HomeMy WebLinkAbout16 - Rhine Channel Mitigated Negative DeclarationINITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
RHINE CHANNEL CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT CLEANUP
Prepared for
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92658
Prepared by
Anchor QEA, L.P.
26300 La Alameda, Suite 240
Mission Viejo, California 92691
June 2010
�eW orr 6 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
° F 3300 Newport Boulevard
j P.O. Box 1768
'`- Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
(949) 644 -3200
Mitigated Negative
Dec�ara tion
To:
From:
Office of Planning and Research
City of Newport Beach Harbor Resources Division
State Clearinghouse
3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768
P.O. BOX 3044
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
Sacramento CA 95812 -3044
® County Clerk, County of Orange
Date: June 10, 2010
Public Services Division
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Public Review Period:
30 days - June 10, 2010 to July 9, 2010
Project Name:
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Project Location:
Portions of Lower Newport Bay, specifically the Rhine Channel and areas bayward of
Marina Park American Le ion & 15 "' Street
Project Description:
Dredging of approximately 150,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments from the
Rhine Channel area of Lower Newport Harbor, transport of these sediments via
ocean barge for disposal and beneficial reuse within the approved Port of Long Beach
Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project confined aquatic disposal facility.
Finding: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council K -3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to
implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the City of Newport Beach has evaluated the
proposed project and determined that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the
environment.
A copy of the Initial Study containing the analysis supporting this finding is 0 attached ❑ on file at
the Harbor Resources Division and Planning Department. The Initial Study may include mitigation
measures that would eliminate or reduce potential environmental impacts. This document will be
considered by the decision- maker(s) prior to final action on the proposed project. If a public hearing will
be held to consider this project, a notice of the time and location is attached.
Additional plans, studies and /or exhibits relating to the proposed project may be available for public
review. If you would like to examine these materials, you are invited to contact the undersigned.
If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document, your comments should be
submitted in writing prior to the close of the public review period. Your comments should specifically
identify what environmental impacts you believe would result from the project, why they are significant,
and what changes or mitigation measures you believe should be adopted to eliminate or reduce these
impacts. There is no fee for this appeal. If a public hearing will be held, you are also invited to attend
and testify as to the appropriateness of this document.
If you have any questions or would like further information, please contact the undersigned.
Chris Miller, Harbor Rpsour es
Phone:
Email:
Date:
Manager �7
(949) 644 -3043
cmiller @newportbeachca.gov
June 10, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT INFORMATION ......................................................................... ............................... V
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................ ............................... ............................ VII
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED .................... ..............................1
DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY) ...... ..............................1
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .................................... ..............................1
I. AESTHETICS ........................................................................................... ..............................1
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES ...................................... ..............................3
III. AIR QUALITY ....................................................................................... ............................... 4
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................................ .............................18
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................... ............................... 30
LIVA w"01 11611VA1,121 130616
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................... ............................... 34
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS WASTES .................................... ............................... 37
D{. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ......................................... ............................... 41
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING ................................................................ .............................50
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES .................................................................... ............................... 70
0 I_ =►[x]_69_ fl
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING ...................................................... ............................... 75
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES .......................................................................... ............................... 76
►: � �� 7 �� i 7 a 1: X117 [� J
XVI. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ............................................. ............................... 80
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ........................................... ............................... 84
►:0$$MT /: \ z i174,41161AMI wi�7i�[ei.Y�]�y[ei�ii�l[N:��EN .Y.�
XIX. STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND EARLIER ANALYSES ............. ............................... 87
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup i 090243 -01
XX. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE ............................................... ............................... 88
............................................................................................. ............................... 91
List of Tables
Table AQl Summary of Peak Daily Construction Emissions, Proposed Project Before
Mitigation................................................................................ ............................... 9
Table AQ2 Summary of On -Site Daily Construction Emissions, Proposed Project Without
Table LU3 Consistency with Natural Resources Element, General Plan
F *7
Table LU4 Consistency with Noise Element, General Plan ................. ............................... 57
Table LU5 Consistency with Coastal Land Use Policy ......................... ............................... 57
List of Figures
Figure 1 Project Location
Figure 2 Proposed Project Area
Figure 3 USACE and Proposed City Lower Newport Bay Dredging Areas
Figure 4 Middle Harbor Confined Disposal Facility Fill Site and Example Barge Haul
Route
Figure 5 Profile of Conceptual Confined Disposal Facility
Figure 6 Areas and Thickness of Conceptual Dredge Plan in the Rhine Channel
Figure 7 Cross Sections of Conceptual Dredge Plan in the Rhine Channel
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 ii Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Mitigation.............................................................................. ...............................
10
Table AQ3
Summary of Peak Daily Construction Emissions, Proposed Project After
Mitigation.............................................................................. ...............................
15
Table AQ4
Regional Impacts Significance Determination After Mitigation ......................
16
Table AQ5
Summary of On -Site Daily Construction Emissions, Proposed Project with
Mitigation.............................................................................. ...............................
16
Table AQ6
Localized Impacts Significance Determination After Mitigation .....................
17
Table BI
Protected Species Potentially Occurring within the Project Vicinity ..............
23
Table GHG1
GHG Emissions ..................................................................... ...............................
35
Table GHG2
GHG Significance Determination ........................................ ...............................
36
Table LUl
Consistency with Land Use Element, General Plan ........... ...............................
53
Table LU2
Consistency with Harbor and Bay Element, General Plan ...............................
53
Table LU3 Consistency with Natural Resources Element, General Plan
F *7
Table LU4 Consistency with Noise Element, General Plan ................. ............................... 57
Table LU5 Consistency with Coastal Land Use Policy ......................... ............................... 57
List of Figures
Figure 1 Project Location
Figure 2 Proposed Project Area
Figure 3 USACE and Proposed City Lower Newport Bay Dredging Areas
Figure 4 Middle Harbor Confined Disposal Facility Fill Site and Example Barge Haul
Route
Figure 5 Profile of Conceptual Confined Disposal Facility
Figure 6 Areas and Thickness of Conceptual Dredge Plan in the Rhine Channel
Figure 7 Cross Sections of Conceptual Dredge Plan in the Rhine Channel
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 ii Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
List of Appendices
Appendix A Air Quality Analysis
AppendiX B SCAQMD Sample Forms
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup iii 090243 -01
PROJECT INFORMATION
1 Project Title
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
2 Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Newport Beach
Harbor Resources
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915
3 Contact Person and Phone Number
Chris Miller, Harbor Resources Manager
(949) 644 -3043
4 Project Location
Rhine Channel, Lower Newport Bay
5 Project Sponsor's Name and Address
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915
6 General Plan Designation
Tideland and Submerged Lands
7 Zoning
None
8 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
• Current Development: tidelands and submerged lands — navigation, moorage, and
recreation
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup v 090243 -01
Project Information
• To the north: residential, recreation, boat yard, and marine commercial
• To the east: residential
• To the south: parks and recreation, residential, marine commercial, and boat yard
• To the west: residential and commercial
9 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit /Rivers and
Harbors Act Section 10 Permit)
• Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (401 Water Quality
Certification/Waste Discharge Requirements)
• California Coastal Commission (Coastal Development Permit)
• California State Lands Commission (Dredging Lease)
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 vi Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Need
The purpose of this project is to remove contaminated sediments from the Rhine Channel in
Lower Newport Bay (LNB) as well as from other nearby areas found unsuitable for
unconfined ocean disposal under Regional General Permit (RGP) 54 issued by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers ( USACE). Overall, this project will remove contaminated sediments to
restore and enhance state - designated impaired beneficial uses' of the Rhine Channel, dispose
of the impacted material in an environmentally responsible and cost - effective manner, and
improve navigation.
The City of Newport Beach (City) proposes to beneficially reuse' dredged material at the Port
of Long Beach (POLB) Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project confined disposal facility
(Middle Harbor CDF). The USACE is also planning to conduct a maintenance dredging
effort in the Federal Channel' of LNB, which would potentially result in additional sediment
that would be beneficially reused at the Middle Harbor CDF. The City's project would be
coordinated with the USACE dredging effort to take advantage of potential cost savings
through economies of scale, decreased mobilization costs, and contractor availability.
From the 1930s through the 1950s, shipyard and cannery operations, boat - building activities,
and metal - plating facilities were located in the Rhine Channel and other portions of LNB,
resulting in a legacy of sediment contamination. Stormwater runoff from the watershed has
also contributed contaminants to LNB. Due to a lack of cost - effective sediment management
options for material with elevated chemical concentrations, many areas of LNB have not
1 A beneficial use is one of various ways that water can be used for the benefit of people and /or wildlife.
Beneficial uses are to be established for all waters of the state (California Water Code, Division 7, Chapter 2). The
beneficial uses designated by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board for the Project Area include,
among others, navigation, recreation, commercial and sport fishing, and wildlife and marine habitat (SWRCB
1994).
2 Beneficial reuse refers to sediment management alternatives that use dredged material in a beneficial manner,
such as beach nourishment to widen receiving beach areas, creating shallow water habitat, and disposing of
material a port CDF to support economic growth (CSTF 2005).
3 The Federal Channel is the area of the LNB described by the USACE, Chief of Engineer to Congress on November
11, 1936, as recorded in the 1st Session of the 75th Congress in 1937 (Harbor Code, Title 17, Newport Beach
Municipal Code).
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup vh" 09 02 43 -01
Project Description
been dredged in decades. As a result, dredging in the most contaminated areas like the
Rhine Channel is needed to restore beneficial uses.
Rhine Channel sediment investigations have revealed elevated concentrations of metals,
pesticides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
as well as significant toxicity to representative benthic organisms (SCCWRP 2003; Anchor
2006). An ecological risk assessment substantiated the potential for wildlife risks associated
with Rhine Channel sediments (Anchor 1996). The potential for ecological risks resulting
from direct contact with contaminated sediments would be greatly reduced by removing
these sediments from the Rhine Channel. The Rhine Channel is currently included as an
impaired waterbody on the state of California's 303(d) List and has been targeted as a priority
for cleanup by the California State Water Resources Control Board. Without immediate
action by the City, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) would
issue a Cleanup and Abatement Order to force the City and/or adjacent landowners to restore
the beneficial uses of the Rhine Channel by removing contaminated sediments.
Other less contaminated but chemically impacted sediments are located throughout LNB, in
both federal and non - federal areas of responsibility. The sediment in some of these areas
may be unsuitable for open -ocean disposal or for use as beach nourishment, while sediments
in other areas would be suitable for unconfined aquatic placement. The City and the USACE
are separately evaluating options for dredging these areas of responsibility. As part of the
proposed project, three of these areas — Marina Park, the American Legion, and the 15th
Street Pier —would be dredged to remove contaminated sediments for beneficial use in the
Middle Harbor CDF. The City is responsible for constructing the Marina Park project and
maintaining the area around the municipal pier at 15th Street. The American Legion holds a
long -term lease from the City.
Environmental Setting
Newport Beach is located in Orange County approximately 35 miles southeast of Los Angeles
and 70 miles northwest of San Diego (Figure 1). Newport Bay is a combination of two
distinct waterbodies divided by the Pacific Coast Highway Bridge: LNB and Upper Newport
Bay. Upper Newport Bay contains both a diverse mix of development in its lower reach and
an undeveloped ecological reserve in its upper reach, which is undergoing a multi -year
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 viii Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Project Description
dredging project conducted by the USACE to restore the ecosystem. LNB, where the
majority of commerce and recreational boating exists, is highly developed with urban and
recreational uses, and the USACE currently considers it a high priority for maintenance
dredging.
For approximately 30 years, the City has maintained an RGP that provides a relatively
streamlined process for permitting dredging and dock maintenance projects between the
bulkhead and project lines' in LNB and Upper Newport Bay (Weston 2005). RGP 54
(USACE Permit No. 200501233 -DPS) was reauthorized by the USACE, Santa Ana RWQCB,
and California Coastal Commission (CCC) in 2005. This permit covers —among other
things —minor maintenance dredging and discharge of material previously deemed suitable
for unconfined placement at adjacent beach sites, offshore disposal sites, or an approved
inland disposal site for dredged material. RGP 54, however, excluded some areas due to
exceedences of chemical and biological thresholds. Portions of these excluded areas (i.e., not
authorized for open -ocean or beach disposal) are included in the geographic area that is the
subject of this Initial Study.
The Rhine Channel and some areas excluded under RGP 54 proposed for dredging during
this project are collectively referred to as the "Project Area" and are depicted on Figures 2
and 3. The proposed dredging areas are comprised of the Rhine Channel and the area located
between the bulkhead and the project lines along a stretch of waterfront encompassing
Marina Park, the American Legion, and the 15th Street Pier.
The USACE is responsible for maintaining authorized navigation depths in the Federal
Channel, while the City, along with the County of Orange, . is responsible for sediment
removal in areas outside of the Federal Channel. For some non - federal areas located
4 Bulkhead lines are the harbor land /water perimeter lines (established in Newport Harbor by the federal
government) that define the permitted limit of filling or solid structures that may be constructed in the harbor.
Due to potential environmental considerations established by the state of California and /or the federal
government, the establishment of bulkhead lines does not necessarily allow the property owner to build to the
limits of the bulkhead line (Harbor Code, Title 17, Newport Beach Municipal Code).
5 Project lines are the harbor water area channel lines of improvements constructed by the federal government in
1935 and 1936, as shown on navigation charts of Newport Harbor. Also referred to as the "Federal Channel" (see
City of Newport Beach Waterfront Project Guidelines and Standards, Harbor Design Criteria — Commercial and
Residential Facilities; Harbor Code, Title 17, Newport Beach Municipal Code).
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup ix 09 02 43 -01
Project Description
between the bulkhead and project lines, the City has transferred responsibility to the
adjacent landowner in the form of a pier permit. In general, dredging has been delayed
because collectively these entities have been unable to identify cost - effective means to
manage the presence of contaminated sediments in LNB. Combined, approximately 1.5
million cubic yards (cy) of LNB sediments need to be dredged by the City and USACE as part
of their respective maintenance and contaminated sediment cleanup programs. Figure 3
shows the location of the proposed USACE and City dredging areas. A final determination of
the total volume of sediments potentially unsuitable for beach nourishment or unconfined
offshore disposal has not been made; however, approximately 150,000 cy of contaminated
sediments are located within the Project Area.6
Development of the Proposed Action
As part of its exploration of the feasibility of dredging contaminated sediments, the City
evaluated management options available to address contaminated sediments in the Project
Area. The City considered dredging and landfill disposal of the sediment as well as dredging
of the sediment followed by physical and chemical treatment prior to landfill disposal. The
City's evaluation of sediment management options concluded that the best option for
managing the sediment originating from the Project Area would be to beneficially reuse it as
part of the Middle Harbor CDF, if the POLB agrees to accept the material? The Middle
Harbor CDF is an approved facility, authorized by the POLB, the USACE, the CCC, and the
Los Angeles RWQCB. The POLB was issued an Individual Permit (No. 2004- 01053 -AOA) by
the USACE and Waste Discharge Requirements (No. 09 -204) to construct the Middle Harbor
CDF. Details of the CDF construction methods and monitoring requirements are described
in these and other permits. The CDF entails filling the open -water area between two
6 Approximately 110,000 cy of material is expected to be dredged from the Rhine Channel and approximately
10,000 cy dredged from the remaining segments of the Project Area. For estimation purposes, a contingency of 15
to 20 percent is added to the total volume; thus, the total dredged volume analyzed in this Initial Study is
150,000 cy.
7 A CDF involves placing dredged material at a site constructed partially or completely in water adjacent to the
shore. CDFs constructed in port terminal slips use the terminal as part of the containment structure, with a dike
structure constructed from rock, gravel, and /or sand fill at the mouth of the slip to complete the enclosure. Once
the dredged material placed in the diked area reaches a specified elevation, it is capped with clean material. The
clean cap raises the elevation to just below or at dike level. The newly created upland can be graded to support
port development after completion.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 x Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Project Description
existing terminals to create a longer wharf and additional space for upland infrastructure
(Figure 4). Figure 5 shows the profile of a conceptual CDF for illustration purposes.
The POLB announced that it intends to solicit suitable material, with an emphasis on
contaminated sediments, from the local region to construct the CDF. Contaminated
sediments may be placed within the CDF, as it will be constructed to ensure the sediments
are isolated from the environment. The Middle Harbor CDF is approved and permitted to
accept contaminated dredged material, making it a unique opportunity for the City to
participate in a regional sediment management solution and to use the CDF as a
cost - effective disposal site for contaminated sediments from City- managed areas.
The proposed project represents an opportunity to beneficially reuse approximately 150,000
cy of contaminated sediment as fill material at the Middle Harbor CDF. This sediment
management alternative is the preferred approach for the City because it: 1) permanently
removes contaminated sediments from the aquatic environment so that beneficial uses can be
restored to the Rhine Channel; 2) does not require upland sediment rehandling, thus
eliminating potentially significant traffic impacts; 3) is the most cost - effective sediment
management method; and 4) uses proven technology to contain contaminants.
Project Timing, Sequence of Activities, and Methods of Construction
Construction activities within the Project Area (i.e., dredging and transport of dredged
material) are anticipated to occur over a 4- to 5 -month period, potentially starting as early as
October of 2010 and extending into early 2011. Dredging can occur weekdays between the
hours of 7 AM and 6:30 PM and Saturdays between the hours of 8 AM and 6 PM. Transport
of sediments via tugboat and barge to the POLB may occur outside of these times, because
work would occur away from residents and would not be disruptive to harbor operations.
While negotiations with the contractor will ultimately determine the sequence of activities,
it is likely that dredging will begin at the north end of the Rhine Channel. Once sediments
in the Rhine Channel have been removed, the remaining segments of the Project Area
(Marina Park, American Legion, and 15th Street Pier) will be dredged. Dredging would
involve the following sequence of events:
• Coordinate with the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), Harbor Patrol, Harbor Resources, and
POLB pilots to identify barge routes and communications protocols
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup xi 09 02 43 -01
Project Description
• Complete pre - construction activities, such as preparing the offloading area for
disposal of debris and mobilizing the dredging equipment
• Remove end piles from floats in the immediate dredging area, replacing them with
new end piles as dredging progresses
• Mechanically dredge the contaminated sediments and place dredged material into
bottom -dump barges
• Transport the bottom -dump barges to the Middle Harbor CDF using tugboats
• Dispose of sediments into the Middle Harbor CDF fill site
• Repeat process for remaining segments of the Project Area until project is completed
• Demobilize construction equipment and replace any structures removed to facilitate
dredging
This sequence of activities was developed based on current design knowledge, professional
judgment, and experience from similar projects, and it may be modified if conditions change.
Contractor Coordination
Prior to mobilization, the contractor will coordinate with all appropriate local entities such
as the USCG, Harbor Patrol, Harbor Resources, and POLB pilots. In addition, a Notice to All
Mariners (NOTAMs) and other public notices required for the safety of the boating public
will be issued. The barge route will be identified and, along with construction schedules,
provided to the public.
Mobilization, Staging, Temporary Relocation of Vessels, and Pile Replacement
The contractor will mobilize the dredging and barge equipment over a 2- to 3 -week period.
At this time, parking and construction trailers are expected be located on the City -owned
property known as Lower Castaways (Figures 2 and 3), although the contractor and the City
may agree on a substitute location that has equal access and does not disrupt established
traffic patterns. Final determination of the location for the construction trailer and
employee parking lot will be made in coordination with the contractor and the USACE. The
proposed upland offloading area for debris removal will be located at the Rhine Wharf in the
public right -of -way east of the Cannery Restaurant, positioned at the north end of the Rhine
Channel. This area will be used to temporarily offload and store debris that may be
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 xii Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Project Description
encountered during dredging (Figure 2) and will be cordoned off in accordance with the City
traffic engineer's approval to ensure safe traffic circulation. Any debris encountered during
dredging (e.g., metal, timber, trash, etc.) will be dewatered, if necessary, on a barge prior to
loading it into a container or truck for transport to a landfill.
Prior to the start of construction, the City will coordinate with the property owners to
relocate vessels currently berthed in the first dredging area. The City owns and operates
adequate mooring spaces within LNB where vessels can be temporarily stored. One area
identified as a temporary mooring location is shown on Figure 2; this temporary mooring
location and others locations throughout the harbor are generally made available to visiting
vessels by the Harbor Patrol. However, for the relatively short period of this project, the
relocated vessels will take priority over visiting vessels for these spaces. Alternative locations
for visitors include anchorage in the Turning Basin off the eastern tip of Lido Isle, yacht
clubs, and other rental opportunities. The Harbor Patrol will assist visitors in locating
alternative mooring. Should additional, temporary moorings be necessary to accommodate
the relocated vessels during dredging, the contractor will be allowed to install temporary
moorings in approved locations.
To ensure the continued stability of the existing floats in the Project Area, the end piles of
dock floats will be replaced with new, potentially longer piles if the existing pile lengths are
not sufficient to provide structural stability after dredging. The removed piles will be
properly disposed of in an upland facility or recycled; they will not be reused. For purposes
of this California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis, it is assumed that all end piles
will need to be removed and replaced. It is anticipated that approximately 150 piles will be
replaced depending on their location with respect to the dredge footprint and their physical
condition.
Contaminated Sediment Dredging Mechanics and Sequencing
Dredging Mechanics. Contaminated sediments will be excavated using a mechanical
dredging process (i.e., clamshell bucket). Operating from a crane or derrick on a barge, the
bucket is lowered, filled with sediment, raised through the water column, and positioned
above the barge; the sediment is then placed in the barge for transport to the fill site.
Mechanical dredges are the most commonly used method to remove contaminated sediments
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup xiu 090243 -01
Project Description
along the shoreline or in close proximity to in -water structures, areas where use of a
hydraulic dredge and pipelines would be difficult. Mechanical dredges are commonly used,
because they can accurately excavate to specific depths below the sediment surface, which is
often required during contaminated sediments removal. Perhaps most importantly,
mechanical dredging (as opposed to hydraulic dredging) does not produce a high volume of
excess water with the sediment, which would require disposal or management. It should be
noted that hydraulic dredging of contaminated sediments is generally not permitted by
regulatory and resource agencies because of concerns about managing the high volume of
waste water produced during hydraulic dredging.
Depending on the condition of existing structures in the Project Area, an excavator or similar
long -reach device may be used to dredge under docks and around or near piles. Using this
piece of equipment rather than the clamshell bucket may enable the contractor to dredge
closer to piles and under floats without damaging them.
The volume of contaminated sediments in the Rhine Channel located between the bulkhead
and pierhead line is relatively small compared to the main channel (equaling approximately
20 percent of the total sediment volume), and to avoid destabilizing any portion of the
bulkhead or piles, the City may necessarily leave a small portion of the material near these
structures. Allowing a small portion of material to remain would be accomplished by
requiring dredging to be offset a prescribed distance from the potentially affected structures .8
Figure 6 depicts the anticipated thickness of dredge cuts throughout the Rhine Channel. The
thickest dredge cuts will occur near the edges of the channel and along the pierhead lines,
where a greater volume of sediments has shoaled over time and where greater accumulations
of unsuitable sediments are found. The thickness of dredge cuts decreases substantially from
the channel to the seawalls running along the perimeter of the channel. Dredging will be
offset from the seawalls by a distance sufficient to avoid reducing the overall stability of the
wall structures.
8 The dredge offset refers to the distance between a structure, such as a bulkhead or pile, and the actual edge of
the dredging prism. Offsets are determined for each type of structure to protect it from damage during dredging.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 xiv Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Project Description
Figure 7 shows typical dredge offset areas in the upper Rhine Channel, the 2 -foot allowable
overdepth9 of dredging, and the payable and nonpayable allowable overdepths.
The dredging plan will also recognize the tendency of submerged sediments to assume their
natural "angle of repose" after dredging. This angle of repose is typically an inclination of
between 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (3H:1V) and 5H:1V. A similar range of likely
slope angles will be expressly accounted for and required by the design, so that the dredging
work will not leave any unstable areas on the seabed.
Mechanical dredging in the Rhine Channel will occur to a depth where clean,
uncontaminated material is found. Sediment samples will be collected and analyzed to
confirm that dredging has successfully removed the contaminated material. If the results of
the analysis show that clean sediments are not encountered in a particular area, then
additional dredging would be necessary in that area; confirmatory sediment sampling will be
repeated until clean sediments have been reached. The proposed cleanup plan, including
partial dredging around piles and close to the bulkheads, has been developed through
discussions with the regulatory agencies.
Accurate horizontal positioning of the dredge will be aided using an electronic positioning
system, differential GPS (DGPS), or other approved positioning system that provides the
required accuracy in real -time. Horizontal position accuracy of plus or minus 1 foot will be
required. Depth of completed dredging will be monitored by routine bathymetric progress
surveys conducted by, or under the supervision of, an experienced hydrographic surveyor.
The contractor will be required to correct any dredge cuts that are not deep enough, per the
dredge plan. After additional dredging is completed, another bathymetric survey will be
performed to verify that the corrective action was successful.
9 The allowable overdepth is the depth to which the contractor is allowed to dredge beyond the required
elevation or grade. Overdepth is allowed due to the inaccuracy (plus or minus 2 feet) inherent with the dredging
equipment working underwater. Payable overdepth for the proposed project is 1 foot beyond the required
elevation; the contractor is paid for the volume dredged to the payable overdepth. Nonpayable overdepth for the
proposed project is 1 foot beyond the payable overdepth. Dredging is allowed to this depth; however, the
contractor is not paid for the volume dredged between the payable overdepth and the allowable overdepth.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup xv 09 02 43 -01
Project Description
In the Project Area outside the Rhine Channel, maintenance dredging to improve
navigability will reach no deeper than -10 feet mean lower low water (MLLW), which is
within the original design depth of this portion of the harbor. In support of the renewal of
RGP 54 in 2005 and 2006, sediment sampling occurred throughout LNB; approximately 16
sediment samples were collected in the vicinity of Marina Park, the American Legion, and
the 15th Street Pier. Sediments in these areas have been tested and the results show that
mercury and 4,4 -DDE were considered to be contaminants of potential ecological concern
(COPEC).
Dredging Sequencing and Duration. While the specific sequencing of the project will be
determined after the contractor has been selected, it is likely that dredging will begin at the
northern end of the Rhine Channel. By dredging from the back of the channel outward, the
contractor will be able to advance the dredge without traveling back across previously
dredged areas. This approach would reduce the potential recontamination of previously
dredged areas. It will take an estimated 10 to 12 weeks to complete dredging in the
open -water channel area of the Rhine Channel using a clamshell dredge, and another 12 to
15 weeks to complete the more detailed work around the marina floats using an excavator
dredge or similarly precise slow - production type of equipment. In actuality, these two types
of equipment may work concurrently, saving overall time on the project, and if this scenario
is chosen, a total duration of dredging on the order of 15 to 20 weeks is a reasonable
expectation. Additional activities will include conducting confirmatory sediment sampling
as dredging is completed and removing and replacing end piles.
The barge holding the mechanical dredge will be approximately 50 to 60 feet wide and the
accompanying scow (used to transport dredged material to the CDF) will be approximately
40 to 50 feet wide. It is common practice for the barge to be placed alongside the scow to
reduce the time for dredging and to minimize the possibility of accidental spills; therefore,
dredging equipment will have a width of approximately 90 to 110 feet. Additional space is
needed for safety and to ensure the mechanical arm of the dredge can swing without
obstruction. The width of open channel in the narrow "throat" of the Rhine Channel
typically varies between approximately 110 feet and 130 feet. Consequently, there will be
temporary restrictions on navigability within the channel depending on where the dredge is
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 xvi Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Project Description
at any given time. The contractor will be required to allow and accommodate access for
emergency vessels throughout the period of work.
After Rhine Channel dredging has been completed, the contractor will move to the
remaining segments of the Project Area (Figure 2) to conduct dredging of Marina Park, the
American Legion, and the 15th Street Pier. It is anticipated to take approximately 3 weeks to
complete dredging in these areas. As with the Rhine Channel, private vessels will be
temporarily relocated until dredging is completed. To allow the contractor sufficient area for
maneuvering dredge equipment, it may be necessary to temporarily relocate some vessels
located in the mooring area immediately off 15th Street Pier.
The contractor may install temporary moorings in Newport Channel to provide a storage
area for dredging vessels during after -work hours and on Sundays. The exact location of the
temporary moorings will be selected to allow safe, unrestricted vessel traffic.
Barge Transportation of Contaminated Sediment
USCG - certified bottom -dump barges will be used to transport the material approximately
27 miles to the Middle Harbor CDF. These barges typically have a maximum capacity of
between 1,000 and 2,000 cy per load. A reasonable assumption is that each barge will hold
on average approximately 1,250 cy per load and that two barges can be filled per work day.
Approximately 15 to 20 weeks will be required to complete dredging activities. This
estimate is dependent on the size of the barge, clamshell bucket, and dredge derrick that the
contractor uses as well as the length of the work day. In addition, the use of additional
dredging equipment, such as a barge- mounted excavator to dredge around the existing
structures, has the potential to affect project duration. Approximately 100 to 120 round trips
are anticipated for dredged material disposal. The actual size of the bottom -dump barges
used for this project will not be known until a contractor is retained.
Contaminated Sediment Disposal
The sediment will be placed within the Middle Harbor CDF by positioning the split -hull
barge into the Middle Harbor CDF and releasing the material towards the back of the fill
area. Specific disposal locations within the CDF will be determined by the POLB during
actual fill operations. To utilize the Middle Harbor CDF, the City's contractor will be
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup xvii 09 02 43 -01
Project Description
required to comply with the POLB's Sediment Management Plan and the conditions
contained in the applicable permits, including permits obtained from the USACE and
RWQCB. In accordance with the permits that govern the disposal site, the POLB will be
responsible for monitoring disposal operations that confirm water quality standards are met
at the fill site.
Equipment Demobilization and Disposal of Debris
A side -scan sonar survey was conducted in the fall of 2004 by Gahagan and Bryant
Associates, Inc., to characterize the existing debris field in the Rhine Channel. The survey
detected 87 pieces of apparent debris. The exact size or nature of the debris was not
characterized, but debris could include objects that may have come from past loading and
offloading of vessels and equipment. Other debris may be encountered during dredging
throughout the Project Area, but to a much lesser extent, based on past uses in the area.
A final bathymetric survey will be performed to confirm dredging has been completed as
required. Over an approximately 2 -week period, the contractor will disperse the dredging
equipment and return the upland staging area to pre - project conditions. Any remaining
construction debris will be transported via truck and disposed of at a suitable upland landfill.
Demobilization will take approximately 3 weeks.
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Potential impacts from the proposed dredging project are discussed in this Initial Study and
summarized herein. Potential impacts from the proposed project include:
• Temporary water quality impacts related to turbidity and elevated levels of chemical
contaminants generated during dredging and spillage of dredged material from barges
during transport to the Middle Harbor CDF
• Temporary air quality impacts from construction equipment
• Temporary noise impacts from operation of equipment and pile installation
• Temporary obstruction of navigation and access to portions of LNB
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 xvin Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Project Description
To avoid and minimize potential project impacts, several design features have been
incorporated into the project. These operational requirements, typically referred to the
dredging industry as best management practices (BMPs), are detailed in individual sections of
the Initial Study and are summarized in the following lists.
General BMPs:
• No dredging work will be conducted from land -based equipment.
• Floating debris will be removed from the water and disposed of properly.
Water Quality BMPs:
• Silt curtains will be placed around the perimeter of the active dredging area.
• A Water Quality Monitoring Plan (WQMP) will be submitted by the contractor for
approval by the City prior to construction. The WQMP will be designed to monitor
conditions in accordance with permit requirements.
• Multiple horizontal dredge cuts will be taken where a thick horizontal volume needs
to be dredged, as to avoid overfilling the bucket and causing spillage.
• A Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan will be submitted by
the contractor for approval by the City prior to construction. The contractor will be
required to follow the SPCC, which will require, among other things, following
established refueling, spill containment and countermeasures, and good housekeeping
procedures.
• All dredged material will be handled and transported such that it does not re -enter
surface waters of the state outside of the protected immediate work area.
• The load line on disposal barges will be predetermined, and the barge will not be
filled above this predetermined level. Before each disposal barge is transported to the
Middle Harbor CDF, the dredging contractor and a site inspector must certify that it
is filled correctly.
Air Quality BMPs:
• Dredge equipment will be required to meet current South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) requirements.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup x x 09 02 43 -01
Project Description
Noise BMPs:
• Work will be conducted during times allowable by City code (weekdays between the
hours of 7 AM and 6:30 PM and Saturdays between the hours of 8 AM and 6 PM).
Navigation BMPs:
• A communication protocol will be implemented to minimize disruption to
recreational and commercial operations within the Project Area.
• Dredging activities will be required to accommodate access for emergency vessels at
any time.
Long -Term Benefits of the Project
Long -term benefits of the project include:
Permanently removing up to approximately 150,000 cy of contaminated material
from the marine environment of LNB
• Restoring designated beneficial uses to the Project Area
• Restoring the Project Area to design depth and improving navigation and public
safety
• Beneficially reusing the dredged contaminated material as fill at the Middle Harbor
CDF
Reasonably Foreseeable Projects
The impacts analysis provided in this document considers the contribution of this project to
other "reasonably foreseeable" projects and the degree to which those projects and the
proposed project cumulatively impact the environment. Cumulative impacts caused by other
projects alone do not determine that a proposed project's incremental effects are
cumulatively considerable, and unless the proposed project results in a change to the
environment, the project cannot contribute to cumulative impacts. As part of the impacts
analysis from this project, cumulative impacts related to the projects listed were considered
and are as follows:
• Project proponent: USACE. Project name: Upper Newport Bay Restoration Project.
Project description: The Upper Newport Bay restoration project will allow for a
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 xx Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Project Description
reduced frequency of maintenance dredging; improve or restore estuarine habitats;
sustain a mix of open water, mudflat, and marsh habitat; increase tidal circulation for
water quality; reduce predator access to sensitive habitats; improve public use and
recreational access; and improve educational opportunities. Dredged material not
beneficially reused for habitat construction is beneficially reused as beach
nourishment material for City beaches. This project has been periodically ongoing
since 2006 and is expected to be completed prior to the start of the LNB maintenance
dredging project.
• Project proponent: USACE. Project name: LNB Maintenance Dredging Project.
Project description: An estimated 1.5 million cy of sediment will be removed from
the federal area; approximately 500,000 cy of sediment may be beneficially reused in
the Middle Harbor CDF. Maintenance dredging will provide full access to the harbor,
which is essential to the economic and recreational health of Newport Beach. The
same contractor will complete the proposed City and USACE dredging projects in
LNB; some project overlap may occur, but the USACE maintenance dredging project
is planned to begin once the City's proposed project is complete or nearing
completion.
• Project proponent: City of Newport Beach. Project name: Marina Park (1770 Balboa
Boulevard) Refurbishment Project. Project description: The phased project consists
of the removal of a nonconforming mobile home park located on historic tidelands
and the construction of a public park. Proposed park components include community
meeting rooms and a visitor - serving marina. Construction of the marina would
require dredging of approximately 62,000 cy of sediment, approximately 3,000 cy of
which would be dredged as part of the Rhine Channel contaminated sediment
cleanup project and beneficially reused in the Middle Harbor CDF. These sediments
are located away from the beach in the northernmost portion of the subtidal area of
proposed dredging for the Marina Park project. This proposed project is immediately
west of the American Legion and is not expected to occur before 2011. The City
certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project on May 11,
2010.
• Project proponent: ETCO Development, Inc. Project name: Newport Bay Marina
(2300 Newport Boulevard) Redevelopment Project. Project description: This project
consists of the redevelopment of a 2.5 -acre former shipbuilding facility within the
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup xxi 09 02 43 -01
Project Description
Rhine Channel with a new mixed -use development and 21 -slip marina. Project
dredging and removal of contaminated sediments near shore is expected to be
completed during the summer of 2010, before the Rhine Channel contaminated
sediment cleanup project begins, and dock construction is expected to occur in 2011
after the proposed project is complete.
• Project proponent: Lido Peninsula Company. Project name: Channel Road Marina
Refurbishment Project. Project description: Located at the end of the east side of the
Rhine Channel, this project proposes to upgrade the existing marina facility. Because
the project is located in the Rhine Channel, dredging would be part of the City's
cleanup project. Subsequent to the dredging, the marina facility would be replaced
with new docks.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 xdi Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
FIGURES
SOURCE: Drawing prepared from Google Earth Pro 2009.
kzANCHOR
OEA
0
Not to Scale
Figure 1
Project Location
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Proposed Debris-
Off loading Area Construction Staging Area
(Lower Castaways)
oil
/
BAY SHORES
LIDO
/ PENINSULA
LIDO ISLE
V A
Marina
Fi Park _
�\ MOAOEInNG AmerlCafl���
Legion
15th 5treef Pier
y �
r
n
SOURCE: Basemap prepared from City of Newport Beach GIS files.
NOTE: Temporary moorage areas are located throughout Lower
Newport Bay.
ANCHOR
lkz OEA
LEGEND:
0 Proposed Project Area
- - - Pierhead Lines (Approximate)
/
Fit//
/
HARBOR
ISLAND
YACHTANCHORAGE
BAY �I
ISLAND
0
01000
$Cale
Figure 2
Proposed Project Area
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Proposed Debris
Offloading Area
LEGEND:
_ Proposed City Dredging Area (Project Area)
/® City Areas Not Proposed for Dredging
_ Federally Managed Navigation Area (Approximate) - A
Maintained and Proposed for Dredging
Federally Managed Navigation Area (Approximate) - N
Maintained and Not Proposed for Dredging
— Federal Project Lines (Approximate)
SOURCE: Base map prepared from GIS files obtained from the City of N
Beach and site delineation provided by the USAGE.
tzANCHOR 0 0 1600
4. y��
QEA c.c.v Sca el in Feet
UPPER
NEWPORT
BAY
�J
Figure 3
USACE and Proposed City Lower Newport Bay Dredging Areas
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
-N SOURCE: Drawing prepared from Google Earth Pro 2009
y� ANCHOR
OEA
Not to Scale
Figure 4
Middle Harbor Confined Disposal Facility Fill Site and Example Barge Haul Route
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Surface Layer
Clean Fill °
e
Approximate Placement Area of Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Berm anrI
— — ` — — a a Sand
/— Cbnfirflem ,
Contaminated Sediment A Layer
wExisting Sediment
kzANCHOR
OEA
Line
Figure 5
Profile of Conceptual Confined Disposal Facility
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
0
0
N
SOURCE: Base map prepared from GIS files obtained from the City of Newport Beach.
HORIZONTAL DATUM: California State Plane, Zone VI, NAD83.
VERTICAL DATUM: Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW).
ANCHOR
kz OIL
LEGEND:
Bulkhead (Approximate)
- - - - Pierhead Line
-13' Preliminary Required Dredge Elevations
LEGEND:
Color
Thickness of Proposed
Dredge Cut in Feet
0to1
1to2
■
2to3
3to4
■
4to5
■
5to6
■
6to7
■
7to8
8to9
■
9 or more
c
0 200
Scale in Feet
Figure 6
Areas and Thickness of Conceptual Dredge Plan in the Rhine Channel
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Lam8!d 8mp'TZ0-dtl-T0-EVZO60 \ApnlS le!lNl \ab7 UodmaN 10- EVZ060 \sa!i3 l3afWd aVDOIntl \'l eAeueq wdgSE oloz'¢ AeW
N N a
O c
C
OD � OJ
LL U U
a)
C C
L
E
aJ
L N
C �
C +'
f0 �
a �
N M
Y
O
U
f0 �
� C
CL m
aJ U
U U
0 N
o
U . c _
O C
0
O
U
N
N
N
0
V
C
(MIIW) laad
ul u01lenal3
0
°
0
0
n
0
m
0
"O
d
N Q
LL
C
O
LL
—
d
0
� C
O
V
\
E
y
\
U
O
Y
O
Y
O
Y
O O
Y Y
O O
Y Y
O
Y
O
Y
L
O
N
N
m V
N W
1`
m O
1
(MIIW) laa3 ul u01 ;ena13
Y w
I
U
II
om
°
O
to
U
=
z
I I
II
'
II
II
\\
t
I I
Y
rb \
(MIIW)
;aa3 ul
uollena13
o
+'
\
0
0
0
I I r
II
s
.Y n II
Qj
.. I
I
r••+ n n
Q)
m'
I I v
v
N �w
N w
`q
a°
to t�¢
v
M °
H S¢
I I v
v
to
°
N �^ N
>
W
I I o'
I I o
O
U
t
I
I I
t
O N
U o>
\
\\
m
I I
>
m
a
a
a
v
I I o
o
m
a
v I I
>
>
0
°
m
m m
a
=
L v
E.G
\
11
d
II n
LL
v v II
z
Q
I I
v P I I
o
o
I
II
II
v
W
c
u
v
u
v
m M
wo
I I
w
ati '
I
�
off¢
g
v ">
V z
j
I O
O
2 r 0 0 3
O`
13:
a
•�.
!
i i
O
O O
N
M
a
10
0
C
W 6 tp
a
II
H
I I
(MIIW) laa3 ul u01 ;ena13
Ea �o
Lu
I
p
I
z
°'^ E 3
m
�o
II
m��g
�
o a
o
I
aa¢
t`3a
0
N
w Z
(MIIW) laad
ul U01
enal3
s
O
S
m >
Lam8!d 8mp'TZ0-dtl-T0-EVZO60 \ApnlS le!lNl \ab7 UodmaN 10- EVZ060 \sa!i3 l3afWd aVDOIntl \'l eAeueq wdgSE oloz'¢ AeW
N N a
O c
C
OD � OJ
LL U U
a)
C C
L
E
aJ
L N
C �
C +'
f0 �
a �
N M
Y
O
U
f0 �
� C
CL m
aJ U
U U
0 N
o
U . c _
O C
0
O
U
N
N
N
0
V
C
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked in the following list would be potentially affected by this
project, involving at least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by
the checklist on the following pages.
❑Aesthetics
O Biological Resources
[El Greenhouse Gas Emissions
❑ Land Use and Planning
❑ Population and Housing
❑ Transportation and Traffic
❑ Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
❑Cultural Resources
❑ Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
❑ Mineral Resources
❑ Public Services
❑ Utilities and Service Systems
X❑ Air Quality
❑ Geology and Soils
❑X Hydrology and Water Quality
❑X Noise
O Recreation
❑ Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
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
0
not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to
by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and
❑
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) 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, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated." 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, there WILL
❑
NOT be a significant effect in this case 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, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
rti A4-
Signature
7h0
Date Signature
Date
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
I. 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 day or nighttime
views in the area?
Environmental Setting
Known for its picturesque views of the Pacific Ocean, Newport Beach is acclaimed for its
beaches, outdoor recreation, and the oldest holiday boat parade in the nation. Within the
Project Area, scenic views of the harbor and the City of Newport Beach (City) are provided
from a number of locations and are shown on Figure NR3 of the City's General Plan (General
Plan 2009). From these locations, the public can see harbor waters, recreational and
commercial vessels, sailboats, and other water -borne vessels. In addition to the recreational
and commercial vessels seen in the harbor, barges and dredging equipment that supported
the dredging in Upper Newport Bay have been traversing Lower Newport Bay (LNB) for the
past 5 years.
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Dredging activities occurring during the approximately 4- to 5 -month project timeframe may
result in potential short-term impacts to the visual character of LNB. The presence and
activities of the dredging equipment could slightly and temporarily degrade the visual
character of the Project Area during dredging activities; however, the public has become
accustomed to seeing various dredging equipment, barges, and related work boats in LNB
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 1 090243 -01
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
❑
❑
❑�C
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑x
❑
Known for its picturesque views of the Pacific Ocean, Newport Beach is acclaimed for its
beaches, outdoor recreation, and the oldest holiday boat parade in the nation. Within the
Project Area, scenic views of the harbor and the City of Newport Beach (City) are provided
from a number of locations and are shown on Figure NR3 of the City's General Plan (General
Plan 2009). From these locations, the public can see harbor waters, recreational and
commercial vessels, sailboats, and other water -borne vessels. In addition to the recreational
and commercial vessels seen in the harbor, barges and dredging equipment that supported
the dredging in Upper Newport Bay have been traversing Lower Newport Bay (LNB) for the
past 5 years.
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Dredging activities occurring during the approximately 4- to 5 -month project timeframe may
result in potential short-term impacts to the visual character of LNB. The presence and
activities of the dredging equipment could slightly and temporarily degrade the visual
character of the Project Area during dredging activities; however, the public has become
accustomed to seeing various dredging equipment, barges, and related work boats in LNB
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 1 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
from the Upper Newport Bay Restoration Project. Localized discolored waters due to
dredge - generated turbidity may also result in temporary impacts to aesthetics.
To reduce potential impacts to water quality and the visual character of the surface waters of
LNB, the contractor will maintain silt curtains around the active dredging area, thus limiting
the extent of this impact. Turbid water generated from dredging will be contained within
the work area before the curtains are removed; based on the sediment characteristics in the
project area, visual impacts from turbidity would no longer be present within 1 or 2 hours of
dredging. Temporary turbidity generated from propeller wash during barge movement will
be minimized by starting and stopping vessels as slowly as feasible.
Determination of Significance
No indirect (operational) effects to aesthetics have been identified. Cumulative impacts to
aesthetics are primarily associated with the potential for localized turbidity during dredging
activities and the presence of dredging equipment during federal maintenance dredging in
LNB. The cumulative impacts to the visual character of the site and its surroundings
resulting from the presence of construction equipment are not expected to be significant,
because the size and number of equipment in LNB will not increase during the federal
maintenance dredging project. Measures to isolate turbidity would also be taken for all
future projects.
The project will not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The proposed debris
offloading area at the end of the Rhine Channel is located in close proximity to one view
point shown in the General Plan (2009). This viewing area may be temporarily closed to the
public during times that debris is offloaded; however, other view points are adjacent to this
area and will remain open. No other temporary impacts to scenic vistas will occur. Due to
the temporary (4 to 5 months) and negligible (isolated to active dredging areas) nature of the
effects, impacts to scenic vistas are less than significant.
The proposed project will not damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway because
the Project Area is not in the vicinity of such a highway.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 2 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
The project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site
and its surroundings, because there will be no change to these conditions upon project
completion.
No additional lighting is proposed as part of the project; therefore, there would be no new
source of light or glare. Because the proposed project will occur during the time of year with
shortened daylight hours, temporary nighttime light or glare will result from construction
activities from sundown to the end of the work day (approximately 3 hours). This impact is
temporary and less than significant.
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of State -wide 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(8)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland
zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51101(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?
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 3
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
X
❑ ❑
❑ ❑X
❑
Less than
❑x
❑
❑
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
❑
❑
❑
❑X
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
X
❑ ❑
❑ ❑X
❑
❑
❑x
❑
❑
❑
June 2010
090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
The California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping, and Monitoring Program
designates the land as "urban land" (CDC 2006); therefore, the proposed project will not
result in the conversion of any farmland to non - agricultural use; conflict with existing
zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract; conflict with existing zoning for
forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production; result in the loss of
forest land or conversion of forest land to no- forest use; or result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to no- forest use.
III. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or
air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations.
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
El
0
El
El
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
El
0
El
El
existing or projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
El
Q
El
El
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
0
0
El
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
El
El
El
0
number of people?
Environmental Setting
A complete description of the existing conditions at the project site can be found in
Appendix A; the following is a summary of the information contained in the attached report.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 4 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Regional Climate and Meteorology. The proposed project is located within the South Coast
Air Basin (SCAB) and within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD). The SCAB consists of the non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside,
and San Bernardino counties and all of Orange County. The climate of the project site is
classified as Mediterranean, characterized by warm, rainless summers and mild, wet winters.
The major influences on the regional climate include the Eastern Pacific High (a strong
persistent area of high atmospheric pressure over the Pacific Ocean), topography, and the
moderating effects of the Pacific Ocean. Seasonal variations in the position and strength of
the Eastern Pacific High are a key factor in weather changes in the area.
The project is expected to occur during the winter months. As winter approaches, the
Eastern Pacific High begins to weaken and shift to the south, allowing storm systems to pass
through the region. A wet seasonal pattern occurs during the months of November through
April, while a dry seasonal pattern occurs during the months of May through October. This
wet -dry seasonal pattern is characteristic of most of southern California.
During the fall and winter months, the Eastern Pacific High can combine with high pressure
over the continent to produce light winds and extended inversion conditions in the region.
These stagnant atmospheric conditions often result in elevated pollutant concentrations in
the SCAB. Excessive buildup of high pressure in the region can produce a "Santa Ana"
condition, characterized by warm, dry, northeast winds in the basin and offshore regions.
Santa Ana winds often ventilate the SCAB of air pollutants.
Criteria Pollutants and Air Monitoring. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) establishes the national ambient air quality standards ( NAAQS). For most
pollutants, maximum concentrations may not exceed a NAAQS more than once per year; and
they may not exceed annual standards. The California Air Resources Board (GARB)
establishes the California Ambient Air Quality Standards ( CAAQS), which are generally
more stringent and include more pollutants than the NAAQS. Project - generated maximum
pollutant concentrations should not equal or exceed the CAAQS.
Pollutants that have corresponding NAAQS or CAAQS are known as criteria pollutants. The
criteria pollutants of primary concern in this air quality assessment are ozone, carbon
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 5 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (S02), and particulate matter with
particle diameter less than 10 microns (PMio) and 2.5 microns (PM2.5). Criteria pollutants
contribute directly to health issues. The known adverse effects associated with these criteria
pollutants are shown in Table 2.1 in Appendix A.
Of the criteria pollutants of concern, ozone is unique because it is not directly emitted from
project - related sources. Rather, ozone is a secondary pollutant, formed from the precursor
pollutants volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). VOCs and NOx
react to form ozone in the presence of sunlight through a complex series of photochemical
reactions. Unlike inert pollutants, ozone levels usually peak several hours after the
precursors are emitted and many miles downwind of the source. Because of the complexity
and uncertainty in predicting photochemical pollutant concentrations, ozone impacts are
indirectly addressed in this study by comparing project - generated emissions of VOCs and
NOx to daily emission thresholds set by the SCAQMD and pollutant concentrations to
NAAQS and CAAQS.
The USEPA designates areas of the United States according to whether they meet the
NAAQS; areas that do not meet the NAAQS for any criteria pollutant are designated as
"nonattainment" areas for that criteria pollutant. CARB also designates areas of the state
according to whether they meet the CAAQS. CARB and SCAQMD maintain a network of
monitoring stations in the vicinity of Newport Beach. The most representative station for
the project vicinity is the Costa Mesa (North Coastal Orange County) monitoring station,
because it is the closest monitoring station to the project site, located approximately 3.5 miles
north of the project site. The Costa Mesa station does not monitor concentrations of PM10 or
PM2.5. The next closest monitoring station that can be used to compile ambient air pollutant
concentrations for PMio and PM2.5 for this analysis is the Mission Viejo monitoring station
(Saddleback Valley), located approximately 15 miles east of the project site.
Table 2.2 in Appendix A shows the highest pollutant concentrations recorded at the two
stations from 2006 to 2008 and exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS are shown in bold.
Ozone concentrations exceeded the 1 -hour state standard in 2008 and the 1 -hour and 8 -hour
standards in 2007 and 2008. PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations exceeded the 24 -hour standard in
2006 and 2007.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 6 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Sensitive Receptors. The impact of air emissions on sensitive members of the population is a
special concern. Sensitive receptor groups include children, the elderly, and the acutely and
chronically ill. These groups are located in residences, schools, daycare centers, convalescent
homes, and hospitals. The proximity of sensitive receptors closest to the project site is as
follows:
• The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site include residents directly to the
west, east, north, and south of the dredge area.
• The nearest school is the Newport Heights Elementary School, located 0.6 miles to
the southeast, at 300 15th Street, Newport Beach, California.
• The nearest hospital is the Hoag Memorial Hospital, located approximately 0.6 miles
north of the project site, at 1 Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California.
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Because all project - generated emissions would be new to the area, the project is considered
to have an emissions baseline of zero. The sequential phases that were considered in the
analysis of potential air quality impacts are Phase 1 (debris removal and associated activities)
and Phase 2 (mechanical dredging activities).
Table 4.1 in Appendix A presents the typical activity and engine -size parameters expected
for each emission source category. The proposed construction project would include the
following distinct types of emission sources:
• Marine sources:
- Dredging Equipment. A single mechanical clamshell dredge would be used to
remove contaminated sediments. The dredge would be positioned on a barge and
operated with diesel engines.
- Push Tugboat/Tender. A single tugboat tender would be used to position the
dredging barge. Once the barge is in place and the tugboat has been secured,
tugboat tender engines would be turned off.
- Tugboats. Tugboats would be used to pull a haul barge with dredged sediments
for disposal in the Port of Long Beach (POLB) Middle Harbor Redevelopment
Project confined disposal facility (Middle Harbor CDF).
Initial Study and Mjogated Negative Declarat7on June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 7 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
- Work/Crew Boat. Workboat /crew boat would be used to shuttle workers and
supplies out to the dredging barge.
- Excavator. There may be instances where a long -reach excavator would be used
to reach sediment under existing docks to avoid temporarily moving floating
docks and other structures during the debris removal phase.
• Off -road land -based mobile sources:
- Front -End Loader. This type of equipment would be used to manage debris
stockpiles and load the material into trucks for hauling.
• On -road mobile sources:
- Haul Truck. A heavy -duty haul truck would be used during the debris removal
phase to haul debris to a local landfill.
- Worker Vehicles.
Project equipment would be diesel - fueled and would generate emissions of diesel exhaust in
the form of VOCs, CO, NOx, sulfur oxides (SOx), PMio, and PNh.s. Equipment usage and
scheduling data required to quantify emissions for the proposed activities were obtained for
the project in consultation with contractors and engineers. When estimating, emissions
were first calculated for the individual equipment and then summed within each phase.
Appendix A provides a detailed analysis of the anticipated emissions and air quality impacts
associated with this project. The results of the analysis show that without mitigation
significant impacts to air quality (i.e., exceedence of the NOx regional threshold and on -site
daily emissions that would exceed SCAQMD's Localized Significance Threshold [LST]
emission thresholds for PM23) would occur, and therefore, the City has considered other
alternatives to reduce emissions. Connecting the dredge equipment to land -based electrical
power would reduce NOx emissions below significance; however, that alternative is
economically infeasible because the infrastructure to provide the required power does not
exist in the vicinity of the Project Area and would have to be constructed at a significant
cost. Additionally, due to the time required to install the infrastructure needed to support
electric dredges, this alternative could not be instituted during the timeframe for disposal of
the dredged material. The City also considered reducing the hours dredging could occur;
however, that alternative was rejected from a logistical and economic standpoint, as the
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 8 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
reduction in dredging hours per day would extend the overall dredging operation beyond
POLB scheduling needs.
Regional Impacts. Table AQl shows the results of the air quality analysis of the project
before mitigation. NOx emissions exceed the peak daily regional threshold for both phases of
construction.
Table AQ1
Summary of Peak Daily Construction Emissions,
Proposed Project Before Mitigation
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 9 090243 -01
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
Source
Activity /Source
Category
ROG
CO
NOx
SO2
PMto
PM2.5
Phase 1: Debris Removal Activities
Off-Road,
Excavator
1.5
4.5
14.1
0.0
0.5
0.4
Land
Off-Road,
Push Tugboat /Tender
1.3
5.5
19.9
0.0
0.8
0.6
Marine
Off -Road,
Dredge
7.6
31.1
60.3
0.1
3.4
2.7
Marine
HHD Truck
On -Road
0.6
3.0
9.3
0.0
0.4
0.3
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
Phase 1 Total
11.1
46.1
103.9
0.1
5.4
4.4
Regional Thresholds (lb /day)
75
550
100
150
150
55
Phase 2: Mechanical Dredging Activities
Off-Road,
Push Tugboat /Tender
1.3
5.5
19.9
0.0
0.8
0.6
Marine
Off -Road,
Tugboat
9.7
36.9
120.2
0.1
6.0
4.8
Marine
Off -Road,
Work /Crew Boat
0.3
1.0
3.9
0.0
0.2
0.1
Marine
Off -Road,
Dredge
7.6
31.1
60.3
0.1
3.4
2.7
Marine
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 9 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table AQl
Summary of Peak Daily Construction Emissions,
Proposed Project Before Mitigation
Activity /Source
Source
Category
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
ROG
CO
NOx
S02
PM10
PM2.5
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
Phase 2 Total
19.0
76.4
204.5
0.2
10.7
8.6
Regional Thresholds (lb /day)
75
550
100
150
150
55
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
Emissions reflect the use of California diesel fuel with a sulfur content of 15 parts per million (ppm).
lb/day = pounds per day
ROG = Reactive Organic Gases
Localized Impacts. Table AQ2 shows the results of the air quality analysis of the project
without mitigation for localized impacts. On -site daily emissions would exceed the
SCAQMD's LST for PM25.
Table AQ2
Summary of On -Site Daily Construction Emissions,
Proposed Project Without Mitigation
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
LST significance thresholds are for a 1 -acre site; the distance to the nearest receptor is 32 meters (105 feet).
LST thresholds were extrapolated for a distance of 32 meters between 25 (82) and 50 meters (164 feet).
Cumulative Impacts. No other major construction activities are expected to occur in LNB
within the timeframe of the proposed project; therefore, no cumulative increases in
short-term emissions from concurrent activities during any day of the project construction
period will occur. Compared to ongoing impacts to air quality within SCAB —from
operations at the Port of Los Angeles, POLB, Los Angeles International Airport, John Wayne
Airport, and other regional airports, ports, and industry —the temporary effects from this
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 10 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
CO
NOx
PM'0
PM2.5
On -Site Daily Emissions
39
89
5
4
LST (lb /day)
672
92
7
3.6
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
LST significance thresholds are for a 1 -acre site; the distance to the nearest receptor is 32 meters (105 feet).
LST thresholds were extrapolated for a distance of 32 meters between 25 (82) and 50 meters (164 feet).
Cumulative Impacts. No other major construction activities are expected to occur in LNB
within the timeframe of the proposed project; therefore, no cumulative increases in
short-term emissions from concurrent activities during any day of the project construction
period will occur. Compared to ongoing impacts to air quality within SCAB —from
operations at the Port of Los Angeles, POLB, Los Angeles International Airport, John Wayne
Airport, and other regional airports, ports, and industry —the temporary effects from this
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 10 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
project do not significantly contribute to cumulative air quality impacts. Given the
temporary nature of this project, permanent increases in pollutant emissions or
concentrations are not anticipated from project implementation.
Best management practices (BMPs) implemented to minimize impacts during this project
include:
• The contractor will be required to implement the air quality monitoring program
required by the SCAQMD during construction.
• The contractor will restrict idling of construction equipment to a maximum of
5 minutes when equipment is not in use.
• The contractor will maintain equipment according to manufacturers' specifications.
• Activities and operations on unpaved surfaces, such as staging areas, will be
minimized to the extent feasible during high -wind events to minimize fugitive dust.
• All internal combustion engines will be equipped with properly operating mufflers.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce air quality impacts to less than
significant levels. These measures are offsetting and operational mitigation measures.
After consultation with the SCAQMD, the City has decided to mitigate the impacts to air
quality (i.e., the exceedence of NOx regional threshold) below the significance level by
offsetting the impact through the purchase of Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits
(MSERCs). MSERCs are created when high- emitting vehicles are retired, and these credits
are considered by the SCAQMD to be an acceptable method to mitigate construction
emissions. NOx emissions will be mitigated by purchasing MSERCs for every pound of NOx
emissions in excess of the significance threshold for each day of the construction period. The
total amount of MSERCs required to fully mitigate construction NOx emissions to less than
significant levels is estimated to be approximately 3,969 pounds.
The use of emission credits to offset NOx construction emissions will mitigate regional air
quality impacts but will not ensure that localized impacts are not significant. The proposed
operational mitigation measure not only reduces regional NOx emissions but helps to reduce
localized impacts to PM25 to a less than significant level. This operational mitigation
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 11 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
measure to reduce NOx emissions requires push tugboat/tenders and work/crew boats to use
modem (Tier 3) main engines. This measure reduces NOx during Phase 1 and reduces
localized PM2.5 emissions to less than significant.
The SCAQMD has established monitoring requirements to verify that purchasing MSERCs
for mitigation meets performance standards and that the project does not result in significant
impacts to air quality. The monitoring program is designed to:
• Verify satisfaction of the required mitigation measures of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND)
• Provide a methodology to document implementation of the required mitigation
• Provide a record of the monitoring program
• Identify monitoring responsibility
• Establish the frequency and duration of monitoring
• Establish administrative procedures for the clearance of mitigation measures
• Utilize existing review processes whenever feasible
Mitigation measures AQ-2 through AQ-11 ensure that the monitoring program required by
the SCAQMD is implemented.
Operational Mitigation Measure
AQ 1. Push tugboat /tenders and work/crew boats shall use Tier 3 main engines. Tugboats
used to tow disposal barges to Middle Harbor CDF during both Phases 1 and 2 shall use Tier
2 main engines.
Offsetting Mitigation Measures
AQ 2. The City shall purchase credits to offset an estimated 3,969 pounds of NOx emissions
credits to mitigate the exceedance of the significance threshold for NOx emissions from this
project. The offset credits will meet the following criteria:
1. Emission credits have been derived from emission reduction project(s) through
existing SCAQMD protocols.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 12 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
2. Emission credits will be current for the time the project takes place, meaning the
MSERCs have not expired before or during the period when the emissions from the
project would occur.
AQ 3. All diesel - powered equipment shall be equipped with a meter to record hourly usage
(not including worker vehicles, haul trucks, or delivery trucks).
AQ-4. The meter on each piece of equipment shall be verified by an independent
construction monitor who shall certify that it is working properly.
AQ 5. To demonstrate that measures AQ 2, AQ 4, and AQ 5 have been met, a pre -start up
audit of equipment shall be prepared by an independent construction monitor and provided
to the SCAQMD for review prior to dredging activities.
AQ 6. The hourly meter reading for each piece of equipment shall be recorded.
AQ 7. Equipment use and hours of operations shall be recorded by the contractor and
verified on a weekly basis by an independent monitor.
AQ 8. A monthly report shall be submitted to the SCAQMD to demonstrate that measures
AQ-6 and AQ-7 have been met. The monthly report shall summarize equipment used, hours
of operation, NOx emissions as well as identify any problems that occur and corrective
actions implemented by the contractor. If NOx emissions exceed the original estimation, the
report should also include additional Reactive Organic Gases (ROG), CO, and SOx emissions
emitted to ensure no exceedance of SCAQMD's California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) NOx construction significance threshold.
AQ 9. Within 15 days after the end of each construction month, NOx emissions exceeding
the original estimation as identified in AQ 8 shall be reconciled and reported to the
SCAQMD. NOx emission credits shall be purchased to reconcile actual emissions with the
previously purchased NOx emission credits, if necessary, at the completion of the project.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 13 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
AQ-10. A final report summarizing all construction activities, NOx emissions, and
reconciliation of NOx emission credits for the entire construction period shall be prepared by
an independent construction monitor and provided to the SCAQMD within 20 days after the
completion of the construction of the project.
AQ 11. A sign shall be posted at the project boundary along Lido Park Drive at the terminus
of the Rhine Channel. The sign should contain City contact information for people with
questions or comments regarding construction activities.
Appendix B includes samples forms provided by the SCAQMD for recording the required
information and completing monitoring.
Determination of Significance
With mitigation, this project does not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
SCAQMD air quality plan.
With mitigation, this project does not violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation.
With mitigation, this project does not result in cumulative increases of any criteria pollutant.
With mitigation, this project does not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations.
The proposed project would increase air pollutants due to the combustion of diesel fuel, and
although some individuals may find diesel combustion emissions to be objectionable in
nature, odorous impacts of these emissions are subjective and depend on the distance of the
individual from the source. The mobile nature of project emission sources would serve to
disperse proposed project emissions over a broad area rather than concentrate them locally.
Therefore, it is unlikely that the proposed project will produce objectionable odors that
would affect a sensitive receptor.
Regional Impacts. Table AQ3 shows the results of the air quality analysis of the project after
mitigation measures are implemented. These mitigation measures reduce the estimated
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 14 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
maximum daily emissions for each criteria air pollutant below mass daily significance
thresholds.
Table AQ3
Summary of Peak Daily Construction Emissions,
Proposed Project After Mitigation
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
lb/day = pounds per day
MSERCs will be used to offset NOx emissions during Phase 2.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 15 090243 -01
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
Source
ROG
CO
NOx
SO,
PMla
PM2.5
Activity /Source
Category
Phase 1: Debris Removal Activities
Off-Road,
Excavator
1.5
4.5
14.1
0.0
0.5
0.4
Land
Off -Road,
Push Tugboat/Tender
0.9
6.2
7.0
0.0
0,3
0.3
Marine
Off -Road,
Dredge
7.6
31.1
60.3
0.1
3.4
2.7
Marine
HHD Truck
On -Road
0.6
3.0
9.3
0.0
0.4
0.3
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
Phase 1 Total
10.7
46.8
90.9
0.1
4.9
4.0
Regional Thresholds (lb /day)
1 75
550
100
150
150
55
Phase 2: Mechanical Dredging Activities
Off-Road,
Push Tugboat /Tender
0.9
6.2
7.0
0.0
0.3
0.3
Marine
Off -Road,
Tugboat
8.6
59.8
79.6
0.1
2.7
2.1
Marine
Off-Road,
Work /Crew Boat
0.2
1.4
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
Marine
Off -Road,
Dredge
7.6
31.1
60.3
0.1
3.4
2.7
Marine
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
MSERC (lb /day)
0
0
-49
0
0
0
Phase 2 Total
17.5
100.4
99.6
0.2
6.7
5.4
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
75
550
100
150
150
55
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
lb/day = pounds per day
MSERCs will be used to offset NOx emissions during Phase 2.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 15 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
With mitigation, regional air quality impacts will result in less than significant impacts as
shown in Table AQ4.
Table AQ4
Regional Impacts Significance Determination After Mitigation
Total Emissions and Significance
Determination by Phase
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
ROG
CO
NOx
SOz
PM20
PM2.5
Phase 1: Debris Removal and Associated Activities
Phase 1 Total
10.7
46.5
90.9
0.1
4.9
4.0
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
75
550
100
150
150
55
CEQA Significant?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Phase 2: Mechanical Dredging Activities
Phase 2 Total
17.5
100.4
99.6
0.2
6.7
5.4
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
75
550
100
150
ISO
55
CEQA Significant?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
MSERCs will be used to offset NOx emissions during Phase 2.
Localized Impacts. Following mitigation, localized impacts from construction emissions will
not exceed the LST, as shown in Table AQ5.
Table AQ5
Summary of On -Site Daily Construction Emissions, Proposed Project with Mitigation
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
LST significance thresholds are for a 1 -acre site; the distance to the nearest receptor is 32 meters (105 feet).
LST thresholds were extrapolated for a distance of 32 meters between 25 (82) and 50 meters (164 feet).
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 16 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
CO
NOx
PM.
PM2.5
On -Site Daily Emissions
41
73
4
3
LST(lb /day)
672
92
7
3.6
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
LST significance thresholds are for a 1 -acre site; the distance to the nearest receptor is 32 meters (105 feet).
LST thresholds were extrapolated for a distance of 32 meters between 25 (82) and 50 meters (164 feet).
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 16 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
With mitigation, localized air quality impacts will result in less than significant impacts as
shown in Table AQ6.
Table AQ6
Localized Impacts Significance Determination After Mitigation
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
LST significance thresholds are for a 1 -acre site; the distance to the nearest receptor is 32 meters (105 feet).
LST thresholds were extrapolated for a distance of 32 meters between 25 (82) and 50 meters (164 feet).
As previously mentioned and analyzed in Appendix A, the proposed project would not result
in construction - related emissions that would exceed regional significance thresholds or result
in significant localized impacts following mitigation. Mitigation consists of operational
measures (i.e., use of Tier 3 main engines for push tugboat/tender equipment) and offsetting
measures (i.e., purchase of MSERCs).
Cumulative Impacts. With mitigation, this project does not contribute significantly to
regional or local air quality impacts and, therefore, does not contribute to cumulative air
quality impacts.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 17 090243 -01
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
CO
NOx
PMta
PMz.s
On -Site Daily Emissions
41
73
4
3
LST (lb /day)
672
92
7
3.6
CEQA Significant?
No
No
No
No
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
LST significance thresholds are for a 1 -acre site; the distance to the nearest receptor is 32 meters (105 feet).
LST thresholds were extrapolated for a distance of 32 meters between 25 (82) and 50 meters (164 feet).
As previously mentioned and analyzed in Appendix A, the proposed project would not result
in construction - related emissions that would exceed regional significance thresholds or result
in significant localized impacts following mitigation. Mitigation consists of operational
measures (i.e., use of Tier 3 main engines for push tugboat/tender equipment) and offsetting
measures (i.e., purchase of MSERCs).
Cumulative Impacts. With mitigation, this project does not contribute significantly to
regional or local air quality impacts and, therefore, does not contribute to cumulative air
quality impacts.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 17 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
IV. 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, and
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 impeded 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?
■
El
J
MI
❑X
❑x
NO
19
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 18 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
❑
❑
❑K
❑
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian ❑
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
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 impeded 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?
■
El
J
MI
❑X
❑x
NO
19
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 18 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Environmental Setting
Because the project occurs in the marine environment, this biological resources analysis
focuses on marine species and habitats in the Project Area. Potential impacts to open -ocean
habitat and species during the transfer of dredged material to the Middle Harbor CDF are
also analyzed. Because of the marine focus of the proposed project, potential impacts to
terrestrial species and habitats are only discussed where relevant. The proposed project's
construction activities would occur only during daytime hours, so the activities of nocturnal
species would not be affected and the inactive periods of diurnal species would not be
disturbed.
Although nearly fully developed, LNB provides habitat to a number of species, including
species listed under the California and Federal Endangered Species Acts (CESA and FESA,
respectively), such as the California brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) and California
least tern (Sterna antillarum brown). LNB is also considered Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)
for species managed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the Pacific
Coast Groundfish and Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plans (FMPs), which are
designated under the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
Eelgrass (Zostera marina), mudflats, and other habitats present within Newport Bay are
considered Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPCs) within EFH, and Environmentally
Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHA) under the California Coastal Act (CCA). The City has also
identified 28 Environmental Study Areas (ESAs) within its jurisdiction; ESAs are generally
undeveloped areas possibly supporting natural habitats that may be capable of supporting
sensitive biological resources within the City. No HAPCs, ESHA, or ESAs are found within
the Project Area.
Habitat types within or adjacent to the Project Area include upland areas, marine habitats
(subtidal, unvegetated mud substrate, intertidal, subtidal sandy substrate, and floats and
piles), and EFH. Shell mounds are commonly found immediately adjacent to and underneath
bulkheads and docks in the Rhine Channel. Although eelgrass has not been identified
within the Project Area (General Plan Figure NRl; General Plan 2009; Newfields 2009),
pre- construction surveys, as required by the Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy
(SCEMP), will be conducted.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 19 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Upland Habitats and Species. Upland areas adjacent to the water are urbanized and
developed with commercial and residential buildings, parking lots, and streets. These areas
provide little or no suitable habitat for native wildlife species. The Project Area does not
provide wildlife movement corridors or connectivity between large areas of open space on a
local or regional scale, but the Project Area is connected with the existing open waters of
LNB. Birds observed at or near the Project Area include the house sparrow (Passer
domesticus), house finch (Carpodacusmexicanus), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos),
and mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), which are all considered urban - adapted species.
Marine- associated avian species include the snowy egret (Egretta thula), California brown
pelican, and gull-billed tern (Sterna nilotica). The sandy beach at Marina Park would be
expected to be used as a resting area by a number of shorebirds and seabirds, notably gulls
(Larus spp.) and sandpipers (Actitis spp.); the intertidal portion of the beach likely serves as
foraging habitat for these species. The adjacent waters of the channel are used by common
waterfowl such as ducks, terns, and gulls (CRM 2009). Other wildlife found in the harbor
includes marine birds, which are primarily spring and fall migrants or winter residents, and
several species of gulls, such as the western grebe (Aechmophorus occidentalis) and Brandt's
and double- crested cormorants (Phalacrocoraxpenicillatusand P. auritus) that are year -
round residents. Grebes and seasonal migrants like surf scooters (Melanitta perspicillata),
red - breasted mergansers (Mergus serrator), and red - throated loons (Gavia stellata) forage in
the calm, open subtidal waters of LNB.
Three sandy beaches are found within or near the Project Area. The proposed project will
not directly affect any of these beaches. The portion of the sandy beach at Marina Park that
is not included in the Project Area, is cleaned and groomed regularly by the City and, thus,
does not constitute wildlife habitat other than as a resting area for shorebirds. The shallow
subtidal zone fronting the sand beach shoreline at Marina Park is sparsely vegetated by green
algae (Ulva and Enteromorpha,). At deeper depths, red (Gracilariopsis) and brown algae
(Colpomenia, Sargassum, and Cystoseira) are more common (CRM 2009; City of Newport
Beach 2006). A second, smaller beach area, approximately 170 feet long by 60 feet deep, is in
the immediate vicinity of the 15th Street Pier. The third sandy beach, 430 feet long by 20
feet wide, is on the southwest corner of Lido Isle West Lido Channel.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 20 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Marine Habitats and Species. Pile and float communities found in LNB typically include
colonial tunicates (Riterella sp.), anemones (Anthopleura artemisia), and bryozoans (Bugula
sp. and Eurystomella sp.). Barnacles (Balanus spp.) generally cover the high intertidal areas
where piles, sheetpile, and bulkheads are located, while oysters (Crassostrea spp.) are present
at slightly deeper depths. The community of encrusting invertebrates is generally more
abundant on dock floats and may include some solitary tunicates, sponges, mussels, feather
duster worms, and colonial ascidians.
Recent surveys of marine resources have been conducted in the areas adjacent to the Project
Area, in the Lido Yacht Anchorage (Merkel and Associates 2007) and Marina Park (CRM
2009). These surveys show that subtidal habitat in the Project Area consists of sandy and
muddy areas with little to no vegetative coverage other than algae growing on piles. The
dominant benthic invertebrate species commonly found in Newport Bay include annelid
worms (polychaetes and oligochaetes), arthropods (gammarid and caprellid amphipods,
isopods, ostracods, and cumaceans), and mollusks (gastropods and pelecypods; CRM 2009).
Between 1992 and 1997, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and other state
and federal agencies conducted investigations of sediment chemistry, toxicity, and benthic
community conditions in Newport Bay and other selected waterbodies in the Santa Ana
Region (SWRCB et al. 1998 in CRM 2009). Sample locations closest to the Project Area
included Station 85006 located off the east tip of Lido Peninsula, Station 85012 located near
the 10th Street Beach, and Station 85013 located in the Rhine Channel. The number of
benthic infaunal species decreased from the harbor entrance —where water circulation is
regular— through sample locations located deeper within LNB —where water circulation is
restricted (CRM 2009). The number of benthic species identified at stations between 10th
Street and the Rhine Channel during the survey varied between 14 species (10th Street) and
32 species (Lido Peninsula). Comparatively, cleaner sediments near the Newport Harbor
entrance channel support as many as 207 species.
Sampling in the open waters of the channel along the Newport Peninsula between 9th and
13th streets recorded approximately 19 fish species; the most common of which are white
croaker (Genyonemuslineatus), shiner surf perch (Cymatogasteraggregata), white surf perch
(Phanerodon furcatus), slough anchovy (Anchoa delrcatissima), deepbody anchovy (Anchoa
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 21 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
compressa), black surf perch (Embiotoca jacksom), queen fish (Serjphus poh'tus), bat ray
(Myliobatis californica), and mullet (Mugil cephalus, CRM 2009). Other common fish
species recorded from Newport Harbor include arrow goby (Clevelandia ios), California
halibut (Paralichthys californicus), topsmelt (Atherinops afEnjs), and walleye surf perch
(Hyperprosopon argenteum).
Essential Fish Habitat. The Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Management and Conservation Act
directs NMFS, regional fishery management councils, and federal action agencies to identify
and protect important marine and anadromous (migrating) fish habitat with the goal of
maintaining sustainable fisheries. EFH is comprised of the waters and substrate necessary to
fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity. The EFH designation is only
applicable if it is formally designated for a species through its respective FMP.
LNB is considered EFH for species managed under Coastal Pelagic Species and Pacific Coast
Groundfish FMPs (NMFS 1998a, 1998b). Four coastal pelagic species —the northern anchovy
(Engrauljs mordax), Pacific sardine (Sardjnops sagax), jack mackerel (Scomber japonjcus),
and Pacific mackerel (Trachurussymmetricus)— potentially occur in the waters offshore of
Newport Beach and may occur inside the bay. Six groundfish species also potentially occur
within the general project area: California scorpionfish (Scorpaena guttata), vermillion
rockfish (Sebastes mjniatus), calico rockfish (Sebastes da&z), California skate (Raja inornata),
spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthjas), and leopard shark (Triakjs semifasciata). Of these species,
only the northern anchovy is very abundant, although less so within Newport Bay.
Northern anchovy support a commercial -bait fishing operation based in the Newport Harbor
entrance channel and are an important food item for many fish and seabirds.
Candidate, Sensitive, or Special Status Species. Table BI lists the protected species that could
potentially be found in the vicinity of the Project Area.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 22 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table 131
Protected Species Potentially Occurring within the Project Vicinity
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Occurrence in the
Project Area
Double- crested cormorant
Pholacrocorox ouritus
CDFG SSC
Rare
Light footed clapper rail
Rallus longirostris levipes
SE, FE
Rare
Marbled murrelet
Brachyromphus marmoratus
SE, FT
Rare
California least tern'
Sterna antillorum browni
SE, FE
Rare
Western snowy plover
Charodrius alexandrines nivosus
FT
Rare
Peregrine falcon
Falco peregrinus
SE
Rare
California grunion
Leuresthes tenuis
CDFG SSC
Rare
Tidewater goby
Eucyclogobiusnewberryi
FE
Rare
Harbor seal
Phoca vitulina
MMPA
Occasional
California sea lion
Zalophus californicus
MMPA
Regular
Bottlenose dolphin
Tursiops truncotus
MMPA
Rare
Notes:
Table created from Merkel and Associates 2007.
SE State Endangered
FE Federally Endangered
FT Federally Threatened
CDFG SSC California Department of Fish and Game Species of Special Concern
MMPA Marine Mammal Protection Act
California least terns are a migratory summer breeding resident found from approximately April 1
through September 1 of each year.
The double- crested cormorant could use the Project Area for loafing and foraging. California
least terns could also use the waters adjacent to the dredging area seasonally for foraging but
would not use the Project Area for regular loafing or nesting. Known breeding areas for the
California least tern include Least Tern Island in the northeast portion of Upper Newport
Bay, approximately 3 miles from the Project Area. California least terns feed exclusively on
fish and typically forage in open waters within 2 miles of the colony site. Their prey
includes anchovies and silversides, and they feed by taking the fish near the surface of the
water after a short, plunging dive. California least terns may transit or feed at the Project
Area, but the project is unlikely to disrupt feeding due to:
• Distance from the seasonal colony
• Existing conditions (low water visibility) and lack of high quality foraging habitat
• Availability of feeding waters in other areas of Newport Bay
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 23 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
The Western snowy plover (Charadriuslexandrinesnivosus) is a small shorebird that nests
on coastal beaches. No critical habitat for snowy plover is found within the Project Area.
Until recently, no nesting by this species has been observed on beaches in the area, which
are likely too heavily used to be attractive to birds. In 2009, one nest on the beach near the
eastern end of the Balboa Peninsula produced three young (CRM 2009). Snowy plover have
consistently roosted on that same beach during the winter, but they are considered to have a
low potential for occurring within the small beaches of the Project Area.
Several species of marine mammals are common to the Project Area and surrounding
vicinity, such as the California sea lion (Zalophus californicus). More rare visitors are the
harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). The California sea
lion, in particular, has acclimated to the presence of humans and human activities.
Occasionally, marine mammals are struck in the navigational channels of LNB by
recreational or tourist vessels; whales have been known to be struck by large ships going into
the POLB.
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Upland Habitats and Species. The proposed project would not result in impacts to upland
habitat features. The debris staging area is urbanized and paved. Construction BMPs will be
implemented to ensure that no removed debris or waste re- enters the water. Dredging will
not disturb sandy beaches; rather, dredging will be located at a sufficient distance from the
beach to prevent beach erosion (distance varies depending on existing bathymetry). BMPs,
such as the use of silt curtains, will protect the beach and surrounding water column from
the effects of a temporary increase in turbidity. This project would result in the long -term
benefit of improved sediment quality near upland recreational areas and beaches by removal
of the contaminated sediments.
Marine Habitats and Species. Dredging activities and pile removal and replacement will
cause some fish to flee the immediate disturbance; others may remain in the area to
capitalize on the availability of food as organisms are suspended into the water column
during pile removal and disturbance of the seabed. Dredging in the Project Area would
temporarily suspend sediment in the water column in the immediate work area. The
response of marine organisms to resuspended sediments is a function of the resuspended
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 24 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
sediment concentration, the duration of exposure, and the type and level of development of
organisms (Anchor 2002). Elevated resuspended sediment concentrations for the proposed
project will be confined to the immediate vicinity of active dredging and pile work.
Resuspended sediment concentrations caused by natural phenomenon such as floods, storms,
large tides, and winds are often higher and of longer duration than those caused by dredging.
Based on a review of existing literature, it appears that in most cases motile marine organisms
are unlikely to suffer adverse impacts from dredging activities.
Within the dredge prism, the entire soft bottom invertebrate community would be removed.
Benthic invertebrates found within the Project Area would tend to recover relatively rapidly
through recolonization from adjacent areas as well as planktonic recruitment. Removal of
the silty, contaminated sediments and exposure of sandy native seabed is anticipated to
provide improved substrate for recolonization of benthic species. The existing benthic
substrate in the Project Area has been found to cause mortality in invertebrates; thus,
removal of the contaminated surface layers and exposure of uncontaminated native
sediments would improve the overall quality of the benthic environment.
Impacts to pile communities will be temporary; there will be no net loss of piles as the same
number of piles removed will be replaced. In addition, pile communities are known recover
quickly after disturbances (Fioravanti -Score 1998; Sutherland 1974).
Essential Fish Habitat. Increased turbidity and loss of encrusting organisms as a food source
due to dredging activities may impact fish species managed by federal resource agencies;
however, silt curtains will be used to contain turbidity and loss of encrusting organisms will
be temporary and negligible. A recent biological survey conducted in an area adjacent to the
Project Area (Merkel and Associates 2007) in support of the Lido Yacht Anchorage Marina
refurbishment project, which entails similar dredging and pile replacement activities,
supports the conclusion that impacts to managed pelagic fish species would be minimal.
Although not present at the Project Area, eelgrass is present in the Newport Harbor entrance
channel. To reduce the possible impacts to eelgrass from barge movement, tugboats and
barges transporting material to the Middle Harbor CDF will follow the same route through
the entrance channel as was used during the federal dredging project in Upper Newport Bay.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 25 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
By avoiding areas previously unaffected by tugboat propeller wash, eelgrass production in
Newport Bay is not expected to be impacted.
Candidate, Sensitive, or Special Status Species. Sensitive bird species that are likely to occur
in the Project Area are the double- crested cormorant and California least tern. These species
will not lose loafing, nesting, or roosting habitat as a result of the proposed project but may
experience temporary, localized foraging impacts that are insignificant due to the small area
of temporary exclusion.
Turbidity plumes from dredging operations could potentially affect the foraging behavior of
the California least tern and double- crested cormorant; however, a silt curtain will be
deployed around active dredging areas to isolate turbidity to the immediate vicinity of the
active dredging operation. By controlling turbidity in the active dredge area, no significant
foraging opportunities for these species are anticipated to be lost. In addition, the known
California least tern breeding locations in Upper Newport Bay are not in close proximity to
the Project Area, and the rest of Newport Harbor will remain available to least terns and
other avian species throughout construction.
The above -water noise generated during driving of replacement end piles could affect marine
birds in the area; however, any noise from pile driving will be of a short duration
(approximately 15 minutes per individual pile). In addition, the Project Area is already
urbanized and subject to a variety of anthropogenic noise sources, to which avian species
have become acclimated. Additionally, the contractor may use jetting to install the piles,
following by proofing the piles with the hammer (applying a smaller number of blows to
drive the piles the final few feet). This technique reduces noise due to pile- driving, but the
ability to use jetting will be determined by the engineer on a case -by -case basis.
California sea lions are observed in Newport Bay, but harbor seals are not common in the
Project Area (CRM 2009). These species are not expected to be affected by the proposed
work, because they do not frequent the Project Area and are highly mobile and able to move
throughout LNB.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 26 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
According to NMFS (City of Newport Beach 2010), the measured sound exposure levels of a
clamshell dredge could affect sea lions (and other marine mammals near the project site) at a
less than significant level. The Marina Park Recirculated EIR (City of Newport Beach 2010)
contains additional analysis regarding the effects of noise on marine mammals and fish:
Based on observations at the Marina Park project site, sea lions tend to be present in
the spring and summer, and not during the late autumn or winter... Pile driving in
the air and water could cause sea lions to temporarily move farther away from these
activities, such as to other areas of the bay, although the sea lions are anticipated to
adapt to noise and continue to be present in the general area of marina construction.
It is expected that pile driving and dredging activity would occur during a relatively
short-period (two months), which limits the potential for adverse effects, if any to
occur. Breeding would not be affected because sea lions do not breed in the Harbor.
Noise generated by pile installation may be attenuated by jetting the pile prior to driving, as
to reduce the number of blows required by the impact hammer.
Sensitive pelagic species potentially found in the deep subtidal habitat between LNB and
POLB include marine mammals (seals, sea lions, whales), sea turtles, and fish (anchovy, squid
[Loligo opalescens], Pacific halibut [Paralichthys californicus]; marine birds (pelicans, gulls,
terns) are commonly foraging in this habitat. It is highly unlikely that contact would occur
between the tugboat and barge and marine mammals, sea turtles, fish, or birds, as these
species are highly mobile and could avoid the pathway of the tugboat and barge. Maritime
commerce is common in the waters between LNB and the POLB, and the limited number of
barge and tugboat trips associated with the proposed project is unlikely to result in any
impacts to pelagic species.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 27 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
BMPs implemented to minimize impacts during this project include:
• During construction, the contractor will be required to implement the water quality
monitoring program required by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB) and to comply with the permit conditions imposed by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and California Coastal Commission (CCC; see
Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality).
• During construction, the contractor will be required to deploy and maintain silt
curtains around areas of active dredge and pile installation activities.
• Consistent with CCA, SCEMP, and City Harbor Code, a pre - construction eelgrass and
Caulezpa = folia surveywill be performed in the Project Area between 30 to 60 days
prior to dredging; a post- construction survey will be performed if eelgrass is located
during the pre- construction survey.
• Based on the determination of the project geotechnical engineer, the replacement
piles will be jetted into place as far as possible, only hammering the piles when
necessary.
• Operators of construction equipment, and all other project workers, shall not harass
any marine mammals, waterfowl, or fish in the Project Area.
Determination of Significance
The benthic communities in the project area have been shown to be depauperate compared
to communities in other parts of LNB that are not impacted by contaminants in the
sediment. Benthic areas impacted by dredging may be recolonized in as little as 6 to 8
months, especially if impacts occur in areas compose of fine sediments like the Project Area
(Newell et al. 1998). Other studies have reported recovery of benthic communities at
dredged sites occurring in as little as 2 to 3 months (Stickney and Perlmutter 1975; Van
Dolah et al. 1984) therefore, project impacts on the benthic community found in the
subtidal, unvegetated mud bottom are less than significant. The removal of contaminated
sediments is beneficial in the long term, because it removes contaminants that have been
shown to be toxic to invertebrates, which form the bulk of the benthic community.
Sensitive bird species may be temporarily excluded from the immediate work area due to
increased localized turbidity and noise and the presence of construction equipment;
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 28 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
however, this exclusion is not expected to have a measurable effect on their foraging
capabilities because of the relatively small size of the Project Area in relation to the rest of
Newport Bay and because the high baseline level of use of the Project Area already
discourages use by sensitive bird species. Impacts to marine mammals are expected to be less
than significant, because these mammals can easily avoid the Project Area.
Cumulative impacts to marine species and habitats are primarily associated with the loss of
benthic organisms from LNB. The temporary loss of benthic habitat from the USACE
maintenance dredging project is substantially greater than that expected from this project
and the contribution of this project to cumulative impacts is less than significant. In the
long -term, habitat conditions (sediment and water quality) will be improved as a result of the
removal of contaminated sediments from LNB by both the City and the USACE. Impacts to
habitats and species found within the Project Area, as previously described, are temporary
and less than significant.
Because of the seasonality of project activities, the relatively short duration of project
activities, and the implementation of established BMPs, the project will not have less than
significant effects on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species.
The project will not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community, because no sensitive natural communities are found in the
project area.
The project will not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands because
no wetlands are found within the Project Area.
While some marine species may be temporarily excluded from the active dredging area, the
project will 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. This impact is less than
significant given the remaining available habitat in LNB. The temporary loss of use of the
active dredging area will not result in loss of foraging or resting area.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 29 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
This project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, because these biological resources
are not found within the Project Area.
This project does 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 including the FESA, CESA, Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, CCA, and
the Natural Community Conservation Plan and Habitat Conservation Plan.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
Less than
to §15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑
Significant
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
Potentially
with
Lessthan
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
❑
❑
❑
❑X
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 ❑
❑ ❑ X❑
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those Q
❑ ❑ Q
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
The project does not entail grading undisturbed areas. The Project Area has been dredged
previously, so that the sediment to be dredged is non - native shoaled material that has
accumulated above the design elevations. While the City has more than 30 archeological
sites identified within its boundaries, none of these sites are located in or near the project site
(General Plan Historical Resources Element 2006), and no archaeological resources would
occur within shoaled sediments.
No historical or archaeological resources are located on site, and therefore, the proposed
project will have no impact on historical or archaeological resources. No paleontological
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 30 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
resources or unique geologic feature will be impacted. It is highly unlikely that any human
remains will be encountered or disturbed during dredging.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
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),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ Q
❑ Q
❑ Q
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 31 090243 -01
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant No
Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact Impact
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
❑
❑
❑ ❑X
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),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ Q
❑ Q
❑ Q
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 31 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Environmental Setting
Newport Beach is located in the southern California geological region, which contains
several active faults. Faults in the region include the Newport- Inglewood Fault Zone, the
Norwalk Fault, the Raymond Fault Zone, the San Andreas Fault Zone, the San Fernando
Fault Zone, and the San Jacinto Fault Zone. No active faults or fault zones are located
immediately within the project site, although the Project Area is located approximately 1.5
miles from of the Newport- Inglewood Fault Zone, the only active fault zone within or
immediately adjacent to Newport Beach (General Plan Figure S2; General Plan Safety
Element 2006).
A portion of the Rhine Channel is located in areas with liquefaction potential (General Plan
Figure S2). In particular, the loose to medium -dense bay deposits underlying the Rhine
Channel are saturated and exhibit relatively low densities, making them susceptible to
seismic - induced liquefaction. Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which seismically induced
shaking results in temporary loss of strength in soils as a result of porewater pressure
buildup — essentially, the soil acts as a weakened, "fluid" mass until the porewater pressures
can dissipate —and typically occurs in loose, saturated sediments primarily of sandy
composition. Liquefaction of soil layers can result in significant ground settlement, lateral
spreading, and surface cracking.
Potential Project Impacts
At a waterfront site such as the Project Area, the potential for liquefaction would manifest
itself in the form of destabilization of shorelines and bulkheads. However, this project's
dredge plan is specifically designed to avoid impacting the stability of bulkheads in the Rhine
and Newport channels by offsetting the dredge areas from these structures (see Figure 7).
Removing sediment from immediately in front of the seawalls would lessen the amount of
earth pressure that acts on the embedded portion of the bulkhead, a pressure that is
necessary to counter the horizontal loads imposed by retained soils behind the walls.
Because the project dredge plan will be specifically designed to maintain the existing stability
of the perimeter bulkheads, dredging will not affect the site's current potential for
liquefaction. Furthermore, dredging will only remove recently deposited sediments, with
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 32 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
minimal removal of underlying native material, thus returning the site to pre - existing
conditions of water depth and seawall embedment.
Because the proposed project will involve no upland land regrading, no unstable slopes will
be created, and new upland or water -based structures that could be exposed to liquefaction
or other seismic risks will be constructed. All existing end piles in the Rhine Channel
portion of the Project Area will be removed to facilitate dredging and replaced quickly to
ensure their stability. The Project Engineer has determined that, based on the substrate type,
distance from shore, and stability of the existing bulkheads, driving new piles is not expected
to cause any significant vibrations in surrounding land areas.
Determination of Significance
The project will not result in the construction of new residential or commercial structures,
and no active faults are found in the Project Area; therefore, the project will not result in
exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground
shaking, and landslides. Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction, is avoided by
providing calculated dredging offsets from the bulkheads and other in -water structures, such
as piles.
This project does not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, because no work
is occurring in the upland, where soils exist.
The project is not located on an unstable geologic unit, or one that would become unstable as
a result of the project, because the Project Area is located on a geological sequence primarily
comprised of beach deposit sands that cannot be destabilized by project activities. All
dredging will be designed with offset distances from existing seawall structures to avoid any
loss of stability to the structures.
The project is not located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1 -B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994). Also, this project does not need soils capable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 33 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
VII. 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?
Environmental Setting
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often called greenhouse gases (GHGs). GHGs are
emitted by natural processes and human activities. Carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4),
and nitrous oxide (N20) are GHGs produced by both natural processes and industrial
activities. In addition, fluorinated gases (hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs] and perfluorocarbons
[PFCs]) and sulfur hexafluoride are GHGs created and emitted primarily through human
activities. A close relationship between the increased concentration of GHGs in the
atmosphere and global temperatures is apparent. Scientific evidence indicates a trend of
increasing global temperatures near the earth's surface over the past century due to increased
human - induced levels of GHGs. A complete discussion of GHGs as they pertain to the
proposed project may be found in Appendix A.
GHGs differ from criteria pollutants in that GHG emissions do not cause direct adverse
human health effects. Rather, the direct environmental effect of GHG emissions is the
increase in global temperatures, which in turn has numerous indirect effects on the
environment and humans. Appendix A contains a more detailed description of the major
GHGs that contribute to global climate change and the global warming potential of each of
the identified GHGs.
Currently, there are no federal standards for GHGs emissions. The U.S. Supreme Court
recently ruled that impacts associated with climate change are serious and well recognized
and that the USEPA must regulate GHGs as pollutants; however, no federal regulations have
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 34 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
❑
❑
❑K
❑
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often called greenhouse gases (GHGs). GHGs are
emitted by natural processes and human activities. Carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4),
and nitrous oxide (N20) are GHGs produced by both natural processes and industrial
activities. In addition, fluorinated gases (hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs] and perfluorocarbons
[PFCs]) and sulfur hexafluoride are GHGs created and emitted primarily through human
activities. A close relationship between the increased concentration of GHGs in the
atmosphere and global temperatures is apparent. Scientific evidence indicates a trend of
increasing global temperatures near the earth's surface over the past century due to increased
human - induced levels of GHGs. A complete discussion of GHGs as they pertain to the
proposed project may be found in Appendix A.
GHGs differ from criteria pollutants in that GHG emissions do not cause direct adverse
human health effects. Rather, the direct environmental effect of GHG emissions is the
increase in global temperatures, which in turn has numerous indirect effects on the
environment and humans. Appendix A contains a more detailed description of the major
GHGs that contribute to global climate change and the global warming potential of each of
the identified GHGs.
Currently, there are no federal standards for GHGs emissions. The U.S. Supreme Court
recently ruled that impacts associated with climate change are serious and well recognized
and that the USEPA must regulate GHGs as pollutants; however, no federal regulations have
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 34 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
been set at this time. GHGs are generally regulated at the state level and are approached by
setting emission reduction targets for existing sources of GHGs, instituting policies to
promote renewable energy and increase energy efficiency, and developing state -wide action
plans. Appendix A provides a complete description of the regulatory environment relative to
GHGs and an explanation of how this project complies with existing laws and regulations.
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Because all project emissions would be new to the area, the project is considered to have an
emissions baseline of zero. GHG emissions will be generated by the burning of diesel fuel in
construction equipment. Table GHG1 shows the project's mitigated GHG emissions from
construction activities.
Table GHG1
GHG Emissions
Activity /Source
Source Category
GHG COZ a (mton)
Phase 1: Debris Removal and Associated Activities
Excavator
Off -Road, Land
9
Push Tugboat /Tender
Off- Road, Marine
2
Dredger
Off -Road, Marine
10
HHD Truck
On -Road
1,312
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
163
Phase 1 Total
1,496
Phase 2: Mechanical Dredging Activities
Push Tugboat /Tender
Off -Road, Marine
32
Tugboat
Off -Road, Marine
311
Work /Crew Boat
Off -Road, Marine
8
Dredger
Off -Road, Marine
197
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
163
Phase 2 Total
711
Project Total
2,207
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
mton = million tons
COz e = CO2 equivalent emissions
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 35 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Determination of Significance
In the absence of a federal or state -wide threshold, SCAQMD has developed an interim
significance threshold that applies mainly to industrial (stationary source) projects where
SCAQMD is the lead agency. However, for the purposes of determining whether GHG
emissions from affected projects are significant, SCAQMD identifies that project emissions
include direct, indirect, and life cycle emissions, to the extent information is available,
during construction and operation. SCAQMD directs that construction emissions be
amortized over the life of the project (defined as 30 years), added to the operational
emissions, and compared to the applicable interim GHG significance threshold tier.
SCAQMD's significance threshold for stationary projects is 10,000 million tons (mton) of CO2
equivalent emissions (CO2 -e) per year. SCAQMD does not specify a significance threshold
for projects that are comprised solely of construction activities. In the absence of other more
appropriate significance thresholds, this interim threshold was used to determine
significance for this project, as shown in Table GHG2.
Table GHG2
GHG Significance Determination
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
GHG emissions are considered from the total project; Phases 1 and 2 were added to
determine significance.
Based on SCAQMD threshold, GHG emissions generated by this project, either directly or
indirectly, do not result in a significant impact on the environment.
This project does not conflict with any adopted plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs (such as AB32 [California Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006] and Executive Order 5 -03 -05 that establishes state -wide GHG
reduction targets mandate a reduction in GHG).
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 36 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
GHG CO,-e (mton)
Project Total
2,207 one time
SCAQMD Threshold (mton)
10,000 per year
CEQA Significant?
No
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
GHG emissions are considered from the total project; Phases 1 and 2 were added to
determine significance.
Based on SCAQMD threshold, GHG emissions generated by this project, either directly or
indirectly, do not result in a significant impact on the environment.
This project does not conflict with any adopted plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs (such as AB32 [California Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006] and Executive Order 5 -03 -05 that establishes state -wide GHG
reduction targets mandate a reduction in GHG).
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 36 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS WASTES
Would the project:
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the El ❑ ❑ ❑X
environment through routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X
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 which complied 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 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?
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 37
090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Environmental Setting
The state of California defines hazardous materials as substances that are toxic, ignitable or
flammable, reactive, and /or corrosive. California also defines an extremely hazardous
material as a substance that shows high acute or chronic toxicity, is carcinogenic (causes
cancer), has bioaccumulative properties (accumulates in the body's tissues), is persistent in
the environment, or is water reactive (California Code of Regulations, Title 22; California
Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5).
The proposed project entails dredging and transporting sediment that has elevated
concentrations of a suite of chemicals but does not meet the requirements to be classified as
hazardous waste. Sediment investigations revealed elevated concentrations of metals,
pesticides, polycychc aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
that are toxic to representative benthic organisms in the Rhine Channel.
A localized area within the Rhine Channel was found to contain lead concentrations above
California Hazardous Waste threshold levels; however, this material will be removed as part
of a separate project (i.e., ETCO Development, Inc.'s [ETCO] proposed Newport Bay Marina
redevelopment project) prior to commencing dredging in the Project Area.
The contaminated dredged material is not considered hazardous waste, and no other
hazardous waste or hazardous materials are found within the Project Area, with the
exception of the Newport Bay Marina area. Should ETCO be unable to complete the
dredging and hazardous waste removal prior to the start of this proposed project, the City
will include removal of this material as part of the project. The Newport Bay Marina project
has undergone separate environmental review; the sediment removal would be accomplished
using the methods and practices identified in the ETCO EIR certified by the City in 2006.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 38 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Accidental spills of oil, grease, or other petroleum products could occur during construction,
because heavy construction equipment will be employed at the site. The potential risk
associated with the use of these products does not differ from the current baseline conditions
in the Project Area, where vessels navigate the waterways and vehicles access the adjacent
upland areas. BMPs implemented to minimize impacts during this project include:
• The contractor will implement a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures
(SPCC) Plan during all construction actives to avoid accidental spills and to ensure
that the appropriate materials are maintained on site during construction to respond
to any gas, oil, or other leak or spill.
• All construction equipment (on land and over water) will be kept in proper operating
condition and will be inspected regularly to minimize the opportunity of accidental
leaks.
• Vehicle repairs and fueling at the upland staging area will be conducted in a manner
that ensures no spillage into the water occurs.
Because the sediment proposed for transport to the CDF is not classified as hazardous,
transportation of dredged material to the Middle Harbor CDF fill site will not result in the
accidental spillage of hazardous material.
Determination of Significance
Dredging and transporting of contaminated dredged material in the Project Area will not
result in adverse impacts due to the presence of hazardous material, because this material is
not classified as hazardous by the state of California. The potential direct impacts associated
with hazards and hazardous materials at the project site are related to the management of
fuel and other petroleum -based products used during construction; these impacts will be less
than significant as a result of the implementation of the SPCC Plan.
The project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and it will not 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, because no
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 39 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
hazardous material will be dredged or transported, and the contractor will be required to
implement an SPCC Plan.
Dredging activities will occur within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school; however,
dredging does not involve the removal or transport of hazardous materials. Potential impacts
from spills of petroleum products from the land -based equipment (e.g., dump trucks) will be
minimized by implementation of the SPCC Plan.
The project is not located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.
The proposed project is not located within 2 miles of any airport, (John Wayne Airport, the
closest airport, is approximately 5.5 miles away), nor in the vicinity of a private airstrip.
The project will comply with all applicable fire codes and emergency evacuation plans set
forth by the City Fire Department. Moreover, emergency plans will be made by the
contractor to ensure prompt, safe, and orderly evacuation, if necessary, at any time during
construction due to a variety of emergencies (fire, tsunami, health and safety, etc.).
This project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving wildland fires because no wildlands are adjacent or near the project site.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 40 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
d) 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?
e) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X
f) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area
❑
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
IX.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
Less than
delineation map?
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
❑
❑x
Significant
Mitigation
Significant No
Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact Impact
a)
Violate any water quality standards or waste
El
❑
❑X ❑
❑
discharge requirements?
❑
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
b)
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
❑
❑
❑ ❑X
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
dam?
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
i) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
❑
❑
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater
❑
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing
June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 41
nearby wells would drop to a level which would
090243 -01
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 that
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-
or off -site?
d) 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?
e) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X
f) 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?
g) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area
❑
❑
❑
❑x
structures that would impede or redirect flood
flows?
h) 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?
i) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
❑
❑
❑
❑
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 41
090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Environmental Settings
The Newport Bay /San Diego Creek watershed is located in central Orange County in the
southwest corner of the Santa Ana River Basin, about 35 miles southeast of Los Angeles and
70 miles north of San Diego (Figure 1). The watershed encompasses 154 square miles and
includes portions of the cities of Newport Beach, Irvine, Laguna Hills, Lake Forest, Tustin,
Orange, Santa Ana, and Costa Mesa. Mountains on three sides encircle the watershed; runoff
from these mountains drains across the Tustin Plain and enters Upper Newport Bay via the
San Diego Creek. Newport Bay is a combination of two distinct waterbodies —LNB and
Upper Newport Bay —that are divided by the Pacific Coast Highway Bridge. LNB, where the
majority of commerce and recreational boating exists, is highly developed. Upper Newport
Bay contains a diverse mix of development in its lower reach and an undeveloped ecological
reserve in its upper reach. The Upper Newport Bay has also been undergoing the Upper
Newport Bay Ecosystem Restoration Project ( UNBERP), which is a multiyear, $38 million
project led by the USACE to restore the ecosystem. The UNBERP involves substantial
dredging of sediments and transporting a majority of those sediments offshore for disposal.
Hydrology. The Project Area lies in a sheltered area of LNB, relatively far (approximately
3 miles) from the Newport Harbor entrance. Hydrology (i.e., the movement of water) is
muted in this secluded location and is influenced primarily by wind -driven currents and
vessel - generated wakes (Everest 2008). The muted hydrology results in poor circulation in
the Project Area, which in turn results in poor water quality.
Groundwater Quality. Two borings conducted at a site in the general vicinity of the Project
Area encountered groundwater at 6.5 and 10 feet below the ground surface (City of Newport
Beach 2010). Analysis of the groundwater detected in those borings showed that
groundwater near the Project Area is heavily influenced by seawater and is unsuitable for
use as a municipal water supply. No municipal wells are located in the general vicinity of the
Project Area.
Surface Water Quality. Water quality in Newport Bay is influenced by a number of factors,
primarily by tidal flushing, discharges into the bay from the watershed, surface runoff, and
sediment contamination. Typical urban runoff contaminants found in the Project Area
include bacteria, heavy metals, nutrients, pesticides, organic compounds, sediments, trash
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 42 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
and debris, oxygen demanding substances, and oil and grease. These contaminants are
carried into the bay by storm events and routine surface water runoff through the storm
drain system or, in the case of very large storms, via sheet flow.
Residence time represents the amount of time required for water at a given location within
Newport Bay to be exchanged with new water from the ocean by tidal action. The longer
the residence time the higher the potential for poor water quality. A shorter residence time
results in a faster exchange of harbor water with ocean water and an associated improvement
in water quality. The residence time of ocean water in the vicinity of the Project Area
(approximately 15th Street Pier) is in the range of 25 to 30 days (Everest 2008). By
comparison, residence time of ocean water near the entrance to LNB is approximately 1 day.
According to the USEPA guidelines established for water quality of marina basins, tidal
flushing, and by extension water quality, near the Project Area is currently inadequate
( USEPA 2010).
LNB is listed on the state of California's 2006 Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited
Segments published by the Santa Ana RWQCB. LNB is listed as impaired for chlordane,
copper, DDT, PCBs, and sediment toxicity. Once a water body has been listed as impaired, a
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the constituent of concern (pollutant) must be
developed for the waterbody. A TMDL is an estimate of the daily load of pollutants that a
waterbody may receive from point sources, non -point sources, and natural background
conditions (including an appropriate margin of safety) without exceeding its water quality
standard. Those facilities and activities that are discharging into the waterbody, collectively,
must not exceed the TMDL.
Several TMDLs have been developed jointly for the San Diego Creek Watershed and
Newport Bay, including nutrients, pathogens, and pesticides. In addition, TMDLs for
organochlorine compounds and metals currently exist or are in development by the RWQCB
and other agencies. TMDLs developed for LNB (and other areas in the watershed) include:
• Siltation (sediments)
• Nutrients
• Fecal coliform (pathogen)
• Selenium
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 43 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
• Metals
• Organochlorine compounds (particularly DDT, chlordane, and PCBs)
Past agricultural and industrial activities in the watershed have resulted in a legacy of
sediment contamination in LNB and, in particular, the Rhine Channel. Sediment
contamination in Newport Bay is specifically a result of historic releases from industrial
sources and storm drains adjacent to the bay as well as ongoing runoff from the surrounding
watershed. Contaminants of concern include metals, pesticides, and PCBs. Rhine Channel
sediments showed metals (arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc). DDT
and PCBs have been detected at concentrations above sensitive ecological screening levels at
stations throughout the channel in both the surface and subsurface sediments. While DDT
and PCB exceedances appear mostly in the upper layers of the sediment, elevated metal
concentrations extend to the interface with the underlying native sediments.
Based on recent site characterization (Anchor 2006), it appears that the interface between
recently deposited sediment and underlying native sediment corresponds well with the
vertical extent of chemically impacted sediment throughout the channel. That is, the
contamination appears to be found in the deposited material not the native material. Project
Area sediments found outside of the Rhine Channel are not as highly impacted; however,
they are physically and chemically unsuitable for open -ocean disposal or beach nourishment
and are consequently most suitable for beneficial use for CDF placement. Therefore, these
sediments are appropriate to include in the Middle Harbor CDF and to isolate from the
marine environment.
The sediment and sediment -water interface (SWI) toxicity have been extensively studied in
the Rhine Channel (SCCWRP 2003; Anchor 2006). In a report prepared by the Southern
California Coastal Water Research Project, correlation analyses for amphipod (small benthic
organisms living in or near the SWI) toxicity and SWI metal concentration provided
statistical evidence for an association between toxicity to amphipods and sediment
contamination. Significant negative correlations between amphipod survival and
concentrations of selenium and zinc were detected. In addition, elevated concentrations of
dissolved trace metals were observed for copper, nickel, mercury, selenium, and zinc,
indicating that some contaminants were released from the sediment into the water column.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 44 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Project activities consist of removing buried debris, removing and replacing piles, and
dredging and transporting dredged material to the Middle Harbor CDF fill site. The
proposed project could result in direct, temporary impacts to water quality from these
activities. Potential water quality impacts would be temporary and localized in nature and
generally limited to the immediate work area within the silt curtains.
Hydrology. This project will not have an appreciable effect on water circulation in the
Project Area, although removal of sediment may slightly increase the volume of tidal
exchange in the Project Area.
Groundwater Quality. Groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge will not be impacted
by this project, because no municipal wells are located in the general vicinity of the Project
Area.
Surface Water Quality. In the short term, construction impacts include temporary, localized
increases in turbidity and the potential for increased concentrations of dissolved chemicals
and metals as well as lowered dissolved oxygen levels as a result of disturbance of anoxic
suliidic sediments during dredging. Project permits and approvals (e.g., 401 Water Quality
Certification/Waste Discharge Requirements) will define the required water quality
thresholds, including required BMPs and monitoring. Typically, the monitoring
requirements imposed by the permits include measuring light transmission, dissolved
oxygen, salinity, temperature, pH, and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Periodic chemical
analyses to detect dissolved metals and other chemical compounds, such as PCBs, DDT, and
TBT, may be required to be conducted concurrently with TSS samples. The duration,
location, and frequency of the water quality monitoring will be developed to comply with
project- specific permit requirements and construction activities, and the contractor will be
required to comply with all regulatory agency monitoring requirements. In the long -term,
sediment and water quality will be improved by the removing contaminated sediments from
the Project Area.
As mechanical dredging occurs, sediments are suspended in the water column. Usually
water quality changes are not observable and are only measurable within a relatively short
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 45 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
distance, often less than 65 to 120 feet from the point of dredging (Thackston and Palermo
2000). The magnitude of these water quality changes tends to decrease rapidly with
increasing distance from the point of dredging (MBC 2000). Thus, increased turbidity may
be observed a few feet from the dredge but difficult to discern at slightly greater distances.
Most research on turbidity plumes has been conducted in areas with predominantly silty
material, similar to the sediment that would be dredged from the Rhine Channel (sediment
grain size ranged from 71 to 95 percent fines). Sediments in the lower part of the channel
had the greatest proportion of fines and grain size tended to increase at stations closest to the
upper end of the channel (SCCWRP 2003). The use of silt curtains around the immediate,
active dredging area will greatly minimize the migration of sediments and turbid water.
Contaminants may also be released into the water column during dredging; however, the
presence of turbidity does not imply that contaminants are present, because the refractive
properties (which reduce light penetration) and chemical concentrations of sediments vary
from site to site. Turbidity can be caused by more than suspended sediment, for instance
high levels of organic matter (e.g., plankton) in the water column, and therefore,
observations of increased turbidity should not be used as a primary indicator of either
suspended sediment or contaminant impacts. Furthermore, any exceedance of turbidity
observed during dredge operations should not be inferred to constitute an impact related to
chemical or suspended sediment concentrations unless confirmed through separate water
quality analyses. Turbidity can provide a general indication of where suspended sediments
and dissolved chemicals are being carried by water currents, but the chemical concentration
that might be measured within that plume at two different sites (or even at the same site
over time) may vary significantly. Turbidity can be used as a general field indicator of where
a plume is centered for the purposes of a wide range of water quality measurements;
however, a measured turbidity level will not correlate to the same level of chemicals or
chemical impacts over various sites and times.
As dredging occurs and sediment is removed from the seafloor and transported up through
the water column, a fraction of chemicals contained in the bulk mass of the sediment and in
the sediment porewater will be released into the surrounding water column. Similarly, some
of the fine particles contained in the sediment mass will also enter the surrounding water,
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 46 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
forming a temporary cloud of turbidity. Both of these effects may temporarily affect water
quality in the immediate vicinity of active dredging.
This effect, however, will be lessened in three ways. First, it is expected that the turbidity
will dissipate over a period of 20 to 30 minutes; thus, the release of chemicals into the water
column will be very short-term. This effect was recently demonstrated at the Dredged
Material Management Plan (DMMP) Pilot Capping Project in Long Beach (USACE 2002).
Second, because the contaminated material will be mechanically dredged, it will be
transported through the water column as a distinct mass within the bucket rather than as a
diffuse mass, thus lessening the degree of intermixing of sediment into the water column.
Third, when considering potential effects to water quality, it is important to recognize that
the relatively small volume of porewater that escapes from the sediment mass is several
orders of magnitude smaller than the volume of surrounding water in the Project Area.
Therefore, the porewater will quickly be mixed into and diluted by the surrounding water,
and as a result, any measurements made at a short distance from the active dredging site will
detect far lower concentrations than those within the sediment plume. Exposures to the
sediment porewater will only occur as an instantaneous exposure at the point of dredging, as
dilution will nearly instantly reduce the dissolved concentrations. Water quality monitoring
conducted during mechanical dredging and in -water placement of contaminated sediments
into a Confined Aquatic Disposal (CAD) cell at the Port of Hueneme, for example,
demonstrated that turbidity and concentrations of dissolved chemicals in the water column
did not exceed thresholds established by the RWQCB even at a distance of only 50 meters
from the active dredging and placement sites (Oxnard Harbor District 2009).
Sediments may also be temporarily suspended during the removal and replacement of piles.
Sediment clinging to the pile may be released into the water column during removal and
agitated into suspension as replacement piles are driven into place. Jetting may be used by
the contractor to install the piles; however, silt curtains are required during pile jetting,
which will localize the turbidity to within a few feet of the pile. Due to the temporary and
localized nature of this impact, water quality standards are not expected to be exceeded by
this activity. Debris generated during pile removal may be temporarily placed for up to 1
week in the offloading area (Figure 2) until disposed of in an upland landfill or recycled.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 47 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Runoff will be managed by the contractor at the offloading area by installing plastic sheeting,
straw bales, and other approved BMPs for this purpose, if appropriate.
BMPs implemented to minimize impacts during this project include:
• Floating booms will be used to contain debris, and the debris will be removed from
the water as soon as possible but no later than the end of each work day. The debris
will be taken to the upland landfill.
• Silt curtains will be employed during dredging and pile replacement.
• The contractor will be required to implement an SPCC Plan to minimize impacts to
water quality from accidental spills of petroleum products during dredging and
transportation of dredged material.
• Water quality monitoring during dredging will be conducted according to the
requirements of the 401 Water Quality Certification/Waste Discharge Requirements
that will be issued by the RWQCB to demonstrate the success of the contractor in
meeting water quality standards.
While it is not expected, the contractor will implement additional BMPs should an increase
in turbidity outside of the silt curtains occur during construction. These BMPs are
implemented only if exceedences of water quality standards are measured outside of the silt
curtain and if simple measures, such as reconfiguring the silt curtains, are not effective in
preventing the exceedences. Rules and methods set out by the Contaminated Sediments
Task Force (CSTF) Long -Term Management Strategy (LTMS) BMP toolbox (CSTF 2005) for
use during dredging activities shall be provided to the contractor, if necessary. Examples of
BMPs to reduce turbidity during mechanical dredging, if exceedences are observed, include:
• Increasing cycle time. Longer cycle time reduces the velocity of the ascending loaded
bucket through the water column, which reduces potential to wash sediment from
the bucket.
• Using an environmental dredge bucket. The environmental dredged bucket
completely encloses the dredge bite and result is less loss of sediment from the bucket.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 48 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
During transportation of the material to the Middle Harbor CDF, barges will not be
overloaded and will be transported only when weather and sea conditions will allow safe
transport without risking spillage, leakage, or other loss of dredged material in transit.
Determination of Significant Impacts
Turbidity is the most likely direct impact to water quality; this impact would be temporary
and localized and would result in less than significant impacts to water quality. Adherence
to proposed BMPs and permit conditions will result in avoidance and minimization of
significant impacts to water quality. In the long term, improved water quality in LNB will
result from removal of the contaminated sediments.
Cumulatively, impacts from this project are not significant because water quality will be
protected during dredging in LNB through the use of BMPs and will be demonstrated
through compliance with permit conditions. Maintenance dredging by the USACE,
anticipated to occur after the proposed project is complete, is substantially greater in volume
and duration than that proposed by the City (approximately 1.5 million cy and 150,000 cy,
respectively), and thus, the proposed project is not a significant cumulative contributor to
impacts associated with turbidity. Based on these factors, cumulative impacts to water
quality from this project are less than significant.
The project will comply with permit conditions and employ all practicable BMPs as well as
all required compliance monitoring; thus, project activities will not violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements.
Groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge will not be impacted by this project, because
there are no municipal wells in the general vicinity of the Project Area.
This project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
because there is no upland work in or near a stream or river; nor will the project
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in
flooding on or off -site because no impervious surface will be created.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 49 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
With the implementation of BMPs and the temporary nature of the potential impact, water
quality will not be substantially degraded.
No housing or other structures will be created as part of this project; therefore, this project
will not place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area.
This project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death
due to flooding, because it does not involve work with flood control structures. While a
tsunami could damage portions of the project site, the Project Area is protected by its
position in the harbor, and this position and orientation will not be altered by the proposed
project. A tsunami is a rare event and is not likely to impact this project.
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, El ❑ ❑ 0
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 El 11 ❑ 0
plan or natural community conservation plan?
Environmental Setting
The General Plan (2006) and the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP; 2009) designations for land
use within the Project Area are tidelands and submerged lands (General Plan 2006; General
Plan Figure LUl; CLUP 2009). This designation is intended to address the use, management,
and protection of tidelands and submerged lands of Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean
immediately adjacent to Newport Beach. The designation is generally not applied to historic
tidelands and submerged lands that are presently filled or reclaimed. Tidelands and
submerged lands are subject to a public trust that, among other things, limits their use to
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 50 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Would the project: Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? El
❑
❑
0
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, El ❑ ❑ 0
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 El 11 ❑ 0
plan or natural community conservation plan?
Environmental Setting
The General Plan (2006) and the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP; 2009) designations for land
use within the Project Area are tidelands and submerged lands (General Plan 2006; General
Plan Figure LUl; CLUP 2009). This designation is intended to address the use, management,
and protection of tidelands and submerged lands of Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean
immediately adjacent to Newport Beach. The designation is generally not applied to historic
tidelands and submerged lands that are presently filled or reclaimed. Tidelands and
submerged lands are subject to a public trust that, among other things, limits their use to
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 50 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
navigation, fishing, commerce, public access, water- oriented recreation, open space, and
environmental protection. The vast majority of tidelands and submerged lands in Newport
Beach have been granted to the City or the County of Orange to administer in a manner
consistent with the public trust limitations relative to use of the property and revenue
derived from that use.
Local Land Use Planning. Determination of consistency with the relevant goals and policies
stated in the adopted General Plan, Land Use Element, Harbor and Bay Element, Natural
Resource Element, and Noise Element, as well as the Coastal Land Use Policy, are provided
as Tables LUl through LUS. Some aspects of these elements that address public access, water
quality, the environment, and plan administration are also covered in other elements. These
overlapping policies or goals are parenthetically noted within each element. Redundancy is
avoided by not repeating each overlapping element.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 51 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table LU1
Consistency with Land Use Element, General Plan
Policy
Implementation
LU 2.5. Harbor and Waterfront Uses. Preserve the uses of the Harbor
Removal of impacted sediments in the Rhine Channel and the rest
and the waterfront that contribute to the charm and character of
of the Project Areas preserves the uses of these areas, which
Newport Beach and provide needed support for recreational and
contributes to the charm and character of the City.
commercial boaters, visitors, and residents, with appropriate regulations
The contractor will be required to comply with the City's Water
necessary to protect the interests of all users as well as adjoining
Quality Ordinance.
residents.
Dredging in the Project Area is part of a comprehensive approach to
Table LU2
Consistency with Harbor and Bay Element, General Plan
Policy
Implementation
HB 8.1. Chemical Uses Impacting Water Quality. Support regulations
The contractor will be required to implement a SPCC Plan, which will
limiting or banning the use insecticides, fertilizers, and other chemicals,
be approved by the City. The proposed project will not involve the
which are shown to be detrimental to water quality. (NR 3.1)
use of insecticides or fertilizers.
HB 8.7. Newport Beach Water Quality Ordinance. Update and enforce
The contractor will be required to comply with the City's Water
the Newport Beach Water Quality Ordinance. (NR 3.7)
Quality Ordinance.
HB 13.1. Sediment Management within Newport Bay. Develop a
Dredging in the Project Area is part of a comprehensive approach to
comprehensive sediment management program that provides for safe
sediment management, resulting in minimized impacts to the
navigation and improved water quality. (NR 13.1)
environment by beneficially reusing the dredged material at the
approved Middle Harbor CDF in the POLB.
HB 13.2. Cooperation with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Cooperate with
This project is being coordinated with the USACE to ensure
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in their maintenance and delineation of
comprehensive sediment management and cost efficiencies with the
federal navigational channels at Newport Harbor in the interest in
federal maintenance dredging of the navigational channels in LNB.
providing navigation and safety. (NR 13.2)
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 53 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table LU3
Consistency with Natural Resources Element, General Plan
Policy
Implementation
NR 3.2. Water Pollution Prevention. Promote pollution prevention and
The contractor will be required to implement a SPCC Plan approved
elimination methods that minimize the introduction of pollutants into
by the City and to comply with the terms and conditions of permits
natural water bodies. (HB 8.2)
issued by regulatory agencies for this project. Removal of
sediments will eliminate a repository of pollutants in LNB.
NR 3.10. Best Management Practices. Implement and improve upon BMPs
BMPs have been identified in this Initial Study. The contractor will
for residences, businesses, development projects, and City operations.
be required to implement these BMPs as part of the project and all
(Policy HB 8.10)
other BMPs required by regulatory agencies in order to comply
with the terms and conditions of project permits and approvals.
NR 4.1. Total Maximum Daily Loads. Develop and implement the TMDLs
Implementation of this project is consistent with the ongoing
established by the RWQCB, Santa Ana Region and guided by the Newport
development of TMDLs related to metals and other pollutants in
Bay Watershed Executive Committee (WEC).
the Project Area. Removal of sediments will eliminate a repository
of pollutants in LNB.
NR 14.2. Maintain and enhance deep -water channels and ensure they
This project is being coordinated with the USACE to ensure that it is
remain navigable by boats (Goal HB 13).
consistent with the federal maintenance dredging of the
navigational channels in LNB. This project will also improve
navigation in LNB by removing shoaled sediments.
NR 15.1. Dredging Projects. Monitor dredging projects within the region to
The sediments to be dredged in this project have been determined
identify opportunities to reduce disposal costs and utilize dredge spoils for
to be unsuitable for ocean disposal or beach nourishment. Upland
beach nourishment.
disposal of 150,000 cy of sediment is not cost effective and would
not result in beneficial reuse of the sediment. This project
beneficially reuses the sediment in the most cost effective and
environmentally protective manner (i.e., the Middle Harbor CDF).
NR 15.2. Regional Sediment Management. Participate in regional sediment
Volumes and sediment composition of dredged material from LNB
management by maintaining records of the number of channelized streams,
will be submitted to the state and federal agencies, consistent with
miles of channelization in streams, volumes of sediment extracted from
regional sediment management planning goals and objectives.
stream channels and debris basins, and the grain size distribution of the
extracted sediments.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 55 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table LU4
Consistency with Noise Element, General Plan
Policy
Implementation
N 4.6. Maintenance or Construction Activities. Enforce the Noise
The contractor will be required to work within the hours prescribed
Ordinance noise limits and limits on hours of maintenance or construction
in the City Noise Ordinance: Monday through Friday, 7 AM through
activity in or adjacent to residential areas, including noise that results
6:30 PM and Saturdays, 8 AM through 6 PM.
from in -home hobby or work related activities.
Dredging of the Project Area is consistent with the Public Trust and
Table LUS
Consistency with Coastal Land Use Policy
Policy
Implementation
2.1.9 -1. Land uses and new development in the coastal zone shall be
This project will not result in changes to existing land uses and uses of LNB
consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Map and all applicable
and is consistent with the Coastal Land Use Map.
Local Coastal Program (LCP) policies and regulations.
2.5.2 -1. Administer the use of tidelands and submerged lands in a manner
Dredging of the Project Area is consistent with the Public Trust and
consistent with the tidelands trust and all applicable laws, including
ensures ongoing commercial and recreation use of tidelands and
Chapter 70 of the Statutes of 1927, the Beacon Bay Bill (Chapter 74,
submerged lands.
Statutes of 1978), SB S73 (Chapter 317, Statutes of 1997), AB 3139
(Chapter 728, Statutes of 1994), and Chapter 715, Statutes of 1984 and
the Coastal Act.
4.1.2 -1. Maintain, enhance, and, where feasible, restore marine
Marine resources will be restored and enhanced by the removing
resources.
chemically impacted sediments from the Project Area.
4.1.2 -3. Require that uses of the marine environment be carried out in a
The proposed dredging activities will not result in significant impacts to
manner that will sustain the biological productivity of coastal waters and
marine organisms and will promote long -term use of the Project Area and
that will maintain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms
improve the quality of the marine environment in LNB.
adequate for long -term commercial, recreational, scientific, and
educational purposes.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 57 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table LUS
Consistency with Coastal Land Use Policy
Policy
Implementation
4.1.2 -5. Continue to require Caulerpo protocol surveys as a condition of
ACaulerpa taxifolio survey will be conducted prior to dredging to ensure
City approval of projects in the Newport Bay and immediately notify the
compliance with this policy.
SCCAT when found.
4.2.3 -1. Permit the diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters,
The City has determined that the dredging methodology and beneficial
wetlands, estuaries, and lakes in accordance with other applicable
use of sediments at the Middle Harbor CDF is the least environmentally
provisions of the LCP, where there is no feasible less environmentally
damaging alternative. The environmental restoration of the project area
damaging alternative, and where feasible mitigation measures have been
by removal of contaminated sediments is consistent with 30233(a)(6) of
provided to minimize adverse environmental effects.
the CCA, and maintenance of authorized navigation depths is consistent
with 30233(a)(2). BMPs have been identified to minimize impacts and
feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to
reduce potential impacts to air quality and water quality. As a result, the
proposed activities will avoid disruption to wildlife habitat (30233[b]) and
enhance the ecological functions of LNB (30233[c]).
4.2.4 -3. Dredged materials suitable for beneficial reuse shall be
Beneficial use of the sediment generated by this project in the Middle
transported for such purposes to appropriate areas and placed in a
Harbor CDF is consistent with this policy. The contaminated dredged
manner that minimizes adverse effects on the environment.
material from this project has been determined to be unsuitable for ocean
disposal, including beach nourishment.
4.3.1 -1. Continue to develop and implement the TMDLs established by the
Removal of chemically impacted sediments from the Project Area is
Regional Board and guided by the Newport Bay Watershed Executive
consistent with existing and developing TMDLs for metals and other
Committee (WEC).
pollutants in LNB.
4.3.1 -8. Protection against the spillage of crude oil, gas, petroleum
The contractor will be required to implement a SPCC Plan that has been
products, or hazardous substances shall be provided in relation to any
approved by the City and to maintain spill response equipment at the
development or transportation of such materials. Effective containment
construction site.
and cleanup facilities and procedures shall be provided for accidental
spills that do occur.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 59 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table LUS
Consistency with Coastal Land Use Policy
Policy
Implementation
4.6 -8. Coordinate with the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S.
Coordination with resource management agencies will occur as part of the
Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and other
permitting processes. Project design features (also referred to as BMPs)
resource management agencies, as applicable, in the review of
will ensure that no impacts to threatened, endangered, or sensitive
development applications in order to ensure that impacts to ESHA and
species occur from project implementation.
marine resources, including rare, threatened, or endangered species, are
avoided or minimized such that ESHA is not significantly degraded, habitat
values are not significantly disrupted, and the biological productivity and
quality of coastal waters is preserved.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 61 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
California Coastal Act. The project site is located in the coastal zone, and the CCA is the
state's regulatory authority governing land use in the coastal zone. This act (California State
Public Resources Code, Division 20, Sections 30000 et seq.) was passed in 1976 in order to
implement the federal Coastal Zone Management Act and ultimately established the
California Coastal Commission (CCC) as the coastal management and regulatory agency for
the coastal zone (Public Resources Code 30103). The CCC is responsible for assisting in the
preparation, review, and certification of Local Coastal Programs (LCPs). LCPs, which
include a CLUP, are developed by local governments and governmental agencies for the
portion of their jurisdictions that fall within the coastal zone. Following certification of the
LCP and CLUP, regulatory responsibility is then delegated to the local jurisdiction for
projects within the coastal zone, although the CCC retains jurisdiction over the immediate
shoreline.
The policies of the CCA constitute the statutory standards applied to planning and regulatory
decisions made by the CCC and local governments, pursuant to the CCA. In the case of the
City, the CCC has not certified the implementation plan of the City's CLUP; accordingly, the
CCC retains jurisdiction in the City's tidelands and is the responsible permitting agency. The
City's General Plan and LCP sets forth policies that serve to guide land use planning efforts
in Newport Beach. As described in Tables LUl through LU4, the proposed project is
consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the General Plan. As described in Table
LU5, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the CLUP
and, therefore, with the CCA on which the CLUP is based. In addition, analysis of
consistency with the CCA is provided in this section.
Chapter 3 of the CCA identifies the six coastal resources planning and management
principles used to evaluate a proposed project's consistency with the CCA. These principles
include:
• Providing for maximum public access to California's coast
• Protecting water - oriented recreational activities
• Maintaining, enhancing, and restoring California's marine environment
• Protecting sensitive habitats and agricultural uses
• Minimizing environmental and aesthetic impacts of new development
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 63 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
• Locating coastal- dependent industrial facilities within existing sites whenever
possible
Analysis under the CCA finds that with implementation of proposed BMPs, the proposed
project is consistent with CCA goals and objectives. The significant relevant policies are
identified as follows.
Section 30211 of the CCA states:
Development shall not interfere with the public's right of access to the sea where
acquired through use or legislative authorization, including, but not limited to, the
use of dry sand and rocky coastal beaches to the first line of terrestrial vegetation.
During construction, public and private access to the water in portions of the Project Area
may be temporarily restricted during dredging. This restriction results from the need to
maintain public safety during active construction by maintaining a perimeter around
construction equipment, including periodic debris offloading in shoreline areas. However,
public use of dry sand and rocky beaches to the first line of terrestrial vegetation will not be
affected. As stated in the project description, the width of the Rhine Channel is insufficient
to provide an open channel for private vessels at all times during dredging of this area.
However, this disruption is of short duration and will result in no permanent effects. Upon
project completion there would be no alteration of public or private access as a result of this
project, and access would remain the same as the pre - project conditions. Therefore, the
proposed project would not have any adverse impacts to public access to the shoreline and is
consistent with Section 30211 of the CCA.
Section 30221 of the CCA states:
Oceanfront land suitable for recreational use shall be protected for recreational use
and development unless present and foreseeable future demand for public or
commercial recreational activities that could be accommodated on the property is
already adequately provided for in the area.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 64 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
As previously described, this project may temporarily and intermittently interfere with
recreational use of small areas of the LNB shoreline and waters. However, this disruption is
of short duration and will result in no permanent effects. Upland areas necessary to support
coastal recreational will not be permanently modified. Upon project completion there would
be no alteration of recreation as a result of this project and access would remain the same as
the pre - project conditions. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any adverse
impacts on recreational use and is consistent with Section 30221 of the CCA.
Section 30230 of the CCA states:
Marine resources shall be maintained, enhanced, and where feasible, restored.
Special protection shall be given to areas and species of special biological or economic
significance. Uses of the marine environment shall be carried out in a manner that
will sustain the biological productivity of coastal waters and that will maintain
healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long -term
commercial, recreational, scientific, and educational purposes.
Section 30231 of the CCA states:
The biological productivity and the quality of coastal waters, streams, wetlands,
estuaries, and lakes appropriate to maintain optimum populations of marine
organisms and for the protection of human health shall be maintained and, where
feasible, restored through, among other means, minimizing adverse effects of waste
water discharges and entrainment, controlling runoff, preventing depletion of
ground water supplies and substantial interference with surface water flow,
encouraging waste water reclamation, maintaining natural vegetation buffer areas
that protect riparian habitats, and minimizing alteration of natural streams.
Removing chemically impacted sediments from the Project Area will improve biological
productivity and water and sediment quality, thus improving the conditions for marine
organisms and human health. Water quality standards during dredging will be maintained
by following an approved water quality monitoring plan, developed to comply with the
terms and conditions of regulatory agency permits, and using silt curtains during dredging
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 65 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
activities to isolate the active workspace. No HAPCs, ESHA, or ESAs are found within the
Project Area; therefore no sensitive habitats will be altered. The proposed project would
result in removal of contaminated sediments from the Project Area in the least
environmentally damaging practicable manner without damage to sensitive habitats or
species and is consistent with Sections 30230 and 30231 of the CCA.
Section 30232 of the CCA states:
Protection against the spillage of crude oil, gas, petroleum products, or hazardous
substances shall be provided in relation to any development or transportation of such
materials. Effective containment and cleanup facilities and procedures shall be
provided for accidental spills that do occur.
The contractor will be required to provide a SPCC Plan to the City for approval and to
maintain sufficient spill response materials in the Project Area to effectively contain any
accidental spills that may occur.
Section 30233 of the CCA states:
(a) The diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters, wetlands, estuaries, and
lakes shall be permitted in accordance with other applicable provisions of this
division, where there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative, and
where feasible mitigation measures have been provided to minimize adverse
environmental effects, and shall be limited to the following: (1) New or expanded
port, energy, and coastal- dependent industrial facilities, including commercial fishing
facilities. (2) Maintaining existing, or restoring previously dredged, depths in existing
navigational channels, turning basins, vessel berthing and mooring areas, and boat
launching ramps. (3) In open coastal waters, other than wetlands, including streams,
estuaries, and lakes, new or expanded boating facilities and the placement of
structural pilings for public recreational piers that provide public access and
recreational opportunities. (4) Incidental public service purposes, including but not
limited to, burying cables and pipes or inspection of piers and maintenance of existing
intake and outfall lines. (5) Mineral extraction, including sand for restoring beaches,
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 66 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
except in environmentally sensitive areas. (6) Restoration purposes. (7) Nature study,
aquaculture, or similar resource dependent activities.
(b) Dredging and spoils disposal shall be planned and carried out to avoid significant
disruption to marine and wildlife habitats and water circulation. Dredge spoils
suitable for beach replenishment should be transported for these purposes to
appropriate beaches or into suitable longshore current systems.
(c) In addition to the other provisions of this section, diking, filling, or dredging in
existing estuaries and wetlands shall maintain or enhance the functional capacity of
the wetland or estuary.
The removal of sediment in the Newport Channel portion of the Project Area (Marina Park,
American Legion, and 15th Street Pier) will restore these areas to previously dredged depths
and, therefore, is consistent with 30233(a)(2). By removing contaminated sediments from
these areas, the proposed project is also consistent with 30233(a)(6). While it is potentially
necessary to dredge below previously dredged depths in the Rhine Channel to effectively
remove contaminated sediments, removal of these sediments is considered a high priority for
the City and the region and would therefore be an allowable restoration project per
30233(a)(6). The beneficial use of the dredged material in the permitted and approved
Middle Harbor CDF creates the least impact to the environment by permanently
sequestering the material from the marine environment and, therefore, is consistent with
30233(a)(6). No new facilities will be created in the Project Area, and no additional marina
or dock facilities will result from project implementation. Therefore, the proposed project
would remove contaminated sediments from the Project Area in the least environmentally
damaging practicable manner and is consistent with Section 30233 of the CCA.
Section 30240 of the CCA states:
(a) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be protected against any significant
disruption of habitat values, and only uses dependent on those resources shall be
allowed within those areas.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 67 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
(b) Development in areas adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitat areas and
parks and recreation areas shall be sited and designed to prevent impacts which
would significantly degrade those areas, and shall be compatible with the continuance
of those habitat and recreation areas.
There are no environmentally sensitive areas within the Project Area. Dredging that will
occur adjacent to recreational beaches will be designed and executed so that the beaches will
not be degraded. For example, adequate distance from the shoreline will be maintained to
protect the beach from erosion and to ensure turbidity does not impact the quality of the
area.
Section 30251 of the CCA states, in relevant part:
The scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas shall be considered and protected as a
resource of public importance. Permitted development shall be sited and designed to
protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, to minimize the
alteration of natural land forms, to be visually compatible with the character of
surrounding areas, and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in
visually degraded areas...
Public views of Newport Bay exist along the bridge leading to Lido Isle, from establishments
along the Rhine Channel, and residences and public areas in and near Lido Peninsula, Lido
Isle, and along the Newport Channel. The existing public views are those of a developed
harbor (i.e., boats, boat docks, gangways). Upon project completion, there would be no
alteration of the visual characteristics, and views would remain the same as the existing
conditions. No landside buildings or expanded in -water structures are included in the
project. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the character of the surrounding
area and would not have any adverse impacts upon public views to and along the shoreline
and is consistent with Section 30251 of the CCA.
Section 30604 of the CCA provides for the issuance of coastal development permits directly
by the CCC in regions where the local government having jurisdiction does not have a
certified LCP. The permit may only be issued if the CCC finds that the proposed
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 68 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
development will not prejudice the ability of the local government to prepare an LCP, which
conforms to the Chapter 3 policies of the CCA. The Newport Beach LUP was certified in
May 2005 and updated in 2009. The proposed development is consistent with the policies of
the certified LUP. Therefore, the proposed development will not prejudice the City's ability
to prepare an LCP (Implementation Plan) for Newport Beach that is consistent with the
Chapter 3 policies of the CCA as required by Section 30604.
Determination of Significance
No potential indirect or cumulative impacts to land use and planning have been identified.
The proposed project will not result in any direct impacts to land use and planning and will
benefit the local area and the coastal zone by removing contaminated sediments from the
marine environment.
The proposed project would not physically divide an established community nor result in
any barriers that would preclude travel throughout the project area. As an in -water project
that will not result in the construction or demolition of any road, building, or other physical
obstacle, no impact related to this issue would result from implementation of the proposed
project.
As demonstrated in the Tables LUl through LU5, this project does 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, LCP, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
This project does not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan, as none of these protected areas exist in the Project Area.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 69 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
XI. 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?
The proposed project is not located in an area identified as a known mineral resource, and
project implementation will not result in the loss of availability of either a known mineral
resource or locally important mineral resource recovery site (General Plan NR Element
2006). The City has determined that the Project Area is located in an "Area with No
Significant Mineral Deposits" (General Plan Update EIR 2006).
The project will 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 and will 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, because no such resources are found within the
Project Area.
The sediments that would be dredged during project implementation would be beneficially
reused by incorporation into the Middle Harbor CDF.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 70 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
❑
❑
❑
�X
❑
❑
❑
❑X
The proposed project is not located in an area identified as a known mineral resource, and
project implementation will not result in the loss of availability of either a known mineral
resource or locally important mineral resource recovery site (General Plan NR Element
2006). The City has determined that the Project Area is located in an "Area with No
Significant Mineral Deposits" (General Plan Update EIR 2006).
The project will 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 and will 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, because no such resources are found within the
Project Area.
The sediments that would be dredged during project implementation would be beneficially
reused by incorporation into the Middle Harbor CDF.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 70 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
XII. NOISE
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
ground -borne vibration or ground -borne 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
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 within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Environmental Setting
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
7MANEW
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑X ❑
❑ ❑
❑ Q
The dominant noise sources in the Project Area are transportation related (General Plan
Update EIR 2006) and include vessel traffic, automobile and truck traffic, and aircraft. Noise
in the Project Area is also generated from ship repair activities, gas - generated motors, and
other commercial, recreational, and harbor - related activities.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 71 090243 -01
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
❑
❑
❑K
❑
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
ground -borne vibration or ground -borne 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
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 within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Environmental Setting
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
7MANEW
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑X ❑
❑ ❑
❑ Q
The dominant noise sources in the Project Area are transportation related (General Plan
Update EIR 2006) and include vessel traffic, automobile and truck traffic, and aircraft. Noise
in the Project Area is also generated from ship repair activities, gas - generated motors, and
other commercial, recreational, and harbor - related activities.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 71 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Noise levels may temporarily increase over background conditions in the immediate vicinity
of the Project Area due to dredging equipment (use of the mechanical dredging apparatus to
excavate and place sediment into barges and use of diesel powered tender vessels to move the
dredge and barges) and pile removal and installation activities. Potential direct impacts
during dredging include noise produced by diesel generators and vessel engines, metal cables
and buckets, and occasional truck traffic. Dredging and placement of sediment into barges
and removal and installation of piles will occur only during allowable construction hours,
per the City Noise Ordinance (Section 10.28.040). Work will occur between the hours of 7
AM and 6:30 PM on weekdays and between 8 AM and 6 PM on Saturday; no dredging or
other construction activities are allowed on Sundays or holidays. Construction activity is
exempt from specific noise thresholds under the City Noise Ordinance, provided that it is
conducted within these hours; however, the increase in noise during project activities has
the potential to result in temporary, localized nuisance effects for nearby residents.
Noise levels will also temporarily increase during impact driving of the replacement concrete
piles. The primary sources of ground -borne vibration during construction would be from the
pile- driving activities, which would occur intermittently and for generally short durations
for each pile. The majority of pile driving will occur no closer than approximately 80 feet
from the shoreline, and based on other projects in LNB (most notably the recent Balboa
Marina refurbishment project), damage to buildings is highly unlikely. Construction- related
noise could be an annoyance to nearby residents during periods of pile driving. Vibratory
advancement of piles is unlikely to be detected by residents, because piles are being placed
into marine sediments at a distance from upland residences and businesses.
The typical noise level produced during impact pile driving is 101 decibels (dBA) at a
distance of 50 feet. It is estimated that the noise level at the shoreline will be approximately
67 dBA (for perspective, a vacuum cleaner produces approximately 70 dBA at a distance of 3
feet and conversational speech produces noise at a level of 60 dBA at 3 feet). Noise related to
pile driving would be temporary and intermittent, because neither pile driving nor vibratory
advancement of piles would be continuous. To minimize this impact, all pile- driving
activities will occur within the allowable construction work windows set by the City Noise
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 72 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Ordinance. Jetting may also be used to install a portion of the piles to within a few feet of
tip elevation, which would further limit noise impacts.
It is anticipated that two roundtrip tugboat trips between LNB and the POLB will be
generated per construction day. By living in a working harbor, residents in LNB are
accustomed to noise associated with vessel traffic. The noise associated with tugboat trips to
and from the POLB would be similar to the typical noises associated with non - project vessel
traffic in LNB, including previous dredging projects in Newport Bay.
During the proposed project, noise levels will return to pre - project conditions once
construction activities halt for the day. Chapter 10.26 of the City Municipal Code sets
internal and external noise standards. Chapter 10.26 exempts "any activity conducted on
public property ... which [is] consistent with, and in furtherance of, the governmental
functions or services the public entity has authorized" and "noise sources associated with
construction... of any real property" as long as construction is conducted within the
allowable timeframe found in Section 10.28.040. To minimize noise impacts resulting from
the proposed project, project activities will comply with the City's Noise Ordinance
(Municipal Code Chapter 10.26 and Chapter 10.28) during all aspects of construction.
Determination of Significance
The project will not result in any permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity. Localized, temporary increases above current ambient noise levels will occur in the
project vicinity during daily construction hours; however, this noise impact is less than
significant due to the compliance with Chapter 10.28 of the City Municipal Code and the
existing commercial and industrial noise - producing activities in and around the Project Area.
Noise generated from pile- driving activities will be temporary and intermittent. Noise
generated by tugboats transporting barges to and from the Middle Harbor CDF fill site will
not create significant noise impacts above existing conditions, largely because the vast
majority of the tugboat route occurs outside of LNB.
Cumulative noise impacts include those associated with the federal maintenance dredging
project in LNB and minor dredging and construction activities in LNB. Given the magnitude
of the proposed federal dredging project, cumulative impacts from noise generated by the
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 73 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
proposed project activities are insignificant. No proposed large construction projects are
proposed that would result in overlapping construction noise with construction noise from
the proposed project; therefore, there would not be a cumulative impact to which the
proposed project would contribute. Pile installation activities are not a part of the USACE
maintenance dredging project; therefore, no cumulative noise impacts associated with this
activity are expected.
The project would potentially expose persons to noise levels in excess of standards
established in the City Community Noise Ordinance only during allowable construction
hours. All dredging and pile- driving activities will be completed within the timeframe
allowed by City ordinance. Therefore, elevated noise levels would not result in a significant
impact. During pile removal and replacement activities, the project would expose persons to
increased noise levels. Based on the distance of the pile driving to the upland structures, the
temporary and intermittent nature of the pile driving, and the ongoing noise and vibrations
generated by marine- related and upland activities, these impacts are less than significant.
This project will not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a
public airport or located in the vicinity of a private airstrip that would expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 74 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
The proposed project will not affect population and housing, because it is a sediment cleanup
project that will not result in construction of new infrastructure or displacement of people or
existing housing. No permanent buildings or roads will be constructed as part of or as a
result of the proposed project. The project will not involve the construction of residential
homes or businesses or an increase in population, housing, or employment in the nearly
built -out city. Project implementation will not necessitate the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere, because it will not displace any people from existing housing.
Because of the limited duration of the proposed project, it is anticipated that the employees
who will be used for the proposed construction will travel to the Project Area from their
existing residences. As a result, the project will not induce substantial population growth,
either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through
extension of roads or other infrastructure). In addition, the project will not result in the
displacement of existing housing; thus, the construction of replacement housing elsewhere
will not be necessary.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 75 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
❑
❑
❑
X❑
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,
❑
❑
❑
0
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
❑
❑
❑
0
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
The proposed project will not affect population and housing, because it is a sediment cleanup
project that will not result in construction of new infrastructure or displacement of people or
existing housing. No permanent buildings or roads will be constructed as part of or as a
result of the proposed project. The project will not involve the construction of residential
homes or businesses or an increase in population, housing, or employment in the nearly
built -out city. Project implementation will not necessitate the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere, because it will not displace any people from existing housing.
Because of the limited duration of the proposed project, it is anticipated that the employees
who will be used for the proposed construction will travel to the Project Area from their
existing residences. As a result, the project will not induce substantial population growth,
either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through
extension of roads or other infrastructure). In addition, the project will not result in the
displacement of existing housing; thus, the construction of replacement housing elsewhere
will not be necessary.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 75 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Result insubstantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of
the public services
Fire protection?
❑
❑
❑
❑
Police protection?
❑
❑
❑
❑X
Schools?
❑
❑
❑
❑X
Other public facilities?
❑
❑
❑
❑
The proposed project will not result in adverse effects to public service ratios, response times,
or other performance objectives, because it is a sediment cleanup project that is temporary in
nature and does not entail modification to governmental facilities. The proposed project will
not impair implementation of or physically interfere with adopted emergency response plans
or emergency evacuation plans. The temporary staging area and the temporary debris
offloading area are the only upland component of the project, and these areas are not located
within the City's tsunami evacuation route. Given the project location in relation to the U.S.
Coast Guard (USCG) facility and the harbor entrance, dredging equipment will not interfere
with USCG emergency operations.
The proposed project will not expose people or structures to increased risk of fire due to the
physical separation of the construction equipment from existing structures. Due to the
temporary timeframe for the project and the coordination of the project with the City's Parks
and Recreation Department, project implementation would not increase the use of existing
neighborhood regional parks or other recreational facilities nor would it require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 76 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
The project will not require additional wastewater treatment facilities and the existing
capacity is adequate to serve the project's projected demand. While the project will
contribute a limited volume of solid waste to area landfills, it will not exceed projected
capacity and will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste.
Because the purpose of the proposed project is essentially to maintain existing facilities by
removing contaminated sediments, this project will not result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government 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 fire protection, police protection, schools,
or other public services.
XV. RECREATION
Would the project:
a) 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) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction of or expansion of recreational
facilities that might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment? Opportunities?
Environmental Setting
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
City parks within Newport Harbor provide recreational activities, including picnicking,
walking, and bird watching. In -water activities include boating, diving, fishing, kayaking,
paddle boarding, parasailing, rowing, sailing, swimming, and windsurfing. Three parks are
located in the vicinity of the project: Lido Park, Rhine Wharf Park, and Veterans' Memorial
Park. Lido Park, a small "mini park," provides benches for resting and harbor views. Rhine
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 77 090243 -01
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
City parks within Newport Harbor provide recreational activities, including picnicking,
walking, and bird watching. In -water activities include boating, diving, fishing, kayaking,
paddle boarding, parasailing, rowing, sailing, swimming, and windsurfing. Three parks are
located in the vicinity of the project: Lido Park, Rhine Wharf Park, and Veterans' Memorial
Park. Lido Park, a small "mini park," provides benches for resting and harbor views. Rhine
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 77 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Wharf Park, planned for future expansion, is currently an unimproved strip of land.
Veterans' Memorial Park amenities include four covered picnic tables, barbeques, and harbor
viewing. The future Marina Park is located within the Project Area, between 19th and 15th
streets and currently offers a sandy beach suitable for recreational activities, including
launching non - motorized craft. Two sailing bases and one restroom facility are also located
in the project vicinity.
Few special events are expected to occur within the Project Area during the proposed project
timeframe (fall and winter). At this time, it is anticipated that only the annual Christmas
Boat Parade will need to be accommodated by storing the dredging equipment out of the
Parade corridor. City- sponsored recreational classes will not be located within the Project
Area during the proposed construction timeframe.
Potential Project Impacts
The proposed project is expected to occur during the fall and winter months when park use
is relatively low, thus reducing potential impacts to recreational opportunities in the vicinity
of the Project Area. To provide a safety buffer zone during debris removal and dredging and
disposal activities, Lido Park, which provides a view point, may be temporarily closed to the
public. Other viewing points in the vicinity of the Project Area would remain open to the
public.
Veterans' Memorial Park is located adjacent to the 15th Street Pier, a City facility that is
open to the public for launching and temporarily mooring non - motorized recreational
vessels. Dredging will occur under and around the 15th Street Pier and bayward of Veterans'
Memorial Park; however, this activity will not require the closure of the 15th Street Pier.
The upland area of Veterans' Memorial Park and the sailing bases located in the vicinity of
the Project Area will also remain open.
Project activities will occur at a safe distance from shore and will allow for continued use of
the beaches and water. Dredging will occur to the north of the beach at Marina Park and
will be offset sufficiently from the beach so that its closure will not be necessary. A safety
perimeter will be maintained around the dredging equipment while it is working in the
vicinity of parks and beaches.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 78 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Construction equipment will move within the Project Area on a daily basis, thus reducing
the overall impacts on in -water recreation at any particular location. Dredging equipment
will occupy a relatively small portion of the Project Area while actively dredging, leaving
sufficient room for a safety zone around the equipment. Private vessels that need to be
relocated during construction activities can be accommodated at nearby City moorage
facilities for the relatively short period they are displaced.
Should dredging be delayed and project activities occur during spring or summer months,
additional coordination with the City's Park and Recreation Department would need to
occur. Depending on the construction timeframe and duration, sailing classes, swimming
classes, and other recreational activities offered by the City may need to be temporarily
relocated to other City beaches, where City recreational activities may already be scheduled.
If recreational classes need to be relocated to another City area, coordination with the City's
Park and Recreation Department is needed to ensure there would be no inconsistent uses of
the areas. It is unlikely that the City will need to cancel recreational classes due to the
presence of dredging equipment off the shoreline, although activities may be relocated.
Determination of Significance
Potential recreational impacts due to a temporary loss of viewing opportunities from Lido
and Rhine Wharf parks are offset by the numerous viewing locations available in the
immediate area. Potential impacts due to the possible temporary loss of use of small portions
of the shoreline and open water for recreational purposes (e.g. sailing lessons) are less than
significant, because the duration of the construction operations will be short and will occur
during a period of seasonally low use.
Cumulative impacts to recreation include temporary loss of access to open water for in -water
activities during dredging and disposal activities undertaken by the USACE maintenance
dredging project. Given the time of year, the limited spatial scope and distance from the
shore, and short timeframe of the proposed dredging, the cumulative impacts associated with
the proposed project are negligible.
There will be no increased use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities due to project activities such that substantial physical deterioration of
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 79 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
the facility would occur. In addition, recreational facilities that require construction or
expansion are not required.
XVI. TRANSPORTATION AND 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 if such facilities?
❑ ❑
❑
Less than
❑
❑
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
❑
❑
❑
❑ ❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑ ❑k
❑ ❑X
❑ ❑X
❑ 0
❑ 0
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 80 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Environmental Setting
The majority of work associated with this project will occur in -water rather than on land;
therefore, potential transportation impacts associated with dredging in the Project Area will
be limited almost exclusively to marine transit, with the exception of a limited number of
potential truck trips (25 to 35 over the entire construction period) to transport any debris
encountered during dredging.
The Project Area is subject to ongoing use by commercial fishing and sightseeing vessels;
sailboats ranging in size from less than 20 feet long to more than 150 feet long; and private
motorized vessels as small as Duffy electric boats and as large as yachts more than 100 feet in
length. Human - powered vessels such as kayaks and paddleboards also make frequent use of
the Project Area. In addition, various dredging projects in Newport Bay have periodically
resulted in tugboat and barge traffic. Vessel traffic in LNB is not currently subject to long
delays or unsafe operating conditions, though vessel traffic may be heavy during peak
recreational periods, such as summer weekends.
Potential Project Impacts and Best Management Practices
Dredging operations for the proposed project will be relatively short term (4 to 5 months)
and will likely involve a barge- mounted mechanical dredge, two bottom -dump barges, two
tugboats, and small support vessels. Typically, all vessels will not be present in LNB
simultaneously, because they will be used as needed during specific construction activities.
The addition of these vessels to LNB will result in localized, temporary constraints on vessel
traffic, particularly in the Rhine Channel. Communication protocols will be developed to
ensure that navigation is impeded as little as possible, and the contractor will be required to
follow standard rules of navigation. Safety perimeters will be established around active
construction equipment, and all vessels will be equipped with appropriate running lights and
day shapes. Information regarding the dredging activities will be available through regular
Notices to Mariners (NOTAMs), public postings, and updates on the City's website.
Access by private vessels to portions of the Rhine Channel may be restricted for as much as 2
to 3 months, depending on the exact sequencing of the contractor's operations. Given the
advance notice to the upland property owners in the Rhine Channel and the temporary
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 81 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
nature of this impact, this restriction to navigation is inconvenient but not significant.
Private boat owners who must access the Rhine Channel during the construction period may
request permission in advance from the City, who will coordinate with the contractor
regarding access. Because the construction will only occur during the City Noise Ordinance
work windows, the Rhine Channel will be more accessible to private vessels during non -
construction hours and on Sundays. Although navigation within the Rhine Channel will be
restricted temporarily during construction, the proposed project will result in the long -term
removal of shoaled, contaminated sediments from LNB, which will be beneficial to
navigation.
Potential upland traffic impacts are limited to the activities associated with debris
transportation for landfill disposal and contractor personnel traveling to and from the staging
area. Any debris encountered during dredging would be transported to an appropriate
upland landfill using typical 16 -yard dump trucks. However, because of the limited volume
of debris identified in the Project Area, it is anticipated that, on average, 2 to 3 roundtrip
trucks trips per week will be required to transport this material to a landfill, which will not
disrupt local traffic patterns to businesses and residences in the area. The contractor will be
required to prepare a traffic plan that ensures adequate access to all residences and businesses
in the Project Area during all aspects of construction. This project will not result in a
permanent increase to traffic volume or vehicle trips nor will it affect the existing level of
service standards.
BMPs implemented to minimize impacts during this project include:
• The contractor will observe all standard USCG practices for navigational safety and
communications, including publications of NOTAMs.
• The contractor will be required to prepare and implement a traffic plan that ensures
adequate access to all residences and businesses in the Project Area during all aspects
of construction.
• The City will update the construction website on a weekly basis to inform residents
and visitors of the upcoming location of the project equipment and potential
restricted areas.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 82 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Determination of Significance
The proposed project is expected to occur during the winter months, which is a period of
relatively low use in LNB. Should project activities occur during the more active spring or
summer months, it may be necessary to increase public notifications regarding dredging
activities and to further physically demarcate the boundaries of dredging activities using
buoys.
The temporary increase in truck traffic from debris disposal is negligible. Because the
dredging and disposal vessels will occupy portions of LNB during construction, temporary,
localized, minor adverse impacts to vessel navigation may occur during the project. These
temporary effects will be less than significant due to their timing, duration, and
implementation of all standard USCG safety protocols. The proposed project will result in
long -term benefits to vessel traffic by removing contaminated sediments from the Project
Area.
Cumulative impacts to marine transportation are primarily related to the maintenance
dredging of LNB by the USACE that is planned to occur once the proposed project is
completed. As previously stated, dredging in Upper Newport Bay and at private or
commercial facilities in LNB has been commonplace for the last several years, and no
cumulatively significant effects on transportation access or safety in the harbor have
occurred as a result of the combination of any of these projects.
This project does not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation, because none of these transportation alternatives is present in the
Project Area. Resident parking will remain available; the contractor will be provided a
landside staging area to ensure no impacts to residents occur.
Because the project would not result in upland traffic impacts, conflicts with an applicable
congestion management program or other standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways will not occur.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 83 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
This project will have no effect on air traffic patterns. No hazards, such as sharp curves or
dangerous intersections, will result from project implementation, nor will incompatible uses
be created due to any project design features.
Existing emergency access to the area will not be impacted, either temporarily during
construction or as a permanent feature of the project. Because the project does not include
upland traffic impacts, conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities will not occur.
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
Significant
Would the project: Impact
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?
Less than
Significant with
Less than
Mitigation
Significant
Incorporated
Impact
❑
❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
No
Impact
❑X
X❑
❑
X
0
❑
X
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
regulation related to solid waste?
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 84 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
The state of California Government Code 4126 mandates that anyone performing excavation
work shall call at least 2 working days prior to commencement of any excavation. Notice of
this project will be provided to area fiber optic, communications, and electrical providers to
request additional information on the location, if any, of private cables or utilities. Although
no known in -water or overhead City - provided utilities are located within the Project Area,
the contractor will be required to confirm the locations, alignments, and depths of any
utilities potentially located within the Project Area prior to dredging. In addition, as part of
the construction plan, all overhead and buried upland utility lines will need to be
demarcated and avoided by the contractor prior to initiating construction.
A relatively small amount of debris will be removed from the Rhine Channel. For disposal of
commercial debris, the City currently has an open franchise system, in which the contractor
will select a City- approved hauler who will dispose of or recycle the debris appropriately
(construction and demolition projects generate a high volume of recyclable material that is
counted towards the City's recycling rate).
The proposed project will not affect utilities and service systems, because it consists of
removal of contaminated sediments from the Project Area for transport to the Middle Harbor
CDF and does not result in additional demands on existing utilities and service systems or
create future demand on them.
No potential direct or indirect impacts to utilities and service systems have been identified,
because no direct or indirect impacts will result from the proposed project. It will also not
result in cumulative impacts to utilities and service systems.
The project will not generate wastewater or require treatment of wastewater, and therefore,
will not exceed requirements of the applicable RWQCB. The project will not require or
result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities. Therefore, the proposed project will not require a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 85 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
The proposed project does not require or result in the construction of new stormwater
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. Sufficient water supplies are available to
serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, and no new or expanded
entitlements are needed.
The proposed project will be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. Through the City's open franchise
system, the contractor will select a City- approved hauler who will dispose of or recycle the
debris appropriately at a landfill that has demonstrated capacity. Therefore, the proposed
project will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulation related to solid
waste.
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
c) Have environmental effects, which will cause ❑ X❑ ❑ ❑
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 86 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant No
Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact Impact
a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the
❑
❑
❑ ❑X
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 period of
California history or prehistory?
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
c) Have environmental effects, which will cause ❑ X❑ ❑ ❑
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 86 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Design features have been incorporated into the project to substantially minimize or
eliminate potential project impacts to maintain the quality of the environment; upon project
completion, the sediment and water quality in LNB will be improved, and dredged material
from LNB will be beneficially reused at the Middle Harbor CDF, consistent with a regional
approach to sediment management. Given the temporary nature of the project, its primary
goal of cleaning up contaminated sediments, and the implementation of established BMPs,
this project does not have the potential to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
or plant species.
All direct and indirect project impacts are less than significant or can be mitigated to a level
of insignificance. No other projects have been proposed in the vicinity of the Project Area
that would result in significant impacts. No cumulative impacts are anticipated to result
from the proposed project in combination with other projects.
The City has found that after the adoption of feasible mitigation measures, all potentially
significant impacts have been reduced to a less than significant level. Temporary,
construction - related increases in air pollutant emissions that would result from the proposed
project have been analyzed in this Initial Study. As discussed in the respective sections of this
document, implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant
impacts. However, where impacts were determined to be potentially significant, mitigation
measures have been identified that will reduce the impacts to less than significant levels.
Therefore, the proposed project would have no substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly.
XIX. STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND EARLIER ANALYSES
In compliance with state law and procedures, the City has determined that a MND is the
appropriate CEQA document for the proposed project. In compliance with Section 15063 of
the CEQA Guidelines, the City conducted an Initial Study to determine whether the project
may have a significant effect on the environment. The preparation of the Initial Study and
MND is governed by two principal sets of documents: the CEQA statute and the CEQA
Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000, et seq.). Section 15063(d)(3)
requires that the potential environmental effects identified on the Initial Study checklist be
explained, and evidence be provided in sufficient detail to support the conclusions. An
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 87 090243 -01
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Initial Study may rely upon expert opinion supported by facts, technical studies, or other
substantial evidence to document its findings. Section 15070 states that a public agency shall
prepare a Negative Declaration or MND for a project subject to CEQA when the Initial Study
shows that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment or the Initial
Study identifies potentially significant effects, but revisions in the project plans /designs show
the effects would be avoided, or the effects would be reduced with implementation of
mitigation measures to a point where it is clearly shown that no significant impacts to the
environment would occur as a result of the project.
As allowed by CEQA, this MND relies on the City's General Plan EIR. CEQA states that
earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier FIR or negative
declaration (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063[c][3][D]). For this project, two earlier
documents were relied on for information and analysis for the effects to biological resources,
hydrology and water quality, and land use. Reference documents include:
• Revised Marine Biological Impact Assessment Marma Park Project, Newport Beach,
California (CRM 2009)
• Draft Recirculated Environmental Impact Report (DREIR) for the proposed Marina
Park (City of Newport Beach 2010)
XX. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
Certain documents are incorporated by reference into this Initial Study and MND pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150. These documents are identified in the previous Initial
Study Checklist discussion. When a document is referenced and /or incorporated by
reference, its pertinent sections are briefly summarized in the Initial Study checklist
discussion.
The following documents are incorporated by reference:
• City ofNewport Beach General Plan Final Program EIR (General Plan 2006)
• City of Newport Beach General Plan, including all its elements
• City of Newport Beach Zoning Map (February 2009)
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 88 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
• South Coast Air Quality ManagementDlstrict Air QualityManagementPlan
(SCAQMD 2007)
• Revised Marine Biological Impact Assessment Manna Park Project, Newport Beach,
California (CRM 2009)
• Draft Recirculated Environmental Impact Report (DREIR) for the proposed Marina
Park (City of Newport Beach 2010)
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 89 090243 -01
REFERENCES
Project Description
Contaminated Sediments Task Force (CSTF). 2005. Los Angeles Regional Contaminated
Sediments Task Force: Long -Term Management Strategy. Prepared by Anchor
Environmental CA, L.P.; Everest International Consultants, Inc.; and AMEC Earth
and Environmental, Inc., for the CSTF.
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP). 2003. Chemistry and
Toxicity in Rhine Channel Sediments. Technical Report 391. May 2003.
State Water Resources Control Board. 1994. "Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana
River Basin (8)." http: / /www.swrcb .ca.gov /rwgcb8 /water issues
/ programs /basin _ plan /index.shtml.
Aesthetics
City of Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan). 2006. "Natural Resource Element."
http: / /www.city.newport- beach. ca. us/ PLN /General_Plan/Figures /FigNR3
_CoastalViews_17xl l color_web.pdf.
Agricultural and Forestry Resources
California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping, and Monitoring Program (CDC).
2006. "Orange County Important Farmland 2006."
ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/Pdf/2006/oraO6.pdf
Biological Resources
Anchor Environmental CA, L.P. (Anchor). 2002. Literature Review of Effects of
Resuspended Sediments Due To Dredging Operations. Prepared for the
Contaminated Sediments Task Force, Los Angeles, California by Anchor, Laguna
Niguel, California. February 2002.
City of Newport Beach. 2006. Bay Island Bulkhead Repair and Bridge Replacement, Initial
Study and MND.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 91 090243 -01
References
City of Newport Beach. 2010. Draft Recirculated Environmental Impact Report (DREIR) for
the proposed Marina Park. Prepared by Sirius Environmental for the City of Newport
Beach, January 2010.
Coastal Resource Management, Inc. (CRM). 2009. Revised Marine Biological Impact
Assessment Marina Park Project, Newport Beach, California. Prepared by CRM for
the City of Newport Beach. December 2009.
Merkel and Associates. 2007. Marine Biological Resources and Essential Fish Habitat
Assessment for the Lido Yacht Anchorage Project Newport Beach, California.
Prepared for Anchor, Laguna Niguel, California by Merkel and Associates. August
2007.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1998a. Essential Fish Habitat: New Marine Fish
Habitat Conservation Mandate for Federal Agencies. National Marine Fisheries
Service Southwest Regional Office.
NMFS. 1998b. Essential Fish Habitat: Essential Fish Habitat Coastal Pelagic Species.
Modified from Coastal Pelagics Species Fishery Management Plan (Amendment 8 to
the Northern Anchovy Fishery Management Plan). http: / /swr.ucsd.edu.
Newell, R.E., L.J. Seiderer, and D.R. Hitchcock (Newell et al.). 1998. The Impact of
Dredging Works in Coastal Waters: A Review of the Sensitivity to Disturbance and
Subsequent Recovery of Biological Resources on the Sea Bed. Oceanography and
Marine Biology: an Annual Review. 36:127 -178.
Stickney, R.R. and D. Perlmutter. 1975. Impact of Intracostal Waterway Maintenance
Dredging on a Mud Bottom Benthos Community. Biological Conservation. 7:211-
225.
Van Dolah, R.F., Calder, D.R., and Knott, D.M (Van Dolah et al.). 1984. Effects of Dredging
an Open -Water Disposal on Benthic Macroinvertebrates in a South Carolina Estuary.
Estuaries. 7:28 -37.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 92 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
References
Cultural Resources
City of Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan). 2006. "Historical Resources Element."
http: / /www.city.newport- beach .ca.us /PLN /General_Plan/07_Ch6_
HistoricalResources_web.pdf.
Geology and Soils
City of Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan). 2006. "Safety Element."
http: / /www.city.newport- beach. ca. us /PLN/ General _Plan /12_Chl l_Safety_web.pdf.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Anchor Environmental CA, L.P. (Anchor). 2006. Rhine Channel Sediment Remediation
Feasibility Study and Alternatives Evaluation Newport Bay, California. Prepared by
Anchor for Orange County Coastkeeper and City of Newport Beach. January 2006.
City of Newport Beach. 2010. Draft Recirculated Environmental Impact Report (DREIR) for
the Proposed Marina Park. Prepared by Sirius Environmental for the City of
Newport Beach. January 2010.
Contaminated Sediments Task Force (CSTF). 2005. Los Angeles Regional Contaminated
Sediments Task Force: Long -Term Management Strategy. Prepared by Anchor;
Everest International Consultants, Inc.; and AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc.,
for the CSTF.
Everest International Consultants, Inc. (Everest). 2008. Marina Park Coastal Engineering
Study. Prepared by Everest for URS Cash & Associates. October 2008.
MBC Applied Environmental Sciences (MBC). 2000. Turbidity Issues in Relationship to
Dredging. Prepared by MBC for the Port of Los Angeles. November 2000.
Oxnard Harbor District. 2009. Project Closure Report. Port of Hueneme Maintenance
Dredging and CAD Site Construction. Prepared by Anchor QEA, L.P. October 2009.
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP). 2003. Chemistry and
Toxicity in Rhine Channel Sediments. Technical Report 391. May 2003.
Thackston, E.L. and M.R. Palermo ( Thackston and Palermo). 2000. Improved Methods for
Correlating Turbidity and Suspended Solids for Monitoring. DOER Technical Notes
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2010
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup 93 090243 -01
References
Collection, ERDC TN- DOER -E8. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development
Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2002. Los Angeles County Regional Dredged
Material Management Plan Pilot Studies. Appendix A — Evaluation of Aquatic
Capping Alternative. Prepared by Anchor Environmental, LLC. November 2002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2010. "Marine Flushing Management
Measure — II. Siting and Design." http:// www .epa.gov /nps /MMGI /Chapter5 /ch5-
2a.html.
Land Use and Planning
City of Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan). 2006. "Land Use Element."
http: / /www.city.newport- beach. ca. us /PLN/ General _Plan /04_Ch3_LandUse _ web.pdf.
City of Newport Beach. 2010. Draft Recirculated Environmental Impact Report (DREIR) for
the proposed Marina Park. Prepared by Sirius Environmental for the City of Newport
Beach. January 2010.
City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program, Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP). 2009. Last
accessed May 2010 at http:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =1317.
Mineral Resources
City of Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan). 2006. "Natural Resources Element."
http: / /www.city.newport- beach .ca.us /PLN /General_Plan/11_ChIO_
NaturalResources_web.pdf.
General Plan. 2006. Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. Prepared by EIP
Associates for the City of Newport Beach. April 2006.
Noise
City of Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan). 2006. Update Draft Environmental
Impact Report. Prepared by EIP Associates for the City of Newport Beach. April
2006.
June 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
090243 -01 94 Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
APPENDIX A
AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
ON=
Air Quality Analysis
In Support of.
Rhine Channel Contaminated Sediment Cleanup
Newport Beach, California
Confined Disposal Facility Alternative
Initial Study
Prepared for:
Anchor QEA, L.P.
26300 La Alameda, Suite 240
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
Prepared by:
re
iLANCO —� Environmental
Los Angeles, CA 90278
March 2010
Table of Contents
1.0
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. ..............................1
2.0
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................................ ..............................1
2.1
Regional Climate and Meteorology ..................................... ...............................
1
2.2
Criteria Pollutants and Air Monitoring ................................ ...............................
3
2.3
Toxic Air Contaminants ....................................................... ...............................
5
2.4
Sensitive Receptors .............................................................. ...............................
6
2.5
Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................. ...............................
6
3.0
REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................... ..............................7
3.1
Federal Regulations ............................................................. ...............................
7
3.2
State Regulations ................................................................. ...............................
9
3.3
Local Regulations and Agreements ................................... ...............................
10
4.0
PROJECT SOURCES AND EMISSION METHODOLOGY ..................... .............................10
4.1
Harbor Craft ....................................................................... ...............................
12
4.2
Off -Road Emission Sources (Land -Based and Marine) .... ...............................
13
4.3
On -Road Emission Sources ............................................... ...............................
14
5.0
AIR QUALITY IMPACTS .................................................................. .............................14
5.1
Significance Criteria .......................................................... ...............................
14
5.2
Significance Determination ............................................... ...............................
17
Tables
Table 2.1. Adverse Effects Associated with the Criteria Pollutants
Table 2.2. Maximum Pollutant Concentrations Measured at the Costa Mesa and Mission Viejo
Monitoring Stations
Table 4.1. Source Activity and Characteristics
Table 5.1. Significance Criteria
Table 5.2. Summary of Peak Daily Construction Emissions — Proposed Project without Mitigation
Table 5.3. Summary of Peak Daily Construction Emissions — Proposed Project with Mitigation
Table 5.4 Summary of On -Site Daily Construction Emissions — Unmitigated Proposed Project
Table 5.5 Summary of On -Site Daily Construction Emissions — Proposed Project with Mitigation
Table 5.6. GHG Emissions and Significance Determination
iLANCO 7Environmental DRAFT
ACRONYMS
AB32
Assembly Bill 32 California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006
AQI
Air Quality Impact
AQMP
Air Quality Management Plan
CAAQS
California Ambient Air Quality Standard
CARB
California Air Resources Board
CDF
Confined Disposal Facility
CH,
Methane
CO
Carbon Monoxide
CO,
Carbon Dioxide
COz a
Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
DPM
Diesel Particulate Matter
EMFAC2007
Emission Factors model developed by the California Air Resources Board and used to
calculate emission rates from on -road motor vehicles
GHG
Greenhouse Gas
GWP
Global Warming Potential
hp
Horsepower
LCFS
Low Carbon Fuel Standard
MSERC
Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credit
mton
Metric Ton
N20
Nitrous Oxide
NAAQS
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NO,
Nitrogen Dioxide
NOx
Nitrogen Oxides
0,
Ozone
OPR
Office of Planning and Research
OFFROAD2007
Off -road emissions inventory, developed by CARB is an estimate of the population,
activity, and emissions estimate of varied types of off -road equipment
PERP
Portable Equipment Registration Program
PFCs
Perfluorocarbons
PM"
Particulate Matter, diameter <10 microns
PMZ.S
Particulate Matter, diameter <2.5 microns
POLE
Port of Long Beach
ppmV
Parts Per Million on a Volume Basis
SB
Senate Bill
SCAB
South Coast Air Basin
SCAQMD
South Coast Air Quality Management District
SF,
Sulfur Hexafluoride
SIP
State Implementation Plan
S02
Sulfur Dioxide
SRA
Source Receptor Area
TAC
Toxic Air Contaminant
URBEMIS
Urban Emissions software is used to estimate construction, area source, and
operational air pollutant emissions from land use projects
USEPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
VOC
Volatile Organic Compound
WRI
World Resources Institute
iLANCO 7Environmental DRAFT
1.0 Introduction
This air quality analysis was prepared in support of the CEQA Initial Study for the Rhine Channel
contaminated sediment cleanup in Newport Beach, California under the Confined Disposal
Facility (CDF) alternative. The main objective of the proposed project is to restore beneficial
uses to the Rhine Channel and Lower Newport Bay by eliminating potential risks associated with
elevated chemicals in the water and sediments. The purpose for the project and project
objectives are described in the Project Description section of the Initial Study document.
This study discusses the methodology and assumptions for the following analyses conducted for
the proposed project:
Regional air quality impacts
Localized air quality impacts
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission estimates
Methods of estimating source emissions vary by emission source and pollutant. Because of the
predominance of mobile emissions in California, methodologies for estimating mobile source
emissions are well- documented. The State of California has developed computer programs,
able to estimate mobile source emissions for off -road equipment that are flexible and adaptable
to a wide variety of equipment types, climates, and operating conditions. Emission factors used
in this study are current best estimates subject to future revision.
This study describes each air emission source associated with the proposed dredging project,
and the methodology used to estimate air emissions and ambient air quality impacts. The
detailed calculation worksheets are attached as Appendix Tables A -1 through A -9.
2.0 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County within the South Coast
Air Basin (SCAB) and within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD). The SCAB consists of the non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and
San Bernardino Counties and all of Orange County. The air basin covers an area of
approximately 6,000 square miles and is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean; on the
north and east by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains; and on the south
by the San Diego County line.
2.1 Regional Climate and Meteorology
The climate of the Project site is classified as Mediterranean, characterized by warm, rainless
summers and mild, wet winters. The major influence on the regional climate is the Eastern
Pacific High (a strong persistent area of high atmospheric pressure over the Pacific Ocean),
topography, and the moderating effects of the Pacific Ocean. Seasonal variations in the position
and strength of the High are a key factor in the weather changes in the area.
The Eastern Pacific High attains its greatest strength and most northerly position during the
summer, when the High is centered west of northern California. In this location, the High
1LANC0 Environmental DRAFT Page 1
effectively shelters Southern California from the effects of polar storm systems. Large -scale
atmospheric subsidence associated with the High produces an elevated temperature inversion
along the West Coast. The base of this subsidence inversion is generally from 1,000 to
2,500 feet (300 to 800 meters) above mean sea level during the summer. Vertical mixing is
often limited to the base of the inversion, and air pollutants are trapped in the lower
atmosphere. The mountain ranges that surround the Los Angeles Basin constrain the horizontal
movement of air and also inhibit the dispersion of air pollutants out of the region. These two
factors, combined with the air pollution sources of over 15 million people, are responsible for
the high pollutant concentrations that can occur in the SCAB.
Marine air trapped below the base of the subsidence inversion is often condensed into fog and
stratus clouds by the cool Pacific Ocean. This is a typical weather condition in the coastal region
during the warmer months of the year. Stratus clouds usually form offshore and move into the
coastal plains and valleys during the evening hours. When the land heats -up the following
morning, the clouds burn -off to the immediate coastline, but often reform again the following
evening.
As winter approaches, the Eastern Pacific High begins to weaken and shift to the south, allowing
storm systems to pass through the region. The number of days with precipitation varies
substantially from year to year, which produces a wide range of variability in annual
precipitation totals, with a wet seasonal pattern during the months of November through April
and a dry season during the months of May through October. This wet -dry seasonal pattern is
characteristic of most of southern California. Infrequent precipitation during the summer
months usually occurs from tropical air masses that originate from continental Mexico or
tropical storms off the West Coast of Mexico.
The average high and low temperatures in the area range from approximately 85 °F (29 °C) and
657 (18 °C) in August, respectively. January average high and low temperatures are 677 (19 °C)
and 46 °F (8 °C). Temperatures in the coastal regions are generally less extreme than inland
regions, due to the moderating effect of the ocean.
The proximity of the Eastern Pacific High and a thermal low pressure system in the desert
interior to the east produce a sea breeze regime that prevails at the Project site for most of the
year, particularly during the spring and summer months. Sea breezes at the region typically
increase during the morning hours from the southerly direction and reach a peak in the
afternoon as they blow from the southwest. These winds generally subside after sundown.
During the warmest months of the year, however, sea breezes could persist well into the
nighttime hours. Conversely, during the colder months of the year, northerly land breezes
increase by sunset and into the evening hours. Sea breezes transport air pollutants away from
the coast and towards the interior regions in the afternoon hours for most of the year.
During the fall and winter months, the Eastern Pacific High can combine with high pressure over
the continent to produce light winds and extended inversion conditions in the region. These
stagnant atmospheric conditions often result in elevated pollutant concentrations in the SCAB.
Excessive buildup of high pressure in the Great Basin region can produce a "Santa Ana'
condition, characterized by warm, dry, northeast winds in the basin and offshore regions. Santa
Ana winds often ventilate the SCAB of air pollutants.
i LANCO YEnvironmental DRAFT Page 2
2.2 Criteria Pollutants and Air Monitoring
Criteria Pollutants
Air quality at a given location can be characterized by the concentration of various pollutants in
the air. Units of concentration are generally expressed as parts per million on a volume basis
(ppmv) or micrograms per cubic meter (µg /m3) of air. The significance of a pollutant
concentration is determined by comparing the concentration to an appropriate national or state
ambient air quality standard. These standards represent the allowable atmospheric
concentrations at which the public health and welfare are protected. They include a reasonable
margin of safety to protect the more sensitive individuals in the population.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) establishes the national ambient
air quality standards ( NAAQS). For most pollutants, maximum concentrations might not exceed
an NAAQS more than once per year; and they might not exceed the annual standards. The
California Air Resources Board (CARB) establishes the California Ambient Air Quality Standards
( CAAQS), which are generally more stringent and include more pollutants than the NAAQS.
Maximum pollutant concentrations might not equal or exceed the CAAQS.
Pollutants that have corresponding national or state ambient air quality standards are known as
criteria pollutants. The criteria pollutants of primary concern in this air quality assessment are
ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (502), and particulate
matter with particle diameter less than 10 microns (PMLV), and particulate matter with particle
diameter less than 2.5 mictrons (PM2.5). Criteria pollutants contribute directly to regional health
issues. The known adverse effects associated with these criteria pollutants are shown in Table
2.1.
Of the criteria pollutants of concern, ozone is unique because it is not directly emitted from
project - related sources. Rather, ozone is a secondary pollutant, formed from the precursor
pollutants volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). VOC and NOx react to
form ozone in the presence of sunlight through a complex series of photochemical reactions. As
a result, unlike inert pollutants, ozone levels usually peak several hours after the precursors are
emitted and many miles downwind of the source. Because of the complexity and uncertainty in
predicting photochemical pollutant concentrations, ozone impacts are indirectly addressed in
this study by comparing project - generated emissions of VOC and NOx to daily emission
thresholds set by the SCAQMD and pollutant concentrations to federal and state ambient air
standards.
Table 2.1. Adverse Effects Associated with the Criteria Pollutants
Pollutant
Adverse Effects
Ozone
(a) Short-term exposures: (1) Pulmonary function decrements and localized lung
edema in humans and animals and (2) Risk to public health implied by alterations
in pulmonary morphology and host defense in animals; (b) Long -term exposures:
Risk to public health implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and altered
pulmonary morphology in animals after long -term exposures and pulmonary
function decrements in chronically exposed humans; (c) Vegetation damage; (d)
Property damage
Carbon Monoxide
(a) Aggravation of angina pectoris and other aspects of coronary heart disease;
(b) Decreased exercise tolerance in persons with peripheral vascular disease and
lung disease; (c) Impairment of central nervous system functions; (d) Possible
iLANCO 7Environrnental DRAFT Page 1 3
Table 2.1. Adverse Effects Associated with the Criteria Pollutants
Pollutant
Adverse Effects
increased risk to fetuses
Nitrogen Dioxide
(a) Potential to aggravate chronic respiratory disease and respiratory symptoms
in sensitive groups; (b) Risk to public health implied by pulmonary and extra -
pulmonary biochemical and cellular changes and pulmonary structural changes;
(c) Contribution to atmospheric discoloration
Sulfur Dioxide
(a) Broncho- constriction accompanied by symptoms that may include wheezing,
shortness of breath, and chest tightness during exercise or physical activity in
persons with asthma
Suspended Particulate
(a) Excess deaths from short-term and long -term exposures; (b) excess seasonal
Matter (PM10)
declines in pulmonary function, especially in children; (c) asthma exacerbation
and possibly induction; (d) adverse birth outcomes including low birth weight; (e)
increased infant mortality; (f) increased respiratory symptoms in children such as
cough and bronchitis; and (g) increased hospitalization for both cardiovascular
and respiratory disease (including asthma)'
Suspended Particulate
(a) Excess deaths from short-term and long -term exposures; (b) excess seasonal
Matter (PM2.5)
declines in pulmonary function, especially in children; (c) asthma exacerbation
and possibly induction; (d) adverse birth outcomes including low birth weight; (e)
increased infant mortality; (f) increased respiratory symptoms in children such as
cough and bronchitis; and (g) increased hospitalization for both cardiovascular
and respiratory disease (including asthma)'
a More detailed discussions on the health effects associated with exposure to suspended particulate
matter can be found in the following documents: OEHHA, Particulate Matter Health Effects and Standard
Recommendations (www.oehha.ca.goy /air /toxic contaminants /PM9notice.htmlflmay), May 9, 2002 (OEHHA
2002); and U.S. EPA, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter, October 2004.
bCalifornia Ambient Air Quality Standards have also been established for lead, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide,
vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles. They are not shown in this table because they are not
pollutants of concern for the proposed Project.
Local Air Monitoring Levels
USEPA designates all areas of the United States according to whether they meet the NAAQS. A
nonattainment designation means that a primary NAAQS has been exceeded more than once
per year in a given area. USEPA currently designates the Orange County portion of California as
in extreme nonattainment for 1 -hr 03; serious nonattainment for PM10; nonattainment for 8 -hr
03, PM2.5, and NO2; and attainment for CO and S02. States with nonattainment areas must
prepare a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates how those areas will come into
attainment.
The CARB also designates areas of the state according to whether they meet the CAAQS. A
nonattainment designation means that a CAAQS has been exceeded more than once in 3 years.
The CARB currently designates the South Coast Air Basin as a nonattainment area for 03, PM10,
PM2.5, and NO2. The Basin is in attainment of the CAAQS for CO and S02.
CARB and SCAQMD maintain a network of monitoring stations in the vicinity of Newport Beach.
The most representative station for the project vicinity is the Costa Mesa (North Coastal Orange
County) monitoring station because it is the closest monitoring station to the Project site,
iLANCO 7Environrnental DRAFT Page 1 4
located approximately 3.5 miles north of the project site. The station monitors CO, 03, NO2 and
S02 concentrations. However, the Costa Mesa station does not monitor concentrations of PM10
or PM2.5. The next closest monitoring station in the vicinity is the Mission Viejo monitoring
station (Saddleback Valley), located approximately 15 miles east of the project site. The Mission
Viejo station was used to compile ambient air pollutant concentrations for PMly and PM2,5 for
this analysis. Table 2.2 shows the highest pollutant concentrations recorded at the two stations
for 2006 to 2008, inclusive, the most recent complete 3 -year period of data available from the
SCAQMD. Table 2.2 shows exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS in bold.
Table 2.2 Maximum Pollutant Concentrations Measured at the Costa Mesa and Mission Viejo
Monitoring Stations
Source: SCAQMD historical air quality data http: / /www.agmd.gov /smog /historicaldata.htm, 2010.
' Costa Mesa monitoring station, Orange County. State station code: 30195; District station code: 3195.
2 Mission Viejo monitoring station, Orange County. State station code: 30002; District station code:
3812.
3 In February 2010 a new federal NO2 1 -hr standard was set at 0.100 ppm. This new standard is not
retroactive in that it does not affect 2006 -2008 attainment determination.
Note: Exceedances of the standards are highlighted in bold.
Vg /m3 micrograms per cubic meter
ppm parts per million
2.3 Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are identified and their toxicity is studied by the California Office
of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). TACs include air pollutants that can
produce adverse human health effects, including carcinogenic effects, after short -term (acute)
or long -term (chronic) exposure. The CARB designates diesel particulate matter (DPM) as a TAC,
iLANCO Environmental DRAFT Page j 5
Averaging
National
Pollutant
Period
Standard
State Standard
Highest Monitored Concentration
2006
2007
2008
Ozone'
1 hour
na
0.09 ppm
0.07 ppm
0.082 ppm
0.094 ppm
8 hour
0.075 ppm
0.070 ppm
0.064 ppm
0.072 ppm
0.079 ppm
CO'
1 hour
35 ppm
20 ppm
4 ppm
5 ppm
3 ppm
(40mg /m)
8 hours
9 ppm
9 ppm
3 ppm
3.1 ppm
2 ppm
(IoMg /m)
NO,
1 hour
0.100
0.180 ppm
0.10 ppm
0.070 ppm
0.080 ppm
PPM'
(338 pg /m)
502
1 hour
na
0.25 ppm
0.01 ppm
0.01 ppm
0.01 ppm
24 hours
0.14 ppm
0.04 ppm
0.004 ppm
0.004 ppm
0.003 ppm
PMlo2
24 hours
150 pg /m3
50 pg /m3
57 pg /m3
74 pg /m3
42 pg/m3
PM2.1 2
24 hours
35µg /m3
35µg /m3
47.0 µg /m3
46.9 11g /m3
32.6 pg /m3
Source: SCAQMD historical air quality data http: / /www.agmd.gov /smog /historicaldata.htm, 2010.
' Costa Mesa monitoring station, Orange County. State station code: 30195; District station code: 3195.
2 Mission Viejo monitoring station, Orange County. State station code: 30002; District station code:
3812.
3 In February 2010 a new federal NO2 1 -hr standard was set at 0.100 ppm. This new standard is not
retroactive in that it does not affect 2006 -2008 attainment determination.
Note: Exceedances of the standards are highlighted in bold.
Vg /m3 micrograms per cubic meter
ppm parts per million
2.3 Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are identified and their toxicity is studied by the California Office
of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). TACs include air pollutants that can
produce adverse human health effects, including carcinogenic effects, after short -term (acute)
or long -term (chronic) exposure. The CARB designates diesel particulate matter (DPM) as a TAC,
iLANCO Environmental DRAFT Page j 5
and SCAQMD studies determined that DPM results in the majority of the cancer risk from the
inhalation of air contaminants in the Port region (SCAQMD 2008, MATES III). Per SCAQMD's
policy (SCAQMD 2010) temporary construction projects need not undergo a health risk
assessment for health impacts.
2.4 Sensitive Receptors
The impact of air emissions on sensitive members of the population is a special concern.
Sensitive receptor groups include children, the elderly, and the acutely and chronically ill. The
locations of these groups include residences, schools, daycare centers, convalescent homes, and
hospitals. The following summarizes the sensitive receptors closest to the project site.
The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site include residents directly to the west,
east, north and south of the dredge area.
The nearest school is the Newport Heights Elementary School, located 0.6 miles to the
southeast, at 300 15th Street, Newport Beach, CA.
The nearest hospital is the Hoag Memorial Hospital, located approximately 0.6 miles
north of the project site, at One Hoag Drive Newport Beach CA.
2.5 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often called greenhouse gases (GHGs). GHGs are
emitted by natural processes and human activities. Examples of GHGs that are produced both by
natural processes and industry include carbon dioxide (COA methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide
(NZO). Examples of GHGs created and emitted primarily through human activities include
fluorinated gases (hydrofluorocarbons HFCs and perfluorocarbons PFCs) and sulfur hexafluoride.
The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the earth's temperature. Without these
natural GHGs, the earth's surface would be about 61 °F cooler (AEP, 2007). However, emissions
from fossil fuel combustion for activities such as electricity production and vehicular
transportation have elevated the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere above natural levels.
There appears to be a close relationship between the increased concentration of GHGs in the
atmosphere and global temperatures. Scientific evidence indicates a trend of increasing global
temperatures near the earth's surface over the past century due to increased human induced
levels of GHGs.
GHGs differ from criteria pollutants in that GHG emissions do not cause direct adverse human
health effects. Rather, the direct environmental effect of GHG emissions is the increase in
global temperatures, which in turn has numerous indirect effects on the environment and
humans.
Currently, there are no federal standards for GHGs emissions. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court
ruled that the harms associated with climate change are serious and well recognized, that the
U.S. EPA must regulate GHGs as pollutants, and unless the agency determines that GHGs do not
contribute to climate change, it must promulgate regulations for GHG emissions from new
motor vehicles (Massachusetts et al. Environmental Protection Agency [case No. 05- 1120],
2007). However, no federal regulations have been set at this time. Currently, control of GHGs is
generally regulated at the state level and approached by setting emission reduction targets for
existing sources of GHGs, setting policies to promote renewable energy and increase energy
efficiency, and developing statewide action plans.
iLANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page / 5
The World Resources Institute's GHG Protocol Initiative identifies six GHGs generated by human
activity that are believed to be contributors to global warming (WRI /WBCSD, 2007). These are
the same six GHGs that are identified in California Assembly Bill (AB) 32 and by the USEPA.
• Carbon dioxide (CO2)
• Methane (CH4)
• Nitrous oxide (NZO)
• Hydrofluorocarbons(HFCs)
• Perfluorocarbons(PFCs)
• Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)
The different GHGs have varying global warming potential (GWP). The GWP is the ability of a
gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere. By convention, CO2 is assigned a GWP of 1. By
comparison, CH4 has a GWP of 21, which means that it has a global warming effect 21 times
greater than CO2 on an equal -mass basis. N20 has a GWP of 310, which means that it has a
global warming effect 310 times greater than CO2 on an equal -mass basis. To account for their
GWPs, GHG emissions are often reported as a CO2 equivalent (COZe). The COze is calculated by
multiplying the emission of each GHG by its GWP, and adding the results together to produce a
single, combined emission rate representing all GHGs.
This air quality analysis includes estimates of GHG emissions generated by the Project.
3.0 Regulatory Setting
The Federal Clean Air Act of 1969 and its subsequent amendments established air quality
regulations and the NAAQS, and delegated enforcement of these standards to the states. In
California, the CARB is responsible for enforcing air pollution regulations. The CARB has, in turn,
delegated the responsibility of regulating stationary emission sources to the local air agencies.
In Orange County, the local air agency is the SCAQMD.
The following is a summary of the key federal, state, and local air quality rules, policies, and
agreements that potentially apply to the project and its related activities.
3.1 Federal Regulations
State Implementation Plan
In federal nonattainment areas, the California Clean Air Act requires preparation of a SIP,
detailing how the state will attain the NAAQS within mandated timeframes. In response to this
requirement, the SCAQMD has developed the 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) in
June 2007. The focus of the 2007 AQMP is to demonstrate progress in attaining federal 8 -hr
ozone and 24 -hr PM2.5 standards.
Emission Standards for Nonroad Diesel Engines
To reduce emissions from off -road diesel equipment, USEPA established a series of increasingly
strict emission standards for new off -road diesel engines. Tier 1 standards were phased in from
1996 to 2000 (year of manufacture), depending on the engine horsepower category. Tier 2
standards are phased in from 2001 to 2006. Tier 3 standards will be phased in from 2006 to
2008. Tier 4 standards, which likely will require add -on emission control equipment to attain
1LANC0 lEnvironmental DRAFT Page 17
them, will be phased in from 2008 to 2015. These standards apply to construction equipment
and terminal equipment, based on year of manufacture. Locomotives and marine vessels are
exempt.
Emission Standards for Marine Diesel Engines
To reduce emissions from Category 1 (at least 50 horsepower [hp] but < 5 liters per cylinder
displacement) and Category 2 (5 to 30 liters per cylinder displacement) marine diesel engines,
USEPA established emission standards for new engines, referred to as Tier 2 marine engine
standards. The Tier 2 standards have been phased in from 2004 to 2007 (year of manufacture),
depending on the engine size. These standards apply to harbor craft, depending on year of
engine manufacture.
Emission Standards for On -Road Trucks
To reduce emissions from on -road, heavy -duty diesel trucks, USEPA established a series of
increasingly strict emission standards for new engines, starting in 1988. Currently, the strictest
standards will be phased in starting in 2007 (USEPA, 2001a). Complete phase -in of the 2007
standards for new engines will be accomplished by 2010. This rule applies to haul trucks used
during the debris - removal phase of the proposed project, depending on year of engine
manufacture.
Nonroad Diesel Fuel Rule
With this rule, USEPA set sulfur limitations for non -road diesel fuel, including marine vessels.
For the proposed project, this rule affects construction equipment and harbor craft, although
the California Diesel Fuel Regulations (described under state regulations) generally pre -empt
this rule. Under this rule, the diesel fuel used by off -road equipment and harbor craft was
limited to 500 ppm starting June 1, 2007; and further limited to 15 ppm starting January 1, 2012.
Highway Diesel Fuel Rule
With this rule, USEPA set sulfur limitations for on -road diesel fuel to 15 ppm starting June 1,
2006 (USEPA 2006). This rule applies to fuel used by haul trucks used during the debris - removal
phase of the proposed project.
General Conformity Rule
Section 176(c) of the CAA states that a federal agency cannot support an activity unless the
agency determines that the activity will conform to the most recent USEPA- approved SIP. This
means that projects using federal funds or requiring federal approval must not: (1) cause or
contribute to any new violation of a NAAQS; (2) increase the frequency or severity of any
existing violation; or (3) delay the timely attainment of any standard, interim emission
reduction, or other milestone.
Based on the present attainment status of the SCAB, a federal action would conform to the
State Implementation Plan if its annual emissions remain below 100 tons of CO or PM2.5, 70
tons of PM10, or 10 tons of NOX or VOC (40 CFR Part 9311 These de minimis thresholds apply to
the federal project, which may include construction and /or operation, depending on the Federal
authority. If the proposed action exceeds one or more of the de minimis thresholds, a more
rigorous conformity determination is the next step in the conformity evaluation process. Project
emissions estimated in section 4 show that the project would not exceed conformity thresholds.
i LANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page 18
3.2 State Regulations
California Clean Air Act
The California Clean Air Act of 1988, as amended in 1992, outlines a program to attain the
CAAQS by the earliest practical date. Because the CAAQS are more stringent than the NAAQS,
attainment of the CAAQ5 requires more emissions reductions than what would be required to
show attainment of the NAAQS. Consequently, the main focus of attainment planning in
California has shifted from the federal to state requirements. Similar to the federal system, the
state requirements and compliance dates are based upon the severity of the ambient air quality
standard violation within a region.
Heavy Duty Diesel Truck Idling Regulation Heavy Duty Diesel Truck Idling Regulation
This CARB rule affects heavy -duty diesel trucks in California starting February 1, 2005. The rule
requires that heavy -duty trucks shall not idle for longer than 5 minutes at a time. However,
truck idling for longer than 5 minutes while queuing is allowed if the queue is located beyond
100 feet from any homes or schools.
California Diesel Fuel Regulations
With this rule, the CARB set sulfur limitations for diesel fuel sold in California for use in on -road
and off -road motor vehicles. Harbor craft were originally excluded from the rule, but were later
included by a 2004 rule amendment. Under this rule, diesel fuel used in motor vehicles except
harbor craft has been limited to 500 -ppm sulfur since 1993. The sulfur limit was reduced to 15
ppm on September 1, 2006. (A federal diesel rule similarly limited sulfur content nationwide to
15 ppm by October 15, 2006.)
Statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP)
The PERP establishes a uniform program to regulate portable engines and portable engine -
driven equipment units. Once registered in the PERP, engines and equipment units may operate
throughout California without the need to obtain individual permits from local air districts. The
PERP generally would apply to proposed dredging equipment.
Executive Order S-3-05
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced on June 1, 2005 through Executive
Order S -3 -05, state -wide GHG emission reduction targets as follows: by 2010, reduce GHG
emissions to 2000 levels; by 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and by 2050, reduce
GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. Some literature equates these reductions to 11
percent by 2010 and 25 percent by 2020.
AB 32 - California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2005
The purpose of Assembly Bill (AB) 32 is to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by
2020. This enactment instructs the CARB to adopt regulations that reduce emissions from
significant sources of GHGs and establish a mandatory GHG reporting and verification program
by January 1, 2008. AB 32 requires the CARB to adopt GHG emission limits and emission
reduction measures by January 1, 2011, both of which are to become effective on January 1,
2012. The CARB must also evaluate whether to establish a market -based cap and trade system.
iLANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page 19
AB32 does not identify a significance level of GHG for CEQA /NEPA purposes, nor has the CARB
adopted such a significance threshold.
Senate Bill 97 Chapter 185, Statutes of 2007
SB 97 requires the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to prepare guidelines to submit to the
California Resources Agency regarding feasible mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or the
effects of greenhouse gas emissions as required by CEQA. The California Resources Agency is
required to certify and adopt these revisions to the State CEQA Guidelines by January 1, 2010.
The Guidelines will apply retroactively to any incomplete environmental impact report, negative
declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or other related document.
As directed by SB97, the Natural Resources Agency adopted Amendments to the CEQA
Guidelines for greenhouse gas emissions on December 30, 2009. On February 16, 2010, the
Office of Administrative Law approved the Amendments, and filed them with the Secretary of
State for inclusion in the California Code of Regulations. The Amendments became effective on
March 18, 2010.
Executive Order 5 -01 -07
Executive Order 5 -01 -07 was enacted by the Governor on January 18, 2007. The order
mandates the following: 1) that a statewide goal be established to reduce the carbon intensity
of California's transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020; and 2) that a Low Carbon Fuel
Standard (LCFS) for transportation fuels be established for California.
3.3 Local Regulations and Agreements
Through the attainment planning process, the SCAQMD develops SCAQMD Rules and
Regulations to regulate sources of air pollution in the SCAB. The most pertinent SCAQMD rules
to the proposed project are listed below. The emission sources associated with the proposed
project are considered mobile or portable sources and are not subject to the SCAQMD rules that
apply to stationary sources.
Rule 402 — Nuisance
This rule prohibits discharge of air contaminants or other material that cause injury, detriment,
nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public; or that
endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public; or that cause,
or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.
4.0 Project Sources and Emission Methodology
The proposed project would remove contaminated sediments via dredging and beneficially
reuse the impacted materials at the Port of Long Beach (POLB) Middle Harbor Redevelopment
site in a confined disposal facility. The project would include temporary dredging and associated
activities. Since all project emissions would be new to the area, the project is considered to
have an emissions baseline of zero.
i LANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page 110
The following sequential and non - overlapping phases were considered in the analysis:
• Phase 1 Debris Removal
• Phase 2 Mechanical Dredging
The proposed project, analyzed as a construction project, would include the following distinct
types of emission sources. Table 4.1 presents the activity and engine size parameters for each
source category.
• Marine Sources
— Dredging Equipment: A single mechanical clamshell dredge would be used to
remove contaminated sediments. The dredger would be positioned on a barge
and operated with diesel engines. Although in some instances it is possible to
electrify the main engines associated with dredging equipment, this project
configuration and location would not allow the use of electric equipment due to
lack of access to the electrical grid in the dredging location
iai•
— Push Tugboat Tender: A single tugboat tender would be used to position the
dredging barge. Once the barge is in place, tugboat tender engines would be
turned off.
— Tugboats: Tugboats would be used to pull a haul barge with dredged sediments
for disposal in the POLE; Middle Harbor Redevelopment site CDF.
— Workboat /crew boat: Workboat /crew boat would be used to shuttle workers
and supplies out to the dredging barge.
• Off -road Land -Based Mobile Sources
— Excavator: There may be instances where a long -reach excavator would be used
to reach material under existing docks in order to avoid temporarily moving
floating docs and other structures during the debris removal phase.
• On -road Mobile Sources
— Haul Truck: A heavy duty haul truck would be used during the debris removal
phase to haul debris to a local landfill.
— Worker Vehicles
Table 4.1. Source Activity and Characteristics
Activity /Source
Source
Pieces of
Engine
Activity
Activity
Category
Equipment
Power
(hr /day)
(total days)
Rating (hp)
Phase 1: Debris Removal
Excavator
Off -Road, Land
1
400
6
12
Push Tug/Tender
Harbor Craft
1
800 main
2
4
engine
275 auxiliary
2
4
engine
Dredger
Off -Road,
1
2325 main
8
4
Marine
engine
iLANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page f 11
Activity /Source
Source
Pieces of
Engine
Activity
Activity
Category
Equipment
Power
(hr /day)
(total days)
Rating (hp)
350 deck
1
4
engine
HHD Truck
On -Road
1
na
40 -mile
12
roundtrip
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
10
na
URBEMIS2007
12
default
Phase 2: Mechanical Dredging
Push Tug /Tender
Harbor Craft
1
800 main
2
81
engine
275 auxiliary
2
81
engine
Tugboat
Harbor Craft
1
1275 main
16
81
engine
115 auxiliary
16
81
engine
Work /Crew Boat
Harbor Craft
1
350 main
1
81
engine
25 auxiliary
1
81
engine
Dredger
Off -Road,
1
2325 main
8
81
Marine
engine
350 deck
1
81
engine
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
10
na
URBEMIS2007
81
default
Notes:
Equipment characteristics and activity were provided by Anchor QEA engineers.
URBEMIS2007 is a CARE- approved software program used to quantify emissions from construction projects. The
program uses CARB- approved emission factors and activity parameters.
Project equipment would be diesel - fueled and would generate emissions of diesel exhaust in
the form of VOC, CO, NOX, SOX, PM10 and PM2.5. GHG emissions would also be generated
from these sources. Equipment usage and scheduling data required to quantify emissions for
the proposed activities were obtained from the engineering specifications for the project and
consultation with contractors /engineers. In estimating emissions, emissions were first
calculated for the individual equipment and then summed within each phase.
4.1 Harbor Craft
Emission calculations for harbor craft exhaust (e.g. push tug /tender, tugboats, and
workboats /crew boats) were based on generalized emission factors for harbor craft derived
from the Stracrest 2008 Port Emissions Inventory document for the Port of Long Beach
( Starcrest 2009) as well as from information contained in the CARB Diesel Particulate Matter
Exposure Assessment Study for the Ports of Los Angles and Long Beach (CARB 2006). Both
documents provide a current methodology and emission factors for calculating emissions from
i LANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page / 12
port - related sources. Equation 4.1 reports the basic equation used in estimating emissions from
these sources.
VLI
Equation 4.1
Where:
E = criteria pollutant emission
EFo = specific zero hour emission factor (when engine is new)
F =fuel correction factor which accounts for emission reduction benefits from burning cleaner fuel
D = horsepower and pollutant specific engine deterioration factor, which is the percentage
increase of emission factors at the end of the useful life of the engine
A = age of the engine when the emissions are estimated
UL = vessel type and engine use specific engine useful life
HP = rated horsepower of the engine
LF = the vessel type and engine use specific engine load factor
Hr = the number of annual operating hours of the engine
A fuel -based methodology was used to estimate SOx emissions from harbor craft sources.
Equation 4.2 shows the basic equation used to determine annual fuel consumption. Fuel
consumption was then converted to SOx emissions based on mass based sulfur content of 15
ppm.
'FQ M HF N LQ M W n UWE r C Equation 4.2
Where:
Fc =fuel consumed per engine per year
HP = rated horsepower of the engine
Hr = the number of annual operating hours of the engine
LF= the load factor
LF = the vessel type specific engine load factor
BSFC= brake specific fuel consumption rate of 0.078 gal /kW -hr or 184 g /hp -hr
The power of each harbor craft engine (propulsion and auxiliary), as well as the activity were
provided as part of the project specifications. Emission factors and load factors were obtained
from the Starcrest 2008 Port inventory.
4.2 Off -Road Emission Sources (Land -Based and Marine)
The emission calculations for off -road (excavator and dredging equipment) equipment exhaust
were based on generalized emission factors for construction and dredging equipment in Orange
County. To derive the generalized emission factors, the OFFROAD2007 program was used to
calculate annual emission inventories for all specified equipment in the SCAB (OFFROAD2007).
OFFROAD2007 is the most current emissions program for California off -road sources developed
by the CARB. The county -wide emission inventories were then divided by the population of
specified equipment in Orange County, as provided by OFFROAD2007, to produce the emission
factors. The basic equation used to estimate off -road equipment emissions is:
E= EF"Pop "AvgHp *Load 'Activity
Equation 4.3
i LANCO 7Environrnental DRAFT Page ( 13
Where:
E = Emission, ton /day
AvgHp = Maximum rated average horsepower
Load = Load factor
Activity = Annual activity in hours per year (hr/yr)
EF = Emission factor in grams per horsepower -hour (g /bhp -hr)
Pop = Population
The equipment power and activity levels were provided as part of the project specifications.
Emission factors, load factors, and population were generated by OFFROAD2007, with the
exception of the dredging equipment for which load factors were provided by equipment
operators (�A to provide cont�ff March 16, 2010). The following equation
was then used to convert OFFROAD output to daily emissions:
E= EoFmoao/Pop'EgCt "20001b 1ton Equation 4.4
Where:
E = Emission, Ib /day
EoF ,e = OFFROAD Emission Output, ton /day
Pop = Population from OFFROAD output
EgCt = Equipment Count
4.3 On -Road Emission Sources
A single haul truck and worker vehicles comprise the on -road emission source category for this
project. A haul truck would be used during Phase 1, debris - removal. Truck emissions were
estimated using EPA's Emission Factors (EMFAC2007) model. The model calculates truck
emissions based on geographic area, truck size, fuel, vehicle miles traveled, and other activity
data. For this air quality analysis it was assumed that a single heavy- heavy -duty diesel truck
would travel an average of 40 miles per round trip on its way to a disposal location.
5.0 Air Quality Impacts
This section presents a discussion of the potential air quality impacts associated with the
proposed Project.
5.1 Significance Criteria
The significance thresholds for this project were based on standards established by the City of
Los Angeles in the L.A. CEQA Thresholds Guide (City of LA 2006), with the exception of AQ -5
(Greenhouse Gas Emissions), which is separately defined and evaluated. For the purposes of this
study, the air quality thresholds of significance for construction activities are based on regional
and localized significance thresholds established by the SCAQMD (SCAQMD 2009).
Regional Significance Thresholds
Regional significance thresholds, set by the SCAQMD, are emissions -based thresholds used to
assess the potential significance of criteria air pollutants on the regional level. The construction
thresholds are set at higher levels for NOx and VOCs, to account for the short -term nature of
i LANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page ( 14
construction versus operational emissions. The operational emissions thresholds are tied to
thresholds contained in SCAQMD Rule 1304 for permitting proposed new emission sources
within the SCAQMD's jurisdiction.
Localized Significance Thresholds
CEQA requires that the potential local impact from construction emissions be compared to the
Ambient Air Quality for Criteria Pollutants thresholds. These significance thresholds represent
concentrations at sensitive off -site locations for comparison with modeled concentrations from
project emissions. SCAQMD developed the Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) and mass
rate look -up tables as a means to assess localized significance for construction projects without
the need to perform dispersion modeling. The LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a
project that will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard at the nearest residence or sensitive receptor,
taking into consideration each source receptor area (SRA), project size, and distance to the
residence or sensitive receptor.
LSTs were derived for CO, NOx, PMlo and PM2.5. Since 03 is a pollutant of regional concern, LSTs
were not developed for VOC emissions, which contribute to 03 formation. LSTs and associated
lookup tables are best applied to projects that disturb less than 5 acres in any given day and are
not applicable to mobile sources traveling over roadways. SCAQMD requires that for
construction projects only on -site emissions be compared to LST thresholds. Table 5.1 lists
SCAQMD's criteria use to determine significance for each Air Quality Impact (AQI) for the
proposed project.
Toxic Air Contaminants and Health Impacts
A project would be considered significant if it exposed receptors to significant levels of toxic air
contaminants. The SCAQMD does not require quantification of health impacts due to short -
term construction projects (SCAQMD Staff, 2009). It is therefore concluded that health impacts
associated with short -term construction activities of this project are not expected to be
significant.
GHG Significance Threshold
Subsequent to the adoption of Assembly Bill (AB) 32 — The California Global Warming Solutions
Act of 2006, there had been little regulatory guidance with regard to analyzing GHG emission
impacts in CEQA documents until the OPR released its Technical Advisory on CEQA and Climate
Change in June 19, 2008. Consistent with Senate Bill 97, OPR's Technical Advisory was
developed in cooperation with the Resources Agency, the California Environmental Protection
Agency (CalEPA), and CARB. According to OPR, the Technical Advisory offers informal interim
guidance regarding the steps lead agencies should take to address climate change in their CEQA
documents, until CEQA guidelines are developed pursuant to SB 97 on how state and local
agencies should analyze, and when necessary, mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.
In October 2008, CARB prepared a Preliminary Draft Proposal of Recommended Approaches for
Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for GHGs under CEQA. The draft guidance specifies a
7,000 metric tons (mton) carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2 -e) as a significance threshold for
industrial projects and the use of performance standards for construction - related emissions. In
the draft guidance, CARB stated that it intends to compile benchmark performance standards as
part of its final threshold recommendation.
i LANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page j 15
In the absence of a statewide threshold, SCAQMD developed an interim significance threshold
that applies mainly to industrial (stationary source) projects where the AQMD is the lead
agency. However, for the purposes of determining whether or not GHG emissions from affected
projects are significant, SCAQMD identifies that project emissions include direct, indirect, and,
to the extent information is available, life cycle emissions during construction and operation.
SCAQMD directs that construction emissions be amortized over the life of the project, defined
as 30 years, added to the operational emissions, and compared to the applicable interim GHG
significance threshold tier. The SCAQMD's significance threshold for stationary projects is 10,000
mton of CO2 equivalent emissions per year. The SCAQMD does not specify a significance
threshold for projects which are comprised solely of construction activities. However, in the
absence of other more appropriate significance thresholds, this interim threshold was used to
determine significance for this project.
Table 5.1. Significance Criteria
AQI -1: A project would have a significant impact if its construction - related emissions would exceed the
following SCAQMD thresholds of significance:
SCAQMD Mass Daily Thresholds - Construction
Air Pollutant pounds /day
NOx 100
vOC 75
P M 10 150
PM2.5 55
sox 150
CO 550
Source: SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, Rev. March 2009
AQI -2: A project would have a significant impact if its construction emissions would result in offsite
ambient air pollutant concentrations that exceed the SCAQMD LST thresholds.
SCAQMD LST Thresholds
Air Pollutant pounds /day
NOx 92
PM10 7
PM2.5 4
CO 672
Source: SCAQMD LST Lookup Tables, Appendix C, Rev. October 2009
Notes:
LST significance thresholds are for a 1 -acre site; the distance to the nearest receptor is 32 feet. LST
thresholds were extrapolated for a distance of 32m between 25m and 50m.
AQI -3: A project would have a significant impact if it created an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule
402.
AQI -4: A project would be considered significant if it conflicted with or obstructed implementation of an
applicable AQMP.
i LANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page j 16
AQI -5: A project would have a significant impact if CO2 -e emissions would exceed 10,000 mton.
AQI -6: A project would be considered significant if it would result in cumulatively significant impacts.
5.2 Significance Determination
AQI -1: The Proposed Project would not result in construction - related emissions that would
exceed regional significance thresholds following mitigation.
Table 5.2 compares the Project's unmitigated construction emissions to SCAQMD's regional
significance thresholds. Table 5.2 shows that the estimated maximum daily emissions for each
criteria air pollutant are below SCAQMD's mass daily threshold with the exception of NOx,
which exceeds the regional threshold for both phases of construction.
Table 5.2 Summary of Peak Daily Construction Emissions - Proposed Project without Mitigation
Activity /Source
Source
Category
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
ROG I CO NOx S02 PM10 PM2.5
Phase 1: Debris Removal
Excavator
Off -Road,
Land
1.5
4.5
14.1
0.0
0.5
0.4
Push Tug/Tender
Off -Road,
Marine
1.3
5.5
19.9
0.0
0.8
0.6
Dredger
Off -Road,
Marine
7.6
31.1
60.3
0.1
3.4
2.7
HHD Truck
On -Road
0.6
3.0
9.3
0.0
0.4
0.3
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
Phase 1 Total
11.1
46.1
103.9
0.1
5.4
4.4
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
75
550
100
150
150
55
CEQA Significant?
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Phase 2: Mechanical Dredging
Push Tug /Tender
Off -Road,
Marine
1.3
5.5
19.9
0.0
0.8
0.6
Tugboat
Off -Road,
Marine
9.7
36.9
120.2
0.1
6.0
4.8
Work /Crew Boat
Off -Road,
Marine
0.3
1.0
3.9
0.0
0.2
0.1
Dredger
Off -Road,
Marine
7.6
31.1
60.3
0.1
3.4
2.7
Worker Vehicles
On -Road.
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.0
1 0.3
1 0.3
Phase 2 Total
19.0
76.4
204.5
0.2
10.7
8.6
Regional Thresholds (Ib /day)
75
550
100
150
150
55
CEQA Significant?
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
Emissions reflect the use of California diesel fuel with a sulfur content of 15 parts per million (ppm).
iLANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page j 17
Impact Determination
Project peak daily emissions would exceed the emission thresholds for NOx during each Project
phase. Therefore, significant impacts under CECIA would occur for proposed project
construction prior to mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
MM AQ -1. Harbor Craft Engines:
Tugboats used to tow disposal barges to POLE CDF during Phase 2 shall use Tier 2 main engines.
Push tugboat/ tenders and work /crew boats will use Tier 3 main engines.
MM AQ -2. Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits (MSERCs):
MSERCs are created when high- emitting vehicles are retired and are considered an acceptable
method to mitigate construction emissions. Remaining NOx emissions will be mitigated by
purchasing MSERCs for every pound of NOx emissions in excess of the significance threshold for
each day of the construction period. The total amount of MSERCs required to fully mitigate
construction NOx emissions to less than significant levels is estimated to be 3,969 pounds.
Table 5.3 compares the Project's mitigated construction emissions to SCAQMD's regional
significance thresholds and shows that the estimated maximum daily emissions for each criteria
air pollutant following mitigation would be below mass daily significance thresholds.
Residual Impacts
Following mitigation, construction emissions will have less- than - significant regional impacts.
Table 5.3 Summary of Peak Daily Construction Emissions - Proposed Project with Mitigation
Activity /Source
Source
Category
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
ROG CO NOx S02 PM10 PM2.5
Phase 1: Debris Removal
Excavator
Off -Road,
Land
1.5
4.5
14.1
0.0
0.5
0.4
Push Tug /Tender
Off -Road,
Marine
0.9
6.2
7.0
0.0
0.3
0.3
Dredger
Off -Road,
Marine
7.6
31.1
60.3
0.1
3.4
2.7
HHD Truck
On -Road
0.6
3.0
9.3
0.0
0.4
0.3
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
Phase 1 Total
10.7
46.8
90.9
0.1
4.9
4.0
Regional Thresholds (lb /day)
75
550
100
150
150
55
CEQASignificant?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Phase 2: Mechanical Dredging
Push Tug /Tender
Off -Road,
Marine
0.9
6.2
7.0
0.0
0.3
0.3
Tugboat
Off -Road,
Marine
8.6
59.8
79.6
0.1
2.7
2.1
Work /Crew Boat
Off -Road,
Marine
0.2
1.4
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
i LANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page j 18
Dredger
Off -Road,
Marine
7.6
31.1
60.3
0.1
3.4
2.7
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
MSERC (lb /day)
0
0
-49
0
0
0
Phase 2 Total
17.5
100.4
99.6
0.2
6.7
5.4
Regional Thresholds (lb /day)
75
550
100
150
150
55
CEQA Significant?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
MSERCs will be used to offset NOx emissions during Phase 2.
AQI -2: The Proposed Project would not result in on -site construction - related emissions that
would exceed localized significance thresholds following mitigation.
Impact Determination
On -site daily emissions would exceed the LST emission thresholds for PM2.5. Therefore,
significant impacts under CEQA would occur for proposed project construction prior to
mitigation per Table 5.4.
Table 5.4 Summary of On -Site Daily Construction Emissions — Unmitigated Proposed Project
Mitigation Measures
Application of MM -AQ1.
iLANCO Y Environmental DRAFT Page / 19
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
CO
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
On -Site Daily Emissions
39
89
5
4
Localized Significancel Thresholds (lb /day)
672
92
7
3.6
CEQA Significant?
No
No
No
Yes
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
LST significance thresholds are for a 1 -acre site; the distance to the nearest receptor is 32 feet. LST
thresholds were extrapolated for a distance of 32m between 25m and 50m.
Mitigation Measures
Application of MM -AQ1.
iLANCO Y Environmental DRAFT Page / 19
Residual Impacts
Following mitigation, construction emissions will have less- than - significant localized impacts per
Table 5.5.
Table 5.5 Summary of On -Site Daily Construction Emissions — Proposed Project with Mitigation
AQI -3: The Project would not result in an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402.
The Proposed Project would increase air pollutants due to the combustion of diesel fuel.
Although some individuals may find diesel combustion emissions to be objectionable in nature,
odorous impacts of these emissions are subjective in nature. In addition, the mobile nature of
project emission sources would serve to disperse proposed Project emissions.
Impact Determination
The potential is low for the proposed Project to produce objectionable odors that would affect a
sensitive receptor. Significant odor impacts, therefore, are not anticipated.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
AQI -4: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of an applicable AQMP.
Proposed project operations would produce emissions of nonattainment pollutants, primarily in
the form of diesel exhaust. The 2007 AQMP proposes emission reduction measures that are
designed to bring the SCAB into attainment of the state and national AAQS. The attainment
strategies in these plans include mobile- source control measures and clean fuel programs that
are enforced at the state and federal level on engine manufacturers and petroleum refiners and
retailers; as a result, proposed project operations would comply with these control measures.
SCAQMD also adopts AQMP control measures into SCAQMD rules and regulations, which are
then used to regulate sources of air pollution in the SCAB. Therefore, compliance with these
requirements would ensure that the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the AQMP.
Impact Determination
The proposed Project would not be significant under this criterion.
iLANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page j 20
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (lb /day)
Co
NOx
I PM10
PM2.5
On -Site Daily Emissions
41
73
4
3
Localized Significancel Thresholds (lb /day)
672
92
7
3.6
CEQA Significant?
No
No
No
No
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
LST significance thresholds are for a 1 -acre site; the distance to the nearest receptor is 32 feet. LST
thresholds were extrapolated for a distance of 32m between 25m and 50m.
AQI -3: The Project would not result in an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402.
The Proposed Project would increase air pollutants due to the combustion of diesel fuel.
Although some individuals may find diesel combustion emissions to be objectionable in nature,
odorous impacts of these emissions are subjective in nature. In addition, the mobile nature of
project emission sources would serve to disperse proposed Project emissions.
Impact Determination
The potential is low for the proposed Project to produce objectionable odors that would affect a
sensitive receptor. Significant odor impacts, therefore, are not anticipated.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
AQI -4: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of an applicable AQMP.
Proposed project operations would produce emissions of nonattainment pollutants, primarily in
the form of diesel exhaust. The 2007 AQMP proposes emission reduction measures that are
designed to bring the SCAB into attainment of the state and national AAQS. The attainment
strategies in these plans include mobile- source control measures and clean fuel programs that
are enforced at the state and federal level on engine manufacturers and petroleum refiners and
retailers; as a result, proposed project operations would comply with these control measures.
SCAQMD also adopts AQMP control measures into SCAQMD rules and regulations, which are
then used to regulate sources of air pollution in the SCAB. Therefore, compliance with these
requirements would ensure that the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the AQMP.
Impact Determination
The proposed Project would not be significant under this criterion.
iLANCO 7Environmental DRAFT Page j 20
Mitigation Measures
None required.
AQ -5: The Proposed Project would not result in a construction - related emission that would
exceed GHG significance thresholds.
Although unmitigated project emissions will not exceed the GHG significance threshold and
mitigation measures are not required, MM -AQ1 will nevertheless be implemented as part of
AQI -1. Table 5.6 therefore compares the Project's mitigated GHG emissions from construction
activities to SCAQMD's GHG significance thresholds and shows that total GHG emissions would
be below SCAQMD's significance threshold.
Impact Determination
The project will not result in significant impacts for GHG.
Mitigation Measures
None required, but MM -AQI will be applied as part of AQI -1.
Table 5.6 GHG Emissions and Significance Determination
Activity /Source
Source Category
GHG CO2 -e (mton)
Phase 1: Debris Removal
Excavator
Off -Road, Land
9
Push Tug /Tender
Off -Road, Marine
2
Dredger
Off -Road, Marine
10
HHD Truck
On -Road
1,312
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
163
Phase 1 Total
1,495
Phase 2: Mechanical Dredging
Push Tug /Tender
Off -Road, Marine
32
Tugboat
Off -Road, Marine
311
Work /Crew Boat
Off -Road, Marine
8
Dredger
Off -Road, Marine
197
Worker Vehicles
On -Road
163
Phase 2 Total
711
Project Total
2,207
SCAQMD Threshold (mton)
10,000
CEQA Significant?
No
Notes:
Values may not add precisely due to rounding.
GHG emissions are considered from the total project; Phase 1 and Phase 2 were added to determine significance.
AQ -6: The Proposed Project would not result in cumulative emissions that exceed any of the
SCAQMD thresholds of significance.
Construction activities in other Newport City locations within a similar time frame as the
proposed Project would increase short -term emissions from concurrent activities during any day
iLANCO Environmental DRAFT Page / 21
of the Project construction period. As discussed, construction emissions associated with the
proposed Project would not exceed any of the SCAQMD construction thresholds. Since no
development is being proposed on the Project site, permanent increases in pollutant emissions
or concentrations are not anticipated. As such, the proposed Project would not contribute to
cumulative impacts.
Impact Determination
The proposed Project would not be significant under this criterion.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
iLANCO Y Environmental DRAFT 22
6.0 List of References
AEP 2007. Association of Environmental Professionals, Approaches to Analyzing Greenhouse
Gas Emissions and Global Climate Change in CEQA Documents, 2007.
City of LA 2006. City of Los Angeles, L.A. CEQA Thresholds Guide 2006.
CARB 2006. California Air Resources Board, Diesel Particulate Matter Exposure Assessment
Study for the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, April 2006.
EMFAC2007. California Air Resources Board, Mobile Source Emissions Inventory Program, 2007.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm
Massachusetts et al. vs. Environmental Protection Agency et al, Case No. 05 -1120, April 2007.
OEHHA 2002. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Particulate Matter Health
Effects and Standard Recommendations. May 9, 2002.
(www.oehha.ca.gov /air /toxic contaminants /PM, notice.html #may),
OFFROAD 2007. California Air Resources Board, Mobile Source Emissions Inventory Program,
2007. http: / /www.arb.ca.gov /msei /msei.htm
SCAQMD 2008. MATES III, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study. September 2008.
SCAQMD 2009. SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, March 2009.
http: / /aamd.goy /ceaa /handbook /signthres.pdf
SCAQMD 2010. Conversation with James Koizumi, SCAQMD. 2010.
Stracrest 2008. 2007 Port Inventory document for the San Pedro, California Ports, 2008.
US EPA 2004. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate
Matter, October 2004.
WRI 2007. World Resources Institute's GHG Protocol Initiative, 2007.
iLANCO Y E nvironmental DRAFT Page If 23
Appendix A
Calculation Tables
iLANCO Y Environmental DRAFT
APPENDIX 6
SCAQMD SAMPLE FORMS
Table 1
Project Name
Emulsified Diesel Fuel Delivery Records
Quantity
Day of Delivery Delivered
Delivery Date Week Time Supplier 1 (gallons)
Table 2
Project Name
Construction Equipment Emulsified Diesel Fuel Re eling Records
Refueling
Equipment Quantity
ID Type Refueling Date (gallons)
Table 3
Project Name
Construction E ui ment Daily O eratin Records
Starting Ending Elapsed
Equipment Meter Meter Time
ID Type Date Reading Reading (hours)
ATTACHMENT C Day:
Sample Daily Log Sheet
Piece of Equipment
Identification
Number
2001 NOx Compliance
Certificate es /no
Equipped with NOx
Oxidation Catalyst es /no
Use of Aqueous
Diesel es /no
Hours of
Operation
CAT 637 Scraper
Terex S24 Scraper
CAT D10L Dozer
CAT D9L Dozer
CAT D8L Dozer
CAT D8K Dozer
CAT D7H Dozer
Dresser TD20 Dozer
CAT 824 Dozer
CAT 631 Water Pull
CAT 14G Moto grader
CAT 992C Loader
CAT IT28 Loader
CAT 235 Excavator
Note: The hours of operation for diesel - powered equipment are limited as follows:
2- Dozers each for 5 hours per day
2 -Water Trucks/Water Pulls each for 5 hours per day
4- Scrapers each for 8 hours per day
4- Miscellaneous (e.g., motor grader, loader, excavator) each for 8 hours per day
Figure 1
Form for Recording Equipment Usage
Type of Equipment:
Identification Number:
Date mm /dd /y
Day of
Week
Beginning
Reading
Ending
Reading
Hours
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Total
Certification:
Operator
Foreman
Figure 2
Form for Recording Delivery Trucks
Date:
Time of Delivery:
Time Truck Left:
Cargo Delivered:
Certification:
Receipt of Delivery
Driver
Foreman
Figure 2A
Form for Recording Haul Trucks
Date:
Time of Haul:
Time Truck Returned:
Cargo Hauled:
Certification:
Record of Haul
Driver
Foreman
Figure 3
Example of Weekly Summary
Type of Equipment
ID Number
Hours
of Operation
per Da
Emission
Factor
Emissions
Pounds
per Da
Total
Weekly
Emissions
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Frida
Saturday
Sunda
Montla
Tuesda
Wednestla
Thurstla
Frida
Saturtla
01/01/00
01/02/00
01/03100
01104100
01105100
01/06100
01/00100
01/01/00
07102/00
01/03/00
01/04100
01105/00
01/06/00
Scaper
4.08
0
0
0
0
3.34517
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Scraper
0
0
0
0
0
3.34517
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Scraper
3.34517
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Scraper
3.34517
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Scraper
3.34517
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Scraper
3.34517
0
0
0
0
01
0
0
0
Dozer
1.283935
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Dozer
1.283935
0
0
0
0
It
0
0
0
Dozer
I
I
I
1
1 1.2839351
It
Ol
cl
Ol
Ol
0
0
0
Dozer
1 1.2839351
01
01
01
01
It
0
0
0
Motorgrader
1 1.8909451
0
01
01
0
01
0
0
0
Motorgrader
1 1 H9094bj
01
01
ul
01
ul
0
0
0
Excavator
1 2.1116641
01
0
0
01
0
0
0
0
Excavator
1 2.111 d6tj
01
01
01
01
It
0
0
0
Loader
1 0,808171
0
0
i 01
0
0
0
0
0
Loader
1 0.808171
It
01
01
01
01
0
01
0
Rexpaclor
1 1.58761
01
01
01
01
01
0
0
0
Rexpaclor
I 1.581bj
01
01
ul
01
01
0
0
0
Backhoe
1 0.80817
0
1!
1!
0
0
0
0
0
Backhoe
0.80817
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Roller
1 1.13851
0
0
i 0
i 0
0
0
0
0
Roller
1.1385
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Roller
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1 1.13851
It
It
It
It
Ol
Ol
01
0
Pa vin Machine
1.25928
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Pavin Machine
1 1.259281
01
01
01
01
01
01
0
0
Curb Machine
1 4.081
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
0
Curb Machine
1 4.081
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
0
Total
I
1 01
01
01
01
01
01
01
0
Number of:
Crew Tracks
0 0 0
0
0 0
0
Significance Threshold
100 100 100
100
0.38
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Water Trucks
4.17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Dellve Trucks
4.08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Daily Emissions:
0 0 0
0
0 0
0
Significance Threshold
100 100 100
100
100 100
100
RTC Usage
0
0
0 0
0 0