duties and obligations specified in these provisions and submission of a Claim as provided in these provisions is the Contractor’s sole and exclusive remedy for the payment of money, extension of time, adjustment or interpretation of Contract Documents’ terms, or other contractual or tort relief arising from the Contract Documents. This exclusive remedy and the limitation of liability (expressed herein and elsewhere throughout the Contract Documents) apply notwithstanding the completion, termination, suspension, cancellation, breach or rescission of the Work or the Contract Documents, negligence or strict liability by the City, its representatives, consultants or agents, or the transfer of the Work or the Project to the City for any reason whatsoever. The Contractor waives all claims of waiver, estoppel, release, bar, or any other type of excuse for non-compliance with the Claim submission requirements. Compliance with the notice and Claim submission EXHIBIT A - 75 - procedures described in these provisions is a condition precedent to the right to commence litigation, file a Government Code Claim, or commence any other legal action. No Claim or issues not raised in a timely protest and timely Claim submitted under these provisions may be asserted in any Government Code Claim, subsequent litigation, or legal action. The City shall not have deemed to waive any provision under this section, if at the City’s sole discretion, a Claim is accepted in a manner not in accord with this section. f. Mediation. All Claims not subject to the Claim resolution procedures set forth in these provisions shall, as a condition precedent to litigation thereon, first be mediated. Mediation shall be non-binding and utilize the services of a mediator mutually acceptable to the parties, and, if the parties cannot agree, a mediator selected by the American Arbitrator Association from its panel of approved mediators trained in construction industry mediation. All statutes of limitation shall be tolled from the date of the demand for mediation until a date two weeks following the mediation’s conclusion. All unresolved claims shall be submitted to the same mediator. The cost of mediation shall be equally shared. 11. False Claims Affidavit. California Penal Code Section 72 provides that any person, who presents for payment with intent to defraud any City, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account, voucher, or writing, is punishable by fines not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) and/or imprisonment in the state prison. Government Code Sections 12650 et seq. (California False Claims Act), pertains to civil penalties that may be recovered from persons (including corporations, etc.) for presenting a false claim for payment or approval, presents a false record or statement to get a false claim paid or approved, or other acts, to any official or employee of any political subdivision of the State of California. Any person or corporation violating the provisions of Government Code Section 12650 et seq., shall be liable for three times the amount of the damages of the political subdivision, plus a civil penalty, plus costs. Contractor agrees that any costs or expenses incurred by the City in reviewing or auditing any claims that are not supported by the Contractor’s cost accounting or other records, or the Contract, shall be deemed to be damages incurred by the City within the meaning of the California False Claims Act. All Claims by Contractor shall include the following certification, properly completed and executed by Contractor or an officer of Contractor: I, __________________, BEING THE _________________(MUST BE AN OFFICER) OF _______________________(CONTRACTOR), DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND DO PERSONALLY CERTIFY AND ATTEST THAT I HAVE THOROUGHLY REVIEWED THE ATTACHED CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AND/OR EXTENSION OF TIME, AND KNOW ITS CONTENTS, AND SAID CLAIM IS TRUTHFUL AND ACCURATE; THAT THE AMOUNT REQUESTED ACCURATELY REFLECTS THE CONTRACT ADJUSTMENT FOR WHICH THE OWNER IS LIABLE; AND, FURTHER, THAT I AM FAMILIAR WITH CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE SECTION 72 AND CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 12650, ET SEQ., PERTAINING TO FALSE CLAIMS, AND FURTHER KNOW AND EXHIBIT A - 76 - UNDERSTAND THAT SUBMISSION OR CERTIFICATION OF A FALSE CLAIM MAY LEAD TO FINES, IMPRISONMENT AND/OR OTHER SEVERE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES. SIGNATURE LINES WILL BE ADDED HERE 12. Claims Processing and Review. The review and treatment of Contractor Claims up to three hundred seventy-five thousand dollars ($375,000) are governed by California Public Contract Code Sections 20104 et seq., the relevant positions of which are summarized below. In addition to these statutory provisions, the City and Contractor hereby agree by contract to a procedure for the review of claims over three hundred seventy-five thousand dollars ($375,000). Claims, then, shall be processed and reviewed as follows: a. For claims of less than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), the City will respond in writing within forty-five (45) days of its receipt of the claim, or may request, in writing, within thirty (30) days of its receipt of the claim, submission of additional documentation supporting the claim or relating to defenses or claims the City may have against the Contractor. (1) If such additional documentation is requested by the City, it shall be provided by the Contractor within twenty (20) days of its receipt of the request from the City or as otherwise mutually agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. (2) Following the Contractor’s submission of all requested additional documentation, the City will respond to the claim within fifteen (15) days or within the period of time taken by the Contractor in producing the additional documents, whichever is longer. b. For claims of over fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) and less than or equal to three hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars ($375,000), the City will respond in writing within sixty (60) days of its receipt of the claim, or may request, in writing, within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Claim, submission of additional documentation supporting the Claim or relating to defenses or Claims the City may have against the Contractor. (1) If such additional documentation is requested by the City, it shall be provided by the Contractor within thirty (30) days of its receipt of its receipt of the request or as otherwise mutually agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. (2) Following the Contractor’s submission of all requested additional documentation, the City will respond to the claim within thirty (30) days, or within the period of time taken by the Contractor in producing the additional documentation, whichever is longer. c. For claims over three hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars ($375,000), the City will respond in writing within one hundred and twenty (120) days of its receipt of the claim, or may request in writing, within forty-five (45) days of receipt of EXHIBIT A - 77 - the Claim, submission of additional documentation supporting the claim or relating to defenses or claims the City may have against the Contractor. (1) If such additional documentation is requested by the City, it shall be provided by the Contractor within thirty (30) days of its receipt of the request or as otherwise mutually agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. (2) Following the Contractor’s submission of all requested additional documentation, the City will respond to the Claim within thirty (30) days, or within the period of time taken by the Contractor in producing the additional documentation, whichever is longer. 13. Extra Work. New and unforeseen items of work will be classed as extra work when they cannot be covered by any of the various items for which there is a bid price or by combinations of such items. The Contractor shall do such extra work and furnish such materials and equipment therefore, as may be required in writing by the Engineer, but he shall not do extra work except upon written order from the Engineer, and in the absence of such written order he shall not be entitled to payment for such extra work. All bills for extra work done shall be filed in writing with the Engineer. For such extra work the Contractor shall receive compensation at the prices previously agreed upon in writing, or upon a failure to agree upon prices, he shall be paid on force account, as provided in Section IX- 14, “Force Account Work” of these General Provisions. All extra work shall be adjusted daily upon report sheets furnished to the Engineer by the Contractor and signed by both parties which daily reports shall thereafter be considered the true record of extra work done. 14. Force Account Work. Where payment is to be made on a force account basis, the Contractor shall receive the actual cost of all material, labor and rented equipment furnished by the Contractor as shown by paid vouchers, plus fifteen percent (15%); provided, however, that the City reserves the right to furnish such materials required as it seems expedient, and the Contractor shall have no claim for profit on the cost of such materials. For use of equipment owned by the Contractor he shall be paid the current prices prevailing in the locality, which shall have been previously determined and agreed upon in writing by the Contractor, plus fifteen percent (15%). When work is performed by force account, in addition to the actual cost of labor, the City will reimburse the Contractor for compensation insurance payments; contributions made to the State as required by the provisions of the Unemployment Reserve Act, Chapter 352, Statutes of 1935, as amended; and for taxes paid to the Federal Government as required by the Social Securities Act approved August 14, 1935, as amended. The payment of fifteen percent (15%) in addition to the actual cost of all material, labor, and rented equipment, as herein provided, shall include full allowance to the Contractor for overhead and profit on the force account work and full compensation to the Contractor for premiums paid on any other insurance of any nature which the EXHIBIT A - 78 - Contractor may be required to carry or which he may elect to carry; and for additional premiums paid on faithful performance and payment bonds required by reason of the increases in the amount of work to be performed over and above that called for in the original contract. All force account work shall be adjusted daily upon report sheets, furnished to the Engineer by the Contractor and signed by both parties, which daily reports shall thereafter be considered the true record of force account work done. If force account work is done on the contract the Contractor shall furnish to the Engineer three (3) copies of a certificate from the insurance company showing the compensation insurance rates to be charged on the various classes of work to assist in verification of the Contractor’s charges for extra work and force account. [END OF GENERAL PROVISIONS] 1774523.3 EXHIBIT A City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-655 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:6. Report regarding a resolution approving participation by the City of South San Francisco in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative.(Eliza Manchester, Management Analyst) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution approving participation by the City of South San Francisco in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative,a three-year,multi-city,public-private partnership designed to grow manufacturing jobs and pathways to economic inclusion through a regional manufacturing ecosystem. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Consistent with its history as the Industrial City,South San Francisco remains a major center for manufacturing.According to U.S.Census data,South San Francisco has about 9,875 jobs in the manufacturing sector,which represents 21 percent of all jobs within the City of South San Francisco (City).Between 2002 and 2017,South San Francisco actually increased the number of manufacturing jobs from 7,726 to the current 9,875 jobs -an astounding accomplishment during a time when the U.S.lost 41 percent of its manufacturing jobs.In general,the City’s manufacturing base is dominated by food processing,biotechnology,and specialty manufacturing,with a total of 106 manufacturing firms located in the City.Currently,South San Francisco maintains over 50 percent of the industrially zoned land in all of San Mateo County,making it one of the largest manufacturing hubs in the Bay Area. The Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative As part of the City’s ongoing efforts to retain and expand its local manufacturing base,City staff recently reached out to SFMade,which is a San Francisco-based nonprofit focused on developing the local manufacturing sector.The SFMade Project was launched in February 2010 as an effort to create solutions and provide resources which sustain and grow companies that make products locally,hire local people,and contribute to the diversity of the Bay Area community. As a result of these informal discussions with SFMade,the City has been invited to participate in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing (BAUM)Initiative.BAUM is a three-year,multi-city public-private partnership to catalyze a powerful and interconnected regional manufacturing ecosystem.SFMade initially launched BAUM in May 2016 with four cities -San Jose,San Francisco,Oakland,and Fremont -but now plans to expand the partnership to other cities across the Bay Area. The BAUM initiative would allow South San Francisco to participate in a regional collaboration to promote the Bay Area manufacturing sector. Specifically, the City’s participation would involve the following activities: City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-655 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:6. 1.Publicly endorsing the BAUM Initiative at the mayoral and/or city council levels; 2.Participating in BAUM events such as the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit with a mayoral commitment to appear, the manufacturing policy huddle, and the partner reception; 3.Completing the intake form and self-assessment and prepare secondary data as needed; and 4.Committing staff resources,or will task an intermediary,to facilitate self-assessment,participate in events, meet with manufacturers as needed, and elevate manufacturing promotion in their cities; and 5.Participating in the Initiative to the fullest extent possible. By participating in the BAUM Initiative, the City will: ·Receive two invitations to the annual partner city reception to meet regional peers; ·Be recognized as a partner at the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit, in the Bay Area State of Urban Manufacturing report, and at www.bayareamfg.org; ·Receive two invitations to the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit (November 2017); ·Gain access to the manufacturing resources self-assessment, urban manufacturing support toolkits, and annual report in addition to other resources and regional data; and ·Promote South San Francisco manufacturing sector throughout the Bay Area and the nation. See Attachment 1 for a detailed summary of the SF Made Project.See Attachment 2 for a detailed description of the BAUM Initiative. See Attachment 3 for the 2017 Partner Cities Agreement. FUNDING City staff time will be needed but there is no impact to the City budget. CONCLUSION The City has been invited to participate in the second year of the BAUM Initiative through SFMade.Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution approving the City of South San Francisco to participate in the Initiative,a three-year,multicity,public-private partnership to grow manufacturing jobs and pathways to economic inclusion through a regional manufacturing ecosystem. Attachments: 1.SF Made Summary 2.BAUM Initiative (Detailed Document) 3.BAUM 2017 Partner Cities Agreement City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Empowering manufacturers. Creating jobs. Transforming our city. SFMade is a California 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation, established in 2010 and headquartered in San Francisco. It is the only organization of its kind focused on building San Francisco’s economic base by developing the local manufacturing sector. SFMade’s mission is to build and support a vibrant manufacturing sector in San Francisco that sustains companies producing locally-made products, encourages entrepreneurship and innovation, and creates employment opportunities for a diverse local workforce. Our vision is a more diverse and sustainable local economy, where companies who design and manufacture products locally thrive, in turn, creating quality jobs for people from all walks of life and contributing to the overall economic and social vibrancy of our City. SFMade engages directly with entrepreneurs and growing small companies, all of whom are headquartered in and manufacture within San Francisco, offering industry-specific education, networking opportunities, and connecting these companies to powerful local resources. By building strong companies, SFMade helps sustain and create job opportunities for the City’s low-income communities and individuals with less typical education, experience, or skills. We also work with manufacturers directly on workforce issues, including connecting companies to local hiring resources and job training programs and connecting their workers to relevant local resources and assistance. In addition to working with manufacturers and their employees, SFMade engages with the larger San Francisco community, offering educational workshops, factory tours, and other programs designed to heighten the public awareness of manufacturing, the craftspeople they employ, and their collective role in the local economy. SFMade also collaborates with both the public and private sectors to define and enhance the local infrastructure – from access to capital to industrial land use policy – required to support a vibrant manufacturing sector. In our work, SFMade seeks to develop and share a model for manufacturing incubation that other major US cities can use to catalyze their own local manufacturing sectors. ©2017 SFMade. All Rights Reserved. Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative Ÿ A Project of SFMade 926 Howard Street, San Francisco CA 94103 Ÿ 415.408.5605 Ÿ www.bayareamfg.org Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative: Nourishing the Bay Area’s Manufacturing Ecosystem May 2016 – May 2019 Year 2 Launched in May of 2016, the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative is a three-year, multicity public-private partnership to catalyze a powerful and interconnected regional manufacturing ecosystem. In 2017, the Initiative will expand across the region from its four inaugural cities (San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, and Fremont) to include more city partners, leveraging the Bay Area’s interwoven economies and communities to grow manufacturing jobs and pathways to economic inclusion. THE REGIONAL CALL TO ACTION Manufacturing is flourishing nationally. Over the past five years the sector has steadily added jobs and new companies, and production has re-shored as domestic manufacturers begin to out- compete their counterparts on flexibility, quality, and even cost. The San Francisco Bay Area is at the heart of this revival: manufacturing growth across our region is now outpacing both the nation and California as a whole. The region is rich in industrial commons and with its position at the epicenter of technology, design, and innovation, the Bay Area has the potential to shape the future of American manufacturing. The Bay Area has: • Access to customers and readymade markets to test and scale new product offerings, • An abundance of resources including capital, suppliers, and skilled talent, and • Cross-sector collaborations that facilitate the transformation of technologies into products. Manufacturing offers the potential for diverse residents to build livelihoods through employment and entrepreneurship and conversely, for designers and manufacturers to benefit from the skills, perspectives, and innovative thinking born of that diversity. In the four largest Bay Area cities—San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, and Fremont—35-45% of all manufacturing positions are middle wage, compared with 27% of jobs across all sectors in the Bay Area. The sector not only directly contributes to the number of quality jobs in the Bay Area but also has the largest economic multiplier of any sector in the U.S. economy, supporting 2.5 jobs for every one in manufacturing. While the Bay Area currently accounts for a quarter of the manufacturing jobs in California, some 300,000 in total, these jobs are not guaranteed. We live in a time with low barriers to connectivity and cities outside of California frequently recruit our state’s businesses. Crucially, the federal manufacturing strategy, while much touted, is no longer clear. Our region must both take responsibility for our local manufacturing sector and assert ourselves as the manufacturing center we are. In order to attract and retain these businesses and their associated economic benefits, it is essential that our cities work together to meet their needs. We must seize this opportunity to retain and create middle-class jobs for a more equitable Bay Area. 2016 INITATIVE LAUNCH The Bay Area Urban Initiative began in 2016 under the leadership of Mayors Ed Lee of San Francisco, Sam Liccardo of San Jose, Libby Shaaf of Oakland, and Bill Harrison of Fremont with three primary goals: to collect direct data from manufacturers in the four largest cities in the Bay Area, to elevate regional manufacturing through the inaugural Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit, and to define key needs for the sector throughout the region. In 2016, the Initiative: Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative Ÿ A Project of SFMade 926 Howard Street, San Francisco CA 94103 Ÿ 415.408.5605 Ÿ www.bayareamfg.org 1. Completed the First Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Survey and Report In collaboration with partner cities, the Initiative developed the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing survey instrument and collected direct data from manufacturers throughout the region for the first time. The data was published in the first annual Bay Area State of Urban Manufacturing report, an analysis of manufacturing in the region. 2. Hosted the Inaugural Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit The Summit was a high-level convening where over 400 participants from cities, manufacturers, policy, and other strategic partners gathered to celebrate manufacturing. Speakers included the mayors or vice-mayors of all four cities and prominent manufacturers. 3. Collaborated on Goals with Partner Cities Using the data collected by the survey and the knowledge gathered through the collaborative development process, the partner cities advised the Initiative on potential goals for the Initiative and for the manufacturing ecosystem in general. GOING FORWARD: 2017 GOALS Based on the results from 2016, the Initiative along with its partner cities targeted work areas where there is a clear, identifiable, and measurable need; fewer existing resources; and an explicit reason for regional coordination. In 2017, the Initiative will: 1. Grow the Initiative and Engage More Cities Goal: Increase the number of cities involved to encourage city coordination By facilitating collaboration, the Initiative will help cities leverage their combined regulatory, zoning, and promotional power to increase the Bay Area’s attractiveness to manufacturers. The Initiative will gather thought leaders from Bay Area cities at select events in 2017 including the 2017 Partner Reception and the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Policy Huddle. 2. Develop and Implement Manufacturing Support Toolkits Goal: Improve local knowledge of mechanisms available to cities to support manufacturing by developing and disseminating toolkits and providing technical assistance to key cities The Initiative will develop and implement two toolkits designed to elevate best practices, to allow individual cities to assess the state of their own resources, and to assist these cities better externalize their existing manufacturing resources. The first will focus on urban manufacturing advancement and promotion and the second will specifically target industrial land use. The Initiative will provide direct technical assistance to cities to speed the implementation of selected strategies from the toolkits. 3. Promote Bay Area Manufacturing Ecosystem Goal: Promote the strength of the Bay Area’s manufacturing sector through reports and press The Initiative will promote Bay Area manufacturing through the Bay Area State of Urban Manufacturing report and Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit, which will reveal best practices from around the region. The Initiative will begin to position the Bay Area as the major manufacturing center it is by publishing a major editorial in the last quarter of 2017. 4. Plan 2018 Initiative Activities Goal: Identify shared actions that will help manufacturers across the region Potential areas of interest for Initiative next steps include: funding manufacturer modernization, formalizing a modern apprenticeship model, and increasing supply chain transparency. Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative Ÿ A Project of SFMade 926 Howard Street, San Francisco CA 94103 Ÿ 415.408.5605 Ÿ www.bayareamfg.org 2017 SCHEDULE Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 City Engagement Partner City Reception Regional Manufacturing Policy Huddle Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit Develop and Release Toolkits Provide Technical Assistance to Cities Bay Area State of Urban Manufacturing Bay Area Manufacturing Editorial CITY BENEFITS By participating in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative you will elevate the importance of local manufacturing and make a public commitment to your manufacturing community. The Initiative creates opportunities for your city to collaborate across the region on a sector specific strategy for equitable job sustainability and creation. You can also use the process as an internal platform to amplify the importance of manufacturing in your city and leverage the resources collected by the Initiative and other partners to advocate for manufacturing across the region. In addition, your city will: • Receive two invitations to the annual partner city reception to meet your regional peers • Be recognized as a partner at the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit, in the Bay Area State of Urban Manufacturing report, and at www.bayareamfg.org • Receive two invitations to the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit • Gain access to the manufacturing resources self-assessment, urban manufacturing support toolkits, and annual report in addition to other resources and regional data • Promote your manufacturing sector throughout the Bay Area and the nation ROLE OF CITIES Your city has an important role to play by promoting the Initiative and engaging with the manufacturers that reside in your city. City support is invaluable because the strength of the Initiative lies in its ability to coordinate actions across cities to support the sector as a whole. Role details: 1. Your city will publically endorse the Initiative alongside its peers 2. Your city will participate in Initiative events including the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit, the manufacturing policy huddle, and the partner reception 3. Your city will complete the intake form and self-assessment and prepare secondary data as needed 4. Your city will commit staff resources, or will task an intermediary, to facilitate self- assessment, participate in events, liaise with manufacturers as needed, and elevate manufacturing promotion in their cities If you are unable to support staff participation, we would appreciate alternative assistance to enable the Initiative to support data collection and related efforts in your city. Join us. Be part of the resurgent Bay Area manufacturing economy. For more information contact: Martine Neider // Program Manager, Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative 415-408-5605 x 6 // martine@sfmade.org Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative Ÿ A Project of SFMade 926 Howard Street, San Francisco CA 94103 Ÿ 415.408.5605 Ÿ www.bayareamfg.org Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative City Participation Agreement May 2016 – May 2019 Year 2 Launched in May of 2016, the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative is a three-year, multicity public-private partnership to catalyze a powerful and interconnected regional manufacturing ecosystem. By participating in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative you will elevate the importance of local manufacturing and make a public commitment to your manufacturing community. The Initiative creates opportunities for your city to collaborate across the region on a sector specific strategy for equitable job sustainability and creation. We must seize this opportunity to retain and create middle-class jobs for a more equitable Bay Area. Partner cities will receive: • Complimentary invitations (2) to the annual Initiative Partner Reception • Recognition as a partner at the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit, in the Bay Area State of Urban Manufacturing report, and at www.bayareamfg.org • Complimentary invitations (2) to the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit • Access to the manufacturing resources self-assessment, urban manufacturing support toolkits, and annual report, in addition to any promotional resources or data produced • Opportunities to promote your manufacturing sector throughout the Bay Area and the nation Partner cities will commit to: • Endorsing the Initiative publically at the mayoral and/or city council levels • Attending the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit with a mayoral commitment to appear • Attending the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Policy Huddle and Initiative Partner Reception • Completing the partner city intake form and the manufacturing resources self-assessment • Preparing secondary data as needed • Participating in related promotional activities as needed • Participating in the Initiative to the fullest extent possible Partner cities will amplify the Initiative by allocating staff time to the above tasks. If you are unable to support staff participation, we would appreciate alternative assistance to enable the Initiative to support data collection and related efforts in your city. Primary Initiative contact: ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Name Title ___________________________________ ___________________________________ E-mail Phone Number ___________________________________ ___________________________________ City Date City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-532 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:6a. Resolution approving the participation by the City of South San Francisco in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative. WHEREAS,the manufacturing sector is experiencing a dynamic period of innovation in America,in which domestic manufacturers are out-competing their counterparts in flexibility, quality and cost; and WHEREAS,the San Francisco Bay Area is at the heart of this manufacturing revival as growth across this region now outpaces both the nation and California as a whole; and WHEREAS,the City of South San Francisco contains over 50 percent of the industrially zoned space in San Mateo County and is home to over 200 manufacturing companies; and WHEREAS,the City of South San Francisco has a rich history of industrial manufacturing which continues to make a significant contribution to the economic prosperity of the City by employing many City residents and offering a diverse quality of products into domestic and international marketplaces; and WHEREAS,the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative is a three-year,multicity,public-private partnership to catalyze a powerful and interconnected regional manufacturing ecosystem; and WHEREAS,the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative started with three goals in 2016 to collect direct data from manufacturers in the four largest cities in the Bay Area,to elevate regional manufacturing through the inaugural Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit,and to define key needs for the sector throughout the region; and WHEREAS,in 2017,the initiative is expanding across the region from its for inaugural cities (San Francisco, Oakland,San Jose and Fremont)to include more city partners,leveraging the Bay Area’s interwoven economies and communities to grow manufacturing job and pathways to economic inclusion; and WHEREAS,the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative’s goal for 2018,is to identify shared actions that will help manufacturers located in South San Francisco and across the region; and WHEREAS,by participating in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative,the City of South San Francisco will elevate the importance of local manufacturing and make a public commitment to its manufacturing community; and WHEREAS,by participating in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative,the City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-532 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:6a. WHEREAS,by participating in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative,the City of South San Francisco will have the opportunity to promote the City’s manufacturing industry companies,attend events with regional city partners,be recognized as a partner at the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit to be held in November 2017,and gain access to resources such as the Manufacturing Support Toolkits and the annual report of all regional data. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby approves the City’s participation in the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative,including the following activities: 1.The City will publicly endorse the Initiative alongside its peers; 2.The City will participate in events such as the Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Summit,the manufacturing policy huddle, and the partner reception; 3.The City will complete the intake form and self-assessment and prepare secondary data as needed; and 4.The City will facilitate self-assessment,participate in events,meet with manufacturers as needed,and elevate manufacturing promotion in their cities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the City Manager,or his designee,is authorized to sign the 2017 Bay Area Urban Manufacturing Initiative Partner Cities Agreement,and to take any other actions as necessary to carry out the intent of this resolution. ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-701 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:7. Motion to approve the Minutes from the meeting of June 28, 2017. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-692 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:8. Motion confirming payment registers for July 12, 2017.(Richard Lee, Director of Finance) The payments shown in the attached payment register are accurate and sufficient funds were available for payment (payroll items excluded). Attachment: Payment Register City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-680 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:9. Report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $9,303 in donations to support the Library’s Summer Learning Challenge and the Community Learning Center,and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year 2017-18 Operating Budget. (Valerie Sommer, Library Director) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution accepting donations in the amount of $9,303 to support the Library’s Summer Learning Challenge and the Community Learning Center,and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 Operating Budget. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The Library has received $4,750 in donations from local businesses and community groups,listed below,to support the 2017 Summer Learning Challenge.This annual program helps prevent learning loss and encourages children and teens to read during the school break.This year’s theme is Reading by Design,encouraging creativity in participants.The Summer Learning Challenge also provides many S.T.E.A.M.(Science, Technology,Engineering,Art,and Math)learning opportunities including Science Club,Book Clubs, MakerSpace, craft programs and more. The specific donations received are as follows: ·First National Bank, $500 ·Lucky Chances, Inc., $500 ·See’s Candies, $500 ·South San Francisco Friends of the Library, $1,500 ·South San Francisco Host Lions Club, $50 ·South San Francisco Kiwanis, $500 ·South San Francisco Rotary Club, $700 ·South San Francisco Scavenger Company, $500 The Library has also received a donation from Malloy’s Tavern in the amount of $4,553 to support the Community Learning Center.Molloy’s held the 38th Annual Chili Cook-off fundraiser on June 4,2017 and donated the proceeds to the Library’s Community Learning Center to support local families in achieving their educational goals. FUNDING The Library Department’s current FY17-18 Operating Budget will be amended to reflect the donations totaling $9,303. Funds not expended in FY 2017-18 will be carried over into FY 2018-19. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-680 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:9. CONCLUSION Receipt of these funds will enable the Library to enhance summer programs for children as well as services at the Community Learning Center.It is recommended that the City Council accept $9,303 in donations to support the Library’s Summer Learning Challenge and the Community Learning Center and amend the Library Department’s FY 2017-18 Operating Budget. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-681 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:9a. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of $9,303 in donations to support the Library’s Summer Learning Challenge and the Community Learning Center,and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year 2017-18 Operating Budget. WHEREAS,the annual Summer Learning Challenge program was established to encourage children and teens to read during the school break; and WHEREAS,the First National Bank of Northern California made a donation to the City in the amount of $500 to support the Summer Learning Challenge; and WHEREAS,Lucky Chances,Inc.made a donation to the City in the amount of $500 to support the Summer Learning Challenge; and WHEREAS,See’s Candies made a donation to the City in the amount of $500 to support the Summer Learning Challenge; and WHEREAS,the South San Francisco Friends of the Library made a donation to the City in the amount of $1,500 to support the Summer Reading Challenge; and WHEREAS,South San Francisco Host Lions Club made a donation to the City in the amount of $50 to support the Summer Learning Challenge; and WHEREAS,the Kiwanis Club of South San Francisco made a donation to the City in the amount of $500 to support the Summer Learning Challenge; and WHEREAS,the South San Francisco Rotary Club made a donation to the City in the amount of $700 to support the Summer Learning Challenge; and WHEREAS,the South San Francisco Scavenger Company made a donation to the City in the amount of $500 to support the Summer Reading Challenge; and WHEREAS,the Community Learning Center was established to assist community members in meeting their educational goals; and City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-681 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:9a. WHEREAS,Molloy’s Tavern held a fundraiser benefiting the Community Learning Center which raised $4,553; and WHEREAS,staff recommends the acceptance of the donations in the amount of $9,303 to support the Summer Learning Challenge and the Community Learning Center; and WHEREAS,the foregoing donations funds will be used to amend Fiscal Year 2017-18 operating budget of the Library Department. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby accepts $500 from First National Bank of Northern California,$500 from Lucky Chance,Inc., $500 from See’s Candies,$1,500 from the South San Francisco Friends of the Library,$50 from South San Francisco Host Lions Club,$500 from the Kiwanis Club of South San Francisco,$700 from the South San Francisco Rotary Club,and $500 from the South San Francisco Scavenger Company to fund the Summer Learning Challenge and $4,553 from Molloy’s Tavern fundraiser to support the Community Learning Center and amends the Library Department’s 2017-2018 Operating Budget in order to reflect an increase of $9,303. ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-682 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:10. Report regarding a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $35,000 in grant funding from the Woodlawn Foundation to support Project Read’s Learning Wheels Family Literacy Program and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year 2017-18 Operating Budget. (Valerie Sommer, Library Director) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the acceptance of $35,000 in grant funding from the Woodlawn Foundation to support Project Read’s Family Literacy Program delivered by Learning Wheels and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year (FY)2017-18 Operating Budget. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Project Read has been awarded $35,000 in grant funding from The Woodlawn Foundation to support family literacy services offered through the Learning Wheels outreach van for low income,low literacy families in North San Mateo County.Learning Wheels,the Library’s mobile literacy program,brings story times,literacy activities,free books and family workshops to those areas with limited access to the Library.Each month, Learning Wheels visits over 400 families at preschools,transitional housing locations,social service agencies, health clinics,and participates in community events.In the past year,Learning Wheels Family Literacy program distributed over 7,000 books during more than 213 site visits throughout the community.In addition, Learning Wheels services provide information and brochures about safety net services available to underserved families.Funding from The Woodlawn Foundation allows Project Read’s Learning Wheels to continue providing vital services to residents of South San Francisco, Colma, Daly City and San Bruno. FUNDING Grant funds will be used to amend the Library Department’s current FY 2017-18 Operating Budget.Receipt of these funds does not commit the City to ongoing funding.Funds not expended in FY 2017-18 will be carried over into Fiscal Year 2018-19. CONCLUSION Receipt of these funds will support Project Read’s Learning Wheels Family Literacy Program for low income, low literacy families.It is recommended that the City Council accept $35,000 in grant funding and amend the Library Department’s FY 2017-18 Operating Budget. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-683 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:10a. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of $35,000 in grant funding from the Woodlawn Foundation to support Project Read’s Learning Wheels Family Literacy Program and amending the Library Department’s Fiscal Year 2017-18 Operating Budget. WHEREAS,the City of South San Francisco (“City”)Library Department established Project Read to assist adults and their families in reaching literacy goals; and WHEREAS,Learning Wheels,a program of Project Read,provides literary services to low-income,hard to reach families in South San Francisco and surrounding cities through site visits; and WHEREAS,the Woodlawn Foundation has awarded the City $35,000 in grant funding to support Learning Wheels; and WHEREAS,staff recommends the acceptance of the grant funding in the amount of $35,000 from the Woodlawn Foundation to support Learning Wheels, a program of Project Read; and WHEREAS,the grant funds will be used to amend Fiscal Year (FY)2017-18 Operating Budget of the Library Department. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby accepts $35,000 in grant funding from the Woodlawn Foundation and amends the Library Department’s FY 2017-18 Operating Budget in order to reflect an increase of $35,000. ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-551 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:11. Report regarding resolutions to pledge Sewer Service Charges to repayment of State Water Resources Control Board Loan financing and declaring the City Council’s intent to reimburse the Sewer Enterprise Fund from State Water Resources Control Board Loan proceeds for the Water Quality Control Plant Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project capital expenditures made in the Sewer Enterprise Fund prior to the receipt of those Loan proceeds.(Richard Lee, Director of Finance and Justin Lovell, Public Works Administrator) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council approve the associated resolutions to (1)pledge sewer service charges to repayment of State Water Control Board Loan for the Water Quality Control Plant Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project;and (2)declare the City Council’s intent to reimburse the Sewer Enterprise Fund from State Water Resources Control Board loan proceeds for sewer capital expenditures made prior to the receipt of those loan proceeds. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION At the June 28,2017 City Council meeting,City Council adopted the five-year sewer rate plan for Fiscal Years (FY)2017-18 through 2021-22.The sewer rate plan included $83 million of capital improvement projects over five years.Part of the rate plan is to finance the South San Francisco/San Bruno Wet Weather and Digester Improvements project. The total estimated project cost is $53.4 million. Staff is pursing financing of the project by applying for a low interest state revolving loan fund (SRF)from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).On March 22,2017,the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign agreements and make submittals of an application for financing with the SWRCB.These documents and agreements have been filed with the SWRCB,and these follow-up resolutions are now required by the SWRCB as part of the loan review process. Adoption of the attached resolutions is required by the SWRCB in order to further the approval of the City’s application for the SRF financing.The first resolution states the Council’s intent to use Sewer Fund revenues received from sewer user fees to paying back the loan.No General Fund revenue will be impacted.The second resolution is needed due to Internal Revenue Services (IRS)regulations regarding tax-exempt debt.For any potential tax-exempt bond,debt,or loan transaction a public entity may be considering,the IRS requires the bonds or loans be issued before any capital expenditures are made,unless the governing body has first declared its intent to use debt proceeds received after the capital expenditures are made to reimburse itself for its temporary use of its own revenues to fund those capital expenditures (United States Income Tax Regulations Section 1.150-2).As the second resolution states the City Council’s intent to reimburse the Sewer Enterprise Fund from the State Water Resources Control Board proceeds for sewer capital expenditures made prior to the receipt of those loan proceeds,bonds or loans will not be required to be issued before capital expenditures are City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-551 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:11. receipt of those loan proceeds,bonds or loans will not be required to be issued before capital expenditures are made. FUNDING The sewer improvements have already been budgeted,and rates have been set to match the projected expenditures,and to match the debt service requirements to pay back the SRF.Approval of these resolutions does not therefore affect the budget beyond what has already been approved by the City Council.Use of this financing will stabilize Sewer Fund cash flow,and avoid the necessity of escalating sewer rate increases in the next five years beyond what was already approved.The City of San Bruno will also pay its share of the capital improvements to the Water Quality Control Plant. These resolutions have no impact on the General Fund. CONCLUSION The attached resolutions will allow the City to take advantage of cost-effective loan financing from the State, and is consistent with actions already taken by the City Council to apply for state revolving loan funding. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-562 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:11a. Resolution declaring the City of South San Francisco’s intent to reimburse the Sewer Enterprise Fund from State Water Resources Control Board loan proceeds for South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Wet Weather and Digester Improvements project capital improvement expenditures made by the City of South San Francisco prior to the receipt of those loan proceeds and prior to the issuance of related state funding. WHEREAS,the City of South San Francisco (the “Agency”)desires to finance the costs of constructing and/or reconstructing certain public facilities and improvements relating to its water and wastewater system,including certain treatment facilities, pipelines and other infrastructure (the "Project"); and WHEREAS,the City intends to finance the construction and/or reconstruction of the Project or portions of the Project with moneys (“Project Funds”)provided by the State of California,acting by and through the State Water Resources Control Board (“State Water Board”); and WHEREAS,the State Water Board may fund the Project Funds with proceeds from the sale of obligations the interest upon which is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes (the “Obligations”); and WHEREAS,prior to either the issuance of the Obligations or the approval by the State Water Board of the Project Funds,the Agency desires to incur certain capital expenditures (the “Expenditures”)with respect to the Project from available moneys of the Agency; and WHEREAS,the Agency has determined that those moneys to be advanced on and after the date hereof to pay the Expenditures are available only for a temporary period and it is necessary to reimburse the Agency for the Project Expenditures from the proceeds of the Obligations. NOW,THEREFORE,THE AGENCY DOES HEREBY RESOLVE,ORDER AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.The Agency hereby states its intention and reasonably expects to reimburse expenditures paid prior to the issuance of the Obligations or the approval by the State Water Board of the Project Funds. SECTION 2. The reasonable expected maximum principal amount of the Project Funds is $53,403,000. SECTION 3.This resolution is being adopted no later than 60 days after the date on which the Agency will City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-562 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:11a. SECTION 3.This resolution is being adopted no later than 60 days after the date on which the Agency will expend moneys for the portion of the Project costs to be reimbursed with Project Funds. SECTION 4.Each Agency expenditure will be of a type properly chargeable to a capital account under general federal income tax principles. SECTION 5.To the best of our knowledge,this Agency is not aware of the previous adoption of official intents by the City that have been made as a matter of course for the purpose of reimbursing expenditures and for which tax-exempt obligations have not been issued. SECTION 6.This resolution is adopted as official intent of the Agency in order to comply with Treasury Regulations §1.150-2 and any other regulations of the Internal Revenue Service relating to the qualification for reimbursement of Project costs. SECTION 7.All the recitals in this resolution are true and correct and this Agency so finds,determines and represents. ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:17-563 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:11b. Resolution pledging sewer service charges revenue from the Sewer Enterprise Fund to payments to the State Water Resources Control Board for loan repayments to finance the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Wet Weather and Digester Improvement Project. WHEREAS,on March 22,2017,the City Council approved resolution 27-2017,authorizing submittal of a Financial Assistance Application for a financing agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board for South San Francisco/San Bruno Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project and authorizing the City Manager to certify the City’s compliance with all applicable state and federal statutory and regulatory requirements related to any financing or financial assistance received from the State Water Resources Control Board; and WHEREAS,pursuant to resolution 27-2017,the City Manager executed said financing agreement with the State Water Resources Control Board; and WHEREAS,on June 28,2017,the City Council approved resolution 71-2017,establishing sewer rates from Fiscal Year 2017-18 to Fiscal Year 2021-22 that increases sewer service charges to support Sanitary Sewer and Treatment Plant Improvements and to payment of the corresponding State Water Resources Control Board financing; and WHEREAS,on June 28,2017,the City Council approved Resolution 70-2017,adopting the Fiscal Year 2017- 18 Capital Improvement Program, including $20.64 million in Sewer Enterprise Funds projects. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco (the “Entity”) that the City Council hereby dedicates and pledges Sewer Rentals and Charges Revenue from the Entity’s Sewer Enterprise Fund to payment of any and all financing from the State Water Resources Control Board, including Clean Water State Revolving Fund (“CWSRF”)and/or Water Recycling Funding Program financing for the South San Francisco /San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project, CWSRF Project No. 8033-110 (the “Project”). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Entity commits to collecting such revenues and maintaining such fund (s)throughout the term of such financing and until the Entity has satisfied its repayment obligation thereunder unless modification or change is approved in writing by the State Water Resources Control Board.So long as the financing agreement(s)are outstanding,the Entity’s pledge hereunder shall constitute a lien in favor of the State Water Resources Control Board on the foregoing fund(s)and revenue(s)without any further action City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:17-563 Agenda Date:7/12/2017 Version:1 Item #:11b. State Water Resources Control Board on the foregoing fund(s)and revenue(s)without any further action necessary. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that so long as the financing agreement(s)are outstanding,the Entity commits to maintaining the fund(s)and revenue(s)at levels sufficient to meet its obligations under the financing agreement(s). ***** City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/30/2017Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™